Forgotten Samurai | Type 5 Ho-To and Type 5 Ho-Ru

Рет қаралды 28,036

Tank Encyclopedia

Күн бұрын

Пікірлер: 78

@GerardMenvussa Жыл бұрын

All of this is history. It happened a long time ha-go.

@TheArklyte Жыл бұрын

While in general they're just another case of "too little, too late" which would have still proven somewhat effective because of usual "bad tank is better then no tank" reality of situation, I feel like they could have proven quite useful IF they were available during the peak of Ha-Go usage. That feeling is somewhat based on british experience with diversified tank armaments in same regiments where some tanks were rearmed with high velocity guns and howitzers to increase overall effectiveness of the regiment against certain targets. So had it been available to landing troops alongside Ha-Go during the invasion phase, those vehicles likely would have been famous. The japanese 47mm is roughly comparable to soviet 45mm so likely it would have helped greatly against whatever small amount of light tanks opposition had and 120mm howitzer would have made short work of any reinforced positions. Both would have potentially sped up the japanese advance at the cost of having to carry two more ammo types... whcih japanese army already lugged around for towed guns ¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯ The effectiveness on later period is harder to judge, but despite them having too light armor and armaments, they're still better suited for specialized roles then Ha-Go and if they were used in previous phase, they would have also been already present when Japan had gone on defensive. Meaning that they would have slowed down the Allied troops in areas where M4 weren't readily available and made recon more risky.

@Wolfe_Blue Жыл бұрын

Nice work

@nathangillispie51 Жыл бұрын

Very interesting video, thank you.

@M.M.83-U Жыл бұрын

Very interesting

@S1nwar Жыл бұрын

so the desperate last ditch 1945 upgrade was roughly equivalent to a panzer1 47mm tankhunter variant^^

@i_nameless_i-jgsdf Жыл бұрын

No mentioning of the sprocket wheels of the Ho-Ru is been modified for a wider tracks to improve ground pressure. The track was enlarged to 350mm width. The wheel guide pins were set in two rows to hold a road wheel between them. The sprocket of the driving wheel was the grating type to gear with the wheel guide pins like T-34

@i_nameless_i-jgsdf Жыл бұрын

At 00:52 which showed the famous model of both Ho-To and Ho-Ru, you can see that the sprocket wheel of the Ho-Ru is not the same as the Ho-To which remained unchanged, also note that the tracks of the Ho-Ru is slightly wider, so this model is pretty accurate replication of the design.

@builder396 10 ай бұрын

I wouldnt be surprised if they just got a Chi-Ha sprocket and track and called it a day. Both have center guides so they should work just fine.

@johnlansing2902 Жыл бұрын

Thank you .

@ven7165 Жыл бұрын

Well in terms of armor and armament I'd say they'd be outdated, but not necessarily useless. I doubt they'd change the war, but I figure these designs are the best the Japanese could've done.

@shanepatrick4534 Жыл бұрын

I wonder the quality of those welds. Welding AFV plate is different than ship hulls or plate.

@plasmadrone3123 Жыл бұрын

World of Tanks obsession of not putting new low tier vehicles really irks me. They missed out on putting these Japanese TDs on their new line and it's so sad :( :(

@builder396 10 ай бұрын

Warthunder sadly has much the same obsession. There is just more money to be made from high-tier vehicles because whales need to pay more to insta-unlock them.

@brucermarino Жыл бұрын

Thank you for another fine video. Would you agree that, at the time the Ha-Go began production, 1935, it was quite a good tank compared to many of its contemporaries? Thanks again!

@TanksEncyclopediaYT Жыл бұрын

It was. It's main problem was it's longevity, which none of its contemporaries shared.

@brucermarino Жыл бұрын

@@TanksEncyclopediaYT Well said, my friends!

@cellardoor9882 Жыл бұрын

imagine if Japan invaded Soviet Union.. the T34s would probably decimate them in short order

@brucermarino Жыл бұрын

@@cellardoor9882 absolutely!

@gagelamka2381 Жыл бұрын

I find that the maim issue facing the type 95, though it's armor, and mobility were not below average for 1935, is it's one man turret and lack of coaxial machine gun.

