Jump to content

Ive stumbled accross this obscure Japanese SPG design a few times already, this one seems to have some background known and many ppl assure (somehow) it existed, this SPG is apparently known as the Type 5 Chi-Ru.

 

From Ive seen, it is a Type 5 Chi-Ri chassis with its secondary 37mm gun taken out, its turret and main gun were replaced by a mount of two Type 89 127mm AA cannons, which wouldve been placed inside an enlarged turret (as seen in the lower depiction), to deal with the weight increase, a liscenced built BMW 800 CV diesel engine was to be installed. The double 127mm AA cannon mount was meant to engage both ground and air targets, probably against bombers which where raiding many Japanese cities at the time.

 

 

127X2.jpg

 

 

 

According to these sources only one prototype was built in August 1945, with only its enlarged turret remaining unfinnished, however it was either destroyed in a bombing raid or dismantled after the war.

 

What do you think, could it have been built or were there plans for it? These are some of the sources I found about it, although they are moslty Japanese and Russian:

 

https://forum.warthunder.ru/index.php?/topic/206141-type-5-ho-ri/&

 

http://www.warbirds.jp/kakuki/kyosaku/15sya/chiru.html

 

http://mihalchuk-1974.livejournal.com/574807.html

 

http://tank2.ru/country/japan/samhodust/chirusau

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by kikiri
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Mai_Waffentrager said:

Its from an alternate history website. 

:D :facepalm: :D..... But the tree looks really neat, and Japan needs more TDs.... Japan needs more tanks and ground attack aircraft in general, though the army and naval fighters are pretty well represented. I don't think those Chi-Ri based TDs will be implemented much but the others seem sound and "Warthunder worthy" though what "worthy" is defined as is up for a significant debate as the rules seem to switch between nations.... there goes the salt again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, xX_Lord_James_Xx said:

I don't think those Chi-Ri based TDs will be implemented much but the others seem sound and "Warthunder worthy" though what "worthy" is defined as is up for a significant debate as the rules seem to switch between nations.... there goes the salt again.

Why not ? The Ho-Ri III seems pretty "worthy" to me, judging from what I know about it.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, xX_Lord_James_Xx said:

:D :facepalm: :D..... But the tree looks really neat, and Japan needs more TDs.... Japan needs more tanks and ground attack aircraft in general, though the army and naval fighters are pretty well represented. I don't think those Chi-Ri based TDs will be implemented much but the others seem sound and "Warthunder worthy" though what "worthy" is defined as is up for a significant debate as the rules seem to switch between nations.... there goes the salt again.


both of the ho ri´s are well suited and should be ingame

Edited by hatorihina

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Mai_Waffentrager said:

Its from an alternate history website. 

 

lol bummer, a lot of ppl seem to be taking this vehicle seriously though (fell for it too), not sure if someone should warn them :p:

Edited by kikiri
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, *AllahHuAirlines said:

The Ho-Ri I & III are vital to Japanese lineups. If Gaijin doesn't plan on adding them, it just shows how little they care about Japan. 

Probably because they're a Russian company and Russia & Japan don't have the best history together. 

 

Lets remember that today Japan wants part of its Kurill Islands back, thats why there isnt a ww2 peace treaty signed. Russia and Japan have been negotiating this now, which has caused a lot of controversy in Russia, with many ppl and hardcore nationalists often protesting and even callingn Putin a traitor. A lot of ppl have also been buying terrains in the Kurils and repopulating the area as a way to claim them. In conclusion, the Gaijin devs might be part of this group. :)

Edited by kikiri
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, kikiri said:

In conclusion, the Gaijin devs might be part of this group. :)

 

I'm not sure if the devs would be a part of this group, but the Russian playerbase are actually listened to and fixing the Japanese AF & GF trees and adding more tanks would definitely provoke outcry on the RU forums, if Japan really is hated that much by Russian Nationalists for wanting some islands back. 

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, *AllahHuAirlines said:

 

I'm not sure if the devs would be a part of this group, but the Russian playerbase are actually listened to and fixing the Japanese AF & GF trees and adding more tanks would definitely provoke outcry on the RU forums, if Japan really is hated that much by Russian Nationalists for wanting some islands back. 

 

Lol who knows, but its a rlly hot topic among part of its population and media, more than one might think. Although its obvious that one of Gaijin's main priorities is in pleasing the Russian playerbase (lets not get further offtopic before some banning approaches).

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, IronVader501 said:

Why not ? The Ho-Ri III seems pretty "worthy" to me, judging from what I know about it.

So is the He 177 and Bf 110 G models.... but they're not here yet... and hell, for more salt, lets put in the Ki 109 as needed for Japan and the Type 60 SSRG with ATGM instead of that laughable APC they have at top tier, wouldn't those be "worthy" too? That's my point, "worthy" varies between the nations, look how USSR has the damned T-44-100, of which only 1 was prototyped.

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, xX_Lord_James_Xx said:

So is the He 177 and Bf 110 G models.... but they're not here yet... and hell, for more salt, lets put in the Ki 109 as needed for Japan and the Type 60 SSRG with ATGM instead of that laughable APC they have at top tier, wouldn't those be "worthy" too? That's my point, "worthy" varies between the nations, look how USSR has the damned T-44-100, of which only 1 was prototyped.

 

Ki-93-Ib Otsu would also be a worthy ground attacker. Like the Ki-109. it uses the Ho-501 (adapted Type88 AA gun, appears to be autoloading) as well, but on a faster, more maneuverable "heavy fighter"-like aircraft. It was apparently completed very late in the war as the second Ki-93 prototype, but never saw testing, and was lost after the war (likely scrapped).

 

Here is the first prototype Ki-93-Ia, which instead had a 57mm Ho-402 and 2x Ho-5 20mms.

Ki93-2ndPrototype-12less10.thumb.jpg.055

Edited by ARADO_AKBAR
  • Upvote 5
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive been doing some quick research on the Type 89 IFV and its armour actually seems to be made out of RHA welded steel, with a thin alluminium alloy layer attached, similar to the armour used in the Type 73 APC. Although the Type 89 IFV can also have reactive armour attached on some areas, these are latter optional upgrades. With this in mind, Im not actually sure if this vehicle would fall outside of the technology restrictions given by Gaijin, in which case it could be a good top tier SPG vehicles since appart from its 35mm cannon, it can also fire two Type 79 guided missiles.

 

Spoiler

1280px-JGSDF_IFV_Type_89_20121021-01.JPG

 

What do you think, could this alluminium plate be considered a technology restriction? Arent there other ground vehicles in warthunder that already have alluminium platings attached?

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, kikiri said:

Ive been doing some quick research on the Type 89 IFV and its armour actually seems to be made out of RHA welded steel, with a thin alluminium alloy layer attached, similar to the armour used in the Type 73 APC. Although the Type 89 IFV can also have reactive armour attached on some areas, these are latter optional upgrades. With this in mind, Im not actually sure if this vehicle would fall outside of the technology restrictions given by Gaijin, in which case it could be a good top tier SPG vehicles since appart from its 35mm cannon, it can also fire two Type 79 guided missiles.

 

  Reveal hidden contents

1280px-JGSDF_IFV_Type_89_20121021-01.JPG

 

What do you think, could this alluminium plate be considered a technology restriction? Arent there other ground vehicles in warthunder that already have alluminium platings attached?

It's outside the current technological restriction, unfortunately. I believe the M113 has an aluminum, or some other metal, plate on the front (I know its a different type of metal, cant remember which). And yes, it would be an AFV/ IFV and not an SPAA as that was not its intended role, though it could perform.

 

And I though Gaijin was working on reactive armor, I remember some leak saying reactive armor was coming for the M60, but I guess that's a long ways off.

 

Now lets get back on topic, Japanese missing TDs.

