Micronaut Only Thread

[pmskaar]

Tanner

Those ships look really excellent. Great job on all of them. I always enjoy seeing your work.

Pete - Binpicker, Out!

[Luca]

My first attempt at basing some ships. Please I need some advice, the waves are not nice as I liked them to be. I didn't have yet the time to print the labels.

[Donald M. Scheef]

Luca,

The first thing I notice is a lack of bow waves. Judging from the wakes, you intend to show the ships at speed. If this is the case, there would be a noticable bow wave of white water surging up at the bow and a "V" angling back from the bow (the higher the speed, the sharper the angle).

A quick search revealed a good article; 'Wake Patterns' by Donald C. Simon.

Don S.

[dragon6]

Somewhere there is a thread on modifying Yamashiro ijn26 into a proper model of Fuso.

I canna find it. Looked in this thread and all the scratch building ones I can find, no luck.

Anyone have the location? ... Bueller...

[battlewagon]

The thread that talks about the Fuso conversion can be found by searching for the thread "IJN BB Yamashiro conversion to IJN BB Fuso (1944)" . It contains the step by step instructions and plenty of pictures. I am the lunatic that did the conversion...OK, I got tired of waiting for GHQ to make it so I carved up a spare Yamashiro kit.

Please feel free to contact me with any questions not answered in the thread referenced above. It was a fun project, pretty easy and I was very happy with the result.
I hope this helps!

Matt

[dragon6]

The thread that talks about the Fuso conversion can be found by searching for the thread "IJN BB Yamashiro conversion to IJN BB Fuso (1944)" .

Thank you. I find the search function... an unhappy thing. My first search,with quotes and the full title of your post, brought up 395 hits, I chopped it to yamashiro conversion to fuso and got 153, eventually just yamashiro fuso which brought up a mere 30 hits with your post on the first page.

Your conversion was an excellent one

[battlewagon]

Glad you liked the conversion. I am working on converting a Chokai class into the 1944 version of IJN Maya with the AA tower in place of #3 main turret. I have set aside a Mogami kit to convert to the 1944 version with the flight deck aft and #4 and #5 turrets removed...yeah, I know...I need to get out more!

[battlewagon]

Duplicate post - please delete

[battlewagon]

Duplicate post - please delete

[dragon6]

Glad you liked the conversion. I am working on converting a Chokai class into the 1944 version of IJN Maya with the AA tower in place of #3 main turret. I have set aside a Mogami kit to convert to the 1944 version with the flight deck aft and #4 and #5 turrets removed...yeah, I know...I need to get out more!

Not at all. You set an example for us all. GHQ can't make everything. Love to see how you make the 5/40 AA mounts.

Look at Nazgul, the man is fantastic. A fine craftsman, like yourself

[SKeeM]

Its been about 15 years since i painted micro anything. This week I started with some armor and 2 ships. Here are the ships.

[WWIICentral]

Hi Guys,

Here are some recently completed Kriegsmarine ships.

More photos on my sites: WWIICentral

Let me know what you think.

Tanner

[Unfathomable]

Okay, to heap any more praise on Tanner's work I'd have to start inventing words, so I don't know what to say except keep posting and don't wast time on all those little tank thingies, not even if your wife does them. It's clear that your duty lies in the betterment of naval modelling and the uplift of those around you and here on this forum, so that they too may pass from the realm of "yeh, it'll do" to "wow, that's amazing". (Or in the case of some, "oh dear," to "yeh, I suppose …")

I've been staring at your latest images for a long time - too long to be healthy, really - and there a a few things I'm curious about, and a few others I'm baffled by, so I thought I'd ask:

1) The lines, shapes or shadings down the middle-length of the Bismark's front turrets - what are they? They look really cool. And how did you achieve them?

2) Your shading/weathering/outlining in pin-wash form. I admit, I'm mystified. Again and again I try to duplicated or to approach your results and repeatedly I fail. In the past you've said "Add the pin wash, avoiding open areas, and wipe off excess". But that, as I've noted earlier in this thread, is like Turner saying "get a canvas and paint well". Almost everything is sharply, and quite darkly, outlined; this bordering effect gives wonderful definition. Whenever I try the same I end with something that looks very unrealistic and out of place. I always have particulate matter floating around, rendering the finish dirty and sooty - the model doesn't appear so much as defined as rubbed in the dirt. It emerges as scribbled on. I've tried what must be every commercially available wash on the market, in acrylic and enamel, not to mention home brews in the above mediums plus in a variety of oil paints and inks. I've tried commercial inks on their own and the same for mixed oils - I've tried hyper-expensive detail pens with superfine nibs, chalks and pastels. I've even tried multiple brands of outlandishly named Sword and Sorcery style washes and inks I've found in basement rooms full of smelly teenagers with glandular issues (what colour is "Bonecrusher", anyway?) And NEVER do I approximate those results! (I've even dipped ships in buckets of Army Painter and spun them on a drill; lovely toffee apple effect, assuming you're one to model toffee apples …) In all of this I'm only talking about detailing the larger structures. I see that you detail in border-form the very smallest of details so that they really pop. I bashing my head against a brick wall here!

3) Do you airbrush absolutely everything? (And if so, how do you handle that indoors?) If not, what aspects to you leave to the brush? If airbrushing I imagine that you'd frequently change colours and be using minuscule amounts of paint: is there a trick to managing this?

Even for a single colour, by the time I a) wait for clement weather and good light, b) haul my AB gear outside, c) thin and mix everything up, d) set up an appropriate rig for the job to hand and, last but by no means least, e) spend at least as much time cleaning the AB up afterwards as I have painting in the first place, I get to do about one spray session a fortnight! Surely you've found a way around this.

4) Are the little swastikas on the fore and aft ends commercially available along with your awesome deck decals? And if not, would you consider making them so, like, if I grovelled?

5) Another airbrush question - do you use particular settings re pressure? The best pressure for such small items is something I've never come entirely to terms with. I've been using the standard 20 psi (sorry, but I can't recall what measurement the US uses and it always catches me out … ringgits, or hand spans, inches or whatever …) and at that pressure I get drips forming on the bow knuckles and whatnot - though a lower pressure doesn't penetrate dense superstructure forms and risks leaving webbing between the spans and spars of cranes and barrels.

6) You have a vivid machine-edged accuracy about the entire comportment of your vessels. In a way it is this, a cumulation of all that you're doing right, that I admire so much. In contrast everything I try has a rough, hand-hewn look. Even when I don't mind what I've done, which is rare enough, I still have to admit that its an example of something self-evidently hand made and somehow approximate , something amateur, something childish. Do you have an opinion of what this should be so? Surely, when looking though all the posted work from so many talented and practiced contributors, you know what I mean. Is there anything you'd add to this observation?

The culmination of all this really strikes me when I look at the planes. On a good day when the stars are aligned I [/i]may pull off an 'okay' plane, maybe two. After that there will be a couple of so-so examples and a runt to two. But the idea of creating a whole clutch that are identical and uniform in their quality eludes me … for now.

And … none of this was what I meant to say when I came on here. It's probably a good thing that more questions will have to wait for another day.

Cheers,
U.

[dragon6]

Okay, to heap any more praise on Tanner's work I'd have to start inventing words, so I don't know what to say except keep posting and don't wast time on all those little tank thingies, not even if your wife does them. It's clear that your duty lies in the betterment of naval modelling and the uplift of those around you and here on this forum, so that they too may pass from the realm of "yeh, it'll do" to "wow, that's amazing". (Or in the case of some, "oh dear," to "yeh, I suppose …")

Wot 'e said

Your shading/weathering/outlining in pin-wash form. I admit, I'm mystified.

U has mentioned this mysterious pin-wash before. If you would be so kind perhaps you could post the technique here

And … none of this was what I meant to say when I came on here. It's probably a good thing that more questions will have to wait for another day.

Cheers,
U.

[Donald M. Scheef]

GHQ's description of the new RMN21, CA Pola, is a bit misleading. It begins, "Four ships in the Zara class."

While it's true that there were four ships in the Zara class and that Pola was one of them, the appearance of Pola differed significantly from the other three. Especially the bridge structure and forward funnel were more similar to that of the Bolzano class than to that of the other Zara class ships.

For a proper model of the other three ships of the Zara class, GHQ's RMN4, CA Zara is the appropriate choice. The Bolzano class is represented by RMN15. Strictyly speaking, RMN21 represents only the single ship.

Having said this, I intend to purchase four of RMN21 for my hypothetical Italian navy to combat the four Algerie class cruisers I have purchased for the French.

Don S.