Al-Khalid MBT And Pakistani Armour

[jat]

Anyone have information about the active laser dazler the Chinese tank uses?

 

[Damian]

I know about the ammunition being a problem in the T series and likily Type XX but in regards to the extra armour on the sides. Perhaps its to defeat RPG etc..

Front and side armor need to be designed in such way to provide protection over frontal arc within safe manouvering angles against RPG's, ATGM's, APFSDS and HEAT fired from tank guns or anti tank guns. Even if side armor is protected against RPG's and still only at extreme hit angles, closer 90 degrees from turret longitudinal axis, the higher probability that modern RPG will perforate turret side armor.

This is why we have two schools of tank designing, Soviet (Russian and Ukrainian) where weak side armor is covered within safe manouvering angles by front turret armor, and we have western school where side armor is exposed within safe manouvering angles, but also it is much heavier protected by no less than 300mm thick composite armor.

Against tanks the Chinese probabily relay on the low siloute theory the Russians based there tanks on.

This theory become outdated in day when modern FCS was fielded. Besides this main reason why Soviet tanks were and are so small, is because by such way, they are lighter being still well protected, and are also more easier to transport and store.

Of course the chasis of a Type 99 is bigger due largely to the larger engine.

And everything would be ok, if they would use their brains and place ammunition stored outside autoloader not in every free space in hull like in T-72, but to place it in better protected areas minimizing risk of ammo cook off after armor perforation.

Anyone have information about the active laser dazler the Chinese tank uses?

I do not see a reason to place it on tank, how it works? Like US AN/VLQ-7 Active protection System? Still such system is outdated in time of fire and forget missiles with passive targeting system.

 

[Damian]

About that Anders, is it supposed to be an IFV or a tank?

It is completely new class of vehicles, called Universal Combat Platforms, it is actually light/medium weight vehicle, Americans were working on heavy weight UCP, currently also Russians are wroking on such vehicle.

It carries a CTG 120mm and weighs nearly 35t. At Level 3 protection it has a pretty pathetic armour rating. Throw on the modular and it weighs more than a Soviet MBT.

It is still technology demonstrator, works on prototype are currently underway, besides this, UCP Anders is not intended as replacement for MBT's but to supplement them, replacement for MBT can be heavy UCP, like designed under ASM program Block III MBT or Russian heavy UCP designed under Armata program.

It is quite a stretch to call it A400M transportable.

Who cares about that euro piece of scrap metal that even not meet all requirements, I would take C-17/C-130J tandem instead.

Most of the guts are imported, Swiss gun, German engine, Serbian night vision. Ukrainian APS, German gunner and commander sights. I see a few Polish vectronics in it that have yet to be exported.

Thermals are Polish, not Serbian, rest of components were choosen to show modularity of this new platform, You don't like Ukrainian Zaslon APS? Ok, then mount German AMAP-ADS, You don't like it either, ok let it be ASPRO-A from Israel.

A) it is still a demo

And what do You expect? Serial produced vehicle without any tests? Reliability is one of the key issues, I need to remind You problems with Leclerc reliability? Russians were laughing from it when it was tested in UAE and elelctronics were overheating.

B) it relies heavily on imported gear

Many things depends on foreing designs, do You know that actually German EMES 15 FCS was coodeveloped by Hughes and Krupp Atlas Elektronik? Even Germans needed foreing help to design modern FCS.

C) it is only one item of innovation that has yet to be verified

We have many more, like MSBS-5,56 that is unique firearm due to it's modular solutions, not seen anywhere else. Besides there is also project of new MBT codenamed Wilk (Wolf).

D) export prospects are slim to none with high weight and low protection

Anders is Light/Medium weight Universal Combat Platform, it is not intended to replace MBT's or other heavy armored vehicles, besides it is still demonstrator, with time it will have more protection if needed, and where it will be possible designers will lower weight of some components.

 

[Armand2REP]

It is completely new class of vehicles, called Universal Combat Platforms, it is actually light/medium weight vehicle, Americans were working on heavy weight UCP, currently also Russians are wroking on such vehicle.

There is nothing light about 35-45 tonnes. Americans scrapped their Bradley replacement because it was too heavy.

It is still technology demonstrator, works on prototype are currently underway, besides this, UCP Anders is not intended as replacement for MBT's but to supplement them, replacement for MBT can be heavy UCP, like designed under ASM program Block III MBT or Russian heavy UCP designed under Armata program.

