Calling all Nagato (長門) and Mutsu (陸奥) fans

angeleyes · Post by **angeleyes** » Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:21 pm

Some fotos i took this evening from the aoshima kit .Overall i would say is very good with very fine details on deck allthough the deck lines are just a little bit too much raised for my liking .Main guns and secondary guns in gunhouses have very good detail with nice simulated canvas covers.The pagoda tower looks very complicated and "busy" as in real ship and all the tower parts include support beams in lower surfaces.The kit doesnt include any etched sets , it only has an additionall 2 generic weapons sprues and light AA as found in most hasegawa/tamiya kits as well.The hull has nice curvature and looks "heavy" and widened as it was after the addition of extra sidebuldges.It also seems that Aoshima has included a new sprue with the entire deck in one piece this time around.I have taken some shots with the nagato hull next to the yamato one to give you an idea of the relative size.

aeronautic · Post by **aeronautic** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 3:38 am

Thanks for sharing the pictures

Its seems to be a fine kit from Aoshima. I can not decide if it is a good thing or not that Aoshima make the hull in one piece -had it not been better to make the hull in two half separated in the waterline?
All my others models is waterline!

Anyway Nagato and Mutsu is missing in my stable of IJN BB ships so I'm interested to buy the kits.

where have you brought your model in U.K. ?

Lars

angeleyes · Post by **angeleyes** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 4:47 pm

i have bought it from hobby link in japan.Fast and efficient shipping (5-7 days).As for the full hull in one piece -remember aoshima produces the same kit in waterline too, so to me that is a reason why they dont give you the flexibillity to choose ,presumably you allready have once you decided to buy the full hull kit .

angeleyes · Post by **angeleyes** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 4:54 pm

http://www.modellversium.de/kit/artikel ... gin=sparte
the above link is a more proper preview of the same kit in waterline format.

aeronautic · Post by **aeronautic** » Sun Dec 03, 2006 4:40 am

Thanks for the advice.
I will send them an Email; 5-7 days is very fast.

Lars

An Chu · Post by **An Chu** » Mon Jul 23, 2007 10:31 pm

It is real !! Check these..
http://www.hasegawa-model.co.jp/J-index.htm

Post by **Timmy C** » Mon Jul 23, 2007 10:38 pm

More precisely:
http://www.hasegawa-model.co.jp/nagato/1/nagato1.html

Just beautiful

And comes with details for the inside of the bridge, too, it seems!

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Tue Jul 24, 2007 1:29 am

The large number of binoculars does not automatically denote 1941. The number of binoculars on the Yamato's bridge actually increased between 1941 and 1944. By 1944 the Japanese had added infra-red binoculars to their warships.

The transparent molded plastic bridge windows are a mistake. On this scale, no molded plastic transparency will look right. It would be far, far better to supply photo etched window frames and leave the windows themselves either open or close them with thin sheets of acetate.

Regarding photo etch, I have no doubt Lion Roar from china will immediately release another $100, all singing, all dancing supplemental set with metal barrels, metal screws, 10 sheets of PE and anchor chain.

Hmmm, I had no idea that the main director range finder, instead of revolving around an axis like any sane engineer would design, actually travels around the whole central tower structure on a circular set of tracks. The unbalance of the weight around the actual center of revolution must make it a beach to keep the range finder on target if the ship pitches or rolls.

Foeth: Chuck is a proud member of the Anonymity Abuse Anonymous

ChrisC · Post by **ChrisC** » Tue Jul 24, 2007 9:47 am

Anonymous wrote:The large number of binoculars does not automatically denote 1941. The number of binoculars on the Yamato's bridge actually increased between 1941 and 1944. By 1944 the Japanese had added infra-red binoculars to their warships.

The giveaway is the position of the direction finder on top of the pagoda and the position of the practice loader. Both were present in 1941 but in 1944 had been replaced by a mattress radar and it's associated control room and a triple 25mm gun, respectively. The kit is also lacking the horn shaped radar mounts. Other than that, however, the pagoda was virtually the same.

ChrisC · Post by **ChrisC** » Tue Jul 24, 2007 9:49 am

Anonymous wrote:Hmmm, I had no idea that the main director range finder, instead of revolving around an axis like any sane engineer would design, actually travels around the whole central tower structure on a circular set of tracks. The unbalance of the weight around the actual center of revolution must make it a beach to keep the range finder on target if the ship pitches or rolls.

Hence why she never hit anything

J. Soca · Post by **J. Soca** » Tue Jul 24, 2007 11:09 am

I was looking at the 3D Nagato book, I don�t understand jack of Japanese but the pictures says it all, Nagato wore another configuration at the end of the war while she was docked at Yokosuka naval base. if you take a closer look to the picture showing the pagodas, youll see the dates.

http://www.warshipmodels.com/~users/J.% ... gatooo.jpg
http://www.warshipmodels.com/~users/J.% ... atoooo.jpg

Moderator note: Images changed to links to save space. Also, if you are going to post images, please makes sure you fully credit the source.

ChrisC · Post by **ChrisC** » Wed Jul 25, 2007 1:17 pm

Paul O'Reilly wrote:I'm not a Nagatoholic but I have always wanted to build a Mutsu, so what does one need to convert the Nagato to her sister? Were the ships identical in 1941?

Paul O'Reilly

Hi Paul,

There were some differences in the pagoda levels, some were shaped differently. There may have been some other differences but that's all I can think of right now. If you decide to convert it and need some drawings of the Mutsu's bridge levels let me know.

Paul O'Reilly · Post by **Paul O'Reilly** » Thu Jul 26, 2007 4:00 pm

ChrisC,

Thanks Chris, I just might take you up on that offer. It will be some time before I get started on that project, though, as I have very few references. That being said, if the main differences are the decks on the pagoda mast and you have the plans for those decks then I might be able to do an OOB build but include the modifications you mention.

Paul

ChrisC · Post by **ChrisC** » Wed Aug 29, 2007 12:20 pm

New photos are now up on Hasegawa's website, including the box art.

Jeff Herne · Post by **Jeff Herne** » Wed Aug 29, 2007 3:47 pm

Tracy mentioned it, and I talked with Steve Wiper at the Nats about it. I held the hull in my grubby little mitts and Hasegawa screwed up...big time.

The vertical lines you see on the hull are not supposed to be there...what appears to have happened, is that Hasegawa transferred the hull station lines from the drawings to the hull sides.

If you match the hull to a set of reduced Fuji Art line drawings, they match...hull stations and vertical hull plating lines on the hull - OOPS!

Both Steve and I (on separate occassions) let the Hasegawa folks know about the error. Let's see if they correct it.

Jeff

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 4:09 pm

So how many of the lines can be fixed with putty without obliterating authentic hull details?

Tracy White · Post by **Tracy White** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 4:31 pm

It looks like most of them.

A trick I've started using more that might work for the lines that are near raised detail is Mr Surfacer and ... erg... can't remember the full title... I think "mr. Color Thinner."

Apply the Mr. SUrfacer, let dry, and then rub down the are with a Q-tipp or paper towel dipped in teh Mr. Color THinner... you can wipe away the raised portions of the Mr. Surfacer and you won't sand off the raised detail.

For the rest of the hull I think conventional putty and sanding will be less tedious, but for the areas with detail it should work well.

Someone on SteelNavy described it as a 3d Excel worksheet.

skuki · Post by **skuki** » Tue Oct 23, 2007 1:12 pm

Mr Surfacer is not the good solution for those lines in the hull. Mr Surfacer lovers once it is dry. The best thing would be some harder putty, like tamiya basic in the tube, or even light curing. However it looks like that there will be a lot of sanding, and it will be very hard to preserve shape of the hull and especially hard edges of the hull and other details. I was thinking to fill only lines beneth water line

BTW, any INBOX so far?

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sat Oct 27, 2007 4:11 pm

Nagato arrived.

The grid lines on the hull were not removed. The hull is very well molded, nevertheless all of the panel lines are totally unconvincing. The horizontal plating joints on fore and aft parts of the hull uses overlapping plate joints. The seam where one plate bents out and down to overlap the one beneath it should be very subdued. It is represented in the kit as a heavy raised line, rather like the excessively heavy joints depicted on the sides of the turrets of Aoshima's new 1/350 Takao.

The vertical plate joints are depicted as recessed line rather like panel joints on an aircraft kit, and somewhat heavy at that. No ships have recessed panel joints.

All in all, the skill of the mold makers were clearly very high. The detail and general accuracy is of a very high order. But the hull surface detail is seriously botched.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sat Oct 27, 2007 4:18 pm

BTW, there are a number of provisions in the kit for building the late war Nagato. there are a number of excess parts, as well as a number of places where the parts actually used are not used in its entirety, and the instruction calls for portions to be removed. So a late war kit is likely in the offing

There seems to be no provision in the kit for parts of it to be used as a basis of a pre-1937 modernization kit.

The Ship Model Forum

Calling all Nagato (長門) and Mutsu (陸奥) fans

Calling all Nagato (長門) and Mutsu (陸奥) fans

Calling all IJN Nagato class fans

Re: Can the Nagato kit be converted to Mutsu?

Nagato to Mutsu conversion

Hull plating...