- Submarine FAQs
-
- In need of plans for machine gun
-
Posted By: Chris Proctor <SubStuff@aol.com>
Date: Thursday, 16 November 2000, at 6:52 p.m.
I am looking for plans for the Type 96 25mm
machine gun. I am looking for well detailed planes of it. factory plans would
be a miracle. Any information on it would be a big help.
Re: In need of plans for machine gun
Posted By: Bob <Bob5@home.com>
Date: Friday, 17 November 2000, at 10:39 a.m.
In Response To: In need of plans for machine
gun (Chris Proctor)
In addition to Skulski's line drawings, J.Ed
Low has done some fine 3-D modelling of the guns at http://www.ijn.dreamhost.com/Guns/Guns%200P984%20inch%20(23%20mm)%2060%20caliber%20type%2096%20triple.html
Re: In need of plans for machine gun
Posted By: Karoly Kele <kele@okk.szamalk.hu>
Date: Monday, 20 November 2000, at 1:07 a.m.
In Response To: Re: In need of plans for
machine gun (Bob)
What is the correct color scheme of the Type 96
25mm AA guns? I'm working on a Pit-Road 1/35 single mounted version. The
instructions are in Japanese only and there are no color codes. My only guides
are the "box art" and a picture of a completed kit from Pit-Road web
site.
According to these the whole gun is dark grey
except the barrel, which is brass. (The brass seems to me strange.)
So what is the truth?
Re: In need of plans for machine gun
Posted By: Tony Williams <autogun@globalnet.com>
Date: Monday, 20 November 2000, at 1:04 p.m.
In Response To: Re: In need of plans for
machine gun (Karoly Kele)
Well, the barrel certainly wasn't made of
brass!
Re: In need of plans for machine gun
Posted By: Karoly Kele <kele@okk.szamalk.hu>
Date: Friday, 17 November 2000, at 12:51 a.m.
In Response To: In need of plans for machine
gun (Chris Proctor)
Visit www.combinedfleet.com and check the Naval
Guns section. I'll find drawings of Type 96 25mm AA gun.
These are not high quality drawings but good to
start.
Re: In need of plans for machine gun
Posted By: William Burdick <Maraposa@erols.com>
Date: Friday, 17 November 2000, at 9:44 a.m.
In Response To: Re: In need of plans for
machine gun (Karoly Kele)
Janusz Skulski's three books, Takao,Yamato and
Fuso each include the same set of excellent drawings of the weapon in 1,2 and
3 barrel versions. The drawings are near good enough to make the gun. The
Battleship Fuso book, ISBN 0-55750-046-0 is shown available by Amazon and The
Naval Institute Press.
Re: In need of plans for machine gun
Posted By: Jon Parshall <jonp@is.com>
Date: Friday, 17 November 2000, at 12:53 p.m.
In Response To: Re: In need of plans for
machine gun (William Burdick)
Skulski's drawings are where I swiped the pics
for my site, and back then I didn't understand that using JPEG's for B/W line
art was el-dumbo. Bottom line; you will be better served for detail by getting
Skulski than by looking on my site. Also, you might check the Naval Technical
Mission to Japan reports on the gun; there may be detail there that Skulski
doesn't have.
Re: In need of plans for machine gun
Posted By: Ron Wolford <wolfieeod@aol.com>
Date: Friday, 17 November 2000, at 2:14 p.m.
In Response To: Re: In need of plans for
machine gun (Jon Parshall)
I sent 3 photos of a 25mm Gun at Naval Station
Guam to J-aircraft.com photo page along with some pic of a mini-sub. If they
don't have them let me know and I'll e-mail them to you.
Re: In need of plans for machine gun
Posted By: J. Ed Low <lowj@tir.com>
Date: Friday, 17 November 2000, at 7:48 p.m.
In Response To: Re: In need of plans for
machine gun (Ron Wolford)
Bob - thanks for the reference to my site. Ron
- I too will be interested in those photos of the guns. Can you please cc them
to me if you are sending them to Chris ?
Re: In need of plans for machine gun
Posted By: Tony Williams <autogun@globalnet.com>
Date: Saturday, 18 November 2000, at 2:27 a.m.
In Response To: Re: In need of plans for
machine gun (J. Ed Low)
There is a full-page two-way drawing of the
triple mount in Campbell's "Naval Weapons of World War Two" (Conway
Maritime Press 1985) a truly excellent book, by the way.
Military gun and ammunition website
Link: http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~autogun/
Midget Subs?
Posted By: Rob Graham <reishikisenguy@aol.com>
Date: Friday, 15 September 2000, at 10:32 p.m.
I'm an aircraft guy, but a midget submarine is
my current project. Any ideas on color? I have several sources, none are
bulletproof, and none seem to agree:
1. The USS Monaghan sank one at Pearl Harbor
and a crewman watched it sink and described it as dark green.
2. The Kure Navy Yard (where many if not all
were built) used a gray like Munsell 5PB5/2.
3. Restored midget subs are black and appear
black in old B&W photos.
4. Tamiya shows a gray in kit instructions.
What's best? I hit a website that shows some
midgets at the end of the war, and they appear lighter than black, but maybe
they were in primer or other color? It's B&W, so it's a guess for me. Are
there any good sources?
Re: Midget Subs?
Posted By: Scott Negron <snegron@abfsonline.com>
Date: Friday, 6 October 2000, at 8:51 a.m.
In Response To: Midget Subs? (Rob Graham)
The green reported by the commander of the
destroyer that sunk the midget sub was due to a thick layer of algae covering
the sub's upper surface. The midgets were attached to the mother I-class sub
which traveled unsubmerged across the Pacific. I don't have access to the book
which I read this in, but the account is very descriptive, and mentioned the
algae being present on the one that beached.
Re: Midget Subs?
Posted By: Rob Graham <reishikisenguy@aol.com>
Date: Friday, 6 October 2000, at 9:42 p.m.
In Response To: Re: Midget Subs? (Scott Negron)
You da MAN! That'd be a neat detail to work in!
An overall black with a frosting of green in places? What do you think? If you
could find out and let me know, I'd be real happy!
Re: Midget Subs?
Posted By: Frido Kip <frido.kip@hetnet.nl>
Date: Sunday, 17 September 2000, at 3:33 a.m.
In Response To: Midget Subs? (Rob Graham)
AFAIK Type A, B and C midgets were painted
black while the longer range Type D Kôryû found at many yards at the end of
the war were painted naval grey. This explains why there are two colours. I
doubt that the PH midgets were painted green, maybe the water was playing
tricks on the eye.
Re: Midget Subs?
Posted By: Rob Graham <reishikisenguy@aol.com>
Date: Sunday, 17 September 2000, at 10:08 p.m.
In Response To: Re: Midget Subs? (Frido Kip)
Thanks for the response. I was thinking the
Type A was black, but when I read what I did, I needed to know more. I think
the dark green could also be attributed to the excitement of the moment. Here,
they had just sank a sub in (then) peacetime conditions, and I'm sure they
were thinking something like, "OK, how'm I gonna write this up???"
Re: Midget Subs?
Posted By: John MacGregor <JohnMacG6@hotmail.com>
Date: Wednesday, 20 September 2000, at 2:33
a.m.
In Response To: Re: Midget Subs? (Rob Graham)
FWIW, the example displayed at the Aussie War
Memorial in Canberra is black, with the visible interior white (with lots of
red pipes & tubes).
I-52
Posted By: James F. Lansdale <LRAJIM@aol.com>
Date: Thursday, 29 June 2000, at 5:04 a.m.
Can anyone on this board identify the markings
on the conning tower of the I-52 which appear below? I thought that the
markings on Japanese submarines were only displayed on removable tarps which
were stored inside. Also, what is strange, is the order of the markings (I-2 /
5).
This is a photo from the sale of a tin ingot
recovered by TIDWELL from the submarine ($10,000 opening bid) which is now on
eBay.
Editors Note: The photo is not reproduced here.
Editors Note: The link is no longer valid
Re: "I-52 / 52" marking resolved
Posted By: David_Aiken <David_Aiken@hotmail.com>
Date: Monday, 3 July 2000, at 11:42 a.m.
In Response To: I-52 (James F. Lansdale)
The "strange" marking on the side of
I-52 is:
[katakana "e" 52 / 52]
The initial "5" and the final
"2" are nearly wiped out from either the battle or age.
There is speculation that the unique
"double 52" painted on the hull was for extra ID purposes when
meeting the German sub. With the extra length of the "double 52" was
probably too long for the standard canvas.
My thanx to a correspondent who forwarded data
from Paul Tidwell, on the recovery team.
