Calling all WW2 IJN sub fans

[JonSS202]

Thank you Dan, your resources are amazing! Though I was skeptical of the I-17 configuration being different from her sisters, not having any proof to discount what combinedfleet stated is going to make a build of her interesting... I was a ground pounder by trade & don't have a lot of naval or flight knowledge but it would seem to me that having a fixed catapult aft of conning tower would not allow a takeoff into the wind or with the optimum forward momentum/speed of the boat and not sure what a B1 class sub would have gained by this configuration anyway

Jon

[Dan K]

Believe it or not, there was an IJN class, J3, with that exact configuration, the I-7 & 8. (I guess they needed a tailwind )

They were very large scouting subs with a heavy deck gun forward., built pre-war and used for squadron commanders. The I-8 made a trip to Nazi-occupied France in 1943.

BTW, I found another I-17 photo, probably taken not to much before the previous pic.

[JonSS202]

Dan,
I did not know that about I-7 & 8, learn something new everyday! I had convinced myself that I-17 must be in the same configuration as her sister ships but now that I know the configuration of the catapult aft of conning tower was a viable design, I am going to build the I-17 as such. But, I still have the same dilemma... What was the configuration of the conning tower & hangar? I searched for pics of I-7 & 8 but most that I found are of lil help. I have a general idea of the shape of the front of the conning tower but not sure of the aircraft hangar placement. I plan to do a multiple kit raid & scratch build, just need a lil photographic or design drawing

[ssn705]

7 and 8 had a normal conning tower with the sloped forward end. The hangar was in two pieces, was aft of the tower and consisted of a cylinder on each side of the forwardmost end of the catapult. I have a number of pics so I'll see if I can scan one or two

Dave

[Dan K]

Not the best scan of I-8 but, the only one readily available.

[JonSS202]

I read that the I-7 & 8 carried a diff plane than a Glen because it wouldn't fit in their hangars. Deciding on what to use for a hangar. The beauty of not having any definitive evidence of the layout of I-17 is that I can use my imagination & not be wrong...

[Dan K]

An Kawanishi H8K Emily, perhaps?

[JonSS202]

Watanabe E9W1 'Slim' Type 96 floatplane, which also happened 2 b a bi-plane unlike the 'Glen'. The Glen was a larger floatplane barely, about 2 ft longer & not quite 6 in taller & displacing about 500 lbs more than Slim. Guessing that the length was probably the issue or it could have been the dynamic of how the 2 differed in assembly? Also, a Glen's engine could be warmed up & power checks done in the single hangar configuration, plane unfolded & ready 4 launch by catapult, a quicker system than the dual hangars. Since the I-17 carried a Glen(per combinedfleet), I think the singular hangar aft of conning tower would be the way to depict her if she did have catapult aft.

[zotz]

Hi,
Anyone have comments of this offering?

Thanks

[Timmy C]

Unless the mold changes alluded to on page 5 of this thread actually occurred, it's a terrible kit and should be avoided. The most obvious error is the bow, where the deck slopes downward as opposed to up.

Here's the kit built from the box: viewtopic.php?f=12&t=119537

And on first page of this thread, there's a nice profile drawing of what it should look like.

[zotz]

Unless the mold changes alluded to on page 5 of this thread actually occurred, it's a terrible kit and should be avoided. The most obvious error is the bow, where the deck slopes downward as opposed to up.

Here's the kit built from the box: viewtopic.php?f=12&t=119537

And on first page of this thread, there's a nice profile drawing of what it should look like.

Thanking you!

[zotz]

Hi,
Any 1/200 Nichimo I-19 PE set?

Thanks

[Peter Rathgeb]

Hi all

I have two questions concerning the type D submarines:

- where was (were) the access door(s) to the interior of the conning tower?
- I-370 was converted to a Kaiten carrier in January, 2015. Were all the deck guns removed, or did she retain e.g. a single machine gun for air defense purposes?
- Which was the exact position of the 5 Kaiten she carried? I have seen different proposals.

Thanks and cheers,
Peter

[Peter Rathgeb]

Hi all

Just a little information for those of you who want to build I-36 and/or I-37 from the 1/350 Aoshima kit of the I-37.

