1/35th Chicom Improved Chi Ha Medium Tank [Edited]

[Story]

September 10 Note: after a deep dive on it's background, this thread has been updated with several tactical and technological aspects that were new to me.

So I uncovered an untouched Tamiya kit in the stash, a late model Chi Ha and wondered what might make for an interesting build.
https://www.scalemates.com/kits/tamiya-35137-type-97-shinhoto-chi-ha-late-version--120304


27 August 24 B.L.U.F edit: I got curious to see if anyone else has done a build thread specific to this ancient TAMIYA offering and beyond the generic Japanese Tank inspiration thread (https://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=1143.0 ) and Robunus' two builds ( https://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=9767.msg184867#msg184867 & https://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=9744.msg184862#msg184862 ) along with Dr YoKai's (https://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=3313.0 ) I found nothing, NOTHING LEBOWSKI!

So I'll try to include the usual illustrated steps, as this is *mostly* a from-the-box build. 

Mostly.

Turns out the Chinese Communists inherited a few (117?) and built their nascent armor force with them
https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/china/gongchen_tank

<- note how slack the track is here.

So what would the Chinese do differently?

By 1949 the captured ammunition stocks for the Type 1 47 mm gun (chambered for the 47×285mmR, unique to this cannon) were limited, so for this test-bed it was replaced by the Soviet-made 45mm M1942 antitank gun (chambered for 45x310 mmR and generally, a better performing round), which saw heavy use during the Korean War.

The only way this replacement was noticeable from outside of the tank was by barrel length, the original Japanese being shorter; 2.53 m (8 ft 4 in) L/53.7 vs 2.985 m (9 ft 9.5 in) L/66.3. 

The three 7.7mm Japanese Type 97 machineguns were eliminated for similar reasons; dwindling supplies of ammunition, lack of compatibility with Soviet aide and lack of effectiveness when limited to 20 round box magazines.

Two 7.62x54R DTM light machineguns were fitted to the roof (AA) and bow mounts, with a PPSH41/Type50 submachinegun with a drum magazine was racked at the turret rear and if needed, could be fired from the pre-existing machine gun port there.

Both DTMs were upgrade with the (then-new) RG46 feed trays, which allowed use of 250 round belts - a noticeable improvement over the DTM's 63 round drum.

[/img]

August 31 update The Chinese version of the RG46 (Type 58) wasn't fielded until 1960 and there's no room for those boxes on the right hand side of either interior mount.

UPDATES
From a Japanese source -

"In other countries, coaxial MG was used to suppress the enemy by scattering bullets. But, IJA did not agree with it. In IJA doctrine, the gun was to hit the enemy. IJA was poor army and they hated to waste ammunition.

To aim at moving enemy infantry, MG had to be moved quickly. So, the turret MG of Japanese tanks was mounted at independent MG mount. Until Chi-Ha, it was placed at the rear of the turret. Note that the MG of rear turret was not to shoot backwards. When shooting enemy infantry, the gunner changed the tank gun to MG by rotating the turret and shot forwards.

However, the gunner often lost the target while rotating the turret. So, it was required to mount MG at front turret. But, there was no room to place an independent MG mount at the front turret. So, the coaxial MG was adopted for light tanks like Ke-Ni or Ke-To and Ka-Mi. But, their coaxial MG structure was different from that of western tanks. The tank gun mount with MG could be moved horizontally as well as vertically like ball mount and it was moved by the shoulder of gunner. So, it could chase the target quickly. IJA doctrine did not change on it.

http://www3.plala.or.jp/takihome/

So this is how it'd look during anti-personnel engagements.

[Frank3k]

Looks like a believable upgrade. For the gun, you can lengthen the kit gun or use the gun from a BT-5, BT-7 or T-27 tank (or BA series armored car.

I’d remove the gun port on the right side of the turret (or “weld” it shut, since it’s molded on) but leaving the rear gun port available sounds like a good idea.


Wow, the parade tank closest to the camera is just asking to throw that right hand track

[Story]

Looks like a believable upgrade. For the gun, you can lengthen the kit gun 

 ... using one of those 37mm tubes you made.

Wow, the parade tank closest to the camera is just asking to throw that right hand track

Yup, thassa what I meant. Probably could stand to have one track link removed to shorten than side, pending whatever was wrong with the tensioner.

This would be a test-bed / concept tank (which is why no one ever saw photos of it), probably scrapped when they ran out of parts for the Mitsubishi engine.  I did poke around and there was nothing in the HP class at that time that could have fit.

More slop

[Ramba]

Interesting project. Looking forward to seeing it done.

[Story]

Interesting project. Looking forward to seeing it done.

But *is* it? It'll be another green tank, albeit with ChiCom stars, that won't be substantially different externally from the Japanese as-produced version. 

[Frank3k]

It'll be a subtle variation. You can change the camo as well. The Nationalist tank looks good, although that was just a repainted Japanese tank (from Tank Encyclopedia:



For musical inspiration: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSPtz7wVDHI

With an epic guitar solo: https://youtu.be/uX8fkPMzV1k?t=169

Here's the far, far less interesting original: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npyXuFJZp-g

[Story]

I’d remove the gun port on the right side of the turret (or “weld” it shut, since it’s molded on) but leaving the rear gun port available sounds like a good idea.

See enlightened thought in subsequent post.
Hmm. If I was running Beijing's version of Aberdeen Proving Ground in 1950, this would be something to address.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53ZA10_AndQ

Maybe some sort of Shurzen is in order, along with a side of eggrolls.


After all, I'm just...

noodling around in this thread so far.

[Story]

Also, I can show you guys the time/date stamps of the pics I was messing with long before 08 August 2022, so how did they read my thoughts?
https://www.taptap.io/post/1627854

[raafif]

bigger howitzer turret like the Finnish BT42?

[Story]

bigger howitzer turret like the Finnish BT42?

That's actually a thing already with the Chinese.
https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/category/china-pre-1950/

[Story]

So I went back to this project whilst the others sauté and reviewed what I actually wanted to do to the basic kit build.

1) Turns out the Chi-Ha Shinhotos are reported to have received some modifications in PLA service, such as the replacement of the original 170HP Mitsubishi SA12200VD air-cooled V-12 diesel (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_97_Chi-Ha_medium_tank) engines with 500hp Kharkov V-2 engines (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kharkiv_model_V-2). "Unfortunately, tanks on display in museums in China have had their engines removed and it is difficult to verify this."

Increasing the tanks' horsepower by roughly 150% while lessening logistical strain (since the Kharkovs were used in T34s and derivatives as supplied by the Soviet Union) made sense. I could find nothing on major cubic displacement issues, so apparently swapping them out wasn't a visible change.


2) The M42 45mm AT gun (again, as supplied by the Soviets) was based on the German PAK36 as was the Japanese Type 1 47mm AT gun. The Type 1 tank gun (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_1_47_mm_anti-tank_gun) was similar, so to ease ammunition logistics replacing the Japanese barrel with a Soviet barrel shortened to the same length would make sense.

An unmolested Soviet barrel might eek out more M/V but the extra weight would mess with the balance and ballistics; like rebarreling a bolt action rifle just unscrew 47mm and screw in shortenated 45mm (assuming the threads are the same), tweak extractor cutout on barrel breach face as needed, leave everything else original Japanese.

Again, no visible change there.

3) Deleting the Type 97 machineguns (as mentioned in Post #1) in favor of a hull DTM and roof Type 58 (RP46) belt fed.

4) The Type 97's armor was paper thin, like Panzer Mk II thin. For elements of style, would the Chinese template the Stuart M5A1's additional turret armor (of which they had in inventory) for both sides of the turret in lieu of something specific to the Germans in Europe (as I noodled about with above)?



Enlightenment - due to the horrendous lack of visibility, any sort of additional 'bra armor' would only make a bad situation worse.  I did a trial fit with a piece from TAMIYA's M247 SGT YORK turret just as a proof of concept.

[Story]

Sprues primed with RUST-OLEUM "Hunt Club Green 2X Satin" rattle can,
since I wanted to see how well it matched a Pennsylvania Railroad Green (which is more black-green) for a 1:1 scale railroad luggage cart/truck I'm rehabilitating.




Close enough... kinda?
[No Judgement Zone] Tanker on the right looks like he's had enough noodles [/No Judgement Zone]


That's the beauty of the WIFFery efforts that are so obscure as to allow maximum leeway for artistic license.

[Story]

Rather than re-write the build specifications for the wheel, I went looking to see what "Cookie" Sewell had already written as far as reviews but only found his tidbit-in-passing.

In 1988 Tamiya tried to upgrade some of their older kits, producing five kits with only minor changes. All five – the upgraded Chi-Ha, the T-34-85, the M4A3E2 "Jumbo", the KV-1B, and the M60A3 – were kits from 1972 to 1981 vintage and all had one or two new sprues added to change the model to another variant. None of the original kit flaws, however, was fixed, so they were really quite mixed – 1988 state-of-the-art new turret and bits with 1972 lower hull and details.

Good to know.

