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

[Oterlia]

Yamato had 3 Mitsubishi F1M(Pete) and 4 Aichi E13A(Jake).

[Marco_Trigo]

And now I'm curious as to why you'd want to do that.

I think he is fond of the idea of giving Yamato fighter like CAM ships had, like the Italians had with the Reggiane aboard their battleships.

The Yamato never had Rufes aboard. The Jake had nothing to do with the Zero, other than the "type 0" in the classification. And since it was much larger than the Zero, BUT as sailor jack mentioned, in the Zero only the wing tips folded, whereas in the Zero, only the tips did so, and that's in the early versions.

It would be really hard to fit the zero through that hangar. Removing the engine for that, would be a very time consuming task, and it would probably make mor sense to just take the wings off... which you couldn't, because the Zero had the "looked-good-on-paper" weight saving construction with fuselage formers an integral part of the wing. That means it was a one-piece wing, and that's why only the wing tips could be folded.

So my belief is that no, you couldn't really fit a Zero on the Yamato in any easy way, or else the Japanese would have done it, considering how keen they were about getting runways out of everything that moved.

Marco

[chuck]

Skulski says 7 planes.
Only the wingtips fold, rather like sticking your arm out and curling your fingers up, but not bending your elbows.
If you remove the engine, it shortens the plane.
Then turn the plane itself sideways to the hangar well.
It should fit; if not, turn the rudder sideways and shorten it more.
Do that, and the fuselage will still have a projection that sticks backwards from underneath the rudder.
Remove that, and you shorten it more.
Next, the wings, folded at the tips, will be too long for a straight-down descent into the hangar well.
So angle the straight aircraft wings at 30 to 40 degrees or so, and the lower wingtip will go down and into the opening while the upper wingtip remains above the lip at the back end of the well.

Disassemble the plane into its main assemblies and it would store even easier.

If not, how would you move the plane in the hanger with its wheels side ways to the direction of motion?

Once you get it out, how would you launch it? Zero is probably not stressed for catapault launch.

Exactly what do you think a couple of zeros can do against the sort of air attack the Japanese are subjected to by the time they lost all their own carriers aircover?

[Marco_Trigo]

As I've said, with the Zero, you just CAN'T remove its wings because it has a single spar and the wings are part of the fuselage. The Zero would require major engineering surgery to have foldable wings and I don't think it would preserve its performance.

As for the last line... I don't think the Japanese ever considered such an issue anyway. It's not like anyone could have thought the Rufe might survive for any length of time on far off islands with no real fighters around...

[pghgeorge]

What a great set of videos. Thanks.

I just uploaded a 2-part Yamato and the Battle of Leyte Gulf, and a 1-part Battle of Cape Engano. I am also uploading a HD version of Yamato's Final Battle which I originally put up last year.

I think you will enjoy - sit down, pop a cold one, and get ready for a rough ride - you'll never get closer to feeling what it must have been like ...

Yamato & Leyte Gulf Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZEOOIO1 ... xWyW9uBwM=

Yamato & Leyte Gulf Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yEXC5t_y ... ea5oUpHjE=

Battle of Cape Engano: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-X1vIB0 ... StRzVo5mA=

[chuck]

Yamato had 3 Mitsubishi F1M(Pete) and 4 Aichi E13A(Jake).

That was the intention. But in practice no more than 2 of each type were ever seen or known to have been shipped.

[prowannab]

In regards to the great video's that Bucketfoot made. I think they are very well done and must have taking a long time to make.With that being said ,In my opinion I feel like they are not a very accurate representation of what actually happened in all 3 video's. To me it looks like the IJN decimated the American forces,when in reality it was quite different.Yes both sides had losses,but the IJN lost a tad bit more than the videos show.The video to me shows that Taffy 3 had been blown completely out of the water and all ships were lost.Which the records prove that was not the case.In actuality if the IJN forces stayed in the battle yes they could've and probably would've destroyed the entire Taffy 3 brigade,but they turned tail and ran. To me it looks like the IJN didn't loose much of anything,this was their last large scale naval battle and had some serious losses that they eventually couldn't overcome.As to why the Yamato basically stayed in harbor until the ten-go operation were she eventually was sunk.

[SailorJack]

Okay, the question was, could you fit a Mitsubishi A6M2 Zero in the belowdecks aircraft hangar bay of IJN Yamato.
Given: fold the wingtips; remove propeller, cowling, and engine; turn rudder sideways or remove it; remove the fuselage projection underneath the rudder; remove rudder bellcrank if also necessary; leave landing gear up.
Turn the aircraft sideways.
Angle the wings about 30 or 40 degrees so one wing is slanted up, the other down.
Down and in she goes.
Skulski's book, by the way, shows that the trolleys had pivoting bases.

It appears that the answer is; Yes, it would fit; and Yes, you could do it.
At least, no absolute rebuttals were given.
Nobody said, "It absolutely, positively, cannot be done because the plane will not fit pure and simple."

[prowannab]

Why not just leave 4 of them on deck,there was enough room,But then the question of maintenance comes in, well if they were thrown on for the ten-go operation then they wouldn't need any,just my two cents,but I have to agree for normal everyday deployment,way to much work just to have a few a/c aboard.

[chuck]

Okay, the question was, could you fit a Mitsubishi A6M2 Zero in the belowdecks aircraft hangar bay of IJN Yamato.
Given: fold the wingtips; remove propeller, cowling, and engine; turn rudder sideways or remove it; remove the fuselage projection underneath the rudder; remove rudder bellcrank if also necessary; leave landing gear up.
Turn the aircraft sideways.
Angle the wings about 30 or 40 degrees so one wing is slanted up, the other down.
Down and in she goes.
Skulski's book, by the way, shows that the trolleys had pivoting bases.

It appears that the answer is; Yes, it would fit; and Yes, you could do it.
At least, no absolute rebuttals were given.
Nobody said, "It absolutely, positively, cannot be done because the plane will not fit pure and simple."

Is the zero's airframe even designed with jack points to fit the trolleys? You can'y just set on plane on some metal support anywhere you want. The metal support will punch right through the plane's light skin. You will need specifically designed frames on the airplane behind the skin to support jack points at the right location in order for the plane to sit on the properly on the trolley without being damaged.

Also, once you remove the engine, what remains of the airframe will be very tail heavy. It probably can't even sit on the trolley with the trolley under the wings and the main spar without the fuselage toppling over backwards.

Also, how do you know the zero can be catapault launched? The airframe has to be intentionally designed to interface with the catapault and transmit the stress of catapault launch to the whole plane without damage. These catapaults are operated by gun powder, you know. They are not exactly gentle on the planes they throw into the air.

[SailorJack]

Hi Chuck, I'm not a pro at mixing answers with remarks, so please excuse me for doing it this way...

Chuck: Is the zero's airframe even designed with jack points to fit the trolleys? You can'y just set on plane on some metal support anywhere you want. The metal support will punch right through the plane's light skin. You will need specifically designed frames on the airplane behind the skin to support jack points at the right location in order for the plane to sit on the properly on the trolley without being damaged.

Me: The belly and-or wing bomb mounts, and lower the landing gear and put a brace agains the backside of the struts, preferably as close to the wing as possible.

Chuck: Also, once you remove the engine, what remains of the airframe will be very tail heavy. It probably can't even sit on the trolley with the trolley under the wings and the main spar without the fuselage toppling over backwards.

Me: Thank you for the suggestion, that's just what I was looking for, good counter-arguments to work with. Answer: bolt-on flat lead counter-weights to compensate for the removal of the engine. Only necessary when the engine is off, and bolted to the engine mounting points.
I spent 20 years as an aircraft sheetmetal man for the USN working on fighter jets, E-2 radome planes, and helos, not that that qualifies me to do AFCs (Air Frame Changes) on Zeros.
But I would say that it would not be impossible to build a custom 'adapter' frame as a go-between for the trolley and/or cradle, and the Zero's underside, with possibly a little torching of the trolley and cradle to accomodate any tricky parts, or to allow a gap with suitable extra cradle frame bracing for mounting the belly bomb.
The specially modified cradle would be contoured and padded, and go with the Zero onto the catapult.

Chuck: Also, how do you know the zero can be catapault launched? The airframe has to be intentionally designed to interface with the catapault and transmit the stress of catapault launch to the whole plane without damage. These catapaults are operated by gun powder, you know. They are not exactly gentle on the planes they throw into the air.

Me: You could reduce the catapult charge.
Hypothetical scenario: Zero stall speed 55 knots; IJN Yamato forward speed 27-28 knots; headwind 20-30 knots.
You might actually need a belly- or wing-mounted bomb load just to keep a Zero under full power from lifting right off the catapult with no catapult charge at all.
The bomb belly mounts seem like good 'hard points' to me to put much of the force of a reduced catapult charge against.
Perhaps also if you lowered the landing gear, and also used the unloaded wing bomb mount attachments; there's a few more 'hard points' designed to take enormous stress, if your adapter reaches up close to the wing to push against laterally.
I'm not saying the above is precisely how to do it, but it would be a good starting point for anyone with an engineering degree and-or experience in launching propeller planes to work from in working up a good adapter rig.
So I would surmise that makes it all fairly feasible, and not just flat out impossible.

PS - I suppose if the belly mounted bomb just sticks down too far, then the belly bomb mount points could still be used as 'hard points'.
Then you'd need your adapter frame to reach out and push against the wing-mounted bomb points in a way that carries the load of adding a pair of wing-mounted bombs.
All I'm looking at is 'feasibility' vs. 'flat out impossible'; and it does seem feasible.

[SailorJack]

I thought this 3D CGI Yamato web site might be of some interest to model-makers;
http://w2322.nsk.ne.jp/qm.masaki/

Starting here...
http://w2322.nsk.ne.jp/qm.masaki/y1.html

...you can go to the bottom and click on a green semi-circular arrow to go to the next set of CGI images, for about 12 pages.
Plus some other CGI images, other IJN ships, and so on.

[redkomet]

Sorry I have an OT request, where I can buy Ishida's itmes?

TIA

[mima]

Hello from Switzerland,

Check out Freetime Hobbies in the US, or send me a private message for more informations
about Ishidas parts, ok??

Best, Michael

[redkomet]

Hello from Switzerland,

Check out Freetime Hobbies in the US, or send me a private message for more informations
about Ishidas parts, ok??

Best, Michael

Thx Michael

cheers

[Oterlia]

Im going to buy a wooden deck for my 1/350 Yamato. I want to have a dark deck and I can see there are two options. There is one set from Artwok and one from Pontos. Which one is to prefer ?

[Senkan]

Are you making the new or old tool Yamato?

[Oterlia]

New tool

[redoctober27]

Hey guys real stupid question for you guys does anyone know if Tamaya kure grey spray paint TS-66 is glossy, semigloss or flat? I finished my IJN Yamato and its in 1/700 scale and it seems like its is slightly glossy. Is there anyway I can flaten this down at all? I do have a stained wood scale deck and its for the most part done and all put together. But i just don't know if there's a way to flatten it down the sheen of the paint a bit with out damaging the wood deck? Or it's just because it used a spray paint ?idk maybe its just me having OCD lol. Any thoughts? Thank you!

[chuck]

All of tamiya's flat colors are not quite matt flat. But this works for IJN gray because the real IJN paint really was not completely flat, especially when new. There are photos clearly showing the paint on IJN warships glinting under the sun.