Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to World1945. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Type 63
Topic Started: Aug 27 2008, 05:49 PM (211 Views)
Peoples Republic of China
Member Avatar
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
http://z15.invisionfree.com/World1945/inde...opic=1869&st=15

"The specimen captured in Vietnam had been just that a specimen, the only one of its kind, cobbled together by an unrecorded North Vietnamese workshop from a redundant tank chassis and a twin 37-mm gun mount probably of naval orgin, encased in a home-made shielded turret. Whatever its effectiveness as an air defence weapon might have been, it was certainly effective in diverting the energies of several intelligence experts for quite a long time."

I have not read the entirety of that work, but either that is inaccurate/out of date, or we are talking about two distinctly different weapons. The Type 63 I am referring to is a T-34 or Type 58 tank, with a bloc-house turret mounted on top, containing two high speed AA (37mm if I recall correctly) guns in twin mounting. Although specific numbers are rare and far between, it is known that it was a production run- due to its immediately obvious deficiencies, it saw service only in secondary duty (including, apparently, riot suppression), as an export weapon and as a R&D weapon- it was the basic inspiration, as it were, for later SPAAGs.
[URL=http://z15.invisionfree.com/World1945/index.php?showtopic=1336&st=0]Embassy of the People's Republic of China[/URL]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
South Korea
Member Avatar
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
AFAIK there have only been one, currently at the Aberdeen proving ground
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Peoples Republic of China
Member Avatar
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
Well, I have seen several mentions of it as a production run, and it is mentioned as a Type- the Type 63, which would mean that it cannot be cobbled together (to gain a type designation in the chinese system, the weapon has to be produced as an actual product- ie beyond prototype).
[URL=http://z15.invisionfree.com/World1945/index.php?showtopic=1336&st=0]Embassy of the People's Republic of China[/URL]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
South Korea
Member Avatar
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
AFAIK the Type number was assigned by US intelligence after the guns it mounted
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
South Korea
Member Avatar
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
Since i have become unsure of my stance and sources I posted a question on the TankNet, hopefully one of the ThreadHeads will have a source one way or another

If you decide to produce it make sure that your version has power operated ( or at least assisted) traverse and elevation
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Peoples Republic of China
Member Avatar
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
South Korea
Aug 27 2008, 06:14 PM
AFAIK the Type number was assigned by US intelligence after the guns it mounted

That would seem unlikely- because the Type 63 SPAAG mounts twin coupled Type 55s (or Type 65). I've been unable to find a definite consensus regarding whether it was the twin version, or simply twin coupled- it may be that different versions were used.

To the assignment of numbers, however- the weapon mounted is a 37mm, Type 55 or 65. Either way, 63 is not found within that set up.
[URL=http://z15.invisionfree.com/World1945/index.php?showtopic=1336&st=0]Embassy of the People's Republic of China[/URL]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
West Germany
Member Avatar
Einigkeit und Recht und Freiheit
[ *  *  * ]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_63_antiaircraft_gun

It is indeed a flak tank of the PRC. And as the technology existed, guns and chassis, it is a valid system IMO.

Adler
[IMG]http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/1404/3dflagsdeu00010001aux4.gif[/IMG][URL=http://z15.invisionfree.com/World1945/index.php?showtopic=87&st=0#entry236221]West German Embassy[/URL][IMG]http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/1404/3dflagsdeu00010001aux4.gif[/IMG]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
South Korea
Member Avatar
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
Huh? And you shouldnt bring wiki into a serious discussion
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Peoples Republic of China
Member Avatar
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
South Korea
Aug 27 2008, 08:54 PM
Huh? And you shouldnt bring wiki into a serious discussion

Not necessarily- wiki can be a very useful resource, if used correctly and in conjunction with other sources.

Regardless, Adler's point is entirely correct- the systems are individually all extant and usable in that regard, making it, where it a 'new' (in game versus historical terms) project. The fact of the matter however, is that it is a 'historical' weapons system.
[URL=http://z15.invisionfree.com/World1945/index.php?showtopic=1336&st=0]Embassy of the People's Republic of China[/URL]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
South Korea
Member Avatar
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
I havent disputed that it is a historical unit, I said that it was a unique specimen not good at shooting down aircraft (traverse and elevation being hand cranked)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Peoples Republic of China
Member Avatar
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
South Korea
Aug 27 2008, 09:09 PM
I havent disputed that it is a historical unit, I said that it was a unique specimen not good at shooting down aircraft (traverse and elevation being hand cranked)

That is entirely true- as a AA gun it was hopeless in its age: the only airborne targets it can actually have any effect on are helicopters, which had not made their debut as 'significant' vehicles when the Type 63 was produced.

It was however, to my knowledge from my research, most certainly not a lone specimen, both for logical and source reasons. The production run was definitely low, although I've yet to find definite number (as compared to guestimates) as to the number produced- my personal guetimate, based on common numbers for failed production designs (with particular reference to very similar failures in the USSR), would be <500.
[URL=http://z15.invisionfree.com/World1945/index.php?showtopic=1336&st=0]Embassy of the People's Republic of China[/URL]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
« Previous Topic · OOC Talk · Next Topic »
Add Reply