Consolidated Micronaut Wish List

This is a general forum for all types of posts related to Military models.

Moderators: dnichols, GHQ, Mk 1

michaelw43
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 4:53 am
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: Consolidated Micronaut Wish List

Post by michaelw43 »

Omaha class Part 1 of 2

All of the Omaha class were completed in the 1920s with 12-6" guns and 4-3" guns. By the early 1930s, two 6" guns were removed from half the class, with Omaha, Milwaukee, Concord, Trenton, and Memphis retaining their 12-6" guns. Between 1933 to 1936, 8 Browning water cooled .50 caliber machine guns were added to all ships, 4 of them in a new "birdbath" built atop the main battery fire control structure above the bridge. Comparing 12-gun with 10-gun ships, the difference in appearance was very slight, as only the aft casemate guns are different and on the model they are small.

Comparing late pre-war with early-war ships, there were only slight differences. I could only find 3 photos of the 1940-41 period, when 3" gun tubs were added to both the front of the fore superstructure forward of the bridge, and also immediately before the after twin gun turret. Amidships, 2 more 3" guns were added at the same time, bringing the total up to 8 single open mount 3" guns. IMHO I don't think separate models are needed for any of these.

The addition of Mark 3 fire control radar, and SC or SC-2 search radar on top of the mainmast made no noticeable appearance difference as the screens were rather small. On a GHQ model the radar screens are made of cast pewter metal, which makes a significant change to their look compared to the real radar screens, which are barely visible because the observer of these nearly flat "bedspring" screens is seeing only pipes and wires strung together over an area that is mostly air.

By around mid-1942 most, if not all of the Omaha class had received 8-20 mm single guns, replacing the 8-.50 cal machine guns. The "birdbath" was removed on square bridge refits, with 4-20 mm guns mounted in the bridge wings and the other 4 on top of the after superstructure. All of the photos I saw with the square bridge treatment were without the "birdbath". That's important to know as the "birdbath" was conspicuously noticeable (see navsource.org/archives/04/008/0400825.jpg). The addition of a 1.1" quad replacing the fore 3" gun and another added to the aft end of the after superstructure didn't appreciably change the ship's appearance. So one model is needed for a winged bridge ship with a "birdbath" on top, circa December 1941 or early 1942. Since all the square bridge ships were reduced to 10-6" guns, I chose Omaha, a 12-gun ship. Other than Memphis there were no other 12-gun ships left by Jan-Feb 1942, and I'm not sure about Memphis due to lack of photos or written info.

In the relatively narrow channels between the Solomon Islands radar echoes from nearby land restricted the length of time that approaching enemy aircraft could be detected by radar. The square-front open-top bridge was needed so that the OD could view the whole sky to quickly determine how to conn the ship when enemy aircraft were closing in.

As part of their reconstruction the armored conning tower was removed in these and all other US prewar cruisers in order to save weight. The tendency of US Navy ships under arms limitation treaties was to build up to the tonnage limit with a maximum of armor for defensive protection, in combination with a maximum of offensive weapons and a plentiful supply of ammunition and fuel for long voyages. With added anti-aircraft guns and ammo, plus radar and their additional crews, American gunships were nearing their stability limits.

Michael D. Waters

michaelw43
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 4:53 am
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: Consolidated Micronaut Wish List

Post by michaelw43 »

Omaha class Part 2 of 2
The major reconstruction for this class resulted in the appearance of the square bridge and the absence of the "birdbath" (see navsource.org/archives/04/007/0400714.jpg), and of course we need a 2nd model. The bridge wings were clipped off, resulting in a compact, open-topped bridge. This occurred from mid-1942 through as late as September 1943, based on available photos. Subsequently, as 40 mm guns became available from late 1942 on, 2 twin mounts replaced the 2 quad 1.1" guns, and one more twin 40 mm replaced the aft 3" gun on the centerline. This reduced the 7-3" guns to 6-3", all amidships. Also the 20 mm were increased to 12, for most ships 2 more on each side, mounted just forward of the 3" amidship guns. There were exceptions to these generalities, but these changes and exceptions made little difference to the look of this class. Additionally the searchlights were reduced to 2 and were lowered, opposite either the 3rd or 4th funnel. Also the advent of the larger SK and SK-1 radar screens in late 1942-44 , some on the mainmast, some on the foremast, made a little more difference, but not enough to call for another new model.

