MwRYum
Major
How bad was that, and did that rectified on the ZTZ-99G?
New Type98/99 MBT thread
- Thread starter Dongfeng
- Start date
How bad was that, and did that rectified on the ZTZ-99G?
no, i don't think it has been resolved, to do that you have redesign the whole turret
the problem is at some side angle, protection is very poor
but as i pointed out, the latest front armor upgrade at least kick it up a notch
read the rest here, remember only take the informative part of the posts
the problem is at some side angle, protection is very poor
but as i pointed out, the latest front armor upgrade at least kick it up a notch
read the rest here, remember only take the informative part of the posts
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
no, i don't think it has been resolved, to do that you have redesign the whole turret
the problem is at some side angle, protection is very poor
but as i pointed out, the latest front armor upgrade at least kick it up a notch
read the rest here, remember only take the informative part of the posts
Quibble about nothing . Most modern ATGM are top attack these days! and Most tank are not protected from the top.
So what,unless you are working at Chinese tank design factory you never know whether they are using composite armor or ERA
irrelevant about the top attack ATGM Hendrik we are talking about turret frontal and side protection, and the most widespread ATGMs are still wire guided line of sight, only very few are fire and forget top attack, also irrelevant in tank vs tank engagement
i suggest you look at the drawing again and see how close the commander and gunner hatch to turret side wall, line B1 and B, no matter what material is used
i suggest you look at the drawing again and see how close the commander and gunner hatch to turret side wall, line B1 and B, no matter what material is used
Hyperwarp
Captain
to be specific; read the posts by Damian
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
Most tank are protected from the front exactly because the opponent come from front. If you need to protect from the side you lost the war already. Tank design is compromised between protection, speed, firepower
You cannot protect everything otherwise it become so heavy and immobile
Tank to tank engagement is so obsolete the most danger facing tank today is not another tank but infantry soldier armed with ATGM as in 6 days war
Since then tank advances has to be accompanied by infantry soldier to eliminate the ATGM but infantry soldier cannot keep up with modern tank. so they need battle field taxi
That is why they have IFV to transport the soldier to protect your flank they come together as a team
You don't need to teach me about armor vehicle
ERA doesn't protect you from sabot but composite armor with ceramic do.
ERA is only good for HEAT ammunition
I don't understand what you mean by weakness because of the angle. The deciding factor is the slope of the armor(glacis)
Last edited:
i'm not trying to teach you anything, and your post still does not address the previous issue we were talking about, it was strictly about turret geometry, i really hope you have read the link i gave, don't look at the book cover, give it a chance, if you have read it and still stand with your argument, i have nothing more to say
and ERA does protect against sabots, just not to the extent of against HEAT rounds
and ERA does protect against sabots, just not to the extent of against HEAT rounds
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
Geometry is a non factor in Turret design. What this guy Damian said is nothing but gibberish. Slope of the turret is the factor. As far as I see in T99A2 they are well protected with ERA brick all around. Like this guy said in post #9
view 1: Turret geometry??? and hits in side armor, I really don't know what you are talking about...I'm sure you don't know what turret geometry of 99 is like.
the protection of turret roof is a difficulty for all tanks,you could offer your solution but extra armor and active defence.and the improvement has been made(the 3rd and 4th turret)...dear.
is a slope part of turret geometry or not?
i have no more arguments, because i don't want to pretend to have more knowledge than that Damian guy, if what he wrote can not convince you, then that is the case
Last edited:
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
is a slope part of turret geometry or not?
i have no more arguments, because i don't want to pretend to have more knowledge than that Damian guy, if what he wrote can not convince you, then that is the case
It doesn't matter anyway because the technology has advanced so far that make battle tank alone on battlefield an endanger species. China has developed SADARM
China has developed its own version of the U.S. SADARM (Search And Destroy Armor Munitions). These small (147mm diameter, 204mm long) devices weigh 10 kg (22 pounds) and are carried two per 155mm shell or 40 per CBU-105, 455 kg (thousand pound), cluster bomb. Each of these SADARMs have their own radar and heat sensor that searches for armored vehicles below and destroys them with a special shaped charge warhead. The SADARM sensors can search and attack vehicles within an area of roughly 150 x 360 meters, as they slowly descend.
SADARM, or "sensor fused munitions" were first conceived of in the 1960s, but it wasn't until the 1980s that the technology was perfected. The self-forging metal projectile used by SADARM punches through the thinner armor on the top of the vehicle (including the American M-1). If a target is not found, SADARM self-destructs.