Ki-61 Hien (Tony) question

[opus999]

I'm looking at doing the early '90's Hasagawa boxing of the Ki-61 Hein and plan to do Chuichi Ichikawa's (244-Sentai HQ) solid green aircraft with the 3 leaf clover on it. I've gotten confused about the lower color.  The instructions call out C62/H56 (IJA Gray) for the bottom.  I have H56 and it is a light green, which seems more appropriate top color (in fact I'm using it on a MiG-23 right now).  Compounding the confusion, swatches I've found on line for C62 are either the same light green or a light gray!  

 

I haven't found any photos of this aircraft.  I see it depicted in models as a light gray bottom, not a light green bottom.  Many instructions for other kits of solid green Tonys that I've found on line show bare metal bottoms. 

 

I realize it's entirely possible that the details are lost to history, but I thought I'd post this in the off chance that someone might have some information.  Does anyone know what Ichikawa's plane underside color was?  Was light green (green gray?) ever used as an underside color?

 

Thanks! 

Edited January 13, 2021 by opus999
Name wrong

[fastterry]

Just to stir the pot a bit here, this wouldn't be the Hein attributed to Ichikawa that was described as 'chocolate bar brown' with a green shamrock, by a reporter at Chofu airfield in 1945? I managed to snaffle the 1/32 Alley Cat Tei nose conversion some time ago and one of the decal schemes was Ichikawa's aircraft. When I built a Hasegawa kit using the nose I went along with the brown and tried to mix a colour that looked like Hershey bar brown and painted the upper surfaces thus. I then painted the spinner and prop 'propeller colour' and blow me down they were near as damn it identical. As this was a field applied colour I figured that at this late stage in the war there was probably a bit of propeller colour lying around, at least enough to do an airframe. Next was the shamrock. After looking in at J-aircraft I started to lean towards a stylised Katabami or wood sorrel so I hand painted the symbol instead of using the decal. Regarding the undersurfaces, I believe they were natural metal typical of a lot of late war Japanese types.  The finished model is quite impressive and different from the typical all over dark green uppers of late war Japanese subjects. There are dozens of interpretations of this aircraft but whichever way you go nobody can say for sure that you are wrong.

TRF

[Toryu]

Hi opus999,

 

This Hien is quite mysterious, not to say doubtful. There is only one blurred photo as far as I know. A very good pictorial history book about the 244^th Sentai doesn't even mention it. It has been attributed alternatively to Maj Kobayashi and Capt Ichikawa based on the victory tally. The cloverleaf and its positioning are very unusual for an JAAF fighter (I'm not sure if a cloverleaf has any meaning in Japanese mythology - and one with only 3 petals??). Since the plane was found in Chofu after the war it might even have been applied by some creative GI (my personal hunch). In a couple of publications there are profiles of this Hien, depicted as either a Ki-61-I Otsu or Tei (with the longer forward fuselage), in one book even as both... The yellow color of the Sentai symbol is also not confirmed (an assumption because Ichikawa was the CO of 3^rd Chutai). Since it has the late-war topside olive-brown camouflage, a Tei is more likely. In short, I would keep my fingers off this (not very typical) Hien.

 

If you still want to build it 😀 : All late Kawasaki fighters (most Ki-61-I Tei and all Ki-100) were factory-painted in olive-brown over silver. Use this link for reference to the late-war olive-brown: http://www.aviationofjapan.com/2011/03/more-about-jaaf-7-ohryoku-nana-go-shoku.html

The lower side of the control surfaces would be doped in gray-green.

 

Gray or gray-green as an underside color in combination with a green topside on JAAF fighters existed only very early in the war, mainly in the CBI. Such camouflage was field-applied.

 

Hope this helps, Michael

 

[Blimpyboy]

 

Some interesting discussions of the aircraft here, with speculation regarding the veracity of photos and the subject shown in known photos (some discussion about colours too, but no strong recommendations):

http://arawasi-wildeagles.blogspot.com/2015/09/questions-requests.html

and

https://forum.largescaleplanes.com/index.php?/topic/73140-chuichi-ichikawas-ki-61-1tei-discussion/

and

https://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php?topic=363528.0

 

 

This Japanese language page has some interesting discussion points on the veracity of the 'shamrock' on the aircraft and speculates on it being an American unit insignia painted on a derelict aircraft: http://www5b.biglobe.ne.jp/~s244f/toso-02.htm (I too, think the photo shows something more bird-like than plant-like),

 

 

Good luck!

