Problems with Type 10 tank
Вставка
- Опубліковано 27 лип 2024
- Type 10 is the latest Japanese Main Battle Tank, when it was first revealed many thought of it to be the first 4th generation Main Battle Tank, for whatever reason, and many went to say its the best MBT yet. But, Type 10 has many problems because the tank is meant to be as light as possible because of Japan's topography, the fact that Japan is basically an island which has other small islands under it, and many of the bridges don't support heavy vehicles. In this video, we will take a look at some of the problems of the tank, of course, this does not mean that the tank is bad, far from it, it is just the focus of the video. The tank has also recently been added to War Thunder, so another reason for me to make the video :)))
Patreon: / redeffect
Fun Fact: The only combat experience of this tank is when Godzilla attacked Japan.
Shin godzilla
Like most japanese tanks
Technically true lol
@@jasonburke5503 and ww2 with there tin cans
Inb4 zilla
As the saying goes: There is no inherently bad tank, only designs specified by a nation to suit it's tactical doctrine. In Japan's case; mobility. Everything else is secondary.
Edit: Ok maybe there are bad tanks. I didn't mean to start a war in the comments.
Edit 2: I take it back, I love pissing people off.
And that's why they have the Type 16 Manoeuvre Combat Vehicle. Wheeled "Tanks" are perfect for mobility.
To some extent, but I still hate that saying. Plenty of tanks were just genuinely bad because they were either built for a shit doctrine, built in violation of a doctrine, or simply outdone by a tank that did everything better.
Yeah, what if the specified design is bad?
Japan pays priority to Navy and Airforce.
Yep Japan Doctrine is based on force of Navy and Airforce to stop enemy (China) from landing on their mainland, if enemy manages to land their main island its mostly gg and ground units are there just to buy time.
There are reason why Type-10 wasn't intended to replace Type-90, instead it was intended to replace aging Type-74 and Type-61 which still used in main and southern part of Japan due to Type-90 weight limitation.
Good point. Looking at the relative weights of the four tank types, it certainly seems as if Type 10 was intended to fill the roles of the earlier tanks.
In a way similar to the Leopard 2 iirc, since Leo 2s are supposed to replace the M48 Pattons and fight along side Leo 1s or something like that
Type 61 is not used
Come on, all Type 61 tanks have been decommissioned over 20 years ago!
Type 61 retired in 2000.
Type10 Relies alot on not being hit/seen for survival as well as being able to be deployed rapidly and quickly to places where the opposing force might not expect/ be prepd against
Not really work against combined arm where there are aerial and satellite monitoring.
The only possible use for the type tank is for mass production to outnumber the enemies. Which is why its simple in design.
@@RandomPerson-tz7wk there's a reason I feel things are this way because the presence of the American military in Japan is a guaranteed defence against said combined arms in the event of an invasion.
*Zimbabwe official
to know more about the purpose of how these "weak armored vehicles" are supposed to work correctly, watch two Videos made by Battle order who had done videos on Rapid deployment and Future new home islands defence strategy.
@@kamovka2317 I'm sorry, what's zimbabwe? I've only heard of Rhodesia.
My guess is it's main function is spaced with the hinges allowing storage. From 30 degrees it would greatly alter the jet stream of a heat warhead and is a good design choice for a light mbt.
Well old saying is Big things swing on small Hinges .
@@williamdodds1394 lol no
Yeah but it's effectiveness against modern shoulder fired rockets used by China is limited to say the least
Would it "greatly"? Because modern AT missile warhead would penetrate it like paper and would retain more than enough capability to pierce side armor twice over. Hell, I wouldn't bet on it stopping even modern RPG-7 warheads which is kinda weak...
@@KuK137 im no expert, but im pretty sure spaced armor works against heat warheads. How is this any differen from the spaced armor on an mrap? Which i believe was pretty effective at stopping rpgs.
Well, at least the tank can drift
M18 Hellcat: "Finally, a worthy opponent! Our battle will be legendary!"
it threw tracks a lot in shows, it cant even drift reliably ((((
The Tank and the Furious: Tokio Drift.
@@zarlev9083
''Alot'' like wow it literally only happened once lol
@@i_nameless_i-jgsdf Either I probably saw the same one from different angles or it was something noticable that it got attention
Yes, Leopard 2A4 is 10 tons heavier. That being said, Type 10's armor is the same strength while being ~20% lighter. Also it can be fitted with 8 tons of additional armor.
there is no composite armour in the side panels on the turret. There are photos of the hatches open clearly showing hollow space.
True dat
Two points. Add-on armor and if your tank is getting hit from the side, you’re already fucked.
@@jesusofbullets Add-on armor is very heavy, nobody would remove add-on armor if they don't have a good reason like air transport weight limit.
Besides, it is designed to fight on islands and urban area, so infantry flanking and ambush are unavoidable.
@@jesusofbullets The type 10 has no appliqué armour Like TUSK or OES but yes. If these things are getting shot in the side there doing something horribly wrong.
@@joelau2383
It’s removable for transport via train or over bridges. The Type 10 was designed to be useable over more bridges than the Type 74 or 90.
the biggest problem is that it costs too much rp to grind. my mommys wallet hurts
That's why i stopped playing WT :P Too much grind
The biggest problem is WT, it is almost fun
Why would you subject yourself to the utter masochism of the entire Japanese tech tree in the first place?
Imagine grinding the Japanese tech tree.
