Global Scale Modeller

Posted: **Tue Feb 04, 2025 5:59 am**

One base coat done and didn't use as much paint this time as the olive drab covers fairly well. Just 18ml of paint I was surprised.
Standing room only in the booth

I'm going to have to paint the inside of the cabins now which is going to be a lesson in how not to do it.
You can't really see much inside them any way. I was going o make another observation , but I don't want to jinx myself

Posted: **Tue Feb 04, 2025 8:14 am**

it looks stunning with the paint on. With just the base coat the detail is already looking amazing

Posted: **Tue Feb 11, 2025 9:12 pm**

Update please!......

Posted: **Wed Feb 12, 2025 2:19 pm**

Stokesy44 wrote: Tue Feb 04, 2025 8:14 am it looks stunning with the paint on. With just the base coat the detail is already looking amazing

Thank you, I hope to add a small amount of detail yet to add to the effect once I've got this paint sorted.

DRUMS01 wrote: Tue Feb 11, 2025 9:12 pm Update please!......

Sorry it's been a week and not really much to show for it except I wasn't happy with the colour after I got prompted. I repainted with the seeds of doubt growing strongly. You can see the difference with the barrel.

Tyres are painted , but not yet clear coated. Crossing my fingers that the paint stays on intact when I wrestle them onto the rims.

So I repainted most of it greener and forgot the barrel as I'd put it out of harms way and only just realised that. Damn as I'd been waiting for the paint to properly dry on the other bits. Kind of messed with my timing now

Ok So what I'll do now is fade the green, varnish it then go on with the interior of the cabs. Wait for that to all dry and go back to the St Charmond for a clear coat. Fix up the A-19 and declare that finished.

Posted: **Thu Feb 13, 2025 7:59 am**

The paint tribulations continue!

Its hilarious just how big that thing is!

Posted: **Thu Feb 13, 2025 9:29 pm**

The new color improves the look big time on a big time kit. The darker green will also help when adding the highlights. It's looking good so far digger.

Question, does this hunk of plastic weigh as much as it looks?

Posted: **Fri Feb 14, 2025 7:46 am**

DRUMS01 wrote: Thu Feb 13, 2025 9:29 pm The new color improves the look big time on a big time kit. The darker green will also help when adding the highlights. It's looking good so far digger.

Question, does this hunk of plastic weigh as much as it looks?

The crane for moving it about is just out of shot in the photos!

Posted: **Fri Feb 14, 2025 9:47 am**

Stokesy44 wrote: Thu Feb 13, 2025 7:59 am The paint tribulations continue!

Its hilarious just how big that thing is!

Oh I'm rolling about in the aisles with the size of this

DRUMS01 wrote: Thu Feb 13, 2025 9:29 pm The new color improves the look big time on a big time kit. The darker green will also help when adding the highlights. It's looking good so far digger.

Question, does this hunk of plastic weigh as much as it looks?

I'm relieved for a positive on the last paint coat ....I can't find a emoticon for the wiping of the brow

Yes it is as heavy as it looks and the empty sprues probably come close to equalling it.
I now have to decide what model is heading to the bin to make room for it. ATM it is the 1/32 Hobbyboss A-10.

Posted: **Mon Feb 24, 2025 7:06 am**

I've come a cropper.

Yeah trying to fit the tyres and the glue popped then the axle broke and I didn't really exert much pressure at all.
It was a fairly big break too and to top it off the paint lifted off the tyres in places. Not all the tyres were affected like this, but at least 4 were. I really don't like vinyl tyres and I had them painted so perfectly too

Repairs are currently under way

Posted: **Mon Feb 24, 2025 7:38 am**

Ouch! Time to break out the CA glue me thinks.

Posted: **Tue Feb 25, 2025 12:01 am**

Stokesy44 wrote: Mon Feb 24, 2025 7:38 am Ouch! Time to break out the CA glue me thinks.

Ouch indeed. There is so much surface area I thought Id try Tet first and the damn springs keep separating from the axles too, now I don't know why as the TET seemed to be doing a good job and they have a solid locating lug.
The tyres don't fit well and are the biggest problem with this kit, and they are no replacements available.

Factoid

Impressively for such a huge weapon, U.S. Army ground crews could detach the T131 cannon from its twin tractors ready for operation in as little as 12 minutes before packing it up and re-attaching its tractors in as little as 15 minutes with a five-to-seven-man crew. As many as 20 T131 artillery pieces were manufactured during its production run. Said manufacturing took place at the Dravo Corporation's production facility in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, as well as the above-mentioned Watervliet Arsenal and the Watertown Arsenal in Eastern Massachusetts.

The T131 is the artillery section of this monster only 7 complete units were ever built as it was obsolete as soon as it was completed with the advent of missiles

Posted: **Thu Feb 27, 2025 11:15 pm**

I think this must have been an idea that sounded great when they drew it up on a napkin at the bar one evening. And it was obsolete as it finished production. The story was that they were frequently moved during the short time they were deployed in Germany and Korea for fear of being a fixed target. I wonder how easy that was done as it was not really maneuverable and by its size and security could most likely be followed pretty easily. This was definitely a crazy time during the cold war.

Now its so much easier to fly a nuke with twice the yield over 10 times father from your PS5 and park it on a doorstep. All in the name of security through mutual assured destruction, right?

Posted: **Fri Feb 28, 2025 8:48 am**

DRUMS01 wrote: Thu Feb 27, 2025 11:15 pm I think this must have been an idea that sounded great when they drew it up on a napkin at the bar one evening. And it was obsolete as it finished production. The story was that they were frequently moved during the short time they were deployed in Germany and Korea for fear of being a fixed target. I wonder how easy that was done as it was not really maneuverable and by its size and security could most likely be followed pretty easily. This was definitely a crazy time during the cold war.

Now its so much easier to fly a nuke with twice the yield over 10 times father from your PS5 and park it on a doorstep. All in the name of security through mutual assured destruction, right?

MAD has kept the world free from nuclear war but the whole supposition is based on there being leaders in place who are mot madder than MAD

Posted: **Fri Feb 28, 2025 12:34 pm**

There is, of course, the other war-like definition of MAD - Magnetic Anomaly Detector - used to locate metal thingies that don't want to be found under water. At least until a certain bunch started building the thingies out of Titanium.....

Posted: **Fri Feb 28, 2025 1:36 pm**

DRUMS01 wrote: Thu Feb 27, 2025 11:15 pm I think this must have been an idea that sounded great when they drew it up on a napkin at the bar one evening. And it was obsolete as it finished production. The story was that they were frequently moved during the short time they were deployed in Germany and Korea for fear of being a fixed target. I wonder how easy that was done as it was not really maneuverable and by its size and security could most likely be followed pretty easily. This was definitely a crazy time during the cold war.

Now its so much easier to fly a nuke with twice the yield over 10 times father from your PS5 and park it on a doorstep. All in the name of security through mutual assured destruction, right?

It could be ready to fire in 12minutes, top speed was about 35mph.

Posted: **Fri Feb 28, 2025 1:48 pm**

Stokesy44 wrote: Fri Feb 28, 2025 8:48 am
DRUMS01 wrote: Thu Feb 27, 2025 11:15 pm I think this must have been an idea that sounded great when they drew it up on a napkin at the bar one evening. And it was obsolete as it finished production. The story was that they were frequently moved during the short time they were deployed in Germany and Korea for fear of being a fixed target. I wonder how easy that was done as it was not really maneuverable and by its size and security could most likely be followed pretty easily. This was definitely a crazy time during the cold war.

Now its so much easier to fly a nuke with twice the yield over 10 times father from your PS5 and park it on a doorstep. All in the name of security through mutual assured destruction, right?
MAD has kept the world free from nuclear war but the whole supposition is based on there being leaders in place who are mot madder than MAD

Isn't a bit of a circular argument in that in the end if no one is prepared to push the button those weapons are useless unless there's a approaching asteroid.
If someone is prepared to push the button then the other side will too and the world ends, civilization dies. So what's the point of having them.

