login   |    register
Dioramas
Do you love dioramas & vignettes? We sure do.
Operation Anthropoid
Dioramartin
_VISITCOMMUNITY
New South Wales, Australia
Joined: May 04, 2016
KitMaker: 1,475 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Wednesday, September 23, 2020 - 03:07 AM UTC
Me neither Erwin, it seems driving on the left has been a relic of either mounting, or whipping, horses depending what you Google - driving on the wrong er right side of the road is another story. As for the parapets, on reflection maybe I could finish them now because the railings can just rest on them & be held in place by mini-brackets at each pillar. Incidentally one of the items I need to photo-etch them (ferric chloride) won’t be available for several more weeks.

Thanks G …aha you must be one of those guys at the back of the tram too About b&w images, it’s an incredibly complex procedure (for me) - in the camera’s editing software I have to point the cursor to the Monochrome option and click…



…which allows adjusting the contrast (I usually reduce it) and from there I can also adjust brightness if it’s too dark or too light. I’m sure everyone must have the same options (and more) than my 12 year old baby Olympus?
PolishBrigade12
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Washington, United States
Joined: January 31, 2009
KitMaker: 380 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Wednesday, September 23, 2020 - 04:42 AM UTC
Signage is looking good, pics are spot on, and the scene is coming together, Beauty Tim!!
cheyenne
_VISITCOMMUNITY
New Jersey, United States
Joined: January 05, 2005
KitMaker: 2,184 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Wednesday, September 23, 2020 - 08:47 PM UTC
Tim, the b/w's are awesome , very cool pics and very cool workmanship !!
Dioramartin
_VISITCOMMUNITY
New South Wales, Australia
Joined: May 04, 2016
KitMaker: 1,475 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Friday, September 25, 2020 - 11:21 PM UTC
Cheers guys, well while I wait for any more news about the signs & flying uniforms here’s a first rehearsal to help work out backdrop perspectives, starting with the opening scene in the north-west corner. The house is unpacked & back in position so roll Heydrich…









…and Cut. So the backdrop view up the street between the Merc & house needn’t be much higher than the fence. A parked tram will hide some of the background between the Merc & trees but the side of the Institute building will have to be painted or drawn. Cue the stand-in with the wrong everything, tell him he’s stepped in a pile of blu-tac, and Action…







Gabcik’s viewpoint. What could possibly go wrong?…



The backdrop will need to extend right round the back of the house all the way along to the north-east corner, although at least it can be highly impressionistic…



Approximate starting positions for Gabcik & Kubis. The joint between the two base halves will disappear, I have an idea of using a very thin foam strip painted like cobbles which will compress to fill the variable gap. Lastly a reminder (as if we ever needed it) of the big picture…



Cut!
Mushonza
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Canada
Joined: September 07, 2020
KitMaker: 12 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Saturday, September 26, 2020 - 12:18 AM UTC
Hi Tim,

the signs are coming along very nicely! The last few weeks seem to have just flown by, so I am trying to catch up. Unfortunately, not even Agent Emeritus was able to find the answer regarding the "D" sign. Apparently, he went through all the documents listing official road signs for that period and this sign is nowhere to be found. So, between him and my other sources, the sign could have either been related to the trams, or it could have been a sign for the German occupational forces (possibly even related to Heydrich's commute along the route, but that is just a speculation). I will keep searching, but at this point whatever you decide regarding the color, will be fine. My guess would be that both the letter and the edge were black.

Just a small comment on the road signs. A couple of your road signs have Czech street names (Troja, Argentinska, Hlavni nadrazi). It is very likely that these signs would have been bilingual, or even German only (e.g., Hauptbahnhof instead of Hlavni nadrazi, etc.).

As for the colors of the street signs, I did not find any information that the colors changed during the German occupation. I have seen several images of old signs that suggest the colors were white letters on red background.

There was a massive renaming going on (almost 450 streets in Prague with "undesirable" names were renamed) and all street signs had to be changed into bilingual with both German and Czech.

Re: the left vs. right driving. Czechoslovakia actually agreed to introduce driving on the right as part of the Paris Agreement of 1926. The switch should have happened first by 1936 and following a postponement it was scheduled for May 1, 1939. The German occupation in March 1939 sped the change up.

I don’t remember if someone else has already posted this, but in case not, here is an interview with two prominent Czech historians who have been studying Operation Anthropoid, which includes a 3D model of the assassination: https://ct24.ceskatelevize.cz/domaci/2816882-klicovou-roli-sehraly-i-mirumilovne-prazske-tramvaje-rikaji-historici-o-atentatu-na .

According to Jaroslav Cvancara (one of the Czech historians I mentioned above), immediately after the assassination, Heydrich got out of the car and tried to pursue Gabcik (even fired a couple shots in his direction). Given his injury he only made a few steps, then lent on the fence before staggering back to the car. He also talks about Heydrich leaning down and picking up the stengun left on the spot by Gabcik. Then he asked a woman, who got off the tram and walked towards his car, for help. She managed to stop a passing car of a delivery company that took him to the nearby hospital Na Bulovce.

They also mention Heydrich’s “flying” coat. The coat was supposed to be on the back seat, where the explosion ejected it upwards. It was supposed to have been entangled in the tram lines for a short while.

I hope this helps and I look forward to continuing this great ride (perhaps with a few pilsners as well. 😊)

Dioramartin
_VISITCOMMUNITY
New South Wales, Australia
Joined: May 04, 2016
KitMaker: 1,475 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Saturday, September 26, 2020 - 02:55 AM UTC
Many thanks Jan and please pass on my thanks to Agent Emeritus too. So the probability is the D/arrow signs are German then. They point in both directions so they must designate a route, not a particular destination - for military and/or heavy goods traffic maybe? I can’t see how they’d help tram drivers (not so easy to get lost!) without at least stating the route number? And OK I’ll revise the non-bi-lingual signs - makes sense, and I’ll keep the Holesovice one as is.

The link you supplied didn’t get me to that interview, please could you check/re-post it? Although if it’s presumably in Czech I’ll still be in trouble. So Mr Cvancara we nearly meet at last - I’ve been trying to get the English translation of his recent book “Anthropoid” without success, not a single copy in Australasia & long covid-delay expected if from Amazon. I didn’t realise he’s also the guy who believes the “green wreck” was/is Heydrich’s but as discussed in previous pages I’m not at all convinced. I know he’s well respected as a historian & director (with a very interesting biography) but if he’s saying Heydrich fired any shots at all - well, that’s not what Pannewitz said in his forensic report at the time. He said the gun in H’s door-pocket wasn’t loaded & the shells picked up at the scene were identified as coming only from two pistols, Kubis’ and Klein’s.

I don’t think Pannewitz mentioned Heydrich picking up Gabcik’s sten either. This photo (which Mr. C. owns) suggests it was left exactly where Gabcik threw it down…



If H was only able to take a few steps (witnesses corroborated) he was too far away from the sten anyway, the car came to rest about 15 metres further on round the bend before he climbed out. According to MacDonald’s sources there’s a bit more to that aftermath story – an off-duty policeman riding in the tram flagged down a baker’s van but the driver (bravely and/or stupidly) refused to be an ambulance. Then “a young blonde lady” flagged down a small open truck carrying furniture polish, whose driver obliged…but the ride in the tray was so bad over the cobbles Heydrich yelled for it to stop again & he was hauled into the cab.

If Mr C. accepts the flying uniform story, if it’s possible to give me a transcript of just that part of the interview (especially if the original source is mentioned) I’d be very grateful. I’m not claiming I’m right about everything (I’m sure I’m not) but of all sources I think Pannewitz has to be the most reliable (and thorough) so if he doesn’t mention something…

Cheers, I think there’s still some (unopened bottles) of Gambrinus down the back Alas I'm driving
Golikell
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Noord-Holland, Netherlands
Joined: October 25, 2002
KitMaker: 1,757 posts
AeroScale: 6 posts
Posted: Saturday, September 26, 2020 - 04:26 AM UTC
I hope your stand in didn't get the creeps from Herr Heydrich, specially being so far away from home and all on his own

I love the way this story unfold, almost like a detective story!!!
Mushonza
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Canada
Joined: September 07, 2020
KitMaker: 12 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Saturday, September 26, 2020 - 05:41 AM UTC
I have fixed the link, so you should be able to get to the interview, Tim. Just in case, here it is again: https://ct24.ceskatelevize.cz/domaci/2816882-klicovou-roli-sehraly-i-mirumilovne-prazske-tramvaje-rikaji-historici-o-atentatu-na .

It is in Czech, but with Google Translate you should be able to get most of it. If there are any particular bits you are especially interested in, let me know, and I will be happy to revise the Google translation. :-)

The information about Heydrich firing two shots at Gabcik is in the interview and also in the Anthropoid book. There is no reference to a source, but I am assuming that Mr. Cvancara has researched this extensively. I will see if I can find a source for this claim (he also mentions in the interview that before people realized who was the target of the assassination, some of those who were in the trams lingered around and even picked up "souvenirs" from the scene, possibly including the fired shells. This may just be speculation, but he did mention this.)

I read about Heydrich picking up the sten gun and then throwing it back on the ground in another interview. I will have to look for it and send you the link.

