Calling all Unryu-class (雲龍) fans

[Timmy C]

Those two are from the same vintage, just representing different stages of the ship's life.

Compare the instructions for the two:
http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10184493
http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10184495

As the description says, they are new-tooled as of August 2012.

(PS: bookmark that site - they almost always have scans of the instructions and sprues so you can compare kits)

[marijn van gils]

Hello Unryu fans,

I would like to build Amagi in 1946, capsized in Kure. It is simply an instant diorama, with a strong mood to it.

For this project, research will be a bit of a challenge, and every photo can add valuable information.

So my question for you IJN experts: which publications contain usefull photo's on Amagi and/or her sisters? They can be any language, even if I can't read it.

I found the following very useful pic on the net:

Any idea from which (Japanese?) book this is?
The printed pic should show me more detail than this scan...

Many thanks,

Marijn

[Dan K]

Pics of the capsized Amagi? With, or without the mooring island behind it? In one regard, they are ubiquitous. On the other, there is no one single, great source. I can post what I have ( a lot)

[marijn van gils]

Many thanks Dan! Much appreciated!

The second photo was new to me, the rest I have found on the net too.

Maybe I'll post here what I have found so far, so everybody can benefit, and if you would like to post more photo's you won't have to do any double work.



























And some stills from this movie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FEbWz4ulESM





Next to that, I'm still interested in finding out which paper publications these photo's come from, as they often show better detail than the scans of them online, which is not unimportant for a modelling project.

Many thanks,

Marijn

[peppe]

i know 3 books on the class:
maru special 23 - japanese
kongo and unryo class - polish but in english - trojka editor- isbn 978-83-60041-42-0
japnese aircraft carrier of ww2 - russian - eksmo editor- isbn 978-5-699-40231-1
all the books have foto and drawings of the ships of the class
they are also 4 foto of amagi in the book "japanese naval warship photo album - aircraft carrier and seaplane carrier" diamond ediction
i have all this books, some in paper and some in pdf or jpg. if you need of something send me pm your e mail address
ciao peppe

[marijn van gils]

Hello Peppe,

I pm-ed you. Many thanks!

Marijn

[marijn van gils]

Dan, I forgot to reply:
I will include a small part of the island. It is a great opportunity to include a piece of land in a ship dio without doing a typical harbour scene. There are also some fun to model features on it, like the wooden skeletons, bomb craters and railroad track. I could also include some delerict railcars, and a couple of US vehicles and some figures checking out the carrier.
But first I have to finish my curremt d?o Project...

Cheers,

Marijn

[Dan K]

The photo quality of the Maru Special books is questionable, and tends to be dark. That's why I think most online sources are actually better.

Marijn, I'm not clear what condition you plan to show Amagi in: before, during bombing, or after capsizing. Different photos for each state.

[marijn van gils]

Hello Dan,

Many thanks! I was of course now considering buying the Maru Special 23, so you might have just saved me some money and frustration!

I want to model her in 1946, so capsized, but before salvage operations started. I want to do her as in these pics:







This diorama should hopefully convey the sad atmosphere of the end of a once mighty empire.

Any photo's of the carrier in this condition are of course great, but also any earlier shots, or even later ones during salvage works, can be very helpful to get the details of the ship as accurate as possible. Photo's of her sisters can help fill the holes when there is no direct photographic evidence on Amagi herself.

Cheers, and happy newyear!

Marijn

[Dan K]

some others, mostly from the Adm. Bogan Collection

[marijn van gils]

Many many thanks Dan!

These will be vital for modelling the extensive battle damage. Just what I need!

Meanwhile, I found a couple more from Katsuragi.
Some details shots showing the structure of the flight deck with bomb damage:







And a nice shot showing the appearance of the camouflage and markings under heavy weathering:



Thanks again,

Marijn

[Haijun watcher]

Could one technically build the Aoshima Unryu kit as the Amagi or a "what-if" complete Kasagi?

I'm getting the impression that one could do that because it seems to me that only the Katsuragi had features that were radically different from her sisters, as described by a post by Dick J on another forum:

There are a number of differences. One which comes to mind is the shape of the back of the bridge. There was a searchlight located there, and the structure supporting it (and the base of the mast) varied from one unit of the class to another. But the most identifying feature on Katsuragi would be the tubs for the 25MM guns. The Unryu was a development of the Hiryu design. Those 25MM tubs which corresponded to the originals on Hiryu were rounded, even on the later Unryu's. Those added to the Unryu design later were angled (like half of a hexagon). Other than the enclosed tubs immediately aft of the stack, all of Katsuragi's tubs were the angled type, including those in the "original" locations.

