Chinese armoured Vehicles - Third Generation

The chinese army has now been developing mobile wheeled vehicles for its Rapid Response Units (RRU). The design requiments are similar to the stryker the american. The army army has now emphasized mobility instead of power. These vehicles are indigenious which reflects the direction the chinese armed forces had been taking since the 1970's

8x8 Armoured Wheeled Vehicle



- The green shows composite armour, these most likey are able to be taken off and new armour can be bolted on
- The yellow area shows a new turret
- The light blue shows what looks like firing ports
- The red square shows the water jets used for amphibious warfare

4x4 Armoured Wheeled Vehicle



6x6 Armoured Wheeled Vehicle


- The red boxes also show water jets used for amphibious warfare missions

105mm 8x8, 6x6 Armoured Wheeled Vehicle

ZLC-2000 Armoured airborne IFV



- 25mm Chain gun

Type 97 Armoured IFV



- 100mm Main cannon
- Gun fired Anti-tank missile


Thanks to ImageShack for Free Image Hosting

Good thread, where have you found your pics?

Here and from my own collection

Originally posted by Figher Master FIN
Good thread, where have you found your pics?

most likely here? linkeh

maybe not

[edit on 3-9-2006 by solidshot]

Well structured and informative post Chinawhite!!!

You have voted chinawhite for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.

Jensy

I think that the gap between Western and Chinese armoured vehicles as closed to the point that there really isn't a lot in it. In some respects Chinese designers are getting slightly ahead at implementing stuff that although wasn't their invention, is under exploited in the West. Bow planing AFVs being a good example.

Here is a good article about the use of these vehicles
Link

[edit on 7-9-2006 by chinawhite]

Originally posted by planeman
I think that the gap between Western and Chinese armoured vehicles as closed to the point that there really isn't a lot in it. In some respects Chinese designers are getting slightly ahead at implementing stuff that although wasn't their invention, is under exploited in the West. Bow planing AFVs being a good example.

NOt resally very hard to catch up with hull technology, it has been stagnant in the West fir some years. The real difference is the technology incorprated inside, aiming mechanisms etc.

BUt hey anyone of them can be penetrated by a person with a $5 RPG.

I want to see if the Brits do something with their electric armour they've been developing.

posted by chinawhite

The chinese army has now been developing mobile wheeled vehicles for its Rapid Response Units (RRU). The design requiments are similar to the stryker the american. The army has now emphasized mobility instead of power. These vehicles are indigenious which reflects the direction the chinese armed forces had been taking since the 1970's. [Edited by Don W]

Commentary
China (PRC) and America - US of A - are the two 800 pound gorillas of the 21st century. Although China is said to have developed huge wind powered sail boats by the 10th -11th century AD, or CE, that could carry 15,000 soldiers on one vessel, the Chinese never invaded another non-contiguous country, to my knowledge, outside the failed effort at Japan. July 30, 1281. I make this opening statement because it is my belief that China has no territorial aspirations today. I know Tibetans do not agree, but as in Taiwan, the Chinese conceive of both to be part of greater China. China has Tibet and will have Taiwan. All in due time.

I don’t know much about Taiwan. The Japanese occupied the island from around 1897 until 1945. I believe there were about 4 million people on the island when the Nationalist Chinese abandoned the mainland to take refuge on the island in 1949. Chiang Kai Chek was successor to Sun Yat-sen, founder of modern China, and the Kuomintang Party, which competed unsuccessfully with the Communist Party led by Mao Zedong. I read that 400,000 Nationalists moved onto Taiwan and took it over from the unarmed Formosans who lived there by dint of arms. I think the last election was said to be the first free election but regardless, the old soldiers have long since been swallowed up by the larger population.

All the foregoing is to justify as well as to bolster my belief that China poses no threat to the territory of the United States. China will not invade America. This excellent display of new Chinese military vehicles shows me the direction the PLA is moving. Rather than building main battle tanks - the US has 3,000 M1A1s - this class of weaponry is much better suited to keeping law and order inside a country than it is in exporting hegemony. The northern borders with Mongolia and Russia’s Siberia are settled. The western borders are sparsely inhabited and have not been the occasion of conflict. Which means the only place where China will be likely to become militarily involved is Taiwan. Follows a link to Chiang Kai Chek. en.wikipedia.org...

