View Full Version : type-62 light tank
well in the old forum, someone show us that there was a type-62 upgrade which changed the turret from egg shape to kind of a boxish shape. I am just wondering if anyone of you have any news on that tank
adeptitus
11-01-2005, 03:34 AM
well in the old forum, someone show us that there was a type-62 upgrade which changed the turret from egg shape to kind of a boxish shape. I am just wondering if anyone of you have any news on that tank
Maybe you're thinking of the Type 63A?
Red Guard
11-01-2005, 10:57 AM
if you mean type 62 light MBT. i don't think there ever was this design. the first "box" turrent's design is about the...cougar from US upgrading, and that's with type 80. maybe you mean type 63, which used to use type 62's turrent mounted on PT-76's hull. and yes, it's changed to a box turrent today, as called type 63, but i am sure there are two or more kinds of "type 63".
Aluka
11-01-2005, 01:13 PM
I've actually seen some pictures of Type62 with welded turret that looked pretty much like the turret of Type89 SPG.
Oh, yeah, i have one:
http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/4441/62g9ap9db.th.jpg (http://img262.imageshack.us/my.php?image=62g9ap9db.jpg)
yeah that is the one that was on the old forum, any specs on that thing??
Red Guard
11-01-2005, 05:28 PM
ah...en.....actually, no. i've seen that pic too, but, no further information on that. i guess it was nothing but a prototype.
and, comrade aluka, go to
http://www.cjdby.net/dispbbs.asp?boardid=6&replyid=998631&id=216760&page=1&skin=0&Star=1
it's no virus, chinese military site
seeeeee anyone familiarrrrrrrrr?????????? :D guess who.
MIGleader
11-01-2005, 06:10 PM
well in the old forum, someone show us that there was a type-62 upgrade which changed the turret from egg shape to kind of a boxish shape. I am just wondering if anyone of you have any news on that tank
rumors were that norinco had been developing a new light tank to replace the type 62, but no solid evidence. but such a design would be impractical, and an ifv would be much better.
yeah that is what people said. i would go for bmp-3 than light tanks.
but i was curious about this old warhorse
Red Guard
11-01-2005, 11:37 PM
96 is the new light tank. there is no point to develop a new one. 62 was proven to be a mistake during the sino viet nam war......light armour, light rifle....nothing, nothing at all.....
Aluka
11-02-2005, 12:29 AM
I have another picture somewhere - those tanks in assembly plant.
I guess it could be some sort of modernisation program that wasn't accepted.
Red Guard, i assume i could post something in return :), but... i wish i had good pics. Anyway, were you in chinese military? Id actually like to discuss this via PMs.
Red Guard
11-02-2005, 01:00 AM
no, i am a 20 year old engineering student in canada. what do you want to discuss?
the reason i show you the site is because, i feel very close to your "close guard" icon. because it's been my icon on the chinese military forum for years. the person you see there is me, :D.
Aluka
11-02-2005, 01:31 AM
I see :)
sumdud
12-03-2005, 01:38 PM
Do you guys mean this link:
http://p098.ezboard.com/fsinodefenceforumfrm3.showMessage?topicID=2.topic
Type 96 the new light tank? What'd you mean?
The old Type 62s are bust, and replacing the turret alone wouldn't do you any good.
At 21 tonnes, I doubt you can airdrop it, but I guess you can get on a plane and fly it to whereever the trouble is in time.......
The turret looks like it's just the egg-shaped turret with a shield placed in front....
Red Guard
12-03-2005, 11:19 PM
if you are asking me upstairs.
chinese MBTs development attempts to follow the rule of "light matches heavy". China is a big country. unlike the russians, it's all flat and at the same longatitue. in the south, there are so much of water field. and tanks like type 99 won't function as well as a lighter tank would. that's why type 59 was issued to the armies in the north, and to the south, the armies were issued with type 62s. today, we still follow this rule. type 99s will be replacing all of the 59s and some of the 80s in the north. and type 96s will be replacing all of the type 62 in the south. and there is one change. now chinese army is changing to a heavy armoured mech divisions and light armoured motorized divisions
there fore the heavy armoured elite mech divisions (mostly in 38, 39 armies) will be using type 99 along with type 86 (BMP-1) or later on a better IFV. and armies in the south mostly with light armoured motorized divisions and brigades will be using type 96 along with type 92 wheeled. these light units are faster they are enough to match the tofu armed forces in the south and west borders of china. besides type 96s are very cheap comparing to type 99.it will be the main MBTs for china in the future. it's not for air borne.
sumdud
12-09-2005, 01:40 AM
Isn't the South being issued type 59Ds while the North is bring armed with 96s?
The type 98G/99s are pretty much just elite only.
And I really doubt the type 96 has better pressure than 98G. The 98G is only 2-4 tonnes heavier, but have a wider and definitely longer hull. I would buy that the type 98G/99 has better distribution.
So type 62G a bust?
Guess so, unless RRU for tanks is on high priority on the PLA's list.
(no matter how fast a tank can run, the one in the flying jet wins. Not to mention maintence and logistics.)
Kampfwagen
12-09-2005, 07:51 PM
The Type 62 is, IMHO, bassed on a vastly outdated system. Despite this fact, I suppouse that if it were used in a fight against light APC's and infantry, it could do quite a bit of damage. But considering it's cannon is just a tad less powerful than a German Tiger tank from WW2, Tank-On-Tank seems laughably one-sided.
Red Guard
12-09-2005, 10:50 PM
Isn't the South being issued type 59Ds while the North is bring armed with 96s?
The type 98G/99s are pretty much just elite only.
And I really doubt the type 96 has better pressure than 98G. The 98G is only 2-4 tonnes heavier, but have a wider and definitely longer hull. I would buy that the type 98G/99 has better distribution.
So type 62G a bust?
Guess so, unless RRU for tanks is on high priority on the PLA's list.
(no matter how fast a tank can run, the one in the flying jet wins. Not to mention maintence and logistics.)
okay, first of all, once again, there is no such thing as 98G or 99G. it's a very stupid thing came out of a very stupid and very unprofessional chinese military forum which every serious and professional chinese military fan hates. i am not pointing a finger at you, i am just saying the fact.
G is as Gai, means upgraded, it's normally a japanese kind of term, as in the late WWII, they have "thunder Gai" and stuff like that. some smart aXX fan thought this name is cool and gave out a 99G term.....
anyway. no, actually, 59D is kinda like a upgrade for excisting 59s, like in russia, they upgrade T-55 (now i may made some mistake on upgradings). but still, 59D is mostly like a test for the gun, and an export version for other small countries. in the future all of the tanks will be replaced by 96 and 99. 96 will be more, and 99 won't just stay in elite. because 99 is very expensive. much expensive than 96. so it will be issued to those so called "fist troop" (fraust truppe?) FIRST. slowly it will be issued to the others mech divisions, well i think all the mech divisions are fist troops... and 96 now is in mess production, all the photos now indicate the massive production of 96s. i read a thread sometime ago, indicating the stop of some types. if i remembered correctly, 96 and 99 are the only things in production, IF i remembered correctly. 96 is cheap and it will be replacing most of the tanks in the service. like those motor div....
darth sidious
12-09-2005, 11:34 PM
Good post RED guard
GUi is a jap term for example chi ko gui roughly equvilent of bis in french
the t-62 was made beacuse the pla armies of the south need a lighter and cheaper tank some were suplied to vietnam and can be seem on the advance on to sigon
also the pla armies of the north were MUCH better armed the the south BY 1969 they had AK M-1946 T-59 with night vision and tungsten round plus Mi-4/Mi-8 and massive numbers MRL in 1979 the armies of the south werent nearly as well equpit
sumdud
12-10-2005, 12:03 AM
I don't know about the type98G, but the type 99G is fake no doubt.
But as for type 96s, well, production is high, but I am not sure if it's cheap.
I mean, why else would they be upgrading type 59s? (And I haven't heard about other countries wanting 59Ds/upgrades)
As for the type 62s, yes, they have about no chance against other tanks, but hey, it's a light tank, it was never built to be used as a MBT. China only used them in Vietnam because it was the other tank able to walk through Vietnam though and was cheap.
But then again, this is the type 62, and its design is way too obslete, so what can you expect?
A new design is great, but China don't really need a light tank now.(As long as China lack large transports.)
darth sidious
12-10-2005, 12:07 AM
the perfomace of the tank in vietnam is not bad in one instance two T-34 were destoryered by it the problme is that the infantry protecting the tank suffered heavy losses hence the bad reputation
Red Guard
12-10-2005, 01:59 AM
keke.
well. first of all about 98. i had talked about this in the other threads when i first arrived in this forum. 98 was never a ....n offical term for "THE new tank". Actually, there were only a few "98" produced back then. those were the ones that were in the parade of 1999 for the armoured troop square. And it was so few, only several (forgot how many) were at the front, and the rest were 96s, (88) and 80s. that was october. those were the "offical 98s". the next year, 98 were out offically, and it was called ZTZ-99. then the so called 99G were the 99s with front armour.
and the type 62. like J-8, type 62 was the product of the time. we needed a tank that could move efficently in the south water rice field, especially something cheap we could support to the viet namese. so a down scaled 59 was presented. today, there is no need for "light tank", so type 62 is about out of the service just like J-6 did.
when i say 96 is cheap, it's comparing to 99. 99 is also called "chinese leopard" by the chinese military fan, many aren't happy with it, since it's like we copied leopard. just like leopard, it's very expensive for PLA. we have so many armoured troops, and if we give them 99s, they are going to eat up the money like crazy. therefore to protect the nation from those weak armoured forces like in the south borders, 96 would do just the job. 99 were aimed for T-90s, and M1s. but to those T-34s, or say... the..M48, M60 of taiwan, well, even 59 could take care them no problem. type 96 is advanced enough for the enemies on the south border.
59D is like a ....plan for a fast solution. we have so many 59s, there are them in beijing military district, what can you do? you can't just change them like that, so in the mean while as 96s are not issued to these non important troops, they will just be using the upgraded 59.
of couse, these creat problems for the war, if we are going to have one. the heavy load for the supply troops and repairment troops.
but i will be expecting 59, 62, 79, 80 out of service soon. maybe not so fast for 79, 80s, well, there aren't a lot of them anyway....
do you think apc like the NEW IFV (bmp-3 style apc) would take care of all the light tank role in the future??? it got 100mm turret and 30mm cannon which could be pretty deadly
sumdud
12-10-2005, 02:34 AM
Hmmm......... I'd say so.
Maybe the vehicle's chassis become a common chassis, just like the Spanish vehicle, and a light tank is derived from it for multipurpose, and maybe rapid roles.
I doubt the type 80/88s will be out of service very soon, but I wonder, why don't they give the D upgrades to the 79s instead of the 59s?
Red Guard
12-10-2005, 03:59 AM
type 88 IS type 96. type 88 is the production name and type 96 is the military name. or you are thinking about the egg shaped type 80 tank? there are not A lot of them.
same to type 79, there are not a lot of 79. and the "D upgrade" is about upgrading the gun of 59 to 125 (am i right?) and upgrading the electronic stuff ( i am not familiar with the detailed.....things). 79 is already much more advanced thn 59. and the gun as well. still there aren't a lot f 79 as well.
79 was a .... sample for the gun. but later on, we didn't just use the gun....
and by the way, i may sound a bit harsh when i speak, that's how i normally speak with the "IS", the "THE" thing, i hope you guys don't take that as an offence. i just want to make a notice.
type 88 IS type 96. type 88 is the production name and type 96 is the military name. or you are thinking about the egg shaped type 80 tank? there are not A lot of them.
same to type 79, there are not a lot of 79. and the "D upgrade" is about upgrading the gun of 59 to 125 (am i right?) and upgrading the electronic stuff ( i am not familiar with the detailed.....things). 79 is already much more advanced thn 59. and the gun as well. still there aren't a lot f 79 as well.
79 was a .... sample for the gun. but later on, we didn't just use the gun....
and by the way, i may sound a bit harsh when i speak, that's how i normally speak with the "IS", the "THE" thing, i hope you guys don't take that as an offence. i just want to make a notice.
That is type-59-125 with new gun, the "D" was new tech, engine and some other upgrade. Sumdud has a good question, why dun they do it to type-69/79 when there are 4000 tanks in total of that type. So many old tnaks :(
Oh another question is, did type-62 get the same upgrade as type-59 on using gun fire ATGM
sumdud
12-10-2005, 10:48 PM
Well, if you upgrade the type 79 instead, you'll gain a lot of ground just by upgrading a better tank. If you give the same upgrade, the upgrade will be cheaper; if you give the same amount of money, you get a much better tank.
As for the gun, you were going to change the gun anyway. The type 79 isn't a common tank, so its rounds, even if very powerful, is only limited in quantity.
The D upgrade upgrades the gun to a better 105mm gun(Best one in China, used on the SPATGs) not 125, that's Pakistan's Al-Zarrar.
The type 80/88s(variants) aren't going to be retired soon, not until all the old unupgraded 59s and 69s are gone. It just got a BMS upgrade.
Type 96 is 88C, not any 88.
I am going to leave it here now, since we are drifting off-topic.
unless something about light tanks appear.
-------------
Edit:
If the type 62s did not get an upgrade, it cannot fire the missile at all for its original gun is 85mm.
Well, if you upgrade the type 79 instead, you'll gain a lot of ground just by upgrading a better tank. If you give the same upgrade, the upgrade will be cheaper; if you give the same amount of money, you get a much better tank.
As for the gun, you were going to change the gun anyway. The type 79 isn't a common tank, so its rounds, even if very powerful, is only limited in quantity.
The D upgrade upgrades the gun to a better 105mm gun(Best one in China, used on the SPATGs) not 125, that's Pakistan's Al-Zarrar.
The type 80/88s(variants) aren't going to be retired soon, not until all the old unupgraded 59s and 69s are gone. It just got a BMS upgrade.
Type 96 is 88C, not any 88.
I am going to leave it here now, since we are drifting off-topic.
unless something about light tanks appear.
-------------
Edit:
If the type 62s did not get an upgrade, it cannot fire the missile at all for its original gun is 85mm.
really, damn i thought it was a 100mm cannon
Red not Dead
12-13-2005, 01:15 PM
Sorry for going off topic but WTF is that flecktarn cammo pattern I saw on RedGuard's post?
German camo pattern on chinese BDU's? When? How?
Red Guard
12-13-2005, 04:44 PM
Sorry for going off topic but WTF is that flecktarn cammo pattern I saw on RedGuard's post?
German camo pattern on chinese BDU's? When? How?
which one?
von_herrs
07-12-2006, 09:52 PM
No, guys, it is not like say if a fromtline division on the Sino-Russian border gets x number of Type 99G's and y number of new IFVs, then a frontline division on the Vietnam border will have the same x number of Type 96's and same y number wheeled APC's. It does not work like that, and anyone with the vaguest connection with someone in PLA will know that it is more a configurative than a qualitative game. The reality is more like half or a third of the northern (for guarding against the Russians) number of the same or similar tank, and proportionally a lot more mechanised infantry, in a southern (against Vietnam) division. This is actually a geographical consideration, as the American experience in Vietnam concluded that using the M113 as a sort of fighting vehicle as opposed to just a battle taxi is the most effective and bloodless mthod in fighting the 'Congs. The infantry themselves very ussualy will f*ck up deep in the boondocks, as the treacherous terrain prescribes all-round general protection. Thus, as a matter of fact, the better southern divisions are amongst the most mechanised (not in tanks, but in aggregrate number of armour) in China because where as in Siberian steppes one could have sweeping heavy armoured and APC infantry formations, the smaller scale necessatated by the Indochine terrain mandates more well-rounded individual vehicles, thus resulting in a lesser number of heavy tanks and a greater number of general armour tracked APC's.
wmdco
07-14-2006, 04:07 PM
I really do not understand why PLA borthered to improve such an old tank. If it is true, one explanation is that, it is for Taiwan. Taiwan is not suitable for heavy tank.
MIGleader
07-14-2006, 06:15 PM
Could be for the marshy southeast/southern area's near vietnam. Or it could be a city tank meant to take on and support infantry.
PanAsian
07-15-2006, 10:25 AM
I've actually seen some pictures of Type62 with welded turret that looked pretty much like the turret of Type89 SPG.
Oh, yeah, i have one:
http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/4441/62g9ap9db.th.jpg (http://img262.imageshack.us/my.php?image=62g9ap9db.jpg)
I just wanted to note that the turret looks to me more like the one on the Type 63A, not the SPG. It's probably a prototype for an upgrade that would only go somewhere if the overall cost benefit makes sense, and don't forget logistics factor in. Are the guns on the original Type 63 and Type 62 the same? Either way it would make sense for both types to get the same turret/gun upgrade if they are to be kept in service.
gizhou
08-03-2006, 07:32 AM
A recent article in tanke Zhuangjia Cheliang explains about the updated Type 62. The 105mm turret from the Type 63A was fitted to the Type 62 but it was decided to make the Type 63A the PLA's new light tank. They are amphibious and it also means one less vehicle type.
sumdud
08-04-2006, 02:36 PM
So the Type 62 is getting retired? Good. It is impossible to apra-drop tanks anyway.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.