I’ve somehow found time to tinker with a couple of pieces of NATO armour: the M59 APC and the Dutch version of the Lynx recce vehicle - M113 C&W.
18 Likes
Looking good so far. Is the M59 the Hobby Link one?
1 Like
It is - and comes with a very comprehensive interior - sadly to be wasted on my model(!)
4 Likes
V, not W 
The Dutch designation was M113 Commando & Verkenning, “Command & Reconnaissance”. I always find it interesting that it’s usually referred to in English as the “Dutch variant of the Lynx” or similar, when the Dutch Army had more M113 C&Vs than the Canadians had Lynxes
I’ve got a whole series of photos of the one (that used to be? not sure) in Overloon, including as much of the interior as I could see through the open side door. If you’re going to close it up those won’t be of any use, but if you need any details of the outside I can look through my photos to see if I took a picture of it.
3 Likes
I only saw the M-59 once in 27 years service. Army Infantry AIT at Ft Lewis in 1967. The M-59 was used in the final TacX for an assault. It was noisy, and hot but it got my squad where we were going. Never saw one again as an Armor Officer.
6 Likes
I’ve seen a few M-59s out on firing ranges. Don’t have any photos though.
Ken
4 Likes
The Hobby Link M59 from two years back, after a bit of bad language concerning the hull side warpage. The hull, minus ramp and hull top, is printed as one piece, and it’s really a sharp accomplishment. Even the cupola interior is provided, something we rarely see in plastic. The tracks are included but the instructions suggest considering AFV Club as replacement, which I did. A lot of the interior is visible through the various hatches.
14 Likes
I remember this one well Jim; lovely finish though | forget what paint you used.
Sadly, in a way, Intend to model most of it closed down so all that lovely effort is wasted on me. My hull sides seem OK, so perhaps there’s been a bit of product improvement along the way.
One thing that strikes me, is the almost impossibly small Driver’s hatch; I’m assuming it’s accurate but it does seem small. I’ll have a head and shoulders (and a Comd figure) Drive figure present on mine, or that’s’ the plan. Any comments/views regarding this - the aperture that is?
2 Likes
Good morning! Sadly, I don’t recall on the paint, except a belief it might have been a Tamiya OD spray can. My bad. A minor degree of color blindness has never been a strong point for me, so different hues are sometimes so subtle that discerning them doesn’t end up well.
As for the hatch, that was an initial concern for me as well, and prompted an exchange with “The Man” at Hobby Link. He responded that yes, it looks small, but the measurements were taken from a 1:1 scale item. When I sourced different images online, I found that, indeed, the driver hatch opening was a small one compared with the M113. I understand that as a race, we’ve grown since the 40s/50s, but really???
3 Likes
Thanks Jim - it’s weird isn’t it - I mean it just looks wrong. Anyway, if it is actually wrong, the major surgery required is beyond me. I’ll crack on I think - the flexible one piece AFV Club tracks (I couldn’t face separate links) have arrived so I’ll install those soon.
1 Like
Good call on the AFV tracks. The itty-bitty driver hatch reminds me of the “small hatch” doors found on the early model Shermans. Nobody wearing web gear is going out that hole in a hurry!
3 Likes
Note that the M75 is larger (length, width, height) than the M113 which
will trick the eye when comparing proportions
2 Likes
Indeed, but I am building an M59.
2 Likes
That’s an M75, not an M59 like the one in @M75’s photo. I think I can see why you got confused, though
2 Likes
Certainly looks like a recipe for instant claustrophobia …
A leisurely stroll out the back seems to be a lot easier than trying to squeeze through that tiny hatch:
The M59 was also longer, wider and higher than the M113.
Edit: since I was barking at the wrong APC I decided to make same/similar comments about the APC in question, i.e. the M59
1 Like
Er, I think we’re agreed on that Robin!
2 Likes
The commander’s hatch here is the same as on the later models of Sherman, and the driver’s hatch seems to have about the same diameter, perhaps slightly smaller. So it’s not big, but it’s also not small.
1 Like
Video showing M59 being driven by a guy that I would not label as skinny.
The hatch coaming could be too thick …
I would say that half the thickness would be enough for scale thickness
I measured the width of the M59 and the diameter of the drivers hatch in the picture I posted previously. The hatch is 18.8% of the width of the hull.
lists the width over the track shrouds as 128.5 inches.
Asumption: The track shrouds are more or less the same as on the M113 AND Tamiya didn’t mess up the measurements too badly.
Under that assumption the track shrouds would add 140 mm to the hull width on the M59.
The hull width would thus be 3264 mm - 140 mm = 3124 mm
The drivers hatch (lid) would be 18.8% of 3124 mm = 587 mm.
Based on images in the video I would say that the outside diameter of the coaming is about 560 mm (the lid overhangs the coaming a little bit but not much).
My shoulders, measured over the bony parts are about 50 cm wide and I am 6’4’’ so if the hatch coaming is 15 mm thick (the side armour is 159 mm) it would leave 53 cm of free space to squeeze my shoulders through. Should be enough …
The outer diameter of the coaming would be 16 mm.
The drivers hatch coaming on Tamiyas M113 is 19.5 mm, 22% larger …
Tight but not impossibly tight.
I would exit through the troop compartment and only use the hatch for heads-out driving
4 Likes