Greg lester wrote:Ok, next question, given there is so little reference material on this class, I'm trying to figure out the panel lines on the hull and what the 4 "flaps" are on the side of the Isuzu. The Aoshima kit does not have them but the box art does. The rest of it I have figured.
You would need to be more specific as to what you mean by "Flaps."
In looking at the box-art (I assume you mean the 1/350 scale kit), I cannot see anything that looks like "Flaps."
MB
OMG LOOK! A signature
Working on:
1/700 (All Fall 1942):
HIJMS Nagara
HIJMS Aoba & Kinugasa
USS San Francisco
USS Helena
USS St. Louis
USS Laffey & Farenholt
HIJMS Sub-Chasers No. 4 - 7
HIJMS Sub-Chasers No. 13 - 16
My bad, on the side of the ship, adjacent to the stacks are 6 panels that run from just aft of the tower to just under the rear torpedo tubes. They sit just above the armour belt.
I was wondering if they were hatches for coal/oiling. Does that make sense?
Yes mate, thanks, that's the thing I'm talking about. The Aoshima kit does not bother to add them even though their box art does. Frankly it's a pretty bland kit, and research is somewhat problematic as there are no decent photos of it.
Thx for posting, that, Timmy. It appears that the actual ship did sport something like that after her reconstruction, but it appears to me to be just some sort of variant on her plating. Definitely not hatches. Of the available, close-up photos of her class, none of the others sport anything like it, at least on a prewar basis. There is a great photo of Isuzu fitting out as built, and her plating there doesn't show these details.
Those are pretty odd, but not (IMO) hatches--or coverings over old hatches--for coaling or oiling.
I suspect, and this is just my own guess, that they may be strakes added on when/if they strengthened the ship's hull after her rebuild. Their odd dimensions suggest something along those lines, I think. (AFAIK, no images of other IJN light cruisers, or of that specific ship, show such plates prior to that.)
It's a good question, in any case.
I just got the plans from Profile Morskie and he does not mention any details on the hull (nor any deck vents). The appear to run along and over the central armour belt, but the camber on the front of them lead me to think they could be a platform of some type? When I start making this kit I'll have to add a layer across the length of the hull but as none of this class survived the war there are no clear photos I can find and only one photo of a model that includes them. Would'nt they make the ship too beamy being so high if they are hull stabilisers?
I can't say for sure, but some sort of strengthening strake makes the most sense to me. The one surviving 5500 tonner was Kitakami, but the postwar photos of her aren't clear enough to make any sort of determination.
I don't know if they were "welded"--I did not use that term--or if they were to "stabilise" the hull, but was thinking of the Ducol strakes added onto ASHIGARA, for hull strengthening. But, I'm just guessing...
ISUZU did suffer hull damage on multiple occasions during the war from direct hits & near-misses by bombs and also by mining.
Also, during her final May-Sept 1944 refit "...the scuttles on the lower deck side were sealed to improve watertight integrity..." (per L&W's CruBible, p. 402)
Those excellent close-up images seem to show no external degaussing cable. Were they internal after her last upgrades?
Every one of those "Panels" has what looks to be a drain-pipe hanging down from it in the same place.
Could that have any relation to what they are there?
MB
OMG LOOK! A signature
Working on:
1/700 (All Fall 1942):
HIJMS Nagara
HIJMS Aoba & Kinugasa
USS San Francisco
USS Helena
USS St. Louis
USS Laffey & Farenholt
HIJMS Sub-Chasers No. 4 - 7
HIJMS Sub-Chasers No. 13 - 16
Kiso had, when she was new, a hangar in the bridge (in contrast to the other Kuma class ships) and she had a launch platform in front of the bridge, which was at least tested. She did not got a catapult and therefore had never floatplanes (only Kuma and Tama got catapults). The hangar was removed before the war. According to Japanese articles, she probably got a 13 mm twin in front of the bridge in the place of the former forward extension of the hangar.
Kiso and Kitakami never received a catapult with their first modernizations in the early 1930s, unlike the other 55000 tonners. Something to do with limitations under the 1930 London naval treaty.
OK, so no answer there! Next, the single 25MM type 96 guns. I cannot find a photo anywhere of one with a circular base (that seems to be fitted to so may kits in the form of deck molding. I'm just not convinced a circular base is right. Is it a case of aftermarket following what's on a kit to make it look better. I thought they were square or just bolted in at the pedestal.
Circular bases did exist for permanently mounted 25mm singles. It's hard to find a photo from above that shows a mount on its base. This photo of Yukikaze postwar clearly shows the remaining mounting rings. See also Report JM-200-F 0-47(N)-2 on AA machine guns and mounts: http://www.fischer-tropsch.org/primary_ ... MJ_toc.htm
