Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

This is a continuation of a discussion that started page two of: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/237895.page

I know its come up before in the past, but lets go. Many people have wanted to see a substantial redesign of the leman russ. With GW's very slight redo of the Leman Russ extra detail is being added and aspects are being reworked, but the vast majority is still the same.

Some have even gone to the length of creating garage kits:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/gallery/28282-Imperial%20Guard%2C%20Leman%20Russ.html?w=600

Others conversions:
http://k43.pbase.com/u9/blitzjaeger/upload/34903525.DSC00063.JPG
http://i234.photobucket.com/albums/ee25/CaiLeonas/M-24VariantActionIII.jpg
http://i234.photobucket.com/albums/ee25/CaiLeonas/M-24LRvariantTopProfile.jpg
http://www.battlegroup.net/blog/?page_id=11
http://img15.picoodle.com/img/img15/3/3/25/colgravis/f_LRtestbuildm_10bf38d.jpg

Lots of different ideas. A good number that deviate, but generally with pushing them more high tech.

In general, what do you all see as flaws and issues with the leman russ battle tank model?

Giant vertical profile, tiny turret, looks like a kids toy. Those are my biggest gripes.

For me, the LR need to fix these:

Over all model too tall ,

Turret should be broader

The 2 sides need to be lowered by 30%

Side should be made to match sponson position option like stormlord

Whilst the kit might well benefit from an upgrade, this should follow the model presented by the rhino, ie that whilst the kit increases in size, gets additional detail and sprues full of extra bitz, no change should occur to the overall aesthetic of the Leman Russ.

The Leman Russ, like the Rhino, the devilfish bodyshape, the falcon bodyshape, is now iconic of the army type.

It should look antiquated rather than modernised, the entire Imperium is trapped in a downward spiraling dark age, losing it's technology and the ability to create as knowledge and worlds are lost.

New kit fine, new look not fine.

Check this one:

http://www.heavy-support.com/

There is a guy over at Warseer who is building these, I´ll see if can remember were...

I think one of the issues with the Leman Russ' aesthetic is that its proportions are too similarly based on smaller tanks.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M3_Grant
http://www.brusselspictures.com/wp-content/photos/WWI-tanks/Frenvh-light-tank-FT-17.jpg
http://www.aaftankmuseum.com/PR10.jpg

If you look at the Leman Russ as an over sized light tank or tankette its proportions make sense. Obviously it doesn't work for what its suppose to be, a main battle tank. I think there are aspects of the leman russ that work others that don't.

There are instances of modern tanks with enclosed tracks:
http://www.armyrecognition.com/europe/Turquie/vehicules_lourds/MBT_New/Turkish_GIAT_MBT.jpg

Sponsons have been replaced with machine guns being mounted on top of the turret and secondary weapons being mounted coaxially (1 large cannon, 1 heavy machine gun, 2 light machine guns):
http://img1.photographersdirect.com/img/15009/wm/pd640492.jpg

Even the bolt on the armor could be explained on a leman russ... modular armor (big image):
http://www.psm-spz.com/downloads/puma_3_gr.jpg

Take those characteristics into consideration and you can more easily attempt to portray a Leman Russ as modern or futuristic.

Banesword wrote:Check this one:

http://www.heavy-support.com/

There is a guy over at Warseer who is building these, I´ll see if can remember where...

I've seen those. The thing is definitely going in the direction of the Forge World models. While it shows directions a leman russ could be taken it doesn't address some of the height issues.

Modern tanks are about 1 1/4 the height of a human (8ft) but with the leman russ we have a tank that stands 2 1/4 times the height of a human (14ft) an extra 6ft:
http://www.weetoysoldiers.com/compare3/2007-04-23_DR_23235_UNA-with-Leman-Russ-front-side-view.jpg

All the super heavies are even taller.

Banesword wrote:Check this one:

http://www.heavy-support.com/

There is a guy over at Warseer who is building these, I´ll see if can remember were...