Re: I-52
Posted By: Frido Kip <frido.kip@hetnet.nl>
Date: Thursday, 29 June 2000, at 10:35 a.m.
In Response To: I-52 (James F. Lansdale)
Initially, names of Japanese submarines were
painted on the bridge. At the beginning of the Pacific War the Japanese flag
(not the naval ensign) was attached to the bridge for identification purposes.
When the Japanese submarine fleet started to suffer heavy losses the numerals
were painted over on most submarines and were replaced by removable tarps, to
make identification more difficult to the enemy. Most of the submarines that
surrendered in August 1945 had these detachable names. It is clear that I 52
did not carry these tarps when she was sunk on 24 June 1944 (the attachment
rails are missing!).
The number is not so strange as it appears. If
you examine the first I-2 more closely you will see that its actually I 52,
with part of the 5 erased. The second numeral appears also to be I 52, which
is strange. I've never seen a picture of a Japanese submarine with its name
written twice on the bridge. Its probably an older name that had been painted
over but is now visible again due to erosion. It's a pity that the area behind
the 5 is too vague to see if there are remains of a 2.
Re: I-52
Posted By: James F. Lansdale <LRAJIM@aol.com>
Date: Thursday, 29 June 2000, at 7:16 p.m.
In Response To: Re: I-52 (Frido Kip)
I obtained an October 1999 issue of the
National Geographic magazine which chronicles the history making event of the
I-52 discovery and exploration. One artist's rendering shows a hinomaru on the
bridge sail which is covering an older (?) rendering of the "5" in
the I-52 identification. I am facinated by the depth (no pun intended) of this
sub article has dealing with the history and fate of the I-52! The photos
alone are worth the price of the copy.
Japanese I-19 / I-400
Posted By: Chris Proctor <SubStuff@aol.com>
Date: Thursday, 9 March 2000, at 9:33 a.m.
I am first looking for information on the deck
gun (5.5 I believe) and the machine gun in the conning tower of the I-19.
Second I am looking for any informatiom on the
I-400's or the I-14. I do have some of the Maru (think thats how it's spelled)
and one of the books do show on hul cross section. Trying to find more
information on it before i scratch build one in 1:48 scale to match my fathers
(almost complete) I-19.
If any one knows where I might find any
information please contact me directly.
Re: Japanese I-19 / I-400
Posted By: Matt <nitflegal@aol.com>
Date: Friday, 10 March 2000, at 9:39 a.m.
In Response To: Japanese I-19 / I-400 (Chris
Proctor)
Check this site for some really nice I-400 info
http://www.pacerfarm.org/i-400/i-400.htm
Pearl Harbor Midget Sub Finder's Fee?
Posted By: James F. Lansdale <LRAJIM@aol.com>
Date: Thursday, 2 March 2000, at 5:27 a.m.
David_Aiken@hotmail.com wrote:
"when I do give sources (see link below)
-which include the site of a lost midget sub- on that message board
(Battleship Row), somehow an expedition suddenly is mounted. Gosh, wonder how
much the 'finder's fee' was that I lost for all of the research? Wonder who
the expedition leader is? What source?"
David, I had no idea you knew the coordinates
of the missing midget submarine! I presumed the same person/s who is/are
involved in the present search must have consulted the same sources you had
for its location. I also assumed that these folks had already been in contact
with you!
When I was first approached last fall with an
inquiry about working on the project I told my California friend you were the
most knowledgeable person on the subject of Pearl Harbor I knew and that they
should contact you. I passed on your name and address. I sent a package and a
letter to you in December regarding the project and my request for your
cooperation. I guess you must not have received it. I received no response
from you and, therefore, assumed you were not interested or had already been
contacted.
My knowledge about submarines in general and
Pearl Harbor specifics is miniscule! I also do not know the person (or his
name) who is primarily responsible for the present search or even IF there is
a "finder's fee." Heck, I don't even know if they have actually
located the precise location of the mini sub for certain. I will try to find
out more information by making more inquiries of the acquintance who was
referred to me by a long-time mutual friend in California. Originally the
project was considered confidential because the alleged salvor did not want
"his find" stolen by another party. A sentiment I am sure you
understand! Of course you are the best consultant I know for this project
(which, apparently, is now a well-known "rumor" among some of our
mutual California friends and associates).
Who knows? This project may not "pan
out" and, like the search for the location of some of the Pearl crash
remains, the mini-sub location may forever be as ellusive as the location of
the "elephants' graveyard!"
While this project may not ever bear fruit and
may be Hollywood hype, it sure is interesting!
Thank you for your input.
Editors Note: The link is no longer active
Re: Japanese Midget Sub expedition
Posted By: Rob Graham <rgraham111@aol.com>
Date: Saturday, 4 March 2000, at 8:36 a.m.
In Response To: Pearl Harbor Midget Sub
Finder's Fee?
I'm sorry to hear about you losing your
finders' fees. How much can it be? I suppose it's variable from one site to
the next, as the Titanic would bring a lot more than, say, John Recruit's SNJ
wreckage in Lake Michigan.
How about sites where human remains are? Is
this something a government pays for? The deceased person's family? If someone
knows where the remains are, but a government has to pay for the return of
these remains before the location of the remains is revealed, does that count
as hostage taking?
I'm REALLY NOT trying to be a smart-aleck or
anything, I am just curious how this kind of thing works, as there's a lot of
international law in this stuff, and I wonder how it all happens. Further, I
wonder how (or IF) the residents of Guadalcanal or other SWPA people do
"business" conscionably by selling this stuff to "the highest
bidder" without notifying the relatives of the deceased.
What's the scoop? Are there "pirates"
out there who take the stuff?
How do YOU find this stuff? Do you go to these
jungles once in a while? I recall you were a resident of Hawaii. Did you
search the islands and find the wreckage or did you hear about it from the
locals? Do you SCUBA Dive? As a houli, I'll bet that would be a tough circle
to enter!
Japanese Midget Submarine Photos
Posted By: Mike Quan <MnkQuan@worldnet.att.net>
Date: Monday, 28 February 2000, at 5:47 p.m.
In today's US Naval Historical Center there's a
segment on Japanese Midget
> Subs. Click on the link below to see the
images posted and available for purchase. Enjoy.
Link: http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/sh-fornv/japan/japtp-ss/mdg-a.htm
More Japanese Midget Submarine Photos
Posted By: Mike Quan <MnkQuan@worldnet.att.net>
Date: Monday, 24 April 2000, at 10:47 a.m.
In Response To: Japanese Midget Submarine
Photos (Mike Quan)
Courtesy of fellow ship modeler Ed Grune, here
is a link to the US Naval Historical Center. There is a further segment on
Japanese Midget Subs; this time on the Kairyu-type submarines, both afloat and
on dry land. Click on the link below to see the images posted and available
for purchase. Enjoy.
Link: http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/sh-fornv/japan/japtp-ss/kairyu.htm
Re: Japanese Midget Submarine Photos
Posted By: James F. Lansdale <LRAJIM@aol.com>
Date: Monday, 28 February 2000, at 7:07 p.m.
In Response To: Japanese Midget Submarine
Photos (Mike Quan)
An acquaintance of mine has a lead on the
location of one of the midget subs involved, but not recovered, after its loss
on or about 7 December 1941. He is organizing an expedition to recover it.
My question is, do you, or anyone else, know
the Ha number assignments of the four remaining midget subs. We know SAKAMAKI
piloted Ha-19. Are the other sub numbers known along with their mother ships?
The salvor in question told me that salvage
operations would begin before filming on the new Pearl Harbor movie begins and
that news of its recovery was intended to help with the hype campaign to
publicize the film.
Re: Japanese Midget Submarine Photos
Posted By: Mike Rose <itchiefoot@aol.com>
Date: Monday, 24 April 2000, at 11:13 p.m.
In Response To: Re: Japanese Midget Submarine
Photos (James F. Lansdale)
Just curious...how did the five midget
submarines who participated in the attack on Pearl harbor get the letter
designators "HA"...as in "HA-19" when Sakamaki's craft has
been described in most books as the "I-24tou"?
PS: I was living on Oahu as a small boy, just
down the beach a few miles from where the I-24tou...or HA-19, washed onto a
coral reef on 8 December 1941.
PSS: Ensign Kazuo Sakamaki, skipper of the
I-24tou and a successful corporate executive for Toyoto for many years after
the war, died on 29 November 1999.
Re: Japanese Submarine Classes
Posted By: James F. Lansdale <LRAJIM@aol.com>
Date: Tuesday, 25 April 2000, at 4:03 a.m.
In Response To: Re: Japanese Midget Submarine
Photos (Mike Rose)
The IJN designated submarines by size/weight
classes. I (A), RO (B), and HA (C) classes existed. The SAKAMAKI midget sub
(HA-19) was carried by the larger "mother" sub (I-24).
