The Rhinos are close ... The Raiders ... not so much ...
| Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/ |
|
| Rhino size old v new http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=21789 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | btom [ Mon Nov 14, 2011 6:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Rhino size old v new |
I have a lot of the old plastic rhinos but none of the new style metal ones. Does anyone have a picture of the 2 side by side and/or the length of the new one? |
|
| Author: | Spectrar Ghost [ Mon Nov 14, 2011 11:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rhino size old v new |
Cue L4... |
|
| Author: | Legion 4 [ Tue Nov 15, 2011 3:58 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rhino size old v new |
I'll have to take pics tomorrow ... but the old plastic or metal Rhinos and Land Raiders are clearly smaller that the newer E:A versions ... |
|
| Author: | Legion 4 [ Tue Nov 15, 2011 4:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rhino size old v new |
The Rhinos are close ... The Raiders ... not so much ...
|
|
| Author: | btom [ Tue Nov 15, 2011 6:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rhino size old v new |
Thanks Legion, I appreciate it. |
|
| Author: | Dave [ Tue Nov 15, 2011 6:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rhino size old v new |
Glad to see those raider sponsons are where they belong relative to the doors... |
|
| Author: | Legion 4 [ Tue Nov 15, 2011 7:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rhino size old v new |
Yes, I had to do a little Greenstuff molding ... but I got it right !!  
|
|
| Author: | carlisimo109 [ Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:34 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rhino size old v new |
Seems like troops exiting the side would run into the giant power conduits going to the las cannons... Looks good though! |
|
| Author: | madd0ct0r [ Wed Nov 16, 2011 7:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rhino size old v new |
better then running into the stuff coming out of the other end of the lascannons |
|
| Author: | WestSide [ Wed Nov 16, 2011 2:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rhino size old v new |
The boys at GW don't seem to have any consistancy or logic on the placement of the lascannons or the side door. But the rear placement of the cannon seems to be preferred. I find Carlisimos comment about the power conduits (or even ammo boxes for the bolter varients) to be quite logical (whether the overall design is or isn't). Not to mention the engine is placed at the rear. If the crew hang out in the front of the vehicle by the 'shall show no fear' frontal assualt hatch then the overall layout with the front doors makes more structual sense (if sense applies to the design at all). For a frontal assualt they would pop out the front, if they went out on a side the armament would provide fire support by pointing to the side leaving some space for the door to open. I suppose its crazy to try and make any logical sense at all. |
|
| Author: | Legion 4 [ Wed Nov 16, 2011 3:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rhino size old v new |
carlisimo109 wrote: Seems like troops exiting the side would run into the giant power conduits going to the las cannons... Looks good though! With the Weapons Mounts where the rear door is, the troops can't get out with the weapons forward. With the weapons mounted in front, the weapons can fire, as the troops dismount, and provide covering fire. And the design of the las-cannons shouldn't/wouldn't have exposed power cables to trip over or be easy targets ... Of course I'm biased on my past career as an Grunt ! Dismounting from UH-1s, CH-47s & UH-60s and then commanding an M113 Mech Co. Experience and logic is something G/W seems to lack in many cases ...  
|
|
| Author: | WestSide [ Wed Nov 16, 2011 5:11 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rhino size old v new |
Legion 4 wrote: With the Weapons Mounts where the rear door is, the troops can't get out with the weapons forward. With the weapons mounted in front, the weapons can fire, as the troops dismount, and provide covering fire. And the design of the las-cannons shouldn't/wouldn't have exposed power cables to trip over or be easy targets ... Of course I'm biased on my past career as an Grunt ! Dismounting from UH-1s, CH-47s & UH-60s and then commanding an M113 Mech Co. Experience and logic is something G/W seems to lack in many cases ... Guess turning the premiere Imperial MBT into a dual duty APC caused some design compromises. At least they eventually put the ammo clip of the Bolter side arm in a more reasonable position. |
|
| Author: | Legion 4 [ Wed Nov 16, 2011 5:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rhino size old v new |
An MBT & IFV hybrid has yet to be attempted ... but it is Sci-fi ... 
|
|
| Author: | Carrington [ Wed Nov 16, 2011 5:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rhino size old v new |
Legion 4 wrote: An MBT & IFV hybrid has yet to be attempted ... but it is Sci-fi ... I guess the Churchill AVRE doesn't really count. |
|
| Author: | btom [ Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Rhino size old v new |
Legion 4 wrote: An MBT & IFV hybrid has yet to be attempted ... but it is Sci-fi ... Excepting the Merkava, though the apc aspect seems to have been an after thought and not used much. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|