New Type98/99 MBT thread

[eckherl]

Both tanks have a lot of room for improvements. As it stands, it seems that AK has better FCS system as well battle management solution. It seems to me that the Chinese are taking their time as any land-based conflict involving large tank engagements is unlikely. I'm sure they'll eventually have a very capable FCS and BMS solution.

As far as projectile length that's used in AK I have never heard about any difference compared to standard 125 mm ammo.
It's the same auto-loader as the original Type 90II subject to the same limitations.

Reportedly there was a 4th AK prototype utilizing a 120 mm gun and western engine for export only. I'm surprised Pakistan didn't go for it if they had access to the tech.
Anyways, they might just put Type 98 turret on AK, who knows?

Yes - the Ukrainians have tried to export T-80 and T-72 series tanks with 120mm guns, this could of offered drawbacks like less ammunition and due to logistical issues. Do you know if they have gone to a bigger auto loader on the TYPE 99.

 

[coolieno99]

Youtube video of Chinese HJ-9 ATGM striking a Type 98 tank.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[keysersoze]

Interesting clip.......According to the info on the side.

"Chinese TYPE98 [ZTZ98] MBT Cactus Structure Composite Armor TEST by Hong Jian-9 ATM [Penetrate RHA：1200mm].

Cactus Structure Composite armor is the Composite armor which used a lot of heavy metal such as tungsten carbide [WC]....

TYPE98 [ZTZ98] MBT Cactus Structure Armor is penetrated by HJ-9 ATM and can confirm that smoke appears from a hatch.

It followed that this Composite Armor ability hurried up deployment of FY-4/FY-5 ERA in a Chinese PLA tanks.

Any verification of this?

 

[ahho]

I dunno but this sound really unfounded, but could the hj-9 test on type-99 be a show???? because, as we know the armour of a tank is always classified and if penetration to the tank is shown due to hj-9, doesn't that show its weakness.

 

[fishhead]

Well, we really don't konw.

An article from Chinese Armor Combat Vehicle claimed that 99 can stand 7 T-72 rounds at the front.

 

[keysersoze]

Well, we really don't konw.

An article from Chinese Armor Combat Vehicle claimed that 99 can stand 7 T-72 rounds at the front.

Yes but does it state the type of round or whether the hits were in all in seperate areas?

 

[zraver]

Well, we really don't konw.

An article from Chinese Armor Combat Vehicle claimed that 99 can stand 7 T-72 rounds at the front.

What BM number please. A BM-9 and its not much of an accomplishment, a BM-42m and I am impressed and doubtful. Also I doubt these were hits in the same location.

 

[eckherl]

Well, we really don't konw.

An article from Chinese Armor Combat Vehicle claimed that 99 can stand 7 T-72 rounds at the front.

Maybe a older generation Tungsten penetrator, DU designed penetrators highly doubtful, they could of also launched shaped charged warhead projectiles also instead of KE penetrators. All in all good propaganda.

 

[eckherl]

What BM number please. A BM-9 and its not much of an accomplishment, a BM-42m and I am impressed and doubtful. Also I doubt these were hits in the same location.

Even getting smacked with 7 BM-9 KE projectiles would most likely place stress cracks on the turret race ring or the turret structure welding seams.

 

[zraver]

Even getting smacked with 7 BM-9 KE projectiles would most likely place stress cracks on the turret race ring or the turret structure welding seams.

doubtful, thanks are tough and flying off a small rise and crashing to earth thousand sof times over a tanks lifetime doesn't stress it. Isolated impacts absorbed by the armors lattice of ceramics shouldn't stress it either. Each impact will only shatter enough tiles to defeat its imparted energy, not enough will be left to be absorbed by the tansk more delicate parts.