Faster pace of modernizing tanks

Discussion in 'Army' started by Delbert, May 20, 2008.

  1. Delbert
    Offline

    Delbert New Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2008
    Messages:
    209
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Somewhere in the Wonderland
    This is more serious.

    I don't understand why the army is still using T-59's, t-62's and T-69 tanks. As far as I am concerned those are totally out of date... I think those must be decommissioned and scrapped.

    I don't think those army tanks can do much on a modern battle. Remember the T-72 Tanks of Iraq lost against the Abrams of US, even given the fact that the Iraqi's might not be well trained. T-69 and older versions are more out to date...

    Sine China already has new type of tanks, why not mass produce it at a higher rate to replace the aging tanks? like T-98,99's?

    I know it wouldn't be wise to reduce the tanks to 2,000-3,000 given the fact that China has a large land area and huge land border with large number of troops... It is better to be around 8,000-10,000 I think.

    But what I am pointing out is replacing the 1950's and 1960's tanks ASAP.
     
    #1
  2. utelore
    Offline

    utelore Junior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2005
    Messages:
    491
    Likes Received:
    1
    think the PRC is still at a cross road on if the type96/99 is the tank that is needed. simply put it is way to light at 50 tons to match the western 65-70 ton monsters and If the ROC upgrades its M-60A3 to Israeli Sabre standard with 120mm smooth bore and slabs of advance composite armour, well the PRC has a bit of a problem.
     
    #2
  3. sinowarrior
    Offline

    sinowarrior New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2006
    Messages:
    111
    Likes Received:
    0
    what is the point? it is unlikely for China to have a land war soon, and the current inventory of 96/98/99 is sufficient for the potential conflict with Taiwan, don't forget China also started to equit its amphibious mech divisions with AAAVs
     
    #3
  4. RedMercury
    Offline

    RedMercury Junior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2006
    Messages:
    973
    Likes Received:
    0
    Exactly. Considering the outcome of the recent elections in TW, money is much better spent improving rural education and healthcare.
     
    #4
  5. utelore
    Offline

    utelore Junior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2005
    Messages:
    491
    Likes Received:
    1
    It is simple math. In 25 years China will need 3 earths to meet its resource/energy needs. Intel indicates China will make a attempt to expand its current territory much like every other civilization through history when it develops the means to do so which will be around 2015.

    We as humans are the same as we were in 1939, 1916, 1870s, 1700 and so on. China at one point will need to or want to create its own manifest destiny. Thus, WAR. This is the human condition. We kill each-other because we want something. The U.S as a superpower has now set precedence for thought followed by action.

    Now, China will in the next 10-20 years will have aggressive thought followed by action. Its just the human condition. So, in closing yes China will need to build a big giant tank better than its OPFOR in order to meet its goal and the human condition.

    WE ARE ONE NASTY LITTLE ANIMAL.
     
    #5
  6. gizhou
    Offline

    gizhou Banned Idiot

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2006
    Messages:
    38
    Likes Received:
    0
    Er AAAvs vs 105mm guns and automatic cannon is a one sided battle - there will a lot of sunk AAAvs. Forget about use barrel fired laser guided missiles from AAAVs and Type 03 light tanks whilst they are coming ashore as those pesky waves keep getting in the way when you try and track something. How are the MBTs supposed to get ashore in the face of MBTs, shore based artillery and anti-shipping missiles, attack helicopters,strike aircraft, let alone infantry ATGMs, land and sea mines and anti-landing craft barriers - and oh yes suitable beaches with sand hard enough for them to land and move on.

    The PLA keeps the Type 59/69/80 et al because there are areas where you don;'t need Type 96/98/99 et al and the lighter weights give them better mobility on the infrastructure. You don't need a Type 99 to shoot up **********. :D
     
    #6
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 7, 2008
  7. crobato
    Offline

    crobato Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2005
    Messages:
    4,852
    Likes Received:
    0
    That is if you want each and every one of them to live like Americans.

    As for the first question above, it depends on the priorities, and it seems like navy and air force getting more priority, being the first line of defense, compared to tanks. Actually the Type 96 is on the lighter side of things, much like the older tanks, and that will provide mobility, and the crux of the production is on this tank, much more than the heavier Type 99.
     
    #7
  8. sinowarrior
    Offline

    sinowarrior New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2006
    Messages:
    111
    Likes Received:
    0
    by the time PLA decided to send those 99 to the shores, there will not be much of the anti shipping missiles, aircrafts etc etc left, and any MBT from Taiwan is likely to be a molten slug already. So AAAV is enough to shoot up those taiwan peasants running for cover, don'f forget the AAAV also have the so called atuo cannons.
     
    #8
  9. Delbert
    Offline

    Delbert New Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2008
    Messages:
    209
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Somewhere in the Wonderland
    Hmmm... I think the current 2200 modern tanks in its iventory wasn't sufficient enough, considering a possible conflict with China's neighbors...

    Remember, China's vast borders are mostly land... Only the eastern part was water.
     
    #9
  10. sinowarrior
    Offline

    sinowarrior New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2006
    Messages:
    111
    Likes Received:
    0
    the border with Indian is moutain, Korea is pretty much hill and moutain, forest on the border with Vietnam, so the only place to use large amour formation will be against Russia, well unless china wants to claim russia far east for resources, i think a small but elite armour formation should be sufficient
     
    #10
Loading...

Share This Page