Aoshima gives you the option to build either I-36 or I-37. It's a beautiful kit, like all Aoshima 1/350 subs, but there seems to be a little confusion concerning the configurations as Kaiten carriers.

Aoshima gives you I-36 after conversion, with the hangar and catapult removed and the tower converted, with 4 Kaiten on the rear and two on the front deck. This is correct, but note that I-36 already carried 4 Kaiten before the conversion, with just her deck gun removed; she participated in (I believe 3) Kaiten missions between September 1944 and March 1945. Only in March 1945, the conversion took place to allow 2 more Kaiten to be carried on her foredeck.

On the other hand, Aoshima gives you I-37 with hangar/catapult, and 4 Kaiten on the rear deck. This is wrong, since I-37 was fully converted to a Kaiten carrier already in September 1944, before her first Kaiten mission. As a consequence, she always carried 6 Kaiten.

But this is not a real problem, you only need to switch the markings, then either sub can be built, I-36 in the configuration indicated for I-37, or I-37 in the configuration indicated for I-36.

A little caveat: since I don't read Japanese, I don't know if Aoshima has any new informations on these subs, which caused them to propose these configurations for the two subs. Something might be part of the long (Japanese only) text in the instructions.

Cheers,
Peter

[Dan K]

That's certainly odd. I don;t know enough about the subs to really comment, but I'll try to do a little research.

Regarding the Ds - all kaiten configurations were two forward, three aft. This line drawing from the 'net (Blueprints.com) seems best. No idea about the hatches.

[gantu]

see this

[bmkerr]

Hi guys, What are your guys's views on 1/700 vs 1/350 ? I ask this because I am currently debating whether or not for my Japanese submarine fleet Converting from 700 to 350 scale subs and only subs! I am a huge fan of 1/700 for ships! but when it comes to my russian subs I usually do them in 1/350 scale and thinking about doing the same for my Japanese submarine fleet as well but still leaving my surface ships at 700 scale only because there are more 350 scale japanese submariens available than there is in the 700 scale. Does anyone have any opinions on this?

Hi, redoctober27.
Are you sure there are more IJN subs in 1/350?
I find quite a bit of them in 1/700 (although not all are of the best quality, but can be considerably upgraded with Tom's photoetch sets; the Pit Road and Tamiya kits are great!):

I-1 + I-6 (Junsen Type 1 and Type 2) (Aoshima)
I-9 + Ro-35 (Type A1 and Kaichu Type 6) (Pit Road)
I-15 + I-46 (Type B1 and Type C2) (Fujimi)
I-16 + I-58 (Type C1 and Type B3) (Tamiya)
I-58 late (Type B3 with Kaiten) (Tamiya)
I-56 and I-58 (Type B3) (Pit Road)
I-13 and I-14 (Type A modified) (Pit Road)
I-400 and I-401 (Sen Toku) (Pit Road)
I-400 also from Aoshima and Hobby Boss
I-68 and I-370 (Kaidai Type 6A and Type D1) (Hasegawa)
I-171 and I-361 (Kaidai Type 6A and Type D1) (Hasegawa)
Ro-35 and Koryu (Kaichu Type 6, and midget Type D) (Pit Road)

I don't think there are so many different types available in 1/350, that's why I went the other way, from 1/350 to 1/700.

Cheers,
Peter

Hi guys,

I'm trying to find a model of I-124 that was sunk of Northern Australia. I'd perfer a 1/700 kit but would settle for a 1/350.

[Guest]

To the best of my knowledge, there is no kit for this class, which was an older, pre-war class. That said, there very well could be a resin kit made in Japan.

[bmkerr]

To the best of my knowledge, there is no kit for this class, which was an older, pre-war class. That said, there very well could be a resin kit made in Japan.

A mate of mine thought the I-121 class was based on a pre-war german design.

Can anyone shed some light on this theory. If anyone knows of a kit close to this class I'm sure I make the changes.

[Timmy C]

Wiki and CombinedFleet.com echo your mate - the I-121 class was a copy of the late-WWI German Type UE II class.

As far as I know, that's even more obscure.