T-80 Tanks

IIRC correctly China bought a few T-72MV's for trials and consideration but decided to stick with domestic production of AFV's. Although the Russian 2A46 L/48 was copied and slightly improved to become the gun on the Type 90II, Type 96, 98 and ZTZ-99. China also copied the carosel autoloader system.

Some people claim (but I don't quiet buy it) that the Type 96,98 and ZTZ-99 are a heavily modified T-72MV clones.

The Type 99 tank's hull bears striking resemblance to the T-72 hull. The turret, however, is Western-inspired.

Originally Posted by Pointblank

The Type 99 tank's hull bears striking resemblance to the T-72 hull. The turret, however, is Western-inspired.

Not really, if you strip away the ceramic plating you see a very frying pan style turret typical of T style and conventional Type style tanks decending from the T-44 the mothyer of the T-54. That being said, I still don't buy the T-72 clone argument wholly. I think the Type 99 is a stopgap until the PLA can actually build a true western style MBT. The Type 85II that had made up the bulk of the PLA's "modern" armor was rapidly going out of date and the PLA was flush with money to repalce it. But as good as the ZRZ-99 is, it still algs behind the western style MBT in both protection and fire power. With the new SK2 on the scene and the Arjun finally entering limited production expect to see a true Chinese MBT in 5-10 years.

It will probably still mount a 125mm gun but will feature cassette style bustle rack loading system like the newest Russian and Ukrainian systems and also feature a higher caliber (52-56 IMHO).

China can already make the engine,transmission,armor and FCS's the beast needs thanks to the Type 98/99 family. So I assuming that the hold ups are in the gun, autoloading system and industrial ability to make a hull and turret big enough.

Originally Posted by zraver

it still algs behind the western style MBT in both protection and fire power. With the new SK2 on the scene and the Arjun finally entering limited production expect to see a true Chinese MBT in 5-10 years.

It doesn't seem to be the reality.

Arjun is dead already, nobody cares it anymore. Chinese MBT has the fire power among the top list in the world, it's well documented.

It lacks the protection as the western tanks have and they won't change it anytime soon. Since half of China, the south part are all rice paddles, a west style tank doesn't fit there due to the weight issue. Actually they balance it with more lethal fire power and fast reaction time.

Originally Posted by fishhead

It doesn't seem to be the reality.

Arjun is dead already, nobody cares it anymore. Chinese MBT has the fire power among the top list in the world, it's well documented.

It lacks the protection as the western tanks have and they won't change it anytime soon. Since half of China, the south part are all rice paddles, a west style tank doesn't fit there due to the weight issue. Actually they balance it with more lethal fire power and fast reaction time.

First off, a 125mm L/48 with a carosel autoloading system with two piece ammo will never have firepower on par with single piece 120mm rounds that are much longer and heavier. The Chinese round apears to be around 560mm long the US M829E3 is 830mm IIRC and is also half again as heavy. Since the Chinese autloader is a copy of the Russian system used with the 2A46 family of guns the maximum leangth will probalby max out around 650mm in any case.

Besides being longer, western rounds are also heavier and more yaw resistent. Armor estimates avaible on the web seem to indicate it takes 17 joules to defeat each mm of RHAe at 2000M. That is a number that is easy enough to figure out.5M*2V=J I've run the numbers with the M829E3 as a control becuase its velocity is not in the 1700m/s ballpark and yet conforms to the 17j rule, and with all the rounds I ran the numbers on seem to fall in to the 17 joules per mm of RHAe range (DM-43,BM-42 etc).

Secondly weight and mobility is a factor of psi and HP/ton not simple gross weights. The Western style MBT- M1A2 which has 15.4psi (1.0803kg/cm) this compares favorablywith the ZTZ-99* which has a ground pressure of 1.172kg/cm (16.67psi) and the lighter Type 96 which has a ground pressure of .99kg/cm(14.1 psi)

when it comes to HP the M1A2 has 21.6hp/t the ZTZ-96 has 21hp/t and the ZTZ-99 has 27.4hp/t

so the M1A2 or a westerns tyle tankie like it at 70 tons has the same HP/t as the ZTZ-96 and lighter gorund pressure than the ZTZ-99 and by any objective standard should be ableto operate in rice paddy country just fine.

The ZTZ family has neither the protection nor the firepowerof a true MBT. The PLA knows this and I expect to see a real MBTin the near future (5-10 years).

* Becuase of the similarities in hull design To figure ground pressures I used published figures for the T-72A 41tons divided by a published ground pressure of.89kg/cm resulting in 46.06741573. I then divided the weights of the 96 and 99 by this number.

http://www.worldwidemetric.com/metcal.htm

Originally Posted by zraver

First off, a 125mm L/48 with a carosel autoloading system with two piece ammo will never have firepower on par with single piece 120mm rounds that are much longer and heavier. The Chinese round apears .....

Well, you don't have any proved data to back you up, all guess.

Here is the interview with the designer of ZTZ99 in 2003, and some data disclosed by him:
http://www.people.com.cn/GB/junshi/6...19/946919.html

At the 2km distance:
ZTZ99's gun can pierce 850mm armor with the Wolfram alloy shell
ZTZ99's gun can pierce 960mm armor with the special alloy shell(depleted uranium)

Compared with M1A2's 810mm and Leopard 2's 900mm at the same distance. And the designer confirmed explicitly ZTZ99 has the strongest fire power among the 3.

I've read the english translation and quite frankly the article is a fake. You can't get around the inherent limitations of 2 peace short rod ammo and low caliber and then surpass every known tank gun in the world.

the M1A2's 120mm L/44 M829E3 weights 10kg and travels at 1555m/s thats 15550 joules of muzzel energy. A 125mm cannon firing a 6.5 kg shell would need to propell the round to 2400 m/s (15600 joules) even then the resulting penetration estimate would only be 917mm. By the way no round has yet demonstrated the ability to punch armor equivalency nealry 50% thicker than it is long.

to achieve the figures you cite 960mm the gun would need to generate 16320 joules or more than 2500m/s for a 6.5 kg shell. Not only is this impossible with current gun technology it is impossible for current round design. The round would deform from the massive pressures excerted agaisnt it.

In reality the chinese round will penetrate at most 672mm of RHAe using the 17j/mm rule. This is right on track for the Chinese round to be between 56-650mm long to fit inside the 2A46 carusel autoloader.

BTW the M829E3 is estiamted to penetrate 900-914mm via th 17j/mm rule the DM-43 will penetrate around 775mm from an L/55 120mm

Please think before making such statements,the fakers claims to be a scientist are not taken seriosuly anywhere by any real experts.

Originally Posted by zraver

Not really, if you strip away the ceramic plating you see a very frying pan style turret typical of T style and conventional Type style tanks decending from the T-44 the mothyer of the T-54. That being said, I still don't buy the T-72 clone argument wholly. I think the Type 99 is a stopgap until the PLA can actually build a true western style MBT. The Type 85II that had made up the bulk of the PLA's "modern" armor was rapidly going out of date and the PLA was flush with money to repalce it. But as good as the ZRZ-99 is, it still algs behind the western style MBT in both protection and fire power. With the new SK2 on the scene and the Arjun finally entering limited production expect to see a true Chinese MBT in 5-10 years.

It will probably still mount a 125mm gun but will feature cassette style bustle rack loading system like the newest Russian and Ukrainian systems and also feature a higher caliber (52-56 IMHO).

China can already make the engine,transmission,armor and FCS's the beast needs thanks to the Type 98/99 family. So I assuming that the hold ups are in the gun, autoloading system and industrial ability to make a hull and turret big enough.

Western tanks have a tendency to use welded turrets with 'slab' turrets in their designs, which the Type 99 emulates (behind the add on armour wedge). Eastern bloc designs tend to use a cast, single piece, pan-shaped design. I say the turret of the Type 99 is more Western inspired due to the slab, welded construction instead of a casted turret.

people, before posting, expecially making new threads, READ THE FORUM rules and use other elements of your common sense as well....IF we have dedicated forum for chinese land forces, WHY post these in the GENERAL military discussion forum?

thread moved

Originally Posted by zraver

I've read the english translation and quite frankly the article is a fake.....

That's from the People's Daily.....

I stop arguing with this kind of logic then.

Originally Posted by fishhead

That's from the People's Daily.....

I stop arguing with this kind of logic then.

The science and mathematics behind what they are claiming do not add up. Plain and simple.

Originally Posted by Pointblank

The science and mathematics behind what they are claiming do not add up. Plain and simple.

I will put more trust on the designer of the tank than some self-claimed experts, esp when the designer spoke to an official media.

FYI, ZTZ99 doesn't use the 2A46 autoloader, just borrowes some design idea from that, so all the claim based on that is groundless.

Originally Posted by fishhead

I will put more trust on the designer of the tank than some self-claimed experts, esp when the designer spoke to an official media.

FYI, ZTZ99 doesn't use the 2A46 autoloader, just borrowes some design idea from that, so all the claim based on that is groundless.

The autloader is indeed a carousel design from the T series, even the article you cited admits that. If you have proof it is not a copy of the system used on the 2A46 then please provide it, in english so I can examine it. Also pics of ammo loading on the ztz-99 show a clear short rod penetrator with no attached propellant between 500 and 600mm in leangth proving two piece ammo. So the claims are not groundless as the visual evidence supports the written claim. The visual evidence also supprts my contention that the gun is under performing becuase of two peace ammo. The best performing rounds for a 2A46 carousel autoloader is probalby the BM-48 which comes in around 760mm in leangth* but can only be fired from specially modifed T-90's with improved autlaoders. The Russians next round the BM-42M desinged for cassette style loading on the Black Eagle is even longer but that is coming from bustle rack storage, not the hull.

That's from the People's Daily.....

The offical rag of the CCP does not cotnain propaganda for domestic consumption? The simple fact that no offical source outside of a newspaper supports the claims the article made should be proof enough. There are guys who analyze tanks and main guns with doctorates in physics and they don't support the claims. Even my severly limited math skills shoot the whole idea down.

"Math > Newspaper"

* Vassily Fovanov provided me with that information.

I don't have the English source to "prove" it, ok. Somebody posting that will be put in jail, it's China. I give you some information but I won't prove it anyway:

The "500 and 600mm" you refered to is for 96(88c) series, which is correct. But 99 is a total different beast, as mentioned by the real 99 developer in this forum, designed from the scratch.

The first T-72 Tank China got was from the East European country, it was long long time ago, so its technology has been well absorbed and melt into Chinese design. It has nothing to do with 2A46 today.

You just need to take that designer's word, I never find they fake any data before.