Japanese LSDs

[el cid again]

I took the RHS Shinshu Maru class
and broke it into two parts - Shinshu Maru itself - the world's first specialized amphibious ship - and Mayasan Maru - representing later
Japanese efforts.

I assigned both classes as LSD type - because while they are not exactly dock landing ships - they do have stern doors and they do carry loaded landing craft which roll down a ramp (on RR tracks) into the sea - actually BETTER than an LSD. [The Japanese concept permits launching without flooding down, in fact even while underway, even at full speed, although this was not normal practice.] The earlier Shinshu is not as well armed - not that either class is very well armed - and it does not carry as much either - but both are actually better than US LSDs as defined in the game (I need to check to see if the US LSDs are as bad as they are defined, cargo wise?) Both classes upgrade their AAA eventually. One ship was missing - so I added it.

There is a somewhat related class I have not yet defined. It is a very strange class, about which very little is known (the Japanese say almost nothing about their wartime activities). This is the Akitsu Maru class. These might be classified as APs (to be efficient troopships) or AKs (so they can carry aircraft as well as troops when the war begins, or as CVEs (so they can fly off aircraft to airfields- their original actual mission - at the cost of no troops in our game system). Regardless, they later convert to a better CVE, and gain army squadrons. Both the Ki-76 (Feisler Storch more or less) and the Ka-1 (Ceviera Autogyro approximately), armed with depth charges, operated from Akitsu Maru.
The Ki-44 was being modified for use from them and other army carriers when the decision was made to decomission almost all naval vessels except submarines (late in the war). I am still working on what is the best compromise for the original version of this pair of ships. They are, in a way, more like a modern LHA than anything else in WWII.

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

I took the RHS Shinshu Maru class
and broke it into two parts - Shinshu Maru itself - the world's first specialized amphibious ship - and Mayasan Maru - representing later
Japanese efforts.

I assigned both classes as LSD type - because while they are not exactly dock landing ships - they do have stern doors and they do carry loaded landing craft which roll down a ramp (on RR tracks) into the sea - actually BETTER than an LSD. [The Japanese concept permits launching without flooding down, in fact even while underway, even at full speed, although this was not normal practice.] The earlier Shinshu is not as well armed - not that either class is very well armed - and it does not carry as much either - but both are actually better than US LSDs as defined in the game (I need to check to see if the US LSDs are as bad as they are defined, cargo wise?) Both classes upgrade their AAA eventually. One ship was missing - so I added it.

There is a somewhat related class I have not yet defined. It is a very strange class, about which very little is known (the Japanese say almost nothing about their wartime activities). This is the Akitsu Maru class. These might be classified as APs (to be efficient troopships) or AKs (so they can carry aircraft as well as troops when the war begins, or as CVEs (so they can fly off aircraft to airfields- their original actual mission - at the cost of no troops in our game system). Regardless, they later convert to a better CVE, and gain army squadrons. Both the Ki-76 (Feisler Storch more or less) and the Ka-1 (Ceviera Autogyro approximately), armed with depth charges, operated from Akitsu Maru.
The Ki-44 was being modified for use from them and other army carriers when the decision was made to decomission almost all naval vessels except submarines (late in the war). I am still working on what is the best compromise for the original version of this pair of ships. They are, in a way, more like a modern LHA than anything else in WWII.

Concerning the Akitsu Maru and Nigitsu Maru...

From Japanese Warships of WWII by AJ Watts.

The success of the Shinsu Maru prompted the Japanese Army to take over two merchant liners, then building on the stocks, and complete them to similar specifications.

In this class the bridge and funnel were sited to starboard so that a deck could be fitted for the flying off of the aircraft that the ships carried.

In May 1944 it was planned to extend the deck on Akitsu Maru to a length that would allow planes to land. The relative shortness of the deck had prohibited the landing of planes but the modifictaion never took place.

Both vessels were sunk by American submarines in 1944.

Displacemnet - 11,800t
Dimensions 488 3/4 (pp) 000 (oa) x 62 1/3 ft
Machinery SHP 7500 = 20 knots
Armament 2- 75mm AA, 10 - 75mm field guns; 30 aircraft; 20 landing craft

Akitsu Maru Lost Nov 15, 44
Nigitsu Maru Lost Jan 12, 44

Because they can not land A/C, would not the CVE designation be inaprropriate?

[Monter_Trismegistos]

Your data may be incorrect. On this picture of Akitsu Maru I cannot see any possibility to lenghten landing deck at least in the way to make difference betwen can and can not land. So I assume that planes already could land without modernization.

[treespider]

-

[akdreemer]

Akitsu Maru

Here is another view showing significant space aft for lengthening the flight deck. The question is did IJA planes have arrester hooks, if not what system would it use?:

[el cid again]

Because they can not land A/C, would not the CVE designation be inaprropriate?

OK. I love Watts - I have a photocopy of his long out of print work - in spite of the fact when he wrote a good deal was not yet available to study.
I also have the Jintshura (sp?) work Warships of the Imperial Japanese Navy. Both are almost difinitive as far as single books go. I mainly base my research on them - supplimented when necessary.

Jintshura says "there was a large barracks on the flight deck, rendering landing impractical" although no drawing, and the only photograph, I have seen shows this - I do believe it. But even for this early form a CVE might be best: IJA has NO carrier squadrons at start - and any fighter or dive bomber is allowed (in the code) to fly off a carrier to a land base (transfer mission only). Since this is the REAL mission of the ship, I think it might be a nice inclusion. But it could be abused by a player putting navy planes on the ship, no question about it. A house rule could more or less prevent that.

Second, the later version of the ship clearly COULD operate conventional planes - and was intended for an army fighter modified (I have just learned with arrester gear) for the job. The text in these references appears incorrect insofar as it implies this version was not operational: see for example Francillon on the Ki-76 and the Ka-1 - both were operated from Akitsu Maru. It appears her sister was not modified before her loss to a submarine, but would have been had she survived. Now a Ka-1 does not really require a landing deck in the usual sense - it is quite capable of a vertical landing (it is rotary wing and needs deck to take off because the rotar is unpowered - it ALSO has a propeller like a regular airplane!). But the Ki-76 is a land plane - albiet an STOL one - its only significant difference from the Storch being it is faster (due to more power) and needs more landing room (due to more weight). ]It may be these aircraft also operated from other ships - but that is a suspicion - not something we know for sure.] Nevertheless, it is certain that the design for the second version is best represented by a CVE, and would have operated (in our terms) two squadrons - a small fighter squadron of Ki-44 in a higher performance version than was previously in use - and an ASW squadron - really it was two flights of 7 each Ki-76 and Ka-1 - but we will use only Ki-76 (not having a Ka-1 to play with). This is functionally correct - and maybe even useful vs submarines or small air raids - but nothing like a line carrier - not even a CVL. The ships are way too slow,
and the "bombers" are perfectly awful for anything but sub hunting.

[el cid again]

Here is another view showing significant space aft for lengthening the flight deck. The question is did IJA planes have arrester hooks, if not what system would it use?:

In the event, IJA first used the Ka-1 - an autogyro - it needs about 12 feet to take off and no space at all to land - it is vertical landing.
At the same time it used a "Japanese Feissler Storch" (Ki-76) - otherwise a trainer and spotter - an amazing VTOL light plane. It needed no arrester gear for carrier use. [Otto Skorezeny (sp?) landed one on a castle top in the rescue of Moussilini, and took off too.] The Japanese version is slighty better in performance, but a light plane nonetheless.

For fighter defense of convoys (the idea was to use merchant aircraft carriers and Akitsu Maru class vessels as convoy escorts) it was intended to modify the Ki-44. A variation of the Ki-44III was to be used - it is sometimes said without arrester gear - but a retired JASDF captain who now works for the official Japanese "Library of Congress" (Diet Library) has informed me it was to use an arrester gear - which is why it was a variant in its own right. In the event, while the plane was modified, and worked, the decision to stop normal operations with surface ships precluded it being mass produced. But in a different situation, if the Allies are not doing too well, it might be useful? Players would not have to produce it or to use it on CVEs if they did. It is an example of creating options and allowing players to decide - in the specific context of their game world events. No player who does not want to use them because they think they are "not really historical" is forced to use them either. I think they are "historical enough" - it depends on game events if they are in time to matter or too late as in real history? It also may well be these are not good ideas - that they will not compete very well with the late war forces they have to contend with. But I am not responsible for that - many weapons are less than ideal.

[treespider]

Jintshura says "there was a large barracks on the flight deck, rendering landing impractical" although no drawing, and the only photograph, I have seen shows this - I do believe it.

Found this website...

http://ww6.enjoy.ne.jp/~iwashige/akitsumaru.htm

With this mock-up...

[el cid again]

The biggest problem with landing on the Akitsu Maru in its original configuration is that mast right aft. I do not see the elevator as a major issue - the worst case is it would need to be reconfigured near the top.
For the light aircraft contemplated, one would simply "crash" forward of the flight deck. [Aircraft land on carriers by a "controlled crash" technique in order to stay on the deck - only VTOL aircraft are an exception - they can take off and land even in the worst sea states IF they do so from the CENTER of the deck - so RN found in the South Atlantic.] I also think all those structures on the deck would need to be removed.

For a source stating planes can land, try Rene Francillon, Japanese Aircraft of the Pacific War, items on Ki-76, Ka-1 and Ki-44.

It is my view that the best classification for the original Akitsu Maru is AK.
That allows it to transport aircraft, but only load and unload in port. It also allows it to have guns and to transport troops or cargo. This seems like the closese we can come for that version, and there is no risk of players abusing it as a real carrier. For the upgrade class, I think it is best to call it a CVE.