Russia's Tank Biathlon
- Thread starter SteelBird
- Start date
Engineer
Major
Zimbabwe's team tried going up a hill, then stalled and slid back down, for the third time.
I love this thread where everyone is asking themselves why Chinese team is doing much worse than Russians and the only answer is 'Russians cheat' and 'Chinese are a level above the competition'
See:
Blackstone
Brigadier
You might not know this, but there's a common sense rule of order that assigns the burden of proof to those that make claims.More like the bottom line being that you have no facts for a counter argument. Kind of like how there is "outcry" from Chinese sources, yet you deem them to be "Internet rumor", right in this very thread. You are the one full of supposition and speculation.
It must pain you to hear that China's equipments can outperform others. What can you do about it? Oh right, nothing.
You said in post #103 Russia banned China from using PLL-05 in this year's Tank Biathlon, because the system performed too well in last year's competition. That sounds like you made two charges in one sentence. So, you need to furnish evidence for your claims;
- Russia banned China from using PLL-05
- The said ban was because the PLL-05 did too well in the last biathlon
plawolf
Lieutenant General
There you go with your baseless flamebaiting again.
Considering how well the old 96A did in previous years, does it make sense to you that the improved version seems to be doing worse?
And no, my default explanation isn't to just assume the Chinese engineers are moronic baffons like you seem to.
I posted this comment in another thread yesterday
"In the first rounds, the tanks were shooting HEAT training rounds at static targets from a distance of 1600-1800 meters. All of the rounds had tracers, except for the Chinese ones, which leads me to believe that the Chinese brought their own munition with them.
In the finals which started today, the tanks had to shoot on the move (at very slow speeds 5-10kmph) at static targets at the same range as mentioned above, only this time they used APFSDS training rounds with a much higher velocity and flatter trajectory.
Again the Chinese brought their own munition because of the lack of tracer, only found at the Chinese.
I do not doubt the capabilities of most participating crews to accurately lay the cross-hairs in the center of the target, holding it steady, laser-ranging and firing the gun. I don't doubt the advanced FCS of both the T-72B3(M) and the Type-96B.
The only reason I can come up with for the terrible accuracy, is the 2A46 tank gun and it's Chinese derivative. Compared to their western analogues, they are leagues behind in terms of accuracy. You can see for yourself googling for "120mm L44 accuracy".
I think a Type-59D with its 105mm gun and modern FCS, would do much better in terms of accuracy."
To see how inaccurate the 2A46 gun is, take a look at page 153:
"In the first rounds, the tanks were shooting HEAT training rounds at static targets from a distance of 1600-1800 meters. All of the rounds had tracers, except for the Chinese ones, which leads me to believe that the Chinese brought their own munition with them.
In the finals which started today, the tanks had to shoot on the move (at very slow speeds 5-10kmph) at static targets at the same range as mentioned above, only this time they used APFSDS training rounds with a much higher velocity and flatter trajectory.
Again the Chinese brought their own munition because of the lack of tracer, only found at the Chinese.
I do not doubt the capabilities of most participating crews to accurately lay the cross-hairs in the center of the target, holding it steady, laser-ranging and firing the gun. I don't doubt the advanced FCS of both the T-72B3(M) and the Type-96B.
The only reason I can come up with for the terrible accuracy, is the 2A46 tank gun and it's Chinese derivative. Compared to their western analogues, they are leagues behind in terms of accuracy. You can see for yourself googling for "120mm L44 accuracy".
I think a Type-59D with its 105mm gun and modern FCS, would do much better in terms of accuracy."
To see how inaccurate the 2A46 gun is, take a look at page 153:
Blackstone
Brigadier
Depending on what kind of source you are talking about. Do you demand Chinese MoD as the only legitimate source? I know that you for most times call Chinese governmental words as "propagandas"? So let's leave it.
Besides, unlike some countries who enjoy pointing fingers at Russia, a fashion recently, China (the sate) regards finger-pointing as rude and unnecessary when China's main purpose in that game is not dick-measuring, but making goodwill.
If we then take in words from members of Chinese BBS, then there is a big outcry. You just have to go to Chinese BBS and read Chinese.
No offence intended, but I assume that you don't read Chinese, so when you talk about "Chinese sources", you must be talking about "Chinese" "sources" produced by Western sources, am I right?