U-47

1 hour ago, Levi said:

It has composite material on it's cheeks, but the rest is RHA. When saying "RHA welded turret" I meant welded turret with composite armor as opposed to cast turret with bolted-on welded modular armor packs typical to WZ-123. The turret on Storm-1 from Beijing museum is actually cast despite the angular shape.

Thanks, this was the clue I was looking for.

Do you know WZ122's variant "product 704" ?

If you know it already, then I won't need to upload its picture anymore.

33 minutes ago, Levi said:

2. I have probably seen every single photo available on searchable internet, including Chinese segment (and yes, I have seen this Storm-2 from the park too). However you have a tendency to post a lot of unique content like these photos of WZ-122-6 engine and driver's compartment that probably would have been lost if not for my request. I just wanted to make sure there isn't anything unposted left where the last bunch came from.
Thanks a lot for what you do anyway. I do not know if you realise it, but for some time already, you have been the only source of new information on historical experimental Chinese armor for the large portion of internet community (mostly western I suppose).
3. So, you're saying that all the differences Storm-1 and Storm-2 had, were in the power pack, and originally they had the same turret? (rha welded one, with Type83A gun (long L7)) I can work with that if it's the case.

The RHA turret is Type80's stuff, not Storm-1 or Storm-2's. The photos above showed Storm tank turret's composite armor pack welded to the turret.

For other parts, yes, Storm-1 uses 730hp engine and planetary gearbox, Storm-2 uses 800hp engine (and the engine part is a little bigger in size) and hydraulic gearbox, basicly that's all the difference.

23 hours ago, Levi said:

Didn't want to register, but it seems I have no choice but to step in to clarify some things. All of the questions were mine.

1, we built 3-hydraulic (WZ122-1) first, and it is a disaster, completely unreliable; that's why we turned back to mechanical (3-mechanical, WZ122-2 and WZ122-3), but they didn't work very well else, one of WZ122B (I don't whether it is WZ1222 or WZ1223) is in plant617's museum as the photo showed before, another one's turret is installed on a Type80 tank body and displaying in BeiJing tank museum (the photo below).

2, buddy, I don't know what pictures you've saw already, and since plant617's museum is not a pubilc museum (and these tanks may also be stored in the warehouse untill now), the photos I uploaded are the only new photos so far.
3, there are other Storm-1 and Storm-2 (they are almost identical except the engine and transmission part) displaying in Chinese North Industries Corp's park and plant617's park. I checked their photos and I found you're right.:

4, I havn't notice this special 59 tank before, I'll see to what I can find.

12 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

1) Why turrets of the Type 80 are different between those 2 sets of photos? Can you give more info about it?

2) Where are those tanks? Are they open for visit by mortals?  Do you have more photos of WZ-111-6 and -1?

Some question asked from otvaga about those photos, can you anwer those as well:

Do you have any detail information of Storm-1? Some thinks that turret on the displayed vehicle is not original (from early Type 90) and 105 mm gun was installed by museum.

There is a model of Type 59 on a display in Beijing Museum with turbocharged engine and 1-piece cast turret, do you know what that tank is? 

 

 

 

1, There isn't too much info about Type 80 welded turret, the only thing we know about is it is a steel turret (without any kind of special armor) for test use only. So it is safe to say they made more than one  prototype turrets.

2, These tanks are in Inner Mongolia First Machinery Group Corporation (plant 617) 's museum, only who were invited may visit there.

Here are more photos of WZ122-6:

About WZ122-1, we call it "三液样车" (in English: 3-hydraulic prototype, meaning hydraulic control + hydraulic transmission + hydraulic suspension), here are its photos:

otvaga questions:

Storm-1 tank ( type85-I, and you all know type85-II which went to Pakistan service and PLA service) is not any kind of classified stuff in China, we know almost all of its common data, so, what they want to know ?

The turret is its original turret, I checked from  several sources. The gun isn't, this displayed vehicle didn't have any gun in the early years, the current gun is installed by the museum. BTW, Storm-1's original gun is 105mm.

I never heard of "type59 with  turbocharged engine and 1-piece cast turret", the only Chinese "1-piece cast turret" I know about is WZ122's turret. So could him upload some photos of it so I may know what tank he talk about?

Where is the gallery now.....

