Ideal PLA main battle tank (?)

I designed and drew the tank myself.

The reasoning behind the twin barrels is that because autoloading barrels are prong to failure either mechanically or because of battle damage, 2 barrels would ensure that the tank has offensive capabilities despite such damage to one gun.

The treads are there for the purpose of menurability and logistic support. Individual treads themselves are removeable and fairely light, and thus can be easilty replaced as result of damage. The tank can still drive impaired with one entire tread missing/ damaged.

Many of the systems of the tank have double redundancy. This is the ground equivalent of the A-10.

This tank has suprisingly low profile of 9-10 ft. A larger version of 100 tons with a higher profile of 12 ft has a rear infantry compartment for a squad of elite infantry troops. It would also have 6 tracks, each track is modular and can be replaced quickly in the battlefield. This Merkava like tank can operate with 33% of it's tracks destroyed.

Not to chide you on anything, but it looks like the Chinese Emperor Overlord tank in C&C Generals.



I understand your logic, but at 88 tons its probably way too heavy to move around in Asian terrain.

I played the generals series to death. A thing that struck me as utter inane about those tanks are the way the guns are wield to the sides, and can't elevate independently of the turret. The same issues exist with the tank treads.

The tonnage can be 20-30 tons lighter as the tank itself can be smaller and lighter and yet still have the twin barrel chassis with 4 independent treads. The 88 ton variant is a heavy version made for the open terrains to achieve total dominance against western tanks.

It's basically a combination of the twin-barrel MBT Leopard 3
cp and paste

and the swedish str102
cp and paste

proelite said:

I played the generals series to death. A thing that struck me as utter inane about those tanks are the way the guns are wield to the sides, and can't elevate independently of the turret. The same issues exist with the tank treads.

The tonnage can be 20-30 tons lighter as the tank itself can be smaller and lighter and yet still have the twin barrel chassis with 4 independent treads. The 88 ton variant is a heavy version made for the open terrains to achieve total dominance against western tanks.

It's basically a combination of the twin-barrel MBT Leopard 3

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

cp and paste

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and the swedish str102

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

cp and paste

Click to expand...

88 tonnes?? it would be lodged in China rice fields and soft soil....they gonna have hard time transporting this tank via air or sea....but this design looks extremely simular to Chinese game Ive played before...

on the bright side nice design anyway

PrOeLiTeZ said:

88 tonnes?? it would be lodged in China rice fields and soft soil....they gonna have hard time transporting this tank via air or sea....but this design looks extremely simular to Chinese game Ive played before...

on the bright side nice design anyway

Click to expand...

-_-

The 88 ton version is only for land superiority against western heavy tanks in terrains that's suitable for heavy tanks. If Chinese rice fields and soft soil are unsuitable for Chinese heavy tanks, they are also unsuitable for western ones. As for transportation via air or sea, I assume by 2015 the PLA would be adequate in this area.

Btw, what's this Chinese game that you're speaking of? Do you mean CNC generals? But that's an American game.

Weight is not an issue; ground pressure is. In other words, the wider the tracks and the longer they are, the less ground pressure you exert.

Pointblank said:

Weight is not an issue; ground pressure is. In other words, the wider the tracks and the longer they are, the less ground pressure you exert.

Click to expand...

I think they meant that some bridges would collapse if the weight on them exceeds 50 tons. This is questionable as pressure play a big factor in bridge collapses too. :nono:

proelite said:

-_-

The 88 ton version is only for land superiority against western heavy tanks in terrains that's suitable for heavy tanks. If Chinese rice fields and soft soil are unsuitable for Chinese heavy tanks, they are also unsuitable for western ones. As for transportation via air or sea, I assume by 2015 the PLA would be adequate in this area.

Click to expand...

I don't see why you feel compelled to counter heavy western tanks with an even heavier tank, this sort of one dimensional thinking is bad, the best weapon against a tank is anything but a tank, of course, tanks have to have reasonable armour and firepower to ensure that they won't be obliterated too easily by enemy tanks, but there is no point to pursue a 88 tonne supper tank.

Exactly correct King Comm. That 88 ton super tank would be killed by a ATGM within a few years of its inception. It's not worth "putting all your eggs in one basket" like that. Better to have several smaller tanks that can work as a team to destroy enemy armour and protect themselves from infantry.

An 88 ton tank is hardly a "super tank" as it's only 30% heavier than a M1A2. The profile is approximately the same albeit with a wider turret, and the added cost is mainly the extra auto loading barrels. The treads are also cheaper to maintain since damaged treads can be easily replaced. I think the redundancy in the armament and the modularity of the treads is well worth the 30% weight gain and the cost increase of the added barrel. R&D would probably be the most expensive part of the program. The weight gain has nothing to with the ideology of "bigger is better", but its the result of rational addition of added survivability and redundancy to the tank.

Supposedly in real warfare, anti-tank missile knocks out one of the guns on the tank. The tank can still be 100% functional as any other single barrel tank, as compared to 0% if it was single barreled. If the anti-tank missile had knocked out one of the treads, the tank can still move as it is capable of doing so with only 3 treads. A normal western tank would be completely crippled. After the engagement, the damaged tread can be replaced and the tank would be 100% for the next engagement.