i read about how japaneese use them - they bury bomb/100kg or bigger/ with mine on it,when tank come,both blow up.
Tanks and other Armoured Vehicles Image thread.
- Thread starter Duke Nukem
- Start date
i read about how japaneese use them - they bury bomb/100kg or bigger/ with mine on it,when tank come,both blow up.
BF110C4
Well-known member
The japanese had exactly the same problem with the M4's than the vietnamese had with the M60. Very few weapons in their arsenal were powerful enough to reliably destroy an enemy frontline tank and the few weapons that could do the job would attract the full attention of the enemy overwhelming aviation and artillery.
But to be fair the PAVN also used tanks for great effect. They managed to sneak P-76 tank battalion to Lang Vei in 1969 to destroy an american special forces camp (using armored vehicles to attack a fortified position is also not recommended in theory but frequently done in practice) and successfully overrun it despite intense artillery and aviation attacks and the defenders were forces to evacuate. More conventional land battles were fought with armored units in the final phase of the war that came after the US withdrawal.
Japan have its problems becouse they do not thought early enough about that.
If they simply made next generation of tanks with 75mm,not 47mm gun,and buyed Panzerfaust from Germans,they would have no problems.
Vietnam - they tried,but soviets do not gave them their best AT missiles.
PsihoKekec
Swashbuckling Accountant
1.Submarines,and sometimes normal ships.They buyed Me-262,and even Pz.6 Tiger.They could buy 6.000 panzerfaust instead.
And,buy license - they could mass prduce it easily,Me-262 and Tigers not so.
2.They start producing Type 97 with 47 gun in 1941.If they worked on Type 3 with 75/38 gun instead,they could use it instead of Type 97.And,they were good enough to face Shermans and T.34.
The Japanese, IIRC, did actually buy some war materiel from Germany, as well as "borrowing" or "evaluating" some German armoured vehicles. They all shipped it by submarine to ports in occupied Asia, which were then shipped back to Japan's home islands by their own cargo ships/transports.
Of course, later on in the war this became completely infeasible as the US navy dominated the seas, but until halfway through, probably pre-Midway? Still doable.
The logistics and cost, however... ouch.
You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. The Soviets gave them thousands of the most advanced AT missiles there were; indeed, at that time the 9M14 Malyutka was literally the only operational man-portable anti-tank missile in the world. These were brand new, utterly state of the art technology; even the Soviets themselves didn't field any until 1963, and the North Vietnamese were the first people to ever use them in actual combat.
Last edited:
The Japanese actually did purchase plans and technical files for the German panzerfaust, but unlike wehraboo fanboys they engaged in *actual professional comparison testing* and found the American bazooka to be the more effective man portable antitank weapon.
They produced many thousands of their own improved version, the Type 4 anti-tank rocket launcher, but never used them in battle as all production was reserved for the final defense of the Home Islands.
They produced many thousands of their own improved version, the Type 4 anti-tank rocket launcher, but never used them in battle as all production was reserved for the final defense of the Home Islands.
Panzerfaust would be still cheaper,and better then anti-tank mine on stick.They could fight longer on Philippines and in Manchuria,if they copied Panzerfaust in 1944.
If the Japanese copied the Panzerfaust in 1944, it would have made no difference whatsoever in the Philippines and Manchuria because the soldiers there would not have received any. Instead, the limited number of Panzerfausts produced would have been reserved exclusively for the last-ditch defense of the Home Islands, just like the Type 4 and every single other advanced weapon the Japanese were able to produce late war.
Panzerfaust were cheaper and easier to produce - so,at least in Manchuria and Okinawa they would be used.
Logical.But stupid - after germany fall,USA knew what they send to Japan from germans who cooperated.They should send modern AT weapon at least to Manchuria.
Amazing Viz did a Fictional Tanks Size Comparison Video.
Started with an adorable 2.85 tonner from Metal Slug and then thirty three armored vehicles later finished off with a thirty thousand plus ton... well... you'll just have to see the video I guess.
Started with an adorable 2.85 tonner from Metal Slug and then thirty three armored vehicles later finished off with a thirty thousand plus ton... well... you'll just have to see the video I guess.
Carrot of Truth
War is Peace
As it should be.
Carrot of Truth
War is Peace
I do think calling a Bolo a tank is really stretching the term, Mobile fortress sounds more accurate IMO.
Doomsought
Well-known member
I'm always disappointed that these size comparison videos never contain anything battle-tech in them.
BF110C4
Well-known member
BT tanks are really impressive compared to some others, but the setting itself does its best to cripple them compared to the mechs. So for their specific tonnage armored tracked vehicles from other settings where they are more relevant are better to illustrate the chart even in the few occasions BT tanks are more powerful.
You know, I'd love to read a series about a mercenary battalion in Battletech that uses highly specialized vehicles to do the same jobs that mechs do -- half the fun would be seeing the Cult of the Mechwarriors REEeee in outrage as these little tanks go around blowing shit up, heh.