@@johnschmidtz5337 Yea, even with a Premium the grind is just too much. I Researched German Tech Tree until Leopard 2A5, and even Leopard 2PL, but i just didn't have the SL to buy them but neither wanted to buy a premium account again for the Top Tier experience which quite sucks in this Game ngl. It's almost fun `(*>﹏
For what i know the type 10 it´s capable of equipping 3 types of armor kits for every intended role or mission so it´s posible that one of the more protective kits includes blocks of composite armor for the turret.
According to leaked documents in regards to weight differences between the Type 90 and Type 10, almost all of the weight loss was removed from components, such as the engine, electronics, and gun weight. The Type 10 has almost the same weight in armor as the Type 90, with a lighter, stronger, and extremely expensive material.
Type-10's composite armor is actually far heavier than Type-90's.
where are those leak if you mind sharing?
They cut down 3 tons of electronics from 8 tons to 5 tons!
@@blahblah7720probably in the war thunder gaming forum since most if not all leaks happen in the war thunder forum
Edit: I am a year late so sorry for the video did not get recommended for me until now
I'm tired of the argument that the Type 10 has thin armor because it's light.
2:05 The labels in this graphic strongly imply that the turret side modules are unarmoured. Translation:
Red turret module: "Gun turret front - Armoured module"
1st yellow turret module: "Gun turret front cover"
2nd yellow turret module: "Gun turret side module"
Red hull module: "Chassis front - Armoured module"
Yellow hull module: "Chassis front surface cover"
Note how it only says "armoured module" for the red ones. The graphic does however also differentiate between "covers" and "modules", which may imply that other side turret modules could be installed at some point.
But I don't know where that graphic comes from, so don't treat it as an authoritative source.
Japanese Wikipedia describes them as hollow detachable applique armour that doubles as storage bins, and that it MAY be intended to put additional armour into when needed. But it seems that the author there was literally just speculating, and it's not well sourced.
Thanks you helped a lot
Thanks for the translation mate!!!
Thanks for the translation, I found it on one forum where a guy claimed that it states "side armor modules" so I was not sure if he was correct since he seemed a bit biased in the way he was talking about it :)
Keep in mind though that this is not the official drawing, the tank is still very classified.
That drawing is only made for a magazine and it is based on artist guesses and imaginations.
So it should not be taken as a reference to the real vehicle, it is irrelevant.
@@i_nameless_i-jgsdf Ok then, dully noted, thanks for the info
I think having fast lighter tank is much better option now than putting a lot of armor on it. The argument for that is that tanks filmed getting hit by atgm are always stationary targets. Tanks have to move, mobility was always their greatest advantage and it seems Japaneese know that well.
I know Japan may never do it; but these would have made a nice export option for countries that wanted a good balance between weight, protection, firepower, etc. (assuming they couldn't get their hands on T-72's and T-90's).
Also, they have brought these to train up in here Washington state. ;)
Actually Japan has already modified the constitution to allow export of military equipment like this.
And there are rumors about Brazil showing interest in Type 10
I mean, countries like the Philippines could use a tank like that.
@@mayuri4184 True; though I would think that something like the M8 AGS or the Stingray (basically any modern LT) would suit the Philippines best. There's nothing in the country that would necessitate the firepower and protection of a full MBT. Plus, getting an 20-25 ton vehicle between all the islands is much easier/cheaper than the 44 tons of the Type 10. ;)
@@gabrielpalileo3294 They DID buy 18 ASCOD IFV's that were modified to become 105 mm gun-carrying light tanks.
@@hendi1571 That only allows them to send non combative equipment only. not any direct offense weapons. that's why Helicopters , patrol crafts and APCs are the best choice.
When you're fighting in mountains, specifficaly in valleys there's no need for side armour because it's very hard or almost impossible to flank your position. That's also why in case of K2 there's not much side armour.
Lol mountains are not the only place for tank battles it can be anywhere so tank must be always ready
@@ice-tgaming4609 yeah but all tanks have dogshit side armor anyways so why even bother
Even in mountains, a RPG can hit you by the side.
@@innerlight7018 In proper combined operations, infantry are not getting a side shot on a properly operated tank working in tandem with infantry. In mountainous terrain, that becomes even less possible especially when the defenders have the home advantage. The U.S. didn't send their Abrams into the mountains to root out insurgents, they sent infantry and smaller wheeled vehicles as support with tons of helicopters.
Actually in mountains it is extremely easy to flank enemy.
The Type 10 is designed for a very specific mission set. It is designed to operate on Honshu and Kyushu against amphibious invasion forces in mobile defense and counterattack operations against beachheads. For that it really doesn't need much side armor. It's main opposition would be amphibious forces, which typically have lighter equipment than regular army forces. Only the Russians, French, British, and the US have the capability to deploy significant numbers of MBTs in amphibious landings. However the only places heavier tanks could really operate freely in Japan is on Hokkaido and the Kanto plain. Neither of which are very inviting targets as any likely invader would be landing on the opposite side of Honshu from the Kanto plain in one case and Japan keeps it's Type 90 heavy MBTs on Hokkaido in the other.
Question: The tank is light because of Japan's geography. Until recently, Japan's constitution prohibited foreign deployment. If that changes, can additional armor modules be installed in the field as needed??
There plans for additional armor on the sides of the Type 10, they’re just not fielded yet.
It could be possible, though i doubt Japan will develop armor modules for their tanks soon. Unless threat of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan or South Korea becomes very serious then they have no reason to make them.
It is possible, there are even heavy upgrades for M60 tanks which offer more protection than current Type 10 like Sabra tanks.
yes actually the developer in one of the interview mentioned about how era and composite armor can be added to the side hull. This would increase the weight of the tank to 48 tons
@@ggoddkkiller1342 they need to revive M60-2000 project. Countries with a whole fleet of M60s and M48s probably could benefit from this upgrade.
