“Would become an easy target in a real battle”: problems with Type99A tank revealed in China


In China, discovered what was called a significant flaw tanks Type99A. This is a modern PLA tank belonging to the 3rd generation. At the moment, the number of such versions of tanks in the Chinese army exceeds 300 units (in addition to more than 600 Type99 tanks).


During recent simulations with tank crews, electronic combat training was carried out on targets, among which were below the plane of the tank. In other words, Type99A armored vehicles fired while in this simulation at prevailing heights relative to targets.

The reports say that when shooting, when you had to lower the gun to the maximum possible angle (and for the 125 mm gun ZPT-98 it is 6 degrees), problems arose. The recoil in this shot led the tank to “bounce”, “lose its target”, roll back on a rocky site, and ultimately the crew had to spend more time to get the next shot accurate.

In this regard, it is stated that in such a situation, the Type99A tank would become an easy target in a real battle for the enemy, if even the most advanced ATGMs were in the arsenal of that.

Sina published material saying that Chinese tank manufacturers should pay attention to the design of the American-made Abrams tank gun. At Abrams, the tilt angle is from -10 to +20 degrees, in contrast to the range from -6 to +14 degrees for Type99A. It is noted that the Abrams tanks behave more stable when firing with a negative slope of the gun.

In the expert community of China, controversy erupted on this issue. In particular, it is noted that "there was an isolated case, which was associated with the fact that the firing was carried out from a conventional rocky site, where stability is initially extremely difficult to provide."
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

25 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. St Petrov 20 February 2020 16: 17 New
    • 8
    • 4
    +4
    an isolated case, which was associated with the fact that the firing was carried out from a conventional rocky site, where stability is initially extremely difficult to ensure


    and write down in the operation manual - avoid stones on the dominant peaks and the peaks themselves.

    1. Lamata 20 February 2020 16: 30 New
      • 10
      • 3
      +7
      Better to avoid war, they can knock out.
      1. Piramidon 20 February 2020 17: 04 New
        • 6
        • 2
        +4
        Quote: Lamata
        Better to avoid war, they can knock out.

        It’s better for the Chinese not to sell anything at all, so that all sorts of their “Sohs”, less built themselves unsurpassed iksperdy.
        1. Lamata 20 February 2020 17: 35 New
          • 2
          • 1
          +1
          This Sohu has completely unbelted !!! To interfere with the opinion even more I leave comments on the VO laughing laughing
    2. Mavrikiy 20 February 2020 16: 45 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: c-Petrov
      and write down in the operation manual - avoid stones on the dominant peaks and the peaks themselves.
      hi Refinement.
      Single tanks avoid stones on the dominant peaks and the peaks themselves, as well as shooting from them. Add sand, if not straw.
  2. Reserve buildbat 20 February 2020 16: 24 New
    • 13
    • 3
    +10
    To increase the elevation-declination angles of the gun, it is enough to "only" increase the height of the tower, and to increase stability, increase the mass to Abrashkina. laughing
    1. St Petrov 20 February 2020 16: 32 New
      • 10
      • 5
      +5
      the mechanic driver Ivan would have competently handed over backwards to the stones in order to lift the stern and lower the front of the hull. S - savvy
    2. Piramidon 20 February 2020 17: 10 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Quote: stock buildbat
      To increase the elevation-declination angles of the gun, it is enough to "only" increase the height of the tower

      The height of the tower, except when remaking the tank in the factory, is difficult to increase. And for this you need to somehow upgrade it. But from time immemorial, to increase the angle of elevation of the guns, natural or artificial elevations were used, on which tanks and artillery guns were driven.
      1. Reserve buildbat 20 February 2020 17: 32 New
        • 5
        • 1
        +4
        Actually my comment is C - sarcasm laughing
    3. svp67 20 February 2020 19: 27 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: stock buildbat
      To increase the elevation-declination angles of the gun, it is enough to "only" increase the height of the tower

      Well, why, you can make the installation of guns like monitors ...



      There is another option, to make a suspension with a variable clearance, as it was done by Koreans on K-2
  3. Andrey Mikhaylov 20 February 2020 16: 41 New
    • 3
    • 7
    -4
    the case when they stamped. not one hundred tanks, and revealed a failure in design.
    1. St Petrov 20 February 2020 16: 42 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      it’s a pity that only 3 and that the jamb was revealed
  4. Thrifty 20 February 2020 16: 53 New
    • 6
    • 6
    0
    It’s kind of like the Type 99 was pierced through by a tower during a demonstration-for-media-shooting? The Chinese from the T72 tank, purchased from Romanians during the Soviet era, shot at their firing range at the firing range, and the shells were old, discontinued in the 70s of the 20th century. The result of the first hit, besides the through penetration of the tower, is also severe damage inside the tower! Here you have the Chinese vaunted technology!
  5. knn54 20 February 2020 16: 53 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    The tank had problems with both the diesel engine and the tracks // tracks. They stalled at the parades, at the "biathlon".
  6. Lord of the Sith 20 February 2020 17: 02 New
    • 5
    • 3
    +2
    What should be expected, well, where did the Chinese get a competent tank school?
  7. Ros 56 20 February 2020 17: 07 New
    • 7
    • 1
    +6
    C'mon, Sohu will write the Russian tanks worse than the Chinese ones. stop lol
    1. Thrifty 20 February 2020 17: 14 New
      • 4
      • 3
      +1
      There are already celestial fans actively minus, grants work off the host? negative
      1. Piramidon 20 February 2020 17: 37 New
        • 4
        • 1
        +3
        Quote: Thrifty
        There are already celestial fans actively minus, grants work off the host? negative

        Never mind. For the second year now, I have been constantly minusted not by the representative of the Celestial Empire, but by the representative of the non-winter, to whom I once "poured salt on the tail", breaking his knowledge in the field of aviation. Now he is taking revenge on the sly, as befits a pan-saucepan. I take it calmly. You can’t be offended by holy fools. hi
  8. John22 20 February 2020 17: 48 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    All Soviet and Russian tanks also have a very small declination angle. Armata should have more. TTX has not yet indicated declination.
  9. John22 20 February 2020 17: 54 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    In general, the angle of declination and the height of the gun in the tower above the hull is a very important indicator. When hiding the tank hull behind a hill as much as possible, it is possible to fire at the enemy. Raising the stern of the tank is not always possible - this requires additional earthwork. So it goes.
  10. svp67 20 February 2020 18: 10 New
    • 5
    • 2
    +3
    The recoil in this shot led the tank to “bounce”, “lose its target”, roll back on a rocky area, and in the end the crew had to spend more time to get the next shot accurate.
    And what did you want, gentlemen, comrades? You have a powerful, very powerful gun and a relatively light tank. You don’t want him to roll back, there either reduce the first or sharply increase the second, bringing the mass of the tank to the mass of Abrams
    Our tanks have the same problem, when fired, it can roll back somewhere on the truck, but somehow this did not cause any problems when shooting ...
    1. dzvero 20 February 2020 18: 32 New
      • 3
      • 1
      +2
      They would have to make sure that only the tower “jumped” and not the whole tank smile
      1. svp67 20 February 2020 19: 02 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        Quote: dzvero
        They would have to make sure that only the tower “jumped” and not the whole tank

        And NEVER ... rocking begins
  11. Grigory_45 20 February 2020 20: 20 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    It is noted that the Abrams tanks behave more stable when firing with a negative slope of the gun.
    - let the Chinese load up to the mass of Abrams, and they will not have problems
    Or is it a secret for the Chinese themselves that their tank is 10 tons lighter than abrashki?
  12. Alexey Brylev 21 February 2020 18: 27 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    A somewhat far-fetched problem in my opinion. This is an infrequent situation in real battles. In general, it’s rather stupid to put your tanks relative to the enemy. And in general, there is no ideal. The same "Abrams" is vulnerable from the stern for heavy machine guns.