The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Wed Jan 19, 2022 8:41 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3153 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 154, 155, 156, 157, 158
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Sep 21, 2021 7:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 11:21 pm
Posts: 6
vds242 wrote:
Quote:
Heaven One


In case of the open 25mm triple guns, there are some photos from 1945 available where you can clearly see, that the open triples haven´t any shields. For example you can see it clear at the attached photo where I had reconstructed the shape of the so called "Zarebas". From a nearby position another set of photos were shot, where you can see two more open triple guns (above direct at the superstructure).

And when it comes to the shape of the Zarebas, the actual 1/10 Kure Model is correct! The shape of Skulski´s Zarebas in his updated AotS is wrong.

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't that the shield for the gun directly behind the officers in the picture? It seams to fit your reconstruction drawing perfectly.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Oct 04, 2021 3:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 10:03 am
Posts: 27
Location: Melegnano, Italy
Timmy C wrote:
Another new 1/700 Yamato, this time from Pontos with full PE and turned brass: https://www.luckymodel.com/scale.aspx?i ... PS-70002R1


Seems very interesting. I used to have the Pit-Road, Fujimi and Yamato 1/700 kits (plus several aftermarket sets) and comparing the details, I have the impression that this is gorgeous and a step ahead. But this is just a rendering. Has anyone an idea what will like the real kit? And why the official Pontos site doeas not mention this?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Oct 04, 2021 2:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 6:00 pm
Posts: 11676
Location: Calgary, AB/Surrey, B.C., Canada
I don't think Pontos usually puts things on their site until it has been released. Mr. Kim from them has posted a short thread announcing/confirming it on this forum though: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=334169

LuckyModel has some photos of the built-up model, though the photos are pretty small: https://www.luckymodel.com/scale.aspx?i ... PS-70002R1

_________________
De quoi s'agit-il?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Oct 10, 2021 1:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2016 12:46 pm
Posts: 11
Not sure anyone caught this but a picture was released a few days ago on the Trumpeter&HobbyBoss Facebook page but taken down shortly after. It was a picture of their new 1/16 Panzer III kit but in the background was their 1/200 Yamato in test assembling. I quickly downloaded the picture before it disappeared. I'm really excited for this, I do hope it will be somewhat good. I still haven't finished my current Nichimo/Fujimi build.


Attachments:
243439852_1978251619000088_2392066151121333069_c.jpg
243439852_1978251619000088_2392066151121333069_c.jpg [ 107.54 KiB | Viewed 1294 times ]
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Oct 12, 2021 8:34 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 9:45 am
Posts: 140
tardis1916 wrote:
Not sure anyone caught this but a picture was released a few days ago on the Trumpeter&HobbyBoss Facebook page but taken down shortly after. It was a picture of their new 1/16 Panzer III kit but in the background was their 1/200 Yamato in test assembling. I quickly downloaded the picture before it disappeared. I'm really excited for this, I do hope it will be somewhat good. I still haven't finished my current Nichimo/Fujimi build.


wow great find!! i recall seeing their box art image years ago. Can anyone dig it back up from the bottom of this thread?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Nov 29, 2021 4:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 6:00 pm
Posts: 11676
Location: Calgary, AB/Surrey, B.C., Canada
If anyone in the US wants a Tamiya 1/700 Yamato with a good amount of Finemolds Nano-dread fixings for cheap, Tamiya's selling the special set at a very steep discount - $50 instead of $140: https://www.tamiyausa.com/shop/1700-wat ... -yamato-2/

_________________
De quoi s'agit-il?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Dec 07, 2021 3:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 10:03 am
Posts: 27
Location: Melegnano, Italy
Thanks! Tamiya with such parts and a good PE is always a good choice, despite the fact the kit is old and a LOT of manufacturers did their own Yamato. Does anyone know if in the future Tamiya will update this 1/700 kit? And also another problem I was not able to solve... if someone wants to add a full hull to this Yamato from Tamiya is there any effective possibility, an aftermarket set or something else?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Dec 21, 2021 7:13 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2014 9:02 pm
Posts: 130
"Also, if anyone could second my conclusion on the shape of the stern before I do any major damage to my model that would be great! I have already begun sanding but thought I better wait incase any experts disagree. Accuracy is all at the end of the day."

