New Type98/99 MBT thread

To all who say China needs to build more tanks in a shorter space of time.


Why spend hundreds of millions of dollars to buy tanks and armored vehicles on par with M1A2s, M2s etc. When it would be best to spend that money on R&D. If Russians field the tank unofficially named T 95 and is as advanced as people speculated then China is gonna be stuck with thousands of less capable tanks.

As Chinese military purchases of recent decades has shown; China is gonna build Type 99 tank in modest numbers until they can field something more fearsome.

Phoenix TV confirmed last night that PLA has been equipped with 200 new tanks namely type 96 and type 99.

Baibar of Jalat said:

To all who say China needs to build more tanks in a shorter space of time.


Why spend hundreds of millions of dollars to buy tanks and armored vehicles on par with M1A2s, M2s etc. When it would be best to spend that money on R&D. If Russians field the tank unofficially named T 95 and is as advanced as people speculated then China is gonna be stuck with thousands of less capable tanks.

As Chinese military purchases of recent decades has shown; China is gonna build Type 99 tank in modest numbers until they can field something more fearsome.

Click to expand...

So you would rather operate type 50's/60's tanks than those newer tanks?

I have just proposed a modest increase in numbers to serve as stop gap, so that those aging tanks can be decommissioned and replaced soon.

Delbert said:

So you would rather operate type 50's/60's tanks than those newer tanks?

I have just proposed a modest increase in numbers to serve as stop gap, so that those aging tanks can be decommissioned and replaced soon.

Click to expand...

They are being slowly decommissioned. I am under the impression people want Type 59s, 80s etc to being very quickly be phased out by spending money that can be put to better uses.

China has no dangerous land enemy since the end of Cold War. Russia has withdrawn over a million men from border and settled the border issue. Issues with Vietnam still linger but before New Year there was deal to settle the disputed border. India, well they are deployed on Pak border, plus I dont think T 90s are better then Type 96 or Type 99s. Again I expect to field better tanks or radically upgraded versions of Type 99s.

I 100% agree with you, Baibar. China has very huge land border, but no immediate land enemy. So deploy large amount of top tank would be very expensive and waste of money. It should concentrate more on its air force and naval force. However, they should keep a small amount of the type 99 to keep the technology and continue to develop more advanced tanks.

Dear Sirs:

China's modest deployment pattern of its advanced tanks and armor serves several purposes, not immediately apparent.

Firstly to have at least some special 1st-class fighting units always available (rapid deployment) equipped and trained with modern main battle tanks and AFV's, having 'trump cards' in hand so to speak.

Second, it seeks to keep its armored vehicle research and development centers constantly employed, so in the event of a major conflict advanced designs which have been tested and 'debugged' are available for mass-production.

Thirdly, it serves to keep manufacturing and production lines open and armor production capabilities intact. That way this valuable capacity is not lost and the specialized and talented personnel employed there are occupied.

China actually is no mean arms exporter in its own right and, maintaining competitiveness in design and price is important. Hence the need to maintain both R&D as well as manufacturing capabilities simultaneously. Having both is very good for your business.

Lastly there is the issue during foreign sales of whether what is being sold is 'good enough' for the customers use. That is much less of an issue if you use the equipment yourself.

Regards,

Dusky Lim

King_Comm said:

If an APFSDS or the metal stream from a large HEAT round reaches where the auto loader is on a Type 99, the vehicle, and the crew will not survive regardless of whether an auto loader is there or not. The ammunition store on the rear of the turrent on western tanks are more for providing a counter balance to the barrel of the gun to allow faster and more accurate turret traverse than making the tank more survivable.

Click to expand...

NO, the back of the turret is the logical play to store ammo if your using a human loader. There is less movement, and less bending its ergonomic. Add a blast door and blow out panels and it radically increases the chance of a long serving multi-million dollar crew surviving. Given the sheer mass of armor on the font turret of the tank plus the gun, trunnion/mantlet and recoil system there is not enough weight on the back to matter.

SteelBird said:

I 100% agree with you, Baibar. China has very huge land border, but no immediate land enemy. So deploy large amount of top tank would be very expensive and waste of money. It should concentrate more on its air force and naval force. However, they should keep a small amount of the type 99 to keep the technology and continue to develop more advanced tanks.

Click to expand...

Yes, they are slowly being decommissioned, but the deployment of newer tanks are also lesser.

Look at the Tank count of PLA in the 1980's and the current tank count. It was shrinking.. Only building of constant several hundreds in a year might increase or sustain the tank numbers.

If I am not mistaken they are already less than 10,000.

Hands down, the best video compilation of the type-99.
Shows it traversing for targets at high speeds, turret rotation. I must say, after seeing this video, I was very impressed with the type-99

Looks like some of the high speed traversing might have been played in fast forward as the movements of the tank was very jerky and unnatural at times.