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.

http://theplasticsoldiercompany.co.uk/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=1_37_39_55&products_id=269&zenid=b416aed99929fe159ae636b66d34ff02

Looks good. I was trying to stay with 1942-43, but this will be hard to resist as I've always liked Fireflies.

PSC will have cornered the 15mm market soon. I like that tank commander model. Any reviews circulating yet?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And what a rubbish name for a tank 'firefly' is.

I think it's the same British commander figure that they supply with all the Shermans (probably time they did a different one). I like the fact that they included applique armour on both the Firefly turret and the normal turret. This means you can use the normal turret on your other PSC Shermans (the other Sherman kits don't have this feature).

Not as bad as "Comet" the UK has had a checkered past with names, some are great like "Centurion" and "Chieftain".

Others are bit more out there, "Matilda" ? "Valentine"? "Deacon"? . Very esoteric. Not testosterone fuelled "look at my manly Brass spheres" naming of "Wolverine" etc.

I have to say the US is funny because they always have designations M48 and then a name comes along. But the designator are all confusing because the M designator and even the code is used on multiple pieces of equipment so you call it by the Name rather than the designator. The current rifle is M4, the Sherman was M4?

The Modern British Rifle L85A2 is commonly called the SA80 and you cannot confuse it with anything else. Because nothing shares the L85A2 designator.

I do hope that this means that I will receive the ones I've had on pre-order from Maelstrom since Christmas sometime BEFORE next month, in a delightful and pleasing change to the Panther problem, without having to request yet more obvious re-organising of my outstanding orders or otherwise faff about to get a four month old order BEFORE someone who ordered it today?

Granted I have no idea how Maelstrom prioritizes their outstanding orders, but it would be nice to think that they dealt with a bit of backlog before starting on new orders...

mwnciboo wrote:Not as bad as "Comet" the UK has had a checkered past with names, some are great like "Centurion" and "Chieftain".

I guess by the time the Comet came out that were running out of appropriate 'C' names for cruiser tanks. And they'd used some of the better names for some rubbish tanks (e.g. the Challenger).

'Firelfy' wasn't an official name, and noone seems to know where it came from. It wasn't used by every unit, and it was also used for the re-armed M10 (which was also known as the Achilles).

I for one wouldn't want to sit in a tank called Achilles. It's like driving a tank called "Indestructable", you are asking for trouble!

i wouldn't be too keen about manning something called a 'Deacon' - and not just because it was a terrible design. I wonder where that one came from? Maybe because the M7 (another SPG) was christened 'Priest'?

The names by which we recognize British tanks are a mish-mash of official designations, code-names and nicknames. 'Matilda (Mk1)' is a reference to a cartoon duck, which stuck to the follow-up Mk2. Valentine to a coincidence of date (or an acronym depending on who tells the story). Both are incidentally Infantry Tanks. Then there is the difference between a Tank created by an independent company and one designed for the Government. The C names are all related to "Cruiser" tanks, and are based off the older Naval naming conventions. (Except the Churchill, which is an exception, and an I tank anyway.) The habit of "naming" American vehicles properly is simply a good way of determining which piece of what kit one is talking about.. (God knows who thought calling ALL Military things M-x was a good idea, regardless of what they actually were?) Again there is a mix of nicknames (Honey) and a vague convention of American Generals (Stuart, Lee, Grant), none of which are particularly aggressive or warlike sounding names either.

The ACTUAL term for a Firefly is "C" , which is even more awful as a tank name than "Firefly". Given the elaborate methods used to disguise the actual "Firefly" in combat so it wouldn't get picked on, I would hazard a guess that 'Firefly' is intended as a fairly innocuous code-word for a specialist tank (not unlike the 'Tigercubs" and "Tigers" conversations between Wavell and Churchill over the delivery of I tanks to Africa.)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
British Self-propelled artillery is all religious names: Bishop, Priest and Sexton (right up to the Abbot). Some cite the "pulpit" shape of the MG ring of the M7 as the reason for this naming convention, though IMO i think its because the 25pdr lost about half its range when built into a turret, and thus could only fire properly when its sat at a slant (or diagonal)...

It works well with Aircraft in the US.

A-10 - Attack (Ground Attack)
F-16 - Fighter
B-2 - Bomber
C17 - Cargo
CH-47 - Cargo Helicopter
AH-64 - Attack Helicopter
UH-1 - Utility Helicopter

The designators are logical...In the main.

