yes
The first of the prototype Maneuver Combat Vehicles to be equipped with a driveable hull and a manned turret.(There is another hull in front of this one to test stability during shooting, but it cannot run because it is not powered.[車体部その1])
2 Likes
I don’t know what the 20mm trunnion-like armor on the main gun is that you can see in the “X-rays” of the Type 10. I have not seen similar tanks from other countries. Instead, when we look at the interior of the tank in the “Armor” section, we see that other countries have modeled trunnions, but Type 10 has none. Does anyone know what this is?
The rear-engine prototype looks really nice.
Does anyone know whether or not it has a comparable armor layout to the production Type 16?
There is little information on rear engine maneuver combat vehicles and I don’t think we will ever find it.
2 Likes
^Official Topic Page for the Type 10 MBT
Go check it out!
5 Likes
^Here’s a page for the Type 16
Lots of cool stuff to see here!
5 Likes
1 Like
The inventory of Type 79 missiles has been depleted and we will see them equipped with new missiles in the future. Maybe the sights, etc. will be upgraded as well?
2 Likes
I believe that picture is of a Type 99 HSP being tested by Mitsubishi before it was delivered to the JGSDF.
That could be, I just noticed how different the front looks.
1 Like
Rumours are the original plan is put the Type 89 turret on new chassis. But like you say, they are run out of type 79. So it is possible to have new missile.
The problem is I am not sure whether this project is still continuing. From what I know, currently, only the dozer variant get adopted.
The Type 89 turret will be transplanted to a new hull and the Type 89 hull will be converted to an APC. the APC type hull will also be newly built. No dozer will be adopted.
My question is… when will Japan introduce a new 105mm apfsds to replace the aging Type 93 apfsds?
Japan adopted the M735 in like 1983 and the penetration was roughly 160-165mm @ 2000m at 60 degrees
Then the Type 93 apfsds was adopted in 1993, with roughly 215mm @ 2000m at 60 degrees of penetration.
In 2016, the Japanese introduced Type 16 MCV which eventhough is Mobile Combat Car, is tasked with Main Battle Tank duties. Even a brand new 105mm Japan Steel Works gun was introduced for the new MCV, but no new round. It’s 2023 now, 30 years since Type 93 came into service and it’s still the most modern Japanese 105mm round.
Meanwhile, Israel has M428 SWORD, China has DTC02-105, France has OFL 105 F2, South Korea has K274N.
The Chinese ZTQ-15 Light Tank which has a 4 sec fast autoloader uses 105mm DTC02-105 APFSDS but it’s compatible for Type 59D tanks as well, and when fired from the standard L7 105mm L/52, it’s penetration is on par with the brand new Russian 125mm 3BM42-2 “Mango 2” APFSDS round, whereas the Japanese Type 93 apfsds is only comparable to the 105mm M413 APFSDS.
Honestly I wouldn’t mind if Japan shuvved the penetrator from 120mm Type 10 apfsds inside a 105mm Sabot and called it a day. It would increase the WHA penetrator length from 485mm —> 630mm and since it’s going to be heavier projectile, I bet the new 105mm JSW can handle a stronger propellant
We know that DAIKIN proposed to increase the power of armor-piercing ammunition for the Type 16MCV, but the details are unknown.
There were some talks on the old forum about Japan developing a new 120mm shell for the Type 90 to match the performance of the Type 10
The same post also mentioned a new shell for the MCV
Although this was around 2021 so I wouldn’t get my hopes up
found it: Type 90 (Kai) - General & Upcoming - War Thunder - Official Forum
Wouldn’t it be just easier to give Type 90 the 120mm JSW L/44 gun instead?
I mean the Type 10 apfsds itself is becoming outdated. And if all Type 90 / Type 10 have the new gun, they will all be compatible for the type 10 apfsds replacement.
US moved from M829A2 to M829A4 already
Germany is moving from DM63 to LKE Neo
France is moving from OFL 120 F1 to Shard Mk.1
China is probably moving to 140mm gun soon featuring DTW-140 apfsds
Japan should just buy DM63 or Shard Mk.1 for the Type 90
I doubt we will get a replacement for type 10 APFSDS anytime soon. I’d Imagine a new 105mm APFSDS would come first due to the doctrine behind the Type 16.
After all, direct fire Armor duels seem to make up the vast minority of engagements currently. To be quite honest, the Type 10 or Type 90 is more likely to shoot at landing craft or soft armor than it is heavy armor in the event of a conflict.
Then again, I’m just some guy on the internet.
1 Like