This is my first actual post since July. I am healing up well since my accident, but I am still having some problems in my left hand, especially the fingers. They are stiff and don’t work too well; making it difficult to hold or manipulate small items like model parts. Actually, it’s kinda hard to hold big items too.
Anyway, since working is still difficult, I am starting to plan out a future project. One of these:
It’s nothing special, just something from my stash. I don’t plan to put a lot of money into it, but I want to upgrade it with some parts from my parts box.
I am looking to build it for the Vietnam war. Are the kit decals accurate for one in Vietnam?
If the kit decals are what’s shown on the box top, I would guess so, as I doubt a tank in the USA or Germany would have such slogans on it 3rd Squadron, 4th Cavalry was in Vietnam from February 1966 until October 1970 as part of the 25th Infantry Division. However, if you want accuracy, then I’m not sure an M48A2 would be the correct tank for them — M48A3s certainly, but I don’t know if they also had any A2s at any point. Vietnam Tracks by Simon Dunstan[1] has an undated photo of an M48A2C of 11 ACR on page 96, though, and there are other pictures of them including the well-known one of a tank wading a river.
The first time I saw the markings on this kit I thought “they have the squadron/vehicle markings reversed”, I was in the 25th Division in 1970 and saw “3/4 Cav” vehicles all the time, Looking at the vehicle from the front, the company/vehicle identification (C 12) was always on the right, and that is literally how every US Army vehicle I encountered over my career was marked. BUT…looking through some era photos (not AI or Photoshopped), sure enough, an M48 in country is marked exactly as shown in the kit. So, technically the markings are incorrect, but they do represent an actual vehicle.
The thing is - you can have modelling fun with this kit and add/embellish as much as you wish: different tracks, add a mantlet cover (not that difficult), tow ropes and hull brackets, different markings - I found it a pretty good basis to be honest.
Most M48s sent to Vietnam were A3s. The 1st Brigade 5th ID, 1/77 & 4/12 Cav, had M48A2s when first deployed in country. They later were re equipped with A3s.
On a related side note, according to Scalemates, the original Monogram kit was first issued in 1958, with generic US Army markings. Their 1966 re issue had new Vietnam looking box art, but not the markings of the next issue. In 1973, Monogram re issued it in the “white box” with the Vietnam markings. I vaguely remember that “Here comes the judge” line on Laugh In, but don’t remember who would say it…
Thanks, I’m doing my best. But it’s slow. It has now been 8 months since my accident, and I still have a ways to go.
To everyone else who replied, thanks for your help and encouragement. I will check out the link provided (thanks Carlos @Stikpusher ) but it looks like I can use the kit decals. I don’t want to spend any extra money on this, just use what I already have or what I can scratch build.
I do plan to add some upgrades, tow cables, a mantlet cover, roadwheels, etc. Maybe some figures. I will post it here once I get going on it.
I have yet to come across any yet. I think it’s the Takom M48A3 kit that comes with 1/77 markings that can be used for one of their A2s with a little reference and some omissions
They and their sister element in 1st Brigade, 5th ID, the 4/12 Cav. Both units had A2s when deployed in 1968, but later re equipped with A3s. I have been trying to acquire and save as many online photos as I can of their A2s. Sadly the great website for 77th Armor, Steel Tigers, went off the net a year or so ago.
I’d give that a 95% likelihood. Monogram did what was common at the time and put new decals of markings for something else on an existing kit.
I remember reading somewhere that due to high losses of M48s during Tet or some time around then that some M48A2s were used as replacements, but that those were not popular with the crews, and that the A3 was the preferred variant due to reduced fire hazard between gas vs. diesel. So a remote chance exists for those markings to be correct, but the likelihood is minimal.