Jump to content
Sturgeon's House
Jagdika

WWII Japanese Tanks in China

Recommended Posts

All photos were taken by myself in year 2016 during my visit to Beijing. Tanks are from the Military Museum of the Chinese People's Revolution and the Tank Museum(currently closed). Enjoy.

 

No.1: Type 94 Light armored car (Tankette) in the Tank Museum

 

171604z2hj6qsptunutq92.jpg

171609xbigttwkwkv4wirk.jpg

171610jdz2vdwsirw3suud.jpg

171613puhvccn9s3s59h6u.jpg

171616xdhcjlqmttp5cb18.jpg

 

This is the early version of the Type 94 Tankette. It was found in a river in 1970s. It is the best preserved Type 94 Tankette in the world.

 

No.2: Type 97 Medium Tank in the Tank Museum

 

172516pxz5xnjjj7hywj6e.jpg

171622sbp29wj1wmjfqpdj.jpg

171625q9k95t2ywb2zy0ya.jpg

171628glfwfclofcskkgqo.jpg

 

171630vpfzi5f04z731047.jpg

171633kw319f73wsa7b76s.jpg

171636nfve7vijzvbovbxy.jpg

171639gwp0iio6s6zo0800.jpg

171645q9usu04iou8964sp.jpg

171642c1qyc1vym9c033m2.jpg

171648f8dybzuurx8u5brb.jpg

This is a late version Type 97 medium tank. It carries the old small 57mm gun turret but has the revised engine ventilation port. This tank was donated by the Soviet 7th mechanized division  before they withdrew from China in 1955.

 

No.3: Type 97 Medium Tank Kai in the Military Museum of the Chinese People's Revolution

 

171558foecnc7zospoec7p.jpg

 

171748qwakivzi3ob3haar.jpg

171748tts8l1z0l8hlkbbt.jpg

 

 

 

  This Type 97 Medium Tank Kai's combat serial number is 102. It belonged to the former China North-East tank regiment. It took part in the attack of Jinzhou against KMT army on 1948-9-14, and did great contribution for knocking out their bunkers and MG nests by shooting and ramming. Thus after the battle this tank was awarded with an honored name:"The Hero(功臣号)“ About the tank itself, it was assembled by the Chinese army themselves by using destroyed or damaged Chi-Ha parts after the surrender of Japan. This particular tank was built up with a normal Type 97's chassis(57mm gun version) early model, and a Type 97 Kai's Shinhoto(New turret for the 47mm gun). However there are other saying claim that this tank was modified by the Japanese. It was the first tank that roared over the Tiananmen Square during the Founding Ceremony of China on 1949-10-1.

 

 

174652u4k634k6kzjavt4j.jpg

The same tank on 1949-10-1. China's tank army origins from old IJA tanks.

 

No.4: Type 97 Medium Tank in the Military Museum of the Chinese People's Revolution

 

175246hlvr8i1421x10uv4.jpg

Sorry, only one photo was taken. This Type 97 Medium Tank has a chassis from Type 97 Medium Tank Kai and a turret from a normal Type 97 Medium Tank. It was merged together by the Chinese army.

 

No.5: Type 95 Armored Track(Train track) Vehicle in the Military Museum of the Chinese People's Revolution

 

175247k1qlul638tqfnqa6.jpg

175247ulcn7i77wlniojzo.jpg

175247in2syn3kvv151hy3.jpg

 

Only two samples survived. One is in China here and one is in Kubinka, Russia (Maybe now it is transfered to the Patriot Park? I don't know).

 

 

Hope you enjoy the photos I took! No repost to other places without my permission.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fascinating stuff, thank you. It's interesting to see how tank development progressed in a country whose machines were (for the most part) used to facing only infantry without AT rifles. Some of them look rather endearingly like mobile teapots, dishwashers or Wallace & Gromit constructions. I note that they largely used what appears to be a form of Horstmann suspension, which I assume was for reasons of monetary and material expedience, and it surprised me to learn that the British Chieftain used the same...or probably similar, to be more accurate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Jamby said:

Fascinating stuff, thank you. It's interesting to see how tank development progressed in a country whose machines were (for the most part) used to facing only infantry without AT rifles. Some of them look rather endearingly like mobile teapots, dishwashers or Wallace & Gromit constructions. I note that they largely used what appears to be a form of Horstmann suspension, which I assume was for reasons of monetary and material expedience, and it surprised me to learn that the British Chieftain used the same...or probably similar, to be more accurate.

