Raven_Wing278
New Member
hey...can any 1 tell me about the new generation chinese tanks? i've seen a picture of one of those on this website...i just wanna noe a lil more about them..like specifications if any 1 can get theirs hands on some
T-98 vs Arjun
- Thread starter Raven_Wing278
- Start date
- Status
armage ur second link is faulty this is the right one
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/china/type-98.htm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/china/type-98.htm
Raven_Wing278
New Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #4
what kinda rounds does it fire? sabots or HEAT? armour thickness? :?:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/china/ground.htm
Find the Type-98 at the bottom.
Find the Type-98 at the bottom.
Raven_Wing278
New Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #6
how does the type-98/type-99/type-99G compare with the M1a2/M1a1?
Raven_Wing, please stay on the topic. This is T-98 vs Arjun not m1a2 or any other tank.
If you want to discuss other tanks, there is a thread opened for that. If there is anything else you need just open a new thread provided that you give full details of the topic you want to discuss and other references that may help your argument, etc. Its best to avoid one line vague questions.
If you want to discuss other tanks, there is a thread opened for that. If there is anything else you need just open a new thread provided that you give full details of the topic you want to discuss and other references that may help your argument, etc. Its best to avoid one line vague questions.
From what it said on sinodefence it says the Type-98 is equal to M1A2
"while certain aspects of the actually performance of the Type 98 is approaching the standard of the M1A2."
Also you can't really compare these tanks, at the end it will come down to trainning and which crew has more exprience.
"while certain aspects of the actually performance of the Type 98 is approaching the standard of the M1A2."
Also you can't really compare these tanks, at the end it will come down to trainning and which crew has more exprience.
Raven_Wing278
New Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #9
hmmm say the type 98 and the M1a1 is operated by crews of the same training and same experience? from what i've heard the type-98 has a "Dazzler" which directly attacks the weapons "line of sight" and the actual crew...isint that against the geneva convention?
Yes, it is against the Geneva convention. I'd be curious to know what training equivalency the PLA thinks it has against the US Army. The US has it's armour training school, which AFAIK no one else has developed to the same level. In addition, China has no actual warfighting experience to reference against - you just can't train based on watching the end effects of other wars. The PLA has done intensive study of GW1 and Iraq 2001, but they don't have access to critical data - and they certaonly don't have the same level of combat experience in armour as even the Iraqis or Iranians. (let alone the french, Israeli UK and US armies)Raven_Wing278 said:
And with the greatest respect, the type 98 etc have legacy heritage against the T-62 and T-59. That means that there are significant restrictions in core capability that cannot be nullified by adding ERA or bigger drivetrains. They don't use uranium depleted armour (any armour designer can see that straight away) and contrary to what some may say, the engines would be underpowered to support UDA anyway (even if it was present). The internal volume of the tanks means that there are known restrictions to what can be achieved in modifying the platforms.
I would question their utility against a Leclerc, Merkava 3 (let alone Merkava 4), Chally 1, Leo2 A3 or even an M1a1 1st Gen. There are too many inherent design limitations in the core platform to make it a threat and platform equivalent response.
So we'll ignore some basic analysis and just assume that these legacy T-62's are the new MBT kings of the hill??armage said:
I've given some very very basic reasons why I don't see any ground breaking platforms and capabilities in these tanks, and yet we still want to make judgements based on personal preferences without any supporting data??
It's the same old mantle design, the same legacy hull, which means that the shell storage will be compromised the same old way that it's design bretheren used to brew up when hit.
You just cannot add capability to an existing hull, you have to redesign it otherwise you have self imposed limits. The hull design has some serious limitations. Adding a new turret or ERA does not change that basic fact.
Raven_Wing278
New Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #13
true...
Don't post one liner, and this isn't even a line.
Don't post one liner, and this isn't even a line.
quicksilver
New Member
T-98 for me
I told you before not to post one liner post, this is your strike one!
I told you before not to post one liner post, this is your strike one!
We still havent discussed how the T-98 figures with the Arjun.If the T-98 could be compared to the M1A1 1st gen tanks,i have seen reports that the Arjun also is pretty close to that mark.It may be disputed but it still isnt in service and how it will fare only will be clear only after being inducted into the army.so any comments???
Well, I'm getting a little bored with these kinds of threads. The Pakistanis will tout their Al Khalid and bash everything else. The Indians will tout Arjun and bash everything else and the Chinese will tout the Type 98 and bash everythings else. Meanwhile there will be little effort at any serious comparison. I see little merit in going through this proces once again. Sorry.
- Status