The Ship Model Forum

by **Vlad** » Thu Jul 22, 2021 6:15 am

MartinJQuinn wrote: It was due to the TONS of flash and the poor fit. It's a shelf queen now.

Ouch, that doesn't sound great, thanks for letting me know!

Can you confirm the extent of the parts for the hangar decks?

by **MartinJQuinn** » Wed Jul 21, 2021 7:01 pm

Dan K wrote:IIRC, Martin Quinn was not thrilled with his Pit-Road build, but that might have been due more to the camo decals rather than its fit.

It was due to the TONS of flash and the poor fit. It's a shelf queen now.

by **Vlad** » Sat Jul 17, 2021 9:43 am

Dan K wrote:If nothing else, the Aoshima kit comes with a hangar deck, which was a big plus to me.

The Pit-road kit also comes with both levels of the hangar (upper full length, tubs for the lower). The engineering is different to Aoshima but the end result looks equivalent to me, at least from browsing the instructions. The hangar is precisely the reason I'm looking at these kits, the Fujimi doesn't interest me.

I've been hunting pictures of built models of the Pit-road and Aoshima, but they're either drowned in upgrades or not closely photographed, so it's hard to compare e.g. the molding quality of raised details.

by **Dan K** » Sat Jul 17, 2021 9:11 am

I can't give an objective answer, as I sold off my Pit-road kit when I purchased the Aoshima kit. If nothing else, the Aoshima kit comes with a hangar deck, which was a big plus to me.

IIRC, Martin Quinn was not thrilled with his Pit-Road build, but that might have been due more to the camo decals rather than its fit.

FWIW, not Aoshima but a comparison of the Fujimi vs Pitroad kits here: viewtopic.php?f=60&t=157028

by **Vlad** » Fri Jul 16, 2021 1:32 pm

What's the verdict on Aoshima vs Skywave for their latest generation Unryu class kits?

by **Dan K** » Fri Mar 20, 2020 7:32 am

That may or may not be true. The postwar US NavTech reports weren't that impressed with the covering, but that was in the age of prop aircraft. It's possible that the USN took a page from the IJN in this instance, or just re-invented the wheel on their own. Impossible to say.

by **DennisJP** » Thu Mar 19, 2020 5:30 pm

gscott wrote:Very interesting reasoning, Dan. I'm firmly in the camp that Taiho did have a wooden deck. It certainly would be another great discovery if somehow you were able to put together enough evidence to support your theory on Unryu (I'm rooting for you). I guess the eventual lack of deck material would have occurred sometime between Taiho and Shinano's completion dates. Did the appearance of the latex deck material coincide with the IJN's adaptation of the green camoflage scheme for all carriers? Just wondering if Unryu might have been completed with standard gray hull and wood deck before a decision was reached to entirely repaint her? Also, were there any differences in the camoflage patterns applied to the flight decks of the three completed Unryus?

(As an aside, does anyone else find it somewhat absurd that IJN applied those merchantile/oiler silhouettes to the sides of the carriers, as somehow US aircraft and submarines WOULDN'T attack them!?)

-Greg

Also when you look at the coverings for post refit Essex CV's the Latex flight Deck coating was put on over the wood on the flight deck. I saw this on Bennington when I helped rig her for tow to be scrapped. I believe this latex coating in the same coating Japan used for their CV's and the US learned about it during the post war period and tried it out. Of course latter moving to NONSKID. Same surface they use today.

by **marijn van gils** » Thu Mar 19, 2020 6:58 am

thebunkerparodie wrote:how hard is it to build the fujimi unryu class kit (I want to use one for one of the unbuilt unryu)

I built the Fujimi kit (late version). I think it is excellent!
The moulding quality is top notch and the detail is very fine. I compared it to many photo's of Amagi and it turned out very accurate. The things I needed to correct were details that differed between the two sisters, so I would say the kit is as accurate for Unryu as it gets.
I find it hard to say how difficult it is to build, because this depends on what you find difficult. It has many small parts, but the engineering is excellent.

by **Dan K** » Fri Mar 13, 2020 7:03 am

Unryu was originally authorized under the Fifth Naval Armaments Supplement Program of 1941: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modified_ ... _Programme

In the wake of the Midway disaster, those plans were recast to include the other sisters (Modified 5th Naval Armaments Supplement Programme):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modified_ ... _Programme

by **thebunkerparodie** » Thu Mar 12, 2020 8:30 am

it seem that 16 ship were considered,got to wonder were that 15 come from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unry%C5%A ... ft_carrier

by **thebunkerparodie** » Tue Mar 10, 2020 2:47 pm

OK,also I'm going to bought the aoshima amagi for one of the unbuilt unryu hull (n�5002)

by **Dan K** » Tue Mar 10, 2020 11:43 am

I don't have the new Fujimi kit (only the new Aoshima version) but I would think it pretty straightforward.

The Ikoma would have differed visually only in that her funnels would have been spaced further apart (probably just the rear one)to reflect reorganized machinery.

by **thebunkerparodie** » Tue Mar 10, 2020 3:44 am

how hard is it to build the fujimi unryu class kit (I want to use one for one of the unbuilt unryu) ,is this accurate?
https://www.deviantart.com/dawley/art/I ... a-79932225

by **marijn van gils** » Fri Jun 02, 2017 12:33 pm

That clears that up too�

Many thanks Dan!

Cheers,

Marijn

by **Dan K** » Fri Jun 02, 2017 7:57 am

Seems like a typo. A second Type 13 was usually mounted on the port, forward aerial mast, facing aft. Katsuragi had one. Amagi's is probably buried in the mud.

by **marijn van gils** » Fri Jun 02, 2017 2:23 am

Many thanks Dan!

That's clearly the one, so type 13 it is indeed!

Dan K wrote:For Amagi, I'm guessing it occurred during her March 1945 dockyard visit.

That would be quite likely indeed I think. This shot of her being attacked at 19 March vaguely shows something spiky on top of the top rear of the island, with a smaller item just in front of it. That might be already the type 13 and type 22 in place. The resolution is of course insufficient to be sure, but it doesn't look like type 21 to me�

One more thought about her radars:
The wiki-page on Amagi states that the other type 13 was located 'on the aft starboard retractable radio mast'.
The photo below doesn't show any trace of it however. Maybe it was detached after (or closely before?) her sinking, and maybe the antennae on top of her island were too? Or maybe it was removed during the march refit and replaced by a new antenna on top of the island? Or maybe they all fell down due to the bombings (but that seems a bit unlikely to me)? Or maybe the wiki page is simply incorrect on this point (imagine that!

)?
Any thoughts?

Cheers,

Marijn

by **Dan K** » Thu Jun 01, 2017 11:54 am

There were many variants on all models of radars. ALmost impossible to track them all.

by **marijn van gils** » Wed May 31, 2017 6:32 am

Thanks Dan! And fast as usual!

I only wonder whether the drawer of that illustration hasn't been a bit fast with interpreting it as a 'regular' type 13 antenna:
- On the photo I posted of Katsuragi, the antenna is visible next to the type 13 on her mainmast, and they look rather different in detail.
- Also, it has a pyramidal base which isn't present on the illustration. That base was also not there when Amagi had it's type 21, so it seems specific for the new antenna.
- The 'spike' which remained on Amagi is much shorter than the type 13 on her mainmast (see pic with red circle). But of course I don't know whether this 'spike' ran all the way to the top of the antenna or not...

Maybe it is a type 13 radar indeed, but with a later type of antenna (maybe smaller and cheaper?)?

ijnfleetadmiral wrote:Not to mention that towards the end of the war, a lot of the ships were being stripped of AA guns and radar sets for use elsewhere on the mainland. Not a far stretch to consider that this applied to Amagi.

That would be possible indeed. The type 13 on her mainmast was still present after capsizing, making it a bit strange that the radar antenna on the island would be missing due to damage.

Cheers,

Marijn

by **ijnfleetadmiral** » Wed May 31, 2017 4:54 am

Not to mention that towards the end of the war, a lot of the ships were being stripped of AA guns and radar sets for use elsewhere on the mainland. Not a far stretch to consider that this applied to Amagi.

by **Dan K** » Tue May 30, 2017 7:55 pm

Yeah, both Amagi and Katsuragi had their Type 21 radars replaced by type 13s, and, for a while, a Type 22 as well. For Amagi, I'm guessing it occurred during her March 1945 dockyard visit.

The Ship Model Forum

Calling all Unryu-class (雲龍) fans

Post a reply

Expand view Topic review: Calling all Unryu-class (雲龍) fans

Re: Calling all IJN Unryu (??) class fans

Re: Calling all IJN Unryu (??) class fans

Re: Calling all IJN Unryu (??) class fans

Re: Calling all IJN Unryu (??) class fans

Re: Calling all IJN Unryu (??) class fans

Re: Calling all IJN Unryu Class CV fans

Re: Calling all IJN Unryu Class CV Fans

Re: Calling all IJN Unryu Class CV fans

Re: Calling all IJN Unryu Class CV fans

Re: Calling all IJN Unryu Class CV fans

Re: Calling all IJN Unryu Class CV fans

Re: Calling all IJN Unryu Class CV fans

Re: Calling all IJN Unryu Class CV fans

Re: Calling all IJN Unryu Class CV fans

Re: Calling all IJN Unryu Class CV fans

Re: Calling all IJN Unryu Class CV fans

Re: Calling all IJN Unryu Class CV fans

Re: Calling all IJN Unryu Class CV fans

Re: Calling all IJN Unryu Class CV fans

Re: Calling all IJN Unryu Class CV fans