This is Mirage’s excellent 1/400 four-stacker destroyer kit of USS Ward. Famous for sinking a Japanese mini-sub at Pearl Harbor on the morning of the attack that brought the US into WW2, she is instead depicted here as she appeared at the very beginning of her career, shortly after her launch in 1918 during WW1.
Backdating the kit to the earlier configuration of these vessels required conversion to an open (and un-armored) bridge with much-reduced searchlight platform on top, opening the midships galley area, and reducing the size of the aft deckhouse. In addition, the aft 4” gun was originally mounted (in a very wet position) on the fantail just forward of the depth charge racks. Instead, the aft deckhouse roof supported a Y-gun depth charge thrower for anti-submarine work (along with ready racks and handling boom for the depth charges), and a small searchlight platform, as well as the rear mast and emergency steering position—a lot going on in a small area on these always-crowded ships.
The two in-progress shots included here give a good idea of the changes and additions required. I also made use of parts of the excellent GMM etch set for these kits. All rigging was stretched sprue applied with white glue.
Though the Ward in her impressive WW1 “dazzle” camouflage was pretty well photographed during her sea trials in August 1918, several details of her fittings and the camouflage scheme itself were modified slightly as time went on. Many of my interpolations were “best gussses.” One particular detail I missed was cutting back the midships gun platform far enough (it actually angled back behind the number 2 funnel). Naturally, I didn’t see a clear (-ish) photograph of this until it was too late to go back and change it. I also wimped out and left the midships sides solid, depicting the later-applied canvas covers that were stretched over the many open areas (and then carefully camouflaged) on these WW1-era Wickes-class ships. I depicted these covered areas on both the midships and bridge structures by attaching lengths of PE railing over the solid plastic, the covering with a thick layer of white glue to simulate the canvas. Painted up, they do a decent effect.
Paints are “eyeball” mixes of Tamiya acrylics, masked with Tamiya yellow tape.
That is one beautiful job both building and painting! Thanks for posting it. I might have missed it, but what brand of PE did you use and was it a set or a mix and match from left over PE?
Outstanding model. Especially the paint job. And I really like the American flag base.
I’ve long contended that the vast majority of warships looked best in their “as built” configurations. (I can think of a few exceptions - the Essex-class carriers for example. And I thought the Enterprise looked better without the “beehive.”) Without those four stacks, those old WWI destroyers just didn’t look right.
Thanks gentlemen, one and all, for your comments. They are much appreciated.
I’ve got both the WEM and Gold Medal Models PE sets, but the WEM one is better suited to the lend-lease versions operated by the Royal Navy during WW2. I used mostly the GMM version for this kit, with a few additions (hatches, firehoses and such) from some Tom’s Modelworks generic sets for the scale.
As to the base, I’ve settled on this style for all my smaller-scale ship models, for everything from the Civil War era up to modern vessels. It’s a simple but sort of elegant base style to do (decals made up and printed from my computer for whatever historical-era national flag is required), and it gives a nice uniformity of look to my collection.
I agree with your observation that most ships look best in their “as built” configurations. One group of ships that I would respectfully include in your list of exceptions would be the American dreadnoughts in their 1930’s rebuild appearances.
Agreed. I also think the British Queen Elizabeth-class battleships looked imposing in the twenties and thirties, with their trunked funnels. But the block-like superstructuctures most of them had by WWII made them look ugly to my eye.
It’s pretty straightforward. You can create your own artwork or modify suitable internet images in whatever drawing or art program strikes your fancy—I generally go for the simple approach and use MS Paint, which is pretty “bare bones” as such utilities go, but fairly intuitive and versatile. Once I’ve got the image the way I like it, I size it to the project using Open Office, then print it out on my inkjet printer.
I’ve always had excellent luck using Bare-Metal Foil’s Experts Choice decal paper. It comes in clear or white, just use whichever is best-suited to the images you’re doing.
Different printers’ inks seem to have different characteristics, some of which seem better suited to decal printing than others. On the whole I’ve had great luck over the years using just the HP printers I have on hand, but there’s generally a “dial in” as to which printer and paper settings will give the best results, so some practice is usually required to get things the way you’re happy with them.
A useful tip–both for the aforementioned practice, and for actual printing of projects–is to use smaller sections of the decal paper, rather than the entire sheet. I’ll generally print a test-run on regular paper to confirm size and appearance, then tape a small section of decal paper over that printed image and run it through again. It saves a lot of good decal paper, and makes it easier to do small runs for small projects, rather than having to save up your project images until there’s enough for a full sheet.
Last step is to let the printed decal dry thoroughly, then spray it with a protective coat. I use Testors spray-can Decal Bonder, which gives a nice flexible coating and causes very little ink-run even if sprayed a little too heavily. Once the protective coat is dry the decal can be used or stored. On occasions I’ve made up decals years in advance, stored them in zip-lock bags, and had them work perfectly when ready to be applied.
I’ve probably forgotten something obvious, but that covers the main points. Any other questions, I’ll be happy to fill in if I can.
When I think of decals I think of soaking them in water and then applying them to the model. However, I would imaging that decals printed at home would run badly if soaked in water. Am I missing something?
One thing though. You need to cut the decals around the edge of the image because the top coat is continuous, not a stencil of the image like most commercial decals.
