Calling all Shokaku (翔鶴) and Zuikaku (瑞鶴) fans

[Atma]

Fujimi will release a 1941 IJN Zuikaku in 1/700 this April:
http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10179373

[Atma]

And finnaly the new IJN Zuikaku 1941 is out by Fujimi in 1/700:
http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10179373

[Dan K]

I had forgotten to post an excerpt of the information discussed on the new Flyhawk Akagi flight deck thread under MFG regarding planking.

Starting with Soryu, the planking pattern for IJN CV wood flight decks is a staggered four plank pattern; it repeats on the fifth plank. This is clearly true for the Shokakus, as exemplified by the Zuikaku images below. Planking pattern image is courtesy of Ed Low

[Dan K]

I have been re-examining the Fujimi 1/350 and 1/700 kits, and it seems that I have erred in stating that the new kit's planking pattern repeats every other plank. Actually it's a three plank pattern that repeats every fourth plank, though the pattern doesn't seem fully staggered. Still, it's a little better than I previously thought.

The origin of the Fujimi specific pattern is a bit mysterious but I did realize that this same pattern appeared about 10 years ago when Fujimi released new Cartograph flight deck planking decals to dress up their original Shokaku class kits.

I compared the Tamiya and Fujimi 1/700 decks for plank width, again out of curiosity. The Tamiya deck contains 20 planks within a 10cm span, width-wise across the deck. The Fujimi deck contains 16.5 planks within the same 10cm span. Not as bad as I originally thought, and the ratio would have been closer if the channels separating the Fujimi planking were thinner. Still, it doesn't bother me as much as does the channels that serve as the butt ends of the planking. These are same width as the legthwise channels but they seem to stand out more when segmenting up the planking.

Incidentally, because the butt ends are part of a three plank pattern, they will not work well as a template for the tie-down holes, as I originally thought they might.

I haven't measured the 1/350 deck again for plank width but I do note, on a very postive basis, that there are no buttends in this scale, which appears much better than does the 1/350 Hiryu deck, which does have these butt ends.

[Dan K]

I did measure the 1/350 Shokaku and Hiryu. The # of planks per 10cm of flight deck width is 10, which means the 1/350 flight decks are actually scaled better than that of the 1/700 versions. The 1/350 planking is identical to Evergreen .040 V-groove sheeting with 1mm/.040 spacing. The planks are actually narrower at .030" each, and the channels taking up the remaining space.

It's worth pointing out that the Hasegawa managed to get the planking width on its 1/350 Akagi kit much more correct at .025" wide.

[drdoom1337]

I have the new tool 1941 Shokaku 1/700 scale. Wondering if anyone can suggest a non carrier kit to display with it? Perhaps a destroyer or cruiser in 1941 fit. Something highly detailed!

[Dan K]

I would suggest one of the new 1/700 Aoshima Hatsuharu class DD 1941 version kits, or one of the new Fujimi Shiratsuyu DD early war versions to represent an escort from DesDiv 27 at the Coral Sea. Shokaku will still be in her original fit at this time.

From Shokaku's TROM:

19 April 1942:
Depart Mako to participate in "MO" Operation - the invasion of Port Moresby, New Guinea slated for 10 May - in the Coral Sea officially commencing 20 April. Screened by Desdiv 27 (ARIAKE, YUGURE, SHIGURE, SHIRATSUYU).

25 April 1942:
Arrive at Truk.

1 May 1942:
Depart Truk with ZUIKAKU to participate in "MO" Operation as part of the The MO Striking Force. The force is under overall command of VADM Takagi Takeo ComCruDiv 5 aboard MYOKO with HAGURO, with CarDiv 5 (RADM Hara Chuichi), six destroyers (Desdiv 27 ARIAKE, YUGURE, SHIGURE, SHIRATSUYU; Desdiv 7 USHIO, AKEBONO) and oiler TOHO MARU. The MO Striking Force's primary assignment is neutralize Australian air bases and to cover the Port Moresby invasion convoy's run-in. Takagi is also expected to deal with any U.S. carrier forces that might show up, but none were expected till CarDiv 5 was in stationed in the center of the Coral Sea.

