Calling all Yamato (大和) and Musashi (武蔵) fans

[bucketfoot-al]

A partial retrofit, if you are talking about the repair of the damage caused by the 2 torpedoes fired by USS Skate that hit Yamato in 1943. From what I read the retrofit was only made to the repaired sections. To re-do the entire ship was probably way too expensive and time-consuming to be done in wartime. Just a guess.

[chuck]

According to a few references I found, the fourth Yamato type battleship would have been Number 111.
I believe they would also have built in the necessary corrections to the side armor mounting brackets during original construction of IJN No 111, which were evidently a retrofit on IJN Yamato.

Basically, the weakness in Yamato's armor joint was the result of a makeshift solution to the fact that Japanese steel makers couldn't make the necessary joint piece in time to meet the ship's builting schedule. The repair done to the damaged joint in 1943 was a make shift solution to a make shift solution involving a diagonal piece welded on to brace the makeshift armor joint. As indicated, it was only applied to the damaged portion being repaired.

It seems possible that enough time elapsed between Yamato and No 111 for the latter ship to receive proper armor joint originally intended by the architects, instead of the makeshift joint given to Yamato to enable the ship to be finished on time.

But whatever the proper solution is, it was probably simply welding a diagonal brace around the joint.

[Atma]

Never heard that, thanks for sharing

[Guest]

According to a few references I found, the fourth Yamato type battleship would have been Number 111.

Please excuse me for posting all these inquiries which are not directly related to model-making.
I did a little more searching, and found a couple of references to the idea that Number 111 was to have been named 'Kii'.
Not the earlier 'Kii-class battleship', but a 'Yamato-class' designated Hull 111.

One reference is here;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_b ... anese_Navy
Yamato class
Yamato (1940) - Sunk in route to Okinawa April, 1945
Musashi (1940) - Sunk October 1944 in Battle of Leyte Gulf.
Shinano (converted to an aircraft carrier, as the Shinano class) - Sunk by submarine torpedo attack November 1944.
No. 111 (Kii?) (scrapped while under construction)
No. 797 (design-only)

I was wondering if anyone can please confirm that Hull 111 was to have been called 'Kii'.
Also, 'ki' (the short form) can mean 'yellow, tree, wood, season, spirit, mood'.
According to this article; 'Kii' (the long form) may or may not be related;
http://translate.google.com/translate?s ... 8.E8.A8.98
[and here is the original page in Nihongo: http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%B4%80% ... 8.E8.A8.98 ]

The Google translation gives the following information;
referred to as the name of "Kii"] [ edit
The seventh century - it was originally enacted, the country wood (modern standard language
, common language
notation: Kinokuni), respectively.
There is a theory as the origin of the name, that was named "Country" tree from the rain forest aspect that many overgrown.

So there is a reference to 'trees' with ["Country" tree] and 'rain forest'.
This vague reference seems to suggest that the 'Province & Peninsula of Kii' may in fact have originally derived the meaning of its name from the short form 'ki' due to the country thereabouts being so thickly 'overgrown' with trees.
It almost sounds as if they took the word 'ki' and simply stretched it out when turning it into a name for a province; thus, 'the country of ki' (land of trees) became 'Kii Province' (supposedly a name with no intrinsic meaning).

So my other question is if 'Kii' derives its ancient original meaning from the word 'ki', thus giving 'Kii' vague references to 'tree, wood, season, spirit, mood'.

[Atma]

Almost all the Japanese battleships where named after old provinces, Kii (Like Yamato, Ise etc) was an old province of Japan. So I dont find it suprising that the fourth IJN Yamato class unit might be named IJN Kii.

[redoctober27]

Are there any pictures or blueprints etc. Of what IJN shinano as a battleship or hull 111 whould have looked liked?

[SailorJack]

Are there any pictures or blueprints etc. Of what IJN shinano as a battleship or hull 111 whould have looked liked?

So far as is known, Hull 111 would have look exactly like IJN Yamato and IJN Musashi, indistinguishable from either of them.

[Atma]

From IJN Shinano and the Warships Number 111 was a slightly modified design The amror was reduced, including the belt, deck, and turrets, cause there was no need for that much armour as no foreign ship available was equipped with 46 cm main guns. The savings in weight this entailed meant that improvements could be made in other areas, including added protection for fire-control and lookout positions.
The old AA 12,7 cm guns was to have been replaced by the new and better AA 10 cm gun.
The fifth vessel, Warship Number 797, was planned as an improved IJN Shinano , in addition to the modifications made to that ship, 797 would have removed the two 155 mm wing turrets in favor of additional AA 10 cm guns. Something like the 1944 IJN Yamato.

[Atma]

The Design A-150 battleship/Super IJN Yamato(50 cm main guns) was following the AA suit of Warship Number 797 design(No 155 mm wing turrets). But the side armour belt was probably going to be 460 mm (18 in).

