Micronaut Only Thread

[STS]

I've been collecting ships for quite a while now, but was to lazy or distracted by other modelling projects to actually paint and base all of them. According to the price tags, some of the blisters I had laying around were from before 01/2002....since my eyes aren't getting any better I ordered 30 more destroyers to replace CINC with GHQ (hence the empty bases) and started painting and planning on finishing them by years end.

A total of 377 ships, ~30-40 already painted, which leaves a meager 340 to go. 95% GHQ, the remaining 5% are a few Subs and Algerines by another manufacturer and a few 3D-printed liners, auxiliaries and minesweepers.


Step 1: printing bases and basing minesweepers, submarines, escort carriers, torpedo boats, destroyers, heavy and light cruisers, as well as auxiliaries. I'll work on the capital ships once the smaller vessels are done. Although Puncher and Nabob were technically British ships, I've decided to base them as Canadians, given their Canadian crews.


6 out of 12 finished Italian destroyers. The finishing touches (bow waves, base sides etc...) will be added later on.

[pmskaar]

Very nice work on the ships, STS! It looks like you have a lot to keep you busy for a long time.

I have lots of the GHQ ships that need painting but have been busy with my 1/285th WWII and Cold War stuff. I'm not sure when I will get around to doing ships again but it is inspirational to see all of yours.

[WWIICentral]

I agree with Pete, great work STS! Thanks for sharing, let's see some more!

[STS]

I'm happy to oblige.

a few US destroyers and LSTs I finished yesterday. Some of the bases already have the bow waves painted on them, although I'm not too happy as to how they turned out on the LSTs

[regia-marina]

That is an impressive collection! Your paint jobs are outstanding. Just curious, how do you attach your ships to the bases?

[STS]

That is an impressive collection! Your paint jobs are outstanding. Just curious, how do you attach your ships to the bases?

Thanks!

As for the bases, I just use a few drops of superglue to stick them on there permanently. First I thought about magnetizing them, to make them easier to store, but at the though of magnetizing Flower-class corvettes or submarines, I quickly abandoned that plan.

as far as painting goes I only was able to finish a few non-GHQ-ships yesterday, but at least I got a few older "paintjobs" based.

[redleg]

That's an amazing collection, STS! That's the kind of collection that makes me want to start collecting WW2 ships now! Very dangerous!

[Brigade Commander]

For anyone modeling the USN PacFlt of WW-II how are you handling ship's camouflage? I am modeling all warships that participated in any of the naval battles from Coral Sea and Midway through the eight naval battles of the G.u.a.d.a.l.c.a.n.a.l Campaign. Since those ships that survived and participated in more than one battle was likely to have served under more than one camouflage measure it leads to later task forces having a multitude of measures present.

Currently, I am painting them in either 1) the measure that they wore when they were sunk or 2) the last measure they were in around the time of the Battle of Rennell Island (January 29~30, 1943). But, as noted, this could leave some models mis-matched with her task force mates in later battles. I have semi-seriously thought about modeling the ships, separately, for each battle. Defense spending levels prohibit that currently with the USA heavy brigade for the 1980's in the FRG trying to be brought up to full level as well.

Just curious how others handle it. The thought of being able to just pull out a tray for Coral Sea or Eastern Solomons and having all of the ships that were there is enticing. But...

[ww2navyguy]

For anyone modeling the USN PacFlt of WW-II how are you handling ship's camouflage? I am modeling all warships that participated in any of the naval battles from Coral Sea and Midway through the eight naval battles of the G.u.a.d.a.l.c.a.n.a.l Campaign. Since those ships that survived and participated in more than one battle was likely to have served under more than one camouflage measure it leads to later task forces having a multitude of measures present.

Currently, I am painting them in either 1) the measure that they wore when they were sunk or 2) the last measure they were in around the time of the Battle of Rennell Island (January 29~30, 1943). But, as noted, this could leave some models mis-matched with her task force mates in later battles. I have semi-seriously thought about modeling the ships, separately, for each battle. Defense spending levels prohibit that currently with the USA heavy brigade for the 1980's in the FRG trying to be brought up to full level as well.

Just curious how others handle it. The thought of being able to just pull out a tray for Coral Sea or Eastern Solomons and having all of the ships that were there is enticing. But...

Great questions. I also battled somewhat with this same issue on my models for WW2 pacific. What I did was, first, try to use the exact ship model for that named ship, regardless if it was a late year version or not. I really wanted to use the correct model from GHQ for each ship, if available. Second, regarding paint scheme, I would use any scheme or measure that was accurate for the ship I wanted to paint from photo evidence or from reputable website databases (like Snyder and Short's shipcamoflauge website for WW2 US navy camo patterns), regardless of year. I felt that if a ship was historically accurate in having a scheme during its life, then it was fine by me to wear that scheme on my model. Even if it was late war and I was using the model in an earlier war naval game. I really like having the correct model for the specific ship if possible and second, if I really like a cameo scheme for that ship, then I would feel it was OK to have the model painted in the scheme (even if late war scheme). Besides, in early WW2, many US ships wore standard MS 21 camo schemes which can look a little boring on the board. Whenever I play naval games I am always drawn to play a ship with a cool cameo scheme.

Just my thoughts....

[whenimaginationfails]

Great work, STS. Thanks for sharing.

[regia-marina]

I agree with ww2navyguy and it would get very expensive to buy a model of a ship for each camo scheme it had during the war. I usually pick a camo scheme that was the most common or the most interesting to me, or the last scheme it carried before being sunk. Other times I go early war with no camo. While a ship may not be in an accurate scheme for a particular battle it is still very satisfying to game them. An example of this is when I gamed the Battle of Punto Stilo (1940) and the Giulio Cesare went into action with her 1941 camo. Or the Blucher in several "what if?" battles in 1942 or 1943, etc. that I have had. My model is painted as she was sunk in 1940 with no camouflage scheme. Not accurate but it didn't detract from the games for me.

[regia-marina]

Double post

[Brigade Commander]

Thanks ww2navyguy and regia-marina. Looks like we ended up with the same approach. I think it is finally time to just touch up the paint, seal and get them on their base. I cannot bring myself to look back and see what year it was I bought the Litko bases. Yikes!

[whenimaginationfails]

Finally got around to photographing and uploading my latest set of 1/2400 ship miniatures. Here are some of the GHQ ships, but you can find more at my blog.

GHQ Akizuki Destroyer 1/2400 miniature

GHQ Type 52D Destroyer 1/2400 miniature

GHQ Type 54A Frigate 1/2400 miniature

GHQ JMSDF Izumo Helicopter Destroyer 1/2400 miniature - based

GHQ USS Wasp LHD 1/2400 miniature - based

GHQ Slava Cruiser 1/2400 miniature - based

[redleg]

Holy Smokes Dude! Those ships look great! I can't believe the level of detailed painting you applied to them!