Tight spaces, rough mountainous terrain and mostly urban landscape, a good highly mobile MBT with enough firepower is much a better options especially when Japan mostly will be on the defensive side when China or Russia invasion may happen someday.
Russia?? Really??
@@tonyjoka2346 well just out of no where speculation.. lmao
@@tonyjoka2346 ukraine intensifies...
@@madtechnocrat9234 unrealistic
@@tonyjoka2346 i asure you russian invasion of ukraine is very realistic.
FINALY! I was really looking forward the your Type 10 video! ;)
The Japanese have a heavy tank but it does not work well with their current strategy. Japan is pretty much just a series of volcanoes sticking out of the ocean and presents unique challenges for tanks. It doesn't matter how good your tank is, if you can't get it to the fight it is worthless. The Japanese were having problems getting around on their islands with the type 90 and its really good suspension system that is why they are building a new tank to suit their needs.
Exactly. The armor may be garbage, but protection against 14.5mm and lobbing 120mm SAPHEI is one mean threat when the enemy must land amphibiously with little if any armor that can defeat said vehicle. Who cares if 2A42 gun can knock it out, if the enemy can't have those, and holy dog shit they're shooting 120mm at us direct fire.
It's built for a specific niche.
@@prfwrx2497 yeah it definitely is built for this specific case. The problem then becomes rpgs and atgms. Practically any man portable anti tank weapon should be able to get through the side of the hull or turret on the type 10
@@poopstick924 while things like rpgs and atgms might pose a threat to the sides of the type 10, the main goal of the Jsdf is defense of the home islands. Meaning the type 10 will almost always be in a defensive position with its sides likely secure. That is unless Japan decides to send the type 10 into overseas head to head combat with the enemy in an urban environment. That is where the type 10 would probably fail.
@@derritter3873 if all goes according to plan, then yeah the flanks will be secured. But we all know how that can end up. In any case, it definitely is much better to have armor than to not have armor and the type 10 is great for what it needs to be
I mean that sounds well meaning in concept but Type 10 is only 5 tons lighter than Type 90. The idea was the armor would be completely dismounted and moved via rail car or a flat bed truck across country however there isn't any instances of this being done and all Type 10's are still based I'm Hokaido just like the Type 90. If anything the Type 16 filled the role the Type 10 was supposed to fill as a rapid reaction tank able to move with easy across Japan's rural area's
War thunder:adds type 10
RedEffect:
This tank was built with the idea to make a MBT equivalent to the previous Type 90, but as lightweight as possible, just like you said.
Also some sources say that the basic configuration tank weighs only 40 metric tons, but additional armor packages increase it up to 48 tons. Does anyone know some details about this?
it's to do with the modular composite armour for the tank. the type 10 was made so that the armour is detachable so that they can easily transport it alongside it's armour around the country. the 40 ton version is a stripped down version without a lot of the composites on that normally makes up it's armour, the 44 ton version is the most common one to see, most of the pics in the video was of the 44 ton version. we don't know anything about the 48 ton version since as to my knowledge it has never been shown, but only talked about by the jsdf, could be a work in progress and maybe have an aps system on it.
Actually it was developed to surpass Type-90 in every category while being lighter. And it does so.
Great vid, as always. Would be cool if you did a full vid on the tank.
Solid info, as usual. Thanks for sharing, appreciate it a LOT!
Greets from the Netherlands 🌷, T.
I think once Red Effect has more solid information he should do a follow up video on the type 10.
I have pics where japanese soldier opened one of those doors and take some stuff from the box.
So yeah it's surely not composite armor.
Great video, keep it up!
The type 10 is one of the first tanks to have C4I and has a hunter killer ability. One tank can spot from a hidden location and others can engage even when behind foliage so out of sight. This gives it protection indirectly as neither vehicle need to expose themselves.
Type 10 is also the first tank to have C4 inside, in the case of seppuku or harakiri.
Whoa just like Yamato and Musashi being able to rely on each other's rangefinders and firing solutions via radio
1 thing to mention there was 3 prototypes for the Type 10 and in many images you see all 3 variants there is a few with the production model but the prototype images are more common to find on the internet
Shameful lol. I like the type 10 🤷🏼♂️🥺
I love the type 10 it’s not a heavy tank but I like how it’s designed to be quick maneuverable and Easley deployable around Japan.
Hi Mat. i like it to. but only if its deployed in Specific terrain. in Eu Plains this thing will lose.
4:20 In fact, based on the lesson that Challenger 2 was attacked on the front of the car body by RPG, additional armor for the front of the car body has been developed for Type 10. However, the image has never been released because the performance estimation is concealed and the actual battle has never been experienced.
under a video about the Type 10 Tank, there was this weeb that claimed he worked with Japanese steel makers, and claimed that he saw the Japanese steel had special composition under the microscope of some special crystallization
That comment got several hundred likes, and when I quipped in a reply saying
"that's because the steel used for the Type 10 tanks were folded 1000 times and was infuse with unicorn tears" The legion of weebs then started attacking me saying unicorns aren't real.
*based*
I heard that the Type 10 do have armour packages for the side armor of the hull, but a lot of publically available documents in regards to the Type 10 was removed from the Japanese MoD website so who knows.
Well Japan claims that this Tank is immune to fire from APFSDS Type-4 ammunition from a distance of 250m but I believe that the Tank should be fitted with various armor modules which will increase its weight to 48 tons. I doubt that this Tank is capable of withstanding fire from Chinese APFSDS munitions such as the DTW-125-II and DTC10-125.
