GHQ Models Forums

There are currently 3 named ships represented in the UK micronaut line:

Warspite UKN1 ; Valiant UKN24 ; Barham UKN32

Which model best represents the Queen Elizabeth? The Malaya?

I am thinking Valiant for the QE and Barham for the Malaya?

Any thoughts, corrections or conversion advice would be appreciated.

Thanks

Here's a pic of the Warspite if this helps. According to my warships book the profile seems the same at least.

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-2/944597/RNP.jpg

My expectation is that sister ships of a class share the same model in the GHQ line. I say that because I bought the USS Washington and the USS North Carolina models and they are absolutely identical except for the name printed on the packaging, so the Valiant may be no closer to the QE than the Warspite.

I don't think you can make a mistake is what I'm saying I guess - buy either one really.

Actually, if you want HMS Queen Elizabeth (the battleship), get GWB 7. This is Queen Elizabeth as she was built during WWI.

Between the wars, the ships of this class went through many modifications and changes to their appearance. By the start of WWII, there were significant differences between the ships. UKN1, UKN24 and UKN32 are not the same, but represent the five ships reasonably well.

During WW II, QE had a single funnel, block superstructure and carried twenty 4.5" AA guns in twin turrets. UKN 24, Valiant, is in this configuration.

At the same time, Malaya had trunked funnels and a tripod foremast. UKN32, Barham, is in this configuration.

Warspite had a block superstructure and single funnel as did QE & Valiant, but did not carry the twin 4.5" turrets.

Although there are small differences between QE & Valiant and between Malaya & Barham, your thoughts are correct.

Yes, those of building the Royal Navy are constantly faced with these decisions that are seldom encountered in the heavily fleshed out USN slections. After researching this question extensively last year, I decided to use Valiant to represent Queen Elizabeth and Barham to represent Malaya as they were the closest matches available. In an attempt to further differentiate them, I used paint schemes and some other trivial detailing to differentiate them as seen below:


HMS Barham in 507C overall


HMS Malaya in tiger scheme

Fortunately, British captains had quite a bit of authority over how their ships would be painted, so many of them sported unique paint schemes that when applied to the few available options we have now for the Royal Navy can help offset this by helping lend the impression of the ship you are trying to represent.

Chris

Thank you everyone for the quick replies!

I'm off to finalize my cart..........

cbovill - those are beautiful

Can I ask do you know of good online sources for RN camo schemes? I've scoured all my local bookstores.

For Queen Elizabeth, use Valiant. As a very quick conversion, cut off the tripod mainmast of Valiant and replace it with a pole mast for QE. Florist wire or a spare from an R class BB will both work. I had such a spare, because I had converted a stock "R" to Ramillies by adding a tripod.

Barham to Malaya is a lot trickier. I did a down-and-dirty conversion by doing the following;

1) replace the tripod mainmast with a pole mast.
2) file off the ships boats. Lay down some strips of plastic to represent the athwartships catapult. Leave turret top cat off of X turret
3) build up a "hanger" atop of whats left of the midships boats. Mount cranes (both of the long straight variety provided w/ Barham) P & S.

It won't be perfect, and a real expert could pick it apart, but it is recognizable as Malaya from 6" or more away

After reviewing my reference material, I would like to point out the differences between Malaya & Barham and between QE & Valiant that I previously described as 'small.'

Barham's aircraft arrangements consisted of a catapult mounted on the superimposed aft turret and a handling boom from the main mast. Malaya had an athwart-ship catapult forward of the main mast and a large built-up hanger structure on either side of the funnel (large enough that the trunking of the funnel that is obvious in Barham is totally hidden in Malaya). Although Barham is the closest match to Malaya, this is hardly a 'small' difference in appearance. Untill/unless someone (hopefully GHQ) comes out with a specific model of Malaya, the only way to get a more accurate representation of this ship is to add a boxy structure around the funnel and remove the catapult from the turret. Until about 1943, you must also remove the boats from the area between the funnel & the mainmast and add a representation of the fixed catapult in this area. After 1943, the aircraft were no longer carried and boats again carried in this area.

The differences between Valiant and QE are smaller. QE had a tripod mainmast; Valiant a simple pole mainmast. This is easy to change. The superstructure around the funnel was one deck lower in Valiant than in QE. This can not easily be changed, and is probably not worth trying to change unless you are a stickler for the specific ship. Also, the searchlight arrangements were different, but this is true of almost all classes of ships and changed over time in individual ships.

For myself, I'm going to try a little surgery on a spare Barham to get a better Malaya but just accept using Valiant for QE (except maybe adding two pieces of wire to make the mainmast a tripod).

Can I ask do you know of good online sources for RN camo schemes? I've scoured all my local bookstores.

The best ONLINE source I have found is at www.modelwarships.com and go to their gallery which is sorted by type of ship and year posted.

Chris