Posted: **Fri Feb 28, 2025 3:06 pm**

The theory is if we have them and they have them neither side will use them. But if they have them and we don't - or we have them and they don't - at some point someone will be stupid enough to think that the threat of using them will be enough to impose their will on every one at which point if the side without them refuses to bow to that will the side with them is obligated to use them. To illustrate the potential for insanity when Iran first announced it was developing nuclear warheads one of their nutjob clerics proudly boasted they didn't need missiles to deliver them, they had an army of jihadi's prepared to detonate dirty suitcase bombs in cities. The response from the Western nations was blunt but simple - do that and we turn Iran into a glass sea. That ended that (and possibly that cleric). The acronym MAD is terrifyingly accurate.
Having them is undoubtedly not a good thing but not having them, given human nature, once the genie was out of the battle is far worse

Posted: **Sat Mar 01, 2025 10:25 am**

RangerNeil wrote: Fri Feb 28, 2025 3:06 pm The theory is if we have them and they have them neither side will use them. But if they have them and we don't - or we have them and they don't - at some point someone will be stupid enough to think that the threat of using them will be enough to impose their will on every one at which point if the side without them refuses to bow to that will the side with them is obligated to use them. To illustrate the potential for insanity when Iran first announced it was developing nuclear warheads one of their nutjob clerics proudly boasted they didn't need missiles to deliver them, they had an army of jihadi's prepared to detonate dirty suitcase bombs in cities. The response from the Western nations was blunt but simple - do that and we turn Iran into a glass sea. That ended that (and possibly that cleric). The acronym MAD is terrifyingly accurate.
Having them is undoubtedly not a good thing but not having them, given human nature, once the genie was out of the battle is far worse

What he said.

Posted: **Sat Mar 01, 2025 12:01 pm**

Stokesy44 wrote: Sat Mar 01, 2025 10:25 am
RangerNeil wrote: Fri Feb 28, 2025 3:06 pm The theory is if we have them and they have them neither side will use them. But if they have them and we don't - or we have them and they don't - at some point someone will be stupid enough to think that the threat of using them will be enough to impose their will on every one at which point if the side without them refuses to bow to that will the side with them is obligated to use them. To illustrate the potential for insanity when Iran first announced it was developing nuclear warheads one of their nutjob clerics proudly boasted they didn't need missiles to deliver them, they had an army of jihadi's prepared to detonate dirty suitcase bombs in cities. The response from the Western nations was blunt but simple - do that and we turn Iran into a glass sea. That ended that (and possibly that cleric). The acronym MAD is terrifyingly accurate.
Having them is undoubtedly not a good thing but not having them, given human nature, once the genie was out of the battle is far worse
What he said.

RangerNeil wrote: Fri Feb 28, 2025 3:06 pm The theory is if we have them and they have them neither side will use them. But if they have them and we don't - or we have them and they don't - at some point someone will be stupid enough to think that the threat of using them will be enough to impose their will on every one at which point if the side without them refuses to bow to that will the side with them is obligated to use them. To illustrate the potential for insanity when Iran first announced it was developing nuclear warheads one of their nutjob clerics proudly boasted they didn't need missiles to deliver them, they had an army of jihadi's prepared to detonate dirty suitcase bombs in cities. The response from the Western nations was blunt but simple - do that and we turn Iran into a glass sea. That ended that (and possibly that cleric). The acronym MAD is terrifyingly accurate.
Having them is undoubtedly not a good thing but not having them, given human nature, once the genie was out of the battle is far worse

Ok I can see that, but extending that out will it not come to pass that every crack pot country will end up with them.

Posted: **Sat Mar 01, 2025 2:21 pm**

digger303 wrote: Sat Mar 01, 2025 12:01 pm
Stokesy44 wrote: Sat Mar 01, 2025 10:25 am
RangerNeil wrote: Fri Feb 28, 2025 3:06 pm The theory is if we have them and they have them neither side will use them. But if they have them and we don't - or we have them and they don't - at some point someone will be stupid enough to think that the threat of using them will be enough to impose their will on every one at which point if the side without them refuses to bow to that will the side with them is obligated to use them. To illustrate the potential for insanity when Iran first announced it was developing nuclear warheads one of their nutjob clerics proudly boasted they didn't need missiles to deliver them, they had an army of jihadi's prepared to detonate dirty suitcase bombs in cities. The response from the Western nations was blunt but simple - do that and we turn Iran into a glass sea. That ended that (and possibly that cleric). The acronym MAD is terrifyingly accurate.
Having them is undoubtedly not a good thing but not having them, given human nature, once the genie was out of the battle is far worse
What he said.
RangerNeil wrote: Fri Feb 28, 2025 3:06 pm The theory is if we have them and they have them neither side will use them. But if they have them and we don't - or we have them and they don't - at some point someone will be stupid enough to think that the threat of using them will be enough to impose their will on every one at which point if the side without them refuses to bow to that will the side with them is obligated to use them. To illustrate the potential for insanity when Iran first announced it was developing nuclear warheads one of their nutjob clerics proudly boasted they didn't need missiles to deliver them, they had an army of jihadi's prepared to detonate dirty suitcase bombs in cities. The response from the Western nations was blunt but simple - do that and we turn Iran into a glass sea. That ended that (and possibly that cleric). The acronym MAD is terrifyingly accurate.
Having them is undoubtedly not a good thing but not having them, given human nature, once the genie was out of the battle is far worse
Ok I can see that, but extending that out will it not come to pass that every crack pot country will end up with them.

No, because the one thing the countries with Nukes have managed to do is, by and large, stop the proliferation of nukes being acquired by so called rogue nations. Despite what you see in films, useable nukes and the material required to make the physics packages that go into them are very difficult to buy and sell, a, because they are heavily monitored and b, because even the worst nations on the planet are afraid of the hell that could be let loose if these weapons actually got into the wrong hands. That's not to say some have not tried.

Worst case scenario is if a nation (defined as a crack pot nation) got nukes with the intention of using them then we would be in for a very bad day indeed. Perversely, the thing that protects against this is that most nations that you would see as targets for 'crack pot nations' already have their own nukes. The response would be akin to Bomber Harris in WW2, you sowed the wind, now reap the whirlwind. This has been replaced with the more modern idiom of F**k around and find out - or FAFO. An overwhelming, nation ending response.

That's the question Mr Madman has to ask himself before he presses the button. History has shown us the gents at the top of the greasy pole, while more than happy to see their underlings martyred for the cause, feel somewhat differently about their own survival.

Posted: **Sun Mar 02, 2025 6:57 am**

Stokesy44 wrote: Sat Mar 01, 2025 2:21 pm
digger303 wrote: Sat Mar 01, 2025 12:01 pm
Stokesy44 wrote: Sat Mar 01, 2025 10:25 am

What he said.
RangerNeil wrote: Fri Feb 28, 2025 3:06 pm The theory is if we have them and they have them neither side will use them. But if they have them and we don't - or we have them and they don't - at some point someone will be stupid enough to think that the threat of using them will be enough to impose their will on every one at which point if the side without them refuses to bow to that will the side with them is obligated to use them. To illustrate the potential for insanity when Iran first announced it was developing nuclear warheads one of their nutjob clerics proudly boasted they didn't need missiles to deliver them, they had an army of jihadi's prepared to detonate dirty suitcase bombs in cities. The response from the Western nations was blunt but simple - do that and we turn Iran into a glass sea. That ended that (and possibly that cleric). The acronym MAD is terrifyingly accurate.
Having them is undoubtedly not a good thing but not having them, given human nature, once the genie was out of the battle is far worse
Ok I can see that, but extending that out will it not come to pass that every crack pot country will end up with them.
No, because the one thing the countries with Nukes have managed to do is, by and large, stop the proliferation of nukes being acquired by so called rogue nations. Despite what you see in films, useable nukes and the material required to make the physics packages that go into them are very difficult to buy and sell, a, because they are heavily monitored and b, because even the worst nations on the planet are afraid of the hell that could be let loose if these weapons actually got into the wrong hands. That's not to say some have not tried.

