New Type98/99 MBT thread

[bladerunner]

After visiting Jeff Heads thread on American lasers, I was wondering whether the Chinese MBTs still have those laser thingys?, and is the Asian terrain really suitable for a Heavy MBT?. I dont ever recall the Japanese ever bothering with one in WW2.or did the Western forces have much use for heavy tanks in the Korean War?

 

[crobato]

The newer Type 99Gs or is it As now, still have them. They appear smaller now, indicating the device has at least gone a generation. The 96s and 96Gs don't have them, but the 96G appear to have a Shtora like device.

Asian terrain has never proven to be good for tanks, and tanks served mostly as pillboxes in both the Korean and the Vietnam wars. Plus they were pretty much working as pillboxes in the entire Pacific war front in WWII and in the Chinese front as well.

Yet, further north, Zhukov routed the Imperial Japanese Army with them before WWII, and the Soviet Union made further use of tanks to route the Japanese Manchurian Army near the close of WWII.

Pretty much, anything north of China is still tank ground, just as they were in the centuries past, the perfect ground for horse cavalry. Tanks are to modern China what ancient cavalry was to the Dynasties before---mainly used to fight the cavalry invaders to the north. This despite that warfare from the central to the south of China tends to be dominated between infantry and amphibious-riverine naval warfare.

After the split between Mao and the Soviet Union, the PRC built its tank armies with the intention of using them to defend against the Soviet Union and its massive tank armies. There were at least 17 SU tank divisions alone facing the Chinese borders. Today, even though Russia and China are friends now, the battle tanks are kept as an insurance card.

 

[SteelBird]

Sorry for my question: Some Chinese sites have claimed that the 99 might be inferior to Al-Khalid made in Pakistan. Because Al-Khalid use German automatic gearbox while the 99 uses indigenous manual gearbox. Is it true?

 

[crobato]

Sorry for my question: Some Chinese sites have claimed that the 99 might be inferior to Al-Khalid made in Pakistan. Because Al-Khalid use German automatic gearbox while the 99 uses indigenous manual gearbox. Is it true?

Why? It should be that the 99 probably uses an indigenously made manual gearbox of German design, and that's because the engine of the 99 is an MTU design. The Al Khalid is more likely to use a Russian or Ukrainian gearbox given that the tank uses a Ukrainian engine. Nationality has nothing to do with superiority or inferiority however.

 

[SteelBird]

Why? It should be that the 99 probably uses an indigenously made manual gearbox of German design, and that's because the engine of the 99 is an MTU design. The Al Khalid is more likely to use a Russian or Ukrainian gearbox given that the tank uses a Ukrainian engine. Nationality has nothing to do with superiority or inferiority however.

In battle, an automatic gearbox is much more flexible, while with manual gearbox, the driver would be too busy and so become less flexible and less effective in battle. One second slower in battle zone has to be paid by lives.

 

[RedMercury]

OTOH, automatic gearbox is more complex and hence less reliable.

 

[SteelBird]

OTOH, automatic gearbox is more complex and hence less reliable.

For the old day, yes. But automatic gearboxes have been matured for about 20 years or more. Now, how many percent of cars that you can find them with manual gearbox?

 

[PrOeLiTeZ]

For the old day, yes. But automatic gearboxes have been matured for about 20 years or more. Now, how many percent of cars that you can find them with manual gearbox?

Alot of cars nowdays are still manual. Its not a small percentage its still a large percentage of people driving manuals. The newest sports cars coming out are still manuals, or at least manual based, but still not automatic. It doesnt matter how much automatic has matured the fact is that manual gearbox still have advantages which automatic cannot give, which manual's have.

Manual gearbox are less likely to fail, easier to repair and maintane, gives more power then automatic. How is manual gear box slower then automatic? It depends on the driver ability to change gears, not by classifying. The Type 99 uses German MTU engine design, so what if its in China. Boeing and Airbus sections are constructed in China, but people wouldn't know the difference. Until they are told that it was constructed in China, then people would of double standards of thinking.

Remember the Al Khalid is a Chinese tank design that Pakistan used, and remember it being rejected by the PLA infavour of Type 98 which in turn was the Type 99. And mobility isn't what sets MBT superiority over another.

 

[SteelBird]

Alot of cars nowdays are still manual. Its not a small percentage its still a large percentage of people driving manuals. The newest sports cars coming out are still manuals, or at least manual based, but still not automatic. It doesnt matter how much automatic has matured the fact is that manual gearbox still have advantages which automatic cannot give, which manual's have.

Manual gearbox are less likely to fail, easier to repair and maintane, gives more power then automatic. How is manual gear box slower then automatic? It depends on the driver ability to change gears, not by classifying. The Type 99 uses German MTU engine design, so what if its in China. Boeing and Airbus sections are constructed in China, but people wouldn't know the difference. Until they are told that it was constructed in China, then people would of double standards of thinking.

Remember the Al Khalid is a Chinese tank design that Pakistan used, and remember it being rejected by the PLA infavour of Type 98 which in turn was the Type 99. And mobility isn't what sets MBT superiority over another.

Well, I agree that manual gearboxes are more powerful, reliable and easy to maintain. When automatic gearboxes first appear, we also refused them for the sake of reliability. But now, it's at least 20 years after the automatic gearbox first introduced.

But what happen when you got stuck in a traffic jam? Automatic gearboxes ease your driving at slow speed, and give you all the convenience you want. The same in tanks. Let's assume that all tank drivers are well trained and highly skilled. When you drive a manual-geared tank, both of your legs and one of your hands are occupied, because you have to change the gear position all the time . But in automatic geared, only one leg is needed to reduce or add speed. It's just like you are playing a toy. So, if two skilled tank drivers, one drive automatic and the other drive manual, fighting each other, who wins?

 

[PrOeLiTeZ]

Well, I agree that manual gearboxes are more powerful, reliable and easy to maintain. When automatic gearboxes first appear, we also refused them for the sake of reliability. But now, it's at least 20 years after the automatic gearbox first introduced.

But what happen when you got stuck in a traffic jam? Automatic gearboxes ease your driving at slow speed, and give you all the convenience you want. The same in tanks. Let's assume that all tank drivers are well trained and highly skilled. When you drive a manual-geared tank, both of your legs and one of your hands are occupied, because you have to change the gear position all the time . But in automatic geared, only one leg is needed to reduce or add speed. It's just like you are playing a toy. So, if two skilled tank drivers, one drive automatic and the other drive manual, fighting each other, who wins?

i do drive a manual and its not that hard driving a slow speeds. doesnt matter if both your hands and feet are occupied. even if your driving an automatic you got free hand and feet doing nothing, so it doesnt really give much significant advantage. Having unoccupied hands or feet doesnt mean dominance in tank warefare.

For argument sake lets neglect the engine for the time being, then you got look at crew reaction time, weapons suite, defence suites, commander skills, crew skills, weapons, armour all this links and adds up to superiority of a tank. So ruling out an engine that has a manual Chinese made gearbox being inferior to a German engine making the tank inferior isnt the aspect in which you view which tank being dominant.