Fireball:
Seems our naval interests are pretty similar, and for about the same reason...
But I'm a bit confused by the question, as Hiei was sunk in November of "42"; and the model is specific to her. So she has no "44" variant...
BTW, I've been meaning to ask- does your moniker have anything to do with your favorite brand of Kentucky "sippin likker"? Good stuff when Saki doesn't cut it...
Oh, and are you familiar with the website- combinedfleet.com?
Kongo class fast battleships
Moderators: dnichols, GHQ, Mk 1
-
kiasutha
- E5
- Posts: 439
- Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 9:10 pm
-
Donald M. Scheef
- E5
- Posts: 1629
- Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 2:24 am
- Location: Waukegan, Illinois USA
Differences among Kongo-class battleships
Sorry to take so long in answering the question – I’ve been busy with some other activities the past week.
For the moment, I’m going to limit my description to the time after 1940. Later on, I’ll come back and discuss the earlier differences among these four ships.
I’ll start with Haruna, since this ship was the first to complete the major reconstruction of the mid-to-late 1930s. To begin, Haruna (and Kirishima) had rounded sides to the main armament turrets. Kongo and Hiei had more angular, flat-sided turrets. Next, the pagoda mast differs from those of the other three ships. It’s difficult to describe – I suggest looking at a book like Siegfried Breyer’s ‘Battleships and Battlecruisers.’ In general, I would describe it as taller and bulkier-looking. Unlike any of the other three ships, the second funnel was taller than the first. Also, the superstructure aft of the second funnel was integrated into the funnel with no space between them. Haruna survived until late in the war, so received greatly augmented anti-aircraft weapons: ten twin 25mm in 1940 increased to a total to 34 in 1943, 94 in 1944, and 118 by 1945. Also in 1944, two twin 12.7 cm mounts added to the existing four. Kongo had similar increases. The exact locations differed, but in a trivial manner only.
The second ship to complete the major reconstruction was Kirishima. As noted, the main gun turrets on Kirishima had rounded sides. The pagoda mast differed from that of Haruna (again, difficult to describe). It was similar to that of Kongo, but not identical. The major difference between Kirishima and Kongo was the arrangement of the searchlight tower between the bridge structure and the first funnel (once more, you have to refer to diagrams to see the difference). Since Kirishima was lost in November of 1942, it did not receive the extensive anti-aircraft upgrades received by Kongo and Haruna.
Kongo was most similar to Kirishima in the early war period. Kongo (and Hiei) had angular sides to the main gun turrets. Other differences were mostly minor variations in the bridge/pagoda mast and in the searchlight supports. After 1943, Kongo received anti-aircraft modifications similar to those of Haruna. Major differences between Kongo and Haruna were the designs of the pagoda mast, both funnels were the same height, and there was a gap between the second funnel and the aft superstructure.
Hiei was the last of the class to receive major rebuilding. This actually returned it to full military capability after a decade as a partially-demilitarized training ship. Its bridge/foremast was based on the tower mast designed for the Yamato class rather than the modified tripod/pagoda mast. The funnels were straight, without the bulge at the top seen on the other ships of this class. Finally, there was a larger gap between the second funnel and the aft superstructure. Since Hiei was lost in November, 1942, it did not receive significant anti-aircraft additions.
With respect to GHQ’s models:
IJN9, BB Kongo – this is a late-war version with six twin 12.7cm guns. If you are not concerned with fine details (shape of bridge/pagoda mast, funnel height, and aft superstructure) you could use it as a late-war Haruna. To improve the Haruna appearance slightly, replace the main gun turrets with the rounded type found in IJN10, BB Kirishima.
IJN10, BB Kirishima – this is (obviously) an early-war version. It works fairly well as an early-war Kongo, except that you want to replace the main armament turrets with the slab-sided type found in IJN09 or IJN48. If you are not concerned with fine details (shape of bridge/pagoda mast, funnel height, and aft superstructure) you could use it as an early-war Haruna. At least the turret shape is correct.
IJN48, BB Hiei – this is (obviously) an early-war version. It is not a good representation of any of the other ships in this class.
What is most missing is Haruna, both early-war and late-war versions.
Don S.
Sorry to take so long in answering the question – I’ve been busy with some other activities the past week.
For the moment, I’m going to limit my description to the time after 1940. Later on, I’ll come back and discuss the earlier differences among these four ships.
I’ll start with Haruna, since this ship was the first to complete the major reconstruction of the mid-to-late 1930s. To begin, Haruna (and Kirishima) had rounded sides to the main armament turrets. Kongo and Hiei had more angular, flat-sided turrets. Next, the pagoda mast differs from those of the other three ships. It’s difficult to describe – I suggest looking at a book like Siegfried Breyer’s ‘Battleships and Battlecruisers.’ In general, I would describe it as taller and bulkier-looking. Unlike any of the other three ships, the second funnel was taller than the first. Also, the superstructure aft of the second funnel was integrated into the funnel with no space between them. Haruna survived until late in the war, so received greatly augmented anti-aircraft weapons: ten twin 25mm in 1940 increased to a total to 34 in 1943, 94 in 1944, and 118 by 1945. Also in 1944, two twin 12.7 cm mounts added to the existing four. Kongo had similar increases. The exact locations differed, but in a trivial manner only.
The second ship to complete the major reconstruction was Kirishima. As noted, the main gun turrets on Kirishima had rounded sides. The pagoda mast differed from that of Haruna (again, difficult to describe). It was similar to that of Kongo, but not identical. The major difference between Kirishima and Kongo was the arrangement of the searchlight tower between the bridge structure and the first funnel (once more, you have to refer to diagrams to see the difference). Since Kirishima was lost in November of 1942, it did not receive the extensive anti-aircraft upgrades received by Kongo and Haruna.
Kongo was most similar to Kirishima in the early war period. Kongo (and Hiei) had angular sides to the main gun turrets. Other differences were mostly minor variations in the bridge/pagoda mast and in the searchlight supports. After 1943, Kongo received anti-aircraft modifications similar to those of Haruna. Major differences between Kongo and Haruna were the designs of the pagoda mast, both funnels were the same height, and there was a gap between the second funnel and the aft superstructure.
Hiei was the last of the class to receive major rebuilding. This actually returned it to full military capability after a decade as a partially-demilitarized training ship. Its bridge/foremast was based on the tower mast designed for the Yamato class rather than the modified tripod/pagoda mast. The funnels were straight, without the bulge at the top seen on the other ships of this class. Finally, there was a larger gap between the second funnel and the aft superstructure. Since Hiei was lost in November, 1942, it did not receive significant anti-aircraft additions.
With respect to GHQ’s models:
IJN9, BB Kongo – this is a late-war version with six twin 12.7cm guns. If you are not concerned with fine details (shape of bridge/pagoda mast, funnel height, and aft superstructure) you could use it as a late-war Haruna. To improve the Haruna appearance slightly, replace the main gun turrets with the rounded type found in IJN10, BB Kirishima.
IJN10, BB Kirishima – this is (obviously) an early-war version. It works fairly well as an early-war Kongo, except that you want to replace the main armament turrets with the slab-sided type found in IJN09 or IJN48. If you are not concerned with fine details (shape of bridge/pagoda mast, funnel height, and aft superstructure) you could use it as an early-war Haruna. At least the turret shape is correct.
IJN48, BB Hiei – this is (obviously) an early-war version. It is not a good representation of any of the other ships in this class.
What is most missing is Haruna, both early-war and late-war versions.
Don S.
Last edited by Donald M. Scheef on Fri May 17, 2019 5:32 am, edited 1 time in total.
"When a fire starts to burn,
here's a lesson you must learn:
something-something and you'll see
you'll avoid catastrophe."
D'oh!
here's a lesson you must learn:
something-something and you'll see
you'll avoid catastrophe."
D'oh!
-
Donald M. Scheef
- E5
- Posts: 1629
- Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 2:24 am
- Location: Waukegan, Illinois USA
I can understand (but not condone) censoring words such as an*lysis, Guadalcan*l and Ess*x, but why then is the French aircraft manufacturer F*rm*n censored but not Arsenal or Levasseur?
"When a fire starts to burn,
here's a lesson you must learn:
something-something and you'll see
you'll avoid catastrophe."
D'oh!
here's a lesson you must learn:
something-something and you'll see
you'll avoid catastrophe."
D'oh!