Type 16 MCV | The new and controversial vehicle of Japan
Рет қаралды 418,609
Күн бұрынThe new face of the changing Japan Ground Self-Defense Force, the Type 16 Manoeuvre Combat Vehicle. #type16 #mcv #JGSDF #armouredvehicle
Why did Japan develop the Type 16?
Does Japan really need a wheeled tank destroyer/fire support vehicle?
What are the capabilities of the Type 16?
What is the tactical value of the vehicle for Japan?
00:00 Introduction
01:39 Brief history of tank development in Japan
04:03 Background of the Type 16 Programme
05:39 Specifications
06:28 Advantages of the Type 16 over tracked vehicles
07:13 Mobility
07:44 Tactical deployment
07:54 Survivability
09:05 Firepower
09:35 Analysis
Welcome to our channel. All the weapon systems are like books. They tell us their stories. The Weapon Detective investigates these books, reads between the lines, analyse, and tells the untold. In the dawn of the Second Cold War, the fruits of new projects give us clues of the future. But current weapon systems also have their own stories. In our videos, you can find technical information as well as historical backgrounds, what happened during the development processes, combat experience and political projection. While the Second Cold War rising, Let's investigate the weapons together.
© Japan Ground Self-Defense Force, natita1208, ponshichi, snagaokatodoroki, prior, Russian State Archive of Film and Photo Documents, NHK (Japan Broadcasting Corporation), Marine Corps Film Archive, USMC, US Army, dragoner JP, caba phantom, net-film.ru, US Department of Defense, Fighter field.556, Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force, OverSeas, yoshishi01, mozukunasubi, ミク, suzuki ken, Soichiro Oga, JP-SWAT, French Army, legionariolocofilms, General Dynamics Land Systems-Canada, South African National Defence Force, DiscoverMHI (Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd.), nyaoCVW5, kinokopack, FNSS, Tonkatsu298, 朝日新聞社, ポッポ屋, 破邪顕正, goinkyox, Hajime Kojima, Italian Army, ubuubu05, yolkhere, CCTV Video News Agency, Japan Air Self-Defense Force, US Navy, CGTN, Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation, RT
Music: 栄光の旗の下に (Under the flag of glory)- Japanese march
Please click the link to watch our other Weapon Detective videos
• Weapon Detective
Please click the link to watch our other Japanese Systems videos
• Japanese Systems
Please click the link to watch our other Weapon Detective-Land videos
• Weapon Detective-Land
/ weapondetective
/ weapondetective
weapondetective@gmail.com
@WeaponDetective 3 жыл бұрын
Please click the link to watch our other Weapon Detective-Sea videos kzfaq.info/sun/PLEMWqyRZP_Lr1-xIzFrM6xUHCOgetdkmp Please click the link to watch our other Japanese Systems videos kzfaq.info/sun/PLEMWqyRZP_LoGHZpbX_LShNT-UxMLomZJ Please click the link to watch our other Weapon Detective videos kzfaq.info/sun/PLEMWqyRZP_LrdqB-XbqY2LocUVEaG_w7D
@julianemperor2554 3 жыл бұрын
Looks just like South African Rooi Kat Armoured Car
@joyalsajan1168 3 жыл бұрын
Sir,it isn't asia -pacific it's indo-Pacific.Look at usa official statements regarding naming of regions of strategic importance.
@alexfang2581 2 жыл бұрын
Can you do one on the South African Rooikat please? TIA
@WeaponDetective 2 жыл бұрын
@@julianemperor2554 Here is our Rooikat video. We hope you enjoy it. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/Z7iXjbCdz76qZqM.html
@user-uy1rg8td1v Жыл бұрын
@@WeaponDetective Great channel. I would highly suggest you don't have background music. I firmly believe background music is annoying, distracting, and unnecessary (especially for information-dense educational videos). I also believe people want to hear you speak (and you do have an accent that makes it hard to hear) and get information and not hear generic background music that they have to mentally filter out and doesn't really add anything useful.
@Locomotion-uz4ly 3 жыл бұрын
It is not just a question of finances. The Type 10 might be expensive, but the reason the JGSDF is not acquiring the Type 90 and the Type 10 in the same quantities as the Type 74 is that they have gotten too big. A tank is designed with a specific terrain in mind. The Leopard 2 is designed for the North German plain, so are the Abrams and the Challenger 2. The Merkava is designed for the Middle East. Japan is mostly mountains. A 70+ ton tank is not an asset there. It is a burden. Very hard to transport, very hard to maneuver, requires a huge logistical train...
@mrteacher1315 3 жыл бұрын
Narrow roads combined with mountainous terrain and relatively soft ground makes classical MBT impractical in Japan. Western style MBT will most probably get stuck and immobilized very quickly. Opposite was true when Japan fought in Asia though.
@pac1fic055 3 жыл бұрын
Can’t cross many of the smaller bridges
@potatopants4691 3 жыл бұрын
They type 10 is only a few tons heavier than the type 74; and is entirely capable of going to most areas that the older vehicle can. It is still worthwhile to have it as a partial replacement, considering the fact that the Type 90 is too heavy, and the type 16 is not capable of engaging better armored tanks with its 105mm gun. All three vehicles have their roles in the JGSDF.
@vonilao2209 3 жыл бұрын
Yes, i agree,,,
@dirtyaznstyle4156 3 жыл бұрын
That goes for most of Asia, mountains or jungle
@kevinstroup 3 жыл бұрын
Short version: It's an economy tank. Not as tough as a full tank, but way cheaper and can do most of the same stuff.
@stonefox9124 3 жыл бұрын
Proved to be a effective strategy for the Sherman in WWII and sense the world's military powers are facing financial collapse I doubt anyone needs super machines.
