Micronaut Only Thread

[battlewagon]

I have modified a few kits and scratchbuilt a couple as well. I use an X-a cto saw blade to modify kit parts. I have a spare parts bin for turrets, stacks and masts. I use sheet styrene to build up new structures.

[battlewagon]

regia-marina, If you have specific questions on modifications, post them here on the board and I and some of the other contributors can provide some insight. I purchase my styrene from Evergreen Scale Models They have some tube stock that is ideal for making barbettes for battleship sized gun turrets (you probably won't need it for this project...but there's always next time!). Somewhere in this thread (and others) are pictures of some of my modified ships, IJN Fuso and IJN Maya (1944) and also my kitbashed / scratchbuilt USS Lexington CC-1, including in progress photos.
Again, I hope this helps.

[regia-marina]

Thank you battlewagon. It does help! I'll post some pictures of my Gneisenau when it's ready. It sure would be nice if GHQ would release a conversion pack for easily converted ships such as the Gneisenau. It would just be a modified funnel and hanger. Maybe GHQ will read this and take my suggestion to heart.

[Begemot]

I've recently finished the Salt Lake City and the Takao. For your consideration.

Salt Lake City in Measure 21:





Takao:

[traveller]

I see H.M.S. Berwick is now released. Is it a better model for H.M.A.S. Australia.than Dorsetshire as mentioned elsewhere.All advice welcome. Thanks

[RedDragon]

Begemot:

I was on vacation when you posted and somehow missed it. Great Work!

Looks like you did a fine job matching the SLC paint scheme. Personally I find those schemes not that attractive which is not a slight against your work.
On the other hand the Takao looks fantastic!

I'm not that knowledgeable about paint schemes so I have no accuracy feedback.

Keep up the great work!

[michaelw43]

traveller:

If GHQ doesn't make a model of the Australia in the near future Kent would be the closest. Since GHQ doesn't make a model of Kent either I would say Dorsetshire is still more similar than Berwick 1939, mainly because the large hangar of Berwick & Cornwall isn't present on Australia. I have a large library of WWII warship books so I can reference the photos.

Michael D. Waters

[traveller]

Thanks for the info Michael, much appreciated.

[dragon6]

Do you lighten the color for your micronauts? If so by how much?

The same applies to microarmor

[SKeeM]

I've recently finished the Salt Lake City and the Takao. For your consideration.

Salt Lake City in Measure 21:





Takao:

AMAZING! I really like your Takao would you mind sharing your technique?

[Begemot]

SKeeM:

I'm glad you liked my work. Thanks.

My technique on painting the Takao.

I painted the ship in several layers working from a darker to a lighter tone with each layer applied in lighter and thinner applications using dry brushing technique. The idea is the underlying darker layer will suggest shadowed surfaces and the lighter layers will emphasize the surfaces more exposed to the light. I paint the model’s pieces as separate pieces. Assembly is done when the painting is done.

I use oils and brushes. Oils can be thinly applied so the lower colors layers can “peekâ€￾ through, giving some depth to the color. Of course, I don’t apply the new layer until the under layer has dried at least a day.

I determined what I wanted the base color to be by referring to the Snyder & Short paint chip sheet for Japanese ships. These chips are very dark so I worked up a much lighter tone that seemed appropriate for scale and weathering effects as the “baseâ€￾ color. The first paint layer was a darkened version of the “baseâ€￾.

The dark tone is an evenly applied opaque layer over the whole model. This is the “shadowâ€￾ layer. The second “baseâ€￾ layer is applied fairly evenly, but thinly, over the model using vertical, top to bottom (of the model) strokes of the brush so the “baseâ€￾ color doesn’t get into all of the “shadowâ€￾ areas. The third and if necessary subsequent layers use increasingly lighter tones of the base color applied with ever lighter brush pressure and lighter amounts of paint in the brush using vertical top to bottom strokes. I think I added a bit of yellow to the lighter tones to warm the color, to suggest sunlight on the raised surfaces of the model.

