Skywatcher
Captain
Money and need. Germany doesn't see a need to put RWS on its latest Leopard 2s, either.
New Type98/99 MBT thread
- Thread starter Dongfeng
- Start date
Money and need. Germany doesn't see a need to put RWS on its latest Leopard 2s, either.
Equation
Lieutenant General
True but most of those wider and shorter tanks don't make it past through many of China's high and narrow mountainous terrain. My guess is the new Chinese tanks are built according to China's terrain.
Most Russian and Chinese tanks tend to lack a manlet, which is why the plastic insulating cover remains exposed. The armour blocks near the gun opening looks incomplete only for the coaxial gun. But the rest of the "lack" of armour surrounding the gun is simply because of lack of manlet. If they put armour blocks all around the gun it won't be able to elevate or depress at all.
And the device on the gun itself (thought to be an automatic identification device as part of the PLA's equivalent of blue force tracking, not a gun reference system) is probably rugged enough so that any thin metal cover on top of it won't help much anyway. Nor are the PLA seeking to use their MBTs in an urban role where insurgents can pick off bits of equipment from atop buildings and what not.
That is the same reason the PLA hasn't adopted RWSs on their MBTs. It would be nice to have, sure, but it's hardly a necessity when you're not using your MBTs to fight in an urban non conventional war.
Personally I like the 99A's appearance. It has the kind of no nonsense bulkiness to it that a tank should have. The only constant criticism for most PLA MBTs is lack of side armour, but I assume that can be affixed in wartime.
In some pictures it looks "taller" than other tanks, because the bustle rack is less prominent in some picture angles than others, which makes the turret in turn appear singular and less wide.
My question is why.
Why don't we have a gun mental? What adventages does it give? Lighter interms of weight ( I drought it)? Easier to replace if damaged in battle? IMO a gun mental will at lest help to better intergrate the frontal armor.
Second why put that thing on to of the gun if it is just a identification device why can't it be put beside the gunner's sight better still intergrate it into gunner's and commander's sights. Do you see those wirings omg it gets on my nerves.
Just my option as an amateur many of the newer weapons introduced in PLA are pretty to look at from certain angle eg type 99 I love the side and rare profiles but the front omg, and j-20 front back top and bottom are all pretty but from the side it just does not feel right. I know all these sound silly but most good things are also good to look at.
Why don't we have a gun mental? What adventages does it give? Lighter interms of weight ( I drought it)? Easier to replace if damaged in battle? IMO a gun mental will at lest help to better intergrate the frontal armor.
Second why put that thing on to of the gun if it is just a identification device why can't it be put beside the gunner's sight better still intergrate it into gunner's and commander's sights. Do you see those wirings omg it gets on my nerves.
Just my option as an amateur many of the newer weapons introduced in PLA are pretty to look at from certain angle eg type 99 I love the side and rare profiles but the front omg, and j-20 front back top and bottom are all pretty but from the side it just does not feel right. I know all these sound silly but most good things are also good to look at.
Not sure why Chinese and Russian tanks dislike Manlets. It bothered me for a while too, but then I thought it probably didn't offer much protection for the kind of battles they want to fight anyway.
If it's an identification device, you want it to emit and receive signals, so putting it somewhere relatively unobstructed makes sense.
And I don't see any loose wirings anywhere.
Yes, it is silly.
Personally I don't have any problems with the aesthetics of any of the newer PLA products, apart from maybe the ZBD04A's wavy side skirt.
Type 99A looks fine from the front to me, if anything it's intimidating. J-20 from the side shows off its length, telling you it's got legs to do its mission and stay there.
Form follows function, and function follows requirements. So what you're seeing is what the PLA requires.
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
The side view of the 99 is deceptive in context to the front. From the side it looks low profile in contrast to the front which looks tall. Superficially I hope the PLA is developing an original new MBT design. I think the evolution track from older tanks makes one think not modern.
Type 99 only looks tall from the front because of the turret.
Western tanks have turrets that are as wide as their bustles (for bustle ammo racks), whereas PLA and Russian tanks have turrets which are narrower than their bustles because they have carousel autoloaders.
So I'd say it is actually the front profile which is deceptive, in that it makes it seem taller than it actually is.
Western tanks have turrets that are as wide as their bustles (for bustle ammo racks), whereas PLA and Russian tanks have turrets which are narrower than their bustles because they have carousel autoloaders.
So I'd say it is actually the front profile which is deceptive, in that it makes it seem taller than it actually is.
Both Western and Chinese/Russian tanks have gun mantlets, only difference are that the Chinese/Russian tank mantlet armour is within the turret with the canvas like covering on the outside, whereas western tanks like to have manlet armour as a block on the outside and seal with canvas from within.
The canvas like cover is made from composite material and serves to seal gaps between gun and turret from water, air and biological/chemical agents, as well as nuclear dust, as part of the NBC protection. It also serves to prevent openings when the tank gun moves backwards after recoil from firing (It's also not possible to prevent gaps from forming between the gun and turret when the gun is changing in elevation).
The tanks would still be able to operate normally without the canvas cover if one does not consider NBC protection a requirement. Below shows what the 99 looks like with cover removed, you can see the ring of armour around the gun barrel and extending into the turret.
Most western tanks adopts a externally placed mantlet outside the turret. Advantage of this is savings in work and time when changing gun barrel, as the whole barrel can simply be removed by pulling through the turret gun ring.
Soviet style tanks adopts internal mantlets with the advantage of smaller size for the same protection, and armour weight closer to the base of the gun barrel and not hung on further along the barrel, at the expense of more tedious procedure when changing gun barrels. (though I think given the cold war doctrine it's probably not expected many of their tanks to change barrels.)
Apparently Chinese newer tanks have a redesigned inner mantlet that allows the gun barrel to be changed by pulling through the turret gun ring, but I do not have a source for this.