€54,50 (including 19 % tax) <-- That price is very insane. So is the tax % so is using , not . makes it look like its also €54,500

The Leman Russ is based off of WWI tanks. Hence the sponson turrets and hte 360 degree exposed tracks. Slap a turret on this:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/db/British_Mark_V-star_Tank.jpg

and you basically have a Leman Russ.

The Mk1-Mk5 british tanks are more the basis for the Land raider than the leman russ.

This is a leman russ... (minus the sponsons, shortened body and chassis flipped around): http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_CbwnjooteyI/SCqt6rtsjyI/AAAAAAAAL4M/nJ1341kNMpU/s400/6.jpg

Even this is closer:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Aberdean_proving_grounds_023.JPG

Land raider factory?: http://historyofoldbury.co.uk/images/2140%20-%20TANKS%20BEING%20BUILT%20AT%20CARRIAGE%20WORKS%20reduced.gif

Yes, the Russ takes features from the M3 Lee/Grant and the Char B1, but I always thought that if there was ever one primary basis it would have to be the (fictional) tank from the Last Crusade. Shorten this: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/90/LastCrusadeTank.jpg

Also, this is like the third thread on the Russ/all IG tanks within the past few weeks.

Here's my take on the Leman Russ, taking design cues from the Char B1 and British WW1 tanks. For ease-of-construction reasons, I deciced not to ive mine a proper suspension either, but did go for exposed drive sprockets (a colossal pain in the neck to build)



More pics here: http://s155.photobucket.com/albums/s319/agamemnon667/Unnamed%20Tank%20Project/

Understand, this post is about a functional issue with GW vehicle designs for imperial tanks, not a cosmetic one.

The IMPERIAL tank designs do not have road wheels or toothed drive wheels (these connect to a motor). Also the armor plates go nearly to the edges of the track. Imperial tanks would get stuck driving over a curb, and the armor that comes within a track thickness of the roadsurfaces would be completley destroyed. Also, as they are shown, they would get high centered and stuck in mud easily and changing a road wheel or a thrown track would be nearly immpossible.

They are attrocius, comical designs and the:

Land Raider
Leman Russ
Chimera

All need to be corrected, for even the most basic functionality.

I like option one in the above posts.

I am begining to think most 40k players (and especially designers) don't know (or care?) how tanks really work, so I grabbed some pictures to demonstrate it. The style of armor on imperial tanks would be like modeling guns with no action, or amo, completley unworkable, despite whatever other cosmetics or nice lines, they might have. I do not think the Leman Russ et. al. hull shape should change cosmeticly, however the tracks need to get corrected, they need to have some clearance from the armor. I will demonstrate this in the attached issues that show an M113, a common afv design close to a rhino/chimera (road wheels), and M3 Grant which is arguable the source design (or very similar) for the Leman Russ (to show boagies) and a Panzer 4 (for proper side clearance armor) as well.

Note all 3 examples here have road wheels, toothed drive wheels, and adequate clearance to traverse obstacles, which is what the GW designs need. The rhino is actaully close.

Also see the wikipedia page for the Leman Russ originator M3 (Leman Russ) design here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:M3Grant.jpg

Personally I'm ok with the nonsensical style of the Russ, I just think the model needs to be updated with more detail. The sponsons and hull weapon option look REALLY stupid, and the back engine area could stand to have more details to it.

Oh and the turret is just absurdly stupid. It looks like the new kit (from the drawings in the Codex) will fix this problem, at least.

The hull, while tall, seems a little thin. It could probably use some beefing out. They always feel so tiny next to my Chimeras, or around Rhinos.

Augustus wrote:I am begining to think most 40k players (and especially designers) don't know (or care?) how tanks really work, so I grabbed some pictures to demonstrate it. The style of armor on imperial tanks would be like modeling guns with no action, or amo, completley unworkable, despite whatever other cosmetics or nice lines, they might have.

I suspect you might be right re: the average player. I've put together enough model tanks (from KV-2 to Pz1 and from a Tiger to a Maus) to know what the bare minimum is for a workable suspension system is, and my design, while in my mind a better one than the GW original, still cannot meet that. This is something of a conscrious choice. Scratchbuilding the 10-20 road wheels and bogies or torsion bars necessary to make a workable suspension would, with my skill level, triple the build time for every project, and render several of them altogether impossible.