Once I think the model has enough depth and definition, I then do the details. Nothing special here. Once the details are done I then applied a thin black wash to the model to give some additional definition to the details. Then a final very lightly applied light gray dry brush to meld it all together. Then assembly.

Hope this makes sense.

[SKeeM]

Thanks for sharing Begemot, I'm going to give it a try. I hope for at least 50% success! LoL!

[michaelw43]

In reference to the Forum topic USN10 what is it?, there was some confusion about which class of destroyer each model represented among GHQ USN 10, 78 and 79. In that thread I posted how that could definitively be determined by the shape of the funnel and its trunking. In these 3 posts I will summarize my findings of the principal changes each of these 3 classes of destroyers manifested.

Armament: As built, pre-war (all three classes): 4-5"/38 single DP guns (aft 2 are open mount), 4 single .50 caliber machine guns, 16-21" (4×4) torpedo tubes, 2-depth charge racks.

Gridley class: Funnel broad and thin, small trunking
DD 380 Gridley
DD 382 Craven
DD 400 McCall
DD 401 Maury

Gridley class modifications:
Early 1942: 6 single 20mm were added, 4 of them replaced the machine guns: 2 before the bridge, and 2 on the after deck-house. 2 more were added after the funnel. 4 K-gun depth charge throwers (in the USN called projectors) were added.
1943: 1-2 20mm were added, 1 in front of the bridge and/or 1 amidships.
1945: The after 2 banks of torpedo tubes were removed (Gridley and Craven – not sure about McCall and Maury). Partial gun shields with a canvas top were added to the aft 5" guns to protect gun crews from cold weather. GHQ10 shows this configuration.
All served in the Pacific and retained 4-5" guns and 16 torpedo tubes (except as noted above). In 1945 Gridley and Craven transferred to the Atlantic Fleet. There were no war losses.

Photos and info: http://destroyerhistory(dot)org/goldplater/gridleyclass/
Craven pre-war: http://www.navsource(dot)org/archives/05/0538206.jpg
Craven 10 May 1942: http://www.navsource(dot)org/archives/05/0538219.jpg
Craven 23 Nov 1943: http://www.navsource(dot)org/archives/05/0538216.jpg
Craven late WWII: http://www.navsource(dot)org/archives/05/0538212.jpg

[michaelw43]

Continuing...

Bagley class: Funnel broad and thin, large trunking
DD 386 Bagley
DD 387 Blue
DD 388 Helm
DD 389 Mugford
DD 390 Ralph Talbot
DD 391 Henley
DD 392 Patterson
DD 393 Jarvis

Bagley class modifications:
Early 1942: 6 single 20mm were added, 4 of them replaced the machine guns: 2 before the bridge, and 2 on the after deck-house. 2 more were added abreast the after part of the funnel casing. 4 K-gun depth charge throwers were added. Jarvis, Blue, and possibly Henley were sunk in this condition. GHQ USN78 shows this configuration.
Late 1942-44: In surviving ships, a 20mm gun was added in front of the bridge and a twin 40mm was added on the after deck-house. The 2 single 20mm which were thereby displaced were moved to expanded gun tubs abreast the funnel trunking.
All served in the Pacific and retained their 16 torpedo tubes and 4-5" guns. The aft 5" guns were open mount – without gun-houses as they were not base-ring mounted, and without partial shields.

Photos and info: http://destroyerhistory(dot)org/goldplater/bagleyclass/
Bagley class as built pre-war: http://www.navsource(dot)org/archives/05/0538610.jpg
Jarvis 8 May 1942: http://www.navsource(dot)org/archives/05/pix2/0539311.jpg
Bagley 28 Apr 1944: http://www.navsource(dot)org/archives/05/0538614.jpg
Bagley 40mm twin added: http://www.navsource(dot)org/archives/05/0538618.jpg
Mugford 3 Mar 1945 showing shape of funnel and expanded 20mm gun tub: http://www.navsource(dot)org/archives/05/pix2/0538932.jpg

[michaelw43]

Continuing...

