All newType-59 thread
- Thread starter King_Comm
- Start date
No, no, no, and no...
Just as the Israelis done a good job in upgrading the M-60 into Sabra standard, the upgraded tank is still not on par with a brand new (latest) M1A2.
But that's not the purpose of the upgrade. Money doesn't grow on trees, and the army is often left with the smallest budget for vehicle procurements. While the AF is given $90 million/plane, the army grunts have to break out the torch and bolt hillbilly armor to their vehicles.
The PLAAF or PLAN is far more likely to receive billions of dollars for new planes or ships, than the PLA for new tanks. If budget wasn't a consideration, I'm sure the PLA would love to procure T-99 MBT's by the thousands. But the reality is that they have to buy the cheaper T-96 to save money, and put their existing old MBT's to good use.
The T-59 is an old MBT, but with proper upgrade and maintenance, it's still useful for training and reserve duties. China has over a dozen countries on its border, and not everyone is equipped with the latest tanks. If the PLA needs to allocate some tanks to troops stationed along "low threat" borders (Burma, Laos, Mongolia, etc), upgraded T-59's will probably be sufficient.
I also suspect that, though the 105mm gun isn't as powerful as the 120mm or 125mm used on newer tanks today, with good ammo (DU?) it'd probably penetrate the frontal armor of a typical T-72.
Yea yea yea yea yea..!!!! That's what I talk of. Much and many thanks!
And if the 100mm gun can (supposively) take out a T-72 with ERA from the front at 2000m, then a 105 should be no problem. After all, if it wasn't good enough, then I don't think they would've chosen the gun for the new 92-assault gun.
And if the 100mm gun can (supposively) take out a T-72 with ERA from the front at 2000m, then a 105 should be no problem. After all, if it wasn't good enough, then I don't think they would've chosen the gun for the new 92-assault gun.
All I can say to that is WOW. If the new L/65 105mm rifle is superior to the 125mm smoothbore in AP performance, maybe a rather larger program of retrofit to newer tanks might be something to consider. It would be interesting to have a shoot-off between the long 105 and the 125. The rifle allows for longer accurate range and for the use of HESH/HEP rounds in the close-support role, which the 125 smoothbore can't use, and HE-FRAG and the like is inferior to HESH for most close-support roles.
Skywatcher
Captain
Which 125mm kinetic round, though?
I think Bofors made a L/62 105mm gun for the Swedish S-Tank. But they've since retired them in favor of Leopards.
Canada purchased a bath of Leopard 1A3 (C1) MBT's in 1970's, and had them upgraded to 1A5 (C2) standard in 2000's at the cost of about $2 million CND each. The upgrade included refurbished turrets with the L7A3 105mm gun:
These MBT's are ~30 years old, but after an upgrade they're still quite useful and were deployed to Afghanistan in 2006. The gun might not be as powerful as the Leopard 2's 120mm but it's sufficient in Afghanistan.
If the Canadian army had retired these MBT's and replaced them with brand new tanks, it'd have costed a lot more than $2 million a piece. For example, the Spanish Army is looking to purchase 219 Leopard 2E (2A6) with 16 recovery tanks and 4 training vehicles for $1.94 billion Euros. That's an average price of $8.1 million Euros per vehicle. The new Korean K-2 and Japanese MBT are both priced at ~$8 million USD each.
For the PLA, upgrading these T-59's probably cost less than $200,000 each. They're not as powerful as the newer generation MBT's, but as demonstrated by the Canadians, these upgraded MBT's are still very useful in deployment to low-intensity conflict zones.
If the PLA was to deploy some MBT's to Africa or Asia in a peace keeping role, do you really need T-99's? The older, but upgraded T-59 is "less threatening" in posture but offers better protection, and packs bigger punch than the typical PLA IFV's in use today.
Canada purchased a bath of Leopard 1A3 (C1) MBT's in 1970's, and had them upgraded to 1A5 (C2) standard in 2000's at the cost of about $2 million CND each. The upgrade included refurbished turrets with the L7A3 105mm gun:
These MBT's are ~30 years old, but after an upgrade they're still quite useful and were deployed to Afghanistan in 2006. The gun might not be as powerful as the Leopard 2's 120mm but it's sufficient in Afghanistan.
If the Canadian army had retired these MBT's and replaced them with brand new tanks, it'd have costed a lot more than $2 million a piece. For example, the Spanish Army is looking to purchase 219 Leopard 2E (2A6) with 16 recovery tanks and 4 training vehicles for $1.94 billion Euros. That's an average price of $8.1 million Euros per vehicle. The new Korean K-2 and Japanese MBT are both priced at ~$8 million USD each.
For the PLA, upgrading these T-59's probably cost less than $200,000 each. They're not as powerful as the newer generation MBT's, but as demonstrated by the Canadians, these upgraded MBT's are still very useful in deployment to low-intensity conflict zones.
If the PLA was to deploy some MBT's to Africa or Asia in a peace keeping role, do you really need T-99's? The older, but upgraded T-59 is "less threatening" in posture but offers better protection, and packs bigger punch than the typical PLA IFV's in use today.
Pointblank
Senior Member
Lighter, but less protected. If your deploying to a low intensity conflict, a lighter tank may be easier, but if your deploying to a full blown shooting war, you want the best protected tank you got.
RedMercury
Junior Member
challenge can you provide more details? A scan of the article would be fantastic. I find this claim rather hard to believe. Well I guess it depends on how much pressure the gun can stand. If it can stand the same or more pressure as a 125, but with a longer length to accelerate the projectile, it may give more muzzle energy.
edit: first few pages of google for 93式 穿甲 comes up with a few pages describing its performance. The quoted figures are 520 to 540 mm RHA at 2000 meters.
edit: first few pages of google for 93式 穿甲 comes up with a few pages describing its performance. The quoted figures are 520 to 540 mm RHA at 2000 meters.
Last edited: