PLA Next Generation Main Battle Tank
- Thread starter by78
- Start date
the post podcast above is the one you should listen to.
I find it absolutely dumb for PLA to overly praise the Type 15 and subsequently proceed to give up on any heavier "proper" MBTs. All other countries are making 4th gen tanks like Leopard 3 with 140mm gun and heavy protection or unmanned MBTs. And did they not remember the campaign in Vietnam all the Type 62 light tanks are completely useless because they are so easily penetrated?
I like the Type 15, but going all in on a light tank while exporting better, proper tanks overseas just baffles me.
Also, a universal platform that can be configured into a light tank or a heavy MBT also doesn't make sense, because the engine space is going to be the same, which means the MBT version are inherently going to be underpowered.
With so much budget going to the navy and air force, the ground force is really looking dire right now...
I like the Type 15, but going all in on a light tank while exporting better, proper tanks overseas just baffles me.
Also, a universal platform that can be configured into a light tank or a heavy MBT also doesn't make sense, because the engine space is going to be the same, which means the MBT version are inherently going to be underpowered.
With so much budget going to the navy and air force, the ground force is really looking dire right now...
This just makes no sense, we don't know the protection level of the new tank, it could weigh up to 45 tons or more for the heavy armor configuration which is only 2 tons less then mainstream Russian MBTs which are pretty well armored, especially when most of the armor for the next generation tank will be concentrated on the hull as the turret will be unmanned. Frontal hull armor judging from the crew hatch location seems to be extremely thick possibly over a meter in LoS thickness. For all we know the armored crew capsule could easily be designed to tank modern 120mm long rod penetrators and up coming darts frontally. There's also nothing stopping them from putting in a 1500hp engine into a 40 ton baseline vehicle, especially when the next generation diesel engine is rumored to basically be world leading and be in class with the likes of MTU 890. I'm not sure why did you assume that the heavy version will be underpowered, it could very likely be that the light variant be overpowered or the engine could just be potentially tuned down via software to extend engine life when in the light configuration. This new MBT certainly isn't cheap and likely costs far more than a ZTZ-99A due to much more new technology went into it, idk where your assumption that PLAGF is underfunded comes from.
Because you are approaching the subject like a Warthunder player rather than a military planner. No offense intended.
When you are determining the requirements for a new piece of equipment, first you gotta ask yourself where and how that thing is needed. Currently, NATO MBTs are weighting close to or over 70 metric tons. Thats not a major problem if you are fighting a war at your own borders, but when you need to ship or airlift tanks halfway around the world -lets say to a certain island less than 200km from mainland China during an emergency- suddenly all that heavy armor and huge guns become a major problem. Just for reference, it took the US Army and Airforce about 6 months to build up the forces in Saudi Arabia to defeat Iraq in 1990, and that was with the added help of dozens of other countries. The strategic mobility of Abrams (and consider the models used then were a lot lighter than nowadays) proved to be a major obstacle.
Likewise, a 55-57 ton heavy Type 99A makes a lot of sense for the PLA if they mean to defend the mainland against a foreign invasion, whereas a lighter tank with configurable protection levels makes a lot more sense also for less defensive operations.
If they are hostile with Russia then go for more heavy tanks by all means. But I don’t think that’s gonna happen.
IMO whatever's inducted now probably doesn't matter too much. The war in Ukraine only happened 3 years ago, it's gonna take a few more years to come up with some comprehensive assessment of what large scale ground warfare of the future will be like and then some more years to design and test out various platforms accordingly.
I think land warfare will be similar to air and naval ones, where it'll be more system-centric than platform centric. Comparing MBT vs MBT would then be a fruitless endeavor, they must be compared in the context of their role in the system if you want to compare them at all. This better armor, bigger gun stuff is just fighting the last war IMO. Paradigm shifts are underway and every army who wishes to stay relevant in the next 20 and beyond needs to devote a lot of resources onto it. I wouldn't be surprised that at the end of it there wouldn't even be a distinction between army and air force anymore, and fights will occur in a seamless continuum from the ground to space.
I think land warfare will be similar to air and naval ones, where it'll be more system-centric than platform centric. Comparing MBT vs MBT would then be a fruitless endeavor, they must be compared in the context of their role in the system if you want to compare them at all. This better armor, bigger gun stuff is just fighting the last war IMO. Paradigm shifts are underway and every army who wishes to stay relevant in the next 20 and beyond needs to devote a lot of resources onto it. I wouldn't be surprised that at the end of it there wouldn't even be a distinction between army and air force anymore, and fights will occur in a seamless continuum from the ground to space.
Words have been spreading about a new lightweight 1500hp engine with a fully-electrical transmission system. To hell with differencers and gearboxes in general, they are the most unreliable component in a tank. With small battery packs acting as buffers the maximum power output in short bursts should be pretty phenomenal.