The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Tue Aug 21, 2018 8:25 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 779 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 ... 39  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Jul 15, 2017 8:15 pm 
Online

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 10:56 am
Posts: 6413
Location: New York City
Quote:
Didn't you say in another thread that the Fujimi Takao had some errors that the Atago kit corrected?


I did.

Quote:
It seems they re-tooled most of the kit, not just tweaked a few details.


Seems that way. Clearly, the Flyhawk PE was produced before the other versions were released.


Sadly, it's an unfortunate development for you. We do need to add this information to the CASF thread.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Jul 16, 2017 3:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:25 pm
Posts: 1328
Location: England
Hi all!

Quick warning regarding the Fujimi 1/700 Takao class kits. I noticed the other day while building my Fujimi 1/700 Atago that the tooling is significantly different to their Takao kit, especially the shape and parts breakdown of the shelter deck and aircraft handling deck. How did I notice? Well... the Flyhawk PE set, designed for the Fujimi Takao kit, that I bought assuming the Atago kit had parts commonality, doesn't fit at all! I made a more detailed post and have asked a mod to merge it here.

_________________
Vlad


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Jul 16, 2017 4:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:25 pm
Posts: 1328
Location: England
:mad_1:

Well, hope the information is useful to someone else.

My plan A is to carry on without the big mis-fitting parts. Plan B is to build Atago OOB and buy the Takao kit to use the PE with (although I've already built Takao, might be an opportunity for a different fit).

_________________
Vlad


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2017 5:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:25 pm
Posts: 1328
Location: England
Just a quick update on this.

I decided to forego the large deck pieces but pressed ahead with the project. The remaining large PE assemblies (main bridge, various upper decks, raised walkways and AA platforms) are useable but most are a slightly awkward fit. It required a bit of sanding and trial-and-error placement and some still have 0.5mm gaps or overhangs in places. Most of it isn't that obvious but it does mean everything needs to be approached with extra caution in case you add a part that then prevents another from going where it should.

On the plus side, the more you get stuck into small parts the less the fit matters (as they're generic not tailored). The sheer number of parts is daunting and I can see myself picking and choosing as the project goes on, but the main bits I'm very happy with.

I don't mean to come across bashing the PE set, only warning that the Fujimi kits are different. I am very impressed with the quality and detail of this set but also the ease of working. Pre-etched fold lines make for effortless accurate folding of complex assemblies, and that also keeps the part count down. The 25mm twin mounts are a single part fold (!) or 2 if you add the shield. The triples only add one extra part. Compare that to the madness that is involved in the infamous old WEM IJN AA set.

_________________
Vlad


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Jul 27, 2017 9:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 9:25 am
Posts: 2113
Location: Los Angeles and Houston
Could someone please tell me what the differences in the Fujimi Atago Kit are from the Takao?

And if these reflect differences that actually existed between the actual ships (specifically for Aug - Dec of 1942)?

I have an Aoshima Takao, with an extensive Flyhawk PE kit for it (I know they make one for both the Fujimi and Aoshima kits).

And I have been tempted to get a Fujimi Atago to contrast with the Aoshima Takao. But if the Flyhawk PE parts won't fit it, then I would need to find out if the changes to the Atago represent changes that existed only on the Atago, or if the changes represent changes to the model that reflect both ships. And thus I would need to probably replace my Aoshima Takao with the Fujimi Atago, and figure out what to do about PE parts.

MB

_________________
OMG LOOK! A signature

Working on:


1/700 (All Fall 1942):
HIJMS Nagara
HIJMS Aoba & Kinugasa
USS San Francisco
USS Helena
USS St. Louis
USS Laffey & Farenholt
HIJMS Sub-Chasers No. 4 - 7
HIJMS Sub-Chasers No. 13 - 16


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jul 28, 2017 3:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:25 pm
Posts: 1328
Location: England
My opinion, having just beaten a Flyhawk set into submission on a kit it wasn't designed for, is that whatever advantages the base kit has aren't worth that effort. Fujimi's Atago is a fantastic kit, though I can't comment as to the relative accuracy compared to their own, or Aoshima's, Takao. Aoshima's kits are accurate, sharply molded and easy to build. Fujimi's main advantage is better detail (through both more smaller parts and extra raised surface detail) but if you're dressing the whole thing in brass anyway that doesn't matter as much. In fact the Aoshima kit, being "cleaner", may actually be the better base kit for that purpose.

But if you're worried that Aoshima's Takao is in some way inaccurate, I would advise just researching the ship and scratch building the shortfall, rather than jumping through hoops to get a different kit and PE for it. I think that's a much better use of your time and effort on this project. The Warship Pictorial Takao class book is an excellent resource, and Dan K has commented in the past that Atago and Takao were essentially identical.

