The Chinese showed their wheeled tank

China has demonstrated its wheeled tank. This type of armored vehicles is in service with the armies of the United States, Japan, Italy and several other countries. Now China has joined them, Warspot reports.

About creating a wheeled tank based on the VP10 armored personnel carrier, it became known in August last year. A new modification of the VP10 is an anti-tank self-propelled artillery mount, which, according to Western classification, is called a Tank Destroying Vehicle (TDV). The machine is armed with a 105-mm gun, the claimed armor penetration of which is 650 mm steel, covered by dynamic protection.

Initially, it was reported that the new combat module weighs significantly more than the "native", so VP10 with the 105-mm gun lost amphibious capabilities. At the same time, the machines shown in the video have propellers. In addition, earlier it was reported that the new tank destroyers were intended for export, while the CCTV-7 TV show showed Chinese army vehicles.

Comments

[demiurg]

Something modest, only 650mm for dynamic protection.
They would write right away, one and a half meters after an active, dynamic defense when firing for 7 kilometers.

[svp67]

Quote: demiurg

Something modest, only 650mm for dynamic protection.

So, this is the old NATO cannon in 105 mm, wait a minute, they will push it there and 125 mm faster than we can do it on the Boomerang. And they will do it precisely for their army.

Initially, it was reported that the new combat module weighs significantly more than the "native", so the VP10 with a 105-mm cannon lost amphibious capabilities. At the same time, the cars shown in the video have propellers.

Screws REMOVE forgot

[seos]

With such armor penetration (650 mm) we need to think about replacing the 125 mm gun in the tanks with the Chinese 105 mm ...
And recently, the Italians wheeled a tank tank rolled out with a 105 mm gun and there they declared the same about 650 mm .....

[svp67]

Quote: seos

With such armor penetration (650 mm) we need to think about replacing the 125 mm gun in the tanks with the Chinese 105 mm ...

Oh, and the 125mm 2A75M Octopus 800 mm guns ...

Quote: seos

with 105 mm push and there they said the same about 650 mm .....

So, I repeat again, this is a NATO cannon

[seos]

According to all sources, the 125 mm Lead shell penetrates 650 mm for 2 km ...

[svp67]

Quote: seos

According to all sources, the 125 mm Lead shell penetrates 650 mm for 2 km ...

Is BPS the ONLY type of projectile capable of penetrating armor in a tank’s tank?

[seos]

No, not the only one, but he is the most reliable ....
When armor penetration of a tank gun is declared, then it is kinetic ammunition that is meant ..
If you mean the "very effective" tank KUV "Reflex" with 900mm armor penetration, which was conceived as the long arm of Soviet tanks, today it is unable to penetrate any modern tank into the forehead ... (Leopard 2a4 (1987) 1300 -1700 mm from Kuma)

[svp67]

Quote: seos

When armor penetration of a tank gun is declared, then it is kinetic ammunition that is meant ..

You're not right. For each type of ammunition, this is indicated specifically, and in this case, "guess guess it yourself"

Quote: seos

If you mean the "very effective" tank KUV "Reflex" with 900mm armor penetration, which was conceived as the long arm of Soviet tanks, today it is unable to penetrate any modern tank into the forehead ... (Leopard 2a4 (1987) 1300 -1700 mm from Kuma)

How is it all mixed up with you. Having built up their “foreheads”, the Germans somehow forgot to build up their “sides”, especially the towers, and “Leo2A4” completely discredited themselves in Syria.

[RASKAT]

Damn the car without DZ at all, it will be burned from any RPG and ATGM.
I am generally skeptical of the wheeled vehicles of the first battle line. Almost any bullet is a guaranteed punctured wheel. It is clear that there is a swap, etc., and if you get a lot or what kind of explosive projectile the 23-mm or Vog-17 or large fragments from artillery fly to, the wheel of the khan immediately, leave the battle or wait until the suitcase of gifts arrives. Undermining an anti-tank mine is guaranteed to tear off the wheel, or maybe two at once, then what? The same caterpillar can be stitched, if desired, even if the rink is torn off and at least temporarily move. Wheel armored personnel carriers, yes, bring away, wheeled mobile artillery, too, yes. A tank and even without DZ, I don’t know. In my opinion, Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan were already stepping on this Rake on an armored personnel carrier. Bradley M1128 MGS. This is how it looked. They built them already 134 pieces and calmed down on this. Even against barefoot Afghans, the idea did not materialize itself.
I think so.

[Vadim851]

Unless the movement speed is much higher, and the engine is much more economical and replacing 100-105mm guns on the battlefield (although there are questions), it is clear that with normal roads, which does not always happen. Allow me to correct you, yet the M 1128 is a Stryker. In my opinion, such a technique, if needed, is in small quantities.

[RASKAT]

M 1128 is a "Stryker"

Sorry, of course Stryker, a reservation.

