login   |    register
Figures
This forum is for discussion of military figure making.
Tucked-in Neckties
long_tom
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Illinois, United States
Joined: March 18, 2006
KitMaker: 2,362 posts
AeroScale: 9 posts
Posted: Sunday, September 27, 2020 - 12:10 PM UTC
I know that when a soldier was in a service uniform during WW2 and was wearing a necktie but no jacket, he had to tuck in his necktie between the first and second buttons of his shirt. How long did this practice last?
oldbean
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Virginia, United States
Joined: July 05, 2004
KitMaker: 769 posts
AeroScale: 3 posts
Posted: Monday, September 28, 2020 - 10:33 AM UTC
Until no officers (or higher ranking ones) were around!
Jesse
long_tom
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Illinois, United States
Joined: March 18, 2006
KitMaker: 2,362 posts
AeroScale: 9 posts
Posted: Monday, September 28, 2020 - 11:24 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Until no officers (or higher ranking ones) were around!
Jesse


Years ago I saw a WW2-era book of "Unarmed Defense For The American Soldier" and that is when I first saw the neckties tucked that way in the photographs. I had originally assumed that this was only done for the purposes of the book, e. g. neckties flapping around would make the demonstration pictures confusing.
stikpusher
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Arizona, United States
Joined: June 16, 2005
KitMaker: 81 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Monday, September 28, 2020 - 12:49 PM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

Until no officers (or higher ranking ones) were around!
Jesse


Years ago I saw a WW2-era book of "Unarmed Defense For The American Soldier" and that is when I first saw the neckties tucked that way in the photographs. I had originally assumed that this was only done for the purposes of the book, e. g. neckties flapping around would make the demonstration pictures confusing.



I inherited that manual from my dad. It was issued to him in 1953.

It looks like that reg was still around in the 50’s with Pvt Presley

Kevlar06
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Washington, United States
Joined: March 15, 2009
KitMaker: 3,670 posts
AeroScale: 833 posts
Posted: Monday, September 28, 2020 - 02:24 PM UTC
I routinely tucked my black necktie into my shirt when the green “Class A” uniform was still around, just because I didn’t like it hanging out below my jacket when I sat down. Of course, when the green shirt with the “Class B” uniform came along, you didn’t have to wear a jacket, so the tie was left out and optionally restrained by a tie tack or bar. The tan uniform was still in service when I first joined up, and I recall the “tie-tuck” was still in fashion then, but only informally, like in the “mess hall” when eating. My Father-in-Law was a retired Colonel, who served during WWII, Korea and Vietnam. He still routinely tucked his tie in his shirt whenever he wore a suit, and he used to say “that was the way I learned to do it in the Army”. He retired in 1969, I came in three years later in 1972. During WWII, in ground combat, the tie was discarded for the most part, and only enforced by hard cases like Patton. It was seen more often in the ETO than it ever was in the PTO.
VR, Russ
stikpusher
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Arizona, United States
Joined: June 16, 2005
KitMaker: 81 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Tuesday, September 29, 2020 - 04:49 AM UTC

Quoted Text

I routinely tucked my black necktie into my shirt when the green “Class A” uniform was still around, just because I didn’t like it hanging out below my jacket when I sat down. Of course, when the green shirt with the “Class B” uniform came along, you didn’t have to wear a jacket, so the tie was left out and optionally restrained by a tie tack or bar. The tan uniform was still in service when I first joined up, and I recall the “tie-tuck” was still in fashion then, but only informally, like in the “mess hall” when eating. My Father-in-Law was a retired Colonel, who served during WWII, Korea and Vietnam. He still routinely tucked his tie in his shirt whenever he wore a suit, and he used to say “that was the way I learned to do it in the Army”. He retired in 1969, I came in three years later in 1972. During WWII, in ground combat, the tie was discarded for the most part, and only enforced by hard cases like Patton. It was seen more often in the ETO than it ever was in the PTO.
VR, Russ



