Against Chinese tanks: "No problem, victory is ours!" Against Soviet, British, and American tanks: "Holy crap, these guys aren't just using go-karts with machineguns!"
@@maxkronader5225 : China's most potent tank before WWII - the Vickers 6-ton Mark E tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/china/vickers-mark-e-type-b-kuomintang-service/
@@timonsolus I was humorously referring to the bulk of Chinese armor; which consisted primarily of elderly armored cars and Pzkpfw Is. Compared to those the Vickers 6 tonner was practically a Panther!😁
An often overlooked factor in the Pacific Theater in WWII is that the Japanese had basically been fighting in Asia for a decade by the time their war became part of WWII. It explains why Japanese industry could not innovate like that of the other major powers and why the Japanese had a difficult time adequately manning many areas. By the time the USA started rolling back the Japanese Empire in 1943, the Japanese had been expending men, treasure, and equipment for 14 years.
Japan could innovate and they did... they just couldn't build it or ship it. Japan was able to develop an indigenous jet fighter, modern tanks, and several other cutting edge systems... but they never were able to build more than a handful because their industry was being used just trying to keep replenishing what they had.
@@porksterbob That and what industry capability/capactiy they did have tended to be used fo be used from for theIJN asnd than the IJA because of their interservicee rivlalry and hte IJN becomiung the dominant branch. This meant tha they got priority in terms of raw materials and industy capacity and the IJA were, more or less, given what was left over by the Navy.
@@BlaBla-pf8mf Japan was fighting in China from 1931. The full on war with ALL of China didn't start until 1937, but as this video says, Japan was fighting major provincial actions in 1933, 1934, 1935.
@hognoxious Likewise. But the 1/72 would've been smaller than a cigarette packet, IIRC. I also had Tamiya 1/35 stuff, obviously bigger than cigarette packets..
I can't wait to learn about my favourite part of japanese armor doctrine: The Imperial Land Navy! In other words: Naval artillery, shortened, or not, simply put on a tank chassis, like the Ji-Ro, the Chi-Ha LG or the Chi-Ha short gun. Guess, that comes later.
**Japanese Armour Doctrine abridged simplified:** Don't fight Russia, deal with China first before announcing your views on America and Hawaii, use China's infrastructure to make better tanks and lastly don't invoke the wrath of the British Empire at the same time. Oh you took British Malaya? Well then forget all this and go back to doing what you were doing...
couldnt. the US very much had ALL of its eyes on china. japan couldnt push farther into china without facing massive backlash from the US. which is where japan was mainly getting its oil and tools from. as for british malaya it had mostly what japan needed, oil and rubber. really the best case for japan is hope to god someone could hold the US attention for long enough to build up manchuko to have more or less a mini USA in terms of factory output. all while somehow steam rolling china and south east asia but no one bother looking there in the first place to put any pressure onto japan. almost requires a hoi4 game where the allies are nothing but derps allowing manchuko to out pace the germans in sub spam...
@@McTeerZor Oh your very welcome. I'm more than happy to give out a good chuckle and laugh, its the best medicine, and is needed especially in these times. I hope you have a good day!
There are a few problems with this idea. #1: "use China's infrastructure to make better tanks" China had WORSE Infrastructure than Japan at this point, they were less industrialized.... You might mean natural resources. But even then, that's not technology, that's just iron/coal. They are still missing oil. #2: Ya that's what they where doing, and the USA told them to stop or lose their oil imports. #3: When they attacked the USA, pretty much everyone else was going to side against them anyways, attacking Colonial holdings in the area is the same thing you are talking about before. Grab as much natural resources as you can as quickly as you can.... The issue is quite simple.. Japan was never going to win in a war against the USA. They were doing what you were talking about, its just that the moment the US said "Do what we tell you or lose your oil." They were done, their options were do what the USA told them or attack the USA... Also as a side note, better tanks would not have really even helped the Japanese. You kind of forget the Japanese still had a 3.5 million man army at the end of the war in China, it didn't help fight the Americans at all.
Calling tanks armored cars was a rather transparent attempt to subvert the regulations. If they had called them combat cars, on the other hand, no one would have ever noticed the subterfuge.
Or dig in and heavily camouflage your mofo tank and shell the clueless US marines at the beachead and if they advance with tanks of their own wait until they come so close that you can shoot with your tiny low velocity gun through the enemy tank's gun barell at the moment they are reloading...
Most Japanese railways are laid to "Cape Gauge" of 3 feet 6 inches. with associated small clearances. Most of the world uses Standard Gauge (4 feet 8 1/4 inches) and Russia uses 5 feet. So you can see the limitations from the start on tank design. "Japanese national network operated by Japan Railways Group employs narrow gauge 1,067 mm (3 ft 6 in) and has maximum width of 3,000 mm (9 ft 10 in) and maximum height of 4,100 mm (13 ft 5 in); however, a number JR lines were constructed as private railways prior to nationalisation in the early 20th century, and feature loading gauges smaller than the standard. These include the Chūō Main Line west of Takao, the Minobu Line, and the Yosan Main Line west of Kan'onji (3,900 mm (12 ft 10 in) height). Nevertheless, advances in pantograph technology have largely eliminated the need for separate rolling stock in these areas.
Surprised col. B, ur J's RR history. Butto the world's standard ga. is nut 4' 8 1/4" buttto it is 4' 8 1/2" (hey, why didn't they come up w 4' 8.0" or 5' 0" like the Russians n Eastern block did instd of this funny mix of fractional?). Yes, Brits used and still do, the std ga. But their tunnels n bridges restricted the loading and the width of their RR eqmnt. Thus, though Brits had the std ga tracks, their locos and RR cars were shmaller than the continental Europe's and much smaller still against wider and taller, and more pulling power of the US locos of std ga. same wheel arrangements. Even the Russian's 5' 0" ga'd locos were no match against the pulling power of the US engines. E.g., N&W Y6b 2-8-8-2 (which has more power than the better known UP 4-8-8-4 loco, though this UP engine was much faster climbing the mountains). Going back to J's tanks, i can understand the cohesive tank division, aircraft, AT units, Infantry mobile units etc couldn't be kept as a whole since J lacked the resources. As this video author showed, they were quickly disbanded to use them in piecemeal et al once the mission was done. This wld b true to cover the vast area of Manchuria and China; then the SE Asia and the Pacific. Their overstretched Logistic took too much of the toll. Only the US, Russia can have the total resources, including oil, minerals, industrial output, and manpower (well, Russians didn't have much manpower but defi netly had more than the Germans) to project the attack capability. J had none of these so w their pitiful resources, they did well against the Chinese, Russians, and at the early stage of the Pacific War. Though the US n USSR can have disasters, losing tremendous amt of mat'l etc., they can easily recover from their loss. Not J. One 'Bang' attack n One 'Boom' loss would just end their ambition vs. the others. Let's c what CCP can do now. They gathered $$$ from all those Made-in-China and acquired all of the US tech free and w EZ spying. Maybe China can now afford to do more than one 'Bang' and take more than one Big 'Boom' loss against the USA and even against the Russians. No, Canada has all the minerals, oils, gas, etc. w isolation as the USA butto they can't become a world pwr bc. she doesn't have nuf population.
The 1m gauge was influence from french i think , southern china and Vietnam - Cambodia also used the 1m gauge well the Chinese now standardized to the standard gauge
The fact that you work along side the World War Two channel is awesome. I have watched almost everything they have done, and a lot of your stuff, because of them. I would love to see you show off more of you model tanks. If you have a model of the ones you are talking about then it would be cool to see them sitting in front of you.
A very illuminating presentation indeed. I was glad to see that my recent book was used as source material. Keep up the good work. I look forward to watching more of your videos.
These are great, work as audiobooks quite nicely. Still, I would like to see an episode how German armoder doctrine and organisations changed betveen poland 1939 and 1941 begining of Barbarossa. German panzerdivions was hole different animal by 1941. Same to the others once they got their shit together later in the war, especially the Soviet, who had to (?) adapt as they went.
He is going through the relevant countries (major WW2 participants, I assume) starting with the 1918-1939/42 period. I think Chieftains is close to having covered all relevant countries, but somehow I don’t think an episode about US armour 1950-80 is the next logical step. I hope he’ll do an entire 1939-45 doctrine series next. But yes, a post 1945/Cold War series would be amazing.
Basically the PDs (Panzer Divisions) were split into 2, with resulting reduced hitting power (with ranks filled in with grenadiers, etc) but that way, the Germans "instantly" created twice as many PDs as what they originally had, thus giving more tactical & stategic flexibility
Eh, conservative in this context isn't political. It means approach to new ideas or doctrine. Conservative in this case means opposed to reform, or; "Tank is subservient to the infantry". Politically, Tojo wasn't necessarily a conservative as far as I know - he was a fairly moderate officer in the army (in comparison to radical officers who wanted a country ruled directly by the army with no civilian government), and a royalist.
@@SonsOfLorgar Not inherently so. For example, during Carlist wars, Liberals frequently would side with the Queens of Spain and not the pretender Don Carlos. Being a royalist implies allegiance to a person holding a certain position or title, which may hold various political views, not to a ideology.
@@filthyweaboo2694 Their 'liberalism' was fairly limited, or, one might say, conservative, and the system they created collapsed into a military dictatorship anyway.
I really hope you'll keep doing these after the WWII channel finishes the job. I want to hear Soviet Armour Doctrine from the Cold War, when they were planning to send Second Guards Tank Army and Third Shock Army swarming over West Germany. THAT would be the armour doctrine video to end all armour doctrine videos.
I used to read the Soviet doctrines and tactics manuals from the 60s to 80s. My unit was clearing out old versions and receiving new so I asked for light bedtime reading lol.
Loved the video! I was surprised that there wasn't more emphasis on the portability of Japanese tanks. In your numerous talks about the Sherman, you make very clear how "We need to be able to ship it in a boat" was a key consideration for the US War Department. It didn't come up in this video, (though it was kind of implied) the Japanese army would have been designing their tanks with the same constraint in mind. They couldn't reliably move 30+ ton tank by ship. It was also not emphasized overtly, but Japanese tanks were built for the horrible infrastructure of China. This meant that they could be deployed places where the heavier allied wouldn't be deployed.
YES!!!!!! I love this guys briefs, fascinating hearing the history of their early mech battles in china and that the Japanese had proper APCs though i guess not in time. Just wish the great war had more money to do this stuff more.
My father-in-law was a marine in ww2 and was involved in the island warfare.. He told a story about him and a marine Sgt that ran into a small Japanese tank. He said they took the tank out. I said so you had a bazooka? He said “we were marines. We didn’t have many anti armor anything.” I said so grenades? “We were marines and we ran out of those early on.” I asked well how did you two take out the tank.. “We were marines.. we had rifles ….” He never explained further…
Great presentation and pleased to see a subject that is known but not covered that well. I found that out while helping the author, David McCormack, with the book a couple of years ago. Oh by the way, you did a nice job with pronouncing Japanese names. I try but end up butchering. Anyway, well done bravo!
Tbere wernt that many nations with armour at all. Australia Romania Finland and Hungary of the smaller nations involved in the war. Maybe the Netherlands, I dont think they actually used their tanks though.
@@ineednochannelyoutube5384 The Netherlands did use theirs against the Germans but they performed horribly I think the Cheiftain actually has a video on them and how the US tests of them basically concluded they were straight up awful :/
@@AnAngryMarauder The Italians at the lower ranks were competent & fought like lions when they had the equipment and manpower to put up a decent fight. However they were unfortunately saddled with an officer corps & command staff of complete and utter rank stupidity. Obviously there were a few good officers in the army, navy and air force but lets be real they were few and far between and it showed.
Good old Nicky. Always nonchalent unless with Sofilein. My favorite Nickolas moment is his description of the pre WW II Soviet tank evolution. He starts out by saying he 'has NOT been looking forwards to doing it', (gesturing to the tortured political miasma disrupting the development of Soviet tanks) but when saying 'it is enough to drive a man to drink' thereby quenching his thirst with 'apple juice' I began to question just how sincere the earlier 'not looking forwards to doing this' statement really was!
@@looinrims In the UK such nicknames names are terms of endearment not disparagement.. It is called humor, I made the important point of saying how long I have enjoyed his shows. Get a grip, I have nothing but huge repect for Mr Nicholas Moran which is why I have spent literally many days listenig to his educational yet also entertaining show.I also like 'Greg's 'Airplane videos as well, as I used to be in the RAF. As for the Mr Moran his videos just get better over time IMHO! I also like to make jokes about Malt Whiskies, alright??
Just want to thank you for the attention to very fine detail , with an overall passion for the subject matter . Of course , being “Chieftain” you already know this , however , still I feel compelled to simply show appreciation via , a big thank you for being you .
Hopefully you will be going a bit more into depth discussing the Louisiana Exercise than others have before Chief. Who, where, when, why, and what was learned.
