Type 87 RCV Prototypes

[Tasty95215 2,099]

Photo of the research prototype

 

This suggestion is for the prototypes of the Type 87 RCV (偵察警戒車 or "Reconnaissance Caution Vehicle"). Also known as the Type 87 ARV, there were two models of the Type 87 prototypes - an initial "research prototype" with a Rheinmetall Rh-202 20mm gun, a stabilizer and a weaker engine, and two later prototypes with an Oerlikon KBA 25mm gun, no stabilizer and a stronger engine. The production model Type 87 RCV was added to War Thunder in Update "Direct Hit", so its prototypes would work

 

(note - I left out a "both" option on the poll since most voters will end up choosing that one)

 

History and Development:

Spoiler

Development of what would become the Type 87 RCV started in 1973 with the construction of the wheeled F-6 prototype. Developed by Mitsubishi, the design was reworked and improved upon with the F-8 prototype, finished in 1975. Also known as the Mitsubishi Model B prototype, this 6-wheeled armored car weighed 12.5 tons and used a 280 horsepower Fusou 8DC engine. It was never ordered for production.

F-6 prototype

 

F-8/Model B prototype

 

In 1978, the company Komatsu Ltd. received an order from the JSDF to produce a testbed prototype to research and test the mounting of a 20mm autocannon. The chassis used was the now-cancelled Mitsubishi Model B prototype, which was modified considerably to mount a new turret. This research prototype was developed in parallel with the B78 Infantry Fighting vehicle and what would become the Type 82 Command and Communication Vehicle (whose chassis was based on the Model B prototype), and as such the different projects influenced each other.

 

 

Two turrets were constructed, designed to hold the required 20mm autocannon. The 20mm gun used was the Rheinmetall Rh-202 gun; this particular gun was taken from one of the Type 73 APC prototypes, the SUB-II-2. The gun was stabilized; in addition, the turret had 60mm Type 74 triple smoke grenade launchers on each side and a coaxial machine gun, likely the 7.62mm Type 74. High-performance radial tires were also installed to give better off-road mobility. Finished in 1981, the purpose of this research prototype was to conduct tests on how well the gun mount, turret, hull, and suspension worked together to absorb recoil of the gun and maintain accuracy while firing. As the JGSDF hadn't built any modern turreted armored cars at this point, it was essentially a shooting testbed for them.

 

The license plate was originally "70-64" and was later changed to 99-0016. Note that the windshield box for the driver is detachable

 

After testing of the research prototype finished, it was decided to increase the caliber of the autocannon. Various guns were considered between the 25mm~35mm caliber range, with them eventually deciding on the 25mm Oerlikon KBA. At this point, the Type 82 CCV had been accepted into service while the B78 IFV prototype had been fully built.

 

Development was separated into two stages, with two turrets being built in 1983 and two hulls being built in 1984. The two prototypes were fully constructed in 1985, with testing was done between 1985 and 1986. While the turrets resembled the earlier research prototype, the gun mount had been modified to hold the larger-caliber autocannon, closely resembling the B78's gun mount. The Type 74 triple smoke grenade launchers on the turret sides were kept, as was the position of the coaxial machine gun. The internal system of the turret (which had been licensed from General Electric) was taken from the B78, though unlike the B78 and the research prototype it did not mount a stabilizer.

 

Technical drawing of the 1985 prototype

 

The hull was mostly similar to the research prototype on the surface, with some small differences such as the handles on the upper glacis, design changes in the upper headlights, tire attachments, and attachment point of the side mirrors. One major (possible) difference was the engine - while the research prototype used the 280 horsepower Fusou 8DC engine, the 1985 prototypes likely had the 305 horsepower Isuzu 10PB1 instead. This engine was - and currently is - used by both the Type 82 CCV (which was already in production when the 1985 prototypes were built). In addition, the higher-performance radial tires of the research prototype were replaced with cheaper bias tires.

 

One of the two 1985 prototypes, covered by a tarp

 

B78 Infantry Fighting Vehicle

 

After testing concluded, these 1985 prototypes were accepted into service as the Type 87 RCV.

