Courbet & Bretagne Hey Don Question

[IRISH]

Nice,

I just received my WW1 - 4 Courbets and WW2 - 2 Bretagnes from GHQ.

Nice! Now I have a WW1 force ( 6 Dantons, 4 Courbets & 3 Bretagnes ) for the Med of French capital ships!

The WW2 Bretagne has that class now represented for WW2, Bretagne, Province and the Loraine. Coupled with the Dunkerque, Strasbourg, Richelieu and Jean Bart look out Italy.

The only French batteships missing would be the Courbet, Paris and the Ocean ( renamed ) I do not see GHQ producing them as they were of little use during the war, even though the British wanted to transfer the Courbet to the Free Polish Navy. That said, this is a far stretch and question for Don and the bunch....

If I bought 2 additional Courbets and then purchased 2 Bretagne bridges would that give a similiar enough look to repersent the Courbets in WW2??? I know the bridge has an additional level, but at least it would give it the tripod, trunked funnels and enlarged bridge.

What do you think???????

As always Thanks guys,

Bill aka IRISH

[Donald M. Scheef]

re: WWII Courbet

My response comes in three stages: initial impression, considered evaluation, and after consulting references.

Initial response: Why would anyone even want a WWII Courbet?

Considered evaluation: Given that you want it, and assuming no commercial manufacturer is likely to produce one, planting a FRN11 bridge on a GWF4 hull is probably the best simple way to get a reasonable approximation.

After consulting references:
(+) This will produce the correct number of funnels, and about the correct size. (-) In FRN11 the bridge and fore mast surrounds the front of the forward funnel; for modified Courbet there should be a separation between bridge and funnel.
(+) This produces the correct type of fore mast. (-) The tripod base on the Bretagne is wider than that of the Courbet.
(+) The bridgework from FRN11 is closer to the modified Courbet than that in GWF4. (-) There are detail differences in the arrangement from the modified Courbet.

Altogether, I would give this proposal an 7 of 10. In my opinion, the major deficiency is the lack of separation between the bridge and funnel. Otherwise, it is a good approximation for relatively little effort.

Don S.

[IRISH]

Don,

As I said the Courbet and Paris were of little value, but had France not been beaten so early on they might have played a role as convoy escorts possibly???

I am a fanatic when it comes to having every ship I admit it LOL so thus the question.

I do not see GHQ producing them long before so many other worthy ships if even at all.

I would love to see the other French warships first missing light cruisers, destroyers, submarines and even the 2 projected modified Richelieus.

The pictures and drawings I have would require some modifications to the Bretagnes bridge. I am comtemplating doing them some time in the future.

As always Thank you for your input.

Bill

[Schwerepunkt]

Irish, are you familiar with the French battleships design of the five Normandie class and
the four Lyon class. Normandie was to have carried 12-13.4 (3x4) and Lyon 16-13.4 (4x4) and while staying at the lighter caliber perhaps be a disadvantage, the broadsides of both of these classes would be shattering to those receiving it.
I am not sure if GHQ will every produce these models but it might be worth a campaign annually to get them produced. Otherwise, you are stuck with three very slow, poorly protected and poorly gunned Courbet class. :

[IRISH]

Schwerepunkt,

Yes I am well aqquainted with them, The carrier Bearn being converted from a Normandie hull. My interest in the Courbets are for the following reasons:

1. I collect one for one on the Micronauts for both wars.
2. The Courbet and Paris were hurried back into service to serve as floating batteries for Cherbourg and another city in WW2.
3. They might have been used as convoy escorts by the French had they not fallen so quickly.
4. The British would have provided the Courbet to the Free Polish Navy had they had enough personel to man the ship.
5. I can not get enough ships in my collection according to my wife.

As for the Lyons and Normandies I would love to see them eventually after other ships are produced as the existing fleets are still lacking. I think GHQ would go for the Italians, AustroHungarians and Japanese ( WW1 and 1905 ) before going for ships like the Normandies, Lyons, British N3s, Hoods ( thought the WW2 would suffice ), American Colorados, Soth Dakotas Lexingtons and such.

Do not get me wrong I would love to see any or all of them for that matter.
I am still working my Doxfords ( 30 out of 110 ), thats including 32 Fort "Victory" types and APA Montroses ( 72 out of 131 ) to fill the ranks. I have only purchased the Navy's Liberties so far, the regular merchant ships will keep me busy for the coming decade LOL

Thanks for the input,

Bill aka IRISH

[Donald M. Scheef]

I understand your preference for ships that actually entered service. On the other hand, the big battleships (even those never completed) are attractive to many. Personally, I would like GHQ to concentrate on ships that existed but occasionally produce one of the hypotheticals. If I had to pick one, it would be Gascogne, the modification of Richeleau design with one of the main turrets aft.
btw, I would not put Hood and Colorado in the same list as the others; these ships were completed. I would like a model of these as originally completed.
Don S.

[IRISH]

Don,

I would fully love to the Gascogne. That is high on my want list.

Bill

[Schwerepunkt]

The above two would complete the Richelieu class as initally planned. Clemenceau had a superior light AA armament and better disposition of the secondary battery. Gascogne had a better all around disposition of main and secondary batteries, improved protection and slightly higher speed. Any of the four French ships would have been excellent matches for Bismarck and Tirpitz. The RN would have certainly welcomed them as reinforcements, especially with action pending in the Southwest Pacific around Singapore and Hong Kong.