@ultraman5168 3 жыл бұрын
It makes sense for them strategically too. Lugging heavy MBTs around Japan and it's surroundings is hard work that takes expensive equipment. Modern Japanese MBTs are all on the light side to begin with. A vehicle like this can serve in many similar roles as an MBT, but will be much easier for the JGSDF to deploy across Japan or transport to a nearby conflict, on top of it's economical advantages.
@marneus 3 жыл бұрын
Wrong. It's not a tank. It's a cavalry vehicle and tank hunter. Just like the Centauro. It is specially useful because many bridged in Japan's rugged terrain can not support the weight of a MBT.
@damascus1111 3 жыл бұрын
@@marneus arguably it can perform in many armored combatant roles successfully. Armor is high enough that small arms fire is negligible, and then at range the goal would be to not be hit in the first place. Doctrinal usage of the vehicle can make it effective in a similar vein to a tank, though not entirely as effective in a range of capabilities.
@ultraman5168 3 жыл бұрын
@@lepepelepub12 new procurement is always expensive, especially when it departs from established doctrines. But Japan's political stance has changed, it desires more force projection and strategic mobility so it can be more proactive in it's own defense and more ready to help it's neighbors. In that context the economy of a wheeled support gun is beyond obvious. Moving MBTs across japan requires specialized railway and road transportation to protect infrastructure, as well as military landing ships and/or heavy weight transport aircraft. You need this to have mobility across Japan itself, to say nothing of deploying such forces some distance from Japan in a timely fashion. Japanese MBTs are already made expensive and fragile by the strict weight requirements of Japanese infrastructure and logistics. Compared to all these specialized logistical assets that would be needed to create an MBT force with comparable mobility, the addition of one wheeled AFV that can be carried by smaller ships, airlifted by helicopter, and drive itself around Japan without tearing up roads, bridges, and countryside, is by far the cheaper, easier, and faster option. And once the use of such wheeled vehicles is established they are categorically more economical than tracked vehicles of similar role. So in addition to short term benefits related to the new military goals, there are long term economic benefits to the introduction of more wheeled vehicles as opposed to over-relying on tracked designs.
@RoninTF2011 3 жыл бұрын
Wut? Wasn't the Japanese Groundforce mainly designed to fight giant reptiles that fire rayweapons from their mouth? I've seen many documentary films on this....
@thhseeking 3 жыл бұрын
They never win :P
@romell06 3 жыл бұрын
@@thhseeking Nobody does. Lol even a nuclear weapons cant do shit against godzilla.🤣🤣
@jameshailerthepostmaster4389 3 жыл бұрын
They also fight against angels
@danielhandika8767 3 жыл бұрын
@@romell06 bruh godzilla eat nukes
@h.bjoewho6859 3 жыл бұрын
And giant insects and alien robots
@Joshua_N-A 3 жыл бұрын
Is everything Japanese controversial? Heavy MBTs isn't favored on Japan's road laws. Type 90 is too heavy to transport to islands around Japan. Type 16 can be loaded into a lamding craft. Japan is mountainous and has plenty of urban areas. Type 16 also designed to shoot and scoot and able to be transported by C-2 transport aircraft.
@bayuakbar1664 3 жыл бұрын
*Scout
@aaronsanborn4291 3 жыл бұрын
@@bayuakbar1664 no not scout...shoot & scoot....as in shoot and haul ass
@vicentegodoy5493 3 жыл бұрын
@@aaronsanborn4291 HA capabilities
@rogerpartner1622 3 жыл бұрын
Also who Gona bother with Japan it's got no Minerals oil rare earths etc it's Total Industrial power could be shut down by 6 submarines.. bit like UK We'd starve without shipping Same old Probs all islands have Uk is better Tank battle country tho Lol Everything is electronic now small powerfull intelligent missiles In small mobile cheap Carriers It's a new world 🌍
@aaronsanborn4291 3 жыл бұрын
@@rogerpartner1622 only thing I can think of Japan could ship would be maybe obsidian since they are volcanic islands....but other than that all mineral resources have been very limited there
@peteturner3928 3 жыл бұрын
Type 10 was not designed to replace the Type 90, it's an advanced supplemental design that will work with them, not replace them.
@HanSolo__ 3 жыл бұрын
Indeed. The same goes for all bullshit about Economy Tank. It's a mountains tank. Means none other heavier vehicles will come on their way. Type 90 and Type 10 got a similar level of FCS cameras and sights. If the author would know about investment in Type 90... Nah, seems like he'd still talk shit about things he had no slightest idea.
@JOKER-tw3di 3 жыл бұрын
Type10 was designed to replace type74
@AWACS_Eagle_Eye 2 ай бұрын
@@JOKER-tw3di And that has come to fruition that now, in 2024, the Type-74 is being retired.
@Hardbass2021 3 жыл бұрын
Well, this vehicle is meant to tackle enemy armored vehicles at a distance and conduct shoot-and-scoot tactics as well as support infantry in urban combat, and if it can do its job well, then why the controversy?
@Joshua_N-A 3 жыл бұрын
Maybe because it's Japan and fear Japan will rise again? I see history is often used against Japan post war.
@potatopants4691 3 жыл бұрын
It's controversial because some in Japan see it as a step towards foreign operations - as the vehicle is fairly light and easy to transport to places outside of Japan. And quite a good portion of the population is against any sort of foreign military involvement.
@xboxgorgo18 3 жыл бұрын
The right wing people don't like the Japanese Self Defense Force, that's why
@pleaseenteranamelol711 3 жыл бұрын
I dont think japan will "rise up" again. Not soon at least. Japanese culture has changed alot, the samurai spirit is dead. The emperor is gone, and now they have given the world anime and efficient cars. They arent the same.
@dirckthedork-knight1201 3 жыл бұрын
@@pleaseenteranamelol711 "The emperor is gone" No he is not he still there what are you talking about?
@edmondshum4116 3 жыл бұрын
Make sense for urban city fighting and rapid mobility requirement in city. Just need powerful munitions
@lancefisher8358 3 жыл бұрын
HE rounds and armor piercing will probably be plentiful in these
@2ndwest891 3 жыл бұрын
As a side note, the deployment of the Type 90 and Type 10 was greatly influenced by circumstances: the number of Type 90s was reduced due to the end of the Cold War, and the Type 10 was due to the reduction of tank units as resources were concentrated in other domains. In the 2010s, the tank quota was halved to 300 tanks, tank units outside of Hokkaido (facing Russia, where most of the tank units are located)and Kyushu (facing China) were to be eliminated in the future. As a result, the Type 16 was assigned to defend areas where there were no tank units. However, the SDF also understands that the Type 16 is different from a tank. Its main missions are delayed action, destroying light armored vehicles, and infantry support. If tank units arrive from other areas and counterattack, it will be in support. The Type 16 is not very strong against tanks, but it has reassuring friends. The medium-range multipurpose missile, MMPM, is capable of multi-target engagement and is a trump card in anti-tank combat. There is also a plan to create a family of APCs and other vehicles based on the Type 16, and this family of vehicles is expected to be the mainstay of the future JGSDF.
@yo2trader539 2 жыл бұрын
By the way, it's not at all controversial in Japan. There has been a discussion on improving wheel-based assets for decades. It took around 15 years and to finally get the budgetary approval.
@monoshrimpekeit9639 3 жыл бұрын
Oh Boy, I cant wait to grind for this vehicle for 2 years in War Thunder.
@TheAmazingCowpig 3 жыл бұрын
Well, better get started right away considering it's sitting right there.
@zinedinezethro9157 3 жыл бұрын
I can imagine it being a fasty boi armed with sabot lmao
@antimatter4733 3 жыл бұрын
Lol, it takes you two years to get a type 16... Rip
@marderkpz7148 3 жыл бұрын
@@antimatter4733 Nah, it only need 2-3 month to grind japan tree(if only grind tank tho)
@antimatter4733 3 жыл бұрын
@@marderkpz7148 took me like 2 months to grind out the entire US tank tree while playing other nations and air...
@discount8508 3 жыл бұрын
its fast .....it can climb.....it hits hard .......its versatile .......its cheaper .........its a no brainer
@antimatter4733 3 жыл бұрын
It's fast on roads, can't compete with tanks on rough terrain and can't take a hit from any modern weapon
@discount8508 3 жыл бұрын
@@antimatter4733 Ive seen them on rough terrain ......they can climb up a hill faster than a tank can notice theyre being prepared for an ambush
@antimatter4733 3 жыл бұрын
@@discount8508 no offense but I find that highly unlikely. Unless the hill was made of firm terrain, sure they can have a higher power to weight ratio but they also have much more ground pressure and less traction, so on soft ground they're at a massive disadvantage, and once again, no armor
@discount8508 3 жыл бұрын
@@antimatter4733 yes .....the ground was firm .......and they were on higher ground before the abrams could get in any firing position .........the top of an abrams = 20mm tops ....another point its better to have something in position fast than something heavier thats going be too late for the party ...... their range is far better than a fuel guzzling tank like the abrams ........also more armour can be bolted on and armament can be whatever you want ie AT rockets , 105mmgun , 20mm gun AA ...take your pick
@antimatter4733 3 жыл бұрын
@@discount8508 real life isn't a shooting range with well compacted dirt roads, when you have to drive across desert sand, swamps and marches there's no substitute for lower ground pressure. Top armor isn't a major criteria for tanks but the Abrams has way more than 20mm, the majority of the top is 38.1mm or 31.75 over the engine, the only place that is 20mm is the blow out panels which aren't connected to the crew compartment. The Abrams is notoriously fuel hungry, when compared to a leopard for example the ranges are pretty similar. You can't bolt more armor on, once again your weight is limited by the ground pressure which is already high, if you added a similar amount of armor to a mbt you'd be almost the same weight with much worse mobility, hence this can't stop anything more than a rpg7 which is cold war tech.
@shiro214okane 3 жыл бұрын
I thought Japanese already invented MCV where there's "new construction options" voice after deployed.
@abdulhamid2369 3 жыл бұрын
This is man of culture
@catachandevilfang 3 жыл бұрын
I’m waiting for the Psionic School Girls Commandos. The PLA will have a hard time getting through Japanese lines when their tanks keep getting slammed into their warships!
@HitomiNee 3 жыл бұрын
"Building..." "Insufficient Funds..." "Structure Sold." XD
@johndexterzarate6663 3 жыл бұрын
We build for yuri Building the Soviet Empire A new location commander? M to the C to the V Cannot deploy here
@Sora-dragneel 3 жыл бұрын
Aaahh the nostalgia rushing in..
@aaronsanborn4291 3 жыл бұрын
Having served in a Stryker Brigade the Type 16 provides the same advantages as the Stryker. Speed, mobility, ease of transport and firepower.
@user-vl9ju3vx9u 3 жыл бұрын
@@al1ce90 I heard that some of the largest reasons of StrykerMGS' retire are its main gun is too old, and its autoloder is too expensive for its effect. I think neither of them happen at Japanese Type-16 MCV(Its main gun is developed for it. The gun isn't old).
@user-vl9ju3vx9u 3 жыл бұрын
@@al1ce90 @AL1ce No, it looks like L7 but deferent. It's new rifled gun developed for Type-16. Actually, L7 was used as Japanese Type-74TK's main gun, and Type-16 can use same ammunition. But it doesn't meen L7 is Type-16's gun.
@csnation 2 жыл бұрын
If weight permits, Active protection will help these immensely.
@arsyadidris6349 2 жыл бұрын
Its basic form is 26 tonnes. Their homgrown airlifter, the kawasaki C2, can carry 36 tonnes and still carry enough fuel to roundtrip japan and then some,, So yeah, an additional 10 tonnes of extra protection (slat, ERA, composite armor addons, active APS etc etc) shouldnt be problem. Though… it might strain that powertrain havin to lug around an extra 10 tonnes. 5 tonnes should be ok i guess😅
@TheGreatThicc 3 жыл бұрын
This gives me flashbacks to when here in Canada we attempted something similar when a politician called to replace our fleet of Leopard 2's and Leopard C2's with the M1128 Stryker. Yeah that didn't go so well.
@WildBillCox13 3 жыл бұрын
"Wheeled Tank" is a contradiction in terms. A tank's major advantage over wheeled vehicles is its great ability to traverse non road terrain. Well, that and armor. For a "support weapons platform", however, a narrower, easier to achieve, set of criteria is sometimes set. Shoot and scoot is a great idea for a defensive posture if the enemy plays by your rules. Modern sensors render that more problematic, as an AFV is more visible to Low Light Camera, Infrared, and RaDAR than a man with an LATW or a team with an ATGW is/are. About Japan as a regional power. Whichever nation Japan allies with will be the stronger for it. I would be sad if that nation became China. IMO, of the various regional powers; China, India, Bangladesh, Malaya/Myanmar, Japan has the longest duration and hardest won continuous naval tradition. India is the one with the longest running carrier ops history, but Japan's presence is a major factor in regional maritime stability*. *Such as it is
@stevestruthers6180 3 жыл бұрын
It didn't go well because the politicians would have allowed it to be used as a poor substitute for a tank, instead of what it was intended for, namely infantry fire support. Rather wisely, the military objected to the proposed purchase. Unless they've served in the military, politicians should stay out of military affairs.
@arsyadidris6349 2 жыл бұрын
Wth… they wanted to replace an MBT with strykers? Its suppose to support the MBT, not replace it. Facepalm
@themeatpopsicle 3 жыл бұрын
A country made up of thousands of island connected by well-built roadways makes a wheeled combat vehicle basically a necessity. A 400km range on a diesel engine means that you can get these things anywhere in the country pretty quickly.
@arsyadidris6349 2 жыл бұрын
Exactly. They are a force multiplier, meant to provide fast response and support the MBTs. And since theyre wheeled and light enough, the can use public roads no problem. Maintain 80-90kmh, and ur they can reach hokaido from tokyo bay in about 2-3 days. Or u can just airlift them and theyll drop by in under 3 hours. Take ur pick😂
@jamesk370 3 жыл бұрын
While on joint maneuvers with the USMC, a Type 74 tank and an LAV-25 got giggy with each other, and the Type 16 was their love child.
@sjerbz5322 3 жыл бұрын
This is a really great video! Nice job dude :)
@wiryantirta 3 жыл бұрын
4:33 i’m not sure this is the case. The type-10 was developed on the get go as a lighter MBT to operate in areas where the road/bridge infrastructure network cannot consistently support a vehicle as heavy as a Type-90.
@richardthornton3775 3 жыл бұрын
Really good mate thanks👍 coming from an island myself, I agree with what you say when you mention that the air/sea is the most important but the army should be well equipped and outgun the perceived enemy in as many ways as is economically/strategically (needed) possible. But not at the expense of the navy & airforce 👌great video mate, cheers 👍
@adrianleon9589 3 жыл бұрын
A good informative video, with a great analysis. keep going !!!
@gusgone4527 3 жыл бұрын
A16 is a very capable vehicle. More than a match for other none MBT AFV's around the world. It's also well ergonomically designed and the quality of the engineering is exceptional. It will be interesting to see what other variants are developed, such as anti-air weapons system..
@matthewwagner47 3 жыл бұрын
Put a RPG cage an spal netting along with reactive Armor plating will help alot. This weapon could be alot better an will surely have its comparison. Adding a ATGM Packs on its turret would really help this infantry support vehicle.
@luket1085 2 жыл бұрын
Or gun launched ATGM - LAHAT
@amvkarthik 3 жыл бұрын
High mobility, high firepower and a decent protection against small arms fire. I can see it going before the main column and after reconnaissance units in the battlefield.
@longrider42 3 жыл бұрын
I like it, but then again I've always liked Armored cars, and armored wheeled vehicles. Good video.
@hugod2000 3 жыл бұрын
Thank you posting this viseo
@cmh6122 3 жыл бұрын
I was an artilleryman, but were I a groundpounder I would love to have one of these watching over us.
@andreasleonardo6793 3 жыл бұрын
Too nice video about Japanese armoured vehicle type 16 MCV its characters & abilities of type-16 with clearly explaining of whole Japan military situation its requirements &its modern strategy among whole allies defense system in south China sea ...thanks for sending👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻🦏♥️🇺🇸🤝🏽🇯🇵♥️🐗👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
@garethmurtagh 2 жыл бұрын
Lack of IED protection seems a common factor in many Japanese vehicles, I guess that’s an advantage of not having to worry about carrying out COIN ops in the Middle East. The JGSDF is designed to fight on home ground so arguably they don’t need that capability as standard
@PySnek 2 жыл бұрын
What do you think happens to a tank with tracks, if an IED explodes right under it? You can say bye bye to them! A tank without it's tracks is a destroyed tank with a dead crew in a very short time...
@burceparmaksz2644 2 жыл бұрын
It is a pleasure to watch your videos you are the best man
@PySnek 3 жыл бұрын
It makes sense to use an armored vehicle with wheels. If the enemy shoots a wheel off, than you're still able to drive away, unlike with tracks, which will immobilize you completely, if damaged. And you are way faster on roads and fields too!
@cheng3580 3 жыл бұрын
Japan actually sends its troops overseas. First time was to Iraq in the 2000s. As of recently the JMSDF has deployed forces to the Gulf of Aden back in 2019 when the situation with Iran got worse. Japan has also sent forces to South Sudan for peacekeeping operations and has partake with many other countries especially in SEA for training.
@mrteacher1315 3 жыл бұрын
yeah, but far away from actual battlefields with plenty of psychological counselling and support.
@cheng3580 3 жыл бұрын
@@mrteacher1315 He stated that they don't send them overseas. Not whethey they see combat or not. I'm only addressing those issues.
@RandomGuy9 3 жыл бұрын
Japanese soldiers are also deployed in Syria. For an UN mission in the Golan hights.
@DoctorDeath147 3 жыл бұрын
They also have a base in Djibouti
@Mugdorna 3 жыл бұрын
Under the Japanese constitution they can deploy overseas to support Allies.
@Pixy335 3 жыл бұрын
Man, Japanese wheeled ,,tanks" will be always giving me those Evangelion vibes.
@marvingulanes5577 3 жыл бұрын
I just realized that the number after the word type in the naming of their tanks is equal to the year they released the tank
@winzyl9546 3 жыл бұрын
This is a good tank, perfect for the terrain. This tank is never meant for invasion, it is meant for defense in japanese island terrain.
@JD-dm1uj 3 жыл бұрын
This is a very flexible and capable vehicle, go Japan!
@enduria3478 2 жыл бұрын
*Centauro* :whoare you? *Type16* :I'm you, but kawaii.
@craigross341 3 жыл бұрын
I didn't realise that tracks are mainly to spread pressure, not for grip. The tracks are essentially like the sand mats trucks can put down in the desert.
@jehamoonsoon2847 3 жыл бұрын
New sub here nice detail explanation.
@foxia828 3 жыл бұрын
type10 never meant to replace the type90
@tommygun333 3 жыл бұрын
Exactly. It was to compliment the former
@rafaelvbv 2 жыл бұрын
hello friend, we brazilians need a vehicle like this to replace our old Engesa EE-9 Cascavel, would be great for our region....thanks for this vídeo
@WeaponDetective 2 жыл бұрын
Thanks for your interest. We will make the EE-9 video as soon as possible
@CocoaBeachLiving 3 жыл бұрын
Very efficient and looks good too👍
@Master-AGN 3 жыл бұрын
It’s (in my opinion) actually perfect for defending the Japanese main islands where shoot and scoot is the game. Different to other countries Japan’s mountains are covered with small go everywhere roads. No tracked vehicles required. You can walk up a mountain road I’m suddenly find a vineyard or temple on the only available piece of flat land. The other differences is that in summer The vegetation grows is phenomenal. Dense like the jungles of Vietnam. If anyone ever invaded it would be worse in the caucuses is for them.
@normandong4479 3 жыл бұрын
An interesting analysis of Japan's Type 16 Combat Vehicle. Cost savings and lower vehicle weight are key drivers of its design. Cheaper than a full MBT, but still having a 105mm main gun on wheels gives it firepower, mobility over existing roads & bridges. In a full tank battle, the Type 16 would not be sustainable, but all the modeling & predictions of conflict for Japan are still hypothetical. Japan's ground forces would still need sufficient man portable anti-tank & anti-air missiles in their combat brigades if the Type 16 is relied on as a main armored vehicle. Effective military planning should never be focused on one item or vehicle but take into account other arms to meet the unforeseen situation.
@semco72057 3 жыл бұрын
Those vehicles are easier to move around and they probably travel at a faster rate of speed to get to where they are needed and can be transported by air or ship from one island to another easily.
@juanzulu1318 3 жыл бұрын
Interesting. Thx
@matovicmmilan 3 жыл бұрын
Great video mate!
@kampfer91 3 жыл бұрын
I thought you can click it and it deploy into a base ?
@edwardharoldbutler7076 3 жыл бұрын
Mobility is the most important thing on any battlefront in any war. They look very mobile. If they can move on all roads in Japan. Then it is a better tank incase of an invasion from an occupation force.
@benghazi4216 3 жыл бұрын
Glad I found this channel, subbed and liked, but please improve the mic situation Not saying to buy something new and expensive as that can be hard for a smaller channel, but like 1 dollar can make sound recording outdoors ten times better (a dead cat from a furry key chain ball) I think some simple tweaks can make it sound less like a telephone from the 90's. But hey, I will still watch every video you put out, so no worries there!
@alitahir4147 3 жыл бұрын
I like how you figured nukes into the video at the end. Binkov tends to gloss over that.
@mr787takium9 3 жыл бұрын
As the years past the technology gets hightech but more expensive to create and to maintain its the price to pay for the quality you can get it depends how much a nation can spend to produce a combat vehicle.
@rootin222 3 жыл бұрын
Love your videos just wanted to make a quick tip its better to time stamp with "0:28" and not "0.28"
@WeaponDetective 3 жыл бұрын
Thanks for tip
@inquisitorsquish5422 3 жыл бұрын
Is R and D / production done by the Japanese government or private companies like General Dynamics etc?