Was that necktie tuck something that you were told to do in the Army, or something that you just did on your own from seeing it beforehand? Just curious. By the time I enlisted and went thru Benning in 1983 it was no longer taught. And being Infantry, I don’t think that we wore our A’s or B’s more than 2-3 times a year.
Kevlar06
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Washington, United States
Joined: March 15, 2009
KitMaker: 3,670 posts
AeroScale: 833 posts
Posted: Tuesday, September 29, 2020 - 05:28 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

I routinely tucked my black necktie into my shirt when the green “Class A” uniform was still around, just because I didn’t like it hanging out below my jacket when I sat down. Of course, when the green shirt with the “Class B” uniform came along, you didn’t have to wear a jacket, so the tie was left out and optionally restrained by a tie tack or bar. The tan uniform was still in service when I first joined up, and I recall the “tie-tuck” was still in fashion then, but only informally, like in the “mess hall” when eating. My Father-in-Law was a retired Colonel, who served during WWII, Korea and Vietnam. He still routinely tucked his tie in his shirt whenever he wore a suit, and he used to say “that was the way I learned to do it in the Army”. He retired in 1969, I came in three years later in 1972. During WWII, in ground combat, the tie was discarded for the most part, and only enforced by hard cases like Patton. It was seen more often in the ETO than it ever was in the PTO.
VR, Russ



Was that necktie tuck something that you were told to do in the Army, or something that you just did on your own from seeing it beforehand? Just curious. By the time I enlisted and went thru Benning in 1983 it was no longer taught. And being Infantry, I don’t think that we wore our A’s or B’s more than 2-3 times a year.



I’d just do it on my own, and never “routinely“ wore A or B uniform options until I became a staff officer at USARPAC in 1989, and worked in the DCSOPS office. I was a Major, and while in the office the Class A or B uniform was required. But I spent a lot of time on Johnson Island, and other not so nice areas of the Pacific, where we never wore the Class A or B uniform. While assigned there I “tucked the tie” because as I said, it’d either hang out below the jacket, or was just in the way, I was constantly shutting it in my top desk drawer. However, when I first joined the reserves in 1972, There were lots of older vets around, and many of them routinely tucked the tie as an option, depending on the CO, while in an office setting. That’s the only place you’d see a tie, and many of our staff NCOs did it. By the time I came on active duty in 76, it was not accepted practice at all, but occasionally, you’d see an “old timer“ wearing it tucked in, but never “officially”. My first assignment was as a platoon leader in the 11th CAV in Europe in 76. We had a Troop First Sergeant that was a grizzled WWII vet and a codger. Whenever he wore his class A uniform without the jacket, his tie was always tucked in, and nobody, including the Squadron CO, argued with him. We had several WWII veterans who followed suit. I think “office rules“ were generally more relaxed, and we didn’t Wear the uniform enough to get “wrapped around the axle” so to speak, unless you were in public or briefing somebody higher up. The “tie tuck” was to prevent the tie getting caught up in machinery, which could be anything from engine fan belts to typewriters.
VR, Russ
BootsDMS
_VISITCOMMUNITY
England - South West, United Kingdom
Joined: February 08, 2012
KitMaker: 978 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Tuesday, September 29, 2020 - 06:05 AM UTC
I'm afraid I do wonder at the motives of the OP; I am not convinced of the value of such input to us, modellers, mainly, of armour-based models.

If one wishes to reminisce or indulge in military historical aspects, then surely there are more appropriate websites?

I appreciate that the occasionally tangent of personal experience within a discussion of a modelling/historical aspect can indeed be useful, but I am beginning to despair of such relatively aimless topics being initiated to this degree.

I always understood this to be a modelling site; hitherto it has proved immensely useful and practically none of my many queries to this site over the years have been unanswered, but this surely is the thin edge of the wedge.

Lately, the inane and the fatuous seem to have prevailed. As I say, I (quietly) despair.

I would strongly suggest, that if you wish to discuss the wearing of neckties then you identify an appropriate militaria website; and "No" - before the easily offended aggressively respond, I am not attempting to curb so-called "free speech" - merely to get us all back on a relevant track - that of military modelling.

Yours - more in hope than much else,

Brian
Kevlar06
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Washington, United States
Joined: March 15, 2009
KitMaker: 3,670 posts
AeroScale: 833 posts
Posted: Tuesday, September 29, 2020 - 06:29 AM UTC

Quoted Text

I'm afraid I do wonder at the motives of the OP; I am not convinced of the value of such input to us, modellers, mainly, of armour-based models.

If one wishes to reminisce or indulge in military historical aspects, then surely there are more appropriate websites?

I appreciate that the occasionally tangent of personal experience within a discussion of a modelling/historical aspect can indeed be useful, but I am beginning to despair of such relatively aimless topics being initiated to this degree.

I always understood this to be a modelling site; hitherto it has proved immensely useful and practically none of my many queries to this site over the years have been unanswered, but this surely is the thin edge of the wedge.

Lately, the inane and the fatuous seem to have prevailed. As I say, I (quietly) despair.

I would strongly suggest, that if you wish to discuss the wearing of neckties then you identify an appropriate militaria website; and "No" - before the easily offended aggressively respond, I am not attempting to curb so-called "free speech" - merely to get us all back on a relevant track - that of military modelling.

Yours - more in hope than much else,

Brian



Brian,
Firstly, I do agree with you “somewhat”. However, the original poster did place his question in the military figures forum posting of Armorama (look at the small icon next to the Armorama icon). Subsequently, answers were given in that posting, which probably addressed the original question. It’s not his fault that some of us have reminisced. On the other hand, there is a service related forum on the Kitmaker network— No need to go off to some other site, and there’s a MAFVA re-enactors forum here as well, if folks are interested in that. At its base level, the question is not unreasonable if one is trying to place a figure in a timeframe, so it’s not an “illegitimate” question If it’s posted in the correct forum, which I think it may be. So often many of us just assume there’s only one interest group here at Armorama, but there are many. But I do agree, sometimes we get a bit “off topic”, Perhaps this might have been better placed on the “Historica Forma” side of Kitmaker? In any event, There’s more to Armorama, and Kitmaker than just Military vehicles. And you can always choose to read a post or not. I’m not defending here, and you may have a valid point.
VR, Russ
alanmac
_VISITCOMMUNITY
United Kingdom
Joined: February 25, 2007
KitMaker: 3,032 posts
AeroScale: 2 posts
Posted: Tuesday, September 29, 2020 - 06:58 AM UTC

Quoted Text

I'm afraid I do wonder at the motives of the OP; I am not convinced of the value of such input to us, modellers, mainly, of armour-based models.

If one wishes to reminisce or indulge in military historical aspects, then surely there are more appropriate websites?

I appreciate that the occasionally tangent of personal experience within a discussion of a modelling/historical aspect can indeed be useful, but I am beginning to despair of such relatively aimless topics being initiated to this degree.

I always understood this to be a modelling site; hitherto it has proved immensely useful and practically none of my many queries to this site over the years have been unanswered, but this surely is the thin edge of the wedge.

Lately, the inane and the fatuous seem to have prevailed. As I say, I (quietly) despair.

I would strongly suggest, that if you wish to discuss the wearing of neckties then you identify an appropriate militaria website; and "No" - before the easily offended aggressively respond, I am not attempting to curb so-called "free speech" - merely to get us all back on a relevant track - that of military modelling.

Yours - more in hope than much else,

Brian



It's just Tom the Timewaster playing his usual game. Take a look at his previous efforts to see this type of thing is typical for him.
BootsDMS
_VISITCOMMUNITY
England - South West, United Kingdom
Joined: February 08, 2012
KitMaker: 978 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Tuesday, September 29, 2020 - 08:09 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

I'm afraid I do wonder at the motives of the OP; I am not convinced of the value of such input to us, modellers, mainly, of armour-based models.

If one wishes to reminisce or indulge in military historical aspects, then surely there are more appropriate websites?

I appreciate that the occasionally tangent of personal experience within a discussion of a modelling/historical aspect can indeed be useful, but I am beginning to despair of such relatively aimless topics being initiated to this degree.

I always understood this to be a modelling site; hitherto it has proved immensely useful and practically none of my many queries to this site over the years have been unanswered, but this surely is the thin edge of the wedge.

Lately, the inane and the fatuous seem to have prevailed. As I say, I (quietly) despair.

I would strongly suggest, that if you wish to discuss the wearing of neckties then you identify an appropriate militaria website; and "No" - before the easily offended aggressively respond, I am not attempting to curb so-called "free speech" - merely to get us all back on a relevant track - that of military modelling.

Yours - more in hope than much else,

Brian



Brian,
Firstly, I do agree with you “somewhat”. However, the original poster did place his question in the military figures forum posting of Armorama (look at the small icon next to the Armorama icon). Subsequently, answers were given in that posting, which probably addressed the original question. It’s not his fault that some of us have reminisced. On the other hand, there is a service related forum on the Kitmaker network— No need to go off to some other site, and there’s a MAFVA re-enactors forum here as well, if folks are interested in that. At its base level, the question is not unreasonable if one is trying to place a figure in a timeframe, so it’s not an “illegitimate” question If it’s posted in the correct forum, which I think it may be. So often many of us just assume there’s only one interest group here at Armorama, but there are many. But I do agree, sometimes we get a bit “off topic”, Perhaps this might have been better placed on the “Historica Forma” side of Kitmaker? In any event, There’s more to Armorama, and Kitmaker than just Military vehicles. And you can always choose to read a post or not. I’m not defending here, and you may have a valid point.
VR, Russ


#
#

Russ,

I fully admit I hadn't quite realised the wide-ranging nature of Kitmaker; but sometimes, "Jeez".

God knows, in my own contributions, I myself do venture into the esoteric, eg shades of British Army Blanco and the endless permutations of webbing equipment, let alone, my own stultifying military experience, but I do try and confine myself into certain constraints.

However, I take your point and perhaps I need to be a little, a little, less curmudgeonly.

Brian

BootsDMS
_VISITCOMMUNITY
England - South West, United Kingdom
Joined: February 08, 2012
KitMaker: 978 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Tuesday, September 29, 2020 - 08:12 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

I'm afraid I do wonder at the motives of the OP; I am not convinced of the value of such input to us, modellers, mainly, of armour-based models.

If one wishes to reminisce or indulge in military historical aspects, then surely there are more appropriate websites?

I appreciate that the occasionally tangent of personal experience within a discussion of a modelling/historical aspect can indeed be useful, but I am beginning to despair of such relatively aimless topics being initiated to this degree.

I always understood this to be a modelling site; hitherto it has proved immensely useful and practically none of my many queries to this site over the years have been unanswered, but this surely is the thin edge of the wedge.

Lately, the inane and the fatuous seem to have prevailed. As I say, I (quietly) despair.

I would strongly suggest, that if you wish to discuss the wearing of neckties then you identify an appropriate militaria website; and "No" - before the easily offended aggressively respond, I am not attempting to curb so-called "free speech" - merely to get us all back on a relevant track - that of military modelling.

Yours - more in hope than much else,

Brian



It's just Tom the Timewaster playing his usual game. Take a look at his previous efforts to see this type of thing is typical for him.



Alan,

Aha; thanks; I feel somewhat vindicated now - I do indeed see what you mean.

Thanks!

