Japanese New Tank TKX

[evripide]

Japanese army finally has shown the new tank.
I can't read Japanese. But you can see the pictures of this.
However, I can identify some specs. 120mm gun and 44ton weight. Its cost per vehicle is 700,000,000 yen(about $7m).

sankei.jp.msn.com/politics/policy/080213/plc0802131146007-n1.htm

[Thery]

Here is the video link TK-X / MBT-X

[evripide]

Does the gun look quite short?

* additional specs;

its engine is 1,200hp (27hp/ton)
5 loadwheels
hydraulic suspension

[eckherl]

Does the gun look quite short?

* additional spec;

its engine is 1,200hp

They will use either a the L-44 or a designed 50 caliber in length 120 mm tube, the have not ruled out the option of using a L-55 either, turret will also be able to house a 140 mm with minimal modifications just as the case with the ROK K2. Turret armor is a advanced ceramic modular design that will be able to provide upgrading for future armor threats, configuration is just like a Leclerc.

[evripide]

They will use either a the L-44 or a designed 50 caliber in length 120 mm tube, the have not ruled out the option of using a L-55 either, turret will also be able to house a 140 mm with minimal modifications just as the case with the ROK K2. Turret armor is a advanced ceramic modular design that will be able to provide upgrading for future armor threats, configuration is just like a Leclerc.

Yes, it is L-44. I have another question. Some say it is a replacement for Type-74 rather than Type-90. Do you think it is right?

[eckherl]

Yes, it is L-44. I have another question. Some say it is a replacement for Type-74 rather than Type-90. Do you think it is right?

It will be a replacement for both eventually, kind of surprised that they showed it off to the public in such a crude state.

[evripide]

It will be a replacement for both eventually, kind of surprised that they showed it off to the public in such a crude state.
Thanks for the answer.
A crude state? Do you think it is not ready to product?

[eckherl]

A crude state? Do you think it is not ready to product?

It is still in the experimental phase so no it is still not ready for production, I think the production forcast is setup for the year 2010 or 2011. The crude state was mentioned due to the lifting points on the armor and the rubber pads missing from the tank track. Knowing Japan, when they unvale the completed package then we will see one darn good package, just look at what they did with the Type 90 design.

[evripide]

thanks eckherl

[eckherl]

Here is a few photos that are making their rounds on some of the other sites.

[swerve]

My personal & entirely non-technical translator watched the video, & told me it's 44 tons, has new lightweight armour, & screens inside which (in her words) show the crew where the enemies are. She said it's for testing - couldn't find the right English word but I think the newsreader called it a prototype.

[eckherl]

My personal & entirely non-technical translator watched the video, & told me it's 44 tons, has new lightweight armour, & screens inside which (in her words) show the crew where the enemies are. She said it's for testing - couldn't find the right English word but I think the newsreader called it a prototype.

I was quite surprised that they brought it out for a public viewing at this stage of the project.:)

[Izzy1]

I was quite surprised that they brought it out for a public viewing at this stage of the project.:)

Me too, they're after something. Tech Transfer?? X
Eck?

[eckherl]

Me too, they're after something. Tech Transfer?? X
Eck?

I do not know what they would be after, if they wanted or needed assistance they could pretty much ask. Japan is pretty good in the research department when they want to design something. What do you think that they are after.:D

[Izzy1]

I do not know what they would be after, if they wanted or needed assistance they could pretty much ask. Japan is pretty good in the research department when they want to design something. What do you think that they are after.:D


Their Type-90 looks pretty much like the old-mark Leo 2.

AGS Technology? Or Deeper - do they have DU?

[eckherl]

Their Type-90 looks pretty much like the old-mark Leo 2.

AGS Technology? Or Deeper - do they have DU?

That is because they relied on German turret design concept when they manufactured the Type 90. What is your exact question in regards to DU, we talking armor or ammunition. I would like to state that Japan is very advanced when it comes to ceramic materials and they could get DU projectile ballistic/penetration testing assistance if needed.

