2009-2010 Micronaut Schedule - my comments

[Donald M. Scheef]

There is kind of a mixed bag this year. First of all, it is disappointing that only eight Micronauts will be released rather than the dozen that have appeared in recent years. I hope that GHQ can boost production in the future. One of the top twelve on my wish list made the schedule, and several others are at least interesting to me. Some of the scheduled releases (especially the pre-Dreadnought types) are of very little interest to me. With my primary interest being the WWII era, the selections are a bit slim.

Here are some personal comments on the individual 2008-2009 Micronauts, beginning with what I consider best for me:

GEN20: Admiral Scheer – This has been on my most-wanted list for some time. Finally someone (and the best of the manufacturers) has a 1/2400 model of a pocket battleship other than Graf Spee. I will order this as soon as it comes on the market. Now we can start clamoring for a Lützow.

UKN45: DDAA Wolfhound – This makes up for my disappointment with UKN43, which did not really represent the V&W class as they existed in WWII. Like the Admiral Scheer, I will order this as soon as it is available (probably five or six packs to match the 14 ships of this type plus a few extras. Next, I would like to see the long-range and/or short-range anti-submarine escort versions.

UKN44: CL Enterprise – Not one of my favorites, but an interesting ship. Two disappointments on this choice; I would have liked to have her near-sister Emerald and there are still several British cruisers of the WWII era that I would have preferred. I will probably order two of these and convert one to Emerald. Next year for the British I would like to see the Modified Colony class or York and some War-Emergency class destoryers.

GWB27: CB Courageous (1917) – This is one of those wonderfully weird designs that the designers should have known would turn out as white elephants. I will probably buy this eventually, but not right away. When I do this, I will probably order three, along with an extra GWB36 to model the original (even weirder) design of HMS Furious. For next year, there are several classes of British destroyers and light cruisers that participated in Jutland that are yet unmodelled.

GWS10: ACR Tennessee – I am slightly interested in this because I can use it in hypothetical battles with other countries’ armored cruisers. I will probably order four in the moderate future; perhaps ten to cover the similar Pennsylvania class. The problem with this ship for me is that it was much too late for the Spanish American War and totally outclassed by battlecruisers by the time of the Great War. If GHQ is going to model pre-Dreadnought ships, I would much prefer if they go back far enough to cover the Spanish-American War and the Russian-Japanese War. The Tennessee was notable for being beached beyond recovery by a tidal wave.

GWS9: BB Virginia – For me, this is even worse than last year’s GWS6 (BB-22 Minnesota (Connecticut class)). I am puzzled by the choice of these classes before producing BB-26 (South Carolina) and BB-36 (Nevada). Although none of these classes saw combat in the Great War, BB-26 and BB-36 were historically much more significant. BB-26 was one of the first “all-big-gunâ€￾ battleships and BB-36 had the first “all-or-nothingâ€￾ armor scheme. Like HMS Courageous, the Virginia class has the attraction of a weird appearance, but the double-decker gun turrets were never successful. It will be a long time before I order any Virginias.

GWR9: BB Evstafi and GWR10: BB Pantelimon (ex-Potemkin) – two more pre-Dreadnought battleships that were too late to fight the Japanese and too old to be effective against the Germans. At least they did see combat and Potemkin’s role in the mutiny was historically significant. If GHQ is going to produce more in the Great War series, I would much prefer more destroyer and light cruiser classes (for British, German, and Russian) and a start to modeling French, Italian, and Japanese ships of the era.

It looks like the fans of post-WWII ships get totally disappointed again. Although it’s not my time of interest, I feel that there is justification for those suggesting ships from the Falklands/Malvinas conflict.

Outside of the area of Micronauts, I would like to comment on two other items:
- Congratulations to the Microarmor modelers on the Matilda I.
- Thanks for producing some Allied vehicles for the W '47 range. On the same time scale, how about some Z-1944 destroyers to go along with Graf Zeppelin and H-39?

Well, that’s it for now. Looks like Scheer and Wolfhound go near the top of my shopping list. The rest get relegated to the long stack of “after I get everything else I want.â€￾

Don S.

[ed*b]

I strongly agree with your comments. While I have a little more interest than you in the pre-dreadnoughts, there are lots of models that would rate much higher on my list (like Vanguard, or any of the WW1 era French, Italian or AH dreadnoughts or late pre-dreadnoughts).

I wonder whether one of the limiting factors is the collection of plans and drawings required to create the models. The focus on expanding the range of Russian WW1 ships before creating models for other WW1 navies seems to imply that a lot of reference material has been gathered for the Russian fleet, and it is intended to make full use of that before moving on to another navy. Otherwise, it is hard to understand why a single ship class like the Pantelimon is issued before ships with 2, 4 or even 6 in the class. If I buy it, I'll only buy 1, but would have bought 4 of a WW1 Courbet model.

[pmskaar]

Don

I always apprecate your thoughtful insights in this area. I am interested in the MIcronaut range and have painted up a few in the past. I am interested in the Scheer and also the Russian WWI ships as well. I would like to see some more WW1 detroyers and maybe some merchantmen. There are still some existing lines to finish as well.
Here is a question: Did the Goeben differ in any significant way from the Moltke? I have 2 Moltke models for both of these ships but they probably had a few minor differences at least.
Still awaiting a 1942 Yorktown/Enterprise. Till then, I have tons of other stuff to paint.

Pete - Binpicker, Out!

[Donald M. Scheef]

re: interest in pre-Dreadnoughts
Actually, I am interested in pre-Dreadnoughts, but mostly those that had some combat history. If GHQ were to produce models of ships that were engaged at Santiago Bay, Manila Bay, Tsushima, etc., I would definitely buy them. To be honest about GHQ's selections, the Russian battleships did see some combat in the Great War. But a model of the Virginia??? This class was inferior to the Connecticuts and even the Connecticuts saw no useful employment in the Great War. Why a Virginia when South Carolina and Nevada have yet to be modeled?

re: Moltke & Goeben
I am on a business trip right now, so I don't have my best references available. From memory and a quick scan of internet sites, it seems that there were no SIGNIFICANT differences between the two ships, at least during the Great War. I do recall something about a difference in the appearance of the funnels of the two ships. After the war, the Turks made some minor alterations, such as welding a few more anti-aircraft guns on the upper decks. I also am using a pair of GHQ's GWG8 for both ships.

If anyone has more detailed information, please correct me. I will check my references when I get back after the July 4th holiday.

Don S.

[ww2navyguy]

Don,

I agree with your comments also regarding the recent GHQ new Micronaut release schedule. There are too few WW2 Micronauts being planned for this next year. And with the outstanding list (compiled by you on the GHQ Forums) given to GHQ of the ships that their customers want to see produced, I was really hoping for a better selection chosen from GHQ.

GHQ is only producing one of my top 20 ships for WW2 Micronauts; although getting Pocket Battleship Sheer for Lützow is good for me too. I would like to see them produce a Lützow soon to complete the series.

I was disappointed to see that only three new WW2 Micronaut were being offered in the next year. I really thought we would get six new models minimum, like previous years. I was disappointed to see more ships being offered in the Great War (WWI or pre-dreadnought) era. I would have liked them to produce at least equal numbers of ships in the two Micronaut lines (i.e., four for WW2 Micronaut line and four for the Great War Micronaut line).

I’m really hoping to see more GHQ WW2 Micronaut kits produced in the 2010-2011 year. Especially since so many very important ships need to be produced like the British County class cruisers Kent, Berwick, Cornwall, Devonshire, Shropshire, and Suss*x. We also need a new model for BB Prince of Wales that differs from the BB King George V to complete the other four ships in the class. There are many French and Italian ships that need to be produced as well, like the French destroyer Bourrasque class and the Italian destroyer Folgore, Freccia, Maestrale, and Oriani classes. We also really need a Japanese destroyer Akatsuki class model since no one makes it. And a Japanese BB Fuso is necessary to replay that crucial Leyte Gulf battleship versus battleship engagement. Again, no one makes this model with it’s unique “pagoda styledâ€￾ superstructure.

Here’s hoping for some better (and increased number) choices for WW2 Micronaut ships in the next year.

Scott

[IRISH]

Don,

I am happy with the ships GHQ is releasing, but I agree that 8 was a little skimpy for us Ship guys. I would like to have seen the following 4 released in addition.

HMS ACR Blacke Prince WW1
HMS BB Lion WW2
US AR Vestal WW2
IJN CVE Taiyo WW2

I did exhausting research in the Merchant ships for WW2 and not 1 made it.
Well maybe they will suprise us with an addition?????? Otherwise another year to hold my breath. LOL

As always Thank you Don for your input and lists, I appreciate them.