Seconding heaven one's request to see if we have an authoritative view on the stern shape. From the pictures heaven one linked, I'd guess that Skulski is correct in AOTS; however, the stern has buckled from impact just where the 'triangle' tapers into a thin edge. If this suggests distortion of the whole area, the current view of the stern shape could be correct.

I feel Skulski is right. If you look at the modernisations the Japanese did to their battleships (and Kaga) the stern was extended and the hull almost concaved in its path along the waterline. They may have discovered this added to the speed/efficiency. Aesthetically, the triangular transom was used on the stern extensions to Yamashiro and Fuso. Clear aerial photos of Yamato and Musashi under air attack show the deck at the stern really tucking in after the catapaults, too.

Given the hull is the biggest and most important part of a ship, it would be nice to get a definitive answer to this question. Does anyone have any clear wreck footage?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Dec 23, 2021 6:38 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2015 12:06 pm
Posts: 7
Location: Germany
Jack G wrote:
"Also, if anyone could second my conclusion on the shape of the stern before I do any major damage to my model that would be great! I have already begun sanding but thought I better wait incase any experts disagree. Accuracy is all at the end of the day."

Seconding heaven one's request to see if we have an authoritative view on the stern shape. From the pictures heaven one linked, I'd guess that Skulski is correct in AOTS; however, the stern has buckled from impact just where the 'triangle' tapers into a thin edge. If this suggests distortion of the whole area, the current view of the stern shape could be correct.

I feel Skulski is right. If you look at the modernisations the Japanese did to their battleships (and Kaga) the stern was extended and the hull almost concaved in its path along the waterline. They may have discovered this added to the speed/efficiency. Aesthetically, the triangular transom was used on the stern extensions to Yamashiro and Fuso. Clear aerial photos of Yamato and Musashi under air attack show the deck at the stern really tucking in after the catapaults, too.

Given the hull is the biggest and most important part of a ship, it would be nice to get a definitive answer to this question. Does anyone have any clear wreck footage?


Hi!

I would never go with the actual "Skulski" Stern! I´m more into the 1/10 Yamato Model in the Kure Museum.
In a Facebook Group someon made a comment, that he send an Email to one of the Curators of the Yamato Museum. Here is the answer he got:

Hello, Mr.David,
Thank you for your e-mail.
I'm Seiko SUGIYAMA, a curator.
I was surprised at your model.
The workmanship is exquisite.
I think that you would like to build it as a complete one.
So, you want to know about the sterns.
However, we don't have information about that.
We conducted a submersible survey of Yamato in 2016, but we couldn't catch the shape of sterns.
Thank you.
Best Wishes,
Seiko SUGIYAMA


Imho Skulski can´t get more information about the stern than the Yamato Museum.

Finally I would go for the !/10 Yamato Stern and the Super Illustration Battleship Yamato No. 745 from Model Art.

Just my 2Cents

Christian


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Dec 24, 2021 2:07 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 1:21 pm
Posts: 3276
Location: equidistant to everywhere
Jack G wrote:
"Also, if anyone could second my conclusion on the shape of the stern before I do any major damage to my model that would be great! I have already begun sanding but thought I better wait incase any experts disagree. Accuracy is all at the end of the day."

Seconding heaven one's request to see if we have an authoritative view on the stern shape. From the pictures heaven one linked, I'd guess that Skulski is correct in AOTS; however, the stern has buckled from impact just where the 'triangle' tapers into a thin edge. If this suggests distortion of the whole area, the current view of the stern shape could be correct.

I feel Skulski is right. If you look at the modernisations the Japanese did to their battleships (and Kaga) the stern was extended and the hull almost concaved in its path along the waterline. They may have discovered this added to the speed/efficiency. Aesthetically, the triangular transom was used on the stern extensions to Yamashiro and Fuso. Clear aerial photos of Yamato and Musashi under air attack show the deck at the stern really tucking in after the catapaults, too.