It is planned to get extra armor packages.
Like what the comment above me says, they are planning extra armor packages for the type 10, but they need to keep its weight down enough that it’s able to use Japan’s infrastructure like bridges.
@Waldel Martell Not always, enemies liked to keep bridges and Defenders always destroy it before the enemy arrives.
There's a lot of cases in WW2 that bridges don't get destroyed until the enemy is within the line of sight.
@Waldel Martell ik that but what I meant is in the case Japan is ever attacked for whatever reason, in the initial stage, the type 10s, as well as the type 74s and type 16s would be able to get to a place getting attacked very quickly. On the other hand, the type 90 is just too heavy for the bridges in Japan and would break them. That also means that if enemy tanks somehow made there way onto Japan’a home islands, there tanks wouldn’t be able to go over the Japanese bridges as almost all other mbts are heavier than even the type 90. Meaning any enemy would have to use lighter vehicles in Japan like ifvs, which wouldn’t fare well against the type 10. Imma stop here before I end up writing like a whole essay.
@Jjohnno 87 It's just a fancy way to name a lighter steel which Leclerc's have been using from the get-go. Just a quote from someone.
"I dislike the name “nano-crystalline steel” because it conveys the idea that there is some form of super-advanced nanotechnology involved in this type of material, whereas it really is just random steel treated differently to alter its grain structure. In essence, it is just a new generation of steel plates with a fancy marketing."
*Great video!!!! Thanks for sharing!!!!*
I wonder if the Type 10s have an add-on armour package that can be installed say by removing the storage containers. Something that could be transported separately and installed in the field?
I think tank is good in the thing which is meant to used.
Which is; deploy in fast manner
Be decent frontal armour
Have superior fire power.
It's not meant to drive on city in Iraq..
It have the same weight as a T-90m that have way better protection, same mobility and firepower (maybe even better firepower considering guided missiles)
@@tsorevitch2409 Interior space is your answer for that. The T-90 is relatively cramped compared to the Type 10.
@@awsmmann it's a price you have to pay to
Make protected tank with reasonable weight.
@@tsorevitch2409 Type-10 is better mobility wise
I really wish RedEffect dude would evaluate tanks based on the stated strategic and tactical goals of the tank makers and primary customers instead of apply a "X tank vs. Leopard 2A7V" approach to everything. It would certainly be more professional.
I mean he literally said a bunch of time that the JDF have to sacrifice a lot when it comes to Type 10 just so that it can cross bridges and be more maneuverable around urban area. It's a bad design in theory but it makes sense with the JDF doctrine
@@quakethedoombringer They have the same design as Leopard 1 and M47 Patton so hull goes disintegrate
@@quakethedoombringersince japan is highly urbanized wouldn't make sense to have tanks suited for urban warfare?
@@azuaraikrezeul1677 in urban warfare, artillery is your best friend, and any enemy invading japan would have extreme difficulty with logistics stuff, especially carrying around heavy tanks all over the island. So most of the times the only thing type10 is going to face is infantry or non lethal military assets, and maybe some wheeled vehicles
Type 10 has a firing rate of 3 seconds and can form a barrage of APFSDS.
Before the advent of drones, there were no engineers who focused on defense because it was easy to hide in a country where 80% of Japan's land was mountainous.
loader - Sir, we running out of ammo
TC - Shove a gigantic sword into our muzzle and charge again enemy tank.
Driver - i like that idea, Sir.
I think that since most of Japanese tank design is based around a principle of defense, they don't consider factors often associated with asymmetric warfare, like that in the Middle East. Because of that, they don't consider ambushes very much.
Yes. The Self-Defense Forces are basically for intercepting enemies, and tanks are also for ambushing like strv103. It lacks side armor because it is not expected to aggressively advance into enemy territory.
Instead, frontal armor and shooting systems are excellent at covering an inadequate number of tanks.
Tanks designed on principles of defense are abrams, leopard 2. Huge, heavy, well defended, with enough ammunition for prolonged firefight. Tanks designed for offensive actions are small, light, mobile, capable to be easily transported by sea/railroad, check T-80 as example. You got the idea
@@rageofmankind Not really, no. It would depend on what defensive doctrine the tank was designed for. It's more a question of static versus dynamic. Most western tanks are well balanced to be a jack of all trades and generally support infantry and other mechanized units. They need the armor to potentially push a dug in enemy without making it absolutely suicidal for the tank crew. They can work well as a static defense with heavy armor, but a static defense can be circumvented and gone around. Some of the best defense is a dynamic defense where mobility and information is king. It's about being in the right place at the right time for a defense and then relocating quickly to the next point. They don't need or even want a long deployment time for this type of work. You want to be constantly rotating units in and out of the fighting to keep them rested and highly efficient while wearing down your enemy.
The theory is that you have your tanks engaging the enemy at a key defensive point and force a route and have your surviving units return to a nearby base for refit and rest while another unit clocks in to take the next shift. Even the U.S. tries to do this when it can as it's much cheaper, easier, and safer to do than trying to extend supply convoys out to armored units in the field where crews end up with lower quality rest.
@@Talishar I was gonna comment in this thread but you wrote a much better reply
@@Talishar Japanese and Korean tanks have hydropneumatic suspension that can go low profile and adjust for terrain from terrain
I think it actually does have side protection, in some of its kits. And these plates on the turret are made from, steel(made using nano technology to be as light and thin as possible) and ceramics... just as well as Puma IFV has now. Which the developers of Puma said RPG-7 penetrates max 10mm at best(dunno how much of this is true, but if Type 16 during tests could survive direct hit from Gustav, and still be usable... I dunno). So there is also probably some additional protection against chemical based rounds (heat, rockets). Type 10 essentially has the same and even better defenses than her predecessor(Type 90), but at half the weight thanks to this composite armor type. While the tank is 40/44/48 tons heavy depending on the kit it picks. I am not saying it cannot be penned, but it´s definitely not as easy as it would seem. Combining with high speed and low profile(not in base mode, but while using hydropneumatic suspension). It´s more of a dodgy tank, that may survive a hit, get back and thanks to modularity be back in action. If there is something it lacks it´s probably firepower, as it still has L44, unlike Leopard with its L55 guns.(As they believed that in a city, the shorter gun would be better, cuz Japan and it mainly being urban area or hills).
you forget that tank is designed for modular armor addons for front plate, and turret sides. Modules are transported separetly and install on site if needed.
Never the less good video as always!
You know it is a good day when Mr.Red uploads
Tempted to write a lot, but I’ll scale it down. Basically, the type 10 was made to be able to freely move around Japan, something the type 90 had trouble with due to it being to heavy. It was designed to defend Japan, so it only has to worry about frontal armor as it should always face where the enemy is coming from. As for the “other tanks can easily pen it” how are those other tanks gonna get to Japan’s main islands?
TLDR: the type 10 isn’t perfect, especially for thing like facing other mbts head-on, but it is perfect for the Jsdf and it’s role. Defense of the home islands of Japan.
So Basicly the same problems like the STB-1 from World of Tanks :D
And Thank you for no Comercials in this Video.
Those box's and hinges on the side of the turret could b some sort of composite armour combined with small storage area's that may get filled with some sort of added armour without being part of the design team or a Japanese tanker we won't know for awhile yet!
At 2:08 on the document its mentioned (description under the image) that the red sections are composite armor and the yellow sections are just spaced armor (ie. empty space).
It's well to Japan's needs. They are a defensive force so it is tailored to their territory. I wonder for pure defense whether a non turret design would have been better like the S103 tank or Stug. Can make them light but still more protected
Might as well make a remote controlled turret
@@badgermcbadger1968 but would US share its data of TTB with Japan though?
@@Joshua_N-A I'm sure Japan can develop its own
@@badgermcbadger1968 oh right, forgot about how capable Mitsubishi is of such things.
Honestly with the advent of unmanned vehicle, I can see casemate type vehicle making a comeback, especially for countries whose doctrine focus primarily on defense. Imagine a 40-50ish ummanned vehicle with a lot of composite armor and ERA because all the space for the crew is replaced with a much smaller computers so loitering ammunition cannot just make for an easy roof kill, armed with a big cannon (130mm perhaps) so it can knock out most modern tanks and roof mounted autocannon for drones
Isn't the tank designed to replace the aging Type 74?
They will also replace Type 90.
@@wezzesunum3297 no they will not, type 10 was designed to fight along side type 90 not replace it
The type 10 was designed to be able to use Japans infrastructure like bridges like the type 74 and to work alongside the type 90. It works along side of the type 74 as of right now though.
It was, but due to low production numbers, with less than 120 tanks built since 2010, this wasn’t the case, and is no longer the case.
Now with the production of the newer Type 16 MCV, which now supersedes the production of Type 10s completed, is replacing the Type 74, and it has already retired a number of former Tank Units based in Mainland Japan with new units equipped with the Type 16. Due to the Type 16’s capabilities in mobility being better compared to the Type 74 and Type 10, it is the more useful and optimistic AFV equipped with a tank gun to see service with the JSDF. This means that with the Type 16 being better and cheaper compared to the Type 74, the Type 74 will see an end to its time in service in the near future.
@@wyattwesterfield4553 Japan is to reduce it's number of tanks from 600 to 300 in the coming years. The remaining will be positioned on Kyushu and Hokkaido.
Maybe the turret cheeks add on boxes can be equipped with different armor packages depending on the weight limit of the crossing that are planned during a campaign slash mission or to spread the weight during transport
If it could be taken off for transport in multiple trucks that would be cool question is if its a thing or not like only after installing the armour once you get into a defensive position isn't that unreasonable
thank you all for the information!
I mean, this tank is not designed to be running at anywhere else beside Japanese lands, which the Japanese will have the advantage of knowing the land better than anybody else.
This pretty much mean that Japan designed this thing to be a coordinated sneak hit-and-run attacker, rapidly moving and striking when the enemy least expect it.
They wont need to prepare for getting attacked from the side because they tactics will not position or place themselves in a position to be attacked from the side.
Another great video! I don't think no one covered new type 10 tank like this other than you.
After watching your video I think Japanese just decided to go all in on mobility and fire power, since 10t~20t additional armor won't provide 100% survivability and only hinder its ability to fit in Japanese road system and railway.
Honestly it's pretty good strategy for Japan.
Please more videos of the Balkan‘s militaries hardware! It‘s interesting to see the variety of vehicles and doctrines.
To be fair, as long as those storage boxes arm the HEAT projectile, even the base steel "armour" of the side of the tank might well stop old RPG rockets from an angle.
Or the Type 10 does have composite on its side. The type10 has 3 armor versions, each one being heavier, meaning its armor is likely easily removeable. That would explain doors, hatches to easily access armor block modules.
The extra armor package isn’t fielded yet and we don’t know what it looks like. The Type 10 is modular.
well the JSDF has stated "nanocrystal + modular ceramic composite Armor" in both Type 90 and Type 10 on the wikipedia and in other Japanese articles (all in Japanese)
what does that mean?
@@zn9219 kind of something Mitsubishi claims of "bringing Iron mon suit armor to Reality" . remember the Arjun video where the supposed hole in the front is protected by a new kind of armor that can provide twice the protection thickness of usual RHA steel? this tech claims to be far more thinner yet able to deal with major blows . kind of a thin sheet of paper being bulletproof to anything till assault rifles and not above.
nanocrystal is a marketing term for the newest (2010s) armored steel. It's lighter. It's already widely used. T-14s outer turret is made of this class of steel, modernized russian BMPs were presented with spaced armor like this. ~5mm does the same job as ~8mm of older steel, enough to stop rifle bullets on its own. It's not a revolutionary improvement, just an improvement.
Nano Crystal Armour just means very high hardness steel but this has been used by other nations way before Type 10 as the standard.
Modern composites use ceramics.
your analysis is classified my friend. Ninja sent to your location ... by the way great work as always 👍✌️
tbh this is my fav channel for Tanks it makes me don't wanna research and just wait XD
With all due respect, this evaluation seems to be the result of speculation and certain published information. In my humble opinion, the Japanese military is making tremendous progress in updating its military prowess.
The current political climate, coupled with the country’s geographic location, in which Japan finds itself is proving to be a tremendous source of motivation for Japan to focus upon developing their military strength. The 6th generation fighter appears to be a real contender.
In short, I would not dismiss Japan’s technological ability and the speed with which they can bring projects together. Let us never forget that it was milling equipment developed and supplied by Japanese industry which served to make American submarines the quietest boats in the world.
So japanese designers are stupid, because you "believe" the tank is made of steel without any hard proof (or rather not the slight idea) of how the T10 protection actually works like...
Impressive!
Ok expert, tell how dies it work?
Y'know even if the boxes on the turret were not actually composite armor, theyre still modular, meaning that it can be if they wanted to.
Excellent video. Red Effect you done great overview about storage compartments of type 10.
I wonder how the frontal armor compares to the T-72, given that they are both tanks in the 40 ton range. Since the Type-10 is newer, I would expect it to have better base armor than the T-72A and probably the T-72B.
but the whole russian doctrine is low profile smol tenk. They save weight as a consequence of small tank, which also limits gun depression and interior space. Type 10 doesn't seem to be very smol. It costs more in weight to put equivalent armor on a bigger tank. So I really don't think weight would be a good indication in this case.
@@jonsong4592they actually are pretty much the same size
If the type 10's light weight is a problem due to not enough armor, but at the same time the enemy tanks are too heavy to travel Japan's roads and bridges......it sounds like the Type 10 wins.
No cuz they have engineering bridge laying vehicles.
@@HelminthCombos Laying bridges takes time. The type 10 would be plinking them off from across the river.
@@rael5469 You seem to lack a little "depth" perception here RAEL. Chances are there would quite a few type 99's backing up any bridge layers.
well.... The T90 weighs 45 tons, thats only 1 ton heavier than the type 10, and 5 tons lighter than the Type 90. The Type 99 is 55 tons, which is 5 tons heavier than the type 90, but the type 96A weighs in at 42 tons.
Japan's closest possible enemies both have tanks that are just as light as theirs. China has mountainous terrain too, so they have tanks that were designed based on similar issues as Japan. Russia just has lighter MBTs in general due to doctrine.
I honestly think maybe Japan plans to move the tanks over bridges and then apply additional armor when they no longer have to be under the weight limit for infrastructure transport.
@@jonsong4592 Interesting info. Thanks.
Even if the side turret compartments were just filled with sand, they'd still be effective protection against RPGs and such.
One thing to mention about the weight is that the Type 10 is actually quite small. It's closer to T-90 than it is to Abrams. It's in fact 50cm narrower and only 8cm taller than the T-90. If you take their blueprints and overlay them, Abrams looks huge next to both of them. Type 10 has the same full-loadout weight as the T-90M and is similar in size.
Yeap. Why it looks proportional to bigger western MBTs is because of that shorter L44 gun. Optical illusion. Coz if it was wearing an L55 gun, its gonna look very “russian”, with a gun that looks too big for its turret.
Type 10 uses an obsolete layout, therefore it can't save any weight. Engine is not transversely mounted, 5 road wheels are spaced far apart which causes high ground pressure loading, the chassis itself is obsolete by the layout alone.
People tends to attribute heavy weight to armor, which is completely wrong in the Type 10's case.
The tank is extremely frontally heavy because of it's composite armor. To achieve a good frontal armor with low weight, they had to strip off all of it's side armor and focused it on it's front. Also, the tank have a smaller profile compared to it's Western counterparts like Leo 2, Challenger 2 and Abrams. The Type 10's hull dimensions are similar to the russian T-series, and the tank's height can be reduced thanks to it's hydropneumatic suspension. Having a smaller profile helps on increasing the protection, since you have a smaller area of the tank to be covered, it is possible to maintain the same level of protection with less weight or increase protection with the same weight.
This comes with downsides however, like possible having higher ground pressure because of less roadwheels, having cramped interior, carrying less fuel and less ammo. Upgrades are also hard to do without greatly increasing the tank's weight.
@@_awston1637 While all of that makes sense we just do't know what kind of armor and how much of it. Wheels seem to be spaced evenly, so i don't know.
@Waldel Martell If there is no auto loader that's 10 tons alone in extra weight. I have no clue about the loader, I didn't look it up, i commented on the bases of the cutaway graphic of the layout, and it's an obsolete layout. Who knows why they went with it.