Also, Fujimi's Atago is a poor choice for a 1942 backdate because it has the circular metal platforms for the single 25mm mounts molded on the deck pieces. You will ruin the surface detail sanding these off and there are quite a few in all sorts of places. Their Takao kit is also 1944 fit. You should study the scanned instructions on Hobby Search, that's a great way to see the differences between the kits. Aoshima has a 1942 version Takao and their kits have far greater mold commonality so there should be less risk in using the Flyhawk set (that is also designed for their 1944 kit). That might be a better starting point for you. Or at least, it's what I would do!

Hope that helps!

_________________
Vlad


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jul 31, 2017 11:27 am 
Online

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 10:56 am
Posts: 6413
Location: New York City
You can reference the illustration at the top of the previous page for differences between Atago and Takao. Truthfully, the auxiliary piping on BOTH sides of funnel #1 aaaaaare the most obvious sources of differences, and I believe that both Aoshima and Fujimi account for that. Certainly, Aoshima does.

As Vlad suggested, the Aoshima versions are a cleaner start to a '42 version, but the Fujimi kit does have more detailing.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Aug 01, 2017 7:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:25 pm
Posts: 1328
Location: England
Although perhaps not relevant to MatthewB if he's planning a 1942 fit, but I believe there is another small difference between Takao and Atago in 1944. I don't remember where I first read this, but it seems the small gap between the midships superstructure and the catapult pedestal was plated up on Atago and Maya but not Takao. Dan can you confirm?

Aoshima's Takao kits ('42 and '44), their Atago '42, the Fujimi Takao and Atago all have the gap. Aoshima's Takao 1944 has a solid bulkhead going across, I believe it uses the same hull mold as their Maya. Are they right?

_________________
Vlad


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Aug 01, 2017 11:30 am 
Online

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 10:56 am
Posts: 6413
Location: New York City
Quote:
I don't remember where I first read this, but it seems the small gap between the midships superstructure and the catapult pedestal was plated up on Atago and Maya but not Takao. Dan can you confirm?

Aoshima's Takao kits ('42 and '44), their Atago '42, the Fujimi Takao and Atago all have the gap. Aoshima's Takao 1944 has a solid bulkhead going across, I believe it uses the same hull mold as their Maya. Are they right?


You probably read it in this thread, as I had posted something about it a while back. Some Japanese websites have picked up on two photos of Atago (one in late 1941, the other then or sometime in early 1942) that show Atago with this gap closed off. Neither photo was taken from close-up. These sites surmise that the gap was plated up. Unfortunately, there is nothing in the official literature to confirm or deny such a change, nor are there any other photos clear enough to absolutely confirm it.

So, it is possible. But, it is also possible that the openings were just covered up with canvas on a temporary basis. Also, the Fukui AA fit drawings of June 30, 1944 indicate that the aperture is still there for Atago as well as Takao, whereas the one for Maya shows no aperture. Given that Maya was heavily reconstructed in this area, I feel it likely that her (Maya) plating was solid back to the the catapult sponson.

(Note about the first Atago photo - she is not camouflaged. The discoloration was caused by water drops on the original photo.)


Attachments:
Atago, December,  1941.jpg
Atago, December, 1941.jpg [ 178.23 KiB | Viewed 1454 times ]
Atago AA fit, June 30, 1944 from Fukui.jpg
Atago AA fit, June 30, 1944 from Fukui.jpg [ 199.91 KiB | Viewed 1454 times ]
Takao, postwar tow to sinking #2.jpg
Takao, postwar tow to sinking #2.jpg [ 182.27 KiB | Viewed 1454 times ]
Takao AA fit, June 30, 1944 from Fukui.jpg
Takao AA fit, June 30, 1944 from Fukui.jpg [ 183.04 KiB | Viewed 1454 times ]
Maya AA fit, summer, 19944, from Fukui.jpg
Maya AA fit, summer, 19944, from Fukui.jpg [ 185.85 KiB | Viewed 1454 times ]


Last edited by Dan K on Wed Aug 02, 2017 9:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Aug 01, 2017 1:38 pm 
Online

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 10:56 am
Posts: 6413
Location: New York City
The Aoshima hulls in 1/700 waterline form for all three sisters don't have the gap. Only the full hull versions for Atago and Takao have the gap in front of the catapult sponson. So, Aoshima corrected itself after the release of the retooled waterline versions.

The subsequent 1/350 releases from Aoshima for Atago and Takao have the gaps, while Maya clearly has a plug for the gap.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Aug 02, 2017 2:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:25 pm
Posts: 1328
Location: England
Thanks Dan. I always thought those post-war shots of Takao showed a gap clearly enough (to my eye) although perhaps this lends more credence to the idea that whatever was there was temporary.

