Chinese 96-A
- Thread starter Agonizing Bliss
- Start date
Are there any feature you can discern from this picture that confirm its a 96? since the original poster clearly states its a 99a only one of you are wrong.
There is this Serbian guy on twitter who is/was a tank mechanic who worked on various Eastern tank models, from T-72's to Type 96.
According to him the Type 96 has excellent accuracy and its gun is less subjected to drooping compared to Russian and Ukrainian guns and has much better resistance to wear.
According to him the Type 96 has excellent accuracy and its gun is less subjected to drooping compared to Russian and Ukrainian guns and has much better resistance to wear.
Same fundamental design as 2A46 variant but both the ZTZ-96 and ZTZ-99 guns are manufactured differently. Apparently I've read in the past that Chinese engineers adopted a fairly time and energy expensive process from western tank gun manufacturing. This correlates with those old CCTV documentaries where the retired tank designed talked about these Cold War era developments and were adamant that Chinese tank guns were a step above Soviet ones despite the 96's gun being basically purchased from the 2A46. The 99's gun were a mix of the 2A46 and the Chinese ZPT-98 anti-tank artillery gun... only larger calibre read length.
Soviet tank doctrine showing with the Soviet approach to manufacturing. 35% lifespan of the German guns (Abrams using the L44 Rhein) makes sense for Soviet doctrine. Chinese one? He didn't mention but probs at best matching western tank guns which are probably just overkill at that point.
Soviet tank doctrine showing with the Soviet approach to manufacturing. 35% lifespan of the German guns (Abrams using the L44 Rhein) makes sense for Soviet doctrine. Chinese one? He didn't mention but probs at best matching western tank guns which are probably just overkill at that point.
No CITV (soft edit: nvm you couldn't see the CITV anyway at this angle even if it was a 99/99A)
No ERA (or whatever type of add-on armor) on the turret roof
The muzzle brake on the 99/99A is more of in the 'middle' of the gun while muzzle brakes of other tanks in the image (including another one with RWS mounted) are closer to the front which is another characteristic of 96/96A
Turret geometry (which angles more 'inward' after the about commander's hatch to the turret rear) does not match that of the 99A
Again, assuming they are all identical tank 'types', then the tank behind the one in the image has hull ERA layout much more in line with 96A, not to mention that the lower glacis profile is almost a 100% giveaway
No laser APS, which is arguably symbolic of the 99/99A, and if it was there then it would easily be seen at this angle on not only the tank in the photo, but also the other tanks in the background; however, none of them have it
E: Also placement of other sensors on the turret, but that's not as easy to tell ofc
Last edited:
If it were pure shooting I do think 96 series have an advantage over T-72. But that’s not the only criteria. There is also protection, power train, fuel efficiency, etc.
i think he was comparing it to the 2A46M used by the early T-72,current russian tanks use 2A46M-5 that uses a better steel is More rigid and precisely produced with reduced dispersion and increased accuracy
There are many periscopes around the commander's hatch of the ZTZ99A.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
Chinese doctrine has always been a fusion of East and West, so Soviet numbers with western quality at Chinese prices.
Also, his experience is probably with the T-72M/M-84, which like most T-72's produced outside of the USSR, the quality wasn't the best with the Polish-made T-72's being the worst of the lot.