PLA Next Generation Main Battle Tank

[ENTED64]

And I’m sure that adequate means of suppression will appear sooner or later, either through counter technology or finally adapting ground combat doctrine to match the pace of 21st century informatization warfare.

Artillery, machineguns, and spotter planes didn’t keep people who really wanted to kill each other permanently confined in trenches for the entire 20th century.

Predicting the future is hard, it's difficult to know what is really a permanent game changer and what isn't except in hindsight. Most things, like the ones you cited aren't so our prior should probably be that drones aren't but real permanent game changers do exist. Nobody fights with spears any more and nukes took direct great power wars off the table.

However even if drones aren't that level of game changer, they could still affect battlefield realities significantly on a permanent basis. Just look at how different infantry tactics today are compared to tactics of 200 years ago. Infantry concentrations really are just permanently lower because adequate means of suppression of automatic weapons never developed. You never see hundreds of people packed shoulder to shoulder in battles now. Maybe drones also will not really have a highly effective means of suppression and the result is that tanks and infantry tactics will have to evolve to meet this new reality.

Personally I am pretty disappointed there is no T-14 or upgraded Type 99A style 50+ ton tank but PLA is training to win wars not to satisfy people's aesthetics so it is what it s.

 

[enroger]

IMO, the biggest threat to tanks in the future maybe artillery after all.

FPV drones seems scary now but they may not be as scary ten years from now, with advances in APS/laser/AI self defense station...etc. However the reconnaissance advantages brought on by drones will be here to stay, there is just no way to deal with them any time soon. In highly networked warfare in the future, any vehicle that got spotted will receive hits from distributed non-direct fire all over the place. We're seeing this with even the much less informationalised armies in the Russo-Ukraine war

 

[Acauntis]

Desert camouflage? Already delivered for testing/parade?
View attachment 156294

Do we know if this is a rifled cannon or smoothbore one?

 

[Tomboy]

Do we know if this is a rifled cannon or smoothbore one?

We'll probably know more once clear picture and it's designation is revealed on 9.3. Then we can make more accurate guesses to what it's mission/protection/firepower etc goal might be.

 

[Gloire_bb]

IMO, I expect this MBT to take a turn from the soviet style sandwich for composite armor but more western style NERA for hull/crew capsule.

Composite/nera mean the same thing. Soviet "lazy" composites really were just a legacy of 1960s (i.e. contemporary to unborn western ones, check T95 program), and from 1980s onwards were replaced with mostly very typical designs.
Western designs, all things considered, were very slightly less volume efficient (not that loader design isn't really the border), but with T-14 and ZTQ-15 even this isn't the case anymore really. Some "western-ish" tanks of 3rd gen are in fact lighter than contemporary russian tanks, and not especially at expense of frontal protection. Side protection, sure.

 

[Tomboy]

Composite/nera mean the same thing. Soviet "lazy" composites really were just a legacy of 1960s (i.e. contemporary to unborn western ones, check T95 program), and from 1980s onwards were replaced with mostly very typical designs.
Western designs, all things considered, were very slightly less volume efficient (not that loader design isn't really the border), but with T-14 and ZTQ-15 even this isn't the case anymore really. Some "western-ish" tanks of 3rd gen are in fact lighter than contemporary russian tanks, and not especially at expense of frontal protection. Side protection, sure.

I mean up to T-90M/T-80BVMs/ZTZ99As still used soviet style lazy composites for hull armor, I am aware for the turret they started using western style NERA. Only allegedly T-14 used NERA for hull and hopefully this new tank.

 

[FKAMtS4kE]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Mobility:

• A 1,500 hp series hybrid (range-extended) powerpack, including a diesel engine, generator, and EMT electromechanical transmission, measures 2m × 2m × 1.18m (4.72 m³).
• For comparison: The VT-4’s 1,200 hp powerpack measures 2.485m (L) × 2.04m (W) × 1.216m (H) (~6.32 m³).
  (The new hybrid system, including batteries, matches the volume of the old 1,200 hp powerpack.)
• Primary propulsion: Two electric motors, with peak output far exceeding 1,500 hp (combined diesel generation + battery discharge).
• This 35–40-ton 4th-gen tankachieves:
  • Top speed ≥ 84 km/h
  • Off-road speed: 40–60 km/h
    — Outperforming 3rd-gen MBTs in both burst and sustained mobility.