Brian
long_tom
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Illinois, United States
Joined: March 18, 2006
KitMaker: 2,362 posts
AeroScale: 9 posts
Posted: Tuesday, September 29, 2020 - 09:45 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text


Quoted Text

I'm afraid I do wonder at the motives of the OP; I am not convinced of the value of such input to us, modellers, mainly, of armour-based models.

If one wishes to reminisce or indulge in military historical aspects, then surely there are more appropriate websites?

I appreciate that the occasionally tangent of personal experience within a discussion of a modelling/historical aspect can indeed be useful, but I am beginning to despair of such relatively aimless topics being initiated to this degree.

I always understood this to be a modelling site; hitherto it has proved immensely useful and practically none of my many queries to this site over the years have been unanswered, but this surely is the thin edge of the wedge.

Lately, the inane and the fatuous seem to have prevailed. As I say, I (quietly) despair.

I would strongly suggest, that if you wish to discuss the wearing of neckties then you identify an appropriate militaria website; and "No" - before the easily offended aggressively respond, I am not attempting to curb so-called "free speech" - merely to get us all back on a relevant track - that of military modelling.

Yours - more in hope than much else,

Brian



It's just Tom the Timewaster playing his usual game. Take a look at his previous efforts to see this type of thing is typical for him.



Alan,

Aha; thanks; I feel somewhat vindicated now - I do indeed see what you mean.

Thanks!

Brian


Prepare for a shock:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Master-Box-Ltd-Europe-1945-1-35-Scale-Model-Kit-MB3514-New-in-Box/173844902793?hash=item2879f6b389:g:~sEAAOSwusdb9Fmh

I thought I was the last person to have learned about all the figures in service uniforms that have been coming out lately. This is but one example. Many in resin, but others in plastic. And this example was clearly based on Osprey's European Theater book, which shows several postwar celebrants. Wanna bet you WILL see figures with tucked-in neckties in a year or so?
long_tom
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Illinois, United States
Joined: March 18, 2006
KitMaker: 2,362 posts
AeroScale: 9 posts
Posted: Tuesday, September 29, 2020 - 09:47 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text


Quoted Text

Until no officers (or higher ranking ones) were around!
Jesse


Years ago I saw a WW2-era book of "Unarmed Defense For The American Soldier" and that is when I first saw the neckties tucked that way in the photographs. I had originally assumed that this was only done for the purposes of the book, e. g. neckties flapping around would make the demonstration pictures confusing.



I inherited that manual from my dad. It was issued to him in 1953.

It looks like that reg was still around in the 50’s with Pvt Presley



I did see the movie "G. I. Blues" years ago. Is the still from that movie or Presley's real-life Army service?
Kevlar06
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Washington, United States
Joined: March 15, 2009
KitMaker: 3,670 posts
AeroScale: 833 posts
Posted: Tuesday, September 29, 2020 - 10:27 AM UTC
Folks,
Several years ago, I vowed I wouldn’t say bad things about folks or their intentions here on Kitmaker. I decided I’d temper my comments constructively, rather than negatively, and not go looking for trouble. That’s the beauty of this site, you can pick and choose topics that interest you. If a topic doesn’t interest you, you can pass. I sometimes click on a title just because it sounds interesting, if I find it isn’t, I just move on.

Tom, it may be better to lead off with “full disclosure” when you ask a question, rather than fragmenting your intent and waiting for someone to “pounce”. Unless of course you are purposely trying to bait someone. If that’s the case, expect the type of response you’re getting above. I sense there’s a reason you ask questions this way. Do you in fact build models? Even if you don’t, there’s nothing wrong with asking questions, but more clarity for the reason behind the question would be better. For all, let’s try and be civil in how we address each other.
VR, Russ
long_tom
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Illinois, United States
Joined: March 18, 2006
KitMaker: 2,362 posts
AeroScale: 9 posts
Posted: Tuesday, September 29, 2020 - 11:15 AM UTC
Yes, I build models, and no, I thought my question was quite obvious. And as for civility, some people here are failing to practice it. One person got his very uncivil comment removed on this thread.
Vicious
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Queensland, Australia
Joined: September 04, 2015
KitMaker: 1,517 posts
AeroScale: 75 posts
Posted: Tuesday, September 29, 2020 - 04:50 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Folks,
Several years ago, I vowed I wouldn’t say bad things about folks or their intentions here on Kitmaker. I decided I’d temper my comments constructively, rather than negatively, and not go looking for trouble. That’s the beauty of this site, you can pick and choose topics that interest you. If a topic doesn’t interest you, you can pass. I sometimes click on a title just because it sounds interesting, if I find it isn’t, I just move on.

