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I mean the Type 10 apfsds itself is becoming outdated.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.
Should not. Japan should and must have its own indegenious designs, with ability to produce them without direct involving of anyone.
It is not as outdated as it may seem from the game. The claimed armor penetration is about 415-430 mm at 2 km.
In the game it`s armor penetration is slightly underestimated due to the fact that in the calculations of armor penetration Gaijin indicated the mass of the core (3.4 kg) and not the mass of the entire projectile (3.6 kg), which is why the penetration is lower than it should be, even taking into account the formula.
And regarding the issue itself, at one time there was a rumor that JSDF considered Belgium APFSDS M1060A3 as a replacement for Type 93, but apparently this did not lead to anything.
The Type 10 is not a de facto obsolete projectile. It is younger than the DM53 (and its actual copy DM63), younger than the M829A2 by almost a decade. It uses fairly modern technologies, including the high hardness core in the “jacket” repeatedly mentioned here from a self-sharpening material (metal glass), which, while maintaining the properties of a tungsten penetrator, provides it with some options of a uranium penetrator. In addition, using a “jacket” made of ductile materials, we actually increase the ratio of the working length of the penetrator to its diameter (L/D). In fact, there is currently no significant technological groundwork for further growth of armor penetration within the ammunition. According to rumors, JSDF experimentally created monocrystalline cores for APFSDS, which, purely in theory, could significantly increase armor penetration, however, taking into account the specifics of the production of monocrystal products, this would mean a multiple increase in the cost of ammunition.
In general, a further rational increase in armor penetration is possible with an increase in the lengthening of the gun, and the transition to 50…55 caliber guns, the JSDF management mentioned such a possibility within the Type 10 by the way. This is especially interesting in the sense that in addition to a direct increase in the initial velocity of the shell, when using long-barreled guns, we are approaching the coveted 2000 m/s, that is, the border at which tungsten begins to self-sharpen perfectly by itself, surpassing even specialized uranium alloys.
414mm @ 2000m
means
207mm @ 2000m (60) - 414 LOS
But Japan user higher BHN steel
Vs standard 260BHN
We get 215mm @ 2000m (60) - 430 LOS
Well they produce their own DM33
Yes, cos 60°=1/2. And if we look at similar values for the ammunition you previously announced, presented as “fundamentally more modern”, we find that either the penetration figures are comparable, or slightly larger — up to ≈220-250 mm at 2000m / 60°, versus 215 mm at 2000m / 60° for Type 93. In addition, large numbers often obtained not on the base L7 gun, but on its deep alterations (and independent guns), that is, guns with a noticeable increase in the length of the barrel and / or an increase in the powder charge. There is no significant groundwork for increasing shell without an avalanche-like increase in the cost of ammunition or the transition to uranium.
It also does not make sense to use the APFSDS Type 10 core to adapt to the JSW-105 gun, the powder charge for 105 mm is physically unable to accelerate the projectile to the speeds for which the Type 10 was designed, otherwise we will get the armor penetration figures, that the JSW-120 gun would provide at about 8 kilometers, and these numbers would be significantly less than what the Type 93 has.
Well, in the end, at the moment there is no urgent need to increase armor penetration in the 105mm caliber. It is expected that the main opponent for the Type 16 will be airborne and amphibious vehicles, which cannot be provided with sufficiently heavy armor, so an increase in firepower of Type 16, which means the weight and cost increase, is not entirely justified here. Type 15, on the contrary, was created for working in mountainous conditions, and a confrontation with sufficiently heavily protected and armed armored vehicles is quite possible, besides less stringent requirements for mass-dimensional characteristics allowed the latter to “get fat” by 7-10 tons, what Type 16 can’t afford.
Eh not really…
105mm M413 is 4.1kg penetrator
Type 10 APFSDS is 4.2kg penetrator
With standard 105mm apfsds propellant the type 10 apfsds inside 105mm sabot would still go 1450m/s at muzzle velocity
It would have same penetration as 120mm DM33
Really. We will get an initial velocity of about 1,373 m/s, while the projectile is designed for 1,780 m/s, the working body of the projectile will not be used up at such extremely low velocity, the projectile is optimized for completely different speeds. You can also forget about such “nuances” as self-sharpening. Simple calculations by Odermatt show that the penetration of such a projectile will be about ≈ 385 mm, despite the fact that these figures are frankly optimistic, they are calculated on the fact that the projectile was developed for such velocity, and was not forced to be used on them. In practice, these figures are likely to be about ≈ 250 mm.
I don’t understand, why do we still not have the Type-81(C)?
I saw the recent teaser and it ended up being the MIM-72 instead.
Gaijin’s official answer is that, according to their data, the machine worked only in the complex
Because they’d rather make up excuses instead of adding a new mechanic unique to Japan.
The only things we have over other nations are the amazing 3rd generation thermal optics for the Type 16s at 9.3 .
Everything else can be found in other TTs: 4 sec reload in Swedish TT, paper thin vehicles in Italian TT, fast Stinger Slinger in US TT, US vehicles that are present in all TTs except Russia, MLRS in Russian and US TTs albeit at a lower BR, big HE slingers found in German and Russian TTs and some other that I might’ve missed.
I don’t think asking for the Chū-MPM and Type 81 is too much.
JP TT is the only tree, which cant successfully oppose Ka-52, while still being capable of shooting down planes. Guess its a feature
And according to their data type93 have only non-lethal IR missiles which makes their data at bare minimum questionable
Dev stream in 90 minutes, let’s hope we at least get something.
Russian one is now
As expected we got a low tier boat.
This update ain’t looking too good for Japan, but then again what did I expect? Here’s hoping an actual vehicle comes along later during the dev servers, but I’m not holding out hope.