I reckon you haven't fully understood my viewpoints, therefore I recommend you read my replies again. Of course we need strategic forces, of course we need to develop them, and that's what we're doing now. But not all affairs can be settled with only strategic forces, nor will all be settled in a relatively pleasant and cost-effective way. You need to think more than just using nukes to send people to hell. And I reclaim, that China-US confrontation will not go into a conflict of war, both leaders are well aware what such a scenario would bring, this claim is supported by dozens of articles by the Chinese military english channel. Strategic weapons would remain strategic, acting as a bargaining chip, a threat, and a peacekeeper, instead of doing what they will do in a worst scenario of a war. For regional settlements with India and Taiwan, tactical forces like the ground force would instead play the role of a threat. And if war really starts, will act as what they're intended, to destroy enemy opposing forces at low cost and high efficiency in a relatively peaceful manner, instead of mass killing with hugely expensive nukes.
PLA Next Generation Main Battle Tank
- Thread starter by78
- Start date
TBH Why he posted these two today was because he was trying to have a debate ithy me on weibo. lol. Both pics matter little tho, first being the 3D simulator model of the 125mm multi-use gun weapon system (not such a leading edge in research I guess) Second one simply just a demonstration modeling that doesn't say anything. (PS the guy is actually not very welcomed in the Chinese community,especially after once he messed up with a certain somebody who's actually professional.Conceptual illustrations from research papers on armored vehicles. Could be relevant, or not.
)
yuxiaochen
Junior Member
What's your weibo name?TBH Why he posted these two today was because he was trying to have a debate ithy me on weibo. lol. Both pics matter little tho, first being the 3D simulator model of the 125mm multi-use gun weapon system (not such a leading edge in research I guess) Second one simply just a demonstration modeling that doesn't say anything. (PS the guy is actually not very welcomed in the Chinese community,especially after once he messed up with a certain somebody who's actually professional.
hxagon_graphite
From a domestically-published 201 Institute owned magazine ("Tanks and Armoured vehicles", blurred parts of it because domestically-published magazines are legally listed as state secret). No description of what it is.
Some features: 7 road wheels, active hydraulic suspension, 2 crew members and an unmanned turret. The frontal and top armour are also changed/improved largely.
Personal speculation is that this thing is something similar to the 201 concept:
I hope public distribution of this picture can be restricted. Content of one of my previous posts was wide spread out, which is not a thing I hoped to see. Luckily that post was information about an export tank, but who knows what might be leaked next time. I beg for your understanding and cooperation. Thanks comrades.
Some features: 7 road wheels, active hydraulic suspension, 2 crew members and an unmanned turret. The frontal and top armour are also changed/improved largely.
Personal speculation is that this thing is something similar to the 201 concept:
Which has 7 road wheels and 2 crew members. Of course, it may as well be something else instead of a 4th gen concept. (like a 7 roadwheel concept testbed) I must also mention that 7 wheels doesn't necessarily mean more weight.
I hope public distribution of this picture can be restricted. Content of one of my previous posts was wide spread out, which is not a thing I hoped to see. Luckily that post was information about an export tank, but who knows what might be leaked next time. I beg for your understanding and cooperation. Thanks comrades.
Does the document specifically mention 2 crew members or because it has 2 hatches on the hull? Because Armata also has only 2 hatches despite having 3 crew members.
That's why I call it a personal speculation... However judging by the width of the hull it seems not wide enough for a 3-men crew, and 201 seems to have no interest in introducing a 3-men crew tank, cause it seems kind of unfinished...Does the document specifically mention 2 crew members or because it has 2 hatches on the hull? Because Armata also has only 2 hatches despite having 3 crew members.
Images in higher res. But don't get too hyped up cause it's an open paper and has nothing to do with 4th gens... Probably except for some certain design ideas.Conceptual illustrations from research papers on armored vehicles. Could be relevant, or not.
What is the yellow thingy at turret ring?