Type 90 Tank/90式戦車

[tanuki10]

Description
For the main gun, a 120mm Rheinmetall L44 smoothbore gun was eventually adopted, although a domestic gun was also built for the early prototypes. Equipped with a thermal sight, the gun is capable of automatic tracking using an infrared hot-point tracking system. High accuracy was ensured.
In terms of defense, ceramic armor is used to provide a high level of protection.
Although its weight has increased from 38 tons to 50 tons, its power-to-weight ratio is very good at 30 ps/t, thanks to its 1500 hp engine.

Armament
◎Main gun:120mm L44 Tank Gun
・Tankgun weight: 3095kg
・Barrel weight: 1153kg
・Ammunition[JM33 APFSDS,Type00 TPFSDS,JM-12A1 HEAT-MP]
◎Coaxial machine gun:Type 74 7.62mm machine gun
◎machine gun:M2HB 12.7mm machine gun

Maneuverability
◎Engine:Mitsubishi 10ZG 2-cycle water-cooled diesel engine
・Engine power:1500PS/2400rpm
・Sprocket power:900PS
・Size: length 1.43m, width 1.19m, height 1.01m
・Dry weight: 2565kg
・Displacement: 21.5 liters
◎Transmission:Mitsubishi MT1500 Automatic transmission with torque converter
・forward 4 speed. Rearward 2 speed
・steering style:Hydrostatic and hydraulic dual actuation type
◎Max Speed:~70km/h

Dimensions
◎Length:9755mm
◎Width:3330mm
◎Height:3045mm
◎Weight:50.2t

Crew
◎Commander/車長
◎Gunner/砲手
◎Driver/操縦手

Features
◎8x 76mm Smoke Granades
◎Laser Rangefineder
◎Laser Warning Receiver

FCS
◎Hot point auto-tracking

Armor

◎Turret composite armor Weight:1381kg
◎Hull composite armor Weight:1249kg

NVD
◎Commander:N/A
◎Gunner:Thermal Imager
◎Driver: Night Vision

Prototype
TKX-0001~0002 is First prototype phase
Tests were conducted from October 1983 to October 1986, with 11,000 km of driving tests and 1,220 rounds of firing tests.
Equipped with domestic main gun and ammunition(Daikin APFSDS,Komatsu HEAT-MP).

Spoiler

・In late January 1985, Komatsu received an order for a prototype HEAT-MP. deadline was for late June 1985.
・In late January 1985, Daikin Industries received an order for a prototype APFSDS. deadline was for mid-October 1985.

Prototype #1 TKX-0001 99-0037
Manufactured in 1983

Prototype #2 TKX-0002 99-0038
Manufactured in June 1985
Preserved at Rikkun land.

TKX-0003~0006 is Second prototype phase
Tests were conducted from September 1987 to December 1988 , with 20,500 km of driving tests and 3,100 rounds of firing tests.
Equipped with rheinmetall main gun and ammunition.

Spoiler

・By August 1987, 10 Rheinmetall 120mm guns were imported by Sumitomo Corporation

Prototype #3 TKX-0003 99-0043
Manufactured in August 1987
It appears to have been used for bulletproof testing and then dismantled.

Prototype #4 TKX-0004 99-0044
Manufactured in August 1987
It is preserved at the Maekawara Garrison.

平成3年度 (1991) 陸上自衛隊 富士総合火力演習（４－２）

Prototype #5 TKX-0005 99-0048
Manufactured in April 1988
It is preserved at Tsuchiura Garrison.

Prototype #6 TKX-0006 99-0049→95-2892?→Tank Test Bed→???
Manufactured in January 1989

Type90 tank recovery vehicle/90式戦車回収車


Description
Type90 tank recovery vehiclee is based on Type90 Tank

Spoiler

Armament
◎machine gun:M2HB 12.7mm machine gun

Maneuverability
◎Engine:Mitsubishi 10ZG 2-cycle water-cooled diesel engine
・Engine power:1500PS/2400rpm
・Sprocket power:900PS
・Size: length 1.43m, width 1.19m, height 1.01m
・Dry weight: 2565kg
・Displacement: 21.5 liters
◎Transmission:Mitsubishi MT1500 Automatic transmission with torque converter
・forward 4 speed. Rearward 2 speed
・steering style:Hydrostatic and hydraulic dual actuation type
◎Max Speed:~70km/h

