Aircraft Carrier FAQs

Topics:

Akagi, Kaga and Soryu - help!

 

Posted By: John R <j.p.redman@nationwideisp.net>

Date: Wednesday, 13 December 2000, at 10:11 a.m.

 

Is it just me or does the flight deck not fit properly?

Along the edges of the flight deck there are oblong protrusions which I guess are walkways. One of these, forward on the stardboard side, prevents the underside of the flight deck from locating on top of the superstructure.

Has anyone else noticed / fixed this?

Re: 1:700 Ryujo

 

Posted By: Frido Kip <frido.kip@hetnet.nl>

Date: Wednesday, 13 December 2000, at 10:41 a.m.

 

In Response To: 1:700 Ryujo (John R)

 

I sanded the top from the big block on the starboard side of the hull till the flight deck, including the deck edge walkways, would fit. This appears to be the best and most accurate solution.

 

Hasegawa 1:450 Akagi

 

Posted By: John R <j.p.redman@nationwideisp.net>

Date: Tuesday, 12 December 2000, at 3:24 a.m.

 

I picked up the above kit cheap a few years ago and intended to build it as a static model. That was until I discovered the Polish book, and concluded the basic kit needed too much work for this to be worthwhile. Just fixing the oversize torpedo bulges would involve major surgery, for instance; and the photoetch would be the wrong scale.

So instead, I'm going to be a great big kid and build it with the motor! Yay! And sail it through London on the Regent's Canal!

My question is, has anyone else built the kit (or similar) and how did it go? For one thing, it looks to me like a *lot* of water is going to come in via the shaft alley. If I stop it with vaseline or something, will that work? Or will surface tension keep it out?

As a last resort I can always just build it and see, of course, but if it's going to be a turkey even as a toy, I may yet put it back in the cupboard until I can be bothered to hack it about and build it up as a decent static kit.

 

Re: Hasegawa 1:450 Akagi

Posted By: Randy

Date: Tuesday, 12 December 2000, at 7:22 p.m.

In Response To: Hasegawa 1:450 Akagi (John R)

 

Pack the shaft alley with vaseline. Look on another site for an Akagi built from this kit, sorry I have forgotten the address. It can be built into an impressive model.

 

Re: Hasegawa 1:450 Akagi

Posted By: gary

Date: Tuesday, 12 December 2000, at 1:08 p.m.

In Response To: Hasegawa 1:450 Akagi (John R)

 

this kit builds into a very nice model the carrier planes are good i suggest that you water line her you will not be disapointed

 

Soryu captains

Posted By: Allan Parry <dparry02@cableinet.co.uk>

Date: Sunday, 10 December 2000, at 1:28 p.m.

 

Can anyone help with the following Soryu captains names? The dates are from the Soryu TROMS in Kojinsha No.6

From 15-9-15: Urase XXX - may be Gamase (or Kamase) Kazuta?

From 15-11-25: Kamizaka Kanae - Kamisaka (or Uesaka) Kanae?

 

Re: Soryu captains

Posted By: Yutaka Iwasaki <navy_yard-iwa@mbj.sphere.ne.jp>

Date: Monday, 11 December 2000, at 5:17 a.m.

In Response To: Soryu captains (Allan Parry)

 

I'm not sure, hard to read even for Japanese.

Maybe

From 15.Sept.1940 KAMASE KAZUTARI

From 25.Nov.1940 KAMISAKA KANAE

 

Re: Soryu captains

Posted By: Emmanuel <aecastro1@aol.com>

Date: Sunday, 10 December 2000, at 3:02 p.m.

In Response To: Soryu captains (Allan Parry)

 

Soryu's only Captain was Yanagimoto Ryusaku. He served from Pearl Harbor Attack to the Battle Of Midway.

 

Re: Soryu captains

Posted By: Allan Parry <dparry02@cableinet.co.uk>

Date: Monday, 11 December 2000, at 6:59 a.m.

In Response To: Re: Soryu captains (Emmanuel)

 

Yanagimoto was assigned on 6 Oct 1941. We are just trying to confirm translations of some of Soryu captains' names from 1937 onwards.

 

Re: Soryu captains

Posted By: Tatsuhiro Higuchi <higumail@green.ocn.ne.jp>

Date: Tuesday, 12 December 2000, at 8:57 a.m.

In Response To: Re: Soryu captains (Allan Parry)

 

Soryu captains here:

1st: Tomoaki Beppu/ 1937.

2nd: Kinpei Teraoka/ December, 1937~.

3ed: Keizo Ueno/ December, 1938~.

4th: Sadayoshi Yamada/ November, 1939~.

5th: Kanae Uesaka/ November, 1940~.

6th: Ryusaku Yanagimoto/ October, 1941~.

Sorry I don't know pronunciation of 5th captain's name. I think may be Uesaka, but his family name's kanji-word also Kousaka or Kamisaka can phonate. I'll search.

 

Revise of Soryu captains

Posted By: Tatsuhiro Higuchi <higumail@green.ocn.ne.jp>

Date: Friday, 15 December 2000, at 9:18 a.m.

In Response To: Re: Soryu captains (Tatsuhiro Higuchi)

 

I get new information of Soryu captains name from web mate. This info includes correct pronunciation of there names. Sorry, In last message some mistakes were existed.

1/ Akitomo Beppu-->16 August 1937 to 1 December 1937.

2/ Kinpei Teraoka--> 1 December 1937 to 15 November 1938.

3/ Keizou Uwano--> 15 November 1938 to 15 October 1939.

4/ Sadayoshi Yamada--> 15 October 1939 to 15 October 1940.

5/ Kanae Kousaka--> 25 November 1940 to 12 September 1941.

6/ Ryusaku Yanagimoto--> 6 October 1941 to 5 June 1942.

P.S Also Capt. Gamase (15 Oct 1940 to 25 Nov 1940) and Capt. Hasegawa (12 Sep 1941 to 6 Oct 1941) were existed. Now I make inquiry about correct pronunciation to fellow. I will post about there names.

 

Japanese escort carriers AA main armement

Posted By: daniel rastello <daniel.rastello@voila.fr>

Date: Tuesday, 14 November 2000, at 4:33 a.m.

 

AOSHIMA give us for the three kits (Taiyo, Unyo and Chuyo)an AA main armement made of 6 120mm guns.

Anybody can tell me if this armement was improved during the war in the same way than the Kaiyo one's (4 type 89 twin 127mm guns,two of they with anti-smoke shield)

 

Re: Japanese escort carriers AA main armement

Posted By: Frido Kip <frido.kip@hetnet.nl>

Date: Tuesday, 14 November 2000, at 11:19 a.m.

In Response To: Japanese escort carriers AA main armement (daniel rastello)

 

Taiyô was completed with four single 120mm HA guns. She received two more single guns in 1943 for a total of six. According to Fukui, Unyô was completed with six single 120mm HA guns of which the two forward mounts were replaced by 25mm mounts in 1944. Therefore, Chûyô was the only one completed with four twin 127mm HA guns instead of the single 120mm guns, both starboard mounts being covered against smoke.

However, there is much disagreement between the various sources, most of them claiming that Unyô also received four 127mm twin mounts in about 1944, but I could not find any hard evidence for this.

 

Re: Japanese escort carriers AA main armement

Posted By: Tony Tully <atully@flash.net>

Date: Wednesday, 15 November 2000, at 9:06 a.m.

In Response To: Re: Japanese escort carriers AA main armement (daniel rastello)

 

Of possible help in the project----though usually not stated in most captions, the good starboard beam photograph you see often of TAIYO was taken on 30 August 1943 after her starboard prop had been smashed by a torpedo from Cabrilla earlier. So these photos show her armament in the fall of 1943.

 

Shoho air complement

Posted By: Jeff McGuire <jmguire@j-aircraft.com>

Date: Monday, 13 November 2000, at 9:12 p.m.

 

I just received my new 1/700 Shoho in the mail today and have these questions. The instructions say not to use the Vals that come in the kit. From what I can gather it says to use all the Kates, Zeroes and 1 Judy. It also shows the aircraft in green on the box art. It was sunk in the Battle of Coral Sea, I think. Were the a/c painted green at that point? Were there no Vals? And finally, did most carriers at that time have only 1 Judy on board for recon?

 

Re: Shoho air complement

Posted By: John Lundstrom <jl@mpm.edu>

Date: Tuesday, 14 November 2000, at 7:30 a.m.

In Response To: Shoho air complement (Jeff McGuire)

 

According to the Japanese official history the Shoho sailed on 30 April 1942 from Truk with nine Zeros, four Type 96 carrier fighters (Claudes) and six Type 97 VT (Kates). One Zero ditched before the battle on 7 May. The Claudes were used primarily for ASW patrol. To my knowledge neither Vals nor Judys ever served as part of the Shoho's air complement.

 

Re: Shoho air complement

Posted By: David Fraser <atsuko@magma.ca>

Date: Tuesday, 14 November 2000, at 10:41 a.m.

In Response To: Re: Shoho air complement (John Lundstrom)

 

Does anyone have any information on how the aircraft may have been painted?

 

Re: Shoho air complement

Posted By: Jeff McGuire <jmguire@j-aircraft.com>

Date: Tuesday, 14 November 2000, at 12:21 p.m.

In Response To: Re: Shoho air complement (David Fraser)

 

The instructions say that the Zeroes were gray and the Kates were mottled.

 

Re: Shoho air complement

Posted By: David Fraser <atsuko@magma.ca>

Date: Tuesday, 14 November 2000, at 1:51 p.m.

In Response To: Re: Shoho air complement (Jeff McGuire)

 

I wonder how the Claudes may have been painted. It would be interesting if they were in the pre-war goldish finish that some of them were in.

 

Re: Shoho air complement

Posted By: Jeff McGuire <jmguire@j-aircraft.com>

Date: Tuesday, 14 November 2000, at 8:45 p.m.

In Response To: Re: Shoho air complement (David Fraser)

 

I'm going out on a wing here, but think they were. Although the gold finish is often disputed as individual's own perceptions due to the fact that most photos were in b/w. Jim Landsdale and Rob Graham are the experts on this subject.

 

Re: Shoho air complement

Posted By: David Fraser <atsuko@magma.ca>

Date: Wednesday, 15 November 2000, at 6:46 a.m.

In Response To: Re: Shoho air complement (Jeff McGuire)

 

I looked at the 2 Model Art books on IJN Fighters and IJN Bombers last night and though they had no information on the Shoho's aircraft they indicated that the Zuiho's Claudes and Kates were in metallic finish with a red stripe lengthwise down the entire length of the fuselage. Apparently, they were painted like this from 1941 until mid 1942. Hosho's planes were finished similarly.

 

To all Shinano builders

Posted By: Allan Parry <dparry02@cableinet.co.uk>

Date: Monday, 13 November 2000, at 7:18 a.m.

 

If you want info about Shinano or if you would like to build a 1/350 scale Shinano-based on the Tamiya 1/350 Yamato kit, you should visit the site linked below. The guy who runs it, Yama, is extremely helpful and has loads of diagrams and English instructions to follow.

While you are there, take a look at his large scale IJN scratchbuilds - serious models!

Link: http://village.infoweb.ne.jp/~seasky/Bi-top.htm

 

Carrier Airgroups - help please

Posted By: John Sutherland <john.sutherland@amcom.co.nz>

Date: Friday, 10 November 2000, at 5:06 p.m.

 

Have any of you in your travels seen anything which would provide the

following information:

1. The breakdown of the aircraft (type/number) carried by the nine

Japanese carriers at Philippine Sea / Mariannas battle, preferably by

carrier. Some reference give a total of 473 (with no breakdown), but this

is 18 more than the theoretical maximum for the 9 carriers involved

(Taiho/Zuikaku/Shokaku/Zuiho/Chitose/Chiyoda/Ryuho/Junyo/Hiyo).

2. The same for Zuikaku/Zuiho/Chiyoda/Chitose at Leyte Gulf/Cape Engano.

3. The same for Kaiyo and Shinyo engaged on convoy escort work late war

4. The same for the Unryu/Amagi/Katsuragi late 1944/1945.

 

Re: Carrier Airgroups - help please

Posted By: Allan <Wildcat42@AOL.com>

Date: Saturday, 11 November 2000, at 10:06 p.m.

In Response To: Carrier Airgroups - help please (John Sutherland)

 

Y'Blood's "Red Sun Setting" is the best and the latest that I'm aware of. While Barrett Tillman gives the authorized strength, Y'Blood appears to be closer. In the appendices, there is a carrier by carrier of each strength, and the losses that accumulated from June 15th up to June 19th. Taiho suffered 6 aircraft losses on the 15th due to lack of pilot training. They were 2 of each type and more were to follow as operational's. So, what you are looking at, is two sets of figures. One for June 15th and one for June 19th. This does not include losses to recon aircraft for the June 17th, 18th or 19th.

Sorry to muddy the waters........... If you desire a running account on Y'Blood's analogy, contact me off-line and I'll send you a copy.

 

Re: Carrier Airgroups, Question 1.

Posted By: Tom Hall <hall023038@aol.com>

Date: Saturday, 11 November 2000, at 4:06 p.m.

In Response To: Carrier Airgroups - help please (John Sutherland)

 

Your questions are very good but there aren't

many good answers. For one thing, there is

a difference between quantities on paper and

actual quantities.

Minoru Akimoto says the 601 Koukuutai had

208 planes. It supplied the air units for

Taihou, Zuikaku and Shoukaku, but the

quantities for each ship I have not seen.

This was for the Marianas Battle. Barrett

Tillman places 214 planes on the three

carriers for the battle. He gives the

quantities of the planes, but no

breakdown by ship or hikoutai. Those

quantities are as follows:

80 Model 52 Zeroes

11 Model 21 Zeroes

44 B6Ns

70 D4Ys (including recon type)

09 D3A2s

It is not clear on what sources these aviation writers have based their numbers. Tillman says his numbers are "authorized strengths". The next issue of Asahi Journal covers Judy and her units. Please contact me

by e-mail if you would like ordering information.

