text:
Certified Psychics | Accurate Psychic Readings
Phone Psychics Email Psychic ReadingsCertified PsychicsLive Psychic Readings psychic hotline Phone Psychics and Mediums Psychics Psychic Medium Reading online astrologers Online Psychics Psychic Readings Get a Psychic Reading tarot card reading Find Psychics Testimonials Psychic Readings by Phone astrology reading Phone Psychic Readings FAQ Top Rated Psychics horoscope reading

discount psychic readingspsychics online now Debit Cards Not Recommended Psychic Readings.
psychics online now
psychics online now
Phone Psychics Online for Psychic Readings Now
online psychic readings
About Psychic Predictions
phone psychic readings

America's #1 Psychic Network for Phone Psychic Readings since 1989.

We promise to connect you with a guaranteed authentic Certified Psychic ®,
a proven accurate psychic who truly cares about you and your needs.

It's your turn. Now, you can experience real psychic readings from ethical, accurate consultants who have been giving professional psychic readings for years. Police departments, movie stars and government officials have consulted our psychics for years.

Experience a REAL psychic reading from one of America's Best Phone Psychics for yourself.

psychic reading psychics

"I wasted a small fortune trying to find a real psychic on other sites. I wish I had found you first. Wow! You are the real."

L., CA

"The most profound reading I have ever had ... this was a level of accuracy and insight that shook me to my core.."

Caleb, NY

"I honestly believe you offer the ONLY credible psychics. Your network is to be commended."

Linda, OH

"Well, finally a REAL PSYCHIC who ACTUALLY KNOWS SOMETHING FOR REAL. You're the best!"

Olivia, GA

"I am not only a satisfied customer but an extremely loyal one. This was such a positive experience!"

C. W.

More Testimonials

professional psychic psychic testimonial online psychic

Select a Certified Psychic® You Can Trust
for a Real Psychic Reading

Click on Psychic's Photo for Details
Psychic Medium, Clairvoyant. Pet Psychic.
Audra 2000
Live Chat
Clairvoyant psychic readings.
Timothy 1116
Live Chat
Natural born psychic. Speaks French, English, Hungarian, Romanian.
Kornelia 2452
Live Chat
Karmic Astrology, Numerology and Tarot.
Ruthie 1910
Live Chat
Astrology, I Ching and Tarot.
Rosada 2340
Live Chat
Clairvoyant, spiritual coach.
Janet 2449
Available by Phone
Love Psychic - In demand!
Gabrielle 1017
Live Chat
Natural Born Psychic, Astrology.
Kathey 2126
Live Chat
Real Psychic Medium
Ariel 2277
Live Chat
Powerful clairvoyant psychic. Amazing insights, detailed psychic predictions.
Susan 9991
In Session
Professional Psychic Tarot Card Readings.
Ron 7788
Live Chat
Professional Psychic Tarot Card Readings.
Khirra 6363
Live Chat
Psychic Medium, Healer and Spiritual Coach. Psychic Readings by appointment.
K D 1121
Live Chat
I Ching, Tarot. Love psychic.
Faith 7878
Live Chat
Spiritual Coach. Practical predictions.
Nanette 2344
Live Chat
Astoundingly accurate professional psychic consultant.
Alex 2439
Live Chat

Consult a Guaranteed Authentic Certified Psychic ®


Content-Type: application/http; msgtype=response

WARC-Identified-Payload-Type: text/html

WARC-Type: response

text:
Our Safeguarding Policy Document is always available in the Sacristy and our Policy Statement is on our website.

The Parish Safeguarding Representatives in this parish work with Fr. Michael and the Parish Pastoral Council to ensure that diocesan safeguarding policies and practices are followed in this parish.  Safeguarding is all the things we do to ensure that children and vulnerable adults are protected from harm.  We were trained for this role and we have access to advice and support from the diocesan Child Safeguarding and Protection Service.

We wish to encourage and promote the participation of children, young people and vulnerable adults in the life and work of our parish.  Safeguarding is about creating an environment which facilitates such involvement so that all of us who are members of this parish community can grow together in love of God and service to his Church.  Everyone who ministers in the parish is a representative of the Church and must observe safeguarding practices and guidelines.  Good safeguarding practice is part of what it is to minister in the Church.  It is not an optional extra.

Dealing with the Covid pandemic has, and continues to challenge us as a parish. What were normal practices twelve months ago are very different today, as we look for different ways to engage with parishioners, especially children, young people and vulnerable adults. We must maintain our safeguarding practices so as to ensure the safety and inclusion of all our  parishioners.

The practices that we put in place in this parish, as in all parishes in the diocese, to keep children and vulnerable adults safe include such measures as:

  • Choosing carefully those who work with children and vulnerable adults in our parish, which includes vetting of those involved in public ministry;
  • Ensuring parish workers and volunteers behave appropriately towards children and vulnerable adults;
  • Making proper arrangements for activities involving children and vulnerable adults, including ensuring adequate supervision of such activities.

We can be contacted through the parish office. Contact details for the diocesan Child Safeguarding and Protection Service and the relevant civil authorities are on the notice in the church porch, and on our Website.

Thank you

To view a copy of the Safeguarding Document click here

The Child Safeguarding and Protection Service is available to provide advice and support to any person who is concerned about the protection and welfare of children and adults who are vulnerable or at risk. Andrew Fagan (Director) or JulieMcCullough (Child Protection Officer) are available during office hours on 01 8360314. They can also be contacted by email on: and

For more details go to

warcinfo:
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2021-39
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for September 2021
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-93
software: Apache Nutch 1.18 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.2-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: https://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/


text:
Discover the most efficient casino Game

Gambling normally have basically got an extensive option of games to their clients’ preference. Games fluctuate in the amount of complicity and excitement plus entertainment they supply. Online gambling games are a good method to attempt your good luck along with to acquire some cash. This is a implies to produce a fortune and also have a great expertise at any time. Slot machine games are one of just about the most popular type of casino games. There is not any condition to understand any difficult policies to play slot machine games; no anticipation is, truly, named for. All what exactly you need might be a of good luck. It is a fantastic game for anyone as well as it provides absolutely nothing with regards to the intricacy of card games. Ports are played with small wagers which can be genuinely conveniently given through the participants and, consequently, are really well known.

casinoVending unit has got their list under history: they already have in fact been introduced in to the gambling property as a type of diversion. After some time moving they already have ended up becoming a lot more popular than greeting card games as well as far more profitable, consequently, men and women enjoyed slot machine games to numerous other games. Today vending equipment is taken into consideration a variety of trademark for online gambling’s. Online casinos in addition to terrain based casinos give you a great selection of slot machine games and also the approach is the same as in land structured casinos. Credit card games will also be employed to players as well as there are many of these which also just about the most innovative pros will surely not be disappointed. Most of card games call for a small understanding at the very least while slot creators usually do not and click here for more info.

Among probably the most well-known credit card games. It is actually a game of knowledge and desires a great deal of ability and excellent command of emphasis. Casino is wager many other players and also not from the dealer. These kinds of greeting card games is fairly manufactured intricate rather than the one that may be handily earned by understanding some policies. Generally, is which include large bank loan wagers. Several other normal and recommended games in both territory centered and online gambling are craps plus stay roulette. The first kind represents a dice game and you also can gamble in different ways to earn. However, it is actually moreover a game that needs a bit comprehension of the guidelines so that you can succeed a minimum of something provided that it consists of specific distinct mix’s along with no tip it is actually pointless to test. It is a really awesome casino internet site game. The final will not be basically produced complex. All precisely what is needed is usually to feel the location where the spherical will tumble, what quantity which will easily be. The bet can be done on reddish colored/black color, great/lower, or odd/even so that you can acquire.


WARC-Identified-Payload-Type: application/xhtml+xml

text:
Last: 0.04 0.00
Volume: 0
Date: Feb 21, 2014

Read More
High Grade Brazilian Opportunity

Quick Links

Email Updates

Gold Price:

$1765.50   +0.60

Simple Average

07/01/13-10/31/13 $1,325.31
01/01/13-06/14/13 $1,543.17
07/01/12-12/14/12 $1,687.83
01/01/12-06/30/12 $1,656.81
11/08/11-12/14/11 $1,721.19

Colossus Minerals Continues Strategic Evolution Toward Producer Status
Announces Executive and Management Changes

Toronto, Ontario, October 11, 2011 – Colossus Minerals Inc.’s (the “Company” or “Colossus”) (TSX: CSI) Board of Directors today announced that, effective October 17, 2011, Ari Sussman, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer has elected to take on the position of Executive Chairman, and the Board has named Claudio Mancuso, previously Colossus Chief Financial Officer, as the Company’s new President and Chief Executive Officer.

Ari Sussman, Executive Chairman commented, “Over the past year it has been my mission to strengthen the senior management team and the Board of Directors in order to advance the Company’s strategy of bringing Serra Pelada into production. We welcomed David Anthony, Antenor Silva and Mel Leiderman to our Board of Directors; all three individuals have significant experience in mine construction, production and finance. We hired Paulo Fagundes, a seasoned mining executive with 30 years experience in the South American mining industry as our Chief Operating Officer. Paulo has done a fantastic job in taking charge of our Brazilian operations, community and partner relations, site construction and underground development. Under the direction of Claudio Mancuso, the finance teams in Toronto and Brazil were rebuilt.  With this transformation now complete, the Board of Directors and I believe that this is the right time to transition the position of President and Chief Executive Officer to Claudio, while I actively continue to serve the Company as Executive Chairman.  Since joining Colossus, Claudio has demonstrated outstanding judgment and the leadership skills required to manage Colossus through construction and into production. Colossus will no doubt continue to benefit as Claudio draws upon his experience from being involved in the construction and operation of six gold mines located in three different countries. I look forward to supporting this team in setting strategic goals, planning and marketing. Colossus is entering a very exciting time in its evolution as the business is at a point where the Company is ready to expand at a robust rate.”

Additionally, the Company is pleased to announce the appointment of Alden Greenhouse as the new Chief Financial Officer. Prior to joining Colossus, Mr. Greenhouse held various senior positions within RBC Capital Markets in commodity risk management, foreign-exchange and fixed income.  Prior to joining RBC, Mr. Greenhouse was a Senior Analyst at Dominion Bond Rating Service. Mr. Greenhouse is a graduate of the Michael G. DeGroote School of Business at McMaster University (B.Com), the London School of Economics, University of London (M.Sc.), and he holds the CFA designation from the CFA Institute.

Mr. Mancuso, President and Chief Executive Officer commented, “I am extremely excited to continue working with this management team and the Board in carrying through on our strategic vision of bringing Serra Pelada into production and using this world-class asset as a cornerstone on which to build a high-quality mid-tier gold producer. We welcome Alden to the team as his extensive capital markets, financial modeling and risk management expertise, will undoubtedly make significant positive contributions to the execution of our corporate strategy.”

About Colossus:

Colossus is a Canadian-based exploration and development company focused in the mineral prolific Carajas region of Para State, Brazil. Our primary focus is to advance the Serra Pelada project into production. Serra Pelada is host to one of the highest grade gold and platinum group metals deposits in the world. Between 1980 and 1986 Serra Pelada was host to the largest precious metals rush in Latin American history.  Colossus Minerals shares trade on the Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX) under the symbol CSI. The Company is headquartered in Toronto, Canada.

Except for statements of historical fact relating to Colossus, certain statements in this press release relating but not limited to the Company’s exploration and development plans, activities and intentions, constitute “forward‐looking information” within the meaning of the Securities Act (Ontario) or "forward‐looking statements" within the meaning of the United States Private Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements represent management's best judgment based on current facts and assumptions that management considers reasonable.  Forward‐looking statements are frequently characterized by words such as “target”, “plan”, “expect”, “project”, “intend”, believe”, “anticipate” and other similar words, or statements that certain events or conditions “appear to”, “may” or “will” occur.  Forward‐looking statements are based on the opinions and estimates of management at the date the statements are made, and are subject to a variety of risks and uncertainties and other factors that could cause actual events or results to differ materially from those projected in the forward‐looking statements.  The factors include but are not limited to risks related to the joint venture operation, actual results of exploration activities, the inherent risks involved in the exploration and development of mineral properties, changes in project parameters as plans continue to be refined, delays in obtaining government approvals, the uncertainties of project cost overruns or unanticipated costs and expenses, uncertainties relating to the availability and costs of financing needed in the future, the uncertainties inherent to conducting business in Brazil and the rest of Latin America, the availability of equipment and supplies, unexpected adverse climate conditions, the reliance on only a few key members of management, as well as those factors discussed in the section entitled "Risk Factors" in the Company’s most recent Annual Information Form filed with Canadian provincial securities regulatory authorities and other regulatory filings which are posted on SEDAR at www.sedar.com.  Unless required by law, Colossus undertakes no obligation to update forward-looking statements if circumstances or management’s estimates or opinions should change.  The reader is cautioned not to place undue reliance on forward‐looking statements.

For further information, please contact:

Ann Candelario, VP Investor Relations Colossus Minerals Inc.
Tel: (416) 643-7655
Web site: www.colossusminerals.com
Email: acandelario@colossusminerals.com


text:
Imagen de avatar cheap burberry
cheap burberry

Designer Shoes: Tips on how to Decide on Them

It is reported that sneakers mirror the character of an particular person. So it is actually a very important garments accessory. Currently footwear have grown to be a style accessory as opposed to merely a point of basic necessity. With footwear turning out to be a poplar fashion accent, different footwear brands have started out to manufacture designer shoes. Males do have a very fascination with these kinds of shoes. And with footwear business on a high roll, these footwear are only essential have for most on the shoe buffs. However, right here are several essential points which you’ll want to take into consideration prior to buying the designer shoe within your selection.

It truly is crucial for you to be familiar with your own design. These designer sneakers use a very unique design and style and look when compared to the traditional design shoes for men. Some search quite eccentric while some are rather elegant. Some actually have a typical layout. So your selection of shoe is solely depending burberry bags outlet on your personal design and style. Then will come the job of the footwear designers. With passage of time and the entire world getting to be a fashion spot, there are many footwear designers to suit burberry wallet your needs to choose from. But before deciding upon your designer you need to know which designer will be ready to offer you using your wished-for type shoe the top.

Yet another critical detail that is definitely of fantastic great importance when obtaining the designer footwear is usually that you need to know the scale of your feet. An appropriate in shape shoe just isn’t burberry tote bag only good for overall health but it really will likely make you appear better. The designer shoe you want may possibly not contain the size that will suit you the very best. There are plenty of designers current available in the market. Several other designer may stock your measurement. When determining to select your shoe, you need to usually keep the shoe dimension inside your mind along with the designer that manufactures and styles your measurement shoe.

Funds is also an essential issue that needs to be regarded. You will need to often have a specified finances for getting designer footwear Phony designer sneakers are also accessible on the market at minimal rates currently. Gentlemen that have a stringent spending plan typically opts for these sneakers but they usually are not superior for your wellness on the ft. Having said that, there are lots of individuals that are brand-conscious and sets their price range significant to purchase superior quality shoes.

Very last although not the the very least; it’s essential to constantly however the designer sneakers on-line. By obtaining these sneakers online you may get yourself a wide range of positive aspects. Not only would you manage to invest in the shoe from a property but there are many far more. You don’t have to line up for purchasing your favourite designer shoe. On the other hand, you can get to decide on from various models and colours when purchasing on line. With just several clicks of mouse, you are able to check out out the several varieties of sneakers that occur up with various brand names and purchase the one which matches your taste and personal type the most effective. Given that spending budget is a crucial factor that needs to be considered when purchasing the shoe, by opting to acquire the sneakers on the net you are able to review the prices of your various designers and buy the one which suits your budget the most effective.

Deja un comentario


text:
Center for Public Policy Studies

650,000 USD from the National Science Centre (NCN) for Emanuel Kulczycki for scientometric studies

February, 2018

The National Science Centre in Poland has awarded a grant to Emanuel Kulczycki for the project entitled ‘Parametric Game in the era of the research evaluation systems’ (2018–2023).

Description of the project

New models of research and science management focus on the accountability of research results. Scientists should not only investigate and describe the world and society, they should also publish their results in the most recognized top-tier channels of scholarly communication. In this way, science in the 21st century has become ‘Speed Academia’ where the main rule is ‘Publish or Perish’. The measurement of scientist productivity has created research evaluation systems on both the national and local levels. In several European countries (e.g., Denmark, Norway, United Kingdom, Poland), such national systems have been implemented.

The main goal of this project is to investigate how the implementing of regulations from the national research evaluation system in Poland in the local regulations of universities and faculties has produced the parametric game (‘punktoza’ in Polish) and transformed the publication patterns of scholars in social sciences and humanities. The parametric game is an academic work strategy that has become widespread in Poland due to the introduction of a particular policy of rewards. In this strategy, the most ‘profitable’ choice is to publish several articles in journals without an Impact Factor rather than one paper in a top-tier journal.

This project will allow us to analyze the parametric game in the social sciences and humanities in Poland. Moreover, the project’s results will contribute to our knowledge about the consequences of government policy on the publication and scientific practices of Polish scholars.

We will identify the publication patterns of Polish scholars in the social sciences and humanities. We will show what types of publications they prefer (articles, books, edited volumes) and how they decide which language to publish in and when to write co-authored papers. In addition, we will reconstruct the historical context of the implementation of the national research evaluation system in Poland. Moreover, we will investigate how ‘Publish or Perish’ has pushed scholars to use the communication channels of Fake Academia (predatory journals and conferences).

We will conduct over 160 semi-structured interviews with personnel from high-level management and scholars from Polish universities and institutes of the Polish Academy of Sciences. In parallel, we will build a complex corpus of official regulations and publications on research evaluation in Poland from 1918–2017. This data set will allow us to reconstruct past and ongoing discourses on research evaluation. Moreover, we will build a data set of Fake Academia (bibliometric data from predatory journals and conferences) that will allow us to add a new interpretational dimension to the analysis of the context of research evaluation system implementation.

The results will be highly relevant for researchers of science and higher education and scholarly communication, especially scientometricians, bibliometricians, and science policy researchers. The project will provide the opportunity to extend our knowledge on academic work and productivity management in the era of global academic competition. In addition, the project will contribute to our knowledge on the use and misuse of national research evaluation systems.

More about Emanuel Kulczycki


text:
Craigmonie Centre Facilities

The Craigmonie Centre is an accessible venue with disbled parking, push button entry doors, lift to upper level, hearing loops, disabled toilets and changing facilities. If you require a PEEP (Personal Emergency Evacuation Plan) or additional support to visit our venue Please let us know.

 Our Facilities Include:

 200 seat Theatre with:

  • Comfortable retractable, tiered seating.
  • HD Projector for PowerPoint, Blueray, DVD & VHS: NEW!
  • Large Cinema Screen for forward projection – rear projection and stage sets by arrangement.
  • Surround Sound and PA system
  • Professional Lighting Rig and curtains

The Craigmonie Theatre

Various Meeting rooms that can accommodate from 10 to 80 delegates

community room

  • Multi Gymnasium /Sports Hall – for a range of indoor activities
  • All Weather Floodlit pitch
  • Grass Playing Fields (available soon)
  • Fitness Suite
  • Changing Facilities with keyed lockers and showers

Professional registered Crèche facilities may be arranged through separate negotiation with GlenUrquhart Childcare Centre, which is adjacent to the centre (details from the centre co-ordinator).

In addition – there is a Café, Library, Dining area, Gallery area, & Courtyard

glen urquhart library

 In house catering that can offer everything from a welcoming Tea / coffee with home baking, through to themed dinners using local produce.

To find out about availability please contact the Centre Co-ordinator

Ensure that you read the Terms and Conditions of let which is available by going to the Booking Info page.  A copy can be downloaded from the Booking Form page

canteen area

Click for Map
Click on the Images below to find out more
Find us on Facebook
High Life Highland
 School's Out catalogue online!
Disability Information Scotland
sitemap | cookie policy | privacy policy | accessibility statement


text:
Crime Stoppers offers a reward of up to $1,000 for information leading to an arrest and charging in any felony case or that helps in the capture of a fugitive.

