Jump to content


Photo

Japanese tanks


  • Please log in to reply
194 replies to this topic

#1 Kentucky-roughrider

Kentucky-roughrider

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 321 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:western Kentucky
  • Interests:Hunting, military history, horses ,and reading<br />

Posted 19 October 2011 - 2212 PM

Is the Type 10 MBT a replacement for the older Type 90, or a tank soledesigned to go into areas that the type 90 is too big and heavy to go? I have heard both stories.

#2 pikachu

pikachu

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,887 posts

Posted 20 October 2011 - 0050 AM

Is the Type 10 MBT a replacement for the older Type 90, or a tank soledesigned to go into areas that the type 90 is too big and heavy to go? I have heard both stories.


It's 10 million bucks a pop, so while intended as the former, it'll likely end up as the latter. Kinda like the F-22 and F-15. Actually, the Type-90's basic weight is 50.2 tons vs. the Type-10's 46-48 tons, so anywhere the -10 can go the -90 should also be able to. The real advantage of the Type-10 over the -90 is that it's better optimized for MOUT, which is the most likely form of combat in heavily urbanized Japan. The newer tank is much more compact and maneuverable, and boasts much better all-around protection.

#3 Lampshade111

Lampshade111

    Armchair Admiral

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,082 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 20 October 2011 - 0107 AM

But does it turn into a mech?

#4 pikachu

pikachu

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,887 posts

Posted 20 October 2011 - 0109 AM

But does it turn into a mech?


Not YET! :lol:

Tomas, your call.

#5 Tomas Hoting

Tomas Hoting

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,693 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nuremberg, Germany
  • Interests:General Military
    History
    Politics

Posted 20 October 2011 - 0110 AM

The Type 10 replaces the older Type 74 tanks.

#6 Archie Pellagio

Archie Pellagio

    Now flouridating a water source near YOU!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,224 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Montpelier, Vermont
  • Interests:Vermonter global conquest rampages!

Posted 20 October 2011 - 0235 AM

What was the logic behind a completely new design?
The Type 90 is broadly equivalent to the Leo2/M1/Challenger2 western tanks right?
Why not continue production of those rather than a whole new tank?

Especially for a country like Japan who, unless I've missed something, probably isn't be staging any armoured thrusts in the near future.

Just jobs for the boys?

#7 Corinthian

Corinthian

    Stone Age Bitter Delusional Retard

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,044 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Peek-a-boo, I'm behind you.
  • Interests:Wholesome stuff.

Posted 20 October 2011 - 0308 AM

Wow. I'm waaaaaaaaaaaaaay behind the curve apparently. Didn't realize their new MBT had a "name" already. I still thought it was a T-X prototype.

So, full scale production already? How many units per month?


Edit:

For some odd reason, it looks and at the same time doesn't look like 40+ tons -

Posted Image

Edited by TomasCTT, 20 October 2011 - 0318 AM.


#8 Corinthian

Corinthian

    Stone Age Bitter Delusional Retard

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,044 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Peek-a-boo, I'm behind you.
  • Interests:Wholesome stuff.

Posted 20 October 2011 - 0319 AM

What was the logic behind a completely new design?
The Type 90 is broadly equivalent to the Leo2/M1/Challenger2 western tanks right?
Why not continue production of those rather than a whole new tank?

Especially for a country like Japan who, unless I've missed something, probably isn't be staging any armoured thrusts in the near future.

Just jobs for the boys?


You forgot Fukushima and giant earthquake which, together, produce city-destroying monster lizards with radioactive-fresh breath.

Edited by TomasCTT, 20 October 2011 - 0322 AM.


#9 pikachu

pikachu

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,887 posts

Posted 20 October 2011 - 0540 AM

What was the logic behind a completely new design?
The Type 90 is broadly equivalent to the Leo2/M1/Challenger2 western tanks right?
Why not continue production of those rather than a whole new tank?

Especially for a country like Japan who, unless I've missed something, probably isn't be staging any armoured thrusts in the near future.

Just jobs for the boys?


Because they want better.