Re: Japanese Midget Submarine Photos
Posted By: Tim Hortman <thortman@epix.net>
Date: Tuesday, 29 February 2000, at 7:05 p.m.
In Response To: Re: Japanese Midget Submarine
Photos (James F. Lansdale)
I just got finished reading "THE JAPANESE
SUBMARINE FORCE & WWII" by Carl Boyd & Akihiko Yoshida ISBN
1-55750-080-0
On page 59 starts the description of the
"Special Attack" subs for the Dec 7 1941 mission. Sakamai launched
from I-24. There were a total of 5 Midget subs involved in the Pearl Harbor
attack. The only other mother ship specifically mentioned is the I-16,
although there were 16 other subs in the area at the time of the attack. I'm
sure there is a better record of which subs carried what somewhere.
I have photos of one of these Midget subs from
somewhere in the US. I remember taking a photo of it one year while on
vacation with my parents. (many years ago.)
Re: Japanese Midget Submarine Photos
Posted By: Rob Graham <rgraham111@aol.com>
Date: Saturday, 4 March 2000, at 8:17 a.m.
In Response To: Re: Japanese Midget Submarine
Photos (Tim Hortman)
I have a vague recollection of being in
Harlingen, TX for the CAF's "Airsho '76" and they had a Japanese
midget sub, but I didn't know enough about them to allocate enough memory to
keep it in my memory module. I hit the site David Aiken linked, but couldn't
find the list, so I don't know what the status of this sub was.
Here's the CAF's web site:
http://www.confederateairforce.org/
They recently moved.
I have the 1/72 Eu-II Pearl Harbor submarine,
and it's a NICE little kit.
Re: Japanese Midget Submarine Photos
Posted By: James F. Lansdale <LRAJIM@aol.com>
Date: Thursday, 2 March 2000, at 6:47 a.m.
In Response To: Re: Japanese Midget Submarine
Photos (Tim Hortman)
You probably took a picture of Ha-19 (PH midget
sub recovered on the beach near Bellows Field) when it was on display in Key
West, Florida. It was on display there for many years at the Light House Naval
Museum. I have many photos of it there and I was even able to get inside it
one summer!
It was subsequently removed. I do not remember
the details, but I seem to recall that it was destined for either the Nimitz
Museum or to be put on display at the Pearl Harbor Memorial. David AIKEN
should know for certain. I also thought that the Japanese had tried to obtain
the Ha-19 but had to settled for a small portion of the one recovered in 1960.
Re: Japanese Midget Submarine Photos
Posted By: Mark E. Horan <mhoran@snet.net>
Date: Thursday, 2 March 2000, at 3:05 p.m.
In Response To: Re: Japanese Midget Submarine
Photos (James F. Lansdale)
The captured PH midget was loaned to the Nimitz
museum years ago, with the intent of having it returned to PH. The Nimitz
museum has since claimed ownership and refuses to return it.
Re: Japanese Midget Submarine Photos
Posted By: Paul Richards <c2water@vianet.net.au>
Date: Tuesday, 29 February 2000, at 4:20 p.m.
In Response To: Re: Japanese Midget Submarine
Photos (James F. Lansdale)
I think that there is a midget sub on display
at the Australian War Memorial, Canberra, A.C.T., Australia.
Nichimo I-19
Posted By: Gary Barling <whitey@nrtco.net>
Date: Sunday, 13 February 2000, at 9:16 p.m.
Just received the Nichimo I-19 kit. Can anyone
suggest: (a) a good reference or two: and (b) any applicable aftermarket
items? It looks like a good kit, but being an aircraft type, I haven't much to
help me with it.
Why would an aircraft guy (RCAF) take on a
Japanese sub, you ask? Turns out that the I-26 shelled Canada in 1942, so the
I-26 is the actual subject. Got a good photo from David Aiken, but a rigging
plan and/or drawings would also help. Thanks in advance!
Re: Nichimo I-19
Posted By: Jim Broshot <jbroshot@socket.net>
Date: Sunday, 13 February 2000, at 10:44 p.m.
In Response To: Nichimo I-19 (Gary Barling)
There are several photos (including one of the
I-26) in
SUBMARINES OF THE IMPERIAL JAPANESE NAVY (Dorr
Carpenter and Norman Polmar)
ISBN 0-87021-682-1
Even more helpful would be RETALIATION:
JAPANESE ATTACKS AND ALLIED COUNTERMEASURES ON THE PACIFIC COAST IN WORLD WAR
II (Bert Webber)
ISBN 0-87071-076-1
This is an Oregon State University Press book
It has a whole chapter on "The War in
British Columbia," including a photo of the I-26 (looks the same as in
Carpenter's book) and two photos stated as taken aboard the I-26, one looking
aft, one looking forward. Webber located some crew men off I-26 after the war,
including the captain.
Re: Nichimo I-19
Posted By: Chris Proctor <SubStuff@aol.com>
Date: Thursday, 9 March 2000, at 9:24 a.m.
In Response To: Re: Nichimo I-19 (Jim Broshot)
There are other good books filled with photo's
of the class sub you are looking for. I have 4 Maru (think thats the spelling,
books in other room) that I got from Pacific Front hobbies in Calif. He also
has the Tamya book of radom drawings #2 that shows info on the conning tower.
I can take some digitals from my 1:48 scale prints ( so - so) or from the
magazines and forward them to you. just let me know what you might need. I
have almost finished my fathers 1:48 scale I-19. If you ever want to build one
of them let me know. I have a parts list for the I-19 (and 2 others) of resin
cast parts.
Doyusha 1/300 'I-401'
Posted By: John MacGregor <JohnMacG6@hotmail.com>
Date: Monday, 31 January 2000, at 1:10 a.m.
I've been offered a doyusha 1/3oo scale kit of
the I-401. It's motorized and, I quote "dives and surfaces
automatically". All very fine, but can anybody tell me if the Thing is
basically accurate?
Re: Doyusha 1/300 'I-401'
Posted By: Duane Fowler <dlfowler@uscg.net>
Date: Wednesday, 2 February 2000, at 10:00 a.m.
In Response To: Doyusha 1/300 'I-401' (John
MacGregor)
Doyusha is the Lindberg of Japan. The kit is a
toy and nothing more. It might make a decent model if you toss the hull and
most of the fittings and scratch build them.
Japanese Carrier Deck/Submarine Markings
Posted By: James F. Lansdale <LRAJIM@aol.com>
Date: Sunday, 16 January 2000, at 12:46 p.m.
Other than the well known kana deck markings
for AKAGI, SHOKAKU, and ZUIKAKU, are there ANY clear photographic references
of the deck markings for KAGA, SORYU, and HIRYU? Other deck marking missing
from the early war period are those of RYUJO, SHOHO, and JUNYO. Artists
renderings only suggest but do not confirm the deck markings. The
carrier-specific red and white fantail stripe patterns are well documented for
most of these carrier decks. So there is a question about whether or not all
the carriers had katakana deck markings as well for carrier identification.
The aerial photographs taken by the B-17s of
the Japanese carriers under attack at Midway are being digitally enhanced to
try and clarify the SORYU and HIRYU deck markings for a new publication. But
until then, any original photographic references would be of much help and
greatly appreciated.
We are also cataloguing the midget and other
submarine markings (if any) for the Pearl Harbor attack and those based on
Kiska for 1942/43 period. Newly found documents located in the NHRC and the
National Archives of Japanese submarines assigned to the Pearl Harbor attack
do list the code signals to be used in radio transmissions. These and other
codes are cross referenced with the "I" and "Ro"
designations for all submarines during the first six months of the war
operations. Aircraft markings/codes for the Glen-carrying submarines are
listed as well. This microfilmed material is being translated in Japan at the
moment.
As you may know, the I boats had their numbers
and the Japanese ensign on canvas sheets which were cleated to the conning
tower when the subs were in port, but their numbers were not permanently
painted on the metal surface for operations during this period for security
reasons. This does not appear to be the case with the Kiska-based midgets
which did have kana/numeral coding painted on their conning tower.
Re: Japanese Carrier Deck/Submarine Markings
Posted By: Dan Kaplan <dboykap@aol.com>
Date: Sunday, 16 January 2000, at 11:05 p.m.
