Jump to content


Photo

Chinese Type 99 MBT


  • Please log in to reply
583 replies to this topic

#581 nemo

nemo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 91 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 21 August 2017 - 1717 PM

The type 96 is still only ~43 tons and is considered by the Chinese to have good performance in difficult terrain. There will be a weight increase from the 105mm to 125mm but it is more than worth it for the increased performance. If they wanted a true medium gun armed tank in the ~35 ton class a deep redesign of the 96 to cut weight would have been the desirable way to do it. You could severely reduce the thickness of the steel base armor and move to aluminium wheels and be most of the way there.

Later models of Type 96 has been up-armored and has high power engines. With reactive armors fitted, it could be a couple of tons heavier.

The weight difference would be close to 10 ton (roughly 25%), still quite substantial.   The protection level of the light tank may actually be similar to the early model of Type 96, due to newer armor and lighter main gun, etc.  Japan's new Type 10 has similar protection compare to Type 90 despite being 10 tons lighter.  I suspect this light tank is similar.



#582 KV7

KV7

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 771 posts

Posted 21 August 2017 - 2005 PM

 

The type 96 is still only ~43 tons and is considered by the Chinese to have good performance in difficult terrain. There will be a weight increase from the 105mm to 125mm but it is more than worth it for the increased performance. If they wanted a true medium gun armed tank in the ~35 ton class a deep redesign of the 96 to cut weight would have been the desirable way to do it. You could severely reduce the thickness of the steel base armor and move to aluminium wheels and be most of the way there.

Later models of Type 96 has been up-armored and has high power engines. With reactive armors fitted, it could be a couple of tons heavier.

The weight difference would be close to 10 ton (roughly 25%), still quite substantial.   The protection level of the light tank may actually be similar to the early model of Type 96, due to newer armor and lighter main gun, etc.  Japan's new Type 10 has similar protection compare to Type 90 despite being 10 tons lighter.  I suspect this light tank is similar.

 

Yes there are ways to improve ME somewhat. The simplest way is to reduce the use of plain RHA. It is also of course acceptable and inevitable to sacrifice protection somewhat if you are aiming for a ~35 T vehicle.


 



#583 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9,639 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgrade, Serbia
  • Interests:Obscure tanks and guns.
    Obscure facts about well known tanks and guns.
    Obscure historical facts.

Posted 22 August 2017 - 0639 AM

You are presuming Chinese and Russian are interchangeable.  They are not.  China and USSR fought a short border conflict in which China captured a T-62. Subsequent testing found their anti-armor capability is insufficient, so they spend a lot of R&D on anti-tank gun.  However, unlike the West, China focused on making stronger guns instead of better rounds.  Later, when they actually got their hand on a T-72, they are not that impressed with the performance of the gun.  Their 125mm gun is actually based on their  own NATO compatible 120mm gun.  As for why they didn't they select 120mm for their new tank, it's because with the information and technology they had, they judged 125mm has higher potential because the chamber is larger (i.e. more propellant).  So Chinese 125mm may be quite a bit heavier than 105mm,  and instead of developing a lighter version of 125mm, it's simpler just to use 105mm -- particularly when they are already in service (e.g. T-59D, etc).

As for protection, reactive armor, slat armor, and maybe APS add-on should be enough to hold off most infantry anti-tank weapons. And in it's chosen terrain, there are not many opponents that can match it in terms of firepower and protection.

 

Chinese 125mm on Type 96 is identical construction to a 2A46, however Chinese one mounting is derived from T-54/55/Type 59 and guns are not readily interchangeable. Very good quality steel gives it somewhat higher life than 2A46, but it is not  that much (~15-20% more EFC).

As for being heavier, it is pretty much same weight.

Their 120mm is totally non-suitable for any kind of tank mounting, since it uses recoil mechanism and mounting of the 152mm howitzer, as when it was available to Chinese they had no mounting able to stand 120/125mm recoil forces. There is no way it or any gun derived from it could have been mounted in Type 96 turret in current setup using what is basically T-55 type mounting.

No idea about Type 99 and it's gun.


Edited by bojan, 22 August 2017 - 0643 AM.


#584 KV7

KV7

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 771 posts

Posted 22 August 2017 - 0800 AM

Did we hear anymore about the 125mm L60 monstrosity ?






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users