 

 

[sroubos]

I'm in a Facebook group on the Hien with some very knowledgeable folks in it (I'm not one of them) and the clear consensus on this plane is that the shamrock is not an original Japanese unit marking and probably American-made.

 

If you are on Facebook you can apply to join the group here, loads of really helpful discussions and great photos of planes and models in there.

 

https://www.facebook.com/groups/Ki61Tony/

 

Edited January 11, 2021 by sroubos

[dov]

To add:

The weathering effect on all WW2 a/c is a major one.

Just to give you a picture: The particular Japanese paints by itself did not have a good grip on the metal surface by itself. Also the primers used did not work properly. This was just a basic quality problem all over Japanese industry in war time. The primer color used by Kawasaki I do not know. Mitsubishi ones is red.

Beside this you have to understand the location of war theater. The Pacific islands with tropical climate and Japanese homeland by itself with tropical climate zones by itself.

The Ki-61 a/c was prone to engine failure. The first rank in maintenance treatment.

The source of ARAWASI is the best you have. I know the person who runs the blog.

This is just a basic to understand Japanese a/c!

Happy modelling

[Graham Boak]

It is quite clear from the survival of wrecks on Pacific islands well into the 70s and later, that Japanese primers were working perfectly well in the early years, or indeed as late as the aicraft captured on Saipan.  But as the US blockade became more and more effective primers disappeared for production, resulting in the peeling of large areas of paint as seen in the aircraft gathered for destruction after the surrender.  By the last year. many Japanese types that actually saw combat simply didn't last long enough for the paint to suffer.

 

Having said the above, I've recently seen a picture of a 1942 Betty which really does look to have a large chunk of paint missing from a wheel door and adjacent fuselage.  Of course, leaking oil and petrol does nothing for a paint finish...

[Ed Russell]

6 hours ago, dov said:

Also the primers used did not work properly.

This is just perpetuating a myth. There's a good discussion here

http://www.swannysmodels.com/JapaneseWeathering.html

and a similar one here

https://j-aircraft.com/research/weathering_question.htm

Quote from the first one.

The alleged poor quality of Japanese paint during the Second World War is a myth, and one very difficult to give credence to considering that for centuries Japan has produced some truly splendid lacquered objects. The preconception that Japanese paint was inferior was in all likelihood brought about by the obvious peeling and chipped paint visible on many types of Japanese aircraft from both services at different periods. It is known today that the cause of this poor paint coverage was the lack of primer under the external color, a reflection on the quality of manufacturing rather than the materials. Producing an accurate and believable replica of a WW 2 Japanese plane does not automatically imply systematically simulating heavy paint chipping. If a modeler knows for certain that a factory applied paint job included primer, he should be aware that extensive paint peeling is to be ruled out immediately.

 

Quote

 Japanese homeland by itself with tropical climate zones

Japan is not in the tropical zone but does have quite a bit of variability in its climate. Some parts of its weather may be described as humid sub-tropical and will certainly contribute to visible weathering.

[opus999]

15 hours ago, Toryu said:

I'm not sure if a cloverleaf has any meaning in Japanese mythology - and one with only 3 petals??

I always wondered about this decidedly western-looking marking.  

 

Thanks guys for the insightful discussion.  I confess I am new to Tonys and don't know yet how to tell a Hei from a Tei.  I'd initially thought that I could use all the decals excluding the Shamrock, and paint it in a late war olive-y green top and NMF bottom and it could still be somewhat accurate, but after reading some of the web pages posted above, I think even that approach would not be very accurate.

 

A quick survey of a well known auction site for decals for all green Tonys shows the Print Scale Decals, which includes the shamrock, and a set of "Lifelike" decals for Ki-61-IIs.   Not a lot to choose from.  Maybe its because everybody wants to do the natural metal with green scribles.

[opus999]

I had a look at my Tamiya kit and it had an all green option, so I can use those decals.  It is the 19th air group out of Luzon, Philippines 1945.

 

It calls out Tamiyz XF-67 "Nato Green" for the topside.  Does that seem like an accurate color for this aircraft?  I thought they were tending more toward an olive drab later in the war...

[Toryu]

It's interesting that discussions often wander away from a modeller's specific question and end in general statements, with Japanese colours and their poor quality obviously being a most favourite subject. @Ed Russell makes a good point when he states that this is a myth.  I think  it is important to avoid generalising and to understand why it happened.

 

(1) Generalisation: "Japanese WW2 aircraft were particularly prone to weathering".

First of all we talk about two independent air arms - The IJN and the IJAAF. IJN aircraft generally had very resistent paint coats and were well maintained. There was much less chipping than presented on many models. Right up to the end of the war ground crews were ordered to keep planes in good shape, often cleaning the surface with oily rags. IJAAF planes were often camouflaged in the field (depot or frontline) without primer being used. Such colour coats did not stick too well.

Second, it depends on the period. The early war time saw standardised paint schemes which were more stable. The IJAAF mottled the silver factory surface of fighters which degraded over time but remained mottled.

Third, the theatre of operation matters. Strong fading was only observed in the SWPA and Central Pacific area, but was generally less pronounced than on USAAF OD  and US Navy 3/4-colour camouflages.

Fourth, some airplanes seem to have been a little more susceptical to chipping like the N1K2-J (no primer) and D4Y (maybe poor primer).

 

(2) The why:

Firstly, Most picture "evidence" for the alleged strong colour deterioration stems from after-war scrap heap photos taken by US occupation forces and found on internet. These aircraft had been exposed to the elements for months without care. Operational pictures of Japanese sources (usually not found on internet) show perfectly finished planes even in the last year of war, when most had a very short service life anyway.

Second, as with all air arms, colour chipped where there was a lot of crew activity, like cockpit entry areas, gun and other access panels, around control surfaces, etc.

Third, some production runs of the same plane were camouflaged in the field (e.g. Ki-84 early, over NM without primer) and later, due to a change in policy, were painted at the factory in the period scheme (Ki-84 as of November 1944). The change in quality was considerable with the latter being the better ones. Another example would be the late J3M5 which appears hastily delivered in NM at war's end and was field-camouflaged, therefore you may observe different results (actually very few J3M were bad - most looked rather good).

 

Generally, on operational pictures the quality of proper factory colours doesn't appear worse than that of other air forces in the theatre.

Cheers, Michael

 

[2996 Victor]

Hi,

 

The Ki-61 is a great canvas for a multitude of subjects from bare NMF through to painted, with some amazing unit markings. I've got several examples of the Tamiya 1/72 kit in my stash that I'm looking forward to doing. The Tei is the long-nose version - I think the engine was moved forward to improve the centre of gravity, but I may have just made that up!

 

While I wouldn't like to comment about the clover-leaf example, I did recently have a conversation with Nick Millman primarily about interior colours that also touched upon the external finishes. As always, Nick was incredibly helpful, and I'm sure he won't mind if I quote him:

 

"As to interiors there are two 'schools of thought' on the Kawasaki interior colour. For a long time the yellow-brown or sandy colour (not RLM 79!) was the consensus for modelling and in Japan is still strongly subscribed to by what I would term the 'Shigeru Nohara' school, to the extent even of attributing it anachronistically to the Ki-10. However another eminent Japanese researcher Sunao Katabuchi who writes articles on colours in the Gakken series of books maintains that the yellowish-brown was the result of colour shift in the paint and suggests the colour sequence of dark blue grey for early production Hien, followed by grey green for mid production and finally the # 7 olive drab colour for late production aircraft. Certainly the component elements (oligomer or high polymer) of much of the Japanese paint at that time was imperfectly purified and also contained many aromatic rings, which led to a tendency to be photo-chemically sensitive to UV exposure. It doesn't take much for some grey paints to become distinctly brownish as with the grey-dyed uniforms of the Confederates where the dyes sometimes had a similar photo-chemical sensitivity. Offset against that are the deliberate 'yellow greys' of anti-corrosive finishes, as with RLM 02. Result - much uncertainty as to what was deliberately intended and what was not! But plenty of leeway for personal interpretation and ignoring the hard and fast 'rules' of forum pundits!

 

The Tei spanned the introduction of factory painting so all Tei in post-production mottle schemes were likely to have had the grey green/grey interiors and all the factory painted olive drab Tei the matching olive drab interior. What complicates things slightly is that IJAAF Depots began applying the solid OD colour to aircraft delivered in natural metal finish before it was introduced as factory painting. There is a complete Tei cowling panel in Japan which has grey green interior paint and an exterior painted in the olive drab, including the spinner repainted from dark brown to the olive drab. The serial number on this aircraft is pre-factory camouflage painting so it was evidently finished by a IJAAF Depot to closely match the subsequent factory painting (there was a time lag between the IJAAF adopting # 7 as a standard colour and the factories beginning to apply it). There are no certain serial numbers for all these changes so much still depends on the interpretation of photos and artifact evidence. It is not always easy to identify a depot painted Tei from a factory painted Tei but there are clues if the photo is clear enough."

 

So, it would seem that Ki-61 interiors were originally grey, not yellowy, changing to IJAAF #7 when this was introduced as a factory-applied finish. I'll be finishing two of my examples one each in these schemes. As I understand it, IJAAF #7 "Ohryoku Nana Go Shoku" is very close to USAAF Olive Drab, and indeed Nick refers to it as Olive Drab. The lower surfaces seem to have been exclusively NMF.

 

I must stress that the forgoing is entirely acquired knowledge, and in no way reflects my own research or expertise (lack of!), but I hope that it helps a bit rather than adding/causing confusion!

 

Kind regards,

 

Mark

[Toryu]

40 minutes ago, 2996 Victor said:

I think the engine was moved forward to improve the centre of gravity,

It was the 20 mm guns that required more space than the previous 12.7 mm.

 

[2996 Victor]

3 hours ago, Toryu said:

It was the 20 mm guns that required more space than the previous 12.7 mm.

 

Ah! That makes sense  

Kind regards,

Mark

[dov]

Just to mention:

This is the only survivor in Japan. I took at 1997 photos in Kakamigahara.

At the Ki-61 the engine is a Japanese version of the German DB-601. The production of this engine was a major problem for the Japanese industry. The engine has a very long crankshaft. This needs precise long holes. The knowledge of form tolerances and position tolerances were only in their infancy in Japanese industry. The geometry was anyway the big problem child among technicians themselves.

So, the liability and confidence of this engine was extreme low. Production rate too. Therefore modification to Ki-100 with radial.

Happy modelling

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bottom view of the engine by mirror!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[opus999]

7 hours ago, dov said:

This is the only survivor in Japan. I took at 1997 photos in Kakamigahara.

Wow!  These are great photos!  Thanks for sharing them!

 

A look at a couple popular color matching sites showed Tamiya's XF-67 to be equivalent to Mr. Color's Khaki green.  I have used that Khaki green and it is a darker green, but I could see it passing for a darker Olive Drab, so maybe that was Tamiya's idea of what #7 should look like?  I also had educate myself about the differences between Hei's and Tei's, turns out I had some mis-conceptions and that both my Hasegawa and Tamiya kits are Teis. So, given that, and what @2996 Victor quoted above, my plan now is to build the Hasegawa kit and use the Tamiya decals for 19th Air Group, Phillipines, 1945 and paint it OD top/NMF bottom.  It sounds like US Olive Drab is a close match to the IJA #7...?

 

Thanks for all of the discussion, I've learned quite a bit!

[Steve190]

Toryu said:

 

"This Hien is quite mysterious, not to say doubtful. There is only one blurred photo as far as I know. A very good pictorial history book about the 244th Sentai doesn't even mention it. It has been attributed alternatively to Maj Kobayashi and Capt Ichikawa based on the victory tally. The cloverleaf and its positioning are very unusual for an JAAF fighter (I'm not sure if a cloverleaf has any meaning in Japanese mythology - and one with only 3 petals??). Since the plane was found in Chofu after the war it might even have been applied by some creative GI (my personal hunch). In a couple of publications there are profiles of this Hien, depicted as either a Ki-61-I Otsu or Tei (with the longer forward fuselage), in one book even as both... The yellow color of the Sentai symbol is also not confirmed (an assumption because Ichikawa was the CO of 3rd Chutai). Since it has the late-war topside olive-brown camouflage, a Tei is more likely. In short, I would keep my fingers off this (not very typical) Hien."

 

James Gallagher is very specific about the colours on the aircraft and the full page photo reveal's more information.  Their is also a side view drawing of the plane.  He describes as ""Chocolate bar" brown all over, and possessing brilliant red Hinomarus and, most remarkably, a large "Kelly-green" shamrock painted on both sides.  This bright-of -greens shamrock was bordered in white and located in front of the national markings on the sides of the plane.  The vertical tail surfaces had the insignia of the 244th Sentai painted in white, and a five inch band of white around the fuselage in front of the tail surfaces."

 

Looking at this photo, I see the wings have heavy scuffing marks from a lot of pilot use.  The kill marking marking are worn to varying degrees even showing some chipping and slight variation(doesn't look faked by some American soldier carrying 5 cans of paint and 5 brushes in his pockets).  The fuselage gun opening are covered. (maybe guns removed to save weight.  Their is even some paint touch-up of the brown on sides which varies in age.  

James said this airplane ". . . stands foremost in my memory - - -. . . " I think that he sounds like he knows what he talking about as he was there. Yes the back of the plane  with the shamrock is fuzzy but in his drawing he shows the shamrock etc quite clearly.  Like many photographer back them he probably keep notes.  This is his first hand evidence which could be used in court, not opinion.  James used a old camera retrieved from his family's attic as his good camera got lost a crash landing a the Pacific. 

 

Meatballs and Dead Birds, 1972, Jon-Jay,Perry Hall, Md

 

The 1972 hardback printing has better paper and clearer photos than the cheaper recent paperback reprint. Steve

[fastterry]

I rest my case your honour.

TRF

[spitfire]

Fascinating discussions, my usual brief checking in on Britmodeller turned into a long read through of my "Broken Wings of the Samurai" !!

 

Cheers

 

Dennis

[Graham Boak]

I'm not sure I can picture a Guinness-swilling break-dancing Samurai painting a shamrock onto the side of his Hien, as easily as I can picture a US photographer lacking knowledge of Japanese plants and iconography mistaking an appropriately Japanese leaf design for that of a Shamrock.  Maybe that's just me.  However I have seen a sketch of what it could have been, had this been the case, and it seemed to fit the unclear photo rather better.  But then it would, wouldn't it?

[Denford]

Or it could have been the mount of one of the select group of Japanese Irishmen who served in the IJAF.  The names Sean Yamaguchi, Hideo Murphy and Brendan Takahashi come to mind.....

[Blimpyboy]

I wonder if the shamrock marking, if real, was a hybrid.

 

Could it have been a case of bored US servicemen colouring in an existing Japanese trefoil leaf marking, mistaking it for a shamrock?

Edited January 16, 2021 by Blimpyboy

[Steve190]

FastTerry said:

Quote

rest my case your honour.TRF

 

Nice guess, Paralegal degree.  I do look for original source material and not conjecture or hearsay evidence. 

BlimpyBoy Said-

Quote

 

"wonder if the shamrock marking, if real, was a hybrid.

 

Could it have been a case of bored US servicemen colouring in an existing Japanese trefoil leaf marking, mistaking it for a shamrock?"

 

As I said, that bored US serviceman would be dragging around five cans of paint.  The kill markings are said to be painted by him to, although they are weathered in varying degrees as the fuselage itself being touched up. There are about 200 varieties of Asian clover including the Japanese clover, I have some in my backyard. 

 

There is a Samurai Sword edge named after the Japanese Bush-Clover.

 

chōji midare (丁子乱れ?, "clove disorder") - an irregular hamon pattern resembling cloves, with a round upper part and a narrow constricted lower part.[7]

 

juka chōji (重化丁子?, "double clove") - multiple overlapping clove shaped chōji midare patterns

 

https://military.wikia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_Japanese_swords

 

Denford said-

Quote

Or it could have been the mount of one of the select group of Japanese Irishmen who served in the IJAF.  The names Sean Yamaguchi, Hideo Murphy and Brendan Takahashi come to mind.....

I guess that like saying Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto was a Christian because he carried in New Testament with him.  Clover has been in Japanese culture for hundreds of years.  It is not inclusively Irish.  Although I found it incredible that Japan has had a Tokyo St.Patrick’s Day Parade for the last 25 years.  Dig those Japanese bagpipes:

 

 

Steve

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Blimpyboy]

On 1/22/2021 at 6:58 AM, Steve190 said:

bored US serviceman would be dragging around five cans of paint

 

I was thinking more along the lines of going back to the workshop and getting paint before wandering back to the derelict, to pretty it up!

 

I agree that most soldiers, sailors and airmen/women (and let's not forget Marines) probably don't carry paint around on them, but in my experience, they will go to great lengths to scrounge whatever's needed, to do whatever it is they want to do to alleviate boredom.

There's precious little that personnel confined to a garrison post won't get up to, to pass the time - legitimate or otherwise - especially in places that are hard to get to!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Japanese celebration of St. Patrick's day is easy: originally a cross-cultural activity, it has morphed, (just like the curious celebration of Hallowe'en, Christmas, etc.) into a mix of commercialism, novelty, dressing up, and generally an excuse to have loads o' fun!

 

 

Having said all that, I'm still in the dark with the Ki-61's decoration (let alone colours)...

 

 

P.S. I know it's a bit of subject creep, but for the heraldically-inclined, here are some interesting sites discussing the Katabami crest:

http://www.kunin-jj.org/katabami-history.html

and

https://tanuki2016.com/2016/06/17/first-blog-post/

 

Edited January 23, 2021 by Blimpyboy

[Graham Boak]

As the examples above show, there's little safe from a bored squaddie.  However, of all the possible variety available, a single well-executed shamrock does seem unlikely.

 

From the description of St. Patrick's Day, why pick on the Japanese?