Chinese 96-A

TerraN_EmpirE said:

Firstly this is a bit like NASCAR here in the States. That's because in most cases all the Tanks are more or less Equivalent. Its about the crew not the Tank. That said every participant in this case was offered to bring there own tank. Now why didn't they?
Survey says Money not everyone can afford to ship there own tank. Most smaller nations can't. We know the PRC could and as such they did. They knew what they were doing they knew that they were bringing a weaker tank.but the fact is they chose to bring there own and not there top of line. But then neither did the Russians.
Russia could have rolled the competition with there latest T90. Which has even higher performance specs but by keeping it to T72 variants they kept it even. No one had a super tank on the field. Its about the crew and pride of the soldier... I kinda like that.
NATO has its own tank competition where the member states bring there tanks and top crews. Challenges are a bit different but in terms of gunnery it about even across the board. When it comes to other performance characteristics though some have raw power to spare like the M1A2 others light weight and mobility like the Lecllarc and the Leopard 2 sits as the default. Because of the Diversity you have a different story in terms of performance and pride. The Nato version becomes more about engineering then crew.

Click to expand...

Amen.

Black Shark said:

I already explained why, because that is the entire concept of the tank biathlon that Participaiting countries come with their own tanks with their own crew. They did not laon everyone else anything majority came with their own tanks flown in or transported with railway. I already explained it.

Click to expand...

And you did not answer the question, no one is saying what the Russians did was wrong, it is just ulgy in terms of sportsmanship and competition.

Black Shark said:

I do think people care about how China fared and the last several pages were all about this tank biathlon.
Never start an argument based on "IF". If my mother had balls she would be my father. No point of arguing in such a manner.

Click to expand...

Oh there is, because it is a fact; the Russian had better tanks for the competition in terms of mobility and hence towards the weighting of the competition. it is skewed, that is a fact and my statement serves to prove that.

An unfair advantage is an unfair advantage, a home field advantage is an home field advantage; it doesn't mean that it is a foul, but it also doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. Fact is fact.

This is a military forum, people talk about how tanks perform in this biathlon, because it is a window for us enthusiast to see how these equipment may perform, it is not about winning or losing.

Black Shark said:

Missing of targets were given penalties but could regain the disadvantage in 3rd stage for personal crew parcour running.
How accurate or inaccurate something is irrelevant, all used same ammunition except China they used APFSDS with far higher velocity giving advantage for shorter flight time and more stable during flight, but all others who fired HEAT shells had equal conditions.

Click to expand...

Again, why is APFSDS an advantage? you do understand that APFSDS are inherently less accurate than HEAT or single part shells because the sabot separates from the round and it is very hard to have it separate so that it does not impact the accuracy of it?

The dispersion data is Russian:
APFSDS: 0.25 mil
HEAT: 0.21 mil



0.21 is less dispersion than 0.25; i.e. HEAT is more accurate than APFSDS even thou the latter flies faster. Chinese APFSDS are supposingly more accurate than Russian ones, at 0.23 mil, but it is still worse than Russian HEAT rounds. Even M829A3 is supposed to have a 0.22mil, but ofcourse NATO mil is 6400 base, while Soviet/Russian mil is 6000 base, so the M829A3 have a dispersion of 0.206mil-russian which is better than HEAT.

Unless, you have some other data on accuracy you would like to share, I trust the Russian gun range test numbers for accuracy.

Black Shark said:

Use your brain it was already explained in my last post, go bitch around somewhere else. Armenia did not give much of bitching and they had disadvantage against China,Russia,India and several other countries.

//edit


HEAT rounds are not more accurate then APFSDS rounds, not on short distance not on long distance. Higher velocity grants more stable flight and flatter trajectory and less time untill impact and exposure towards wind or any other factor which could decrease accuracy.

Click to expand...

Which contestant actually bitched about a loss? quote and reference it.

The fact is, field test and gun ranges have shown that Russian HEAT is more accurate than Russian and Chinese APFSDS. You just have to accept the fact that the sabot separating from the arrow cause it to be less accurate than HEAT which is slower, heavier and doesn't go through a as dramatic process as shedding a sabot that contribute to more accuracy and less dispersion.

Again, fact is fact. you can believe that APFSDS is more accurate, or you can accept publications and thousands of rounds of testing which establish the dispersion of each round type.

Okay Letz I think We get it now. The PRC team was at a disadvantage right?

it is just ulgy in terms of sportsmanship and competition.

Click to expand...

but they were by choice. All the other teams used borrowed Russian T72s. Presumably the PLA had the option of using the same tank as the others, yet they did not.
they chose to use there own tank. They Chose to use there T96 series tank. They could have rolled out with a T99 but they chose the 96.
If they made the choice what were the Russians supposed to do? Break out T64s?
It may not sound nice but as the saying goes
You can't win the Kentucky Derby unless you're on a thoroughbred.
Joe Torre

TerraN_EmpirE said:

Okay Letz I think We get it now. The PRC team was at a disadvantage right?

but they were by choice. All the other teams used borrowed Russian T72s. Presumably the PLA had the option of using the same tank as the others, yet they did not.
they chose to use there own tank. They Chose to use there T96 series tank. They could have rolled out with a T99 but they chose the 96.
If they made the choice what were the Russians supposed to do? Break out T64s?
It may not sound nice but as the saying goes
You can't win the Kentucky Derby unless you're on a thoroughbred.
Joe Torre

Click to expand...