My hull was marked 1975 and 1987, so clearly it was the updated production.

TRACK-LINK has several build logs, this being one of the better illustrated
https://www.track-link.com/forums/site_blogs/37373/flat


Instructions divide this into suspension, lower and upper hulls, then turret.

[Story]

While reviewing the available materials, note the original open-style stowage boxes vs the *enclosed* later style - took awhile for me to figure out that the earlier *Gongchen* either had damaged or deleted stowage boxes while the parade versions were original Japanese, just lacking the pioneer tools - either missing or replaced with smaller versions to fit inside the boxes (which would make sense considering the potential for atomic/nuclear battlefield contamination at that time).







TAMIYA'S earlier 57mm version has exposed engine vent grills on it's upper deck, which are not found in the later version.
For those wanting to show or imply the engine bay, this would require some kitbashing.

.

[Old Wombat]

 

[Story]

This build video is full of valid observations, with regards to the age and limitations of the kit
It addition to priming the interior, he also uses sheet plastic to bridge the gap between the front and rear hull fenders (@6.30 mark)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0OyFfvkXws

He also mentions using individual link tracks, so I went off and found this build video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FU4doNg6158

along with a 3D file source https://cults3d.com/en/3d-model/various/individual-track-links-for-type-97-chi-ha-tank?srsltid=AfmBOooJtPxR-nN0WhNpuExtqfqiccen0kjXizFN2Re9rqGflRrgfz7I

VISION MODELS also offers a track kit (this one from a Perth establishment)
https://www.perthmilitarymodelling.com/reviews/vehicles/visionmodels/va9003.html


The next build video of the 57mm (earlier) Type 97 solves the stowage bin mystery.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qSbyPy1aLM

That kit has the side ventilation panels over the engine molded into the back deck, with separate covers.

At 2.39 mark   and at the 3.39 mark

Here's an inside tour of an extant example in America
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftmiuInv1Ik

Hull machinegunner's position around the 7.30 mark. Big enough for a water cooled Maxim?

Driver's vision slits around the 8.00 mark. That's insane.

The rear machinegun mount and a 30 round main gun ammunition box around 10.45 mark. That'd imply the vertical hatch next to the rear machinegun mount was meant for a rapid-replacement of that main gun ammunition box and possible could double as an emergency escape hatch.

Additional article by someone who started restoring the Type 97 at the Nimitz Museum in Fredericksburg, TX.  Interesting point was the asbestos panels on the tank's interior.
https://worldoftanks.com/en/news/history/type-97-resto-moonshadow/

[Frank3k]

It looks like the first tank was missing the asbestos cladding.

 Even empty, the tank looks very cramped; you might be able to fit a Maxim in that hole,; since it's slightly smaller than the type 97 MG. You would still need room for the water tank, which is about the size of an ammo box. I can't believe the tank had a crew of four... It would probably be a tight fit for two modern sized crew - even if they're Japanese.

I like this version:

[Buzzbomb]

Interesting discussion and certainly looking forward to how the build evolves

[Story]

Time for some real WIFFery, which would dictate what the final form would look like.

Assuming the PLA's Type 97 had shrunk from @117 to an understrength Battalion (25-30) concurrent with Mao's public denunciation of "revisionism" in April 1960, all traces of non-Communist weapons systems were removed from western eyes while staying in service. It was just a matter of which ethnic minority they'd be suppressing - the Buddhists in Tibet or Uyghurs in Xinjiang (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xinjiang_conflict).

The Type 97's thin armor and overall obsolesce wouldn't matter in either locale, and whatever living Japanese mechanics were still in the unit would disappear into China's interior.

Both locales have arid areas, so it'd be an even coin toss whether the unit retained it's original green or was given a khaki/tan coat of paint.

[Story]

 Even empty, the tank looks very cramped; you might be able to fit a Maxim in that hole,; since it's slightly smaller than the type 97 MG. You would still need room for the water tank, which is about the size of an ammo box. I can't believe the tank had a crew of four... It would probably be a tight fit for two modern sized crew - even if they're Japanese.

Spot on. Between the tissue paper armor, ridiculously restrictive vision slits and four dudes crammed into one I get the heebie jeebies. 

Which is why I'm not doing anything with the interior, as I'd probably get the vapors. Reminds me of this build philosophy
https://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=7253.msg126683#msg126683 and I'm not the only one that feels this way.

From Greg Wise's review of the FINE MOLDS Early production hull -
Choosing a plan of action I opted for a straight- out-of-the-box build. I considered the option of opening up the hatches and building an interior, but this faded with the reality of the time and effort that would be needed to fill the empty spaces; not to mention researching the subject properly. So I set about looking for any other minor build issues I needed to plan for.
https://reviews.ipmsusa.org/review/ija-type-97-medium-tank-chi-ha-early-production-hull

If I was detailing the extremely cramped interior, I'd use the breach and cradle from TAMIYA's 3.7cm PAK 36 and the TAMIYA Semovente 40/75-18 drive train then open up all of the hatches, just so my work could be obscured by the crew.

But since I'm deleting the rear machinegun, this port will need an overgrown teardrop shaped cover.

[Story]

A rental place in Las Vegas has a Type 97 mounted in a section of armor, perfect reference for those who want to do interior detailing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lq7fs67Bz6E  and here's the full backstory on the gun itself https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGoKCpFZxFI

Interesting that the bipod had fixed length legs and actually mounted to the barrel, which I took into consideration for a side-project.

Dismounted with the clamshell armor for the barrel
 

i stole the bipod from a TAMIYA Soviet Infantry DP28, For the uber-purists, note the distinct curve to the magazine in the kit, vs the real magazine. I *think* the kit's is based on the 6.5mm Type 96's 30 round magazine while the 7.7mm Type 97 used the straight 20 round mag. 

and with the scope mounted (a real fiddly bit!).  I'll repurpose the kit's two ball mounts (foreground) for another project

[Story]

Since we're talking about swapping out the Type 97 for the Soviet pan-fed DTM, this is what one looks like mounted.



I'm thinking one gun would suffice and that if it spent most of it's life on the roof mount, theoretically it'd be possible to run the tank with only three crewmen.  We were trained for 'degraded mode', to continue operating short-handed beyond broken subsystems.

I don't currently have a DTM in my spares box, but I swore TAMIYA had one as part of a tank kit. Guess I'll have to come back and scratchbuild one at a later time.


Altho MINIART has an offering in their SOVIET MACHINEGUNS AND EQUIPMENT


For those who really want to go down the rabbit hole, enjoy the manual
https://www.forgottenweapons.com/wp-content/uploads/manuals/DTM%20manual.pdf

[Story]

Other options from FINE MOLDS

Tripped over this
https://www.scalehobbyist.com/manufacturers/Fine_Molds/Military_Vehicles/ija-type-97-tank-with-47mm-turret/FIN0000FM26/product.php?

and the earlier version -  I think the additional armor was added to the front lower glacis
https://www.scalehobbyist.com/manufacturers/Fine_Molds/Military_Vehicles/ija-type-97-tank-with-additional-armor/FIN0000FM27/product.php?

But the real prize was this 
Just under $100 retail but $65 on sale!

It's a limited-edition kit of the "Gongchen" tank, the very first tank used by the People's Liberation Army (PLA). This specific Type 97 w/Shinhoto (new turret) tank was captured from the Japanese in 1945. It later saw combat against Kuomintang troops in the Chinese Civil War and it was chosen to lead a victory parade in Tiananmen Square on Oct 1, 1949. Even today the "Gongchen" tank, whose Chinese name roughly means "Heroic", is housed in a Beijing museum.

This 1/35 scale model is a hybrid that makes use of the chassis and hull from Dragon's existing Type 97, combining it with the Shinhoto turret from Japanese maker. For modelers wishing to own an important slice of Chinese and PLA history, this kit is a fine selection. However, customers will have to be quick as it will be available for only a limited time.
https://www.scalehobbyist.com/manufacturers/Dragon_Models/Military_Vehicles/pla-gongchen-tank-type-97/DML00006880/product.php?

[Story]

Couldn't find a Japanese Tanks inspiration thread, so I'll just drop this here -

In a significant act of historical restitution, a rare World War II-era tank has been returned from Texas to Japan, bridging decades of wartime history. The National Museum of the Pacific War in Fredericksburg recently facilitated the transfer of a Japanese Type 97 Chi-Ha medium tank to a new museum in Japan, marking the end of a historical bilateral agreement that was signed in March 2024.
https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/japanese-tank-texas-museum-20268746.php?fbclid=IwY2xjawJlXFFleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHtn6katYwU4dUXRwByJTkaoUUFS1by_EOrwZyIYEbgpLRd3JHzXR5kT7s6tg_aem_nA2gnjfRaKdWibeG-bC_KQ

[Buzzbomb]

Nice pick up.

A lot of stuff is going back to where it came from. Museum swaps of gear is certainly increasing.

I am constantly amazed at the vehicles and equipment that ends up in the Cairns Aussie Armour and Artillery museum, from around the world