VT4 prototypes showcased in China had Active Protection System GL5 , Hunter Killer capability and Composite Armour + ERA replacing the RHA + ERA. So its not exactly junk.
It's at the same level as a Russian T-90A from the late 90s, minus the HK capability. AK-1 also comes with HK and composite armour anyway. And never mind talking about APS, it requires actual testing to prove its effectiveness, not Chinese "export level" testing.
By today's standards even IA operates junk that requires significant upgrades, never mind this VT-4.
I wouldn't call the Chinese tanks junk. Vt4 is a different topic but the type 96 type 99 are equivalent to our t90s and in some cases out perform our tanks in terms of mobility and firepower. The ztz 99a is superior to any tank in Asia the only near equivalent being the k2 black panther. Vt 4 maybe an export downgrade like the Soviet t72 but from the performance of older Chinese tanks in Africa they don't seem to be as junk as people show it to be
The Type 96 is equivalent to the T-72. The Type 99 is much better, and are T-90 equivalents, but the newest Russian T-90s are so much more superior in comparison. It's only the IA that's stuck in the past whereas the Chinese are bringing in improvements quickly in comparison. However all these tanks have significant armour related weaknesses, and that's the point of a tank, the armour, the ability to take punishment. The T-90S has less weaknesses compared to the Type 99, but the T-90MS increases its weakness with its bulkier turret design, although it's still less than the Type 99. The Type 99's armour weaknesses are horrendous, along with the Type 96. The Arjun's weaknesses are totally different, but equally bad.
India and China have to design new tanks from scratch, otherwise both of us are pretty laughable at this game.
And please don't compare the K2 to any Chinese tank. The basic design of the tank is far superior to the Type 99.
The Abrams is still the gold standard for any 3rd gen tank design.
Add Hunter Killer Capability of Arjun to T72/90 fleet and add the 125mm smooth bore gun of T90 to Arjun.
Will solve quite a few things.
Arjun is fine with its rifled gun. It needs a whole new gun if it has to switch to smoothbore, perhaps the German L55, if not an indigenous solution. The K2's gun would be a pretty good fit. The T-90's gun and carousel design may not suit the Arjun.
It will be interesting to see if Indian solutions will be explored for the T-90 upgrade. AFAIK, the driver's new TI sights will be out of DRDO's labs. Even the CPS. So let's see what happens with the gunner's TI.
DRDO NG Main Battle Tank concept...☺☺
Looks like a cross breed of Russian Armata and Israeli Merkava....
I'm talking about the ztz 99a . The tank doesn't get as much recognition but the tank has way better armour distribution than most of the Soviet based tanks and actually is superior to the t90ms . Their new apfsds can penetrate 800mm rha and the armour on hul and turret is similar value or more. Some claims even go upto 1400mm on the turret .
Also Abrams is no way close to the gold standard for tank design the hull of Abrams can be easily penetrated a much better tank is the leopard 2a5+. Abrams has way too many flaws the only good thing being a decent gun and amazing turret armour and even that is not unique because a lot of new tanks have come up and none have copied the Abrams anywhere. Americans make even shitty designs viable because they continue to work upon it. The f18 is a useless piece of shit put enough avionics and sensors and it can pretty much defeat best performing aircrafts of its category.
I don't know but presently the Chinese have figured out the basics of their tank design very well and they have design their own 125 mm gun which is said to be superior to the 2a46m5 and if the performance values are true could be closer to the 2a82. They actually field a better engine rated at 1500 hp copy of the German mtu (similar to what the Arjun uses compared to t90s 1130hp even the ms will be using the same engine. They even reversed engineered the relikt era and use it on their tanks. And they have put western influence on Soviet tanks and have a pretty decent package of a modern tank which ticks all the right boxes and doesn't try to be revolutionary. This praise is only limited for the type99a2 or the ztz 99a . Also the k2 gun is basically the l/55 so it would be wise for us to just buy the license of the gun and mass producing it. Otherwise we might again end up buying South Korean stuff
The problem with the armour is not the "best figures", it's the "worst figures". The armour has weaknesses at the top due to its sloped armour when looking at LOS. What that means is, from certain angles, a shell will go through it like tofu.
You can see it yourself. The armour to volume ratio is absolutely atrocious. Any T-90 is better than this.
Everything else on the tank has undergone continuous improvement, so, as I pointed out before, those aren't the problem. The main problem is the turret armour design is very poor and completely goes against NATO standards. Even Arjun has better armour design, even if it goes against NATO standards here as well, although that had more to do with the technological limitations of the time.
Anyway, I'm sure the Chinese are working on their own next gen MBT which will fix such mistakes.
Btw, the ZPT-98 gun used on the tank is a reverse engineered 2A46M, but has undergone its own improvements over the last 2 decades. It's nowhere near the 2A82. But its firepower is a definite improvement over our T-90S, including the use of longer rod shells. But it's most definitely not seen as much improvement as the 2A46M-4/5.
As for our needs, the DRDO NGMBT's basic design with a hull-protected crew is much better than any of the 3rd gen tanks, so we are doing fine.
Maybe I went overboard on comparing the zpt-98 to the 2a82 but the newest variant of the gun has Ammunition that can penetrate upto 800 mm rha . The svinets has penetration of 740 mm rha. It does seem better than the 2a46m5. There was an article claiming that the CIA Factbook or some similar document that ztz 99a couldn't be penetrated by any modern munition within the U.S armoury. The thing is I can't find the link anymore. It could possibly be just fake propaganda planted by the 50cent army.The problem with the armour is not the "best figures", it's the "worst figures". The armour has weaknesses at the top due to its sloped armour when looking at LOS. What that means is, from certain angles, a shell will go through it like tofu.
You can see it yourself. The armour to volume ratio is absolutely atrocious. Any T-90 is better than this.
Everything else on the tank has undergone continuous improvement, so, as I pointed out before, those aren't the problem. The main problem is the turret armour design is very poor and completely goes against NATO standards. Even Arjun has better armour design, even if it goes against NATO standards here as well, although that had more to do with the technological limitations of the time.
Anyway, I'm sure the Chinese are working on their own next gen MBT which will fix such mistakes.
Btw, the ZPT-98 gun used on the tank is a reverse engineered 2A46M, but has undergone its own improvements over the last 2 decades. It's nowhere near the 2A82. But its firepower is a definite improvement over our T-90S, including the use of longer rod shells. But it's most definitely not seen as much improvement as the 2A46M-4/5.
As for our needs, the DRDO NGMBT's basic design with a hull-protected crew is much better than any of the 3rd gen tanks, so we are doing fine.
The Svinets is a very old shell. So achieving its standards isn't such a big deal. The Russians have long surpassed that.
Such type of information is unreliable. Only a war will solve that equation.
Russians have surpassed it but not using the 2a46m5 which is used on majority of the Russian tanks itself. And even nato rounds have a max penetration of 800 mm rha. While most eastern euro and asian countries including india have achieved apfsds rounds with max penetration of 500-550mm rha which is average for modern warfare. So saying that achieving 800 mm rha ke rounds is not a big deal is underestimating the Chinese they are now capable of destroying every modern tanks except the t14 armata. And that is not in mass production so Chinese are way ahead of us in armour.
It's not a problem for us since a tank battle is almost entirely unlikely in a Sino-India war. Not to mention, we will have significant amounts of air superiority in such a war. The small amounts of tank contact that may take place will be against the up and coming T-90MS that we plan to buy for the Sikkim area, while the Chinese also have to deal with Indian airpower in the same setting. Let's not forget that the majority of their army is still composed of the older Type 96, and it is quite likely India will be faced with this tank instead of the Type 99. The Type 99 is a pretty heavy tank for the Himalayas.
That's why, many posts ago, I pointed out that Chinese armour is not good since they have to engage in a tank battle with NATO and Russia, not India.
And this 800mm RHA round is just a rumour. It's yet unknown to what extent the Chinese have modified their ammo carousel to carry such a large round. Even they are currently constrained by the limitations of the Russian autoloader designs. They are likely to be at the same level as Russia's older shells like the Svinets, with DoP of 600-650mm, also unlikely for it to have been exported to Pakistan either. China does not operate long rods, so only shells below 700mm are realistic.
Commander’s Sighting Systems for AFVs
May or maynot be,but main achievement is DRDO managed to launch a missile through rifled gun bore. If I am not wrong it could be the first such development in the world ( correct me if I am wrong)
Hope this time things will change,VT4 with PA may change IA perceptions about heavy tanks.Every few years they test and goes AWOL.
This is a never ending project.
What we need is an upgrade of the guns. Our armour is still fine. But hey lack the apfsds to penetrate enemy armour. The mango apfsds is useless against vt4,ztq 15, type 99 series. If the warfare goes the armoured way we will lose badly. In terms of close air support we are not that lacking but we need more attack helicopters. The mq9 we are buying should also come equipped with hellfires. Because we don't have a lot of ways to destroy those tanks. Our atgm inventory is more modern than Pakistan but still dated when compared to China. Even though China has lot of old atgms. We will be overrun if it becomes an mechanised war. Same is in artillery department. We don't have weapons like the iron dome. Even though we had done a deal of 1.8 billion with them. No information on delivery. Neither C-RAM type weapons which can destroy incoming artillery rounds. Neither we have k 31 biho to take out cruise missiles. Only saving grace is the air-force which can turn the tide on our side. The Pakistani air force has a very small inventory of actually capable planes. The mirage, jf17 are dumb bomb trucks. The f16 is The only capable fighter and 27th Feb showed us that we are capable of handling with our mig 21's so most of our better aircrafts can focus on the Chinese front. The problem only starts if the Pakistanis get the block 3 in decent numbers. On the Chinese friend the Himalayas are our friends so we can dominate till aksai chin. Any deeper thrusts and we lose advantage and it will become like the German invasion of Russia. The j20 and J10c are the real problem and our mki would have a hard time against pla j10's there j16 is another big problem...
