New Type98/99 MBT thread

[RedMercury]

Ahem, that is clearly a 96G

 

[crobato]

You are saying it as if western look is an advantage of some kind. Quite weird, i didn't expect to see something like this here.
About the photo - i think that usage of the system similar to Shtora was confirmed, and there are more 96 pictures with it, but this Merkava-looking turret front looks suspicious. I have a strong feeling that this photo was PS-edited.

Not really. There are more photos I didn't post, pictures that have far more detail. All these photos are scanned off a magazine so its definitely not fan created. However these pictures are not uploadable to this forum due to their size. Here are some of those small enough to be uploaded.

 

[crobato]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

No, as i said, it is purely functional. Western/Chinese turrets have a "boxy" front since armor is positioned so that directly incoming shell's trajectory would be normal to the block, which gives moderate protection against normal hit, good protection against hits within 45deg angles and no protection on flanks. Russian design has armor blocks turned somewhat 45deg to the normal, giving good protection against normal hits and moderate in other directions.
Turret bustles on Chinese tanks are functional to, they simply needed space for electronic components.

Umm no. You didn't seem to understand that the Chinese "Western style" turret is actually built around an inner "Soviet style" cast turret. That is one reason why the turrets are a lot bigger than their predecessors. The old cast wok shaped turret is still there. except that a box is now welded around it. Then in that box, multiple layers of armor is added, and the empty spaces poured and filled with some thing. Then outside of this box, ERA modules are added to form the shape. Thus the original Type 80 and Type 85 turrets are still there.

For example, without the ERA, the slope of the turret is moderately wedged shaped, sloping downward, much like the Type 85 turret.

As for no protection in the flanks, like the Type 99 turret, the Type 96G turret has arrays of ERA blocks on the side and around to the back of the turret.

Because of this design, its actually questionable that the "bustle" you see in the boxier Chinese tanks may be storing things like ammunition. Most likely its just storage for convenience, plus added weight to balance the turret since it has very long guns.

 

[kyanges]

So you are saying in tank design with the same interior packaging, the same exterior protection and the same choice of material, there won't be any room left for designers with different cultures to have different styles?

Personally, I don't think that's the case. Coz after all we are just humans, even twins cannot draw two pictures the same. So even with all the conditions you mentioned above, tank designers from China, Russia, West Europe and North America will not be able to come up with the exactly the same look in the end.

And from the very beginning, that's what I was trying to say. There should be little but enough room for Chinese tank designers to 'style' the 99G better. As for now 2007, western tank exterior style seems to be the way to go.

If I were in charge of a design team for anything in the military, the last thing I'd want to find would be the designers worried about looks for the sake of looks.

If they were concerned about looking intimidating, then then would at least be an improvement, and more relevant for a military vehicle, than pure "style".

The first thing they should be worrying about though, is that whatever they're designing, does the best job possible, rather than worrying about whether it looks Western, or Eastern, American, or Chinese.


That said, it wouldn't hurt if you looked cool while doing it. .

 

[kickars]

That said, it wouldn't hurt if you looked cool while doing it. .

That's exactly what I mean. Any style has to be within all the conditions of a tank design. But it doesn't mean there is no room at all for the style.

 

[Chengdu J-10]

Looks don't matter it can be as ugly as hell and it wont effect its performance. MBT look at the neccessary things such as:
>Protection
>Reliability
>Firepower
>Survivability

Looks dont win you the war.

Type 96G is just more of a refined MBT from the Type 96. Type 99 is an early 3rd generation MBT with further refinements and room for improvement.

Type 96 and Type 99 MBT in battle is a fierce force even for the M1 Abraham despite its impressive battle record.

 

[kickars]

Sure, but I don't think I was talking about looking good or not. What I mean is its exterior style, which in tanks case it doesn't mean good or ugly. It means how intimidating the tank could be. I'm sure there's little but enough room left for tank designers to alter the exterior style, making it as intimidating as possible.

 

[kyanges]

Looks don't matter it can be as ugly as hell and it wont effect its performance. MBT look at the neccessary things such as:
>Protection
>Reliability
>Firepower
>Survivability

Looks dont win you the war.

Type 96G is just more of a refined MBT from the Type 96. Type 99 is an early 3rd generation MBT with further refinements and room for improvement.

Type 96 and Type 99 MBT in battle is a fierce force even for the M1 Abraham despite its impressive battle record.

Of course, you're absolutely right, but we never claimed they did. ?The point we have, is that once all relevant factors, like the ones you mentioned are considered, then there's a slight, ever so slight room for looks. I don't believe that pilots painted those shark faces on their airplanes, for any real relevant military purpose, for a moment. .

Sorry for the off-topic kind of nature of this "looks" discussion, I'll stop adding to it after this post. Back to the Type-99.

 

[Aluka]

Damn, i came here only to post that 8x8 article, but it seems i am being sucked in once more...

Umm no.

Umm yes.

You didn't seem to understand that the Chinese "Western style" turret is actually built around an inner "Soviet style" cast turret.

You don't even seem to understand what i was talking about. Arrogance never suits anybody. Normally i should have asked you to read my posts once more, but ok, i'll explain myself. You say that turret was made around inner soviet turret, T-54 i suppose? Then you are wrong, Type96 innards were largely remade, and resemble more T-72 than T-54. Again, there is nothing that can't be changed.

That is one reason why the turrets are a lot bigger than their predecessors.

Actually Chinese turrets are smaller that Soviet ones.

The old cast wok shaped turret is still there.

No. Really, compare them, nothing similar. Probably overall shape, but does it matter?

Because of this design, its actually questionable that the "bustle" you see in the boxier Chinese tanks may be storing things like ammunition.

What?! Did i say it was for ammunition? No! In my opinion these are not for ammunition, as i already told, i believe it is for FCS/other electronics.

Now i am going to explain what did i mean by different approach.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Boxy, right? Here's reason why:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I don't feel like making any comments, ive already explained everything in my previous post.

Edit: hmm.. I should have probably used M1 turret as a better example. Now it looks as if T-90 turret was better overall...

 

[crobato]

Yes I saw your diagram, and you seem to conveniently forget that on the ERA blocks are present on the sides of the turrets. So I really wonder what you mean by no protection on the flanks. Try looking at the turret of the 96G once more.