Jump to content


Photo

Chinese Type 99 MBT


  • Please log in to reply
591 replies to this topic

#21 nitin

nitin

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,850 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:India
  • Interests:defence matters

Posted 24 April 2006 - 0139 AM

The German have the same training route.

http://www.anyboard....bad26_64701.jpg

View Post


That is insanely scary. For it requires you to have complete and utter faith in that tank crew.
Cruuuuunnnnchhhhhhh!

Edited by nitin, 24 April 2006 - 0139 AM.


#22 Harkonnen

Harkonnen

    Andrei

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,347 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Planet Arakkis, Dune
  • Interests:Tanks, Art, history

Posted 24 April 2006 - 0156 AM

The German have the same training route.


And the US, at least thay had, maybr now not.

#23 Davin

Davin

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 849 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Russian tanks.

Posted 24 April 2006 - 0215 AM

The German have the same training route.

http://www.anyboard....bad26_64701.jpg

View Post

Look the right side of the Leo-2A4 turret.
There is a extra box on its right side frontal turret.
What is it?

#24 Gabe

Gabe

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,947 posts

Posted 24 April 2006 - 0451 AM

I've seen the French do it as well.

#25 Gabe

Gabe

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,947 posts

Posted 24 April 2006 - 0455 AM

The German have the same training route.

http://www.anyboard....bad26_64701.jpg

View Post


I think those are Norwegians, judging by their camo.

#26 Tomi Sarvanko

Tomi Sarvanko

    Sausage grilling hyper active reserve officer home commando!

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,571 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oulu, Finland
  • Interests:Family, skiing and sailing.

Posted 24 April 2006 - 0508 AM

I think those are Norwegians, judging by their camo.

View Post


Finns. Its part of the basic training.

#27 pikachu

pikachu

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,887 posts

Posted 24 April 2006 - 0600 AM

Hmmm.... a really nasty thought just crossed my mind. Imagine doing that with a tank using hydropneumatic suspension then, right after the crunchie's legs disappear under the tank, lowering the whole vehicle ever.... so..... slowly...... <_<

#28 Michael Dekmetzian

Michael Dekmetzian

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 265 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Alberta, Canada

Posted 24 April 2006 - 0637 AM

The German have the same training route.

http://www.anyboard....bad26_64701.jpg

View Post


fuck that!

:lol:

#29 DRW

DRW

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 326 posts

Posted 24 April 2006 - 0744 AM

How important would you state a MRS to be, in terms of main gun accuracy & range? Can a non MRS equipped tank achieve equivalent results by virtue of good stabilization and FCS alone?

View Post

There are several names for the system. MRS is the Americans choice. It is very, very important for sustaining accuracy especially during long range engagements and extreme weather changes. It also allows crews to conduct continous operations whereas time for boresighting may not be available and still achieve a very high PH factor.

All heavy metal tubes bend and change their "orientation" even due to the changing position of the sun during the day. This can even happen with a thermal sleeve or wrap on the gun tube. This movement is tiny to the eye but effects accuracy and consistancy. These systems help to correct for this movement.

#30 Mk 1

Mk 1

    Difficile est saturam non scribere

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5,088 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pleasanton, CA, USA
  • Interests:Military history, collecting and shooting historic firearms, wargaming, a house full of kidlins, life in general.

Posted 24 April 2006 - 1804 PM

And the US, at least thay had, maybr now not.

My father claimed to have been "run over" by tanks during training in the Tank Destroyers in WW2.

But the regimen involved digging a fox hole with hide, and then getting run over. Not just laying down in the road.

I've also seen pictures and read of Soviet era training involving recruits in 1/2m deep trenches being run over by tanks. Even by the treads. All part of a deliberate effort to prevent "tank terror".

-Mark 1

#31 woodstock74

woodstock74

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 66 posts

Posted 24 April 2006 - 2008 PM

Back to the Type 99, what hull is it based on? T-72? Indigenous?

#32 Jim Warford

Jim Warford

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,874 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 24 April 2006 - 2209 PM

Recently, a second modified variant of the ZTZ-99 has appeared in select PLA units, with what appears to be a narrower turret (fitted with fewer reactive armor "bricks"). Additionally, the turret roof is flat...without the obvious "hump" clearly visible on both the ZTZ-98 and the older variant of the ZTZ-99. The lack of the "hump" could indicate the use of a new or modified automatic loader. When I first discovered the new variant, I intially thought that the tank was actually a modified MBT 2000 export tank. Since then, I've changed my mind; while the new variant of the ZTZ-99 could be intended for the export market, it is much more likely that it's a modified ZTZ-99 and not related to the MBT 2000. Here are some comparison pics:

Posted Image

Posted Image

#33 Guest_JamesG123_*

Guest_JamesG123_*
  • Guests

Posted 24 April 2006 - 2350 PM

Its hard to judge precisely with out two comparitive photos from the same angle, but it looks to me like it is just the rounded cast turret roof (the "hump") has been replaced with a sloping flat plate with maybe a little extra height on the front armor array. Looking at the positioning of the TC cupola and Gunner's hatch/sights, it seems to have the same angle or height as the humped turret.

My guess is that it was done to simplify manufacturing.

#34 Sebastian Balos

Sebastian Balos

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,145 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 April 2006 - 0048 AM

The German have the same training route.

http://www.anyboard....bad26_64701.jpg

View Post


I personally experienced that too (Serbia and Montenegro), but I was in a trench, not lying under the tank. Not such a big deal, but addmitedly, there's a difference.

Regards, Sebastian

#35 Davin

Davin

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 849 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Russian tanks.

Posted 25 April 2006 - 1058 AM

Back to the Type 99, what hull is it based on?  T-72?  Indigenous?

View Post

It's based on T-72.
Jim,
Here is another detail photo on 99式 turret add-on armor.
Posted Image

#36 woodstock74

woodstock74

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 66 posts

Posted 25 April 2006 - 1124 AM

It's based on T-72.
Jim,
Here is another detail photo on 99式 turret add-on armor.
Posted Image

View Post



Any ideas of the differences between the T-72 hull and the Type 98/99's? I'm asking from a modeling standpoint, Trumpeter produces the Type 98 in 1/35 scale but they've comprimised the hull in lieu of motorization. So it is longer and wider compared to a T-72 hull.

#37 Guest_pfcem_*

Guest_pfcem_*
  • Guests

Posted 25 April 2006 - 1202 PM

Recently, a second modified variant of the ZTZ-99 has appeared in select PLA units, with what appears to be a narrower turret (fitted with fewer reactive armor "bricks"). Additionally, the turret roof is flat...without the obvious "hump" clearly visible on both the ZTZ-98 and the older variant of the ZTZ-99. The lack of the "hump" could indicate the use of a new or modified automatic loader. When I first discovered the new variant, I intially thought that the tank was actually a modified MBT 2000 export tank. Since then, I've changed my mind; while the new variant of the ZTZ-99 could be intended for the export market, it is much more likely that it's a modified ZTZ-99 and not related to the MBT 2000.

I don't think that the "new" turret is actually narrower. It appears to me that it just has the front portion angled so that it is narrower at the "point" while the earlier turret is "straight".

old.................new
_____........._____
|------|.........|------|
|------|.........|------|
|------|..........\___/

Sorry, too lazy to draw it.

#38 Davin

Davin

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 849 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Russian tanks.

Posted 25 April 2006 - 1203 PM

Any ideas of the differences between the T-72 hull and the Type 98/99's?  I'm asking from a modeling standpoint, Trumpeter produces the Type 98 in 1/35 scale but they've comprimised the hull in lieu of motorization.  So it is longer and wider compared to a T-72 hull.

View Post

Yes,99式 hull is longer then T-72.Most Chinese source suggest that 99式 has a hull dimension as length 11m(with gun)/7.3m(without gun) height 2m and width 3.4m.

#39 Jim Warford

Jim Warford

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,874 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 29 April 2006 - 1541 PM

...here's another look at the "new" ZTZ-99:

Posted Image

#40 Irwin_Rommel

Irwin_Rommel

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 447 posts

Posted 30 April 2006 - 0836 AM

Hmmm.... a really nasty thought just crossed my mind. Imagine doing that with a tank using hydropneumatic suspension then, right after the crunchie's legs disappear under the tank, lowering the whole vehicle ever.... so..... slowly...... <_<

View Post



Or may be you can stop over him and start turning in place, similar to the German movie Stalingrad. The T-34 buried a German soldier in hole doing that. :lol:




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users