Peru is buying Chinese tanks
- Thread starter Autumn Child
- Start date
Jesus.. What happen to these sino defense for sprouting rubbish? Go take a look at China defense forum. I bet the people there are more prof on these. But I don't think is very courtesy for me to directly link there to here. So go and dig it up yrself.
Actually according to army guide (), Type 85II was based on Type 80. And according to deagel () Type 80 was based on Type 80 which is based on Russian's T-62 which itself was a further development of the T-54.
However we cannot look at things this way. If we are going down the ancestory of the tank, we might as well said that the MBT is actually basing on ancient steam engine.
However we cannot look at things this way. If we are going down the ancestory of the tank, we might as well said that the MBT is actually basing on ancient steam engine.
Semi-Lobster
Junior Member
You're getting awfully worked up about some pretty old tanks. I'm not trying to insult anybody here, I'm just point out that, as far as I know, there has been a steady development of Chinese tanks based on the Type 59. If you think this information is incorrect then contact admin of this site and tell him what you know.
It's a much more direct ancestry than that but you're right. What's most relevant about this is that the MBT-2000 has 10% parts commonality from the Type 59, 15% from the Type 69, and 20% from the Type 85/88C which means research, testing and mass-production can be done very quickly and efficiently. Whats most important about the MBT-2000 is the 55% of the tank that is new.
Last edited by a moderator:
Can you tell me what 10% part common with Type 59? Because it uses wheel and track and got a turret plus a main gun?
Or you are sprouting rubbish again?
Semi-Lobster
Junior Member
I'm talking very basic, specific parts here such as certain bolts, cabling etc. There is more to a tank than just gun, track, turret etc. every piece of the tank is built from dozens to hundreds of smaller pieces, parts commonality helps maintenance and repair work.
Like I said, I'm monolingual, if you have some insight into Chinese tank development, than contacting the sinodefence and helping him rewrite his articles (which he's been doing for the past several months now) would help everybody.
Semi-Lobster
Junior Member
I'm talking about things such as exact components, these things change and are updated constantly while others are constantly produced. This doesn't chance the basic design of the tank. The T-54/55 for example was the basis for the T-62 was was developed into the T-72 and the T-72 was the basis for the T-90. There were many landmark improvements during these improvements but that does not mean that there are many design carry overs from the T-54/55 to the T-90 and there are parts commonalities between them as well, the parts may have improved but you can could still replace a T-90's wheel with a T-54s and it would work generally.
Lineage is more important in the context of development. On how a tank is created and improved. I am not saying an MBT-2000 is a Type 59 with some minor improvements. What I've been trying to say is that it is the results of difficult engineering work from the Type 59 to the present. The MBT-2000is based on the Type 59 and uses a few similar parts but it has far more in common with the Type or Type 88 which are also descended from the Type 59.
I am now going to bed because itgs VERY late and I have work and exams tomorrow.
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't think you need to continuously attack someone who holds a different opinion from you, yet is being polite about it. I also don't see how a link to an older tank is relevant in this discussion, but it's unnecessary to be so defensive about it.
Back on topic, I saw that this report has already been updated into the wikipedia article on the MBT-2000, it links to an AP article.
There's also a picture of the tanks under "evaluation" in a military parade.
Last edited:
From your way of linking ,M1A2 is also link to Sherman tank?
T-72 is never derive from T-62 or developed from. They never even share a same thing.
Same as Type 96 is never derived from Type59 and they never both same a same thing.
Last edited by a moderator: