Micronaut Only Thread

[regia-marina]

I'm so glad they finally are coming out with the Admiral Scheer. Now all we need to get them to do is the Lutzow. Thanks GHQ! (for the Admiral Scheer)

[Donald M. Scheef]

I have just had my first chance to take a close look at the 2009-2010 GHQ catalog and noticed that UKN44 is described as "CL Enterprise Sistership Emerald."
Emerald and Enterprise are not truly sisters; more like first cousins. The most noticable difference is that Enterprise has her forward guns in a twin mount, while Emerald has two single six-inch mounts.
At the standard price of US$8.75, UKN44 could not include two separate ships. Does anyone know if GHQ intends to include alternate parts (forward superstructure) so that either ship could be modeled or will it be just the Enterprise.
Conversion of one to the other wouldn't be extremely difficult, but not trivial either since the superstructure forward of the bridge would have to be modified.

I have received my first order of UKN44 and, as expected, there is a single ship representing Enterprise as modified with the twin gun mount. Converting this to an Emerald would involve removing a rather large built-up ring for the gun mount and fitting a new forward superstructure, so I think I'll wait for an accurate Emerald. On the other hand, UKN44 does include a second twin 6" mount, so I may get one to build a hypothetical version with the aft two single guns replaced by a twin mount.

Don S.

[cbovill]

It's been a while since I've posted any pictures out here, and these may be the last I post for a long time as in September I'm going back to school at night to get my masters degree so there goes any time I had for building ships and aircraft. In this batch I was working on US and Australian ships that were present at the Battle of Savo Island and in the case of HMAS Australia - she is depicted as she appeared at Coral Sea.


Heavy cruiser USS Chicago sporting Measure 21 (all 5-N Navy Blue). When I first embarked on building the USN I thought I would hate painting ships up in Ms 21, but now I love it because with highlighting and weathering, these ships gain so much character and depth. Ms 21 really shows these effects off well. The key for me will be in trying not to overdue it.


USS Chicago again as she appeared during the Battle of Savo Island which she survived, although her commander's reputation didn't.


Heavy cruiser USS Quincy in Measure 12 mod as she appeared during her final encounter at the Battle of Savo Island. Ms 12 mod is a royal pain in the you-know-what. It's similar to painting RN ships in Admiralty Disruptive schemes in that no two ships are alike. Takes a bit of research to get the right pattern.


Heavy cruiser USS Vincennes, sister to the Quincy and also wearing her own version of Ms 12 mod. She too was lost at the Battle of Savo Island on the night of August 8-9, 1942. But she and her consorts kept Vice Admiral Mikawa's force away from the transports of the 1st Marine Division landing on G u a d a l c a n a l and Tassaforonga.


Destroyer USS Blue painted blue (Ms 21) was on patrol the night of the battle but failed to spot Mikawa's cruisers in time.


USS Blue again. In this photo her weathering and the waves on the base can be seen to good effect.


Destroyer USS Sterett in an unofficial Ms 12 mod, I could not find pictures of her in this scheme so I did the best I could.


USS Sterett from the port side.


Royal Australian Navy heavy cruiser HMAS Canberra wearing USN Ms 21. I have been waiting a long time for GHQ to produce this ship and am so happy to add her to the fleet. Information on her is sketchy so I believe this is the way she appeared at the battle on the night she was lost.


Port side view of HMAS Canberra. I believe she was the only County class cruiser to not have been significantly upgraded, and she still sported the original single mount secondary battery.


RAN heavy cruiser HMAS Australia. Ok, I know all of you who are enthusiasts will know that the Canberra model is not valid for Australia, but I don't know if we will ever get one, so here she is sporting incorrect secondary battery in a beautiful Alexandria flavor of the Admiralty Disruptive scheme. She was a joy to paint and a beauty to behold.


HMAS Australia again as she appeared during the Battle of the Coral Sea. She was not present at Savo Island on that fateful night and so lived to fight another day.


RAN light cruiser HMAS Hobart as she appeared during the Battle of the Coral Sea. She is sporting an Alexandria Admiralty Disruptive scheme that she and the rest of the Australian cruiser squadron received during their Medeterranean service.