Dimensions
◎Length:9110mm
◎Width:3610mm
◎Height:2700mm
◎Weight:49.6t

Crew
◎Commander/車長
◎Mechanic/整備手 ×2
◎Driver/操縦手

Features
◎8x 76mm Smoke Granades

NVD
◎Commander:N/A
◎Mechanic:N/A
◎Driver:Night vision

Prototype
Prototype #1 99-0054
Prototype #2 99-0055

Suggestions

STC-1 MBT Prototype

poll DESCLAMER! The name STC was used by the the Japanese media to refer to the ST-A series and STB series. However they later on changed the program title to NTK for the Type 90 meaning New Tank. The individual tanks were named TK-X-000#, TK-X-001#, TK-X-002# and so on. But to make it easier for everyone to follow along, i be refering to the prototype as STC-1 witch was the media name used for the prototype. [image] First Pictures of the Type 90 prototype called STC-1 The Mitsubishi Comp…

STC-2 MBT Prototype

poll DESCLAMER! The name STC was used by the the Japanese media to refer to the ST-A series and STB series. However they later on changed the program title to NTK for the Type 90 meaning New Tank. The individual tanks were named TK-X-000#, TK-X-001#, TK-X-002# and so on. But to make it easier for everyone to follow along, i be refering to the prototype as STC-2 witch was the media name used for the prototype. [image] Picture of the Type 90 prototype called STC-2 The Mitsubishi Company was …

Type 90 (T-ReCS) - Not your average dinosaur

poll poll poll Hey everyone! Today I would like to present to you a specific little known modification of the Type 90 operated by the Japanese Ground Self-Defense Force! With the major versions of the Type 90 already being implemented there are some more obscure versions left. today I’m here to pitch to the idea for one of them. The Type 90 with T-ReCs. [image] History: TL;DR: A regular Type 90 with Tank Regiment Command and Control system. There isn’t a lot of history in regards to this mo…

Bug report list

Spoiler

Not applied
・

acknowledged
・

fixed
・

Submitted as a suggestion
・

Sources
◎Web Sources
・90式戦車 - Wikipedia
・https://www.mod.go.jp/gsdf/nae/2d/kuniwomamoru/soubihin/souki/90tk.htm
◎JGSDF Specifications
・D9003 90式戦車
・D9003B 90式戦車(B)
・D9503 90式戦車回収車
・XB1004B 74式車載7.62mm機関銃(B)
・G2051 85式野外無線機
・R3603 92式地雷原処理ロ一ラ
・GW-Y716603M 120mmTKG JM33装弾筒付翼安定徹甲弾
・CP-Y-0045M 120mm戦車砲砲座付き
◎Other
・三菱重工技報 昭和60年 第22巻 第6号
・月刊 JADI 1997年1月号,1998年8月号
・軍事研究 1987年10月号,1987年11月号,1988年4月号,1989年4月号,1989年5月号,1992年4月号
・将来車両装置(その2)の研究試作 システム概要設計報告書
・防衛生産委員会特報 285 10式戦車と今後の戦車製造の態勢
・防衛技術ジャーナル 2012年3月号 No.372 [戦車の変速操向機]

This article is still incomplete. Please contact @tanuki10 if you would like me to add anything or if you need any corrections.

[Sombralix]

Considering how the turret is 670mm LOS
If we apply C-Tech equivalent protection for Type 90. Leopard 2 has 750mm LOS composite which gives 450mm KE (0.60x KE protection) with C-Tech

The turret cheeks on Type 90 would offer 400mm KE (670 x 0.60) vs APFSDS.

Considering how penetration tests were conducted on TKX-0002 in 1986, before arrival of DM33… DM23 would of been used instead.

120mm DM23 is a 360mm long tungsten penetrator which weighs 4.3kg. 1650m/s muzzle velocity. Penetration is 398mm @ 0m.
The Japanese claim the 120mm APFSDS couldn’t penetrate the turret cheeks from 250m.

If DM23 has 393mm @ 250m (1631m/s) of penetration and Type 90 turret cheeks were 400mm KE vs APFSDS, then the story would add up.

Now to the hull…
If the Type 90 hull composite 580mm LOS then with C-Tech equivalent (580 x 0.60) it would offer 350mm KE vs APFSDS for the hull. However I’m not sure if the hull is 580mm LOS or 670mm LOS.

Anyways… if Type 90 has 400mm KE turret, 350mm KE hull, it would put it into the same category as Leopard 2A4 and M1A1 in terms of protection

[Sombralix]

Although it’s from Wikipedia it makes sense.
Former Leopard 2 commander told me that some Leopard 2A5 still had the original fire control system but since that one isn’t in production anymore, instead of repairing it, it gets replaced by the most modern Attica FCS.

It would be nice to have Type 90 represent the initial version in 1990’s whilst Type 90B would represent a Type 90 from 2010’s with newer refitted modern thermal sights

[tanuki10]

Prototype #3 (99-0043) was released to the press on August 28, 1987, so it is quite possible that DM33 was used since the bulletproof test was probably conducted after this.

I have heard that the tank’s protective capability is designed for performance redundancy and includes future firearms and ammunition.

[Sombralix]

Extremely doubtful

For 670mm LOS composite to stop 120mm DM33 at 250m [1634m/s)
(510mm tungsten rod weighing 4.3kg)
You’d need 479mm KE protection vs apfsds

1. Let’s just say that… even Leopard 2A5’s C-Tech with 750mm LOS of composite didn’t achieve that, never mind with 670mm LOS on Type 90 turret.

2. I highly doubt Germany started throwing around their brand new best round as soon as it was introduced in 1987 to everyone else. When the DM33 was introduced in 1987, it was the best and highest penetrating round in the world. Considering when Type 90 was designed and the fact that STC-2 prototype came in 1986, I don’t see how it’s armour would have been designed to defeat the worlds most powerful apfsds a year later when the DM33 was introduced.

3. When you look at the total weight of Type 90 turret composite, the idea of it being way superior than C-Tech is just absurd. Type 90 turret composite armour in total weighs only 1380kg.

4. Challenger 1 achieved 480mm KE protection on its turret front, however despite its light and weak side armour and on top of that weak frontal hull armour rated 300mm KE (that is if we ignore that huge thin lower plate) that tank still ended up being 62 tons heavy.

Additional info for 1st point.
B-Tech offers roughly 0.467x KE
C-Tech offers roughly 0.600x KE

In order for Type 90’s 670mm LOS of composite to offer 479mm KE, it would need 0.715x KE and yeah… you’ll quickly come to realise, well damn they must of used DM23.

[コタリ]

1. Germany did the exact some thing giving Sweden prototype DM53 to test in their MBT program and the Leopard 2 IMP was able to defend against it (the most power apfsds at the time).
2. You keep saying STC-2 was used in the test. It was STC-3 which was used after finishing mobility trials.
3. Just flat out comparing weight doesn’t mean anything when the Leopard 2 has 2 massive side modules of armor. The Type 10 nearly doubles it’s composite weight from 4t to 8t with it’s proposed side armor modules that are only rated against 30mm Mk258.
4. The CR1 was still using old rubber steel composites at the time while the Type 90 was the first tank to use a SiC CERMET.

@Sombralix

If we apply C-Tech equivalent protection for Type 90. Leopard 2 has 750mm LOS composite which gives 450mm KE (0.60x KE protection) with C-Tech

Also before you said the Leopard 2 has 450KE with C-Tech, but that’s just not true. The Leopard 2A4 cheek has 450KE and it’s using old B-Tech. If you actually look at the 2A5:

This section of armor provides 260mm of protection while being 310mm thick with 230mm of that being composite. Remove the steel protection from that: 35mm1.10 = 39mm + 45mmMRHA1.01 46mm. So 260mm - 85mm KE from the steel plates and 230mm of just the composite is providing 175mm KE protection. The final total comes to… 0.76x KE effeciency for C-Tech! But 0.715x KE for the Type 90 is unrealistic right?