From what I read it is supposed to be a tank destroyer like AMX-10RCR or Stryker MGS. That explains the gun but not the weight for such low protection.

Who cares about that euro piece of scrap metal that even not meet all requirements, I would take C-17/C-130J tandem instead.

Poland can afford C-17s?

Thermals are Polish, not Serbian, rest of components were choosen to show modularity of this new platform, You don't like Ukrainian Zaslon APS? Ok, then mount German AMAP-ADS, You don't like it either, ok let it be ASPRO-A from Israel.

The drivers night vision scopes are made by SCG Serbia. The thermal sights are made by Carl Zeiss Germany.

https://www.artem-defense.com/newsletters/en/artem-defence-newsletters/74-201010-newsletter-16-artem-uk/download+Obrum+Anders+Sagem&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESgYO53L00Q1RUm-cySI6rbV3U3QOcYJ1k-MA8PUTSpq_ZE05mqFc_KU7vJvgEvGPOe2mcrwciLGPZ7sH3WZAiYCdTa9HxmTHOPtPlb9giE1lDSS9VbdO8EKYSZbyzPF789WqX6Y&sig=AHIEtbRz50uNQ1Dn7SDejqE5I5f1Els04Q&pli=1]Powered by Google Docs[/url]

Zaslon is some kind of joke using 6 modules of individual sensors that don't even move.

And what do You expect? Serial produced vehicle without any tests? Reliability is one of the key issues, I need to remind You problems with Leclerc reliability? Russians were laughing from it when it was tested in UAE and elelctronics were overheating.

Russians were laughing real hard when Leclerc beat their ass.

Many things depends on foreing designs, do You know that actually German EMES 15 FCS was coodeveloped by Hughes and Krupp Atlas Elektronik? Even Germans needed foreing help to design modern FCS.

The original point of the discussion was to point out that Poland is not on the level to develop wide ranges of defence technology. The Anders tech demo is a prime example of it.

We have many more, like MSBS-5,56 that is unique firearm due to it's modular solutions, not seen anywhere else. Besides there is also project of new MBT codenamed Wilk (Wolf).

Yes, you have many more unverified ideas in small arms. MSBS is such a hit not even the WP has inducted it.

Anders is Light/Medium weight Universal Combat Platform, it is not intended to replace MBT's or other heavy armored vehicles, besides it is still demonstrator, with time it will have more protection if needed, and where it will be possible designers will lower weight of some components.

Countries are looking for light weight high protected IFVs, not heavy weight low protection. I will be suprised if the IFV model ends up in the WP.

 

[Damian]

There is nothing light about 35-45 tonnes. Americans scrapped their Bradley replacement because it was too heavy.

Firts, as I said it is Light/Medium class, depending on configuration.

Second, US did not scrapp GCV program, just rewrite it, educate Yourself. What they scrapped was FCS program where MGV veicles were max 20 tons heavy, and were seen as not survivabale piece of scrap metal that costs too much.

From what I read it is supposed to be a tank destroyer like AMX-10RCR or Stryker MGS. That explains the gun but not the weight for such low protection.

I wonder where You read such bollocks, probably from another west european arms "expert". Anders in WWO variant is (Direct) Fire Support vehicle, it can engae tanks of course, but it's main role is to support infantry, it is like, StuG, same with M1128 Stryker MGS, it is also not tank destroyer but (D)FSV.

Poland can afford C-17s?

One or two if we need to, really Poland is not a poor country, only are stupid politicians make us go in to socialist EU that blocks our freedom to do what we want to do, it is known fact that German and French politicians were bulling our politicians to increase taxes etc. so we will have slower economic growth.

The drivers night vision scopes are made by SCG Serbia. The thermal sights are made by Carl Zeiss Germany.

https://www.artem-defense.com/newsletters/en/artem-defence-newsletters/74-201010-newsletter-16-artem-uk/download+Obrum+Anders+Sagem&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&src id=ADGEESgYO53L00Q1RUm-cySI6rbV3U3QOcYJ1k-MA8PUTSpq_ZE05mqFc_KU7vJvgEvGPOe2mcrwciLGPZ7sH3WZA iYCdTa9HxmTHOPtPlb9giE1lDSS9VbdO8EKYSZbyzPF789WqX6 Y&sig=AHIEtbRz50uNQ1Dn7SDejqE5I5f1Els04Q&pli=1]Powered by Google Docs[/url]

What bollocks, we are making our own night vision and thermal sights by PCO company, and link does not work.