Simply click on the Submit a Web Tip button on the left of this page; call our toll free number; or use a smart phone APP to qualify and to help solve a crime.
To provide information click Solve this Crime below each case. Shown below are selected cases Law Enforcement is trying to solve.

Stephanie Smith homicide in South Minneapolis
February 15, 2012

On Monday, March 28, 2011 Minneapolis Police Officers from the Third Precinct responded to the 3400 block of Park Avenue South on a report of shots fired in the area. As Officers arrived they learned that a vehicle had arrived at Abbott Northwestern Hospital with three occupants, two of the occupants had been shot. One of the victims survived and the other victim, Stephanie Smith (pictured), died as a result of her injuries. The Hennepin County Medical Examiner’s Office determined that this case was a homicide.

Officers determined that the vehicle that arrived at Abbott Northwestern Hospital had been in the 3400 block of Park Avenue South. Witnesses reported seeing two black males running from the area after hearing multiple gunshots.  Homicide investigators and Smith’s family believe that someone has information regarding this case and are asking the public’s help to solve this crime. No arrests have been made in this case.

If you have information about these suspects or this killing you can help solve this crime.

This case has been featured on You Solve on KSTP-TV.  Thanks to an anonymous donation, useful information about this case qualifies for a reward of up to $2,000 if that information is submitted through Crime Stoppers of Minnesota

Site Image

Level 3 Predatory Offender On The Loose
February 25, 2011

The Minnesota Department of Corrections (DOC) has issued a warrant for the apprehension of Eugene Glaraton, a level three predatory offender. Glaraton is on Intensive Supervised Release for failing to register as a sex offender in Ramsey County. His prior convictions include First Degree Criminal Sexual Conduct.

Glaraton was released from the Minnesota Correctional Facility (MCF)- Lino Lakes on 2/15/2011. He has been on fugitive status since 2/20/2011 when he absconded from a halfway house placement.

Glaraton is 42 years old. He is white, 5`11", 222 pounds, with gray hair and blue eyes. He was last seen with a shaved head, and a slight mustache and goatee that are grey in color.

Citizens should not attempt to confront Glaraton. Anyone with information on his whereabouts is asked to call 911 or the DOC 24-hour tipline at 651/603-0026 or call the Crime Stoppers of Minnesota Anonymous Tip Line.

Click here for more pictures of this offender: MN+Corrections+02-24-11+News+Release.pdf

Site Image

$100,000 Reward for Information on Bank Robbers
November 08, 2010

Police and the FBI are in search of suspects believed to have robbed several banks in the Twin Cities area.  The banks robbed include Wells Fargo Bank in Champlin on August 4, 2010, U.S. Bank in Plymouth on September 13, 2010, and U.S. Bank in Anoka on November 5, 2010. They are also believed to be responsible for attempted robberies at TCF Bank in Chanhassen on August 30, 2010 and TCF Bank in Lakeville on September 2, 2010.

The individuals responsible for these crimes are generally described as black males in their 20s or 30s, one approximately 6` tall with a slim build, and the other approximately 5’8” tall with a stocky build. They typically wear dark clothing, to include masks and gloves, and carry a black backpack. They have threatened bank employees with violence if they do not cooperate, and have displayed firearms at times. They may be assisted by other individuals as well.

A separate reward of $100,000 is being offered by U.S. Bank for information leading to the arrest and conviction of the individuals responsible for these bank robberies.  U.S. Bank offers this reward to show it is very concerned about the welfare and safety of its employees and customers and therefore is eager to take these bank robbing culprits off the streets.

If you have information about these robberies or the suspects please come forward anonymously by contacting Crime Stoppers from this website.

Site Image

Page 2 of 223 RecordsPrev | Next


text:
Skip to Main ContentSkip to FooterNavigate to SitemapAccessibility Features
Search icon: magnifying glass
Get 25% Off

Stretch Flannel Shirt

Our trusty, cold-weather flannel in original plaids. Now with a bit of stretch for comfort.

Green Grey Plaid
Shirt Size
Shirt Fit
Free Shipping and Returns in the U.S.
Soft touch stretch flannel fabric | Two chest pockets | Heather Grey fabric placed at the interior back yoke and interior button placket


text:
Tag: silicone

2012 – Grand Old Party: Political Satire

American designer Matthew Epler shows how to build physical visualizations out of silicone using 3D printing and mold casting. He also shows how to use them to make political statements. Source: Matthew Epler (2012) Grand Old Party (video here).

Added by: Pierre Dragicevic, sent by: Fanny Chevalier. Category: Passive physical visualization  Tags: 3d printing, adult toy, digital fabrication, extruded 2d, moulding, opinion polls, politics, satire, silicone


text:
XML Sitemap

This is a XML Sitemap which is supposed to be processed by search engines which follow the XML Sitemap standard like Ask.com, Bing, Google and Yahoo.
It was generated using the WordPress content management system and the Google Sitemap Generator Plugin by Arne Brachhold.
You can find more information about XML sitemaps on sitemaps.org and Google's list of sitemap programs.

URLPriorityChange frequencyLast modified (GMT)
http://davidorlo.com/articles/wordpress/wordpress-update-fatal-error-out-of-memory-fix60%Weekly2011-08-30 05:11


text:
Adobe Travel App

Role: UI and Visual Designer, Art Director
Project Scope: App Screens, Branding System, UI Elements, Production Guide, Development Sprints Support, Asset creation

Valtech collaborated with Adobe to build a prototype redesigning what a traveler’s journey might look like when integrating lifestyle patterns with technology opportunities.

As a team, we researched how various existing entities and connected devices might partner together in new ways to address pain points and provide a more seamless experience. We built a prototype based on a hotel stay while also iterating sketches around similar journeys involving air, train, and transit stations. Collaborating with the UX designer, front end developers, and product owner, I established a visual brand system and designed all UI elements, screens, and related assets.

Additional Projects


text:
Grade A Entrepreneurs

(also: Zeitgeist, great atypical people, books and misc.)

Grade A Entrepreneurs header image 4

Patent or Not Patent? “That is not the real question,” David Jakopin says.

December 13th, 2008 · 1 Comment · Entrepreneurs

Google results: 139,000,000 for “patent; “46,100,000 for “intellectual property.” However, the significance level of these numbers may not be much higher than that of a googol in math. When you are a startup, where do you start as far as IP is concerned? One simple, or “simpler” item on your priority list should be to […]

[


text:
Images » Gigi Hadid » Gigihadid And Nick Jonas
HomeMovie NewsMusic NewsTV NewsGossip NewsConfirmed NewsShare Start

Photo : Gigihadid And Nick Jonas

6 Fan Uploads: Gigi Hadid Gallery
Barbara Ferreira
Brianna Hildebrand
Gigihadid And Nick Jonas
Is this Gigi Hadid the Model?
Share your thoughts on this image?
Gigi Hadid, Katy Perry, Nicole Scherzinger: Self-confessed competitive celebs
22nd January 2020 @ 11:16am
There are many competitive celebrities around and here we will take a look at a few of them.
Gigi Hadid defends Zayn Malik romance
5th July 2018 @ 10:37am
Gigi Hadid has hit back at a Twitter troll to defend her relationship with Zayn Malik
Zayn Malik reveals how he used Gigi Hadid to get Taylor Swift collaboration
14th December 2016 @ 01:44pm
Zayn Malik has been talking about working with Taylor Swift on new single I Don't Wanna Live Forever


text:
About Sharing Not Hoarding March 17, 2021 9:48 pm

A 'meanwhile' public art project located in Dundee's Waterfront Development.

About Sharing Not Hoarding

Sharing Not Hoarding was launched in 2015 as part of the Dundee Commons Festival. The project aims to encourage participation in Dundee's Waterfront Development by engaging with artists and community partners to reflect on issues pertinent to that development.

Using 18 4-sheet billboard posters to create a vibrant dialogue of image and text, the project provides opportunities for artists and the wider public to raise critical questions about our collective future by celebrating a diversity of voices and visions for the city.

The title, Sharing Not Hoarding, describes our method and aim: A collaboration between Jonathan Baxter (formerly On Site Projects) and Nomas* Projects to develop a programme of evolving exhibitions in hospitable-critical dialogue with Dundee citizens and other collaborating organisations both within and outwith the city.

Together we share the city. Together we shape its future.


text:
Try Free Gambling Online While Playing Free Poker Games

“Risks usually over the place”. For your players of casinos whether in land-based casinos as well as online casinos the associated with getting into something which you are not familiar with one of the most common risks in bets. Specially in online casinos that the temptation along with the urge of gambling should be considered present. With its flashy ads, great offers, and different kind of promo and privileges any player wouldn’t resist its charm to risk. And because on the players straggle between your risks on online gambling or not likely. More or less, there are numerous of gamblers that go ahead and take first range.

The rules are simple when playing online slot games, one just for you to be know which button hit to win or not there are software developers that have included between four to reels and assend to 26 pay types. There are even bonus games; these make the sport a bit more challenging. Comparing the winning combinations, the payout percentages before starting the game will assist you win lots more. The free online Pg slot games end up being way to travel to if you do not the money to released for playing. This is nothing but a bet on chance, there isnrrrt set of rules the man has obviously how november 23 at slots, it’s just like hit and miss.

So which maximize a great experience with online slots, find a website provides free practice or a zero cost trial occasion. When you find one, take advantage right out of town. This is also one way determine how perform online slot and to actually understand its concept provided rules and mechanics for the game.

The best argument presented against gambling from a Biblical standpoint is if you want that while you gamble you are coveting. That is, an individual coveting or “craving for” money which usually is not yours or that belongs to someone else because in casino poker. While this argument may sound very good up front, upon examination it falls down by using a crash. For starters, it ignores foods that you’re risking a couple of your own money method to to win something regarding just flat-out “coveting” an income.

The last, and most drastic, decision you may have to make end up being leave responsibility if happen to be living these. If they are draining your financial circumstances by not having to pay their share then it is time for in order to go. Discover still offer emotional support with your ex and understanding, but use the “tough love” approach.

먹튀검증 associated with online casino temptation often they are giving their players a far lower level of money to wager inside their casino applications. A lot of players grab a whole lot of offers, specially with those low rollers member. Online casinos are giving off this form of offers to grant their players a longer hours to gamble in their Gambling house online.

