ZTQ-15 and PRC Light Tanks

Inst said:

THe level of armor protection on the Sprut is so poor that a Chinese IFV with a 30mm autocannon can penetrate it. So it's an improvement in Indian capabilities, if the Indians do sign the contract, but not that big an improvement. The fact that its 125mm can reliably penetrate even ZTQ-99s from the right angle is worrying, but the lack of protection means that the ZTQ-15 can easily destroy it in a fight, as can any anti-tank equipment the Chinese deploy. It's likely to be even penetrated by Type 69s.

Click to expand...

Fire control systems matter. A 125mm from a Sprut has not a great chance of hitting anything before the Sprut is hit itself. The FCS onboard 99 and 15 are surely many, many leagues above the Sprut. Even the Type 96A I'm confident would be able to successfully drive, turn, and shoot while hitting Sprut before the Sprut slowly takes aim from stationary positions. FCS comes before ammunition quality and gun. You gotta hit your target first before the round can do damage to the target.

There's little chance the Sprut has better FCS and hydraulics (no way!) compared to modernised T-72. Those modernised T-72s already have abysmal FCS and pretty much comparable to Type 96 original and at best (for the latest T-72 variants) roughly equal to Type 96A/B levels. That's no comparison to what the Type 99, 99A, and Type 15 use. So the Chinese tanks won't only be running while shooting, they will also see Sprut first and fire first and fire far more accurately.

For instance, the Japanese claimed rather publicly that the Type 10 FCS is so amazing that a Type 10 can destroy multiple Type 99 tanks before it is overwhelmed itself. That's because it supposedly can detect and outrange Type 99 with its superior FCS, gun + ammo combos. This of course is really up to debate since the Type 99 carries pretty decent FCS and has gun fired ATGM which outrange the ballistic ammo on Type 10. Type 10 is also very poorly armoured by modern standards. Super expensive high tensile steels are a stooooopid way to design modern armour. Sorry Japan you got really lazy with the Type 10's protection design. Methinks Nippon Steel and the rest of the corporate gang shoved some serious yen down a few throats. Then again it was always designed as some sort of mobility ace with admittedly excellent firepower. They just better get a good APS on that tank to improve defence against missiles.

No way Sprut has even a half decent FCS given the antiquity of the platform, how few of them are in service with Russia, no modernisation programs, and no Russian interest in this light tank anymore.

Point of the Type 10 is that it can be uparmored depending on the circumstance. Its exceptional power to weight ratio is the result of it being in its minimal configuration, making it effectively a light tank that can be uparmored into an MBT. The ZTQ-15 can't do that, in comparison.

FCS on the Sprut is also in question, but tbh it sounds very much like Chinese nationalist bleating as to the crappiness of Russian gear.

Inst said:

Point of the Type 10 is that it can be uparmored depending on the circumstance. Its exceptional power to weight ratio is the result of it being in its minimal configuration, making it effectively a light tank that can be uparmored into an MBT. The ZTQ-15 can't do that, in comparison.

Click to expand...

Wrong.

Show me proof Type 10 can be up-armoured and show what this "up-armouring" consists of. Then show me proof Type 15 CANNOT be up-armoured in any way. Provide power to weight ratios for every permutation for both tanks. You can't. You can't even find literature to hint at this. Type 15 literature hint at armour packages and customisation. So you're already wrong in claiming ZTQ-15 "can't do that" ... whatever "that" even means. Please enlighten us what "that" entails for the Type 10 and how it's different to what the ZTQ-15's modular armour package is like.

FFS we've SEEN Type 15's armour configurations. There are pictures all over the place of at least three distinct armour packages for the type 15 tank model - with variances for both export models VT-5 and PLA's own ZTQ-15. Have we seen any for the Type 10? I haven't. Doesn't mean they don't exist and this wasn't even a point of contention except to say you're totally 100% wrong as usual.

Type 10 isn't a light tank. It's a similar class as the T-72 and T-90s but with superior FCS and most likely also superior gun and ammo compared to even the best T-90 variant - T-90MS.

Anyway we're getting sidetracked. I think you missed the main point which the Type 10 was introduced to make an example of. The point is that the Sprut has very outdated FCS and probably a very primitive one at that. The Sprut's hydraulics and chasis is unlikely to be able to handle the 125mm as well as other Russian MBTs that use the 125mm. So the Sprut and the Type 15 are incomparable in effectiveness in any reasonable way. Now if the Sprut had good protection as well as mobility, that's another matter, but its frontal armour is IFV thin.

Let's assume the Sprut can offer its user as much penetration firepower as a T-90... if the round hits. Now if it hits, the Type 15 may not be able to take the damage, even a direct frontal shot. But I'm saying there is no opportunity for the Sprut to locate, aim, and shoot the Type 15 before the Type 15 is delivering at least its second round even if the first round or two miss. The Srput however, certainly cannot take a 105mm anywhere. I have doubts it can take 12.7 anti-material rounds let alone 20mm or 30mm. 105mm for the Sprut, well it can probably punch through two or three Spruts back to back.

It would be an epic blunder for the Indian military if they decided to buy Spruts.

India's posture on Ladakh is and will be defensive. They will focus on how to defend against any PLA invasion well into their borders. This won't happen unless the situation disintegrates and the strategic calculus get shifted very violently. On the actual points of confrontation along with potential confrontation points, the altitude is not suitable for T-90 or Arjun (which isn't even deployed anywhere near Ladakh and focused on more south western points and the desert). Buying Sprut just for the higher altitude in the hopes that its relatively high power to weight ratio can compensate for low oxygen? Definitely not a smart thing to do without extensive evaluation.

Type 15 has the same if not slightly higher than Sprut's power to weight. Type 15 has much more modern suite of everything. It has far better protection than Sprut and arguably better mobility since its P:W is same or higher and its powertrain is designed specifically for low oxygen environments. Its heavier weight isn't going to impede its roadholding, bridge crossing mobility or accessibility. Its track clearance offers superior trench and obstacle crossing compared to the Sprut and I daresay its engine also has a lot more torque.

India has already placed T-90 in lower altitudes well within their side of the border. These are to confront any PLA incursion that far into India but as said, that is extremely unlikely and even if such a war somehow gets started, MBTs are the least of a general's concerns. A handful (that's all the Indians have deployed) of T-90s won't hold up a shred of resistance if PLA has air superiority or even air dominance while PLA's anti-T90 abilities are off the charts if Indians fail to deliver artillery and air strikes to thwart PLA advances. Of course this situation again is unlikely to occur as both nations seem to have settled on the new status quo.

ougoah said:

Fire control systems matter. A 125mm from a Sprut has not a great chance of hitting anything before the Sprut is hit itself. The FCS onboard 99 and 15 are surely many, many leagues above the Sprut.

Click to expand...

Guys, i start feeling myself as that old hag which always spoils the party. This data is openly available everywhere.
Basic 2s25 is indeed unimpressive here, (1A40M-1 sight is ... sigh)

Indians are discussing new SPRUT-SDM1, however. It, in turn, uses full(maximum) set of Kalina FCS, i. e. same kit as t-90ms and t-90m.

by78 said:

Note the feline decal on the turret sides. They are not painted on.

Click to expand...

And here the video from which the screen shots were taken.

plawolf said:

It’s more akin to an self propelled artillery piece than a tank since even IFVs can easily knock them out from the front.

Click to expand...

From google translate "Frontal armor of the tank provides protection against a 23mm projectile from a distance 500m.

ougoah said:

Fire control systems matter. A 125mm from a Sprut has not a great chance of hitting anything before the Sprut is hit itself. The FCS onboard 99 and 15 are surely many, many leagues above the Sprut. Even the Type 96A I'm confident would be able to successfully drive, turn, and shoot while hitting Sprut before the Sprut slowly takes aim from stationary positions. FCS comes before ammunition quality and gun. You gotta hit your target first before the round can do damage to the target.

There's little chance the Sprut has better FCS and hydraulics (no way!) compared to modernised T-72. Those modernised T-72s already have abysmal FCS and pretty much comparable to Type 96 original and at best (for the latest T-72 variants) roughly equal to Type 96A/B levels. That's no comparison to what the Type 99, 99A, and Type 15 use. So the Chinese tanks won't only be running while shooting, they will also see Sprut first and fire first and fire far more accurately.

For instance, the Japanese claimed rather publicly that the Type 10 FCS is so amazing that a Type 10 can destroy multiple Type 99 tanks before it is overwhelmed itself. That's because it supposedly can detect and outrange Type 99 with its superior FCS, gun + ammo combos. This of course is really up to debate since the Type 99 carries pretty decent FCS and has gun fired ATGM which outrange the ballistic ammo on Type 10. Type 10 is also very poorly armoured by modern standards. Super expensive high tensile steels are a stooooopid way to design modern armour. Sorry Japan you got really lazy with the Type 10's protection design. Methinks Nippon Steel and the rest of the corporate gang shoved some serious yen down a few throats. Then again it was always designed as some sort of mobility ace with admittedly excellent firepower. They just better get a good APS on that tank to improve defence against missiles.

No way Sprut has even a half decent FCS given the antiquity of the platform, how few of them are in service with Russia, no modernisation programs, and no Russian interest in this light tank anymore.

Click to expand...

Type 10 dont have composite or reactive armor? Just steel?

TK3600 said:

Type 10 dont have composite or reactive armor? Just steel?

Click to expand...

I didn't say that. I said Inst is wrong for saying Type 10 has all sorts of armour packages available while ZTQ-15 has none. The exact opposite appears to be true. There are several widely publicised versions of ZTQ-15, all featuring different armour packages and even within the same model, it is "officially" said to be highly modular. The Type 10 is supposedly modular according to fanboy rumours. I have never seen the Type 10 with modular armour or APS or ERA although I don't doubt it can support all of the above.

Type 10's armour based on my readings, contain some extremely high tensile steels. They don't mention anything else. Why they wouldn't use a combination of plating like everyone has been doing since the 70s is beyond me. So that's unlikely to be the case. Perhaps it does and also makes use of some expensive and relatively exotic steels. Japan has some decent steel industries if you ignore their recent scandals. Perhaps some of Nippon steel's scandalous sub-par steels have made their way onto the Type 10 lol... a charge Indian and FLG fake news often accuse the Chinese of with little to no evidence. Meanwhile Nippon Steel actually committed such crimes and supplied various vendors and end customers with sub-par material.

Anyway using only steel is just too stupid to be believable and the tank weighs roughly what you'd expect some heavy use of ceramic plating will make it weigh for that size. They just made it clear that it uses some new exotic "high tensile steels" in its armour as if that's a good thing. Maybe it can fool the scientifically illiterate. All tank armour use steel in different ways.

T 90 and 72 are doing fine and no they are not at lower altitude as claimed by Chinese member above lol.
Jjs