Judging by how long it takes for new tank variants to emerge, we might see a 99B this decade. Afterall, the PLA likes to upgrade their weapon systems to get as much mileage out of them(Type 59s, J-7s etc)One point to note is that PLA equipment always seems to modernize more rapidly than doctrine. But this isn't always a bad thing.
Like the PLAN for example - they invested heavily into advanced anti-ship missiles like the YJ-12A and YJ-18 for an asymmetric edge over powerful adversaries. It was only after these were developed that doctrine shifted to focus more on air-sea operations and air defense with the UVLS on the 052D and 055. Even today, the PLAN does not have a multi-pack SAM for surface combatants and so they have a lot of catching up to do now that they have updated their doctrine. But on the positive side, it was only because they pursued a deviant doctrine in the past, that the PLAN has ASuMs like YJ-12A and YJ-18 while NATO navies are stuck with the vintage Harpoon.
I suspect we will see the same development for PLA equipment. Right now, tanks like the 99A are the ultimate expression of classic PLA doctrine - extreme focus on frontal protection, more so than any other MBT in its weight class. Maybe one day they will consider the need for urban warfare and modify doctrine accordingly. And then we might see improved side protection for a 99B variant. It could be a simple as standardizing existing upgrade options into a full package, such as blundling together the rumored 1800 HP powerplant, FY-5 ERA on the side skirts, remote weapons station, the new suspension technology from the ZTQ-15, a hard-kill APS, or maybe even the 125mm L/52, although the longer barrel would be detrimental in urban combat.
The real question is if the PLA is willing to pay for it. If they get the budget and determination to upgrade the MBTs further, they might decide to work on the Type 96 first.
Last edited: