Calling all IJN Takao-class (高雄型) fans

[Pagodaphile]

I was wondering if anyone knows what the difference is with Pitroad's W-54 1942 and the W-57 1944 kits. Specifically I am trying to determine what was changed in the decks, as I am told that Flyhawk's new (FH # 700267) '42 PE deck won't fit the '44.

I have compared the Pitroad kit drawings online, but don't see the difference. The turret placement and superstructure at deck level appear the same.

[Dan K]

I could have sworn that I had a 1/350 Maya drawing, but I've no clue where it is. I have 1/400 scale Profile Morskie drawings for Chokai, Maya and Tone, but, I'd be hesitant to rely just on those.

I do have some scans that should be helpful. First is the Takao class as built dimesions linked to displacement, freeboard included. I did not scan for the rebuilt versions but note that the rebuilt Takao-Atago settle lower by >50cm across the board. I also observed from the as built data that Mogami-Mikuma had the greatest freeboard, followed by the Myokos, with the Takaos the lowest. The spread between the classes is > 1/2 meter at any point. Didn't look at the Tones.

More helpful will be the scans from the AOTS Takao. If you enlarge them, you should be able to read the overall heights and adjust accordingly. If you need me to email you the originals, let me know. HTH.

[Dan K]

I don't have the '44 kit but, aside from more AA, ammo storage boxes, and some crew rest quarters, there shouldn't be any difference. Unless they are differentiating pre and post May 1942, when the 12cm AA mounts were replaced by the 12.7cm mounts. Different splinter enclosures surrounding the mount area.

[Pagodaphile]

I don't have the '44 kit but, aside from more AA, ammo storage boxes, and some crew rest quarters, there shouldn't be any difference. Unless they are differentiating pre and post May 1942, when the 12cm AA mounts were replaced by the 12.7cm mounts. Different splinter enclosures surrounding the mount area.

Thanks Dan....

Changing over the splinter shields and ammo boxes sounds like a surmountable task. However, Sirpaul mentions an additional deck house near the rear funnel of the '44 Takao which might be the crews quarters you speak of, and I now suspect, could be the offending detail.

Unfortunately, while the Flyhawk designer was kind enough to point out a problem in using their new '42 deck on the '44 version, the specific problem was not mentioned. I would think that the superstructure footprint on the main deck level on the '44 version is different enough to rule out the PE deck. Did the new crew quarters extend down to the main deck level ?
FH '42 PE deck: http://flyhawkmodel.com/en/product.asp?code=700267

[Dan K]

The additional quarters were built on the HAG deck (one deck up) and possibly between the funnels like Maya. Not on the main deck. That's clearly a repalcement aft main deck for an original fit deck, thru 1938 for Takao & Atago.

It's interesting that PitRoad retained the original configuration aft main deck for all the versions, whereas Aoshima and Fujimi molded new hulls/parts.

I love FlyHawk stuff but, I'm not sure why they produce replacement main decks in PE for non-wooden decks. The kit versions are usually accurate enough. I'm curious - what's the attraction for you?

[sirpaul]

Yes Dan i agree. I find no use in stripping a deck down to use a pe one. Thanks for the info and line drawings. I will probably take the hull down another 2mm. Plus noticed in photo's the bulge should meet the waterline at the first turret. So i will take down to there and it should solve my dilema. I also built up the Tone's hull to compare. I'll be posting some pic's after i'm done.

[Dan K]

Looking forward to the pics. The AOTS book also has crossections for 20 or so frames, with waterline illustrated. I did not have time to scan.

[Pagodaphile]

I love FlyHawk stuff but, I'm not sure why they produce replacement main decks in PE for non-wooden decks. The kit versions are usually accurate enough. I'm curious - what's the attraction for you?

Mainly as an expedient I suppose. Quite often I remove molded on details, (ie hatches, ammo boxes, vents, reels, splinter shields etc) leaving a lot of carnage after all the snipping and sanding is done. I find it preferable to just reduce it all and start over with a crisp new surface and replacement details, than to obsess about damaging and remaking the surrounding areas on the deck.

Since it sounds like (except for removing small molded on details) the '42 PE
should mate up with the '44 deck, I'll give it a shot. Thanks to Paul and Dan for your input.

[Atma]

Fujimi's 1944 1/700 IJN Maya is out at December 2012:
http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10205886

[Atma]

Finnaly IJN Maya 1944 in 1/700 new tooled by Fujimi is out:
http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10205886

[Dan K]

Thx for posting, Atma. While I'm not about to buy one, I'd be most interested to examine one in the box. It looks very good. I wonder if they lowered the rims of the washing area on the rear main deck?

Most importantly, Fujimi does seem to have wised up to the the port side bulge problem of the Takao by issuing separate bulges to be glued onto the hull. That means they tooled an all new hull. Good for them. Could this kit actually, finally, be a flawless Fujimi release?

If one were interested in improving their late war Takao kit, this would be the logical kit bash option.

[Atma]

Most importantly, Fujimi does seem to have wised up to the the port side bulge problem of the Takao by issuing separate bulges to be glued onto the hull.

Also for a future release.
Anyway, IJN Maya replaced IJN Ise in my 1/700 top list as what is the best plastic kit at the moment out there, when you finnaly have your copy Dan, you will notice that the smaller parts(vents, bridge supports, etc) are all there and molded seperate.
As for perfect ? No they still got the training aiming devices on top of turrets, BUT the rangefinders are correct for a late war Imperial Heavy Cruiser(Enlarged hoods on number 2# and 3#(former number 4# turret) and shaved rangefinder on number 1#turret.

[Dan K]

Also for a future release

Well, that obviously means Chokai. The Omani blog has some nice close-ups of the sprues. The hull does not have sealed scuttles, making it applicable for an early war ship (Chokai without bulges, Atago with bulges.) The lower bridge is sharply molded in one piece, which means no seams along the lower bridge facing. Nice. The anchor hawsehole has an ovesized ring in it but, that is incredibly minor and can be shaved down.

See: http://mokehana.blog34.fc2.com/blog-entry-407.html

[Atma]

Dan you have to review it for MW site
I can provide a free sample, but without the box art(plain white).

Btw, did you notice that Fujimi provides reloads for the torpedoes. IJN Maya didnt had reloads after the conversion to AA cruiser. But Im not sure if the armored boxes remained in palce but they where empty. In the second case Fujimi is wright.

[Dan K]

did you notice that Fujimi provides reloads for the torpedoes. IJN Maya didnt had reloads after the conversion to AA cruiser. But Im not sure if the armored boxes remained in palce but they where empty.

I didn't check the instructions or photos that deeply. As per L&W, p.329, she did not carry reloads or reload equipment. I'm not sure if that means the stowage bays, or the actual rails and overhead gantries.

A review, huh? You know, I just might be up for that. I certainly am curious. If you want to contact me via PM or email, we can work it out. Thx.

[sirpaul]

Does anyone know the locations where they stored lumber for repairs?

[Dan K]

Generally, around and between the funnels. It's going to vary a bit by ship and time period.

[Vladi]

Is it ok that the new Fujimi Maya has open hull scuttles? I think these should be plated over in her 1944 config.

[Guest]

Generally, around and between the funnels. It's going to vary a bit by ship and time period.

Thanks Dan. I figured around the funnels. I seen some there in some photos. I also seen some on the boat deck and some around the mainmast on the aircraft deck. I thought the IJN built racks for the lumber in some cases as "field mods".

[Dan K]

That is correct. It's like their Zuikaku kit; each is sharing a hull with another variant so, you are responsible for the covers.