For weight management the first thing that's done is optimization of the hull layout, and the first thing that's done there is transverse mounting of the engine to cut down on hull length.
I am not sure about most of your points, but I sorta agree with the road wheel part. I think this thing needs 6 road wheels like the Russian tanks. However, I have also heard odd number road wheels (5 or 7) is better than even number road wheels (6, 8) for traction and mobility. Perhaps they stuck with 5 because of that.
But 44 tons/10=4.4 tons of pressure per wheel
M1 Abrams 63 ton/14=4.5 tons of pressure per wheel
Leopard 2 61.7 ton/14=4.4 tons of pressure per wheel
Merkava Mk.4 65 ton/12=5.4 tons of pressure per wheel
Challenger 2 62.5 ton/12=5.2 tons of pressure per wheel
As for engines, maybe I am wrong but in automobiles having logtitudinal engines are better for weight distribution, stability, capability and mobility. That is why most high end luxury cars, sports cars and every other heavy duty truck have it while cheap economy cars have transverse layout. Maybe that is the logic?
Also the Type 10 has a V8 engine not a V12 like every other tank, so smaller length engine so longtitudinal is not as big of an issue.
Yes Type 10 have autoloader
@@_awston1637 yes look up surface area to volume ratio. If you increase the volume, the surface area's ratio decreases. Meaning u need more heavy armor to compensate for that. While a smaller volume object have higher surface area coverage ratio or in the tank's case protection. So u have more armor ratio per in smaller volume/size tanks which the type 90/10 are (compared to most western nato tanks) so u don't need heavy armor.
Japan has good performance, but the number of deployments is small and it will not be very useful for national defense!
They intended to make a production as slow as possible to keep a production plant running and workers still have a work to do. I think if war somehow broke out, they csn produce it fast and in sufficient number.
The Type 10 has 3 variants of it, the 40 ton version with minimal amor (used for transporting) a 44ton variant which is the one that everyone sees, and a 48ton variant with a lot of add-on composite, (there is no photo of this possibly due to the fact that it could have some new armor?) (sources are available to see but I don’t have any on hand as of right now, will be back with the sources)
I think that due to narrow roads, in urban areas, encounters would either be head on, or an attack on its rear. Also, the could fire from a fixed position in the country side that has been dug in. To counter attacking forces. Hence the front armor is disproportionately stronger. The odd slope on the sides of the turret, expose weakness to the sides, but augment deflection head on. I think its designed to protect the homeland, rather than operate offensively, like the Swedish S from a long time back, but, with a turret.
When the Abrams has a passionate night with the Leopard at a Tokyo love hotel, you get this
I think leclerc is more suitable rather than the abrams,because it has an autoloader
Lack of side armor isn't a limitation with the vehicles intended role. The JSDF is a defensive force, and would be deployed with support of infantry and IFV's in terrain. They aren't as much concerned with making advances, as they are containing an amphibious landing, so that air, artillery and even naval assets can then pulverize said landing. So, they're very mobile (to get into position to oppose the landing) with a good gun and fire control (to keep a potential landing force pinned in place, because the Type 10's will kill anything that sticks it's head out of hard cover). After that it's just waiting on the landing force to be reduced and eliminated by air, artillery and naval assets.
Finally i wanna see the type 10 discussion
Hey Red, I see you sharing a Rheinmetal presentation somewhere in the chat. Have you ever considered sharing your source documents with Patreons?
My guesses are the boxes in the turret are mockups (in place only for show). Nobody has seen the real modular armor installed yet. Possibly for transport and been classified. The thickness of the side armor is a constraint for rail transport. Carriage sizes are different than those that exist in another places. Before anybody comments, HSR aka Shinkansen, don't transport heavy cargo or any type of containers. In Japan, cargo trains use the *japanese regular tracks. In summary, since the type 61, the japanese tanks are for defense of the japanese territory. They are not expeditionary tanks (meaning, made to invade another countries). With exception of the type 90, they all are hit and run tanks. Therefore the type 16 MCV makes more sense.
Japan has similar problems to Indonesia and the Philippines when it comes to tanks, but it also shares many of the same strengths. Indonesia purchased a bunch of Leopard 2 tanks, but such a big and heavy (and expensive tank) will be borderline useless in Indonesia's topography and geography, given the many islands, poor infrastructure, thick jungles and mountainous terrain. Similarly, Japan has highly dense urban centres (and therefore lots of urban warfare), dense forests and mostly mountainous terrain, and infrastructure not suited for large or heavy vehicles. Traditional tank or mechanized warfare isn't really that viable or likely for either Indonesia or its enemies. Same goes for Japan. even though Japan can't viably use its larger and heavier (more western) Type 90 outside of Hokkaido, most other modern tanks from other nations wouldn't really be able to operate well in Japan to begin with, not to mention the fact that just getting them there would be difficult in the first place.
Type 16 MCV would be suitable for places like Indonesia and Phillippines. Singapore could actually turn its Terrex or Bionix into a light tank given it's a tiny island.
@@Joshua_N-A I think Indonesia would be better off purchasing a customised Hunter AFV from Singapore with the turret from the KF51 Panther. Alternatively they could hit up Brazil for the EE-T1 Osório which is a lightweight MBT, hit up Argentina for the TAM 2C, or maybe get the Dardo IFV or AS-21 Redback and fit a 105 or 120mm cannon turret from Cockerill or Leonardo.