 

It's similar in the sense that any suspension system with springing elements will operate on a very similar principle to all the others. Chieftain et al have two wheels per spring, and load the spring in compression; whereas the Type 97 Medium Tank has springs in tension and one wheel per spring on the front and rear, and looks to have 4 wheels supported by the same spring in the middle. The rotating bogie on a sprung swingarm is neat, and quite like the ferdinand (or more likely the ferdinand was like the japanese tanks, given the production dates)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Xlucine said:

 

It's similar in the sense that any suspension system with springing elements will operate on a very similar principle to all the others. Chieftain et al have two wheels per spring, and load the spring in compression; whereas the Type 97 Medium Tank has springs in tension and one wheel per spring on the front and rear, and looks to have 4 wheels supported by the same spring in the middle. The rotating bogie on a sprung swingarm is neat, and quite like the ferdinand (or more likely the ferdinand was like the japanese tanks, given the production dates)

 

...It's quickly dawning on me that I'm going to need to read a lot more about tank suspension. At a glance, the suspension types look virtually identical, though I suppose much of their inner workings is concealed behind the wheels themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Jamby said:

I note that they largely used what appears to be a form of Horstmann suspension

You are right, the Japanese is really fond of the Horstmann type suspension, Although they did not actually bought one of the foreign tank which use that suspension. To some extent the horizontal coil spring suspension largely used by the Japanese tanks was designed by themselves (Tomio Hara). From Type 94 Tankette (the first Japanese tank applied with that suspension) to the mighty Type 5 medium tank their suspension design are all similar. 

Here is an overall picture of Type 97 medium tank's suspension:

131105tddllhlh4tqziach.jpg

 

This is the initial suspension design (road wheel and spring arrangement) on Experimental Type 97 medium tank No.1. It comes basically straight from the standard Horstmann suspension

 

131106jkauzafa34liaeuk.jpg 

 

Hope these will help :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, EnsignExpendable said:

That setup looks extremely vulnerable to mines. Did the Japanese write anything about suffering damage from Chinese IEDs?

Maybe, but to be honest I haven't found out any original Japanese archives regarding the Tanks'(I have Type 89's, but it uses leaf springs, and most damages were not caused by IEDs) damage report caused by Chinese IEDs or homemade explosives, probably because there were too few encounters in 1940s. But I'll sure let you know when I find them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Similar Content

    • By Jamby
      Sooooo...after doing a site-wide search and perusing Google, I'm surprised not to have found anything about tank suspension, other than a somewhat doubtful thread on the WoT forums. Would my learned colleagues of SH be able to assist me in understanding and identifying the different types of tank suspension? I think I've got leaf-spring more or less mastered, as well as both VVSS and HVSS (thanks, JGT!) but was somewhat embarrassed not to be able to differentiate between the suspension of a Type 97 Chi-Ha and an FV4201 Chieftain.
       
      UPDATE: I think I understand tank suspension better now. Thanks, everyone!
    • By Darjeeling
      Greetings  I am Darjeeling and I come from Hong Kong. Recently as Turkey launched the OB so I investigate in the TAF as I am a apoist.
       
      The following article will mainly focus on the best armoured unit of TAF. All the data are collected from internet and I need help to complete it.
       
      [Introduction on armour unit organisation]
       
      Turkish tank brigades included three tank battalions while in the mechanised brigades just 1 tank battalion. Each tank battalion consists of 41 tanks. The staff and management team consists of 2 tanks, 39 armored rest distributed to 3 tank Wrotham. Each tank company consists of 13 tanks while 1 tank company commander and platoon 4 to 3 tanks. 
       
      Since the showing the TO&E of all armoured units should be too long, the following will only present some  "Ace armoured unit".
        =====   Version 1.1 
       
      Welcome for any suggestions/addition on this issue
       
      1)M60T units
       
      M60T is a modernised M-60 which is capable with T-72s. Turkey utilizing large numbers of these tanks have been seen deploying to the southern border in the previous years. They were used during incursions into Syria and Iraq in earlier operations to combat Kurdish forces in both nations.
       