In Response To: Japanese Carrier Deck/Submarine
Markings (James F. Lansdale)
Good question. A quick run thru my photographic
references does not shed any additional photographic (i.e. documented)
evidence for katakana markings. Unfortunately, clear overhead photographs of
IJN carriers is notoriously sparse. However, for whatever it's worth, many
Japanese ship modeling resources identify additional katakana markings. For
instance, the Gran Prix Shuppan book on IJN carriers cites several all of
those mentioned, as well as for the Hiryu (pp. 168-171). Even more
interesting, Skywave/Pitroad, a very well-regarded Japanese manufacturer of
1/700 ship models, issues a decal set including katakanas for Soryu, Hiryu,
Akagi, Kaga, Shokaku, Zuikaku, Junyo, Zuiho, Chitose, & Chiyoda. My
suggestion would be to contact Skywave/Pitroad (I don't have their URL handy)
directly regarding their sources.
Re: Japanese Carrier Deck/Submarine Markings
Posted By: Tennessee Katsuta <kinson-garments@on.aibn.com>
Date: Tuesday, 18 January 2000, at 6:50 p.m.
In Response To: Re: Japanese Carrier
Deck/Submarine Markings (Dan Kaplan)
As far as I know, the carrier I.D. characters
identified by photographs are only those seen on Akagi, Hiryu, Shoukaku,
Zuikaku, and Zuiho. The rest are at best educated guesses based on what
appeared on the flight decks of the sister ships. Specifically I'm talking
about Soryu, Kaga, Chitose, and Chiyoda. I know this because Mr.S. Kinushima,
a ship modeller/historian says so in his publications, and these educated
guesses were made by him. As for Jyunyo, the Japanese character "Ji"
supposed to have been painted on her flight deck, according to an illustration
made by Mr.Takani. It is not known where he got this info. So, the decals made
by Pit-Road are based on educated guesses made by these historians, and not on
photographic evidence.
Japanese I class Submarines
Posted By: Mackenzie Gregory <macden@melbpc.org.au>
Date: Monday, 3 January 2000, at 10:39 p.m.
I am seeking information on the number of
Japanese I class submarines
that carried Midget Submarines used in the
attack on Sydney Harbour
on the night of May 31/ June 1 1942.
I would appreciate any book references that are
relevant especially any from a Japanese source.
Re: Japanese I class Submarines
Posted By: Jim Broshot <jbroshot@socket.net>
Date: Tuesday, 4 January 2000, at 8:08 p.m.
In Response To: Japanese I class Submarines
(Mackenzie Gregory)
Its a source in English that you may have but
one of the co-authors is a retired JMSDF Captain: THE
JAPANESE SUBMARINE FORCE
AND WORLD WAR II (Carl Boyd and Akihiko Yoshida) ISBN 1-55750-080-0
Original plan called for
"Submarine Unit B" with I-27 (with
midget submarine), I-28, I-29; to carry out a mission off the southern coast
of Australia
"Submarine Unit C" with I-22 (with
midget submarine), I-24 (with midget submarine), I-21; to destroy shipping off
the eastern coast and in the waters around New Zealand
two groups were united as Eastern Unit
I-28 was lost off Truk on 17 May 1942
Eastern Unit assembled off Sydney and launched
three midget submarines on the afternoon of 31 May 1942.
Re: I-201 Submarine plans
Posted By: Tatsuhiro Higuchi <higumail@green.ocn.ne.jp>
Date: Saturday, 9 December 2000, at 9:24 p.m.
In Response To: I-201 Submarine plans (Matt
Flegal)
I have a book named "Japanese Secret
Weapons of W.W.ll" journal "Ground Power" special issue
November 2000. This book include part of Type I-200th submarines. But this
books was written in Japanese.
I-200th submarines was the counterpart to the
German XXI's as you said(those days, they had no communication about XXI or
XXIII). In October, 1943, Type I-200th was projected as high speed(in
hydrospase) submarine on the basis of 71th ship (200tons class experimental
high speed submarine). Four torpedo tube equiped on bow. All I-200th were not
sallied.
I-201/ completion in February, 1945-> cade
to US.
I-202/ completion in February, 1945->
abandon at Sasebo offshore.
I-203/ completion in May, 1945-> cade to US.
I-204/ 90% completion-> sunk by bomb attack
at Kure in June, 1945.
I-205/ 80% completion-> broke by bomb attack
at Kure in March, 1945.
I-206/ completion in March, 1945-> unclear.
I-207/ 20% completion-> work stoped.
I-208/ 5% completion-> work stoped.
I-209~223/ groundbreaking stoped.
Yoroshikune!
Re: I-201 Submarine plans
Posted By: Jim <shoner@uniserve.com>
Date: Friday, 24 December 1999, at 5:23 a.m.
In Response To: I-201 Submarine plans (Matt
Flegal)
The Japanese monthly magazine, which I beleive
may be called "Ships of the World" did a special entitled
"History of the Japanese Submarine" in their 1993 No. 469 issue. The
entire 148 pages is about Japanese WW2 submarines and in the back part is a
10" by 18" foldout plan of the
"""interior""" (nine cross sections, two plans
and one profile) of the I-201 class submarine dated from 1945. If you would
like a couple of copies of it, please email me your address and I will send
you the copies for FREE. By the way, on the other side is the best plan and
profile of the """exterior""" of the I-400 class
submarine I have ever seen. I can send a couple of copies of the I-400 plan
also if you would like them for the same ridiculus high price as mentioned
above. I await your answer, and have a Merry Christmas if I don' hear from
you. I hope Santa brings you lots of great submarine treats. Must go now and
feed my little Rudolf and all his buddies, before the big run tonight at
midnight. Bye - The Submarine Santa (also known to the payroll dept. as Jim
Reimer at shoner@uniserve.com)
I-361
Posted By: Steve Epperson
Date: Wednesday, 17 November 1999, at 5:50 p.m.
I was given a 1/700 scale waterline model of
the I-361. Does anyone know what class this submarine belonged to?
Re: I-361
Posted By: Scott Reigel <Sdreigel@concentric.net>
Date: Wednesday, 17 November 1999, at 8:01 p.m.
In Response To: I-361 (Steve Epperson)
I-361 was the lead boat of the D(1) type, built
as supply subs in 1943/44. I-361 was originally fitted with two 21 in TT
tubes, but they were removed from all subsequent boats after she showed a
conspicuous bow wave on her trials. They are neat little subs since it can be
fitted with Kaitens or 13m landing craft
Japanese Midget Subs In Pearl Harbor
Posted By: Shane <axisplastc@aol.com>
Date: Sunday, 7 November 1999, at 7:45 p.m.
Naval History Mag. (Dec. 99) has an article
examining a photograph taken from a Japanese Kate bomber during the attack on
PH. The photo, using the latest computer techniques, seems to show a Type-A
class Midget sub in the middle of the Southeast Loch. It seems to have
breeched during the explosions of other torpedos, and two torpedo tracks
leading from it to the battleships in battleship row. It makes interesting
reading and very professional photo analysis, but leaves many question
unanswered. Interesting photo and interpratation, more in depth than this
review of it.
Re: Midget Subs vs BB Row, Pearl Harbor
Posted By: David_Aiken <David_Aiken@hotmail.com>
Date: Sunday, 21 November 1999, at 10:46 a.m.
In Response To: Japanese Midget Subs In Pearl
Harbor (Shane)
A full rebuttal of this revisionist myth is
given on the "All Other Japanese Forces" page of the
"Battleship Row" web site.
"http://www.GeoCities.com/CapeCanaveral/hangar/5115"
National Geographic Sub Special
Posted By: Jerry Wesolowski <J.wes@worldnet.att.net>
Date: Saturday, 11 September 1999, at 10:36
a.m.
If anyone is interested. On 9/11/99 there's a
National Geographic special on NBC. It's supposed to be about a WWII Japanese
Submarine, the I-52. Sunk during WWII by U.S. warplanes. The Sub was supposed
to be carrying a shipment of gold. It sounds like divers will be going down on
the wreck. It's supposed to air at 8:00 P.M. EST.
Re: National Geographic Sub Special
Posted By: Ron Werneth <ronwerneth@aol.com>
Date: Friday, 24 September 1999, at 6:23 p.m.
In Response To: National Geographic Sub Special
(Jerry Wesolowski)
Does anybody have a copy of this? I would be
happy to pay for the tape + duplication cost. I love Japanese subs. I hope to
interview some of the sub veterans during my next research trip to Japan.
Re: National Geographic Sub Special
Posted By: Dave Pluth <info@j-aircraft.com>
Date: Friday, 24 September 1999, at 7:40 p.m.
In Response To: Re: National Geographic Sub
Special (Ron Werneth)
Pick up the new National Geographic also as
there is an article with several photos from the dive. It's one of their
better specials and probably worth the $19.99 they were asking for it.
Re: National Geographic Sub Special
Posted By: Jerry Wesolowski <J.wes@worldnet.att.net>
Date: Friday, 24 September 1999, at 7:30 p.m.