China has already laid down the gauntlet, challenging the United States both in the Middle East and in Africa. China has made contracts with Russia and Uzbekistan and Iran for natural gas and maybe crude oil. China has long been a competitor to the US in arms sales around the world. The Russian SKS rifles enjoying renewed popularity in the US are now made in China. I have handled a copy and it is well made with close operating tolerances and looks good, but I found it a bit too heavy to my liking.

My last observation is that the Chinese are so much more pragmatic than the Americans who seem to be so much ideologically driven. It seems to me that pragmatism is more likely winner as long as the contest is played out in that way. Americans are too much self-satisfied with their system and can't understand why it has not been readily accepted by the majority of people on the planet who are not equally enamored with it.

Racial prejudices, social inequities, disdain for immigrants and a myriad of other faults and shortcomings that make the export of Americanism a lot less attractive in places where a real alternative is found in the China model which seems more akin to their own circumstances. We’ll see how it plays out.
www.newsday.com...



[edit on 9/7/2006 by donwhite]

Hey donwhite you forgot to include Vietnam to the list of nations that China attempted to invade in the past. You say the people of Tibet is unhappy about being conquered but its exceptional. And what about China's past going back thousands of years that have conquered Asia before weakening and the Europeans came over? But then past is past and not related to now. Hopefully.

posted by deltaboy

Hey donwhite you forgot to include Vietnam to the list China attempted to invade in the past. You say the people of Tibet is unhappy about being conquered but its exceptional. And what about China's past going back thousands of years . . But then past is past and not related to now. Hopefully. [Edited by Don W]

To keep it "neat and clean" maybe I should have said, post-1912 Revolution. In my defense, I think I did say "non-contiguous" countries.

It's intresting that chinese vehicles don't look very much different from world war 2 vehicles maybe in another 50 year's they might have something comparable to were Western technology is today.

posted by Shamanator

It's interesting Chinese vehicles don't look very much different from World War 2 vehicles; maybe in another 50 years they might have something comparable to today's Western technology. [Edited by Don W]

I love it! I see several good things in it, if your somewhat denigrating comments are true. I’m not saying you are correct. I’m not saying you meant it that way, but that’s the way it coma across to me. China is obviously the only real challenger to the United States.

I think this show of Chinese weapons demonstrates the US does not have to spend billions on billions to “counter” the “threat” from China on the ground. Every American taxpayer owes a debt to China. We know Chinese Air Force is small, limited to defensive fighters and those are old Russian deigns. So we can save money on X35 and the soon-to-come X45. Another 500 billion saved. Thank you China. Let Lockheed Martin begin making lawn mowers. Or roto-tillers. Something we can use. Without killing half the population.

I see the Chinese have ordreed 2 submarines from European makers. I forgot who. The subs are diesel, but said to be ‘super quite.’ Definitely upgraded WW2 German type U-Boats. Maximum depth, about 800 feet. Versus our nuclear subs going down to 2000 and coming back to tell. Diesel subs can run 22-25 knots surfaced, 15-18 knots underwater for maybe 2 hours, 4-5 knots for 24 hours. Our nuclear subs are actually faster underwater than on the surface. Around 45-48 knots, indefinitely. OK, so these Chinese subs are no threat to the US and we don’t need to build 6 of ours to confront 2 of theirs. At $2.5 billion each, that’s another 15 billion dollars saved. Thanks again, China.

OK, you say, those Chinese are treacherous. They purposely keep their apparent military capability low, but in secret, they have many nuclear bombs and great rockets to send the bombs to America. We need to spend about $1 T. on SDI to make America safe. But wait, there is no evidence the Chinese missiles are designed to do that. They are designed to lift modest payloads into low earth orbits. Like communication satellites. Not at all like our Minuteman III of which we already have 400 in active service. Do you think doubling that force to 800 would make us twice as safe? Gosh. I think I wanna be twice as safe as oppose to just being ‘safe.’ And only for $1,000,000,000,000.00! Geez. I love America.

My point? America has been looking for an enemy since 1991. We hit on Iraq 2 times. The second time, they were ready for us. Now we cant win and we cant leave. Holy Christ. Who got us into that quagmire? We may have to do a Vietnam and cut and run.

But China as a warmongering enemy? Not this year. Sorry Bush43. You’ll have to think of some other reason to raise our gaudy $455 billion war budget to over $500 billion next year.

