New Type98/99 MBT thread
- Thread starter Dongfeng
- Start date
A theory...
But why would they need to replace one welded turret construction with another, especially considering the fact that armor blocks remain same (judging by their size)? What if these ZTZ-99 tanks were simply produced at the other plant?
But why would they need to replace one welded turret construction with another, especially considering the fact that armor blocks remain same (judging by their size)? What if these ZTZ-99 tanks were simply produced at the other plant?
Last edited:
MIGleader
Banned Idiot
Aluka said:
cause the arnmor on the original type 98 was not strong enough, it was merely a permanent block of composite armor on the turret, much like the type 96. when the type 99 came out in 02, it replaced the single composite block with several modules that could be either era or an improved composite, for greater flexibility and protection.
btw, does anyone know how many production lines there are for the type 99?
Vytautas
Junior Member
Im not sure that this turret is new.Apart from some minor changes everything is the same.As for the sloped front of the turret if you look closer then you will see that all that is different are some sloped armor blocks attached.(as on those modernised british centurion tanks in service with the idf)
You didn't get my point. I didn't mention ERA blocks, and i did not compare ZTZ-98 to ZTZ-99, but oldZTZ-99 to newZTZ-99 instead (assuming that the main difference between 98 and 99 is ERA). The rear construction of the turret was changed to type90-style. Composite blocks most likely remained same. And by the way, physical thickness of type98 armor is somewhat 1.3*thickness of type96 armor.
Probably the've realised - the bigger ERA block is, the better it reacts against sabot.
MIGleader
Banned Idiot
some updates.
read aluka!!! is it still a t-72 copy?
dongfeng, can u clarify:
what are the exact systems of the type-99s new BMS(battle management system), and how do they work and perform? there was a discussion about this, and I didnt know the type 99 didnt have a BMS til now.
theres also a claim that the type 99 has improved firepower over the type 98, how? i thought they used the same gun.
read aluka!!! is it still a t-72 copy?
dongfeng, can u clarify:
what are the exact systems of the type-99s new BMS(battle management system), and how do they work and perform? there was a discussion about this, and I didnt know the type 99 didnt have a BMS til now.
theres also a claim that the type 99 has improved firepower over the type 98, how? i thought they used the same gun.
I know some were arguing that the Abrams is not as good as the Americans say it is, but I am not to sure, it can be knocked out, yes, but it is easily repaired and back in action, and crew survivability is fantastic(The abrams knocked out in desert storm was shot from a short distance and in the side and the round didnt penetrate completely, and the crew survived...) . Dont forget also that the LeClerc, Leopard, and the Challenger are all similarly as good...Im not sure if this tank compares to any of those.
Also it probably has an autoloader, which is a bad idea, a average Abrams crew can get off a shot every 4 seconds, some even at 2 seconds apart. Average autoloader is 8 seconds.
Also you must not forget that no matter how good the equipment...how good are the people using it, how experienced and well trained are the commanders ect...
Any army that is lesser in equipment quality and greater in skill and morale will win, look at history, especially Israel.
Also it probably has an autoloader, which is a bad idea, a average Abrams crew can get off a shot every 4 seconds, some even at 2 seconds apart. Average autoloader is 8 seconds.
Also you must not forget that no matter how good the equipment...how good are the people using it, how experienced and well trained are the commanders ect...
Any army that is lesser in equipment quality and greater in skill and morale will win, look at history, especially Israel.