[Izzy1]

That is because they relied on German design concept when they manufactured the Type 90. What is your exact question in regards to DU, we talking armor or ammunition. I would like to state that Japan is very advanced when it comes to ceramic materials and they could get DU projectile ballistic/penetration testing assistance if needed.

My second question - their first design thus appears Leopard2A4 - how about the next step? Chobham armour or did we trade that in for something else?

[Izzy1]

Did we?

[eckherl]

My second question - their first design thus appears Leopard2A4 - how about the next step? Chobham armour or did we trade that in for something else?

Now Izzy - you would not want me or anybody else to discuss highly sensitive information now would you? One would think that you could improve the actual properties in materials used.;)

[skyrider]

That is because they relied on German design concept when they manufactured the Type 90. What is your exact question in regards to DU, we talking armor or ammunition. I would like to state that Japan is very advanced when it comes to ceramic materials and they could get DU projectile ballistic/penetration testing assistance if needed.
This reminds me of a rumor that has been floating arround japan site for sometime. During the development of the type 90, military officals were invited to give suggestions. It was rumored that one high ranking army guy simply put a pic of leo2 on the table and said "make me this one". And now they got the type90.

[eckherl]

This reminds me of a rumor that has been floating arround japan site for sometime. During the development of the type 90, military officals were invited to give suggestions. It was rumored that one high ranking army guy simply put a pic of leo2 on the table and said "make me this one". And now they got the type90.

During that time frame, early eighties the LEO 2 was most likely the best tank in production.

[Ozzy Blizzard]

During that time frame, early eighties the LEO 2 was most likely the best tank in production.

I f your going to copy one, LEO 2 is not a bad option at all, considering the logistical advantages it enjoys over Abrams and Challanger.

[eckherl]

I f your going to copy one, LEO 2 is not a bad option at all, considering the logistical advantages it enjoys over Abrams and Challanger.

Agreed, this still holds true today.:)

[Thery]

More pictures include interior ones:

[Mick73]

You guys might have already worked this out but it has a crew of 3 and auto loader, a commander sight system that puts target info straight to the gunner's screen (like a networked FCS)and attachment points for add on amour.

[Waylander]

@Izzy
The Type 90 already features advanced multi-material armor (As always the rest is classified ;) ).

I get the feeling that this is more a project to keep the industry running and not out of actual need.
The Type 90 is not what I would call old and it shouldn't be hard to upgrade. There hasn't been any armor upgrades so far and with it's 50 tons and 1500hp there should be plenty of reserves left even if it gets 5 tons heavier.
It already features a lot of very good electronics (including hunter-killer capabilities and auto-target tracking). Integrating a battlefield management system is nothing spectacular and shouldn't be a problem (If it hasn't been done already).
The L/44 + autoloader also offers no advantages over the current Type 90.

Only the weight comes to my mind. Are the possible 55 tons of an upgraded Type 90 really too much for Japan's needs?
Or maybe the Type 90 has some problems we don't know of. It is hard to actually get good infos about this interesting track.

[eckherl]

You guys might have already worked this out but it has a crew of 3 and auto loader, a commander sight system that puts target info straight to the gunner's screen (like a networked FCS)and attachment points for add on amour.

Yes - there is no reason why you cannot tranfer over the finer details of a Type 90, NEC and Kyoto are excellant companies for electronics and armor technologies.

[swerve]

@Izzy
The Type 90 already features advanced multi-material armor (As always the rest is classified ;) ).

I get the feeling that this is more a project to keep the industry running and not out of actual need.
The Type 90 is not what I would call old and it shouldn't be hard to upgrade. There hasn't been any armor upgrades so far and with it's 50 tons and 1500hp there should be plenty of reserves left even if it gets 5 tons heavier.
It already features a lot of very good electronics (including hunter-killer capabilities and auto-target tracking). Integrating a battlefield management system is nothing spectacular and shouldn't be a problem (If it hasn't been done already).
The L/44 + autoloader also offers no advantages over the current Type 90.