It is interesting what McDonald says about Heydrich's trip to the hospital. According to Mr. Cvancara Heydrich was first brought into the cab of the truck and later, because of the pain, he asked to stop and was moved to the truckbed lying down on his stomach.

Last but not least, here is a link to a Czech bookshop, where you can buy the English version of Mr. Cvancara's "Anthropoid" e-book: https://www.kosmas.cz/knihy/235307/anthropoid-the-czechoslovak-patriots-story/. It looks like it is in a PDF format.

Mushonza
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Canada
Joined: September 07, 2020
KitMaker: 12 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Saturday, September 26, 2020 - 12:01 PM UTC
Here is the interview with two Czech historians Jaroslav Cvancara and Eduard Stehlik, where they talk about the assassination: https://ct24.ceskatelevize.cz/2823743-podivejte-se-atentat-na-heydricha-ve-3d-modelu .

It is here they mention Heydrich firing two shots at Gabcik (they talk about witness accounts of this) and Heydrich picking up Gabcik's sten gun and dropping it back on the ground when returning to the car after briefly trying to pursue Gabcik.

The interview is, of course, all in Czech. The transcript of parts of the interview (not all of it) is in the previous link I sent.
Dioramartin
_VISITCOMMUNITY
New South Wales, Australia
Joined: May 04, 2016
KitMaker: 1,475 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Sunday, September 27, 2020 - 01:46 AM UTC
Thanks so much for the new research Jan, the plot thickens again. That’s right Erwin - I want answers! I want the truth!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kRMMg-YY5mI

Maybe so! Anyhow Jan, there were several places in the transcript where Google-translate clearly wasn’t accurate so I’ll try to comment only on what I hope was faithfully interpreted.

Stehlik’s theory is interesting that in their original plan Kubis may have been #1 assassin (with 3 bombs in his bag , 1 to disable the car, 2 into the open top, and a spare) and Gabcik as #2 assassin covering K. But of course that’s not what happened - G outranked K so maybe he decided (on the day?) he would have the better clear shot. I never could understand why G & K parked their bikes so far away from where they knew they’d be wanting to escape from pronto. They could have parked them on the bend and feigned some difficult maintenance issue for the benefit of passers-by…better still they should have been sitting on them! I think that’s an important question because (unless due to plain incompetence or hubris) it suggests a last-minute change of plan. I wonder if G & K were originally intending to attack the car from the long straight sidewalk as it slowed to make the bend - it would have been just as close to them & on their side of the street. The bikes would then have been only a few metres away. Maybe in the quick conference the three of them had when they met, G decided he’d be too exposed for too long levelling the Sten, giving Klein too much time to react as the car approached. So having improved the ambush idea by hiding on the bend, perhaps they didn’t think they had enough time to also move the bikes in case Heydrich was running early.

I agree that Klein’s missing testimony would most likely have settled a lot of questions. And great to have a clearer photo of the park-side road-signs, I can now see the top one is “17D” & the bottom is “2 . E . C (?) . 20” – what the * does that mean? I guess they’re both black on ochre…back to the drawing board.

Surprising Stehlik “only recently” realised G & K’s starting positions, so I’m glad to know that they’ve come round to my point of view Agree with Mr C about the police photographer’s camera lenses skewing all the perspectives. I doubt any (material) souvenirs were taken – police were on scene quickly enough & bystanders obviously knew it was Heydrich. All the stuff G & K abandoned (2 briefcases, G’s bike, G’s coat & sten, shell casings etc. were all recovered at scene. Pannewitz’s crime-scene diagram even shows where debris from the car and tram landed. As I illustrated at least a year ago in this blog the car’s aerial vanished fairly quickly, probably along with the licence plates & pennant recovered by the police overnight.

That’s new information for me that a/the off-duty policeman on the tram chased Kubis but quickly chickened out…maybe because he wasn’t armed? Pannewitz said it was Klein who gave chase but accidentally ejected his magazine when he had Kubis in his sights. When the wounded Heydrich saw that happen, he yelled to Klein to chase Gabcik instead (who was much closer & who had just abandoned his jammed Sten), probably on the split-second assumption both now appeared to be unarmed or disarmed. The debate about why Klein left the wounded Heydrich open to further attack is unnecessary – Heydrich ordered him to pursue G, so I doubt the chauffeur chose that moment to question the Reichsprotektor’s judgement.

Unfortunately their “3D” virtual reconstruction video doesn’t play for me in either link (“Invalid code”) but the opening frame looks reasonably correct. I don’t know what they used for landscape data, I used the original Prague transport survey map on the basis those measurements must have been precise. But how accurate can this video be when they’ve ignored Pannewitz again, who clearly stated the Merc was “SS 4”, NOT “SS 3”? And I also see they have the “diamond” sign as…bright yellow?

It’s also a shame these two historians seem to be writing the 3rd brave agent (Josef Valcik) out of the story. He was the guy up the street with the mirror signalling down to G when H’s car approached. Even if it was “partly cloudy” the mirror would have still worked, is that really their only reason for doubting Valcik was there at all? I’m sure they would have had a default signal too, such as Valcik opening a newspaper. I thought all accounts agreed (from surviving Resistance who harboured all three in the days following the assassination attempt) that they all met at the bend first & conferred before Valcik headed up the road. They’d already cased the location a day or two prior.

Just a cursory look at that “3D” opening frame makes it obvious why Valcik’s role was essential. Gabcik can’t see up the road from the bend because of the traffic, so he couldn’t possibly stand there with a sten under his coat for over an hour with only a few seconds to react to/identify Heydrich’s car whenever it appeared – it could have been completely screened by a tram (and nearly was) at the critical moment. Which is why he stood for all that time with the (mis-)assembled Sten under his coat on the sidewalk along from the house, looking up the straight section of street to where he could see Valcik in the distance on the same sidewalk. The signal gave G enough time to stride across the road to the inside bend sidewalk, alert Kubis who WAS loitering further round the bend and couldn’t see anything, and get ready.

I don’t think the other video frame shows the blast correctly either - the Merc was more likely still rolling when Kubis threw the bomb, probably the reason he missed lobbing it into the car only 3- 4 metres away. After sweeping past Gabcik, Klein put his foot down to get away but Heydrich then told him to halt. The blast more likely happened one or two car-lengths back from its final position for the car to end up where it did. For the shrapnel to hit Heydrich in the back he must have been still sitting (or maybe standing) in the car, which suggests the car hadn’t yet stopped. But the frame shows the car already in its final position with the blast.

Incidentally, about the dubious story Heydrich fired two shots - he would have been twisted right round if he’d “fired” from the car & therefore couldn’t have been hit with shrapnel in his back. So he must have taken aim at Gabcik once out of the car and then, as Pannewitz says his pistol wasn’t loaded…click. Click. At about the same moment Kubis was running away firing his pistol into the air to clear a path between (or past) the tram carriages. Two of his shells were found in the vicinity. So if there really were witnesses who “saw” this scene, they may have been looking at Heydrich but hearing Kubis. Ironically Gabcik seems to have also been fooled – he decided not to risk running through Heydrich’s apparent field of fire to his own bike, and once Klein changed tack to go after him he ran off in the opposite direction.

No flying uniforms mentioned (?) but how can I possibly resist depicting the nazi granny hurling a watering can under Kubis’ wheels as he pedalled away. Who says I can’t handle the truth?
Mushonza
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Canada
Joined: September 07, 2020
KitMaker: 12 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Sunday, September 27, 2020 - 07:17 AM UTC
Many great questions, Tim! The more we get into this, we seem to come up with more questions, and fewer answers. 😊 Most likely we will never know what exactly happened there, but it is interesting to speculate…

Let me just make a few quick comments here.

I seem to remember reading / hearing in another interview with the Cvancara/Stehlik duo that the original plan that Kubis and Gabic were trained for in Britain was indeed a practically simultaneous assault by the two. The “ideal” scenario was that a first grenade would be thrown at the engine to stop the car, with a second grenade to go in the car to kill Heydrich and the driver. Gabcik would then fire the sten gun to finish the crew off in case they would survive the grenade attack. They also say that it was the plan from the beginning (i.e. their training in Britain) to attack in a sharp curve, where the car would have to slow down considerably. They considered several locations in Prague and even in Panenske Brezany (the village outside of Prague where Heydrich's residence was) before they settled on the intersection in Kobylisy.

In another article/interview that I came across I remember Mr. Cvancara talking about Kubis being frustrated during the training because he kept missing the car with the grenade. Unlike his British instructors (who all played cricket) who would hit it every single time. My understanding is that Kubis had 2 grenades in his briefcase and the third grenade was in Gabcik’s briefcase, which was left on his bike.

Very good question regarding the bikes. In the interview Cvancara and Svehlik mention that in 1942 the intersection was on the outskirts of Prague with generally little traffic. That may explain why they left the bikes across the intersection thinking that, after the attack, they would easily get to their bikes and ride away. In that sense they were very unlucky since at the moment of the attack three (!!!) trams appeared on the spot at the same time – number 14 arriving from Kobylisy, another #14 arriving from the opposite direction, and #3 arriving from Liben. Especially the #3 tram blocked their way to the bikes plus all of a sudden there was a large number of people who got out of the trams.

Both Cvancara and Svehlik are not impressed with Klein and Heydrich and view their handling of the situation as absolutely contrary to the security protocol, which Heydrich himself wrote. First, they say Klein made a mistake by passing the tram on the left, then the second mistake was Heydrich ordering Klein to stop when they spotted Gabcik with the sten gun and finally Klein abandoning the injured Heydrich at the scene not knowing if more attackers were hiding there. Klein was apparently issued his pistol just two weeks before the assassination, so Cvancara/Stehlik doubt whether he even had a chance to fire it before then.

To me it looks like the 3D model focuses on the movement of the situation, movement of the car, trams and Gabcik and Kubis and not the details, such as the correct traffic signs, etc. Clearly they have used the present-day sign for a main road, not the correct one for the period and many of the other signs, which we have been debating, are missing entirely. However, I think from their point of view that is not the important part. In any case that is just my speculation, I did not read any interview with the actual creators of the 3D model.

Cvancara/Stehlik do seem to be convinced that Valcik was not on the scene. The main reason they mention is the fact that his face was known to the Gestapo, which had gotten a hold of his photograph, and posters with his photo were fairly widely circulated. There is a Czech movie on the subject made in 1964 called Atentat (Assassination) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqZw5VlVRJY, which shows Valcik on the scene. Many people’s view (at least in the Czech Republic) of the events have been influenced by this movie. Even though it is still the best dramatization of the event (I may be biased, but the movie benefited from filming on actual locations, which in some cases – mainly the intersection – have been completely changed since then), there are a few mistakes including Gabcik stepping in front of the car, and possibly the presence of Valcik.

In the interview Cvancara and Stehlik do say that they believe that Gabcik and Kubis probably saw Heydrich’s car at the last moment since their view was blocked by the #14 tram (consisting of 3 cars, so definitely providing a very good cover for Heydrich’s car) arriving at the stop from Kobylisy. Therefore, they only had a few seconds to react and that is why they may have changed the order of the attack with Gabcik trying to shoot first and Kubis throwing the grenade second. All of this is, of course, a speculation.

In the interview (not the transcript, which seems to be a shortened version), Cvancara/Stehlik talk about both Heydrich’s coat being thrown in the air by the explosion and getting entangled in the tram line for a while before falling down and Heydrich picking up and then dropping the sten gun.

I will have to take a close look at the signs you mentioned and get back to you, if I can figure out what exactly they may be.

The lady throwing a watering can under Kubis’s bike is an interesting side story. Same as another lady who he ran over shortly after who allegedly later provided a detailed description of Kubis and his bike to Gestapo. Even though she denied this, she was apparently sentenced to eight years in prison after the war.

Great discussion! Signing out for now but ready for more exploration (and more pilsner, or other adult beverages of choice to help us along ).
Dioramartin
_VISITCOMMUNITY
New South Wales, Australia
Joined: May 04, 2016
KitMaker: 1,475 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Monday, September 28, 2020 - 02:22 AM UTC
Hey Jan so THIS is the documentary…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JA-fkCgrknU

Their virtual version of the scene’s not bad, it does look quite a lot like my diorama But they didn’t show the steps down to the garden correctly, or the tram-stop post, or the trailer-tram...although they do have a red & white Holesovice sign.

No doubt the plan evolved between training & er execution, I guess if I was the Sten guy I’d also want to intervene first. Too much could go wrong aiming a big-ass grenade at a car first (?!) not knowing how/where a successfully disabled limo would end up, pulling out another for the occupants (while they sat patiently awaiting their fate), and all the while getting close enough to be accurate yet not be hit by shrapnel. One important extra to the plan, which may have only emerged when the agents learned where Heydrich was going that morning (to meetings with Himmler/Hitler in Berlin), was to grab Heydrich’s briefcase/papers after they’d killed him. Gathering intelligence was crucial regarding German intentions so the briefcase was considered vital.

To clarify the question of the bikes - I measured the distance on the survey map & compared it to the crime-scene photo of Gabcik’s bike in situ, leaning against a lamp-post (way past the end of my diorama to the east) at least 45 metres (50 yards) from the apex of the bend. I suppose it’s worth applying the logic test: assassins didn’t leave their means of escape nearby - therefore assassins had no expectation (or intention) of escaping? Supporting that idea is the fact they made no attempt to disguise themselves – although they did afterwards by bleaching their hair. Valcik had already dyed his blonde hair dark for the reasons you mentioned, after an unlikely escape from a raid a few weeks earlier. All the same I think there’s enough circumstantial evidence to indicate their dual intention was assassinate Heydrich AND take away intelligence.

