new 60 ton tank for the PLA

Interesting if it's true. China may not need it but like aircraft carriers they should at least build them for the know-how and to develop independent capabilities. Much of the US's commercial technological developments were born from military applications first.

introduction of active defense system such as rayteon quick kill, LED-500 or trophy could provide all around protection not only against missile,RPG and even APDSFS round.
swedish LED-500 mounted on newest jordanian army tank in quick succession manage to intercepted 2 105mm APDS-FS round .
raytheon quick kill ADS also boost same capability. early test show it successfully track and engage hellfire ATGM at steep angle,and multiply killed against RPG and TOW ATGM.

solarz said:

Capture Seoul? Hanoi? Kashmir? What?

The only possibility of a war on the Korean peninsula is if the North launches an attack, something that China absolutely will not condone. Without China's cooperation, the North will never have enough supplies to launch such an attack. Even if the North is unstable enough to do such, China will interfere in the event of a North defeat, but I seriously doubt either China or USA will want to make the mistake of crossing the 38th parallel again.

Click to expand...

Not a remote possibility at all. A North Korea scenario is exactly what the 38th Group Army and 39th Group Army exists for. These are the two most elite units in the entire PLA.

In fact, the 38th GA and 39th GA are the only things that stop South Korea and USA from plowing over the North right now given the enormous gap in economy, technology and capability. If you were South Korea, you know a succession crisis if you best chance at reunification of a "Greater Korea." It's now or never. If you were the US, you would be tempted to "redeem yourself" on the 50th anniversary after the first Korean War for the disappointing performance the first time around.

solarz said:

It's crazy to think that Vietnam will pose a threat to China in the foreseeable future. For one thing, Vietnam no longer has the USSR's backing. For another, the military gap between Vietnam and China is about 10 times what it was 30 years ago. Vietnam provoking China these days is utter suicide. China wouldn't even need to send troops: crippling airstrikes against major vietnamese industrial centers will destroy the fighting will of the vietnamese.

Click to expand...

Vietnam is too intimidated to provoke China precisely because Hanoi is very close to the Chinese border. If Vietnam was an island like Taiwan or on the other side of the Himalayas like India, you can bet it would be a lot more obnoxious about overlapping territorial claims. You can bet it would be a lot more eager to ally with the US to balance Chinese pressure.

Air strikes are rarely decisive. If the PLAAF attacks Taiwan from the air, it would be very damaging but it would not cause Taipei to surrender. Same is true for Vietnam, air strikes would not cause Hanoi to surrender.

Rather air strikes work to the disadvantage of China since it raises the potential for international pressure in the form of sanctions or even possibly a blockade. On the other hand, a swift armor thrust into the capital city means that the West would politely knock on China's door and politely ask for a ceasefire.


The bottom line: China's neighbors have a tendency to be a lot more assertive if there is a geographic barrier between its capital city and China. China's neighbors that don't have this geographic barrier and whose capital city is exposed to PLA armor are lot more peaceful. What this implies is that PLA ground forces is still China's biggest offensive instrument: whether by railroad, by heavy transport or by amphibious landing crafts, when PLA tanks get close to a hostile country's capital city, that country's attitude quickly becomes a lot more accommodating.

The main tactics that China would or should employ when dealing with potential adversaries would actually be determined by the capability of her opponents.

For potentially weaker opponents such as North Korea and Vietnam, an armoured thrust into their capital might be useful but very wasteful of China's troops. Thus the main tactics would be to employed the vastly superior air-force, missile force and Navy first... doesn't actually need to be destroying all their important assets (if possible to destroy their infrastructure and assets, it would be the best result) if not it will also serve to lower their troops morale, bring fear to their normal citizens. Only after these objectives are reach then, the armour would be used to thrust into opponent's capital.

As to adversaries like Japan and South Korea, the main tactic use should be their missile force, to knock off as much as possible, the opponents' important assets and break down their basic infrastructure, before sending in the air-force for surgerical strikes. The infantry and armour should only move in at the later stage of the war.

At present moment, China is still not like US, who could afford extended period of operation at faraway areas, thus their best bet is to move in quickly, achieve their objectives and leave the place.

Heavy armour that are slow and basically not able to travel in most of the roads, terrains and bridges in their opponents nations are useless. And if these tanks are actually used only as defensive element back in China herself... it was basically not required to do so... because many of the country's terrain also make the tank quite difficult to operate.

Thus I believe Type 99 (basic) is enough for its current job, instead of jumping up the tonnage and having a much bigger gun.

Not developing a heavy tank when you have the financial and technological means to do so would be extremely short sighted.

Sure such a heavy tank will not be suitable in some terrain, so don't use it there. But there are still plenty of places well suited to such tanks and where China's current gen of medium tanks might be at an disadvantage if pitted against current gen western heavy tanks.

This is especially true as China acquires more interests internationally and is starting to look at setting up overseas bases to safeguard those interests.

You don't have to replace all existing tanks with a new heavy tank, but having a division or two worth of such tanks ready for deployment could be the difference between victory or defeat in certain theatres of battle.

Roger604 said:

Rather air strikes work to the disadvantage of China since it raises the potential for international pressure in the form of sanctions or even possibly a blockade. On the other hand, a swift armor thrust into the capital city means that the West would politely knock on China's door and politely ask for a ceasefire.

Click to expand...

Unless the invaded has actually capitulated, I cant see what the difference would be.

plawolf said:

Not developing a heavy tank when you have the financial and technological means to do so would be extremely short sighted.....

You don't have to replace all existing tanks with a new heavy tank, but having a division or two worth of such tanks ready for deployment could be the difference between victory or defeat in certain theatres of battle.

Click to expand...

For what its worth, this could be of some interest to you.
I read the remarks of some military researchers, who've opinionated, that heavy tanks leading an attack was not part of the current or future PLA doctrine and they are currently in the process of breaking up their armoured divisions and forming them into battalion sized battle groups.

plawolf said:

Not developing a heavy tank when you have the financial and technological means to do so would be extremely short sighted.

Sure such a heavy tank will not be suitable in some terrain, so don't use it there. But there are still plenty of places well suited to such tanks and where China's current gen of medium tanks might be at an disadvantage if pitted against current gen western heavy tanks.

This is especially true as China acquires more interests internationally and is starting to look at setting up overseas bases to safeguard those interests.

You don't have to replace all existing tanks with a new heavy tank, but having a division or two worth of such tanks ready for deployment could be the difference between victory or defeat in certain theatres of battle.

Click to expand...

Developing heavy tank just because you have the financial and technological mean is even more short sighted. Not because that the country had the mean to field this type of weaponry or equipment, they must do it. The face of future war is changing. Heavy tanks are not suitable for many terrain, they are slow (unless you have an extremely large and powerful engine or there is a breakthrough in engine technology), they drink fuel like we drink water, the ammunition they carry is a joke (too little for prolong battle) and finally they will be killed like all other tank with a single direct hit from an anti-tank weapon.

The only good point I see about this type of weapon is as a mobile artillery unit. True, they kill easily... but will be killed easily too. Modern warfare now focus on speed... helicopter gunships, UCAV, etc, all could bring the tank down easily.

Remember the Lebanon war? Israelis MBT are way better than their opponent, but they still got beaten pretty badly.

Thus instead of wasting precious resource (no matter if you have it or not) on tanks, isn't it better to divert resources to other areas... such as developing and building more helicopter gunships or even A-10 class of aircrafts.

type-99A armed with 140mm tank gun first surfaced in 2004,according to the article, other option is to lengthen ZPT-98 /51 cal. to 55 calibre,and higher chamber pressure to match RH-120/L-55 .

plawolf said:

Not developing a heavy tank when you have the financial and technological means to do so would be extremely short sighted.

Sure such a heavy tank will not be suitable in some terrain, so don't use it there. But there are still plenty of places well suited to such tanks and where China's current gen of medium tanks might be at an disadvantage if pitted against current gen western heavy tanks.

This is especially true as China acquires more interests internationally and is starting to look at setting up overseas bases to safeguard those interests.

You don't have to replace all existing tanks with a new heavy tank, but having a division or two worth of such tanks ready for deployment could be the difference between victory or defeat in certain theatres of battle.

Click to expand...

Exactly right! The 38th and 39th Group Armies are the PLA's elite armor. Sending PLA into combat without the best that China's technology and industry can give would be grossly irresponsible.