      Here are what I confirmed:
       
       
      - 5th Armoured Brigades
      (Confirmed in internet data)
       
      - 20th Armoured Brigades
      (Confirmed in internet data)
       
      - 172nd Armoured Brigades
      (Confirmed in internet data)
       
      They are believed to have equipped with M60T. As each Turkey tank battalion consists of 41 tanks, a total of 123 out of 170 should have counted. I believe there maybe one brigades unknown.
       
       
      Example in real combat:
      >M60T act as spearhead and attaching a YPG town but being ambushed. Two tanks were destroyed.
       
       
      https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=78lnBhcA_n0
       
      2) Leopard 2 units
       
       Turkey has 354 of highly capable Leopard 2 German manufactured tanks. Leopard are currently deployed in Syria in OB and the previous OB. It is most likely that these more capable MBTs are with units tasked with guarding Turkey’s border with Russia and the Caucasus, where they would have to fight against a much more capable adversary. 
       
      Here are what I  confirmed:
       
       
      - 2nd Armoured Brigade
      (Confirmed in Operation ES as casualties)
       
      - 3th Armoured Brigade
      (Confirmed in the 2016 failed coup)
       
      - 5th Armoured Brigade 
      (Confirmed in Operation OB as casualties)
       
      So it is obviously that more efforts needed to be done on Leo2. Only half of them counted.
       
      The Leo2a4 of TAF is the outdated version that it's last update is in 1992. So this explained why it performed so bad in ES. Total 10 tanks were confirmed lost in the battle and even captured by ISIS.
       
      Yet, while facing the poor equipped and trained YPG/J, only 3 Leo 2 was destroyed in OB. 2 was taken out because the engine was penetrated and taken out by Air Force (prevent captured by YPG/J). The only effort of YPG/J is penetrating a Leo 2 from flank and lead to the blow. 
       
       
      Example in real combat:
       
      >Leo 2 receive a direct hit by YPG but it was not destroyed. High survivability showed. 
       
       
      https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YafzmkvVRiI
       
      3) M60A3 units 
       
      M60A3 is a 2nd Gen-MBT in TAF. They are mostly used as supporting fire unit to assist the infantry. Yet, the performance of M60A3 relatively bad.
       
      Here are what I confirmed:
       
       
      - 16th Mechanised Brigade 
      (Confirmed in Operation ES as casualties)
       
      - 39th Mechanised Brigade 
      (Confirmed in Operation OB as casualties)
       
       
      Example in real combat:
       
      >M60A3 being hit as no soldiers protect it in ES
       
       
      https://m.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=28&v=pg-rbEC0jXI&ebc=ANyPxKqRFXar7bNqSS5wcCJspZFJMnyoQD0qixyUheJgMdLHy5q0eQakNmCBv16NSoGjfAoNbcP4cGDbJHXTpR7eJhobZW8EPw
       
      —————
       
      PPS:This is my post about order of battle of OB about TAF
       
      https://www.reddit.com/r/syriancivilwar/comments/81nml8/keep_updateturkish_order_of_battle_of_ob_up_to/?st=JEE2UT1F&sh=d04daee9
    • By Jagdika
      This is an article simply to show you guys here how Waffentrager is a faker. The original article  ( https://www.weibo.com/ttarticle/p/show?id=2309404213101531682050) was written in Chinese and Japanese. For better understanding I will translate and edit the article and post it here. 
        And I must tell you why I want to reveal this shit: Long time ago I found many sayings from Waffentrager’s blog which I had never heard of, so I turned to my Japanese friend and IJA tank researcher Mr.Taki and asked him to confirm a few of them. In the end it turned out that none of Waffentrager’s article is true. I once argued with him and he not only failed to give out his reference but also deleted my replies! I’m very angry!
       
        Now let’s get started.
       
        At the very beginning I recommend all of you who opened this post to take a look at Waffentrager’s original article, that will help you understand what I’m debating.
       
