Chinese Armored Vehicles

[hbogyt]

Changes:

1. The spacing between the Wheels from second to fifth are reduced, gives a shorter chassis..
2. New Engine Compartment from new engine..
3. Modified Fuel tanks..

Similarities:
1. The spacing between the wheels from second wheel to fifth are inherited from previous chassis..
2. The No of wheels are same..
3. The Torson bar suspension is same and the bars at same place as before..

The ERA is covering the older turret and front addon is removed form older turret..



No it doesn't, Its not first in PLA..

US, Israeli and Uk so does newer T-90M using different size ERA to give proper protection, Regular tiles don't fit every where and leave Expose parts..

Would you stop going down the path that the new chassis is an evolution of the old one? In fact, this "new" chassis predates the Type-99 chassis, as the Type-90 came before the Type-99. Read up on these tanks on Login or Chinese Space Program | SinoDefence.com

I will reply regarding the ERA later when I have the time. In short, I still do not think that those are ERA blocks due to their non-applique appearance.

 

[cir]

To borrow someone's expression - scared of reality：

New Type 502 blabla。。。

 

[Ray]

Nice photo of tanks on a railway!

The flatbeds looks a wee bit undersized!

 

[cir]

Nice photo of tanks on a railway!

The flatbeds looks a wee bit undersized!

PLA's latest piece of toy comparable to the German Puma :cool2:

 

[Ray]

PLA's latest piece of toy comparable to the German Puma :cool2:

The comment was on FLATBEDS.

 

[cir]

The comment was on FLATBEDS.

The correction was on "tanks"ã€‚

 

[Ray]

My comment was on Flatbeds.

Tanks could be from Mars as far as I am concerned.

 

[cir]

MBT for export in the cover story of the latest issue of the "Weapon" magazine:

 

[cir]

My comment was on Flatbeds.

Tanks could be from Mars as far as I am concerned.

My emphasis is on the fact that those are not tanks, which renders your comment, made in the context of what is being shown, invalid.

 

[Ray]

My emphasis is on the fact that those are not tanks, which renders your comment, made in the context of what is being shown, invalid.

Unlike you who desire to dazzle with photos of tanks, artillery etc, I look at the issue in its holity.

One may have tanks (the best in the world), but if flatbeds are undersized, it adds to the problems of mobilisation!


For want of a nail the shoe was lost.
For want of a shoe the horse was lost.
For want of a horse the rider was lost.
For want of a rider the message was lost.
For want of a message the battle was lost.
For want of a battle the kingdom was lost.
And all for the want of a horseshoe nail.

 

[cir]

Unlike you who desire to dazzle with photos of tanks, artillery etc, I look at the issue in its holity.

One may have tanks (the best in the world0, but if flatbeds are undersized, it adds to the problems of mobilisation!

That's an entirely different topic.

Still, do you see any problem in transporting those equipments on the flatbeds so used?

Or perhaps the infrastructure in India is so bad that you are more accustomed to moving heavy armours atop flatbed lorries?

Or worse shifting on their own wheels?

What a waste and total immobilisation!

 

[Ray]

Armour cannot be used except in Two place in Tibet

Tibet is a plateau.

China has practically and unbridled manoeuvre space.

 

[Ray]

In India, we have to engineer our tanks on the infrastructure available.

It would be silly to believe that tanks have to move on their prime mover and yet, be effective!

It is equally silly to build showcase tanks which do not conform to the infrastructure and is conveyed on undersized transportation or move over bridges that do not have the correct bridge classification.

Tanks, BTW, do not have wheels. They are tracked and wheels are the bogey wheels. Hopefully, you understand the meaning of 'bogey' before you start another of your tangential tirades!

 

[Kunal Biswas]

MBT-2000 improved AKA AK-2

 

[Kunal Biswas]

 

[Blackwater]

yeah kya item ha? kon si country ka ha yeah???

 

[Kunal Biswas]

yeah kya item ha? kon si country ka ha yeah???

China, MAKING the Al-kabab 2

 

[JAISWAL]

China, MAKING the Al-kabab 2

.
.
No, its not Al-kabaab2,
its chin-pak's AL-Kabaad-2
means-- our trash-2.

 

[pankaj nema]

It is Al Khalid 2

Pakistan is trying to get an answer for T 90 and Arjun

In fact Arjun is over kill for Alkhalid

T 90 alone can despatch it away

 

[indian_sukhoi]

In the above picture,.............where did the picture taken? Are those trails taken in desert or something


Was watching a documentary in which, The Abrams MBTs were undergoing trails infront the Pak military govt. But they kept failing due to heat and maintainence.

Arjun MBTs original requirement was for a 40-ton tank armed with a 105mm gun, and DRDO had to start from scratch. Midway through this process, the Army changed its requirement to a 120mm gun armed heavier tank, capable of going toe-to-toe with the American Abrams tank, which Pakistan, was thought to be about to acquire from the United States in the 1980s.
Arjun