New Chinese Military Developments

E

eecsmaster

Junior Member
Re: new Chinese supertank,question....

that pic with the 140mm was taken from strategepage. And clearly, it wasn't 140mm. The thermal sleeve and the lighting made the gun look thicker. As for Germany supplying 88mm high velocity gun...not gonna happen. It's called an arms embargo.
 
J

jackbh

Junior Member
Re: new Chinese supertank,question....

I read on sina.com that the PLA is testing a 140mm gun on the type-99, and that they are going to field type-99 with that gun in the future. It's just what I read from sina.com in the military section, so please don't shoot the messanger.
 
U

Undead Yogurt

New Member
Re: new Chinese supertank,question....

I wouldn't quite so easily dismiss the probability of a "large-scale armor battle" on China's borders. I believe one of the reasons China is still maintaining its thousands of obsolete tanks such as the Type 59 is because there is a good chance China may need to tank-rush North Korea in the forseeable future, for which China would like a numeric superiority over equally obsolete NK armor units. This is not nearly so far-fetched as some might think. China is rapidly accumulating "economic interests" in NK, the defence of which will serve as a good excuse to intervene in NK at the first sign of certain and imminent collapse (or immediately after the collapse; China should be able to gain the cooperation of a few top NK generals) of the extant regime. A large-scale blitzkrieg incursion involving thousands of tanks is the most effective way to knock out the possibility of any coordinated NK defense. It will be to China's advantage that NK has most of its forces concentrated along the DMZ.
 
Last edited:
renmin

renmin

Junior Member
Re: new Chinese supertank,question....

Undead Yogurt said:
I wouldn't quite so easily dismiss the probability of a "large-scale armor battle" on China's borders. I believe one of the reasons China is still maintaining its thousands of obsolete tanks such as the Type 59 is because there is a good chance China may need to tank-rush North Korea in the forseeable future, for which China would like a numeric superiority over equally obsolete NK armor units. This is not nearly so far-fetched as some might think. China is rapidly accumulating "economic interests" in NK, the defence of which will serve as a good excuse to intervene in NK at the first sign of certain and imminent collapse (or immediately after the collapse; China should be able to gain the cooperation of a few top NK generals) of the extant regime. A large-scale blitzkrieg incursion involving thousands of tanks is the most effective way to knock out the possibility of any coordinated NK defense. It will be to China's advantage that NK has most of its forces concentrated along the DMZ.
Click to expand...
I would have to disagree with your claims. theres power in numbers. China knows its forces arnt as high tech as the west, the next thought after improvment is a huge army capable of devestating a invading force. China is more close to NK than you think. Without China, Nk would of been taken over by SK a long time ago. without NK, the US and SK can easily cross the Ya lu river and invade China wothout warning. Ive said it many times and I would say it again. PRC is a defensive country not an offensive. China can easily conquer Iraq as America did. Why didnt they? China does not waste its money and power for extra land. The PRC has no intentions to expand. Dont you think its big enough already?!;)
 
sumdud

sumdud

Senior Member
VIP Professional
Re: new Chinese supertank,question....

What happen to the super tank? :eek:ff:
But since this topic is rather obscure with its load of information, I guess I will let it go..... for now.

The last 2 posts aren't exactly wasteful anyway.....
If they did, they would do it for the resource, war doesn't have to mean conquest, but also plunder and raids, kind of like the Israeli incursions.
We are talking about a DPRK w/o Kim here.

People these days don't easily go to war, they know better. And since American forces in SK aren't very well equipped, an invasion from the South wouldn't nesecessarily mean America on China's border. (The Korean Peninsula is probably of little strategical value to America anyway, since it would be stupid for America to try and use it to invade the mainland, there is no point.) Basically, I don't expect Americans to take part here.

But I disagree that those old tanks will be used for Blitz also, since North Korea is a hilly place, unfit for such speedy moves. A 2-prone though, would make sense.
 