Edited by xX_Lord_James_Xx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

I found this interesting design of an SPG, couldnt find much more info about it but as seen on the following image, it is basically a Type 97 Chi-Ha chassis with a Type 5 105mm gun equipped on top. The tanks turret was removed and the 105mm gun was placed instead, facing backwards, a couple of armoured plates were placed on the sides for crew and ammo protection against small arms fire at least, along with an open top which could probably have a soft cover placed:

 

IrrP5qv.png.afbd053d591f43a90c101521f63e

 

 

According to these sources it is simply known as Type 97 105mm Heavy SPG, it was designed or built in 1945, same FHA armour as the Chi-Ha as well as its same 170hp diesel engine, with a total speed of around 31 km/h, and it had a crew of 6. Was this ever built or is there more info about it somewere? Hopefully this isnt another alternate war design. :D

 

http://baike.baidu.com/item/九七式105mm自走重加农炮/10767218?fromtitle=97式105mm自走重加农炮&fromid=6177702

 

http://www.360doc.com/content/16/0201/16/7536781_532112970.shtml

 

https://forum.warthunder.ru/index.php?/topic/167654-добавление-в-игру-наземной-техники-японии/&page=19

 

Edited by kikiri
  • Upvote 5
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

This is the last pair of TD designs that Ive stumbled while searching around, like some of the others, Ive seen these designs on a few occassions being presented and discussed with very little info or background in some websites and forums.

 

Spoiler

Chi_ri2td_plan.png

 

According to the descriptions found, these TDs are based on the Chi-Ri II chasis while having two proposed versions, the upper which looks like a Jagdpanther being the first and the second being the lower design that looks like a turtle (unfortunately I cant read the Japanese descriptions).

 

The armour would be of 75mm just like the slopey hull of the Chi-Ri II, while the armour of the upperstructure remains unclear, their main weapon would be the same Type 5 75mm gun, although whether these keep the autoloader or not isnt known either. It seems that both of these TD proposals remained as blueprints only.

 

 

http://dday.migeater.net/wiki/index.php?title=File:Chi_ri2td_plan.png

http://forum.worldoftanks.eu/index.php?/topic/135375-japanese-tank-tree-by-locomati/

 

 

  • Upvote 6
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could be decent TDs for 4.0. They could be implemented like the Pz 4/70 is, with one version in the regular tree and the other as a premium.

Given that there are 4 designs for 105mm-armed TDs and a design for a long 120mm-armed TD, I think it would be safe for one of these two to be premium (I like the look of the second one so it should be regular tree ;)).

Any idea on whether they were actually produced or just a cheaper design kept in reserve for getting the Type 5 75mm out into battle at the bitter end? 

  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, *AllahHuAirlines said:

Any idea on whether they were actually produced or just a cheaper design kept in reserve for getting the Type 5 75mm out into battle at the bitter end? 

 

Conceptuals prior to Ho-Ri. 

  • Upvote 6
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 5 weeks later...

Here I found a couple of other TD designs, the first one being according to the description a Type 94 TK tankette chassis equipped a Type 1 47mm gun and a gun shield installed. As seen on the image, the vehicle is facing backwards and has its main gun along with the gunshield placed at the rear:

 

 

USDKoPDLJ2s.jpg

 

Although it might also seem like the Type 97 Te-Ke, there are a few differences which distinguish it such as the placement of the escape tube and especially the engine which is placed at the front of the vehicle, allowing the gun crew to operate the TD easier in this case. As seen on the image, he drivers hatch is still placed in the middle of the vehicle, thus it is possible that the vehicle would be driven similar to the British Archer TD, since the driver would only have visibility towards the front.

 

The sketch of the tank seen on this image resembles the style of those made for other vehicles such as for the Ku-Se SPG, Ho-Chi SPG, So-To carrier, among others, so all these could come from the same source?

 

(late Type 94 TK tankette)

Spoiler

type_94_TK_late2_HD.jpg

 

(Type 94 TK from rear)

Spoiler

type-94-tankette.jpg

 

(Type 1 47mm gun)

Spoiler

47mmGun.jpg

 

  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Mai_Waffentrager said:

It is an error. The original drawing was to refer to the Type5 Ho-Ru. Using the Type95 Ha-Go chassis as the basis for mounting the Type1 47mm. 

 

7HyzYto.jpg

That could be a nice TD between the Ho-Ro and the Ho-Ni with a 1.7 - 2.0 BR with its small size you probably could ambush enemy like the ASU-85 57 (edit : silly me):p

Edited by Terriblours
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...