I would have preferred a model with twin 40 mm and SK-1 radar on the mainmast, but GHQ built USN35 with 1.1" quads and no mainmast, representing Detroit as of 16 Aug 1942. When I buy one of these I just might do a little kit-bashing. I would definitely add a mainmast, as on this class it is not a slim one. When GHQ does a redo on USN35 they certainly should add one. And if they go the "full Monty" the mast should have a signal light on the aft side a little higher than the searchlights with an SC radar screen at the top. LOL !

Now for the unique one, Marblehead. In 1932, when 2-6" guns were removed, one was replaced on the centerline on a built up after superstructure, giving 11-6" guns. I went back and forth on this one, but ultimately my more particular side won out. I think we need a 3rd model for 1941 Marblehead (see navsource.org/archives/04/012/0401203.jpg).

Marblehead was with the Asiatic Fleet when war broke out, and so could not be upgraded there. After being damaged, Marblehead returned to the US and got the square bridge treatment in Nov 1942, resulting in removal of the 11th 6" gun and casemate. However, the surrounding structure remained, resulting in an after superstructure about 2 decks taller than the rest of the class, with 2 twin 40 mm replacing 2 quad 1.1" guns. So that means we need a 4th model. I prefer Marblehead May 1944 to get SK-1 radar and 2 searchlights (not lowered).

One more we need to look at is Detroit. In Jan 1945 Detroit was modified again. The upper forward 6" casemates were replaced with twin 40 mm. Also 2 more 3" guns were added just forward of the 3" guns amidships. That gave Detroit 8-6", 8-3" & 10-40 mm guns. Also the torpedo tubes were removed. Those changes, along with SK-1 radar on the foremast, gave a somewhat different look. However each change was small and IMHO the overall look unchanged. This time my moderate side held out, so I don't recommend another model. A true particularist would want a 1945 Detroit model as well as the others.

To summarize, I recommend the following 4 models:
1941-early 1942 Omaha with bridge wings, "birdbath" on top of the foremast, 12-6" guns, 8-3" guns or (7-3" & 2 quad 1.1" guns). Represents all Omaha class except Marblehead
1942-45 square bridge, 10-6" guns = USN35. Represents all Omaha class except Marblehead
1941-mid 1942 Marblehead with bridge wings, "birdbath" on top of the foremast, 11-6" guns
1944-45 Marblehead with square bridge, 10-6" guns (could also represent Marblehead late 1942-43)

Michael D. Waters

ww2navyguy
E5
Posts: 303
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2005 8:21 am
Location: Sunny Florida

Re: Consolidated Micronaut Wish List

Post by ww2navyguy »

Michael, nice write up. I like the summary too. I'm glad the USN35 model seems to be most useful for the overall class for wargaming purposes, however, the Marblehead version would be very nice for recreating the Java Sea battles.

Thank you for the detailed work! :D Very nice job.

michaelw43
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 4:53 am
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: Consolidated Micronaut Wish List

Post by michaelw43 »

@ww2navyguy

Thanks for the compliments. :)
I agree with you about USN35 & Marblehead.

Michael

Brigade Commander
E5
Posts: 451
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 2:26 am

Re: Consolidated Micronaut Wish List

Post by Brigade Commander »

Michael,

Definitely a scholarly work. Very much appreciated. As the Omaha class were never a front-line unit in WW-II I have been back-and-forth about modeling them. Being yet again reminded of their invaluable service in the far flung areas of the oceans of the world I think I will have to add them to my collection. Now I have to decide whether to use USN-35 for Marblehead until GHQ releases a Marblehead model and replace or wait and see if they do release one.
"It is a dangerous business, Frodo, going out your door. You step into the road and, if you do not keep your feet, there is no telling where you might be swept off to."