Firepower:
View attachment 156360

• 105mm/L58 high-velocity gun, firing a new 4th-gen APFSDSwith:
  • ~750mm penetrator length
  • ~6.45 kg mass
  • Muzzle velocity: 1,706 m/s
  • Theoretical penetration: 720mm RHA

Protection:
View attachment 156359View attachment 156361

• Unmanned turret: Minimal armor ("tin can").
• Hull: Tiered armor layout (similar to T-14) — base armor + wedge-shaped composite + heavy ERA.
  • Base armor: Low-angle steel/composite, minimal thickness.
  • Primary armor: ~500mm wedge composite (estimated vs. 3BM42 "Mango").
  • Outer layer: New heavy ERA, enhancing anti-KE/anti-HEAT performance.

Verdict:
This "double-absurd" design dominates in all aspects except frontal protection (offset by new APS + anti-air weapon station). It outperforms previous-gen MBTs (e.g., Type 96/96A) and is slated for full replacement.
(All data/images sourced from BaiduTieba War Thunder– 长生戏命.)

---

Ayi repost: "The armor belt is literal (like on the Japanese Type 10 and French Leclerc)."

View attachment 156358

Can you explain the logic behind a minimally armored turret?

 

[Kejora]

Can you explain the logic behind a minimally armored turret?

Same design philosophy as Armata

 

[supersnoop]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Mobility:

• A 1,500 hp series hybrid (range-extended) powerpack, including a diesel engine, generator, and EMT electromechanical transmission, measures 2m × 2m × 1.18m (4.72 m³).
• For comparison: The VT-4’s 1,200 hp powerpack measures 2.485m (L) × 2.04m (W) × 1.216m (H) (~6.32 m³).
  (The new hybrid system, including batteries, matches the volume of the old 1,200 hp powerpack.)
• Primary propulsion: Two electric motors, with peak output far exceeding 1,500 hp (combined diesel generation + battery discharge).
• This 35–40-ton 4th-gen tankachieves:
  • Top speed ≥ 84 km/h
  • Off-road speed: 40–60 km/h
    — Outperforming 3rd-gen MBTs in both burst and sustained mobility.

Firepower:
View attachment 156360

• 105mm/L58 high-velocity gun, firing a new 4th-gen APFSDSwith:
  • ~750mm penetrator length
  • ~6.45 kg mass
  • Muzzle velocity: 1,706 m/s
  • Theoretical penetration: 720mm RHA

Protection:
View attachment 156359View attachment 156361

• Unmanned turret: Minimal armor ("tin can").
• Hull: Tiered armor layout (similar to T-14) — base armor + wedge-shaped composite + heavy ERA.
  • Base armor: Low-angle steel/composite, minimal thickness.
  • Primary armor: ~500mm wedge composite (estimated vs. 3BM42 "Mango").
  • Outer layer: New heavy ERA, enhancing anti-KE/anti-HEAT performance.

Verdict:
This "double-absurd" design dominates in all aspects except frontal protection (offset by new APS + anti-air weapon station). It outperforms previous-gen MBTs (e.g., Type 96/96A) and is slated for full replacement.
(All data/images sourced from BaiduTieba War Thunder– 长生戏命.)

---

Ayi repost: "The armor belt is literal (like on the Japanese Type 10 and French Leclerc)."

View attachment 156358

Are the batteries externally charged? Series hybrid fuel efficiency is not very good generally speaking. Unless the idea is the battery/electric motor provides superior power to weight than diesel alone.

 

[Gloire_bb]

I mean up to T-90M/T-80BVMs/ZTZ99As still used soviet style lazy composites for hull armor, I am aware for the turret they started using western style NERA. Only allegedly T-14 used NERA for hull and hopefully this new tank.

T-80BVM do, but only because it's a modest upgrade of T-80BV at a core. T-90s and, if i understand correctly, ZTZ99A don't - their setups are different from "NERA blocks" due to different geometry and thickness involved, but they're same in general concept to composite packages on western examples with large thicker plates (most prominently, IFVs).

It is not a downside, quite the contrary - heavily inclined plates ensure that up to 60-70% of ru/chinese mbt upper surface is heavily armored, just because. For all modern western MBTs, it's like 20% in a best case scenario(basically limited to cheeck overhang), everything else is huge, thin homogenous steel plate base. Granted, some add composite packages over crew stations since 2010s, but for east bloc MBTs it's normal to have upper hemisphere ERA since 1980s.