Jump to content
Sturgeon's House


Contributing Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Atokara

  1. The problem is they have no high pressure ammo to fire out of it. DM73 isn't in production yet, good luck getting Japan to part with any Type 10, and its unknown if the US would sell non-export M829A3/A4 with it being DU. Either way their best bet would to just be waiting until DM73 as I don't predict the UK getting in any major land wars in the next few years.
  2. Unsure about if the gun is Korean modified or not, but as for why L/55 is a standard is because anything longer than that and the gas starts to lose efficiency. Between pressure lost through small gaps, friction on the sabot, and the explosive reaction being complete and no new energy being inputted, anything past 55 calibers means you start to lose energy.
  3. My primary reason for this is the fact that its got a proper diagram with listed lengths which is pretty hard to come by past DM33. It acted as essentially a control group to make sure I was doing proper measurements. However after cross checking with your measurements I can't find any fault in your measurements either despite them being different from mine and I have a few guesses as to why. Here is the first one. When measuring I was measuring from tip to ends of the fins. I found a diagram of 105mm Type 93 to compare against the Type 10 as there was no indication for either m
  4. So I've seen this image used a whole lot across the internet as an estimate for the proportions of DM53 and I thought I would do my own measurements on it to see how things line up. Disclaimer: I am merely providing my own interpretation of the measurements using the same methodology as whoever originally posted the image. Pixel measuring is an inherently inaccurate measurement tool and very subjective especially on blurry images such as this as people will have different opinions on which pixels can be considered part of the rod and which cannot. I accounted for pixel bleed as b
  5. It uses a mix of medium and high frequency induction heating. With the device they patented, they are able to treat sections of steel up to 3m in length (which is a pretty big deal since it's usually hard to get NC steel plates that large). Talks about the quenching liquid and cooling rate to prevent cracking, but doens't mention which liquid was used, but does mention that Matensite does form in the cooling process. Talks about maintaining the correct space between the induction heater and steel plate and methodology to maintain that distance despite possible warpage from the heating process.
  6. Simple size and weight shouldn't really be an excuse here seeing as the Type 10 is the lightest MBT with a standard chamber pressure that is 100 bar short of the 2A46M-5s maximum chamber pressure, while also having the smallest recoil impulse. That isn't to say that Russia NEEDS a better recoil system though. When you have 7+ seconds between firing and a completed reload cycle there isn't much point of having an immediate stable firing platform when you still need 5 more seconds to finish reloading. My point is just that Russia's recoil system is pretty substandard and being light isn't an exc
  7. https://ssl.bsk-z.or.jp/kenkyucenter/pdf/mnm20191225.pdf Heres a brochure on NC steel used in the Type 10 and Type 16.
  8. I don't understand the need to make a single platform that does everything ok, but nothing really well. I thought everyone realized this when the North Korean's started putting both ATGM's and MANPADS on their MBTs. Let's say you send one of these out to patrol with a few infantry squads and it gets destroyed. Congrats, now your fire support, air defense, and anti-tank power are gone from a single RPG/IED.
  9. Idk about IJA, but the practice has become a lot more common with the JGSDF. TKG is the most common way to refer the main cannon of armored vehicles. Basically TanK Gun. Usually it's just the XXmmTKG, but I've also seen the Type 10 cannon called 10TKG to differentiate it from the 120mmTKG of the Type 90. AFV's themselves on the otherhand really only receive this style of abbreviation from the Ministry of Defense rather than the JGSDF. ie: 90TK, 74TK, 89FV, 11CVR, 16MCV. https://www.mod.go.jp/gsdf/equipment/ve/index.html This nomenclature is frequently
  10. Source videos if you want to do your own timing. All the above vids above were timed from first frame of muzzle flash to first frame of the FCS unlocking the main gun using a 30fps timer. All vids are directly from the military or military sponsored vids.
  11. It's Japan we are talking about here. You'll be hard pressed to find accurate numbers on how much ammo their tanks carry, let alone a full write up on the autoloader performance. That being said there is no evidence that there was any reliability issues where you might expect to see them brought up such as interviews with design leads: https://dl.ndl.go.jp/view/download/digidepo_1283286_po_TRDI50_04.pdf?contentNo=4&alternativeNo= Type 10 design outlines specifying improvements needed over the Type 90: https://drive.google.com/drive/u/0/folders/0B8KVYt57g6q_QTVHN1EyMThwRnM
  12. Even if France is experienced doesn't mean they are necessarily good at it. Just comparing the speed of the Type 90 and Leclerc you can already begin to see the flaws in the Leclerc system. Mainly how long it takes between the round being pushed into the breech and how long it takes the breech block to shut afterwards. Japan's solution was to attach the rammer arm on a pivot point so that the breach can close sooner during the retraction stroke. Then you get to the Type 10 where it's pulling out entire reloads in the time it takes for just the mechanism stage of th
  13. At what point do you give up on an existing platform and start over from scratch? If there has been anything I've learned from tanks, the key to weight savings isn't armor, it isn't the size of the gun, it isn't the size of the engine. It's the frame it's built on, and that's the single thing you can't change with these upgrade programs. The best weight tables available online are for the Type 10 and CR1, so my comparisons will be for the two of them. To put it into perspective, the Type 10's structural hull is 7 tons lighter than the CR1 and the turret is 3.8 tons lighter. I feel like with su
  14. Sounds like an incredibly dumb idea. Solar panels aren't even reliable in a civilian environment mounted on stationary platforms let alone vibrating military vehicles out in the desert collecting sand, dust and small arms fire. War was never a clean activity, so I don't understand the attempts to make it such. Either this is cheap pandering to the green parties in NATO aligned nations or this NATO chief is actually this brain dead and believes that this is an effective idea let alone possible. NATO just keeps wanting to justify it's dissolution, larping as "environmentally friendly" with it's
  15. I don't really see it as much of an issue. The K2 seems to be protected against the most common CE threats it would see in combat. As for KE threats, pretty much any actual cannon will punch through every MBTs side armor. Based on the frontal estimates of the armor, KSAP CERMET seems to be pretty effective and with what looks to be around 80mm of it on the side, the K2 should be protected against autocannons at combat ranges. Composite side armor on most MBTs is usually relegated to increased protection at a 60 degree arc, but for shots at those angles the LWS will probably get the turret faci
  16. Fin marks really only ever happen on thinner armor as well as softer metal such as cast steel. There is a reason why you only see fin marks being left on T-72s and M60 series tanks. It is also very likely that the Type 90 uses HHA on the outer layers meaning that the fins would just snap off when contacting the surface. That's just a guess though and from what I remember there were multiple shots from both HEAT and APFSDS, so we could just be seeing only the first shot of the test.
  17. Rule of thumb for any autoloader, no matter the country or design. As soon as the barrel moves, the reload is complete since any movement during the loading process would just sheer off any feed arm/ramp. An autoloaded version of a lap load is actually a really good way to describe it.
  18. Looks like the "human loaders are just as fast as auto loaders" is finally over. It seems like the Type 10 has two settings similar to the Leclerc's "Doublement" mode. Looking at patents for the auto loader system Japan uses, the next round seems to drop off the ammo belt onto a feed ramp. my best guess for how the 1.6 seconds is achieved is a button is pressed where immediately after the first round is loaded, a next round is dropped off and prepared. As a result you get a faster overall reload, but lose the ability to switch ammo type in between shots. Otherwise you get a standar
  • Create New...