New Type98/99 MBT thread

[Aluka]

I wonder how effective this ERA can be against a sabot hit. My guess is that it will not help at all.
And even this does not matter, since soviet and western/chinese turrets do represent two different ways of thinking. And a theory of shape similarities to 59 turret as a possible reason of 96 turret being boxy can't be viable - you just can't compare cast turrets to composite armor layouts.

 

[RedMercury]

FY series ERA is effective against both.

 

[eckherl]

I wonder how effective this ERA can be against a sabot hit. My guess is that it will not help at all.
And even this does not matter, since soviet and western/chinese turrets do represent two different ways of thinking. And a theory of shape similarities to 59 turret as a possible reason of 96 turret being boxy can't be viable - you just can't compare cast turrets to composite armor layouts.

TYPE 98/99 uses a welded construction method for turret assembly, same thing that Russia is doing to the turret sides on the T-90. Ukraine started doing this on the T-84 turrets due to cost and because it does give you better strength with the addition of ERA type armors or additional bolt on armor.

 

[Aluka]

TYPE 98/99 uses a welded construction method for turret assembly

Did somebody say something different?

same thing that Russia is doing to the turret sides on the T-90

The whole turret actually.

FY series ERA is effective against both.

China is not the first to make such era, Russians fielded similar design in 1985. And "effective against" does not mean that it's going to stop it, merely reduce it's effectiveness. On the glacis or turret front it may give additional protection equal to 200-300mm, which is great because of ERA low weight. But if there is NO armor at all, it will not help against sabot, though it will effectively prevent penetration by HEAT.

 

[RedMercury]

Indeed. I'm interested in learning more about the Relict (sp?) ERA.
Also, do you have more armor depth at angle diagrams for other contemporary tanks, Aluka?

I remember an old advertisement poster for the FY series ERA. However I can't dig it up now. This is a Jane's article which talks about it.

JANE'S DEFENCE WEEKLY - JANUARY 28, 2004

China upgrades Type 59 tank

CHRISTOPHER F FOSS JDW Land Forces Editor
London

...snip...

It has recently been revealed that NORINCO is marketing a complete family of ERA, called FY, to meet different operational requirements. The baseline FY-1 only guards against HEAT projectiles; FY-II provides protection against HEAT and armour-piercing fin-stabilised discarding sabot (APFSDS) attack; while FY-III provides protection against tandem HEAT warheads.
The most advanced FY-IV protects against APFSDS and tandem HEAT attack. The latter type of warhead is designed to neutralise the ERA so that the main charge penetrates the armour of the vehicle.

...snip...

 

[Chengdu J-10]

I came across this video when I was browsing through some Chinese websites and came across this CCTV7 video, it show PLA Ground force in exercise, PLA Army Aviation, troops firing live ATGM rounds at targets, Type 96MBT firing, IFV, artillery firing, and PLA troops charging. Link wont work so I found a simular but shorter version about 30 secs less on you tube. Here is the youtube link below. Tell me what you think about it recent? (As in 2005-present)

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[eckherl]

Did somebody say something different?

The whole turret actually.

China is not the first to make such era, Russians fielded similar design in 1985. And "effective against" does not mean that it's going to stop it, merely reduce it's effectiveness. On the glacis or turret front it may give additional protection equal to 200-300mm, which is great because of ERA low weight. But if there is NO armor at all, it will not help against sabot, though it will effectively prevent penetration by HEAT.

Incorrect - T-90 turret is cast into large sections with the sides added by welding.

 

[eckherl]

Indeed. I'm interested in learning more about the Relict (sp?) ERA.
Also, do you have more armor depth at angle diagrams for other contemporary tanks, Aluka?

I remember an old advertisement poster for the FY series ERA. However I can't dig it up now. This is a Jane's article which talks about it.

China had access to Relict armor for quite some time now, they have used some of that technology to design/fine tune a better ERA package for their armor, and yes it will defeat some KE long rod penetrators. Russia and Ukraine are pretty much set on the Kaktus armor package that offers even more protection levels against KE long rod penetrators. The U.S and other NATO members were quite concerned with Kaktus protection levels to a point that you started seeing the likes of the 829A3 and DM53/63 tank rounds being produced.

 

[Aluka]

I'm interested in learning more about the Relict (sp?) ERA.

There are some articles in Russian, i will probably translate and post them at world armed forces.

Also, do you have more armor depth at angle diagrams for other contemporary tanks, Aluka?

Hmm. I've made those two myself using common sence and line drawings of both tanks. However gspo has some accurate diagrams of different Russian tanks and Leopard 2.

Incorrect - T-90 turret is cast into large sections with the sides added by welding.

No, you are wrong, and i have no idea where have you been misled in such a way.
Here is the photo:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Here is the drawing:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

China had access to Relict armor for quite some time now

Provide a source please. Relict isn't being mass-produced even by Russia yet.

Russia and Ukraine are pretty much set on the Kaktus armor package that offers even more protection levels against KE long rod penetrators.

Ukraine doesn't have access to Kaktus, this is Russia's only thing (however Ukraine has quite an interesting piece called "knife", i'd say it's an uncommon approach to era design). And it's actually the whole different story, it's a perspective system being developed to have functions of both era and composite armor.

 

[eckherl]

There are some articles in Russian, i will probably translate and post them at world armed forces.

Hmm. I've made those two myself using common sence and line drawings of both tanks. However gspo has some accurate diagrams of different Russian tanks and Leopard 2.

No, you are wrong, and i have no idea where have you been misled in such a way.
Here is the photo:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Here is the drawing:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Provide a source please. Relict isn't being mass-produced even by Russia yet.

Ukraine doesn't have access to Kaktus, this is Russia's only thing (however Ukraine has quite an interesting piece called "knife", i'd say it's an uncommon approach to era design). And it's actually the whole different story, it's a perspective system being developed to have functions of both era and composite armor.

The only true all welded turret configeration is the T-90M correct?, and this model is what is being exported to India. Russia uses a casting and welding process for their turret models like the T-90S series.

Kontakt 5 came out on the ealier version T-72 BM and T - 90, you do not think that Russia has upgraded to Kaktus armor protection levels for their very own T-90S tanks.
Russia may not be mass producing Relict armor but I do not see why they would not sell the technology to other countries.

Ukraines (Knife armor) approach is reportely able to stop the latest DU armor penetrators, I have my doubts, the rounds like DM53/63 could be in trouble though.