Bill ( IRISH )

[Leopold]

Disappointing list. Only one ship I've been dying for made it (HMS Enterprise) but once again we drew a blank for the Jutland Armoured Cruisers of the Defense, Duke of Edinburgh and Hampshire classes. This remains a huge hole in the range. Not to mention the various "C" class CLs for the RN among other light ships we need. My resin rubbish will continue to struggle on I guess

Tennessee? Virginia? No thanks.

[GHQ]

It's always interesting to see how the comments go on our new release schedule after we announce it. Overall we have received more 'best list ever"-type comments than ever before. That must mean that we are doing pretty well. A lot of the time people view our new release list through a pinhole (their own personal wants), while we must look at the whole picture. We know going in that no one will ever be absolutely ecstatic about every item that we put on the list. We do our best to make the most people happy. Keep in mind that even the people who have chimed in earlier on this topic, and have listed suggestions don't even have a single ship in common. It's not easy putting a list like this together, but based on the comments that we have received in e-mails, phone calls, comments listed on the bottom of orders that are submitted, and the postings on this forum, we are pretty happy about this new list.

Sometimes a couple of our choices fall into the crosshairs, and it becomes fashionable to heap it on and knock them. One of these choices from last years list was BB-22 Minnesota. The Minnesota was our best selling ship, new or existing, last year. Since it was released on June 30th, 2008, it has sold almost twice as many as the next best selling ship. We will admit that we are surprised by this fact. However, some of the more vocal critics hammered on the Minnesota. We wish that every item that we release would sell as well as the Minnesota has. What we are trying to do is make a point by illustrating a prime example. No one really knows how well releases are going to go over until they are actually out on the market. Keep in mind that our only goal here at GHQ is to produce things that our customers will actually buy. We have no hidden agenda. Remember that just because something does, or does not, fit your personal interests, it very well may be just the thing for thousands of others.

Thank you for your support,
GHQ

[Donald M. Scheef]

GHQ is welcome to my support; and I do support them. The quality of their figures is significantly better than any of their competitors.

With respect to the critics of BB-22; well, I was (and still am) one of them. I believe my reasons are well expressed in previous postings. It's not that I don't want this model (or Virginia, etc.), just that I would much rather have other ships. I probably will eventually buy enough Minnesota and Virginia to represent the USN battle fleet of 1908.

Actually, I'm pleased that GHQ did well with the Minnesota. If GHQ survives and continues to produce a few models I like, then that's good for me.

Finally, I try to make it clear that any criticism I make of GHQ's choices are my personal opinion. Anyone who had different opinions or facts is welcome to point where (they think) I am wrong. The fact that the Minnesota was GHQ's best Micronaut seller last year shows that they made the better choice. I hope that Virginia sells as well (while still hoping for BB-26 and BB-36).

Don S.

[ed*b]

Very interesting that the Minnesota sold so well. Overall, it would be fascinating to develop a statistical model to predict sales based on era, nationality, number of ships in class, service history and competition. The Minnesota would have high positives in nationality (U.S.), number of ships in class (6) and competition (none), and lower ratings for era (pre-dreadnought) and service history (no combat). The sales volume per unit, and number of ships already produced should be sufficient to allow statistical an-alysis of these variables.

Just in ranking the above (without any numerical values), I would suggest for each of the variables from most popular to least popular:

Nationality:
U.S.
German
British
Japanese
Italian
French
Russian
everybody else

Era:
WW2
WW1
pre-dreadnought
modern

Service History:
Combat in WW1 and WW2
Combat in WW2
Combat in WW1
Projected
No combat or minor skirmishes (e.g. Falklands)

Number in class:
More than 4
3 to 4
2
1

If my estimates are roughly correct, it would explain why there have been no additions to the modern micronaught line for a few years.

[CG1]

I have always used 1/3000 scale and it's worth pointing out that both major manaufacturers I know of have effectively ceased releasing new modern models with a 3rd smaller only producing a very few new releases of minor warships. 1/2400 hasn't got enough UK range for me to switch so it's a bit disappointing all round really.

[El Grego]

The focus on expanding the range of Russian WW1 ships before creating models for other WW1 navies seems to imply that a lot of reference material has been gathered for the Russian fleet, and it is intended to make full use of that before moving on to another navy.

I would faint if the next WW1 fleet started by GHQ was Turkish... and after I woke up I would buy some

I am thinking that there is a grand scheme to this - we just can not comprehend it yet. I am just returning to 1/2400 naval after a long absence, so my collection is starting off at near zero. I can understand the views of the veteran collectors/gamers here however.