Here's a better shot of her camo scheme.


The Australian cruiser squadron cruising together.


Here's the famous 67th Pursuit Squadron of the Cactus Air Force that fought in the Solomons Campaign. They were based at Henderson Field on G u a d a l c a n a l. Notice they are wearing an RAF paint scheme. The P-39's and P-400's flown by this squadron were originally ordered by and built for the RAF but once it was known that they were a poor fighter at high altitude, the RAF didn't want them anymore, and in 1942 the Pacific theatre was willing to take anything it could get its hands on.


Here they are in squadron formation, flying in the recently adopted "finger four" formation where pairs of aircraft fly in support of each other.

I'm hoping to squeeze in some Japanese carriers before I start school, but I don'tknow if I will have time. Hope you enjoyed looking at these as much as I do building them.

Chris

[Mk 1]

Chris:

What a delight it is to see these ships. But then you already know what a fan I am of your marvelous micronaughts.

The detailing and weathering are superb: The life-boat benches; the shading of the decks vs. hulls on the US Ms 21s; the crisp edges of the camo on the RN (RAN) disruptive schemes; the suble vertical "drip" marks down the hulls.

And not to be neglected ... the P-39s! Absolutely marvelous!

You have once again out-done yourself! Brilliant work.

[MTB]

Nice looking vessels and aircraft.

[ww2navyguy]

Chris,

Outstanding work on the new ships. Thanks for sharing the pictures!

Scott

[pmskaar]

Chris

Excellent work on all those ships. Great painting and basing and as Mk1 noted very nice suble weathering. I know the MS-12 modified scheme is not easy to do and varied greatly from ship to ship. I really enjoy seeing your work.

Pete - Binpicker, Out!

[pmskaar]

Hi Chris

You made the point of the fun of painting U.S. ships in MS-21. I have to agree with there.
Although some might think that "Navy Blue" ships would all look the same there were lots of variations due to weathering. MS-21 faded rather rapidly so that many ships would appear as your excellent Chicago. A ship that had just returned from refit would be a lot darker so there is a lot of room to play here. Yes, MS-12 modified in its many variations and because no two ships were the same requires research for each ship that wore it. Great job once again.

Pete - Binpicker, Out!

[cbovill]

Hey guys,

Thanks for the wonderful compliments and I'm glad you like them. It's funny, the ships in Ms 21 start out real dark blue/gray and then as they work their way through to completion they get lighter and lighter. I have some others that I didn't put through as much of a weathering process and they are definitely darker in appearance.

Well last night I set three IJN carriers and nine destroyers out on the worktable last night. I have exactly one month to build them before I have to put everything away for a long time. So I hope its enough time given the few moments I get to spend on this hobby.

Thanks again,
Chris

[Donald M. Scheef]

UKN44 has shown up on the New Releases page and, as expected, it appears to be a very nice representation of HMS Enterprise.
However, GHQ should change the line describing HMS Emerald as a "sister ship." Emerald had two single six-inch mounts superimposed forward of the bridge rather than one twin six-inch mount of Enterprise.

Don S.

[hussar62]

Some pics of South Dakota I (modified as if she had been build and updated for WWII service)





I think this is a Superior model which I modified with GHQ parts (5"/38's, 40mm gun tubs, a/c, catpult and crane, and a tower super structure from a GHQ So Dak II BB)

Lexington class BC USS Constellation refit for WWII service




Also a Superior model which I modified with GHQ parts (5"/38's, 40mm gun tubs, a/c, catpult and crane)

North Carolina




No modifications to this kit. built straight from the GHQ pack

[cbovill]

Tom,

Those are some nice looking battleships - good work modifying the original South Dakota for World War II service.

Chris

[cbovill]

Okay, it's been a race against time to complete one more batch of ships before I have to start school on top of work, family and everything else. I wanted to complete a batch of Japanese carriers and destroyers that were used in the Battle of the Coral Sea. The ships are finished but I have not yet built the air groups for the carriers. Of course, later in the war that might actually be more accurate for the carriers to be without aircraft.

Pictured below are the carriers and destroyers of Admiral Takagi's fast carrier strike force as they appeared in support of Operation MO, the dual invasion of Port Moresby and the capture of the island of Tulagi in the Solomons for use as a seaplane base.


This is a port side view of the carrier Shokaku. I mistakenly have her flying the flag of Rear Admiral Chuichi Hara who was actually commanding the Fifth Carrier Division from her sister the Zuikaku. Oh well.


Aerial view of Shokaku. Half the production time for these carriers was in painting the flight decks. All the carriers depicted here have had their flight decks painted on, no decals. There were suttle differences between Shokaku's markings and those of Zuikaku.


The fast carrier Zuikaku.


Port-side view of Zuikaku and her vastly complicated but otherwise empty flight deck.


The light carrier Shoho depicted here in her only active operation of the war before she was sunk. This carrier did not serve with the Fifth Carrier Division but instead formed the Close Support Force with one destroyer - the Sazanami - hardly an adequate escort for so valuable a ship. I would have put all the carriers together in one command surrounded by as many ships as I could muster. She was under the command of Rear Admiral Aritomo Gotō.


Port-side view of the Shoho.


The Hatsuharu class destroyer Ariake, one of six escorting destroyers for the Carrier Strike Force.


The Fubuki class destroyer Ushio, also escorting Takagi's Carrier Strike Force. I love the Fubuki class destroyers, they have long, sleek lines, good looking ships.


The Shiratsuyu class destroyer Shigure, two of this class escorted the carriers at the Battle of the Coral Sea.


Admiral Takagi's fast Carrier Strike Force assembled for the Battle of the Coral Sea. With all the ships Japan had at this time in the war, one would think they could have provided such important ships as the Fifth Carrier Division with a more impressive escort than just two cruisers and six destroyers. They're just plain lucky they didn't lose these carriers in that battle.


Admiral Goto's Close Support Force. This should not have been a separate force, not surprised that Shoho was sunk.


Here's a good shot showing the three carriers together, notice the difference in size between the fleet carriers and the light carrier.


Here's Fletcher's Task Force 17, centered around the carrier Yorktown. Still have to build the ships of Task Force 11, the Lexington carrier battle group. I have Task Force 44 built (allied cruiser force). These three groups formed the ships that fought on the allied side in Coral Sea. Just before the battle they were rearranged into one TF17 with sub-groups (TG's). Even with one TF we still failed to operate our carriers together as one strike force.


Comparison shot of IJN fleet carriers to USN fleet carriers. The Shokaku class could carrier 84 aircraft, but due to Japanese tactics, they could only operate 72 in three chutai (squadrons). These similarly sized American carriers would eventually operate many more aircraft than that simply because we learned to permanently spot aircraft on the flight deck and only use the hanger for maintenance and so forth.


Now we compare IJN, USN and RN fleet carriers. Notice how much shorter HMS Victorious is compared to the Shokaku and the Yorktown, and because she was designed with an emphasis on survivability in the European theatre where land based air was an almost constant threat, she could only carry half the aircraft of the Yorktown. Protection vs. Air Group, I'd always side on having a larger air group.

Well there they are, I hope to get the Japanese aircraft built on my next break in classes and then will start doing some carrier battles. I love the site of a massed carrier strike on the gaming table.

Chris

[intobattle]

Wow Chris, very very nice! The group shots look particularly realistic... I also really like the worn look on the decks.

Thanks for sharing

Tanner

[Mk 1]

The highlighting it fantastic! I can see the arrestor wires on the Yorkie!

I also agree on the weathered look of the flight decks. Not just "Oh I'll do some washes to make it look a bit worn", but deliberate thought as to where and how the wear might take place. I can see the darkened areas where touch-downs occur (rubber smudges) and where the engines are run-up for take-off (exhaust smudges).

Oh, and I too am delighted to see the side-by-sides you've done. For whatever I have read about these same carriers, I have never seen them side-by-side, whether as models or composite photos. It is very illuminating to see how they compared!

Great stuff! And thanks for posting it.