I often wonder how the Imperial Japanese Army would have innovated if it hadn't been in the Second Sino-Japanese War for so long. Fighting an massive enemy of light and heavy infantry with little to no heavy weapons really gave the IJA a false sense of capability in modern warfare. The Soviet incidents did scare some, but it is clear by 1941 that the Japanese still thought light infantry could rule the battlefield despite the massive parks of artillery and tanks that every other great power had, even Italy. For sure, Japan's light infantry doctrines (and the tanks they made for it) are underrated at times, but several million dead Japanese soldiers and ultimate defeat pretty much sums up how effective those doctrines were in the end.
The Japanese didn't lose because the army was inefficient, they lost because the sea war. Sure they were split between China and the Pacific but even if the best case scenario (Japanese had won China, with all the resources and the trade routes, and moved every single bit of manpower into the Navy after Pearl Harbor) the Americans could still outproduce them. 3 million soldiers & 300,000 tanks sitting on an island with perfect doctrine, can't defeat a blockade.
@@sixthugger Here's the story in detail - from the Nihon Kaigun site, "Why Japan Really Lost The War" (it's in English) www.combinedfleet.com/economic.htm
Japan developed a light infantry doctrine because it was what they had and what would work in the areas they were fighting. Japan knew they lacked industry, they knew they were going to be putting people at the end of a long logistics tail, they knew that the areas they would be fighting in were not going to have a lot of roads and rails. So they focused on the light infantry. As they said here though, they built armored divisions, they had artillery. But Japan is holding an empire larger than the German one with more population, light infantry is the only way to do it. As the war went on, the Japanese army would dive into the elan of infantry more and more, but again, what choice did they have? They couldn't move heavy weapons, they couldn't build more vehicles, they had no fuel... A focus on infantry tactics here is Japanese generals coming to the realization that all they can count on to have when fighting the Western Allies is their infantry. They'd love some tanks and a ton more artillery but they knew they weren't going to get it.
I'd be interested to see you take a look at the use of Heavy tanks in the jungles of the Pacific/Asia, especially the Australian use of Matilda IIs in New Guinea
It's awesome that you are keeping your talks in the same time-line as the World War 2 channel's Week by Week series. So I can watch your video and not find out who wins. .it's mid 1942,and I'm getting pretty worried 😕
Wow! I knew about the expertly and aggressively wielded tanks on Malaya but I didn’t know that they had a fully tracked APC design. It had to have been one of the first in the world. The Japanese were no joke. If they had had more resources and industrial capacity then they would have given the Allies a real combined arms spanking and we would be reading all manner of books on WW2 Japanese armored doctrine and employment in 2021.
The Japanese were failed by their logistics. They had many modern weapons, but by the end of 1942 they lacked the industry to build it and the shipping to move it.
Awesome video ! just some engine info for other's type 94 built in 1934 used till late 1942 powered by 160 hp Mitsubishi air cooled diesel. Also type 95 built 1935 used till 1943 powered by 110 hp Mitsubishi air cooled diesel.. Thought others would like to know ..
I love the crazy stuff that never got past early prototype and mockup. All the high tier stuff in WoT that WG mostly made up for example. Like fatter TOG II's.
Maybe it was the IJN influence, but the Japanese trained intensively for night fighting. To this end, one of the more interesting features of at least one of their tanks was bullet-resistant headlights. Not by using heavy armoured glass, but by the simple expedient of mounting the actual lamp inside the hull and using a piece of polished stainless steel as a reflector. Thus rifle bullets would shatter the front glass and punch holes in the reflector, but the light still worked. Adequate and effective for night assaults on infantry positions . Too bad the the targeted infantry had a halfway decent anti-tank gun.
My dad this week visited the War Memorial in Rabaul, PNG. They still have some Japanese armour - a tank & an APC. Both of which didn't look like Nick would fit in, let alone multiple crew 🤔
We had absolutely NO doctrine of any kind for tanks. Not a rudimentary or outdated one, but simply none. We had precisely one "tank division" (quotation mark needed), which was 2 brigades, supported by foot infantry. Other than that, four "independent companies" (read: a semi-improvised unit to look good on paper) of tanks AND 30-31 (depends on sources) companies of TK-3 and TKS tankettes. If we remove tankettes from the picture, there were less than 200 tanks in Poland, spread all over the border. If we account those tank companies, then the idea was to just have 2-4 tanks per company, and said company being part of a regular infantry batallion. If this wasn't enough, Poland deployed over 100 Renault FTs. In 1939. The result was a tank "force" that was used predominately as poorly-organised (no radio) recon for infantry and spread so thinly, it was unable to accomplish anything of any tactical or strategic value, not to mention vast majority of tanks being "females", armed with machine guns. Thus, at BEST, it was useful for ambushes against equally obsolete and underarmoured Panzer Is, and being butt-fucked by just about anything thrown at them in an actual combat. If this wasn't enough, there was ZERO communication (Polish army was in the same time super-centralised AND lacked any sort of long-range communication, THEN the HQ simply bailed the country), so nobody knew what was going on and where, often sending tanks to places that were already captured and/or overrun. Doctrine? Please, they were just happy that they have tanks to flex muscles on parades (Poland was ruled by an incompetent, nepotistic military junta, don't let anyone tell you that was a democratic government), and the average Polish staffer was someone from political, rather than military appointment (including the marshal of Poland and the de facto ruler of the country)
Story told to me by my wife's uncle before he died. Combat on Okinawa: Our outfit was in a ditch. Other than the ditch we were caught out in the open. Five Japanese tanks were approaching us, in line, across the open area. We were pinned down and were soon to be cut up by the tanks. One of the guys who was normally the company sc**w up took up a bazooka. He had to stand up to fire the bazooka. He stood up and fired. The first tank in line exploded. The first tank blew up so hard that it caused the tank behind him to explode. The second tank exploded so hard that it caused the third tank to explode. The fourth and fifth tanks split, and one came around the line on one side and the other came around the other side. The guy stood up and fired a second bazooka round. Tank four blew up. Tank five fired its main gun and struck the guy smack in the chest. Tank five then turned around and tried to run. Japanese tanks were vulnerable in the rear. We must have fired a thousand rounds into the back of that tank. The tank caught fire, then exploded. The guy should have gotten the CMH, but there were no officers present.
always nice to hear about more obscure armor... and on that front will there be a video for the smaller Axis powers? Hungary, Romania, and Bulgaria for example.
It sounds like their doctrine was evolving and the evolution was logical. Unfortunately, or fortunately for their enemies, their industry was unable to keep up with the doctrine and they were never quite capable of putting what might have been sound doctrine into practice. And yes, like other nations, there was internal push back against change even when it was obvious to most that the current method wasn't working.
Speaking of japanese tanks (i came to think of rivets) are you ever gonna do a inside the hatch of a P40 tank? The tank has a strange interwar tank feel to it and probably has an interesting development history.
Yes! Nicholas i have been waiting for this for months! guess the nations you shall cover next will be quite obscure? be cool to Hear the Israel, or Egyptian, Syrian Tank Doctrine from 1950-1980,
A question for your next Q&A. How do you think Percie Hobart and the 79th armored division would have faired in the Pacific theater during WWII? From what I know about him he seemed very keen to be the tip of the spear in Normandy and some of the unique tanks in his division could have been quite useful in the amphibious assaults in the Pacific.
Considering that a Sherman flail could probably crush any Japanese tank in melee, I suspect they would do rather well. On a serious note, I have seen images of improvised flails fitted to Marine Corps Shermans in the Pacific.
You may be closer to good Japanese pronunciation than you think! Under the most common romanization the consonants are English, the vowels are Spanish, and you say all of those vowels. It's atonal so you can't go _too_ wrong if you stick to that.
Will you be doing minor WW2 powers as well one day? Would be interesting to hear about Hungarian, Polish, Romanian, Finnish doctrine, even if the more easily accessible information on that might be really limited.
The glacis plate was made from beautifully enamelled strips of iron, bound with leather cord, 12 layers of bamboo cane and over 35 layers of exquisite silk.
Or, even more likely, Nishi's force was that size, strength and composition because that is what he could get his hands on and fit into the hundred trucks he could find. The amount of fuel at hand which he could also pack into those trucks probably played a role as well. I'm no soldier, but reading military history has taught me, expediency often outweighs idealised theory.
You may have one of the most fragile tank force. But if you can bring them to places that others can't go say the jungle. Being the ones with a tank beats being the ones without.
A US Navy 40mm Bofors with M81A1 AP ammo claimed 70mm of penetration at 0 yards and 30mm of penetration at 2000 yards. The only number for 20mm Oerlikon penetration that I've seen is from a Russian source with unknown ammo, which claims a maximum of 40mm of penetration, dropping to 30mm at 400 yards. That means they should both be decent weapons against the pre-war Japanese tanks, but would be marginal against the upgraded wartime tanks.
"May we please have some steel, sir?"
Japanese Army to Japanese Navy, 1936
No.
Japanese Navy to Japanese Army, 1936
Japanese navy would throw steel in the water before letting the army have some
considering the interservice rivalry, im sure they werent that polite
Japanese armor doctrine: "What if we come up against tanks?" "Well, then we're f*cked six ways to Sunday!"
LOL
Japanese armor doctrine from the foreign pov:
Bless em they are trying
Against Chinese tanks:
"No problem, victory is ours!"
Against Soviet, British, and American tanks:
"Holy crap, these guys aren't just using go-karts with machineguns!"
@@maxkronader5225 : China's most potent tank before WWII - the Vickers 6-ton Mark E
tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/china/vickers-mark-e-type-b-kuomintang-service/
@@timonsolus
I was humorously referring to the bulk of Chinese armor; which consisted primarily of elderly armored cars and Pzkpfw Is. Compared to those the Vickers 6 tonner was practically a Panther!😁
An often overlooked factor in the Pacific Theater in WWII is that the Japanese had basically been fighting in Asia for a decade by the time their war became part of WWII. It explains why Japanese industry could not innovate like that of the other major powers and why the Japanese had a difficult time adequately manning many areas. By the time the USA started rolling back the Japanese Empire in 1943, the Japanese had been expending men, treasure, and equipment for 14 years.
Japan could innovate and they did... they just couldn't build it or ship it. Japan was able to develop an indigenous jet fighter, modern tanks, and several other cutting edge systems... but they never were able to build more than a handful because their industry was being used just trying to keep replenishing what they had.
@@porksterbob
Japanese scientists and engineers could innovate, their industry could not.
@@porksterbob That and what industry capability/capactiy they did have tended to be used fo be used from for theIJN asnd than the IJA because of their interservicee rivlalry and hte IJN becomiung the dominant branch. This meant tha they got priority in terms of raw materials and industy capacity and the IJA were, more or less, given what was left over by the Navy.
@@BlaBla-pf8mf Japan was fighting in China from 1931.
The full on war with ALL of China didn't start until 1937, but as this video says, Japan was fighting major provincial actions in 1933, 1934, 1935.
Everything was a variation on a theme from the west.
I just noticed the tiny tank between the Abrams and Bradley in his table
It's very cute. The middle tank is usually relevant to the topic of the video, this one looks like a tiny Type 89.
@hognoxious Likewise. But the 1/72 would've been smaller than a cigarette packet, IIRC.
I also had Tamiya 1/35 stuff, obviously bigger than cigarette packets..
@@jonathanbaron-crangle5093 wait till you see 1/100 models
I can't wait to learn about my favourite part of japanese armor doctrine: The Imperial Land Navy! In other words: Naval artillery, shortened, or not, simply put on a tank chassis, like the Ji-Ro, the Chi-Ha LG or the Chi-Ha short gun. Guess, that comes later.
BIG GUN
"Shortened, or not" killed me lol
I've always loved the idea of Land Battleships
I didnt knew about this division ! I wanna learn more about it!
"Schlachschiffkanone?"
"Ja, Hans. Ja."
"Not to exceed 15 tons" winds up 18 tons. Ya. Sounds about right for a military order of any country.
Gengre savvy buyers take this in account. If max 20 tons are acceptable ask for 15 tons and you get 18 tons... 😉
Also I need that in 2 weeks for 3 years from now.
**Japanese Armour Doctrine abridged simplified:** Don't fight Russia, deal with China first before announcing your views on America and Hawaii, use China's infrastructure to make better tanks and lastly don't invoke the wrath of the British Empire at the same time. Oh you took British Malaya? Well then forget all this and go back to doing what you were doing...
Took me a second, definitely buffered. Then it Hit me, spat out my water, and had a good chuckle. Thank you.
couldnt.
the US very much had ALL of its eyes on china.
japan couldnt push farther into china without facing massive backlash from the US. which is where japan was mainly getting its oil and tools from.
as for british malaya it had mostly what japan needed, oil and rubber. really the best case for japan is hope to god someone could hold the US attention for long enough to build up manchuko to have more or less a mini USA in terms of factory output.
all while somehow steam rolling china and south east asia but no one bother looking there in the first place to put any pressure onto japan.
almost requires a hoi4 game where the allies are nothing but derps allowing manchuko to out pace the germans in sub spam...
@@McTeerZor Oh your very welcome. I'm more than happy to give out a good chuckle and laugh, its the best medicine, and is needed especially in these times. I hope you have a good day!
There are a few problems with this idea.
#1: "use China's infrastructure to make better tanks"
China had WORSE Infrastructure than Japan at this point, they were less industrialized....
You might mean natural resources. But even then, that's not technology, that's just iron/coal. They are still missing oil.
#2: Ya that's what they where doing, and the USA told them to stop or lose their oil imports.
#3: When they attacked the USA, pretty much everyone else was going to side against them anyways, attacking Colonial holdings in the area is the same thing you are talking about before. Grab as much natural resources as you can as quickly as you can....
The issue is quite simple..
Japan was never going to win in a war against the USA.
They were doing what you were talking about, its just that the moment the US said "Do what we tell you or lose your oil." They were done, their options were do what the USA told them or attack the USA...
Also as a side note, better tanks would not have really even helped the Japanese.
You kind of forget the Japanese still had a 3.5 million man army at the end of the war in China, it didn't help fight the Americans at all.
@@captainseyepatch3879 Its a joke.
Calling tanks armored cars was a rather transparent attempt to subvert the regulations. If they had called them combat cars, on the other hand, no one would have ever noticed the subterfuge.
look up modern japanese "destroyers"
I've been so looking forward to more episodes in this series
Same. They're what got me started with watching the channel.
This a great series. I have been waiting patiently for this and the Americans.
I'm waiting for the Elbonia episode.
Indeed I've been looking forward to this one.
@@benholroyd5221 you mean the armour program of The Netherlands
Japanese Armor Doctorine: "Drive me closer, I wish to use my heirloom katana to hit them."
*because the machine forged piece of katana shaped shit the army issued broke on an insubordinate chinese civilian last week...
is this the worst meme ever ?
@@mikepette4422 Real history makes for terrible memes.
BANZAAAAI
Or dig in and heavily camouflage your mofo tank and shell the clueless US marines at the beachead and if they advance with tanks of their own wait until they come so close that you can shoot with your tiny low velocity gun through the enemy tank's gun barell at the moment they are reloading...
First time anyone tried to explain anything about Japanese Armor. Thanks Chieftain. I enjoyed this one immensely.
'Tracked form of armoured car' no arguing with that logic.
A popular strategy of the time, the same thing happened in the US and France.
Reminds me of the early Royal Navy designation of "through deck cruiser" for the Invincible class.
Today's topic by Chieftain, the Japanese tank force, or "Stop poking holes in my Armor"... ^~^
You mean: Watashi no yoroi ni anawoakeru no o yame nasai?
@@Omnihil777 ^~^ yes that, I presume...
Or:
"Oh crap, they don't all have armor like the Chinese did!"
@@maxkronader5225 ^~^ War-Thunder... No Armor is Best Armor...
"STOPU POKINGERU HOLESARU IN MY SHIPPURU"
Most Japanese railways are laid to "Cape Gauge" of 3 feet 6 inches. with associated small clearances. Most of the world uses Standard Gauge (4 feet 8 1/4 inches) and Russia uses 5 feet. So you can see the limitations from the start on tank design.
"Japanese national network operated by Japan Railways Group employs narrow gauge 1,067 mm (3 ft 6 in) and has maximum width of 3,000 mm (9 ft 10 in) and maximum height of 4,100 mm (13 ft 5 in); however, a number JR lines were constructed as private railways prior to nationalisation in the early 20th century, and feature loading gauges smaller than the standard. These include the Chūō Main Line west of Takao, the Minobu Line, and the Yosan Main Line west of Kan'onji (3,900 mm (12 ft 10 in) height). Nevertheless, advances in pantograph technology have largely eliminated the need for separate rolling stock in these areas.
Railway gauge differences have been the bane of invading armories since railroads were created.
Still, the loading gauge was wider than in Britain.
Size of the tracks is one thing, but other obstacles like tunnels are a whole other consideration.
Surprised col. B, ur J's RR history. Butto the world's standard ga. is
nut 4' 8 1/4" buttto it is 4' 8 1/2" (hey, why didn't they come up w
4' 8.0" or 5' 0" like the Russians n Eastern block did instd of this
funny mix of fractional?). Yes, Brits used and still do, the std ga.
But their tunnels n bridges restricted the loading and the width of
their RR eqmnt. Thus, though Brits had the std ga tracks, their
locos and RR cars were shmaller than the continental Europe's and
much smaller still against wider and taller, and more pulling power
of the US locos of std ga. same wheel arrangements.
Even the Russian's 5' 0" ga'd locos were no match against the pulling power of the US engines. E.g., N&W Y6b 2-8-8-2 (which has more power than the better
known UP 4-8-8-4 loco, though this UP engine was much faster
climbing the mountains).
Going back to J's tanks, i can understand the cohesive tank division, aircraft,
AT units, Infantry mobile units etc couldn't be kept as a whole since J lacked
the resources. As this video author showed, they were quickly disbanded to
use them in piecemeal et al once the mission was done. This wld b true to
cover the vast area of Manchuria and China; then the SE Asia and the
Pacific. Their overstretched Logistic took too much of the toll. Only the US,
Russia can have the total resources, including oil, minerals, industrial
output, and manpower (well, Russians didn't have much manpower but defi
netly had more than the Germans) to project the attack capability. J had
none of these so w their pitiful resources, they did well against the Chinese,
Russians, and at the early stage of the Pacific War. Though the US n USSR
can have disasters, losing tremendous amt of mat'l etc., they can easily
recover from their loss. Not J. One 'Bang' attack n One 'Boom' loss would
just end their ambition vs. the others. Let's c what CCP can do now. They
gathered $$$ from all those Made-in-China and acquired all of the US tech
free and w EZ spying. Maybe China can now afford to do more than one
'Bang' and take more than one Big 'Boom' loss against the USA and even
against the Russians. No, Canada has all the minerals, oils, gas, etc. w
isolation as the USA butto they can't become a world pwr bc. she doesn't
have nuf population.
The 1m gauge was influence from french i think , southern china and Vietnam - Cambodia also used the 1m gauge well the Chinese now standardized to the standard gauge
The fact that you work along side the World War Two channel is awesome. I have watched almost everything they have done, and a lot of your stuff, because of them. I would love to see you show off more of you model tanks. If you have a model of the ones you are talking about then it would be cool to see them sitting in front of you.
Japanese WWII Armored Force in a nutshell.
Japanese Sailor: "This ship has good steel!"
Japanese Tanker: "That was supposed to be OUR steel." 😑
Fascinating. A topic rarely covered.
A very illuminating presentation indeed. I was glad to see that my recent book was used as source material. Keep up the good work. I look forward to watching more of your videos.