In Response To: Re: National Geographic Sub
Special (Ron Werneth)
At the end of the show, they broadcast an offer
to purchase copies of the show. I don't know the e-mail address for National
Geographic. However I'm sure someone else out there can help out. Their
library of video tapes is very extensive. Also they usually have extra footage
included in them.
Re: National Geographic Sub Special
Posted By: Bruc <bc_jewett@msn.com>
Date: Saturday, 11 September 1999, at 11:48
p.m.
In Response To: National Geographic Sub Special
(Jerry Wesolowski)
I was impressed with the show. I thought the
I-boats had a hanger on deck for a seaplane but none was mentioned. Does
anyone know if they were ever meant to have one? Also I wonder if the Japanese
government or a Japanese business has any intentions of raising the I-52 or
recovering what they can.
Re: National Geographic Sub Special
Posted By: Tennessee Katsuta <kinson-garments@on.aibn.com>
Date: Sunday, 12 September 1999, at 9:30 p.m.
In Response To: Re: National Geographic Sub
Special (Bruc)
Many Japanese subs carried a seaplane, but some
classes did not carry any sea plane. The I-52 (by the
way, the "I"
is not pronounced "eye", but it should be pronounced "ee")
belonged to the "HEI" class subs, which sacrificed their seaplane
and catapult for more torpedoes and torpedo tubes.
Saw the special
Posted By: Dave Pluth <info@j-aircraft.com>
Date: Saturday, 11 September 1999, at 8:45 p.m.
In Response To: National Geographic Sub Special
(Jerry Wesolowski)
We watched the special here. It was funny to
see the historian vs the businessman and who won out in the end. Overall the
footage was pretty good and there was a nice amount of it, as opposed to the
previous Midway National Geographic Special.
Movie about Japanese midget submarine attack on
Sydney
Posted By: Jim <shoner@uniserve.com>
Date: Sunday, 5 September 1999, at 9:43 a.m.
Many years ago, (about 1989), I saw a one hour
docu-drama on PBS about the IJN midget submarine attack on Sydney harbour. It
also had a five minute part on the midget sub attack on Pearl Harbor. It was
very well done and historically accurate as far as I can tell, and also told
of Lt. Keiu Matsuo's early life and story of his background in the IJN. I
managed to tape the first 34 minutes of this program but was not able to tape
the name of the program at the start and my video tape ran out before the end,
so I do not have the credits at the end. I think this was probably a joint
Japanese/ Australian or American production as the Japanese actors spoke
Japanese with an English voice commentary and some actual 1940s Japanese film
was used. There was extensive use of mutiple radio controlled Japanese midget
submarine models as well as interior mockups of submarine interiors. My
questions are as follows. 1)Does anyone know the name of this program or show?
2) Dioes anyone have a copy of this program? 3) Does anyone know if this
program is for sale through any of the specialty videos production companies?
Re: Movie about Japanese midget submarine
attack on Sydney
Posted By: Garth <kkoori@mpx.com.au>
Date: Monday, 13 September 1999, at 12:21 p.m.
In Response To: Movie about Japanese midget
submarine attack on Sydney (Jim)
I have not heard of this production, I am in
Sydney and Canberra and I have an immense interest of World War Two in, around
and over Australia.
I have several books on the midget submarine
attack, none of which mention the movie. I have just sent an email around to
my military history workmates and friends to see if they can shed any light
for us ;)
Kaiten details
Posted By: DANIS Jean-Charles <amar.derni@cfwb.be>
Date: Wednesday, 1 September 1999, at 11:38
p.m.
I'm looking for close-ups and detail views
(including cockpit) of the Kaiten MK1 in order to superdetail the Fine Molds
kit.
Does anyone can help me in this project ?
Re: Kaiten details
Posted By: Jim <shoner@uniserve.com>
Date: Sunday, 12 September 1999, at 11:30 a.m.
In Response To: Kaiten details (DANIS
Jean-Charles)
The Finemolds kit of the Kaiten is a Type 1
Kaiten and the Kaiten at Pearl Harbor is definately one of the larger ones
which is the Type 2 or 4, I cannot remember. The Kaiten Type 1 is 14.75 metres
long and displaces 8.3 Tons and the Kaiten Type 2/4 is 16.5 metres long and
displaces either 18.37 or 18.17 tons per Fukui's book. Also the Kaiten Type 1
had a crew of one as in the plans I have and the Type 2 or 4 had a crew of 2.
From the 40 photos I have of the inside and outside Type 1 there is not a
great deal inside to detail, so I think there is not much point in doing any
interior modeling and sealing it up completely so you cannot see it yourself.
Re: Kaiten details
Posted By: Tennessee Katsuta <kinson-garments@on.aibn.com>
Date: Sunday, 12 September 1999, at 9:22 p.m.
In Response To: Re: Kaiten details (Jim)
I think there is a bit of confusion here. The
midgit subs used to attack Pearl Harbour on Dec. 8 (Japan time) 1941 were NOT
Kaiten. They were top secret midgit subs, the KOHYOTEKI. They were 2-manned
midgit subs capable of carrying and firing two torpedoes. Although their
chance of returning to the mother sub was slim, they were NOT suicide weapons.
KAITEN, on the other hand, was essentially a
torpedo manned by a pilot(s) to ensure their success on hitting their target.
They were used toward the end of the war, and they were indeed suicide
weapons. Kaiten was NOT a submarine.
Fine Molds released both the KOHYOTEKI (midgit
sub) and KAITEN(manned torpedo) in 1/72. Perhaps this too contributed to the
confusion here?
Re: Kaiten details
Posted By: Jim <shoner@uniserve.com>
Date: Monday, 13 September 1999, at 8:09 a.m.
In Response To: Re: Kaiten details (Tennessee
Katsuta)
Sorry to say this, but I don't think you
understand what I wrote. There is definately a Kaiten Type 2 or Kaiten Type 4
at the museum at Pearl Harbor right now on display as of the last time I
visited. I never said that a Kaiten of any type was used to attack Pearl
Harbor in 1941. The Kaiten type 2 was the type that was being developed in
1944-1945 using the Type 6 engine which used hydrogen perioxide as an oxide
for the fuel. When that failed, other efforts were made to convert it to other
fuels, this was the Kaiten Type 4 which also was a failure. No Kaiten Type 2
or Type 4 ever reached operational use as they both were still in developement.
I have a copy of the large U.S. Navy report from 1946 which covers all this
history. The Kaiten now at Pearl Harbor is part of the very long list of
submarine material that the "Naval Technical Mission to Japan"
reported as brought back to the United States in about November of 1945. I
have the complete list of all these items which includes "all" the
Kaitens brought to the U.S., plus I have a 8" x 10" photo of the
Kaiten at the Submarine Museum(Bowfin) at Pearl Harbor.
Re: Kaiten details
Posted By: Tennessee Katsuta <kinson-garments@on.aibn.com>
Date: Monday, 13 September 1999, at 9:56 p.m.
In Response To: Re: Kaiten details (Jim)
Thanx for the clarification. When you said
"Kaiten at Pear Harbour", I thought you meant "Kaiten used to
attack Pear Harbour" and I assumed you were confusing Kaiten and
Kohyoteki. I apologize for misunderstanding you.
Re: Kaiten details
Posted By: Mike Connelley <mikeconnelley@yahoo.com>
Date: Sunday, 12 September 1999, at 7:11 a.m.
In Response To: Kaiten details (DANIS
Jean-Charles)
There's a Kaiten on display at the USS Bowfin
memorial museum (right next to the USS Arizona
museum) at Pearl Harbor. I'll
be going there one more time before I head off to school, so I can attempt to
take cockpit shots for you. The display has two openings which allow a peek
into the cockpit area, but they are covered in plexiglass so a photo might be
difficult. General detail shots will not be hard.
Please contact me off line.
IJN I-400 Class Submarines
Posted By: James F. Lansdale <LRAJIM@aol.com>
Date: Sunday, 22 August 1999, at 6:53 a.m.
Can any one recommend a good book specifically
on the subject of the giant, aircraft carrying I-400 class of Japanese
submarines? A friend of mine is on a research quest for a project and I would
greatly appreciate any help!
If none are available, which book would give
the best and most complete information on Japanese submarines?
Re: IJN I-400 Class Submarines
Posted By: Jim Broshot
Date: Sunday, 22 August 1999, at 1:02 p.m.
