All newType-59 thread

[FORBIN]

The number have clearly decreases remains 1300 + 1100 B/D with 105 mm on 7500 tanks.

 

[PeoplesPoster]

Why? modernised T-59 is still good enough against 80% of the potential enemies

You always have limited resources, so use it wisely is the way to go ... you don't need a howitzer to kill a rabbit

At this point it's probably more expensive to maintain these antiques than purchasing all new vehicles.

 

[antiterror13]

At this point it's probably more expensive to maintain these antiques than purchasing all new vehicles.

I don't agree ... these babies are very easy to maintain

 

[Skye_ZTZ_113]

I am not familiar with maintenance costs for the Type, but from the point of view of replacing parts-there are a great many of the same/similar model being decommissioned every year. These would be used for scrap if the entire fleet was decommissioned. Unfortunately, there is also the issue of a great deal of munitions for the 100mm cannon sitting around-a problem the Russian Federation had too following the breakup for the SU, albeit on a much larger scale. Thankfully, the PLA did not make the mistake of trying to mass-adapt IFVs with 100mm cannons, as BMP service history in Chechnya/ M1128 in Afghanistan etc. have proven this to be a terrible idea.

At the end of the day, one can never be too sure that these vehicles will never be needed. There would be a large gap in the PLAGF's tank arsenal to replace, and as others have pointed out here; a tank is still a tank. It still outclasses contemporary IFVs like the Stryker and Bradley for comparison.

 

[SinoSoldier]

It would be useful to upgrade these old Type 59s to the standards of the Type 59G and with the Chinese variant of the Rheinmetall 120 mm gun.

 

[antiterror13]

It would be useful to upgrade these old Type 59s to the standards of the Type 59G and with the Chinese variant of the Rheinmetall 120 mm gun.

View attachment 28692

I thought most of remaining Type 59 are already or being upgraded to 59G

 

[kriss]

I thought most of remaining Type 59 are already or being upgraded to 59G

Not to the standard in the photo sino posted (which I think is also impractical for china). Also, I think they are armed with 125mm caused they basically put a ztz-96 turret on 59 chassis.

 

[ahho]

I don't think having 100mm IFV was a bad idea. The IFV was meant to provide direct fire support and anti armor (mostly other IFV). I think the issue, was that it was directly deployed in high density area where even tanks are having trouble navigating through without being hit.

Back on topic, I am wondering if they have tried to put in APS for Type-59.

 

[Lezt]

100mm for IFV is not a bad choice.

25mm/30mm cannon doesn't provide much for HE

 

[Miragedriver]

I am not familiar with maintenance costs for the Type, but from the point of view of replacing parts-there are a great many of the same/similar model being decommissioned every year. These would be used for scrap if the entire fleet was decommissioned. Unfortunately, there is also the issue of a great deal of munitions for the 100mm cannon sitting around-a problem the Russian Federation had too following the breakup for the SU, albeit on a much larger scale. Thankfully, the PLA did not make the mistake of trying to mass-adapt IFVs with 100mm cannons, as BMP service history in Chechnya/ M1128 in Afghanistan etc. have proven this to be a terrible idea.

At the end of the day, one can never be too sure that these vehicles will never be needed. There would be a large gap in the PLAGF's tank arsenal to replace, and as others have pointed out here; a tank is still a tank. It still outclasses contemporary IFVs like the Stryker and Bradley for comparison.

Very similar to the Soviet T-55. They were loved by their crew because of there simple maintenance.