Only the weight comes to my mind. Are the possible 55 tons of an upgraded Type 90 really too much for Japan's needs?
Or maybe the Type 90 has some problems we don't know of. It is hard to actually get good infos about this interesting track.

There was a comment somewhere in the official guff about weight-restricted bridges. Japan has a lot of very small roads. Although I think you may be right that this is more an industrial than a military project (that's what my partner thinks: waste of money, according to her), they've taken the opportunity to fill a gap which is about to arise in their armoured force with the retirement of the Type 74, by building a tank which can get into more obscure corners of Japan than the Type 90. It'll also remove any constraint on up-armouring the Type 90. With its compact size & small volume to protect, I would expect it to be pretty well armoured. The quoted dimensions are a bit less than a Leopard 1, but it's heavier & has armour which should have a better protection:weight ratio.

BTW, as far as power plant goes, I would expect the Type 90 to cope with well over 60 tons. Dunno about the transmission or suspension, though.

I can't see what problems the Type 90 might have that would be solved by this, unless there's a problem with weight limits on the suspension.

[evripide]

I also heard about the railway capacity in Japan. Though the country is well connected by the railway system, the rail tracks are often too narrow to convey tanks. Especially, many of these are private railways, so the companies would not allow to convey the huge vehicles.

Also, technological minimalism of Japan is, probably, an important reason. Walkman, Casio,....

As you know, Almost all Type 90s are used only in Hokkaido which is a big northen island, close to Russia. That's why I am thinking the 'high end' tank will be still Type 90s and the new tank will replace Type 74s which are used in major areas of Japan, Honshu. Smaller weight, and even smaller hp/weight ratio, same weapon,...Can you sure it equip better armour than 52tonnes tank?

[f-22fan12]

I f your going to copy one, LEO 2 is not a bad option at all, considering the logistical advantages it enjoys over Abrams and Challanger.

The Germans have a history of producing the best tanks in the world. From the Tiger to the Panther to the Leopard, I admire Germany's technical genius. :)

[eckherl]

Let me state for the excellant achievement of Japans capability to design a tank that the only thing that even can be stated as the same set up between a Type 90 and LEO 2 is the turret armor layout, but the laminate/ceramic armor is their own design. L44 gun and breech mechanism belongs to Germany also, all other tank sub components along with propulsion and suspension systems is their own design and set up, including the auto tracker.

[performance]

They will use either a the L-44 or a designed 50 caliber in length 120 mm tube, the have not ruled out the option of using a L-55 either, turret will also be able to house a 140 mm with minimal modifications just as the case with the ROK K2. Turret armor is a advanced ceramic modular design that will be able to provide upgrading for future armor threats, configuration is just like a Leclerc.

Where are you getting your information?

Nothing about this tank is impressive. You busted up the xk-2 for some odd reason, but here you are praising the Admin: Text deleted. Language please. There are better ways to make comment and not breach forum rules on respect etc... This comment was unnecessary.

[swerve]

Where are you getting your information?

Nothing about this tank is impressive. You busted up the xk-2 for some odd reason, but here you are praising the Admin: Text deleted. See original Mod reference to this. out of this tank which sounds like a mini-leopard.

Nothing? They seem to have packed an impressive amount into a small package.

[performance]

Nothing? They seem to have packed an impressive amount into a small package.

And what is impressive about that?
Eckherl & swerve both of you are adamantly pro-Japanese

For some reason the internet just adores Japan doesn't it.

[swerve]

And what is impressive about that?
Eckherl & swerve both of you are adamantly pro-Japanese

For some reason the internet just adores Japan doesn't it.

Perhaps because we both have some experience of the place & the people, we don't have an irrational prejudice against it, & you interpret that as being pro-Japanese.

[Waylander]

Why is it always that Eckherl is said to be anti-Korean?
He is maybe the last guy on this board who can be accused of being that.