If you disagree, then by all means correct me before I make a mistake.

----------------------

Another thing, why do people keep saying the Unryu class is a development of the "Hiryu design".

But Hiryu had a port side bridge, so don't they mean the "Soryu design", which had a starboard bridge, instead?

Hiryu and Soryu were only "half-sisters", so to speak.

[Dan K]

Could one technically build the Aoshima Unryu kit as the Amagi or a "what-if" complete Kasagi?

I would think so. There might be differences in their radar fits, but they are probably 99% identical.

Another thing, why do people keep saying the Unryu class is a development of the "Hiryu design".

The hulls were identical, save for increased concrete protection around the avgas storage. The hangar decks were also essentially the same, save for the reduction in the number of elevators, and their shape. Only the bridge was relocated, and improved in terms of facilities and area.

[Dick J]

Haijun watcher, Hiryu had a number of differences from Soryu. The displacement was increased by about 1,400 tons, the beam increased by 3 to 4 feet, the forecastle was raised by one deck, the bridge was relocated, the 5" guns rearranged, and the flightdeck shape changed slightly. There were a number of other detail differences. The Unryu class had the larger hull and displacement of the Hiryu rather than the Soryu. It also had the 5" arrangement of Hiryu, the flightdeck shape (except in the immediate vicinity of the bridge structure), and the raised forecastle. Many of Hiryu's internal detail differences were also incorporated in Unryu. As Dan indicated, the main differences were in the bridge placement, the number and shape of the elevators, and the avgas stowage. Soryu and Hiryu also had a number of projections on the hull below the flightdeck that were eliminated on the Unryu's. But when Unryu was designed, the Hiryu's plans were the starting point, not the Soryu's.

As for Katsuragi, her gun tubs seem to have been unique to her. If you look at the post immediately above your last one in this thread, in the top photo, note the shape of the projecting gun tubs. Even on the enclosed 25MM mounts aft of the stacks, the enclosed portion is circular, but the outer structure still has sharp corners. I have never seen this done on any other IJN carrier. Compare that to the shots of Amagi, capsized, and note that the tubs between the stacks and the after 5" are rounded, while only the two tubs aft of the 5" mounts are angular. Kasagi seems to have copied Unryu and Amagi in that regard.

[Dan K]

Very good points by Dick. Regarding the shape of the gun tubs, it may be a reflection of naval yard preferences. Katsuragi was built at Kure, while Unryu came from Yokosuka, and both Amagi and Kasagi were built by Mistubishi-Nagasaki.

[Haijun watcher]

Dan K and Dick J,

Thanks for all your feedback.

Still, regarding another question on their respective deck markings, a quick online search shows this display from one modeller:



For those who can't read Japanese Kanji, Amagi is on the left, Katsuragi is in the middle, and Unryu is on the right.

However, inside the Aoshima Unryu kit I currently have are deck decals exactly the same as those of Katsuragi, with the false battleship silhouette bow and stern painted brown instead of light green.

Either the carriers are mislabelled, or are these deck markings accurate?

Furthermore, Amagi seems to have a lime-like gray-green colour added on the gun tubs/hull where her sisters simply have light/bright green.

Like I said, my original intention is to use the Unryu kit to make either Amagi or Kasagi.

[Dan K]

Note that there is no color photo corroboration of the flight deck patterns except for Katsuragi, and Amagi long after her flight deck was trashed. In fact, there is no photo of Unryu's flight deck, Only forensic inference, recollections, and interpretations. That, and the overall patterns initially proscribed by IJN research. You can really handle it any way you want.

[Haijun watcher]

Note that there is no color photo corroboration of the flight deck patterns except for Katsuragi, and Amagi long after her flight deck was trashed. In fact, there is no photo of Unryu's flight deck, Only forensic inference, recollections, and interpretations. That, and the overall patterns initially proscribed by IJN research. You can really handle it any way you want.

Colours aside, on looking closer at Amagi, it seems like the middle part of her pattern was also slightly different from that of her sisters. I may have no choice but to build the model as the Unryu then or a "what-if" Kasagi.

[Dan K]

If you are using the models as your guide, note that the modeler's interpretation is subjective. AKAIK, Amagi's patterns cannot be definitively established.

[Haijun watcher]

If you are using the models as your guide, note that the modeler's interpretation is subjective.

I take it the same can be said of the box art of all Unryu class carriers from Aoshima, Fujimi and Pit-road?

The box artists had a subjective interpretations with little historical research? (when it comes to each carrier's flight deck colours, etc.)