My design above fixes some of the problems of the stock chassis (poor trench crossing ability, no visible sprockets) while leaving others unaffected (large target, slab sides, poor hull gun position, etc.). If I had my druthers, I'd build something more akin to a Churchill or Char B1, with small road wheels partially hidden behind the side armor, with individual suspension. It'd go well with the general IG trench-warfare aesthetic.

I personally love the russ.

The only things I dont like are fixed by FW turrets and mars alpha bodies:

1. The big ol box the lascannon pokes out of.

2. The kids toy look of the battlecannon.

Nerf_IG wrote:Yes, the Russ takes features from the M3 Lee/Grant and the Char B1, but I always thought that if there was ever one primary basis it would have to be the (fictional) tank from the Last Crusade. Shorten this: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/90/LastCrusadeTank.jpg

Also, this is like the third thread on the Russ/all IG tanks within the past few weeks.

Thats true, but this is all still fun and thats what this forums about. The Indiana Jones tank is Mark VIII with a turret hollywood added, if I'm not mistaken.

Augustus wrote:Understand, this post is about a functional issue with GW vehicle designs for imperial tanks, not a cosmetic one.

The IMPERIAL tank designs do not have road wheels or toothed drive wheels (these connect to a motor). Also the armor plates go nearly to the edges of the track. Imperial tanks would get stuck driving over a curb, and the armor that comes within a track thickness of the roadsurfaces would be completley destroyed. Also, as they are shown, they would get high centered and stuck in mud easily and changing a road wheel or a thrown track would be nearly immpossible.
...

This assumes an equal mix of modern/future/past technologies... it being sci-fi there are explanations. First we should put aside the idea that these models are meant to be as high detailed as scaled tank models, cause its simply not the case. That said maybe the tanks use magnetic locking tracks, that utilize a large magnetic field on one or several wheels to rotate the tracks. Maybe the the suspension is a an active suspension that can raise or lower the profile of the tank to help manage with terrain (something being worked on now). Or maybe its an antiquated (even by todays standards) iron box that can barely crawl over any terrain at all and just sucks as a tank, indicating why marine utilize the tanks they do.

Augustus wrote:
I am begining to think most 40k players (and especially designers) don't know (or care?) how tanks really work, so I grabbed some pictures to demonstrate it. The style of armor on imperial tanks would be like modeling guns with no action, or amo, completley unworkable, despite whatever other cosmetics or nice lines, they might have. I do not think the Leman Russ et. al. hull shape should change cosmeticly, however the tracks need to get corrected, they need to have some clearance from the armor. I will demonstrate this in the attached issues that show an M113, a common afv design close to a rhino/chimera (road wheels), and M3 Grant which is arguable the source design (or very similar) for the Leman Russ (to show boagies) and a Panzer 4 (for proper side clearance armor) as well.

I'm beginning to think some people got into 40k for the reality and not the fantasy of it. These tanks are as much a characterization of a tank as a space marine is of an 8ft tall super soldier. The proportions are mangled and while some would like to see a true scale, true proportioned marine a tank isn't likely till the infantry is done that way.

I don't disagree with your critique, I really don't, but I believe your threshold for your demands on the realism are beyond what 40k or Games Workshop are about. The rhinos clearance actually is appropriate. The things you'd like to see are definitely things I'd like to see, but they should retain the spirited caricature that makes it 40k. Shifting the threshold of the reality of GW's models is different from demanding reality, that is ultimately my point. I understand you want a higher degree of "function" built into the model.

One reason I started this thread separate from other ones was to hear ideas and perspectives on different interpretation of what a Leman Russ should be, your inputs been appreciated. Right now I'm strongly considering taking my time and effort, combined with my engineering and 3D CAD expertise and modeling and using it to develop an add on kit for the basic Russ to make it a bit more what people want. I'll admit I'm quite disappointed GW is only taking a minimalist approach to modifying the Leman Russ. I like happy gamers. This is the direction I'm moving toward.

