This competition is really getting stale. They need more emphasis on different types of shooting not just racing around easy obstacles (yes Type 96 lost a wheel from poorly fabricated axle and driver allowing the tank to bounce). It may be just for entertainment and not a real competition of the crew and hardware but it would be nice to see more variety too. Even if most western tanks don't participate, if Thailand brings VT-4, Ukraine brings Oplot M, India brings Arjun Mk2, and Greece brings their Leopard 2A4, it would be much more fun to watch. But then those T-72BMs will probably get lapped if they put more emphasis on shooting.
Chinese 96-A
- Thread starter Agonizing Bliss
- Start date
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Generally the commander's sight picture behind the tank is poor from his station anyway. It's easier for the commander to look back by popping out of the coupila.
That's not to say you have a bad idea
Even better is a hybrid of the RWS, Commanders sight and hard kill APS by combining all three the APS which can damage the separate stations is mounted in a manner so that if employed the weapon and optic are out of the way.
I think the cause of the wheel coming off was excessive shear from the bouncing. It also revealed the questionable quality of the fabrication of the axle because 40 something tonne tanks should be able to handle that kind of bouncing around. Still tanks are not exactly something PLA receives much funding for. Numbers trump everything in this area since they really just need something light enough to handle the terrain and carry that 125mm. Investing in next gen tanks isn't all that sensible (no western nation has serious programs to replace existing gen tanks). Why Russian spent the time and money on T-14 platforms when they could have modified other areas in desperate need to funding is anyone's guess.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
You are unlikely to see any western tank brought in and I doubt Arjun.
( actually I doubt Arjun could take the pounding)
Don't even think about the Ukraine given the current state of Ruso Ukrane relations.
The Russian Biathlon places it's emphasis on fire and maneuver hence the borrowed "Biathlon". Many western competitions mix in other skills not just tank related directly but also crew related like small arms fire from the turret position for example.
Yeah politics and current sentiments aside, it would be nice to see more variety that's all. In fact it would be ideal to see actual scientific destructive tests done to compare armour, FCS, rounds, and gun. If only. Of course all that is impossible for now, including Leopard and Oplot appearance.
by78
General
China is currently developing a next generation MBT, apparently with an unmanned turret. Furthermore, development programs are ongoing for a next-gen IFV, a new airborne IFV, and a new amphibious IFV as well. The army is finally receiving some love.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Actually western nations have them (serious programs) for next generation tanks and IFVs going on .they are just not aiming for replacement right now. Most are targeting the 2020-2030s.
Russia's T14 was meant to address the issues of survivability of there tanks in regards to the Autoloader and crew survival. Hence the compartmented crew. The idea is not new plenty of other nations have tried unmanned turrets and concepts like totally isolated gun systems. It's just it gets very complicated and expensive far more than what the Russians seem to want to admit.
Even out ourside of current events it's unlikely that western tanks would have taken part. Again the emphasis again.
Europe just held a tank competition a month or so ago in Germany the Strong Europe Tank Challange. I remember seeing pictures from the event of a tanker shooting his side arm at targets from the commander's position and watching the traditional car crushing. Ukraine has participated for the past 2 both times taking last place.
Last edited:
It's admittedly my personal opinion that tanks are really not all that useful these days. Sure they are needed but it's hard to justify serious spending on them now that military technologies has evolved to encompass so many areas. It's still important to keep certain players in business and talents at work exploring improvements. China has prioritised tanks exactly where they think it should be, low down on the scale.
Yeah you're right, there are programs. I went too far earlier but it does seem they are increasingly paying less attention to modernising their MBTs compared to other fighting systems like supporting vehicles and cost effective solutions like bradleys, small arms, and upgrades to existing vehicles. The emphasis is still on airforce and navy because modern warfare is moving further away from just isolated land battles even if they will always exist. So if you lose the technological war in the air, on the sea, and in space, it doesn't matter if you have 10K T-14s in your inventory.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Bradley?? Bradley is not so hot in any way right now. It's hardly cost effective due to issues of it's age and design limitations.
This is true to a point. In general it is more effective to upgrade the Current MBT then start a new one unless you as an organization deem the existing vehicle so fundamentally flawed for the future needs that it just needs to be replace.
Modern Warfare is all about Combined arms Tanks are one of those arms they are not "Isolated" Isolated Tank actions are where Armies loose there tanks. Just see The Middle east right now.
No,Air power doesn't take and hold ground, Sea can only fight on the sea, Space is all about intelligence gathering These ar arms designed to support the Infantry on the ground who take and hold territory, route out insurgencies and are directly supported by the MBT.
10K T14 doesn't do any good with out Air Sea and Space as well as Grunts but then Air Sea and Space is worthless without the ground pounders and the Tanks.
Those branches of the armed forces may not hold ground but they can devastate ground forces if not challenged. The priority when faced with a more advanced opponent (in these fields) is to make efforts in negating their advantages and even matching and exceeding them in the long term. Developing these technologies is far more important than fielding small numbers of super expensive new tanks that can easily get knocked out because you lose air superiority etc. All considering that PRC will likely only be fighting technologically peer or superior opponent in near/mid term future. So pure numbers will be a more important quality than having an advanced tank that can lob a sabot accurately to 3km etc.
Point taken about Bradley. In theory, they are moving in that direction, fielding ground units that can support those tanks rather than working on completely new designs. These approaches are different and often don't overlap, but it seems like western militaries are adapting to modern warfare, especially urban warfare by avoiding the path of developing new MBTs to meet new requirements. Emerging technologies like drones and remotely controlled vehicles will eventually become mature enough to meet these new urban challenges without the need to redevelop current generation MBTs. I'm not saying MBTs are obsolete now or even in near future, but common sense on budgeting needs to be considered when MBTs are considered. All in all I think PLA's approach with numerous cheap upgraded Type 96s is quite appropriate given the potential wars and opponents it could be fighting.
Point taken about Bradley. In theory, they are moving in that direction, fielding ground units that can support those tanks rather than working on completely new designs. These approaches are different and often don't overlap, but it seems like western militaries are adapting to modern warfare, especially urban warfare by avoiding the path of developing new MBTs to meet new requirements. Emerging technologies like drones and remotely controlled vehicles will eventually become mature enough to meet these new urban challenges without the need to redevelop current generation MBTs. I'm not saying MBTs are obsolete now or even in near future, but common sense on budgeting needs to be considered when MBTs are considered. All in all I think PLA's approach with numerous cheap upgraded Type 96s is quite appropriate given the potential wars and opponents it could be fighting.