Calling all IJN Fubuki-class (吹雪) fans

[ijnfleetadmiral]

YAMASHITA Shizuo
Eta Jima Class 50 (Class Rank Unknown)
Midshipman - 1 June 1922
Ensign - 1 April 1924
Lieutenant (j.g.) - 1 December 1925
Lieutenant - 30 November 1929
Lieutenant Commander - 1 December 1936
Commanding Officer, Kisaragi - 1 December 1936 - 1 December 1937
Commanding Officer, Hatakaze - 10 April 1939 - 15 October 1940
Commanding Officer, Fubuki - 15 October 1940 - 12 October 1942
Commander - 1 May 1942
Captain - 12 October 1942 (Killed In Action 12 October 1942)

Also KIA when Fubuki was sunk was Torpedo Officer Lt (LtCdr posthumously) NAGASHIMA Masanori (64). Survivors included Gunnery Officer Lt (j.g.) (later Lt) KAYADA Katsuki and Chief Engineer Lt (later LtCdr) Shirato Masatoshi.

[DavidK]

I was surfing YouTube under a 1/700 search, and I came across a series of short videos (in Japanese, of course) of a middle-aged man building and painting a 1/700 Pitroad Ayanami (Fubuki 2 class) including some Pitroad PE-177 steel photoetch that seemed to be custom made for this kit (or perhaps it is part of the kit-I didn't look to see if there was a deluxe edition). He only says "Ayanami" once or twice in all the clips (as far as I could tell), so I had to initially get the name off the box cover when it was in frame.

There were 15 clips ranging from 1-10 minutes in length. These video clips have high quality photography and lots of close-ups of what he was doing. I was watching on a 47" TV, and sometimes his fingers were as large around as my head (I think most of the 1/700 modelers know how hard it is to get real good close-up photos due to depth of field issues). He basically built the entire ship model (except rigging) before doing any painting! He then applied Tamiya gray primer, air-brushed one of the IJN grays, and then air-brushed a tan undercoat in the linoleum areas - all without using any masking tape! He cleaned up a small amount of tan overspray using a thinned out IJN gray and a pointed brush. He then painted all the details, added washes and filters, etc by brush (I would say the man could be a real artist, i.e. an artist by training). The brush painting included the linoleum deck brown which was applied almost like a wash over the tan undercoat. I'm pretty sure that he also did dry-brushing in one of the clips. The final clip is rigging (he used a thin metal wire

This was the YouTube link to part 2/15 today on my PC (I think some of these links change with time).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PclwPuo1bkk
I actually watched it through XBox Live rather than on my PC. The YouTube app is free, and so was this video, so no reason not to watch in my comfy chair. The clips are in something called ActOnTV (excuse my woeful ignorance of all things YouTube).

The video has a Japanese title (so you can see that there is no English word that can be fed through a search engine, only some numbers).
1/700???????????????????? 2/15?????
which I have pasted to this post, and it seems to have come through OK in Preview mode. Usually the other episodes will appear in the "Up Next" block on the right side of the YouTube PC screen, so you only need to find one to get started. XBox Live fed them one after another in numerical order without me having to do anything.

The model doesn't look all that impressive in the beginning, but as he builds up his colors it turns into quite a nice paint job (in my opinion). He was working mostly with Tamiya acrylics and thinner. The XF- series paints were still labeled as such even though they probably never left Japan. (I'd never seen Tamiya paint in square bottles before, though. All of mine are round.) He did some neat things with thinned out paint that he placed and let run wherever it could reach. He almost always thinned the Tamiya paint before applying it by brush (maybe 1:1 to 2:1 thinner to paint). I think I learned a few useful tips just watching him in action.

Rigging was done using Modelkasten 0.06 fine wire (which I believe is the diameter in millimeters, not inches) with other labels on the case for the spool of wire for Artbox and Metal Rigging (see first photo below). The product appears to be designed for ship modelers. A 0.06 mm diameter wire is equivalent to about 0.0024 inches, which would put this product in between Dai-Riki monofilaments #8 and #9, which were 0.002 and 0.003 inches in diameter. There were other advantages to using wire instead of nylon evident in the video, e.g. no knots to pull it taut and it was still stiff and straight. The delicacy of the flag lines on the foremast can be seen in the second photo which maybe is a better way to judge how fine this product is than labels that are in a foreign language.

He has a second series of related videos where he makes a wooden base for the waterline Ayanami and adds water. Same story. Initially, I was thinking "where is he going with the colors for his water" (black, dark green, blue, and close to white in fairly broad swaths). But, he continually refined the look of the water - blending colors together, and it was quite good looking at the end of the series. The painting techniques he was using to achieve his effects are what suggested to me that the man is a trained artist, not just a decent model builder.

On top of that, he did all his work in both series wearing a dress shirt and sweater vest, and I don't think he got a drop of anything on them the whole time.