This is kinda to the real tank what the leman russ model is to a "real life" leman russ.

http://www.rocketanimation.com/images/tiger2_porsche_turret_bw_72dpi.jpg

Just showing even as a caricature we can have expectations of a fantasy grounded in reality.

I'd like so see a bigger turret and the hull top surface needs to be "bigger" and or wider.
The Las Cannon and Heavy Bolter could easily be updated to the newer mould version, which would be a big improvement.
Wider tracks would be quite good too.

my general thoughts

Well written, love to see what you create one day!

aka_mythos wrote:I don't disagree with your critique, I really don't, but I believe your threshold for your demands on the realism are beyond what 40k or Games Workshop are about.

You absolutely have me there.

I have to remind myself at times, it's a ficticious universe (possibly for 12 year olds?) where people can climb on tanks and beat them till they explode, where troops with guns carry big swords and mutant creatures are more durable than warmachines...

In a comic world can one really argue these things? Not really, there could be any explanation, and it doesn't matter because it is all fake.

My most satisfying artwork and fictions tend to be created from the plausible perspective first and the "magic' perspective second.

One reason why I really hate the entire demon army... but, that's another story...

aka_mythos wrote:In general, what do you all see as flaws and issues with the leman russ battle tank model?

I'm going to start here, as it basically will feed into the rest of the commentary.
- too small footprint - should have similar footprint to Land Raider, and similar overall bulk
- narrow track is for a medium cruiser, not a "Lumbering Behemoth"
- Sponsons and hull guns are clumsy and aged poorly
- Turret is undersize and badly-lid out
- gun barrels are ridiculously oversized.

The current model has huge problems that require a major redesign. Turret is much too high for such a narrow tank. Sponsons are goofy, and make thing design worse.


With the heavy limitations of the current kit, I re-concepted the Russ as a SPG:
- http://public.fotki.com/JHwang/40k/ig/ig_tanks-1.html


A new design should match the Baneblade in style and minor details, to carry the family forward.

aka_mythos wrote:Some have even gone to the length of creating garage kits:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/gallery/28282-Imperial%20Guard%2C%20Leman%20Russ.html?w=600

This is just wierd, and won't cut it at all. It's a good conversion job, and a very solid effort, but it's not a canonical Leman Russ by any stretch. Perhaps if the maker had reversed the main hull to retain the heavy slope at the rear, it'd be a better fit.

aka_mythos wrote:
- http://k43.pbase.com/u9/blitzjaeger/upload/34903525.DSC00063.JPG

Hahaha, this isn't even close. It's a find AdMech thing, but not a Russ.

aka_mythos wrote:
- http://i234.photobucket.com/albums/ee25/CaiLeonas/M-24VariantActionIII.jpg

"M-24" - 1950s / Vietnam era light tanks are poor inspiration for something that is to be a Leman Russ.

aka_mythos wrote:
- http://www.battlegroup.net/blog/?page_id=11

"M-41" - see above. Too light.

aka_mythos wrote:
- http://img15.picoodle.com/img/img15/3/3/25/colgravis/f_LRtestbuildm_10bf38d.jpg

"Baneblade-style" - I really like this, and could see GW building something like this. It's big and chunky, with wide tracks, and a strong family resemblence. The Hull HB & Sponsons match the Baneblade, without the turret, bringing the profile closer in line with other Russes. The Turret is nicely-sized, neither too big, nor too narrow. Single Fuel Tanks are a nice touch to carry the family linkage over, while reinforcing the this is smaller than the Baneblade. Really, it's a very impressive accomplishment.

Augustus wrote:Understand, this post is about a functional issue with GW vehicle designs for imperial tanks, not a cosmetic one.

When we look at newer tanks (new Land Raider, new Rhino, new Baneblade), GW is making clear efforts to inject a little realism into the designs. They're still not good, but they're less implausible. I'd expect a new Leman Russ to have similar efforts.

With respect to drive wheels, I like to believe that GW uses internal drive teeth, like on any Caterpillar Tractor.

