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?

Cue L4...

_________________
SG

Ghost's Paint Blog, where everything goes that isn't something else.

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 ...

_________________
Legion 4 "Cry Havoc, and let slip the Dogs of War !" ... "People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."

The Rhinos are close ... The Raiders ... not so much ...

_________________
Legion 4 "Cry Havoc, and let slip the Dogs of War !" ... "People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."

Thanks Legion, I appreciate it.

Glad to see those raider sponsons are where they belong relative to the doors...

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

Yes, I had to do a little Greenstuff molding ... but I got it right !!

_________________
Legion 4 "Cry Havoc, and let slip the Dogs of War !" ... "People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."

Seems like troops exiting the side would run into the giant power conduits going to the las cannons...

Looks good though!

better then running into the stuff coming out of the other end of the lascannons

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.

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 ...

_________________
Legion 4 "Cry Havoc, and let slip the Dogs of War !" ... "People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."

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.

An MBT & IFV hybrid has yet to be attempted ... but it is Sci-fi ...

_________________
Legion 4 "Cry Havoc, and let slip the Dogs of War !" ... "People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."

I guess the Churchill AVRE doesn't really count.

Excepting the Merkava, though the apc aspect seems to have been an after thought and not used much.