New chinese MBT

[MacGalin]

From Jane's:
http://www.janes.com/defence/news/jd...0617_1_n.shtml

Chinese are testing new MBT, Type-99, armed with 140 mm cannon. ( I wonderit has something in common with Rheinmetall NATO 140 mm gun?)

Anyway: can China, using european / israeli tchnology create MBT that would easily defat its western counterparts?

[PlasmaKrab]

Depends how you look at it (that is, either from an arrogant Westerner's view, or from an arrogant Chinese's )...

Look at the Type-98G: it already has a front turret modular addon armor pack said to be similar to that of the Leopard 2A5 plus advanced ERA, their new 125mm 50cal gun is NOT an improved Russian design but a derivate from their own 120mm gun, firing DU sabot round that could very well be derivates from Israeli technology, the turbodiesel 1200hp GMP derivates from German WD396.
It is also said that Chinese manufacture AT-11 gun-fired missiles.

Apart from all that, the Type-98 is the first an yet only tank in the world to field a laser soft-kill active defence device.

Don't believe what is too often said, China moves forward like everyone else, maybe even faster right now, but quietly...

Look this unofficial site for good info about the Type-98.

[Randy]

With information like this, I wonder what the prospects are for the Army's Future Combat System? I know that we need lighter armored forces/medium weight forces, but is the FCS it? I think they might be going too light.

[Pergite]

Randy said:
With information like this, I wonder what the prospects are for the Army's Future Combat System? I know that we need lighter armored forces/medium weight forces, but is the FCS it? I think they might be going too light.

If you are hit you are probably screwed anyway. As long as you have enough firepower, then speed is a good protection as anything.

[PlasmaKrab]

Pergite, open the game, launch a battle in "tank heavy" mode with enough points to have at least one tank squadron on each side. Place both on ridges at gun range. How many shots per kill? Last time I tried this (M1 IP vs. T-80b), there were about 4 shots for one hit and 5 hits for one kill.
Now try that on medium armor, even the best of IFV (NOT Strf-90C, that's cheating ).

I can understand why some say that thick armor and big guns will die hard. Light mobile forces with long-reaching smart weapons are fine so long as you keep the edge and a good standoff. As soon as you'll lose the initiative you're done.

Anyway I don't understand why the US military fear the Chinese that much? Do they fear an invasion? Would the Chinese manage what even the Japanese didn't try, when they have a whole continent as playground as long as they don't start playing silly buggers?

Oh, anyway, I guess some people can't feel good without an enemy, and that on both sides of the Pacific ocean... mmh, quite anywhere, indeed

[SCAJolly]

Seeing as America didn't tolerate to have to share the world with the USSR, America will still not tolerate to have to share the world with China. Developing econimically and militarily in ways no one anticipated, China is truly a competitor for the title of The World's Largest Superpower.
Not only are they developing a blue-water fleet that in not many decades will rival that of the US, but they are also drooling over "re-uniting" Taiwan with its motherland, and this latter is of great concern to USA and Japan. America has already taken the side of Taiwan, and should a Chinese strike be launched, she has little to do but join in the melee. Officially, of course, there is much else to do, but if an invasion is launched, then by God there aren't many alternatives left. I doubt any US president is willing to tolerate to lose face in such a battle.
Also, the Chinese will perhaps not be as careful with their nuclear weapons as the Soviets and westerns were. They share many of the basic understandings of moral and ideology, while China's (the men in charge, of course) perception of the world is a completely different one.

[PlasmaKrab]

Pacific coexistence, anyone? No interest? Last bid!

I guess it is also part of the political game for the Chinese leaders to show off their new shiny power (at least the parts where it IS shiny ) to stand up against the almighty USA. Quite alike Kim Jong-Il's stand in North Korea, only more successful.

The point is that China is progressing impressively fast indeed, but not enough to stand against the US forces in the Pacific area, let alone invading Taiwan. One practical hing is that they don't have the amphibious capacity for that.

Besides, if Taiwan gets reunited to mainland China in the next years, it will be progressive an bloodless, like Hong-Kong with more rant
I don't want to be overly optimistic, but Chinese power apparatus is so intricately cross-controlled that no single power-crazed general is bound to launch a surprise strike anywhere just to get at the head of a war-torn country!

All progressist and thriving it may appears now, the country is deeply divided. The average Chinese is a poor farmer or worker without education, in some forsaken and trackless outback county, ruled by a distant, tax-thirsty and Kafka�an administration and corrupt, incompetent and tax-thirsty local delegates.
The wealth generated by the new economy is more concentrated than ever, and the leaders of the next generation tend to be sharks the like of which has never been dreamed of by the combat guppies of Wall Street.

