Calling all IJN Kuma-class (球磨), Nagara-class (長良) & Sendai-class (川内) fans

[MatthewB]

FineMolds (FM) Nanodread set #15 contains finely rendered 13mm mounts in single, double, and quad configuration. Even thinner than the 25mm, as they should be.

I know... I just said that I have that set (and will be getting a few more - never again will I use stock AA weapons).

The question was about the number of such weapons on the Nagara and Isuzu in late-42, before their early-43 refits.

And where such weapons were.

Given this, I humbly repeat:

How many 13mm, in what configuration (single, double, quad) and Location were the 13mm, Type 93 MGs on the Nagara and Isuzu in the Solomons' Campaign?

And, I will add a second question, please:

How many 25mm Type 96 MGs, in what configurations and locations were the 25mm, Type 96 MGs on the Nagara and Isuzu?

The Nagara Kit has only 4 13mm Type 93s in a quad mount under the bridge.

And the Nagara kit has 14 Type 96 25mms, in 4 double, and 2 triple mounts, abreast the stacks, abaft the forward torpedo well (in the configuration, bow-to-stern, double-triple-double). The book I have does indicate that they got AA upgrades, but is vague upon when (and photos for this class seem to be exceedingly rare for the war years).

I did notice a 1942 1/350 scale Nagara build in the WIP section. So I will take my queues for the Nagara build from there. But would the Isuzu have been identical?

I almost have the bridge re-built for this kit (both of my Nagara-class are old Fujimi kits. The hulls are fine, but the bridge and weapon turrets all need major work.

I will post some new photos of my WIP on it, and the other ships I am slowly finishing (which are embarrassingly bad - the second set are much better in appearance) in my WIP thread in that section later today.

But I would like to get the AA weapons sorted out, as I will need to build new tubs for them (I am not using the ones that came with the kit, as building splinter-shielding with .015" styrene is too easy.

I am going nuts in the meantime, because I get paid tomorrow (disability insurance from the accident), and will be able to buy the St. Louis, Boise, and Helena I have set aside.

And, I need to track down the offers on the Pensacola, Salt Lake City, and Northampton that were made.....

OH! And I have Japanese Cruisers to buy as well. I need a Sendai, and a Takao and Atago.

The Japanese really went into WWII unprepared in terms of CLs, didn't they?

MB

[Dan K]

The Japanese really went into WWII unprepared in terms of CLs, didn't they?

No and yes. Japanese doctrine used these ships as destroyer flotilla leaders. They were designed to act as destroyer squadron flagships ( 3-4 divisions of four DDs each) and to lead the destroyer divisions in torpedo attack. They were five such flotillas at the start of the war led by Sendai, Jintsu, Naka, Abukuma, and Kinu. However, equipment shortages kept Sendai and Kinu from getting the torpedo equipment upgrades that the other three received.

That said, yes, they were older ships. Limited industrial capacity meant that Japan had to prioritize its warship construction. These ships were upgraded as much as possible to make do until the Aganos could be brought online. IIRC, there may have been treaty restrictions as well that delayed the introduction of new CLs.

Nagara in the Solomons - 2 x 2 twin 13mmAA mounts on a platform on the front of the bridge. 2 x 2 twin 25mmAA, one to either side of funnel #1. No other light armament.

Isuzu in the Solomons - 1 x 4 (quad) 13mmAA mount on a platform on the front of the bridge. 2 x 2 twin 25mmAA, one to either side of funnel #1. No other light armament.

[Aekold]

IIRC, there may have been treaty restrictions as well that delayed the introduction of new CLs.

I don't think so. Americans actually used loopholes in the treaty, when they built their Brooklyn/Helena class cruisers after they had exhausted their CA allowance. The same loophole was abused by IJN when they initially built Mogami-class as CLs.

[MatthewB]

The Japanese really went into WWII unprepared in terms of CLs, didn't they?

No and yes. Japanese doctrine used these ships as destroyer flotilla leaders. They were designed to act as destroyer squadron flagships ( 3-4 divisions of four DDs each) and to lead the destroyer divisions in torpedo attack. They were five such flotillas at the start of the war led by Sendai, Jintsu, Naka, Abukuma, and Kinu. However, equipment shortages kept Sendai and Kinu from getting the torpedo equipment upgrades that the other three received.

That said, yes, they were older ships. Limited industrial capacity meant that Japan had to prioritize its warship construction. These ships were upgraded as much as possible to make do until the Aganos could be brought online. IIRC, there may have been treaty restrictions as well that delayed the introduction of new CLs.

Nagara in the Solomons - 2 x 2 twin 13mmAA mounts on a platform on the front of the bridge. 2 x 2 twin 25mmAA, one to either side of funnel #1. No other light armament.

Isuzu in the Solomons - 1 x 4 (quad) 13mmAA mount on a platform on the front of the bridge. 2 x 2 twin 25mmAA, one to either side of funnel #1. No other light armament.