Given the hull is the biggest and most important part of a ship, it would be nice to get a definitive answer to this question. Does anyone have any clear wreck footage?



I highly doubt skulski was right.
1. Modernized Fuso and Yamashiro didn’t have a triangular transom. What they had was a traditional hydrodynamic tapered cruiser stern below waterline, but flared out above waterline to enlarge the deck area available to work the float planes. Yamato didn’t handle float planes at the extreme stern, there is no clear reason to adopt such a flared stern.
2. The skulski stern is not really a transom stern. The key feature that makes transom stern hydrodynamically efficient is the sharp knuckle at the bottom. This allow water flowing under the keel to separate cleanly, in effect giving the ship the water flow pattern equivalent to that of a longer ship. Skulski’ s stern has a rounded bottom. In this case the reason for the flat vertical stern depicted by skulski is not clear. It just doesn’t make sense.

_________________
Assessing the impact of new area rug under modeling table.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Jan 01, 2022 10:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 11:38 pm
Posts: 285
Deleted post.


Last edited by baseballbrat on Tue Jan 04, 2022 12:48 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jan 03, 2022 9:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2018 2:00 pm
Posts: 423
baseballbrat wrote:
Question: This kit just launched here in the US and wondering, Pontos is calling this Yamato 1945, but it looks like an early version with the twin gun placement on the aft behind the crane. Also single gun placements forward. Is Pontos just stupid and not informed about Yamato's history? It's a great kit, but if their are too many errors, what's the point. It's a $150 kit in 1:700.


I'm not sure every exact final detail of Yamato's final anti-aircraft weapon configuration is definitively known? Both due to destruction of the records by the Japanese before their surrender, and the heavy damage to the wreck from her final battle and her subsequent magazine explosion.

Maybe there are lovely high resolution photos in Japanese sources somewhere that clearly show the detailed placement of every sandbag position and the shape and position of every single splinter shield for each and every 25mm AA mount? But I certainly have never seen them. Photos taken by US aircraft both before and during the final battle seem to be the best sources of information?

Calling Pontos Models stupid is unduly harsh in my opinion. Regardless of kit manufacturer, I imagine there will be an element of educated guesswork for Yamato's final AA configuration. And indeed Musashi's final AA configuration from October 1944 for that matter. As to my knowledge definitive sources for every little detail in this regard simply did not survive the war and thus no longer exist.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jan 03, 2022 4:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 11:38 pm
Posts: 285
Mr. Church wrote:
baseballbrat wrote:
Question: This kit just launched here in the US and wondering, Pontos is calling this Yamato 1945, but it looks like an early version with the twin gun placement on the aft behind the crane. Also single gun placements forward. Is Pontos just stupid and not informed about Yamato's history? It's a great kit, but if their are too many errors, what's the point. It's a $150 kit in 1:700.


I'm not sure every exact final detail of Yamato's final anti-aircraft weapon configuration is definitively known? Both due to destruction of the records by the Japanese before their surrender, and the heavy damage to the wreck from her final battle and her subsequent magazine explosion.

Maybe there are lovely high resolution photos in Japanese sources somewhere that clearly show the detailed placement of every sandbag position and the shape and position of every single splinter shield for each and every 25mm AA mount? But I certainly have never seen them. Photos taken by US aircraft both before and during the final battle seem to be the best sources of information?

Calling Pontos Models stupid is unduly harsh in my opinion. Regardless of kit manufacturer, I imagine there will be an element of educated guesswork for Yamato's final AA configuration. And indeed Musashi's final AA configuration from October 1944 for that matter. As to my knowledge definitive sources for every little detail in this regard simply did not survive the war and thus no longer exist.


I apologize for my error. Looking at my reference books which are many, I found my statement to be unfounded, thus my rant on the Pontos kit should never had been posted. I actually went out and bought one today because I don't think any 1:700 kit has this much detail included. I think I might be losing my mind. Probably from wearing a mask so much, my brain is being starved of oxygen. Haha!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3153 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 154, 155, 156, 157, 158

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DonaldAbuct and 11 guests


You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group