Vehicles of the PLA: Now with refreshing new topic title!

[LoooSeR]

   Yuri Lyamin linked on otvaga - modernized ZBD-03. Changes on turret - looks like they added optics on gun mantlet and some sort of box on right cheek of the frontal turret armor.

 

Spoiler

 

 

[Scout]

Upgraded ZBD-03

Digital FCS with two axes stabiliser
Millimeter wave IFF system

 

 

[TINDALOS]

On 3/17/2021 at 5:06 PM, LoooSeR said:

   Yuri Lyamin linked on otvaga - modernized ZBD-03. Changes on turret - looks like they added optics on gun mantlet and some sort of box on right cheek of the frontal turret armor.

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

Fun fact: ZBL-08, ZBD-03, and ZBD-05 don't have thermal sight and dual plane stabilizer previous to this upgrade

[TINDALOS]

On 4/27/2020 at 6:03 AM, Wiedzmin said:

 

 

some HE tests on Type99 prototype ?

Yes, there was an actual study conducted in mid 90s about the possibility to use 125mm HE shells fired from type 99 tank as an anti tank weapon. The shelling test was conducted on a modified type 69 tank (with A LOT of additional add on composite amour and ERA to represent a T-80U).

[TINDALOS]

[LoooSeR]

5 hours ago, TINDALOS said:

Fun fact: ZBL-08, ZBD-03, and ZBD-05 don't have thermal sight and dual plane stabilizer previous to this upgrade

   And i though situation with our IFVs was bad regarding FCS and sights.

[TINDALOS]

1 hour ago, LoooSeR said:

   And i though situation with our IFVs was bad regarding FCS and sights.

ZBD04 (not ZBD04A, I think you guys call it ZBD08？) also don't have a thermal sight. For a pretty long time ZBD04A is the only ifv equipped with thermal sight in the PLA arsenal. For tanks, ZTZ-96A and ZTZ99's sight is pretty much T-90A level (one for thermal and one for daylight, just like ESSA+1G46M on T-90A). ZTZ-99A and VT4 has something similar to SOSNA-U, a multi channel combined day/night sight.

[barbaria]

42 minutes ago, TINDALOS said:

ZBD04 (not ZBD04A, I think you guys call it ZBD08？) also don't have a thermal sight. For a pretty long time ZBD04A is the only ifv equipped with thermal sight in the PLA arsenal. For tanks, ZTZ-96A and ZTZ99's sight is pretty much T-90A level (one for thermal and one for daylight, just like ESSA+1G46M on T-90A). ZTZ-99A and VT4 has something similar to SOSNA-U, a multi channel combined day/night sight.

I remember when I got personally attacked a couple years ago for stating that the majority of the Chinese IFV's were lacking thermals. 

A lot has changed on this forum since then..

[TINDALOS]

Just now, barbaria said:

I remember when I got personally attacked a couple years ago for stating that the majority of the Chinese IFV's were lacking thermals. 

A lot has changed on this forum since then..

As a Chinese myself, I can confirm "the majority of Chinese ifv lacks a thermal sight" is pretty true. Basically every ifv before ZBD04A (if you don't count export model I guess) don't have it.

[Wiedzmin]

21 hours ago, TINDALOS said:

The shelling test was conducted on a modified type 69 tank (with A LOT of additional add on composite amour and ERA to represent a T-80U).

not very interesting test, but real tank(Tyep99) test in interesting, there was also photos of ballistic test of type 99 UFP, is there any info about this test  ?

 

 

[TINDALOS]

3 hours ago, Wiedzmin said:

not very interesting test, but real tank(Tyep99) test in interesting, there was also photos of ballistic test of type 99 UFP, is there any info about this test  ?

 

 

I would like to take a look at those photos, seems interesting. I never heard about that there were photos of ZTZ99's protection test.

[TINDALOS]

If anyone is interested in the history behind the development of Chinese third generation tanks, I strongly recommend this article (written in Chinese):

Part one
https://weibo.com/ttarticle/x/m/show/id/2309404519105649574380?_wb_client_=1

 

Part two

https://weibo.com/ttarticle/x/m/show/id/2309404531003560690005?_wb_client_=1

 

Part three

https://weibo.com/ttarticle/x/m/show/id/2309404571464467873891?_wb_client_=1

 

[Wiedzmin]

On 4/16/2021 at 1:22 PM, TINDALOS said:

I would like to take a look at those photos, seems interesting. I never heard about that there were photos of ZTZ99's protection test.

 

 

 

[LoooSeR]

   Chinese TA2320 Taian MRAP. 8x8 chassis and 32t of weight, 105 km/h max speed on road, tracked UGV included.

 

Spoiler

 

[TINDALOS]

Recently, ZTZ-99A's chief designer Mao Ming gave a speech at North China University （a university deeply related to Chinese defense industry) about the modern development of domestic and foreign tanks.

[TINDALOS]

 

[TINDALOS]

He pointed out the three main flaws of modern domestic tanks:

1. Low cross country speed

2. Lack of means of hard-kill active protection

3. Low commonalities (or shared characteristics?) between platforms (I'm not sure about this one, my interpretation on this might be totally off)

 

He then pointed out three positive characteristics about domestic tanks:

1. Low weight and profile (obviously, when compared with western tanks instead of Russian tanks)

2. First class protection

3. Strong fire power

 

Also, he seems quite admire T-14's design except the X shaped A-85 engine. He think that placing the crew in a separate and protected compartment is a great idea to improve crew comfort and possibility of survival. He also praised the modular design of the whole Armata family.

[TINDALOS]

Funny little side story: he also bashed the whole "tank is becoming obsolete and UAVs are going to takeover" theory. 

[TINDALOS]

On 4/15/2021 at 10:32 PM, LoooSeR said:

   And i though situation with our IFVs was bad regarding FCS and sights.

I mean... Russia managed to get 3rd generation thermal imager (Catherine XP) into production and installed on their tank (T-72B1MS's commander sight), while Chinese tank is still using 2nd generation thermal imager... For wepaon stablizers, the current Chinese one installed on tanks is a hyrdoelectrical stablizer similar to 2E42-4, while Russia already managed to produce 2E58 electromechanical stablizer and install them on T-90M (I might be wrong). For fire power, Gen 2 and Gen 3 Chinese 125mm sabot's performances are largely similar to 3BM59. Imo, the advantage of Chinese tanks is their built-in C4I capability.

[LoooSeR]

1 hour ago, TINDALOS said:

I mean... Russia managed to get 3rd generation thermal imager (Catherine XP) into production and installed on their tank (T-72B1MS's commander sight), while Chinese tank is still using 2nd generation thermal imager... For wepaon stablizers, the current Chinese one installed on tanks is a hyrdoelectrical stablizer similar to 2E42-4, while Russia already managed to produce 2E58 electromechanical stablizer and install them on T-90M (I might be wrong). For fire power, Gen 2 and Gen 3 Chinese 125mm sabot's performances are largely similar to 3BM59. Imo, the advantage of Chinese tanks is their built-in C4I capability.

   FCS situation improoved quite noticeably in last decade, for sure, but still we have plenty of problems. Majority of our tanks are T-72 Budget cuts 3, which mean that majority of our armor forces are not on the highest level of tech avaliable in Army service.

[barbaria]

7 hours ago, TINDALOS said:

Also, he seems quite admire T-14's design except the X shaped A-85 engine. He think that placing the crew in a separate and protected compartment is a great idea to improve crew comfort and possibility of survival. He also praised the modular design of the whole Armata family.

It does come with its own drawbacks though IMO. What about the repearability after penetration of the ammo compartment? Wouldn't an internal ammo cook-off destroy the turret beyond any cost-effective repair, seeing how the turret contains all the sensitive and expensive parts.

 

Of course for this to happen the APS needs to run out of interceptors or malfunction. So I guess the chance of the aforementioned problems to play out seems very slim though.

 

IMO, there seems to be a clear cut-off for when at least an autoloader and a subsequent unmanned turret is a necessity in a tank and that is when the shells are becoming too heavy for a human loader to handle. I think this is what we are going to see when we go beyond the 120/125mm caliber, both for the western and eastern tank designs. Anything less than that is manageable by a human loader and thus an autoloader and a subsequent unmanned turret is not necessary IMO. 

 

 

[HAKI2019]

ZTZ-99A is bigger than west tank like K2 and type 10,may be taller than abrams and leopard 2.It is not a really compact tank.Which makes it lighter than M1A2 and leopard 2A6/7 are smaller powerpack and weaker side armour.

 

The poor protection of both turret and hull side is the really problem,i think it is a compromise for weight .

 

When ZTZ-99A came into service in 2010s, it was a nice tank for PLA,but now it needs MLU.

[TINDALOS]

On 5/24/2021 at 9:44 PM, HAKI2019 said:

ZTZ-99A is bigger than west tank like K2 and type 10,may be taller than abrams and leopard 2.It is not a really compact tank.Which makes it lighter than M1A2 and leopard 2A6/7 are smaller powerpack and weaker side armour.

 

The poor protection of both turret and hull side is the really problem,i think it is a compromise for weight .

 

When ZTZ-99A came into service in 2010s, it was a nice tank for PLA,but now it needs MLU.

Yes, that is mainly the PLA's issue (they actually want that turret because it looks "cooler", however there are not much of an improvement in protection values between this new turret and ZTZ-99's old turret), not the designers'. The huge turret of ZTZ-99A has been actively criticize for years in China. Also, technically speaking, ZTZ-99A itself can be considered as a MLU of ZTZ-99. Today, the most advanced main battle tank in China is VT-4P (Pakistan variant) instead of ZTZ-99A.

[TINDALOS]

On 5/24/2021 at 9:44 PM, HAKI2019 said:

ZTZ-99A is bigger than west tank like K2 and type 10,may be taller than abrams and leopard 2.It is not a really compact tank.Which makes it lighter than M1A2 and leopard 2A6/7 are smaller powerpack and weaker side armour.

 

The poor protection of both turret and hull side is the really problem,i think it is a compromise for weight .

 

When ZTZ-99A came into service in 2010s, it was a nice tank for PLA,but now it needs MLU.

Didn't all Asian 3rd generation tanks have thin side armour? 

[LoooSeR]

5 hours ago, TINDALOS said:

Yes, that is mainly the PLA's issue (they actually want that turret because it looks "cooler", however there are not much of an improvement in protection values between this new turret and ZTZ-99's old turret), not the designers'. The huge turret of ZTZ-99A has been actively criticize for years in China. Also, technically speaking, ZTZ-99A itself can be considered as a MLU of ZTZ-99. Today, the most advanced main battle tank in China is VT-4P (Pakistan variant) instead of ZTZ-99A.

   What features makes VT-4P better than ZTZ-99A?