And I never had the feeling that he is talking down the XK-2. He stated alot of viable things about it and I always thought that he things that the Koreans managed to develop a fine piece of kit.

On the other hand I get the feeling that often enough Koreans here seem to be very touchy when it comes to Japan.
What is the problem?

The Japanese tank looks indeed interesting especially if they would decide to offer it for export. I could imagine there are some customers for a smaller but still western style tank of less than 50 tons. And if the 6,4 million US$ are right than it is not even that expensive.
As Swerve said, this track has the dimensions of a Leo 1 but with better protection, firepower and electronics. Could defenitely be a good replacement for their fleet of Type 74 while the Type 90 remains the mainstay of their forces which are stationed in more open areas.

[DavidDCM]

More pictures include interior ones:

Hmm, I really can't really make friends with the idea that the gunner's primary optic should be that monitor instead of a mono-/binocular eyepiece. That will probably affect the gunners aiming in a negative way when firing on the move, especially in rougher terrain. Are there already tanks out there with a monitor instead of a eyepiece?

[gf0012-aust]

And what is impressive about that?
Eckherl & swerve both of you are adamantly pro-Japanese

For some reason the internet just adores Japan doesn't it.

You need to have a bit of a change in your attitude within the body of this post. I don't care what your personal issues are with the Japanese, but you will keep them out of this topic

In absolute terms, it is irrelevant what Eckherl and Swerve think about the Japanese, they obviously don't have a problem with them or their technology. You do.

Deal with it internally, but do not let it manifest itself in your replies as it has no bearing on a technical discussion.

I have issued one warning already, this one is now officially your second.

I do not want to see anyone banned when it can be avoided, but your failure to heed my initial advice is colouring my willingness to cut you some slack.

A third warning will result in you being banned for a period of time. This is completely avoidable. It's up to you.

[eckherl]

Where are you getting your information?

Nothing about this tank is impressive. You busted up the xk-2 for some odd reason, but here you are praising the Admin: Text deleted. Language please. There are better ways to make comment and not breach forum rules on respect etc... This comment was unnecessary.

My information is based on many years of research and actually serving on tanks and in other positions that would allow my mind to focus and wander around and look at different countries capabilities in the armor field, some of those countries I have visited first hand. This doesn`t mean that I walk around thinking that I know everything, and I am not afraid to admit it when I am wrong so if you have something that you would like to offer instead of making a wrongful accusation against me and Swerve then I am willing to read what you write.

Okay - Countries that have researched and or developed a 140mm maingun would include the following:

Germany
UK
France
U.S
Israel
ROK
Japan
Ukraine
There could be others that I am not fully aware of, reasoning behind research and developing would be because of the following reasons:

Advancements in armor materials
ETC programs have not matured fully, at least with some countries, and the cost factor.
Engagement time sequences when engaging threat vehicles, engaging a tank 20 years ago at 2,000 meters is alot different today due to FCS advancements, propulsion systems, suspension and armor protection levels, so the ultimate goal is to engage at maximum effective maingun range with a high probability of a 1st shot kill before your opponent can close the gap to do all kinds of mean nasty things to you. Please keep in mind that we are talking future threats, not present, so look for breech and recoil mechanism being able to have the ability to offer either a 120mm or 140mm.
Russia and China are also working on larger maingun calibers, so this could be a factor also.

As far as armor protection capabilities look up Kyoto Ceramic technologies, the side modular armor does look like the concept that is used on a Leclerc, but I would also agree with Waylander that the front turret armor looks alot like a Leo2A5/6 or even a little like a Canadian Leo1 with their latest armor package.

If there is something a little more specific that I can answer or if their is something that you disagree with I am more than willing to give you the courtesy and listen.


PS - the only part of Korea that I have a dislike for would be North Korea, and that is totally for their government, not the people.

[eckherl]

Hmm, I really can't really make friends with the idea that the gunner's primary optic should be that monitor instead of a mono-/binocular eyepiece. That will probably affect the gunners aiming in a negative way when firing on the move, especially in rougher terrain. Are there already tanks out there with a monitor instead of a eyepiece?