The Anthropoid story, facts and myths, were investigated in Miroslav Ivanov’s “Target Heydrich” (1974), based on interviews with surviving witnesses. I haven’t found that book yet but it may provide some first-hand accounts of Josef Valcik’s involvement - MacDonald relied heavily on Ivanov’s primary research & he’s my main source. As already discussed, I believe a longer-range lookout would have been essential (with a mirror or not) and I can’t imagine a reason why someone would invent his participation. He was another SOE-trained agent hiding out with them, he died with them in the final siege, and ten members of his family were rounded up and murdered as part of the reprisals.

This seems to be a good time to revisit Pannewitz’s crime-scene diagram. Provided one accepts the accuracy of this document (and that nobody souvenier’d anything) it tells the story better than any witness, author or modern-day commentator…



Just to verify, here’s a police photo of some items (4 & maybe 5) so marked on the ground…



Referring to the diagram, Item 14 (just by the front drivers-side wing of the Merc) was an unexpended 7.65mm Patrone Geco bullet - fairly convincing proof it came from Klein’s pistol, having bounced out of the magazine when it hit the ground after he’d accidentally ejected it instead of flicking off the safety. It couldn’t have rolled far because of the cobbled surface so it fixes Klein’s position very well. There are no expended Patrone shells anywhere else at the scene. Items 27 & 28 are a total of four 7.65 Kynoch shells - to the right of the tram, fired by Kubis. There are no Kynoch shells anywhere else at the scene.

So, this primary source indicates that (1) Klein never fired a shot (2) Heydrich never fired a shot (3) Gabcik never fired a shot (until later, during the back-streets chase by Klein) (4) Kubis fired 4 shots after he’d cleared the trams and milling passengers, either into the air or in the direction of Klein. (So I retract the assertion in my previous post that two shells were found near the trams, I can’t now recall where I got that from!) I don’t doubt there was some gun-pointing by the others, but they might as well have had flags coming out of the muzzles with “BANG” written on them. Incidentally the debris pattern in the diagram seems to confirm the bomb went off one or two car-lengths before its final position – not as shown in the virtual video.

I get the impression there was a concerted effort after the war (and ever since) to embellish and dramatize the actual forensic evidence, rather than portray this undoubtedly courageous and symbolic blow for freedom as the semi-farce it really was. At the time the Germans had no reason to do the same - Pannewitz just told it like it was in his report, which went all the way to Hitler. Accuracy was an imperative in order to catch the perpetrators, there was no room for propaganda or fiction. It may also be the case that some alleged “eye-witness” statements, in the post-war era taken as gospel, were given by people excusing their own inaction, and/or ingratiating themselves in the hope of a reward. In other words, not necessarily reliable.

If you look back a couple of pages the 1964 Atentat movie was discussed & I showed a few stills. The area had already been altered by then – road-widening etc. I also found a blurry bit of (undated) tourist cine-film of the intersection almost as it appears in the movie, except the pillars/railings had been replaced by a crappy chain-link fence. I assume that was because the Czechs demolished all of it in ’45 in the process of removing the masonry memorial the Germans built in between two pillars on the bend. The railings in the movie are a simplified design compared to the originals and the pillars are in much better shape – they must have been rebuilt for the movie because in it you can still see the chain-link fence right behind the pillars. As far as I know the more radical re-modelling of the intersection must have happened in the early 70’s.

OK I’ll buy the flying/falling uniform! Na zdravi
Golikell
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Noord-Holland, Netherlands
Joined: October 25, 2002
KitMaker: 1,757 posts
AeroScale: 6 posts
Posted: Monday, September 28, 2020 - 06:01 AM UTC
Aparently, the book by Ivanov you mentioned is for sale on Amazon...

https://www.amazon.com/TARGET-HEYDRICH-Miroslav-Ivanov/dp/0690803346
Dioramartin
_VISITCOMMUNITY
New South Wales, Australia
Joined: May 04, 2016
KitMaker: 1,475 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Friday, October 02, 2020 - 02:15 AM UTC
Thanks for that link Erwin but I’ve rapidly become wary of trusting any publication on this subject - maybe I should write an Anthropoid book rather than buy any more. Meanwhile it’s Tax time which I find fairly debilitating, so for diversional therapy I decided to tackle something easier than backdrops…



OK it wasn’t that easy but Paint’s preferable to Excel any day. The design evolved until I got as close to the real thing as I’m able (top right) given the tolerances of photo-etching likely at this scale. But I’ve never done it before so time will tell. Turns out two of the three PE chemicals on order have to come from overseas, so it may be December before I can actually try it. Most of the 11 railings need customising because the distance between each pair of pillars varies in a range 9.5 - 10.3 cms, this master’s the widest. Zero information about colours so I’m open to debate, they don’t look black to me in the police photos…



The “3D” virtual model has them as just dark grey…baaarp, I don’t think so & I doubt they were just rusty iron either. So, because Prague’s signature colour seems to have been red (like the trams & suburb signs) I’m guessing the railings probably were too. But there’s clearly at least one other colour in places, gold seems to be one obvious choice (?)