In my opinion, such a technique, if needed, is in small quantities.

Well, if only a little bit, for some mobile parts, and for a war with a knowingly weak enemy. But DZ should not be neglected. It costs a penny, it does not weigh much. I mean something like a 5 contact. The relic is all the same heavy for such machines in my opinion, and it is partially designed for BOPSs.

[mvg]

You, like, are a tanker. Why so many mistakes?

[Vadim851]

Nowhere without DZ, especially RPG
and ATGM now at least one place chew.
Given the presence of BMP-3, Nona-S, then for special cases 150 wheeled pieces will be enough.

[Aqr009]

I am generally skeptical of the wheeled vehicles of the first battle line. Almost any bullet is a guaranteed broken wheel ...

Perhaps this touched the future, progress has reached the production of tires. The wheels of the future are essentially a hybrid of a wheel and a track, and even with auger elements, like the Goodyear Eagle-360

[Alf]

Quote: RASKAT

Bradley M1128 MGS That's how it looked

Actually, this is Stryker.

[nikoliski]

As the Chechen experience showed, when a caterpillar infantry fighting vehicle and a wheeled BTR80 are blown up by a mine, as a rule, everyone dies in a caterpillar car (from there it’s a fashion to drive outside, leveling the need to put armor in general), and wheeled vehicles when the wheels are wider than the car’s body (they learned how to harness such cars in South Africa) has the best characteristics in terms of crew safety in this case (I will explain, when hitting a mine, the explosion detaches the wheel completely, the blast wave goes up and is reflected from the trough-shaped bottom of the amphibian machine to the side, Uzhen has a very good charge in order to break through such protection, taking into account the distance to the ground, so often a pair of high-explosive 62 mm shells were attached to the TM152 to reliably hit the target) In general, I think wheeled vehicles are a cheap alternative to tracked vehicles — production is cheaper, wheel life is 50 km ( versus 000, caterpillars and track rollers) consume much less fuel (which means longer range), higher maximum speed on the highway, of the minuses it is considered that patency is worse than that of tracked vehicles, although I will say that the BTR10 sometimes climbed on their 000 to in the forests, where the T80 sat on a low belly, hitting an obstacle with clearance and getting stuck, by the way, if a wheel is punched, the armored personnel carrier will not get up as some people write here, driving all 8, turning 64 rows, so the armored personnel carrier can be without a wheel (sometimes without a pair, it depends row) to go, but the tracked vehicle will lose the gusli (and the gusli in Chechnya were lost even when trying to quickly cross the railway track, the gusli jumped right on the rail ... In general, the Chinese fellows, I think ours will do something similar soon, Yes, and about breaking through 8 mm I doubt, as far as I know the best minutes 2mm podkaliber DU hit only 650 mm armor.

[Alf]

By and large, I agree with you, but there are a few objections.
1.

Quote: nikoliski

consume much less fuel (means more range)

Is there data on a BIG difference?
2.

Quote: nikoliski

means more range)

Cruising range BTR-80 600 km, T-72 600 km.
3.

Quote: nikoliski

higher maximum speed on the highway

Does a lot of technology drive at maximum speed? Not at all.
You should take into account the average speed, and it is the same for BTR-80 and T-72 and is 30-
40 km / h.

[Captain Pushkin]

Quote: demiurg

Something modest, only 650mm for dynamic protection.
They would write right away, one and a half meters after an active, dynamic defense when firing for 7 kilometers.

The distance is not specified. Maybe 200 meters. Then, why not 650mm (although at such a distance there should be a very good shell).

[Sergey985]

Impression: tyap-blap, blinded.

[purple]

The Chinese .... copy everything they saw ... just in case

I saw a live Chinese humvi ... it looks cool, almost like a real one

[Borik]

] China has demonstrated its wheeled tank. This type of armored vehicles is in service with the armies of the United States, Japan, Italy and several other countries. Now China has joined them, reports "Warspot"[

Presented as if the Chinese had already adopted it. This is still an experimental instance. And we had similar ones but weren’t accepted into service.

[donavi49]

They are in Djibouti on the BD.

[donavi49]

But in the PLA in the parade.

[donavi49]

And they also have an 122mm howitzer on the same chassis. In addition to the armored personnel carrier itself. Tablets. Staff. EW. Plus there are prototype air defense systems.

In general, they organically develop their wheeled units. On a single chassis, they have a lot of cars. Without disagreement (well, in the sense of a disagreement of an armored personnel carrier of the last generation by the whole family).

[mvg]

As usual, on top. No humor.

[konstantin68]

Not tall? The tank is still not a gantrack. Though...

[purple]

As for the height, this is a V-shaped bottom, so fashionable now

[donavi49]

On Boomerang it will be even higher. This is the current generation of armored personnel carriers. They are all tall. For landmines everywhere. And the ephemeral gain in the projection area does not justify itself in other respects (cramped space, less volume for equipment, weapons, again mine protection). Moreover, modern SLAs and anti-tank systems - 30cm will not especially feel the difference. And the guy with the RPG is no longer so scary (the main losses in recent wars are land mines, aircraft, Toe / Bassoons / Cornets / Milan).

[Yrec]

Not a tank, but a wheeled self-propelled gun. Passability only on roads and hard ground. Settlements no higher than 2 floors, otherwise it will break the broken concrete and reinforcement of the wheel. Applicability is very doubtful.

[Captain Pushkin]

Quote: Yrec

Not a tank, but a wheeled self-propelled gun. Passability only on roads and hard ground. Settlements no higher than 2 floors, otherwise it will break the broken concrete and reinforcement of the wheel. Applicability is very doubtful.

Outside of settlements, as a weapon of fire support, and even with the possibility of fighting tanks, it is a very useful self-propelled gun. Especially in low-intensity conflicts like the Syrian.

[Alf]

Quote: Captain Pushkin

Yes, even with the possibility of fighting tanks,

Watching which ones. If with Abrams, T-90 or Challenger, then only on board. If the Chinese are Type 69, then Yes. If this British woman could fight with Tanks (and not with antiquity on tracks), then the calibers of modern tank guns would not so quickly rush up.

[Yrec]

The Americans were one of the first to put such guns on the strikers, but they quickly abandoned them, too heavy, the wheels quickly turned into trash. It seems that such units in South Africa are somehow used. They are useless against tanks, for fire support the gun is weak, you need a normal self-propelled gun with the ability to fire from closed positions. Roll out for direct fire - wait for the ATGM. You can’t get off the road into the field - it will immediately get stuck.

[donavi49]

Field Marshal Haftar also thought roughly. He had Mi-24. T-72. Grad. 100500 soldier. The enemy is Toyota with Milan.

Toyota won.

[Yrec]

Because it’s not iron that fights, but people, and the coalition burned all the equipment.

[donavi49]

There was no coalition in that war. There was only Chad + Zaire with military-technical support from France (mainly in training Baboons and deliveries of Milans + training for operators) and Libya with the Chadian separatists - which they supported.

In that war - where the coalition burned all the equipment, Field Marshal Haftar was on the side of Toyota and the Coalition.

[Yrec]

And, definitely, I got it. But anyway, giving arms to unprepared and unmotivated fighters is a dumb thing.

[konstantin68]

Quote: purple

As for the height, this is a V-shaped bottom, so fashionable now

That is not, everything is fine with height. But how cool it is to see the battlefield from above. Good tank.

[Lex.]

I wonder how the terminator would look like a wheeled chassis

[Graz]

experience is experience, even if it is unsuccessful, they are going in the right direction, the main thing is that they can afford experiments finance

[Xenofont]

These are the serial ZTL-09 machines that have been used by the Rapid Reaction Forces for quite some time. They carry the old English 105 mm smooth-bore gun of low ballistics. For export, they make a bunch of wheeled “tanks” of both three-axle and four-axle based on the ZBL-09 armor.

[Borik]

For our Siberian roads is not suitable. So we will not be upset.

[donavi49]

Well, in general, the tactics of wheel joints are quite progressive. It was repeatedly used and it gave success - if there were no serious punctures in the planning. Yes, we will not even take the Americans. Take the native Armed Forces of the Russian Federation - the 45 raid was wheeled and achieved the greatest success, cutting Georgia off from the sea. However, they also faced a big problem. Tanks far in the rear. They had only the BTR-80 and all.

Modern wheel joints - incorporate air defense systems, artillery, anti-tank systems and all this on a single (or similar in running and resource characteristics) chassis. That is, such a connection breaks and rides at a single fast pace. Going around heavy mechanized enemy units.

[demiurg]

And while no one is bombing them, they are not subjected to shelling. Well, there is no solid front line. And so everything is correct.

[Yrec]

For raid tasks, you can slip on the greats. Everything rests on the training and motivation of the fighters. Hacking defense requires heavy equipment and artillery, here an armored personnel carrier with an attached gun will not work.

[gorenina91]

-Yes ... it’s just right ... -first, numerous heavy Chinese tanks will crush and push the defenses and cause serious damage .. and then “these” will go ...- lighter, faster and more maneuverable with quite serious weapons (weapons) ...- and also numerous ...
-Not in the tropical jungle, the Chinese are going to use them ... -and for the fields and unpaved Russian roads they just fit ...

[AlexVas44]

All of these, the so-called wheeled tanks are nothing else in my opinion, like our caterpillar Acacias and Carnations. Only with the advantages inherent in wheeled vehicles. In any case, neither one nor the other is suitable for battle formations.