 

Re: Carrier Airgroups

Posted By: Randy

Date: Sunday, 12 November 2000, at 11:18 a.m.

In Response To: Re: Carrier Airgroups, Question 1. (Tom Hall)

 

I received or found the following information this past August directly from W.D. Dickson and have edited it for this site as appropriate; Dickson would have the final word but I believe this answers a great many questions.

"When I wrote the Shokaku article for WI in 1977 it was commonly thought that these records were gone-gone-gone. Those at central ministries were but much was captured and never translated. If you read and write Japanese you could probably find out everything: the number of aircraft and the names of the individual pilots. TAIHO was designed to carry 53 aircraft (24 A7M, 18 D4Y, 6 C6N plus 5 spares -- this is from memory but easily checked). Only D4Y were ready when she fought in Philippine Sea. Since her overall dimensions were approximately the same as the Shokakus but her hangar smaller she carried a small contingent on her flight deck so the distribution among the three ships was essentially equal. The Shokakus were given a nominal air group of 27 VF, 27 VB, 18 VT 3 VS. None of the Japanese carriers actually carried their nominal group (this can be said for the US carriers also -- the nominal air group for an ESSEX class CV in June 1944 was 36VF, 36VB and 18VT, but it is easier to hypothesize that the Japanese split their groups evenly since their groups were organized at the carrier division level rather than ship level. I wrote a book in the early '70s, "The Battle of The Philippine Sea," which had fairly detailed summaries of the air operations on all of the carriers and I think I do a fairly good job of reconciling the disparities among sources. By the way, the Japanese War History office gave me a different make up of all three air groups. It is discussed in one of the appendices. I backed into the number of aircraft which went down with TAIHO and SHOKAKU using the other numbers and feel reasonably confident of my numbers -- they shouldn't be off more than one or two airplanes. Tony Tully and I did some math recently on this very subject. TAIHO lost six aircraft in a deck landing accident after the 1st Mobile Force left Tawi-Tawi but before 6-19-44 so she was already 6 down when the fight started."

And a further fragment...

"...The curious thing about the Marianas, compared to say Santa Cruz, is there is little logistical reason for the nominal air group not to nearly match the actual. The air groups were just forming and their aircraft production should have met the requirements. The most interesting is the attaching of Vals to 601 Kokutai (all sources seem to agree there were Vals on the big three). There seems to be no operational reason for assigning these older planes to the three big carriers. The CVLs and HIYOs lower speeds meant they could not operate at full complement with the newer a/c types."

Therefore, it seems 225 aircraft would be nominal with the 6 lost prior to action, which would leave 219 aircraft absent any operational losses from Sho and Zui prior to June 19th. Y'Blood's book does not account for the 9 D3As onboard "...the big three..." and which seem -- by general consensus -- to have been there; are these then added to the 219 figure above for 228 aircraft total?

Does anyone have a copy of Dickson's Philippine Sea book? It must be one of the few I do not have. I would find his numbers very persuasive.

 

Re: Carrier Airgroups

Posted By: Jim Broshot <jbroshot@socket.net>

Date: Wednesday, 15 November 2000, at 6:22 p.m.

In Response To: Re: Carrier Airgroups (Randy)

 

This is what I compiled from various sources (but with NO breakdown as to number assigned to each carrier):

601 Kokutai

18 Jun 1944 1st Battle of the Philippine Sea

(Hata) 81 A6M 81 D4Y, 9 D4Y1-C 54 B6N

(Morrison)79 A6M 70 D4Y, 7 D3A 51 B6N

(Nomura)11 A6M2, 80 A6M5 70 D4Y, 9 D3A 44 B6N

(Francillon)10 A6M2, 76 A6M5,81 D4Y, 9 D4Y1-C 56 B6N

(Okumiya) 81 A6M 81 D4Y 54 B6N

(Profile #236) 81 A6M 81 D4Y,, 9 D4Y1-C 54 B6N

(The WP formatting doesn't transfer well, sorry)

 

Japanese Escort Carriers

Posted By: bob pienkos <bpink@worldnet.att.net>

Date: Friday, 10 November 2000, at 8:39 a.m.

 

What colors were the flight decks of the carriers Taiyo,Unyo,Chuyo. I've seen some representations of these ship models with wooden flight decks and or all gray flight decks. Which of these would be the correct or closest choice?

 

Re: Japanese Escort Carriers

Posted By: Allan Parry <dparry02@cableinet.co.uk>

Date: Friday, 10 November 2000, at 2:26 p.m.

In Response To: Japanese Escort Carriers (bob pienkos)

 

See link below for Taiyo and Unyo 1944 camouflage experiments.

Link: http://www.kamakuranet.ne.jp/~mad/camoe.html

 

Re: Japanese Escort Carriers

Posted By: Frido Kip <frido.kip@hetnet.nl>

Date: Saturday, 11 November 2000, at 7:48 a.m.

In Response To: Re: Japanese Escort Carriers (Allan Parry)

 

AFAIK all three Taiyô class carriers had wooden flight decks. The were probably not painted until camouflage was applied.

Allan, I really loved the camouflage schemes. I wanted to paint Unryû in camouflage colours and now I know what it looks like. Thanks a lot! BTW the grey colour in Chitose/Chiyoda is that lighter than IJN navy grey or the same colour?

 

Re: Japanese Escort Carriers

Posted By: Allan Parry <dparry02@cableinet.co.uk>

Date: Sunday, 12 November 2000, at 8:33 a.m.

In Response To: Re: Japanese Escort Carriers (Frido Kip)

 

I should have pointed out that the Unryu camouflage drawing at Pit-Road is just one of the designs doing the rounds! I will send you the others.

 

Hinomaru on flight deck *PIC*

Posted By: Tennessee Katsuta <tennkats@hotmail.com>

Date: Tuesday, 7 November 2000, at 10:08 p.m.

 

Someone asked if hinomarus were ever drawn on the flight decks of IJN carriers other than the four carriers at Midway. I found an interesting photo in a Japanese site. According to the caption, the Japanese military periodical "Maru" published a photo of Zuiho's flight deck in its May 1999 issue. The photo was taken just before the Battle of Midway, and you can clearly see the hinomaru on the flight deck.

Link: http://homepage2.nifty.com/vanguard/intro/menu-list.htm

Editors Note: The photo is not reproduced here.

 

Re: Hinomaru on flight deck

Posted By: Tony Tully <atully@flash.net>

Date: Monday, 13 November 2000, at 10:20 a.m.

In Response To: Hinomaru on flight deck *PIC* (Tennessee Katsuta)

 

Thanks for posting this. It is a very interesting picture! It matches the type Hiryu had, and possibly Soryu. But Akagi's appears to be "solid" or an "opaque" Hinomaru, and possibly Soryu's also. But Hiryu's is clearly this Zuiho type.

 

Re: Hinomaru on flight deck

Posted By: J. Ed Low <lowj@tir.com>

Date: Thursday, 9 November 2000, at 3:47 p.m.