C

challenge

Banned Idiot
Re: new Chinese supertank,question....

jackbh said:
I read on sina.com that the PLA is testing a 140mm gun on the type-99, and that they are going to field type-99 with that gun in the future. It's just what I read from sina.com in the military section, so please don't shoot the messanger.
Click to expand...
Kharkov tank design (Ukraine) do offering 140mm tank gun ,can easily be fitted inside the T-80 tank.
according to Miltech ,NATO 140mm/45cal. long gun suppose to possess muzzle energy of 18 mega joules. compare to 120mm/45 cal. 11 meg.joules.
Newer 120mm/55 calibre long increase to 13 mg.jls.able to punches thru 970mm thick armour plate at 2km.down range,and that is just tungsten round.
 
Indianfighter

Indianfighter

Junior Member
Re: new Chinese supertank,question....

renmin said:
Perhaps "super" tank is exagerating the idea. I would say more of a "advanced" tank.
Click to expand...
I agree with the above statement. The most advanced tank in the world, i.e. the Merkava has been proven to be vulnerable to guerrila millitants.

The maximum speed of F-1 cars has not increased since the last two decades. Current efforts are focussed on increasing the fuel-efficiency, reducing the work-load of the driver, extracting the maximum benefits due to aerodynamics, etc.

Thus, it is unlikely that such a concept of a "super-tank" may be feasible.
The diameter of 120/125 mm of the guns of tanks is a limit of mechanical engineering. A bigger gun (whether rifled or smoothbore) would be extremely cumbersome, is likely to be operated manually, would subject the tank to its limits, and also consume a lot of power.

That guns have rarely been experimented beyond the limit of 120/125 mm since the past 2 decades, must be proof of the infeasibility of 140mm guns.
And we are not yet settled about which is the best "current" supertank : Leo2, T-90, M1A2, Merkava 4 ...
Click to expand...
Although this thread is not about Global Military, the Arjun tank may also be added to the above list.
 
A

adeptitus

Captain
VIP Professional
Re: new Chinese supertank,question....

Hmm...

T-34: 76.2mm F-34 gun
T-44: 85mm ZiS-S-53 gun
T-55: 100mm D10T rifled gun
T-62: 115mm smoothbore gun
T-10: 122mm D25-TA gun
T-72: 125mm 2A46M smoothbore gun
T-95: rumored to be equipped with 152mm gun, status unknown

I'd say the evolution toward larger caliber guns will continue, until the technology (tank gun) is replaced by something new (EM projector?):
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
renmin

renmin

Junior Member
Re: new Chinese supertank,question....

adeptitus said:
Hmm...

T-34: 76.2mm F-34 gun
T-44: 85mm ZiS-S-53 gun
T-55: 100mm D10T rifled gun
T-62: 115mm smoothbore gun
T-10: 122mm D25-TA gun
T-72: 125mm 2A46M smoothbore gun
T-95: rumored to be equipped with 152mm gun, status unknown

I'd say the evolution toward larger caliber guns will continue, until the technology (tank gun) is replaced by something new (EM projector?):
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...
:rofl: lol. Railgun tech, isnt comming any time soon. The reason? Railguns require way too much power and there isnt a efficeint way to store all that energy. It is way too complicated to be used in warfare let alone being armed on a tank. Railguns may be the cuting edge weapon in the future, but now, its just somethin to dream about.
 
J

jackbh

Junior Member
Re: new Chinese supertank,question....

I think that there is still plenty room for tank guns to be bigger as long as you built a big and strong enough tauret. Just look at the guns on the world war II battle ships, those guns easily tops 200mm. Of course a gun as big as that would be needed to be place on a heavy vehicle like a battle ship.
The maximum speed of F-1 cars has not increased since the last two decades. Current efforts are focussed on increasing the fuel-efficiency, reducing the work-load of the driver, extracting the maximum benefits due to aerodynamics, etc.
Click to expand...

This is because F-1 regulation limits the size of the engines and configuration the the competition can have. In fact they just they just introduce new regulations this year that cut the cylinder from 10 to 8 with even smaller size engine. I'm sure if they allow the competition to build what ever they like of course they would come up with something faster.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top