Third regiment of T-72 tanks to be moved to Ladakh soon

[Omega007]

Is it possible to bring Arjun over there.

Well, I guess they can.Since the Globemasters have a cargo capacity of 70 tons, and i guess Arjun weighs still lower than 70 tons, so............

 

[Jamwal's]

doesn't look that bad but why we are deploying t 72 why not t 90 ,last time i hear there was proposal about deploying 300 t 90MS what happen to that

Its not about looks but flawed design.

Type 96 and MBT 2000 have exposed turret roof which is inclined towards frontal Armor, hence a weak spot.

T 72/ T 90 have no such issues.

 

[Akasa]

Sure they have and in terms of pure technical features, they are fare match but what I'm talking about is turret geometry!!The problem with all of the tanks of Chinese origin (and that of South Korean K2 as well) is that their weak turret side protection with the base armor consisting of just a ~80 mm or so RHA plate and no composite inserts with a layer of ERA panels over them.Not really a good design choice if you ask me.

I'd like to see from where you pulled the 80 mm figure and the claim that no composites were used.

48 calibre vs 52 calibre - simple physics my dear friend.And I'm talking about your ZTZ 96 here, so please do not bring the 99 here.I'm quite aware of the fact that they have got better guns, thank you.

Although a longer barrel length does provide greater muzzle velocity, a lot of other confounding factors are at play when determining the energy and lethality of a tank cannon.

When did i ever say that??Just try to grasp the context against which I wrote that comment.The other member said the T 72s can not stand against your heavier, more well protected ZTZ 99s which I agreed with.I just said that I do not think PLA would try to bring them across the mountains, through the narrow passes especially when the overlooking high grounds are already occupied by the Indian Army with built up defences.
And as for countering MBTs, I'm sure your PLAGF poses enough HJ 8s and soon HJ 12s to do the job, just like we have got our Milans, Konkurs and Kornet Es.

And within the context of your scenario, in which the Chinese are the "aggressors" by sending tanks against India's forward-deployed T-72s, tank-to-tank warfare is essentially an impossibility at such terrains.

 

[Omega007]

Its not about looks but flawed design.

Type 96 and MBT 2000 have exposed turret roof which is inclined towards frontal Armor, hence a weak spot.

T 72/ T 90 have no such issues.




View attachment 318999

You quoted the wrong person m8!!And while you are at it, do not forget about the weak side turret protection which is a more serious flaw compared to a partially exposed turret roof from frontal aspect, since the tanks gunners are trained to aim for centre mass and not on the top.

 

[Akasa]

Its not about looks but flawed design.

Type 96 and MBT 2000 have exposed turret roof which is inclined towards frontal Armor, hence a weak spot.

T 72/ T 90 have no such issues.




View attachment 318999

As per the very diagram you posted, the issue has been fixed on later variants on the ZTZ-99. The MBT-2000/ZTZ-96 never had this issue.

 

[Jamwal's]

You quoted the wrong person m8!!And while you are at it, do not forget about the weak side turret protection which is a more serious flaw compared to a partially exposed turret roof from frontal aspect, since the tanks gunners are trained to aim for centre mass and not on the top.

Mate, I quoted @nik141993 ?

 

[Omega007]

Mate, I quoted @nik141993 ?

Really??Why??Your post would seem more logical of a reply to Mr Sinosoldier.

 

[Jamwal's]

As per the very diagram you posted, the issue has been fixed on later variants on the ZTZ-99. The MBT-2000/ZTZ-96 never had this issue.

Can you post the images and specs of "later variant" of ZTZ 99 ?

In general, Chinese Turret design provide less armor coverage along the frontal Arc and reduces the safe manoeuvering angle.


I hope you understand the principle of Safe Manoeuvering Angle ?

 

[Omega007]

As per the very diagram you posted, the issue has been fixed on later variants on the ZTZ-99.

Well, the diagrams actually show little improvements on that aspect, if any.

The MBT-2000/ZTZ-96 never had this issue.

Unfortunately, they did have that issue and they still do.
Here is the Type 90IIM aka Al Khalid

Just look at the slop on the upper frontal turret and how the roof has sloped down.That place is covered by rather thin RHA layer and completely exposed from the frontal aspect!!That my friend shouldn't have been there!!

Here is ZTZ 96 :

Same slopped rooftop coming down over the frontal arc!!Again, not a good news.

Now I'm not saying this single flaw would automatically turn them into a bad design!!No, not at all.Over all, these are neat machines and can become extremely dangerous at the right hands.All we are saying here is that the designers could have done it differently, a weak spot in the frontal arc ,no matter how small, can become a huge problem at the worst possible time.We should know, we had to suffer for inducting such flawed tanks.

 

[Akasa]

Can you post the images and specs of "later variant" of ZTZ 99 ?

In general, Chinese Turret design provide less armor coverage along the frontal Arc and reduces the safe manoeuvering angle.


I hope you understand the principle of Safe Manoeuvering Angle ?


View attachment 319004

Posting these words from another blog doesn't help the argument. But in any case, the so-called "safe maneuvering angle", which is by no means a technical term, isn't a numerical parameter that can be applied to tanks that use armor we know nearly nothing about.

Look at the bottom schematic on the diagram that you've posted and you'll see the changes quite clearly.

Well, the diagrams actually show little improvements on that aspect, if any.

Unfortunately, they did have that issue and they still do.
Here is the Type 90IIM aka Al Khalid
View attachment 319005
Just look at the slop on the upper frontal turret and how the roof has sloped down.That place is covered by rather thin RHA layer and completely exposed from the frontal aspect!!That my friend shouldn't have been there!!

Here is ZTZ 96 :
View attachment 319007
Same slopped rooftop coming down over the frontal arc!!Again, not a good news.

It is quite apparent from your photos that the roof has been sheathed within an armored block itself. Whether that armored block is sloped or not doesn't mitigate the fact that the crew is no longer exposed frontally speaking.

The same principle applies to the MBT-2000, which has later been upgraded with ERA blocks.

 

[Jamwal's]

"safe maneuvering angle", which is by no means a technical term, isn't a numerical parameter that can be applied to tanks that use armor we know nearly nothing about.

Safe manoeuvering angle is indeed an important principle in Armor Protection.

At least, for countries with oldest and famous design bureaus of the world, not Chinese who are relatively new in Armor deigning and most of the tanks are mutation of Soviets.

The turret is angled inward towards turret center axis, also notice the edge fragments between side armor and Front Armir module.

This weak spot is most common Hit Angles.


Secondly, side turret armor is not properly covered by by front Armor as in Russian Design.

Also, if you can post pics of tank commander hatch, let's see if there is any place for Composite Armor.

Below is the image of ZTZ99 front Turret Armor Module, you can see mounting bolts, behind this the RHA plate, in front opening is Composite Armor array.

So 100mm air gap and composite Armor array that is thinner than in other tanks.

Credit - Damien
______________


You can compare all this with Russian and Ukrainian design in T 72, T 80 and T 90.






Basic protection level of T 72


Without ERA protection.

IA Ajeya with ERA

 

[nik141993]

Its not about looks but flawed design.

Type 96 and MBT 2000 have exposed turret roof which is inclined towards frontal Armor, hence a weak spot.

T 72/ T 90 have no such issues.




View attachment 318999

thanks well i am a noob in tanks related stuf

 

[Hephaestus]

PLA Type 96B MBT

You guys need to polish up your tanks.

A clean looking tank. But, that's not what tanks are for. Variation of the ship in harbor .

 

[Akasa]

Safe manoeuvering angle is indeed an important principle in deigning Armor Protection.

At least for countries which has oldest and famous design bureaus of the world, not Chinese who are relatively new in Armor deigning and most of the tanks are mutation of Soviets.




View attachment 319014


The turret is angled inward towards turret center axis, also notice the edge fragments between side armor and Front Armir module.

This weak spot is most common Hit Angles.


Secondly, side turret armor is not properly covered by by front Armor as in Russian Design.

Also, if you can post pics of tank commander hatch, let's see if there is any place for Composite Armor.

View attachment 319020



Below is the image of ZTZ99 front Turret Armor Module, you can see mounting bolts, behind this the RHA plate, in front opening is Composite Armor array.

So 100mm air gap and composite Armor array that is thinner than in other tanks.


View attachment 319022

Credit - Damien
______________


You can compare all this with Russian and Ukrainian design in T 72, T 80 and T 90.






Basic protection level of T 72


Without ERA protection.

View attachment 319024




IA Ajeya with ERA

View attachment 319026

The side of the vehicle would be shielded by the frontal armor blocks which extend all the way to the sides. Take a frontal look at both the Type 99G and Type 96A; it is impossible make a direct line-of-sight with any unprotected portions of the side. I'm not sure as to what you mean by "edge fragments". This coverage is even more apparent in the heavily-redesigned Type 99A.

How did you get measurements on that supposed air gap on the armor block? How do we know it is an air gap in the first place rather than a space for composite blocks?

 

[Omega007]

I'd like to see from where you pulled the 80 mm figure and the claim that no composites were used.

The 80mm figure is an approximate value, for example, both the t 72 and T 90's side turret is around 85 mm thick (but the turret is designed in such a way that the weaker sides are fully hidden behind the frontal armor, giving the turrets of T series their distinctive roundish shape).The same is also the case with the German Leopard Leopard 2, so i thought it won't be much different for your Type 99s/96s.
And as to how you determine whether there is composite armor or not on a particular place by looking at a photograph, you first have to learn how they work!!They work by inducing frequent compression and decompression to the penetrators (KE and CE alike) by running the rods through layers of different materials with different sectional density, which in turn induces a lot of shearing stress on the rods/jets, and thus breaking them up or degrading them over the period.
So in order to be effective, the composites are needed to be placed in thick layers, and for that, you gonna need room to insert them!!
Now just take a look at some photographs of you ZTZ 99, shall we?
So, here goes,
1. ZTZ 99 :

and

Now just take a look at the distance between the outer edge of the commanders cupola and the edge of the turret side!!There is simply not enough room in there to insert composite armor panels!!It's not really that difficult or complex tbh.
Here is ZTZ 96

And now compare this to something like Leopard 2A4 :

Now just take a look at the weld lines on the turret sides, that part shows us the placement of composite panels.
Here, let me mark them out for ya

Notice the portion in red box and compare this to the above image without markings.

Here is another one, an unfinished Leopard 2A4 turret in the factory floor :

The armor cavities are clearly visible in this photograph.
Now compare this with your Type series of tanks, notice the difference yet??See how much greater the distance is between turret sides and edge of cupolas compared to your Type series tanks??
As I told you earlier, ain't really that much hard to find out if you have got the desire to do so.It's the age of internet after all.