In Response To: Hinomaru on flight deck *PIC* (Tennessee Katsuta)

 

Thanks for the interesting picture. I am also particulary interested in this Japanese military periodical "Maru" which you refer to. I have not heard of it. Do you or anyone on this list knows about this periodical and in particular know where I might subscribe to it? In addition, can you also list the URL for the site from which this picture came from ?

 

Re: Hinomaru on flight deck

Posted By: Tennessee Katsuta <tennkats@hotmail.com>

Date: Thursday, 9 November 2000, at 10:19 p.m.

In Response To: Re: Hinomaru on flight deck (J. Ed Low)

 

"Maru" is the name of a monthly periodical which specializes in military stuff. The often mentioned "Maru Mechanics" and "Maru Specials" are published by the same folks who publish "Maru." Unfortunately, I don't know of any sources from which we outside of Japan can subscribe to.

I did post the URL in my original message. Unfortunately, it doesn't take you directly to the pics. Once you get to the site, click "Talks & studies about warships" on the bottom left corner. Then go all the way down on the right side and click "2000.10.9", and that should take you to the Zuiho pics. If you have problems getting there, let me know.

 

Re: Hinomaru on flight deck

Posted By: Matthew Greer <Furher@qwest.net>

Date: Thursday, 9 November 2000, at 12:06 a.m.

In Response To: Hinomaru on flight deck *PIC* (Tennessee Katsuta)

 

I know we have all talked a lot abt the Hinomaru on the flight decks of IJN carriers. I have noticed that they may have been on the upper deck/ protective shed for the Seaplane tenders like the chotise, and chyodia. But has any one figured out just why the IJN put them on the ships in the first place. Was it a decoration or did it serve as some pratical purpose such as an air identification symbol simmlar to the swastika on the bow of the capital ships of the Kreigsmarine fleet. Any thoughts???

 

Re: flight deck Hinomaru history

Posted By: David_Aiken <David_Aiken@hotmail.com>

Date: Thursday, 9 November 2000, at 6:36 a.m.

In Response To: Re: Hinomaru on flight deck (Matthew Greer)

 

The appearance of huge Hinomaru immediately after the Battle of Coral Sea brings to mind the landing incident in that action. A KATE unit was sent out at dusk to find the American carriers. After fruitless search, they returned and found their carrier, approached to land, and -as some senarios even suggest- given a waveoff by the American deck officer on the US CV! The Kana name on the rear flight deck just was NOT enough, thus the meatball.

 

Re: flight deck Hinomaru history

Posted By: Tony Tully <atully@flash.net>

Date: Monday, 13 November 2000, at 10:18 a.m.

In Response To: Re: flight deck Hinomaru history (David_Aiken)

 

This is an interesting fact. I hadn't realized there were no Hinomarus on Shokaku and Zuikaku at Coral 

Sea. There were of course similar circular recognition symbols on the flight decks as proven in some 1941 photographs, but this would explain the very large size ones are inspired by Coral Sea.

 

Re: flight deck Hinomaru history

Posted By: David_Aiken <David_Aiken@hotmail.com>

Date: Monday, 13 November 2000, at 12:09 p.m.

In Response To: Re: flight deck Hinomaru history (Tony Tully)

 

My sensei says the large white circles are on one end of the deck for a landing aid. The hinomaru was at another locale on the deck after Coral Sea.

 

Re: flight deck Hinomaru history

Posted By: William Blado <wblad@msn.com>

Date: Tuesday, 28 November 2000, at 12:57 p.m.

In Response To: Re: flight deck Hinomaru history (David_Aiken)

 

Open white circles on Japanese carrier decks are "Landing Circles." Some prewar American carriers also had these. Hinomarus are solid red circles used for recognition. The two markings are different in appearance and purpose. Don't confuse them.

 

IJN CV Ryuho

Posted By: Matthew Greer <Furher@qwest.net>

Date: Saturday, 4 November 2000, at 8:38 p.m.

 

It has been a while since I posted any questions or comments on this board so here is my latest brain teezers.

First dose any one know when the CV Ryuho was commishioned. And second dose any one have a complet list of IJN capital ships that were active just prior to the Midway operation? Specifically I am looking for any major warships that were on the IJN's active roster as of the 1st of May 1942.

 

Re: IJN CV Ryuho

Posted By: Allan <Wildcat42@AOL.com>

Date: Saturday, 4 November 2000, at 9:32 p.m.

In Response To: IJN CV Ryuho (Matthew Greer)

 

Completed March 31st 1935 as Taigei (Submarine Tender), then reconstructed and commissioned 

November 28, 1942 as Ryuho.

How far down are you asking on "Major" Warships in commissioned by May 1st, 1942?? Cruiser Level??

Sentai 1 - Nagato, Mutsu, Yamato

Sentai 2 - Ise, Hyuga, Fuso, Yamashiro

Sentai 3 - Kongo, Haruna, Kirishima, Hiei

Sentai 4 - Atago, Takao, Chokai, Maya

Sentai 5 - Myoko, Haguro, Nachi

Sentai 6 - Aoba, Kinugasa, Kako, Furutaka

Sentai 7 - Kumano, Suzuyu, Mikuma, Mogami

Sentai 8 - Tone, Chikuma

Sentai 9 - Oi, Kitagami

Sentai 16 - Ashigara, Nagara, Kuma

Sentai 18 - Tenryu, Tatsuta

Sentai 21 - Tama, Kiso

DesRon 1 - Abukuma

DesRon 2 - Jintsu

DesRon 3 - Sendai

DesRon 4 - Naka

DesRon 5 - Natori

DesRon 6 - Yubari

CarDiv 1 - Akagi, Kaga

CarDiv 2 - Soryu, Hiryu

CarDiv 4 - Ryujo

CarDiv 5 - Shokaku, Zuikaku

Plus these Carriers, Zuiho, Hosho

Hope this helps..............

 

Re: Forgot One

Posted By: Allan <Wildcat42@AOL.com>

Date: Saturday, 4 November 2000, at 9:49 p.m.

In Response To: Re: IJN CV Ryuho (Allan)

 

CarDiv 4 - Ryujo, Shoho

 

Thankyou

Posted By: Matthew Greer <Furher@qwest.net>

Date: Sunday, 5 November 2000, at 6:40 p.m.

In Response To: Re: Forgot One (Allan)

 

Thankyou for the information abt the Ryujo and the capital ships. I'll tell you why I need the info I am trying to collect all the IJN's ships that were commishioned and still active "not sunk" as of the first of May. I plan on doing a fictious gatering of all the major warships just prior to midway in Hashirajima anchorage. I know it will not be historically accurate but I think it will make for an impressive and very large diorama. The scale I will be modeling the ships in is 1/700 scale. If possible I would like to have an accurate list similar to the one you provede me above only with ships still on the IJN's active roster as of the 1st of May 1942.

 

Re: Same Request??

Posted By: Allan <Wildcat42@AOL.com>

Date: Thursday, 9 November 2000, at 7:58 a.m.

In Response To: Re: No Problem (Matthew Greer)

 

Isn't this the same request as November 4th??

 

Re: Same Request??

Posted By: Matthew Greer <Furher@qwest.net>

Date: Friday, 10 November 2000, at 8:17 p.m.

In Response To: Re: Same Request?? (Allan)

 

It is simmlar to the request on the 4th but this time I would like to have a list of the ships still considered by the IJN to be active as of the 1st of May. I know roughly abt what ships were commishioned by 1st of may but I don't really know for sure what ships had been sunk and which ones were still a float. Also if it is not to much trouble could you make the list to include the following ship types. CV,BB,CA,Cl.

Again I am very greatful for the information you have provided me. I would like to extend this offer. If you ever need a question answered abt Germany's participation in WW2 just ask me.

 

Aircraft Carrier Akagi

Posted By: John Waddell <DandJWaddell@aol.com>

Date: Tuesday, 24 October 2000, at 8:19 p.m.

 

I am accumulating information for a large-scale model of Akagi, and I would like to know the best sources for scale drawings and photographs of this ship. What books might be considered worthwhile? Also, where can I find information

regarding her air group, in terms of unit markings and insignia, during the Pearl Harbor period? Any assistance provided would be greatly appreciated

 

Re: Aircraft Carrier Akagi

Posted By: Frido Kip <frido.kip@hetnet.nl>

Date: Wednesday, 25 October 2000, at 11:02 a.m.

In Response To: Aircraft Carrier Akagi (John Waddell)

 

One of the best books on the subject is the Polish Monografie Morskie 2 'Akagi' by Skwiot and Jarski (ISBN 83 86208 01 5) which I believe you can order from www.pacificfront.com. Although it's in Polish it provides many good quality drawings and many pictures which will certainly be helpful.

Also a good source are the articles written by Hans Lengerer in Warship 1982 (Nos. 22-24), published by the Naval Institute Press and Conway Maritime Press, called Akagi & Kaga.

And then there's also the Grand Prix volume on aircraft carriers which is excellent but entirely in Japanese, but it contains many close up drawings.

 

Re: Aircraft Carrier Akagi

Posted By: David Outten <DMOutten@cs.com>

Date: Tuesday, 24 October 2000, at 8:53 p.m.

In Response To: Aircraft Carrier Akagi (John Waddell)

 

As far as her air group during the Pearl Harbor strike, "A6M Zero", Aircraft Number 59 by Squadron/Signal Publications list carrier air group markings April 1941-June 1942 as follows:

CarDiv-1 Akagi AI-101 (A6M)

AI-201 (D3A)

AI-301 (B5N)

Kaga AII

CarDiv-2 Soryu BI

Hiryu BII

CarDiv-5 Shokaku EI

Zuikaku EII

The remaining carriers followed the same numerical pattern for the three aircraft types. I don't know about the D3A's or B5N's, but the A6M's from the Akagi were white with black engine cowlings. They also had a red stripe that went completely around the fuselage between the cockpit and tail assembly. I hope this was some help to you John.

 

Japanese Escort Carriers

Posted By: David Outten <DMOutten@cs.com>

Date: Wednesday, 18 October 2000, at 7:58 p.m.

 

I'm interested to know how the the Order of Battle for the Hosho,Taiyo,Unyo,Chuyo,Kaiyo and Shinyo progressed thru the war. I've seen the OoB for 7 Dec 41 with Hosho in CarDiv-3 (training) and Taiyo CarDiv-4 (ref: "Japanese Warships of WWII", AJ Watts). I realize they were used primarily for training and aircraft transport, but were there any specific CarDiv's or likewise. I would much appreciate any assistance.

 

Re: Japanese Escort Carriers

Posted By: Paul Richards <c2water@vianet.net.au>

Date: Sunday, 22 October 2000, at 8:36 p.m.

In Response To: Japanese Escort Carriers (David Outten)

 

In Mark Parillo's book, page 105:

The escort carriers amassed what can only be termed an incredible record under Grand Escort Headquarters. Taiyo was the first of these four carriers to complete its repairs. Along with a strong surface contingent, it departed Japan on August 8, 1944, with a convoy of ten merchantmen. Ten days later an American submarine sent it to the bottom of the Luzon Straits. Four weeks later Unyo,also onits maiden voyage since repairs, met the same fate in nearly the same spot. Shinyo differed only in meeting its doom in the Yellow Sea, for it, too, fell victim to a submarine on its maiden escort mission barely two months later. Kaiyo escaped destruction because further damage incurred while undergoing repairs forced it to stay in port until the war ended.

 

Re: Japanese Escort Carriers

Posted By: Tony Tully <atully@flash.net>

Date: Monday, 23 October 2000, at 11:19 a.m.

In Response To: Re: Japanese Escort Carriers (Paul Richards)

 

Regarding your post/quote from Parillo's book, a correction has to be made. His overview of the CVE's is not overly in depth, for it is not the focus of that book. Especially as pertains Kaiyo here:

"Kaiyo escaped destruction because further damage incurred while undergoing repairs forced it to stay in port until the war ended."

No, not at all. Kaiyo was operable and *serving* on convoy runs as late as December 1944. She was just simply *luckier* and wasn't nailed by submarine torpedo. She in fact passes Hyuga, Ise and Oyodo as they head to Singapore from Saigon shortly after Kimura's raid on Mindoro. In 1945, the Kaiyo is fully operational, and assigned to aircraft plane landing and take-off training duties in the Inland Sea. However, in March 19 raid on Kure, she takes a bomb which causes moderate damage. But this is repaired by early May, and May, June, July again sees her regularly sortieing to train aviators. It is while thus engaged she meets her end after first a mining on 24, than air attack on July 28, in Beppu Bay in late July.

 

Re: Japanese Escort Carriers

Posted By: Allan Alsleben <Wildcat42@AOL.com>

Date: Monday, 23 October 2000, at 1:30 p.m.

In Response To: Re: Japanese Escort Carriers (Tony Tully)

 

What air units were assigned to this CVE's?? I have 931 ku assigned to a couple of them, but I don't believe that that is entirely correct. What is your thoughts on this??

 

Re: Japanese Escort Carriers

Posted By: Tony Tully <atully@flash.net>

Date: Wednesday, 25 October 2000, at 5:51 a.m.

In Response To: Re: Japanese Escort Carriers (Allan Alsleben)

 

Regarding the Air Groups on the CVE's I know that your 931 Air Group is correct for TAIYO, I just confirmed it yesterday from my papers. In fact, on her last voyage, TAIYO has twelve Type-97 planes aboard. She is performing genuine convoy escort duty, and is not just plane-ferrying. Ironically, initially, in July, both Taiyo and Unyo had been on a large convoy to Manila, but were plane-ferrying. The Shinyo was with them, and to her fell the actual patrol duty.

It appears 931 is assigned to Unyo also, but the question mark for me is whether Shinyo and especially Kaiyo are also 931. Have not translated that part yet. But my guess is that Kaiyo is not 931, since she is in a plane landing-and-launching training role by then, and I don't know if 931 AG even still existed in July '45?

I can't really improve on the posting you made of the ship's order of battle. It seems right.

 

Re: Japanese Escort Carriers

Posted By: Tony Tully <atully@flash.net>

Date: Monday, 23 October 2000, at 2:31 p.m.

In Response To: Re: Japanese Escort Carriers (Allan Alsleben)

 

That sounds *almost* right, or was it `831'?, but I will check when I get home tonight. Its right there in one of my documents.

By the way, do any of you have any details on escort carrier Shinyo's sinking and casualties? I am specifically looking for how many survived and how many were lost. I know Captain Norie Ishii went down with her.

 

Re: Casualties aboard the CVE's

Posted By: Allan <Wildcat42@AOL.com>

Date: Wednesday, 25 October 2000, at 7:31 a.m.

In Response To: Re: Japanese Escort Carriers (Tony Tully)

 

With regard to casualties, sadly I don't have anything on Shinyo, but I might be able to help obtain them. Would you need Chuyo as well?? It would be better to make one request to Japan rather than two.

 

Re: Casualties aboard the CVE's

Posted By: Tony Tully <atully@flash.net>

Date: Wednesday, 25 October 2000, at 9:35 a.m.

In Response To: Re: Casualties aboard the CVE's (Allan)

 

I would be extremely grateful for any inquiry you could make. Yes, a confirmation on CHUYO's or especially TAIYO's loss/survivor account would be good. SHINYO is the most elusive, but really, other than knowing her skipper survived, I don't know TAIYO's either.

I don't know the nature of your inquiry---if possible, in SHINYO's case find out also if four torps really hit her and what time she actually sank. Thanks!

 

Re: Casualties aboard the CVE's

Posted By: Allan <Wildcat42@AOL.com>

Date: Wednesday, 25 October 2000, at 9:54 a.m.

In Response To: Re: Casualties aboard the CVE's (Tony Tully)

 

Message is away........ Expect answer sometime early next week. Please contact me off-line as this source in Japan does not wish to be used as a go-pher. If the information is there, we'll get it. The National Institute for Defense Studies takes too long, up to 6 to 8 weeks. This source can provide me (If possible) the information within 72 hours, depending on availability.

 

Re: Japanese Escort Carriers

Posted By: David Outten <DMOutten@cs.com>

Date: Monday, 23 October 2000, at 4:33 p.m.

In Response To: Re: Japanese Escort Carriers (Tony Tully)

 

I appreciate all help that has been generated from this post, but the CVL Hosho (CVE?) has been one not touched on yet. I know to start the war she was in CarDiv-3 and later participated in the battle of Midway, indirectly anyways. Was she in any CarDiv order of battle after Midway? Was she used like the other five escort carriers during the war, aircraft transport and convoy escort especially? Her speed shouldn't have been a problem, I believe she was rated for 25 knots.

 

Re: Japanese Escort Carriers

Posted By: Allan <Wildcat42@AOL.com>

Date: Monday, 23 October 2000, at 6:29 p.m.

In Response To: Re: Japanese Escort Carriers (David Outten)

 

Hosho

12/ 7-'41 to 4/ 1-'42 - Attached to 3rd CarDiv with Zuiho

4/ 1-'42 to 6/20-'42 - Attached to 1st Fleet

This was during the Midway Operation

7/14-'42 to 1/15-'43 - 1st Air Fleet (Training)

1/15-'43 to 1/ 1-'44 - 3rd Fleet / 50th Air Group (Training)

1/ 1-'44 to 2/20-'44 - 12th Air Fleet / 51st Air Group (Training)

2/20-'44 to 4/20-'45 - Combined Fleet

4/20-'45 - Reserve Ship, 4th Class

Taiyo (Ex Kasuga Maru)

7/ 1-'42 to 8/31-'42 - Combined Fleet

8/31-'42 to 12/10-'43 - Combined Fleet

12/10-'43 to 10/10-'44 - General Escort Command

Sunk August 18, 1944

Unyo (Ex-Yawata Maru)

5/25-'42 to 8/31-'42 - Combined Fleet

8/31-'42 to 12/10-'43 - Combined Fleet

12/10-'43 to 11/10-'44 - General Escort Command

Sunk September 16, 1944

Chuyo

11/20-'42 to 2. 5-'44 - Combined Fleet

Sunk December 4, 1943

Kaiyo

11/23-'43 to 12/10-'43 - Combined Fleet

12/10-'43 to 12/10-'44 - General Escort Command

12/10-'44 to 4/20-'45 - 1st Escort Fleet

4/20-'45 to 8/15-'45 - Combined Fleet

 

Re: Japanese Escort Carriers/Hosho Air Group

Posted By: Jim Broshot <jbroshot@socket.net>

Date: Monday, 23 October 2000, at 10:33 p.m.

In Response To: Re: Japanese Escort Carriers (Allan)

 

Here's one for the experts.

In THE BATTLE THAT DOOMED JAPAN (Fuchida and Okumiya) the HOSHO air group for the Midway operation is given as "8 bombers." Francillon in an Aircraft in Profile on the Kate, gives HOSHO 8 Type 97 Carrier Attack Planes as of June 1942; and H. P. Willmott in THE BARRIER AND THE JAVELIN says HOSHO's air group for Operation MI was composed of 9 A5M4s (Claudes) and 5 "B4N1s" (sic) (Jeans). He bases this on the fact that survivors of HIRYU said they were overflown by an aircraft with fixed landing gear - which he extrapolates to putting Jeans on HOSHO. Hata and Izawa state that HOSHO had no fighters in April 1942 only six carrier attack planes.

 

Re: Japanese Escort Carriers/Hosho Air Group

Posted By: Mark E. Horan <mhoran@snet.net>

Date: Tuesday, 24 October 2000, at 2:47 p.m.

In Response To: Re: Japanese Escort Carriers/Hosho Air Group (Jim Broshot)

 

Hosho carried 8 Jeans at Midway. Her fighter squadron had been disbanded prior to this voyage. Her limited air complement was along purely for ASW purposes.

 

Re: Japanese Escort Carriers/Hosho Air Group

Posted By: Jim Broshot <jbroshot@socket.net>

Date: Tuesday, 24 October 2000, at 10:15 p.m.

In Response To: Re: Japanese Escort Carriers/Hosho Air Group (Mark E. Horan)

 

I greatly appreciate all of the information about HOSHO's air groups. Two points for idle speculation:

1. Was HOSHO big enough/fast enough to operate KATES?

2. If Willmott bases his conclusion that HOSHO carried JEANS for the Midway operation just because a HOSHO aircraft was sighted that had fixed landing gear, could HOSHO have been carrying Mitsubishi B5Ms, the KATE rival with fixed gear?

 

Re: Japanese Escort Carriers/Hosho Air Group

 

Posted By: Tony Tully <atully@flash.net>

Date: Wednesday, 25 October 2000, at 9:41 a.m.