Thanks. I almost got my Nagara and Isuzu bridge weapons mixed up.

The Fujimi kits for these things are all kinds of messed up. If I did not already own them I would have bought something else upon finding out how wacky they were/are (The Nagara has 1x4 13mm AA mount on the front platform, and 4x2 twin 25mm AA next to Funnels #1 & #2, and the Isuzu is being converted from a Kinu, which is at least a little closer). I am re-building the bridge on each (which is pretty messed up as well). And, while I am at it, I am going to scratch-build all of the splinter-shields for the AA guns, since the ones provided are so freakishly wrong and clumsy looking (and it isn't hard to build the three-sided splinter-shields they had for these). They do not look half-bad after all of the additions and modifications. I wish that I had some easier way to add the windows on the Compass Bridge, though. The Plastic is so hard that it makes easy modification difficult. It does hold an edge pretty well, though. Maybe I will just glue a strip of those paper windows they supply on. . . .

MB

[Dan K]

I don't think so. Americans actually used loopholes in the treaty, when they built their Brooklyn/Helena class cruisers after they had exhausted their CA allowance. The same loophole was abused by IJN when they initially built Mogami-class as CLs.

The Mogamis were originally designed as improved Takaos CAs, but the allotted tonnage for the CAs was already used, so the Mogami design was forced to reside within parameters of the lesser B, or CL, type cruiser with a nominal 8500 ton limit equipped with 15.5cm main battery. The bridge was cut down in size in the wake of the Tomozuru and 4th Fleet incidents.

They were never meant to be destroyer flotilla leaders. However, their tonnage allotment used up whatever was left of the lighter category for the Japanese. This contributed to the long delay before the Aganos appeared, even after the Japanese renunciation of the Treaty limitations.

[maxim]

@ Mathew: these Fujimi kits are terrible. And part of that is that they are based on outdated knowledge about the conversions of these ships. Fujimi's Nagara should probably be also a late war fit, but they got it wrong. I would forget these kits.

[MatthewB]

@ Mathew: these Fujimi kits are terrible. And part of that is that they are based on outdated knowledge about the conversions of these ships. Fujimi's Nagara should probably be also a late war fit, but they got it wrong. I would forget these kits.

Converting them isn't that hard, and I only have two to convert (Nagara and Isuzu).

I am just outright building the bridge for the Isuzu from scratch (it's just a box).

The hulls are basically OK, and I have the materials to fix all of the problems (aftermarket AA guns, even Aftermarket Main Battery, and a bit of PE for the windows - which I FINALLY found my saw to just cut a slot where the compass bridge windows would be... at least for the Nagara; I can just build the Isuzu's bridge correctly).

I do need to get a Sendai and Tenry?, and am looking for kits that work for late-'42. The Sendai-class do not look to have undergone a huge amount of change until late in the war (for the survivors); basically getting the same scattering of 25mm guns that all of the ships got. I don't know much about the Tenry?.

I found a Gakken magazine on Scribd that has images of 1/350 builds of the Nagara, so that I can get the details correct.

Plus, there is a 1/350, 1942 build of the Nagara in the WIP section that I am using. It looks like I am going in the right direction (squaring off the bridge, adding a short extension of the forward bridge housing to mount the 2 double-25mm AA guns on the front of the bridge. And adding a squared off chevron splinter-shield directly to the deck for the double-25s amidships to Stack #1). Other than that.... I need to get some photo-etch railings, and hatches, and maybe some ammo boxes.

This is really the first kit I am working on that I am going to keep (that I am doing for reasons other than to just practice building and painting). So who made it is irrelevant, considering the simplicity of the alterations.

But I wouldn't buy another one. These were just part of a huge haul of kits I got cheaply (I probably paid about $5 each for them).

But.... if anyone has any suggestions on who makes a decent Sendai and Tenry?, I would like to hear it.

It looks like Aoshima, Hasegawa, Tamiya, and Pit-Road all make kits of these.

MB

[Dan K]

Aside from the original (and poor) Fujimi versions, Aoshima makes the Sendai, Jintsu, & Naka. These are recent toolings, and far improved.

[Aekold]

As for Tenryu, Hasegawa has recently made a kit with all new tooling, I guess that one would be the best.

[MatthewB]

For the Nagara, Sendai, and Tentry?....

Did the dual-25mms on these ships have gun shields?

What about the 25mm guns on the Agano in '42/'43 (I am pretty sure she was at Empress Augusta Bay). Did they have gun shields?

MB

[maxim]

I think the gun shields are late war.

In regard to Fujimi kit: the problem is not the conversion, but everything else. You have to replace most parts, even the hull sides are way inferior compared to modern kits - as the Sendai kit by Aoshima (there are two versions, one 1933, one 1943) and the Tenryu kit by Hasegawa (do not buy the old one!)

