PLA Next Generation Main Battle Tank
- Thread starter by78
- Start date
Economy of scale is a thing tho, the raw material might be about the same but if you really only need like 5 of the heavier MBT they are for sure going to cost much more than the lighter ones which you'll be making in the hundreds.
true but this is china. raw materials is not something they are short of. the actual electronics and stuff is what's gonna be the most expensive. more steel for a larger hull and more armor is probably negligible.
The point I observed was: The new tank pays too much attention to armor-APFSDS countermeasures.
More appropriate firepower for future tanks is something like 155/30 or 125/40 which pays more attention to the power of HEs and gun-shoot missiles, and It is worth sacrificing the power of APFSDS for this
Most of the targets of direct fire support aren't going to be tanks, it's mostly infantry in built up positions. In an advance, you might not want to wait for other kinds of firepower to show up so you're going to want to have something on hand. Basically, there's always going to be a use for mobile direct fire support. And in the cases where tanks weren't available, the troops on the ground would often use a poorer substitute to fill perform the job. As it turns out, most of the time, even a bad tank is better than no tank.
ATGMs can be used as one these substitutes, but it's often not a great one. I remember reading back in the day how the ATGMs on Strykers just couldn't do the job of the MGS Strykers, and that the latter were needed even though they mostly sucked. Maybe ATGMs are more advanced nowadays, but not all of their problems have gone away.
The name main battle tank is more about role than weight or even firepower or protection. It means that it can effectively perform the role of basically any other tank out there. This tank seems to do everything that main battle tanks are supposed to do. In comparison, the turtle tanks are very limited and I don't think that they are a very good design for other countries to copy.
I suspect that keeping the weight down on this new tank was a very high priority. Being overly heavy will make it that much harder to transport and support. It was a very concious decision to make a lighter tank and this ZTZ-201 should be much more available than a heavier one. Besides, a 105mm HE charge is still going to be very potent. Even though the M10 Booker had a lot of failings, the choice of a 105mm gun was not one of them.The point I observed was: The new tank pays too much attention to armor-APFSDS countermeasures.
More appropriate firepower for future tanks is something like 155/30 or 125/40 which pays more attention to the power of HEs and gun-shoot missiles, and It is worth sacrificing the power of APFSDS for this
Would this be the kind of “火力不足恐惧症” people have with regards to equipment?
The best tactics maybe to stay at a safe distance and call the arty on it, a bunch of guided 155 shells with drones provide lasing
As far as I understand it, this meme mocks certain PLA members who always demand the largest calibre in weapon designs. The OP was talking about some Chinese military fans.
Well, armored vehicle capable of direct fire for anti concrete purposes still exists. Unless they packed a mininuke into that 105mm, it aint gonna cut it.
There's no fundamental difference between 105 and 120/125 for clearing modern field fortification and urban landscapes.
Both clear single spaces in one shot, both breach walls, neither is remotely enough as demolition caliber.
120/125 however packs substantially less ammo for given volume.
Frankly speaking, same is true all the way up to 155, included. During WW2, yes, 152 could drop then prevalent types of architecture in one hit. Now, not so much.