 

In Response To: Re: Japanese Escort Carriers/Hosho Air Group (Jim Broshot)

 

You raise a good question. Especially since we should remember that the `planes with wheels" sighted 

comment is just from HIRYU's survivors when HOSHO's plane overflew them around 0630 5 June. When you consider that, we have to think of what *might* have looked like fixed wheels also. It may not be right, and this could be a red-herring. Do not Vals also qualify? I think the best clue would be whether or not Hosho's re-fit was designed to make her capable of training with field aircraft.

 

Re: Hosho and Zuiho

Posted By: Allan <Wildcat42@AOL.com>

Date: Tuesday, 24 October 2000, at 7:24 a.m.

In Response To: Re: Japanese Escort Carriers/Hosho Air Group (Jim Broshot)

 

The BKS Volume 34 is unclear, but I've taken it up with John Lundstrom and Jon Parshall some time back. Hosho had 8 B4Y1 (Jeans) but Zuiho had 12 VF and 12 VT (So states V34). At first, I thought these were 2nd line aircraft, but both Parshall and Lundstrom believe that the 12 VF were A6M's from the reserve of the 4 carriers of Kido Butai and the VT were B5N, also from Kido Butai.

However, Captain Yoshida from NIDS states that they were "Claudes" and old "Kates" onboard Zuiho. This is one of those old frustrations that have never been worked out to my satisfaction.

Again, from NIDS recently, Captain Kitazawa stated that these were all instructors aboard Hosho and Zuiho and experienced personel but the aircraft not identified.

I don't expect anyone to touch this, because the first thing I would ask, What Source did it come from?

 

Re: Hosho and Zuiho

Posted By: Frido Kip <frido.kip@hetnet.nl>

Date: Tuesday, 24 October 2000, at 10:29 a.m.

In Response To: Re: Hosho and Zuiho (Allan)

 

Now we are talking about aircraft complements, does anybody know what aircraft Taiyô carried in 1942 whn she wasn't used on transport missions?

 

Re: Hosho Air Group

Posted By: Randy

Date: Tuesday, 24 October 2000, at 7:07 a.m.

In Response To: Re: Japanese Escort Carriers/Hosho Air Group (Jim Broshot)

 

You will also note that Okumiya's book assigns command of the Hosho bomber detachment to Irikiin Yoshiaki -- who would go on to be the man who launches a third torpedo into Hornet at Santa Cruz, is shot down immediately thereafter and dooms attempts to restore power to the carrier.

Just a historical note.

I believe the Jeans were the only aircraft aboard Hosho for the Midway Operation. I believe this is what Mark Horan has had to say in the past.

 

Re: Shinyo

Posted By: Allan <Wildcat42@AOL.com>

Date: Monday, 23 October 2000, at 10:11 p.m.

In Response To: Re: Japanese Escort Carriers (David Outten)

 

I missed one and that was Shinyo

1/20-'44 to 1/10-'45 - General Escort Command

This too was sunk sometime IIRC in December of '44. This ship had the 931st Ku aboard from 10/5 to 25-'44 for escort and anti-submarine patrol. The aircraft were B5N2 "Kates", 15 in number, if I remember correctly.

Taiyo was at Truk during the Battle of Eastern Solomons, in company of Yamato and the Destroyers Ushio and Akebono.

But as Tony was saying, these CVE's were firstly ferrying aircraft, then acting as cover for convoys.

 

Re: Shinyo

Posted By: Tony Tully <atully@flash.net>

Date: Wednesday, 25 October 2000, at 5:56 a.m.

In Response To: Re: Shinyo (Allan)

 

Allan is correct. I would add that Shinyo departs Imari Bay on Nov 13, 1944, as part of the gathering of HI-81 convoy. The convoy proper departs the Nagasaki vicinity off Goto Island on the morning of Nov 15th. The large army carrier Akitsu Maru is sunk that morning by USS Queenfish, and Shinyo herself exploded and sunk by submarine torpedoes from USS Spadefish an hour before midnight on Nov, 17th 1944. I have not yet found indications of her casualties or survivors figure, but her skipper Norie Ishii was lost.

If 931 Air Group was aboard on Oct 25, it seems reasonable that it may have been also when sunk. As far as I know, Shinyo did not change her duties in between the last convoy HI-79 and then heading south again for HI-81.

 

Re: Japanese Escort Carriers

Posted By: Jim Broshot <jbroshot@socket.net>

Date: Wednesday, 18 October 2000, at 10:46 p.m.

In Response To: Japanese Escort Carriers (David Outten)

 

as of 14 Jul 1942 reorganization

attached to Rengo Kantai

CVL Taiyo with 11 A6M and 14 D1A

CVL Unyo with 14 B5N

this from ZERO!

CVL Hosho was attached to the Main Body for the Midway operations with "8 bombers" (B5Ns)

I bet Allen Alsleben has a lot of data on this. :):):)

 

Re: Japanese Escort Carriers

Posted By: Allan Alsleben <Wildcat42@AOL.com>

Date: Thursday, 19 October 2000, at 5:37 p.m.

In Response To: Re: Japanese Escort Carriers (Jim Broshot)

 

I'll check to Tony on this. All my information is packed for a move come the 28th this month. However, I'll review the board after I get settled and if no further response, I'll post what Monograph #116 has on the subject.

 

Re: Japanese Escort Carriers

Posted By: Tony Tully <atully@flash.net>

Date: Thursday, 19 October 2000, at 10:41 a.m.

In Response To: Re: Japanese Escort Carriers (Jim Broshot)

 

I actually have considerable interest and have made much research into the Japanese Escort Carriers. You will surely find the TAIYO and CHUYO troms on our page interesting if you haven't already seen them. As for Orders of Battle, I can look them up. Prior to late '43, the CVEs were attached to local entities, while TAIYO served directly with Combined Fleet during the Guadalcanal operations. All were engaged in heavy plane-ferrying between Yokosuka and Truk. Then, in a nutshell, from memory, in November 1943, the CHUYO, TAIYO, and UNYO were attached to Grand Escort Command, and specifically tended to serve in the Second Escort echelon and convoy duty. However, CHUYO was sunk on Dec 3, 1943 by submarine. But KAIYO and SHINYO took its place, joining the roster. They remained in service till Grand Escort Command itself was abolished, just over a year later. By then, TAIYO, UNYO, and SHINYO had all been sunk by submarine. Only KAIYO remained, and attached I think to Combined Fleet's 4th reserve, was pressed into service in 1945 landing and training pilots. Thus the last operational carrier in that sense, and is still doing it when mined, then destroyed by air attack in Beppu Bay in July 1945. I will double check the details for you. I plan some pretty extensive posts about the CVEs soon.

 

Posted By: jon <jcr1@grapevine.net>

Date: Sunday, 15 October 2000, at 10:59 a.m.

 

Need help. I am building a 1/200 Shinano, converted from the Nichimo Yamato. I need good drawings of decks,armament,radars,fittings,equipment etc... What was the color of the ship? Was it camoflauged and if it was ,what were the colors?BTW, has anyone ever looked for or ever considered looking for the wreck? Should'nt be a problem to find or am I wrong.

 

Re: Shinano

Posted By: Randy

Date: Sunday, 15 October 2000, at 12:37 p.m.

In Response To: Shinano (jon)

 

Why don't you pick up Tamiya's newly tooled Shinano for details, colors and the like? She went down in about 12,000 feet of water and she'll be seen someday, I suppose.

 

Re: Shinano

Posted By: John Waddell <DandJWaddell@aol.com>

Date: Sunday, 22 October 2000, at 7:30 p.m.

In Response To: Re: Shinano (Randy)

 

Jon, I'm currently trying to obtain information on the Shinano for my own somewhat smaller (1/350) 

version. The box art on the Tamyia 1/700 release shows the ship painted in a medium green scheme. I honestly don't know if this is correct or not, as I've always read (and been told) that Japanese warships of the period were a dark satin gray color. As for detail information, the book "Battleships"

subtitled "Axis and Neutral Battleships in World War II" by William H. Garzke, JR. does include a two-view drawing of the Shinano with a hull plan. I understand you are converting the Nichimo kit-Be advised that although the underwater hull configuration for Shinano was very close to that of Yamato and Musashi, there were noticable differences, particularly in the area of the bouyancy blister and the armour belt. If you are able to obtain any additional information on this subject not mentioned here, I would appreciate your contacting me as well. Good luck!!

 

Re: Shinano

Posted By: Yutaka Iwasaki <navy_yard-iwa@mbj.sphere.ne.jp>

Date: Monday, 23 October 2000, at 9:33 a.m.

In Response To: Re: Shinano (John Waddell)

 

Tamiya's 1/700 shinano is the most accurate model now in the world.

It depend on the formal drawing (I don't know who possesed it but SHIGERU MAKINO most possibly),

and using CAD drawing systems. So you may gauge it directly.

Colour scheme is also accurate. Since June 1944, Japanese merchantman adopted black-green and green camouflage

to fit the Phillipines or China-Indochina jungle because they must voyage shallow waters near the land to avoid submarine torpedoes.

After Marianas campaign IJN lost almost all their carrier based aircrafts, so they needed to keep their carriers in Inland-sea beside small islands.

Therefore the carriers painted same as merchantman on their side, and strangely painted on their flight deck. (It was a pattern imitating the small island's terraced farm fields, I think.)

The book 'SHINANO! THE SINKING OF JAPAN'S SECRET SUPERSHIP' by CAPTAIN JOSEPH F ENRIGHT with JAMES W RYAN

contains the midship section drawing of SHINANO. It shows the shape of its buoyancy blister.

The top of its is one meter below of YAMATO's, so more round shape than YAMATO's wedge shape.(The reason of this modification is because once SHINANO designed to be smaller draft than YAMATO. Three sets of 18-inch gun turrets were heavier than full flight deck 75mm armours.)

Japanese publisher GAKKEN's recent issue 'TAIHO and SHINANO' contains much useful drawings including body plan , AA-guns arrange and island(bridge) plan.

TAMIYA's 1/700 shinano, however still has many inaccurate details.

Ommited flight deck crew waiting pocket,

cutter boat(minesweeping float handling) deck under forward 12.7cm guns,

catwalk around the hangar deck

landing guide signal lamps

the plan of island(bridge) top is a supposition and ommiting binoculars(some remaining reports says there were 36 sets of binoculars).

TAMIYA's island is little longer toward the fore.(2-3mm in 1/700)

And my question is how Japanese covered the SHINANO's side opening of hangar deck, it's too wide to shut out the lighting outside at night.

Anyway the supership is still myth and labyrinth. Everyone can make his own correct SHINANO. Good luck too!!

 

Re: Shinano(addition)

Posted By: Yutaka Iwasaki <navy_yard-iwa@mbj.sphere.ne.jp>

Date: Monday, 23 October 2000, at 10:15 a.m.

In Response To: Re: Shinano (John Waddell)

 

Island support structure below the hangar deck is longer 2 meter forward and 2 meter afterward than at above the hangar deck(below flight deck).

There were quarter round fashion plate to soften the wave splash.

Tamiya's 1/700 shinano ommit them.

 

Re: Shinano

Posted By: Tony Tully <atully@flash.net>

Date: Wednesday, 25 October 2000, at 7:04 p.m.

In Response To: Re: Shinano (Yutaka Iwasaki)

 

If I may ask, since you have the Gakken on Shinano/Taiho, can you tell me if it has an account by any 

survivors or report of Taiho's explosion and loss? Or is there a good book in Japanese on the subject? I can arrange some translations if I know good sources. I have that Gakken, but are unable to make out its table of content.

 

Taiho casualties

Posted By: Yutaka Iwasaki <navy_yard-iwa@mbj.sphere.ne.jp>

Date: Thursday, 26 October 2000, at 8:18 a.m.

 

In Response To: Re: Shinano (Tony Tully)

In Gakken's Shinano/Taiho, only Mr. JIRO KIMATA(researcher and writer) mentioned about this subject that the number of TAIHO crews is 1,751(perhaps except pilots). In same author's another book 'War history of Japanese aircraft carrier' TOSYO-SYUPPANSYA co.ltd 1977, he says the TAIHO casualties

officer: 28

sailor: 632

total 660

Also he says number of survivors is unknown, but TAIHO had more than 1,751 crews because certain number of temporary single AA guns gunner must be on board.

In same book, he also mentioned about escort carrier SHINYO.

the number of SHINYO crews is 948. That's largest comparing any other Japanese escort carrier. And he is not sure the SHINYO casualties, but he believes most of crew couldn't survive.

 

Re: Taiho casualties

Posted By: Richard Wolff <rrwolff@bpa.gov>

Date: Thursday, 26 October 2000, at 12:14 p.m.

In Response To: Taiho casualties (Yutaka Iwasaki)

 

I have worked with Tony to translate sections of Mr. Kimata's "History of Japanese Aircraft Carriers" and have found it to be very authoritative. I was not aware that Mr. Kimata played a role in the Gakken work on Taiho & Shinano. Now that I check, I can see his name cited on the last page (line 18) of the Table of Contents. Do you have any information about how I might contact Mr. Kimata?

Regarding Taihoh's complement, Mr. Jyouji Hayashi gives the total as 2038, which I believe includes the aircrews but I'm not sure if it includes the extra AA gun crews. See www.kt.rim.or.jp/~kaliy/TAIHOU.htm for details.

 

Re: Taiho complement

Posted By: Yutaka Iwasaki <navy_yard-iwa@mbj.sphere.ne.jp>

Date: Friday, 27 October 2000, at 7:26 p.m.

In Response To: Re: Taiho casualties (Richard Wolff)

 

Richard Wolff 26 October 2000

how I might contact Mr. Kimata?

 

He gives his address on publisher's imprint page. I have 1993's his book, the same address with "History of Japanese Aircraft Carriers".

Taiho's complement, Mr. Jyouji Hayashi

www.kt.rim.or.jp/~kaliy/TAIHOU.htm

This table seemes including 134 aircrews.(still differ with KIMATA's)

For me, this table is some primary resources once to be used