Pershing Icon Set *DELETED*

[oragus]

Yeah, I know, I have quite a few of his publications on artillery. Still, I doubt he would put his name on something he didn't believe was accurate?

Either way. A bit frustrating is what it is.

Thanks for the good talk though Don. Its appreciated.

Joe

[DRG]

After reviewing the three top view drawings I have of this thing and making a few adjustment to the Icon this seems to be closer to the proportions of the M26. The composite at the lower right has a rear hull shadow line

3x normal size


Don

[oragus]

So, what are the actual pixel dimensions on your mod here?

[DRG]

fender to fender no shadow line 42x23. Here it is 1:1

Don

[oragus]

That is what my M-46 is in that comparison. I did the M-46 because that was what I was workin on and they are "basically" identical outside of the different engine deck and small details of course.

Do me a favor and slap that modded Pershing next to one of your latest T-54s and post it would ya? I want to see how those look in comparison to my Patton / T-54 comparison.

Oh, I forgot to add something about your mod that made me chuckle. You modded one of the things that I changed right off...LOL... The turret ring. My turret is too small. LOL. Detail oriented eyes look a like.

So all these little detail talks gonna lead to some of my stuff making it into the game again?..LOL...

Joe

[DRG]

T-55 / M26

3x normal size

Don

[oragus]

Thank you Don.

I know this is gonna be a resource thing probably but, according to my source the T-55 should be at least 2 pixels shorter & about 2 pixels narrower than the Pershing. It looks like it is narrower, but not shorter...kinda my point, looks too small. I don't know. Screw it, we'll run with it. I'll start with what I used to do. I used to look up about three different sources, and go with the common source. I bought my Greenhill Data Book for the "cure all" of that to save time. Oh well, time to double, and triple check it on everything. An update will be coming soon.

Joe

[DRG]

Joe, there are fuel tanks hanging off the end of that vehicle that make it appear longer. And they do indeed extend the length of the Icon beyond the stated "hull length". Any source that gives hull length should NOT be including the fuel tanks ( though it wouldn't surprise me to find one that does ).

When checking 3 view drawings of the tank the width x length ratio for that vehicle from the front mud guards to the rear of the fuel tanks it comes back as 2.134. Check that Icon and it comes back 2.143. One pixel shorter makes it 2.095 and one pixel longer makes it 2.190 so 2.143 is, using the scale we are using, virtually dead on 45x21 which is what that icon is when the fuel tanks are added to the rear of the tank



Don

[oragus]

I am not disputing your T-55 dimensions and of course I know those are 55 gallon drums strapped to the back of it to extends it range. LOL.. Give me a bit of credit here Don...LOL...

Also notice, that I said "screw it" I'll go back to my old way of double and triple checking my resources. . I am already in the works of down sizing my Pershing Icon Set and M-46 Pattons, which will eventually lead to down sizing all the other Pattons as well. But that is down the road. Plan was to only post my M-26s, M-46s, and M-47s. Because they are the only ones using my ancient icons and was thinkin it would take much to repost them with minor updates from my Yahoo ones. Boy, did that ever back fire...LOL...

But it shall be done! Can't release something not to scale, which didn't even know they were, till now... Guess @#& happens after all...LOL...

[oragus]

Want to hear something funny about this Don?

http://afvdb.50megs.com/usa/m103heavy.html, look at the last reference. #6.

That is my book I use for everything...LOL...Oh the conflicts of resourses. LOL.

Joe