Seeing the plethora of WW1 Russian ships is very interesting (and welcome), but then again I am a 'Russophile'...

[LAX_Kev]

Like El Grego, I would like to believe that there is a grand plan here with selecting which new 2400-scale ships to create and release.
I was initially surprised a few years ago when there were WW1 Imperial Russian Navy releases. At first I thought “What was GHQ thinking, I’ll never get any of those things…â€￾ So much for first impressions – they are all now part of my collection. It did encourage me to look into aspects of the WW1 war at sea beyond just the British / German conflict. Seems there were lots of other navies out there, and some additional engagements that I knew very little about. The two Russian pre-dreads on this year’s new release list formed the backbone of the Russian Black Sea Fleet before the completion of the Imp Maria-class dreads, and exchanged shots with the German/Turkish Goeben a couple of times. Perhaps GHQ is planning over a multi-year period to release some of the ships from other WW1 Navies, and some of the participants in some of these secondary/backwater area battles (Moon Sound, Cape Sarych, Gallipoli, etc)
Another long term strategic release plan might be one that I have suggested in the past – having GHQ produce a representative from each of the USN’s battleship classes (from Maine & Texas up thru Montana). With GHQ being a US-based company, and a pretty good US following, it would be logical to add to the pre-WW2 USN capital ships that they currently offer. This is in keeping with one of Ed*b’s points above. It would certainly result in me getting rid of my “resin rubbishâ€￾ (nicely said, Leopold) that I currently have for these ships in my collection. I’d upgrade to GHQ in a heartbeat should their products become available. This is why I was very happy to see the BB Virginia on this year’s list. Since it represents a 5-ship class, I think that this ship might benefit from some of the same sales volume momentum that resulted in the success of last year’s BB Minnesota (especially from those of us that buy the whole class!) To Don’s point, there remain some holes in the WW1 USN dreadnought lineup, and like him I hope that GHQ gets to these over the next few years (because I want to replace the rest of my resin rubbish and my VF stuff too). Maybe in the near future, we’ll get to see a pre-dread Maine (BB-10) and a South Carolina (BB-26) as new releases. And if the Turkish navy shows up on a future list too , I suppose El Grego & I will be among the first to place an order for them too!
In related string, Tanner notes that GHQ is a business with limited resources and they can't do everything at once – that observation is so very true. So for now I’ll be content with this year’s new offerings, and hope that patience is rewarded in the future years’ new releases lists.
So much for strategic musings. Now I’ve got to start budgeting for this year’s buys!

Kevin

[Leopold]

In part of course we will always be captives of our own prejudices - and GHQ needs to turn a profit at the end of the day. I personally have no interest in anything involving WW2 post 1942, on sea or land, but thats just me. Just because I have no interest in the late part of the War doesn't mean that translates to anything like an accurate read on the market though. Example - my own micronaut collection of US ships is all painted in either MS 21 or MS 12 modified, but when I paint for other guys the majority seem to prefer the late war MS 31/32/33 camo patterns. I personally don't own any Iowa class BB's or Yorktown II class CV's - but they will obviously be big sellers for most of the market, and I get that. As for the Scheer - I'll probably buy it, though my dislike for the Kriegsmarine is so strong that they are always the last of my fleets to get upgraded from lesser manufacturers. They barely even deserve to have those beautiful GHQ models Yes, irrational prejudice again!

This still doesn't help my Jutland RN fleet very much, and that's my highest priority - so please forgive my crushing disappointment at not seeing those beautiful Armoured Cruisers this year - yet again

[ed*b]

Some good points above, and one thought that occurs to me is that while a person might very well buy 10 or 20 packs of a new tank model or a type of infantry since you need that many to fill out a couple companies or a battalion structure, it is very unlikely that a person would buy more models of one ship than were actually in service. This makes the naval line inherently more lmited from a market point of view. It also suggests to me that number produced might be a very significant factor in how many copies of a particular ship model will sell.

Competition might be considerably less important, since there is a very highly differentiated structure of producers. The resin rubbish comes at the very bottom, and I for one won't touch it. However, I made do with VF for WW1 era U.S. BB until the GHQ line came out at which point they were speedily replaced (except for the South Carolinas, so far). The same fate will hopefully someday befall my WW1 Italian VF battleline. C in C is the next step up, but still significantly below GHQ in quality. My replacement program there is a little slower, and focussed on my particular preferences (UK and Japanese).

Whenever some new producer appears (like the recent Mackensen model) I'll try them out, but the long term goal remains to upgrade everything to GHQ.