The Japanese had the wrong anti-tank guns, if the battle was intended to be part of the Kalin Gol incident. The standard Japanese anti-tank guns, at the time, were the the 37mm. L.37 Type 92 & 37mm. L.37 Type 94. According to US range tests, these guns could penetrate up to 45mm. of RHA @ 0 degrees @ 100 yards with APHE and up to 53mm. of RHA @ 0 degrees @ 100 yards with AP solid shot.
Une très bonne vidéo 🎦 🎬 sur une embuscade de l'armée japonaise 🇯🇵 contre une colonne de l'armée soviétique 🚩. La fureur des combats est bien retranscrite à l'écran . ⚔️💥💥💥⚔️ Bravo et merci à vous pour la réalisation. 🙏👍🙂😃 ⭐️🥇⭐️
Shocking the Japanese stopped the Soviets, usually it was the other way around, even Soviet light tanks were better tanks than what the Japanese had except some new tanks the Japanese were bringing and developing with 57 and 75mm main guns in 1944 and 45,at this time they only had 37mm on their tanks,The T 26 had a 45mm main gun ,figured with that gun and being fast moving tanks they would of drove behind the Japanese main defenses before they reacted .Stupid AI made the Soviets mingle bunched up at that cross road, target for all the Japanese guns,oh well
Japanese had better tanks in 30s then USSR in battle for khalkin gol they used: USSR only used BT-5, T-26 and T-28 Japan had Type 95 Ha-Go, Type 89 I-Go, Type 97 Chi-Ha and Type 94 Tankette Japanese used Type 97 anti tank rifle with rifle which was capable of penetrating around 30-40 mm Japanese tanks had 37mm cannons, 57mm, Japanese tanks had a sufficient caliber to destroy all types of USSR tanks used during the Battle of Khalkhin Gol. Only in 1945 did the USSR have better tanks, but in 1939 it was more than equal in quality."
Wait, did the Japanese fought battles against the USSR from that early? I thought the USSR attacked Manchuria practically months before the war would end, in 1945
@@jatanieltesta7508 the Japanese lost way more lmao those stats doesn't line up with other sources The Japanese are known to minimise their losses to keep up morale
@@sergeyserbskiy7122 soviet union lost something like 1.5 times more than japanese at khalkin-gol, and huge amount of tanks. Upd. Also lost more on lake khasan
@@jimmcneal5292But nevertheless, thanks to the defeat of the Japanese, they decided to expand in the Pacific Ocean, instead of attacking the USSR. In general, the Soviet tactical decisions were quite good, especially with the rush of Japanese defense. If not for this defeat, the Japanese would have continued to produce a huge number of tanks, instead of huge costs for the fleet
@@SimpleHuman-ug8fk it was tactical defeat at best(if it even can be called such). Japan more or less logically decided to not fight USSR since it could not right away win, all while there were basically no discovered resources in the soviet far east back then, especially compared to indonesia and malaya
