Prev: Re: [MERCS] Weapons available [FH] Next: Re: [ Way OT but babbling anyway...] Chi-ha

[ Way OT but babbling anyway...] Chi-ha

From: Glenn M Wilson <triphibious@j...>
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 21:10:18 EDT
Subject: [ Way OT but babbling anyway...] Chi-ha

On Tue, 23 Apr 2002 10:52:38 +1000 "Alan E Brain"<aebrain@webone.com.au>
writes:
>>>Tremble in fear, Chi-ha, tremble in fear...
>>
>>Ummm.... is this an Aussie thing, or am I going to get ridiculed by 
>everyone
>
>>for not getting the reference?
>
>The type 97 (ie vintage 1937) Chi-Ha and the improved new turret 
>version Shinhoto
>
> Chi-Ha was the best tank in widescale production the Japanese had in 
>WW2. On
>a 
>good day, it was nearly as good as an M3 Stuart, which is to say, not 
>very.
>
>
>See 
>http://www.wlhoward.com/japan.htm
>or
>http://users.swing.be/tanks/edito/japonais.htm
>for japanese tanks.
>
>Chi Ha
>http://users.swing.be/tanks/engins2/244.html
>
>Shinhoto ie "New Turret" Chi Ha
>http://users.swing.be/tanks/engins2/245.html
>
>Maximum armour: 25mm. 
>
>Compare with Sentinel:
>http://www.overkill82.freeserve.co.uk/Sentinel.html
>or
>http://users.swing.be/tanks/engins2/576.html
>
>Maximum armour: listed as 65mm (though rather more from my own 
>examination of
>the one in the Australian War Memorial)
>
>According to http://salts.britwar.co.uk/salt7.htm
>A UK 2 lb would go through 40mm at any range it could hit at.
>A 17lb would go through rather more - at least 100mm, often twice 
>that.
>" many sources credit the 17-pdr firing APDS with 231mm penetration at 
>1000
>yards
> on armour sloped at 30 deg, but it seems tolerably obvious that this 
>figure
>really 
>refers to armour at 0 deg. "
>
>The Chi-Ha's gun would penetrate 10mm with luck ( 57mm gun not 
>designed for
>penetrating armour)
>, and the Shinhoto's 47mm gun a maximum of 55 mm at zero range.
>
>

Dear diary,

Avoid playing Japanes tanker in WW2 games.  Ever.  Play Poles or
Italians
if you must but never Japanese...  Japanese Infantry, yes; Japanese
Naval
Air, sure; Japanese Navy, always; Japanese Army Air Maybe.  Japanese
armor, never.

Although a scenario involving lots of Chi-ha versus some Suart M3's
might
be... different.

So, was it a inherently  bad design originally or was it a case of a 
tank used in the wrong role?

Gracias,
Glenn/Triphibious@juno.com
This is my Science Fiction Alter Ego E-mail address.
Historical - Warbeads@juno.com
Fantasy and 6mm - dwarf_warrior@juno.com

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:


Prev: Re: [MERCS] Weapons available [FH] Next: Re: [ Way OT but babbling anyway...] Chi-ha