Calling all IJN Mogami-class (最上) fans

[redoctober27]

Dose anyone know if there are any plans from anyone whom might have a new re-tooled Kumano or Suzuya coming out?

[Atma]

Not from Tamiya, there was rumors though few months ago something from Trumpeter. In my opinion, I doubt it.

[redoctober27]

Hmmm it is as I feared, no one gives these ships the credit they deserve but that is weird that Trumpeter was rumored to be making one. I didn't think they do Japanese ships. If only there was a way to convince them to make them

[Angeliccypher]

If I am doing the Mikuma from Tamiya, will Lion Roar's super upgrade set for Mogami work for her?

[Atma]

About 50% from the 1944 set will be useable for your IJN Mikuma.
If you are using the 1942 set then only turrets detail will be unuseable.

[Atma]

Hmmm it is as I feared, no one gives these ships the credit they deserve but that is weird that Trumpeted was rumored to be making one. I didn't think they do Japanese ships. If only there was a way to convince them to make them

The Tamiya offerings are good at the moment till a new tool sometime in the future arrives, with some touch up details only and you have a nice looking model. And I don't think is true that no-one gives these ships the credit the deserve, they where the first IJN Heavy Cruisers to be re-tooled in 1/700, and the real IJN Kumano is very popular in Japan.

[Vladi]

Hi all, I am getting ready to build Suzuya 1/700 from Tamiya ("new" tool) in its October 1944 config. I identified several aspects that need correction compared to the box contents:

- external bulges added in 1937 are missing entirely in the kit (Lacroix pg. 445) - although Kumano and Suzuya had them smaller than Mogami and Mikuma, these would probably still be seen above the water (but considering war load etc.... who knows)
- degaussing cable is indeed missing for earlier WW2 fits (seen in Lacroix), but the question is if Suzuya had it at Leyte (as discussed in another places here)
- the bridge structure deserves checking (e.g., against Lacroix 467-8 and on)
- most of the hull scuttles should be closed/welded over (Lacroix pg. 491)
- many more 25mm AA guns added (Lacroix pg. 495)
- wind baffles on the bridge structure - does anyone have photo or a drawing of those at Suzuya? Had these been different from Mogami's as posted by Dan on page 1 in this topic?

Any other comments are welcome

[Atma]

Hi all, I am getting ready to build Suzuya 1/700 from Tamiya ("new" tool) in its October 1944 config. I identified several aspects that need correction compared to the box contents:

- external bulges added in 1937 are missing entirely in the kit (Lacroix pg. 445) - although Kumano and Suzuya had them smaller than Mogami and Mikuma, these would probably still be seen above the water (but considering war load etc.... who knows)
- degaussing cable is indeed missing for earlier WW2 fits (seen in Lacroix), but the question is if Suzuya had it at Leyte (as discussed in another places here)

Any other comments are welcome

No major changes in bridge, you can use the IJN Mogami's bridge (The top of the bridge of course, and the enlarged AA platform that was used for the large 25mm that replace the 13mm in front of the bridge).
The bulges are okay, for waterline mode. The hull could use of course some detail enhance (see links below).
The kit needs some boat davits (replace the one Tamiya is providing and don't use the holes, fill them with putty).

I based my IJN Suzuya 1942 mode in this build, hope it can help you too:
http://homepage2.nifty.com/vanguard/700 ... umano1.htm
http://homepage2.nifty.com/vanguard/mak ... mano-1.htm
http://homepage2.nifty.com/vanguard/700 ... umano2.htm
For where the extra AA goes, Lacroix's book can help you as it has the profile for a 1943-era IJN Suzuya and IJN Kumano.


Edit:In the links you can see the difference in IJN Mogami-IJN Mikuma from IJN Suzuya-IJN Kumano for the hull details.

[Vladi]

Thanks for your views on Suzuya/Kumano.

The external bulges were designed to extend aprox. 0,5m above waterline (Lacroix p. 445) so I was thinking about adding a triangular profile ~1mm thick to the waterline to simulate them. But considering the usual overweight status during wartime you may be right they would probably not be apparent at a waterline model anyway (especially with some model water around).

[Dan K]

I can't comment on the bulges as I'm not certain one way or another. The bridge structure differs at it's base - best to see the L&W plan comparison as posted on p.2 of this thread.

Unfortunately, late war closeups of Suzuya are almost non-existant. The photo below is a crop from the view of Tone refueling from a tanker during the Battle of the Phillipine Sea with Suzuya in the background.

There is a drawing of Suzuya or Kumano in the Model Ship Modeling Special on this class - as with the photo below, there is an enlarged platform for carrying the 25mm mounts at the base of the bridge and it has gained some support columns in front.

[Vladi]

Thanks a lot, Dan! Could you probably post that drawing from Model Ship Modeling Special here or send it to me via PM? I guess the platform will be similar to the one in the Lion Roar PE set for late war 1/350 Mogami (at the bottom of http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/image/10098450z4/70/4, part D20 and others), right?

[Vladi]

After checking again what L&W has to say about Suzuya I found the following:

- there is a rather clear photo dated Jan 5 1939 on page 484 where the newly added bulges can be clearly seen above the waterline. But the cruiser seems to be quite high in the water so the question of how much of them was visible with full load (and plus all of the later added weight of AA, radar etc.) remains open. Funny enough, the Suzuya box art shows the bulges, too.

- comparison of drawing 9.27 on page 491 (Suzuya/Kumano with the enlarged AA platform at the front of the bridge) with drawing 9.28 on page 492 (Mogami as a/c cruiser) sugests that the new AA platform on Mogami is different from those on Suzuya and Kumano, so the inspiration with the Lion Roar 1/350 Mogami PE set will not work. Would be good to verify against your drawing from Model Ship Modeling Special.

- also of interest is the added AA platform just behind the mainmast as seen on the Suzuya drawing

[Dan K]

From the Model Art SMS vol. #8: bridge structure views of Mogami/Mikuma as built, top left, Suzuya/Kumano as built top right, Kumano, late war bottom right.

The revised AA platform is very similar to the late war Mogami's but not identical, IMHO. Illustration also does not show ammo box placement.

About the degaussing cable for Suzuya, late war, I'm inclined to believe she retained it. She was never brought in for major repair or changes so, it 's likely to have been left on.

[Vladi]

Thanks a lot, Dan. The drawings you posted confirm my previous feeling that the AA platform on Suzuya/Kumano seemed to be a bit smaller and one level higher than on Mogami.
Also thank for your comment on te degaussing cable!

[aleccap]

http://www.flickr.com/photos/capalec/6673987801/
Above is my little rush job of Mogami, I built one of each heavy cruiser class from IJN WW2, can't remember if I submitted them to the gallery, darn not ask Sean again, he'll only go into one, I have no idea what the very tall structure is suppose to be at the back of the ship, but in the real world it must have been a good 50 foot tall held by guide ropes and steel bars.
As we know, there were 5 classes of IJN heavy cruisers.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/capalec/6674027169/
A problem getting a photo of all five.

[Dan K]

I can post one more late war photo of Suzuya but, it's not detailed enough to reveal anything about her bulges, degaussing cable, or much else. She's on the left.

[aleccap]

Just found this rather nice photo -
http://www.flickr.com/photos/16118167@N04/6072387013/

[Atma]

Actually no, the first drawing that Dan (Thank you Dan btw.) that post is too simplistic. IJN Suzuya and IJN Kumano main difference from a IJN Mogami's main bridge after 1944 is that circled area.
The so-called crew rest area, added after the increase of AA guns:

In IJN Mogami that area was bigger in size (red circle). While the one under the enlarged AA platform (blue circle) was same as in IJN Kumano and IJN Suzuya. The height was also the same.



One more difference not showing in the first drawing, is this area (at least as-built and early in the war), the orange circle:

Tamiya's 1/700 IJN Kumano and IJN Suzuya have this difference from the IJN Mikuma.

[Atma]

I want to add something last. Its still unknown if IJN Kumano and IJN Suzuya received this extra AA director like IJN Mogami, after the increase in AA equipment. I think this extra AA director was not only fitted in IJN Mogami but also in IJN Kumano and IJN Suzuya after the AA increase. Of course there is no evidence for that so far.

[Atma]

One last difference from an early war to a late war bridge. The protected lookout posts.
Early in the war (and as-built with triple 15,5 cm main guns) IJN Mogami class had those lookout posts under protected shields (Instructions from a 1942 IJN Mogami in 1/350, by Tamiya):

While later those shields where removed (Instructions from a 1944 IJN Mogami in 1/350, by Tamiya):

You can see them also in the second picture that Dan posted. But not in the first one cause like I said, it is too simplistic.