To estimate somebodies addiction you may ask some questions noticed below. They were developed by psychological specialists and now you may check yourself or somebody you are worried about.

There are extensive video slots available within casinos. They differ mostly in jackpot prizes, coin denominations, payouts, and regarding pay accounts. If you have a good budget for your game, it is strongly suggested that you play in machines which have at least 9 pay lines or even more. It is pointless to play in machines having less that 9 pay lines because will certainly not let your earn more cash. Casino gambling is really fun and one strategy really enjoy your experience is perform video casino wars and get a victory.


text:
Monthly Archives: August 2015

French artillery in 1:100 – Part 7 the 24pdr howitzer

24pdr howitzer

And so last but not least we come to the 24pdr howitzer. This became the standard French field howitzer in the Empire period, and it may have been the second most produced artillery piece for the French in the era, after the 6pdr, being in production from 1804. And yet until recently it has been nearly invisible to historians. No figure manufacturer has attempted to produce it in 15mm that I am aware of. Consequently this has been the single biggest modelling challenge in my project.

This howitzer was introduced as part of the An XI artillery reforms, and seems to have been generally well thought of. It had a smaller calibre than the 6 pouce howitzer it replaced, but it had a longer barrel, and was more accurate. Napoleon was pleased that each ammunition caisson could carry significantly more rounds. Like the 6pdr it was virtually the same calibre as its Austrian counterpart, the 7pdr (150-152mm) – presumably allowing ammunition to be interchanged – though likely to be of different dynamic characteristics. It took its name, 24pdr, from the being the same calibre as the 24pdr heavy cannon. This was a new, rationalised naming convention that does not seem to have taken, though. Some referred to it as 5 pouce 6/7 lignes, but it seems to have been quite common to round this to 6 pouce, or inches, causing confusion to later historians. Since it was about 6 English inches in calibre, English observers called it 6 inch too. In the Royal Armouries catalogue the two examples they have (both captured at Waterloo and cast in or about 1804) are both referred to as 6in howitzers, the same nomenclature as the two much larger 10pdrs. Sadly there are no drawings of these two, and just basic measurements (a single length measurement and calibre) in the catalogue.

It was quite distinctive of appearance, though. At 101cm (muzzle to breeech ring) the tube was about 5cm longer than the Austrian and Prussian equivalents. But the trunnions were further back, giving a barrel that stuck out well beyond the carriage, as the above illustration shows – quite the opposite of the 6 pouce howitzer it replaced. This picture is of one of the pieces captured at Vitoria  in 1813 and now in Lisbon (a picture of it also appears in David Chandler’s Campaigns of Napoleon, inevitably referred to as a 6in howitzer). Did the design change as the wars progressed? DDS suggests it was modified. Indeed its table refers to two different howitzers: the “M1803 7-pdr” – calibre 151.5mm and 101cm in tube length, and the “M1808 24-pdr “,calibre 148mm and length 120cm. And yet I have seen no drawings or other pictures of the later piece. The Royal Armouries examples clearly conform to the former dimensions (allowing that their length includes the button at the rear), as does the photo of a “M1803 24-pdr” in DDS book itself.  The drawings that I have seen in another publication are also of the early version. I need rather harder evidence of that the later design was ever in fact operational in serious numbers.

And what of the carriage? This seems to be closely modelled on the 6pdr carriage. DDS carries a drawing of the “M1803” version. This shows a carriage identical to the 6pdr, alongside a drawing of a 10pdr barrel. Apart from the barrel being of a different piece, the issue with the carriage is that the elevating plate seems designed for the much longer 6pdr barrel. I would expect a much shorter plate for the howitzer, as we indeed see on the closely related later Prussian designs. The pictures of the 24pdr in Lisbon don’t reveal this detail, unfortunately, though otherwise the carriage design is consistent with drawing, allowing for the later addition of trail handles.

But how to model this piece? I wanted three of them. The carriage is easy – the Blue Moon 6pdr carriage would be the logical starting point. But their Prussian 6pdr and Howitzer carriages would be nearly as good, as indeed would be the AB Prussian Howitzer carriage, assuming a shorter elevating plate, or the 6pdr for a longer plate. The Prussians seem to have copied the An XI carriage for their later artillery pieces, with even the reinforcing metal bands on the trail being in about the same places. For the BM models an elevating plate needs to be added (e.g. from plastic card), or at least the rear end. I had some spare BM Prussian howitzer models (from the pernicious BM practice of selling their artillery pieces in packs of 6), so I used these, adding trail handles from bent bits of staple. Also I cut out the two retaining bars for the ammunition case at the bottom rear of the trail.

But the barrel? It is of unique shape, and I searched my bits and pieces for anything that could be adapted. The closest was the BM Prussian howitzer. But the trunnions are too far back, which means that the barrel does not have the characteristic projection from in front of the carriage. It is also a bit thin. I wanted the barrel to be noticeably thicker than the French 6pdr barrel. My first idea was to adapt the BM Prussian 6pdr barrel. This is quite thick (it does have the dolphins too – even though Prussians had eliminated these from their 6pdr in fact). I could saw off the ends,  shorten the remaining barrel, and then stick the ends back on. I decided not to because I had it in mind to use these barrels for their original purpose – to play the part of heavy Prussian 6pdrs, to work alongside the beautiful AB 6pdrs, which would act as the light version. I also thought the area around the middle, which has a bit of a “saddle” would not be easy to replicate. In hindsight I think I made the wrong decision, though, and I may yet try to make an additional piece this way.

But instead I decided to make the barrel from scratch! I took a piece of plastic sprue from a kit for two of the barrels, and rolled some Milliput epoxy putty for the third. On one I wrapped a slither of paper around the middle to get the “saddle”; for the other two I used some epoxy putty (grey stuff – I’m not sure which brand). Trunnions were added from a bit of plastic rod (from the same kit, which was a building). For the dolphins I fashioned something from putty for one, cut bits of plastic for the other two. For the rear I used the sawn off end of some old Minifigs 12pdrs. For the muzzle I used sections cut from a Minifigs artillery wheel hub, with quite a bit of filing down. All of which is easily said, but 1:100 is a small scale, and my fingers aren’t as nimble as they once were. And I didn’t find the putty that easy to work with (perhaps because mine is a bit old?). This was not a particulary neat or precise job. The trunnions and dolphins were particularly difficult – which is why I think my first idea was a better one. A further reason was that the barrel turned out to be a bit too thick. This is OK until it is put next to one of the other howitzer models, when it looks heavier than even the 10pdr. Never mind! One point worth adding is that the BM trunnion recesses are far too deep, which means that the barrel tends to go too low. I used a little bit of plasticine to sort this out – I didn’t find the epoxy putty easy to work with for this job.

And here’s the result!:

24 How

Here are the three types of howitzer together: the 10pdr, the 6 pouce and the 24pdr. in that order. You can see that the 24pdr barrel is too heavy in comparison with the other two. It is a tad over scale and the others a tad under.

3 Hows

And here it is with the 6pdr gun (Blue Moon version), its normal companion.

24 how 6pdr 2

And again with my Old Glory horse artillery crews:

24 how 6pdr 1

So what would I recommend for anybody that wants one of these to support their 15mm army? Straight out of the packet the closest fit is the Blue Moon Prussian howitzer. The barrel doesn’t poke out far enough, but actually the fit isn’t so bad. I would urge doing something about the trunnion recesses so the barrel doesn’t sit too low, and I would add an elevating plate under the barrel – advice that applies just as much to the Prussian version. If somebody quibbles you can always say it is a captured piece! The second alternative is to use the BM 6pdr and attempt the barrel conversion. You will need something to cut the barrel with though, like a jeweller’s saw. Using a knife has a tendency to squash the barrel.

And that completes my collection. Something is gestating on limbers, but BM have recently released their limber models, and these are well worth a look. I will complete my series of posts with a wrap-up piece though, and some pictures of all the types together.

Part 8 – Finishing off and conclusion

French artillery in 1/100: Part 6 – the 6in howitzers

An so we come to the howitzers. Howitzers are often ignored by wargamers, as they usuallyFrench howitzers only comprised one section of two  in each battery – so there is only a call for them if you are representing pairs of guns. My games are grand tactical where each tabletop piece represents one or two complete batteries. And yet I have always had a soft spot for the type, and found ways of including one or two on the tabletop. And when it came to this project the howitzers caused me more research problems than any other aspect – and so has the modelling. Confusion reigns from start to finish. Let’s begin by considering the diagram to the right, which shows a drawing of each of the three howitzer types that the French used in the field, alongside captured weapons. Each of them is usually referred to as a 6 inch howitzer. In addition to these three RC in his Osprey offers some pictures of an earlier “Gribeauval” howitzer that was not in use in our era, so far as I know.

The one at the top is the “real” 6 pouce ( = thumb = inch) howitzer, that was cast in the 1790s, and dominates all illustrations of French howitzers. Its calibre is exactly six French inches, which were slightly longer than the ones in modern use in Britain and the US. I will call this the 6 pouce. The second is the heavy howitzer, based on the Prussian 10pdr howitzer. It was never produced in large numbers but it accompanied French 12pdr batteries right up to Waterloo. I will call this the 10pdr. These two I will deal with in this post. The third is the An XI howitzer, more properly called the 24pdr, or sometimes the 5 pouce 6 or 7 lignes (12 lignes = 1 pouce). It is nearly six English (and modern) inches in calibre, and is thus it is usually called a 6in howitzer by British observers. Perhaps disliking the alternative nomenclature, the French also seemed to have used this name very often too. It is much the most important of the three militarily, and also the most challenging to model, so it gets a post all to itself. I will call it the 24pdr. Incidentally DDS uses modern inches to distinguish the three (6.4, 6.8 and 5.9 respectively), but I don’t think this helps – if you must impose modern nomenclature, then surely the metric system is preferable and transparent.

