Cheaper and easier to replace the electronics than to do any major modification work. Seeing that this is a tank that is being moved down to second or third line units, or to reserve units, spending a lot on major modifications isn't worth it, but there is a need to keep the lower echelon troops up to date with the latest in fire control suites in case there is a need to move them up to the first line units.
Why upgrade to the 125mm? The Type 59 is by today's standards a small tank and is rather cramp inside. 125mm rounds will do no help to the space. And since the Type 59 wasn't built for the big gun, no one knows what kind of damage it will do to the turret/turret ring, etc. At 34 rounds, the Type 59's payload is already small, why make it smaller?
I think standardizing all the Type 59s (And maybe 69s and 79s) to one standard is much more important. I'd standardize the 100mm guns to those used on the new tank destroyers, and replace other 105 guns with Type 83 105mm guns, used by the Type 88s and 63As. Logistics would be much better off there.
Can this Tank compare up against the M1A2 Abrams,Leopard M1A2, British challenger and the French Leclerc.(top 4 tanks with chobom armor.)Also what about the Type-99 that i herd off. Which is Better
on the 4 basis of a tanks, Mobility, Firepower, Protection, and Producebility. All have to be balence, Ex: the Isrealy Mercava4 MBT. Oh and Send me any other tanks you recommend that are good.Tell me about them to especialy the Type-99.:china:
Doesn't compare all that well with the latest generation of Western tank designs; the 105mm gun is not very effective as a anti-tank weapon against the latest breed of Western tanks, but it is still somewhat effective against the later Eastern bloc tanks at close range with DU rounds. This is more of a tank that's job is to perform direct fire artillery support for ground troops, and fend off light armour and maybe a early Cold War tank.