New Type98/99 MBT thread
- Thread starter Dongfeng
- Start date
sorry to offend everyone, I think most of the entire chinese tanks are sitting duck for ATGM.
And pray... tell us... which nation's tanks could survive a direct hit from a modern ATGM? Plus... what ATGM are you talking about.
Well... even the M1 abrams are damaged or destroyed by hits from Soviet era ATGM missiles. That is why the Russian, the Chinese and the European came out with their own version of countermeasure, like the Arena Active Protection System, the laser countermeasure system.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
First you have to define what you consider "survive" in operations British Challenger , American Abrams and IsrealI Merkava tanks have all taken direct hits from AGTM's. That said in those actions all three were rendered non functional. But the crews lived and the hulks were in most cases repaired. Single hits of most AGTM types have when dealing with super heavy MBTs are as effective as you might think. The question then becomes one of armor, weight, point of impact and power of weapon. Remember in Iraqi freedom a single outdated RPG round managed to peirce a M1 all the way to the crew compartment, how? A lucky shot found a weak spot, a weak spot that was likely covered as part of the latest upgrade.
So is the latest PLA tank a Sherman playing a Tiger? Well it is a bit on the lighter side of the weight scale. And I would really like to see a automated machine gun and active defence system but until some one takes a shot at them the jury is still out. Personally I feel it has some holes which is why the Chinese seen to have a new model coming out every week.
So is the latest PLA tank a Sherman playing a Tiger? Well it is a bit on the lighter side of the weight scale. And I would really like to see a automated machine gun and active defence system but until some one takes a shot at them the jury is still out. Personally I feel it has some holes which is why the Chinese seen to have a new model coming out every week.
russian experience in chenya,(losing more than 300 tank)israel and US experience in lebanon and iraq is warning,no AFV can survive in Anti tank rich environment or RPG country.
according to US marine white paper,urban warfare is the war of the future.
there's already more than 3 dozen cities with more than 20~30 million people,as the earth get more crowded.urban warfare becoming a standard norm.
according to US marine white paper,urban warfare is the war of the future.
there's already more than 3 dozen cities with more than 20~30 million people,as the earth get more crowded.urban warfare becoming a standard norm.
And your point being? All tanks from any nations could survive anti tank rich environment? And so what is your previous claim? Chinese tanks (only)?
Yes, what you say is true. However, my post was an answer to Hardware, who came in out of nowhere saying that all Chinese tanks are sitting ducks to ATGM. Which, I responded... which tank could withstand a blow? That is why they have active defence systems.
SinoSoldier
Colonel
The Type 99A2 is rumored to have an active protection system; the Type 96G already has one based on a Russian system. It wouldn't make much sense for a newer tank to lack the systems of an older one. And the Type 99A2 turret was seen in testing with a remote weapons system.
Broccoli
Senior Member
Difference is that Chinese and Russians are more likely to explode and kill the crew if anti-tank weapon penetrates tanks armor. So far we haven't seen Chinese tanks carrying any sort of side skirts to protect tanks hull from sides... important place since a simple RPG could penetrate hull and ignite the rounds in ammo carousel.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
Difference is that Chinese and Russians are more likely to explode and kill the crew if anti-tank weapon penetrates tanks armor. So far we haven't seen Chinese tanks carrying any sort of side skirts to protect tanks hull from sides... important place since a simple RPG could penetrate hull and ignite the rounds in ammo carousel.
That's because no modern Chinese tanks have ever been deployed in combat. Armoured side skirts is hardly cutting edge technology now is it? And I would also do a little more research before making sweeping and incorrect statements. There are plenty of pictures of Type99s with side skirts all over the Internet. Granted those are rubber skirts, but it would take like 5 minutes to change them out for steel or composit ones.
Raising something as easily addressed as armoured side skirts just gives the impression you are looking for examples to prove a point rather than deriving your conclusions from facts and observations.
Besides, tank design is dictated by how one intends to use them, and where one intends to use them. It is always a compromise between firepower, protection and mobility. Just because one side puts massive emphasis on one of those attributed does not make that the best design solution. Tanks are ultimately meant to win wars. Having 90% of your crews survive the death of their tanks is ultimately a poor consultation prize if the price for such high crew survival meant the losse of the war.
The best protected tank with the best firepower in the world is also useless if it cannot get to where it is needed before no bridge would withstand its weight or if the ground is just too soft for such monster tanks to move around without worrying about getting bogged down and trapped.
Chinese tanks are designed for battle out in the open country, and mostly inside China, against enemy armour and as much favour mobility and firepower over protection. With how much fuel modern super heavy MBTs like the Ambrams guzzle up because of their obesity, lighter, more fuel efficient Chinese tanks can easily exploit their range and speed advantage as well as ability to cross terrain super heavies cannot traverse to flank enemy tank formations and cut them off from their fuel supply.
Your super heavy MBTs will have 100% crew survival if they run out of fuel before even making contact with the enemy and are forced to scuttle their own tanks to prevent them from falling into enemy hands.
In addition, lets not forget the WWII German lesson. There is a balance between quality and quantity that needs to be met, or else your forces are left vulnerable. The Germans had undisputedly the finest tanks of WWII, but they were still thoroughly crushed by the Soviets because their ultra-engineered Rollex tanks took too long and too much resources to produce to make up for combat losses.
Chinese tanks might not be as good as western tanks when it comes to urban combat, but that is only because urban combat is an arena where protection is far any away the most importantly factor. But as I demonstrated above, if you pick an arena where mobility and range are more important, Chinese tanks would come out on top. No tank is king of the hill in every battlefield. It is up to the designers to come up with a design they think will be most suited to the most battlefields, and the general to pick and choose where and when he fights to maximise the inherent advantages of his tanks while denying the enemy as much of their own advantages as possible.
China is starting to look at super heavies now as well, but that is only because Chinese economic and military power has now risen to a point where it no longer looks like winning would be the hardest part in most likely wars China might likely fight. Thus, now Chinese focus is gradually shifting from winning at all costs to winning in style.
Saying that, I still think the PLA will still prefer lighter, more mobile and economical tanks. They will get a good number of the new Type 99G2 monsters, but the bulk of their tank forces will still reman equipped with the lighter Type 96s or its next gen follow-ons.
If you look back, this has actually already stared to happen with the Type99 and Type96. The 99 was the heavy, premiere tank, but the 96 is what made up the bulk of the numbers.