Military Review

Sohu explains why the Type 96 is called the "Chinese T-72"

50
Sohu explains why the Type 96 is called the "Chinese T-72"

In China have passed tank maneuvers with the participation of Type 96 main battle tanks. This is a 43-ton vehicle, which has been in operation in the PLA since 1997. Against this background, there were statements in China that "it's time to abandon the operation of the Type 96 in favor of more modern tanks." In particular, they talk about the need to increase the percentage of Type 99 tanks in the army and introduce new developments - including wheeled tanks.


Today, the Chinese armed forces have about 2,5 Type 96 and Type 96A tanks. In the military-thematic section of the Sohu information service, they believe that it is too early to say goodbye to these PLA MBTs.

A Chinese author under the nickname Liang Jianjiong publishes material, which says that Type 96 tanks are often called "the Chinese version of the T-72 tanks." At the same time, there are also those in China who are "offended" by such a comparison. But such a comparison can offend only those who are ready to judge the combat effectiveness and efficiency of tanks solely by the year of their development. If the T-72 was developed in the late 1960s - early 1970s, then the Type 96 in the PRC is also called "obsolete" by some critics in connection with the above definition.

The aforementioned author in Sohu explains why the Type 96 MBT is called the "Chinese T-72". According to him, one of the reasons is its low price. So, to date, the Type 96, according to the estimates presented, costs the military budget of the PRC less than $ 1 million. At the same time, the Type 99 is already two to three times more expensive.

From the publication:

The Type 96 is inexpensive and can be equipped with a lot of equipment. It has a high potential for modernization, just like the Russian T-72. That is why the number of these tanks in the PLA is about 2,5 thousand.

As you can see, the reason for this name in China is also seen as a developed modernization potential.

Another reason is, according to the Chinese author, ease of use and security, based, among other things, on the active protection complex (KAZ). And this is at the low cost of tank maintenance.

At the same time, the disadvantages of the Type 96 MBT are also noted, for which, as noted, "it is also similar to the T-72." Among them - low "in comparison with modern Western" engine power - about 800 hp. This is comparable to the 72 hp of the T-780 engine.

But one of the differences between the Type 96 and the T-72 is that the Russian (Soviet) tank was actively exported and exported, in contrast to the Chinese one. T-72 tanks of various modifications are currently in service with the armies of India, Poland, Iraq, Kazakhstan and a number of other countries of the world.
50 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Thrifty
    Thrifty 12 January 2021 18: 38
    +8
    Well, yes, in such a biathlon we lost a skating rink on an obstacle, the quality of the metal leaves much to be desired! They forgot that Soviet tanks were taken as the basis of their tanks, including the T72, that our tanks showed themselves in heaps of wars. And they showed it on the good side, mostly! And what can the Chinese de facto boast about, except for ordered articles? ??
    1. donavi49
      donavi49 12 January 2021 18: 57
      +2
      But the T-72B3 - a special series for Biathlon, is cracked at the seams. We conclude that the T-72B3 are falling apart even without enemy shells, and if they arrive, they will burst along all the welded seams ???


      1. Voltsky
        Voltsky 12 January 2021 19: 00
        +3
        beautiful, uncle petia is a notable welder ...
      2. Thrifty
        Thrifty 12 January 2021 19: 19
        0
        Donavi49 - most likely, the tank was one of the first releases, it was exploited mercilessly, it is possible that it had to fight, in the same Chechnya, for example. Metal fatigue is evident, in contrast to the poor quality of Chinese tanks. We then drive our cars mercilessly, so the wear, especially, of the chassis is very high.
        1. donavi49
          donavi49 12 January 2021 19: 32
          -5
          This is a new tank - they were exclusively made for biathlon.
          Special modification of the T-72B3 mod. 2014 for "tank biathlon" - there is a new box and 1130 engine power. They were made by 40-50 tanks and have been killed exclusively at the final draw of the Biathlon for 5 years, they have not seen the army.
          1. Constanty
            Constanty 12 January 2021 19: 57
            +23
            This tank is not new, but the old one (1985-1987) has been modernized.