Why would it cause a issue, sights have really advanced to a stage that you do not have excessive polarity (ghost image) between the reticle and target, this was a slight issue on earlier designed thermal sights. China Type 99 is one tank that has similar set up, Ukraine T-84 also.

[Waylander]

I think he thought about your head shacking around during a rough cross country ride.
It could be harder to focuss your view onto a screen without your head(neck) being supported.
When using eyepieces you can press your head against them for additional stability (and sometimes ram your forehead into it :D ).

I don't know if this really makes a difference and would not try to argue against it before I meet somebody who used both (screen and eyepiece).

[DavidDCM]

Yeah, that was what I meant. If I could not have "locked" myself into my seat by pressing my head against the eyepiece and my back against the backrest it often would have been really difficult to focus on the target as well as keep my hands still.

[eckherl]

Ahh - okay I can see his point, It would be I think a matter of preference with some gunners. I had a gunner that actually wore a left eye shield and he stated that it helped him shoot better, he never was able to convince me of that but hey, he hit everything that he aimed at so I left him alone and called him Capt. Cook.:onfloorl:

But yes - you can get tossed around quite a bit while moving cross country, especially with a new rookie driver and I have gathered a few scars along the way. Eye and brow pads can be a good thing.:)

[Waylander]

Some people just cannot really good close just one of their eyes and concentrate on the other one.

One of our gunners also had this problem and also had to shield one of his eyes during small arms training (He really like the red dot of the G36). Due to the binocular eyepiece of the Leo he hadn't this problem as a gunner.

But as I said I can also just guess what is better and one has to use it before judging about it.

A screen should defenitely be better during long phases of observation duty.

[Distiller]

The screen is the way to go. Offers all kind of options for sensor and information overlays.


Something else 1: I like that hydraulic suspension. Who did it first? Kampfpanzer 70? Anyway, quite useful I think. BUT: What about reliability? Any experiences?


Something else 2: Lighter tanks are the way to go. Putting the "Medium" instead of "Main" in MBT. 70 metric ton Stalin-esque monsters are a dead end.


And finally: What is the Japanese operational concept behind their tank formations? I mean, they are an island. And expeditionary warfare is still a political no-no (and no logistics available anyway). Do they think that somebody could amphib or para assault them? And even if you'd plan for that possibility wouldn't be some cavalry formation, say with CV90 class vehicles be enough to fight off any threat?

I like that tank, btw.

[Waylander]

The Type 90 has a hybrid suspension. I think the were satisfied enough with the hydraulic part of it to go fully hyraulic with the new design.

A CV90120 is not going to offer the same protection as this tank but it is worth to think about to use a lighter tank hunter on the same chassis as your current IFV to reduce the logistical footprint.
If you have no concerns of stretching your logistical system too much it doesn't make that much sense to go with a tank hunter on your IFV chassis.

In this thread your questions about deployment have been adressed (Thanks to our informed members :) ) and it looks like the Type 90 is going to be the heavyweight (Or better remains to be it) which covers the more open northern areas against a possible agression while the lighter design is going to support the defense in the mountaineous regions where everything is a little bit narrow and the bridges are not that strong. This role is currently fullfilled by the Type 74.

And the JGSDF are already much smaller than the JASDF or JMSDF which fits into their situation as an island nation. Nevertheless one still needs to have a well trained and equipped ground force to cover every aspect of a potential defense of an island even if this force is naturally smaller than the other branches.

[eckherl]

The screen is the way to go. Offers all kind of options for sensor and information overlays.


Something else 1: I like that hydraulic suspension. Who did it first? Kampfpanzer 70? Anyway, quite useful I think. BUT: What about reliability? Any experiences?


Something else 2: Lighter tanks are the way to go. Putting the "Medium" instead of "Main" in MBT. 70 metric ton Stalin-esque monsters are a dead end.


And finally: What is the Japanese operational concept behind their tank formations? I mean, they are an island. And expeditionary warfare is still a political no-no (and no logistics available anyway). Do they think that somebody could amphib or para assault them? And even if you'd plan for that possibility wouldn't be some cavalry formation, say with CV90 class vehicles be enough to fight off any threat?

I like that tank, btw.

For the suspension question one must ask, when was the type 74 designed versus a MBT 70. For that type of terrian in Japan the hydro suspension is a good idea, as you most likely know, ROK has it also on the K1 (K88) thru to the K2 and they just love it, Japan seems to be content with it also seeings how this will still be featured on their newest tank project. So reliability seems to be not the issue with either countries.:)

[Offensive]

Perhaps because we both have some experience of the place & the people, we don't have an irrational prejudice against it, & you interpret that as being pro-Japanese.

Admin. Text deleted. Completely off topic and breaches forum guidelines. Formal warning issued.

[Offensive]

PS - the only part of Korea that I have a dislike for would be North Korea, and that is totally for their government, not the people.

Admin: Text deleted. You are way out of line. Read the Forum Rules. Esp the ones relating to respect. Both of the individuals you seek to malign have established and demonstrated competency. You on the other hand have wandered in and started a "drive by" based on some perceived association to commentary being eugenics based.

Lift your game. 2nd Formal warning issued.

Im sorry but this tank is a joke, and I find it amusing that swerve and you are praising it 5 times per page.

[swerve]

Hmm. An eerily familiar tone & posting style, & still contributing nothing to the discussion.

[Waylander]

Hmmm, I think I have a dejavú... :rolleyes:

Back to topic.

The last info I have about their ammo is that they are using license produced DM-33 and DM-12 for their 120mm L/44s.
Is this still the case or have they switched to something else like DM43/53/63, KEW-1/2 or something totally different?

[DavidDCM]

I don't wanna beat a dead horse with the "screen vs. eyepiece" discussion, but I still wonder how the problem with the shaky head is solved in those tanks? Do they just accept it, or do they have another solution that somehow avoids the need of an eyepiece yet still locks the gunner into position?

[eckherl]

Enough with the bullshit. How many times are you going to claim your vast knowledge of Korea and your so called family there afterwards turn around and talk shit?

Im not even talking solely about these forums. I've seen you on forums like military photo, tank net. I remember one guy destroyed you when you tried to put down the tank and you started screaming about it.

Im sorry but this tank is a joke, and I find it amusing that swerve and you are praising it 5 times per page.

What does Korea have to do with this discussion, your comments are suspect. If that is your opinion of me then that is okay, you are entitled to think what you want. :)

[eckherl]

I don't wanna beat a dead horse with the "screen vs. eyepiece" discussion, but I still wonder how the problem with the shaky head is solved in those tanks? Do they just accept it, or do they have another solution that somehow avoids the need of an eyepiece yet still locks the gunner into position?

The sighting systems are fully stabilized in both axis by using gyros.

[eckherl]

Hmmm, I think I have a dejavú... :rolleyes:

Back to topic.

The last info I have about their ammo is that they are using license produced DM-33 and DM-12 for their 120mm L/44s.
Is this still the case or have they switched to something else like DM43/53/63, KEW-1/2 or something totally different?

I do not know the current KE projectile but will do some digging.

[Waylander]

He is talking about the shacking head. Remember the discussion some posts ago?

And thanks for your effort concerning the ammo. :)

[eckherl]

He is talking about the shacking head. Remember the discussion some posts ago?

And thanks for your effort concerning the ammo. :)

Maybe we can get decked out with gyros to so that we can go with the flow of the vehicle.:onfloorl: Just kidding, it does take some coordination, time and practice to get used to it I would amagine.:)

[DavidDCM]

Maybe we can get decked out with gyros to so that we can go with the flow of the vehicle.:onfloorl:

Only if this comes with a eye-inbuilt LRF and smoke dischargers in the arse :D

Just kidding, it does take some coordination, time and practice to get used to it I would amagine.:)

So, basically, they make a compromise and try to get along with it. I don't know, I still see no basic advantage in this, but then as long as I didn't try it out myself (which will probably never happen), I wont complain. Nonetheless, there were lots of situations were I would not have hit anything if I could not have locked myself into position with all my power, which would have been impossible with an eyepiece...

