Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

[militarysta]

Yes, it's not bad armoured, but IMHO it's rather not so good as M1A2 and rather not good as Leo-2A5/A6 in overall shape.
In western tank armour is placed whit more constans thickness and rather bigger: 800mm+ then avarage thickens in ZTZ-99G.

And hull is still mystery, but this:

and lower ZTZ-99G turret part (640mm LOS) is showing that in chinnese tanks front hull is rather not thicker then 650mm LOS -what is avarage typical for:
T-72B model 1989, T-90S, T-90A, Leopard-2A4, Challenger-1/2 etc.
M1A2 have hull front LOS slighty bigger - between 650 and 700mm LOS.

 

[Damian]

Yup, and very weak side protection, especially for hull. Just aim at the sides, and watch how turret fly away.

It's interesting to see that Chinese do not use either ballistic skirts or ERA to potect hull sides, only a thin sheet metal/rubber skirts. IMHO they still have problems with vehicle weight, they want to keep them as light as possible, on the other hand their tanks still have for some reason larger internal volume than Russian tanks and thus are heavier, so to keep weight down, they sacrifice armor protection.

 

[militarysta]

yup, low weight is one of adavntage here:

ZTZ-96A:

42,8t

 

[jouni]

LEO 2A4 's are helping police to fight dangerous speeding at wintertime

 

[Damian]

I wonder when we see Finnish Leopard 2A6 tanks?

 

[jouni]

New Leos start to arrive next year. They will be the new spearhead and total we will have over 230 A4 & A6. Makes you sleep well at night. Those and new antitank missiles from Sweden NLAW

 

[militarysta]

Two version: LQ and HQ:

As we can see:

ZTZ-99G have on 40% forntal hight LOS equal to 840-1000mm , but on 16% area it's 700-800mm, and on 44% area LOS is equal to under 640mm what today is definetly not enought.
Becouse un mantled mask area (and main sight area) in ZTZ-99G is weaker to,then - more then 50-55% of fornatl ZTZ-99G area have LOS under 640-600mm.

For compare Wiedzmin from otvaga2000 work:

He notice obvious think: gunner main sight is making HUGE weak spot in this module


btw: Wiedzmin mesurement is based on draw, I prefer real photo - couse draws are ussaly wrong made by OPSPEC prupose.

 

[CCP]

MBT-3000 (export version of Type 99A)

 

[Damian]

It's not export variant of ZTZ-99, simply because it is based on a different tank, look at the turret and hull, they are completely different.

MBT-3000 is evolution of MBT-2000/VT-1A which in itself is evolution of Type-90-IIM of version which is Pakistani Al Khalid.

 

[Dazzler]

It's not export variant of ZTZ-99, simply because it is based on a different tank, look at the turret and hull, they are completely different.

MBT-3000 is evolution of MBT-2000/VT-1A which in itself is evolution of Type-90-IIM of version which is Pakistani Al Khalid.

they are all inter-related, in fact, type-99 was based on type-98, which was further modification with a longer hull of type-90IIM.

Type-99 has a longer hull to accommodate a bigger engine. Longer hull was not a given, rather, a deficiency since the engine was bulky. The current 99A2 has the same hull as MBT 2000 due to the fact that the engine is now more compact, producing same power.

Type-90IIM took a different route in Pakistan (HIT) and became alkhalid with certain key technologies being imported or made in house, the chinese developed it into mbt 2000 with all local gizmos including a primitive thermal imager which was far from reliable, so was the engine, hence ukrainian 6td series stepped in for VT-1A and current MBT 2000 for Morocco, Bangladesh and Myanmar orders.

The VT-4 or MBT 3000 is said to be going through trials, some changes are already visible, such as additional side armour within the frontal turret basket, that was not in the original mbt 3000.


some visible changes in VT-4 for trials for Pakistan, compared to earlier mbt 3000

The biggest news here in Pakistan is the completion of Alkhalid-Improved, or simply, Alkhalid-2, being worked on at HIT, to be revealed by late 2014 at IDEAS 2014 exhibition. This tank incorporates 6-10 major changes compared to the original alkhalid mbt.

Changes include newly developed composite armour, slightly longer hull, additional frontal and side protection, ukrainian 6t-3 1500hp engine and multiple reverse speed transmission, auto transmission control, improved datalink and command and control features, indigenous 125mm smoothbore gun made by heavy mechanical complex, and a newly developed autoloader. To accompany this, POF and other related firms are working on new apfsds and HEAT ammos, also to be revealed at IDEAS 2014, by november this year.

 

[Pandora]

It's not export variant of ZTZ-99, simply because it is based on a different tank, look at the turret and hull, they are completely different.

MBT-3000 is evolution of MBT-2000/VT-1A which in itself is evolution of Type-90-IIM of version which is Pakistani Al Khalid.

In all how you rate MBT3000 sir? Week Points and Strong points about this particular tank,so that our dear Friend @Dazzler will remember that in PDF too.

 

[Damian]

In all how you rate MBT3000 sir? Week Points and Strong points about this particular tank,so that our dear Friend @Dazzler will remember that in PDF too.

Same weaknesses as all Chinese tanks.

Relatively inconsistent frontal protection creatin a lot of weak zones. Very weak side hull and turret protection, which means you want to see this things burning with turrets flying? Aim at hull sides just under the turret where ammunition is stored, just like in T-72.

 

[Dazzler]

In all how you rate MBT3000 sir? Week Points and Strong points about this particular tank,so that our dear Friend @Dazzler will remember that in PDF too.

it has few, every mbt has them, but much less than a mighty warrior.

 

[Dazzler]

Same weaknesses as all Chinese tanks.

Relatively inconsistent frontal protection creatin a lot of weak zones. Very weak side hull and turret protection, which means you want to see this things burning with turrets flying? Aim at hull sides just under the turret where ammunition is stored, just like in T-72.

inconsistent frontal protection? 800mm+ LOS is not inconsistent protection by any means.

Side hull has additional armour layers, see the pics, it is not as thick as M1Axx or Leo-2A5 but much better considering the competition it is to be operated against.

 

[Damian]

inconsistent frontal protection? 800mm+ LOS is not inconsistent protection by any means.

Doubtfull there is 800mm+ of LOS armor.

And by incosnistent I mean a lot of weak zones or large areas where there is most likely no special armor.

Actually Russians on forum Otvaga-2004 have some discussion because photos of Chinese tanks in factory leaked which shows some hull armor layout. Russians also during "Tank Biahtlon" take a closer look at Chinese tank ZTZ-96A.

Their overall conclusion is laconic - not impressive.

Side hull has additional armour layers, see the pics, it is not as thick as M1Axx or Leo-2A5 but much better considering the competition it is to be operated against.

Side hull? There is no additional armor layers, these side skirts is a thin, few mm sheet metal, I hope you understand that such "protection" is irrelevant even by 1940's standards?

 

[Dazzler]

Doubtfull there is 800mm+ of LOS armor.

And by incosnistent I mean a lot of weak zones or large areas where there is most likely no special armor.

Actually Russians on forum Otvaga-2004 have some discussion because photos of Chinese tanks in factory leaked which shows some hull armor layout. Russians also during "Tank Biahtlon" take a closer look at Chinese tank ZTZ-96A.

Their overall conclusion is laconic - not impressive.



Side hull? There is no additional armor layers, these side skirts is a thin, few mm sheet metal, I hope you understand that such "protection" is irrelevant even by 1940's standards?

In recent biathlon, type-96A stood out as having the most accurate fire control and armour protection among all participants, including the t-72b3v. Yes it lost on grounds of having a less powerful engine, I can show videos if you like, t-72b3v was missing targets but type-96 was not.

Regarding VT-4 side armour, It has armour cavities with inserts, not just metal of steel sheets, also notice composite block within the turret basket.
As for hull sides, skirts are known to be HHS sheets unlike earlier rubber of gill type skirts.

 

[Damian]

In recent biathlon, type-96A stood out as having the most accurate fire control and armour protection among all participants, including the t-72b3v.

1. Armor protection was not tested during "Tank Biathlon", did you ever watched the competition? Stop making up facts for Christ sake...
2. T-72B3V is your another invention? Such designation and vehicle does not exist. Russian teams during recent "Tank Biathlon" used T-72B3 with upgrades in engine and fire control system, while other teams besides Chinese with their ZTZ-96A, used standard T-72B tanks.

Yes it lost on grounds of having a less powerful engine, I can show videos if you like, t-72b3v was missing targets but type-96 was not.

I seen all videos... to be honest all tanks participating in "Tank Biathlon" in terms of gunnery are obsolete compared to NATO MBT's.

Regarding VT-4 side armour, It has armour cavities with inserts, not just metal of steel sheets, also notice composite block within the turret basket.
As for hull sides, skirts are known to be HHS sheets unlike earlier rubber of gill type skirts.

You know what? Just stop, seriously stop.

For you people in 3rd world seriously logical thinking is a complete abstraction isn't?

I will be honest with You, I never ever seen a bigger BS....

 

[Broccoli]

At least they gave RWS for commander so things are going forward.

 

[Dazzler]

1. Armor protection was not tested during "Tank Biathlon", did you ever watched the competition? Stop making up facts for Christ sake...

was it prohibited?

2. T-72B3V is your another invention? Such designation and vehicle does not exist. Russian teams during recent "Tank Biathlon" used T-72B3 with upgrades in engine and fire control system, while other teams besides Chinese with their ZTZ-96A, used standard T-72B tanks.

Some sources call it b3, others b3v, why are you so offended??

I seen all videos... to be honest all tanks participating in "Tank Biathlon" in terms of gunnery are obsolete compared to NATO MBT's.

who is arguing when it is obvious??

You know what? Just stop, seriously stop.

For you people in 3rd world seriously logical thinking is a complete abstraction isn't?

I will be honest with You, I never ever seen a bigger BS

so Poland has become a first world region, since when? Congrats if it did

You know what, you are such a trash can, you know s**t about armour, particularly Chinese and Pakistani armour that it is simply ridiculous. Arguing with you is like banging head against the wall. I had you earlier, dont make me had you again

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Any more of these will give you Point 3 infraction ..

Keep up posting ..

it has few, every mbt has them, but much less than a mighty warrior.

You know what, you are such a trash can, you know s**t about armour, particularly Chinese and Pakistani armour that it is simply ridiculous.