Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
Plucky Brit by Rob-Cavanna Plucky Brit by Rob-Cavanna
Companion piece to the Dingo Scout: [link]

3D sketchup model created by Todd Norton :iconltla9000311: for OPDS. :thanks:

You can see his original work here: [link]

Photoshop retouching by me.

If this were real.. I'd want to hug it! :D
Reminds me a lot of the Stuart-ish Biped from Ring of Red : [link]

----------------------------------------------------------------

For those who don't recognize the chassis, the Daimler Mk.I was a real armored car used by British forces in WWII. In the fictional world of "Operation: Dragon Slayer", like many originally wheeled or tracked AFVs, it has been adapted to operate w/ legs, both in order to compete against the high mobility of enemy walkers, and to keep up w/ friendly mech units. Some notes on the real Mk.I which still apply to this model:

"The Daimler armored car was based on the same design as the Daimler scout car. Outwardly similar, it weighed [more than] twice as much and had a two-man turret. Work began in 1939, but initial problems meant that the first production vehicles did not appear until April 1941. A total of 2,694 were built. The turret was the same as that designed for the Tetrarch light airborne tank... First employed in North Africa, the vehicle established itself as an excellent addition to reconnaissance units, despite its limited combat capability, giving good all-round performance and reliability..."

-from "Armored Fighting Vehicles" by Philip Trewhitt
Add a Comment:
 
:iconhexidextrous:
Hexidextrous Featured By Owner Sep 7, 2012
Looks kind of like what an AT-PT from Star Wars would look like, in a WWII setting. Nice Job!!!
Reply
:iconrob-cavanna:
Rob-Cavanna Featured By Owner Sep 7, 2012
Nice way to think of it. Thanks.
Reply
:iconqu-ro-quro:
QU-RO-QURO Featured By Owner Feb 20, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Great!
I want this plastic model!
Reply
:iconrob-cavanna:
Rob-Cavanna Featured By Owner Feb 21, 2012
:D me too!
Reply
:iconmechanox:
Mechanox Featured By Owner Feb 18, 2012
I realy like this light AFW. Great work you two! :icongreatjobplz:
Reply
:iconrob-cavanna:
Rob-Cavanna Featured By Owner Feb 19, 2012
:laughing: Thanks!
Reply
:iconjager375:
Jager375 Featured By Owner Feb 9, 2012  Professional Digital Artist
For my part, it's verging on cuteness. But I like it. Love the feet.
Reply
:iconrob-cavanna:
Rob-Cavanna Featured By Owner Feb 9, 2012
Yes, it is. It'd be even cuter w/ a British special forces chick (SF Cammy style) popping out the turret top. :D
Reply
:iconjager375:
Jager375 Featured By Owner Feb 10, 2012  Professional Digital Artist
Indeed. :salute:
Reply
:icondandabug:
Dandabug Featured By Owner Jan 17, 2012
Incredible render as usual, Rob! So far I've had the most fun reading the conversation that began about IR and quickly evolved beyond. I love how your works always inspire such in-depth and intelligent conversations! :D
Reply
:iconrob-cavanna:
Rob-Cavanna Featured By Owner Jan 17, 2012
Much appreciated, Dan! I'm lucky to have watchers and friends who are as obsessed w/ technical/historical minutia as much as myself.
I suppose that art which is detail oriented attracts people who are detail oriented.
The whole project is very much a learning experience and open dialogue.

How mechs would actually behave in combat is something we can only study theorize.
Everyone has their own areas of expertise, and will envision different combat simulations, w/ different nuances.
The more brains contributing, the better!

But as for the render quality, I have to bow to :iconltla9000311:'s modeling effort. I just did minor touch-ups.
Reply
:icondandabug:
Dandabug Featured By Owner Jan 17, 2012
Superb! I just might have to join this intricate banter every now and then, though my focus in history is more cultural and musical than mechanical or strategic. Still, I do enjoy obsessing over gritty, diesel-powered machines... :D

Oh, and kudos to ltla for the original modeling. ;)
Reply
:iconknightofspades:
KnightofSpades Featured By Owner Jan 17, 2012
Very fun design.
Reply
:icondeaddogpod:
DeadDogpod Featured By Owner Jan 17, 2012
EPIC
Reply
:iconwastelander7:
Wastelander7 Featured By Owner Jan 16, 2012
I know they had it in Korea, because they had Korean era M-1 carbines at a gun show once that had an infrared NV scope mounted on it. They were used for taking out line crossers at night.
Reply
:iconwastelander7:
Wastelander7 Featured By Owner Jan 16, 2012
Very nice! Be good for infantry fire support. Like the searchlight mounted on the turret too.

I don't know if this would fit with your scenario, but, have you considered giving some units infrared? Cause it occurs to me, that this thing would be one hell of a night fighter. Infrared doesn't have the range to aid heavy tank guns, but, it would work wonders on something like this as a night sentry against infantry trying to infiltrate. It would also work well giving covering fire to advancing infantry. If it fired tracers the infantry could use the tracers as aiming points and enfilade the enemy machine gun positions.

I don't think infrared would be too outlandish in your scenario as they had it during Korea, which was only a few years after WWII was over. They probably wouldn't have small personal units, but, I don't see why they wouldn't have units mounted on armor.

Just some thoughts.
Reply
:iconrob-cavanna:
Rob-Cavanna Featured By Owner Jan 17, 2012
There will absolutely be IR technology featured in OPDS. Actually, you can see some examples already: [link]
and some here: [link]

BUT besides those, the "mech ace" custom version of the Pzf V Donner (medium anthro mech equivalent to a Panther tank) will have integrated IR systems. Very fancy. Piloted by a foxy Italian femme-fatale.

Logistically, I'd hesitate to put IR on this one because: 1) Fielding top-notch equipment was not the the British MO. 2) If they ever did mount (captured and reverse engineered) IR technology on an AFV or mech, it would probably be something w/ much better chance of survivability in a sustained fight, like a Cromwell, Firefly Sherman, or a "Big Tom". The Daimler is very vulnerable IMO. Very budget friendly and spartan vehicle in general.

Although, besides infantry support, I could also see the usefulness of night time spotting for long-range artillery. And the Brits loved night time bombing too, right? ;P
Reply
:iconwastelander7:
Wastelander7 Featured By Owner Jan 17, 2012
Very cool info!

Well, IR is kind of special purpose. My thinking was that at about 600 meters (which is about 300 meters better performance than I was anticipating) tank guns would be almost at point blank, but, it's perfect MG range. Was thinking of them more as special purpose machines, not general issue. I think a machine this size would be air drop-able. And if they could silence the mufflers sufficiently, would be an asset as fire support machines for commandos.

And I'd remind you that it was the Brits that came up with the special purpose Sherman mods for D-Day. The flail tank for clearing mine fields and the road layer Sherman likewise both were well designed and worked well in the British sectors on D-Day where the Americans suffered greatly because they didn't have them.

So, while it's not the standard British MO, you get some crazy ass inventor who pushes the ideal through, and you never know.

I was watching a program the other night on how the Brits busted the main German dam that was supplying the factories with water and power. They did it with Lancaster bombers flying at 60' high and basically an oversized oil drum full of explosives that they skipped across the water of the reservoir. Because the bomb was spinning backwards, it skipped across the water like a stone, kissed the dam, then sank. It worked. The Germans had to hump their butts for 3 months to repair the dam

I don't know if you can view these from over there but, here's a link to the page [link]
Reply
:iconrob-cavanna:
Rob-Cavanna Featured By Owner Jan 17, 2012
I think I saw a tiny bit of this program, but was unable to watch the whole thing. But yeah, they were trying to figure out how to bust a dam w/ a water hopping bomb dropped from very low alt.
How come they couldn't just bomb from high altitude though? Why the daredevil approach? Must've been some crazy ass pilots to take that mission.
Reply
:iconwastelander7:
Wastelander7 Featured By Owner Jan 18, 2012
Well, on the program they said that during a raid about one bomb in 5 was actually in a 5 mile radius of the target. That's why they went in for wholesale carpet bombing with incendiaries. That and the German dams were heavily defended with flack batteries. It was actually less suicidal to come in low than to come in at an altitude that would allow precise bombing of the dams. At least some of the crews made it back alive.

Also, the primary one was made up of thousands of granite blocks. It would take multiple hits even with large bombs to significantly damage the dam. All while you're being shot to hell with flack cannon. I think they said the dam was 5 million tons of solid granite blocks. That's a lot of rock to move with Explosives under the best of circumstances.

As to whether the crews were crazy, according to the program, the crews weren't asked, they were notified. Whole thing was top secret, and they didn't know what their target was till just before they took off.

The reason the barrel bomb worked was that it kissed the dam and sunk, then exploded 50' under water. The water contained the blast gases and focused more energy on the dam. The bomb was 5,000 pounds of explosive with three depth triggers. Essentially a giant depth charge.

They had an Brit explosives expert demonstrate and had a strip of plastique on a steel plate. Going off in air, it barely dented the plate. When he taped a plastic tube of water behind the strip of explosives, it blew a hole through the steel plate. Short of nuclear, I think that an underwater bomb was about the only practical way of actually busting the dam.
Reply
:iconrob-cavanna:
Rob-Cavanna Featured By Owner Jan 18, 2012
Damn, this sounds like a great show!
Reply
:iconwastelander7:
Wastelander7 Featured By Owner Jan 19, 2012
I like it that's for sure! The shows Nova and Secrets of the Dead have had some really cool programs. Last night they had a Nova on how they used modified unarmed Spitfires to take 3D pics of German emplacements and used stereoscopic viewers to find V-1 and V-2 sites, as well as gain detailed information on German defences. D-Day would have been much more costly if it hadn't been for these planes and the photo interpreters. Interestingly one of the interpreters was hired because he worked for Disney, and animators and artists have an eye for detail.

