Oxford Rail announces Warwells

[M.I.B]

Thanks MIB

 

So the barrel could be secured for transport within the turret without any external support? Is this a recent innovation ie post 1950?

 

I imagine the Comet would be before your time?  Nevertheless any advice on transfers/decals......dont want anything too complicated just reasonably credible from 3'

 

Regards

I did move a Comet - in fact it was the last move I did.  In 2003 or thereabouts.

 

Wasn't much paint on it IIRC!

 

A shiny new ex-works piece of armour would have anything other than a number plate stenciled on it.  Unit badges and markings would be done when it arrived with its first user.  So you can credibly lose the need for markings if you wish.

Edited September 4, 2017 by M.I.B

[JSpencer]

Thanks MIB

 

So the barrel could be secured for transport within the turret without any external support? Is this a recent innovation ie post 1950?

 

I imagine the Comet would be before your time?  Nevertheless any advice on transfers/decals......dont want anything too complicated just reasonably credible from 3'

 

Regards

 

Guns can suffer from a thing called Barrel Droop and supporting a weapon at both ends can reduce this. Comets had a travel lock on the rear deck.

 

Modern tank guns are like thin tubes compared with WWII weapons which tended to be thicker towards the breach than at the muzzle end. This is all due to propellants, modern propellants burning more slowly than older ones. If we take black powder, that burns (explodes) in an instant compared to later nitro-cellulose based products, leading to canons that were short, fat at what would have been the breach end (as breaches rarely existed on Nelson era canons), thin at the muzzle end. There was no point in making long barrels like now, as the pressure was expended quite quickly in a short tube.

The use of slower burning powders allowed the use of more powder which means maintain the same high pressure as black powder over a longer tube (or lower pressure over longer thinner tubes).

 

While gun pressure is lower, by maintaining it over longer distances gives a constant high acceleration to the shell, meaning higher velocities are achieved and/or heavier shells can be used.

In WWII British tanks would be assigned a T number, painted on each side prior to delivery to the final unit.

 

I think travel locks are still used on Challengers but these are too big for warwells. The smaller 30mm raden guns on warriors and sabres probably don't need them as they are in effect like a Bofors 40mm AA gun, scaled down to fit a turret.

[JSpencer]

FWIW I have the new Oxfordrail Warwell with tank load. It's exactly the same as OR pics. Even the tank, green with none of the details picked out in true colours. The tank itself is better than the 1960s Airfix kit and is Diecast.

 

The wagon comes with a detail pack that allows you to choose another style of buffers (round clipped as supplied fitted or oval). Box is really long, big enough for a Mark 3 coach.

 

One browny point over Hattons version is that the Oxford one has both closer coupling and uses a close coupling system. Hattons has an edge in weight and running quality.

Edited September 4, 2017 by JSpencer

[No Decorum]

FWIW I have the new Oxfordrail Warwell with tank load. It's exactly the same as OR pics. Even the tank, green with none of the details picked out in true colours. The tank itself is better than the 1960s Airfix kit and is Diecast.

 

The wagon comes with a detail pack that allows you to choose another style of buffers (round clipped as supplied fitted or oval). Box is really long, big enough for a Mark 3 coach.

 

One browny point over Hattons version is that the Oxford one has both closer coupling and uses a close coupling system. Hattons has an edge in weight and running quality.

I thought that the box was made long to accommodate a tank at one end of the wagon. Wrong again! I think you’re right in that the box anticipates the coaches.

 

I found that the Oxfords run very freely; much more freely than the Hattons, even after the Hatton ones have had their pinpoints slightly lubricated. Kadees are too low in the Hattons but fine in the Oxfords. The hooks of the tension locks on both versions have a tendency to become detached. The price swings it for me and the Sherman is the icing on the cake.

 

Come to think of it, icing would have been as effective as a Sherman against a Tiger!

[JSpencer]

I thought that the box was made long to accommodate a tank at one end of the wagon. Wrong again! I think you’re right in that the box anticipates the coaches.

 

I found that the Oxfords run very freely; much more freely than the Hattons, even after the Hatton ones have had their pinpoints slightly lubricated. Kadees are too low in the Hattons but fine in the Oxfords. The hooks of the tension locks on both versions have a tendency to become detached. The price swings it for me and the Sherman is the icing on the cake.

 

Come to think of it, icing would have been as effective as a Sherman against a Tiger!

 

FWIW - Tigers were also built for rail transport though in Germany where the loading gauge is bigger but not in the UK. Both nations built tanks withing the limits of their respective rail systems, to detriment of the UK leading to too small turret rings and therefore smaller guns. That said after designing the 2 PDR and 6 PDR for tracked and and tank use, why did they design the 17 PDR only for tracked use? Always a mystery to me.

 

A lesser known fact about the Sherman was that its gun was gyro stabilized, British (not until the Centurion), German and Russian made tanks were not.

 

I hope Oxford do more Warwells with tank loads, hopefully picking out some of the features too (black paint on the road wheel tyres, tracks in steel colour rather than black, Machine guns left off or painted gun metal etc....).

[PaulRhB]

Tigers had to have narrow transport tracks fitted and the outer set of the interleaved wheels removed. They weren't able to drive off and go straight towards the action.

I once bumped into an ex Sherman crew man who told me the hype about the Tiger was overdone since the war. They were very wary but they still took them on. You just used the Sherman's speed to try and outflank them and get a shot in the rear and then get away to safety. Once they got the Fireflys the standard ones tried to distract, by loosing off a shot or two as the ran for cover, if caught in the open to give the Firefly a good shot.

Hopefully my Sherman laden ones are waiting at the shop

[JSpencer]

Tigers had to have narrow transport tracks fitted and the outer set of the interleaved wheels removed. They weren't able to drive off and go straight towards the action.

I once bumped into an ex Sherman crew man who told me the hype about the Tiger was overdone since the war. They were very wary but they still took them on. You just used the Sherman's speed to try and outflank them and get a shot in the rear and then get away to safety. Once they got the Fireflys the standard ones tried to distract, by loosing off a shot or two as the ran for cover, if caught in the open to give the Firefly a good shot.

Hopefully my Sherman laden ones are waiting at the shop

 

We are moving OTT, but a Sherman 75mm had little chance of penetrating either the side or rear of a Tiger 1 (80mm thick in both cases). Outflanking was not easy either as the Germans were not known for leaving them open. The best hope was to find an opening in the armour like a vision slit and throw shells at that until one penetrates. Shock waves from repeated hits could also disable them. Even if you can run round, you need to get within 200 yards to stand a chance of penetration. There seems to be some myth that the tiger will be alone, but they operated in groups big enough to make running around them almost impossible.

The fact the sides of the tiger were almost as thick as the front, they had tactics for attacking in formation by approaching a steep angle rather than straight on, and would zig zag towards the objective accordingly.

 

However out flanking would fair better with Panthers (45mm plate, sloped on the upper hull but vertical lower down) as these tanks really need to keep the thick front facing the enemy.

 

The firefly evened things in gun power at 500 yards, a typical western front combat range, but would not be enough on the eastern front where combat distances of a 1000 yards to 2000 yards were common.

 

That said, in practice, the allies would break through where there were no tigers (they were few and far between as a tank type anyway), and out run them. Most would then be abandoned by their crews either due to breakdowns or more likely, lack of petrol.

 

I hope Oxford expand their Sherman's to include later M4 types and M4A4 (Sherman Vs). Plus Sherman IIs, all used by the Brits and include them on warwell loads.

Edited September 5, 2017 by JSpencer

[pharrc20]

My uncle has brought several of the Hatton's and Oxford Rail Warwell models and brought them round to show me last night and one thing I noticed that the brake rigging and the positioning of was different on each model when comparing both wagons with the vacuum pipe running down the left side of the upturned models. I am no expert on these wagons but noticed this straightaway. Were there two versions of the brake rigging. Hatton's was no. 55 Oxford was MS1 iirc.

Paul

Edited September 5, 2017 by pharrc20

[No Decorum]

I hope Oxford do more Warwells with tank loads, hopefully picking out some of the features too (black paint on the road wheel tyres, tracks in steel colour rather than black, Machine guns left off or painted gun metal etc....).

Absolutely! A triple pack with Shermans would be excellent. The beginnings of a wartime train. Different wagon numbers but the wagon livery and tanks the same. The machine gun could be chopped off if Oxford doesn’t want to do it for us. Roughly £100. Does Oxford dare?

 

I seem to recall a statistic that 80% of Tigers were destroyed from the air but 80% of Shermans were destroyed by German tanks and I believe that the Fireflies had the ends of their guns camouflaged in the hope that the Germans couldn’t distinguish them from ordinary Shermans and hence would not single the Fireflies out as the main threats to be shot at first.

[Fat Controller]

Absolutely! A triple pack with Shermans would be excellent. The beginnings of a wartime train. Different wagon numbers but the wagon livery and tanks the same. The machine gun could be chopped off if Oxford doesn’t want to do it for us. Roughly £100. Does Oxford dare?

 

I seem to recall a statistic that 80% of Tigers were destroyed from the air but 80% of Shermans were destroyed by German tanks and I believe that the Fireflies had the ends of their guns camouflaged in the hope that the Germans couldn’t distinguish them from ordinary Shermans and hence would not single the Fireflies out as the main threats to be shot at first.

The relative destruction by air versus ground fire is as much to with the Germans having little or no air-support with any form of anti-tank capacity, as with the relative fire-power of the tanks. A colleague has done the translation and/or proof-reading of a couple of works on the Tiger, and says that even the Germans now admit they weren't what they were cracked up to be.

[No Decorum]

Agreed about the lack of German air support. Tigers weren’t as reliable as Shermans but I’d still rather be in a Tiger if I had the choice! Pretending to be on topic, I hope Oxford’s later models are offered with appropriate AFVs.