So first to the 6 pouce. This is the 8pdr of the howitzers. From the literature and illustrations you might think it was the only howitzer the French had in service. And yet it was not all that widely used – though it is hard to tell for sure because when orders of battle refer to 6in or 6p howitzers they may be referring to any of the three designs, and possibly some captured 7pdr howitzers too. A number of barrels pop up in illustrations; all were cast in the 1790s, and I don’t think any were cast later. RC says that more were cast between 1804 and 1813, but I am sure he is confusing it with the 10pdr. The 6in howitzers captured at Waterloo and in the Royal Armouries, when not referring to the 24pdrs, refer to two 10pdrs, one cast in 1795 and the other 1813 (the entry for the latter was shown in my previous post). The 6 pouce was regarded as inaccurate and its carriage had a tendency to shatter (according to RC). Still, a number were used well into the Imperial era. There is an example in Les Invalides mounted on an An XI carriage, clearly from later on. And the official documentation seems to keep mentioning it. Whether it was used in Spain, like the Gribeauval guns, I cannot tell. All the howitzers described in both French (as published by Nafziger) and English (the report of artillery captured at Vitoria) sources refer to all the field howitzers as 6in. The surviving example from Vitoria in Lisbon is a beautiful 24pdr, showing that the French, as well as the British, referred to the 24pdr as “6 inch”. The Spanish government may not have used this design, unlike the Gribeauval guns – and these were the main source of artillery for the French in Spain, apparently.

Be that as it may, unlike the other howitzers, there are some lovely drawings of it and its original carriage. Some of these originate with designs sent by the French to the United States. One (after de Scheel 1800) is reproduced in part in DDS, and shows the original elevating mechanism – with a triangle of wood moved by a screw to the rear. Here is another version of this drawing:

This is the source of a nice picture in RC – though this elevating mechanism (quite unlike the Gribeauval one) was replaced in 1792 according to DDS (the elevating screw came from below the barrel). Artists and historians seem attracted to these drawings and have quickly appropriated them to represent all French howitzers. It is used, for example in Mark Adkins’s book on Waterloo, in spite of the fact that it was almost certainly not used in the 1815 campaign. The visual appearance is certainly striking. You can see from the above drawing that the barrel is very stubby; there is not much barrel in front of the trunnions and it barely projects from the carriage. But it is also very chunky. as is the carriage, which, apart from the elevating mechanism, seems to have a family resemblance to Gribeauval pattern (though the cheeks do look a bit chunkier, they have that characteristic bend) The wheels are the same as the 8pdr and 12pdr, but the trails are shorter, though longer than for the 4pdr. One remarkable picture in DDS shows this carriage mounting a 24pdr from about 1822 – including the triangle of bolts relating to the obsolete elevating mechanism. This may be an attempt to render an 8pdr carriage, which we are told was in use at the time, but it clearly refers to the obsolete 6 pouce carriage.

There is a bit of problem with the drawings though. The barrel seems to be subject to different drawings from the carriage, and the scales get wonky. According to the above drawing the length of the trail is 187cm; according to the picture in DDS it 298cm. According to a table of dimensions in RC (which looks authoritative, though the metric conversion can be shaky) it is 268cm – which is the version I take as accurate. The DDS scale appears to be accurate for the barrel, but not the carriage. The colour illustration in RC seems to have overcome these problems, though, to produce a very nice picture, albeit with the out of date elevating mechanism.

How to model the 6 pouce? Unsurprisingly, it is the only French howitzer that any of the manufacturers has attempted. But they haven’t given it much attention. Battle Honours gave us a barrel, but supplied it with their “light” gun carriage, which I have used for the 4pdr. Old Glory and Fantassin/Warmodelling give us a tiny barrel to plant on a standard 8pdr carriage. Minifigs produce quite a nice model, but under scale for my purposes. AB get the closest. The overall dimensions and topography are correct on my models, bought over 10 years ago, and it even gets the elevating mechanism right, but apart from the wheels it just looks a bit weedy. The barrel, in particular, is much too thin – it should rival the 12pdr in girth (the calibre is larger after all (166mm to 121mm). The model may have changed, though. The picture in the link on the Fighting 15s site seems to show an 8pdr style carriage, not unlike the one used for the 6pdr. The recent Blue Moon offering is nothing less than a disaster. The carriage is hopelessly over scale (33mm long, or 330cm in scale). The barrel is on a more accurate scale, but lacks heft, though it is better than the AB attempt. The wheels are fine though!

So what to do? I used the BM barrel on the AB carriage. I already had three of the ABs, and I used two for this purpose. Some of the BM carriages I converted to 12pdrs, and I have used all the wheels – so I have managed to get something form £12 purchase of six. If you are starting from scratch I can only suggest you use the AB version and grit your teeth – unless you fancy scratch building the barrel yourself – it has quite a simple shape after all. I remain a bit disappointed with the carriage though. And if they have changed it to the 8pdr type, then this is something of a blank. The closest I can get is the Minifigs Prussian 10pdr, but the wheels are too small, the carriage a bit too broad, and the barrel nothing like right. It may be easier to model it on the AnXI carriage – see my next article. The barrel will still be an issue!

And now for the 10pdr. During the 1790s, apparently, the French were impressed with the Prussian 10pdr howitzer. So much so they produced a copy for their own use in 1795. I’m not entirely clear why. Perhaps problems with the 6 pouce howitzer led them to look on foreign weapons more kindly. But its more obvious competitor was the 7pdr howitzer, and Austrian 7pdr howitzer was certainly well regarded. DDS mentions the use of captured Prussian and Austrian ammunition. Perhaps the French just wanted something hefty to join their 12pdr batteries. And this piece was hefty at some 670/680Kg. That was twice as heavy as the 6 pouce, and heavier than the 8pdr gun – and only 100Kg lighter than the 12pdr. And it wasn’t a particularly new design – the original dated from 1743 according to DDS, and I have seen a picture of the barrel of the Prussian version complete with antique dolphins, representing mythical sea creatures, not the simple handles of the Napoleonic era. Still, it continued in use throughout the era, with additional pieces cast in 1813. Two were taken away by the British at Waterloo and are now in the Royal Armouries, one dated 1795, the other 1813.

What of its carriage? Here I have practically nothing to go on. DDS declares that the commonly depicted 6 pouce carriage was the Prussian original for this (in the caption to the drawing of the 6 pouce carriage, which shows a very clear drawing of the 6 pouce barrel alongside). I don’t believe this – the design is surely more modern and takes features from the Gribeauval design. But in the absence of any better data, I have decided that ithis carriage was used for both designs. The trail would no doubt have to be widened a bit to take a significantly broader barrel, but I expect that was standard stuff in those days before precision manufacturing. My basis for this (apart from assuming that there might be something in the DDS reference) is a picture in RC showing a Guard artilleryman in front of a howitzer (see below); this is clearly the 6 pouce carraige, but the barrel is a bit ambiguous (a bit too long-nosed for the 6 pouce, without looking like a 10pdr). This picture seems to date fromGuard howitzer late 19th Century, and is thin evidence indeed. But if in doubt I often take a lead from artists confronted by the same problem; the 10pdr was surely the howitzer used by the Guard foot batteries.

Whether this carriage was really robust enough for this brute is another question. Later in the era tangential references in DDS suggest that it may have been mounted on on a modified An XI carriage with an elevating plate. But there are no illustrations of this piece, apart from the barrel, that I have seen anywhere, so this amounts to guesswork. One thing can be said about its appearance though, apart from being very bulky: the trunnions are towards the bottom of the barrel (like many pieces of heavy artillery). This means that it would look as if the barrel was perched on top of the carriage, compared to how other weapons look.

Modelling this piece, almost invisible to history, might seem a hopeless task. But not so. I had bought the AB Prussian 7 pdr howitzer to support my slowly developing 1815 Prussian army – but it looked wrong. The barrel looked far to big, and it perched on top of the carriage. As I became aware of the 10pdr, the penny finally dropped. This represented a 10pdr howitzer, not the 7pdr! The dimensions measured up too – though since my French artillery barrels have a slight tendency to be oversized, it might not look quite right in comparison – though fine next to the 6 pouce, as it happens. I used this barrel on the AB French howitzer carriage. I had to add trunnions to it (the AB model moulds these to the carriage not the barrel) from a plastic rod – quite hard for my clumsy fingers, though. I simply borrowed a barrel from one of my many old Battle Honours Austrian howitzers to put on the original Prussian carriage, to give quite decent looking 7pdr. If you don’t want to do this, simply convert the Prussian carriage to a French one. In essence the Prussians copied of the French An XI carriage design for their later ordnance, so it makes quite a plausible carriage for French service. Just cut out the retaining bars for the ammunition box underneath rear end of the trail, and add some trail handles if you feel up to it (bend and cut some fuse wire or ordinary stationery staples and glue on). If you have the patience (I did not on my Prussian conversions) you can also cut off/file down the rings on the right of the rear transom.

So here are my models. The 10pdr is on the left, the 6 pouce to the right.:

6in hows 2

And here is the 6 pouce next to the original AB Prussian “7pdr”. The Prussian howitzer wheels are too flat – a common problem with AB models – but these can be bent into shape with pliers. Apart from the flat wheels, and mounting the wrong sized barrel, the AB model is a beauty, incidentally. Note that the AB French model doesn’t have the distinctive trail handles, which it really should. I haven’t had the patience to add them in this case!

AB howitzers

Next article: the 24pdr howitzer

French artillery in 1/100: Part 5 the 6pdr

The French 6pdr, introduced after 1803, may have been the most produced artillery piece in the Napoleonic Wars (the Austrian 6 pdr, produced over a longer period, may have rivalled it – or perhaps the Russian 6pdr). The  Russians alone had captured over 184 by 1813 (mainly through the 1812 debacle, no doubt). Many more were cast in 1813, so that at Waterloo Napoleon had 142, not counting Grouchy’s corps. Compare that to the 92 8pdrs in use in 1806, as production ceased, according to DDS. And yet in most literature, until recently, it was as if this weapon did not exist. A picture of one in Chandler’s standard work The Campaigns of Napoleon is described as an 8pdr. Unfortunately 15mm figure manufacturers have taken their cue from this silence. So finding models of them to support a 15mm French army has been more than a small problem.

