Chinese ATGM discussion

Against tanks without more advanced armor or protection systems such missiles are more than sufficient. Also AFAIK some versions of the HJ-10 are fibre-optic wire-guided missiles. That decreases the range but makes the system more robust against jamming. If you have the misfortune of facing tanks with both advanced armor and APS even a top attack missile will be useless.

Those M1's in Iraq and Yemen and the Leopard 2A4's in Syria are good example of that. Their armor protection is pretty rudimentary. But against the latest USA M1's or Leopard 2 kits with proper usage of the tanks then things would be a bit different. But still the M1 or the Leopard 2 are obsolete tanks from my point of view. They were both designed in the late 1970s. Like 40 years ago.

gelgoog said:

But still the M1 or the Leopard 2 are obsolete tanks from my point of view. They were both designed in the late 1970s. Like 40 years ago.

Click to expand...

That definition would include every other MBT in existence, which base standard design can be traced back to the same time frame, but with small differences. Just because a tank was introduced ,in lets say the 1990s, does not mean that it is more advance or superior to existing ones. In fact, not a single MBT after the Leopard and the M1 had brought forth any game changing qualities to the Armor vs Weapon race. And other improvement are readily adapted and installed on the existing tanks as well.
Even the much vaunted T-14 Armata does not fundamentally change the way how armor works, despite it's hype. The tank still uses composite armor, as well as ERA and APS. The first 2 which are already found on the M1 And L2 while the third can be added on as a kit.

The current tank vs anti tank race can be best described as a "I got a bigger gun/shield that you". With designers simply increasing the thickness of the composite armor or the potency of the HEAT warhead in response.

AssassinsMace said:

Anyone remember that Iraqi M1 that was destroyed by Peshmerga using an obsolete HJ-8? And that was a frontal hit.

Click to expand...

To be fair the Iraqis used a watered down variant of the M1 that excludes depleted uranium layers from it's armor, and exact details of the kill are sketchy at best. The Iraqis understandably are loath to give any revealing statements on the matter.

Viktor Jav said:

To be fair the Iraqis used a watered down variant of the M1 that excludes depleted uranium layers from it's armor, and exact details of the kill are sketchy at best. The Iraqis understandably are loath to give any revealing statements on the matter.

Click to expand...

Yes a common reaction. How would you like to sell a "watered-down" M1 to other countries when it can't take a frontal hit from what many say is the most obsolete ATGM out there? The main selling point is the armor protection.

AssassinsMace said:

Yes a common reaction. How would you like to sell a "watered-down" M1 to other countries when it can't take a frontal hit from what many say is the most obsolete ATGM out there? The main selling point is the armor protection.

Click to expand...

Now you are putting words in where there is none to be found, did I ever say the HJ-8 was obsolete ? (Well it might depending on the variant that is in question). Moreover, there is good justification as to why such tanks are sold with such varying levels of advanceness, politics comes first and foremost. Iraq is not a staunch US ally, so with every reason for it's government to alter it's policies depending on it's preferences is it any wonder as to why the US would be loath to sell it the top end line of it's equipment ? Iraq had already shown that it is capable of switching by electing pro-iran politicians in their government. To put that in perspective, would China be willing to sell such equipment like the ZTZ-99 or the HJ-12 to countries of a similar disposition, like let's say Malaysia ?
Second is costs, depleted uranium layers are a pretty expensive piece of equipment. How is one to expect a nation like Iraq, whose military budget is not only small but also largely funded by the US in it's foreign assistance program to afford this upgrade on their tank fleet ?
These 2 things factors are present in not just US military sales, but those including Russia, Europe and even China itself. Do we see China offering Thailand the ZTZ-99 ? Or are we to take from this instance that the VT-4 is actually more superior than the ZTZ-99 itself ? The only saving grace that China has in this matter is that none of its modern tanks are actually exposed to trial by fire in actual combat.
And to top this all off, the only source that claims it was a HJ-8 that knocked out the Iraqi Abrahams was one which has not be vouched or confirmed by either the Iraqi government itself or the Peshmergas. A similiar ATGM like the Kornet could had done the deed and none would be the wiser.

Insignius said:

An ultimately obsolete ATGM, adopted because the PLA was too cheap to buy the HJ-12 and similiar Top-Attack ATGMs.

It's not that China will face advanced tanks now, but once the ROCA gets M1A2s, including IR-jammers, those HJ-11 SACLOS ATGMs will not be any better than last generation's Russian ATGMs.

Click to expand...

Considering how the Iraqis were actually banned by the US form buying the Russian Kornet and RPG-29 for fear of them being used against them. I did say that that is actually pretty okay.

Viktor Jav said:

Now you are putting words in where there is none to be found, did I ever say the HJ-8 was obsolete ? (Well it might depending on the variant that is in question). Moreover, there is good justification as to why such tanks are sold with such varying levels of advanceness, politics comes first and foremost. Iraq is not a staunch US ally, so with every reason for it's government to alter it's policies depending on it's preferences is it any wonder as to why the US would be loath to sell it the top end line of it's equipment ? Iraq had already shown that it is capable of switching by electing pro-iran politicians in their government. To put that in perspective, would China be willing to sell such equipment like the ZTZ-99 or the HJ-12 to countries of a similar disposition ?
Second is costs, depleted uranium layers are a pretty expensive piece of equipment. How is one to expect a nation like Iraq, whose military budget is not only small but also largely funded by the US in it's foreign assistance program to afford this upgrade on their tank fleet ?
These 2 things factors are present in not just US military sales, but those including Russia, Europe and even China itself. Do we see China offering Thailand the ZTZ-99 ? Or are we to take from this instance that the VT-4 is actually more superior than the ZTZ-99 itself ? The only saving grace that China has in this matter is that none of its modern tanks are actually exposed to trial by fire in actual combat.
And to top this all off, the only source that claims it was a HJ-8 that knocked out the Iraqi Abrahams was one which has not be vouched or confirmed by either the Iraqi government itself or the Peshmergas. A similiar ATGM like the Kornet could had done the deed and none would be the wiser.

Click to expand...

I never said you said it. I said "what many say." How do come to the conclusion that was only you? Read plenty of articles that called the HJ-8 the worst ATGM out there. Of course that was before you saw all these armies using it in the Middle East.

AssassinsMace said:

I never said you said it. I said "what many say." Read plenty of articles that called the HJ-8 the worst ATGM out there. Of course that was before you saw all these armies using it in the Middle East.

Click to expand...

Then again, the most common targets for the HJ-8 is against IFVs and APCs. Hardly the most heavily armored vehicles to be found in that war zone. Hell we are even seeing Malyutkats being utilized, one can't be too picky in those situations.

This is not to say that the HJ-8 in its current iteration would fare poorly against modern MBTs like the Abrahams with all it's upgrades, but it is still an open question until we actually get solid evidence of it being used against the likes.

Viktor Jav said:

Then again, the most common targets for the HJ-8 is against IFVs and APCs. Hardly the most heavily armored vehicles to be found in that war zone. Hell we are even seeing Malyutkats being utilized, one can't be too picky in those situations.
This is not to say that the HJ-8 in its current iteration would fare poorly against modern MBTs like the Abrahams with all it's upgrades, but it is still an open question until we actually get solid evidence of it being used against the likes.

Click to expand...

Well you're never going to get publicly any solid evidence. It happened and they don't want any public scrutiny because that would threaten exports sales no matter what.

AssassinsMace said:

Well you're never going to get publicly any solid evidence. It happened and they don't want any public scrutiny because that would threaten exports sales no matter what.

Click to expand...

So you are going to attribute your claim to what basically amounts to nothing more than hearsay.