Chinese future tank devolpments...


VIP Professional
Registered Member
Now, we have the conversation going rather hot over this matter in the ezboard so why shall not in here...

Biggest question is the Type98G/Type99, if its going to be the new MBT for vast PLA's tank forces. Do you think its good enough? In my opinion, china now, whit the money and all technological edge's bridged, shouldn waste their time and resources whit late 80's level T-72 derivate. The orginal T-72 and chinese devolpments from it werent anyway superior to western desings of that time and the latest Russian improvements like T-90 havent gain the upper hand in the comparisions. Now, i severly doupt that chinese improvments from their Type 88 and type 90 could done any better when they dont contain any radical new innovations.

So the question lies, Should china stick whit the old doctrine and face the qualitively superior opponent forces whit quantatives of lesser tanks (and therefore continue to introduct the Type98 to service) Or should they go on for newer generation tanks and produce something that could bring the qualitive edge to Chinese side? And if to go on whit that direction, where from that? what are the latest requirments for new chinese MBT from PLA point of wiev and alongside the lates requirment for tank doctrines??

Or am i totaly missleaded and Type98 isent so inferior in face of latest western tank forces...? :rolleyes:


Junior Member
VIP Professional
If I were the PLA I would go with the Leclerk. The weight of the tank would fit current bridges in china and they should be able to LIC produce such tank. This would prevent years long design and testing for a home grown version. They could maybe have 250 within 3 years if they moved quickly. Also the leclerk is not a band tank.....a little under armoured but it would work. big improvement over the T-98


New Member
besides even though the LeClerk is underarmored it doesn't mean that you can't upgrade it when needed


Junior Member
Or we can upgrade the Type 96/98 with heavy Blazer-type ERA. Wouldn't that be cheaper? The Type 98G will do for now. Getting the Leclerc and domesticating it will cost a fortune and pull funding away from more critical areas like the Navy and Airforce.


Banned Idiot
screw tanks. their uses are becomming fewer and fewer. the days when countires needed mass armor fleets are gone. the type 99 still has design potential, and will serve as a good tank until tanks become obsolete. btw, does sntone know if the 99 has armored compartments or blow out panels? i know the 98 dosn;t.

98 would wipe the floor with leclerc. its gun is more powerful, and can fire atgm's. its combo of composite armor and era with armor modules gives it decent armor. the jd-3 will blind the leclerc's crew.


Junior Member
Well, on the open battlefield in traditional tank country tanks are still very useful. And the things that make tanks look obsolete are very expensive weapons like attack choppers, attackers and ATGM's. Nothing compares to a company of tanks leading the assault on the Mongolian steppes in the summer. The enemy infantry will be pinned down, with nothing to fight the tank with, unless equipped specially with LAW. The infantry will be mowned down by the dozens. That is, if the enemy doesn't have air support.

So tanks still have their uses, despite them being more and more vulnerable on the open battlefield.


Banned Idiot
as far as i know, no one is completely sure of the capabilities of the 99's optics and fire control.

Chairman Hu

Banned Idiot
I say take the best tanks that U.S.A, E.U and Russia have and use all of their best abilities (e.g armor, turret-hull design, etc) and pull one together that is the best that the West can offer, a revolutionary tank is what we need

I remember that the T-98 was designed by the team that wanted a T-72 mockup or something like that and the western revolutionary team lost, well I can't remember so whatever.

We need a 150mm+ cannon, and we still need the older tanks for firepower, mechanized warfare now playes the biggest role, even in a double envelopment tactic, we still need those old worthless T-59s, heh, I love the pincer movement.


Senior Member
VIP Professional
Well, most countries can't easily get air superiority.

Plus, some countries don't support the idea of choppers, some don't even have proper ground attack planes.

150mm gun? You are kidding........ You don't need that to knock out a tank......

For the type 98(in comparison to the Leclerc), the chassis is OK, it was owned by the T-72, and has the mobility and speed, at 65 km/h, as provided by the 1200/1500 hp engine.
The gun is OK, but the armor is rather bad. It had a gap in the 98, and had to rely on ERA(not good) on the 99. I doubt its armor is as good as the others.

For the FCS, it's most definitely worse than those of Leclerc.