None of those indicated a 125mm.
PLA Next Generation Main Battle Tank
- Thread starter by78
- Start date
Fair point but i think up gun the type100 isnt far fetch at all. Worst come to worst you can plonk a new turret with a bigger gun onto the chassis.
Absolutely all problems found in Ukraine are applicable to ZTZ-99 as it is. Worse yet, it's strong parts are relatively secondary.
Arguably in worse form - it is large/heavy and seriously lacks when it comes to side protection (like better western tanks), it has internal carousel autoloader for catastrophic losses (like eastern tanks). Like Challenger.
It has great gun and frontal protection, features found to be rather secondary even in February 22.
And PLA's reluctance to fit side armor onto it, IMHO, is dangerously close to suspension/terrain concerns. It's a heavy tank indeed.
I.e. there's in fact that very pressure. Granted, current drone industry is working on China.inc, but it isn't tied to China by physical constants.
While there are indications and two likely photos of that configuration, IMHO it'll take a separate vehicle. Especially if China's to keep strong sides of 99.
Last edited:
the thing is though western tanks don't have better side protection on the hull armor without addon kits than ZTZs/T-XYs infact they are weaker. maybe their side turret armor are better but this is a big maybe because the side turret armor of the ZTZ-99A is unknown up to this point. Challenger 2 armor and gun are both jokes because even according to british unclassified data it reaches 600mm protection vs 1990s KE and 900 vs CE on the frontal turret armor. It is a tank that should've been ready by 1988 but got delayed to 1992 and retained the same armor all the way from 1992 to 2025. Challenger 2 hull armor is a joke with the ballistic window for the driver and the Thicc (TM) 70mm armor on the lower hull which gets perforated by WW2 era AP ammunition let alone anything newer. There is a video floating around in which a russian drone with a ( i presume ) PG-7VR perforating the frontal hull armor of Leopard 2A6 and setting it on fire on the left side where hull ammo rack is located. So this is telling me that german armor is overrated too because a 2001 tank is getting shit on by a Tandem HEAT SC from 1988 in other word Leopard 2A6 frontal hull armor is below 750mm in protection from CE ammunitions so much for NATOs superior armor lmao. As for the autoloader take a look at the Challengers that blew up sky high after getting touched by 1 drone or 1 ATGM lmao it has no autoloader but it sure blows up just as much if not even more so than T-XYs. Abrams tanks have their own problems like the Upper Glacis armor or engine that lights up like a christmas tree on thermal vision which thanks to China is present on every single russian drone.
Sorry to tell , they are CGI, I know the 3d model author. THEY ARE NOT REAL, THOSE ARE NOT PHOTOS
This is the first time I question the content posted by by78, since normally by78 always post verified info/pics, but this time I am sure it is fake since I know the source
This is the first time I question the content posted by by78, since normally by78 always post verified info/pics, but this time I am sure it is fake since I know the source
Why would it be a glass tank?
Because following also applies for modern tanks:
A glass cockpit is an aircraft cockpit that uses electronic flight instrument displays, typically LCD screens, instead of traditional analog dials and gauges, providing a clear, integrated interface that enhances safety, situational awareness, and efficiency for pilots. These digital screens integrate various systems like flight management, navigation, engine data, weather, and traffic into a seamless display, allowing for customizable presentation of information to the pilot