Jump to content


Photo

Chinese Type 99 MBT


  • Please log in to reply
594 replies to this topic

#581 nemo

nemo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 101 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
  • 942 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
  • 9,838 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
  • 942 posts

Posted 22 August 2017 - 0800 AM

Did we hear anymore about the 125mm L60 monstrosity ?



#585 JasonJ

JasonJ

    takoyaki8plz

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 7,816 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Osaka

Posted 27 October 2017 - 0825 AM

Said to be a new light tank.

newLT.jpg



#586 JasonJ

JasonJ

    takoyaki8plz

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 7,816 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Osaka

Posted 28 October 2017 - 0009 AM

The new light tank might be in the rear in this picture.

newLTmaybe.jpg

 

 

 

New 6 wheeler

new6o1.jpg

 

new6o2.jpg

 

new6o3.jpg



#587 2805662

2805662

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 593 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 06 November 2017 - 1348 PM

Once Imgur is back up, Ill post pics of the VT4 & VT5 models on display at Defense & Security 2017 in Bangkok, Thailand. Heavy PLA presence.

#588 Hakka

Hakka

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 244 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Palm trees and pearly white sand
  • Interests:Obscure facts about common tanks

Posted 07 November 2017 - 0641 AM

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.

 

 

Is it completely identical aside from the barrel? Does the Chinese 125mm have the same non-symmetric recoil system as the 2A46 or was it improved to a symmetric system like the 2A46M? If so, there should be rather poor accuracy from the gun.


Edited by Hakka, 07 November 2017 - 0650 AM.


#589 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9,838 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgrade, Serbia
  • Interests:Obscure tanks and guns.
    Obscure facts about well known tanks and guns.
    Obscure historical facts.

Posted 07 November 2017 - 0652 AM

One on 96 has non-symmetric, however, like 2A46M it uses detachable barrel. No idea about one on 99.



#590 Hakka

Hakka

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 244 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Palm trees and pearly white sand
  • Interests:Obscure facts about common tanks

Posted 07 November 2017 - 1036 AM

That's really strange. It doesn't seem like a big task to modify the non-symmetric recoil system of the 2A46 into a symmetrical one as in the 2A46M. It would be a big boost in accuracy. Makes no sense for a relatively new tank like the Type 99 to use such an outdated gun design.



#591 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9,838 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgrade, Serbia
  • Interests:Obscure tanks and guns.
    Obscure facts about well known tanks and guns.
    Obscure historical facts.

Posted 07 November 2017 - 1306 PM

Edit, my mistake, recoil system is different than on 2A46 being basically the same as on 100mm D-10T but enlarged to stand 125mm. T-54/Type 59 origins really show.



#592 charliebravo

charliebravo

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 80 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lima

Posted 08 November 2017 - 1602 PM

Edit, my mistake, recoil system is different than on 2A46 being basically the same as on 100mm D-10T but enlarged to stand 125mm. T-54/Type 59 origins really show.

 

Hi Bojan.

 

This is from MBT-2000 Operator´s Manual.

 

https://i.imgur.com/r2U5usy.jpg

 

Regards

 

 

 

 

 

Regards



#593 JasonJ

JasonJ

    takoyaki8plz

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 7,816 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Osaka

Posted 07 December 2017 - 0916 AM

Is there any actual function of the room the tank is in? Anything similar looking found in facilities of other countries or is it just for making a sharp looking picture.

scifiztz99a.jpg

 

 

Not part of the question, just a new picture.

scinewlight.jpg



#594 methos

methos

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 738 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 December 2017 - 0952 AM

Is there any actual function of the room the tank is in? Anything similar looking found in facilities of other countries or is it just for making a sharp looking picture.

scifiztz99a.jpg

 

 

They are used for measuring all kind of signatures (radar waves, electro-magnetic, accoustic). The pattern on the walls eliminates intereferences from exterior sources. AFAIK a prototype of every medium/heavy German AFV is tested in such a room, the same probably applies to other NATO members.

 

Here is a description of such a "very quiet room" of the Georgia Tech Research Institute.



#595 JasonJ

JasonJ

    takoyaki8plz

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 7,816 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Osaka

Posted 09 December 2017 - 0338 AM

Thank you.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users