M577 w/extension

panzergator · Post by **panzergator** » Mon Sep 25, 2017 5:14 am

I wonder if GHQ is considering reworking the M577 track extension. The one chosen for the prototype is not correct - it should be twice as long. It appears the model maker used a completely fabricated (as in INACCURATE) 15mm model. There are plenty of pics on the internet of the correct, real-life ones. The current model is very disappointing and of absolutely no use to me. GHQ is known for its accuracy, but in this case, its reputation is completely misplaced. Please rework this model with the correct tent extension.

redleg · Post by **redleg** » Tue Sep 26, 2017 12:09 am

I'll keep using my paper tent extensions until the GHQ model gets fixed. I'm just going off of personal experience with my tentage and I've been out for over 10 years so I guess it's possible that the snub-nosed tent extension is a real thing, but I'm pretty sure I couldn't fit an FDC in one of those, or a TOC in 2-3 of them.

GHQ was pretty quick to fix the M119 prime mover as I recall. Perhaps this can be an easy fix as well.

panzergator · Post by **panzergator** » Tue Sep 26, 2017 12:15 am

I think they just had to swap an already-in-production truck for that. This would require a re-sculpt. More expensive and complicated. I raised the issue when it first came out and have heard nothing. Your modelslooked good. I dont have that kind of time right now, so I will muddle along without the extensions.

whoa Mohamed · Post by **whoa Mohamed** » Tue Sep 26, 2017 12:23 am

Hope you all realise there was more than one tent extension in use. This version was very common to artillery FDC in the 80s. I don't think they need to fix anything really. Maybe just make models of additional extensions. Good job GHQ.

panzergator · Post by **panzergator** » Tue Sep 26, 2017 1:16 am

I assumed there may have been, although in the latter 90s and later. Havent seen any picslike the GHQ model in all my looking, except on the 15mm mod. I was in the service in the 70s and 80s (US Army), and never saw any like the one modeled. I HAVE seen something SIMILAR on the back of a UK Fv432 and, in Vietnam, before the M577s became common, on the back of an M113. The latter looked like a crew tent pressed into service.

In any case, this one wont do for me and I will happily do without unless the one I am familiar with becomes available. Call me grumpy.

whoa Mohamed · Post by **whoa Mohamed** » Tue Sep 26, 2017 11:13 am

1/77 FA 83-84. Its all good. My BAS 577 had the longer extension.

redleg · Post by **redleg** » Thu Sep 28, 2017 7:31 am

So the snub-nosed tent extension IS a real thing! When I was an FDO (way back in the day) we used the longer extension or a SICPS tent for the FDC. All of the actual fire direction was done inside the track, but if we were going to be in place for more than a few hours we would set the tent up and put the boys and the gear out in the tent. We had a crew of 7 jammed in the M577, but we only needed 3 at any given time to shoot.

panzergator · Post by **panzergator** » Thu Sep 28, 2017 9:48 am

I dont know that we have seen anything that says the snubnosed extension is accurate. I would appreciate something definitive, but I am still holding out gor the one I know used by the US Army in the 70s and 80s. Not spending money on this one.

whoa Mohamed · Post by **whoa Mohamed** » Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:48 am

Of course its your choice to buy or not buy..My experience docent mean anyone else's is less accurate. All I can say is in the unit I served in the Battery FDC was more likely to have the version depicted by the model just released by GHQ while the Battalion command tracks would be more likely to have the longer version.

whoa Mohamed · Post by **whoa Mohamed** » Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:49 am

Deleated

whoa Mohamed · Post by **whoa Mohamed** » Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:49 am

Deleated

panzergator · Post by **panzergator** » Fri Sep 29, 2017 8:41 am

Guess I won't have any track extensions then. Which is fine, but disappointing.