@IcyFemboi Жыл бұрын

Is that Danganronpa and Persona music I hear? Excellent choices!

@vilo_h5541 Жыл бұрын

Very informative. Thank you.

@NativeLanguage02 Жыл бұрын

Hmmn. A US style of narration just like those old HC videos. Great video.

@HeinzGuderian_ Жыл бұрын

Most of the newest equipment remained in Japan awaiting the invasion.

@jamesedwardladislazerrudo1378 Жыл бұрын

"Imagine carrying the insufferable Yamato battleship that has cultural significance from navy" -IJA Tank division

@w0lfgm Жыл бұрын

Nice

@lukefriesenhahn8186 Жыл бұрын

They need to add both to War Thunder and World of Tanks.

@thatonepolishtroll4290 Жыл бұрын

Ah yes Japanese hetzer

@jacobrobar Жыл бұрын

Enjoy the narrator! Has a “tank” voice!

@nomoneyglobal Жыл бұрын

Did that self propelled 5.9 inch gun see combat? That's a big ass shell.

@CARL_093 Жыл бұрын

japan is more on infantry its rare to see Japanese tanks in ww2

@MrLoobu Жыл бұрын

They had very little domestic steel production, particularly high density and good quality steel required for effective tanks. To make it harder on tank designers and manufacturers, much of that supply was put into the Navy, which was full of massive ships needed to carry their invasions across the pacific and mainland Asia. It was mostly supply issues that kept their tanks small in size and number. Their style of warfare also usually left most of those behind the front line.

@allangibson8494 Жыл бұрын

The Japanese used tanks from day one in WW2. Tanks were the entire key the Japanese advance in 1942. Japan had a massive steel industry- what they were short of was oil. The British, Dutch and Americans had zero tanks between California and Egypt in 1942.

@nathanworthington4451 Жыл бұрын

Duh

@scottkrater2131 Жыл бұрын

@@allangibson8494 You are mistaken. The US had light tanks in the Philippines in 42. Until Japan had defeated US/Philippino troops.

@TheArklyte Жыл бұрын

@@allangibson8494 "Tanks were the entire key the Japanese advance in 1942" Yes, however the was a problem of several year capability gap caused by "defeat" at the hands of soviet forces in border conflicts that resulted in lowered priority on tank development and production right at the start of WWII. Because despite massive success of tanks in China in 1920's, in late 1930's japanese high command catched a mass aneurysm and decided that tanks were overrated. That idiocy costed the japanese a lot. Tbh japanese generals and admirals should have received Allied honours for their systematic sabotage of japanese war efforts... if not for the fact that same morons dragged Japan into a war it wasn't ready and fit to wage😅

@EroPantherH Жыл бұрын

Why is Persona music playing in the background?

@alangordon3283 Жыл бұрын

Bob made short work on these hohos

@MrLoobu Жыл бұрын

Modern warfare should look at smaller tank designs. 2 people, 10 tonnes, with modern drive trains and electronics, it could make a lot more sense than it used to. It would hide and run much better, be harder to hit from the air, still provide great design protection from the air and sides for the smaller crew compartment. The armor and armament couldn't compete with a frontline battle tank, but 3 or 4 of them could with the same amount of cost in lives and money involved.

@builder396 10 ай бұрын

Nah. This idea barely makes sense for pure ATGM carriers like the Wiesel with a TOW on top. And while a Wiesel like that has logistical advantages because it can literally be airdropped and generally transported fairly easily, its also fairly fast. But nothing about it screams survivability against pretty much anything larger than bullets. The only way it can hold its own in a fight is to find a ridgeline, pop the launcher over it, fire, and retreat to reload. Rinse and repeat on different points of the ridgeline. As soon as you want a cannon the idea falls apart even worse because you cant put them on a tiny soap box, there is a reason these guns only go on tanks and near-tank-sized 8x8 wheeled vehicles. And making a turretless vehicle is something nobody will seriously so because having a turret that can snap on target in two seconds flat, regardless of the targets direction, is a must on the modern battlefield to get a first shot advantage, and only in extremely rare cases will a limited traverse be considered acceptable. So no, 10 ton tanks will never again be a commonplace thing.

@MrLoobu 10 ай бұрын

@builder396 Really has nothing to do with what I said. You can have smaller guns, on a turret, with similar penetration and smaller diameter. You can have similar armor but less of it, and you could operate a tank with 2 people. My point is smaller targets, more targets, less people per target for drones, and armor reoriented to protect more from them.

@builder396 10 ай бұрын

@@MrLoobu No, no and no. A smaller gun cant get the same penetration as a modern 120mm. They cant even get the 105mm L7 derivatives to nearly the same penetration, nevermind something like the 60mm HVGS, which is the smallest gun to fire APFSDS short of literal autocannons. And that 60mm APFSDS probably wouldnt even hurt a T-54 frontally. Scaling armor across a smaller surface area is nothing new. But Wiesel doesnt come with composite armor, mostly because there is no way to keep it light enough to be air-dropped. Even if that wasnt a requirement there is no way the drivetrain and suspension would take kindly to it, and its not like it has the space to upgrade either. And operating a tank with only two people is begging for issues of overworking them with too many different tasks. The French tried it and failed miserably. Modern technology somewhat mitigated the workload of operating a radio, so that job migrated to the commander and sometimes the loader. But notably French tanks didnt even have those anyway, so same difference. Modern technology doesnt make that any easier. If anything there are now even more things to do. The only project I know that somehow similar to what youre proposing and actually has merit is the Chinese dragging Type 59s from mothballs, think T-54s with 105mm L7 guns, and fitting them with autoloaders and remote control entirely to overrun enemy defenses with borderline-suicidal swarm tactics. Which is actually a sound idea.

@MisterSplendy Жыл бұрын

11:28 Are you certain this is correct? If the muzzle velocity is 290 mps, with a firing range of 5.6km, then how could a Panther tank with a much higher muzzle velocity have an effective firing range of 1.1km? Are my numbers wrong or am I understanding them incorrectly? This is a serious question, not a critique, I am confused. Thanks for your great video as always.

@TanksEncyclopediaYT Жыл бұрын

Effective range is defined as the range at which you can engage a target with a reasonable hit chance. This makes significantly different criteria for when you're looking at AP rounds (where you need to hit a tank size target) and at higher caliber HE, where anywhere in the postcode is fine.

@allangibson8494 Жыл бұрын

Range is limited by elevation of the gun. Maximum range where air resistance is ignored is achieved at 45 degrees elevation. If you do consider air resistance higher elevations do give better ranges with 54 degrees used for really long range guns capable of putting a shell into the stratosphere where the air is thinner. The other reason to go to high elevations is to hit targets in mountainous terrain (or on the other side of a mountain) - which is why howitzers exist.

@michaelkaiser1864 Жыл бұрын

The Ho To failed to sell in Lain countries. A bit likevthe Nova.

@T29Heavy Жыл бұрын

Gaijin When?

@SRDPS2 Жыл бұрын

11:02 not quite low It's "no" Live .50cal Reaction

@flarvin8945 Жыл бұрын

So the only source for the Ho-Ru is a questionable drawing? Then why do a video on it, when everything about it is mere speculation? If it is real at all.

@TanksEncyclopediaYT Жыл бұрын

Because we decided it was interesting enough and paired well with the Ho-To as a topic.

@flarvin8945 Жыл бұрын

@@TanksEncyclopediaYT thanks for the reply. I can see that, with the limited info on the Ho-To. I think a video on late war Japanese rare/possible designs based on existing vehicles, would be a good fit for it. Along with being an interesting topic.

@i_nameless_i-jgsdf Жыл бұрын

LMAO they literally made videos on tanks from WoT in the past (Don't ask me why), which is well known for having completely fictional vehicles made by a game studio, get used to it. At least the Ho-Ru has a proper history behind it to support its existence. Additionally the Japanese source claimed that the vehicle existed in the form of a prototype or even reached to mass-production stage.