Bilbo Baggins to Frodo Baggins.

ww2navyguy
E5
Posts: 303
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2005 8:21 am
Location: Sunny Florida

Re: Consolidated Micronaut Wish List

Post by ww2navyguy »

I think another manufacturer (CnC) makes a model of Marblehead in WW2 configuration in 2400 scale, but not sure if the model is correct for USS Marblehead or not. I think I have an old model somewhere, but can't find it. I filled out all of my Omaha class light cruisers using the GHQ USN35 model.

Donald M Scheef
Posts: 27
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2022 3:12 am

Re: Consolidated Micronaut Wish List

Post by Donald M Scheef »

Sorry for the long delay, but I have been experiencing problems with my server connections. I'll try to get updates into the files as soon as possible.
One particular item; for reasons explained in the Micronauts Only thread, I am restoring late-war KGV to the wish list.
Don S.
Last edited by Donald M Scheef on Thu Dec 08, 2022 11:47 am, edited 1 time in total.

ww2navyguy
E5
Posts: 303
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2005 8:21 am
Location: Sunny Florida

Re: Consolidated Micronaut Wish List

Post by ww2navyguy »

Don,

Welcome back. I, along with many others on the GHQ Forums were concerned about you. Glad you are back! Sorry to hear about the computer issues, but happy to hear your absence wasn't due to illness.

Looking forward to reading you future posts...especially on topic of WW2 naval!

michaelw43
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 4:53 am
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: Consolidated Micronaut Wish List

Post by michaelw43 »

My new request for Micronauts consists partly of pre-war major warships and partly of minor warship types from the mid-1930s.

1. WWI Japan destroyer Momo class
2. WWII Siam/Thailand destroyer Phra Ruang (British old R class Thornycroft Special), 1921-45 appearance
3. WWII France destroyer Aigle class, first group, with rounded corners on top bridge level *
4. WWII Netherlands coast defense ship Soerabaia, 1941-42 appearance
5. WWII Brazil battleship Minas Gerais,1938-45 appearance
6. WWII Germany battleship Schlesien, 1939-45 appearance
7. WWII China gunboat Hsien Ning
8. WWII Mexico patrol sloop Guanajuato class
9. WWII UK motor torpedo boat MTB 1 class, early B. P. B. type
10. WWII China light cruiser Ping Hai
11. WWII Poland river monitor Warszawa class, 1936-39 appearance
12. WWII Italy motor torpedo boat MS 11 class, type 1

* The present GHQ model, FRN #5 Vauquelin, is inaccurate and should be redone.

Firstly it is not Vauquelin, as that ship had 7 torpedo tubes (1x3, 2x2), and FRN #5 has 6 (2x3), as in the Guépard class and the first group of the Aigle class. Also the stern of Vauquelin was rounded without the tumblehome of the Guépard/Aigle first group ships.

Secondly the winged bridge is one deck level too low. It needs to be raised one deck, giving 2 bridge deck levels instead of 3, as in all the 4-stack French destroyers. Anyone can verify this by looking at photos of the real ships. FRN #5 looks to me just like a drawing I once saw in a mid-1930s issue of Jane's Fighting Ships. I would not buy FRN #5 as it is.

Nepty
E5
Posts: 111
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 7:57 pm

Re: Consolidated Micronaut Wish List

Post by Nepty »

Would like to see Japanese Oscar KI-43 and KI-21 Sally bomber and some Japanese AAA guns
USN Buffalo fighter, TBD torpedo bomber


Nepty

michaelw43
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 4:53 am
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: Consolidated Micronaut Wish List

Post by michaelw43 »

@Nepty

Japanese 25mm AA guns came in singles, doubles, and triple barrel mounts. You'll have to ask GHQ if they can supply you with 25mm mount parts. Same goes for other calibers of triple A.