@Veritas419 3 жыл бұрын
Just subscribed. 👍🏻
@cyberarchitect9280 3 жыл бұрын
I fall in love the MCV
@stephanelegrand8181 3 жыл бұрын
Like always Trolls and armchair specialists ! Nice vid I was clueless about japanese tanks ! And the investigation sound cool tome !
@hartono89687 3 жыл бұрын
Smart made, as future war won in the city, as city also perfect for a defensive position.
@setsunahakanai 3 жыл бұрын
3:03 looks exactly like that one scene in GuP where the Chi-Nu was founded
@pinktea8951 3 жыл бұрын
aye
@setsunahakanai 3 жыл бұрын
@@pinktea8951 I rallied at least one fellow weeaboo (you). I have reached enlightenment
@hardcasekara6409 3 жыл бұрын
@@setsunahakanai Cause it's based on the image.
@setsunahakanai 3 жыл бұрын
@@hardcasekara6409 My thoughts exactly. Thanks for confirming!
@DoctorDeath147 3 жыл бұрын
hello, Tenshimp.
@aking-plums6985 3 жыл бұрын
Nice to see your channel showing off weapon systems from Japan mate. Do you know why the Type 16 MCV went will the 105 mm main gun rather than the 120mm main gun on the Centauro II?
@WeaponDetective 3 жыл бұрын
As we tried to explain in the section on the Centauro, the ballistic protection of armoured vehicles used in amphibious landing and airborne operations is low. The 105mm gun provides sufficient firepower for this type of vehicle. Also, the Type 16 is not designed for direct combat with enemy main battle tanks. The vehicle is tasked with delaying the enemy until the JGSDF's main battle tanks arrive in the area. The Type 16 can also be used effectively against main battle tanks by setting ambushes and performing hit-and-run attacks. A 105mm gun is enough for this task.
@aking-plums6985 3 жыл бұрын
@@WeaponDetective Wasn't the reason the Centauro went from 105 mm to 120 mm because the 105 mm was inadequate against modern MBTs, thus giving the Centauro II a better chance of stopping an enemy tank either by hit and run or ambush tactics as you say. If the Type 16 MCV can't penetrate their enemy's armor (MBT), then the only delays that the enemy tank crews would be having is manoeuvring around the burning remains of the vehicle. Surely by putting soldiers in a vehicle that only has the ability of taking out lightly armored vehicles and expecting them to take on anything such as a MBT would seem that they didn't learn the lessons from WWII.
@matovicmmilan 3 жыл бұрын
@@aking-plums6985 I agree with you. The 105mm cannon isn't able to effectively deal with the modern MBTs nor with the frontal armour of the older MBTs. Against infantry, non-armored and lightly armored vehicles, auto-cannons in 30, 35 or 40mm caliber would be the preferred option for being more flexible and providing vehicle with the antiaircraft defense capability.
@aking-plums6985 3 жыл бұрын
@@matovicmmilan Yeah mate, the French came to that conclusion when they were designing the EBRC Jaguar armored reconnaissance combat vehicle, combining the 40 mm cannon with MMP guided anti-tank missiles. These will replace their AMX 10 RC, ER90 Sagaie and VAB HOT.
@scratchy996 3 жыл бұрын
The main thinking is that if Japan can't move its tanks from one island to another fast enough, so would an invading force. Also an invading force would be most vulnerable while it lands, that's why they need fast vehicles, to get quicker and attack the enemy while they are most vulnerable. Of course, a 105mm can't destroy a modern MBT, but it's good enough to do a mobility kill, and a tank that can't move, with destroyed optics and sensors is useless. The Type 16 doesn't work alone, helicopters, jets, drones, artillery and infantry will be there too. Modern warfare is all about combined arms.
@jamaicasysbm2580 3 жыл бұрын
Japan 🇯🇵 needs to start exporting theses hardware
@codyi5232 3 жыл бұрын
Look into the barrier resistance effect projectiles .
@JoseLopez-vt8kd 3 жыл бұрын
Excelente análisis. En España tenemos el Centauro I, y puede hacer diversas misiones complementarias al los tanques de batalla principales. Y proporcionan una buena potencia de fuego en caso de ser desplegados en misiones de interposición de la paz.
@cheng3580 3 жыл бұрын
*Insert funni Godzilla fighting JSDF*
@KisukeUrahara215 3 жыл бұрын
Hello
@fetusofetuso2122 3 жыл бұрын
looks vaguely like a Centauro.
@extremathule982 3 жыл бұрын
Yep, like a Centauro I
@Mandrak789 3 жыл бұрын
And Rooikat.
@MPdude237 3 жыл бұрын
Looks like a Leopard 2 Turret on a Stryker if you had to ask me.
@stevenrith2386 3 жыл бұрын
It’s a optimal design so thus the similar design.
@Mandrak789 3 жыл бұрын
@@stevenrith2386 Yes. French have similar vehicle AMX-10RC, only it's 6x6 instead of 8x8.
@lordtemplar9274 3 жыл бұрын
Good idea to have wheeled to supplement MBT, as cost of tracked makes it difficult to own many tanks. However the 105mm rifled barrel is a mistake, as it cannot penetrate modern tanks. A 120mm would have made more sense if you want anti tank capability. So in effect a Type 16 is only limited vs infantry, light/medium vehicles and some defences, but this could have been achieved more efficiently with a 30mm or 40mm gun which has the added benefit of also doing AA vs drones and helicopters.
@yo2trader539 2 жыл бұрын
While I see the benefits of your argument, what you propose would increase weight and recoil. That would make it less easy for air transportation (and defeat the design purpose of the MCV). Type-16 MCV wasn't designed as an anti-tank weapon. There are other assets for that. Keep in mind it was designed for Japanese military needs.
@cwf_media9200 10 ай бұрын
And you are wrong yes IT wont ne a big Thread to a mbt but the Homeland Advantage Could make Them Side Shooting so the best mbt IS weak. You also need to consider Shooting with a 30mm gun you need to be far Closer to the enemy wich ist Not ideal If you have Paper Armor so the Type 16 is more of a Sniper. I tought at First Like you why wont they Take the centauro 2b with 120mm. Well they don't Need. The centauro would be facing many mbt's in a war.
@JS-wl3gi 2 жыл бұрын
Wheels are faster and mobile, tracks are slower but can over more terrain. There should be a mixture in the force.
@fabriciuslan 3 жыл бұрын
Ahhh a Rooikat!
@Mandrak789 3 жыл бұрын
Yup, only this vehicle is armed with larger gun.
@fabriciuslan 3 жыл бұрын
@@Mandrak789 jep , but the Rooikat also had a 105 version, the SANDF felt they did not need it.
@Julia-fc4mp 3 жыл бұрын
Rooikat platform but different turret.
@fabriciuslan 3 жыл бұрын
@@Julia-fc4mp jep the turret looks a bit more advanced. Makes sense, they are used for quite different roles.
@hendi1571 3 жыл бұрын
@@fabriciuslan the even developed a 120mm version
@TheWizardGamez 3 жыл бұрын
its basically, a domestic stryker, but with a turret that has people in it
@Armoredcompany 2 жыл бұрын
To my knowledge the JSDF can actually deploy overseas now. I can't say for a 100% certainty but I seem to remember something coming up 2-3 years ago about their legislation regarding JSDF usage changing.
@arsyadidris6349 2 жыл бұрын
Yes, defence of japan “and her allies”. Im paraphrasing ofcourse, but thats about the gist of it. For now, that updated constitution is heavily implied for their naval vessels. The JMSDF is pretty much a blue water navy. All it needs now is some proper set of teeth. And first off: upgrading their “helicopter carriers” to carry the F35B
@Alrion1704 3 жыл бұрын
0:30 the only question i have at this point, Why are all the TD´s incontinent?
@user-gp4vw5vt1c 2 жыл бұрын
The Type 16 MCV's shells are compatible with those of the Type 74 tank, and many of its crew have switched from Type 74 tanks.
3 жыл бұрын
Just recently UK started to think that their armored inventory is under-strength both quantity and quality. Japan needs to match her potential enemies in terms of armored forces which might have over-whelming quantity and some quality.
@geroutathat 2 жыл бұрын
but UK invades countries, and Japan is forbidden rightly so from doing that. UK needs tanks for Syria, Iraq, even the Saudi regions doesnt it? Japan does not really need to build 600 tanks because Ghana bought 200 russian tanks. They need to deploy heavy guns around their land as quickly as possible, thats it. We have just seen russian tanks are struggling to cross Ukraine, china will have tanks based on Russia, these japanese tanks can hit fuel supplies and the chinese tanks wont get off the beach, then just scoot off, hit and run, hit and run, and boom the World turns up probably USA first to smash china.
@aurelienrb 3 жыл бұрын
Can someone tell me why is water leaking from under the vehicles at 0:28 ?
@irksome100 3 жыл бұрын
Why is fluid pouring from underneath? Engines overheating?
@m000Theevilcow 3 жыл бұрын
The status of Japan military operations abroad has already been closed since they have sent already some troops abroad for peacekeeping missions.
@benlex5672 3 жыл бұрын
Type 16 was only meant to tackle enemy landing forces, with China as the main potential enemy. China isn’t exactly known for its amphibious capability despite being a strong land power. The only possible landing zone for any invading country to Japan would be either Kyushu for China or Hokkaido for Russia, and Hokkaido already have most of the Type 90 stationed. Type 16 was meant to be the tank that removes enemy air assault force while type 10 removes enemy landing in Kyushu beaches.
@hoangvuification Жыл бұрын
Type 16 is a beautiful looking tank
@ΔΓςΗΞΜΨώθΓκζ 3 жыл бұрын
Type 10 developed for replacing type 75 not to replace type 90 they are planning to build around 400 type 10 but and they realized that type 10 is good but expensive so they minimized the production of type 10 and choose the type 16 for it's cost. They still making both Type 10 and 16. There currently on debate if they should start a production prototype next gen tank that will replace the type 90 or make a upgrade pack for type 90 to kai version.
@Mandrak789 3 жыл бұрын
Perhaps they could have added ATGM launcher. 105 mm is more than enough to deal with IFVs, but with ATGMs it could fight MBTs on long range.
@tsumibito5796 3 жыл бұрын
Japanese wont be engaging people at long ranges really its for urban combat
@Mandrak789 3 жыл бұрын
@@tsumibito5796 I wouldn't bring this thing into the city where RPG might await around every corner and window. It's poorly protected for urban combat, imo.
@hjalmar4565 3 жыл бұрын
ATGM aren't that great in mountainous areas, like Japan.
@davidschnell1561 3 жыл бұрын
Actually this vehicle may be better than their tanks because of the mountainous terrain of Japan and the fact that many of the bridges across the islands of Japan cannot support the weight of the tanks. Then there is the issue of fuel and how much can Japan store and protect from destruction. Japan may be cut off from oil and gas supplies because they are an island nation.
@Stryker200000 3 жыл бұрын
What’s up with the liquid spraying out beneath the vehicles at the beginning when they are all driving away all cool like?
@ironwolf2244 3 жыл бұрын
Seems like the modern version of the Sd.Kfz. 234/2. I approve of it.
@ZaHandle 3 жыл бұрын
You gotta see the modern puma(that’s its name btw)
@ironwolf2244 3 жыл бұрын
@@ZaHandle I have seen it. This seems more akin to the original design in my opinion though. The puma is abit more deviated in design principle.
@kentmcjo4927 3 жыл бұрын
Thank you Japan Thank you JGSDF
@shanequeen5003 3 жыл бұрын
Tanks on the main islands this vehicle all the others makes sense
@kevinyaucheekin1319 3 жыл бұрын
However it needs a active protection system of some kind.
@JaneDoe-dg1gv 3 жыл бұрын
All armored vehicles need active protection now.
@soumadeeplaskar9494 3 жыл бұрын
@@JaneDoe-dg1gv yeah! In near future all armored Vehicles will be useless without active protection system especially against UAV and attack helicopters.
@SilverShamrockNovelties 3 жыл бұрын
Actually, it’s the opposite. The MBTs are deployed on Hokkaido and Kyushu. The wheeled vehicles are intended for the main island.
@syahareensharani6869 3 жыл бұрын
*Type 61 exist* Wargaming: Next update we are introducing the new Japanese wheelie vehicles in World of Tanks
@patrickct9386 3 жыл бұрын
Yep, looks like a Rooikat Similar weight and a prototype 105mm Rooikat was produced. .
@jd5179 3 жыл бұрын
If you supply your army with shoulder mount anti tank missile, it will take out any armored vehicle for only 3% cost of a main battle tank.
@IKMojito 3 жыл бұрын
Have fun explaining to infantry why they need to engage an enemy vehicle with no battle tank support because their shoulder mounted missile is cheaper than their tank
@jd5179 3 жыл бұрын
@@IKMojito thats why you never engage tanks in open battlefield with no armored support .
@emregungor2986 2 жыл бұрын
@avigdonable Жыл бұрын
00:29 what is that water streams bellow that Type 16s are releasing?
@International_Internet Жыл бұрын
Water is sprayed to prevent damage to the road. Type 10 and Type 90 pass after this video
@mr.highground9250 2 жыл бұрын
The armor and gun caliber its same Kaplan MT can you please compare Type 16 and Kaplan MT?
@rjhp420tv4 3 жыл бұрын
Japan has the rights to make there defence force to be more stronger just let them . Love japan love asians from philippines
@sherwoodbaker2714 3 жыл бұрын
Bataan death match....
@henrykfu 3 жыл бұрын
The important question, how effective is it against Kaijus?
@R3dp055um 3 жыл бұрын
The thing that made me sit up straight and say "WTF?" was when you mentioned that the Type 16 has a *rifled* 105mm gun, rather than the smoothbores which have become almost universal in AFV's over the last 40-some years. You did not mention what types of ammo are available to this gun, which was a significant oversight on your part, if you will forgive me for saying so. Rifled guns don't work well with HEAT rounds, which is why the smoothbore has become so popular. Presumably the Type 16 fires some type of a sabot round, but it won't be the usual APFSDS, not with a rifled barrel. I think we definitely need to know more about ammo types. Is there any chance of a follow-up video to address this issue?
@SpectreBGM 3 жыл бұрын
Well it's derived from the british L7 which was used on the type 74 so i guess they wanted to keep ammo compatibility and heat works just fine in rifled guns only looses about 10% performance when compared to same calibre smoothbore . Also as an 105mm gun it's not really capable to engage modern MBT frontally smoothbore or not and for everything else it's more than sufficient . Taking into account the terrain where it will most likely be deployed heavy duty MBT wouldn't be able to operate there anyway .
@RalphReagan 3 жыл бұрын
We need 3000 of these.
@nikolatasev4948 3 жыл бұрын
It is a cost efficient solution. First, if an invasion happens the attacker would have to balance between sending few heavy machines, many light machines or a lot of infantry. Plus, they would need to also ship a ton of supplies after the first few waves. So an invasion, from the sea or air, will not have mass heavy tanks, an the Type 16 will be more than enough to handle them. Having more machines like that on all islands is far better than having few heavy tanks on a few islands. Second, as the video said, to stop an invasion you would need air and naval power. The funds given the ground forces to prepare against an invasion are funds not given to the navy and air force to prevent it. Again, a cheaper ground force solution is better for the country as a whole. I'd say buying a foreign machine would have been cheapest and therefore best, but I suppose it was a political decision of national pride. The Type 16 would not make sense if Japan has a land border that could be invaded, so it would not work as well for South Korea, or the Baltic states. For Japan, it is just fine.
@ralphjimenez3191 3 жыл бұрын
The Virgin Main Battle Tank vs The Chad Wheeled Tank Destroyer.
@bryanmartinez6600 3 жыл бұрын
The GIGACHAD ATGM
@hukama6911 3 жыл бұрын
War Thunder meta in a nutshell
@the_bane_of_all_anti_furry 3 жыл бұрын
them yoy understand tank destroyer like these can get blowed out by explosives quite easy
@jayrigger7508 3 жыл бұрын
Why in opening scene .. were all the "tanks" shooting water from underneath
@IsThisHandleTaken 3 жыл бұрын
What's the giant artillery(?) unit in the background at 0:35? That thing looks massive
@derj-flug9785 3 жыл бұрын
It is a Japanese Type 99 155mm Self-propelled Artillery
@IsThisHandleTaken 3 жыл бұрын
@@derj-flug9785 Awesome, thank you!
Weapon Detective
Рет қаралды 84 М.
National Museum of Military Vehicles
Рет қаралды 293 М.
Nir Gaming
Рет қаралды 4,9 МЛН