 

 

How to tell the prototypes apart:

 

 

How to tell the 1985 Prototypes from the Production Models

The 1985 prototypes were mostly identical to the Type 87 RCV production models outside of some small differences:

• Type 74 triple smoke grenade launchers instead of newer quadruple smoke grenade launchers
• No periscope in front of the commander cupola (and thus no commander infrared night vision)
• Shorter gunner periscope
• Gun placement (directly in middle on prototype, slightly off center in production model)
• Gun mantlet design
• Extra headlight on the top left mount
• Windshield box only covers right side of hull
• No storage box on back of turret

 

Comparing the prototype and production model technical drawings:

Spoiler

 

Type 87 RCV production model windshield box:

Spoiler

 

Armament:

Spoiler

20mm Rh-202 on a Spähpanzer Luchs

20mm Rheinmetall Rh-202

• Only used on research prototype
• Rate of fire: 1000 rounds/minute
• Ammo types:
  • AP-T: 1100 m/s
  • APDS-T 1150 m/s (*)
  • HE-T 1050 m/s

 

25mm Oerlikon KBA on a production model Type 87 RCV

25mm Oerlikon KBA

• Only used on 1985 prototypes
• Rate of fire: 570 rounds/minute
• Ammo types:
  • APDS-T: 1335 m/s
  • APDS-T: 1385 m/s (*)
  • HEI-T: 1100 m/s

 

(*) - While compatible with these guns, these rounds were likely never used with these vehicles and would be ahistorical

 

7.62mm Type 74 in the JGSDF Public Relations Center

7.62mm Type 74 coaxial

• Used on both the research and 1985 prototypes
• Rate of fire: 700 (low) to 1000 (high) rounds/minute
• Muzzle velocity: 750 m/s

 

60mm Type 74 smoke grenades on Type 74 tank

60mm Type 74 smoke grenades

• Used on both the research and 1985 prototypes
• 50 m/s initial velocity
• 100 meters range

 

Night Vision:

Infrared night vision equipment is available for both the gunner and driver in both the research and 1985 prototypes. However, unlike the production model, neither prototype has night vision for the commander.

 

Type 82 Driver Night Vision Device (also used by Type 74 and Type 90 MBTs)

Spoiler

http://web.archive.org/web/20040122235033fw_/http://jda-clearing.jda.go.jp/kunrei/i_fd/iz1982j2013_003.gif

 

Specifications:

1985 prototypes are assumed to have identical specifications with the production model. The research prototype is more unclear, but aside from the mobility and armament they are likely very similar. 

Spoiler

Research Prototype:

• Height: 2500mm
• Length (without gun): 5525mm
• Width: 2480mm
• Crew: 5 (Commander, Gunner, Driver, 2 Scouts)
• Weight: 14.8 tons (estimate)
• Engine: Mitsubishi-Fusou 8DC diesel engine with 280 horsepower
• Top speed: 90 km/h (estimate)
• Power-to-weight ratio: 18.9 hp/ton
• Main armament: 20mm Rheinmetall Rh-202
  • Has stabilizer
• Secondary armament: 7.62mm Type 74 machine gun, 60mm Type 74 smoke grenades
• Gunner magnification: 8x
• Ammo count:
  • 20mm: 500 rounds
  • 7.62mm: 4000 rounds
  • 60mm smoke grenades: 6 grenades
• Gun elevation/depression: +45°/-10° (restricted to -0° at rear)

1985 prototypes:

• Height: 2500 mm
• Length (without gun): 5525mm
• Width: 2480mm
• Crew: 5 (Commander, Gunner, Driver, 2 Scouts)
• Weight: 15.0 tons
• Engine: Isuzu 10PB1 diesel engine with 305 horsepower at 2700 RPM
• Top speed: 100 km/h
• Power-to-weight ratio: 20.3 hp/ton
• Main armament: 25mm Oerlikon KBA
  • Does not have stabilizer
• Secondary armament: 7.62mm Type 74 machine gun, 60mm Type 74 smoke grenades
• Gunner magnification: 8x
• Ammo count:
  • 25mm: 400 rounds
  • 7.62mm: 4000 rounds
  • 60mm smoke grenades: 6 grenades
• Gun elevation/depression: +45°/-10° (restricted to -0° at rear)

 

 

In War Thunder:

The research prototype with the 20mm Rh202 would likely fit in Japan's light tank line after the M24 but before the M4A3, assuming it only gets APDS (listed in-game as HVAP). It's very comparable to the R3 T20, albeit slightly slower. If it gets APFSDS, then I could maybe see it going between the M4A3 and M41, putting it above the R3 T20's current battle rating. While the vehicle never used this round (as the DM63 APFSDS was introduced after the research prototype was done getting tested), War Thunder has added ahistorical ammo to vehicles for balance so it wouldn't be unprecedented.

 

For the 1985 prototype, as it's mostly identical to the production model outside of the smoke grenades, it would likely fit foldered with the production model at BR 7.3. If Gaijin decides to give it the historical ammo choices (that is, don't give it the PMB 09 APFSDS) then this could likely drop down to a lower BR - maybe 6.3 to fit in between the M41 and Type 60 SPRG?

 

If I had to choose one of the two types of prototypes, I would want to add the research prototype over the 1985 prototypes. Even though the research prototype has worse firepower and mobility, the 1985 prototypes are pretty much identical to the already-introduced production model Type 87 RCV - it would be a bit redundant to add both to War Thunder while leaving out the research prototype. The research prototype would be more unique, and potentially fit in better at a lower BR.

 

Sources:

Spoiler

• JDA file on the Type 87 RCV: http://web.archive.org/web/20040114032241fw_/http://jda-clearing.jda.go.jp/kunrei/i_fd/iz1987d4002.html
• JDA file on the Type 82 CCV: http://web.archive.org/web/20040114030854fw_/http://jda-clearing.jda.go.jp/kunrei/i_fd/iz1987d4001b.html
• JDA file on the Type 74 triple smoke grenade launcher: http://web.archive.org/web/20030821133437fw_/http://jda-clearing.jda.go.jp:80/kunrei/i_fd/iz1975xb9001.html
• JDA file on the Type 74 60mm smoke grenade: http://web.archive.org/web/20030821133449fw_/http://jda-clearing.jda.go.jp:80/kunrei/i_fd/iz1975xc4701.html
• JDA file on the Type 74 7.62mm tank machine gun: http://web.archive.org/web/20030821133506fw_/http://jda-clearing.jda.go.jp/kunrei/i_fd/iz1988xb1004b.html
• JDA file on the Type 82 driver night vision device: http://web.archive.org/web/20030821132610fw_/http://jda-clearing.jda.go.jp/kunrei/i_fd/iz1982j2013.html
• Japanese Wikipedia page on the Type 82 CCV: https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/82式指揮通信車
• Japanese Military Review magazine, November 2008 issue: http://gunken.jp/blog/archives/2008/10/30_1300.php
• Ground Power magazine, July 2005 issue (グランドパワー 2005年7月号)
• Website on the Type 87 RCV: http://combat1.sakura.ne.jp/87SHIKI.htm
• Photos and information of prototypes from https://twitter.com/type3fighter
• Navweaps page on Rheinmetall Rh-202 20mm gun: http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNGER_20mm-65_mk20.php
• Navweaps page on Oerlikon KBA 25mm gun: http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNIT_25mm-80_KBA.php

 

 

Edited September 10, 2021 by Tasty95215

[leroyonly 4,311]

Open for discussion. 

[MaterialWharf3 454]

I'd recommend one of the polling options to be "both" so that people can choose that option if they want both of them.

[Tasty95215 2,099]

38 minutes ago, MaterialWharf3 said:

I'd recommend one of the polling options to be "both" so that people can choose that option if they want both of them.

 

 I considered it, but in my experience the vast majority of voters would end up choosing both. I was more curious to see which of the two versions people here wanted more - there's no point in making a poll if you already know what the answer would be.

[_N4MELESS_ 2,972]

Yes i would like to see it added.

But it has been almost 4 years (since the suggestion is approved) and we still don't  even have the service Type 87 ARV

 

I voted the one with 20 mm cannon, i do not see the need for another identical vehicle to the production vehicle. So with 20 mm gun the difference between prototype and production vehicles will be much greater.

I think the 20 mm can be at lower Br and the production vehicle is placed right after it it.

 

 

Edited September 14, 2020 by I_NAMELESS_I

[Wolf_89 2,525]

There is a Type 83 being worked on.

