Amphibious operations are something I have an interest in, and an often important aspect of these operations is Naval Gunfire Support (NGS). Naturally since I have acquired a number of suitable hulls for use as amphibious warfare platforms (click here
for more details), I have also been on the lookout for something with a little more bang.
|A little more bang......|
I have been aware of the existence of large toy battleships for some time, but I hadn't seen any for sale here in NZ, and the cost of getting one shipped here seemed excessive (around NZ$100). Then one turned up on NZ's favourite local auction site for NZ$25 plus shipping, so I had to grab it...
|A view from the rear.|
|Rear turret and helipad....|
The battleship seems to be based on the US Iowa class, but with the length and lines becoming less sleek, and rather more caricatured. Given that this is idea for letting big items appear on a tabletop, I certainly won't complain.
|And complete with storage drawer....|
This battlewagon came with some metal planes and two HO scale tanks (a Churchill and a Sherman - I have another Sherman for you Ion, if you are interested), but I have seen it offered with a variety of different toy army items, some more useful than others.
|The tape gives an idea of the length of this beast.|
Ideally, I would like to obtain at least another one of these, or a similar type of ship, but even having one is very useful.
Would you not have liked to have has this beasty at that Tarawa debacle about 10 years back, Brian? It would at least have lent tone, as battlewagons are apt to do, to what otherwise would have been a down and dirty barroom brawl. At what looks like 2' 4" it would have looked the part.ReplyDelete
Sure I am interested in the Churchill and the Sherman, thank you. I'll just have to figure out - or perhaps we can negotiate - what I can offer in return...
Sherman is down delivered! And, yes I would have loved this and several of its friends for that Tarawa game!Delete
It hit 'Publish' by mistake, before enquiring how you new job is going. Judging by the 6 weeks or so of silence, you are keeping pretty busy!ReplyDelete
The job keeps me busy - but I do get to travel to places like exotic Wiberia!Delete
I have been looking for the same model in the UK for the same purpose that you have in mind. I thought that the superstructure could easily be modified to make it look like the USS SOUTH DAKOTA or one of its sisters.ReplyDelete
Good luck with your project,
It is a toy with a great deal of potential!
What a monster! Great find and should provide some stupendous supporting barrages!ReplyDelete
I look forward to it joining the rest of the fleet and ruining someone's day soon!Delete
i like your Blog!
I follow you. If you like to follow me too, i’ll be happy!
The Board Game Theory
Violet Studio Paint
I looked up the meaning of 'sovereignty of Parliament' and found what Kyle and I were thinking of were completely different ideas. Having found out what Kyle was speaking of, I agree with the principle, though I have discovered that it is not one shared by all legislatures.
Ours is derived from the British legislature, and among others, Israel's legislature also runs under the principle. The The United States legislature does not. I think I can see why. Its whole system is built upon wholly different lines. If anything, I guess the Constitution is sovereign (at least in principle, though in effect judicial amendments have taken place there without due process - e.g. the ruling that Corporations are persons under the Constitution - never a formal Amendment).
I can see some serious implications here for the TIPP negotiations. The principle of sovereignty states (inter alia) that no government in New Zealand can enact law to which future governments are bound not to repeal, amend or supersede. Which means that under NZ law, any future government can set aside any provision of TIPP that interferes with its capacity to legislate. Any Corporation within or without New Zealand's legislative jurisdiction would have no right of redress in such an event. The Government might be liable, but Parliament, not. Which implies that in effect that a Government's defence is that as Parliament is sovereign, it can not act contrary to its will, and therefore is not subject to legal action if in accordance with the will of Parliament it passes laws that the corporates mislike.
I like that principle - provided of course it don't get abused. But as it can be abused, it will be....
Thanks for the kind words. I have looked at your blog and followed it too. Your painting skills are very impressive!