"Splendid cats: Beatty's battle cruisers in 1/6k" Topic

I have finally got my Great War project started and have painted up HMS Lion and the 1st Battle Cruiser Squadron (Hallmark 1:6000 ships). Thought you might like to see them.

I'm pretty much sold on 1:6000 for capital ship actions now due to the small size making the ground scale compression less obvious. I have discarded the Hallmark base in favour of larger, thicker bases to make them easier to handle though – not a massive issue for battle cruisers, but it will definitely help with the destroyers.

Names are diptychs using white letraset washed over using the same colour as the base. Letraset's a beggar to use – the wrong bits rub off where you don't want them and trying to line them up is virtually impossible.

Ln=Lion, PR=Princess Royal, QM=Queen Mary, Tg=Tiger.

Nick

very nice -like the way you identify them – simple yet effective

A nice job on some of the most beautiful warships ever built, too bad they looked better than they performed.

Excellent Work!

If you can find a floor to play on, 1 foot = 1 nautical mile is 1:6076 scale.

Lovely!

Very nice work.

Nice job, as usual. If one must base ships, your treatment is the best I have seen so far, in any scale. (And of course, your bases match your playing surface).

Now how are you going to handle the DDs? Are you going to remove them from their cast-on bases, or retain those and attempt to get a similar look somehow?

Mark H.

Cheers guys, really appreciate the comments.

To be honest the paint job is a simple dark wash and light grey highlights – it's the quality of the castings that makes them look nice!

For the bases I was going for the fridge magnet look ;-)

Seriously the bases are for practical reasons as these ships need something to make them easier to handle. I do intend to remove the DDs from their bases so they match. They do match the playing surface (not the one in the photos – that's a copy of Jane's Fighting Ships of WW1!) but the blue leatherette I use and I know what you mean – if bases don't match then it does ruin the effect.

To be honest I'd prefer not to have names, but I have to for practical reasons with – hopefully in the future – lots of similar looking ships.

And Jericho… oh, yes! But no – not in my house – too small!

Nick

Don't forget this, from an earlier thread:

Procedure for removing Figurehead 1:6000 DDs from their bases. Let me know if pictures are needed; hopefully this is understandable without them:

1) Using a small pair of flush-cut rail nippers (model railroad tool; available from Micro-Mark), I clip the base from around the model hull. Don't let the nippers touch the hull during this step, which is merely intended to remove excess material to make filing-down easier. It is not intended to produce a final hull-side surface.

2) (Optional) As with all my Figurehead models, I then adjust the sheer line of the hull to approximate the desired final shape, mostly by careful bending. FYI, the sheer line is the edge of the weather deck of the hull when viewed from the side; the weather deck includes the forecastle deck at the bow, the quarterdeck at the stern, and the connecting deck amidships. Often models will be bent during the molding process, or the original master may have had an exaggerated sheer forward or aft. I may also clean up the casting and adjust the superstructure shape as desired, using small hobby files / cutters. This step needs to be performed before the bottom of the hull is filed down.

3) The resulting clipped (and adjusted) hull is then filed down to (just short of) the desired waterline using a sharp, small-to-medium-sized metal file (hardware store) clamped to my workbench. The model is held in the fingers, and moved against the clamped, stationary file. One needs file cleaners for this step. 2 kinds I use are a course one with stiff angled mild steel bristles, and a fine one with brass bristles which looks like a large toothbrush (Micro-Mark). During the filing process, I periodically place the model on a small flat surface, hold it up to eye-level, and examine it from all sides. If this is not done, the model's final waterline will be "tilted", and it will look as if it is sinking (not desirable).

4) The sides of the hull are then cleaned up using a needle file (Micro-Mark). If needed, the flare and rake of the bow (and stern) can be adjusted at this stage. Note that the lower part of the final hull shape may well be metal which was originally part of the base. FYI, flare is the outward slope of the bows of the hull when viewed in section, and rake is the angle of the bow when the hull is viewed from the side. File cleaners are needed for this step also, and sometimes an old exacto-blade is needed to gently remove a stubborn piece of metal from the file.

5) The model is them brought down to the final waterline, using the same procedures as in step 3. Carefully remove any metal burr from around the bottom edge of the hull with a fingernail, or the back of an exacto blade.

This relatively time-consuming procedure is why I (and possibly others) convinced Steve of Hallmark to cast the modern Figurehead DDs separately from their bases.

The few special tools mentioned above can be purchased from Micro-Mark on the Internet, and are useful for other model-making purposes.

Cheers Mark – you've just saved me having to scroll back through the threads to find this! I'd read it before and was going to go back for it when doing the DDs.

Nick

Rather than remove the figurehead DD bases, I attempt to hide them on the division base by filling around them with Liquitex super heavy gel:

Close up, the original bases still poke out, but that is less noticeable on the game table.

Cheers NCC – they do look good! I have considered mounted by divisions for DDs but worry I might change my mind later. My intention for this project is GQ2 with the 'fleet action' amendments. If I ever get too many ships for GQ to handle I'll use '15 minute Jutland'. Either would work fine with multiple DDs on one base

Another idea is to use 1 DD model to represent the location of 2 DDs. The SDS can either be a combined one for 2 DDs, or 2 separate SDSs. That's my current plan for Jutland in 1/6000. Cruisers and up would be individual models.

We also must consider the tradeoff between model and ground scale WRT inter-ship-model intervals. I think NCC1717's are too close together, from a visual perspective. My personal compromise is any ship closer than 1" apart must dice for collision. Admittedly, can put ships farther apart than historically, depending on ground scale. This mostly matters when you have a large number of battleships (Jutland), and IMHO can be discounted otherwise. Such dispersion reduces your ability to concentrate fire from a long battleline. However, in WWI, funnel smoke would probably prevent that degree of concentration anyway. FWIW…

MH

I've been wondering about this issue of how close ships are. Here's a link to a documentary on Jutland:

YouTube link

At 16:29 there's a clip of a destroyer flotilla overhauling a capital ship. They seem to steaming at some speed and are quite close together. Looking at this I reckon I'd be quite happy to follow NCC1717's example of multi-based DDs/TBDs.

From my reading, DDs were at about 200-300 yard intervals when steaming in line. Capital ships steamed at about 500 yard intervals.

B