FYI GHQ already makes F2A Buffaloes and TBD Devastators.:D USN 91 Carrier Planes #3 sells for $13.99 a pack. It consists of "Devastators, Vindicators, and Buffaloes, both stowed and deployed." GHQ


Michael D.Waters

Brigade Commander
E5
Posts: 451
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 2:26 am

Re: Consolidated Micronaut Wish List

Post by Brigade Commander »

Trying to start some discussion over Cold War USN carriers. GHQ only has one actual Cold War carrier: the Nimitz-class Theodore Roosevelt. I believe this would be acceptable for all ships of the Nimitz-class. From what I have read so far it appears the majority of the differences in the Nimitz-class vessels are mostly internal and / or below the waterline. The Gerald R. Ford-class seem to be more of a post-Cold War class. This is what it would, I believe, be required for GHQ to supply all of the USN Cold War carriers.

Midway-class(3): There seems to have been enough variation in the angled-deck conversions for there to be one of each ship made.
CV-41 Midway / CV-42 Franklin D. Roosevelt - post SCB110.
CV-41 Midway - post SCB101.66.
CV-43 Coral Sea - post SCB110A.

Forrestal-class(4): There seems to be just enough visible variation to warrant two models.
CV-59 Forrestal / CV-60 Saratoga.
CV-61 Ranger / CV-62 Independence.

Kitty Hawk-class(3): Again there seems to be just enough visible variation to warrant two models.
CV-63 Kitty Hawk / CV-64 Constellation.
CV-66 America.

John F. Kennedy-class(1): Model needed.
CV-67 John F. Kennedy.

Enterprise-class(1): Model needed.
CVN-65 Enterprise. I honestly thought GHQ made one but I cannot find it in the on-line catalog or catalog #55. So here it is.

Nimitz-class(10): GHQ has CVN-71 Theodore Roosevelt which was the first of the second block of seven. I do not see anything indicating a separate CVN-68 / CVN-69 / CVN-70 model is needed at 1:2400. Thoughts?
"It is a dangerous business, Frodo, going out your door. You step into the road and, if you do not keep your feet, there is no telling where you might be swept off to."

Bilbo Baggins to Frodo Baggins.

StarCruiser
E5
Posts: 394
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 5:42 am
Location: Houston, we have a problem...

Re: Consolidated Micronaut Wish List

Post by StarCruiser »

The only decent(ish) CVN-65 Enterprise I'm aware of was Superior's...it's ... ancient.
"It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the beans of java that the thoughts acquire speed. The hands acquire the shakes, the shakes become a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion." - Programmer's Mantra

redleg
E5
Posts: 3396
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2004 11:02 am
Location: Riverside, CA

Re: Consolidated Micronaut Wish List

Post by redleg »

I would love to see some of these older carriers too. Particularly the Midway and Kitty Hawk classes. Of course, we would need a cold war carrier aircraft pack too. The modern carrier aircraft pack already contains F-14 and A-6, and the modern land based fighter pack contains the F-4, but it would be cool to get those in a pack together with AD, A-4, and A-7/F-8 aircraft.
Redleg's Website: micropope.webstarts.com

Beagle
E5
Posts: 693
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2021 2:45 am

Re: Consolidated Micronaut Wish List

Post by Beagle »

I would love to see models of Cold War carriers. There is a huge gap of missing ships between Midway and Nimitz. As far as the Nimitzezez, the Bush and Reagan have longer Islands, there is an upper stage weapons elevator inside the after section, which makes the area between the Island and elevator 3, the Junk Yard, smaller. There's basically room for Tilly, some GSE and squadron gear and thats it. It also brings the LA foul line closer to the port side of the Island and gets rid of the Aft Hummer Hole that the boats with the shorter Islands have. That all said, none of that would make any difference for gaming, but for collecting, they'd look different and you'd have to set aircraft on deck differently.

Post Reply