Zaslon is some kind of joke using 6 modules of individual sensors that don't even move.

Only because You don't understand something do not mean it does not work, AMAP-ADS elements are also not moving and it works. Educate Yourself, because I see that education levels in France are very low if You don't understand such simple things.

Here, educate Yourself how Zaslon is working.

http://andrei-bt.livejournal.com/14840.html

Oh and look, American Iron Curtain also works without any moving elements.

http://andrei-bt.livejournal.com/86751.html

Oh my, AMAP-ADS is also working without moving elements:

http://andrei-bt.livejournal.com/48985.html

Oh my my, American Quick Kill also works without any moving elements.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IH0Hr1RrV-8

Pfff, this only shows level of Your "knowledge".

Russians were laughing real hard when Leclerc beat their ass.

And when did happen? Oh wait, never? But fact is that when leclerc was promoted for export it was in it's earlier, unreliabale early variants from S1 and S2, SXXI solved most if not all problems.

The original point of the discussion was to point out that Poland is not on the level to develop wide ranges of defence technology. The Anders tech demo is a prime example of it.

This only prooves You have problems with comprehending simple things.

Yes, you have many more unverified ideas in small arms. MSBS is such a hit not even the WP has inducted it.

Because MSBS is still in R&D stage... oh wait, You didn't know? So why You even have rank of "Sr. Defence Professional" if You don't know such simple things?

Countries are looking for light weight high protected IFVs, not heavy weight low protection. I will be suprised if the IFV model ends up in the WP.

So typical, making conclusions on early technology demonstrator, You don't even understand that serial vehicle can be very different.

If I would be You (unprofessional) I would say the same about Leclerc just watching early prototypes and their configuration. But I will not do this, it is well below my level.

 

[Armand2REP]

Firts, as I said it is Light/Medium class, depending on configuration.

Second, US did not scrapp GCV program, just rewrite it, educate Yourself. What they scrapped was FCS program where MGV veicles were max 20 tons heavy, and were seen as not survivabale piece of scrap metal that costs too much.

First, as I said 35-45t is anything but light... it is medium to HEAVY.

Second, I said the US scrapped GCV because it was too HEAVY and that is WHY they scrapped it for a LIGHTER version. You have reading comprehension problems...

I wonder where You read such bollocks, probably from another west european arms "expert". Anders in WWO variant is (Direct) Fire Support vehicle, it can engae tanks of course, but it's main role is to support infantry, it is like, StuG, same with M1128 Stryker MGS, it is also not tank destroyer but (D)FSV.

I read it in your pathetic €6 billion defence budget.

One or two if we need to, really Poland is not a poor country, only are stupid politicians make us go in to socialist EU that blocks our freedom to do what we want to do, it is known fact that German and French politicians were bulling our politicians to increase taxes etc. so we will have slower economic growth.

Yes, you really are a poor country. That is why your people flood our borders by the millions looking for work. That is why dumb Pollock jokes are STILL told.

What bollocks, we are making our own night vision and thermal sights by PCO company, and link does not work.

Nope...

MEGAUPLOAD - The leading online storage and file delivery service

Only because You don't understand something do not mean it does not work, AMAP-ADS elements are also not moving and it works. Educate Yourself, because I see that education levels in France are very low if You don't understand such simple things.

AMAP-ADS has coverage over the ENTIRE vehicle, Zaslon does not.

Here, educate Yourself how Zaslon is working.

andrei_bt - Активная Защита Основного Танка

It has a limited arc of protection with blond spots susceptable to attack. Only the Drozd is worse.

Pfff, this only shows level of Your "knowledge".

Pfft, this only shows you do not know the difference between 360 coverage and Zaslon with 60 degrees of gaps.

And when did happen? Oh wait, never? But fact is that when leclerc was promoted for export it was in it's earlier, unreliabale early variants from S1 and S2, SXXI solved most if not all problems.

It happened when Russia lost a $4 billion order for tanks.

This only prooves You have problems with comprehending simple things.

This only proves you don't have a clue what is in your own kit which isn't Made in Poland.

Because MSBS is still in R&D stage... oh wait, You didn't know? So why You even have rank of "Sr. Defence Professional" if You don't know such simple things?