[chuck]

Are there any pictures or blueprints etc. Of what IJN shinano as a battleship or hull 111 whould have looked liked?

So far as is known, Hull 111 would have look exactly like IJN Yamato and IJN Musashi, indistinguishable from either of them.

There were some older sources that suggest the fantail of Shinano and No 111 would be different from Yamato and Musashi.

[Atma]

Chuck, we know what was the reason for this modification ?

[redoctober27]

I have here that the IJN Shiano and the following were to be twin turrets instead of triples.. is this true? or is this a bunch of old wrong info I read?

[chuck]

Chuck, we know what was the reason for this modification ?

Yes. Yamato and Musashi was thought to have a special flat semi-transom stern shaped designed to accommodate a special rough weather float plane recovery system. This system was never installed on either ship, and Shinano and No 111 were suppose to revert to a more conventional stern shape.

One of Tamiya's Random Japanese warship detail volumes depict how the system was suppose to work. Basically, a large floatation matt on a large drum reel was installed behind the flat part of the transom. When a sea plane lands, the matt is reeled out and trails behind the ship. The float plane taxis onto the matt, and the matt then reels back in until the stern crane can pick the plane up.

However, here is the catch. The flat semi-transom stern of Yamato and Musashi are usually depicted only in sources dating from before, say 2006 (like AOTS, etc, etc). Latest depiction, like Tamiya's own 1/350 Yamato, depicts Tamiya with a round stern. So it's no longer clear if the theory that Yamato and Musashi has a special stern that was later abondoned in favor of a conventional fantail in Shinanao and No 111 was correct in the first place.

[chuck]

I have here that the IJN Shiano and the following were to be twin turrets instead of triples.. is this true? or is this a bunch of old wrong info I read?

Definitely not for Shinanao. Shinano's uninstalled triple 18" turrets and guns were actually found in storage in Japan by USN after the war. Most sources I've seen suggests the next two ships after Shinano were to have triple 18" gun turrets also. Only with Hull No.6 and 7 would they go to twin 20" guns.

[Atma]

I have here that the IJN Shiano and the following were to be twin turrets instead of triples.. is this true? or is this a bunch of old wrong info I read?

Definitely not for Shinanao. Shinano's uninstalled triple 18" turrets and guns were actually found in storage in Japan by USN after the war. Most sources I've seen suggests the next two ships after Shinano were to have triple 18" gun turrets also. Only with Hull No.6 and 7 would they go to twin 20" guns.

Yes those were the so called Super IJN Yamato class battleships/Design A-150 battleship.
Like this one from Fujimi in 1/700 and 1/500:
1/700-http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10050788
1/500-http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10144602

[bucketfoot-al]

duplicate post deleted

[bucketfoot-al]

One of Tamiya's Random Japanese warship detail volumes depict how the system was suppose to work. Basically, a large floatation matt on a large drum reel was installed behind the flat part of the transom. When a sea plane lands, the matt is reeled out and trails behind the ship. The float plane taxis onto the matt, and the matt then reels back in until the stern crane can pick the plane up.

Chuck - So this mat is then the large square wood piece attached to the rear stern on many Yamato models? Another mystery solved. Couldn't for the life of me figure out WTH that thing was.

[bucketfoot-al]

I have here that the IJN Shiano and the following were to be twin turrets instead of triples.. is this true? or is this a bunch of old wrong info I read?

Definitely not for Shinanao. Shinano's uninstalled triple 18" turrets and guns were actually found in storage in Japan by USN after the war. Most sources I've seen suggests the next two ships after Shinano were to have triple 18" gun turrets also. Only with Hull No.6 and 7 would they go to twin 20" guns.

Chuck - I assume that Shinano's turrets were then cut up and melted down. *SIGH*

[ceefood]

Chuck - So this mat is then the large square wood piece attached to the rear stern on many Yamato models? Another mystery solved. Couldn't for the life of me figure out WTH that thing was.

I was under the impression that the wooden platform thing was supposed to be a drag anchor to help turn the vessel if the rudder was damaged - never understood how it was supposed to work but thats what I read somewhere (might have been on here)

[chuck]

Yes, the wooden board at the stern was suppose to be an emergency rudder. Lots of IJN warships towards the end of war carried these. But most recent depictions of Yamato does not show her carrying it, so it seems there is question about whether Yamato carried it.

The way is works is it this. If the ship's steering is damaged, efforts would be made to center the main rudder if possible. Then the wooden emergency rudder would be lowered into the water, and trailed behind the ship, edge forward. If the ship needs to turn, sailors manning the steer capstan would reel in a set of pulleys attached to the aft edge of the rudder, on the side towards the direction of the turn. This would cause the emergency rudder's aft edge to swing into the intended direction of the turn, and cause it to drag on the main tow line and pull the stern away from the intended direction of the turn, thus causing the ship to slowly swing around into the turn.

The sea plane recovery Matt was different. It was supposed to be mounted on a spool fixed behind the fantail. It was never installed.