It's also PRECISELY because the posture of the SDF is politically defensive-only that they need a MOUT tank. Any defensive action happening on Japanese soil is very likely to start in the major urban centers that dot the coastline. Nobody is going to start a Japanese invasion by climbing up mount Fuji (which is where the bulk of the Honshu tank fleet is assigned) or rampaging through Hokkaido (which is where the rest are). The Type-90 is deemed unsuitable for deployment into urban terrain because of several factors. MOUT experience in ROW over the past two decades indicate a requirement for increased side protection and better turning ability for tanks engaged in this type of combat. In particular, the Type-90's relatively long hull makes it totally unsuitable for maneuvering in Japan's cramped cities. For this reason the majority of the Type-90 tanks have been deployed around Mount Fuji and in Hokkaido, where maneuvering space is not so scarce.

The Type-10 tank is made with a shorter hull (almost 1 m shorter) able to turn 360 degrees on its centroid axis to alleviate some of the shortcomings (from the Japanese perspective) of its predecessor. The turret side armor has been beefed up significantly and the sponsons fitted for installation of modular armor (as yet in development). The TC's TI periscope is placed higher up than in the Type-90 and has wider viewing angle and increased depression/elevation. It can now see very close to the sides of the tank, something not doable by its predecessor. There were plans for some sort of RWS, but I haven't seen them fitted.

Also, while it is true that the Type-10 is replacing Type-74s in the ORBAT proper, in theory it was the Type-90 that was intended to replace the entire stock of Types 61 and 74. However, the production and replacement program was delayed by budgetary problems and now that a successor has appeared, it makes more sense to replace the older tanks with the Type-10 instead. Both tanks will serve together for a long time to come because, as you yourself pointed out, there's nothing inherently wrong with the Type-90. It's already up to par (if not better in some aspects) with the current generation of Western tanks.

#10 demosthenes

demosthenes

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 621 posts

Posted 21 October 2011 - 0823 AM

Posted Image

JM33 and JM12A1

I know they license produce their rounds, but do the Japanese have an active R&D capability?

Edited by demosthenes, 22 October 2011 - 0945 AM.


#11 swerve

swerve

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,779 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Reading, Berkshire
  • Interests:Too many to list all, but include military, economic &technological history. And cycling.

Posted 21 October 2011 - 0948 AM

...Nobody is going to start a Japanese invasion by climbing up mount Fuji (which is where the bulk of the Honshu tank fleet is assigned) or rampaging through Hokkaido (which is where the rest are).

Deployment in Hokkaido is because for many years that was exactly where an invasion was deemed most likely. It's just a short hop from Russia.

Tanks elsewhere are just for training.

Type 10 could be a reaction to a perceived change in threat. The Red Army storming south down the island chain is no longer considered the main danger.

From the videos, the Type 10 looks very manoeuverable.

Edited by swerve, 21 October 2011 - 0950 AM.


#12 chino

chino

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,005 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Now in Macau
  • Interests:S2 Branch & Rifle Platoon Runner

Posted 21 October 2011 - 1347 PM

Japan seems to want to keep their weapon building technology tip top - even though it is extremely costly building for local consumption only. There may come a day they decide to expand their military, and do not want to be hindered by outside interference.

#13 Kentucky-roughrider

Kentucky-roughrider

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 321 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:western Kentucky
  • Interests:Hunting, military history, horses ,and reading<br />

Posted 25 October 2011 - 1936 PM

Could this new design plus the loosening of the export laws mean that they could be wanting to sell this tank to nations such as the Philippines (assuming they could afford them), South Korea for their Marine Corp (replacing their M47's assuming they are still in serve which I doubt they will) and other counties with needs like them and can pay for them?

#14 tankerwanabe

tankerwanabe

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,504 posts

Posted 25 October 2011 - 2054 PM

Could this new design plus the loosening of the export laws mean that they could be wanting to sell this tank to nations such as the Philippines (assuming they could afford them), South Korea for their Marine Corp (replacing their M47's assuming they are still in serve which I doubt they will) and other counties with needs like them and can pay for them?