Hey Red Effect did you see the new Iranian karrar tank auctlly being produced and having training etc(basically being used as I suspected and may I include that there is so far as(far as I known) 300 to 600 made of these tanks. May you do a review on the new tank and the newer versions of the tank. As it looks completely different than from 2016 when it was introduced. Thank you much and keep up the content because I prove others with your videos 🙏✌️❤️
External armor can always be added - upgraded to fit any situation.
You forgot to mention that the type 10 has extra composite armor modules that it can have mounted to the sides of it's hull and turret which would add an additional 4 tons if used.
Despite being a fan of this tank. You accurately stated its flaws, although I just think personally its flaws is what makes it Japanese really.
It’s not inherently flawed, the Japanese designed it the way it is on purpose, they just don’t expect it to get shot at much in action.
Yeah, pretty sure the turret sides don't have additional armor. At 2:05 the turret sides (from back to front) are labelled:
砲塔側面モジュール: Turret side module
砲塔側面カバー: Turret side cover
砲塔側面装甲モジュール: Turret side armor module
If the yellow module part was armored, they'd probably have added the "装甲" part and colored it red, just like the other part that's specifically labelled as "armored" (装甲).
Another Great Vid!!!!!
YOU SEEMS TO BE FIXATED AROUND "TRANSPORT" WEIGHT OF THE TANK CLAIMING THE TANK IS TOO LIGHT. JAPAN WANTS YOU TO KEEP THINKING THAT WAY WHILE OPERATIONAL WEIGHT IS UNDISCLOSED. THEY ONLY NEED TO MAINTAIN 1:7 TO 1:10 KILL RATIO AGAINST SOVIETS AND CHINA. VERY EASY JOB LMAO.
The Type 10 tank uses Crystal grain refined bulletproof steel plate , which have higher defense efficiency than the existing third-generation MBTs that use homogeneous rolled steel sheets.
Please make a video about the pro's of this tank 🙏
Given Japan's unique terrain requirements, I'd say they did a pretty great job of meeting them with this tank. Sure it's lighter than other contemporary MBTs, but packing a 120mm cannon, albeit shortened, and some very nice electronics and that variable suspension, II beleive it's an excellent addition to their armored forces.
Id like to see how they managed to create their new "Mono-crystalline" steel armor.
Supposedly it performs better than the steel armor on an Abrams and Id like to see how they might have managed to overcome the brittleness issues.
I think every japanese tanker would rather be in an Type-10 rather than a Type-74
Lack of budget
@@AK-wy9db * Laughs in Type-16 *
this tank dont feel either light or mobile in WT.. i dont care about armor.. but it needs to be alot faster and the turret traverse and gun elevation is horrible.
That's because Gaijin's _sub-par_ programmers have *no idea* how to implement Type 10's transmission and the management *doesn't care* about that, the tank's FCS or the Japanese techtree in general. This tank was added only because *alot* of vocal players wanted it in the game and Gaijin thought that'd mean a quick buck.
@@bickboose9364 and then there's forum members like NNHack who are just straight up delusional on how things work irl. I'm gonna paraphrase what he said as "Eastern Asian countries don't have the experience of German, American, or Russian tank designers so that why their tanks are like swiss cheese".
@@PerciusLive Lol, yeah. No point in even trying to argue with people like that. Anyway, what we can be pretty much 99% sure of is that the Type 10's maneuverability and gun handling should be superior to Type 90's. They'll probably be fixed sometime in the next decade knowing Gaijin's work efficiency.
@@bickboose9364 well, if the Type 10 still keeps eating s*** like it is, they should give it its actual 3.1sec reload. Same goes for the type 90 gettings its 3.5 sec, or fixing its armor, since i dont see them dropping that down to 10.3, where it should be.
@@PerciusLive I highly doubt that'll happen. The very fact they gave those tanks even 4 second reloads is a miracle. If Japan starts making them more money they might consider your proposal, but the tech tree sucks so that's not going to happen.
Could the 3 holes on the sides in front and back be used to attach some sort of modular side armor kits (ERA/NERA)? Same question goes for turret space - could it be designed in a way to drop special ERA/NERA bricks in them with different thicknesses?
Those boxes could be placeholders for future reactive modules.
Buut noooooo, nano crystal indestructuble he-I mean anime armour!1!1!1!1
#RedEffect All your videos are making me so damn hungry to start playing WAR THUNDER damn it!!!!!!!!!! 🙂
These not meant to fight, just pose on the islands to deter people to even thinking of doping stupid stuff. So they are fine to have a glass cannon.
where did you find that picture with the type 10 with the hard kill active protection system upgrade?
As someone who can read Japanese sources, there are a lot of mistakes in this video.
Feel free to elaborate?
sigma grindset #177013, you don't need armor if you don't plan to get hit in the first place.
Bruh. Legend.
cringe
NOPE Edgy boy.
Good design to be lighter if there's no extra armour. They'll planning to make their own extra amour that is much more harder in the future. That could be only for representation, the next tank with similar features but can have more armour to be attached, the name Type-10A, and Type 10B.
The armor of the Type 10 is not weak, and as for the car body, the weight is lighter than the Type 90, but the composite armor is doubled. In addition, steel plates other than composite armor miniaturize the crystal grains in the steel plate, which is a polycrystalline body, increasing the area of the crystal grain boundary and dispersing the stress caused by enemy bullets.Although it is ammunition that enters the car body, this (and the armor) is not open to the public, but it is expected that only a few rounds will enter the car body, and a dozen rounds will enter the ammunition depot, and several other rounds will enter.Also, the armor around the gun is not fake, but it is possible to remove and install it depending on the situation.I'm sorry for writing such a long sentence. Also, this was translated by Google Translate, so I'm sorry if the sentence is strange.