These are outstanding! And very useful for when I tackle/complete my T-10. Showing the vehicle rigged for a river-crossing is very useful, not that I think I will attempt same, but still, a very useful guide.
I am a fan of the T-10 series. It is often portrayed as a lumbering, slow-moving “heavy” in the true sense of the word, akin to the two western designs deployed to combat it, viz the M103 and the Conqueror, but it was far removed from these efforts, and was, relatively agile, well armoured and of course possessed that lethal 122mm gun.
Some authors further comment that the ergonomics were less than they should have been, in addition to the “faults” of weight etc aforementioned, but I feel that such observers overlook that soldiers train on what they are given, and with resolve and training will make a system work as best they are able. When I arrived in Germany in 1971, and was employed alongside the Corps Intelligence Section, it was still on the Order of Battle of the Group of Soviet Forces Germany.
Certainly, its days were numbered back then (the introduction of T-64 was nigh), but those Independent Heavy Tank units were accorded no small respect.
A pity we don’t seem to see that many on the display tables; I suppose I’d better consider mine!
Extremely well done. All three. But I really love the first one,
Viktor Suvorov was famous for making pronouncements about the Soviet military. I don’t know which tank he was alluding to, but in one of his books he wrote that something akin to Jersey barriers had to be laid in channels across rivers where training demonstrations were held. It seems the ground pressure wasn’t very high, and the tanks had a nasty habit of wandering around once submerged.
I recall that too; I seem to think this was done for the filming of “I serve the Soviet Union” - I might be wrong (probably am given my memory these days). They had to ensure that there were no Snafus as the river crossing was being filmed, and the mighty Soviet Army had to be seen in a good light, so no drowned tanks or even crew come to that.
Those are really cool. My favorite is the one with the snorkel. After viewing your work, I adding a T-10 to my Want List. It will look great sitting next to a KV-1 and/or M103.
Thank you very much for your replies. I’m glad that I’ve sparked your interest in building the T-10M model. I’m very interested in your models. The model has been on the market for over ten years now, but there isn’t much information about it in the forums. The big question is which model, MENG or Trumpeter, is better. In my opinion, the MENG model doesn’t accurately reflect the image of the original vehicle. I remember the T-10 tanks looking different, especially regarding the tank’s height. Unfortunately, I haven’t built a Trumpeter model yet to compare. Perhaps there is a model builder here who can comment on this.
Now, something about the topic of underwater travel. What you wrote here was very interesting to me, as I hadn’t known about it before. Since MENG has completely ignored this problem and there are hardly any pictures of it, I’m posting pictures here for model builders to use for replicas. However, I don’t have any photos showing that the underwater propulsion tube is attached to the left side of the tank. It was always on the rear stern. For whatever reason.
I don’t know either. My only contribution to the T-10 project was sending them my copy of Tank Magazine that had several 1/35 scale line drawings in it. Those drawings back then were usually pretty accurate. That was right about the time I had contemplated bashing one from a JS III kit - but they saved me from that embarassment. Who knows if they even used the drawings.. But they did send me a kit.
US answer to it (and the Nazi heavies)… M34 Heavy Tank. A Company, 746th Tank Battalion(Heavy), 3d Army. Germany. 1948. U.S. Army began developing a heavy tank in 1944 to counter the German Tiger tanks. The T-29 had a 105mm gun and 770 HP engine. The T30 had a 155mm gun and 810 HP engine. The T-34 had the same engine , but a better performing 120mm gun. A total of 14 of the T series test vehicles were built. The production M34 would have had the 120mm main gun, the 810 HP engine , and the stereo range finder from the T-29E3. Also, an 18 inch Crouse-Hinds searchlight.
After the various replies, I’ll first address your answer. It’s interesting that you planned to build a T-10 model from the JS-III kit. I don’t remember in which post I advised you against it and sent you a model. Perhaps you can enlighten me.
But when the JS-III kit from Tamiya was released, I was faced with the same problem: building a T-10 tank from two JS-III kits. At the time, I had very few meaningful photos and little information about this tank. The internet was out of the question. I built this project to completion. After the release of the T-10M kit from MENG, I planned to destroy the built model, but I didn’t. It lay in a corner for many years and has been gathering dust. Tracks for this model weren’t available at the time, so I used Friul JS-III tracks. The model was truly challenging for me, and I spent a long time building it. The final result wasn’t satisfactory. Today, after many years, I got the model back in my hands and dusted it off a bit. I’m showing some pictures of the finished model here; unfortunately, no pictures were taken during construction.
I recall that the US modeller, Cookie Sewell did pretty much the same; his efforts were recorded in a magazine at the time, but I can’t recall which one.
I had always planned to attempt the same, but then I got hold of the Navigator resin model and delayed it all. I delayed too much as then Meng and Trumpeter brought their versions out - luckily for me.
That is a very nice effort. If you were to ask me what it was - I’d immediately say a T-10. I was very close to pulling the trigger on the same thing when Meng saved me - I had the aforementioned line drawings and was going to go off of those.
First of all, thank you for the positive review of the model. I never thought this T-10M topic would be so interesting here in the forum. It seems that many modelers are interested in this tank; it has always been an interesting replica for me. You have to experience this tank in the real thing; you never forget the impression of its size and the damage it caused to the roads. I also really like the model from the US modeler; it’s a good picture. I also followed the construction process of the modeler Navigator with great interest. He also built a very good model. Back then, the possibilities were different than they are today, which is something we must not forget. I once did a size comparison with MENG, and you can see that I made a lot of mistakes.
There were multiple pages of comparisons between the model and the same features on real tanks. In general they liked the kit (5/5 rating) but said there were some detail and general model building issues.
The Meng kit was review in the 8/2016, #183 issue. That reviewer spent more time with the history of the vehicle and felt the need to replace a number of bolt heads. It also got a 5/5 rating.
The problem with making accurate models of many Soviet vehicles is a combination of a) secrecy and b) frequent changes and modifications incorporated into production and throughout service. It is difficult to determine when particular vehicles were made (no painted on registration numbers, limited and poor quality photographs) and what was different over time. It takes a lot of work by a determined researcher to begin sorting this out. Model companies simply can’t afford the time or money to get the last 90% of accuracy so they model, as best they can, particular examples, even if that example is some one-off freak.
Thanks for your contribution, the comparison is interesting. The dimensions on the model are correct, but it still looks strange when built. The long time spent seeing tanks also changes people’s memories. Unfortunately, I lost all my M-Hobby magazines in a computer crash. Also, many rare pictures, which is a real shame and annoying.
Here are some pictures of the three T-10M with the BTR-50P lead vehicle.
A word about the canisters. There are photos that show that the canisters were mounted differently. They were either behind the tanks or on top of the tanks, two on each side. One photo only shows the mount. There doesn’t seem to have been a standard for this. Unfortunately, MENG didn’t take this into account.
After viewing your work, I adding a T-10 to my Want List. It will look great sitting next to a KV-1 and/or M103.