The Philipines are probably looking to upgrade their airforce and navy first considering that they're an island nation. And the S. Koreans will more likey transfer their K1 to their Marine Corps than purchase from the Japanese.

I'm guessing that what the world wants is their ASEA radar kits. Albeit they've had innitial teething issues, the Japanese have been in the game for a long time and have tons of experience with that techonology. That and other electronics is what the Japanese have an advantage in.

Not necessary a full weapons system, which may be prohibatively expensive anyways. But key components, which are affordable and can bridge the technology gap.

#15 Guest_JamesG123_*

Guest_JamesG123_*
  • Guests

Posted 25 October 2011 - 2100 PM

such as the Philippines (assuming they could afford them)

They can't.

South Korea



The Koreans would sooner buy Chinese AFVs than Japanese.

and other counties with needs like them and can pay for them?


There is still a glut of low mile Leo2s, and the PRC and Assorted Former Soviets will sell to just about anyone. While their tanks are no doubt spiffy and advanced, they are also unproven in combat not to mention even the almost as bad international purchase trials. I cannot see how the Japanese could be competitive on the MBT market.

#16 Archie Pellagio

Archie Pellagio

    Now flouridating a water source near YOU!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,224 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Montpelier, Vermont
  • Interests:Vermonter global conquest rampages!

Posted 25 October 2011 - 2333 PM

South Korea for their Marine Corp (replacing their M47's assuming they are still in serve which I doubt they will) and other counties with needs like them and can pay for them?


Why? The Koreans already produce their own MBT's - the K2 is about 55t so comparable in size too.
They could always transfer over K1's as well.

The Koreans would sooner buy Chinese AFVs than Japanese.


Well they already operate T80U's so why not? :lol:

#17 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,636 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:33.8369/-84.2675
  • Interests:WWII Armor, Ferrets, Dingos, Humbers, etc...

Posted 26 October 2011 - 0109 AM

What are the external fittings for sensors? Any rear facing cameras for the driver? The video I found showed the driver very accurately running back over the path he drove over to begin with.

#18 pikachu

pikachu

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,887 posts

Posted 26 October 2011 - 0130 AM

What are the external fittings for sensors? Any rear facing cameras for the driver? The video I found showed the driver very accurately running back over the path he drove over to begin with.


It's got both front and rear cameras, a few side-looking cameras on the turret, and apparently some sort of electronic driver aid of undisclosed nature. This tank is built for maximum situational awareness in a locked-down posture.

#19 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,636 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:33.8369/-84.2675
  • Interests:WWII Armor, Ferrets, Dingos, Humbers, etc...

Posted 26 October 2011 - 0157 AM

It's got both front and rear cameras, a few side-looking cameras on the turret, and apparently some sort of electronic driver aid of undisclosed nature. This tank is built for maximum situational awareness in a locked-down posture.


That's one of the things I've pondered for years, starting out as a kid looking at tanks and pondering external views and of course Japanese giant robot concepts. A surrounding view by LCD panels with interferometry combining multiple camera inputs seems like something almost possible with current tech.

#20 Corinthian

Corinthian

    Stone Age Bitter Delusional Retard

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,044 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Peek-a-boo, I'm behind you.
  • Interests:Wholesome stuff.

Posted 26 October 2011 - 0206 AM

The Philipines are probably looking to upgrade their airforce and navy first considering that they're an island nation. And the S. Koreans will more likey transfer their K1 to their Marine Corps than purchase from the Japanese.

I'm guessing that what the world wants is their ASEA radar kits. Albeit they've had innitial teething issues, the Japanese have been in the game for a long time and have tons of experience with that techonology. That and other electronics is what the Japanese have an advantage in.

Not necessary a full weapons system, which may be prohibatively expensive anyways. But key components, which are affordable and can bridge the technology gap.


What James said. We can't afford it. But if we could, you'll be best advised to put your money in congress giving a huge chunk of the budget to the army. The army takes the biggest slice in any philippine military budget, which is why our air force and navy are crap.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users