ZTQ-? Light Tank

Discussion in 'Army' started by by78, Mar 15, 2014.

  1. jobjed
    Online

    jobjed Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2011
    Messages:
    1,913
    Likes Received:
    4,914
    The number plate implies this occurred at Xiangtan although there's a slight possibility that was a non-local car.

    Assuming it was Xiangtan though, we can conclude that the ZTQ belongs to the former-41st GA, or current 75th which would make it the second confirmed unit to be outfitted with the ZTQ after the Tibetan unit spotted earlier this year.
     
  2. FORBIN
    Offline

    FORBIN Lieutenant General
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2013
    Messages:
    13,669
    Likes Received:
    23,039
  3. Hendrik_2000
    Offline

    Hendrik_2000 Brigadier

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2006
    Messages:
    5,628
    Likes Received:
    18,333
    convoy of ZTQ 15 light tank

    15式軽戦車

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
    N00813, PanAsian, keldon and 4 others like this.
  4. ougoah
    Offline

    ougoah Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2008
    Messages:
    833
    Likes Received:
    785
    Looks nothing like VT-5. I thought PLA will be getting their version (non-export) of VT-5 and the one in the photo is the model that wasn't selected? Looks far better and more well protected than VT-5 though.
     
  5. SinoSoldier
    Offline

    SinoSoldier Major

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    3,330
    Likes Received:
    4,968
    Far better and more well-protected? Are you sure?

    24024260349_e6ab33eebb_o.png
    VS
    DHQ2KMzV0AMGXII.jpg

    I've stated this and I'll state this again: the VT-5 design seems like a perfect design that could be scaled-up to a full-sized MBT (at least externally speaking). This is probably the first "modern"-looking tank that the Chinese have produced at this point.
     
  6. jobjed
    Online

    jobjed Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2011
    Messages:
    1,913
    Likes Received:
    4,914
    Can you list the core technologies that you think the VT-5 have but the ZTQ do not?
     
    Figaro and ougoah like this.
  7. SinoSoldier
    Offline

    SinoSoldier Major

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    3,330
    Likes Received:
    4,968
    Was referring to the overall turret design & armor layout, not the internal technologies. The VT-5 features better all-aspect protection, especially at the cheeks, than the ZTQ-15 although the latter has improved a lot compared to the ZTZ99 series.
     
  8. jobjed
    Online

    jobjed Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2011
    Messages:
    1,913
    Likes Received:
    4,914
    Could you point out in the pictures how the VT-5's "all-aspect" protection is better than the ZTQ?

    Side skirts don't count.
     
    Figaro, N00813 and ougoah like this.
  9. ougoah
    Offline

    ougoah Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2008
    Messages:
    833
    Likes Received:
    785
    Um. I did say it looks far better protected. Implying I don't know for sure. Now reason I say this is because it uses the same ztz-99/ leopard 2a5+ wedge add on that supports some form of reactive armour. This is easy and cheaper to replace than fixing up the entire section of armour damaged by anti-tank munitions. Underneath this wedge bracket (this means it is not a shot trap unlike what some actual idiots think) lies the armour that contains the plates of ceramic etc. We've all seen the cross sections and diagrams. Chobham and Dorchester is ancient technology that everyone now has at least caught up on if not exceeded. Whenever an Abrams is severely damaged, the vehicle is mission killed and requires the entire front section to be replaced which is exceptionally difficult and costly even for superficial damage. Having a modular design like Leopard 2a5+, Leclerc, T-80x, T-84x, T-90x, and Type 96x/99x is FAR superior to Challenger 2 and Abrams approach to armour. For the same weight at least. Of course this is only referring to head on frontal arc. Chinese tanks have been quite weak in the angled frontal arc and abysmal pretty much everywhere else but the decision to do this is to focus all the weight of armour of statistically most likely place to get hit while keeping that section as tough if not tougher than the hardiest tanks and still keeping weight down. Now this ZTQ approach I think looks better than VT-5's which follows the ancient Abrams/ Challenger method. At least seems to. I haven't looked into VT-5.

    What makes you think VT-5 is the perfect design for scaling up? What makes it "modern" looking? Russian method of improving protection while keeping weight down (much much MUCH more important that protection) is actually the more modern solution. Abrams, VT-5 etc are not much different to cold war era solutions albeit with far more sophisticated materials. Sophisticated materials is NOT limited to using this method of turret design.
     
    N00813 likes this.
  10. SinoSoldier
    Offline

    SinoSoldier Major

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    3,330
    Likes Received:
    4,968
    Take a look at the side cheek armor; the VT-5 has a thick layer of armor all around the front and sides while the ZTQ-15's ERA abruptly stops right as the front transitions to the sides. Again this is a reflection of the flaws found on the ZTZ99 series.
     
    N00813 likes this.
Loading...

Share This Page