I figured I would show a couple shots of my entry for this GB. Its the Type 3 "Chi-Nu" Japanese medium tank. Made by Fine Molds and a beauty at that! Im gonna try two firsts here: 1, is Friul tracks and the 2nd is camo pattern with an air brush. So rest assured I will be picking everyones brains for hints and tips..Feel free to post your entries here and keep this post alive

That is a very unique looking tank. What kind of camo scheme are you going to apply?
I'm still discovering some of the IJA's tanks and softskins they used in WWII.

With that above, I thought since this is just an entry topic, I'd post what I will be working on very shortly (like tonight )

I have never seen this tank before. It seems to have a lot of detail. How is the fit of the individual parts? By the way it's looking good so far.

Hi Animal, The fit is all around exellent! So much so I will be buying a couple more from Fine Molds!

Hi PvtParts,

Very nice tanks ya got there, but I really really hate to do this, since it's such a nice built model, but any tanks are not allowed in the TD GB. Suppose to be a Tank Destoryer Campaign, actually, if you see anything with a rotatable turret, you need to be careful, unless it's like M10, M18, M36, etc.

I am sorry PvtParts. But I am sure with your skill, and resources, you can find another subject for the groupie, may I recommend the awesome Jagdpanther.

Sorry again PvtParts, and a very very nice model.

Ken,
I can't wait to see that halftrack TD finished it is a very different model subject.

Dave, I must throw my two cents (not to be confused with sense) in here. The Type 3 "Chi-Nu" was in fact used as a TD.
We did quite a bit a research before concluding it was built as a tank destroyer. This is a quote from one site that speaks of it's purpose:

According to Greenwood they were deployed to tank battalions, which had Type 97 and Type 1’s. The Type 3’s were deployed as a tank destroyer. Each tank company had a few Type 3’s to engage US tanks at long range.

The above quote was taken from this site BUILDING A TYPE 3 'CHI-NU' MEDIUM TANK - by: Jim Hensley

Lord Kencelot,

I respectfully disagree. I am sorry, the type 3 was built as a tank from the drawing board up. It might be deployed as a TD in a tank group, because Japanese has no other tank that could take on enemy tanks.

As you can see from the original rules of this group build, we planned to do vehicle that was designed for one purpose alone, to kill enemy tanks and is not a tank. Hence, the plane category. Later on, some one asked if a Stug III ausf F or later can be built, then after discussion we came to the conclusion, the introduction of the 75mm L/43 or L/48 guns were meant to counter tanks, more than give infantry support. Hence sanctioned.

But if a medium tank, that was to be used AS tank destoryer can also be allowed, that might open door for many other entries, i.e. Panther, or Tiger, or even Pz IV ausf F2 or later, because these tanks were designed for one purpose mainly to kill enemy tanks, or M1A1 to that extend.

But the group is a TD build that does not including tank killing abled tanks.

I am sorry Ken. and PvtPart.

hello all,
a was also under the impression that the type 3 was tank.
they were designed to deal with shermans, and as such were employed as tank destroyers.
to be honest i would allow it in the gb, as that is what it was used for.
lots of vehicles were designed as something but used for td's,
stug 111 for example, designed as a infantry support vehicle, used as a td
just my thoughts
cheers
joe

Stug III A, B, C/D , E, were designed as Infantry support weapon, hence, is not in the TD group. But I guess, even it was used at one point or another to shoot at tanks, i.e. Wittman's famed encounter with T34 in his Stug III ausf. A.

So what you say about a Panther? or a Tiger.

I am sorry to be an ass about this entry, as I said I am very sorry about it, but if we accept any vehicle at one point or another deployed as a tank killing weapon, we may as well, do the whole build. What about Battleships that fire shore bombardment and knocked out the Panzer division, or the B24s/B17s that bombed Lehr divison and Hilter Jugend to pieces at Normandy?

I am so sorry guys, if this guideline was not clear. here is the thing:

THEME: Tank Destroyers. Purpose built , kill one type of target , vehicles.

ERA: If it was called a tank Destroyer then it is suitable. (Creativity points for pre WWII vehicles)

SECTIONS: Wheeled,Towed Gun,1/2 track,Full track. (Soviet anti tank dogs are a nyet-nyet)

SUBLOTS: As SS said:
"Da Real McCoy"
88mm carried TD (elefant, hornisse, etc), 17 pounders (archers, etc), 90mm, or such big gun TD, SU-122, SU-85, etc

"Da Wannabes"
Hetzers, Marders, etc, etc

"Da Door Knockers"
them halftrack mounted with a 37 mm, etc, etc,

"Da 'Are you Kidding me?' "
either the real crazy 128mm jagdtiger, or the real small TK with 20mm guns...

PARTICIPANTS: It's a Group Build - anyone and everyone is invited - including Aircraft modelers! Whip out those A-10 Warthogs!

I understand what's being said, while not wanting to be dragged into controversy, I would like to make the following points....I believe the conversion of a TD has to come from the hull up. All of the major TDs used existing chassis and created a new hull for the vehicle... M10/M36 were all built on top of the sherman running gear. The Chi-Nu, the little I remember of it, was simply given a new turret. I personally think it's a real pity as the work that has been done on it indicates that it could be a real show-stopper.
As one who is taking part in this GB, I have to admit in lacking imagination by working on an M10 Achilles, OOB, no additions at all. The Chi-Nu, looks superb and shows real imagination to choose this as a subject. I personally would not object in the slightest if it was admitted although the rules seem to be pretty clear... Not a nice position for anyone...Jim

I agree with Dave on this one Sorry Ken but then you can say that as Russians did not have too many TD's that would put SU-85 SU-100 SU-122 ISU-155 as TD right most likely even the T/34 type 76 and 85 Right as they opposed the Germans at Kursk and these were used as tank against tank so would that not make them TD?

I guess we all need a list of what is and what is not.
Adam where is Adam (++) (++)

"Purpose built ",is the key.
Built to deliberatly kill attacking Armor.Now if a tank found it was undergunned vs, the opponents,it would be upgraded,but stiill be a tank.
Now I wonder about some of the SU's.Were they mobile artillery,or infantry support,or built to hunt/destroy attacking German armor? Was an SU built,found to be inadequate,and up gunned? And was the larger gun put on to make it a TD instead of an infantry support vehicle? (++) 49 (++)

Hey all, Being Im not a military expert and opted to try something not normally seen. I found this beast, saw the words tank destroyer and decided to build it. I dont want to see this drag into a post war. I will finish this one and find something else for the GB. There is still enough time left. Remember..Its all about Fun!

I just want to comment about the model. Pvt Parts, she is a beauty. I have never ever considered making a model of a WW2 Japanese tank (or tank destroyer) but seeing that kit has got my interest up. Can't wait to see the finished product the Japanese certainly used some interesting camoflauge schemes

here is what poop I dug up on this thing

http://member.nifty.ne.jp/takixxx/develop.html

listed as tank


Now if it was a HO-Ni III then would be a self propelled gun!

Type 3 Medium Tank Chi-Nu was urgently developed to cope with the M4 Sherman.

Not good enough? Hmmm...