Chinese 96-A
- Thread starter Agonizing Bliss
- Start date
SinoSoldier
Colonel
Hi Narangd, welcome to the forum.
Instead of dishing out sweeping generalizations and brash one-liners, perhaps you can back your argument up with technical data or specifications; it lends more credence to your assertions that way.
If you are basing your critique on accuracy alone, then please start by posting data regarding the T-72's biathlon results as well; a standalone picture of the 96A's target hits provides no frame of reference upon which a fair comparison could be formulated.
Can anyone confirm whether those pictures of the targets are actually of the ZTZ96A? Because from what I heard the ZTZ96A did very well in the actual shooting component of the biathlon, claiming to have hit every target, but came third due to slower overall speed and other penalties.
Kirgizian T-72B shoot result on 1600~1800m by HEAT, whith fixed position. Of course, accuracy of HEAT is far lower than the APFSDS.
Anyway, it is said that the reason T-72B3M slowed down while firing on the move was due to problems of Russian education army system. T-72B3M is quite a decent tank in terms of FCS.
Is HEAT actually less accurate than APSDFS? AFVs aren't my forte, but a quick google shows that the Soviets seemed to have preferred HEAT (fin stabilized of course) for their tanks during the early cold war and actually found them more accurate than their APSDFS.
Of course I have no idea what the comparison is like now. APSDFS obviously has higher muzzle velocity, and in theory that should equal higher accuracy, but by how much, in practice?
Anyway, as for your photos, can you point us to the actual parts of a video which shows ZTZ96A making the shots that you say they missed? For independent verification.
And also show us the video of ZTZ96A shooting from a fixed position? Because I've watched quite a few clips of the biathlon last year and I don't recall ZTZ96A ever stopping to make a shot, then again I only watched maybe 20 minutes total.
Finally, this entire discussion is ridiculous if we don't have numbers for the overall accuracy during the whole competition for all tanks. You can put up pictures claiming ZTZ96A missed one of four shots and the three ones which hit having wide spread, but I'll then point you to a video demonstrating ZTZ96A making all its shots while travelling at over twice the speed of the T-72s it competed with, with some of the T-72s even missing their shots despite such a slow travelling speed
As for T-72BM3, if its FCS really was so capable while the tank was moving faster then why would they slow down so much for a competition that puts speed above everything else?
Of course I have no idea what the comparison is like now. APSDFS obviously has higher muzzle velocity, and in theory that should equal higher accuracy, but by how much, in practice?
Anyway, as for your photos, can you point us to the actual parts of a video which shows ZTZ96A making the shots that you say they missed? For independent verification.
And also show us the video of ZTZ96A shooting from a fixed position? Because I've watched quite a few clips of the biathlon last year and I don't recall ZTZ96A ever stopping to make a shot, then again I only watched maybe 20 minutes total.
Finally, this entire discussion is ridiculous if we don't have numbers for the overall accuracy during the whole competition for all tanks. You can put up pictures claiming ZTZ96A missed one of four shots and the three ones which hit having wide spread, but I'll then point you to a video demonstrating ZTZ96A making all its shots while travelling at over twice the speed of the T-72s it competed with, with some of the T-72s even missing their shots despite such a slow travelling speed
As for T-72BM3, if its FCS really was so capable while the tank was moving faster then why would they slow down so much for a competition that puts speed above everything else?
Last edited:
broadsword
Brigadier
China's usage of APSDFS was discussed on the net and here too, three pages back and Lezt has this to say.
Black Shark
Junior Member
There is no such thing as T-72B3M just T-72B3 and HEAT rounds are less accurate, which comes from velocity and the relative large fins giving surface to cross winds, just like on RPG's when there are cross winds you actually have to point the gun behind your driving tank target rather than aim few meters infront of its driving direction, because the cross wind will push against the fins and the nose will point to different direction, loosing up the trajectory by airflow and airdrag decreasing its already lower velocity.
The difference here is APFSDS are solid penetrator darts, with small fins while HEAT rounds have lot of airgaps infront of its warhead before the copper jet cone while having relative high mass behind it with additional Fin stabilization giving surface for wind to take an affect on it.
The difference here is APFSDS are solid penetrator darts, with small fins while HEAT rounds have lot of airgaps infront of its warhead before the copper jet cone while having relative high mass behind it with additional Fin stabilization giving surface for wind to take an affect on it.
Lets do some simple maths,
Lets use the 1800m, further one as an example.
That looks like a 2m dispersion to me? by eyeball.,
it looks like this round:
NORICO 125mm IIM
Dispersion should be ~300mm @ 1000m... or 0.3 mil.. this round 50% more dispersion than lets say Russian HEAT.
Lets look at the HEAT shots
looks like a dispersion of around 1.3-4 meters to me, so the scale fits the sales brochure given that its numbers are from a benched gun firing at perfectly ranged targets. So in a moving tank, we can expect worse as seen here.
I think we can agree here that the Chinese team and the Russian team did some pretty bad shooting here. At 1.8 KM, they are shooting quite a few non center of mass hits. like glazing off the roof, hitting the tracks... I believe NATO did better at the Canadian Army Trophy in 1991
broadsword
Brigadier
Shark,
What I know is the heavier round by having more mass is more resistant to wind interference. A 12.5 sniper bullet used in Barrett for instance is more stable and accurate in crosswind conditions than a 7.65.
The data provided by Lezt speak for themselves in terms of dispersion.