Tom, it may be better to lead off with “full disclosure” when you ask a question, rather than fragmenting your intent and waiting for someone to “pounce”. Unless of course you are purposely trying to bait someone. If that’s the case, expect the type of response you’re getting above. I sense there’s a reason you ask questions this way. Do you in fact build models? Even if you don’t, there’s nothing wrong with asking questions, but more clarity for the reason behind the question would be better. For all, let’s try and be civil in how we address each other.
VR, Russ



Amen!....soo true
stikpusher
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Arizona, United States
Joined: June 16, 2005
KitMaker: 81 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Wednesday, September 30, 2020 - 04:49 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text


Quoted Text


Quoted Text

Until no officers (or higher ranking ones) were around!
Jesse


Years ago I saw a WW2-era book of "Unarmed Defense For The American Soldier" and that is when I first saw the neckties tucked that way in the photographs. I had originally assumed that this was only done for the purposes of the book, e. g. neckties flapping around would make the demonstration pictures confusing.



I inherited that manual from my dad. It was issued to him in 1953.

It looks like that reg was still around in the 50’s with Pvt Presley



I did see the movie "G. I. Blues" years ago. Is the still from that movie or Presley's real-life Army service?



The photo is from his real Army service and not from the GI Blues movie. His time in the Army was fairly well photographed. I’ve debated about building the Dragon M48A1 in my stash as either a Checkpoint Charlie/Berlin Wall Crisis or in Elvis’ actual 3rd AD unit markings.
landshark4
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Alabama, United States
Joined: June 04, 2012
KitMaker: 103 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Wednesday, September 30, 2020 - 07:10 AM UTC

Quoted Text

I'm afraid I do wonder at the motives of the OP; I am not convinced of the value of such input to us, modellers, mainly, of armour-based models.

If one wishes to reminisce or indulge in military historical aspects, then surely there are more appropriate websites?

I appreciate that the occasionally tangent of personal experience within a discussion of a modelling/historical aspect can indeed be useful, but I am beginning to despair of such relatively aimless topics being initiated to this degree.

I always understood this to be a modelling site; hitherto it has proved immensely useful and practically none of my many queries to this site over the years have been unanswered, but this surely is the thin edge of the wedge.

Lately, the inane and the fatuous seem to have prevailed. As I say, I (quietly) despair.

I would strongly suggest, that if you wish to discuss the wearing of neckties then you identify an appropriate militaria website; and "No" - before the easily offended aggressively respond, I am not attempting to curb so-called "free speech" - merely to get us all back on a relevant track - that of military modelling.

Yours - more in hope than much else,

Brian



It is a legitimate question for modeling and the answers are important. If I am doing a diorama or model with figures, then it is important to know the time frame an item was worn. In this case ties. Someone could say that "According to this or that book, ties were required to be tucked in from years blahblah to blahah. And, inevitable, someone will say, "Well, in my unit ties were worn from blahblah to blahblah." Thus changing the approach to a figure or helping pinpoint when a reference photograph was taken. If personal recollections remain focused on the original intent of the question then what is the problem? It's not like someone went off on a tangent and started discussing civilian ties. So, I say keep the discussions going. You can always skip past the responses not of interest.
long_tom
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Illinois, United States
Joined: March 18, 2006
KitMaker: 2,362 posts
AeroScale: 9 posts
Posted: Wednesday, September 30, 2020 - 09:51 AM UTC
Ah, if only somebody made a 1/35 scale Elvis army figure...
stikpusher
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Arizona, United States
Joined: June 16, 2005
KitMaker: 81 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Wednesday, September 30, 2020 - 09:56 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Ah, if only somebody made a 1/35 scale Elvis army figure...