_________________
Vlad


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 4:15 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2013 3:33 pm
Posts: 241
Location: The Savo Island
hi,all
Feeling urged to post something re. a new build of this class cruiser and by Dan´s recent suggestion,almost everything is in a slow-motion picture. Have so far managed to form the hull (in waterline, again!) with some difficulty as i had to make drawings by myself in 1/00 as a starting point. Firstly,the bread & butter in two sections,so i can have it seperated in case it needs to be transported in the future.

mucho,


Attachments:
ASIIMG_0013ms.jpg
ASIIMG_0013ms.jpg [ 67.74 KiB | Viewed 1216 times ]
ASIIMG_0024ms.jpg
ASIIMG_0024ms.jpg [ 56.42 KiB | Viewed 1216 times ]
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 4:21 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2013 3:33 pm
Posts: 241
Location: The Savo Island
posting-part 2
In the middle of tackling with make of 20.3cm main guns and casemates....
Studying of steel-plates on the deck was under focus,too.
Still a long way to go.

mucho,


Attachments:
ASIIMG_0100ms.jpg
ASIIMG_0100ms.jpg [ 69.76 KiB | Viewed 1217 times ]
ASIIMG_0131ms.jpg
ASIIMG_0131ms.jpg [ 84.97 KiB | Viewed 1217 times ]
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 7:58 am 
Online

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 10:56 am
Posts: 6413
Location: New York City
That. is. COOL.

Thx, Mucho!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 3:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 1:32 am
Posts: 405
Location: Peach State
Very nice. I will be watching for updates. Will future posts be made to this thread, or will you start a new thread in the work-in-progress section? Best wishes for a trouble-free project.

I have a general question about the brass strips on linoleum decks. Were they kept polished, or were they allowed to weather to browns and greens? TIA.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 3:46 pm 
Online

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 10:56 am
Posts: 6413
Location: New York City
I did my best to review wartime deck pics, of which there are too few of varying degrees of quality. The findings vary.

I would say that it is safe to assume that attention to details such as keeping the strips polished during wartime were not as scrupulous as during peacetime. My sense is that during uptempo ops, it was ignored, and then, if there was a couple of days downtime at anchor at Truk, Rabaul, the Shortlands, Kwajalein, or where ever, the crew would tend to regular maintenance.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 3:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 1:40 pm
Posts: 6359
Location: In the hills of North Jersey
Wow - impressive!
Mike C wrote:
Very nice. I will be watching for updates. Will future posts be made to this thread, or will you start a new thread in the work-in-progress section?

I would be best if it was a new Work in progress thread. He can always post updates to that thread here.

_________________
Martin

"Tomorrow is the most important thing in life. Comes into us at midnight very clean. It's perfect when it arrives and it puts itself in our hands. It hopes we've learned something from yesterday." John Wayne

Ship Model Gallery


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 6:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2013 3:33 pm
Posts: 241
Location: The Savo Island
hi, mates,
About question of brass strips by Mike, IJN did polish any object/utensil made of brass. That was according to rules of maintenance of deck cover such as linoleum,teakwood etc. Though,many of brass products were painted in grey color to save maintenance time during the wartime. I would think brass strips must have been an exception. Several photos can account for it,the attached being from Nihon Rikugun-Kaigun Gunso site. You got side works; pls guess the name of these crusiers. Am doing make of the gun houses first, the bridge and hull structure later...

mucho.,
Have some more pics to follow, these were rejected due to bmp images, changing them into jpeg afterwards.
I may be posting here, coz Dan K. started this up. :d


Attachments:
ASIIMG_0135sm.jpg
ASIIMG_0135sm.jpg [ 65.01 KiB | Viewed 1046 times ]
ASIyamano_lc_285 copy.jpg
ASIyamano_lc_285 copy.jpg [ 72.35 KiB | Viewed 1046 times ]


Last edited by Mutsuo Sasaki on Wed Nov 15, 2017 6:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 6:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2013 3:33 pm
Posts: 241
Location: The Savo Island
other pics showing brass strips that glitter.

mucho


Attachments:
ASIyamano_lc_284 copy.jpg
ASIyamano_lc_284 copy.jpg [ 43.13 KiB | Viewed 1044 times ]
ASIyamano_lc_287.jpg
ASIyamano_lc_287.jpg [ 34.07 KiB | Viewed 1044 times ]
DiskF 063.jpg
DiskF 063.jpg [ 42.88 KiB | Viewed 1044 times ]
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Nov 16, 2017 4:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 1:32 am
Posts: 405
Location: Peach State
Thanks for the responses, gentlemen, although I'm a bit surprised about the strips. Since the linoleum decks were a reddish brown and since bronze and some alloys of brass oxidize to a brown color, I would have expected the Japanese to let the brass strips gain some patina. I guess keeping the strips polished is also a good task for keeping idle hands busy.

Mucho, if I may inquire, the last time I saw you posting here you were working on a model of Aoba, I believe. Is that finished, or is this project a diversion from the other project?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 779 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 ... 39  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group