        Here is the link to the original article: https://sensha-manual.blogspot.jp/2017/09/the-ho-ri-tank-destroyer.html?m=0  
       
        In China we need to use VPN(aka “ladder-梯子” or “the scientific way of browsing the Internet-科学上网” in Chinese)to open that link above so at first I post out Waffentrager’s original post in the form of screenshots in my article. I’ll skip that here.
       

       
      Fig.1: I will skip his original article.
       
        Now, I had raised my first question here: Please take a look at the screenshot:
       

       
      Fig.2: My first question
       
        In the original article, Waffentrager insisted that the Type 5 gun tank was built in July, 1944 and fully assembled in August. It was also put into trials at the same time.
       

       
      Fig.3: Waffentrager’s original article.
       
        But, is that true? Let’s have a look at the Japanese archive:
       

       
      Important Fig.4: Archive code C14011075200, Item 4
       
        Notice the part with the red, this is the research and develop plan for the Japanese Tech Research center in 1943, and had been edited in 1944. ◎砲100(Gun-100) is the project name for the 105mm gun used by Type 5 gun tank. The column under it says: “Research a tank gun with 105mm caliber and a muzzle velocity of 900m/s”. This means that the gun had just begun to be developed and from the bottom column we can know that it was PLANNED to be finished in 1945-3[完成豫定 means ”plan to be finished” and 昭20、3 means ”Shouwa 20-3”. Shouwa 20 is 1945 in Japan (you can wiki the way for Japanese to count years I’m not going to explain it here)]
        Next let’s move on to the Type 5 gun tank itself, here is the Japanese archive:
       

       
      Important Fig.5: Archive code C14011075200, Item 7
       
        “新砲戦車(甲)ホリ車” is the very very first name of Type 5 gun tank, it should be translated into:”New gun tank(A), Ho-Ri vehicle”. “ホリ” is the secret name of it. Still from the column we can easily know that Ho-Ri was also planned to be finished in 1945-3. But under that column there is another one called:”摘要(Summary or outline)”, in this it says:”砲100、第一次試作完了昭和19、8”, In English it is: “Gun-100, First experimental construction(prototype construction) finished in Shouwa 19-8(1944-8)” What does it mean? It means that in 1944-8, Only the 105mm gun used by the Type 5 gun tank was finished! If the Ho-Ri tank itself was finished why it was not in the 摘要 column? So how could an unfinished tank mounted the prototype gun? Waffentrager is talking bullshit.
      Also from Mr.Kunimoto’s book, he gave the complete schedule of the 105mm gun, here it is:
       

       
      Important Fig.6: Kunimoto’s schedule
       
        “修正機能試験” means ”Mechanical correctional test”, it took place in 1944-8, this matches the original Japanese archive(though this chart was also made from original archives). At that time the gun had just finished, not the tank.
       
        Next is this paragraph from Waffentrager’s article:
       

       
      Fig.7: Weighing 35 tons
       
        From the archive above(important Fig.5) we can learn from the second large column”研究要項(Research items)” that Ho-Ri was only PLANNED to be 35 tons, and maximum armour thickness was PLANNED to be 120mm, not was. Waffentrager is lying, he used the PLANNED data as the BUILT data. I will post out the correct data below later to see what Ho-Ri is really like when its design was finished.
       

       
      Fig.8: 全備重量-約三五屯(Combat weight-app.35t), 装甲(最厚部)-約一二〇粍(Armour, thickest part-app.120mm)
       
        At this time, some of the people might inquire me that:”Maybe the Type 5 gun tanks were really finished! You just don’t know!” Well, I will use the archives and books to tell these guys that they are totally wrong. None of the Type 5 gun tank was finished.
        Always let’s look at Waffentrager’s article first. He said that a total of 5 Ho-Ri were completed.
       

       
      Fig.9: Waffentrager said 5 Ho-Ri were completed.
       
       He also put an original Japanese archive(C13120839500) to “enhance” his “facts”.
       

       
      Fig.10: Waffentrager’s archive
       
        Everyone can see the”ホリ車,1-3-1” in the document, and someone might actually believe that 5 Ho-Ri were actually built. But they are wrong! Waffentrager is cheating you with “only a part of the original document”! Here is what the original archive really looks like:
       

       
      Important Fig.11: Archive code C13120839500, Item 7
       
        “整備計画” is “Maintenance plan” in English, again it was PLAN! The whole plan was made in 1944-12-26. I don’t actually know how Waffentrager can misunderstand this, maybe he doesn’t even know Japanese or Chinese!
       