[Fat Controller]

Agreed about the lack of German air support. Tigers weren’t as reliable as Shermans but I’d still rather be in a Tiger if I had the choice! Pretending to be on topic, I hope Oxford’s later models are offered with appropriate AFVs.

Or even some RE material, such as road rollers, excavators and dump-trucks. These ran to places where AFVs didn't, such as Llandovery, on the Central Wales line, or Morpeth.

[Trains&armour]

 

I seem to recall a statistic that 80% of Tigers were destroyed from the air 

A myth. Yes, air attacks were in large part responsible for the destruction of German transports/logistics, but killing a well armoured vehicle from the air is very difficult. Read this:

http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/articles/tactics/tank-busting-ww2.php

[JSpencer]

The relative destruction by air versus ground fire is as much to with the Germans having little or no air-support with any form of anti-tank capacity, as with the relative fire-power of the tanks. A colleague has done the translation and/or proof-reading of a couple of works on the Tiger, and says that even the Germans now admit they weren't what they were cracked up to be.

Again OT, The proof of the pudding is that post war the Germans built the Leopard which was lighter, more handy than the US or British counterparts. When faced with RPGs, I,d rather be in a Challenger though!

A lot of British losses was due to Montgomery putting British armoured units needlessly through a meat grinder during Overlord. He believe he was just sacrificing material except the men were being sacrificed as well. Tanks could often be repaired (often with a hole in the armoured), the men less so.

 

Moving slightly back on, OR have a entensive range of other military items which could be used, but agree on the need for expansion. Like the idea of the triple well and tank pack, maybe with one as a Firefly though.

[No Decorum]

Like the idea of the triple well and tank pack, maybe with one as a Firefly though.

That is a good idea!

[mikesndbs]

Evening all, here is my video review and comparison of the new Oxford Rail, Warwell wagon.

We take a good close look then see it alongside the Hattons Warwell released earlier this year.

While there are some enhancements as far as I am concerned the Hattons wagon has the edge on detail whereas the Oxford one has the better running and coupling distance.

Truthfully for me there is no clear winner here, both are excellent and really plug the gap for the WW2 era modeller, however there are differing versions covering all dates to present day.

See what you think?

 

Oxford has the edge due to price and couplings for me personally.

 

https://youtu.be/dhnjhfBiVqo

[Tomjtt]

Hi all    who has the contact information of Oxford? Thanks.

[GreenGiraffe22]

The Oxford one looks a bit like a children's toy next to Hattons', is having the entire thing in green - buffers, axels, cains etc accurate?

[PaulRhB]

Hi all who has the contact information of Oxford? Thanks.

Use the contact button on their website.

 

https://www.oxforddiecast.co.uk/pages/contact-us

Edited September 18, 2017 by PaulRhB

[mikesndbs]

The Oxford one looks a bit like a children's toy next to Hattons', is having the entire thing in green - buffers, axels, cains etc accurate?

 

Hi, with respect I think that's a bit unfair, the Oxford offering is well made, runs well, is clearly a warwell and is cheaper as well.

 

The colour is right, having looked into it more, there were two colors specified in WW2, one of which was lighter and remember that this was a time of austerity, paint was used to cover everything as a means of protecting the metal not for appearance.

 

I have further learned that the paint was hand mixed and very much depended on what base colours were available.

 

There are some minor details missing that the Hattons version seems to replicate but all in all both models are very valid and very welcome surely?

Edited September 18, 2017 by mikesndbs

[PaulRhB]

The Oxford one looks a bit like a children's toy next to Hattons', is having the entire thing in green - buffers, axels, cains etc accurate?

The Army did tend to paint everything green

I painted the buffers on mine as they get dirty in use then a very thin wash of tamiya black to get a bit of shadow in the corners and dabbed at it with a sponge and paper towel to get rid of pooling lines. Add a bit of rust / track dirt and it looks good to me.

[JSpencer]

The Army did tend to paint everything green

I painted the buffers on mine as they get dirty in use then a very thin wash of tamiya black to get a bit of shadow in the corners and dabbed at it with a sponge and paper towel to get rid of pooling lines. Add a bit of rust / track dirt and it looks good to me.

 

It is the wrong green if the Army painted the Warwells in Oxford's colour. Far too light. Who specified the colours I wonder?

[GreenGiraffe22]

If the depiction is accurate then fair play to them

[PaulRhB]

It is the wrong green if the Army painted the Warwells in Oxford's colour. Far too light. Who specified the colours I wonder?

Probably is by official specifications but two guys I knew who were in the army just post war and in the 60's said they painted stuff in all sorts of shades of green. Some near black others rather pastel depending on what they had and what they bulked it up with. They said they only fussed over stuff going to Germany or going on parade.

Add to that faded paint and I suspect the Oxford colour is representative of at least a few especially just before repainting. Hence I've grubbied up mine a bit which also nicely darkens the colour a bit.

[GreenGiraffe22]

It wasn't so much the shade I was questioning, it just looked odd having every bit of the wagon (excluding the wheels, presumably?) covered in green, but if that's how they were then there we go