Z-10 thread

[asif iqbal]

No matter how armoured your ground equipment is it will be always very vulnerable to attack helos

Some of the Iraqi republican guard divisions had pretty good ground equipment but due to the lack of air cover it was no match against the AH-64s

Attack helos work hand in hand with armoured ground divisions providing early warning, like a AWACS for the air force or a carrier AWACS for the navy the attack helo is to be used with ground divisions to provide cover for the advance and offensive capability to take out enemy positions

 

[broadsword]

Ok... seriously... China has better metal alloys than NATO? I'm taking that with a mountain of salt.

I agree with you. In all probability, I also don't think it is possible for China to be able to come up with a kind of metal that you can use to make a western barrel of the 90's look slim today. If it is between 25 to 30 mm, it has nothing to do with metallurgy.

 

[hardware]

I agree with you. In all probability, I also don't think it is possible for China to be able to come up with a kind of metal that you can use to make a western barrel of the 90's look slim today. If it is between 25 to 30 mm, it has nothing to do with metallurgy.

Chinese tank gun barrel such as 125mm gun barrel suffer from frerquent barrel burst,until the assisstant from the german firm solve the problem.

 

[PanAsian]

the gun does look quite delicate.

I agree the gun does look slim. At the same time it completely defeats the point of having the Z-10 as a supposed dedicated attack helo if its gun armament is only a HMG, that's just ineffective.

Even with engine power constraints I would expect the designers to compromise on armor and manouevrability but not weaponry. Unless the HMG is mounted as a stopgap measure until a more powerful engine is found after which a larger caliber cannon will be fitted but that seems too inefficient logistically and financially.

Going through pictures of China's armored vehicles and the Z-10 pictures it seems that the cannon is too slim to be 30mm. I would guess that its 23mm or 25mm to streamline logistics, I'm not aware of China operating 20mm cannons. My little deductive reasoning exercise of the night.

 

[TerraN_EmpirE]

No matter how armoured your ground equipment is it will be always very vulnerable to attack helos
Attack helos work hand in hand with armoured ground divisions providing early warning, like a AWACS for the air force or a carrier AWACS for the navy the attack helo is to be used with ground divisions to provide cover for the advance and offensive capability to take out enemy positions

true but to enable that you need the right abilities. Take a moment and think. Would the US have had the same success if the Army and Marines had used AH1G and not the AH64/ post AH1J Cobra varietys ? Sure the TOW missile would have made a dent but that chopper would have been a disadvantage her gun system a 7.62mm gattling gun and a 40mm grenade launcher would do fine on troops, but practicality a joke against tanks and armoured vehicles.

 

[broadsword]

true but to enable that you need the right abilities. Take a moment and think. Would the US have had the same success if the Army and Marines had used AH1G and not the AH64/ post AH1J Cobra varietys ? Sure the TOW missile would have made a dent but that chopper would have been a disadvantage her gun system a 7.62mm gattling gun and a 40mm grenade launcher would do fine on troops, but practicality a joke against tanks and armoured vehicles.

He did mention attack helos along the line of AH-64. Or did I misunderstand?

 

[TerraN_EmpirE]

Not quite it may seem a case of details but the way his statement is phrased is critical. Just as all Createns cannot be judged to tell only lies, so to can all attack helicopters not be classified as armour killers.
That is my point. A anti-tank ability is a both armour ability and that demands missiles rockets and canon suited to the job. Having one or two of the three in a attack helicopter does not make it justified as a tank killer.

 

[MwRYum]

Not quite it may seem a case of details but the way his statement is phrased is critical. Just as all Createns cannot be judged to tell only lies, so to can all attack helicopters not be classified as armour killers.
That is my point. A anti-tank ability is a both armour ability and that demands missiles rockets and canon suited to the job. Having one or two of the three in a attack helicopter does not make it justified as a tank killer.

Well, Canon takes photos only...if you've said Nikon I might run a bad gag about Nikon made gun sights for IJN up and include those optical targeting system for the IJN Yamato's main guns...

But of all seriousness, modern day helicopters' cannons are only up to the job to deal with lightly armored targets; for tanks, its either hydra rockets or ATGMs...unless you're talking about WW2 era tanks.

 

[TerraN_EmpirE]

Spell-checker cant live with it cannot live without it.
You can still make a real mess of modern IFVs and any tank made before 1970. Even some after to. With a 25mm or better.

 

[Mysterre]

Pretty much any modern tank can be destroyed by any cannon 20ish mm+ if not fired into the frontal arc. The sides, top and back of a tank are usually designed to stop bomb fragments and HMG (e.g. 14.5mm) fire only. "Hard" ERA may provide additional kinetic protection on top of HEAT defense, but not sure how they fare against cannon-sized rounds.