Italian vs. Japanese WW2 Tanks

This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

nuuumannn

Major
9,775
8,406
Oct 12, 2011
Nelson
So, let's play a game.

This is a rough guide to what we are looking at here and is not to be taken as anything except a very superficial look at these vehicles and their capabilities. According to my book on world tanks, the Type 95 Ha Go was speedy and reliable, one of the best tanks the Japanese used during the war, powered by a reliable Mitsubishi 6-cylinder 120 hp diesel engine. The disadvantage of the tank was its three man crew, with the machine gunner sat next to the driver in the hull, and the commander in the turret also responsible for loading the main gun. Armed with a 37mm main gun and a 6.5 mm machine gun and protected by 12mm maximum and 6 mm minimum armour plating, the Ha Go wasn't powerful, but compares favourably to other light tanks of the day, with a road speed of 28 mph. A later variant received the same armament as the Chi Ha, upgunning the design with a 57 mm gun.

44270781231_132fbd67f9_b.jpg
Type 95

One Italian tank in service at the beginning of the war was the Carro Velocce CV.33, which was based on the British Carden Lloyd Mk.VI tankette, but was obsolete by the war, having entered service in 1931, but still in use in North Africa. British tanks were easily able to overwhelm this type owing to its light armour and armament of machine gun calibre weapons. Its armament comprised twin 8mm machine guns, with 15 mm maximum and 5 mm minimum armour plating, with a road speed of 26 mph. One disadvantage to this tank is that it doesn't have a moveable turret, but being a tankette was manoeuvrable. It had a crew of two. This is a Carro Velocce Fiamme flamethrower variant, captured in North Africa.

51735189309_89366bbfe0_b.jpg
DSC_0196

The Carro Armato L.6/540 replaced the CV.33 in service and although more modern, it was barely more capable against British armour, again, owing to its 20mm main armament and 30mm maximum and 6 mm armour plating. It could manage 26 mph on the road as standard for this size tank. A later version, the Semovente had a 47 mm anti tank gun mounted in the hull. As with the CV.33 it had a crew of two, so the loader also acted as commander, also firing the machine gun, which was mounted in the turret in the main armament mounting. The Semovente had a crew of three, which was an improvement but the type's speed went down owing to the extra weight of the gun and space inside the cab was restricted by the armament.

So, on the face of it, the Ha Go has the most powerful armament, with a 37 mm gun and is reliable and the fastest of the three vehicles here, and when fitted with the 57 mm gun is more than a match for the Italian tanks here, although the 47 mm gun of the Semovente could be effective against the standard armed Japanese tank. Ultimately, Japanese efficiency and discipline would trump Italian manoeuvrability; my money would be on the Ha Go to win.
 

nuuumannn

Major
9,775
8,406
Oct 12, 2011
Nelson
I beleive the Vickers 6 Ton, and some old French FT-17s.

Yup, the good ole FT-17 was the very first mass produced tank and first to be built under licence, the Russians building them, and they were still prevalent within the Red Army during the Great Patriotic War, although they probably did accompany the armies ploughing through Eastern Europe on the way to Berlin. The Manchukuo army had them as well as the Kuomintang, although the type was long obsolete by the end of WW2. Great little tank though, the trendsetter that gave birth to the modern tank.

49252936992_6cd25d5c25_b.jpg
Royal Museum 11
 
Last edited:

GrauGeist

Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
Yup, the good ole FT-17 was the very first mass produced tank and first to be built under licence, the Russians building them, and they were still prevalent within the Red Army during the Great Patriotic War, although they probably did accompany the armies ploughing through Eastern Europe on the way to Berlin. The Manchukuo army had them as well as the Kuomintang, although the type was long obsolete by the end of WW2. Great little tank though, the trendsetter that gave birth to the modern tank.

View attachment 650921 Royal Museum 11
Was it the Russians or the U.S., with it's M1917 tank?
 

nuuumannn

Major
9,775
8,406
Oct 12, 2011
Nelson
Was it the Russians or the U.S., with it's M1917 tank?

