Calling All IJN Kongo-Class Fans

[ArturC]

I am using Open Source Blender. It is a powerful software.
AC

[MatthewB]

I don't know why I didn't think of doing this earlier regarding the Shelf Oddity PE set with the Slanted Bridge Roof.

But here are a few illustrations that show that the front of the bridge roof aren't slanted down at the front.

Here is an annotated image/illustration of the bridge, with lines showing the top of the bridge roof edge, and then the line of the top of the windows under the bridge, as it exists in the photos and illustrations, both being parallel to each other:

Which means that the roof EDGE does not slope downwards in the front.


And here is an illustration of the same Bridge without the lines showing the straight top of the bridge roof edge (which doesn't mean that the roof itself does not slant down TO this edge, merely that the edge itself is straight, and the straight line of the top of the windows being parallel:

And here is an annotated illustration of what the Shelf Oddity Bridge Roof Edge does, showing that it does not follow the line of the bridge roof edge:

And that illustrates the difference I have been talking about between the roof being slanted down from the Center to a Level Roof Edge, and the roof EDGE slanting down at the front.

MB

[Guest]

Hey guys! Does any one know if Pontos is to come out with a 1/350 super detail set of Haruna for the Fujimi kit???

[gnorfen]

For those who has not seen it , new? manufacturer with Kongo from 1914

http://hlj.com/product/KJKKM70001

[Dan K]

It should prove popular.

[Haijun watcher]

To Dan and Atma,

What fit is the Fujimi Haruna (Toku-25 kit) supposed to be? 1941 or 1944/45?

Also, is the Fujimi double set (SP-35) that includes Kongo and Haruna supposed to depict them in early or late war fit?

[Timmy C]

To Dan and Atma,

What fit is the Fujimi Haruna (Toku-25 kit) supposed to be? 1941 or 1944/45?

It includes the Type 21 radar, so not 1941. The description in the photos contains a lot of references 1944 - that, plus the fact their 1/350 kit was also 1944, strongly suggests it's meant to be 1944 fit.

Also, is the Fujimi double set (SP-35) that includes Kongo and Haruna supposed to depict them in early or late war fit?

1944, according to Hobby Search (worth bookmarking for future reference, by the way): http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10271735

[Haijun watcher]

Thank you Timmy for the prompt answer.

It doesn't seem like there's a 1941-42 version of Haruna out there then in 1/700 scale, unless backdating either a Fujimi or a Hasegawa Haruna only requires removing the radar and some AA positions.

[Dan K]

Unfortunately, backdating the kit is your only option if your are set on an early war version. Or, yes, work with the older Hasegawa kit.

The hull and deck of the Hasegawa kit are pretty good, shape wise. The A-C handling deck is a little generic.. Maybe a kit bash of the superstructures/turrets is in order?

[MatthewB]

Isn't this Haruna capable of being built in a 41/42 outfit?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/FUJIMI-1-700-42 ... 258c29c4d1





From the images they show, the "Completed" (painted) images show a different pagoda-mast structure and top, and the absence of many of the AA guns that were added after 1943.

Specifically the third pair of Type 89 127mm DP guns, the Type 96 25mm AA guns on the Turrets, on the forward bridge platform, and all along the aft hull, P/S of the #4 Turret (I'm sure there are others I have missed)

It does show that there are a few Casemate 6" guns missing for a 1941/42 outfit. But adding those would be fairly easy.

And it says it can be built as either Full-Hull or Waterline.

Or.....

Is that picture lying to us???

MB

[Dan K]

I agree that the boxart makes it look like an early war fit, but if you look at the buildup, instructions, etc, it's a late war version: http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/image/10098708/10/0

[Atma]

All you have to do is look at IJN Haruna's pagoda for determine what year the model is representing. Having a reduced in height pagoda as in the picture, is 1943+ version without further questions.

[Atma]

Thank you Timmy for the prompt answer.

It doesn't seem like there's a 1941-42 version of Haruna out there then in 1/700 scale, unless backdating either a Fujimi or a Hasegawa Haruna only requires removing the radar and some AA positions.

IJN Haruna's pagoda is partially different from a pre 1943. Fujimi's kit is 1943+ so some scratch building is required, take a look(And if I remember correctly, Hasegawa's kit is also a pre 1943 but I may be wrong):

[Haijun watcher]

(And if I remember correctly, Hasegawa's kit is also a pre 1943 but I may be wrong):

There seems to be radar on the box art of the Hasegawa 1/700 Haruna, so I assume 1944.

[W.H.min]

(And if I remember correctly, Hasegawa's kit is also a pre 1943 but I may be wrong):

There seems to be radar on the box art of the Hasegawa 1/700 Haruna, so I assume 1944.

I doubt Hasegawa's kit is 1944. Haruna installed Type 21 radar in 1943.4, that means Hasegawa's kit is absolutely after 1943.4. Since Haruna installed Type 13 radar in 1944.6, that kit is before 1944.6.

[PetrolGator]

I'm currently working on Kajika's new Kongo. I'm trying to determine if the ship had railing along its turret tops in 1914-16. Pictures of FUSO from the period show it, but none of the various (and rare) pictures of the Kongo battlecruisers seem to show it.

Anyone have better resources?

Thanks!

[Dan K]

I have a few photos of her on trials prior to commissioning, and in early service. I don't see any railings until the early 1920s.

[PetrolGator]

Thanks, Dan. I was leaning that way. Do you have any detailed "on deck" images showing any bulkhead-side equipment or other detail? Kaika's kit is wonderful but lacking in that.

[Dan K]

In my first quick run thru, I really don't see a lot of detail. I will continue searching through some other references.

[ch hoeltge]

Perhaps I'm wrong, but on the pics I don't see the torpedo nets.
Only the support for it, it is right. Where they perhaps added later in Japan?
I will start my Kajika kit soon, and this is the most obvious missing part.

Greetings Christian