Actually the Type 15 has a fairly effective 500mm RHA (at 2 km) penetrating round available for it. It might not be enough to penetrate the T-90 from the front but from the sides or the top it certainly can do it. This round is not as effective as modern long rod penetrator rounds like the T-90M's Russian vacuum-1 round which can penetrate 1000mm RHA but for a light tank it is decent. Many older generation heavy tanks, think Leopard 2A4, have similar penetration. Rifled guns typically also have better HE rounds available and these would be important against infantry. What the Russians did learn in Afghanistan though was that they were better off using anti-air systems like the Shilka which had more gun elevation so they could hit troops in high mountain positions than with tanks. This plus their experiences in urban fighting in Grozny later gave rise to specialized vehicles like the BMPT Terminator.
Ladakh Flash Point
- Thread starter Mt1701d
- Start date
- Status
Actually the Type 15 has a fairly effective 500mm RHA (at 2 km) penetrating round available for it. It might not be enough to penetrate the T-90 from the front but from the sides or the top it certainly can do it. This round is not as effective as modern long rod penetrator rounds like the T-90M's Russian vacuum-1 round which can penetrate 1000mm RHA but for a light tank it is decent. Many older generation heavy tanks, think Leopard 2A4, have similar penetration. Rifled guns typically also have better HE rounds available and these would be important against infantry. What the Russians did learn in Afghanistan though was that they were better off using anti-air systems like the Shilka which had more gun elevation so they could hit troops in high mountain positions than with tanks. This plus their experiences in urban fighting in Grozny later gave rise to specialized vehicles like the BMPT Terminator.
According to this Weibo post the soldiers who took the video were Indo-Tibetan soldiers. Maybe this explains the relatively civilized behaviors?
The chinese army still uses type 59 ??? they should retire them ASAP. Not good even for training.
I have never been a soldier, but boasting is something that military types everywhere do in peacetime. If a war starts, then things might be different.
Light tanks don't equal "scout tanks." They can be employed in recon, that doesn't mean they will be. They also function in the Fire Support role, which means they go in with the Mech Infantry, after the major threats have already been neutralized by your MBTs and other assets.
Also, MBTs are more than capable of screening themselves, they don't need light tanks for that. MBT platoons leapfrog, screening each other as they maneuver from one point to the next. Here's an example of this from a US Army Field Manual that I posted a while back in the Army section:
Why would you ever recon an area with Type-15s if you know enemy T-90s are deployed in that sector?! And the whole world knows T-90s are deployed in that sector. The PLA has many tactical recon options for that, including tons of UAVs.
The only way a Type-15 would end up in a "firefight" with a T-90 is if something has gone horribly wrong. Which is not to say it can't happen (it's a battle after all) but it would still mean you messed up. Because that's not supposed to happen. Worst case, it would probably signal a flawed battle picture at a brigade or division level. That means your entire Division has no idea which sectors the enemy has deployed its MBTs, and so your platoon commanders are basically running into ambushes everywhere (but in that case, everything you're doing is FUBAR anyway.)
Point being: The Indians who are comparing the Type-15 to the T-90 have no idea how armored warfare works. It's like comparing a Strategic Bomber to a Fighter Aircraft, and then bragging that your Fighter can shoot down the Bomber.
Good luck acquiring a maneuvering MBT platoon through layers of smokescreens laid by mortars and artillery. I already had a discussion on this a while ago with some members who were over-emphasizing the role of ATGMs on light units versus MBTs in a proper conventional battlespace. Assuming the maneuvering MBTs are well-led and know what they're doing, they will go through the ATGM equipped light unit like a hot knife through butter. And even if you were able to pop off a few shots before your entire unit is vaporized, there's still no guarantee your shot will hit through the MBT's IR smoke and APS. You may get a lucky kill or two, but your entire formation will be turned into a shish kabab.
The only time in recent history where light units with ATGMs have succeeded against heavy armor is where MBTs were employed with bad tactics and were basically sitting ducks against a non-conventional guerilla force e.g. the Israelis versus Hezbollah, the Turks versus Kurds, Saudis versus Yemenis etc. Each time the MBTs were not employed to maneuver aggressively (as they are designed to do) but were parked in a fire support role, while the enemy light units maneuvered around them to take pot shots. If you use MBTs like that, it's your own fault, don't blame the tank. When properly employed, MBTs can murder ATGM units on the move, under cover of smoke and artillery.
Last edited:
The fact that Type 15s are not equipped with HJ ATGMs (which kills tanks better than its 105mm rifled gun) tells me that the Type 15 is not designed for tank duels. The 500mm RHA penetration performance sounds decent, but is still not ideal for tank duels and should be avoided. The Type 15's role is more like an assault gun. The 105mm gun won't have a problem againts any soft targets.
I suppose the real tank killing would be done by air assets, HJ-10 carrying ZBD-04, and infantry At teams. The Type 15 should be supported by these guys in a real war.
I wonder if the Type 15 could be fitted with the 125mm gun in the future. Something like the Type 69 tanks. It would massively boost the overall firepower of the tank. But it could also require sacrificing armor, resulting in a vehicle like the Russian Sprut SD.
The tank in the video is a type 88A which is a rare animal, the chassis is close enough to the type 96, nothing wrong with them used for training or other tasks.
Right AFAIK they don't have ATGMs. But the Israelis do have the LAHAT ATGM for their 105mm tank guns which are derived from the British L7 gun. So making such a missile wouldn't be impossible. The LAHAT AFAIK has 800mm penetration with a tandem HEAT charge.
I think this tank is more for scouting and skirmishing purposes than to be used as an infantry tank. But yes against dismounted infantry, or infantry in light armored vehicles, it should be quite effective with its HE round. It can also easily win against most 1980s or prior tanks which haven't had upgrades which are quite a few.
Nice joke. The footage was released by an anti-PRC Tibetan group. All your Weibo handles simply copied and downloaded the video from that account.
- Status