At least he/she was working on it.

https://live.warthunder.com/post/853316/en/

 

And Japan needs more vehicles. Just wish they had at least put a Milan launcher on it.

Or something similar. To make it more useful  

Edited August 30, 2020 by Wolf_89

[Tasty95215 2,099]

Edited with more information. As it turns out, despite the weaker gun and engine the research prototype was a bit more high-end - it had a stabilizer and higher-performance radial tires, while the 1985 prototype lacked a stabilizer and used inferior bias tires (presumably to make production cheaper)

[WayOfTheWolk 1,573]

21 minutes ago, Tasty95215 said:

Edited with more information. As it turns out, despite the weaker gun and engine the research prototype was a bit more high-end - it had a stabilizer and higher-performance radial tires, while the 1985 prototype lacked a stabilizer and used inferior bias tires (presumably to make production cheaper)

Given that the first prototype used a different mantlet how different was the armor layout? I assume both prototypes had similar armor values. 

[Hronomant 182]

One of the prototypes seems to have used ground search radar.

Spoiler

 

[onemax9000 1,243]

+1 we should get all of the different versions.

[Tasty95215 2,099]

12 hours ago, WayOfTheWolk said:

Given that the first prototype used a different mantlet how different was the armor layout? I assume both prototypes had similar armor values. 

 

I haven't really seen any information on the armor values or types, so I'm assuming it's basically the same for both prototypes.

 

9 hours ago, Hronomant said:

One of the prototypes seems to have used ground search radar.

  Hide contents

 

 

This is one of the production vehicles, not the prototypes. You can tell since it has the production model gun mount, smoke launchers and license plate (25-XXXX not 99-XXXX)

[Borotovas 4,500]

+1

[Bountyhead 83]

Unlike the R3, not only will this be slower, with less armour but significantly bigger too. This might drive like the fiat before the AUBL. It'll be rough to use this

[Wiggly_Armed_Man 2,383]

23 hours ago, Bountyhead said:

Unlike the R3, not only will this be slower, with less armour but significantly bigger too. This might drive like the fiat before the AUBL. It'll be rough to use this

To be fair, the armour of the R3 doesn't really matter anyway. It may be 70 mm~ thick at its 62-degree slope but with the x0.47 modifier of the armour, that's only 33 mm which is basically nothing at 4.0.

[Bountyhead 83]

2 hours ago, Wiggly_Armed_Man said:

To be fair, the armour of the R3 doesn't really matter anyway. It may be 70 mm~ thick at its 62-degree slope but with the x0.47 modifier of the armour, that's only 33 mm which is basically nothing at 4.0.

It doesn't does matter. It's paper thin everywhere except the front. As a result the R3 T106 can rush a US vehicle shooting 12.7s with little issue. This is especially important if say you're rushing a T29/T30 or anything of the sort with a long reload. 

 

This thing on the other will play a simillar role of the BMP2 without ATGMs or the manoeuvrability of tracks on the spot. 

 

IMO this vehicle really has no place in WT unless it gets ATGMs or a big cannon.OP wants it to be like the R3 T20 but it has already been nerfed to a BR that most people would struggle with against tanks. At top tier it has no place, and OP already stated it's a worse version than the R3 in many ways and I doubt the community wants this huge modern slow vehicle below 4.0

 

There are so many amazing vehicles that can be added for Japan like the Chu MPM, but this ain't it in my opinion.

Edited December 4, 2020 by Bountyhead

[Wiggly_Armed_Man 2,383]

54 minutes ago, Bountyhead said:

It doesn't does matter. It's paper thin everywhere except the front. As a result the R3 T106 can rush a US vehicle shooting 12.7s with little issue. This is especially important if say you're rushing a T29/T30 or anything of the sort with a long reload. 

 

This thing on the other will play a simillar role of the BMP2 without ATGMs or the manoeuvrability of tracks on the spot. 

 

IMO this vehicle really has no place in WT unless it gets ATGMs or a big cannon.OP wants it to be like the R3 T20 but it has already been nerfed to a BR that most people would struggle with against tanks. At top tier it has no place, and OP already stated it's a worse version than the R3 in many ways and I doubt the community wants this huge modern slow vehicle below 4.0

 

There are so many amazing vehicles that can be added for Japan like the Chu MPM, but this ain't it in my opinion.

I don't see how either the Rh 202 or the KBA would be weak aside from the limited elevation angle compared to the R3; but from my experience with the Pvlvv fm/42 I can tell you that 45-degrees is enough for both anti-tank and anti-air duties. Aside from that, both of these guns have APDS: the Rh 202 the DM43 introduced in 1972 capable of penetrating 55 mm at 1.5 kilometers and this is the extent of the data I can find on this round and the KBA a APDS capable of penetrating 31 mm at 60-degrees from 2 kilometers which is only slightly worse than the 35 mm KDE on the Type 89 capable of penetrating 37 mm at the same angle and range.

 

As for mobility, the research prototype has a hp/t of 18.9 and the 1985 prototypes a hp/t of 20.3. The AUBL 74 has a hp/t of 16.3 and the R3 a hp/t of 24.7. I think you're overexaggerating just how slow it would be, though it's still lower than the M18's at 22.6, it should be able to outpace most if not all medium tanks and to keep up with the light ones.

 

And as for the size, it really isn't that big. It's no taller than a Stuart and is no longer than a Sd.Kfz. 234, though it is slightly more wide than either of those.

 

It's not a "huge modern slow vehicle", it's a small moderately fast vehicle with a gun, in the cases of both the Rh 202 and the KBA, MUCH more powerful than the KAD on the R3 granted by the APDS that both of the prior-mentioned guns are capable of using. However, you are right that they would probably both be below 4.0 unless they're artificially pushed into the SPAAG role like the R3 had been. I find it more likely they would be put at 3.0 or 3.3 and adjusted accordingly, at that BR they're at the crux of either frontally penetrating pretty much everything in the downtier or frontally penetrating almost nothing in the uptier. There's also the question of if APDS was even used on either of the prototypes which would radically decide where either of them would go.

Edited December 4, 2020 by Wiggly_Armed_Man

[N-Glycerin@psn 89]

Want it. Don't care how low it goes. WT is a game about combat vehicles, not ww2. The R3 is already down there anyway.

+1

[Abaddon75 460]

+2 (why not both!!!!)

[ALIEN109 1,321]

The Type 87 RCV Production in "Direct Hit"

 

So as OP pointed out, not much need for the 1985 prototype as it would be a doublon

Edited September 1, 2021 by ALIEN109

[Milocat 4,857]

Looks nice!  I hope it's tiered appropriately.  Congratulations, Tasty!  

[Tasty95215 2,099]

I've slightly modified the OP to reflect how the production model Type 87 RCV has been added to the game. Most of the changes are in the "In War Thunder" section, though I did make a note about possible ahistorical ammo in the "Armament" section as well.

[N-Glycerin@psn 89]

Wish we had more information about the model with the funky radar. I voted for the 25mm version way back when. Now that we have the production model in game I'd like to voice support for the Rh202 version. Possibly as a premium as the one we have in game feels like it's a good SL grinder. 

 

More info on Type 87 RCV with radar please. 

[Epsilon160 270]

On 27/09/2021 at 20:52, N-Glycerin@psn said:

More info on Type 87 RCV with radar please. 

I'm guessing the Radar is the Type 82 JPPS-P10 or something along those lines. I don't speak Japanese and don't have the sourced book, but Google Translate said something like "Ground Radar Device No. 2" as the name of the radar that could be mounted on the RCV, and the page for JPPS-P10 said that it had been renamed to the same thing, and the characters looked the same outside of translate. I looked up JPPS-P10 and the same image of the Type 87 with a ground radar came up, linked to a post on Twitter saying that it could mount the JPPS-P10 and JTPS-P23. Both the JPPS-P10 and JTPS-P23 are ground radars as far as I know.

 

I found more information on JPPS-P10 than JTPS-P23. JPPS-P10 is stated to have a range of 10km with an azimuth of 30 degrees, being able to detect moving targets and identify them in capture mode, it transmits info to the operator through acoustic beeps. I think it would be best to have the radar as a Tier 4 modification, aimed with commander view or the turret, and display the radar in the standard visual way rather than acoustically. I don't believe it would be too unbalanced, as it can only detect moving targets in a narrow azimuth. This would help give the vehicle more of a scout feel, rather than just an IFV without ATGMs. If anyone can find official documentation or anything that isn't Wikipedia saying that it could mount the JPPS-P10 (Ground Radar Device No. 2 / Type 82 Ground Radar Device), then it could be suggested (Wikipedia sources: PANZER 臨時増刊 陸上自衛隊の車輌と装備2012-2013 2013年1月号,アルゴノート社,P54).

