Jump to content


The Japanese Type 95 Ha-Go


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
18 replies to this topic

Community #1 Posted 03 December 2013 - 12:46 PM

    Sergeant

  • Content Team
  • 0 battles
  • 24,443
  • Member since:
    11-09-2011
Read about the Type 95 Ha-Go: the only Axis AFV to reach North American shores.

Full news text

A_Hardy_Buck #2 Posted 03 December 2013 - 12:52 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 4220 battles
  • 2,287
  • Member since:
    05-27-2013

View PostCommunity, on 03 December 2013 - 12:46 PM, said:

The only Axis AFV to reach North American shores.

Full news text

This is the EU forum

Hokum15 #3 Posted 03 December 2013 - 01:07 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 32322 battles
  • 1,940
  • [HO_PO] HO_PO
  • Member since:
    06-06-2012
"Additionally, use of the handheld “Bazooka” rocket launcher by the US marines was quite a shock"

OMG US HACKS!

IPaul72 #4 Posted 03 December 2013 - 01:36 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 8123 battles
  • 1,603
  • Member since:
    04-20-2012

View PostA_Hardy_Buck, on 03 December 2013 - 12:52 PM, said:

This is the EU forum
Hello there
Your right they are, but this is talking about the only Axis AFV to reach American shores  :smile:
Also demonstrating how light tanks can be used as a tactical invasion vehicle as stated in the article here:
Spoiler                     
Kind Regards
IPaul72

A_Hardy_Buck #5 Posted 03 December 2013 - 01:44 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 4220 battles
  • 2,287
  • Member since:
    05-27-2013
Just saying though some japanese light tank getting to some extremely remote island off alaska of all places is much more interesting to the muricans , it was hardly a game changer in the large scale of things

IPaul72 #6 Posted 03 December 2013 - 01:48 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 8123 battles
  • 1,603
  • Member since:
    04-20-2012

View PostA_Hardy_Buck, on 03 December 2013 - 01:44 PM, said:

Just saying though some japanese light tank getting to some extremely remote island off alaska of all places is much more interesting to the muricans , it was hardly a game changer in the large scale of things
Agreed but it is interesting also for the whole of the european peoples too.
I dare say there were lessons learn't on all sides on armored vehicle warfare during this conflict and how to tactically use various vehicles in different situations. :smile:
Kind Regards
IPaul72

Denii #7 Posted 03 December 2013 - 01:49 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 21188 battles
  • 792
  • Member since:
    01-21-2011
I wonder if you can take out 15 of them with a single splash if they're close enough.

IPaul72 #8 Posted 03 December 2013 - 01:51 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 8123 battles
  • 1,603
  • Member since:
    04-20-2012

View PostDenii, on 03 December 2013 - 01:49 PM, said:

I wonder if you can take out 15 of them with a single splash if they're close enough.
Should imagine so, most of them had paper thin armor  :teethhappy:

Cobra6 #9 Posted 03 December 2013 - 02:50 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16295 battles
  • 15,001
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010
Reminds me a lot of early war Polish tanks :smile:

Cobra 6

Solaxe #10 Posted 03 December 2013 - 03:00 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 8837 battles
  • 446
  • Member since:
    06-13-2011

View PostCobra6, on 03 December 2013 - 02:50 PM, said:

Reminds me a lot of early war Polish tanks :smile:

Cobra 6

I was always curious why are you using signature under ever post.. we know your nickname

Jack_Varus #11 Posted 03 December 2013 - 03:26 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 7715 battles
  • 58
  • [READ] READ
  • Member since:
    05-13-2011
It's an interesting article. Especially their amphibious modifications, I didn't know about those and the pontoon idea looked good- I wonder if they handled better than their canvas screened allied counterparts.

Maximillian #12 Posted 03 December 2013 - 03:42 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 28670 battles
  • 534
  • [MUTTS] MUTTS
  • Member since:
    07-08-2010

View PostA_Hardy_Buck, on 03 December 2013 - 01:44 PM, said:

Just saying though some japanese light tank getting to some extremely remote island off alaska of all places is much more interesting to the muricans , it was hardly a game changer in the large scale of things
Some of are interested in all aspects of history, not just what is relevant in the big picture..

Interesting thing about the amphibious version, is that some subs could actually carry these and deploy them( Japanese were innovative with their subs, take the i400 that was a "aircraft carrier")

Quote

I didn't know about those and the pontoon idea looked good- I wonder if they handled better than their canvas screened allied counterparts.
I would guess they did, seeing as the type 2 was built completely around the concept of making it amphibious(made to fight on water and land). Some even had a bridge added :amazed:
http://www.tanks-enc...ype_2_Ka_Mi.php

TheKroo #13 Posted 03 December 2013 - 03:57 PM

    Product Manager

  • WG Staff
  • 10290 battles
  • 5,653
  • [WG] WG
  • Member since:
    08-24-2010

View PostMaximillian, on 03 December 2013 - 03:42 PM, said:

Some of are interested in all aspects of history, not just what is relevant in the big picture..

