Chinese Armored Vehicles

Discussion in 'China' started by Kunal Biswas, Dec 16, 2011.

  1. Damian

    Damian Defence Professionals Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Messages:
    4,835
    Likes Received:
    2,175
    Re: Arjun vs Chinese Legacy tanks..

    But what actually mean "ideal conditions"? What is the context? If it was a KE round that it was fired from 50m? But what is then a purpose of such test? The goal should be rather to achieve maximum possible penetration at as longest distance as possible, in case of HEAT round ideal conditions might mean that we are firing at mild steel not RHA.

    Our Chinese users here, seems to preffer to accept some dogmats and truths from their native sources without even a second thought, especially considering how fishy are all these claims.

    I suggest to you all, to be more carefull and critical towards official claims of the PRC.
     
  2. Keshav Murali

    Keshav Murali Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2013
    Messages:
    1,406
    Likes Received:
    972
    Re: Arjun vs Chinese Legacy tanks..

    @Damian,

    Is my previous post correct? (I wrote from memory, and my memory is very bad in IDEAL conditions)
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
  3. Damian

    Damian Defence Professionals Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Messages:
    4,835
    Likes Received:
    2,175
    More or less correct.
     
  4. badguy2000

    badguy2000 Respected Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    5,133
    Likes Received:
    734
    Well.some of your words are right,others are wrong,as i know. In 1980s, china imported several t72 for study.but to chinese amazement,chinese found 125mm canon of those imported t72 was even poorer~performanced than china~made ones and worthless studying. At least,chinese thought those 125mm t72 cannon might be downgrade exported version and soviet domestic version t72 125mm cannon might be much advanced..however,chinese imported several sovier domestic version t72 and found that the 125mm cannon was indeed worthless studying.
     
  5. badguy2000

    badguy2000 Respected Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    5,133
    Likes Received:
    734
    btw,it was indeed for az~loader that china t99 used 125mm,instead of 120mm,though china~made 120mm was already world class in early 1990s.
     
  6. W.G.Ewald

    W.G.Ewald Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2 Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2011
    Messages:
    14,140
    Likes Received:
    8,562
    Location:
    North Carolina, USA
    Did China buy any KBA-3 gun from Ukraine?

    2A46 125 mm gun - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    http://fofanov.armor.kiev.ua/Tanks/ARM/2a46.html
     
  7. W.G.Ewald

    W.G.Ewald Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2 Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2011
    Messages:
    14,140
    Likes Received:
    8,562
    Location:
    North Carolina, USA
    120mm and 125mm Main Guns

     
  8. Keshav Murali

    Keshav Murali Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2013
    Messages:
    1,406
    Likes Received:
    972

    You didn't import from SU. Original 2A46 was a promising gun with poor chamber pressure and a small autoloader. ZPT98 is indeed much superior. But 2A46M-5 is much better gun, 2A82 will be unmatched and 2A83 is a monster.

    2A46M-5 with modified AZ autoloader used only in T-90A and export versions (T-90S) can already fire 3BM46 Svinets (650 mm), 3BM42M Lekalo (600 mm), Svinets-1 DU (750?? mm penetration) and Svinets-2 WHA (700-750? mm penetration) which are excellent rounds and markedly superior to 125 mm Chinese rounds. But data for all rounds except 3BM46 is double classified. We know the name and the length of the penetrator. Nothing else.

    Therefore 2A46M-5 with modified autoloader is superior to ZPT98 but if China successfully modifies AZ or makes new autoloader, they can make a gun comparable to even Rheinmetall L/55.
     
  9. badguy2000

    badguy2000 Respected Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    5,133
    Likes Received:
    734
    the data of t99 caNnon available is that it can pierce 850mm rha 2km away with tungsten~alloy round and 960mm rha2km away with du round
     
  10. W.G.Ewald

    W.G.Ewald Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2 Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2011
    Messages:
    14,140
    Likes Received:
    8,562
    Location:
    North Carolina, USA
    Russia Plans to Field the T-99, a Radically New Main Battle Tank by 2015 - Defense Update - Military Technology & Defense News
     
  11. Keshav Murali

    Keshav Murali Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2013
    Messages:
    1,406
    Likes Received:
    972
    False my dear sir. Chinese investment in Tungsten alloys for only 10 years or so. German investment in that sector is 50 years or more. The best they can come up with is the DM63 which is segmented APFSDS which penetrates at maximum 790 mm and the DM53 with slightly higher performance. But DM63 better against ERA and composites. The best Russian WHA penetration is 700 mm.

    China equals old Soviet Union (600 at max for WHA alloys and 650 at max for DU) Assuming China has long rod (which it doesn't thanks to AZ autoloader) the maximum penetration will still be around 670-690 mm. As long rod penetrator is not available, the best WHA made by China penetrates at max 650 mm of RHA. And that is optimistic claim.

    As for DU, again, China does not have long rods. The best DU round is produced by USA. M829A3 has penetration of maximum 800-820 mm of RHA ( @Damian , correct me on this). M829E4 supposed to have 850 or more. China has neither experience nor long rod for more than 700 mm of penetration with DU. At maximum China can equal 3BM46 which penetrates 650 mm. Longer projectiles don't fit. Give me reliable source and I will stand corrected.

    All penetration data given on 270 HB steel and at 2 km.

    @W.G.Ewald sir, he means Type 99's propaganda. Not Armata.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
    AVERAGE INDIAN and W.G.Ewald like this.
  12. Damian

    Damian Defence Professionals Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Messages:
    4,835
    Likes Received:
    2,175
    I think that Chinese users, should learn one thing, Chine is not a best experienced manufacturer of armored fighting vehicles and anti armor ammunition, China is not even capable to designa jet engine on it's own. And there is no shame in this, knowing what morons (including Mao Ze Dong) rulled their country for several decades, and how much traitors from communist party of China destroyed China in every possible way (culture, economy, scientific base), it will take time to rebuild and keep up with the better prospering part of the world.

    But the only way for China and Chinese is to destroy their communist party, integrate with rest of the world, open up to the world, resign from imperialism, and build up a peacfull relations with their neighbours and other countries.

    World without China will solve it's problems, China without world will not, and if Chinese will let these criminals from communist party of China, further rule their country, it will mean only further isolation and hostilities between China and rest of the world, and this will harm only Chinese really.
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2013
  13. ice berg

    ice berg Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2011
    Messages:
    2,145
    Likes Received:
    289
    A source will be nice. Nvm:

    http://www.tungsten-alloy.com/

    With 20 years experiences, Chinatungsten Online has been being the leading tungsten heavy alloy manufacturer and top tungsten heavy alloy suppliers in China.

    It took me 2 mins to google. Maybe you should try it next time.
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2013
  14. badguy2000

    badguy2000 Respected Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    5,133
    Likes Received:
    734
    Well,860mm piercing with tungten one and 960mm with dp one is old data of t99 at least 3~4years ago. In fact,if necessory,china cound have set 140mm cannon for its new tank,but chinese engineer think 125mm cannon can pentrate all other tank already and it is unnecessory to use 140mm one.
     
  15. badguy2000

    badguy2000 Respected Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    5,133
    Likes Received:
    734
    W.G.Ewald likes this.
  16. badguy2000

    badguy2000 Respected Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    5,133
    Likes Received:
    734
    well, jet engine is the crown of industry ...if one country were able to manufacture top jet engine, the the country would be top tech-leader in the world....so it is normal that China-made engine can not match USA or EU,when CHina is not world tech leader,yet.

    without Mao zedong, CHina would be as weak as India and has not its own industry chains.
     
    ghost likes this.
  17. Keshav Murali

    Keshav Murali Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2013
    Messages:
    1,406
    Likes Received:
    972
    @moderator,

    Tired of explaining why China can't make penetrators with more than 650 mm penetration. @methos, @militarysta, @Damian, @pmaitra, Read my previous posts and please back me up.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
  18. Damian

    Damian Defence Professionals Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Messages:
    4,835
    Likes Received:
    2,175
    Wrong, jet engine from mechanical point of view is one of the simplest engines ever made, the problem is quality, Chinese products are famous for their, actually non existing quality.

