That looks oddly familiar…
Is that just a different name for the Ro-Go or is it a seperate project?
Yea its heavily inspired by british interwar heavy tank designs like the Independent from what information survives. I think its rather plausable as a majority of pre ww2 lights and mediums including japanese designs have their origins in the Vickers E. Its not a long shot to expect independant to have similar influence like it did for the russians with T35
There is a japanese blueprint of the Independant however it is heavily speculated to be a post war fake, exactly the same as O-I
1 Like
so your just feigning ignorance.
https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/japan/mi-to-origins.htm
2 Likes
a random track link at a training school and a couple websites with no sources cited (one being a model making website lol) isnt evidence of the O-I.
I believe the russians about the KH38MT before some weaboos coping over the reality that japan was incapable of building good tanks.
This is about vehicles that were partially constructed in various states, and almost all vehicles in War Thunder fall under this.
Some are now hidden, some for not being real but out of necessity. Others are hidden for no real reason, as it caused more problems >_> staring at you, Ho-Ri.
Not sure if bait.
Edit
If you understood japanese army doctrine, you’d understand the way the IJA tanks were built the way they were.
They were built to work alongside infantry as support in muddy, heavily forested terrain and be easily transported in numbers.
To that end, they excelled at their purpose.
Conversely, they didn’t deal with competent armored threats until Russia and the US. Now as to whether they could end up building tanks that could legitimately rival even the M4 Sherman; unlikely.
Most of the steel was going to the Navy and many within the Imperial Japanese military were old fashioned, which was why bayonet charges were still favored so heavily.
Even had the Chi-Ri and Ho-Ri been completed and produced (even in numbers that could matter), I doubt they would have offered any strategic advantage.
Sensha Manual is already known to BS a lot of information.
This is one of many reasons why the Ho-Ri eventually was hidden. The individual was known to use real pictures, Photoshop, hand-drawn, etc. Anything to create misinformation.
1 Like
a huge amount of the german and russian bluewater fleets are questionable “what they may have been” representations of the ships.
I get why they do it, it stops the game just being the british empire and the americans with some overweight (and not very good in the real world) juggernauts from germany and japan sprinkled in.
WTs naval rules being different does go against WTs grain quite a lot and is the direct cause of a major amount of the discourse around naval battles. Ships like soyuz not even being realistic to what it probably would have been if the russians were even capable of completing what was in that dock is why i gave up on the mode personally, why would i want to use HMS rodney when communist pipedreams oppress all?
Didnt stop them being matilda and stuart food did it?
which makes O-I and HO-RI even less realistic than their fake and probably illegitimate source information.
Doesnt help that Sensha manual has poisoned the well of information to do with them with their fakes and lies.
Never heard of Sensha until this thread but yes, the well has been poisoned because of it
O-I is the one I’m on the fence about. Even if the track link is from an O-I, you’d think there would be at least one picture of the actual vehicle if it had been built. Of course, this photo - if it even existed to begin with - could have been lost when the two bombs were dropped or destroyed just before surrender.
As for the Ho-Ri, I genuinely doubt it’d get an engine in the 4 digits range for horsepower. Although my personal opinion doesn’t mean much.
There’s a reason for this; ships aren’t prototyped. They’re iterated on in the design phase and then built.
Soyuz might be the most whined about but there’s other problem ships at their own tiers; HMS York in the 5.3 bracket, Tosa in the 8.0 bracket are just two examples.
Most of the incomplete project ships are generally ‘okay’ to ‘good’ in terms of capabilities in game. The only exceptions to the rule is Tosa and Soyuz.
Just proved my point that you don’t understand the doctrine. The japanese tanks weren’t built to fight armored threats.
without any actual evidence to confirm it, assume fake.
even if it did, there isnt a gearbox to take 1000hp for decades later.
IK. I dont like the length gaijin has gone with the creative liberties though, some of the laid down only ships would have simply been impossible to do.
So like a british infantry tank. a valentine, matilda or churchill kind of deal. We also to this day have bayonets and kukri (for Gurkhas) in our soldiers doctrine.
most of the steel for britain was also going to the navy. the british still made very capable tanks despite the major resource and budget constraints towards their design and development.
Japan was bad at tanks, even when you try to defend them with doctrine ideas they crumble vs peers of the same doctrine styles.
Yes and the british built their infantry support vehicles with the ability to fight armor as they had actual armored threats to fight against (example: Germany)
The imperial japanese command, however, were generally not forward thinking in this regard. They were stubborn in the idea of armored warfare. Doesn’t help they didn’t fight any real armored vehicles until they came across Russia and the US and by that point, the high command had hamstrung themselves so badly there was no way to come back.
Japan’s lack of actual armored fighting vehicles comparable to other nations is both due to nearby opponents (China, malaysia, etc) and stubborn, old fashioned military leaders that didn’t see much value in them until it was too late.
Other examples is being the first nation to have purpose built carriers… But have absolutely abysmal anti air weaponry despite knowing just how dangerous aircraft could be.
And understanding the concept of diving shells… While being more or less the only nation to build their ships against it. [Except other nations didn’t rely on diving shells to do damage]
1 Like
Remember, the Japanese burnt a lot of their documentation; the firebombing of Tokyo likely burnt even more.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki also had an effect. As well as all of the aircraft strafing, machine gun fire, intentional destruction, etc. Combined with all of this, about 90->95% of documentation is lost, and the only picture we do have is still debated as to whether it’s a real picture of a modified O-I’s turret.
Or a naval cannon. Simply because the Camera angle and probably the process and camera itself depict it as larger than it probably was.
Yeah, I stated that.
Quite a bit of documentation was lost on project A140 (Yamato class) as a result. I think at least 17 designs were lost that were drafted but a few have been found over the years.
Most of the documentation we have is in archives all over. Matter of time, honestly. That said, Japan is still heavily neglected by Gaijin; rather depressing.
Thats the problem only if the weapon was some prototype that was not tested at all.
If vehicle was not tested, but weaponry it would’ve used is something normal, like, already used/tested on different vehicles: cannons, machineguns, bombs, then its ok.
+100 i would love to see Ju 287 added
Ju 287 V4 🙀??
i never knew V4 was 60% built i wonder what’s the difference from V3
1 Like
The difference is that for an unfinished prototype to be considered it needs at least one completed vehicle-specific part, so a component exclusively made for the specific vehicle.
For ships simply being laid down (hull construction started, no components completed) is already enough to count.
1 Like
Please go re-read the suggestion, there’s more sources listed there.
The tank was built, even if the project was cancelled before it could be completed as the initial prototype already did poorly during testing.
1 Like
My only problem with prototype/experimental vehicles some that didn’t enter service is that they can get technology they never actually carried or had half the capability to use that technology but get it and their full capabilities but in service vehicles can’t get technology they had tested to 90% completion before switching to something else last sec and are denied even though some can benefit from having it and have enough proof technically capability witch should be considered a less of stretch compared to prototype/experimental vehicles some that didn’t enter service
And I understand some nations do need prototype/experimental vehicles to fill in gaps/performance witch I’m fine with as I do like to see prototype/experimental in game
1 Like
Please stop spreading misinformation. It’s enough to have had people make up Japanese heavy tanks from misinterpreted intelligence reports, you don’t need to go the other way and pretend that a real one isn’t.
Even if you doubt the state of completion, a cast track link of the prototype still exists, which even ignoring all other known information proves that production capacity for those was established (guess what you call a part made for one vehicle that’s literally useless for anything else?)
Now we won’t see it anyways since Gaijin say they lack the info to accurately model it, but this has been said about complete vehicles too and is entirely disconnected from a vehicle existing or not.
1 Like