New Type98/99 MBT thread


RichardGao

Junior Member
Registered Member
90M has "curtain" softkill APS, VT4 should be able to install GL5 hardkill APS, but for now no VT4 has installed
Mistake, VT4 also has softkill APS like the "Curtain". Hardkill optional but nobody asked for it.

I thought the Type 99's price was between $2M and $3M. How could the 99A be $5M?
Then you can just guess. Whose data is more accurate in your opinion? :D
There are various armored vehicles even more expensive than 99A. :)
 

ougoah

Captain
Registered Member
Mistake, VT4 also has softkill APS like the "Curtain". Hardkill optional but nobody asked for it.



Then you can just guess. Whose data is more accurate in your opinion? :D
There are various armored vehicles even more expensive than 99A. :)
But Shtora/curtain doesn't work for modern ATGMs guided by wire or other means not affected by the infrared interference. What is the VT-4's soft kill protection system? The Russians don't bother with Shtora anymore. It's mostly going to be deadweight. Is the VT-4's soft kill system against missiles something similar to Shtora in concept?

Also I've heard Chinese tankers describe themselves as crews for Type 96B. I think it's started as a biathlon mod but eventually the engine package and whatever other changes, made everyone consider the "newer" 96A as the 96B. Technicalities anyway.

If the 99A is $5M a piece for the PLA, that's a hell of a lot more expensive than a 96A/B. More expensive vehicles exist :confused:
 

RichardGao

Junior Member
Registered Member
Is the VT-4's soft kill system against missiles something similar to Shtora in concept?
Yes, in concept.
Also I've heard Chinese tankers describe themselves as crews for Type 96B.
According to my survey of the 96B tankers at the Biathalon, they didn't really like the 96B much... The bus system and FCS isn't really updated and 96B can't really be modified from older 96As (unless you chop off and change a large chunk of the rear hull and change the turret and UFP armor modules, but that's cost ineffective)
 

Mohsin77

Junior Member
Registered Member
Even 55t and 65t tanks are being absolutely wrecked beyond recognition by semi decent, 2000s ATGMs (admittedly placed well) ALL OVER the middle east since 2010. Imagine the latest and greatest ATGM and anti-tank rounds.
I was just discussing this issue over the IFV thread... allow me to clarify here as well.

We need to put the MBT losses to ATGMs in the recent past in proper context, because in each case these MBTs were lost during COIN ops (Merkavas vs Hezbollah, Leopards vs Kurds, Abrams vs Houthis). Tanks will never be good at COIN. Why? Because nothing will ever be 'good' at COIN. (There's a general point to be made here on the ridiculous nature of COIN doctrine in general, but let's ignore that discussion.) MBTs are inherently an aggressively maneuvering platform. If you park them in one spot for fire support, while it's your enemy (light infantry) that is maneuvering around you, or taking pot shots from hidden positions, it won't matter what protection the tank has. Even the latest APS, armor and countermeasures will fail against salvos of ATGMs eventually. No amount of protection can save a sitting duck.

But this does not mean MBTs are at a disadvantage against ATGMs, when tanks are being used in the manner they were designed for. In combined arms maneuver warfare, MBTs can overcome any land based ATGM threat, because ATGMs rely on a very fragile kill chain and are very slow to acquire, (plus their ToT sucks.) Smoke screens alone invalidate the vast majority of ATGM threats, leaving only MMW ATGMs, and those are only available to the best gunships. The main threat to MBTs are still other MBTs, gunships/CAS and guided artillery. Light infantry ATGM teams, or IFVs equipped with ATGMs pose no major threat to MBTs in traditional land warfare.
 

ZeEa5KPul

Junior Member
Registered Member
For 99A vs VT4, I think I've mentioned it once before in this very thread and the conclusion is that the new upgraded VT4 is better than 99A in every aspect except firepower (lack of 125III and still uses an old gun)
We had an exchange previously about the PLAGF's conservative and penny-pinching procurement practices and this is another example of that. If the VT-4 is better than the 99A in everything except gun and looks (I don't care what the stats are, the 99A is the best looking tank out there), why doesn't the ground force have Norinco supply VT-4s with the 99A's gun? Is it just not worth it with the 4th gen tank around the corner?
 

Gloire_bb

Junior Member
Registered Member
why doesn't the ground force have Norinco supply VT-4s with the 99A's gun?
Because 99As are already there.
Unless you're cursed with Soviet politics, there is no point adding +/- similar tank to complicate logistics for no serious gain.
Tank isn't a ww2 fighter plane...
 

RichardGao

Junior Member
Registered Member
We had an exchange previously about the PLAGF's conservative and penny-pinching procurement practices and this is another example of that. If the VT-4 is better than the 99A in everything except gun and looks (I don't care what the stats are, the 99A is the best looking tank out there), why doesn't the ground force have Norinco supply VT-4s with the 99A's gun? Is it just not worth it with the 4th gen tank around the corner?
I repeat, I've answered many times in this thread to this very question. Find it for yourself.
 

ougoah

Captain
Registered Member
I doubt there's a fourth gen tank right around the corner. It's so pointless and has no place in PLA's modernisation to meet the US in contested hot spots. Is the 4th gen tank going to counter overwhelming numbers of F-35, B-21, and Ford class supercarriers armed with the next generation of ordinance and electronic equipment? Would be a tragically stupid way to spend money and talent.
 

Broccoli

Junior Member
What ever next major war is going to be, i'm sure that heavy tanks (+50 tons) will become like battleships during wolrd war 2, well armored and impressive on peace time activities, but in real shooting war those things are gonna be largery used as target practice by more flexible forces coming from all directions.

Had they put 125mm gun on Type-15 with room for 130mm gun update it would have been able to replace all other tanks in PLA service.
 

Top