PLA Next Generation Main Battle Tank

Michaelsinodef said:

Think you underestimate the material science breakthroughs in the last 10ish years.

Both ERA and base armor improvements might make this new 40ish tons next gen tank rival the 99A in protection.

And if you gonna say something about upgrading the 99A as well, then uh, it ain't no longer a 99A but like 99A+ or 99AG.

Not to mention, seems like base version of the next gen is gonna include APS, while that is not the case for the 99A.

Click to expand...

APS cannot protect against KE penetrators effectively so base armor is still important. Unless you provide some sources specifically for advances in highly weight efficient armor it is hard to believe a mid 30 ton tank can achieve and likely exceed protection level of 55-60 ton tanks. ERAs has its own issues especially for constrained spaces like city warfare coupled with no evidence this new tank uses any leads me to believe ERAs would not make up the bulk of armor like on previous Chinese/Soviet/Russian designs with possible light ERA addons.

As for upgrading ZTZ99As, me personally do not think it's a good idea. The design although comprehensively modernised from the original ZTZ99 but still has some carried over Soviet design influences which IMO isn't great for modern warfare. Plus if the heavy config of these new MBTs can match and exceed 99A's armor and firepower performance there is no reason to continue spending money upgrading them. It might in fact be more economical to start replacing everything with these new tanks for better economy of scale especially when there seems to be a entire system designed around the same hull.

Tomboy said:

APS cannot protect against KE penetrators effectively so base armor is still important. Unless you provide some sources specifically for advances in highly weight efficient armor it is hard to believe a mid 30 ton tank can achieve and likely exceed protection level of 55-60 ton tanks. ERAs has its own issues especially for constrained spaces like city warfare coupled with no evidence this new tank uses any leads me to believe ERAs would not make up the bulk of armor like on previous Chinese/Soviet/Russian designs with possible light ERA addons.

As for upgrading ZTZ99As, me personally do not think it's a good idea. The design although comprehensively modernised from the original ZTZ99 but still has some carried over Soviet design influences which IMO isn't great for modern warfare. Plus if the heavy config of these new MBTs can match and exceed 99A's armor and firepower performance there is no reason to continue spending money upgrading them. It might in fact be more economical to start replacing everything with these new tanks for better economy of scale especially when there seems to be a entire system designed around the same hull.

Click to expand...

How many tanks and armour vehicles were destroyed by APFSDS in Ukraine?

vincent said:

How many tanks and armour vehicles were destroyed by APFSDS in Ukraine?

Click to expand...

So you suggesting future MBTs forego kinetic protection all together? That's just ridiculous, there are still cases of tank on tank action in Ukraine. Betting on the enemy not having APFSDS rounds is not a viable strategy. Just because two badly equipped armies cannot afford to use KE rounds doesn't mean whoever China will be fighting will cheap out as well.

Tomboy said:

So you suggesting future MBTs forego kinetic protection all together? That's just ridiculous, there are still cases of tank on tank action in Ukraine. Betting on the enemy not having APFSDS rounds is not a viable strategy. Just because two badly equipped armies cannot afford to use KE rounds doesn't mean whoever China will be fighting will cheap out as well.

Click to expand...

It's not about being cheap but cost/benefit ratio. If one expects 99% of tank kills will be done by FPV and top-attack munitions, why add armour that will increase the tank's weight, size and reduces the mobility?

vincent said:

It's not about being cheap but cost/benefit ratio. If one expects 99% of tank kills will be done by FPV and top-attack munitions, why add armour that will increase the tank's weight, size and reduces the mobility?

Click to expand...

Again suggesting MBTs forgo all types of armor and rely purely on APS and drone defenses. If this is realistic than everyone else would've been doing it(or atleast trying), ATGMs/RPG is still a big threat to MBTs and APS can fail as seen in Palestine numerous amount of time. Good base armor is absolutely still required as a fallback against drones/ATGMs/RPGs and the occational tank on tank combat.

Tomboy said:

Again suggesting MBTs forgo all types of armor and rely purely on APS and drone defenses. If this is realistic than everyone else would've been doing it(or atleast trying), ATGMs/RPG is still a big threat to MBTs and APS can fail as seen in Palestine numerous amount of time. Good base armor is absolutely still required as a fallback against drones/ATGMs/RPGs and the occational tank on tank combat.

Click to expand...

ATGMs/RPG can be defeated by ERA.

What about satchel charges and infantry?

vincent said:

ATGMs/RPG can be defeated by ERA.

Click to expand...

We don't know if this tank will feature ERA as part of it's main armor array, right now we haven't yet seen any indication of ERAs even on the heavy armor config aside from maybe the side blocks which to me seems more like large composite blocks instead.

Tomboy said:

We don't know if this tank will feature ERA as part of it's main armor array, right now we haven't yet seen any indication of ERAs even on the heavy armor config aside from maybe the side blocks which to me seems more like large composite blocks instead.

Click to expand...

That's a separate discussion.

The main point stands, future tank kills are most likely to be done with weapons other than APFSDS. Design and build tanks with enough amour to defeat APFSDS is not worth the sacrifices in other areas.

vincent said:

That's a separate discussion.

The main point stands, future tank kills are most likely to be done with weapons other than APFSDS. Design and build tanks with enough amour to defeat APFSDS is not worth the sacrifices in other areas.

Click to expand...

What major sacrafices? The reason why the term “MBT” is used is because we’ve been able to build tanks that are fast, powerful, and well armoured. ERA cannot replace composite, it can only help, putting ERA on a bmp-1 will do nothing.