Oh no, it is past R&D. The rifle is ready for LRIP, the C4I of ISW Tytan is what is holding it up. They past on foreign components so they are left relying on Polish companies that are going nowhere.

So typical, making conclusions on early technology demonstrator, You don't even understand that serial vehicle can be very different.

So typical, making tech demos full of foreign kit and claiming Poland is on the level of advanced industrial nations. You don't understand your defence industry is not up to the task.

If I would be You (unprofessional) I would say the same about Leclerc just watching early prototypes and their configuration. But I will not do this, it is well below my level.

If I would be you I would make outlandish claims that Russia can kick the EU's ass, Poland is on the level of French defence technology and doesn't develop it because there is no need when Poland is the most anal country in the EU about US protection and fear of Russian invasion. But I will not do this, it is well below my level to talk such fantasy.

 

[Damian]

First, as I said 35-45t is anything but light... it is medium to HEAVY.

45 tons is medium class, heavy starts with 50 tons.

Second, I said the US scrapped GCV because it was too HEAVY and that is WHY they scrapped it for a LIGHTER version. You have reading comprehension problems...

GCV was not scrapped, just rewrited, and still this thing in basic configuration will be weighting 40-50 tons, with addon armor it can exceed 55 tons.

I read it in your pathetic €6 billion defence budget.

Seems that translations from my language is harder than I could except... or once again, people writing such documents are not well educated enough to understand what MoD, Military and Designers have in mind.

Yes, you really are a poor country. That is why your people flood our borders by the millions looking for work. That is why dumb Pollock jokes are STILL told.

No not poor, only under socialist goverment, and stupid jokes only says about culture and intelectuall level of these joke makers, not subjects of these jokes.

AMAP-ADS has coverage over the ENTIRE vehicle, Zaslon does not.

You have problems with reading, or with eyes, did You read about Zaslon in these link? Zaslon also have full covarage of all sides, depends on modules numbers and placement.

It has a limited arc of protection with blond spots susceptable to attack. Only the Drozd is worse.

Yeah I have right, You have problems with even understanding what You see. So typical for most west europeans.

Pfft, this only shows you do not know the difference between 360 coverage and Zaslon with 60 degrees of gaps.

Try harder little man, for example learn languages, or learn how to read with understanding.

It happened when Russia lost a $4 billion order for tanks.

In a deals where Leclerc also lost to other competitors?

This only proves you don't have a clue what is in your own kit which isn't Made in Poland.

I have, I have, because I use my own countries sources. Besides who knows better Polish? You or me?

Oh no, it is past R&D. The rifle is ready for LRIP, the C4I of ISW Tytan is what is holding it up. They past on foreign components so they are left relying on Polish companies that are going nowhere.

It is still in R&D, final configuration was not still shown, nor LRIP was shown. And it is only a rifle, there is no need to wait with rifle production untill Tytan will be finished.

So typical, making tech demos full of foreign kit and claiming Poland is on the level of advanced industrial nations. You don't understand your defence industry is not up to the task.

Read my posts 100 times untill You understand the point. Many nations are using foreing subcomponents, even US was doing that to save money and time. But yeah, people, by Armands logic probably also US military industry is not capabale to design anything.

If I would be you I would make outlandish claims that Russia can kick the EU's ass, Poland is on the level of French defence technology and doesn't develop it because there is no need when Poland is the most anal country in the EU about US protection and fear of Russian invasion. But I will not do this, it is well below my level to talk such fantasy.

Well, west europe is living in fantasy land for many years, and it's arrogance once again some day will cost it's money, citizens life, maybe even something worser.

But please, say more how other countries and nations are inferior, especially to Your beloved France that was not even capabale to design simple tank prototypes comparabale to TTB, Object 195 or Object 774, designed by these "stupid" Yanks or these "barbaric" "inferior" Russians and Ukrainians.

 

[jat]

This theory become outdated in day when modern FCS was fielded. Besides this main reason why Soviet tanks were and are so small, is because by such way, they are lighter being still well protected, and are also more easier to transport and store.

that being said is true but weight is a non issue if you build the right things to support them. IL-76 and bridges layers were built for the T-72 and T-80 not the other way around. This theory of low siloute has been destroyed partly due to modern FCS but I would say it has more to do with armor and space.
And everything would be ok, if they would use their brains and place ammunition stored outside autoloader not in every free space in hull like in T-72, but to place it in better protected areas minimizing risk of ammo cook off after armor perforation.
I believe they started storing the extra ammo in the turret rear in the new T-90AM or whatever they want to call it. The Type 99 seems to have a big turret. Possible that they also did the same?