Any bump in the fast-lane road to progress could very well topple the country into an endless and bloody continental civil wars. Enough factions want more air as it is. BTW, the next Olympics could be a pretty tribune for the unheard masses of the Empire... Let's wait and see.

Shortly put, that is why I don't think China will risk a military intervention against Taiwan and a war against the US in the real world.

This is purely off-topic, but hey, I thought that was worth explaining. For what my sources are worth.

[Pergite]

PlasmaKrab said:
Pergite, open the game, launch a battle in "tank heavy" mode with enough points to have at least one tank squadron on each side. Place both on ridges at gun range. How many shots per kill? Last time I tried this (M1 IP vs. T-80b), there were about 4 shots for one hit and 5 hits for one kill.
Now try that on medium armor, even the best of IFV (NOT Strf-90C, that's cheating ).

I could try that IRL in a war and that would be devestating. You cant afford waging war like that anymore and the modern battlefield would probably not even allow it. You cant just dig your tanks in on a hill and wait for the enemy to come rolling and start up a big tank duel a�la potential Fulda Gap. There wont be one big front and if you stay too long in one place, you will soon have something with a rather high Armour penetrationg value dropped on your roof, while the enemy effecivly have taken another route around your position.

I would never compromise firepower, I would rather increase it (more atgm�s). But a lighter fast moving tank could be effecitve anywhere on the battlefield and be depolyed where ever it would be needed without a enormous logistics train.
But that is just my philosophy, and I have never been that much fond of tanks anyway .

[kevin]

Oh Boy!!! We are really hitting all my favorite topics this week. My Bachelors Degree is in Chinese and Japanese history. Where do I begin?

I don't think the US Military fears China. It makes a good Hollywood story line to portray warmongering Generals playing up fear to get more budget money. I am the type of nerd who watches Congressional Briefings, and China has rarely come up in the last ten years. Generally the concern is:
1. Development of Long-Range, hypersonic, huge anti-ship missiles (practical only for sinking US Super Carriers or Oil SuperTankers)
2. Weapons proliferation, which China has cut back on since 9/11

The Chinese and the Russians are very different people, whether they are communist or not. Calling China communist today is a joke, since they are selling the last of there state-run industries. I think the Chinese Leadership is not so fatalistic as to be cavalier with nuclear weapons. They do have the attitude that the Chinese people are "peasants" who serve them, and I don't think they want to loose that power.

China does not have the power to invade Tiawan. They do not have enough amphibious capability. They can launch a large Air and Sea battle (astride the world's most busy shipping lane) and China can beat Tiawan do to sheer mass. But, to what end? They have the WTO, world acceptance and they need oil.

The Chinese power structure is somewhat unique. So far, the emerging middle and wealthy classes have not demanded a seat at the leadership table, as has happened with every other Western nation when a middle class arises. Chinese culture, emphasizing the family over the individual, and harmony over agitation, may allow an open market economy exist in a totalitarian political system. (I wrote a paper on this very subject.) Admission into the WTO, (undeserved in my opinion, but we needed them not to Veto and Enduring Freedom UN resolutions) has solidified the ruling faction's grip on power. This is the faction that wants engagement and commerece with the West.

The final thing worth noting is what I call the "Walmart effect." After 5 years the US / Chinese economies are now so thoroughly linked that trade sanctions and threats are not practical. China is growing by manufacturing dinky little things that Americans scoop up for cheap. So in the end, it is still American dollars and most Americans understand this. (ok no they don't, but those are the dumba**es that don't vote anyways) There is no need to fear the big Red Chinese Machine.

I think you will see China make a slow, very slow transition to democracy, an "Asian Democracy" much like Japan, different in form and style, just as the US and Europe practice Democracy in different ways.

[PlasmaKrab]

Wow, I would really like to read your thesis papers on this Kevin! I would never have hoped for such a specialist around!

Now you agree that China has no interest in attacking any neighbouring country without threat. They seem to have mastered quite well the tricks of 'economical warfare' and to be well beyond force shows.

Now everyone here says that agreeing that China and USSR are different, and gabbling about mad generals and so on... Should I recall that NO mad Russian general has made any silly attempt as described yet?

So, in the same way that many here play cold-war breakout scenarios without it ever having a fair chance to happen (and stay playable in this game, IIMSS), why not, in full gear paranoid gamer's imagination, consider a potential Taiwan conflict as a good scenario mining patch

Now whatever you say, Kevin, I remain quite frightened that there be a good level of political instability in China right now, external influence or not. Some people who also know China from first hand have raised this question, but I think the 'opportunity window' for any really chaotic political turnaround for China only will close quite soon.