In Response To: IJN I-400 Class Submarines
(James F. Lansdale)
No specific books but other books with some
details (including interior photos):
SUBMARINES OF THE IMPERIAL JAPANESE NAVY (Dorr
Carpenter and Norman Polmar)
(1986) ISBN 0-87021-682-1
THE JAPANESE SUBMARINE FORCE AND WORLD WAR II
(Carl Boyd and Akihiko Yoshida)
(1995) ISBN 1-55750-080-0
Re: IJN I-400 Class Submarines
Posted By: Tennessee Katsuta <kinson-garments@on.aibn.com>
Date: Sunday, 22 August 1999, at 7:17 a.m.
In Response To: IJN I-400 Class Submarines
(James F. Lansdale)
A Japanese publisher named Gakken is releasing
a series of soft covered books on IJN ships. This series has been a mentioned
in this message board several times in the past. Their vol.No.17 covers IJN
subs, and while the text is in Japanese, it has MANY excellent photos and a
drawing of the I-400. Hobby Link Japan has the Gakken series, but
unfortunately, this volume seems to be out of stock for the moment.
Re: IJN I-400 Class Submarines
Posted By: Will Gossett <wilgossett@aol.com>
Date: Thursday, 2 September 1999, at 8:34 p.m.
In Response To: Re: IJN I-400 Class Submarines
(James F. Lansdale)
Two minor sources for info are:
Japanese Naval Vessels at the end of World War
II, by Fukui, 1991 reprint; crude but informative arrangement drawings and
specifications (p.18) and a couple of photos (p. 144-145).
Submarine Commander, by Schratz, 1988; memoirs
of a WW2 sub captain who stayed on in Japan for the occupation and was one of
the officers in charge of the de-mobilization of Japan's sub fleet. There is a
photo of 3 '400' class subs next to a US sub-tender at the end of the war and
the author describes the interiors of the subs and pilots a '200' class back
to Pearl Harbor.
Hope this adds to your sources.
Re: IJN I-400 Class Submarines
Posted By: James F. Lansdale <LRAJIM@aol.com>
Date: Friday, 3 September 1999, at 4:40 a.m.
In Response To: Re: IJN I-400 Class Submarines
(Will Gossett)
Thank you for the information. Now, if we could
only track down a photograph showing the tail codes on the Seirans they
carried!!!
Re: IJN I-400 Class Submarines
Posted By: Rob Graham <rgraham111@aol.com>
Date: Monday, 13 September 1999, at 9:36 p.m.
In Response To: Re: IJN I-400 Class Submarines
(James F. Lansdale)
It was in July that Tim Hortman started a
thread about Seiran camouflage. In the thread, American "stars and
bars" were said to be applied. Was there any credence to this or any
debunking?
He said:
"...The fellow I talked to (sorry, don't
have his name handy) said that it has now been confirmed that the M6A1's that
were deployed on subs WERE natural metal with US insignia! I know that this
has been a rumor since restoration began, but it has now been documented. I
don't know all of the details, but it makes for some interesting
thoughts..."
It's an interesting thread that I think you
might have missed while on vacation. Click below to see the thread...
What are your thoughts?
Natural Metal Seirans?
Posted By: James F. Lansdale <LRAJIM@aol.com>
Date: Tuesday, 14 September 1999, at 11:30 a.m.
In Response To: Re: IJN I-400 Class Submarines
(Rob Graham)
To the best of my knowledge, Seirans left the
factory assembly line in prototype orange (some of which were overpainted in
dark green (see Ethell, "Pacific War Eagles," p.213) or dark green
top with light grey-green lower surfaces. No one I know at Garber nor Bob
MIKESH has any knowledge about natural metal Seirans with American markings.
What is the documentation or original source for this allegation?
Re: Natural Metal Seirans?
Posted By: Tim Hortman <thortman@epix.net>
Date: Wednesday, 29 September 1999, at 3:17
p.m.
In Response To: Natural Metal Seirans? (James
F. Lansdale)
For anyone who has been following this thread,
I have some more info posted on the NAVY boards in a few minutes. Please look
there.
Re: Natural Metal Seirans?
Posted By: Rob Graham <rgraham111@aol.com>
Date: Tuesday, 14 September 1999, at 3:56 p.m.
In Response To: Natural Metal Seirans? (James
F. Lansdale)
I went back to the thread on this and excerpted
some comments. In essence:
The Aichi M6A1 Seiran Special Attack Plane
recently restored at the Paul Garber Facility for the National Air and Space
Museum in Washington, DC has been the source of some interesting discussion.
Recently, evidence was revealed showing the plane was possibly painted by the
Japanese to look like an American aircraft, thus improving its chances for a
surprise Kamikaze attack.
There are two possible scenarios in this
debatable subject.
It could be that the aircraft was not completed
at the time of its capture (i.e., the fuselage in NMF, and the wings painted
but not marked), and US markings were hastily applied by American troops. When
the plane was brought back to the US and shown as a war prize, it may have
been camouflaged and Hinomarus applied at that time.
It could also be that some parts of the plane
were indeed marked in US insignia by the Japanese for the purposes mentioned,
then camouflaged over and Hinomarus applied afterward, just before its
capture.
Conventional wisdom says that no nation would
mark their equipment like that of her enemy. Knowing the conventional wisdom
makes me skeptical.
However, there are several accounts (old and
new, American and Japanese) which lend credence to the story. Moreover, what
is conventional wisdom to a government that is desperate to have a victory?
Old account: A man named Ed, of the Garber
Facility, said Mr Mikesh had gone to Japan (or spoken to someone there) some
years ago, and had confirmed that the Seirans that were sent on missions
aboard subs were silver with US insignia.
New account: During restoration, the team found
US looking insignia on both the wing and fuselage. The US markings on the
wings were found over the green camouflage & under the Japanese markings
(which could have been easily been placed there by the troops who captured the
a/c). The markings on the fuselage, however, were under the green paint and
seemingly "original" (placed there by the Japanese).
American account: A few years ago, when they
started the restoration of the Garber a/c, the docent (tour guide) pointed out
some strange US looking insignia on the sanded fuselage.
Japanese account: Translated from Model Art
No.458, IJN Kamikaze AC:
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
While at Maizuru arsenal, Seirans were painted
silver in an attempt to simulate NMF US aircraft, and all the hinomarus were
removed.
The crew painted American star insignias on the
wings with the aircraft on the catapult while the submarines were at Ohminato
bay.
Because they were expected to carry out
kamikaze attacks, the fins from the 800kg bombs were removed in a desperate
attempt to make the bombs appear as drop tanks.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
My comment: Further to the point, the Japanese
had very few inline engines and the Seiran could have easily sounded like a
USAAF aircraft, thus furthering the alleged ruse.
I have personally seen this plane at the Garber
facility, and the wings looked blue-green to me. There was no hint of silver
paint or anything to lead me to believe it was ever anything but camouflaged.
The fuselage was already stripped and primed. Of course, I wasn't allowed
close enough to inspect it for this type of thing.
Many thanks to:
Tim Hortman
thortman@epix.net
Tennessee Katsuta
kinson-garments@on.aibn.com
for these comments! BTW, I saw the Garber Cam
shows the Seiran is NOW all painted!
Re: Natural Metal Seirans?
Posted By: James F. Lansdale <LRAJIM@aol.com>
Date: Tuesday, 14 September 1999, at 8:41 p.m.
In Response To: Re: Natural Metal Seirans? (Rob
Graham)
Bob MIKESH is in Japan, but he will be back
around mid-October. I will get a direct quote from him regarding this anomaly
and a clue to the identity of "Ed" at the Garber facility.
Anything is possible I suppose during wartime.
However I remain sceptical that the Japanese would sunbect the Seiran crew to
being shot down by their own defenses by sporting American markings on the
outbound leg of their mission. Even to the poorest spotter, the Seiran was so
distinctive that I doubt that the ruse of painting it silver or putting stars
on it would have have been successful in making the Americans think it was a
friendly aircraft. Heck, American crews on board the ships were so trigger
happy they even shot at American aircraft that came too close!
The Germans, I have read, would creep up to
bomber formations in captured American aircraft, but they took the precaution
of painting them in German markings to reduce beeing shot at by friendly
aircraft on their mission. Also, don't forget that the Japanese had major
recognition problems and went to the trouble of painting wide defense bands on
their army fighters to highlight the hinomaru and their nationality for home
defense purposes.
Again, as I said at the beginning of this
missive, I suppose anything was possible and maybe there was a Seiran in
sheep's clothing all set to charge the American ships. Using Kaiten's would
have been easier and more effective!!!
One thing is certain in this discussion, it
will be possible to get Bob MIKESH's direct input shortly and, perhaps, that
of the mysterious "Ed" at the Garber facility as well. First hand
information is best!
Re: Natural Metal Seirans?
Posted By: Rob Graham <rgraham111@aol.com>
Date: Tuesday, 14 September 1999, at 9:46 p.m.
In Response To: Re: Natural Metal Seirans?
(James F. Lansdale)
I agree anything is possible, and I also have
some reservations about it. However, identification by the US military would
have been tougher because the Seiran was to have been launched without floats
for the Kamikaze attacks. Identification would have been tougher like that,
but you're right in that the Seiran looked nothing like a typical American
plane.
Japanese "friendly fire" spotters
would have likely not been a problem, as I think the Japanese had so few
friendlies that far out. American spotters in and around Ulithi would have
been less trigger happy than those in Okinawa, I think.
Imagine (and it's JUST imagine time; I'm not
offering a theory at all) what would have happened if the attack had occurred
a month before. With the US's realization that Japan might use US paint
schemes, there would have been chaos and "markings of the day"
(which were, as you may recall reading about the ETO, chaotic in and of
themselves). There would have been some seriously unfortunate friendly fire
problems, don'cha think?
Just random thoughts. I'm looking forward to
what Mr. Mikesh has to say, and I thank you and appreciate your input and
contribution to this. I think this will probably be better resolved than it
first looked.
Perhaps there are photos of the sanded fuselage
on the Seiran that shows the US markings. Anybody seen them???
Re: Natural Metal Seirans?
Posted By: James F. Lansdale <LRAJIM@aol.com>
Date: Thursday, 16 September 1999, at 7:17 p.m.
In Response To: Re: Natural Metal Seirans? (Rob
Graham)
I cannot get Bob MIKESH until mid October,
however, I did get a lead on "Ed." I believe that the "Ed"
mentioned in Tims posting is Edward McMANNUS, Aircraft Conservator for the
National Air and Space Museum. I will ring him up soon and try to find out the
origin of the natural metal Seiran story.
No Hard Evidence For "Silver" or
Natural Metal Seirans
Posted By: James F. Lansdale <LRAJIM@aol.com>
Date: Friday, 17 September 1999, at 6:49 p.m.
In Response To: Re: Natural Metal Seirans?
(James F. Lansdale)
I have just concluded (9/17/99, 8:00 p.m.) a
telephone interview with Ed McMANNUS, Conservator of Aircraft for the National
Air and Space Museum at the Garber Facility. He stated that, "There is
absolutely no hard evidence to support the contention that Seirans were ever
painted silver or had American markings applied by the Japanese." He
further stated that while some folks on the restoration project expressed the
"opinion" that the Japanese had possibly painted the/some Seiran/s
silver, the restoration team had failed to encounter "any evidence"
of this practice on the NASM Seiran during its restoration."
Mr. McMANNUS also stated that they (NASM) had
no hard evidence that a "silver" or "natural metal finish"
had ever been applied to a Seiran from any of their Japanese sources and that
he (McMannus) had never stated otherwise! Perhaps this will settle the
question about the NASM position regarding such a paint scheme appearing on
the Seiran as expressed by the senior NASM official on the restoration
project.
Re: No Hard Evidence For "Silver" or
Natural Metal Seirans
Posted By: Tim Hortman
<thortman@epix.net>
Date: Monday, 20 September 1999, at 6:51 p.m.
In Response To: No Hard Evidence For
"Silver" or Natural Metal Seirans (James F. Lansdale)
Sorry to be so quiet about all of this, but I
have been quite busy with a few things. I'm still in my on-going quest for a
scanner, but I do have several photos of the Garber Seiran that are
"interesting" in that they do show what looks to be a US "star
& bar" on both the fuselauge & wing. I have seen the marking on
these sanded surfaces since during the ongoing resoration for several years
now. It was only this past summer that I heard 'offically' the story of the
natural metal/silver Serian's (but only the ones aboard ships mission bound)
I will get these posted as soon as I get that
blasted scanner.
While these will not prove or disprove
anything, they do make you wonder why they are there in the first place.
Since starting this whole thing, I have been
trying to get more info without much sucess. Jim, I would appreciate any info
that Mr Mikesh has to offer when you do get in touch with him.
Sorry for stirring the pot...
Tim
PS: Jim, that was not the 'Ed' I spoke to at
Garber, but thanks for the info!
Re: No Hard Evidence For "Silver" or
Natural Metal Seirans
Posted By: Rob Graham
<rgraham111@aol.com>
Date: Saturday, 18 September 1999, at 9:15 p.m.
In Response To: No Hard Evidence For
"Silver" or Natural Metal Seirans (James F.
Lansdale)
Thanks for the clarification! Now, though, I
wonder where Kazuhiku Osuo's info for his Model Art article came from, and was
it perpetuation of a previous speculation? I wonder where the story originated
from.
Again, my Seiran will be a different color. I
was thinking an amber clear coat. No, seriously... Lilac. No, seriously...
probably just plain IJN green over gray. The Seiran is so cool looking in its
regular scheme that it's a conversation piece in the drabbest of finishes.
Don'cha think??? I love that Seiran... I'll probably do my FM Judy 33 in
orange.
Re: Natural Metal Seirans?
Posted By: Rob Graham
<rgraham111@aol.com>
Date: Tuesday, 14 September 1999, at 1:30 p.m.
In Response To: Natural Metal Seirans? (James
F. Lansdale)
I hope Floyd isn't too much for you right now!
I'll send you the stuff I kept on it. It was
too interesting to pass up, so I tracked the thread.
It seems there are several folks, including Bob
Mikesh, who knew about it. The thread is fascinating with contributions from
Tim Hortman, Tennessee Katsuta, and Dan Salamone.
Re: Natural Metal Seirans?
Posted By: Tennessee Katsuta
<kinson-garments@on.aibn.com>
Date: Tuesday, 14 September 1999, at 9:10 p.m.
In Response To: Re: Natural Metal Seirans? (Rob
Graham)
In case you're interested, the caption in Model
Art that I translated was originally written by Kazuhiko Osuo, a well known
Japanese historian. I don't think he'll write something that's pulled out of
thin air. I belive he has a good enough reason to beleive (no matter how
unlikely it is) that such event took place. Any way, Seiran in a fake US
scheme makes an interesting modelling subject, don't you think?
Re: Natural Metal Seirans?
Posted By: Rob Graham
<rgraham111@aol.com>
Date: Tuesday, 14 September 1999, at 9:17 p.m.
In Response To: Re: Natural Metal Seirans?
(Tennessee Katsuta)
I do think it makes an interesting subject, but
I do also have reservations about the Garber Seiran having been painted
silver. I saw the plane, and IT seems to have been camo on the wings.
This is not one of the planes from that action,
so it can't really be called the SAME, but who knows? I'd like to know more
for a historical perspective, though I'll likely model a different scheme.
Tennessee, I thank you a lot for your input
here on this subject (well, ALL of your input for that matter). It has been
interesting to see!
Re: IJN I-400 Class Submarines
Posted By: Will Gossett
<wilgossett@aol.com>
Date: Friday, 3 September 1999, at 8:42 p.m.
In Response To: Re: IJN I-400 Class Submarines
(James F. Lansdale)
I hadn't looked this up before but Francillon
writes that the M6A1 never actually was used in combat even though the subs
had left port for an attack on the Panama Canal (later changed to Ulithi).
Thorpe writes on page 156 that "No codes were worn when the unit reached
operational status." Where his info came from is not mentioned. He writes
that codes were used for unit formation and operational training only so is it
possible that no codes were carried during the sortie?
Re: IJN I-400 Class Submarines
Posted By: James F. Lansdale
<LRAJIM@aol.com>
Date: Saturday, 4 September 1999, at 7:46 a.m.
In Response To: Re: IJN I-400 Class Submarines
(Will Gossett)
Bob MIKESH reports on page 9 of the Monogram
Closeup No.13 that during operational training the Seiran Corps used the code
[K6-] for "kogeki" and 6 Kantai (submarine fleet). MIKESH then adds,
"According to former I.J.N. pilot Ichiro
Naito, and Flight Officer Takunaga, both having served aboard I-400 Class
submarines with the Seiran Corps, the unit number 631 would not have been a
tail marking due to the utmost secrecy of the unit."
However, photos show that the unit code
[671-..] was applied to Glens used for training floatplane pilots for 6
Kantai.
Also not that the I-400 had its number
displayed on the conning tower when captured so I suspect the Seirans had some
unit code as well. They probably incorporated a "Kikusui" emblem
which was used on some aircraft and submarines on special operations at that
time.
Re: IJN I-400 Class Submarines
Posted By: Will Gossett
<wilgossett@aol.com>
Date: Sunday, 5 September 1999, at 7:55 a.m.
In Response To: Re: IJN I-400 Class Submarines
(James F. Lansdale)
Thanks for the added info. Even though I have a
pretty good library of WWII Japanese subjects (aircraft and ships), I have
many gaps and Mikesh's books and the Maru Mechanic series are among the
missing.
Having picked up Thorpe's first book when it
first came out, I have often wondered where all of his info came from. He
gives no bibliography and his acknowledgements are brief. They are good basic
references though.
By the way, I have a copy of a wartime analysis
of the first captured A6M2-N which contains nice drawings of the floats and
fuel tank arrangement, metal analysis, etc. If you don't have this and are
interested, perhaps I could have them scanned in for all to see. I have not
done scanning before but my son has a scanner that I could use.
Re: IJN I-400 Class Submarines
Posted By: James F. Lansdale
<LRAJIM@aol.com>
Date: Sunday, 5 September 1999, at 1:36 p.m.
In Response To: Re: IJN I-400 Class Submarines
(Will Gossett)
I am sure Dave PLUTH would be pleased to put
your scans of the A6M2-N in the in the aircraft photos link on the J-Aircraft
Home Page. Please send your scans to [info@j-aircraft.com].
Don THORPE obtained the photos from the sources
listed with each caption. His color interpretations and the basis for his art
work were the photos of these contributors and illustrations in Japanese
publications (Aireview, Koku Fan, Maru) from the '60s and the '70s. THORPE's
most valuable contribution was his original research in matching the Japanese
camouflage colors of relics provided by Dr. Charles DARBY to the Munsell
standards. If you look at his acknowledgement page you will see all of his
contributors. Alas, many, like the late Dick BUESCHEL, are now doing their
research in the Great Archives beyond and much of their work and material has
been lost.
Re: IJN I-400 Class Submarines
Posted By: Tom Eisenhour
<eisen@swbell.net>
Date: Saturday, 30 October 1999, at 8:29 a.m.
In Response To: Re: IJN I-400 Class Submarines
(James F. Lansdale)
I'm surprised that no one listed this web siten
as an I-400 resource. It is an account written by the USN officer who brought
the I-400 to the US for study after the war.
I highly recommend it.
Editors Note: The link is no longer active
Re: IJN I-400 Class Submarines
Posted By: Tim Hortman
<thortman@epix.net>
Date: Saturday, 30 October 1999, at 10:35 a.m.
In Response To: Re: IJN I-400 Class Submarines
(Tom Eisenhour)
You ended up with an extra 'http' in your link.
Here is (hopefully!) a working link to the
site.
THANKS for the info! It looks very informative!
Link: http://www.pacerfarm.org/i-400/i-400.htm
Hull colors for I-400, I-401
Posted By: Dan Salamone <dano@rust.net>
Date: Saturday, 5 December 1998, at 5:06 a.m.
I was wondering if anybody knew what the hull
colors would be for these submarines? Green, grey, or whatever, I am mainly
interested in the area around the hangar and the top of the deck where the
Seiran were handled and launched. Thanks in advance for any help or
information!
Re: Hull colors for I-400, I-401
Posted By: Rob Graham
<RGraham111@aol.com>
Date: Sunday, 13 December 1998, at 6:51 p.m.
In Response To: Hull colors for I-400, I-401
(Dan Salamone)
It's quiet here, isn't it??? I'm due to get my
1/700 Aoshima I-400 from HLJ, so if you find anything out, please let me know.
I've only seen B&W photos (in the Monogram Close-Up on the Seiran) and
could not tell at all.
Re: Hull colors for I-400, I-401
Posted By: Dan Salamone <dano@rust.net>
Date: Sunday, 13 December 1998, at 7:04 p.m.
In Response To: Re: Hull colors for I-400,
I-401 (Rob Graham)
Very quiet! I also have the Monogram book, as
well as some other photos in a Japanese publication, all black and white......
If I do hear anything I'll be sure to let you know. Take care!
I-400 hull colors, need hasegawa kit.
Posted By: Mike Swinburne
<a4_kahu@hotmail.com>
Date: Tuesday, 22 December 1998, at 12:53 p.m.
In Response To: Re: Hull colors for I-400,
I-401 (Dan Salamone)
I *think* the upper hull was dark grey, but
don't hold me to my word on this. What are you planning to do Dan? Are you
wanting to build the front portion in 72nd or 48th like me??????
I also need a hasegawa 160th scale I-401 if
anyone knows where to get one.
Too much ambition I don't know, but I want to
build the top front half of 401 with one seiran complete and one folded..
Re: I-400 hull colors, need hasegawa kit.
Posted By: Dan Salamone <dano@rust.net>
Date: Tuesday, 22 December 1998, at 4:38 p.m.
In Response To: I-400 hull colors, need
hasegawa kit. (Mike Swinburne)
My dream project is the deck and front of the
open hangar with a couple of Seiran, in 1/48. I just picked
up a second Seiran
kit(Squadron has them on sale this month for $13.00 each), and almost started
the hangar area last week until a book for another project finally arrived....
I'm looking at it as a project that may take
many years, no reason to rush something like this. I have the Monogram Close
Up on the Seiran, and some other drawings and dimensions from another Japanese
publication, want to try and locate 1/48 drawings of the sub as well. I've
tried the sub discussion group, had no success there as far as scale drawings,
but am still searching.
FWIW, the prop on the Tamiya Seiran kit appears
to be too wide to fit into the hangar tube, from the dimensions I have for the
tube and then checking those against the a/c model dimensions.
Did I mention that this was a big project? :-)
Take care Mike, thanks for the input!
Re: I-400 hull colors, need hasegawa kit.
Posted By: Mike Swinburne
<a4_kahu@hotmail.com>
Date: Wednesday, 23 December 1998, at 4:31 a.m.
In Response To: Re: I-400 hull colors, need
hasegawa kit. (Dan Salamone)
That was what I was also wanting to do. The
width of the inside hanger is 8 feet IIRC, but it would be cool to have a huge
model like that. Do you have cross sections or plans enlarged to 48th scale?
Re: I-402 hull artwork in color
Posted By: David Aiken
<David_Aiken@hotmail.com>
Date: Wednesday, 23 December 1998, at 12:22
p.m.
In Response To: Re: I-400 hull colors, need
hasegawa kit. (Mike Swinburne)
Looked thru some OLD ship books and found a
color artist rendering (top and side view) of I-402. Clear your "battle
stations", I hope to send this as an attachment on your e-mail address
sites. I do not know how big this will be, but it looks to be about a 2000K
attachment! Perhaps it will have to be-scanned? Stand-by! The artist rendering
MAY clear up colors, and maybe will help on your drawing problem.
Re: I-400 hull colors, need hasegawa kit.
Posted By: Dan Salamone <dano@rust.net>
Date: Wednesday, 23 December 1998, at 11:42
a.m.
In Response To: Re: I-400 hull colors, need
hasegawa kit. (Mike Swinburne)
No plans enlarged yet, I just tried another
ship plan source with no luck.
I have heard of guys building r/c versions, so
there has to be something out there for plans on these subs.... I have some
basic ideas on how I want to replicate the hangar, the photos I have help a
lot in showing equipment inside, etc. Just would love to have plans though!
Re: I-400 hull colors, need hasegawa kit.
Posted By: Mike Swinburne
<a4_kahu@hotmail.com>
Date: Wednesday, 23 December 1998, at 2:42 p.m.
In Response To: Re: I-400 hull colors, need
hasegawa kit. (Dan Salamone)
someone posted these plans of I-401 in 10th
scale from the hasegawa kit on the net for me since my computer wouldn't take
'em through email.
try these
http://pages.cthome.net/elrond/1.html
http://pages.cthome.net/elrond/2.html
http://pages.cthome.net/elrond/3.html
http://pages.cthome.net/elrond.4.html
you may have them, they may not still be up,
but try them.
I-400/401 references- crane and catapult
Posted By: Dan Salamone <heroncreek@qwest.net>
Date: Sunday, 11 February 2001, at 6:50 p.m.
I was wondering if the GAKKEN series of IJN ship books have any specific data on the I-400 and I-401 as far as the crane and catapult?
It seems that one of the best references for the Seiran and I-400 class is the Monogram Close-Up #13- I have this book and would be interested in finding any other source beyond this book be it Gakken or otherwise.
Re: I-400/401 references- crane and catapult
Posted By: UCHIDA, Katsuhiro <katsuhiro.uchida@honeywell.com>
Date: Monday, 12 February 2001, at 10:40 p.m.
In Response To: I-400/401 references- crane and catapult (Dan Salamone)
Please visit the following page I posted on Navy & Ships page before. I hope it will help you.
http://member.nifty.ne.jp/heart_2/i400/
-