The Ship Model Forum

I wanted to add something, the aircraft deck has detail that is even missing from the 1/350 Aoshima's IJN Kirishima. Also notice the ventilators in the aft bridge and the deck detail.

Beyond the hull, IJN Kirishima has amazing detail, juts notice the wealth of detail in the aircraft handling era.

As much as I respect what is published in the Gakken books, just quoting Fujimi's insistence that it's in a secondary publication is not proof, Atma. For one, we need to get a read on the actual citation.

Kirsihima's hull was discoverd by the Ballard Guadalcanal expedition, upside down. Which means the scuttles are available for viewing. I wonder if it would be possible to contact Ken Marchall, who did the paintings and therefore had to view the photos.

[quote="Dan K"]

IMHO, Fujimi took the easy way out to justify reusing the Kongo hull instead of issuing a new hull. Clearly, Fujimi has had little issue with producing one-off molds like Hiei, Akagi, Kaga, and now Hiryu, so I don’t know why this was an issue for them.

[/quote]
Well the Gaken 21# declares that the portholes were covered at Truk atoll in late 1942, so as long as there some new evidence, Fujimi is right.
This was Fujimi's answer to my question when I had recieved an advance copy of IJN Kirishima, is not my statement.

Edit:Dan, you are commiting a crime to your self, by not getting a IJN Ise by Fujimi in 1/700 !

Well, the new Fujimi 1/700 Kirishima has docked and I have incredibly mixed feelings above it. As Atma alluded to in the CASF Kongo class thread, everything from the new main deck on up is exceptionally molded & detailed. It’s just beautiful and it looks to be very, very accurate. Even the molded on anchor chains are magnificent; I actually don’t know that I would scrape them off and replace them. When compared to, say, the new Hiei kit, they are just a hair more raised, with more depth. A truly great detail and typical of what I see for most of the parts. Personally, I would still replace the standard Fujimi supplied weapons, searchlight and boat sprues, with aftermarket pieces but, for someone looking to build out of the box or with a minimum of expense, the kit supplied pieces are fine.

I also purchased the Kirishima PE set, which is both comprehensive and exceptional. Besides the trusswork for the searchlight platforms, I appreciate the addition of several bridge tower components, for some very sharp definition, should you want it.

Unfortunately, the hull from the Kongo 1944 kit is used. I think this is a great shame, and really crimps my enthusiasm for the kit. One reason is the same old crooked casemate problem. A fix will be difficult, regardless of how one approaches it. The most accurate way to correct the casemates is to shave down the sidewalls, though that will be a delicate operation. Filling them in would create casemate apertures that are too narrow.

Another thing might be to use the Hiei hull, which has fairly correct casemates, but then the armor belt blisters are far too wide. Shaving the blisters down may not be practical. Perhaps scratch-building new ones and integrating them into the hull would be easier.

The other point of contention is the Kongo kit hull’s depiction of plated of portholes for the lower row of portholes. I have very serious doubts as to that actually being the case for Kirishima in late 1942, despite Atma’s assertion (from Fujimi, I assume) that the portholes were covered at Truk in late 1942, per Gakken #21.

For one, a review of Kirishima’s TROM shows only one such mention, and only maintenance at that. More importantly, the TROM for Kirishima’s BB division mate and flagship, Hiei, is identical on this point, and it seems clear that Hiei’s lower scuttles were not plated over before she sank. Certainly, Fujimi doesn’t think so for Hiei.

I’ve been in contact with one of my Japanese experts on this same point. He has not reviewed Gakken #21 but feels that it more likely that the Gakken volume is citing a set of directives, the “Kunnrei” telegrams, were issued in late 1942, specifying the addition of portholes covers. This directive was issued in response to the circumstances behind the loss of the heavy cruiser Kako some three months earlier from torpedo attack. Her loss was accentuated by the condition of her portholes being open, or forced open from a torpedo blast. The directive does not mean that such work was done on Kirishima, only that it should be done as soon as was possible.

IMHO, Fujimi took the easy way out to justify reusing the Kongo hull instead of issuing a new hull. Clearly, Fujimi has had little issue with producing one-off molds like Hiei, Akagi, Kaga, and now Hiryu, so I don’t know why this was an issue for them.

Close-ups of the sprues can be seen on a blog on the Omani site, by clicking on them, dated Sept 16th: http://mokehana.blog34.fc2.com/blog-entry-277.html