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

[Dan K]

I really don't know why. Actually, the Nagara subgroup also has two variations: Abukuma and Natori are to port while Nagara, Isuzu and Kinu are to starboard. Can't remember about Yura.

[Gilbert]

I really don't know why. Actually, the Nagara subgroup also has two variations: Abukuma and Natori are to port while Nagara, Isuzu and Kinu are to starboard. Can't remember about Yura.

According to the same source (Lacroix and Wells op. cit. p.195), during the first modification of Yura (between June 1933 and January 1934) made at Sasebo, "the deck was extended aft along the starboard side...."

[DanCinSD]

Thank you Gilbert and Dan and Peppe for your answers... I had my Ref. Pictures backwards, Lacroix & Wells is correct, but it made me wonder when I saw the "new" Model Art was different, did they have newer research.
Dan the colorized picture made it completly clear! Are the other pictures taken in this port visit also colorized??? The series is fantastic!

Anyway, IJN Kumu will begin construction soon in her 1942 fit, as well as IJN Tenryu (Hasagawa kit) in her 1941 fit.

[Dan K]

Hi, Dan:

I haven't gone thru all the site photos (not easily navigated) so, I can't be sure. I tend to doubt it. The link is : http://blog.livedoor.jp/irootoko_jr/

[Steve]

Are either of these or the Naka now here in the US? I've not seen them noted as available yet in a few of the mail order sites I frequently visit.

[Timmy C]

If you are willing, you can get them from Hobby Search based in Japan.

'33 Jintsu:
http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10070271

'33 Sendai:
http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10070270

'33 Naka:
http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10075824

[Blue Devil]

Just hanging about today.

Do I remember a few weeks ago seeing an announcement from Hasegawa that they would be doing a 1/350 IJN light cruiser? Now I can't find it anywhere. Anyone know if it's true and, if so, which one?

Thanks,

Michael

[Timmy C]

They're planning on doing Agano in one of her guises. It was listed as a one-liner blurb, text only, on the Japanese half of their website, but has since been taken down.

[Dan K]

There is also talk of doing the 55000 tonners in 1/350 but nothing firm.

[Gone Asiatic]

One of these days, I`ll get around to building my garage kit IJN Chikuma (1912).

[DanCinSD]

I see in the March 2009 "Model Graphix" mag on page 113 is an ad from Aoshima for a 1/700 Oyodo and a 1/350 5,500 ton light cruiser, 1942 sorry i can't read the name as it is in Japanese( I think in a different mag. I saw it listed as a "Kuma class") !!!! Since building the Tamiya 1/700 Natori I really love the beauty of these ships, I hope I will be able to afford this kit unlike the Tamiya Mogami!

Gone Asiatic, I hope you will post photos of your upcoming Chikuma build..... I enjoy your posts.

[Timmy C]

It should be the Nagara.

[Timmy C]

Aoshima's 350th Kinu is now released:
http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10098873

[potchip]

Hi folks. Trying to figure out the AA armament of Nagara at Midway here. The TROM suggests in April '42 TWO type 93 twin 13mm are fitted. I can only see one spot for the type 93, and that's fore of the bridge. The instructions for the 1/350 Aoshima Nagara gives an option to have ONE twin or a quad 13mm at the same spot. So what is it?

To me, to have TWO individual type 93 mounts in that spot is clearly not 'space efficient'.

[peppe]

the bible of japanese cruisers in ww2 say: "during the refit (12-24 april 1942),the single quadruple 13-mm mount in front of the bridge was replaced by two twin type 93 13-mm mounts." as you can see in the foto of model it is enough space.
ciao peppe

[potchip]

That is a late war fit Nagara, evident with the type 21 Radar instead of the gun director on top of the bridge. A Tamiya one at that which has the wrong forward torpedo area - it was never covered.

The AA gun emplacement before the bridge in '42 should be a single round tub, hence my query as it seems cramped with 2 twin 13mms that should need to rotate.

Interesting that it said that in the 'bible', what's the reference? If it's 2 twins replacing a quad, that's no change imho?

[DanCinSD]

According to Japanese Cruisers of the Pacific War by Lacroix and Wells on Page 393 it has the following entry, "After her return to Maizuru the Nagara was refitted until May 4th, being dry docked at the Navy Yard 12 - 24 April. During the refit, the single quadruple 13mm ount in front of the bridge was replaced by two twin Type 93 13mm mounts." Her next operation was Midway.
The only reason I can think of going from a quad mount to 2 twin mounts is now you can engage 2 targets instead of 1.
Hope this helps.

[maxim]

That is a late war fit Nagara, evident with the type 21 Radar instead of the gun director on top of the bridge. A Tamiya one at that which has the wrong forward torpedo area - it was never covered.

What is your reference for this statement?

Lacroix/Wells wrote that the forward torpedo area was enclosed during the refit in the Maizuru Navy Yard (26th of January to 24th of April 1944). In the same refit also the after torpedo mounts were replaced by quads, the number of 14 cm guns was reduced, she got a 12,7 cm twin etc.

Also in several Japanese sources this refit is depicted, e.g. Model Art Waterline Special No. 29.

[potchip]

I'm searching for the sources (if any) re the torpedo cover now. Also found a detailed review of the new Aoshima 1/350 kit in Japanese, with some interesting points:

The pre '42 refit had the quad 13mm and post refit (midway etc) replaced it with a single twin 13mm. Apparently it is according to some recent Japanese reference.
The top of the main mast of the 1/350 Aoshima kit is incorrect (depicted the '30's shape, it should be shorter and with 1 cross bar only).
The range finder in the aft mast may not be there, due to a comparison of a '43 photo of Natori which has the range finder replaced by the search light on top of the range finder in the aoshima kit.
The 2 vent platforms (with the binocular/range finger on top) are of different heights, the one closer to the stern should be taller and the one closer to the bridge should be lower (which the aoshima kit apparently depicted the other way around)

But Nagara is notorious for having few war-time pictures and a lot of the 'references' are apparently inferred from sister ships.

[Dan K]

Thx for posting the review points - very good know.

When you refer to the "torpedo cover" what are you referring to, the enclosed, plated over position?