xAP Types:
11) Keihuku Maru xAP: Twelve ships in this class (the largest xAP group). A single bmp file (0311.bmp), not shared. One data base entry (12/41). Cannot upgrade or convert. No evidence of early war camo.
The main issue with this class is the extreme variability in ship profiles. One of the most obvious is funnel count, in particular the fact that every ship has one funnel except the class namesake,
Keihuku Maru (#1). But we also see variations in height of superstructure, promenade decks in the superstructure (varies from 1 to 3), length of hull, flush decks vs raised forecastle and/or poop, etc. (#2). Even worse, the existing shipside doesn't match ANY ship in this class. However, after looking through the various ONI pages (all but 2 ships have them), the
Ural Maru (#3) appears to be most representative, and thus a good candidate for the new profile. Worth noting that this issue affects the xAK classes to a far greater degree, but it's more noticeable when you have a small number of ships to compare against one another.
As to colors, all of the Japan-built vessels have pre-war photos showing a black hull and white uppers, but we don't have any wartime pics or models. On the other hand, there's an undated photo of the
Tango Maru (#4) which is certainly from the war years, probably late 1942-early 1943.
Per the TROM, this was originally the German vessel
Rendsburg, confiscated in 1940 by Dutch authorities in the NEI, scuttled near Batavia as a blockship, refloated & repaired by the Japanese in August 1942, and returned to service as the Tango Maru sometime thereafter. Since the ship name is clearly visible in the photo, it must be dated post-August 1942, and the vessel obviously has bright white uppers and a very dark (probably black) hull. Which is one of the clearest indicators yet that Japanese commercial shipping was still being painted in pre-war colors well into 1942. Additional information can be gleaned from the TROMs and other sources (such as they are). Of the 12 ships:
7 of 12 have combinedfleet TROMs
8 of 12 were small "Japan-built" passenger+cargo ships, most of which were assigned to Japan-Manchuria routes
5 of 8 Japan-built vessels do not have TROMs
4 of 12 were foreign (3 from Vichy, the other being the previously discussed Tango Maru)
2 of 12 have TROM records indicating IJA conversion to Troop Transports (with grey paint)
2 of 12 served as hospital ships, one for the entire war.
So what does that tell us? In general, the absence of a combinedfleet TROM tends to correlate with civilian-controlled ships that operated outside the main war zones. Which makes sense here, since the Japan-Manchuria routes kept many of these vessels operating in the seas north of the Home Islands. Accordingly, a number of them probably retained the white upper/black hull combination for some time. We also know that a few of these were definitely painted in "wartime grey" colors (for example, see
Ural Maru TROM entry for November 1941), so that's a reasonable transition for this class, probably in late 1942. With nothing else to go on, let's take an approach similar to that used with the smaller xAK classes (since this is the smallest xAP class), and give them a greyish rust in 1943, and even more of the same in 1945.
Armament: According to the database, this class has a single stern-mounted Type 88 DP gun, but the existing shipside placed it in front, thus we need to place it in the correct location on the new shipside.
So here's the foldered plan:
12/6/41 = New shipside with white uppers/black hull (#5)
11/1942 = Shift to a uniform greyish color scheme (#6)
9/1943 = Add rusty streaks to the shipside (#7)
1/1945 = More rust (#8)
Note: Of some interest perhaps, is a prewar photo of the
Ussuri Maru (another ship of this class and very similar to the Ural Maru) berthed dockside in Dairen, Manchuria (#9). Unfortunately the picture is rather low res, but it's still fascinating to see the cargo winches in action, and the piecemeal way in which goods were handled in those days. So yes, build up your ports, dammit!