    So you actually support man that inspired genocide of your own nation? Interesting, maybe you should ask yourself if you are a patriot, or even Chinese, or you are just like that bunch of criminals from CPC that is rulling your country, and just like Mao, didn't hesitate to attack their own nation when there was even a single sign of different opinion between citizens and goverment.

    But we back you up. It is obvious for any sentient life form, that due to physical dimensions, it is not possible or incredibly difficult with existing technology, if someone is not capable to understand it, consider he might actually not be sentient life form. ;)

    And again bollocks.

    Let's clear here some things.

    First question, can you think rationally and with use of logic? Yes? No?

    Second question, do you understand that claims of some people does not mean they say truth? Yes? No?

    Because how Chinese engineer can think his ammunition can penetrate (or properly perforate) all other tanks, if he never actually tested them against such ammunition? China never had the same capabilities like NATO to purchase many different weapon systems across the globe for tests, especially USA do it regularly if and when possible.

    Third question, do you understand that penetration capabilities of APFSDS ammunition, greatly depends on penetrator lenght, diameter, ratio between both, if you can't place long enough penetrator due to hull and autoloader physical dimensions, you can't achieve such penetration levels. It is simple, really simple... at least for sentient life form.

    As for installing 140mm or bigger gun, again you completely do not understand what it means for vehicle itself.

    It is possible that vehicle will sustain recoil of such gun? It is possible to place such big gun inside of turret? Will stabilization system handle such gun?

    And also take in to consideration dimensions of ammunition and where you will place it, in autoloader? Ok but it is designed for 125mm ammunition, it can't handle much bigger 140mm or 150+mm, so you need new autoloader, but if you will place inside existing hull, it means ammunition quantity reduction.

    Bigger gun and bigger ammunition also means more weight, more weight means that vehicle might loss it's mobility characteristics, and to retake them, you need a stronger engine, new transmission, probably suspension modifications.

    In the end it is immposible and not cost effectiv to place such gun in existing design, and it will become more and more obvious that it is nececary to design completely new vehicle.


    Just admitt it, you have absolutely no idea about tanks or AFV? Do you?
     
    Last edited: May 5, 2013
    Kunal Biswas likes this.
  19. Keshav Murali

    Keshav Murali Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2013
    Messages:
    1,406
    Likes Received:
    972
    I think Chinese penetration claims are given on reverse engineered Krupp mild steel made back in 1940 for Neubaufahrzeug prototype.
     
    Last edited: May 5, 2013
  20. shiphone

    shiphone Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2009
    Messages:
    1,881
    Likes Received:
    1,796
    Re: Arjun vs Chinese Legacy tanks..

    right...the posts were moved here...
    1. I don't know whether labeling someone as a troller is some kind of personal attact after my very first post in the original thread ...LOL...

    2. normally we can see 150mm ,180mm, 220mm, 250mm RHA targets at our shooting ranges....,in those academic papers of early 1990s we could find many test results on 150 or 180mm target...nowadays, 220mm and 250mm targets appear very often ...many other composite armor targets are also used , for example:204mm thickness Type681 composte armor target(80mmRHA+20mmRHA+glass fiber-reinforced plastic+corundum)....

    the RHA targets in the range...it's not a pic of ours,but no much difference.
    [​IMG]

    in china national standard ...standard RHA target is 380HB
    [​IMG]

    3. more than 10 years ago, the China Norinco group provided such export version AFPSDS rounds along with MBT2000 tank which was based on the DTW-125MM Block 2 rounds in PLA Army service...
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    -------------------
    BTW , those baseless comments were quite funny as well....such as: 1. china has no good plastic explosive..2. china didn't invest in Tank gun and shell technology heavily...would you give us your source and the exact figure of such chinese investments? ...........that's just some personal guess from those even couldn't read Chinese. and this also reminds me those arrogant comments by someone from european country which is not a key player in these fields.

    why not have a study on the chinese 105mm Depleted Uranium ammunition projects in 1980s by yourself?
    [​IMG]
    -------------------

    I just explained the Static armor penetrating TEST of HEAT Warheads...did I mention the KE rounds tests before?
    does KE rounds need the Static armor penetrating TEST ? obvously no...at least in China we have no such test item in National test.

     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
    J20! likes this.

Share This Page