Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!lll-winken!sun-barr!newstop!sun!amdcad!amdcad!military
From: rblack@smcnet.smc.edu (Russ Black, Media Center)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Italian Tanks and Japanese Tanks
Message-ID: <1991Apr24.054441.18528@amd.com>
Date: 23 Apr 91 18:22:18 GMT
Sender: military@amd.com
Organization: Santa Monica College, CA 90405
Lines: 29
Approved: military@amd.com


From: rblack@smcnet.smc.edu (Russ Black, Media Center)


If you look at current affairs at the time the Italian tanks were being
manufactured it is not much different from the Japanese.  Their design
was in direct correlation to who they were fighting at the time.  The
people they were fighting in the 20's and 30's weren't the most
advanced army in the world (Italians).  Nobody though they would fight
all of Europe and the United States.

Most of the fighting the Japanese did was against light armour in China
(French Tanks) and light defenses.  Their armour and the fact that they
were defeating their enemy left and right didn't help advance their
technology.  Only later in the war did they develop larger caliber guns
and heavier tanks to meet Allied armour.  They never got to use them
because the war ended.

Italian armour suffered much the same fate.  As a matter of fact, the
army as a whole suffered from such a fate.  They weren't built up
enough to sustain heavy losses.  There equipment wasn't geared to
total war.  The only thing they has that was execellent and had
sufficent replacement was their air force.

Since they (Italians) surrendered in 1943 they didn't have the time to
field newer armour.  Japan was able to field better pieces of existing
armour but, their Navy was getting sunk.  Japanese officals even stated
at the war trials that they weren't  geared into total war until 1943.
But, they were better geared to replace equipment and sustain losses.