[Aiden1128]

Maybe I’m not remembering this correctly, but isn’t the type 90 supposed to be protected from it’s own round at 250m?

If so, they’d have to take JM33 into account, as that’s the primary APFSDS round.

[Sombralix]

Yes however that outcome isn’t possible

[Sombralix]

The Type 10 has no turret side composite really, it’s extremely thin. So all the composite weight is focused at the front in smaller volume

Type 90 lower composite weight is spread across larger volume which includes the sides.

Leopard 2A4 cheeks are 860mm LOS
Type 90 cheeks are only 670mm LOS

Leopard 2A4 cheeks flat on are 750mm LOS and from the front when they are at an angle, they become 860mm LOS. The hull is 750mm LOS.

Leopard 2A4 with B-Tech gets
Turret = 400mm KE (860mm x 0.467)
Hull = 350mm KE (750mm x 0.467)

[Sombralix]

Lol if C-Tech was 0.78x KE

The 750mm LOS hull would offer 570mm KE protection, but it doesn’t does it. It’s just 450mm KE. The Leopard 2A4 side turret isnt C-Tech, it’s steel heavy to get more KE protection with less LOS thickness.

Type 90 turret = 400mm KE protection

Russian tank hull protection after fix
T-72M1 = 340mm KE
T-72B “85” = 425mm KE
T-80BV = 405mm KE
T-80U = 506mm KE

[tanuki10]

According to「ダイキン工業70年史」the DM33 was introduced in the second prototype phase (TKX-0003~0006).
Bulletproof testing was performed on TKX-0003.

Type 90 資料用 #246 WarThunder Wiki

[DTalpha98]

Type-90’s forward suspension should be able to go much lower as seen here.

Currently, this is as far as it goes.

[DTalpha98]

Moreover, Type-90 and Type-10 should be given the ability to adjust their suspension on the move.
The in-game mechanic exists in the Strv 103.

Anyone asking for proof can see in this video the Type-90 resetting its suspension as it reversed back down the hill.

[4K]第73戦車連隊① 90式戦車の射撃 2022年度第7師団戦車射撃競技会 北海道大演習場

[Sombralix]

Ok, HOWEVER it doesn’t say DM33 was used in the ballistics test. Why would they test something that the armour wasn’t designed against.

Bottom is 105mm Type 93 APFSDS
The one on the top looks like 120mm DM23

Just because 2nd prototype phase is TKX-0003 to 0006 doesn’t mean it came during 0003, could have been TKX-0004 or later and as I already pointed out, why test against DM33 round when the initial specification requirement was for the armour to withstand a weaker round, like the DM23 which was the most modern during type 90 armour protection designing. If it was designed to defeat DM23, they would test it with DM23.

[Sombralix]

120mm DM33 L/44
Penetrates:
444mm @ 2000m (0)
207mm @ 2000m (68) - 553mm LOS

This means that this round is so powerful that it can defeat T-72B hull without ERA even at 2000m.
T-72B has
215mm thick composite at 68 degrees - 574mm LOS
It’s rated to offer 520-550mm LOS of steel equivalent and DM33 claps 553mm LOS (68) at 2km

LMAO if Type 90 could defeat DM33 whilst being only 5tons heavier than T-72B, but have the height for enough gun depression, length of tank enough for ultra fast autoloader, modern transmission and 1500hp engine at the same time, everyone would be scrambling to know that composite…

Germany would be scrambling for it, literally their 5ton heavier Leopard 2A4 can only stop DM23

[tanuki10]

↑Type00 105mm Training Projectile NOT DM23！！
↓Type93 105mm APFSDS

[hiramu]

Do you know the details of the panzer 68 “Pfeil Pat 87 Lsp: 1450 m/s, L/D 22”? I know it is on another site but it weighs 18.7kg. I couldn’t find anything about it, but in my opinion the closest thing to it is the DM33. But it is 105mm.

Spoiler

[_N4MELESS]

I have bug reported it during the same update they nerfed the suspension of Type 90 for some reason.

I can’t say if this bug report is still relevant and if they will fix it or not, all i know is they approved it…

[DTalpha98]

And that was like… years ago?

[_N4MELESS]

This nerf occured during Danger Zone update back in June 2022, so more or less.