Worst case scenario is if a nation (defined as a crack pot nation) got nukes with the intention of using them then we would be in for a very bad day indeed. Perversely, the thing that protects against this is that most nations that you would see as targets for 'crack pot nations' already have their own nukes. The response would be akin to Bomber Harris in WW2, you sowed the wind, now reap the whirlwind. This has been replaced with the more modern idiom of F**k around and find out - or FAFO. An overwhelming, nation ending response.

That's the question Mr Madman has to ask himself before he presses the button. History has shown us the gents at the top of the greasy pole, while more than happy to see their underlings martyred for the cause, feel somewhat differently about their own survival.

True the bods at the top like to live the good life and a long one.
A avalanche tends to gain speed as it travels downhill. China an Russia supplied Iran will they in turn supply another country who knows , but the odds increase with each increase in numbers and time.
Nobody was able to stop Iran gaining the capability and they tried only managing to slow down the development. If they have the will
anyone can gain the capability.

Posted: **Sun Mar 09, 2025 2:37 pm**

Just another boring up date

Painted and faded

Couple of my goof's. Too much too quick , but I'm hoping to turn that into a thing and the chrome all went to crap which bugs me the most so I'm hoping to tackle that tomorrow night.

Posted: **Mon Mar 10, 2025 7:43 am**

I use Vallejo Metal Color and their chrome is very hit and miss when it comes to coverage.

Its not getting any smaller is it?

Posted: **Tue Mar 11, 2025 7:03 pm**

After removing any residual gunk, my suggestion would be to either decant a Molotow silver and soft brush it on (it will not leave brush marks as long as you do not continue brushing it while it cures). Another option would be bare metal foil chrome, cut the width you need and begin the seam beneath the view that can be seen on the cylinder and burnish it on. Those to me would be the easiest fixes (IMHO). Old school baby!

Posted: **Wed Mar 12, 2025 2:56 am**

DRUMS01 wrote: Tue Mar 11, 2025 7:03 pm After removing any residual gunk, my suggestion would be to either decant a Molotow silver and soft brush it on (it will not leave brush marks as long as you do not continue brushing it while it cures). Another option would be bare metal foil chrome, cut the width you need and begin the seam beneath the view that can be seen on the cylinder and burnish it on. Those to me would be the easiest fixes (IMHO). Old school baby!

Sage advice old boy

I don't own any Molotow so I either try again or use some self adhesive foil.
I'm removing that over applied matte finish too. You know it looks good a I thought I could give it just one more pass and it's too much , beads ya try to fix it by blowing it around spreading it out and nope it's stuffed no matter what you do.

Posted: **Wed Mar 12, 2025 8:33 am**

digger303 wrote: Wed Mar 12, 2025 2:56 am
DRUMS01 wrote: Tue Mar 11, 2025 7:03 pm After removing any residual gunk, my suggestion would be to either decant a Molotow silver and soft brush it on (it will not leave brush marks as long as you do not continue brushing it while it cures). Another option would be bare metal foil chrome, cut the width you need and begin the seam beneath the view that can be seen on the cylinder and burnish it on. Those to me would be the easiest fixes (IMHO). Old school baby!
Sage advice old boy
I don't own any Molotow so I either try again or use some self adhesive foil.
I'm removing that over applied matte finish too. You know it looks good a I thought I could give it just one more pass and it's too much , beads ya try to fix it by blowing it around spreading it out and nope it's stuffed no matter what you do.

Would a heavier weathering approach help? I know you mentioned the condition of the real thing would have been relatively clean but it might help to camouflage the issue?

