The Ship Model Forum

[quote="Dan K"]But there would have been no hiragana writing on the hull during wartime. It was painted out at the start of hostilities, then never renewed.[/quote]

The same for hull numbers? Ok, Thanks.

But there would have been no hiragana writing on the hull during wartime. It was painted out at the start of hostilities, then never renewed.

[quote="Dan K"]Why not just buy the Asashio kit for a '42 fit? https://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10556968[/quote]

Thanks for the feedback. But I would prefer an actual [i]Kasumi[/i] kit since it would have the [i]hiragana/katakana[/i] decals for the ship in question for both the starboard/port sides of the ship.

It's not like the Skywave [i]Kagero[/i] 1/700 kit which has multiple hull number decals to enable to most ships in that class to be built.

Why not just buy the Asashio kit for a '42 fit? https://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10556968

[quote="Dan K"]Kasumi is a late war fit, April 1945: https://www.1999.co.jp/eng/image/10531238[/quote]

Thank you Dan. I guess I have to research which AA positions etc I have to remove in order to backdate it to Midway or Indian Ocean 1942.

Kasumi is a late war fit, April 1945: https://www.1999.co.jp/eng/image/10531238

Hello Dan K and all,

Does anyone know if the new [url=https://www.ebay.ca/itm/Hasegawa-49466-1-700-IJN-Kasumi-Neu/392733433116?hash=item5b70bc9d1c:g:Y~YAAOSwXMZedIEw]1/700 Hasegawa [i]Asashio[/i] #49466 re-box[/url] is early war fit, or late war fit?

The box cover and listing description doesn't say the year depicted, unlike other listings.

Thanks to anyone who may know.

Also, as expected, Hasgawa has announced it's new late war version, as Kasumi. To be released at the Shizuoka show in May. (Image courtesy of HobbySearch Japan.)

You are most welcome, Greg. :smallsmile:

Regarding the breakwater, it did not extend the full width of the deck, if it even existed at all. I'm actually not positive about that. Available photographs are unclear on the actual, full shape. It was probably no wider than the turret, which was typcial of the previous classes.

The two rectangles are access hatches. The treading on them may be conjecture.

[quote] Thanks again for the great write-up and pics; I always enjoy your historical overviews and personal insights.[/quote]

Thank you. I like to put the ships in their proper context. I hope it helps to get a sense of how a design fitted into their scheme of things.

[quote]From the pictures it appears there is a significant difference in hull width, especially aft.[/quote]

I would agree. I can't say that I sat with a micrometer and ruler and compared it to plans, but I think the Hasegawa kit is closer to the reality.

Thanks for posting the detailed review of the new Hasagawa Asashio, Dan. It looks great! (I just ordered this and the new Yugumo for my stash.) I had a couple kit-specific questions. Regarding the heavily-molded breakwater on the foredeck: did the breakwater actually extend across the entire width of the deck, or was this just a compromise to the manner in which the part was manufactured? (Wondering if it's best to remove and replace this feature entirely?) For the part containing the two forward torpedo reloads: there are two small rectangular features directly in front of the reload bays which are covered with treading: are these hatches or skylights? Thanks again for the great write-up and pics; I always enjoy your historical overviews and personal insights.

From the pictures it appears there is a significant difference in hull width, especially aft.

In conjunction with the review of the new Hasegawa Asashio class kit ( http://www.modelwarships.com/reviews/ships/ijn/dd/Asashio-700-hsg/index.htm ), here are some comparison views between it and the older Pit-Road kit:

I believe so. I only have the Asashio kit so far (expect a review next month), but examining the Minegumo kit piece layout leads me to believe that components of mid and late war versions are there as well. I see much the same with the Hayanami kit (review in 2-3 months). This suggests that Hasegawa will eventually release new boxings in late war fit for both, though you may not have to wait if I am correct. At least on the Asashios; the Yugumo do require a different bridge form (in the back) which is not available with the Hayanami kit.

Thanks for the quick response, Dan. I would like to purchase each of the new Hasagawa DD releases and didn't want to make any obvious errors by ascribing incorrect features to whichever ship I choose to model. It looks like Asashio or Minegumo could be used to build any class member as long as it is the correct year.

Hi, Greg .

Unfortunately, there is virtually no information on which shipyards may have installed the degaussing cables on the Asashios, nor as to whether or not there are variations between ships. In fact, AFAIK, there is only one photo of the class members that is clear enough to show the cable, that of Arare in April, 1942.

The aft end is indistinct, but certainly the forward half matches what Hasegawa has molded for its new Asashios. In the absence of any other information (though I do have one other, 2nd hand source that I will check tonite), I guess we can only assume that this is correct. :scratch:

While I don't know exactly what Hasegawa used as a template for Minegumo's change of platform, I will note that: 1) other DDs that entered the yards in late 1942 for repair began to receive upgraded AA fits, 2) Minegumo spent 3 months under repair from bomb near misses in Oct, 1942, not departing Yokosuka until the beginning of Feb, 1943, & 3) the revised platform matches schematics for Yamagumo and Michishio in June 1944, though they have slight indents at the leading edge of the platform. This is a long winded way of saying it's probably correct, though adding the indent couldn't hurt. My opinion.

HTH,
Dan

Hi Dan. I've been following your comments regarding Hasagawa's new 1/700 Yugumo release and the different degaussing cable patterns. Does the degaussing cable on the new 1/700 Asahio from Hasagawa align to a specific shipyard also? Additionally, is the different AA platform on the Minegumo release due to upgraded AA suite or just builder's fancy? :

For those of you not closely following the Paul Allen/ MV Petrel Expedition to Surigao Strait, they have found what they believe to be Asagumo, one of three Asashio class sunk that day, along with Yamagumo and Michishio. Her bridge is in surprisingly fine condition.

And, something for IJN DD aficionados to consider: look at her bridge face; completely smooth, no metal splinter shielding or even bolts for holding on that type shielding. And she was in late war fit.

This tells me that not all the late war ships necessarily had the shielding around their bridge. I do imagine she probably had rope hawsers mounted up high for protection, but they would have obviously rotted away. Very interesting detail, to me.

I don't have one of these yet, but having examined it as best I can online, it certainly looks to be a very nice kit, and improved over the older Pit-Road version. However, there does appear to be one obvious error. The kit(s) utilize the wrong main gun director atop the bridge.

Apparently, a couple of sprues from the new Yugumo class kits have been carried over to his class because of the commonality of weapons and fittings. Unfortunately, those sprues only carry the director for Yugumo class. It appears that a proper version for the Asashio type (which was also common to the rebuilt Fubuki Type III, Shiratsuyu and Kagero classes) was not created for this kit.

Fortunately, there are replacement alternatives. Obviously, one can use the director from one of the aforementioned kits, or the older Pit-Road E-10 equipment set (carried with almost every one of those Pit-Road version kits) has both the proper director as well as the later type for the Yugumos. I believe that would be part B27 on that sprue.

The new tool Asashio has just been released. More pics here: http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/image/10486726

First post in this thread revamped, with info on the class, list of available kits and list of gallery entries, courtesy of Dan Kaplan(san).