Interesting thing about the amphibious version, is that some subs could actually carry these and deploy them( Japanese were innovative with their subs, take the i400 that was a "aircraft carrier")


I would guess they did, seeing as the type 2 was built completely around the concept of making it amphibious(made to fight on water and land). Some even had a bridge added :amazed:
http://www.tanks-enc...ype_2_Ka_Mi.php

Ka-Tsu is also an interesting concept for those interested.

It had an unique feature: portions of the vehicle were completely sealed off so it could be carried submerged on the deck of a submarine.
In the late stages of the war some modified versions could even carry torpedoes. Although their effectiveness in this role would be slight to say so.

The Japanese actually planned on using them to assault docked US ships in areas where ships or subs could not travel.
They planned on dropping them of from a sub near the enemy target and letting the Ka-Tsu use their own propulsion to reach the target and fire the torpedo's at it.

Cobra6 #14 Posted 03 December 2013 - 04:48 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16295 battles
  • 15,001
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

View PostSolaxe, on 03 December 2013 - 03:00 PM, said:

I was always curious why are you using signature under ever post.. we know your nickname

I've been asked this many times and every time I say the same:

In every (formal) written communication you sign off with your name at the end, letters, e-mails, fax's. This is the reason why I always sign off with mine. It's a simple formality.
With an email the other party also knows who you are yet generally you put your name at the end. Same deal.

Cobra 6

alex_balea84 #15 Posted 03 December 2013 - 08:50 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 7281 battles
  • 4
  • Member since:
    12-15-2012

View PostHunter1911, on 03 December 2013 - 03:57 PM, said:

The Japanese actually planned on using them to assault docked US ships in areas where ships or subs could not travel.
They planned on dropping them of from a sub near the enemy target and letting the Ka-Tsu use their own propulsion to reach the target and fire the torpedo's at it.

I'd think the survival rate of this kind of atack force would be marginal. Still an interesting terror tactic of asimetric war.
I'm surprised of this tank's very long frontline life, I know Asia had a low level ( if any) of mechanized war but still if you calculate this tank was in service for 11 years at a time when a tank design in Europe went obsolete after 1 or 2 years.

ColonelBlimp #16 Posted 04 December 2013 - 12:42 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 19919 battles
  • 281
  • Member since:
    02-18-2013
So, to summerize, prepare for more T18 cannon fodder in 8.10

IPaul72 #17 Posted 04 December 2013 - 08:30 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 8123 battles
  • 1,603
  • Member since:
    04-20-2012

View PostSolaxe, on 03 December 2013 - 03:00 PM, said:

I was always curious why are you using signature under ever post.. we know your nickname

View PostCobra6, on 03 December 2013 - 04:48 PM, said:

I've been asked this many times and every time I say the same:

In every (formal) written communication you sign off with your name at the end, letters, e-mails, fax's. This is the reason why I always sign off with mine. It's a simple formality.
With an email the other party also knows who you are yet generally you put your name at the end. Same deal.

Cobra 6
Formal is formal and manners cost nothing (unless you go to a posh school then they cost a lot :teethhappy: ), can't knock a fella for that!  :blinky:
Kind Regards
IPaul72

IPaul72 #18 Posted 04 December 2013 - 08:34 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 8123 battles
  • 1,603
  • Member since:
    04-20-2012

View PostHunter1911, on 03 December 2013 - 03:57 PM, said:

Ka-Tsu is also an interesting concept for those interested.

It had an unique feature: portions of the vehicle were completely sealed off so it could be carried submerged on the deck of a submarine.
In the late stages of the war some modified versions could even carry torpedoes. Although their effectiveness in this role would be slight to say so.

The Japanese actually planned on using them to assault docked US ships in areas where ships or subs could not travel.
They planned on dropping them of from a sub near the enemy target and letting the Ka-Tsu use their own propulsion to reach the target and fire the torpedo's at it.
Nice useful bit of information thanks Hunter, I shall take this into consideration when I figure out my plans for world domination  :glasses:
Kind Regards
IPaul72

TheKroo #19 Posted 04 December 2013 - 11:06 AM

    Product Manager

  • WG Staff
  • 10290 battles
  • 5,653
  • [WG] WG
  • Member since:
    08-24-2010

View Postalex_balea84, on 03 December 2013 - 08:50 PM, said:

I'd think the survival rate of this kind of atack force would be marginal. Still an interesting terror tactic of asimetric war.
I'm surprised of this tank's very long frontline life, I know Asia had a low level ( if any) of mechanized war but still if you calculate this tank was in service for 11 years at a time when a tank design in Europe went obsolete after 1 or 2 years.
Both the effectiveness and the survival rate of such action are dubious to say at least.
Still an interesting idea.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users