New Type98/99 MBT thread
- Thread starter Dongfeng
- Start date
Chengdu J-10
Junior Member
M1 and M1A1 tanks have been produced at a cost of $2,350,000-4,300,000 per unit, depending on the variant. The Type 99 tank reports that it cost $2,000,000. The cheaper or early M1 variant still cost more than the Type 99 tank. If the PLA allocates another $350,000 to the Type 99 tank per unit I'm sure that they can make something comparable to the M1 or even the M1A1. Anyway the M1 tank is what 63 tonnes compared to Type 99 tank which is 54 tonnes. The tanks aren't even in the same weight class. I never believe fully in what US says, they tend to exaggerate things, and the M1 Abraham tank seems to one of them. The Type 99 MBT is one of the most advance MBT in the 21st century it isn't far from the M1 MBT capability, if the M1 faced the Type 99 it wouldn't be a push over (tough battle-nearly equal).
Please please study the two tanks beofre you go a boasting. The M1A2 firing the M829A3 will spank the ZTZ-99 coring it from any aspect. meanwhile the 125mm gun of the ZTZ-99 cannot penetrate the front of an M1A2 unless it is a freak shot.
Not to mention the abrams has a better FLIR, battle management, firecontrol, stabilisation and other systems much heavier armor and a superior susension, more comftrable crew accomodations, lighter crew workload etc.
Not to mention the abrams has a better FLIR, battle management, firecontrol, stabilisation and other systems much heavier armor and a superior susension, more comftrable crew accomodations, lighter crew workload etc.
though i am not an expert in tanks, but given moder cannons on a tank, if it doesn't penetrate, it still shake the crew a bit, but if you are being hit from the side or the back, you are pretty much in trouble. Also another point to win a modern combat tank warfare is who gets the hit first.
Last edited:
Uhmm no M1A1 Abrams were hit hundreds of times in GW1 by non penetratign canon and missile hits and jsut kept on rolling. Spaced armor and anti-spall linings isulates the crew the impacts unless the shot penetrates.
Yes side and rear hits are dangerous to any tank. However this is an area where tatics and training more than technology comes into play, although technology is still very important. The PLA still has a long way to go before it can compete with the US Army here. The PLA is still transforming from a combloc monolith into a modern military. In 15-20 years this might be a different story. But right now the US by virtue of 2 major mechanized wars and 2 decades of training at NTC as well as its emphasis on the recon-counter recon fight and superior battlefeild recon assets has a huge edge.
I am not knocking the PLA, it is going through a force modernisation at all levels similar to what the US Army went through in the 80's. The PLA can rightfully be proud of the progress it has made and will make in the near future. But there is no substature for experiance.
Chengdu J-10
Junior Member
Read thoroughly next time, before you start posting. The M1 Abraham has had more money put into it, I said on my last post that if the Type 99 MBT had that much money funded into it I'm sure that the PLA can make something that is on par with the M1 Abrham. The current Type 99 I said isn't far behind but is not yet as capable as the M1, which I said on the last post. Referring to your post crew comfort? this is war not luxury. Lighter crew load? The M1 requires 4 people while the Type 99 requires 3 people due to the auto loader. How do you know that the Type 99 MBT cannot penetrate the M1? Just because nothing could in the Gulf doesn't neccessarly mean the Type 99 cannot. You simply just can't assume things. The US has never faced the PLA in modern time in warfare so no one could not examine. Great battle though I'm guessing. Finally a competition for the US. Have you researched? what are you referring? Have you? The Type 99 is still classfied and is not yet fully revealed in detail about its capability and armour. No one knows how it good it truly is, we have just been given the brief. And the facts are given from the PLA which at times tend to hide the truth and give out facts that aren't always true. They say that ### isn't as good as ### but really it is as good an even maybe better. I'm not referring to the tanks on this. So don't just believe in the media for both the US or Sino. Think logically yourself
becuase the ZTZ uses a 125mm smoothbore with a penetrator under 600mm long( and no short rod penetrator has ever demonstrated relaible penetration past 500mm RHAe), vs a generally accepted RHAe of at least 750mm and possibly exceeding 1M in some locations vs KE. meanwhile on the US side the M829A3 form the 120mm will penetrate at least 800mm and probably in excess of 1M of RHAe. So the ZTZ might be able to penetrate the M1A2 while the Abrams might not penetrate the ZTZ. The American's also have better Thermal, more rested crews, more combat experiance etc. China is catching up, but she aint there yet.
eecsmaster
Junior Member
"Uhmm no M1A1 Abrams were hit hundreds of times in GW1 by non penetratign canon and missile hits and jsut kept on rolling. Spaced armor and anti-spall linings isulates the crew the impacts unless the shot penetrates."
this is clearly not true. There was at least one documented case of a T-62 firing on an Abram at very close quarters. The shot didn't penentrate, but it might as well have been a mission kill because the crews all suffered concussions and were out of the fight.
and talking about mission kill, you might want to know just how many M1s were mission killed by 30mm on BMP-2s and RPGs.
this is clearly not true. There was at least one documented case of a T-62 firing on an Abram at very close quarters. The shot didn't penentrate, but it might as well have been a mission kill because the crews all suffered concussions and were out of the fight.
and talking about mission kill, you might want to know just how many M1s were mission killed by 30mm on BMP-2s and RPGs.
23 abrams were kncoked out in desert storm, mobility kill or mission kill non were catasphrophic kills for a total of 1 KIA and 21 WIA. This out of a force of 1,848 Abrams with 7392 crewman for a total loss rate of .00124% of the US tank force being knocked out and .00297% of the crews being wounded or killed. This includes 9 friendly fire incidents and 2 destruction in place of bogged down tanks. If those are subtracted the entire iraqi armor manged to knock out just 14 M1's none permamently with 1 KAI and 10 WIA.
The offical post war report by the GOA actually mentions crwws reporting beign hit by 125mm imapcts at close range and not bieng affected.
mean while at least 500 iraqitanks were destroyed by direc tgun fire and hundreds more non-tank armored vehicles
The offical post war report by the GOA actually mentions crwws reporting beign hit by 125mm imapcts at close range and not bieng affected.
mean while at least 500 iraqitanks were destroyed by direc tgun fire and hundreds more non-tank armored vehicles
eecsmaster
Junior Member
"The offical post war report by the GOA actually mentions crwws reporting beign hit by 125mm imapcts at close range and not bieng affected."
that was a sabot, and the tungsten rod got stuck in the composite. HEAT/HESH would be a completely different story.
that was a sabot, and the tungsten rod got stuck in the composite. HEAT/HESH would be a completely different story.