            modernized.
            As far as is known, the damage shown in the photographs resulted from hitting a concrete wall at a speed of over 50 km / h as a result of driver error.
            It's just an accident, there is no need to look for sensations
            1. yaglon
              yaglon 12 January 2021 20: 38
              +4
              Nice table, respect
          2. loki565
            loki565 12 January 2021 20: 33
            +12
            I doubt that a new hull was made for biathlon, most likely the modernization of the tank from storage.
      3. poquello
        poquello 12 January 2021 19: 22
        -1
        Quote: donavi49
        But the T-72B3 - a special series for Biathlon, is cracked at the seams. We conclude -

        an isolated case, unlike))))) mortars of some neighboring country, and they would have been of the same quality as an armored personnel carrier 4 - well, they would not have become so massive
        1. donavi49
          donavi49 12 January 2021 19: 27
          0
          Well, that is, an isolated case of a type 96 roller breaking off - a tank of rubbish, metal was welded in a Mao home oven, etc.

          A rupture at the seam of a T-72B3 at the same biathlon is an isolated case.

          Clearly understood. wink
          1. poquello
            poquello 12 January 2021 20: 18
            0
            Quote: donavi49
            Well, that is, an isolated case of a type 96 roller breaking off - a tank of rubbish, metal was welded in a Mao home oven, etc.

            A rupture at the seam of a T-72B3 at the same biathlon is an isolated case.

            firstly, it is biathlon, respectively, the loads are specific,
            secondly, I did not say this about the Chinese skating rink, or are you offended for the popularity of T72?,
            thirdly, t72 has no competitors in biathlon yet
          2. Orkraider
            Orkraider 12 January 2021 22: 41
            +7
            Quote: donavi49
            Well, that is, an isolated case of a type 96 roller breaking off - a tank of rubbish, metal was welded in a Mao home oven, etc.

            A rupture at the seam of a T-72B3 at the same biathlon is an isolated case.

            Clearly understood. wink


            Welcome.
            hi

            To be fair, the destruction of the balancer and the roller on the Type96 occurred when overcoming a typical obstacle:
            Loads when driving through the so-called. the comb led to the destruction of the front left road roller balancer mountings. The roller and balancer made chaotic movements inside the caterpillar for several seconds.


            And the biathlon 72 drove into the block at speed, which is not a typical task, but rather a crash test wink

            At the same time, I note separately, I am far from calling Type96 trash. A very good and balanced car. By the way, it should be borne in mind that the Type 96, like the T-72 biathlon, was specially prepared for competitions, that is, the Chinese made it easier and installed a forced power plant.
      4. loki565
        loki565 12 January 2021 19: 48
        +1
        Which one rolled over?
        1. donavi49
          donavi49 12 January 2021 19: 57
          +4
          No. The red one turned over.



          The green one, which cracked, flew into the escarpment, or whatever this concrete block is called, which must be forced.
      5. Vadim_888
        Vadim_888 12 January 2021 23: 15
        -7
        Looks like a hangover was cooked, or the RFP was detained laughing
      6. user1212
        user1212 13 January 2021 03: 43
        +1
        So this is hitting the wall at speed, the Chinese have a similar reason?
    2. mvg
      mvg 12 January 2021 20: 14
      -3
      Lord, don't comment anymore. What, show yourself it..m nowhere else?
    3. Simon
      Simon 12 January 2021 20: 15
      +3
      And what can the Chinese de facto boast about, except for ordered articles? ??

      Of course, the Chinese can lick it off well, but they cannot yet manufacture technology for parts and equipment. The same can be compared to the Soviet AK and Chinese. I think there is no comparison. request
      1. yaglon
        yaglon 12 January 2021 20: 43
        -2
        The ZTZ-99 was mastered, the Abrams-level tank of the latest modifications. Penetration of 900-950 kinetics, armor kinetics meter and one and a half kuma. In general (in terms of economic goods, I will say) the Chinese quality has improved dramatically over the past 15-20 years. With regards to tanks - the Chinese 105-mm Englishwoman brought to the perfect mind. And this fluff is underestimated in the 21st century, the Israeli comrades will not let you lie. Much has been written here that it is much more accurate than the 120-mm Merkava, and thanks to the Chinese and the Americans, it gives about 650 mm, that is, it disassembles the T-90M into vulnerable zones.
        1. hohol95
          hohol95 12 January 2021 21: 00
          +5
          Are there examples of "parsing" Indian or Russian T-90 tanks by Chinese tanks?
          1. yaglon
            yaglon 12 January 2021 21: 55
            -4
            Until there is a war, there are no examples of analysis. Where do they come from? However, it gnaws that the tanks are unlikely to ever be at war with each other. I'll tell you honestly, as in the spirit, the tank has outlived its usefulness. Well, the front kinetics meter, so what? It will fly from above, into the 20-30-mm roof of the T-90M, that of the Abrams, from a penny drone. For me personally, this is a small tragedy, the death of a whole class of combat vehicles, I really love tanks.
            1. hohol95
              hohol95 12 January 2021 22: 00
              +2
              Then why such statements? This is all theory. And what will be known in practice only to heaven ...
              1. yaglon
                yaglon 12 January 2021 22: 09
                -5
                In general, I was more interested in the opinion of Israeli comrades about 105-mm down. Maybe someone will answer. They too forced L7 here. Their reaction is interesting.
                1. hohol95
                  hohol95 12 January 2021 22: 13
                  +4
                  They consider it to be ideal for fighting the existing enemy in the form of Palestinian or Hezbollah units. For the destruction of buildings of strongholds and just support the infantry. And cheaper for such combat operations.
                  1. yaglon
                    yaglon 12 January 2021 22: 19
                    -2
                    No, no, I remember exactly that the gunners of their guns said that the L7 is much more accurate than the Rh120 and its clones. I have many questions for this fluff. Do they overestimate the armor penetration for it (apparently, for advertising purposes - the same Chinese with this tank, which is at the head of the article) or do they not overestimate? No exact information. Can 105mm down take 650mm? The Chinese, are expected to say yes - confidently. Our people say they are not sure. Therefore, the shooting of Israeli tankers is interesting.
                    They must have all types of shells BOPS, OFS, etc., both Chinese and local Israeli. For 105mm I mean.
                    1. hohol95
                      hohol95 12 January 2021 22: 24
                      +1
                      Israeli tank crews have outdated data. When was the last time they fired at a real tank? In the 80s on the Syrian T-55 and T-62 tanks. Maybe they practiced on the T-72, but only the inhabitants of the "promised lands" can answer this.
                      1. yaglon
                        yaglon 12 January 2021 22: 34
                        -2
                        Don't tell me, the Israelis have greatly improved the 105-mm down (and 120-mm too), developed for it and for the down 105-mm and 120-mm special fragmentation-shrapnel shells, which have a continuous engagement zone of about 200x50m at a distance of 500 m. This is a matter of their national pride, such shells, they always blamed them for the fact that the Americans did not develop them. What are you talking about T-55 and T-62? It is generally known that the T-72 company was first destroyed by 12 units by Jews in the Golan in 1982.
                      2. hohol95
                        hohol95 12 January 2021 22: 42
                        -1
                        Only in board and massive use of Tou. And only one machine in the side of the sub-caliber from the Centurion with 105 mm. And they lost at least one Merkava from the T-62 fire! Of all the machines of this type lost then. Around 13.
                      3. Zaurbek
                        Zaurbek 12 January 2021 22: 42
                        0
                        Considering that NATO did not have PF shells at all, this is progress.
                      4. yaglon
                        yaglon 12 January 2021 23: 07
                        -2
                        Yes, it turned out interestingly from that war, maybe even good for old tanks. The centurion killed the T-72, and the T-62 even spanked the Merkava. Here at VO, Jews believed and said that the T-62 is the best tank for the USSR, they love Tyrant. Why? They themselves actively exploited. Besides, it seems to them that mech-recharge is evil.
                        NATO had HE shells like before .. hmm
                      5. Zaurbek
                        Zaurbek 12 January 2021 23: 11
                        +2
                        Yes, I read it ..... I also read that the T72 was for export and did not differ much from the T-62 in terms of armor. But when they changed tactics and began to take advantage of the 125mm cannon's range, the situation was leveled. And do not forget, the USSR supplied equipment in export performance for armor, sights, communications and shells. And Israel used the latest Western (And its) achievements. The Arabs also managed to interfere with the IS-3.
                      6. yaglon
                        yaglon 12 January 2021 23: 16
                        -2
                        Yes, Baryatinsky has already disassembled it. But I do not agree that they did not differ much from the T-62. The reduction for the T-62 is equal to the T-55, i.e. 200mm hull and turret. T-72 monolith 400 mm turret and hull without "special armor" (smischno, without combat fiberglass, STB-blocks, which in terms of strength x .. sorry for the comparison)
                      7. yaglon
                        yaglon 12 January 2021 23: 19
                        0
                        Let's also for Israel and for the USA. Chobham is aluminum (aluminum oxide, corundum) in several layers, as in our tanks, with an atmospheric gap. Secret infa.
                      8. Zaurbek
                        Zaurbek 12 January 2021 23: 20
                        +1
                        Yes, but NATO and Israel already had 105 mm guns with a large penetration ... And only the 115 mm gun caught up with it. And for comparison, the MT12 100mm smoothbore (a powerful weapon) no longer took the T64 in the forehead and 72 normal from 1-1,5 km. So the colonel told us at the military commissar.
                      9. yaglon
                        yaglon 12 January 2021 23: 32
                        -1
                        It is necessary to decide on the armor penetration. М829А3 about 800-830, М229А4 - about 900-950, Chinese Type 03 improved about 850-950, our BM-59 from Armata about 800-850.
                      10. mvg
                        mvg 13 January 2021 02: 19
                        0
                        Who molds you cons? Thrifty?
                      11. user1212
                        user1212 13 January 2021 04: 04
                        +2
                        Quote: yaglon
                        It is necessary to determine the armor penetration

                        It has been a long time, but the world is not perfect :)
                        Quote: yaglon
                        М829А3 about 800-830

                        What? It is clear that mm. Homogeneous armor? And what kind of armor is this? What are its characteristics? What do Americans use for assessment? And ours? Are these armor plates identical in their characteristics? Yes, right now. And as a result, we have M829A3 punches 800 mm plates from one steel, our 800 mm from another steel, so not only are they different, with the processing of steel is also incomprehensible. And from what distance? At what angles? Breakthrough criteria (breakthrough can be considered as any damage to the inner layer and full passage of the scrap behind the obstacle)? Does the best result in a series of breakouts count, or is it average, or maybe even the minimum guaranteed? How does it compare? request
                      12. yaglon
                        yaglon 13 January 2021 20: 42
                        0
                        From what distance and at what angle it is clear - 2 km and 90 degrees. It's kind of like an axiom for a rough estimate. I know about the breakout criteria, so there is always a scatter in numbers. I meant the approximate ratio. Plus or minus. And then I read here, for example, on VO that Mango is an unsurpassed projectile, and M829A3 seems to be resting. In fact, the difference between them in penetration is very significant.
  • Vadim_888
    Vadim_888 12 January 2021 23: 23
    +5
    ... The same can be compared to the Soviet AK and the Chinese. I think there is no comparison.

