• Military Menu                       

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Industry
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• WMD
• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

Armored car model 92 (1932) "OSAKA"

Until late in the War, considerable confusion existed in Allied intelligence between this armored car and the model 25(?) "Vickers Crossley," specifications of the "Osaka" being attributed to the latter vehicle.

Unfortunately, much of the early history of Japanese armored vehicles is covered in darkness. Many details of the history of the first armored cars and other vehicles simply did not survive or are waiting in the wings in the archives. One of the "victims" of such circumstances was the Type 92 armored car, created in the early thirties. Lack of information, as well as some problems with access to it for a long time led to a specific situation. There is not much information about this vehicle, and some of the data contradict each other. In addition, a noticeable confusion is brought about by the fact that in 1932 several armored vehicles under the name "Type 92" were adopted at once.

While no details were available, at the time US Army intelligence believed that the "Osaka" was of Japanese origin, a standard commercial chassis being used for its manufacture. Wheels are fitted with pneumatic tires, the front single and the rear dual mounted. Machine guns are of the Vickers type; one is mounted in the front of the turret. As an extensive free traverse had been allowed to this gun, it is considered possible that the turret is fixed and cannot be traversed. As the design of the driver's front plate gives no indication that the second machine gun is mounted in the front of the hull, it was probable that this weapon was mounted at the rear of the vehicle.

The Type 92 "Osaka" was produced in two variations - with four axles (for the Army), and with six axles (for the Navy). The Navy's Type 92, therefore, had a slightly higher horsepower than the Army's four axle variant. Type 92 followed the standard practice and common nomenclature referred most often to the Type 92 as the "Osaka", as the Type 92 was built at the Osaka Armory. The Naval variant is sometimes known as the Type 92 "Chiyoda", as the Naval version was produced at the Chiyoda Arsenal.

Both of the vehicles were designed to a similar blueprint, but they were designed with different goals in mind. The Army's four axle Type 92 was designed for the purpose of recon; the Navy's six axle type 92 was designed for the purpose of crowd control and security, as well as general utility. As such, the two varied considerably in armament and crew size. The IJA Type 92 was equipped with dual, turret mounted 7.7mm LMGs; the IJN Type 92 was equipped with no less than five 7.7mm LMGs - one to each hull side, one to the fore of the hull, and two in the turret itself. An additional LMG could be mounted as an anti-aircraft weapon in both models.

Speed also varied. The Army variant could do about 38mph; the Navy variant could do nearly 50mph. Crew, naturally, was slightly larger for the IJN model - six crew compared to the Army's five.

There is no exact information about the production of these machines. According to some information, only one prototype was built, while other sources claim that the armored car was built in a large series. The Type 92 was used primarily in China and Manchuria. A few were used in the Home Islands; a few also made their way to Malaya. Production data is not available, but both models were fairly heavily engaged in occupation duties throughout the Second World War.

According to some accounts, ovor several years, Japanese industry built about 500 armored vehicles. There is reason to believe that this version does not fully correspond to reality. Five hundred armored vehicles could certainly have left a noticeable mark on the history of hostilities, but this did not happen. Thus, Osaka armored cars - even if they reached mass production - were not produced in noticeable quantities.

More popular is the alternative version, which is more believable. It involves the construction of one or more armored vehicles required for testing. The prototype / prototypes passed the necessary checks, after which the military decided not to adopt such equipment and not to launch its mass production. The armored car turned out to be a technology demonstrator, and not the most successful one. The absence of serious advantages in the presence of certain disadvantages seriously limited the prospects for the machine.