im more inclined to the type 10 cuz its a connection similar to a spot where a sight mast would be added, not enough for a sight but for the mast itself, something similar to this
2 Likes
How old is the CCV in comparison with the type 10 sight?
It says the CCV started in 2007 so they should not be too far apart
1 Like
Ah, I see. Thank you, everyone, for replying. I went back through some of the sources and found this:
事業のうち性能確認試験の実施に当たり、画像処理装置等に既存品を活用することにより、コストの低減を図った。
Is that enough to work with? I was also wondering if I should consider adding the reconnaissance mast as well. I’m not sure it it was mounted along with the turret.
Source: 近接戦闘車用機関砲システムの研究, [資料], 別紙1.
Source: 近接戦闘車用機関砲システムの研究, [資料], 別紙2.
4 Likes
The Ho-Ri II’s gun angles are +20 degrees in elevation, -10 degrees in depression, and 11 degrees of traverse to each side. These values take into account the extended roof of the fighting compartment.
The Japanese Army did, in fact, develop a smoke shell alongside the Type 1 37mm tank gun in 1941, though it was never adopted. The shell was designated the Experimental Type 1 Smoke Shell (試製一式発煙弾). However, I’m a bit skeptical of the claim that the secondary gun on the Ho-Ri or Chi-Ri was primarily intended for launching smoke shells. There is a considerable time gap—about two years—between the development of the smoke shell and the decision to mount a secondary gun in 1943. Furthermore, it’s uncertain whether there were any additional requirements for this experimental shell after that decision.
The common explanation for the purpose of the 37mm secondary gun is that it served as a supplementary weapon to eliminate targets that were either too tricky or unnecessary for the main gun. Personally, I think it had multiple purposes.
[Photo of Experimental Type 1 Smoke Shell]
As for the sloped armor design, I don’t think there’s enough proof to say it was dropped just because of the secondary gun. It’s not even clear whether that design existed before they added the secondary gun. The idea that the sloped armor was part of the early Ho-Ri design is generally based on the assumption that the Ho-Ri II represents the final form of the vehicle, and that all other versions preceded it. However, in reality, design reviews for the Ho-Ri appear to have continued even after its armor plates — likely for the Ho-Ri II — were delivered in 1944, and went on until just before the end of the war. I’ve spent quite a bit of time researching the sloped armor Ho-Ri, but I still haven’t found a source that clearly says when the design first came about.
6 Likes
What about the radar instead?
6 Likes
I doubt it would be mounted with the turret, it would be inconvenient
1 Like
Also its close combat vehicle, not a reconnaissance, so i dont think it should have it
And its a cool concept and all but it getting on the way of the gun on the RCV (P) its annoying haha
1 Like
Unfortunately, the CV-40AAG was proposed but not pursued at the the time. At least we know the adjustable fragmentation round was developed.
For what i remember when the M6A1E2 came out, one of gaijins rules its that if the parts existed and it was planned to be, then its fair game
Im not good investigating this things but the spaa version its pretty much just the CCV with the type 87 radar isnt it?, also the adjustable fragmentation rounds need the radar to adjust the time fuze in real time for a target before shooting doesnt it? Or can optical tracking do the same?
I could be saying nonsence, I dont really know, but if theres a chance to get the spaa version too then that would be amazing
1 Like
I have some docs on it
Whether it’s useful or not idk
I’ll tell you what tho
I’ll trade you docs for a more fair and accurate representation of the type 10.🤣🤣🤣 I’m jk we all know that won’t be happening
Also sorry guys video has been delayed. It’s taken a lot longer than I predicted to actually get everything up and running on the PC and it’s taking a lot of work as well. Remain patient my friends
1 Like
And we all know it won’t happen becuase your documents and reports is just mess of auto translations with total conclusion “trust me bro”
3 Likes
Hey if you wish to pay a translator for me then have at it. That argument only works if you’re the type of guy offering the cash up for someone to do that
It called Google translator with clear clippings and conclusions based on information, rather than a clean machine document without text that doesn’t make sense…
1 Like
We already translated as such. Machines are just as accurate as google translate
Again your argument only works if YOU are willing to spend the minimum 1,250USD to have them translated
Btw there’s over 1,000 pages which I can tell you easily exceeds 15,000 words. If you want to pay me for those professional services I’d be more than happy to go get those documents officially translated by a comps offering those services
I think you don’t understand the main problem with not the missing of full document translation but with missing normally made report
1 Like
We aren’t missing the full document
Are there documents missing???
Yes
But the documents we do have our complete in their entirety and aren’t missing anything
Tbh, if you choose, then the long Type 10 is better
7 Likes
instead of having a go at the guy wait for him to produce the video to convey what he was stating clearly
Unfortunately, based on previous reports I am highly doubt that this video will be really informative and show issue with the source prooving that it is wrong
1 Like