I do not see a reason to place it on tank, how it works? Like US AN/VLQ-7 Active protection System? Still such system is outdated in time of fire and forget missiles with passive targeting system.

according to the Chinese fanboys, it blinds tanks and missiles. The missile part i'm doubtfull unless its coming headon which is stupid, since top attack is the future. But any prospect of a laser blinding a modern FCS or does this only work on old T-72?

 

[shiphone]

before call others 'fanboys' you'd better have a check on youself...funny...

1.IA has 1 combat regiment of Arjun besides the test and training unit, around 100 MK1 currently,it was said the prodcution began in 2004...the confirmed order is 124 Mk1 and 124 Mk2...and Mk2 is under development 500 ZTZ99 in service now,and new ZTZ99A entered in service this year...

2.current ZTZ99 serial(actually all these varients are called ZTZ99) is around 52-54 tones,the improved ZTZ99A just entered service, it's shorter in length,so we don't see it will be heavier...japanese Type 90 and French Leclerc is at the same weight level...the new japanese Type10 is around 45T. and all these tanks have 3 crews only...

3. it's quite silly to compare the price of chinese made weapon with a indian one full of imported componets and use the price to measure the advancement, I thought CAG reports made it clear why the price is so high,and some news said MK2 will be more expensive few month ago..

and chinese defence industry has exported thounds of tanks since 1980s, the cost performance is always the key of marketing ,and we know the great profit margin in defence trade...the new generation of Export varients of Tank is much advanced and electronized ,and the price goes up as well. they will be much more expensive...2.5 million or more is for international offer,and the price for the PLA is always cheaper.

4. it's empty talk to find which one is better with limited or wrong information...maybe we have to find it out in a real battle, but In PLA , the ZTZ99 and ZTZ96 serial have been the backbone of the Armored force,and we all know what is in IA...and in international market, the new variant sharing the same tech as ZTZ99A is active for market ,several customer is testing it..the new released pic here-improve VN-1 tanks

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Empty talks Ship-hone, The member asked abt technical specs..

 

[shiphone]

1st: Turret geometry is not good for current turret armor distribution. Armor distribution on Chinese tanks is same as in Soviet (Russian/Ukrainian) designs, however turret geometry is closer to western tanks, this makes Chinese tanks highly vurnabale to hits in side armor that is not well angled to be covered by frontal armor within safe manouvering angles (frontal arc, +/- 0-30 degrees from turret longitudinal center axis), also turret roof that is ~70mm thick is not well angled and is highly exposed in all ZTZ-99 variants.

2nd: Because ZTZ-99 to ZTZ-99A1 use very specific front turret modular composite armor, there is more RHA and big air gap for mounting bolts instead of composite insert. Also it is not certain if ZTZ-99 to ZTZ-99A1 variants use ERA, not regular geometry of externally mounted cassettes/plates suggest that this is not ERA but some kind of bolted on addon armor, maybe ceramic or HHS.

3rd: Side hull protection is only basic, 80mm RHA side hull armor + few mm non ballistic skirts without any additional protection (ERA or otherwise).

.

view 1: Turret geometry??? and hits in side armor, I really don't know what you are talking about...I'm sure you don't know what turret geometry of 99 is like.
the protection of turret roof is a difficulty for all tanks,you could offer your solution but extra armor and active defence.and the improvement has been made(the 3rd and 4th turret)...dear.

view 2: sorry, I can't tell you what is the structure of composite armo on ZTZ99,but what you said is baseless, show us your source please....if you mean the wedge blocks which empty inside, I thought Leopard2 A6 was the same.

chinese ERA? oh ,god, it has been developed for 3 genearations, the newest FY-4 and FY-5 on ZTZ96A and 99/99A are the 3rd gen



view 3: and you'd better have a look at the image above and notice the low silhouette of the hull and the wheels.

 

[jat]

before call others 'fanboys' you'd better have a check on youself...funny...

Yea...I will.

1.IA has 1 combat regiment of Arjun besides the test and training unit, around 100 MK1 currently,it was said the prodcution began in 2004...the confirmed order is 124 Mk1 and 124 Mk2...and Mk2 is UNDER development...actually chinese is not addicted to talking about the future and dreams ,unlike indian...around 500 ZTZ99 in service now,and new ZTZ99A entered in service this year...

Despite all the negative media attention the Arjun got its being inducted and in large numbers as well. It wasn't not too long ago when the Chinese fanboys just like touted the superiority of the Type 99 and even AlKhalid over the Arjun and calling the tank Arjunk.
Despite all this, the quality of control has passed and the production line as fine tuned to take out any manufacture defects.

2.current ZTZ99 serial(actually all these varients are called ZTZ99) is around 52-54 tones,the improved ZTZ99A just entered service, it's shorter in length,so we don't see it will be heavier...japanese Type 90 and French Leclerc is at the same weight level...the new japanese Type10 is around 45T. and all these tanks have 3 crews only...

Yea, and they don't have addon armour. Your point?

3. it's quite silly to compare the price of chinese made weapon with a indian one full of imported componets and use the price to measure the advancement... I thought CAG reports made it clear why the price is so high...and some news said MK2 will be more expensive few month ago..
and chinese defence industry has exported thounds of tanks since 1980s, the cost performance is always the key of marketing ,and we know the great profit margin in defence trade...the new generation of Export varients of Tank is much advanced and electronized ,and the price goes up as well. they will be much more expensive...2.5 million or more is for international offer,and the price for the PLA is always cheaper.

You are a fanboy. The type 99 uses a licensed assembled German engine or imported. Get a clue kid.

4. it's empty talk to find which one is better with limited or wrong imformation...maybe we have to find it out in a real battle, but In PLA , the ZTZ99 and ZTZ96 serial have been the backbone of the Armored force,and we all know what is in IA...and in international market, the new varient sharing the same tech as ZTZ99A is active for market ,servial customer is testing it..the new released pic here-imporve VN-1 tanks

Yea China make super weapon.

5.and dear friends, forgive me, india is never on the chasing list of chinese defence industry.

Yea China is super power make best tank in world right?
The Type 99 is a soviet design tank heavily mutilated with the same defects seen in the T series while having an enlarged chasis for the heavier/larger German engine.
You have specs other wise you might aswell not contribute.
Before you come here and call us fanboys you should visit Chinese forums where you speculate about the China's super power weapons and then make CG art over it again and again.
The Arjun has come of age despite what you've said and DRDO has made little modifications since the production line started, albiet it took time to work out the quality control, in 2005 American's were hired to teach their Indian counter parts on how to assemble a heavy tank. That was why it took this long since the first batch. Do don't spread your PR.
What we need is specs especially on the APS 'laser dazler' system. We already know the type 99 should have flaws on the lines of T-90 near the turret and thats why you keep seeing a gradual increase in addon armour and era on the front and especially the sides.
Thanks for the picture, it refearms my guess that the Chinese have not enlarged the Type 99 tyrret. Infact it seems to ressemble the T-90 with out armour.
The new T-90AM turret seems to resemble Type 99 turret. Side still is a weak point.
Am right to asume that aside for the addon armour that they are also using ERA on some aprts of the tank?

 

[jat]

FYI cost of tanks has nothing and very little to do with labour price. Materials cost the same.

 

[shiphone]

it's important make it clear between the furture and current situation, the plan and the reality ...if war happens,we don't fight with the weapons on the paper...if you want to conquer the enemy,you't better conquer yourself (IA ? in this case) please...

You are a fanboy. The type 99 uses a licensed assembled German engine or imported. Get a clue kid.

oh,again...basicly we are all fans ,hobbyist or enthusiast ONLY...

it's strange that an indian fanboy who can't read chinese would lecture me about chinese weapon system...,the nearing 60tones weight, imported germany engine ,etc......
show us your source please, which model is used on ZTZ99 and origin model from Germany ...and then I would put the interview of the chief designer years ago here.

the only imported engine used on a chinese tank is from UKrain, TYPE90 serial and MBT2000...and those TOT models to Pakistan.

--------------------
and chinese 'MK2' is on the way to the operation units ...taken early this year...

 

[shiphone]

Empty talks Ship-hone, The member asked abt technical specs..

I knew, but indian won't tell the secret of Kanchan Armor as well...coz few knows and no one tells...

empty talks about comparation again...so take it easy...

