The Ship Model Forum

Expensive for an IJN cruiser or expensive for whateveryouwant?
I wouldn't say they are beautiful; yes, up to scale, not more. Similar PE items from say Voyager are more refined and slim; thin details and sharp edges I think are more preferable in 1/700 scale.

Dan was referring to the dual 5", not the 25mm.

_________________
De quoi s'agit-il?

I am awfully sorry; does it mean Dan and you approve those notorious dual 5" guns?

The ones in the new Finemolds set? I'm not sure what you don't like about them: http://www.finemolds.co.jp/WA/WA13,14.html

Sure, PE is finer, but if you want a simple injection plastic piece, these are quite well-done. And if it's a 3D barrel that you're wanting for the 25mm, PE won't do.

_________________
De quoi s'agit-il?

I think the guns’ part of the set is good enough, while the “surroundings” are pretty ugly: these thick, overscale details make the mounting look like a toad.

Timmy is right, I'm referring to the new 12.7cm HA mounts from Finemolds but, I think both those and their 25mm mounts to be exceptional, particularly for injection molding.

I prefer the FineMolds 25mm over the PE versions that I've seen, As Timmy said, the 3D aspect really enhances it. My preferences.

My preference among "simple plastic injection pieces" of 12.7cm mounts is the Pit-Road version. It is also not perfect, but there are less ugly thick details there.
As we all know, the PE versions of 25mm guns are not 2D -- strictly speaking. Should I prefer cylindrical 100mm barrels emulating 25mm ones at the expence of realistic mounting details, I would definitely choose "nanodreads".

Fine Molds plastic 1/700 12,7 cm AA are superb compared to anything plastic in the market.

Can anyone please let me know to what extent the 1/700 Aoshima Soryu 1942 (Midway) deck markings are correct (http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/image/10107388t2/60/2)? These seem to me to match what I can be see at the B-17 photo of her (http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/images/f000001/f004845.jpg), but I have seen other interpretations, too (e.g. John Parshall's in Shattered sword).

Also any hints on corrections needed to her Midway config would be much helpful, e.g. the layout of her degaussing cable etc. Thanks!

How do you feel that the Aoshima kit markings differ from Parshall's? I'm not clear on the discrepancies.

Exact location of the degaussing cable is going to be difficult as I am not aware of any photo or official plan with this detail. There are several artistic imressions and, they are going to be as good as any. I would let common sense and the patterns as used on the Shokakus and the Hiyos act as a basic guide. FWIW.

Hi Dan,
sorry I have not been more specific about the deck markings - I attach a page photo from the Shattered sword (sorry for the low quality) below. There are quite a few differences between this drawing and Aoshima decals (http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/image/10107388t2/60/2) - white background around hinomaru vs. just white outline, hinomaru (and also aft circle) not intersected/intersected by longitudal lines, distance between longitudal lines, depth of the red-white striped area aft, kana symbol aft yes/no etc.
Thanks for your comment on the degaussing cable, too!

Hey Vladi,

Thanks for writing, and I figured I'd just answer here, so that everybody could see it. It's been a number of years, obviously, since I did those drawings, and it's hard to remember the exact decision-making process around what to draw. I consulted a lot of different drawings from various Japanese publications as well--and there were inconsistencies between them, of course. Also, the photographic record for Soryu is particularly bad, and so there is undoubtedly going to be some guesswork involved. However, after quickly reviewing the images you sent, I have a couple of comments. First, I think my drawing is wrong in how it shows the aft deck markings. As you noted, the photograph of Soryu taken from the B-17s seems to show the dashed lines going all the way to the aft fantail, and I didn't do that. So I think the decal is closer to the mark in that respect. However, I do own an actual hardcopy print of the B-17 photo in question. It's hard to make out, but as I look at the photo, it seems to me that one can faintly detect that the white surrounding the hinormaru does, indeed, go all the way to the deck edges, as shown in my illustration. So, I think the decal is wrong in that respect, and my drawing is right. So, you get the worst of both worlds--errors on both sides! ;-) Anyway, I hope that's helpful, and good luck on your kit!

Best Wishes,

-jon parshall-

Hi Jon,

thanks a lot for your fast response! It really seems difficult to try to get things "right" in case of Soryu as the evidence is lacking. I am not really concentrating on smaller details as I am building kits just for my pleasure and my patience has its limits but the deck markings are quite noticeable detail and after I noticed the differences... Can you please by chance have one more look into your hardcopy B-17 photo and focus at:

1. the distance between the dashed lines and the center line - in your drawing these lines seem to be much farther apart of each other most of their lenght and the starboard line has a "jump" approx. at the first funnel position getting suddenly closer to the center thant the port line

2. if these three lines actually intersect the hinomaru and the aft circle or not? This is something I cannot judge from any of my copies of the B-17 photo

Thanks!

Vladi

I think it's great that Jon took a moment to respond.

Regarding the deguassing cable, I think the new box art gives as good an idea of placement as anything else, at least for the starboard side. Staff Yu's model, which opened this thread, seems pretty good on placement as well.

Vladi,

You can see an overhead picture of Soryu here:

http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/2011/08/world-war-ii-battle-of-midway-and-the-aleutian-campaign/100137/

A higher resolution photo can be obtained by performing an online search of Soryu Midway photos.

Ed

As I think back, my sense is that the deck markings are from an earlier iteration of Soryu's deck markings, like maybe at the time of her commissioning. This drawing was developed from an earlier drawing that I did for Mark Peattie's "Sunburst", and I most likely simply carried them over from that. Oops. This is particularly aggravating, since I *did* use the photographic record to correct some of the details on Soryu's *profile* views (particularly her port quarter, iirc), but apparently didn't have the good sense to double check the *deck markings* against the B-17 photos. Argh.

In any case, as I look at the B-17 photo, it is clear that all three lines intersect the hinomaru, and seem to continue all the way to the fantail. There does not appear to be a "jog" in the deck lines at all near the funnel. In other words, I'm not too happy with my drawing right at the moment, despite my best efforts five years ago. ;-/

Cheers,

-jon-

Dear Jon,

many thanks for your reply, I really highly appreciate your honesty and professionalism! Little mistakes and overlookings simply happen, even in such a great work like your Shattered sword. Once again thanks for this wonderful book, I hope there will be more in the future.
I checked several other versions of the B-17 photo on the internet (thanks for pointing that out, Ed!) and even after enlargement I cannot tell if the Soryu's Hinomaru has been applied over a white background extending to the deck edge - but it may as well just be high reflection of the entire (steel) bow portion of the deck as most of that part is extremely light on the photo with only the Hinomaru and the front barrier standing out. I tend to rely on your observation above as this is exactly such subtle difference that may easily disappear during scanning. Once again - many thanks for your help!

Vladi

Jon will probably remember this. Over on the j-ships board around the time that Shattered Sword was published, Bill Sommerville posted a previously unknown USAAF photo taken of Soryu at Midway (also from the B-17s, I think). Ed Low matched up the image with the then current graphic. Below.

Hey guys,

i hope this is the right forum section to ask my question.

Anyway, im planning to buy all necessary parts for a complete 1/700 Soryu build. Its going to be a gift for my Dad, who is a huge fan of the IJN during WW2.

So far i found:

Aoshima IJN Soryu 1942 #046234
1/700 Flyhawk Photo Etch Soryu Aircraft Carrier Super Set
1/700 Flyhawk Photo Etch WWII Soryu Flight Deck for Aoshima
FineMolds Type 89 12.7cm AA Gun
FineMolds Type 96 25mm A-A Guns
Flyhawk 1/700 IJN Type93 13.2mm AA guns sets

Im not a big fan of plastic guns, but i read they are the best for 1/700. Any other idas for the guns?
And what else do i need for a complete Soryu?

Thanks in advance!

Phil

This one:
http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10125120
and you are fine, best early war aircraftcarrier based planes in 1/700