[Timmy C]

Yamashita's 1/700 Fubuki has been released - Hobby Search has the instructions and scans: http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10326452

[Dan K]

Thx, Timmy. I've gone ahead and ordered one. I like the box art.

[Tracy White]

I built Tamiya's 1/700th Fubuki when I was young and didn't know better - I don't know how I enjoyed myself so much with all the problems I now read about. Since then I've had a fondness for the ship and would like to build one in 1/350th depicting her at her loss. However, if my reading through this thread and research is right, there isn't a Fubuki I configuration available in kit form in this scale, so I would be looking at changing the forecastle break to start as well as the bridge and other details, correct? I think it would be a hoot to have the kit built up with a Kancolle figure.

[Dan K]

Yeah, the Tamiya kits were an early build of mine as well. I built a ton of them as well when young and clueless. Those were some good days.

Unfortunately, Tracy, you have read correctly. There is no Type I in 1/350 as yet. You could build Murakumo, (edit 2: and Hatsuyuki) or Uranami from the 1/350 Ayanami/Type II kit as they both had long forecastles like the Type IIs. More recent research suggest that some of the other Type Is may have had a shortened forecastle only on one side. Fubuki herself appears to be one of these according to original plans.

Regardless, all would need scratch-built turrets and funnels. The bridge is essentially the same for a Type I, save that the there is a more simplistic cupola on top of the bridge roof. A couple of other small things as well. It's certainly feasible.

I'm kind of surprised that FineMolds hasn't attempted a release of Uranami at the very least. She would only require new turrets and a bandstand in front of #2 funnel. (edit: took out funnels).

[maurice de saxe]

It's interesting that you mention the drawings showing both long and short forecastles on some Type I Special class destroyers. I've seen this for Fubuki and I have a copy from the archives of Miyuki with a long forecastle to port and a short forecastle to starboard. However, the photographs of both Fubuki and Miyuki, at least as first commissioned, show both of them with short forecastles on both sides, so I'm not inclined to trust the drawings and wonder of they may represent suggestions from the naval architects that were only taken up later.

Maurice

[Dan K]

I have noticed these variations in the past, but have not known what to make of them. For instance, Gakken #18 shows a reproduction of a plan for Fubuki with this asymmetrical arrangement. It�s certainly not true for all the Type Is. In those instances where there are clear photos taken abeam from both sides of some ships, it�s clear there is no assymetry. This fact certainly applies to Isonami (short forecastle), Hatsuyuki, and Murakumo (both long forecastle), among others.

I mention it now because of some new information that I�ve become aware of. There is a new Japanese modeling website, DD Model Laboratory, whose current focus is on the Fubukis and Fubuki class modeling. The proprietor has done a lot of research, and has put forth a lot of assertions, including that of the asymmetry of the forecastle in Type I ships. I don�t agree with all the various points he has put forth to date, but I do agree with some of them (the variations in the Type II bridges, for instance). He does list his references, which is very helpful, but I feel that these references are not always so conclusive. In some cases, I could counter some of his points with these same, and other, references. (It�s all in Japanese, so I rely on his illustrations and machine translations.) I do find his postings interesting and refreshing, if nothing else.

On the point about the forecastle asymmetry, he seems to have first asserted this aspect specifically about Fubuki, then later recanted it. However, he makes the point that the asymmetry is more clear for other sisters such as Shinonome. If I understand the translation correctly, this development may have occurred during their reconstructions in the mid 1930s. If true, it would also explain why the photo record is not immediately clear. One would have to match up photos from the appropriate time frame. I'm also at a loss to understand why it was done at all, if true.

The link: http://ddmlabo014.wix.com/ddmlabo

[J.F.S.]

Thx, Timmy. I've gone ahead and ordered one. I like the box art.

Hi Dan,
Just wanted to know if you received this kit yet,and what is your impression of this kit.
Joe

[Dan K]

I do have the kit, Joe. I'm actually working on an in-box review that I hope to finish in the next few weeks.

I think it's beautifully rendered, accurate, and possibly a preferred alternative to the Tamiya & PitRoad versions. There is a SERIOUS problem, though. The hull hogs significantly, 1.5mm on mine. Actually, I've seen 2 hulls with this defect, and had a third confirmation of it from another board member. I'm betting this is true of yours as well. I'm guessing it has to do with the hull walls molded thinner than typical kits, and that's just what happens when it cools down after released from the mold.

For someone who bolts down their hulls, its not going to be an issue but it is for someone like me who doesn't, I have yet to figure out a good way to keep it flat on its own. Damn shame on an otherwise outstanding kit. If the hogging problem can be corrected, then it's a hands-down winner over the other Type I kits. Note that it is a short forecastle Type I kit.

There's a couple of other small things that bother me (with reason) but, the funnels are correct, the housings and deck houses are molded separately from the hull to ease painting, and lots of great small details and pieces.

[J.F.S.]

Dan,
Thank you!
Joe

[Quaestor]

I do have the kit, Joe. I'm actually working on an in-box review that I hope to finish in the next few weeks.

I think it's beautifully rendered, accurate, and possibly a preferred alternative to the Tamiya & PitRoad versions. There is a SERIOUS problem, though. The hull hogs significantly, 1.5mm on mine. Actually, I've seen 2 hulls with this defect, and had a third confirmation of it from another board member. I'm betting this is true of yours as well. I'm guessing it has to do with the hull walls molded thinner than typical kits, and that's just what happens when it cools down after released from the mold.

For someone who bolts down their hulls, its not going to be an issue but it is for someone like me who doesn't, I have yet to figure out a good way to keep it flat on its own. Damn shame on an otherwise outstanding kit. If the hogging problem can be corrected, then it's a hands-down winner over the other Type I kits. Note that it is a short forecastle Type I kit.

There's a couple of other small things that bother me (with reason) but, the funnels are correct, the housings and deck houses are molded separately from the hull to ease painting, and lots of great small details and pieces.

Dan, many thanks for your just-posted review; however disappointing. I was REALLY looking forward to snagging one of these, now I'll probably hold off until some genius (or even the manufacturer, dare we hope?) comes up with a solution to the hull issue.
One more demonstration of the huge value of this board. We all benefit from each others' experiences.

[Dan K]

Thx, Harold. I've been alerted to a possible fix by a board member. If he succeeds, he plans to post his comments later this week.

It would be interesting to know if future batches have the same issue, or if Yamashita might rework the hull a little. Probably not.

I've also been alerted to my erroneous inclusion of Kako to the Battle of Cape Esperance in which Fubuki was sunk. Oops.

[Quaestor]

It would be interesting to know if future batches have the same issue, or if Yamashita might rework the hull a little. Probably not.

Probably not, indeed; which is why I said "dare we hope?". C'mon, Yamashita; surprise us

[MatthewB]

Just bought a couple of the Yamashita Fubukis.

I have noticed that there is a discussion of the Long Forecastle, and the Short Forecastle on some Type I DDs.

Do we know which ship had which, and which kits are of which type?

MB

[Quaestor]

Do we know which ship had which, and which kits are of which type?

Go to page 1 of this thread. Dan started it off with a wealth of information on the class and types.

[MatthewB]

Do we know which ship had which, and which kits are of which type?

Go to page 1 of this thread. Dan started it off with a wealth of information on the class and types.

OK... One small problem.

It mentions that the IJN Shirakumo is the correct hull for the Type I long forecastle hulls.

But the Pit-Road kit for the IJN Shirakumo is for the 1944 outfit, and what if we need it to be for 1942?

There also seem to be no Photo Etch Kits I can find for the Type I Special-Types... Tetra Models makes one of the Yamashita kits (but not many components are included in these PE sets).

The Tom's Modelworks IJN DD sets appear to include a lot of stuff that would be used on these (although I see no handrails for the turrets, and I can swear I see some on the Type I turrets).

It looks like the Fubuki's are going to give me some grief in getting them completed.

I need to find something to use as a Murakumo (long forecastle) in 1942, for the Battle of Cape Esperance.

MB

[Dan K]

I am thrilled to announce that MW board member Steve Guzy has engineered a fix for the Yamashita hull, based on a tried and true technique used on other hulls. See: viewtopic.php?f=4&t=160829&p=672243#p672243

[Dan K]

But the Pit-Road kit for the IJN Shirakumo is for the 1944 outfit, and what if we need it to be for 1942?

Don't delete the #2 turret, retain the original foremast, retain the original AA setup, no radars. This link takes you to the instructions for the PitRoad Fubuki as posted on HobbySearch Japan, which is the configuration you want: http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/image/10059595/10/0

There also seem to be no Photo Etch Kits I can find for the Type I Special-Types.

Well, the Tetra set appears to be a good base. Rainbow makes the torpedo reload girders, also funnel grills.

I need to find something to use as a Murakumo (long forecastle) in 1942, for the Battle of Cape Esperance.

Pit-Road makes a Murakumo kit: http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10252056

[MatthewB]

Don't know how I missed the Murakumo.

I can't tell, by looking at these kits, any difference in the length of the Forecastle.... I want to be able to tell.... But can't.

So would it be OK to just get the Murakumo, or would I need to get the Shirakumo, and build it as the the original Mast, #2 Turret, and AA outfit?

My "Buy" finger is lingering over a button.... waiting for the best option.

And I grabbed some of the Rainbow Torpedo Skid Beams for my Yamashita kits. I was surprised at how inexpensive those were from Japan compared to some of the Pit-Road kits.

MB

Edit: And the Pit-Road Equipment Sets E-02 and E-05 look to carry the Turret Type A that would be used on the Uranami (which has the Special Type II Stack Vents). Is that right?

Also, who makes handrails for the Type A turrets? I notice that they have one rail, which makes a kind of "loop" on the front sides of the front of the turret, so that it creates two levels of rails on the sides of the turret.