The 6pdr was the central product of the An XI review of French artillery instituted by Napoleon in 1803. It was to replace both the 4pdr and 8pdr, allowing more standardisation across the army. The advantages over the 4pdr were easy to see – the feeling that the lighter piece was not up to the task was widespread. The replacement of the 8pdr was more contentious. But in Napoleon’s view the advantages of the heavier weapon were trumped by those of the new one. Perhaps he could see, in a way that junior artillery officers could not, that lighter weapons meant more of them.

It was also a step towards standardisation with other armies, allowing greater interchangeability of ammunition. The 6pdr was the standard calibre for all other major nations, and most of the minor ones too. Although each nation’s version of the pound was different (there were about 8 French livres to 9 English pounds, for example), the calibres were generally more similar than this might suggest. According to DDS the French 6pdr had calibre of 96mm (to the nearest mm – this was not a precision age), and so were the Austrian and Russian weapons. For the Prussians it was 94mm, though, the British ploughed their own furrow with 93mm. Interestingly the Austrian ball was quite a bit smaller than the French one (just over 90mm compared to 94mm), but the charge behind it was 93mm. All this meant that some interchangeability was feasible, although the dynamic properties would have differed.

The new French 6pdr was part of a more general redesign. It inherited a some of the design features of the Gribeauval system – the big wheels and the less angular look (though the trail was straighter) – but it changed a lot too. This included peripheral features such as the carriage of the ammunition coffret (the small chest carried on the trail in the old system), and the use of trail spikes to manoeuvre the piece – which gave raise to the distinctive trail handles. The result was a piece that bore a family resemblance to the old 8pdr, but was notably different. The barrel was shorter and much lighter. In common with most other An XI barrels, it did not have the central reinforcing rings, giving it a smooth appearance that is distinctive from all or nearly all its peers in other nations. The carriage was about the same length as the 8 pdr, but lighter, straighter and had the characteristic upturned end. There were three rather than two sets of metal reinforcing bands on the trail, with the front two in different positions. And there was no second set of trunnion recesses for transport mode. There were no trail handles, no recesses for the coffret and the iron axle was encased in a larger wooden one.

All this was too much for the field officers, who criticised the new weapon compared to their beloved 8pdr. The new design was said to be  not as robust. In response, modifications were made. Back came the trail handles and the coffret recess; the wooden axle casing went. DDS says that the barrel was redesigned to be much bigger: “in effect, a lightweight version of the Gribeauval 8-pdr”. All these changes together they refer to as the “M1808” system. But how radical were the changes in fact? From a modeller’s perspective they appear to be pretty superficial. There is a drawing of the “new” weapon in DDS, and pictures of a scale model in the Musée de l’Armée at Les Invalides. Added to that evidence is the above picture of an example of an actual piece in Les Invalides (dating it is said from 1813 – though probably only the barrel’s date is known for sure). I have found a much older picture from les Invilades of what is surely the same piece:

6 pdr Invilades

It is clear from this evidence that carriage much the same as before. It’s the same shape; the bands are in the same places. That leaves the almost superficial detail of the trail handles, with the recesses for the coffret and the axle representation not being things that a typical 15mm model deals with.

And what of the bigger, heavier barrel? The barrel in the drawing has the same dimensions as the original, and that seems be true of the two photos too. The Royal Armouries has no less than 9 French 6pdr barrels, captured at Waterloo and all cast in 1813 (five in France, three in the Netherlands and one in Italy). These are 166cm or 168cm muzzle to breech ring (four of the French ones are 166cm; one of the French ones and one of the Dutch ones is 168cm, the lengths of the others isn’t mentioned in the Armouries catalogue) . The French ones are all 390 to 392Kg (the one measured Dutch one about 380Kg).  According to DDS’s statistical table the original barrel length was 166cm and weight 390Kg. Their “M1808” version is described as being 180cm and 392Kg. The 180cm measurement appears to include the button at the end, where it would conform to the 168cm Waterloo ones, and the weight is the same as the old version – so it doesn’t look as if they have firm data for the “M1808” barrel. The 1813 barrels conform to the original 1803 pattern, and I have yet to see any decent evidence that the heavier barrel was actually ever produced. Of course they might have been, and in the desperate circumstances of 1813 they might simply have gone back to the earlier design because of metal shortages. But show me a real living example of the bigger barrel!

Here is an extract from the Royal Armouries catalogue showing the entry for one the 6pdrs; note the lack of central reinforcing rings – and the notes on dimensions. The howitzer entry below it is also interesting, but more of that in my next post.

Royal Armouries

A further development is mentioned in DDS. It is that in January 1814 Napoleon ordered that old 8pdr carriage was to be adopted for all field ordnance, including the 6pdr, the 12pdr and the howitzers. But I wonder what evidence there is that this was ever adopted? Alas the carriages from the Royal Armouries 6pdrs were lost in a fire in the 19th century. Six of the barrels are on display at the Tower of London, but on modern (1950) reproduction carriages, based, I understand, on the Gribeauval 4pdr. My working assumption must be that the Waterloo 6pdrs looked like the example in Les Invalides.

And so to my models. In my collection I had three AB 6pdrs already. These were the only attempt at a 6pdr available at the time, but I found them deeply unsatisfactory. Firstly the wheelbase was much too wide – wider, even, than the 12pdr. But this may have been corrected somewhat since, judging by the LittleArmies blog, though still out by about 1mm. Second the carriage is simply an 8pdr one without the second trunnion recesses. The trail handles are also missing on mine – though these look as if they have since been added in, judging by the picture on the Fighting 15s website (and LittleArmies’ blog). There is no upturned trail end. The trail is bit narrow and straight rather than splayed, as with the 12pdr, but I am not so worried about that for the 6pdr, and it looks fine next to the AB 12 pdr anyway. This might be a fair representation of a post 1814 carriage, but I don’t think that there were many of these, if any. Unfortunately in the confusion over my last reorganisation all the barrels got muddled up, and I can’t comment on the accuracy of the barrel length. But I can say for sure that it has central reinforcing rings – and they’re still there.  Apart from these admittedly major problems, the usual very high standard of detailing from AB is there. I decided to keep them, but with 1mm or so taken off each axle end, and with the central reinforcing rings filed off the barrels. Whether these barrels are the originals, or whether they come from Battle Honours (BH) 8pdrs I can’t say!

Also from my bits and pieces, I had some old BH Prussian 6pdrs. The carriage looked rather suitable, being of the right dimensions, and with the trail bands in more or less the right place. With new wheels (taken from Blue Moon French or Prussian pieces – which I may yet regret when I come to complete my Prussian artillery project) and barrels from AB/BH, with the central rings filed down, I had a passable version of the original An XI 6pdr.

But I need serious numbers of the 6pdrs for my 1815 games, and if I ever get into 1812 and 1813/1814. I set a target at this stage of 12. That means I couldn’t just mess with my existing bits and pieces, I needed new stock. Fortunately, there’s a new kid on the block: Blue Moon. They do a 6pdr (in the usual packs of 6). This does have some issues. The barrel has the central reinforcing rings (and the dolphins are a bit vague), and the elevating plate sits far too low. The trail cheeks are also a bit thick. But filing down the barrel and with a new plastic card elevating plate (I simply glued the back end of one to the back of the barrel) and we were away. This is a very acceptable model. I have six of these to bring my total to 12 – and I know I can knock up many more if need be.

Here are the three variations with the usual crew figures. At the front is the BM, next is the AB, behind that is the BH Prussian conversion, and finally the 8pdr for comparison.

6pdrs 1

Here they are again, without the crews, from right to left: the 8pdr, the BH Prussian conversion, the AB and the BM.6pdrs 2

And a comparison of the the AB and BM models. The AB with the classic bent 8pdr carriage is to the left. It is difficult to see the shape of the BM model, but there is a marked uptick at the end of the trail, though not as marked as the real thing. The BM model is freshly painted for this photo, and could do with a little touch up, at bits of white undercoat are showing through! The AB carriage (not the tube) is an old paint job, with a darker interpretation of the carriage colour.

6pdrs 3

If you are starting from scratch I would recommend using the Blue Moon 6pdrs, with the same modifications noted above if those details bother you. The only serious alternative is the AB version, which is at least available singly – but you may have to narrow the wheel track, and really should file down the barrel rings.  Warmodelling/Fantassin claim to do a 6pdr, but I wouldn’t touch it. The carriage is all wrong, and not very nicely modelled either. I have not actually seen any others.

Next article: the 6in howitzers

French artillery in 1/100: Part 4 – the 12pdr

Gribeauval_cannon_de_12_An_2_de_la_Republique_top_viewAnd now for the big one. The 12pdr was the standard reserve artillery piece in the French army. These weren’t used in great numbers but they might described as “charismatic”. 12pdr batteries were present at army corps level, and the Imperial Guard had a number of batteries, the elite of the French artillery.

The best known version was the Gribeauval one. The picture above is from Les Invilades, the French army museum in Paris, and dates from about 1794, apparently (that may just be the barrel, though). It’s a big brute. Funnily enough the carriage dimensions aren’t that different from the 8pdr (though beware a misconverted metric measurement for cheek length in the dimensions given in RC – the Osprey). The wheels are the same diameter (146cm) and the axle the same length (209cm). The cheek length is 302cm compared to 286cm, and the cheeks are thicker. The overall appearance of the carriage is beefier than for the 8pdr. And the barrel is much bigger of course (211cm from muzzle to base ring, as opposed to 184cm – more misconversions in RC, incidentally): 880Kg, as opposed to 580Kg. Incidentally DDS suggests that the 12pdr barrel was 985Kg in weight, but the two 1794 examples in the Royal Armouries are slightly under 880Kg, the weight given in RC.

How the weapon evolved during the wars is not so clear, though. In the An XI review the 12pdr was retained but redesigned. The barrel was nearly the same length, but a bit lighter at 760Kg. Like other An XI designs the barrel did not have the reinforcing rings at the centre, the barrel being smooth from the breach ring up to the muzzle zone. The carriage was also of similar general dimensions to the old one, but straighter, lighter and with the characteristic upturned end. The axle had a wooden casing, the two trunnion positions were a bit closer together, and there was an additional metal band near the axle, between the trunnion recessess – probably the easiest way to tell the difference at a quick glance (though the second reinforcing band on the trail is further back than the Gribeauval design too). Remarkably, one of these carriages is at Les Invilades (with a broken wheel – pictures feature in both RC and DDS):

12 pdrIncidentally this shows the trail handles, which were not part of the original An XI design. The barrel on this weapon, however, is not the An XI 12pdr (you can see the reinforcing rings in the centre) – it looks like the Gribeauval version.