What, production wise? I think the Americans built them under licence first, Dave, although the Imperial Russians received them before any foreign country, which were then absorbed into the Bolshevik army. I think at least...
 

Donivanp

1st Lieutenant
6,627
4,272
Feb 23, 2014
Katy Texas
Now the thought of an Italian v Japanese "tank" fight. Now that's a idea. Two paper mache toys running around trying to see how can plow a straight furrow. Yeah sorry not much of a fan of either "tank" concept. Though each was effective until a true tank arrived to take it on.
 

GrauGeist

Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
What, production wise? I think the Americans built them under licence first, Dave, although the Imperial Russians received them before any foreign country, which were then absorbed into the Bolshevik army. I think at least...
This is an interesting subject, to be honest.
The US Army used French FT-17s during the war and started manufacturing the M1917 in 1918, though the first production units arrived in Europe about a week after the war ended.

Any idea of the Russian's timeline?
 

WARSPITER

Staff Sergeant
1,208
2,464
Oct 23, 2007
Yup, the good ole FT-17 was the very first mass produced tank and first to be built under licence, the Russians building them, and they were still prevalent within the Red Army during the Great Patriotic War, although they probably did accompany the armies ploughing through Eastern Europe on the way to Berlin. The Manchukuo army had them as well as the Kuomintang, although the type was long obsolete by the end of WW2. Great little tank though, the trendsetter that gave birth to the modern tank.

View attachment 650921 Royal Museum 11
Note the use of wood for the large front idler wheel. Worked quite well too.
 

nuuumannn

Major
9,775
8,406
Oct 12, 2011
Nelson
Any idea of the Russian's timeline?

For construction, gonna have to look it up. I do know that the US factory had only just begun producing the M1917 and only a few (can't remember off the top of my head) reached France before the war's end. The Russians had received the tank before the revolution, or so I remember... The French used the type in action and it proved worthy, tactically it laid the foundations for modern tank combat.
 

WARSPITER

Staff Sergeant
1,208
2,464
Oct 23, 2007
The white Russian army received Renaults to use against the red army during the Russian revolution. Fourteen were burnt out and captured - these were refurbished
at the Krasnoye Sormovo factory in1920 and then one copy was also made. In 1928 the first T-18 tank was made which was based on the FT-17.

The FT-17 was used by 27 countries besides France including Afghanistan where US troops found four intact in 2003.
 

GrauGeist

Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
Last I heard, there werw two FT-17 relics discivered in a scrapyard near Kabul.

They hadn't been used in decades and needed to be restored. The Afghan government gave them to the U.S., who shipped them to the Patton museum

In that same scrapyard, were several Hawker Hinds (if I remember right, 12 airframes and a pile of parts).
Those went to the UK and at least one as been restored and put on display so far (at Cosford, I believe?).
 

WARSPITER

Staff Sergeant
1,208
2,464
Oct 23, 2007
That could be where two went with one still in Afghanistan and one sent to Poland. Two more were found in Iraq with the original engines
and were sent to the US. There are around fifty still in reasonable condition.

The Afghan scrapyard is said to have one or more Hawker Harts and a lot of other equipment but there is the danger of mines just to
add a bit of spice to any recovery operations.
 

Reluctant Poster

Staff Sergeant
1,206
1,521
Dec 6, 2006
In fairness, though, what was the competition for the Japanese tanks before 1942? Was Thailand an armor power? Did the Indochinese have a Panzer Corp? Did the British have ANY armor in Malaya? Even a piddling little armored car with a LMG is pretty terrifying if all you've got is a Siamese Mauser. Even the Chinese didn't have anything like a tank corp, so anything offered by the Japanese wouldn't have much to slow it down.
Before the official start of WWII the Japanese used their tanks in China . All went well until they faced the Russians in 1939. Here is the wiki article On those battles
It notes that the Japanese increased their tank production from 500 to 1200 after these battles.
 

Users who are viewing this thread