USA marine witnessing on Okinawa the mighty O-I moments before her catastrophic ammo cook off from a Bazooka hit
1 Like
It is the picture of Type 1 37mm AA yeah. I don’t remember was it license or copy but they adopted it and made like tens of them. Then decided to stop production for copying Bofors (but they started to produce Bofors only in 1945)
This gun later was planned to be used on Ta-Ha, but need to note that it wasn’t specially made for Ta-Ha. Firstly it was made as field AA
3 Likes
There is enough information, all I did not see was the internal mechanism of loading the gun, otherwise everything is there. There was nothing stopping the developers from turning half of the game’s fleet into fantasy (since most of the ships existed only conceptually on paper without accurate drawings and data). Somehow, the developers were able to add Ho-Ri and other paper tanks, many planes are also fiction (but nothing stopped the developers from setting them up the way they think), all modern tanks are also mostly fiction. Here, having a sufficient amount of data, the banal laziness of developers comes into effect, because there is nothing to copy the machine from and everything has to be done from scratch.
1 Like
There is not
What important information is missing?
1 Like
Everything about load system performance
Everything about FCS
Most about gun itself (only that it is 105mm)
Everything about crew number and location
We know really good about chassis - engine power (650hp if I remember correct), transmission type and its speed (it use HMT, same hydromechanical transmission type as Type 10) but it is only what we really know
And there is difference between what we know and what we may suppose based on poor guesses
2 Likes
the crew, layout, all this repeats the Type 89 and all this is in the information on the B78.
The L7 gun, shells are all like the Type 74.
What are you interested in electronics? There is no thermal sight, there is a rangefinder and stabilizer, that’s all.
automatic loader, yes, it is unknown, but what is the reload, what is the drive, what is the zoom of the sight, all these are balanced values and the developer adjusts them often for his own reasons.
1 Like
It is actually not so, there isn’t information about it
It is only supposed but likely
There is also zero information about it. You just imagined it
Only reload can be a balance value. Also info about autoloader include ammo storage place, ammo count and etc what is also unknown
The box on the right side of the barrel is the rangefinder. The optics of the thermal imager are not visible, it is logical to assume that it does not exist. The stabilizer was already on all tanks of that time, it is logical to assume that it should be.
look at the type89, it just “very reliably” showed the location of the modules. What’s different here? the engine is under the radiator grille, the driver is in front, the transmission is at the front rollers, the gunner and the commander are under the turret closer to the engine. That’s it, the modules are over.
Yes, yes, very funny. The zoom on the helicopters was not changed after the release of the new anti-aircraft vehicles. Over the years, these parameters have probably never changed on the Type 89 and Type 74, as well as on other tanks. even the range of capturing TV weapons is changed by the developer as he wants to match the realities of the game.
Developers invent entire battleships based on concepts. Here you can invent a couple of small details, the same Ho-Ri is unclear how the developers were born, but they came up with the same thing. Snail was able to come up with details for many tanks in the game and add them with less information, what’s the problem here? Conduct a detailed analysis, look for more information at the expense of Japanese employees and connections with the Japan Self-Defense Forces and just come up with a logical representation of this tank.
“rangefinders” are almost never seen as separate detail. Only fact of sight existing can be seen and existing of laser range finder is not known
Number of crew, how it is located and etc
As I said it can be “supposed” (made as someone will decide) but information is missing
If funny - continue to fun.
I only want to say what is really known about this vehicle and just want to ask to not lie that “we know almost everything”.
If you want to imagine and fake facts - please do it but also please make special note (as you did note that photos was edited by AI)
It was answered already many times
3 Likes
To this day I still question if that thing is accurate at all. It has a rear facing driver but a horrible reverse speed. On top of that it has horrendous turning radius.
1 Like
Its transmission is made as in documents as I remember
I have never measured its speed but won’t be surprise if it is really bad. On some videos where it is turning radius is really big
2 Likes
When reversing it will just crab sideways very often. It’s very annoying.