Were many of these newer designs ever made? It’s hard to tell. According the DDS the An XI system was suspended in 1805, and by 1808 the original Gribeauval designs were reverted to, subject to some modifications. Old pieces were converted. DDS says that all the An XI 12pdr carriages had been replaced by 1812. In which case for one to have survived is quite remarkable. Alternatively it might be that “replacement” did not involve much more than adding the trail handles (visible in the picture above) and other accoutrements required for the old system for manhandling the guns, and recesses for stowing the ammunition coffret on the trail in transit. If so quite a few modified An XI carriages might well have survived until the disaster of 1812.

What did the post-An XI 12pdrs look like? These are referred to as “M1808” by DDS, but I think this system of classification (Original An XI = M1803, etc.) suggests more system and uniformity than there really was, as well as being a modern artefact. DDS carries a couple of pictures of later carriages. One is one of the Royal Armouries pieces, thought to have been captured at Waterloo; the other dates from 1821 and is at Les Invilades. The former has a distinctly turned up trail end, but otherwise looks very similar to the 1794 picture above. The 1821 one is not a complete picture – the trail ends are not shown – and I can’t even be certain it is different from the “1794” one in the first picture above. It may well be my imagination, but I think that both of these later carriages look a bit lighter than the older one, though.

I’m sure none of the original Gribeauval pieces were withdrawn after 1803. Many tubes from the 1790s or even earlier still survive. DDS count just 20 French made 12pdrs in service in 1807, so it would seem that the army had quite a reserve of old barrels, unused perhaps because of the shortage of horses. A number of An XI pieces were made and then subject to relatively minor modifications. Then a number of post An XI pieces were made, often remounting old tubes. Amongst the 58 captured French 12 pdrs brought to Moscow on the Tsar’s orders in 1813, the tube manufacture dates are 1767 to 1811, with only 15 post 1803. No doubt further tubes were cast in 1813 – but none has popped up in any of the publications that I have read. In fact no tubes later than the 1790s have – which makes judging the appearance of later castings difficult to judge.

Now for my models. I already had two AB 12pdr models. While being generally unenthusiastic about them, I haven’t rejected them. What I don’t like is the trail, which has quite a small gap between the cheeks and there is no splay. But from most angles they are quite reminiscent of the Royal Armouries Waterloo piece, without the turn-up at the trail end. One good feature of the AB models – which Battle Honours (also by Anthony Barton) also reflects – is that the elevating plate is in the right place, rather than being way below the barrel, which Blue Moon tends to get wrong. I wanted at least three more pieces though. I was put off BM by LittleArmies‘ review of their 12 pdr. The trail was 36mm long – 5/6mm too big, though it did have a nice uptick at the end, signifying a late war carriage.

But then I had a look at the BM French howitzer carriage. This is way too big for the howitzer itself  – my biggest disappointment with Blue Moon, and of which more later. But the carriage and wheels work as the basis for a 12pdr. It is a tad overscale, but tolerable – and better over than under for this piece. The carriage required a few modifications. The rear trunnion recesses had to be cut and filed out. The rear of the elevating mechanism had to be cut out, and an elevating plate (plastic card) put in. A transom (also plastic card) had to be added in between the trail cheeks. The barrels were supplied from stock (I think from old Series 2 Minifigs), though the trunnion slots were a bit deep and I filled them with a little plasticine. In the end I had something quite pleasing, which I think looks the part next to my other models, rather better than my AB piece.

Here are the three converted 12pdrs with AB Old Guard crew figures:

3 12pdrs

And here is a rear view of all five, with the two AB models to the right:

5 12pdrs

And finally a comparison between the AB and the conversion a bit closer up:

2 12pdrs

So how would I recommend readers get their own 12pdrs without going through the conversion palaver? Well I have said that the AB version is perfectly acceptable, and you can buy them singly at £2.40 each. My worry is that they do not look at their best next to Blue Moon 6pdrs, with their heavier and wider trails – and the BM 6pdr is nicer than the AB version (more of that later). The BM 12pdr might be worth trying if you don’t mind finding £12 for 6. The carriage is too long, but the other dimensions look OK. Better too big than too small for this one. You will not find anything suitable in Old Glory, Fantasin/Warmodelling or Battle Honours. All of these try putting a 12pdr tubes on an 8pdr carriage (though in the Warmodelling case, this isn’t too bad size-wise, it’s just rather vaguely modelled). As this is quite a widespread practice, buying this one on spec is not advisable. You might even attempt my conversion using the BM howitzer parts – but you will need to find some 12pdr barrels from somewhere.

And if you want to do the An XI 12pdr? You can get the barrel by filing down the central reinforcing rings from the Gribeauval version, but the carriage looks a tall order. The BM 12 pdr is the closest, though too long. Converting it would be hard work though. For me this is the one that got away – I would have liked one of these in my collection!

Next article: the 6pdr

French artillery in 1/100 Part 3: the 8pdr

Now on the the most well-known of Gribeauval’s designs: the 8pdr. According to the old wargamers’ beliefs, which are remarkably persistent, this was the main piece in use by the French throughout the wars. Every 15mm figure manufacturer has a go at this one.

The 8pdr seems to have been well liked by the artillery men that served it, who forgave its weight. One aspect of the weight was that a second set of trunnion recesseses was required, and the barrel (580kg) had to be moved between them each time the weapon was limbered or unlimbered. No doubt this was easy enough for a practised crew. The weapon had more hitting power than almost all its field opponents (usually 6pdrs – the British 9pdr was the exception, and this could match it). Perhaps that gave the crews a better sense of security in the counterbattery exchanges which were so much a feature of the wars.

But the weapon was less popular with the war ministry. The extra weight meant more expensive metal. A typical 6 pdr weighed just 400kg. And no doubt this discrepency applied all the way down the line: the cost of ammunition, and the number of horses and caissons need to shift things around. So in the An XI reforms of 1803 it was decided to phase the 8pdr out.

This meant that probably not all that many of them were manufactured. In the pre-Empire era the French were notoriously short of artillery. This persisted into the early Empire when several corps were kitted out with captured artillery, such as Austrian 6pdrs. And after that they were officially obsolete. So they would have missed out on the big manufacturing push in the early Empire period.

Still, they continued in use after 1803. No doubt the field units were reluctant to give them up, and the first priority was to replace the captured guns with the new 6pdrs. According to the orders of battle for the 1809 Austrian campaign, quite a few units were still equipped with 8pdrs. This included the horse artillery supporting the cuirassier divisions – showing that the piece’s weight was not too much of an obstacle even for use by the horse arm. By 1812, though, they were gone, except in Spain. There were none at Waterloo.

As with the 4pdr, though, they experienced a bit of an afterlife in the Pensinsula. This was partly because the Spanish had them, and it was convenient for the French to take these over. Some divisional batteries used them, but they were also used in a reserve artillery role, in place of the  12pdr. Nearly as many of them were at Vitoria as 4pdrs – though how many of them were actually in use, rather than left on the Park, is an open question. (As it happens I suspect that all, or almost all, of them were brought into action in that battle, mostly as reserve artillery, and the 12 pdrs were left in the Park).

That wasn’t the end of the story though. The post-Napoleonic regime brought them back for use in the horse artillery, and their use continued beyond 1827.

There are no photographs of surviving 8pdrs with original carriages – which means that probably none have survived. Oddly enough I haven’t even seen any detailed drawings either. There is a rather fine model in the French Army Museum, which gets a lot of pictures in the publications, though, so I suspect that detailed drawings do exist. A few barrels survive, including one in Britain’s National Armouries.

For my models I wanted just three of these, enough for the artillery-light Peninsula and revolutionary wars battles, and to play a role in any 1809 scenarios. I decided to assemble them from bits and pieces I had to hand, rather than buying them new. I took the carriage from my Old Glory pack. These are quite nice, at about the right scale. It is nicely detailed, and I find the proportions are pleasing to the eye. There’s a slight splay on the trail, which not all models attempt. A trail spike is moulded stowed on one side, which won’t be to everybody’s taste (the same is true for my Battle Honours 4pdrs). The main problem is that the elevating plate is too low for the firing position – though works perfectly well for the travelling position on the rear trunnion recesses.

The trouble with the OG models is that the wheels are too small (though at least they can be reused for the 4pdrs!), and the barrel doesn’t work. The wheels look quite nice – but I want to acheive the big-wheeled look in my models. Truth be told I’m not entirely sure which barrels came from which models with my old bits and pieces, but I’m not that impressed with the ones I think are from OG (nor the ones I know came with the OG Prussian pack). The three OG carriages I was using (with their original wheels) had barrels borrowed from (I think) BH 8 pdrs (where the carriage is not as nice). I took the wheels from the Blue Moon French howitzers. This pack was a major disappointment, of which more later, so sparing three pairs of wheels was not a difficulty.

As for the barrels, my BH ones would have done at a pinch, but they were a tad small. The main problem with them was that they did not look much different in size from the Blue Moon 6pdr barrels – and I needed them to look substantially bigger (while being clearly distinguishable from 12pdrs). I found one really nice barrel, though I don’t know where it came from (it might be a very underscale BH 12 pdr). The other two were, remarkably enough, taken from my series 2 Minifigs Austrian 6pdrs, which says something about the accuracy of those old ranges! I cut the rear portion of the elevating plate from from plastic card and glued it to underneath and the back of the barrel.

The overall result was quite pleasing. This picture shows the three with OG horse artillery crew figures on my old basing system. The two Minifigs barrels are closest to the camera:

8 pdr models 2

A rear view without the crews (on an uneven cloth!):

8 pdr models 3

And here next to my 12pdr, the latter with AB Guard foot crew figures:

8pdr12pdr models

How would I recommend readers model the 8pdr from scratch? No need to repeat my palaver. Based on LittleArmies‘ reviews, the Blue Moon 8pdr is probably perfectly good, if your budget can stretch a pack of 6 for £12 in the UK. AB also do an 8pdr, though I haven’t seen it and neither did LittleArmies. But I have seen their 6pdr and 12 pdr and a picture. It is likely to be nicely detailed, with the trails dead straight and a little narrow. But the wheels will be about the right size, and the elevating plate probably in the right place. And you can buy them one at a time (at £2.40 here in the UK). If you are using the 12pdr and 6pdr from AB (which I will post about in due course), then this may be the best choice.

