sub-tree Republic of Korea Sub-tree: 강한친구 대한민국 육군

[DagothMoose 11]

5 minutes ago, 04시설 said:

Why is the Korean tree included in the Japanese tree?  The two countries have nothing to do with each other.  It's just geographically close. Other than this, there's no reason to say that the Japanese tree is poor.  Do you think it is justified to have Egypt or Jordan as subtrees because of the lack of Israel?  I'd rather go into the technically related American subtree or come out with American Premium Vehicles and Squadron Vehicles.  Other countries have nothing to do with it, and it would be nice to come out as a t-80u (Korean version) to the Soviet Union.

Swiss Hunter.

[tj8m23le 24]

its good to be subtree in jp trees.

[Nachtgeist2423@live 27]

Nice to see you completely changed the poll because it wasn’t going the way you wanted and the overwhelming majority of votes was for SK to Japan. Edit: fun fact when confronted about fixing the results they make the suggestion they will request to have this whole post removed.

Edited June 19, 2023 by Nachtgeist2423@live

[Ayatsuno Yuni 0]

Didn't you know and choose a few vehicle ?

Is it not adding one line like other countries, but placing more than half of Korean vehicles?

[READY_TO_FIRE 17]

if add the korean tech tree into japan,over the half of vehicles will be koreans.

then which one is sub-tree?

[SlotV 8]

japan will never get the ROK tree

[DLETA_Human_Decoy 101]

2 hours ago, 鮮血魔嬢 said:

japan sub tree+1

korea used to be a part of japan in ww2

and ROKA also incorporated a plenty of Japanese former soldiers in korea war after independence.

（such like Park Chung-hee，an IJA/Manchukuo Imperial Army former soldier and later became the President of South Korea）

———————————————

just like india as a UK sub tree lol

Douglas MacArthur was once the shogunate of Japan, so go to the U.S. subtree!

1 hour ago, Atokara said:

This is an important point. Japan's influence on the ROKA and ROKAF doesn't end in 1945. The first 10 chief of staff of the ROKA were ex-Imperial Japanese officers (almost all volunteers and not conscripts) while none were from the Korean independence movement. Many of the ROKAF's pilots were ex-IJAAF pilots as they were the only ones with flight experience.

https://www.quora.com/How-important-were-former-Korean-members-of-the-Imperial-Japanese-military-in-the-formation-of-the-modern-militaries-of-North-and-South-Korea

Japan intervened in the Korean war providing minesweeping that allowed landings of UN forces to provide relief to South Korea. Japanese and South Korean relations are at an all time high. The two countries are looking to integrate each others BMD radars to better allow tracking of NK missiles.

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/japan-skorea-link-radar-systems-track-nkorea-missiles-source-2023-05-09/

The K2 rifle was also developed with the help of Japan.

Reveal hidden contents

The K21 was also initially influenced by the Type 89 as early mock up models show. The K21 originally planned to have a turret identical to the Type 89 also using a 35mm including Japan's unique smoke grenade launchers.

Reveal hidden contents

Iwao Hayashi was initially consulted along with other international people during the K2's development.

For how heavily restricted Japan was post WW2 in military exports and cooperation with other countries it's very significant.

according to your logic

Japan was ruled by the U.S. military government after the war

And Type 74 was influenced by the m47

Then should the Japanese tree go to the American sub-tree?

 

to add to that And Korean modern equipment has never been influenced by Japan

 

Edited June 19, 2023 by DLETA_Human_Decoy

[Epsilon160 270]

37 minutes ago, Nachtgeist2423@live said:

Nice to see you completely changed the poll because it wasn’t going the way you wanted and the overwhelming majority of votes was for SK to Japan. Edit: fun fact when confronted about fixing the results they make the suggestion they will request to have this whole post removed.

No it was removed because every time Japan is an option anywhere near a Korean tree the majority of posts become about the political implications of adding South Korea to Japan rather than a discussion about the vehicles. As you probably have noticed.

[RGZ91_ReGZ 4]

 

On 18/06/2023 at 09:16, SaabGripen said:

 Whether Poles love the Germans or not, the Leopard 2PL is clearly a Leopard 2 family. As Moderna is in the USSR TT. By the way, do Korean and Japanese vehicles have this technical relationship?

 

You claimed an " apolitical standpoint " for this suggestion. But why give a political perspective to the discussion of technological relevance? It's a double standard.

 

Yeah, I believe the US sub tree may be better.

I'm not sure but I believe K1 is related with M1 or XM1 in some exitance, I'm not saying K1 is a Korean XM1 or M1, but they are surely more related than the relationship between K1 and Type-74 or Type-90 in Japan. Over all it was designed by both Chrysler Defense and General Dynamics Land Systems, so, that will do:). And since South Korea own a large fleet of US tanks variants (Eg. M48A3K, M48A5) and other armored vehicle (like M113) for a relatively long time period, it is better to go with America. (Also, one more thing on ground tech tree need to be mentioned: Even though there're also a large amount of Russian tank in ROKA, there's almost no possibility of South Korea the become a sub tree of USSR, right...?)

By the way, if we focus on the aviation tech tree. Ah~ over half of them are form the United States.

[Epsilon160 270]

3 minutes ago, RGZ91_ReGZ said:

 

 

Yeah, I believe the US sub tree may be better.

I'm not sure but I believe K1 is related with M1 or XM1 in some exitance, I'm not saying K1 is a Korean XM1 or M1, but they are surely more related than the relationship between K1 and Type-74 or Type-90 in Japan. Over all it was designed by both Chrysler Defense and General Dynamics Land Systems, so, that will do:). And since South Korea own a large fleet of US tanks variants (Eg. M48A3K, M48A5) and other armored vehicle (like M113) for a relatively long time period, it is better to go with America. (Also, one more thing on ground tech tree need to be mentioned: Even though there're also a large amount of Russian tank in ROKA, there's almost no possibility of South Korea the become a sub tree of USSR, right...?)

By the way, if we focus on the aviation tech tree. Ah~ over half of them are form the United States.

A US subtree makes more real world sense, a US subtree makes little balance sense because it fills no gaps in US lineups and takes spots in updates that could be used for domestic vehicles, and forces people that want to play Korean vehicles to grind the entire US tree. I have all the ranks of the US tech tree unlocked, but I still would rather it be an independent tree over a US subtree.

Edited June 19, 2023 by Epsilon160

[SaabGripen 642]

1 hour ago, Atokara said:

This is an important point. Japan's influence on the ROKA and ROKAF doesn't end in 1945. The first 10 chief of staff of the ROKA were ex-Imperial Japanese officers (almost all volunteers and not conscripts) while none were from the Korean independence movement. Many of the ROKAF's pilots were ex-IJAAF pilots as they were the only ones with flight experience.

https://www.quora.com/How-important-were-former-Korean-members-of-the-Imperial-Japanese-military-in-the-formation-of-the-modern-militaries-of-North-and-South-Korea

Japan intervened in the Korean war providing minesweeping that allowed landings of UN forces to provide relief to South Korea. Japanese and South Korean relations are at an all time high. The two countries are looking to integrate each others BMD radars to better allow tracking of NK missiles.

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/japan-skorea-link-radar-systems-track-nkorea-missiles-source-2023-05-09/

The K2 rifle was also developed with the help of Japan.

Reveal hidden contents

The K21 was also initially influenced by the Type 89 as early mock up models show. The K21 originally planned to have a turret identical to the Type 89 also using a 35mm including Japan's unique smoke grenade launchers.

Reveal hidden contents

Iwao Hayashi was initially consulted along with other international people during the K2's development.

For how heavily restricted Japan was post WW2 in military exports and cooperation with other countries it's very significant.

I know what ridiculous postings you've seen on Reddit. So, everyone. I will now show you how Weebs fabricate facts.

 

1 hour ago, Atokara said:

The K2 rifle was also developed with the help of Japan.

Hide contents

There is nothing about K2 here.

 

1 hour ago, Atokara said:

The K21 was also initially influenced by the Type 89 as early mock up models show. The K21 originally planned to have a turret identical to the Type 89 also using a 35mm including Japan's unique smoke grenade launchers.

Hide contents

Iwao Hayashi was initially consulted along with other international people during the K2's development.

For how heavily restricted Japan was post WW2 in military exports and cooperation with other countries it's very significant.

Why do you only mention Type 89 and not Dardo? Dardo is also "similar". However, this wasn't the only mockup of the K21 design concept. Furthermore, did the Japanese patent and monopolize 35mm ammunition worldwide? The 35mm was also an ammo that ROKA was already using as their AAA battery ammunition. In addition, the final design of the K21 is rather to the CV90.

 

Also, you shot yourself in the foot while bringing this video. In the video, he mentiond not only Hayashi Iwao but also 4 other Specialist from other countries. Tal(from Israel), Philip W. Lett(from US), Sven Berge(from Sweden), Richard M. Ogorkiewicz(from UK). So did they directly intervene the design of K2 Development anyway? No.

 

Their role was an advisor (about eight hours / five days 32:18 in video) to understand the system ahead of the development of a MBT Program not some Designer Role, in the video guest clearly saying it. That's why it's not correct to talk about the turret similarities between the K2 and Hayashi's Type 90 tank prototype, as he was just an advisor who, along with four other advisers, presented an approach to tank development, Not drawing the tank from blueprints.

 

With this logic, French players also can claims K2 to France TT with more legitimacy because it's more certain that the K2 tank's autoloader was influenced by Leclerc's autoloader, not only "similar shape vehicle".

Edited June 19, 2023 by SaabGripen

[SaabGripen 642]

8 minutes ago, RGZ91_ReGZ said:

 

 

Yeah, I believe the US sub tree may be better.

I'm not sure but I believe K1 is related with M1 or XM1 in some exitance, I'm not saying K1 is a Korean XM1 or M1, but they are surely more related than the relationship between K1 and Type-74 or Type-90 in Japan. Over all it was designed by both Chrysler Defense and General Dynamics Land Systems, so, that will do:). And since South Korea own a large fleet of US tanks variants (Eg. M48A3K, M48A5) and other armored vehicle (like M113) for a relatively long time period, it is better to go with America. (Also, one more thing on ground tech tree need to be mentioned: Even though there're also a large amount of Russian tank in ROKA, there's almost no possibility of South Korea the become a sub tree of USSR, right...?)

By the way, if we focus on the aviation tech tree. Ah~ over half of them are form the United States.

Sure, it is as you would expect.
In 1976, the Korean Ministry of National Defense began working with Chrysler to design the concept, and in 1978, the Korean government signed an MOU with the US government to develop the ROKIT(Repulic Of Korea Indigenous Tank).

 

PV-1(Prototype Vehicle No.1) of XK-1. Photo taken at the Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, United States.

 

PV-2 of XK-1. Photo taken at the Selfridge Air National Guard Base, Michigan, United States.

[AT214 9]

2023年6月16日22时02分，扬策说：

谢谢你的更正，我很感激。

 

不管怎样，我的观点是成立的。如果韩国必须是一个子树，美国将是最好的选择。韩国使用的许多车辆已经在树上，需要额外的韩国伪装/皮肤选项，以及许多后来的车辆都有类似的方面和来源。同样，它的空军甚至海军也可以说是如此，它使用了SPY-1雷达和Arleigh-Burke灵感为KDX-III(世宗大帝)类DDG。 

In order to take care of the feelings of Korean players, I believe it is necessary to merge North and South Korea to create a technology tree on the Korean Peninsula

[Atokara 5]

34 minutes ago, SaabGripen said:

There is nothing about K2 here.

Special rifle is the K2. The date of when the agreement went into effect and when the K2 started development is the same.

35 minutes ago, SaabGripen said:

Why do you only mention Type 89 and not Dardo? Dardo is also "similar".

Dardo didn't receive it's atgm config until after the K21 was prototyped and decades after the Type 89 entered service. You chose to straight up neglect that the turret is an exact 1:1 copy of the Type 89.

 

36 minutes ago, SaabGripen said:

Also, you shot yourself in the foot while bringing this video. In the video, he mentiond not only Hayashi Iwao but also 4 other Specialist from other countries. Tal(from Israel), Philip W. Lett(from US), Sven Berge(from Sweden), Richard M. Ogorkiewicz(from UK). So did they directly intervene the design of K2 Development anyway? No.

Between the Merkava, Abrams, S103, and Challenger the K2 is closest to Japanese design philosophy.

[jay2422101 6]

5 minutes ago, Atokara said:

Special rifle is the K2. The date of when the agreement went into effect and when the K2 started development is the same.

Dardo didn't receive it's atgm config until after the K21 was prototyped and decades after the Type 89 entered service. You chose to straight up neglect that the turret is an exact 1:1 copy of the Type 89.

 

Between the Merkava, Abrams, S103, and Challenger the K2 is closest to Japanese design philosophy.

Is there any Korean reference that K2 is closer to Japan design? 

[AT214 9]

2023年6月18日06:38，特里卡基尔说：

联合韩国树或没有树。 

I agree. Science and technology in South Korea should merge with North Korea, not enter Japan out of political malice.

[turkishspicyfist 9]

Japanese tree users are so greedy. u guys are arguing that Japan should take Korea's armoured vehicle based on the fact that Korea was a Japanese colony and that many early korean politicians were commanders engaged in the Japanese Imperial Army. But such minor reasons are not the basis for Japan to get Korean vehicle. Rather, Korea's first leader hated japanese and implemented a violent maritime policy of arresting, assaulting, and killing many Japanese fishermen. Even the Korean leaders who were served for Japanese Empire as you call it, awarded medals and honored those who opposed the Japanese Empire.

However we can also ignore the historical debate and make a decision to apply it. Warthunder is a game, not a history lecture. But that also doesn't make sense either. u guys are beating around a bush, but It is true that Japan has had little impact on Korea's armoured vehicle. Rather US and Germany have had much more influence on Korea's vehicle development, and Japan's influence converges to almost 0%. There is no technical connection and military history connection. So It is ridiculous that Korea, which operates a larger and larger armoured force than Japan, have to become a subtree of Japan. If the Korean sub-tree proposed by this man is applied, Japan must completely take off its national flag and country name in the modern war. It's insane!

[SaabGripen 642]

4 minutes ago, Atokara said:

Special rifle is the K2. The date of when the agreement went into effect and when the K2 started development is the same.

Dardo didn't receive it's atgm config until after the K21 was prototyped and decades after the Type 89 entered service. You chose to straight up neglect that the turret is an exact 1:1 copy of the Type 89.

 

Between the Merkava, Abrams, S103, and Challenger the K2 is closest to Japanese design philosophy.

If the year of development is the same, is it the same gun? By that logic, the G11 and HK33 are the same gun. lol

Can you read this? It's just an MOU. Nowhere in the documentation does it say that it was actually implemented and resulted in a K2 AR. It's a classic 'mixed fact with some' falsehood.

 

11 minutes ago, Atokara said:

Dardo didn't receive it's atgm config until after the K21 was prototyped and decades after the Type 89 entered service. You chose to straight up neglect that the turret is an exact 1:1 copy of the Type 89.

Ad hoc

Needless to say again, no trace of the model you are referring to can be found after all.

 

17 minutes ago, Atokara said:

Between the Merkava, Abrams, S103, and Challenger the K2 is closest to Japanese design philosophy.

"As I saw it with my non-professional eyes, without any references. Trust me!"

Someone could argue with the same logic that the Type 90 is a copy of the Leopard 2A4 only with an autoloader.

[RGZ91_ReGZ 4]

1 hour ago, Epsilon160 said:

A US subtree makes more real world sense, a US subtree makes little balance sense because it fills no gaps in US lineups and takes spots in updates that could be used for domestic vehicles, and forces people that want to play Korean vehicles to grind the entire US tree. I have all the ranks of the US tech tree unlocked, but I still would rather it be an independent tree over a US subtree.

Yeah, totally understand your point. It would be best if we can get an independent tree. But if we cannot get an independent tree by some random reason, I would rather it be a US subtree than a Japan subtree. (But that would lose so much passion when players need to unlock all of those Rank V and Rank VI M48s after unlocking them already in the US tree)

[Atokara 5]

35 minutes ago, SaabGripen said:

Can you read this? It's just an MOU. Nowhere in the documentation does it say that it was actually implemented and resulted in a K2 AR. It's a classic 'mixed fact with some' falsehood.

MOU that resulted in a functioning and actually fairly successful (but also costly) lmg? The agreement clearly progressed past that and the development started the same time as the K2 both programs headed by the ADD.

Spoiler

 

35 minutes ago, SaabGripen said:

Needless to say again, no trace of the model you are referring to can be found after all.

Spoiler

It's a Korean model as this other picture of an alternate proposal shows. It's not surprising that many people would want this sort of thing scrubbed from the public conscious because such influences would be considered taboo.

 

35 minutes ago, SaabGripen said:

Someone could argue with the same logic that the Type 90 is a copy of the Leopard 2A4 only with an autoloader.

Except no one from Germany was brought on to consult for the Type 90 unlike what happened for the K2.

Edited June 19, 2023 by Atokara

[DeltaSBW 311]

"Let the French TT merge as German sub-tree, because it's part of Germany in WWII, close military relationship in nowdays"

 

No one will agree with that clueless idea.

 

And this is excatly same thing happens when someone proposes Korean TT merge as Japanese sub-tree.

 

What many people rejected, there must be proper reason. And this "Korean-Japanese sub tree drama" was rejected so many times from old days. Just hope to stop watching any more drama about this stupid idea.

 

Only United Korean TT as Israel or no Korean TT in game.

Edited June 19, 2023 by DeltaSBW

[鮮血魔嬢 9]

2 hours ago, DLETA_Human_Decoy said:

Douglas MacArthur was once the shogunate of Japan, so go to the U.S. subtree!

 

I really argee with you，bro☺️

actually I wouldn't object to gaijin making japan and korea together as U.S. sub tree. all U.S. colonies，after all.