These are great, work as audiobooks quite nicely. Still, I would like to see an episode how German armoder doctrine and organisations changed betveen poland 1939 and 1941 begining of Barbarossa. German panzerdivions was hole different animal by 1941. Same to the others once they got their shit together later in the war, especially the Soviet, who had to (?) adapt as they went.
I think the same.. about the audio book. Or sleep help
Can we get a video on American armor doctrine between 1950 and 1980
He is going through the relevant countries (major WW2 participants, I assume) starting with the 1918-1939/42 period.
I think Chieftains is close to having covered all relevant countries, but somehow I don’t think an episode about US armour 1950-80 is the next logical step.
I hope he’ll do an entire 1939-45 doctrine series next. But yes, a post 1945/Cold War series would be amazing.
Basically the PDs (Panzer Divisions) were split into 2, with resulting reduced hitting power (with ranks filled in with grenadiers, etc) but that way, the Germans "instantly" created twice as many PDs as what they originally had, thus giving more tactical & stategic flexibility
Tojo was somewhat of a conservative. The understatement of the year.
Expansionism = Conservatism
Up = Down
Right of Mao = Literally Baddolf Bimbler
Eh, conservative in this context isn't political. It means approach to new ideas or doctrine.
Conservative in this case means opposed to reform, or;
"Tank is subservient to the infantry".
Politically, Tojo wasn't necessarily a conservative as far as I know - he was a fairly moderate officer in the army (in comparison to radical officers who wanted a country ruled directly by the army with no civilian government), and a royalist.
@@filthyweaboo2694 beeing royalist has conservativism as a prerequisite...
@@SonsOfLorgar Not inherently so. For example, during Carlist wars, Liberals frequently would side with the Queens of Spain and not the pretender Don Carlos. Being a royalist implies allegiance to a person holding a certain position or title, which may hold various political views, not to a ideology.
@@filthyweaboo2694 Their 'liberalism' was fairly limited, or, one might say, conservative, and the system they created collapsed into a military dictatorship anyway.
Having recently noticed how I keep watching and re-watching the channel backlog, I very much appreciate this.
Speaking of type 97 chi-ha's. Did you ever complete that model??
I have bee waiting the painting episode since May 2020
History Channel watchers: Sherman has no armor.
Japan: Konnichi wa
But that would suggest that there was some actual history on the history channel.
Sherman are a type of ancient alien?
Who watches the History Channel, maybe 15 years ago.
I really hope you'll keep doing these after the WWII channel finishes the job. I want to hear Soviet Armour Doctrine from the Cold War, when they were planning to send Second Guards Tank Army and Third Shock Army swarming over West Germany. THAT would be the armour doctrine video to end all armour doctrine videos.
I used to read the Soviet doctrines and tactics manuals from the 60s to 80s. My unit was clearing out old versions and receiving new so I asked for light bedtime reading lol.
I love this collaboration.
Essentially, their reach extended beyond their grasp. They had very good ideas and decent designs, but they lacked the industry to implement them.
Loved the video!
I was surprised that there wasn't more emphasis on the portability of Japanese tanks.
In your numerous talks about the Sherman, you make very clear how "We need to be able to ship it in a boat" was a key consideration for the US War Department.
It didn't come up in this video, (though it was kind of implied) the Japanese army would have been designing their tanks with the same constraint in mind. They couldn't reliably move 30+ ton tank by ship.
It was also not emphasized overtly, but Japanese tanks were built for the horrible infrastructure of China. This meant that they could be deployed places where the heavier allied wouldn't be deployed.
...or so they thought and assumed.
Shame It takes so long till each episode can come out, but it’s great as always!
Thanks for making this video
YES!!!!!! I love this guys briefs, fascinating hearing the history of their early mech battles in china and that the Japanese had proper APCs though i guess not in time. Just wish the great war had more money to do this stuff more.
My father-in-law was a marine in ww2 and was involved in the island warfare..
He told a story about him and a marine Sgt that ran into a small Japanese tank. He said they took the tank out.
I said so you had a bazooka?
He said “we were marines. We didn’t have many anti armor anything.”
I said so grenades?
“We were marines and we ran out of those early on.”
I asked well how did you two take out the tank..
“We were marines.. we had rifles ….”
He never explained further…
Metal slug style !
Great video as usual Chieftain!
Thank you for this lecture. Growing up I read/heard next to nothing about Japanese armor in any capacity during WWII.
I must say Sir, you are better at briefings/lectures and keeping peoples attention, than any Major I encountered while in uniform (Sgt British Army.)
Ah, yes. Another terrific video by The "This tank is too small for me" Chieftain.
Really enjoyed this video.
Very interesting.
Cheers.
Nicely done, sir and very informative. Mostly new info to me.
Great presentation and pleased to see a subject that is known but not covered that well. I found that out while helping the author, David McCormack, with the book a couple of years ago. Oh by the way, you did a nice job with pronouncing Japanese names. I try but end up butchering. Anyway, well done bravo!
I've been waiting for this one forever
Great historical video. Thank you.
I heard that as "major competent nations " in your intro and thought, well, guess we won't get one of these on Romania.
Didn't we get an Italian one though?
Tbere wernt that many nations with armour at all.
Australia Romania Finland and Hungary of the smaller nations involved in the war. Maybe the Netherlands, I dont think they actually used their tanks though.
@@ineednochannelyoutube5384 The Netherlands did use theirs against the Germans but they performed horribly I think the Cheiftain actually has a video on them and how the US tests of them basically concluded they were straight up awful :/
@@ineednochannelyoutube5384 Finland didn't make their own armor, got some tanks from england, soviet union and assault guns from germany.
@@AnAngryMarauder The Italians at the lower ranks were competent & fought like lions when they had the equipment and manpower to put up a decent fight. However they were unfortunately saddled with an officer corps & command staff of complete and utter rank stupidity. Obviously there were a few good officers in the army, navy and air force but lets be real they were few and far between and it showed.
I miss the intro. Best I've seen on any UA-cam video.
Good old Nicky. Always nonchalent unless with Sofilein. My favorite Nickolas moment is his description of the pre WW II Soviet tank evolution. He starts out by saying he 'has NOT been looking forwards to doing it', (gesturing to the tortured political miasma disrupting the development of Soviet tanks) but when saying 'it is enough to drive a man to drink' thereby quenching his thirst with 'apple juice' I began to question just how sincere the earlier 'not looking forwards to doing this' statement really was!
Some casualties were expected....
I shared that video with a friend in the Army, he shared the Chieftain's opinion.
I was facepalming so hard I looked like I had been in a fight.
