the artilce original published 5 years ago.I check it again.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
All newType-59 thread
- Thread starter King_Comm
- Start date
the artilce original published 5 years ago.I check it again.
the original L-7 51 calibre gun manufactured in China as type-79,under the WZ-120 project, it was lenghten excess of "60 calibre" (62?) as typre-83a.
type-83A when fired type-86 kinetic rd. will pen. 480mm of armour,with type-93 -540mm.
but during military excercise.the penetration is close to "600mm"
by contrast.japanese type-93 rd/ will penetrate 414mm of armour.
type-83A when fired type-86 kinetic rd. will pen. 480mm of armour,with type-93 -540mm.
but during military excercise.the penetration is close to "600mm"
by contrast.japanese type-93 rd/ will penetrate 414mm of armour.
Skywatcher
Captain
Would the enhanced performance be due more to better metallurgy involving sabot or better propellant?
There's a guy who collects tank data for table top war gaming:
According to his data, PLA 105mm has 2 types, Long and Short. The 105mm DU has 3 types, 86, 93, and 95.
Fired from 105mm short, at distance of 2km:
Type 86 DU ammo: 460mm RHA
Type 93 DU ammo: 510mm RHA
Fired from 105mm long, at distance of 2km:
Type 86 DU ammo: 480mm RHA
Type 93 DU ammo: 540mm RHA
Type 95 DU ammo: 580mm RHA
He collects his data from sources like Tanknet. I cannot verify his numbers, so consider them "internet sources". I think I posted this URL once before a few years back.
The Japanese JM-33 is supposed to be licensed German DM-33, and has penetration of 550mm @ 2km tested in 1987.
p.s. Here's a Russian mod of the T-55:
According to his data, PLA 105mm has 2 types, Long and Short. The 105mm DU has 3 types, 86, 93, and 95.
Fired from 105mm short, at distance of 2km:
Type 86 DU ammo: 460mm RHA
Type 93 DU ammo: 510mm RHA
Fired from 105mm long, at distance of 2km:
Type 86 DU ammo: 480mm RHA
Type 93 DU ammo: 540mm RHA
Type 95 DU ammo: 580mm RHA
He collects his data from sources like Tanknet. I cannot verify his numbers, so consider them "internet sources". I think I posted this URL once before a few years back.
The Japanese JM-33 is supposed to be licensed German DM-33, and has penetration of 550mm @ 2km tested in 1987.
p.s. Here's a Russian mod of the T-55:
Last edited:
RedMercury
Junior Member
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.
Does PLA even HAVE HESH rounds? It's probably not too hard for PRC to develop such a round, but as far as I know I haven't heard of one.
Though, looking at the PRC's gun placement philosophy is rather intereseting... longer-ranged, more accurate small calibre rifled guns for small, mobile platforms (T-63A, T-59D, ZBD2000), and big smoothbores for the battlewagons.
Does PLA even HAVE HESH rounds? It's probably not too hard for PRC to develop such a round, but as far as I know I haven't heard of one.
Though, looking at the PRC's gun placement philosophy is rather intereseting... longer-ranged, more accurate small calibre rifled guns for small, mobile platforms (T-63A, T-59D, ZBD2000), and big smoothbores for the battlewagons.
Yeah, it sounds almost like the way the Russians used to do things: medium tanks with high-velocity tank killers, and heavy tanks with large-calibre bunker-busting guns. If the PLA is retrofitting the high-velocity L/65 rifle to its Type 59s, then good for it and provide a HESH round for it (and I say again, swap out the 125 smoothbore for the long 105 rifle on the newer tanks). As you said Troika, the PLA doesn't have HESH deployed AFAIK, but it shouldn't be hard to produce a good round.
Yeah, it sounds almost like the way the Russians used to do things: medium tanks with high-velocity tank killers, and heavy tanks with large-calibre bunker-busting guns. If the PLA is retrofitting the high-velocity L/65 rifle to its Type 59s, then good for it and provide a HESH round for it (and I say again, swap out the 125 smoothbore for the long 105 rifle on the newer tanks). As you said Troika, the PLA doesn't have HESH deployed AFAIK, but it shouldn't be hard to produce a good round.
I am all for long range accuracy and more ammo, though I still think a larger calibre gun is the way to go at least for the ZTZ-99 family, for logistical reasons if nothing else, they have a huge stock of tooling and ammo invested into that, besides, even if it is just a marginal improvement over the 105mm at range (I am pretty sure at closer range it kicks the 105mm quite considerably), it offers quality augmentation, a new capability of able to standing up to a Western style MBT (far better than a ZTZ-96 can, anyway!), which is always important.
A lighter tank with good range and accuracy is all good (fitting the ZTZ-96s with them I think might arguably be a good idea. I'd normally say the 120mm rifle instead, but a THIRD tank gun calibre is probably a terrible idea logistically), but you'd be placing artificial restrictions on yourself tactically.
At the risk of going off topic, a high-low combination of faster and more mobile T-59D and maybe lighter ZTZ-96Gs armed with the 105mm rifle and the heavier ZTZ-96G2s armed with the 125mm might be worth having a look at, though I am getting the distinct feeling that this may be taking a step back tactically back to the days of medium tank, heavy tanks!
Yeah, it sounds almost like the way the Russians used to do things: medium tanks with high-velocity tank killers, and heavy tanks with large-calibre bunker-busting guns. If the PLA is retrofitting the high-velocity L/65 rifle to its Type 59s, then good for it and provide a HESH round for it (and I say again, swap out the 125 smoothbore for the long 105 rifle on the newer tanks). As you said Troika, the PLA doesn't have HESH deployed AFAIK, but it shouldn't be hard to produce a good round.
PLA certainly does have HESH or an equivalent to it. It's called 碎甲弹 in Chinese term. It was developed and put in service some time during the 60's.
Swapping the 125mm with the long 105mm on new tank is a simply ridiculous idea. Even though the 105mm can claim better performance over some rounds fired by 125mm at this time, there's no future in it. That's the performance limit of 105mm, where the 125mm can still be improved. Plus, the only effective round against composite armor is AFPSDS, which is best suited for a smooth bore gun. Getting AFPSDS to work for a rifled gun is a lot more complex. Thus, any reasonable person would have chosen the 125mm for the future instead of the 105mm.
Pointblank
Senior Member
Getting AFPSDS to work for a rifled gun is a lot more complex. Thus, any reasonable person would have chosen the 125mm for the future instead of the 105mm.
The Brits have managed to solve that issue; they use driving bands and sabot carriers on their APFSDS rounds in their rifled 120mm guns. This does however increase wear and tear on the gun.