Hopefully this is the final word on revised signage based on Jan’s advice & the clearer photo of the park-side signs - it doesn’t look like there’ll be any information about the D/arrow signs so…











Father Merrin’s standing where I believe Gabcik stood, not far from his bike, waiting for Valcik’s signal before crossing to the bend & it’ll take hard evidence to persuade me otherwise. I’m even coming round to the idea that he & Kubis waited there together, during which time they decided it would be better to cross to the bend when Heydrich’s car was approaching. It’s even possible they actually did feign a mechanical problem with one of the bikes, rather than stand apart looking increasingly suspicious - they were waiting for over 90 minutes with nothing to do and nowhere to sit.

New theory about the “black & gold” signs - I took the quotation to mean the Germans converted signs from red background/white letters to black background/gold letters, but I’ve just realised that the “ordinary” road-signs have a gold-ish ochre background with black letters, some bi-lingual. Duh! So I’m inclined to think ALL the road-signs (except the diamond one) in this scene are German Occupation, so they’re weathered on the assumption they’ve been in situ up to three years
G-man69
_VISITCOMMUNITY
England - South West, United Kingdom
Joined: October 17, 2017
KitMaker: 943 posts
AeroScale: 2 posts
Posted: Friday, October 02, 2020 - 03:23 AM UTC
Hi Tim,

The signage and the fencing look amazing...that comment should really apply to the whole build, .

And attempting your own PE, well you're leaving the mms (mere modellers), like me, standing still on the starting blocks...very impressive, even if we have to wait until the end of the year to see the results, .

Cheers, ,

G
PolishBrigade12
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Washington, United States
Joined: January 31, 2009
KitMaker: 380 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Saturday, October 03, 2020 - 06:40 AM UTC
From the video link I found several war flicks for the bunker this winter, excellente! Dio research is incredible Tim, Ruck On Bby!
jrutman
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: April 10, 2011
KitMaker: 7,940 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Saturday, October 03, 2020 - 08:24 AM UTC
Brilliant work and additions as always Maestro.
J
Golikell
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Noord-Holland, Netherlands
Joined: October 25, 2002
KitMaker: 1,757 posts
AeroScale: 6 posts
Posted: Sunday, October 04, 2020 - 09:21 PM UTC
I understand your holding back on yet another publication, but you stated yourself you were searching for this book?


Quoted Text


The Anthropoid story, facts and myths, were investigated in Miroslav Ivanov’s “Target Heydrich” (1974), based on interviews with surviving witnesses. I haven’t found that book yet but it may provide some first-hand accounts of Josef Valcik’s involvement - MacDonald relied heavily on Ivanov’s primary research & he’s my main source

cheyenne
_VISITCOMMUNITY
New Jersey, United States
Joined: January 05, 2005
KitMaker: 2,184 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Sunday, October 04, 2020 - 10:44 PM UTC
Brilliant work Tim !!
Extremely 1/1 scale lookin !!
Dioramartin
_VISITCOMMUNITY
New South Wales, Australia
Joined: May 04, 2016
KitMaker: 1,475 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Monday, October 05, 2020 - 02:19 AM UTC
Thanks gents, general street-grime/weathering & some random variation to the cobble tone to come. G – hah right now I’m in those starting blocks too re photo-etching…I just know I’ll regret saying this but the process seems pretty simple. I now have the mini UV light-box (it’s what they use in nail salons) & the 0.013mm brass sheets, just awaiting the witches’ brews. Toying with the idea of pimping the limo a bit more after the railings.

Guilty as charged Erwin, but I reserve the right to change my mind. After writing the last part of that sentence last week I had an attack of logic: Macdonald relied heavily on Ivanov…and Macdonald’s narrative of the event contains some elements of fiction…therefore….