As I have already said, I don’t like the BH 8pdr, even if it was readily availalble; the OG version has the problems I have mentioned, as well as being sold in packs with crew (though these should be usable, unlike the BH ones). Incidentally, LittleArmies has two different versions of the OG artillery, neither of which match mine, though he wasn’t entirely sure where his originated from. So there’s also a risk that what you get now does not match ones I had in my 1809 Horse artillery pack, bought before Timecast days. The Warmodelling/Fantassin models are really quite horrid, and I would avoid them. LittleArmies says the XAN version works well, though I would find the wide carriage a bit off-putting. I haven’t seen the Minifigs version, but they tend to be a bit small. There will be many others out there which I haven’t seen, of course.

Next article: the 12pdr

French Artillery in 1/100 Part 2: Gribeauval and the 4pdr

4pdrMy first item is the 4pdr Gribeauval gun. I’ll start with an introduction to the
Gribeauval system. Gribeauval was an officer who learnt much of his trade in the Austrian army, and who overhauled French artillery in the 1770s. His name has become practically synonymous with French artillery of the era.

Gribeauval instituted a whole system – this included artillery pieces, carriages, limbers and caissons, and standard methods for moving and handling the guns. This level of standardisation was revolutionary, and resisted at first. But it brought French artillery of era up to being the best in the world.

Gribeauval’s artillery had a number of characteristic features that gave them a distinctive appearance, when compared to other artillery of the time. They had big wheels, an elevating plate and screw underneath the barrel, the trail had a distinct kink and a curved end, the axles were metal rather than wood, and there were distinctive trail handles poking up from the middle of the trail brackets (part of the system of manoeuvring the piece). Apart from the elevating plate (not visible) and the trail handles (not present on this example), these are visible on the picture of a 4pdr above (captured by the Portuguese at Vitoria in 1813, and probably originally in Spanish service). Soft metal models, such as the miniatures I use, do not attempt to model the axle, which is rather thin, but otherwise all these features should be part of a model.

Three field artillery pieces were part of system: 4pdr, 8pdr and 12pdr. A 6in (or rather 6 pouce; pouce = thumb =inch – the French inch is distinctly bigger than the Imperial one now in use) howitzer is also associated with the system, but this was introduced in the 1790s, or perhaps slightly earlier. More on that later. The 4pdr was associated with horse artillery (or light artillery in French terminology).

But the lightness of the piece came at a cost in hitting power, and there was also a cost to not standardising ordnance across the light and field arms. In most field conditions it was perfectly possible to use the 8pdr in the horse artillery role, and this was frequently done. So the 4pdr was scheduled to be phased out by the time we reach the Imperial era, when a 6pdr was to replace both the 4pdr and 8pdr.

But it lived on in three contexts. First because it took time to replace it in early campaigns; there still quite a number used by horse batteries in the 1809 campaign against Austria, for example. Second, in Spain and Portugal the rougher terrain and type of fighting made it lightness more useful, and in any case they took over quite a few from the Spanish army, which had also adopted the Gribeauval system. It was the most often used calibre for divisional batteries, as well as horse batteries, there. More were in use at Vitoria as late as 1813, than any other calibre. And thirdly they were used as regimental artillery in the campaign against Russia in 1812.

I have quite often run Peninsula battles, and have an eye on the early Imperial ones, so I wanted quite a few of these: six in fact. I’m lucky though, because the Battle Honours “Light artillery” pieces are quite a good fit, and I’ve got lots of them. These may in fact be meant to be 6pdrs in a smaller scale (BH are generally smaller than 1/100), but no matter. The barrel is about right; the carriage is a bit long, but not by much. The wheels would do, but are a bit small  (they should be over, not under 13mm in diameter). As it happens I have plenty of wheels of the right size from BH 8pdrs or Old Glory artillery – I substituted the latter. Another nice thing about these models is that the elevating plate is high enough (just – the tube does point up a little). Sorted. Here are a couple of pictures of the end result, with an 8pdr for comparison. The crews are Old Glory horse artillery, and the basing is the old one. My miniatures photography skills need a bit of work too:

4pdr8pdr models 2

4pdr8pdr models 1

But for any readers who want to make 4pdrs from what is currently available, this is not a viable route. I bought my models when BH were a going concern and sold their artillery in packs of three, without crew. They then went out of business. Recently they resurfaced, sold by TimeCast in packs with crew. TimeCast have stopped selling them but in the US still seem to. But I don’t know which pieces are in which pack. I would be guessing if I suggested the horse artillery had these! Besides the figures are a bit small and will probably be unusable (the Guard Horse artillery ones certainly are); the 8pdrs and 12 pdrs might provide a few usable parts but no more.

A better bet are Blue Moon. These are about the only manufacturer producing new models in this scale right now. The have an awkward practice of selling their artillery in packs of 6 for £12. But according to LittleArmies they are quite similar to the BH ones, only with wheels that are even smaller. You can choose to live with this, or you can try hunting for bigger wheels from somewhere. Mine were from Old Glory (French horse artillery – but Prussian foot artillery would do also). At least the crew figures are more usable than those from BH, though I generally prefer Blue Moon. A think the big-wheeled look is so part of the appearance of French artillery, that I would find the small wheel size very off-putting.

AB, the Rolls Royce of 15mm figures, don’t do a 4pdr. Old Glory provide standard 8pdr carriages with different barrels. Warmodelling do the same, though I haven’t bought their 4pdr (I have the 6, 8 and 12pdr and howitzer, to my great regret – they are pretty much unusable). Minifigs do a 4pdr, but I’m wary after trying their howitzer, which came out too small.  I can’t speak for anybody else.

Next article: the 8pdrs

French artillery in 1/100. Part 1 – setting the scene

Over the last months I have been overhauling and re-basing my French army. Apart from looking a bit tired I had two problems. First the infantry (all in 15/18mm scale, or 1/100) were based in one rank on a single base, one inch (25mm) wide and half an inch deep. I am moving to one inch squares, with the figures in two ranks of three. These look much better and are easier to handle. The deeper bases create a host of problems for game mechanics, especially in the grand tactical games that are my main focus, but I have decided to take those challenges on. The second change was artillery, where the bases are too deep (40mm for the most part – a shade over 1.5 inches). This was messing up limited tabletop space. So I am cramming them onto shallower bases (a bit wider if need be) with fewer crew figures.

The first task was rebasing my mainly 1809 Old Glory infantry, which are the backbone of the army. This involved some conversions (mainly head changes) to get the elite company poses looking consistent, and painting up skirmishers (which came from Blue Moon rather than OG). This is now done, bar finishing touches to the bases. That still leaves the Imperial Guard, which I will leave for later. The next task is the artillery, where I don’t just want to rebase, but I want to completely overhaul my rather inadequate models, to align them better with what is currently known about them, and allow later campaigns (especially Waterloo) to be depicted more faithfully.

I have been researching this for months. My aim is to have a complete range of models representing all the main field artillery types in use by the French, and substantial numbers of 6pdrs, which I currently lack.

You would think that for something  as basically factual as this, it would be not too hard to work out what these various pieces looked like. But in fact the information out there is mired in muddle and misinformation. When I started the hobby in the 1970s, all the English language literature suggested that the French operated the Gribeauval system with the use of 4pdr, 8pdr and 12pdr guns an 6in howitzers throughout the wars. In fact it turns out that from 1803 these weapons were being replaced by a new system, the An XI, instituted by Napoleon. By Waterloo most of the artillery were 6pdr guns and 24pdr howitzers (actually a bit lighter than the old “6in” ones). Unfortunately most 15mm figures ranges were cast when the old story was still current, and when good data on the newer pieces were scarce.

Two more recent publications have helped somewhat. The first, in 2003, was the Osprey booklet Napoleon’s Guns 1792-1815 (volume 1 is the relevant one) by René Chartrand (which I’ll call RC). Then came Napoleonic Artillery in 2007, Anthony and Paul Dawson and Stephen Summerfield (DDS). These are big advance, but I have found inaccuracies in each.

The truth is that there isn’t all that much good data out there. Few examples of the pieces survive with their original carriages – though more of the tubes do. There are some technical drawings – which exert a disproportionate influence over how the weapons are represented. There are also some official papers and some contemporary tables giving some measurements. This was before the age of precision manufacturing and machine based mass production.  Standardisation was the theory, but less so the practice. Carriages might be made without detailed drawings to work from, or the drawings might be lost. Changes might be improvised in the field without any clear records. That leaves plenty of gaps into which people must speculate.

I am not attempting accurate representations of the pieces – that is too much. My objective is similar to that of artists – to get something which is recognisable – and also I want the models to look more or less right next to each other.

And before I move on to the detail, I want to say a bit about my collection to date. I started building my 15mm armies in the 1980s, using early (series 2 I think) Minifigs. I didn’t take to their artillery, and I quickly replaced them with Battle Honours in the 1990s. But I didn’t particularly like these either (or the heavier pieces and howitzers anyway), so I brought in a few Old Glory and AB models. That leaves me with a lot of old bits from which to make my models – especially including a few Austrian and Prussian models that I have acquired along the way. In order to help readers without these resources, though, I will offer guidance on how to reproduce these from stuff that is currently available.

What I haven’t done, though, is gone on a spree of buying all the models that are available from the different manufacturers. I have made a few speculative buys of French and Prussian pieces (I am assembling a late Prussian army too – and their later pieces were quite similar to the French ones). I must particularly acknowledge a debt to fellow London blogger LittleArmies, whose review of 15mm models, including exchanges on TMP, has been of enormous value.

I must also acknowledge help from author Kevin Kiley, who helped me find a number of very useful drawings, supplying me with scans of a number of them. Plus a number of contributors to TMP – including Stephen Summerfield (of DDS) – who have taken the trouble to illuminate a number of details.

Next article: Gribeauval and the 4pdrs