‘Nicky’ pretty disrespectful
@@looinrims In the UK such nicknames names are terms of endearment not disparagement.. It is called humor, I made the important point of saying how long I have enjoyed his shows. Get a grip, I have nothing but huge repect for Mr Nicholas Moran which is why I have spent literally many days listenig to his educational yet also entertaining show.I also like 'Greg's 'Airplane videos as well, as I used to be in the RAF. As for the Mr Moran his videos just get better over time IMHO! I also like to make jokes about Malt Whiskies, alright??
@@vladdrakul7851 Do you have ANYTHING useful to contribute?
I really should be sleeping but tank history is more important to me
Same man, same
I enjoy listening to you. I learn a ton thx
Just want to thank you for the attention to very fine detail , with an overall passion for the subject matter . Of course , being “Chieftain” you already know this , however , still I feel compelled to simply show appreciation via , a big thank you for being you .
Well, in fairness, I don't know how to be anyone else
Bringing quality content to my slow workday, thanks Chieftain!
Thank you, very well done.
Tough lecture to memorize. Impressive. :)
That is a joke, right😉
Thanks for another informative vid
"That's not a tank, its a tracked armored car!"
Hmm yes the steel is made of steel
Hopefully you will be going a bit more into depth discussing the Louisiana Exercise than others have before Chief.
Who, where, when, why, and what was learned.
I often wonder how the Imperial Japanese Army would have innovated if it hadn't been in the Second Sino-Japanese War for so long. Fighting an massive enemy of light and heavy infantry with little to no heavy weapons really gave the IJA a false sense of capability in modern warfare. The Soviet incidents did scare some, but it is clear by 1941 that the Japanese still thought light infantry could rule the battlefield despite the massive parks of artillery and tanks that every other great power had, even Italy. For sure, Japan's light infantry doctrines (and the tanks they made for it) are underrated at times, but several million dead Japanese soldiers and ultimate defeat pretty much sums up how effective those doctrines were in the end.
That would imply the light infantry and armor doctrine was why they lost
Hardly the truth
@@looinrims we must kill Boomer
The Japanese didn't lose because the army was inefficient, they lost because the sea war. Sure they were split between China and the Pacific but even if the best case scenario (Japanese had won China, with all the resources and the trade routes, and moved every single bit of manpower into the Navy after Pearl Harbor) the Americans could still outproduce them. 3 million soldiers & 300,000 tanks sitting on an island with perfect doctrine, can't defeat a blockade.
@@sixthugger Here's the story in detail - from the Nihon Kaigun site, "Why Japan Really Lost The War" (it's in English)
www.combinedfleet.com/economic.htm
Japan developed a light infantry doctrine because it was what they had and what would work in the areas they were fighting.
Japan knew they lacked industry, they knew they were going to be putting people at the end of a long logistics tail, they knew that the areas they would be fighting in were not going to have a lot of roads and rails.
So they focused on the light infantry. As they said here though, they built armored divisions, they had artillery. But Japan is holding an empire larger than the German one with more population, light infantry is the only way to do it.
As the war went on, the Japanese army would dive into the elan of infantry more and more, but again, what choice did they have? They couldn't move heavy weapons, they couldn't build more vehicles, they had no fuel... A focus on infantry tactics here is Japanese generals coming to the realization that all they can count on to have when fighting the Western Allies is their infantry. They'd love some tanks and a ton more artillery but they knew they weren't going to get it.
I'd be interested to see you take a look at the use of Heavy tanks in the jungles of the Pacific/Asia, especially the Australian use of Matilda IIs in New Guinea
been waiting for another one of these
"I've got a great idea, lets use diesel!"~Japanese engineer as he ran towards the nearest body of water.
It's awesome that you are keeping your talks in the same time-line as the World War 2 channel's Week by Week series. So I can watch your video and not find out who wins. .it's mid 1942,and I'm getting pretty worried 😕
For those who wondered what an Irishman would sound like when trying to pronounce Japanese names.
I thought he was an American?
@@cameronash5492 born in Ireland, moved to America iirc
@@patchouliknowledge4455 actually born in California, raised in Ireland, moved back to the US.
@@AgentTasmania so he's still Irish, then.
Wow! I knew about the expertly and aggressively wielded tanks on Malaya but I didn’t know that they had a fully tracked APC design. It had to have been one of the first in the world. The Japanese were no joke. If they had had more resources and industrial capacity then they would have given the Allies a real combined arms spanking and we would be reading all manner of books on WW2 Japanese armored doctrine and employment in 2021.
The Japanese were failed by their logistics. They had many modern weapons, but by the end of 1942 they lacked the industry to build it and the shipping to move it.
@@porksterbob no, they were failed by this massive commerce war that collapsed their economy in 1943 and 1944
I'm only sad I couldn't have watched this excellent presentation at an airshow.
The classic Imperial japanese inter-service rivalry, never gets old
Production figures; what a gift! Tank you!!
Brilliant video 📹 👏
Sino-Japanese war explained simply 👌
Awesome video ! just some engine info for other's type 94 built in 1934 used till late 1942
powered by 160 hp Mitsubishi air cooled diesel. Also type 95 built 1935 used till 1943 powered by 110 hp Mitsubishi air cooled diesel.. Thought others would like to know ..
been looking forward to this!
I love the crazy stuff that never got past early prototype and mockup. All the high tier stuff in WoT that WG mostly made up for example. Like fatter TOG II's.
Thank you for Part the One, look forward to the next installment, the use of tanks in the Far East gets little airing.
My first thought when I saw the title was 'is this going to be twenty minutes of the Chieftain falling over laughing'?
Maybe it was the IJN influence, but the Japanese trained intensively for night fighting.
To this end, one of the more interesting features of at least one of their tanks was bullet-resistant headlights. Not by using heavy armoured glass, but by the simple expedient of mounting the actual lamp inside the hull and using a piece of polished stainless steel as a reflector. Thus rifle bullets would shatter the front glass and punch holes in the reflector, but the light still worked. Adequate and effective for night assaults on infantry positions . Too bad the the targeted infantry had a halfway decent anti-tank gun.
I never knew how much fun one could have listening to an Irishman trying to pronounce Japanese things. The tanks are fun too
Excellent Video again. I am quite surprised that the japanese had a fully tracked infantry transport so early. Very intersting.
My dad this week visited the War Memorial in Rabaul, PNG. They still have some Japanese armour - a tank & an APC. Both of which didn't look like Nick would fit in, let alone multiple crew 🤔
I've got mediocre photos if you're interested! ❤️
Whatever happened to Inside the Chieftain's Hatch: M8 HMC, Part 2?
This honestly just make me curious about the Polish tank force during the war, since it was one of the largest in the world.
A metric ton of machinegun-bearing tankettes if I remember correctly
We had absolutely NO doctrine of any kind for tanks. Not a rudimentary or outdated one, but simply none.
We had precisely one "tank division" (quotation mark needed), which was 2 brigades, supported by foot infantry. Other than that, four "independent companies" (read: a semi-improvised unit to look good on paper) of tanks AND 30-31 (depends on sources) companies of TK-3 and TKS tankettes. If we remove tankettes from the picture, there were less than 200 tanks in Poland, spread all over the border. If we account those tank companies, then the idea was to just have 2-4 tanks per company, and said company being part of a regular infantry batallion. If this wasn't enough, Poland deployed over 100 Renault FTs. In 1939.
The result was a tank "force" that was used predominately as poorly-organised (no radio) recon for infantry and spread so thinly, it was unable to accomplish anything of any tactical or strategic value, not to mention vast majority of tanks being "females", armed with machine guns. Thus, at BEST, it was useful for ambushes against equally obsolete and underarmoured Panzer Is, and being butt-fucked by just about anything thrown at them in an actual combat. If this wasn't enough, there was ZERO communication (Polish army was in the same time super-centralised AND lacked any sort of long-range communication, THEN the HQ simply bailed the country), so nobody knew what was going on and where, often sending tanks to places that were already captured and/or overrun.
Doctrine? Please, they were just happy that they have tanks to flex muscles on parades (Poland was ruled by an incompetent, nepotistic military junta, don't let anyone tell you that was a democratic government), and the average Polish staffer was someone from political, rather than military appointment (including the marshal of Poland and the de facto ruler of the country)
Pretty much a given that it’s Interesting And informative!
great video, brilliant serires, but the books on the right side of the top shelf?
Great job man; God bless you
I await the day Nick reviews Irish tank doctrine! Lol
Story told to me by my wife's uncle before he died. Combat on Okinawa:
Our outfit was in a ditch. Other than the ditch we were caught out in the open. Five Japanese tanks were approaching us, in line, across the open area. We were pinned down and were soon to be cut up by the tanks. One of the guys who was normally the company sc**w up took up a bazooka. He had to stand up to fire the bazooka. He stood up and fired. The first tank in line exploded. The first tank blew up so hard that it caused the tank behind him to explode. The second tank exploded so hard that it caused the third tank to explode.
The fourth and fifth tanks split, and one came around the line on one side and the other came around the other side. The guy stood up and fired a second bazooka round. Tank four blew up. Tank five fired its main gun and struck the guy smack in the chest.
Tank five then turned around and tried to run. Japanese tanks were vulnerable in the rear. We must have fired a thousand rounds into the back of that tank. The tank caught fire, then exploded.
The guy should have gotten the CMH, but there were no officers present.
always nice to hear about more obscure armor... and on that front will there be a video for the smaller Axis powers? Hungary, Romania, and Bulgaria for example.
Few, futile & fucked.
It sounds like their doctrine was evolving and the evolution was logical. Unfortunately, or fortunately for their enemies, their industry was unable to keep up with the doctrine and they were never quite capable of putting what might have been sound doctrine into practice. And yes, like other nations, there was internal push back against change even when it was obvious to most that the current method wasn't working.
"Tojo was something of a conservative..."
Yeah, I suppose that's one way to put it.
Hello, my name is Ethan, and I'm interested in your video's and I hope you do an episode on armored trains history
Speaking of japanese tanks (i came to think of rivets) are you ever gonna do a inside the hatch of a P40 tank? The tank has a strange interwar tank feel to it and probably has an interesting development history.
Yes! Nicholas i have been waiting for this for months! guess the nations you shall cover next will be quite obscure? be cool to Hear the Israel, or Egyptian, Syrian Tank Doctrine from 1950-1980,
Good information on the Japanese amour.
A question for your next Q&A.
How do you think Percie Hobart and the 79th armored division would have faired in the Pacific theater during WWII? From what I know about him he seemed very keen to be the tip of the spear in Normandy and some of the unique tanks in his division could have been quite useful in the amphibious assaults in the Pacific.
Considering that a Sherman flail could probably crush any Japanese tank in melee, I suspect they would do rather well. On a serious note, I have seen images of improvised flails fitted to Marine Corps Shermans in the Pacific.
You may be closer to good Japanese pronunciation than you think! Under the most common romanization the consonants are English, the vowels are Spanish, and you say all of those vowels. It's atonal so you can't go _too_ wrong if you stick to that.
Yeah, pronouncing the vowels correctly is the biggest thing about getting Japanese names/words right. :)
Will you be doing minor WW2 powers as well one day? Would be interesting to hear about Hungarian, Polish, Romanian, Finnish doctrine, even if the more easily accessible information on that might be really limited.
Probably not, for the exact reason you mention. I need to be able to find the information!
of course the japanese army and navy would have separate tank designs, why do anything coordinated or efficiently
No wonder the soldiers fought fiercely. They had compensate for stuff like this. 🙃
Like the sound of this Tommy O’Hara character
The glacis plate was made from beautifully enamelled strips of iron, bound with leather cord, 12 layers of bamboo cane and over 35 layers of exquisite silk.
Or, even more likely, Nishi's force was that size, strength and composition because that is what he could get his hands on and fit into the hundred trucks he could find. The amount of fuel at hand which he could also pack into those trucks probably played a role as well.
I'm no soldier, but reading military history has taught me, expediency often outweighs idealised theory.
What are your thoughts on the Sho't Kal Alef/Bet/Gimel/Dalet series tanks?
That Chi-ha beside the Sherman looks like it needs a little track tensioning...
I know this is off topic, but can you look for the M60 - 2000?.... it seems like a super cool thing to get a win down by you on.
You may have one of the most fragile tank force. But if you can bring them to places that others can't go say the jungle. Being the ones with a tank beats being the ones without.
Question, could a forty millimeter bofors or even a twenty millimeter AA gun. Do enough damage to the japanese light and medium tanks to stop them?
In a word, yes. At least the 40
A US Navy 40mm Bofors with M81A1 AP ammo claimed 70mm of penetration at 0 yards and 30mm of penetration at 2000 yards.
The only number for 20mm Oerlikon penetration that I've seen is from a Russian source with unknown ammo, which claims a maximum of 40mm of penetration, dropping to 30mm at 400 yards.
That means they should both be decent weapons against the pre-war Japanese tanks, but would be marginal against the upgraded wartime tanks.
@@ARCNA442 0 yards?
Surely if you're on bayonet range you should just use a bayonet?
@@benholroyd5221 I have heared a figure of 65mm at 100m out of the L60.
@@benholroyd5221 of course, Japanese Tank guns had a bayonet lug.
WW2 Channel is about to end the 1945 timeline. Please do a follow-up to the doctrine series.
Thanks!