New Type98/99 MBT thread

[FriedRiceNSpice]

1. It will be or is an issue; the average height of an adult is increasing, mostly due to better nutrition. It will be very difficult to find people that are 5"6 or shorter in the immediate future. For example, the average height of a Canadian male is 5"9.

Not in China! Large population pool and lower average height due to genetics!

 

[Lezt]

1. It will be or is an issue; the average height of an adult is increasing, mostly due to better nutrition. It will be very difficult to find people that are 5"6 or shorter in the immediate future. For example, the average height of a Canadian male is 5"9.

2. Gun depression is a major issue when fighting on hilly terrain. The sooner I can point my gun down before cresting a hill, the sooner I can engage a target hiding in defilade.

3. What one claims and what is in reality are often quite different. The Russians haven't installed sprall liners in their tanks.

And there is often no dead space inside a tank; a tank designer does its best to make use of all of the space inside a tank for equipment, ammunition, or crew storage.

4. The Russians haven't rolled in upgrades into their existing armoured fleets that have significantly upgraded crew protection.

Lighter, but less useful in performance. Their tanks are more deadly to their crews, and the performance of Russian tanks in the past demonstrate this. Not to mention the poor ergonomics of Russian tanks that hinder fightability. A tank should focus on protection, ease of use, firepower, and lastly, mobility.

5. Their inability to fight in hull down position except from well prepared positions. A Western tank is able to fight from improvised positions created through the terrain, where the enemy can't reply while it hammers the enemy on the thinner side and top armour in kill zones.

I believe the Chinese census in 2006, the average male is 165 cm tall? 5'5", Russia I believe is 176 cm or 5'10"? for Canada, Statcan 2005 Canadian Community Health Survey 3.1 says 5'8.5".

It is true that humans are getting bigger and taller, but in countries like the USA, the height of the average person stagnated about 5'10"?

note that the T90, or T72, or should I say T62 or truthfully the T55 or originally the T44 is designed for the russian population of the born in the 50s, 60s and 70s which incidentally have an average male height of 5'5".

Which the customers of T90s namingly India, have a average male height of 5'5" in 2006. so what is the problem if the average male of these country can fit into the tank comfortably? Russia, I agree with you, have issues, and no one is claiming Russia to be equal to the west nowadays, they have problems, mainly due to economy. I think the Russians would want to move onto newer technologies if they are financially able, or else why would they build 600~ T90 for India in 6 years, while only producing 60~ T90 for the russian army a year?

And if the population of these country do become larger in a generation's time, why not build a larger generation of tank then? It is like how the post war Japanese perfected the M24 Chaffee over the M4 sherman as their tankers were of too small a stature and that the 75mm tank round was thought to be the largest they can man handle effectively. They gradually increase the main gun caliber to 90mm as their tankers got bigger in the Type 74, and eventually to 120mm in the type 90.

It took the Japanese, ~50 years to have their average height from 5'3" to today 5'7.5" and the USA ~50 years to gain 5", isn't it premature to design a tank for taller people 50 years down the road?

2) Lets do some maths, if we are having typical cross country speeds of lets say 15 kmph? An T90 to be a block 2.2m Tall, 9.5m long, going over an 33% slope, and the center of mass is in the middle of the tank.

From being exposed over the crest of the hill to when the center of mass passes the crest of the hill, the tank will have to travel 9.5/2+2.2/tan30 = 8.0605m, which means that tank travelling at 15kmph or 4.166 m/s will pass the hill from the time it was exposed to the time it clear the crest in less than 2 seconds.

The tank not being a rectangular blob and that the gun can still deviate somewhat means that the exposed time is even less. Is this 2 second lag that important? with taller western tanks, this unable to engage time is similar even with the larger gun deviation.

Gun deviation is really much more useful in static defensiveness situation where the tank body itself can be hidden behind the crest exposing the turret front at extreme oblique angles - hence enhancing armor protection.

3) True say, and so could be said of western tanks. have you inspected each and every Russian tank for spall lining? or each and every western tank for their advertised systems. Do you have an update credible report claiming that Russian tanks do not have spall liners? If not, then you are relying on what is advertised as well, hence it is entirely acceptable to assume Russian tanks are build as specified with spall liners.

Each and every machinery have dead space, a tank is no exception. Why don't you tell me what is the space between the torsion bars used for if not just space? or how about the space between the gun mantle and the turret shell? Humans are ergonomic creatures and you cannot utilize all available space due to the physical limit that crew and equipment are not standardize blocks which does not need service space.

4a) mmhmmm we did talk about the Russian economy, so yes, you are correct that they have not been massively implemented. This as I have already agreed with you, what I disagreed is that Russia did not learn from their experience.

You do know that the T90 is an upgrade of a T72 which in-turn is an upgrade of T62 which in-turn is an upgrade of T55 which in-turn is an upgrade of T44? so if they are upgrading T72 to T90 standard, are they not significantly improving crew protection? Is an increase of 300~ RHAe or 40% increase vs APFSDS KE rounds not a significant improvement?

4b) why do mobility come last? doesn't every country have a right to determine their best options? What good were the Tigers and Tiger IIs were stuck in the mud in russia Vs the highly mobile M4 Shermans and T34 storming Germany?

5) you talking about the golan heights or Korea? thinner top armor? given the near flat trajectory or modern AP rounds, your dug in tank need to be significantly higher to shoot the weaker top armor. and how does a improvised field position equate to the ability to shoot the enemy at their sides?

Have you accounted for the dozer blade on the T72 making it capable of sinking the T72 to turret level and allowing it to improvise a firing position where there is earth/soil/sand?

I don't see why western tanks are better by the points you have claimed.

 

[IronsightSniper]

Of course, that's assuming that the ERA gives as much protection as it's RHAe gives out. Remember, M829A3 was designed specifically, I.E. shear force resistant, to counter laterally moving steel plates, which is the Main kill mechanism of K-5 ERA and presumably Relikt too.

 

[Lezt]

Of course, that's assuming that the ERA gives as much protection as it's RHAe gives out. Remember, M829A3 was designed specifically, I.E. shear force resistant, to counter laterally moving steel plates, which is the Main kill mechanism of K-5 ERA and presumably Relikt too.

Lets assume that is true for this discussion? If not, we will have to consider that Relikt was designed especially to counter the M829A3.

 

[IronsightSniper]

Well tell me how Relikt does that? Not a lot of literature on that too, as far as I know, it's main kill mechanism is the same as K-5's blowing the front plate side ways to feed the projectile ever more steel and then blow the back plate the other way to create a guillotine. Super DU which is what the M829A3 is made out of and a thinner and longer projectile means harder time to be broken and thus reducing Relikt's effectiveness.

 

[Lezt]

Well tell me how Relikt does that? Not a lot of literature on that too, as far as I know, it's main kill mechanism is the same as K-5's blowing the front plate side ways to feed the projectile ever more steel and then blow the back plate the other way to create a guillotine. Super DU which is what the M829A3 is made out of and a thinner and longer projectile means harder time to be broken and thus reducing Relikt's effectiveness.

Err, I don't know; and even if I did, I doubt I will have the clearance to tell you; and that doesn't mean that since I do not know how it works mean that it does not work.

Lets put it this way, do you know the exact construction for Realikt and do you have the calculation showing that an T90 with it will be defeated by the M829A3?

What is the structure of this "Super DU" ? what is the exact alloy? What is the Yonges modulus? What is it's hardness scale? and all of this at what temperature?

The real capacity of the M829A3 is classified, just like Relikt is classified.

Thinner and longer penetrative rods does have it's draw back, you are reducing cross sectional area hence lateral strength. Which means that the rod is likely much more hardened and subspectable to other defeat mechanism possibly via shatter, etc.

But the onus is on the person whom doubt the sales literature to prove themselves correct. So if you don't believe Relikt protected T90 is incapable of withstanding a M829A3 round, then prove it.

 

[IronsightSniper]

There is a certain forum that was literally dedicated to this, and after reading through a bunch of their Scientific forum, their best guess is yes, M829A3 v.s. Relikt and M829A3 comes out in one piece.

 

[Lezt]

There is a certain forum that was literally dedicated to this, and after reading through a bunch of their Scientific forum, their best guess is yes, M829A3 v.s. Relikt and M829A3 comes out in one piece.

So if someone reads this forum and quote that I made the assertion that the T90 is impregnable by the M829A3, would you be convinced?

rhetorical question aside, that is still no proof that the M829A3 defeats the Realikt,

Lets ask a retarded question, have you consulted russian sourced forums with russian experts claiming that the Realikt armored tank is capable of defeating M829A3?

and while we are at it, what forum did you read it from? and which expert with what credentials do you quote from?

 

[IronsightSniper]

Ah, but the difference is in the math! We know that the M829A3 is made out of Super DU, we can guess roughly how much it weighs, we can guesstimate it's L/D ratio from pictures, and we can assume that it's muzzle velocity and muzzle drop are as they claim it to be. With that we can put it through the Odermatt formula and find it's approximate RHAe penetration from how many meters we decide to theory test it.

The difference is, is that no one actually knows the composition of Relikt, it's plates could be made from super-hardened steel or paper, no one actually knows. Mostly because Russia is a very quiet country and there aren't any resident Russian military experts laying around.

Asides from that, I thought we can't link to other forums? Otherwise I would of just quoted them myself.

 

[Lezt]

You do not even know what is Super DU is. Besides Lanz-Odermatt predictions originally for WA rods modified for DU generally suggest a penetrative power of ~800 mm RHAe, or lets say 850 mm on the high side. And what i don't get is that, in you post 1035:

In any case, the T-72 doesn't have super thick Glacis armor. According to

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, the Glacis of the T-72BM has about 510 mm RHAe. With Relikt that estimate goes to over 1000 mm of RHAe.

Technically speaking, the numbers don't add up, 850 mm perforation v.s. 1000 mm protection, protection wins. However, as APFSDS rounds come, the M829A3 is the best there is. Asides from that, I wouldn't say I know if T-99s use Relikt anyways.

you have already agreed to that the M829A3 is insufficient in penetrating the T90 with Realikt?

Besides, what value do this discussion on the M829A3 have to offer on the Type 99 and its distant cousin the T90? all we have proven is that they are capable tanks at a fraction of the cost of a western tank.

You can't link to them, but you can quote them in words.