All British tanks have a number also with an "A" in front of it

e.g. The Churchill is the A22.

Aldramelech: Well spotted. But the British ones also all have names of some description with which to distinguish them.

mwinciboo: Indeed. Its the insistence on using M that causes the problems. If they had used perhaps "T" for Tank and "G" for gun then it might have been a smidge clearer. "R" for Rifle? P for pistol? M for mortar, MG for machine gun, and bobs your uncle.

I'm not much of a fan of the PSC tank crewmen. Thankfully several companies produce some very nice tank crew models that fit very nicely.

I find it funny that the Abram's designation is lower then what was used for Shermans.

I think its done to deliberatly confuse people.

ArbeitsSchu wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:
British Self-propelled artillery is all religious names: Bishop, Priest and Sexton (right up to the Abbot). Some cite the "pulpit" shape of the MG ring of the M7 as the reason for this naming convention, though IMO i think its because the 25pdr lost about half its range when built into a turret, and thus could only fire properly when its sat at a slant (or diagonal)...

The naming of the artillery vehicles after priestly titles is reputed to have been down to a British Major in charge of designation who had an intense loathing for the religious orders.

He wanted to name them after 'something blustering, noisy, and full of hot air' so he chose rather well.

Hmmmm, Artillery is king of the Battlefield? I would have named it after ancient Kings. Arthur, Agamemnon etc

Canadian 4th Armoured here I come

ArbeitsSchu wrote: 'Matilda (Mk1)' is a reference to a cartoon duck, which stuck to the follow-up Mk2.

I saw this on the internet, but the code-name 'Matilda' was given to the A11 proposal before the prototype was built, so it could well be apocryphal.

Again there is a mix of nicknames (Honey) and a vague convention of American Generals (Stuart, Lee, Grant), none of which are particularly aggressive or warlike sounding names either.

I dunno - Sherman was a ruthless commander who is still regarded as a war criminal in parts of the American south, Lee is often considered to be up there with Napoleon as a general, and Grant won the Battle of Gettysburg. And the Americans liked this approach so much that they adopted it, resulting in some great tank names (Pershing, Patton, Abrams).

The ACTUAL term for a Firefly is "C" , which is even more awful as a tank name than "Firefly". Given the elaborate methods used to disguise the actual "Firefly" in combat so it wouldn't get picked on, I would hazard a guess that 'Firefly' is intended as a fairly innocuous code-word for a specialist tank...

There is no evidence that 'Firefly' had any official origin. And let's not forget that the initial four types of Panzer didn't have sexy names either. Meanwhile, the Germans were naming SP-guns after weasels (Marder = marten) and insects (Hummel = bumblebee).

Big P wrote:The naming of the artillery vehicles after priestly titles is reputed to have been down to a British Major in charge of designation who had an intense loathing for the religious orders.

He wanted to name them after 'something blustering, noisy, and full of hot air' so he chose rather well.

That's rather good - I've never heard that one before.

At some point this was a thread about the new PSC Firefly...

Again there is a mix of nicknames (Honey) and a vague convention of American Generals (Stuart, Lee, Grant), none of which are particularly aggressive or warlike sounding names either.

I dunno - Sherman was a ruthless commander who is still regarded as a war criminal in parts of the American south, Lee is often considered to be up there with Napoleon as a general, and Grant won the Battle of Gettysburg. And the Americans liked this approach so much that they adopted it, resulting in some great tank names (Pershing, Patton, Abrams).

Grant did not win the Battle of Gettysburg (or was he even at the battle), that was George G. Meade. Grant was fighting the Siege of Vicksburg at the time of Gettysburg.

Clearly it was called "Firefly" for its ability to light gak up.

Tailgunner wrote:

ArbeitsSchu wrote: 'Matilda (Mk1)' is a reference to a cartoon duck, which stuck to the follow-up Mk2.

I saw this on the internet, but the code-name 'Matilda' was given to the A11 proposal before the prototype was built, so it could well be apocryphal.

Again there is a mix of nicknames (Honey) and a vague convention of American Generals (Stuart, Lee, Grant), none of which are particularly aggressive or warlike sounding names either.