OK, here are some Chinese cold-war prototype tank.

1980s, Type 80 tank with welded turret,this is one of the first Chinese welded tank turrets, as you can see its quality isn't very well:

1970s, WZ122-6 tank (the 6th prototype of WZ122), this tank's design is effected by M48 tank we got from Vietnam, and armred with a 120mm L/48 smooth gun (not the German L44 gun or any kind of its copy, but a local developed low pressure tank gun, never used in any Chinese mass- produced tanks).

WZ122-2 or WZ122-3 prototype:

WZ132, if you are a WOT player, I believe you surely heared it already:

BK1851 prototype tank, it's a project started in 1985 which meant to use steering wheel driving and western engine & transmission parts.

On 2016/10/29 at 5:33 PM, Militarysta said:

And here older version, from Type.85-II and 85-III and very very erly Type-96:

 

 

From here:

 

 

And Type 85 erly armour:

 

 

 

 

 

To be honest - I would like sitting in old T-72B (Ob.184) then in those chineese tanks above - those armour modules have huge weak zones couse it's NERA placment inside...

As I understend - this was relesed to public in china so in Type-96A and newest tanks there must be completly diffrent armour configuration.

And you are right about this.

The tank in your picture is Type85 tank, its armor is just about the same level as T-72M1 (no kidding), so T-72B do has much better protection.

Concept art for the J-18

 

 

 

http://defence-blog.com/news/china-confirms-that-the-next-gen-long-range-bomber-is-under-development.html

It's not made up, and also not J18.

In Chinese code system, we call bombers as "轰-X", or H-X for short, the "轰" means "轰炸机" or "Bomber" as in English.

J-X means "歼-X", and "歼" means "歼击机" or "Fighter" in English.

This is a bomber anyway, so of course it won't be called as J-18, instead, we call it "新隐轰" which means "new stealth bomber" in Chinese internet, "轰-18" (H-18) is its unconfirmed rumor name.

This plan is true and do has a real model to show to the military, but it seems (rumor again and we can't confirm it) this plan has been dropped and that's also why it leaked on the internet (a serious Chinese plan won't leak to the net easily).

Here is a more clear picture of its model:

http://www.toutiao.com/i6359331861507867137/?tt_from=mobile_qq&utm_campaign=client_share&app=news_article&utm_source=mobile_qq&iid=6527130742&utm_medium=toutiao_android

 

It's not very long, but it's one of the few official references to the defunct J/F-25 project.

 

For those of you who don't know, yes it was technically real, but unlike internet fanboy claims that it's some secret super fighter, it was never intended to enter service and never did, it was purely an R&D project to see just how much of a modern fighter design you could 3D print feasily and how costly it would be. (spoiler alert: with the tech of 3d printing at the time it was done, about 6 times as much as standard methods, that pretty much answered the question of "should we consider 3d printing entire airframes or try?") They also concluded that about 80% of the aircraft could be practically made in such a way.

My God, that's where you so called J25 came from......

It's a famous fake on Chinese internet years ago.

You get an upvote anyway for uploading it so we can watch it easily.

I agree.

 

I've seen this image pop up in quite a few places, though the part where some of the jets on the deck appear to be J-25s, a project that was never meant for actual production raises some red flags.

 

My eyes could be deceiving me though.

Again, fan made design, as you can see this is basicly a Ford-class carrier. And we have no any kind of J-25 so far, they do talked about a carrier-born J-20, but it's just a plan so far.

So, this has been talked about for a bit (as it was mentioned here), but in addition to a new Destroyer design, it looks like there could be a new Frigate design aswell, designated the Type 057 (I find this rather odd, as the construction of the Type 054B block is just gearing up.)

 

Also, this is from a Russian news site, they may have translated wrong.

 

 

 

According to glorious Russian media!

