There has been some discussion about the Sherman Tanks I released in 2013. I had made a mistake by adding a plate on the left side on the Early and Mid-Production Models.
When I ventured to ask the question if it was really a big deal... the answer has been a resounding "YES". Many of you were inspired to fill my PM Box... I was reminded by one of the members that I (ME) really let down the
Code of Historical Accuracy.
Actually it was put this way..."You damn idiot, what we you thinking by adding that damn armor plate". So I am guilty as charged and will take steps immediately to correct about 35-40 models which have the extra plate, which was a major mistake on my part.
And since I am pretty much stuck in my wheel chair, and have a lot of time, I decided that perhaps I should incorporate the Series 3 Updates into the Current Sherman Line Up. These Updates were the new stowage items and some refinement in the hulls themselves.
Example: Is it better to see the inside of the tank when the turret is blown off? Does it give tou the sense of 3D depth. Most of my tank models since early 2014 have the inside view, as do may turrets. This is a matter of opening the top of the Hull under the Turret Ring. The test Hull, the M4 Early Production-Welded, is going to serve as the base for all M4 Early and Mid production Hull variants, except the M4A1 which was a Cast Hull. Most of the factories used the same specs for the welded variants: M4, M4A2, M4A3. The M4A4 was virtually the same but a bit longer than the others due to the engine length. These can be spotted in displayed Tanks because of the Bogie Spacing. Most of these were sent to the UK with many converted to the FireFly. I posted the M4A1 Late Production on gagarins page yesterday, and it also includes the Series 3 Updates, so it can be exploited to carry just about any stowage. I'll leave where we take it to the community.
Which brings up another issue.
Should I use the same names so the new models replace the current tanks? I don't really want to have yet another Series of Sherman with a unique Name Convection. So I thinking we just move the Series 3 Updates into the current Folders, and replace the Series 2 models as we go. The original Sherman Series took me almost a Year to complete. That included the vast amount of research I did along the way.
Since I created 6 different Sub-Classes of M4 variants, the total has grown from the original 58 to over 90 with the customized Heavies, Jumbos and Easy Eights, which all are Series 3 Models. Series 3 models are derived from the Series 2 models, and most of the parts are the same. But the UV (Skin) has been rearranged to make room for some of the newer features. The Skinners can easily adjust by using previous skins.
More about this project:
Is this something you guys would like to participate in or is this a colossal waste of time? Let me know before I start working on this massive undertaking. Or is it even worth going through the effort to update all of these models to the Series 3 Standard?
So what if I go into detail as this project is underway. You would benefit from the Historical Application. YOU can make suggestions or ask questions along the way.
Perhaps the guys who wish to learn MAYA can cut their teeth on this work. They can develop their own styles as they learn from working on the top of the scale. Top of the Scale is what I build. They are original, detailed and can be adapted for virtually every application. These are not based on the original BK Models or share any of the same parts. So yes, these guys would be working at the top of the scale because that is what I do. They benefit from working with a system of development that is already in place. The project would move much faster if I decide to do this, and each student can show their work and will share in my rights.
My hope for each of them is that they can create original works based upon the real specifications, and really pay attention to detail But it is their choice to do as they wish. But, someone simply has to be able to pick up the ball and run with it when I'm no longer around. The recent event should be a wake up call... a Clarion Call, that someone from the masses will replace me at some point. This is the natural progression of life. My work becomes their work and the mission continues.
So let me know what you guys think about this Project. Do I proceed and train the next generation of Model Builders.... or do we skip the Sherman Historical Project and I just do what I can from behind the curtain?
I'll present a few pictures in the next few days which might tip the scales in favor if I can get your attention. I'm going to share the inner workings of how models are built to reduce the amount of mystery and magic. But I'll leave the Project in your hands until you voice the outcome and future of the Project.
First Picture:
Sherman Series III - M4 Hull Development: Showing: Hull Detail, Hull Deck Cut-Out with Inside perspective, all of the add-on parts such as hoods, fuel inlets, lights, lifting eyes... etc... This will become the Base Hull for All Early and Mid Production Shermans - Sub variants M4, M4A2, M4A3 and M4A4.
This is where the details begin and separates the quality of the model. This model when finished can be used for almost any war game platform if properly detailed. The outside is only part of the build... some models include the interior views, which can easily be accomplished by adding those parts. For BK, these are likely to be the highest detailed Series of Models that will ever be created. 10 years ago, this level of detail was not possible, but modern PCs evolving quickly, we are not limited by Low Poly Models and Graphics. The Game Engine can handle everything I have thrown at it so far. Should we not strive for more detail across the board?
Of course, my other work and research will continue so those projects are rleased.