I dunno - Sherman was a ruthless commander who is still regarded as a war criminal in parts of the American south, Lee is often considered to be up there with Napoleon as a general, and Grant won the Battle of Gettysburg. And the Americans liked this approach so much that they adopted it, resulting in some great tank names (Pershing, Patton, Abrams).

The ACTUAL term for a Firefly is "C" , which is even more awful as a tank name than "Firefly". Given the elaborate methods used to disguise the actual "Firefly" in combat so it wouldn't get picked on, I would hazard a guess that 'Firefly' is intended as a fairly innocuous code-word for a specialist tank...

There is no evidence that 'Firefly' had any official origin. And let's not forget that the initial four types of Panzer didn't have sexy names either. Meanwhile, the Germans were naming SP-guns after weasels (Marder = marten) and insects (Hummel = bumblebee).

Big P wrote:The naming of the artillery vehicles after priestly titles is reputed to have been down to a British Major in charge of designation who had an intense loathing for the religious orders.

He wanted to name them after 'something blustering, noisy, and full of hot air' so he chose rather well.

That's rather good - I've never heard that one before.

At some point this was a thread about the new PSC Firefly...

As with almost all these things, sources differ, often wildly. I suppose even a drawn prototype of an A11 looks a bit like a duck, so the story still could have some truth to it.. American general's names may appear warlike to Americans, but to those who have only a passing understanding of US military achievements, they are just names. A bit like warship names. Warspite is a warlike name to any listener. Rodney not so much. Centaur, Challenger, Comet and Chieftain have an inherent dynamism and can easily transcend national barriers.. Picking an example, I would hazard a guess that at the time more people were familiar with "The Centaur" as a mythological beast in the West than know who Sherman is now!

Indeed there is no proof either way of where Firefly came from, I'm just taking a stab at where it originated, based on other comparable events. After all, it must have originated somewhere, so why not a high-level conversation between two commanders? Its as likely as anything else until someone locates the relevant paperwork.

I'ts not surprising that German used "names" for alot their vehicles, (especially compound designs) given the huge unwieldy names that some of their designs actually had in the mother-tongue. People do seem to gravitate towards "Tiger" and "Panther" as evidence of a "sexy name" convention, but IMO most German names sound quite interesting or slightly intimidating even if they do mean "bee" or "Ferret".

I do like the Priest naming story about the Major. It makes one wonder how many iconic names have been down to sheer chance or the momentary prejudice of the nearest officer ...

A couple of the German 'cool' names are also unofficial nick names. Brummbar (Grizzly Bear) and Hetzer (Baiter or Hunting Dog) spring to mind.

There's also the 'Red Devils' (Rote Teufel) moniker which came about because the Germans called their own parachute troops Green Devils.

I remember reading that Firefly wasn't used for 17pdr armed Shermans until late-late/post war. It was used however for 17pdr armed M10s and I was believed that the moniker rolled over to other 17pdr armed vehicles afterwards.

General Seric wrote:Grant did not win the Battle of Gettysburg (or was he even at the battle), that was George G. Meade. Grant was fighting the Siege of Vicksburg at the time of Gettysburg.

You're absolutely right - I don't know the US Civil War very well. Apologies. The point still stands that naming a tank after a soldier like Grant seems suitably 'warlike'.

Or it could be named after a funding disbursement that doesn't have to be repaid. Like I said, its only "warlike" if an individual can apply a context to it that is warlike.

Tailgunner wrote:

General Seric wrote:Grant did not win the Battle of Gettysburg (or was he even at the battle), that was George G. Meade. Grant was fighting the Siege of Vicksburg at the time of Gettysburg.

You're absolutely right - I don't know the US Civil War very well. Apologies. The point still stands that naming a tank after a soldier like Grant seems suitably 'warlike'.

It's fine, after all, we Americans can't expect everyone else to know all the details of our wars.

Here's what happens when a Firefly meets a jagdpanther


It was also a Firefly that killed that unrepetant Nazi tank ace Wittmann

Er... Im afraid not.

That is the Jagdpanther from the Imperial War Museum in London and it was knocked out by the Cromwell of Lieutenant WH Griffiths 2nd Armoured Reconnaissance Batt. Welsh Guards in Hechtel, Belgium (Sept 1944).

I knew I shouldn't have listened to the guy standing next to me when I took this photo .

Its also on the Side armor.

Not all that impressive, Panthers and Jagdpanthers were not a challange if flanked.