There were three groupings, known as the Special Type I, Type II and Type III.  (The groupings are also referred to by the name of the lead ship in each group, respectively:  Fubuki, Ayanami & Akatsuki classes.)  Each subsequent group saw incremental improvements in their main armament turrets, torpedo reload equipment, engine room arrangements, and command facilities. The final group of Type III ships was also intended to include twelve ships, similar to the earlier groups.  However, Japanese concerns about overt violation of their allotted destroyer tonnage under the naval disarmament treaties resulted in a reduction to only four Type III ships.

There were some obvious, physical changes between the Type IIIs and the earlier sisters. Improvements in boiler design lead to a reduction from four boilers in the earlier ships to three in the Akatsuki variant. One larger boiler replaced two in the forward boiler compartment, and those exhaust gases vented through a noticeably thinner forward funnel. Improvements to the air intakes for the boilers had already taken place with the final five Type II ships, and this change was carried over into the Type IIIs.  The torpedo tube mounts were enclosed by a weather and splinter proof shield, an improvement that was subsequently carried over to all of the earlier sisters during their mid 1930s refits. Finally, the secondary AA was relocated from a small platform in front of number two funnel to positions further aft that same funnel. 

The Type III ships were also designed and initially constructed with even larger bridges than the previous group. This was done by adding an additional upper lookout deck, which in turn, raised the height of the main rangefinder by one level.  A larger foremast followed suit. However, there were few corresponding changes to the hull to balance the additional weight, leading to a certain degree of inherent instability.

All these changes were part of a generalized trend in the IJN in the late 1920s and early 1930s toward adding additional armament and equipment on treaty limited hulls. This was a reflection of the mindset of the Naval General Staff which, given the overall and individual tonnage limitations of each ship type by treaty,  sought to maximize the qualitative superiority of each Japanese ship over a potential adversary. This trend toward top heavy ships was abruptly (and fortuitively) halted by a series of unfortunate incidents. In 1934, the torpedo boat Tomozuru capsized in a storm, and a year later, a typhoon damaged a large number of ships conducting realistic exercises whilst in the typhoon, both with a small loss of life. 

The design and hull structure of the entire fleet was called into question as a result. After a thorough investigation, the IJN embarked on a massive correction program, adding ballast, reinforcing hulls, and reconstructing some ships and classes in order to reduce their top weight. The Type IIIs fell into this last category.

All four ships underwent reconstruction between 1935 and 1937. Hull plating was reinforced with additional plating, and more ballast added, resulting in an increase in displacement from approximately 2000 to 2400 tons. Top speed fell slightly as a result. The bridge was reduced in height by two levels. An improved main fire control director was emplaced on top of the new bridge. The mast was reduced in size to that of the earlier Fubuki types. The main turrets were modified as well, with a lower profile to the gun layer’s position, a stiffening of the structure, and improved ventilation. It was in this revised configuration that all the sisters started the Pacific War. 

From the start of the Pacific war in December, 1941, she and her division supported operations and landings throughout Southeast Asia.  DesDiv 6 provided cover for Admiral Kondo’s Southern Main Force, escorting Japanese troopships for landing operations in the Malaya and the invasion of the Philippines, and continued to support operations throughout the Philippines and Southeast Asia to the end of March 1942. She returned to Japan in late March and received a refit in April at Yokosuka Naval Base, where she remained for the month.

DesDiv 6 was then assigned escort duties for the Aleutians Operation and invasion of Kiska in early June. In the aftermath of the successful taking of Kiska, US forces responded with available forces. USN PBYs repeatedly bombed Kiska harbor in the days following the invasion.  On June 12th, while exiting Kiska harbor for patrol duties, she incurred heavy damage about the bow from several near misses dropped by PBYs. At reduced speed she made her way home, stopping first at Ominato, where her damaged bow was truncated to a point just forward of number one mount and replaced with a temporary bow. She then continued on to Yokosuka for a full repair, which was completed by mid October, 1942 

For the next six months, she, along with other, assorted Fubuki sisters, was a primary escort for the CVEs Taiyo, Unyo & Chuyo, themselves providing air cover for convoys or conducting vital aircraft ferry missions.  Hibiki’s AA fit was upgraded with a twin 13mm AA mount in front of the bridge during a brief yard visit to Yokosuka in January, 1943. (That mount was further upgraded to a twin 25mm mount later on in the year.)

She was then assigned to patrol and escort duty in the Aleutians in May, serving there until August.  She was one of five destroyers involved in one of the successful evacuation runs of Kiska in early August, 1943. She then returned to Yokosuka for maintenance. Afterwards, she served in a convoy escort role for various troop, tanker, and fleet movements until April, 1944, when she reported to Kure NY for a substantial refit. There, her superimposed # 2 main turret was replaced by two triple 25mm AA mounts and their emplacements. Two additional such AA mounts were placed on a raised platform between #s 2 and 3 torpedo mounts, roll off depth charge racks were added at the stern, a Type 22 radar was placed on a revised foremast, and passive radar detectors were installed on the bridge.

Hibiki immediately resumed escort duty for critical tanker convoys in concert with Type III sister Inazuma. In mid May, she had to rescue 125 survivors from her sister, after Inazuma was torpedoed by USS Bonefish. In June, she was assigned as escort to the First Supply Force, the UNREP group supporting the First Mobile Fleet during the Battle of the Philippine Sea. The First and Second Supply Groups coalesced into one unit and retired after completing their refueling assignments. Hibiki’s subsequently suffered two dead in strafing attacks that followed a large US carrier based attack on the entire supply force late in the battle.  In that same attack, tankers Genyo and Seria Maru were sunk, and Hayasui damaged. 

More escorting for the critical tanker convoys ensued until late July, when Hibiki returned to Kure for repairs, the addition of additional single 25mm mounts throughout the ship, and the installation of a Type 22 radar on the mainmast. Following the completion of the yard visit, still more convoy escort duty ensued until September, when Hibiki incurred either mine or torpedo damage off Takao, Formosa. Her bow collapsed, and she entered Takao for makeshift repairs. Hibiki then proceeded to Yokosuka NY in mid November, where she underwent full repairs until the end of January, 1945. 

She remained in Japanese waters until the end of the war, performing escort duty until sustaining yet more mine damage at the end of March. Repaired at Kure, she acted as a guard ship for the remainder of the war. After the cessation of hostilities, she was demilitarized and pressed into service as a repatriation vessel.

Unfortunately, hogging issues with the kit hull, at least with the initial production runs, marred the release.  Since then, there have been reports of a fix that seems to have corrected the problem (corroborated by several modelers.) Some other issues, particularly with fit, have also surfaced, but overall, that kit now seems to have made good on the promise of a more proper Type I Fubuki in 1/700.

Yamashita has now expanded the Special Type offerings with a release of a Type III, nominally that of Hibiki. As with the Type I kits, neither Tamiya nor Pit-Road ever fully hit the mark with their Type III kits. The Tamiya version incorrectly utilized the same hull as its short forecastle Type I kit, resulting in a somewhat deformed looking version. There was also an improperly shaped aft deck house, excessive freeboard to the hull, and a lack of small details overall.

The Pit-Road Type III kit was better in these regards, but erred in making the base of the bridge too short in length by several millimeters. They also compromised on the shape of the funnel intakes to equip all of their Type II & Type III kits, but with a shape that serves none of them particularly well. And, their deck equipment layouts match the ships as originally built, not as they were refit and appeared during the Pacific War. The same as-built fit holds true for the main turrets supplied with those kits.

This new Type III kit successfully improves on all those points. Forecastle length and shape, funnel air intakes, decks, turrets, and bridge base appear all properly sized, scaled, and detailed for an early war Type III. The kit is molded in a light grey plastic with uniformly sharp detailing. It is a waterline version only; no full hull option is available.

While marketed as Hibiki, straight out of the box, this kit can be built as any of the four Type III ships (Akatsuki, Hibiki, Ikazuchi or Inazuma) after modernization. The fit out-of-the-box is immediate pre-war and early war fit through the end of 1942. The only missing component is a degaussing cable, which can be added with styrene strip, or with any number of PE offerings.  Additional modifications would be needed to build it into a late war version of Hibiki or Inazuma. Conversely, converting the kit to an as-built version would need some kit bashing to create the larger, higher bridge.  Bridge parts from the one of the Pit-Road kits, or possibly a Tamiya Type III kit, might conceivably work for such a conversion.
 

Unlike the Fubuki Type I kit that I reviewed previously, this hull lies completely flat!!! This is a very, very welcome change, and eliminates my biggest disappointment with the previous kit. The set-up of the hull upon the sprue is identical. All injection points come from underneath the hull from one sprue runner as before. The only difference that I can discern is that the plastic appears to be much more rigid in composition, making it easier to resist the hogging of the previous kit. (This is also likely the fix used for the newer Type I hulls.) 

Aside from the elimination of the hogging flaw, the other change is the extension of the upper hull that supports the rear portion of the longer forecastle deck typical of the Type IIs and IIIs.  Whereas the Pit-Road kits show obvious mold lines for the insertion of the additional length, this kit shows no such seams. It appears that Yamashita has created a new CAD and mold without changing anything else about the hull.  Many kudos to them for the extra effort. (Note: In this scale, the Type II/III forecastle is approximately 4 mm longer than a Type I forecastle.) 

Carried over from the previous kit is a minor issue; that the lower portion of the bow as it approaches the waterline is slightly erroneous in profile. The kit profile line enters the water in near vertical fashion when, in fact, it should show more of a curve as it enters the water. After having had some time to think about it, I think the curvature as it enters the waterline would have been better served by raising the onset of this curve just a hair higher on the bow. 

The profile can be easily corrected with some sanding, but doing so would create another problem, that of eliminating the raised hull plating lines that wraps around the bow. This would be technically more correct, as the plating at the bow wrapped around either side and showed no seam lines to either side for several inches on the real thing.  However, replicating that sort of detail would require a very clean and carefully delineation between the raised seams and the area around the bow. 

Unfortunately, my kit also had the slightest touch of a sinkhole to either side of the bow. This flaw has also been reported by other modelers. It can be filled with putty, but again, filling the seam will require sanding away some of the hull plating seam, and then resurrecting it after the fix.

The hull again scales out exceptionally well. The waterline length is now correct, as the profile issue is really limited to the area just immediately above the waterline. Hibiki’s particulars versus the scale and kit:
 

Overall Length:		118.41m/388.5’		1/700 OA length:		169.16mm		Kit OA length:		169mm
Waterline Length:		115.3m/378’		1/700 WL length:		164.7mm		Kit WL length:		164.7mm
Beam:		10.4m/34’1”		1/700 Beam:		14.85mm		Kit Beam:		15mm

          

Unlike the Type I kit, which molded the funnels as part of the superstructure housing that sat upon the main deck, these funnels have been molded separately.  They still sit atop hooded air intakes which are part of another sprue.  Given that two identical funnel have been molded, it’s a near certainty that a Type II release is pending.

The parts are sharply molded with good detail, including fine raised lines for grab rails and an incredibly small, tertiary vertical auxiliary pipe. I recall Fujimi having done the same thing for its 1/700 Kagero class kits, but these are more sharply rendered.  It’s a very nice detail.  On the other hand, Yamashita has carried over the effect of a subtly widened upper 1/3 portion to the funnel from the Type I kits, and this is erroneous. However, unless one is planning to sand off all the grab rails for more detailed PE parts, it’s just not worth correcting. 

Another feature repeated for this kit is the molding of the rearmost auxiliary funnel pipe to the funnel itself. Its representation is not as toy-like as with the Type I version, because this pipe is located closer to the flat middle of the funnel and doesn’t stick out as far. I still don’t understand why Yamashita chose to do this, but at least here, it’s barely noticeable. In the same vein, the piping for the steam whistles, and the whistles themselves, are also molded onto the funnel. These were so small that I think it entirely appropriate to mold them this way. 

The molded funnel grills are solid, but again, very sharply done. These are among the best looking of the solidly molded grills for a Japanese destroyer that I’ve come across in this scale. For those reluctant to install PE replacement grills, you’ll be satisfied with these kit versions.

It is beautifully detailed and scaled.  Metal treading and linoleum tie-downs cover the deck, with assorted hatches and equipment boxes. Torpedo trolley rails and mine rails are raised, but incredibly fine. The mine rails at the stern are parallel to the axis of the hull, and not splayed out as seen in the Pit-Road kits. There is a base for the aft deckhouse.

Again, everything is finely detailed and properly scaled. The torpedo bay access hatches are clearly defined and shaped, an aspect that is clearly lacking in the other companies’ kits. The mainmast is incredibly fine, maybe the truest to scale that I’ve seen in 1/700 for a Japanese destroyer, with molded on detail representing the maneuvering signal lights.  Like the foremast, it could probably support stretched sprue, but nothing more.   The motor launches are also scaled nicely, though somewhat devoid of detail.

The forecastle deck is extremely well done, showing the turtleback sides at the decks edge, the spurnwaters running to either side, the base site for # 1 mount, treaded deck plate around the anchor deck, bollards, boat chocks, molded on anchor chain, and linoleum tie-down strips. At first glance, it appears identical to the forecastle for the Type I kit, but the base for Turret #1 is shaped differently, and the end of the deck extends further aft then does the Type I deck. 

The compass bridge deck has its interior molded with pedestals for binoculars and the compass binnacle.  It does not have these on raised grating as did the Type I kit. That’s probably because, practically speaking, the footprint of this level for this kit is smaller than that of the Type I.  (It’s a certainty that the real thing had a raised wooden grating in this area.)  It will greatly aid anyone who looks to detail the interior of the bridge, particularly with open PE framing for bridge windows or, the clear plastic windows included with this kit. 

There are two small points that are admittedly nit-picking. Somewhat problematic is the shape of the covers to the side ventilation ports on the turret. Actually, that’s not entirely correct. The shapes are fine for #s 2 and 3 mount, but not correct for # 1 mount for all of the Type II and III ships, dating from about 1939 onwards. Those covered ports should be round and not rectangular.  In this regard, the NE-07 set has the edge because that set comes with two each of the number one turrets with circular ports, as well as two turrets with rectangular ports for the rear positions. 

Even more nit-picky is the inclusion of what appears to be a third stiffening bar on either side of the turret at the top.  This should come off.  Technically speaking, #s 2 and 3 turrets should not have stiffener bars at all, though I suppose you could argue the lines are possibly grab bars. They are really too thick for that, though. 

The Yamashita turret is also slightly larger than the NE-07 version, somewhere between 5 and 10% so.  In fact, I’d place it midway in size between the turrets of the NE-07 set, and those from the earlier Pit-Road equipment set #10, meant for IJN destroyers. I’m uncertain as to which is more correct as I don’t have a full set of measurements for the turret. Nitpicks aside, I think it’s a great looking turret.

For anyone who ever chiseled off the molded-on deck reels on the waterline kits and then wondered why all the better detailed replacements seemed so much larger, the answer is, because, until now, no one was willing, or able, to mold them small enough to be in scale with any reasonable detail. The same can be said of the mushroom vents.  I know it seems almost ridiculous for me to gush over this small sprue but, these pieces are fantastic.  Be forewarned; the carpet monster is waiting!”

To repeat what I wrote in the Type I review, the breakdown and detail of the torpedo tubes is on a par, if not superior, to the Fubuki class version issued by Pit-Road in its NE07 equipment set. In fact, the relief on the depth charge rack is superior to that of any of Pit-Road’s versions.  However, replacement by a photo etch version is still preferable, in my opinion.

Kit courtesy of my wallet, from Hobbylink Japan. I don’t think these are yet on sale in the US, but the cost at HLJ was approximately US$12.50, plus shipping