Similarly, they don't *have* to use torsion bar suspension, even though it's the most compact. There needs to be some concept of ground clearance and articulation for any Tank to move at a moderate pace. But then, the Leman Russ is slower than a typical tank, only going d6+6" flat out, rather than a full 12". So the reduced / missing suspension is reflected in the tank, being limited to infantry ground speed (conveniently d6+6" running). It's actually one of the few rules that makes sense for the model.

Current tank is painful to the eyes. An updated version that keeps with the overall shape and feel, similar to what GW did with the rhino, predator and vindicator would be greatly enjoyed by many eyeballs.

I rather like the blocky, cumbersome look. It represents the 'lumbering behemoth' rule quite well. Besides, when is the Imperium going to have the time to make a new variant of a tank that works fine as is?

The Leman Russ should stay chunky and clumsy. Updating it to a more 'modern' look goes against everything else in the fluff. Why don't Space Marines have huge lasers? Why do IG have piddly little flashlights? Because the Imperium is supposed to be gritty and crude, not all flashy and high-tech.

And what about people like H.B.M.C who have something like twenty of them? People like that probably don't want a new design.

It seems to me that most of the people who want a total redesign of the model are younger gamers who grew up with images of tanks from modern times. I'm a younger gamer, and I like my modern tanks, but redesigning it goes against tradition. Just like GW's obscene prices and outdated codecies, the Russ is here to stay.

...redesigning it goes against tradition

Oh really Cheese?

Perhaps you don't remember the old rhino hull, and the predator, and the vindicator, and the land raider, and the landspeeder (like 4 times), and the reaver Titan, the Warhound, and the imperial jetbike, and the carnifex and the...

Time will tell.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:Whilst the kit might well benefit from an upgrade, this should follow the model presented by the rhino, ie that whilst the kit increases in size, gets additional detail and sprues full of extra bitz, no change should occur to the overall aesthetic of the Leman Russ.

The Leman Russ, like the Rhino, the devilfish bodyshape, the falcon bodyshape, is now iconic of the army type.

It should look antiquated rather than modernised, the entire Imperium is trapped in a downward spiraling dark age, losing it's technology and the ability to create as knowledge and worlds are lost.

New kit fine, new look not fine.

wouldn't the chimera body, be the iconic guard vehicle shape?

Augustus! Shame. A Leman Russ won't get stuck on a curb or in the mud, and you should know why.

The power of the machine spirit will see it through! All praise the Omnissiah!! Wooo!

(I'm kidding, of course.)

One thing to consider about the Leman Russ is its footprint on the tabletop. It's not designed to take up as much real estate as a Land Raider, and most of the methods of "modernising" it would result in this. Now, exposing some of the wheels would not do this, and GW could always put some plates of "floating" armor over the bottom portion of the track that moves, but I have a feeling that this will always be overlooked. I think that the best thing to do would be to re-jigger some of the proportions like they did on the Rhino resculpt to make a slightly more aesthetically pleasing model, and I think that drawing from a Victorian Steampunk inspiration would not be a bad way to go in this case.

I don't mind the current Russ, although the turret is much to small. It looks suitibly archaic as an ancient design that hasn't been changed in mellenia should.

But...

A redesign to make it look more like a baby baneblade would be perfect IMHO, really tie the kits together like they did with the rhino and land raider.

@Iorek: How big is new Land Raider's footprint compared the old Land Raiders? I think the new one takes up more space.

And certainly, the FW Baneblade is clearly larger than the Armorcast, which I believe to be a tad larger than the DIY templates.

But embiggening the Leman Russ isn't a bad thing. It'll look much better on the board. And as it'll be plastic, we'll be stuck with it for quite a while.

Honestly I think a redesign could be better than a baby baneblade.

The relative size of the Leman Russ to a guardsmen makes the hull length 21ft long and 12ft wide (no sponson) as opposed to:
Abrams: 26ft by 12ft
Merkava: 25ft by 12.2ft
Leclerc: 22.5ft by12.2ft
Challenger 2: 27ft by 11.6ft

The models length would change between .2 in (5mm) and 1.1 in (28mm) depending on how large a battle tank the leman russ is meant to be relative to modern tanks.

Overall I think foot print is less of a problem than height and turret size.