It introduces a lot of political problems. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries wants to sell their products as a MIC company. A good amount of the JSDF are cool with exports.
The large peacenik contingent of the Japanese public are against it and what it would mean for their country's image.
These things take a while. The JSDF only recently started being seen as "good". It wasn't until the 2010s that it stopped being seen as a job program for frick-ups.
My wife's co-worker cried at work when his daughter went into the JGSDF because he felt like he failed to give her a good enough education.
HOLY shit, I didn’t think you could reload a big gun like that so fast. However, does reloading that fast even make a difference most of the time? Lately a tank vs tank battle seems really rare and with the drones, arty, and missiles it seems like it doesn’t matter to much no matter what you do in a tank.
iirc the standard doctrine with the Abrams was so have a round indexed, pop out of cover or over defilade, fire, load fire again, then reverse into cover because that amount of time was considered slightly less then the time it would take an enemy to acquire and retaliate
in this context a quick reload means quite a bit, offering the gunner more rounds to engage in this span, or shortening the exposed time all together
Without being familiar with the exact details of the autoloader, I assume preselection. A round of the same type as the one that was just loaded (or another one preselected by the crew, I really don't know) is positioned by the rammer, ready to load. When the gun is fired, the autoloader just has to ram, it doesn't have to cycle. Like lap-loading in older tanks, where the loader held a round ready to go and immediately just shoved it in the breech after firing.
>Can it be made faster
Probably, though after a certain point, accelerating and decelarating heavy objects precisely requires more and more complexity and you hit diminishing returns. 3 seconds is plenty fast enough though, the US cycle describes takes about 7 seconds, so in that time a Type 10 can fire three times, which is a net gain. Or can just do the same, but faster.
Why did he shot only two?
There is got to be some catch.
If you wanna brag how your autoloader is fast you shot shoot at least 5 times in the row.
>The predecessor of the Type 10, the Type 90, was deployed only in Hokkaido due to road and bridge weight limitations in mainland Japan. >For this reason, weight was a priority in design, as the Type 10 needed to be capable of deploying anywhere in Japan. >Size and weight reductions made the Type 10 six tonnes lighter than the Type 90. Approximately 84% of bridges in Japan can accommodate the Type 10, compared to only 65% for the Type 90, and ~40% for other NATO tanks.
There is a point where fast reload has diminishing returns
If your gun reloads faster than your cannon can adjust to a new target then you wasted budget on something useless, you dont need to shoot the same target twice with a MBT canon
The same m1gay cope. >you don't need autoloader, it's acshually better to have an entire extra person in there to load the gun >loading too fast is acshually bad
What makes you surprised about that? Even the sloppy soviet autoloaders from 60's take like 5 seconds to load in a shell (same system vatnigs are using in their current tanks, they as a nation did not progress technologically at all since the fall of the union).
You pair that with faster, more precise mechanical loader parts + more integrated electronic fire control systems + the benefit of rounds not having to be rotated vertically since its a french style bustle autoloader on Type10 and you end up with smooth n fast system.
Shitbox soviet autoloader on T64/T80 for comparison https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6okDotojj58
Even there loading a shell takes just barely few seconds, its all the manual stuff done around it that you have to do due to lack of modern electronics integration that slow it down. Autoloaders are the way to go, and they have all the potential for pushing them to go even faster.
The MZ autoloader of the T-64/80 takes 6.5 seconds to load without cycle time, the AZ autoloader of the T-72/90 takes 7 seconds to load without cycle time.
(Then there is the issue of some types of AZ carousels only rotating one way, meaning that cycle times can get very long if the ammo you need is in a previous slot, but that's an entirely different issue)
The autoloader in russian tanks wasn't about speed, but space.
The 6.5 seconds is with counting in all the manual part of having to deal with manual controls. My point is that while you see how sloppy this old system is, it is clearly visible if you streamline the process, like its done on Type10, you fire, autoload, your gun is still on target without having to readjust/you can be aiming towards next target while reload is in process etc, and swap the old slow mechanical parts with loose tolerances for more precise and faster ones, you will end with that kind of sustained fire rate nippon tonk displays.
Aka that kind of speed is expected from a competent design (soviet shit is NOT competent lmao, but for what it is - crude massmanufacturable low tech system, it shows what can be done if you do it better)
You should have post a webm too.
How long can it do this for?
14 rounds in the autoloader. Another 22 in the hull that need to be transferred manually.
FASTER
It is really good, so what? Why does anyone think it strange that one of the most advanced nations on earth keeps defense secrets to themselves?
