SinoDefence Forum

Semi-Lobster

I'm talking very basic, specific parts here such as certain bolts, cabling etc. There is more to a tank than just gun, track, turret etc. every piece of the tank is built from dozens to hundreds of smaller pieces, parts commonality helps maintenance and repair work.

Like I said, I'm monolingual, if you have some insight into Chinese tank development, than contacting the sinodefence and helping him rewrite his articles (which he's been doing for the past several months now) would help everybody.

Lion

Same bolts and cabling and can be link to Type 59? Great!

Despite wiki can be unreliable sometimes. But the description of Type 80 is quite there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_88_(tank)

Semi-Lobster

I'm talking about things such as exact components, these things change and are updated constantly while others are constantly produced. This doesn't chance the basic design of the tank. The T-54/55 for example was the basis for the T-62 was was developed into the T-72 and the T-72 was the basis for the T-90. There were many landmark improvements during these improvements but that does not mean that there are many design carry overs from the T-54/55 to the T-90 and there are parts commonalities between them as well, the parts may have improved but you can could still replace a T-90's wheel with a T-54s and it would work generally.

Lineage is more important in the context of development. On how a tank is created and improved. I am not saying an MBT-2000 is a Type 59 with some minor improvements. What I've been trying to say is that it is the results of difficult engineering work from the Type 59 to the present. The MBT-2000is based on the Type 59 and uses a few similar parts but it has far more in common with the Type or Type 88 which are also descended from the Type 59.

I am now going to bed because itgs VERY late and I have work and exams tomorrow.

Spike

I don't think you need to continuously attack someone who holds a different opinion from you, yet is being polite about it. I also don't see how a link to an older tank is relevant in this discussion, but it's unnecessary to be so defensive about it.

Back on topic, I saw that this report has already been updated into the wikipedia article on the MBT-2000, it links to an AP article.

There's also a picture of the tanks under "evaluation" in a military parade.

Lion

From your way of linking ,M1A2 is also link to Sherman tank?

T-72 is never derive from T-62 or developed from. They never even share a same thing.

Same as Type 96 is never derived from Type59 and they never both same a same thing.

Lion

It's not about holding a different opinion. Its about wrong and correct. As this forum is look into by thousands of people world wide including some important military analyst. It is important to convey the correct information and let them have the correct judgement.

Forum is also about projecting the correct information to speak up the truth .

rhino123

At this present, we are arguing the ancestry of MBT2000 and Type-96 MBT... which seriously I found to be pointless. It is not the ancestors of the MBT that actually matter in this case or in whatever case.

From the point of view of a designer and manufacturer, it is easier to evolve a design rather than creating something radical and totally new. The reason is simple - cost and time saving. Older design had already been proven, their advantages had been exploited and their weaknesses had been known.

Thus what we should be looking at is the effectiveness of the tank design and the capability of the said tank and not who or what it is evolved from.

jackbh

If it were really an extension of T-54, they wouldn't have bought it. They obviously had other choices.

And if they really want Russian tanks that's in the family tree of T-54 they could have just bought T-90s from Russia.

RedMercury

Well, the T-54 was a great tank of its era, possibly even one of the best tanks of all time. No real shame in being in its lineage.

bd popeye

Mods note >> Knock off the minor league flaming or warnings will be issued

bd popeye super moderator

__________________
Discover the Chinese and World Military picture threads!


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


..And the Chinese Daily Life Photo thread!!


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


..And don't forget

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"I am what I am.... 'Dat's all what I am"

Pointblank

Honestly, I don't think the Chinese will win Peru's tank competition; the market for tanks is pretty saturated with tons of slightly used Leopard 2's being sold by the Germans and the Dutch. Unless the Chinese can SIGNIFICANTLY undercut in price (for example, the Dutch sold Leopard 2 A4's for $5.5 million per vehicle to the Norwegians), I just don't see the Chinese winning the contract.

Lion

With VT-1A already use by Peru army and ride on parade. And its defense minister openly declare very close to signing the deal with the Chinese side.

I don't know how you got the idea Chinese is going to lose it?

And Chinese is rich at the moment (they can easily lend generous loan with very low interest )and need huge natural resources. Barter trade is definitely welcome while it will not be the same for Germany, Ukarine and Russian who prefer in hard cash.

Plus military deal is not all about politics only. It must be also the good merit of VT-1A that Peru army prefer it at the moment. Don't forget, they need to compete against chilean Leopard A4. VT-1A might have prove itself to be in the leading contention of the deal.

SteelBird

Giving the price of the Leopard you quoted, I think the Chinese tanks have huge competition space with its price at about 1 million (correct me if I'm wrong), and the latest tank of China is only about 2 million, right?

RedMercury

Why use USD when Peru has plenty of natural resources to barter? Win win.

adeptitus

From the following news article, the Chinese Government provided Peru with better financing terms. Recently there's been talks of improving economic and tourism ties between China and Peru. Currently only 8,000 Chinese tourists visit Peru annually. Xinhua article claims that if direct flights are implemented, the number could climb as high as 300,000 annually. Not sure what kind of plane you need to fly direct (nonstop?) from China to Peru?

Peru's army has 300 T-55 and 110 AMX-13 tanks in its inventory. Most of their tanks, APC's, and armored cars are vintage equipment. The PRC could provide T-55 rebuild/upgrades like the Al-Zarrar with T-59D/P technology, but I think they'd prefer to just sell new tanks, and hopefully make a good enough impression to sell ships and planes later.

=======================

Living in Peru » News » Peru's President confirms purchase of MBT-2000 tanks from China

Politics | 10 December, 2009 [ 19:57 ]
Peru's President confirms purchase of MBT-2000 tanks from China

LivinginPeru.com
Isabel Guerra

President Garcia told the press that he considers as “correct” the decision of the Army and the Ministry of Defense to purchase Chinese tanks, and stressed that such a decision "doesn't contradict our vocation against an arms race."

He advanced that this acquisition is “almost a fact” and that the respective draft agreements with the Asian country have already been signed.

Garcia Perez added that thanks to his Chinese counterpart Hu Jintao, "we got an important reduction, not in price, but in the first payment, and in the period of time in which they must be paid."

The President explained that those tanks “are advanced technology,” and that this purchase is due to the fact that many of Peru's T-55 tanks need to be replaced.

He also said that it would he “irresponsible and unpatriotic” to talk openly about the tank's technical specifications to the media, but that it might be discussed by the Defense Commission in Congress.