Possibly did exist.🤷♀️
How about start getting information about it’s mounting how it looked did anything else change did the ammo stowage change.
Because we know literally nothing apart from maybe just maybe 4 were given a 8.8
Do you have any that say it was intended to mount the 105? Iirc that was mainly just post-war misconceptions, the same way that the different weight versions likely just come from the prototype missing the weight of the turrets that were never mounted.
I know its called out somewhere that it was specifically going to be built to mount the Type 92 105.
Which was the field gun that was later developed into the gun that was going to be on the Ho-Ri.
1 Like
Probably would have quite a slow reload in game because its a Screw breach gun.
and normally those are slower to reload than Falling block breaches. See the M3 GMC (the half track one)
Hey i found a picture of the FV1201 pulling around the trailer without the gun on it, so thats cool.
Closest I could find was post war reports where Mitsubishi engineers made some confusing claims about the O-I, which don’t match actual documentation on the tank like lower armor, a higher top speed and a claim from Tomio Hara it used a “10cm cannon”.*
*
I don’t actually own Tomio Hara’s book, so this is only from others only citing it. There might be more information or context here that I don’t have. If anyone here does have it, images of the relevant pages would be appreciated
It also might be worth noting that it seems Tomio Hara was not part of the design team for the O-I, and only was there for testing at the Sagami Arsenal.
This could just be mainly misremembering, and confusing it with other projects. For example I believe that a part of this might come from SPG conversions of two of the Type 95 Heavy Tank chassis that were also done by Mitsubishi, which both mounted 105mm cannons.
One of the Type 95 based SPGs, a second one was also made with a rear-mounted enclosed casemate but no known images remain.
It’s also possible that there was different designs made during development, and potentially even improved designs after prototyping that never came to be as the project was cancelled. This can also be seen with the development of the Maus for example, which initially called for lower weight, different armor and different armament as well, and past the original production, despite not even having entered service, there was still plans for an improved “Maus II” design.
Porsche Type 205A design for the project, which had a lower weight of 150t (compared to final 188t) and 150mm cannon (compared to final 127mm). This also wasn’t the first known design of the project.
But generally I’d say unless there is a proper way to sort in these statements we should just rely on the written contemporary sources. This is easier said than done of course, but even FineMolds who currently own a lot of the known documentation including the blueprints for the prototype came to the conclusion that the complete O-I would be a 150t tank mounting a 150mm cannon.
For now we can only hope that more of that information is released
1 Like
But isn’t a smaller gun more of a downgrade? Sure you get a quicker reload, but worse pen and explosive filler. On the other hand, a Jagdtiger 88 matches previous Battlepass entries like the downgunned Object 248.
It’s almost like they used (or intended to use) those trailers for other things as well
The 88s reload time is less than half of the 128s and the APHE still has a decent amount of pen
For harder targets you do get APCR
I wouldn’t call that a downgrade, but rather a sidegrade
On 90% of targets you meet, you will be shooting the same weak spots anyway. Tutels? Cupola. US T-series? Lower front plate corners and MG port, plus a few turret weak spots that vary depending on the model. IS-3? Driver port. IS-4? Driver hatch or middle of lower front plate. Somua? Turret. Etc etc.
The only target you’re really going to lose out against is the IS-3, because the 128mm can pen the commander bulge/cheek and the 88mm cannot. But you can still shoot the driver port, and with over twice the RoF of the 128, your mistakes are forgiven much more easily.
That said, I would still prefer a Jagdtiger Sla instead. The mobility nerf has absolutely kneecapped the original JT imho. It is much more affected than the Tiger IIs which are still very meta.
2 Likes
I hope we can get a high engine power prop or turboprop maybe.I like those HorsePower monster too much!!!
Just buy the wyvern or a2d atp
I have them,and i want more
I mean tbh they all play roughly the same
Understandable,but i think there are many prototypes canceled cuz their high horsepower engine research failed,so there may have some plane not only can climb and rush?
I don’t think there are any turboprops that would be interesting enough to be DCT vehicles
More turboprops like the Trent Meteor would be cool to see either way tho
Or this Chinese IL-10 with a turboprop
well,i want the turboprop IL-10 too much.And other plane has a engine with more than 24 cylinders would be nice too
But we know The only OI prototype that was built, was the 100T prototype, thats what the surviving track link is supposedly from.
And that 100 ton prototype is what Gaijin would be adding.
faster reload, smaller gun that would provide much better firing angles due to the breach not hitting the internals of the tank, very similar pen, Plus its just cool
1 Like