Posted: **Sat Jun 28, 2025 2:26 pm**

It's been a long 3 months since I've progressed this build...sorry guys.

Now I haven't quiet finished the paint, but all the other has been done. On assembling it all I found the only safe thing to do was to actually put it on a base especially when moving it as it is in 3 pieces and I can really see some part coming apart and ending on the floor.

The base is done except I must add some pins to go through the tyres to stop it sliding around.
Good old Australian Jarrah hard wood with a bee's wax finish.

I promise to do a more comprehensive up date very soon.

Posted: **Sun Jun 29, 2025 1:48 am**

That's the base ?!?

I know it's big but now with the base shown, it's even bigger then I thought.

Posted: **Sun Jun 29, 2025 7:28 am**

I may have posted this before but looking at that base......

[url]

Posted: **Sun Jun 29, 2025 5:21 pm**

Nice work on an impressive project.

By the way, were those some old copies of Military Modelling, I saw in one of the earlier pics.

As for a madman getting his hands on nukes, er... didn't that just happen?

Posted: **Mon Jun 30, 2025 1:23 am**

Thanks guys

[quote=Steve64 post_id=402558 time=1751214065 user_id=69

By the way, were those some old copies of Military Modelling, I saw in one of the earlier pics.
[/quote]

Yes I have a pile of all sorts of mags and in fact just gave 2 box fulls away to a friend who runs a weekend stall at the markets.
Still more to go yet I might try and ebay the oldest ones.

Posted: **Tue Jul 01, 2025 1:13 am**

Been a long while getting back to this.....sorry for the long wait guys, but this happens in this hobby and is par for the course for a lot of us.

Factoid

A product of the iconic Kenworth Motor Truck Company, the front and rear transport tractors were massive in their own right. Weighing in at 7,950 lbs (17,191 kg 19 tons) in the M249 4x4 Heavy Gun Front Truck and 35,910 lbs( 16,267 kg 18 tons) for the M250 Rear Truck. Each of the 33 front and rear transport trucks sported a Continental AO-895-4 six-cylinder diesel engine cranking out 375 horsepower. Not bad for the early 1950s.

The kit doesn't really provide for having the tractors separated and deployed. It could be done, but more scratch building of the hitch area would need to be employed.

This is such a large kit that has hinge points I thought it a good idea to pin it to the base. It is only held by friction, but as I'm not about to turn it upside down it should be good.

Another reason to hate vinyl ! I only put the smallest tabs of masking tape on and yet it still lifted and I didn't burnish it down either.

Two repairs to do and then the reveal, I'll be so happy to see this finished

Posted: **Tue Jul 01, 2025 6:12 am**

Great picture of the real thing.

And as for the masking tape, I bet the air turned blue when you peeled those pieces off

Posted: **Tue Jul 01, 2025 11:03 am**

Stokesy44 wrote: Tue Jul 01, 2025 6:12 am Great picture of the real thing.

And as for the masking tape, I bet the air turned blue when you peeled those pieces off

Nah , but my spirts did take a blow and I reiterated my peeve about bloody vinyl tyres.

Posted: **Tue Jul 01, 2025 1:44 pm**

Nice work on this. It will be most impressive on that very nice looking piece of wood. I also second the aluminium foil for chrome. Paint can't beat metal for shine.

Posted: **Tue Jul 08, 2025 5:18 am**

cor wrote: Tue Jul 01, 2025 1:44 pm Nice work on this. It will be most impressive on that very nice looking piece of wood. I also second the aluminium foil for chrome. Paint can't beat metal for shine.

Thanks

Last Update...all done only 6 months on and off mainly because I'd procrastinate.
Please excuse the back ground clutter. It was too big to photograph inside.

I Used VMS glue for clear parts and it was just horrible stuff. Very tacky and stringy and when it dried while very clear it was very noticeable. I tried to clean it while wet and no it wasn't pretty, I don't think I use it again.

Thank to all those that dropped in especially those who took the time to say a word or two.

Posted: **Tue Jul 08, 2025 5:57 am**

Cracking finish to a massive project.

I wonder what it was like to drive it, how they coordinated between the front and the back to ensure they were pulling / pushing with the same power to avoid overstressing the tow links.

Posted: **Tue Jul 08, 2025 9:03 am**

What a project. Really nice finish. need to build a shed to store it.

Posted: **Tue Jul 08, 2025 10:09 am**

Stokesy44 wrote: Tue Jul 08, 2025 5:57 am Cracking finish to a massive project.

I wonder what it was like to drive it, how they coordinated between the front and the back to ensure they were pulling / pushing with the same power to avoid overstressing the tow links.

Thank you I appreciate the sentiment.

As to driving it co-ordination was key and they had a radio system set up between drivers and to anyone directing them from the outside.

cor wrote: Tue Jul 08, 2025 9:03 am What a project. Really nice finish. need to build a shed to store it.

Thanks for the kindness.
Your not wrong there it is the same length as 3 Centurions end to end including barrels.

One last pic just because it's interesting the look on the guys faces when hoisting a shell into position.

Posted: **Tue Jul 08, 2025 3:01 pm**

Excellent job sir!! That base really sets it off display wise.

One last pic just because it's interesting the look on the guys faces when hoisting a shell into position.

Probably thinking "better not drop this cos I hate mushrooms"...

Posted: **Tue Jul 08, 2025 7:18 pm**

RangerNeil wrote: Tue Jul 08, 2025 3:01 pm Excellent job sir!! That base really sets it off display wise.

One last pic just because it's interesting the look on the guys faces when hoisting a shell into position.
Probably thinking "better not drop this cos I hate mushrooms"...

Brilliant.

Yeah, they're good in a Chile but I wouldnt order them as a starter!

Posted: **Wed Jul 09, 2025 1:18 am**

RangerNeil wrote: Tue Jul 08, 2025 3:01 pm Excellent job sir!! That base really sets it off display wise.

One last pic just because it's interesting the look on the guys faces when hoisting a shell into position.
Probably thinking "better not drop this cos I hate mushrooms"...

Very kind thank you.

I shall endeavour to avoid said mushrooms

Actually here over time mushrooms have become less and less. I don't know whether it's because the rain fall has decreased 25% or some other cause. I buy mine from the supermarket these days, certainly not as gritty as the natural ones.

Posted: **Wed Jul 09, 2025 6:52 am**

digger303 wrote: Wed Jul 09, 2025 1:18 am
RangerNeil wrote: Tue Jul 08, 2025 3:01 pm Excellent job sir!! That base really sets it off display wise.

One last pic just because it's interesting the look on the guys faces when hoisting a shell into position.
Probably thinking "better not drop this cos I hate mushrooms"...
Very kind thank you.

I shall endeavour to avoid said mushrooms
Actually here over time mushrooms have become less and less. I don't know whether it's because the rain fall has decreased 25% or some other cause. I buy mine from the supermarket these days, certainly not as gritty as the natural ones.

Ah the eclectic world of the modeler. What's next, an ISM Cookbook, 50 great recipes while the primer dries?

Posted: **Wed Jul 09, 2025 10:46 am**

Stokesy44 wrote: Wed Jul 09, 2025 6:52 am
digger303 wrote: Wed Jul 09, 2025 1:18 am
RangerNeil wrote: Tue Jul 08, 2025 3:01 pm Excellent job sir!! That base really sets it off display wise.

Probably thinking "better not drop this cos I hate mushrooms"...
Very kind thank you.

I shall endeavour to avoid said mushrooms
Actually here over time mushrooms have become less and less. I don't know whether it's because the rain fall has decreased 25% or some other cause. I buy mine from the supermarket these days, certainly not as gritty as the natural ones.

Ah the eclectic world of the modeler. What's next, an ISM Cookbook, 50 great recipes while the primer dries?

"50 great Pie Recipes" and I'm keen.

Global Scale Modeller

Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie

Re: Atomic Annie