 

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/87式偵察警戒車

https://web.archive.org/web/20030513114636/http://jda-clearing.jda.go.jp/kunrei/i_fd/iz1982f1003.html

Edited October 8, 2021 by Epsilon160

[Wiggly_Armed_Man 2,383]

8 hours ago, Epsilon160 said:

I'm guessing the Radar is the Type 82 JPPS-P10 or something along those lines. I don't speak Japanese and don't have the sourced book, but Google Translate said something like "Ground Radar Device No. 2" as the name of the radar that could be mounted on the RCV, and the page for JPPS-P10 said that it had been renamed to the same thing, and the characters looked the same outside of translate. I looked up JPPS-P10 and the same image of the Type 87 with a ground radar came up, linked to a post on Twitter saying that it could mount the JPPS-P10 and JTPS-P23. Both the JPPS-P10 and JTPS-P23 are ground radars as far as I know.

 

I found more information on JPPS-P10 than JTPS-P23. JPPS-P10 is stated to have a range of 10km with an azimuth of 30 degrees, being able to detect moving targets and identify them in capture mode, it transmits info to the operator through acoustic beeps. I think it would be best to have the radar as a Tier 4 modification, aimed with commander view or the turret, and display the radar in the standard visual way rather than acoustically. I don't believe it would be too unbalanced, as it can only detect moving targets in a narrow azimuth. This would help give the vehicle more of a scout feel, rather than just an IFV without ATGMs. If anyone can find official documentation or anything that isn't Wikipedia saying that it could mount the JPPS-P10 (Ground Radar Device No. 2 / Type 82 Ground Radar Device), then it could be suggested (Wikipedia sources: PANZER 臨時増刊 陸上自衛隊の車輌と装備2012-2013 2013年1月号,アルゴノート社,P54).

 

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/87式偵察警戒車

https://web.archive.org/web/20030513114636/http://jda-clearing.jda.go.jp/kunrei/i_fd/iz1982f1003.html

Type 82 ground radar device JPPS-P10:

• Maximum / minimum detection distances:
  • 100 m ~ 10 km for large vehicles
  • 100 m ~ 8 km for medium and small vehicles
  • 100 m ~ 5 km for personnel
• Movement target speed:
  • 2 ~ 100 km/h
• Modes
  • Performance in detection mode
    • 30° aerial scanning angle
    • Two-stage switching between antenna scanning speeds of 20°/s and 10°/s
    • Azimuth display range -240 ~ +240 mm
  • Performance in capture mode
    • Distance display range (on digital display) 0 ~ 9990 m
    • Distance accuracy:
      • Large vehicle @ 2,500> m: +/-25 m
      • Large vehicle @ 2,500< m: +/-1%
    • Directional resolution (of large vehicle @ 500 m) 20> mm
• Azimuth / high / low angle variable range
  • Azimuth 0 ~ 6,400 mm
  • High / low angle -800 ~ +350 mm

There is no public JTPS-P23 Outline in the list meaning that it has had to have been a recent invention after 2000. JPPS-P10 does have a Outline, listed above, and there are numerous other ground radars including:

• Type 71 ground radar device JTPS-P6
• Type 71 ground radar device JTPS-P6 (B)
• Type 85 ground radar device JTPS-P11
• Type 85 ground radar device JTPS-P12

Of these, the JTPS-P12 seems the most likely to have been mounted on the Type 87 RCV due to the existence of this single line:

• (2) The JTPS-P12 has a structure in which each component is mounted on a wheeled medium-sized vehicle (for ground radar) (hereinafter referred to as a wheeled armored vehicle).

It is the only one that mentions a vehicle and the description matches a Type 87 RCV, though it doesn't specifically name it. Though, it's also likely that the Type 87 RCV could just mount any of these radars since, in its Outline, it only lists a generic "ground radar device" rather than specifying a specific model.

[hienapunk 1,065]

I wouldn't mind the weaker version to give japan more variation in the upper ranks which it needs critically