This is a review of the new Tenryu kit:
http://www.modelwarships.com/reviews/sh ... /index.htm

Here is a review of the Sendai kits (in German, but you can check the photos):
http://www.modellmarine.de/index.php?op ... atid=7:aos

[MatthewB]

I think the gun shields are late war.

In regard to Fujimi kit: the problem is not the conversion, but everything else. You have to replace most parts, even the hull sides are way inferior compared to modern kits - as the Sendai kit by Aoshima (there are two versions, one 1933, one 1943) and the Tenryu kit by Hasegawa (do not buy the old one!)

This is a review of the new Tenryu kit:
http://www.modelwarships.com/reviews/sh ... /index.htm

Here is a review of the Sendai kits (in German, but you can check the photos):
http://www.modellmarine.de/index.php?op ... atid=7:aos

Thanks. Very helpful. There was little danger of me buying another of the older Fujimi Japanese CLs. Two are more than enough.

I decided to document the conversion/mod of the Nagara in the WIP section. I have the bridge pretty much finished (I will have more photos up soon).

Then it will be on to the Stacks to deal with them. I have to buy some PE, which I have been informed is available for just the stacks from Rainbow. Which will be the last of the major problems with the kit.

MB

[Dan K]

I forgot to mention one other differentiating point between Nagara and Isuzu. The crane boom for Nagara is of lattice work design whilst that of Isuzu is a solid boom that's round in cross-section.

[MatthewB]

I forgot to mention one other differentiating point between Nagara and Isuzu. The crane boom for Nagara is of lattice work design whilst that of Isuzu is a solid boom that's round in cross-section.

Thanks. That will come in Handy as well.

I have trashed the Bridge of the Nagara (well, not literally trashed it - just decided it isn't useable).

I am currently TRYING to get it modeled in ViaCAD. But ViaCAD had an update that I installed, and suddenly nothing freaking works the way it did, and I am having to re-learn an awful lot of it (Admitted, I like the changes that I find so far. They greatly speed up the tools they replace, but I have to completely re-do all of my Keyboard Shortcuts, and Tablet settings, which will take a week to complete).

In the meantime, I should probably get back to work on the Bridge. I am just beginning to put the portholes in the sides, and create the construction lines for the platforms holding the tripod mast up (I can't actually create them until I have measured dimensions so that the 3D printed part will match up with the Kit's parts).

I should have done this to begin with, but laziness kept me from doing the obvious.

At least this way I can add details that would never have appeared in a kit.

I think I am going to re-do the Stack Funnels as well. The Fujimi Kit's funnels are all kinds of messed up for adding PE. And I just ordered some PE for IJN CL Stack Grills.

I need to decide on whether the prop guards will be Styrene or PE, too. And whether to bother with putting hatches on the aft quarterdeck housing that is covered by the main deck (hmm... is it really a quarterdeck then???). Any hatches would barely be visible even if you looked for them. We'll see how many hatches I need for the Ayanami, Sendai, and Isuzu. Any left over will go into that area on all of the CLs.

MB

[Aekold]

It would really enjoy if the discussion here could be kept on the topic. I guess if I'm interested to know about latest CAD updates and plans to buy stuff for a particular build, I'd rather visit a corresponding work-in-progress thread.

[MatthewB]

OK then, on the topic of the Nagara CLs' Bridges.

Were there any distinct differences in Compass Bridge Windows, or in the portholes in the bridge superstructure?

All of the blueprints/plans I can find show the sides of a few of the ships (Nagara, Kinu, Isuzu), which show minor differences over the years, but not for the other ships.

Would there be any significant difference between the Isuzu, Kinu and Nagara's front windows during '42 or '43?


MB

[Angeliccypher]

For the Nagara, Sendai, and Tentry?....

Did the dual-25mms on these ships have gun shields?

MB

There are splinter shields that go around the two dual 25s on the Nagara in her 41-42 configuration before or after that I am not sure.

[MatthewB]

For the Nagara, Sendai, and Tentry?....

Did the dual-25mms on these ships have gun shields?

MB

There are splinter shields that go around the two dual 25s on the Nagara in her 41-42 configuration before or after that I am not sure.

I have found an image of the '42 Nagara.

It is the Sendai and Tenry? with which I am having trouble locating any additions that might have been made in '42 - '43.

I know in '43 a lot of ships started getting AA upgrades.

MB

[Aekold]

You can Sendai'42 planes for 10 Euro here: https://blueprintsofwarships.com.pl/350_LargePDF.htm
Some people find mistakes there, but they are really convenient to work with for me.

[MatthewB]

You can Sendai'42 planes for 10 Euro here: https://blueprintsofwarships.com.pl/350_LargePDF.htm
Some people find mistakes there, but they are really convenient to work with for me.

OOH!

The Sendai is on sale, too.

Thank you muchly.

They are better than nothing (or what I currently have, with is a slight bit more than nothing).

MB