 

"China finished design of a new frigate of the Type 057 project of the fourth generation, reports mil.news.sina.com.cn portal. It is expected that construction of the ships of this type will begin at the end of the 2014th ─ the first quarter 2015. Allegedly, a series of frigates of the new project will consist of 20 ships, and their delivery of Naval Forces of China will come to the end by 2025. As a part of Navy of People's liberation army of China frigates of the Type 057 project will replace the same quantity of the outdated ships of a similar class of the Type 053 project. For the first time the ships of the Type 057 project will be equipped with the hybrid power plant which will allow to reduce significantly their noisiness in comparison with frigates of the previous projects. Displacement of Type 057 will make about 4-5 thousand tons. The ships it is planned to equip with new radar stations, installations of vertical start-up of rockets and surface-to-air missile missile systems. In a design of frigates technologies of a low-visibility will be applied. Two anti-submarine helicopters and prospecting unmanned aerial vehicles will be based on frigates of the Type 057 project. In the middle of March, 2013 of Naval Forces of China took advantage of a new frigate of the Type 056 project constructed with application of technologies of a low-visibility. As a part of fleet the ship with board number 582 received the name "Bengbu" in honor of prefecture in the province Ankhoy in East China. As expected, in interests of the Chinese military 20 ships of this kind will be constructed."

 

Translations errors are by virtue of the fact Mandarin-Russian-English doesn't generally go well.

 

Interestingly enough, Some Russian sources were also advising the Russian Armed forces to purchase some Type 054As as escort vessels last year, which would be a pretty amusing case of the shoe being on the other foot.

This is a fan made design, end.

Next time you see any 3d CG picture marked with "西葛西造舰", they are all fan made design, or at least most of them.

The true new Chinese FFG which we are working on are 054B (gas turbine powed, basicly looks like Singaporean Formidable-class frigate) and 058(light frigate like 056, I don't know its detail).

Do you want me to try? send me the video link.

Good! Thank you.

Here is the link:

http://www.pearvideo.com/video_1029365

A new 3D CG video just made by my friends who work in the media, it shows the construction process of our new carrier with data, and the different between the new one and Varyag.

In this video, "山东" (ShanDong, which named after one of our province) means the new carrier current under construction, "辽宁" (LiaoNing, named after another province, where these 2 carriers were building/built) means the carrier we bought (Varyag).

test

Shit...... I failed to upload the video again and again......

Can somebody tell me why CIA wwould document their own tank or their own serect armor(at 80s) ?

Anyone looking for diagrams showing the interior of Abrams "special armor"?

 

https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP91B00390R000300220014-8.pdf

This is really great !

PLA received number of new light tanks.

Looks like either wide field test or initial production run.

This is the PLA Army painted (not test anymore) Type 16 light tank (someone also called it Type 17, we don't know its real name as for now), it's going to field the 41th army (which bases in Southern China, Guangxi province).

Just a few notes, per Jeffery Lin, who's right most of the time, the barrel length is actually 7.5m (well, he initially said "over 7.5m", but that's really not very specific and I doubt it would be significantly higher then that or he'd imply it.) which would make the barrel caliber L/60 not L/70 (7.5m divided by 125mm = 60.)

 

That being said, looking at the original gun they do look similar but not identical. for reasons I'm not aware of the material of the barrel near the breech appears different or unpainted as It was darkened black on the original, it's a very distinct silver color now. Another noticeable difference is that the bore evacuator is near the front of the gun now, as opposed to original gun shown where it was closer the back instead, the muzzle brake appears unchanged though it's hard to see for sure with the photos given.

 

 

That's the only photo I know of on the original gun where the muzzle brake isn't covered with a tarp, and it's out of focus on said photo.

 

 

I guess it's plausible they changed some of the design details after experimenting with it going from a towed gun to a gun intended for a vehicle armament.

This is just a prototype gun for test use.

 

Someone (who can read Chinese) can explain what exactly is shown in this image? It compares the autoloader design of the T-72 to the autoloader design of what tank? Does it mean "upgraded T-72" or "improved design based on the T-72 autoloader"?

 

If the autoloader's of the Chinese Type 9X tanks would woork like that, the crew would be quite well protected. The projectiles are stored within an armored container below the turret ring, while the propellant charges are stored behind a layer of armor in the turret bustle, apparently with some blow-out panels.

This is some kind of fan made design, not sth that our tank really are or will be, in fact all Chinese 125mm gun MBTs so far are all using the stand T-72 autoloader system. Chinese tank designers believe that the real key to avoid explosion is a more reliable automatic fire suppression system, not a thin 20mm plate between ammo and crew (they believe if a APFSDS do penetrate the front armor, then this thin plate won't stop it else).