I think that comment you quoted was directed at the fact the Russian team was using a more modern (so presumably better) version of the T72 compared to what they supplied to everyone else.

plawolf said:

I think that comment you quoted was directed at the fact the Russian team was using a more modern (so presumably better) version of the T72 compared to what they supplied to everyone else.

Click to expand...

it's a cheat ... no point winning it, unless you are lack of confidence

Perhaps, the scoring rules weren't transparent enough and the PRC team end up bringing a slower tank only to realize when the competition is about to begin that speed play a big part in scoring points.

Realistically speaking, the 96-A is probably the only tank the Chinese can bring or use with realistic aspect to compete.

1. The 99A is out of the weight class. (And remember the Russians did not bring out the T-90 nor T-80 with the gas turbine engine---supposed to be THE original "flying tank" either)

2. The Chinese crew were never trained in a T-72. All other nations had T-72 in their service. The Chinese did not. It therefore makes no sense to use the Russian provided T-72s if the crew have never before trained in them.

3. The 96A while under powered, is still the best package out of all of the other tanks currently in PLA service barring 99A. It is also relevant because it is the current "main" tank.

4. Winning the competition isn't important. Making a politically friendly gesture of attending the Russian hosted event, and letting the PLA to have a chance to examine the relative advantages and deficiencies in both the 96A hardware and crew training, and to see if there are any unexpected areas of concern that needs to be addressed is a lot more important.

PS: The PLA knew the 96A was underpowered from the start. And they knew about the rules of the competition. They never actually expected the team to win in the first place.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

Okay Letz I think We get it now. The PRC team was at a disadvantage right?

but they were by choice. All the other teams used borrowed Russian T72s. Presumably the PLA had the option of using the same tank as the others, yet they did not.
they chose to use there own tank. They Chose to use there T96 series tank. They could have rolled out with a T99 but they chose the 96.
If they made the choice what were the Russians supposed to do? Break out T64s?
It may not sound nice but as the saying goes
You can't win the Kentucky Derby unless you're on a thoroughbred.
Joe Torre

Click to expand...

I don't think so actually, I feel more for the ex-soviet republics who can't afford to bring their own tank. The Chinese brought whatever they wanted to and we had a great show. no? as I said, I don't care who wins and I honestly would prefer to see the show with more different tanks like the Abrams, Challengers, Leos, Leclec, Ariete, Type X, Black Panther... I would love to see some Pokpung-ho tanks moving and shooting.

antiterror13 said:

it's a cheat ... no point winning it, unless you are lack of confidence

Click to expand...

It wasn't cheating and the rules already said, countries are only allowed to use OWN tanks and crews, so if some incapable countries can not bring their own tanks you somehow believe they will be granted some special rules breaking the very first rule of the Tank biathlon and giving them better tanks than those countries posses in own inventory, also not trained to specific new FCS.

The rules are clear, countries do only participate with own crew and own tanks, giving them something better would be violation and result in direct disquilification from the Tank biathlon.

Quickie said:

Perhaps, the scoring rules weren't transparent enough and the PRC team end up bringing a slower tank only to realize when the competition is about to begin that speed play a big part in scoring points.

Click to expand...

The point system was transparent, from each country officials were on the side as observers of jury.

Since the Tank Biathlon is invoked again let me add my thoughts as well.

First of all it is fair to argue that shooting and hitting the target is THE most important think. In the finale the Chinese in their Type 96 A driving at a moderate speed HIT ALL TARGETS, while the other participants in T 72 driving at a slow speed hit some of their targets but missed other. The recording showing this is in this thread (page 4 of the thread I think). So it can be said with justice that in the end the PLA tankers were the best shots.

BUT – the Chinese performance was not so sterling all the time, prior to the finale it was “only” good. Writing from memory in the earlier stages of the tank biathlon the Chinese had something like circa 70% hits – which is good but not perfect.

I am neither putting the Chinese down nor trying to elevate them and do not want to start a forum fight but think the points raised add to the discussion.

IMHO – others have the idea too – the whole thing for the Chinese was not about wining but about participating, having a comparison in a competitive environment, having a look at different training techniques and performance measurement benchmarks.

Obviously the Chinese found the participation in tank biathlon useful and worthy to share as an experience. Proof – check out the link below.



In case the link does not work here is the text in full:

In the Tank Biathlon-2014 in Moscow, Russia, from August 4 to 16, a group of Chinese soldiers driving their home-made tanks won the third place following the Russia and Armenia.

It is the first time in the 70 years' history of the armored force of the Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) that the armored troops have carried domestic made armored equipment to participate in an international military contest.

Armored troops from 12 countries including China, Russia, India, Kuwait, Mongolia and Serbia participated in the Tank Biathlon-2014. Huang Xucong, deputy chief of staff of the 1st Group Army of the Nanjing Military Area Command (MAC) of the PLA, who was also the head of the Chinese delegation, said that the Chinese tanks enjoyed the highest shooting accuracy among all the participating teams.

The Chinese PLA delegation to the Tank Biathlon 2014 is from an armored brigade under the 1st Group Army of the PLA. On October 22, in front of more than one hundred representatives from the PLA's four headquarters/departments, combat units as well as military academies, armored troops of the brigade gave a demonstration of seven subjects set up by the competition rules of the Tank Biathlon.

This demonstration was designed to help promote the training of the PLA armored units to be more close to real battles, according to an responsible officer of the Military Training Department of the General Staff Headquarters (GSH) of the PLA.