Japan doesn't have that many tanks, the ones they do have should be amazing and they are.
It introduces a lot of political problems. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries wants to sell their products as a MIC company. A good amount of the JSDF are cool with exports.
The large peacenik contingent of the Japanese public are against it and what it would mean for their country's image.
These things take a while. The JSDF only recently started being seen as "good". It wasn't until the 2010s that it stopped being seen as a job program for frick-ups.
My wife's co-worker cried at work when his daughter went into the JGSDF because he felt like he failed to give her a good enough education.
HOLY shit, I didn’t think you could reload a big gun like that so fast. However, does reloading that fast even make a difference most of the time? Lately a tank vs tank battle seems really rare and with the drones, arty, and missiles it seems like it doesn’t matter to much no matter what you do in a tank.
We were so close to a world of antitank machine cannons
iirc the standard doctrine with the Abrams was so have a round indexed, pop out of cover or over defilade, fire, load fire again, then reverse into cover because that amount of time was considered slightly less then the time it would take an enemy to acquire and retaliate
in this context a quick reload means quite a bit, offering the gunner more rounds to engage in this span, or shortening the exposed time all together
>Why is it so fast
Without being familiar with the exact details of the autoloader, I assume preselection. A round of the same type as the one that was just loaded (or another one preselected by the crew, I really don't know) is positioned by the rammer, ready to load. When the gun is fired, the autoloader just has to ram, it doesn't have to cycle. Like lap-loading in older tanks, where the loader held a round ready to go and immediately just shoved it in the breech after firing.
>Can it be made faster
Probably, though after a certain point, accelerating and decelarating heavy objects precisely requires more and more complexity and you hit diminishing returns. 3 seconds is plenty fast enough though, the US cycle describes takes about 7 seconds, so in that time a Type 10 can fire three times, which is a net gain. Or can just do the same, but faster.
It was a tactical demo, not a capability demo
What exactly is the purpose of this tank?
>The predecessor of the Type 10, the Type 90, was deployed only in Hokkaido due to road and bridge weight limitations in mainland Japan.
>For this reason, weight was a priority in design, as the Type 10 needed to be capable of deploying anywhere in Japan.
>Size and weight reductions made the Type 10 six tonnes lighter than the Type 90. Approximately 84% of bridges in Japan can accommodate the Type 10, compared to only 65% for the Type 90, and ~40% for other NATO tanks.
Killing chinks.
There is a point where fast reload has diminishing returns
If your gun reloads faster than your cannon can adjust to a new target then you wasted budget on something useless, you dont need to shoot the same target twice with a MBT canon
The same m1gay cope.
>you don't need autoloader, it's acshually better to have an entire extra person in there to load the gun
>loading too fast is acshually bad
hey did you know they maintain a defensive posture?
Why did he shot only two?
There is got to be some catch.
If you wanna brag how your autoloader is fast you shot shoot at least 5 times in the row.
What makes you surprised about that? Even the sloppy soviet autoloaders from 60's take like 5 seconds to load in a shell (same system vatnigs are using in their current tanks, they as a nation did not progress technologically at all since the fall of the union).
You pair that with faster, more precise mechanical loader parts + more integrated electronic fire control systems + the benefit of rounds not having to be rotated vertically since its a french style bustle autoloader on Type10 and you end up with smooth n fast system.
Shitbox soviet autoloader on T64/T80 for comparison https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6okDotojj58
Even there loading a shell takes just barely few seconds, its all the manual stuff done around it that you have to do due to lack of modern electronics integration that slow it down. Autoloaders are the way to go, and they have all the potential for pushing them to go even faster.
The MZ autoloader of the T-64/80 takes 6.5 seconds to load without cycle time, the AZ autoloader of the T-72/90 takes 7 seconds to load without cycle time.
(Then there is the issue of some types of AZ carousels only rotating one way, meaning that cycle times can get very long if the ammo you need is in a previous slot, but that's an entirely different issue)
The autoloader in russian tanks wasn't about speed, but space.
The 6.5 seconds is with counting in all the manual part of having to deal with manual controls. My point is that while you see how sloppy this old system is, it is clearly visible if you streamline the process, like its done on Type10, you fire, autoload, your gun is still on target without having to readjust/you can be aiming towards next target while reload is in process etc, and swap the old slow mechanical parts with loose tolerances for more precise and faster ones, you will end with that kind of sustained fire rate nippon tonk displays.
Aka that kind of speed is expected from a competent design (soviet shit is NOT competent lmao, but for what it is - crude massmanufacturable low tech system, it shows what can be done if you do it better)