    On the market in Kabul $ 200 Chinese and $ 2000 made in the USSR
  • nnm
    nnm 12 January 2021 18: 44
    +2
    Copier is outraged by the comparison with the T-72? Yes, it would be better to take such a comparison for the best possible compliment. Something at the 96th tank biathlon cannot show itself better than our cars.
    1. mvg
      mvg 13 January 2021 02: 23
      0
      Have you watched biathlon for a long time ??? Can you tell me where the PRC is? Miracle..,
    2. Vladimir_2U
      Vladimir_2U 13 January 2021 03: 37
      0
      The 96 has a weak point of the 72 - the forehead at the gun is covered. Least.
  • svp67
    svp67 12 January 2021 18: 47
    +3
    Yeah, but the fact that the AZ on it is completely from the T-72, and much more ... this is so "passed by"
    1. nnm
      nnm 12 January 2021 18: 50
      +5
      "You don't understand, this is different!" )))) Either they do not like the air intakes on our plane from the photo, then the comparison in tanks. And something like a turmoil with India - both sides of Russian production began to pull together aviation, that tanks.
      1. Doliva63
        Doliva63 12 January 2021 19: 39
        -3
        "... both sides of Russian production began to pull together aviation and tanks."
        Naive laughing Everything will depend on planning. In 41, our technique was also not inferior to the German one - neither in quantity nor in quality. But they retreated to Moscow until they learned to think.
        1. nnm
          nnm 12 January 2021 20: 53
          +1
          Well, really stop ...
          Why not compare the quantity and quality of equipment in the zones of offensive of army groups ?!
          About such things as the combat experience of the Wehrmacht units, obtained throughout Europe, I am already silent.
          But if you want to substantively - let's discuss the calculation of forces and means in the zone of offensive of Army Group Center, for example. What positions were met and so on.
          1. Doliva63
            Doliva63 13 January 2021 17: 18
            0
            Quote: nnm
            Well, really stop ...
            Why not compare the quantity and quality of equipment in the zones of offensive of army groups ?!
            About such things as the combat experience of the Wehrmacht units, obtained throughout Europe, I am already silent.
            But if you want to substantively - let's discuss the calculation of forces and means in the zone of offensive of Army Group Center, for example. What positions were met and so on.

            So in the "offensive zones" the equipment itself does not focus - solely by the decision of the commander, isn't it? Well, that is, I still had to think. I don’t argue at all for the experience of the Wehrmacht, but why was it not studied? The guilt of the command is obvious. I'm talking about that.
            1. nnm
              nnm 13 January 2021 18: 11
              +1
              Well, you are still twisting again! Did you know where the tank wedges would strike? Or was there no need to distribute drugs and equipment over a considerable length of the border: from the Baltic to the Far East? Yes, there were a lot of mistakes. Including in relation to the spraying of tank units, and in reconnaissance, and in the construction of airfields, warehouses, fortified areas, etc. , but it is not entirely true to write that the forces were equal. Overall, yes. In the areas of the main blows, the situation immediately looks not so straightforward.
              1. Doliva63
                Doliva63 13 January 2021 19: 51
                0
                Quote: nnm
                Well, you are still twisting again! Did you know where the tank wedges would strike? Or was there no need to distribute drugs and equipment over a considerable length of the border: from the Baltic to the Far East? Yes, there were a lot of mistakes. Including in relation to the spraying of tank units, and in reconnaissance, and in the construction of airfields, warehouses, fortified areas, etc. , but it is not entirely true to write that the forces were equal. Overall, yes. In the areas of the main blows, the situation immediately looks not so straightforward.

                Have you heard such a term - intelligence? Everything dances from her. A normal commander. Over time, they learned, but then (as it is now, it seems to me) they didn't really bother with it. Hence the problem.
  • Voltsky
    Voltsky 12 January 2021 18: 58
    +10
    the main difference between the T-72 and the 96th; the fact that the T-72 was developed in the 70s with all the consequences; and this is a trough with comparable characteristics in the 90s ...
    I see no point in discussing further.
    1. The comment was deleted.
  • The comment was deleted.