Hell, I’d be happy with more 1/35 50’s/60’s/70’s Cold War US Army figures, grunts and tankers. Most of the AFVs have been kitted, it’d be nice to have more figures for them. In summer and winter uniforms.
long_tom
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Illinois, United States
Joined: March 18, 2006
KitMaker: 2,362 posts
AeroScale: 9 posts
Posted: Wednesday, September 30, 2020 - 01:59 PM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

Ah, if only somebody made a 1/35 scale Elvis army figure...


Hell, I’d be happy with more 1/35 50’s/60’s/70’s Cold War US Army figures, grunts and tankers. Most of the AFVs have been kitted, it’d be nice to have more figures for them. In summer and winter uniforms.


This might help: http://hobbyfan.com.tw/index.php/Home/Product/index/tid/5/mid/13/p/2.html?&lang=en
Kevlar06
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Washington, United States
Joined: March 15, 2009
KitMaker: 3,670 posts
AeroScale: 833 posts
Posted: Wednesday, September 30, 2020 - 02:18 PM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text


Quoted Text

Ah, if only somebody made a 1/35 scale Elvis army figure...


Hell, I’d be happy with more 1/35 50’s/60’s/70’s Cold War US Army figures, grunts and tankers. Most of the AFVs have been kitted, it’d be nice to have more figures for them. In summer and winter uniforms.


This might help: http://hobbyfan.com.tw/index.php/Home/Product/index/tid/5/mid/13/p/2.html?&lang=en



Hobby fan figures are very difficult to find here in the US, and when they are available, they’re ridiculously expensive. But they do make great stuff. I understand from my time in a LHS that HF (part of AFV Club) limits their quantities to save the molds, and only re-pops the figures after they’re OOP for a while, hence their availability issues. On a different subject, I had the privilege of commanding the Frieberg Germany Garrison many years ago, when the 1AD was there. They had a museum with Presley memorabilia, and the Barbershop on base was still run by the German barber that cut Presley’s hair. In the barbershop was a plaque with a lock of Presley’s hair embedEd in plexiglass.

On another un-related note, Franklin Roosevelt spent time in Frieberg as a child with his parents. They have photos of Roosevelt and his family in the town hall. Frieberg is known as a “cure” town because of the salt water and juniper mixed air folks come to breath. It’s believed Roosevelt placed Frieberg off limits for bombing during WWII because of this. It didn’t stop the Germans from militarizing it though, as they built the underground HQ for OKW there. It’s now used by the German Heer. Just some trivia. Back to the subject— I too would like very much to see more mainstream manufacturers create 1950s, 60s and 70s US figures, ties optional, especially Korean and Vietnam war figures.
VR, Russ
stikpusher
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Arizona, United States
Joined: June 16, 2005
KitMaker: 81 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Wednesday, September 30, 2020 - 04:41 PM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text


Quoted Text

Ah, if only somebody made a 1/35 scale Elvis army figure...


Hell, I’d be happy with more 1/35 50’s/60’s/70’s Cold War US Army figures, grunts and tankers. Most of the AFVs have been kitted, it’d be nice to have more figures for them. In summer and winter uniforms.


This might help: http://hobbyfan.com.tw/index.php/Home/Product/index/tid/5/mid/13/p/2.html?&lang=en



Aside from a few Korean War era figures, most of the HobbyFan stuff is WWII, Vietnam, or current Iraq/Afghanistan. Nothing in steel pots, fatigues, Field Jackets, or other typical Cold War uniform.