       
      Important Fig.12: The cover of the same archive, “昭和十九年十二月二十六日” is 1944-12-26” in English.
       
      I have other archives to prove that Ho-Ri were not finished as well:
       


       
      Important Fig. 13 and 14: Mitsubishi’s tank production chart made by the American survey team after the war ends.
       
        From the chart you can only find out Type 4 and Type 5 medium tanks’ record. There is no existence of Type 5 gun tank Ho-Ri, or the”M-5 Gun Tank” in the chart’s way.
       
        Except for the archives, many books written by Japanese also mentioned that Type 5 gun tank were not finished:
       

       
      Fig.15: Kunimoto’s record.
       
        “二〇年五月完成予定の五両の終戦時の工程進捗度は、やっと五〇パーセントであり、完成車両出せずに終戦となった。” In English it’s: “When the war ended, the five Ho-Ri planned to be finished in 1945-5 had finally reached 50% completion. No completed vehicle were made when the war ended.”
       
        Here is another book written by Japanese with the help of former IJA tank designer, Tomio Hara:
       

       
      Important Fig.16: Tomio Hara’s book
       
      “完成をみるには至らなかった” Again he emphasized that the tank was not finished. Also when Ho-Ri’s design was finished its combat weight was raised to 40 tons, not the planned 35 tons. It was only powered by one “Modified BMW watercooled V12 gasoline engine”, rated 550hp/1500rpm. In Waffentrager’s article he said later a Kawasaki 1100hp engine were installed, but obviously that’s none sense. There was really existed a Kawasaki 1100hp engine but that is the two BMW V12 engine(Same engine on Type 5 gun tank or Type 5 medium tank) combined together for Japanese super-heavy tank O-I use. It will take much more room which Ho-Ri do not have.
       

       
      Fig.17: O-I’s engine compartment arrangement. There’s no such room in Ho-Ri for this engine set.
       
        And last here are the other questions I asked
       

       
      Fig.18: Other questions I asked
       
        I have already talked about the questions regarding C13120839500 and the engine. As for the gun with 1005m/s muzzle velocity, the Japanese never planned to make the 105mm gun achieve such a high velocity because they don’t have the enough tech back then. Also from the archive C14011075200(important fig.4) the 105mm gun was designed only to reach about 900m/s.
       
        So, after all these, how did Waffentrager replied? I will post out the replies from my E-mail(because he deleted my replies on his blog).
       

       
      Fig.19: Waffentrager’s first reply
       
      He kept saying that my archive is not the same as his and he is using his own documents. I didn’t believe in these shit and I replied:
       

       
      Fig.20: My reply
       
        Last sentence, the Ho-Ri III he was talking about is fake. There are only Ho-Ri I(The one resembles the Ferdinand tank destroyer) and Ho-Ri II(The another one resembles the Jagdtiger tank destroyer). He even photoshoped a picture:
       

       
      Fig.21: Waffentrager’s fake Ho-Ri III
       

       
      Fig.22: The real Ho-Ri I and the base picture of Waffentrager’s photoshoped Ho-Ri III in Tomio Hara’s book. Many same details can be seen in Waffentrager's fake Ho-Ri III
       
        The 4 variants of up-armoured Type 3 Chi-Nu medium tank is also fake, I will post his original article and the confirmed facts I got from Mr.Taki by E-mail.
       

       
      Fig.23: 4 models of up-armoured Chi-Nu by Waffentrager
       

       
      Fig.24: Mr.Taki’s reply
       
        Waffentrager used every excuses he could get to refuse giving out the references, and finally he deleted my comments. What an asshole!
       

       
      Fig.25: Our last “conversation”
       

       
      Fig.26 He deleted my comment.
       
        So, as you can see, Waffentrager is really a dick. He is cheating everybody because he think that we can’t read Japanese. Anyway I still hope he could release his reference and documents to prove me wrong. After all, I’m not here to scold or argue with somebody, but to learn new things. Also if you guys have any questions about WWII(IJA) Japanese tanks, feel free to ask me, I’m happy to help.
×