Thats not entirely relevant, if the 105mm weighs the same (or heavier as the published research may indicate), has a similar aerodynamic profile (L/D ratio, similar geometry, etc.) and muzzle velocity than, lets say DM63, then it will achieve similar or greater performance at all ranges.
PLA Next Generation Main Battle Tank
- Thread starter by78
- Start date
Or a drone flies behind so you can have third person pov
Thats not the most important question. Rather ask "What need do they have to design something completly new?". Russia´s justification for T-14 were the inherent and unsolvable limitations of the T-72 platform layout in the face of projected future requirements. China´s may be more related to strategic and operational mobility requirements.
If strategic and operational mobility was the sole criteria then the Type 15 would have been enough. Instead they made this tank. Which is way more advanced. I think it is designed to be both mobile and win against a heavy MBT. Like the ones Taiwan operates. Or the T-90s that India and Vietnam use.
What justification do you have to keep producing older tanks when new designs and new technologies exist? That is the biggest justification for upgrade.
The more richer and and powerful China gets the expectation will be that each weapons platform will be able to achieve better results than older ones. 1 soldier from pla will be able to achieve more than 2-3 soldiers of other countries.
You could call this combat productivity.
So, Chinese new technology tanks will be able to achieve more victories with less numbers. They will likely lose less tanks compared to enemies. That is the biggest justification for constant upgrades.
Yes I agree with that assesement. But the key priority must have been to do all kinds of tank missions with the projected threat scenarios while keeping the weight down.
Whats wrong with current western platforms that can´t be fixed through overhauls? Both the M1E3 and European concepts show that there is a lot more capability that can be squeezed from the in service chassis. Which BTW also makes production cheaper because the capacity and tooling are already in place.
Their tanks are sufficient for what they need. Their main competitor, Russia, doesn't have money to buy anything other than T-90's
Though T-90 on itself is the main justification for them spending a lot right now to modernize their fleets. Not a pushover by any means.
Not just a T-90 but a T-90M. Anyway the thing is switching production in the middle of a war is a big no-no. Only if the T-90M became unsuitable for some reason would such an effort happen. But I am fairly sure the T-14 or some variant will enter production after the war is over.
The new Chinese tank has a lot of positives, some questionable choices, and some things I dislike. But seems to be a vast improvement overall.
The new Chinese tank has a lot of positives, some questionable choices, and some things I dislike. But seems to be a vast improvement overall.
It is not about having a better tank than adverary, it is about the value of tank itself. It will not matter whose tank is better if they all get destroyed by drones easily.
The new tank should be designed to reflect new nature of warfare, where drones are ever present. I am not a fan of the new tank. It is a major technological advance, but it feels outdated, as if someone in 2010 dream up a new tank. Entire design is built around sensors, APS against ATGM proliferation. And indeed, ATGM was what every one was worried about in 2010. But Ukraine taught us drone is by far the biggest threat not ATGM, and I am not seeing new design to protect it.
I am being very realistic here. How good is your tank if some random ISIS can neutralize it? This is the kind of question we must ask.
What use is a new expensive tank if it is as survivable as a ZTZ-96A? Perhaps you would say the tank will be protected by EW and various anti-drone system. I am not convinced. EW is expensive along with various shortcoming, and does not protect against fibre optic drones. The current anti-drone is unproven in realistic battlefield, and is itself vulnerable to artillery and direct gun fire. We cannot expect tanks to perform its job if it is as vulnerable to the thin skinned vehicles around it. Realistically there is no satisfactory solution to kill drones while remaining protected against various other threats. Meanwhile drones can easily improve, while anti-drone measures are order of magnitude more expensive and hard to keep up. Things are not really looking good for traditional tank designs.
In general the more complex the solution is, the more holes it can poke. Having a complex series of special vehicle is extremely expensive, unreliable for such a cheap, simple threat. So I think ultimately the solution to drones must be very affordable, and simple enough to not have anti synergy with task of tank: a rugged assault platform operating in high threat environment. An expensive fleet of anti drone system will not survive. I think ultimately we will return to simple solutions like 'cope cage'.
We see Russia was able to convert T-72 into very survivable platforms with heavy amount of cage armor. But this kind of design has its own problems. The new tank design I am hoping for is to incorporate comprehensive anti-drone armor while remain unimpeded by it, and still able to perform its traditional roles. I am not sure if these armor is compatible with APS system new tank is built around. It may just be useless once it carry anti drone armor.
Drone protection is central to design of every military vehicle, and every feature must work around it. Until new tank design reflect it, I expect it remain a placeholder at best, sidegrade at worst. The improvements like better propulsion system is theoritical at best.
The new tank should be designed to reflect new nature of warfare, where drones are ever present. I am not a fan of the new tank. It is a major technological advance, but it feels outdated, as if someone in 2010 dream up a new tank. Entire design is built around sensors, APS against ATGM proliferation. And indeed, ATGM was what every one was worried about in 2010. But Ukraine taught us drone is by far the biggest threat not ATGM, and I am not seeing new design to protect it.
I am being very realistic here. How good is your tank if some random ISIS can neutralize it? This is the kind of question we must ask.
What use is a new expensive tank if it is as survivable as a ZTZ-96A? Perhaps you would say the tank will be protected by EW and various anti-drone system. I am not convinced. EW is expensive along with various shortcoming, and does not protect against fibre optic drones. The current anti-drone is unproven in realistic battlefield, and is itself vulnerable to artillery and direct gun fire. We cannot expect tanks to perform its job if it is as vulnerable to the thin skinned vehicles around it. Realistically there is no satisfactory solution to kill drones while remaining protected against various other threats. Meanwhile drones can easily improve, while anti-drone measures are order of magnitude more expensive and hard to keep up. Things are not really looking good for traditional tank designs.
In general the more complex the solution is, the more holes it can poke. Having a complex series of special vehicle is extremely expensive, unreliable for such a cheap, simple threat. So I think ultimately the solution to drones must be very affordable, and simple enough to not have anti synergy with task of tank: a rugged assault platform operating in high threat environment. An expensive fleet of anti drone system will not survive. I think ultimately we will return to simple solutions like 'cope cage'.
We see Russia was able to convert T-72 into very survivable platforms with heavy amount of cage armor. But this kind of design has its own problems. The new tank design I am hoping for is to incorporate comprehensive anti-drone armor while remain unimpeded by it, and still able to perform its traditional roles. I am not sure if these armor is compatible with APS system new tank is built around. It may just be useless once it carry anti drone armor.
Drone protection is central to design of every military vehicle, and every feature must work around it. Until new tank design reflect it, I expect it remain a placeholder at best, sidegrade at worst. The improvements like better propulsion system is theoritical at best.
Last edited: