Rin's blog

March 2, 2023

Tank post!

Filed under: Uncategorized —— Rin @ 10:44 pm

Going on a little interest rant, I’d like to talk about two different tanks and their history as well as their failings. I guess this is kind of a tank post instead of a post about the government, but hopefully you enjoy it just as much!

The first tank in my discussion is the Type 90 Kyu-Maru, a mix of East and West. Tracing its design back to 1976 with the TK-X program, the Type 90 was developed in order to replace the already aging Type 74 (which was adopted only a year earlier). The design was to use several key features from the Type 74; hydraulic suspension (essential for the hilly terrain of Japan), an autoloader, laser rangefinder, and a small vehicle size, among other things. Starting in 1981, a series of prototypes were developed and manufactured. The first prototype (TK-X-0001) was completed by 1982, and looked incredibly advanced for its time. It used an indigenous Japan Steel Works 120mm main gun and had a different armor layout than production vehicles, as the turret front had an odd amount of angling. Massive optics were placed upon the tank’s roof as well. The second series of prototypes (TK-X-0002) were completed by 1989, and used an exterior design similar to the German Leopard 2. These still retained the JSW 120mm gun, and a slightly different armor layout (i.e “false” panels on the turret cheeks, to demonstrate the addition of armor upgrades that would be present in the future). These prototypes are nearly identical to serial Type 90s, but the Type 74-ish smoke launchers, fabric-covered add-on turret armor, and mounting brackets on the lower hull plate are dead giveaways.The finalized Type 90 was officially adopted in 1990, and mass production began the same year. A number of changes were made to the final vehicle; the gun was replaced with a license-made Rh-120, the turret armor was no longer fake, and the fire control system was improved. The gun/optic combination that the Type 90 used was likely the best in the world at the time of it’s introduction. The conveyor-belt autoloader loaded shells in 3 – 5 seconds, and the gunner’s main optic allowed for tracking and hit probability to be displayed. The vehicle was powered by a 1500hp engine, allowing it to travel at speeds up to 70 km/h. Overall, the vehicle is great. But even now, the Type 90 still hasn’t replaced the Type 74 in service due to budget issues. It also hasn’t seen any combat, so its true combat effectiveness is unknown…

The second tank of our discussion is the Panzer 68: when “innovation” creates issues.

We all know the Swiss for their quality, right? Whether it be knives, or cheese, or straight-pull rifles, or mountains… whatever. But what if I told you that in the 1960’s, Switzerland actually created something that really sucked? Believe it or not – it’s true, and I’m here to explain.

The Panzer 68 entered official service in 1971, but the design clearly traces its roots back to the Panzer 61, which began production only 3 years before. The Panzer 68 was generally more of a modernization of the 61 under a different name than a new tank entirely. I mean, they’re basically identical. The improvements over the Panzer 61 included a wider track setup, a stabilization system for the main cannon (why they didn’t have this before baffles me), a new suspension system, pressurized main cannon breech, new heating unit for the crew, new high-range radio, and a new engine that allowed the tank to reach speeds of up to 55 km/h. Sounds all good, right? Yeah, no. This tank sucks so much that I need an entire section about it. The technical issues were revealed in 1977 by Weltwoche, with an article so controversial that it literally caused the resignation of the Swiss defense minister. This article revealed several problems. First of all, the NBC protection in the vehicle was lacking, to the point where crews would have to wear gas masks. And the new heating system and pressurized gun breech I mentioned earlier? Yeah, when the heating was turned on, it had a high chance to FIRE the main gun on a whim. The gearbox was also horrible, with the tank needing to stop entirely just to switch into reverse, or else the gears would break. The new radio also interfered with the turret drive, causing it to spin out of control when the radio was used at full power (this, combined with the spontaneous main gun, was CATASTROPHIC.)

Thank you for reading!

One Response to “Tank post!”

  1.   kfpatnaude  Says:
        

    Hey Rin! I really enjoy reading about history, so I am glad that you wrote about something like that! The Type 90 Kyu-Maru, Japan Steel Works seems very interesting. Although I am surprised it has not seen combat. I was very confused with a lot of the technicalities of this one, but I am interested to know more of the history behind the people that designed this. Part two had an interesting idea “The second tank of our discussion is the Panzer 68: when “innovation” creates issues.” This seems like a very capable tank. Overall, I am happy to have read your blog. There are a lot of technical aspects of military history and current military occurrences. In the future, I would love to read more blogs about history. I love watching History Channel, and I feel like they have similar themes as this. It is really interesting the designs of the tanks. The blueprints are always very detailed and helped me put an image to some of the descriptions, so those were very helpful. I’d love to read more of your thoughts about several other historical events, possible other wars and mayb e other military history tactics.

Leave a Reply

©2025 Rin's blog
Provided by WPMU DEV - The WordPress Experts
Hosted by Naperville Community Unit School District 203 Sites

Skip to toolbar