In the end I think I’ll just have to make a decision about Valcik’s involvement based on practical probabilities, rather than contradictory claims including whatever Ivanov says. Having him as a lookout far up the street signalling (importantly, far enough away from them because he was a fugitive on the run) makes a lot of sense, if not with a mirror then maybe a newspaper. It would have given Gabcik & Kubis enough time to assess how other approaching traffic/trams might impede their line of fire, to the extent of deciding whether to stay on the main road near their bikes, or cross to the bend - they had plenty of time to mentally prepare for either option. I think the strongest support for that theory is that just as they got the signal Heydrich was coming down the hill, the tram approaching from the opposite end of the long straight (on their side of the street) would have looked like it would pass between them and Heydrich’s car just as it turned into the bend, thus blocking their attack. So they quickly crossed to the bend. It’s one of the few elements to the action I don’t think any account disputes, that Klein had to speed up in order to make the turn in front of that on-coming tram and then brake hard.

But then I could always change my mind again
Golikell
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Noord-Holland, Netherlands
Joined: October 25, 2002
KitMaker: 1,757 posts
AeroScale: 6 posts
Posted: Monday, October 05, 2020 - 05:12 AM UTC
I won't dispute you right to change your mind. I just reacted to you remark
Dioramartin
_VISITCOMMUNITY
New South Wales, Australia
Joined: May 04, 2016
KitMaker: 1,475 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Thursday, October 08, 2020 - 10:02 PM UTC
Was it Mark Twain who said something like the older I get, the less certain I am about anything? I dunno.

Backdrops. I’ve been mulling/avoiding this issue for two years but now it’s crunch-time. I was relieved after taking those first tree/garden photos outside a couple of months back, when the view from our balcony served as an OK semi-urban blurry background for shots taken from behind the derelict Merc. One less to worry about.

That leaves (1) the long view west up the hill from where Heydrich’s car approached, (2) the view behind the house & all along the north side of the long street, (3) all along the east side, (4) the south side aspect incorporating what I’ve called the art-deco building which still stands today. I’ll probably build it for the same reason as the house (too many views from too many angles for 2D to work), with a blurry strip of background running either side of it. That same low-ish strip might work running right around (3) and (2) but it won’t work for (1) because it’ll need to be higher & so more likely to sabotage the photography because of the shadows it will cast. Wherever I decide the sun is in the sky at 10.30am Prague time, there’ll be significant shadows & whether weak or strong they’re likely to be in all the wrong places. And that’s assuming I’d be able to pull off convincing painted backdrops in the first place.

Alternatively: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kb5mRBMZbYo





I should be able to do better, just playing here & couldn’t stop tinkering. Luckily in the final photos one of the trams will blot out most of the Institute building on the left, which was tricky as it’s set at an angle to the road & not parallel with it. The main point of the exercise was to see if I could photoshop a plausible vanishing-point and suggest a gradually ascending hill. It took about 3 hours, not much less than actually drawing/painting a “real” backdrop but of course I’d have to repeat it for every photo looking in this direction. Even so there are some time-saving/consistency tricks like cutting/pasting real skies & trees from other images & blending them in, and then using that same backdrop from one photo onto another & with perspective modifications. This particular west view’s probably the most difficult because of the amount of background needed for the narrative as tram & Merc approach – in most of the ensuing photos it should hardly be an issue at all, with foreground elements dominating & backdrops (hopefully) merely glimpsed.

Is it cheating? No more than real backdrops, both methods are intended to deceive. I think it would be wrong to manipulate any 3D elements though (i.e. anything built) and in the above example I did indeed cheat just once, but it’s hardly a hanging offence - hope you agree?

A couple of surprises on the line up ahead, hold on
cheyenne
_VISITCOMMUNITY
New Jersey, United States
Joined: January 05, 2005
KitMaker: 2,184 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Friday, October 09, 2020 - 12:11 AM UTC
I love it Tim . It works beautifully in a photo venue . In a photo your eyes peruse the foreground first then the background as an afterthought . I mean it's just parsley for the main dish . The background you have though is not just good enough , it's pretty dam cool !!
You get to see it in person so it may not come across the same as me seeing in a photo , knowwatImean .
jrutman
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: April 10, 2011
KitMaker: 7,940 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Friday, October 09, 2020 - 01:56 AM UTC
Looks like a seemless blending to me. Well done Sir! I wish I knew the sorcery behind PS. I would like to think I have the smarts to learn it but the main drawback is I don't want to learn it! hahhaha I like my old school drawing and painting I suppose.
Having said that I really enjoy this view. As I said, seemless.
J
G-man69
_VISITCOMMUNITY
England - South West, United Kingdom
Joined: October 17, 2017
KitMaker: 943 posts
AeroScale: 2 posts
Posted: Friday, October 09, 2020 - 02:26 AM UTC
Hi Tim,

'WOW!'...I am not worthy, I don't often cuss, but that looks bloomin' amazing, as Jerry says...seamless.

It's not just a simple backdrop, it's an extension of the whole, definitely another Industrial Light & Magic movie moment, .

Cheers, ,

G