[drdoom1337]

Do you have a model number for that Aoshima kit? I found the Fujimi kit relatively easily but it includes two DD's. I know I'll never build the second because I'm almost completely uninterested in the IJN. As far as the Aoshima kit goes I see several of them out there with different prices, it's hard to tell of the tooling but one includes a PE sheet with some primitive rails and extensive other works.

[Marco_Trigo]

Doctor Doom, Aoshima's Hatsuharu's are some of the best looking models I've ever seen in 1/700. I won't say anything about their accuracy as that's beyond my scope, but they feature heaps of detail.

The model you want is Hatsuharu (1941), which is model 45800.

Marco

[djohannsen]

I feel more than a bit out of my league by posting in this thread, but hope that some might have a minute to give some advice...

I just bought the old Fujimi Waterline Shokaku (1/700). I am vaguely aware that this kit has numerous scale and accuracy issues, but I can live with this since this is my first IJN carrier build (so I wouldn't know accurate if it were to walk up and bite me). O.K., so I am not looking to try to make a silk purse of a sow's ear, but I would like to improve the kit's appearance a bit. My question is what PE route to go? I know that Eduard makes a set for the Tamiya offering, but would much of this fret be unusable due to the kit differences? Maybe a couple of the Lion Roar sets; e.g., the Flight Deck Netting (700019) and the Mast Set (700057) and maybe a radar set as well (don't yet know which one would be approriate)? I would appreciate any suggestions for a reasonable aftermarket solution to improving the final appearance of this kit.

Finally, one more question... Am I right that there aren't really any inexpensive references that might be helpful? The Gakken #13 costs more than I care to spend (and really is overkill for what I would need to help with PE placement). I have the Osprey book on IJN carriers, and it is what it is (a reasonably nice overview for novices like myself, but not useful as a reference on any particular carrier). So, is there anything between these two extremes that can be had fairly cheaply? Even a more general reference to IJN carriers with some information on the Shokaku would be enough for me.

Again, I apologize for injecting novice questions into this thread, but would be grateful for any suggestions from those who obviously have a lot of experience.


Dave

[peppe]

http://www.ebay.com/itm/IJN-AIRCRAFT-CA ... 564b933364
a possibility
ciao peppe

[Dan K]

Dave, these threads are for everyone's benefit, not just the obsessed detail freaks like myself. We haven't really ever discussed the old Fujimi kits, so yours is a good set of questions. Incidentally, I believe "Jonathan" was building one recently, per the previous page of this thread, so perhaps he can chime in as well.

The Eduard set is very much Tamiya specific when it comes to sizing; I suppose it could be used in places. As you have surmised, generic IJN CV PE sets are one way to go. Many mfgs. make these; I have the the Lionroar sets,also some Voyager and FlyHawk versions of the netting, masts (also FIneMolds) so, proably any of them will do, though if anyone has specific experience in fitting them to the older Fujimi kits, it would be good to hear from them. A less expensive alternative might be the Tom's CV sets, but this is a much more generic set. For railings, I strongly feel the GMM Ultrafine IJN railings set is the way to go but these are extremly delicate.

Another option might be to use the extremely comprehensive Fujimi PE sets for their new Shokaku/Zuikaku kits. While you might have to use a more generic rail set (like those from GMM) to ensure fit, everything else you need is included and should come close to fitting well. Certainly no worse than cobbling together a number of disparate sets. The more I think about this, the more I'm inclined to suggest this option.

Pepe has given a link to a good source of photographs on the class. Several of the Model Art Ship Modeling Specials have good photo and line representation of the class. #s 12 & 28 actually have brief buildups of the old Fujimi kit with some corrections. These are not as exhaustive, however, as some of the Tamiya build that are included.

The Model Graphix Navy Yard Specials also have several beautiful builds (though not of the old Fujimi kit) and articles that can serve as a guide. I'd have to look again at those for specific issues.

[djohannsen]

Dan and Peppe, thank you for all the useful suggestions. I'm primarily interested in US naval subjects (and I'm new to the world of ship building, as well), so it's very nice to have some friendly help when I'm in this far over my head.

Another option might be to use the extremely comprehensive Fujimi PE sets for their new Shokaku/Zuikaku kits. While you might have to use a more generic rail set (like those from GMM) to ensure fit, everything else you need is included and should come close to fitting well. Certainly no worse than cobbling together a number of disparate sets. The more I think about this, the more I'm inclined to suggest this option.

Looking at the some of the Japanese sites (1999.co.jp, in particular) I see very spendy sets of etch (sets A-D). However, I also see a two fret set http://www.modelwarships.com/reviews/pe ... eview.html that looks like it would be more than enough to put into the old Fujimi kit. I assume that it is the latter that you were referring to? (Edit: Ah, I now see that the reviewer of the set that I linked is Dan Kaplan... Lights are beginning to go on... )

I think that I'll see if I can round-up the set that's reviewed here. Thank you for taking a novice by the hand and giving me an assist.


Dave

[Dan K]

You are most welcome. If you want an early war ship, get the Shokaku PE set. If you want a mid to late war ship with radar, get the Zuikaku PE set.

And welcome to world of IJN

[Jonathan]

Hi Dave

My advise is throw the old Fujimi kit in the nearest bin as fast as possible and buy a cheap Tamiya one!

Seriously though if you're new to ships and do want to turn this kit into something half decent then you can use the Eduard Tamiya fret as most parts are interchangeable (I have the set) but you will need to do a lot of work to get the best out of it which imo is probably just not worth it. For example, the funnels are molded solid and will need drilling out to best effect the funnel caps. The AA armament is very simple but the addition of one of the ordnance sets could rectify this but by the time you've finished you might as well buy the Tamiya kit (with the ordnance set included) and the KA etch and deck set (no need to paint the deck either) which will be quite stunning if the Hiryu set is anything to go by.

If you are considering using the new Fujimi etch then please only put it on the new Fujimi kit or even better, buy the Carrier Division 5 set and build Zuikaku too, then you'd need two sets of etch and the deck sheet oh and the rub down transfers and dont forget the new Fine Molds detail set (which you'd need two of too) and of course then you might as well complete the whole Kido Butai and you'd need......

If you need any reference material then there are at least two very comprehensive examples available to download if you know what I mean

enjoy.

[cnimsk@q.com]

What were the differences between the Shokaku and Zuikaku when built, circa 1941, meaning at the time of the Pearl Harbor attack of December 7. Put another way, can the Fujimi 1/350 kit of Shokaku be built as the Zuikaku December 7 1941.

Chuck

[Dan K]

(moderator, you may want to incorporate this into the Shokaku class thread)


AS I wrote for you on SN: The most significant difference is the flight deck markings, particularly the hiragana symbol denoting Zuikaku vs. Shokaku. This is, literally, a superficial difference. Some of the flight deck striping is different as well.

The sisters are virtually identical. Some differences in the framing of the bridge windows, and the location of a large loudspeaker on Zuikaku's mainmast are about the only other differences.

Plus the marking on the a-c, of course.

[MartinJQuinn]

Added links to Shokaku class gallery entires on the first page. Thanks to Dan Kaplan for compiling the list.

[Guest]

Hello

Can you tell me which is the best 1/700 Shokaku and 1/700 Zuikaku in the market now ?
Tamyia , Fujimi Hasegawa ? have you got the reference of this better kit ?

Sorry i have listen the post but i'm lost (not sure to well understand ... i'm french )

thanks in advance

Dom

[Dan K]

Hi, Dom:

Fujimi released new 1/700 toolings of Shokaku & Zuikaku beginning in late 2010. I think most would consider them the "best" available tooling of this class, as would I, though they are not perfect. If you've had the chance to read throught this CASF thread, particularly the last page, you'll see my nit-picking.