Pz.Kpfw.VI Ausf C/B (VK36.01)

2 in 1 w/ interior

REVOSYS | No RS-3001 | 1:35

Факти

Марка:

REVOSYS

Наименование:

Pz.Kpfw.VI Ausf C/B (VK36.01) 2 in 1 w/ interior

Номер:

RS-3001

Мащаб:

1:35

Тип:

Пълен комплект

В продажба:

2017 Нова матрица

Баркод:

4897083250011 (EAN)

Тема:

VK 3601 » Танкове (Превозни средства)

Съдържание на кутията

Литник, Фотоец, Воден декал

Хронология на продукта

 

REVOSYS

Rye Field Model

2017

 

2019

Нова матрицаНови частиНови части

Инструкции

Изтегли 12024Kb (.pdf)

Пазар

No partner shops available

Преглед на съдържанието

Външни прегледи

Преглед в кутията

Panzer Modell

Преглед в кутията

Armorama

Преглед в кутията

Armorama

Преглед в кутията

Missing-Lynx

Всички отзиви » (10 общо)

Списания

Tamiya Model Magazine | 261

English (TOC: 11 lines)

July 2017

Model Military International | 138

English (TOC: 14 lines)

October 2017

Scale Military Modeller | Vol 48 Issue 566

English (TOC: 11 lines)

May 2018

Всички списания » (4 общо)

Коментари

DONALD STEVENS
I love this kit. Full of details. Lucky enough to buy 5 of them before all the sellers jacked up the prices so high. Got them for 54.99 each and free shipping. Plan on building all the different versions. Why did DRAGON/DML give up on this kit?

1 6 October 2018, 06:34

beers
Well, thankfully scale models don't have to abide by what was existed and what didn't. We can have whatever what-ifs we want.

 6 April 2024, 22:28

beers
Perhaps, but this vehicle did exist. The hull was tested as shown, the turret was made but never mounted; the gun is the only "fictional" part, though the project for a squeeze bore 75/55mm gun was very real - it just never went anywhere, someone must have realized it was all looking quite expensive.

 7 April 2024, 14:15

beers
Expensive to make and operate, yes. Expensive to shoot? Not at all, it used the same ammunition as the Flak 36.
The squeeze-bore cannon that was supposed to go on the VK 36 01H required ~1kg of tungsten per shot, a material that was perpetually in very short supply. If not for that and the excessive barrel wear, they just might have fielded one of these.

 10 April 2024, 21:15

beers
That is what I said about the Tiger 1, yes. Still cheaper than a tank for which ammo production would have been impossible.

 11 April 2024, 02:11