Benham class: Only 3 boilers vs. 4 in the other 2 classes, therefore a slimmer funnel, small trunking
DD 397 Benham
DD 398 Ellet
DD 399 Lang
DD 402 Mayrant
DD 403 Trippe
DD 404 Rhind
DD 405 Rowan
DD 406 Stack
DD 407 Sterett
DD 408 Wilson

Benham class modifications:
Mid 1941: Atlantic Fleet ships (all but Benham and Ellet – they were Pacific Fleet): 2-3 .50 caliber machine guns and 4 K-gun depth charge throwers were added. The 2 after banks of torpedo tubes were removed. Number 4-5" gun was enclosed in a gun-house, with number 3 gun in a partial shield having a canvas top. Pacific Fleet ships (Benham and Ellet): 2-3 .50 caliber machine guns were added and a Y-gun depth charge thrower probably was added.
Mid 1941-42: The after deck-house was cut down to deck 01 level (not Benham).
Early 1942: all ships: all machine guns were removed, 6-20mm guns were added: 2 before the bridge, 2 aft of the funnel and 2 further aft, before number 3 gun. Benham and Ellet: 4 K-guns were added; Y-gun, if it had been installed, was removed. GHQ USN 79 shows this early war configuration, representing the 2 Pacific Fleet ships with 10 tubes. (The GHQ online catalog however shows the model painted as an Atlantic Fleet ship in Arctic colors.) Benham was sunk in this condition. Ellet later lost the after torpedo tubes.
Mid 1942: Lang, Stack, Sterett and Wilson were transferred to the Pacific Fleet: Aft 5" guns were returned to open mountings.
Mid 1942-44: In surviving ships, the aft 2 single 20mm were removed, replaced by 2 twin 40mm mounts. The other 4 single 20mm were removed and replaced by 4 twin 20mm mounts. The 4 remaining Atlantic Fleet ships (Mayrant, Trippe, Rhind, and Rowan – sunk Sep 1943) retained their enclosed aft 5â€￾ guns as described above.
Spring 1945: Mayrant, Trippe and Rowan were transferred to the Pacific Fleet. Presumably they lost their aft 5â€￾ gun shield and gun-house at that time.
Mid 1945: Lang and Sterett got the anti-Kamikaze refit: the remaining torpedo tubes were removed, replaced by 2 twin 40mm aft of the funnel.

Photos and info: http://destroyerhistory(dot)org/goldplater/benhamclass
Lang as built pre-war: http://www.navsource(dot)org/archives/05/0539904.jpg
Rhind 17 Sep 1942: http://www.navsource(dot)org/archives/05/0540410.jpg
Stack 21 Mar 1943: http://www.navsource(dot)org/archives/05/0540607.jpg
Lang 25 Oct 1943 showing shape of funnel and single 20mm: http://www.navsource(dot)org/archives/05/pix1/0539905.jpg
Stack 5 May 1944 showing 2 twin 40mm and twin 20mm: http://www.navsource(dot)org/archives/05/0540614.jpg
Lang 17-21 Aug 1945 showing anti-Kamikaze refit: http://www.navsource(dot)org/archives/05/pix1/0539903.jpg

References: Whitley, M. J., Destroyers of World War Two, 1988, pages 266-269,271-273.

Online references: navsource(dot)org, click on the Destroyers link, click on each ship of each class listed by DD hull number.

destroyerhistory(dot)org, click on Goldplaters, click on 1,500-ton & Sims classes, in turn click on each of the 3 classes.

navypedia(dot)org, click on FIGHTING SHIPS OF THE WORLD, click on UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, click on TORPEDO SHIPS, scroll down to numbers 24, 25 and 27 to click on the links to the 3 classes.