 

[shiphone]

FYI cost of tanks has nothing and very little to do with labour price. Materials cost the same.

the Scientific Research Levels and industrial base matters...you misunderstand the power of industrialization
if you really want to talking about the labour price, we could hire 5-6 researchers with the same salary amount in china for one in western country ...

 

[jat]

oh,again...basicly we are all fans ,hobbyist or enthusiast ONLY...

it's strange that an indian fanboy who can't read chinese would lecture me about chinese weapon system...,the nearing 60tones weight, imported germany engine ,etc......
show us your source please, which model is used on ZTZ99 and origin model from Germany ...and then I would put the interview of the chief designer years ago here.

the only imported engine used on a chinese tank is from UKrain, TYPE90 serial and MBT2000...and those TOT models to Pakistan.

Kid go to tank.net. Help yourself. In the meantime understand that the 1500 HP engine just didn't come out of thin air. Its a German engine! thats why the Type 99 Hull was enlarged. You think the engineers wouldn't design a engine to fit a tank? or did they design the tank to fit the engine.
Its all speculation but Chinese fanboys that have more knowledge than you have admitted that the Type 99 tanks use German engines until an alternative would be avaliable. That being said, why do you think Pakistan's AK uses a Ukrainian engine? Better performance over a 1500 HP engine?
Answers, cost or space
The AK with its weight does not need a 1500 HP engine nor does it have the space for it. PA even switched out Chinese FCS for a foriegn one.
But I don't care if the 1500 HP engine inside the Type 99 is German dseigned or Chinese assembled. Its something thats 1500 hp or so the sources claim.
So staying on topic how is better than Arjun on paper? Since I don't see PLA invaded India with Type 99 tanks anytime soon.

 

[jat]

Notice something? No change in Hull or Turret just more and different armour. Seems like the Chinese keep realizing the ineffective protection and flaws the T series have.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

I knew, but indian won't tell the secret of Kanchan Armor as well...coz few knows and no one tells...

empty talks about comparation again...so take it easy...

All you have posted yet been posted earlier, I think we do told abt Kanchan Armour`s logic in this fourm already..

Empty talks again, i am just a observer here, I can go on, i will speak when needed..



1.Besides what is the length of Chinese 125mm gun
2.Any new AP rounds in development ?
3. What are the properties of FCS
4. What type of thermal viewer it use, range ?
5. What is the addon on front> a. A Hidden ERA, B. Composite materiel blocks..
6. Does Commander`s Periscope or CITV have Thermal or NG ?

Lot more..

 

[shiphone]

Kid go to tank.net. Help yourself. In the meantime understand that the 1500 HP engine just didn't come out of thin air. Its a German engine! thats why the Type 99 Hull was enlarged. You think the engineers wouldn't design a engine to fit a tank? or did they design the tank to fit the engine.
Its all speculation but Chinese fanboys that have more knowledge than you have admitted that the Type 99 tanks use German engines until an alternative would be avaliable. That being said, why do you think Pakistan's AK uses a Ukrainian engine? Better performance over a 1500 HP engine?
Answers, cost or space
The AK with its weight does not need a 1500 HP engine nor does it have the space for it. PA even switched out Chinese FCS for a foriegn one.
But I don't care if the 1500 HP engine inside the Type 99 is German dseigned or Chinese assembled. Its something thats 1500 hp or so the sources claim.
So staying on topic how is better than Arjun on paper? Since I don't see PLA invaded India with Type 99 tanks anytime soon.

dear friend, the engine on ZTZ99 is 1200HP ...LOL ,angain ,get the fact correct first, and please don't pretend knowing everything without any evidence and source...if it is about chinese weapon, I'm sure you know much less than any chinese member here...if you want to change this,you'd better to learn chinese first,and try to learn the development history of the chinese third generation Tanks.... any intentional slight won't work ...

again, since you made the point about the "Imported engine", show us your source please...not personal guess or opinion ...
---------------

the ZTZ99 and Type90/MBT2000/AK were developed by 2 teams and have own development tree diagrams although they share some techs and research results ...project ZTZ99 is for PLA only...the only goal of Project Type90/MBt2000 is to the international macket for money. the R&D team could integrate anything they could get . as simple as that.

there are 3 research institutions and more armored vechiels Factories in china ...every new equipment is selected after hard compition between different R&D teams. and normally the loser is always macketed into international macket...some of them lost in the compition due to the price and productbility not the lack of the advancement.