In this picture, the left part "标准的T-72设计" means "The stand T-72 design" ,as you can see it shows what happens to a common T-72 when it get penetrate; the right part shows this guy's "龙氏隔舱化T-72设计" (means "Dragon's compartment T-72 design") which he blieve will protect the crew better and blah.

A interview to Type96 tank's power system director.

Here are some points from this interview (in case you don't know these):

1, Type96's diesel engine is called Type150 (which means its cylinder's diameter is 150mm ), the "old" type150 of Type96 (not Type96B) is developed from T-34's V2 500HP engine with turbocharger, its power output is 730HP.

2, Type96A uses a improved version which has 800HP output.

3, Type96B uses a completely new Type150 engine which is developed from Type99's engine (with different numbers of cylinders), its power output is 1000HP.

4, There are 12 Type96B tanks as for now.

Wrong post.Edited.

To be fair, I highly doubt any APC or IFV system known is going to be armored enough to survive against 125mm APFSDS except for maybe the very latest with highly advanced ERA packages installed.

 

It would better to just send things like other tanks (Sudan proper is currently 4-0 against South Sudanese T-72Bs with their imported ZTZ96As) or advanced ATGM systems. (HJ-9B, HJ-8/HJ-11 and HJ-12) to deal with it if enemy armor starts becoming a problem.

Do you mean the whole Sudan (whatever side) has 4 T-72/ZTZ96 totaly?

Here is a interesting news, since obviously this event is a very bad reputation for Type92/WZ551, the TieMa( Type92/WZ551's manufacturer) has just released a new VN2C IFV which is basily a Type92/WZ551 with additional armor (SATNAG 4569 level3, 19 ton now instead of type92/WZ551's 12 ton) and 402hp new engine.

A lot of Chinese people who knows nothing about AFV tech simply blamed that how can a "armored" vehcile couldn't resist a incoming shell and our soliders got hit and died.

Of course, we know that there is no way a wheeled APC/IFV can resist mortar's direct hit, and even Type04 IFV or some other Chinese tracked modern IFVs can hardy resist such hit else, so the best hope we have on such thing is a heavy APC based on Type59 (T-54A copy) tank which just tested this year (sorry there is no photo of this APC, just a offical list named it).

But what is even worse is the Sudan army got T-72AV MBT outside, what if they fire at us like this time for whatever misfire reason? Obviously even if we do have a Type59 tank based heavy APC, it still couldn't resist a 125mm APFSDS.

Hello, welcome to the forum.

 

Anyway, are you sure about the Mortar claim? I thought it was plausible a mortar did it at first too, but after seeing Lightning posted the tail remains of what's clearly an HE shell for a 125mm Tank gun that was found at the site, I'm not so certain.

 

Anyway, I don't think the WZ551/Type92 is supposed to be heavily armored but just supposed to operate in low intensity operations, it reminds me of a bigger M113 (and is only 200kg heavier, so it can't be that much heavier armored), which is a vehicle that served a similar purpose in the US Armed Forces (among others) yet wasn't heavily armored at all, being able to be easily penetrated by .50/12.7mm AP fire.

 

I think a better solution would be to send heavier, high intensity conflict equipment if the situation in Sudan/South Sudan turns hotter.

Y, I know the tail, we saw it first from the Chinese peacekeeping force's official blog, who said they were attacked by an HEAT shell.

Then we compared the photo to all known shells and we found it is a 125mm HE  tail as well. But, as we all know: a 125mm shell can hardy hit the roof, and if it do, a 125mm HE will more likely to  tear the wheeled IFV apart instead of just a small hole.

And then we were told by the TieMa's staff that the blog made a mistake, that tail is from somewhere else (the blog simply release the photos as quickly as they can without think too much), not the one hit the IFV. The one hit the IFV is a 60mm mortar HE shell, and probably a Chinese made 60mm mortar HE shell. So TieMa official words is "a mortar shell less than 82mm".

Hi, guys, I am a Chinese who happens to found here.

According to a friend of the manufacturer TieMa company (in English as Iron Horse, but I don't know if it uses such English name or sth else, this company builted these Type92 IFV, and this event makes a lot of Chinese blame them that they made a weak AFV that couldn't protect our soliders), the one that hit the Type92 is a 60mm mortar, and the roof armor where it hits is 5mm.