[eckherl]

@Waylander

KE projectiles used by Type 90 - DM43A1

[eckherl]

Only if this comes with a eye-inbuilt LRF and smoke dischargers in the arse :D



So, basically, they make a compromise and try to get along with it. I don't know, I still see no basic advantage in this, but then as long as I didn't try it out myself (which will probably never happen), I wont complain. Nonetheless, there were lots of situations were I would not have hit anything if I could not have locked myself into position with all my power, which would have been impossible with an eyepiece...

You could also look at the benefits of target identification and scanning the battlefield with a full screen optic by using both eyes thus eliminating tunnel vision which is a concern when using one eye. Battlefield awareness should be greatly increased, especially in thermal mode.:)

[Waylander]

Because of that good tanks have a binocular eyepiece... ;) :D


And thanks for the infos about the ammo! :)

[Offensive]

Admin: Text deleted. You are way out of line. Read the Forum Rules. Esp the ones relating to respect. Both of the individuals you seek to malign have established and demonstrated competency. You on the other hand have wandered in and started a "drive by" based on some perceived association to commentary being eugenics based.

Lift your game. 2nd Formal warning issued.

Im sorry but this tank is a joke, and I find it amusing that swerve and you are praising it 5 times per page.

Its far more than percieved. They are blatant anti-Korean, pro-Japanese. Not only on these forums but on all the major ones. People should know.

[Offensive]

What does Korea have to do with this discussion, your comments are suspect. If that is your opinion of me then that is okay, you are entitled to think what you want. :)

Nothing really. But i like how you are praising a tank that is still in prototype. Looking at it from an objective point of view the tank is a joke.

Medium armor is better than heavy? I'm sure the US military are a bunch of idiots more so the rest of the world.

"The crude state was mentioned due to the lifting points on the armor and the rubber pads missing from the tank track. Knowing Japan, when they unvale the completed package then we will see one darn good package, just look at what they did with the Type 90 design."

T-90 was a copy of the Leopard A2. So what did exactly did they achieve with the t-90?

The tkx looks like a mirror image of the leclerc.

I love how you absolutely bash the Korean tank, when someone calls you on it, you claim you have family in Korea, and then turn around and praise the Japanese.

You and swerve are full of it.

[eckherl]

Its far more than percieved. They are blatant anti-Korean, pro-Japanese. Not only on these forums but on all the major ones. People should know.

Hmm - On all major ones, again your comments are suspect. You have never heard Swerve or myself make a so called anti Korean statement on this forum, your dislike for the Japanese is seething with your comments, you are upset with me because I have made comments towards the XK2 that doesn`t fit your agenda even though I have stated that it is a good tank, again please leave all of this rubbish out of this thread before it gets closed. If you have anything that you would like to add inregards to the XK2 please take it to that thread.

[Vajt]

I like the design of the vehicle and it fits a nice niche which many countries may be interested in purchasing.

For all those who say it is copies of other designs, well if something works, why not use it instead of re-inventing the wheel. Anyways, besides possibly the rumored Russian T-95 which may have an unmanned turret, most turreted designs will have many similar features.

Anyone know if it will also use an active defense system?

-----JT-----

[eckherl]

I like the design of the vehicle and it fits a nice niche which many countries may be interested in purchasing.

For all those who say it is copies of other designs, well if something works, why not use it instead of re-inventing the wheel. Anyways, besides possibly the rumored Russian T-95 which may have an unmanned turret, most turreted designs will have many similar features.

Anyone know if it will also use an active defense system?

-----JT-----

Most likely will have soft and hard kill systems, what they will go with though is most likely pure speculation at this point due with the vehicle being a proto type platform.