They've also had programs on the Zulu victory at Ishandwana (not sure I'm spelling it right) a body found at Stonehenge, and tons of programs on science. Everything from string theory (quantum mechanics) to new materials and alternative energy. Very cool stuff!
Reply
:iconrob-cavanna:
Rob-Cavanna Featured By Owner Jan 19, 2012
All sounds awesome! 3D recon photos? That's yet another WWII wonder I'm glad to learn of.

Totally down w/ Zulus, Stonehenge, quantum theory, and all that jazz...
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconwastelander7:
Wastelander7 Featured By Owner Jan 17, 2012
My point being the Brits were the ones who had the crazy tank equipment, not the Americans or the Germans (though a rifle designed to fire around corners is a bit on the crazy side admittedly)
Reply
:iconwastelander7:
Wastelander7 Featured By Owner Jan 17, 2012
OH, and I forgot the floating Sherman! Had a canvas sleeve that raised up from the hull that turned it into a boat!
Reply
:iconrob-cavanna:
Rob-Cavanna Featured By Owner Jan 17, 2012
Even more practical than that... the Sherman firefly. Which fitted the very powerful British 17-pounder AT gun for it's main weapon. Unlike the regular Sherman, it actually stood a fighting chance against Panthers and Tigers -able to penetrate their heavy armor. It was the Brits who figured out how to make their Shermans more than mere panzer fodder.

BUT I can't help but think that this desperate conversion (which suffered considerable disapproval before the concept was proven effective by stubborn advocates) also highlights the severe ineffectiveness of existing Allied tanks, both English and American.
Reply
:iconwastelander7:
Wastelander7 Featured By Owner Jan 18, 2012
They were horribly ineffective for the most part. The only real competition the Germans had in terms of tanks during WWII came from the Russians. The allies (if memory serves me right) didn't come up with anything workable until the end of the war. At the beginning of the war the British and French tank doctrine was that tanks were to assist infantry assaults. The ideal of using them as mobile artillery in conjunction with air power didn't really sink in for a while. Even after the war started the allies were still trying to fight WWI.

It's a common failing of militarizes around the world that their doctrines are always geared towards winning the last war they were in, not the future ones. That's why Germany had so much initial success. They had successfully come up with a strategy on how to win WWI, but, after the war shifted into both sides having fluid lines and it became a game of attack and counter attack, the Germans lost momentum. And once the allies learned to imitate or neutralize blitzkrieg attacks, the superior numbers, energy reserves, and manufacturing might of the allies sealed their doom.
Reply
:iconrob-cavanna:
Rob-Cavanna Featured By Owner Jan 18, 2012
Too true. That, and the fact that their high command was totally divorced from reality.

Yes, they weren't fancy about it, but the Russians understood what tanks were for, and how to build them.

The American solution for neutralizing enemy tanks was simply tank destroyers deployed en masse...
Right, because why should a tank need to fight another tank? Let's use really lightly armored vehicles for that instead!
Reply
(1 Reply)
:icondukeleto:
dukeleto Featured By Owner Jan 17, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
the Germans had an IR sight by the end of WWII, an adaptation of the STG44, called "vampir"

This is a cool design, reminds me a bit of the Guard Sentinel from WH40K, but that's no bad thing. I do wonder why the "plucky Brit" has US markings tho...
Reply
:iconwastelander7:
Wastelander7 Featured By Owner Jan 17, 2012
Thanks for the info dukeleto! I didn't know that! :D

(and I was wondering about the US army star too, but hadn't gotten around to asking)
Reply
:iconrob-cavanna:
Rob-Cavanna Featured By Owner Jan 17, 2012
Indeed, some Panthers were also equipped w/ 'Infrarot' equipment. And there was even a special SdKfz 251 halftrack equipped w/ an IR spotlight! Very good info and pix of them here: [link]

Apparently not unprecedented for British vehicles to bear the Allied Star. I've seen a few examples. And I think it just looks good against OD paint scheme in any case. [link]
War is so unpredictable, I think it's possible to justify many odd marking scenarios -especially w/ vehicles changing sides in the field all the time -abandoned, captured, re-appropriated, etc...
But really, I just have a compulsive need to put stars on green. ;)
Reply
Add a Comment:
 
×




Details

Submitted on
January 16, 2012
Image Size
712 KB
Resolution
3426×1700
Link
Thumb
Embed

Stats

Views
6,423 (1 today)
Favourites
90 (who?)
Comments
45
×