The minimum turning radius, according to the Outline, is 9 meters on flat and paved road. There also is no rear driver, that’s the “rear scout.” The machine gunner in the front is the “front scout.” Neither of the scouts have any driver controls.
2 Likes
warships are a forum of architecture you don’t get a real second chance. Modifications can be made but the blue prints are fully calculated a tank on the other hand gets to be a little wishy washy that is why there is sometimes factory differences. In the old days there where factory competitions for things like small arms on who can make an acceptable rifle so you would get some strange factories popping up like sewing machine factories this would also extend into vehicle parts. USA would do this a lot in the lead up to WW2 which helped with the war effort. Japan sort of had a whole backyard factory thing which would do something similar quality was pending though.
Here’s links to all my balance proposals for Japan’s WW2 tanks on the official balance changes thread.
Drop a like on any posts you agree with in the thread, if you haven’t already, to show Gajin the type of changes the playerbase wants to see. The amount of likes is apparently important when they data scrape the thread.
Changes
-
Arcade Battle BR: 1.3 → 1.0
-
Realistic Battle BR: 1.3 → 1.0
-
70 mm Reload Speed: 4.0 s → 3.5 s
-
Correct missing shoulder-stop stabilizers to both guns (Bug Report)
Changes
-
Reload Speed: 5.9 s → 3.3 s
-
Add Type 1 (APHE) (Bug Report)
Changes
-
Reload Speed: 6.0 s → 5.0 s (Bug Report)
-
Add Type 95 (APHE) (Bug Report)
Changes
-
Arcade Battle BR: 4.3 → 4.0
-
Realistic Battle BR: 4.3 → 4.0
-
Reload Speed: 6.5 s → 6.0 s
-
Replace Type 4 Kou (APHE) with Type 4 (AP) (Bug Report)
Changes
-
Reload Speed: 6.5 s → 6.0 s (Bug Report)
-
Replace Type 4 Kou (APHE) with Type 4 (AP) (Bug Report)
Changes
-
75 mm Reload Speed: 5.0 s → ~3.7 s
-
37 mm Reload Speed: 4.0 s → 2.9 s
-
Engine Power: 500 hp → 700 hp (Bug Report)
-
Replace Type 4 Kou (APHE) with Type 4 (AP) (Bug Report )
-
Correct missing 37 mm shoulder-stop stabilizer (Bug Report)
Changes
-
Reload Speed: 6.5 s → 5.0 s
-
Replace Type 4 (APCR) with Type 4 (AP) (Bug Report)
4 Likes
The ultra-strong German loader can simply overcome having a narrower turret ring, far less spacious turret, literally no turret ammo storage (which is partially mechanized on the Chi-Ri), no automatic loading system, and a complete round that is approximately the same mass, if not slightly heavier.
That’s right, he can compete with a Japanese loader moving a shell like 1 millimeter between 2 relatively fixed locations, and a mechanical arm that does a frame perfect reload after the gun fires.
4 Likes
If you want to complete the list, here’s a couple more links (about zero’s going 6.0, and a part of the 12.0 lineup)
Type 81 (C) and Tan-SAM Kai
11.7-> 11.0 and 12.0 → 11.3
TKX(P)
12.0 → 11.7
A6M5 Ko and Otsu
stay at 5.7 (217 likes as for now, impressive)
Second link
A7M1 (NK9H)
7.7->5.3
R2Y2
8.0 → 7.3 for air realistic
V1
V2
V3
Could have been easier to just say R2Y2 (V1, V2, V3) or R2Y2 (all variants) honestly
IJN Isuzu
4.7 → 4.3
F-16A OCU (JPN)
13.7 → 13.3
Bonus:
Ho-Ri Production
7.3-> 12.7
4 Likes
Or they could just fix it and move it to 12.7 like the Belgian F-16s with similar armament. There is absolutely no reason for it to get AMRAAM when there is other AMRAAM capable F-16s that could’ve been added instead.
4 Likes