Why don’t we just settle this once and for all, and give OBL $1 B. To turn himself in, and then $1 B. For every dead al Qaeda he gives us? It would be cheaper. If we can’t win fighting dumb, let’s try fighting smart.

Originally posted by donwhite
OK, you say, those Chinese are treacherous. They purposely keep their apparent military capability low, but in secret, they have many nuclear bombs and great rockets to send the bombs to America. We need to spend about $1 T. on SDI to make America safe. But wait, there is no evidence the Chinese missiles are designed to do that. They are designed to lift modest payloads into low earth orbits. Like communication satellites. Not at all like our Minuteman III of which we already have 400 in active service. Do you think doubling that force to 800 would make us twice as safe? Gosh. I think I wanna be twice as safe as oppose to just being ‘safe.’ And only for $1,000,000,000,000.00! Geez. I love America.

LOL, you need to do some more reading on the Chinese missile forces. WHat are you suggestinng that their ICBM's are only meant as satellite launch vehicles. Also, their heavyweight ICBM's have a far greater throw weight than the tiny Minuteman. I suggest you revise your ' facts '.

Armor on a chinese vehicle? Has the government finally realized they can't just send a billion people to fight with nothing more then sticks and rocks and hope to win?

Just a little sarcasm.

With the advent of nuclear weapons they had to rethink how they fought wars. No longer can they just send a bunch of uneducated peasents to fight in mass numbers, more peasents then they enemy has bullets and they are garunteed a win right?

I sure hope the military vehicles aren't a F'ing joke like the cars they build there.
We wouldn't want to gear up to fight just to have them break down and win without breaking a sweat right?

China is STILL a third world country. It's bad when they have limit what you can see on the internet and ban the word "freedom" from search engines.

Originally posted by Shamanator
It's intresting that chinese vehicles don't look very much different from world war 2 vehicles maybe in another 50 year's they might have something comparable to were Western technology is today.

Are you talking about the pictures you've seen on this thread? If so then maybe you should go compare them with WWII chassis!!

I see that the Cox Report has resurfaced here..
Happy discussing

Actually it seems that it resurfaced somewhere else and not here!
apologies..
happy disuccing where ever!!




[edit on 8-9-2006 by Daedalus3]

posted by rogue1
You need to do some more reading on the Chinese missile forces. You’re suggesting their ICBM's are only meant as satellite launch vehicles. Their heavyweight ICBM's have a far greater throw weight than the tiny Minuteman. I suggest you revise your 'facts.’ [Edited by Don W]

I concede I am not up to speed on Chinese missiles. There is very little information in the popular press or my daily newspaper. I get a weekly electronic edition of the NYT and the London Daily Mail. I would pay high regard to anything I see in “Janes” publications, but I have not seen a copy since 1999. Once Janes was the benchmark publication on weaponry around the world. It had no peers. I can not trust any source that is American, all the less if it’s connected to the US Government. That was not the case in the past. That is a tragedy. “Without a vision the people will perish.” Can you offer a suggestion? I’m sure I’m not alone in America’s new self-inflicted Age of Dankness. “We’re protecting you, trust me.”

posted by Jihad213
With the advent of nuclear weapons they had to rethink how they fought wars. I sure hope the military vehicles aren't a joke like the cars they build there. [Edited by Don W]

Well, everything coming out of China today is top quality. That is why they have captured the manufacturing corner of the world’s economy. High quality, low prices. Unbeatable in the so-called “free market.” I heard a couple months ago that China was selling cars in Japan. I would think their cars a a cut above a Shanghai rickshaw to be able to compete in Tokyo.

We wouldn't want to gear up to fight just to have them break down and win without breaking a sweat right? China is STILL a third world country. It's bad when they have limited what you can see on the internet and ban the word "freedom" from search engines. [Edited by Don W]

It’s the “gear up” for a fight that I’m so much wearied of. If the US could slash its military budget by 75%, we’d still be spending 3 X the amount any other country on the planet spends for war. We like to think we are the smartest people on earth, and pragmatic and all that, so why not give the Pentagon a challenge: Keep America safe on a $100 billion a year, or retire.

I agree China should not be blocking Google and so on, but then, I am under the impression the United States may be doing the same thing on an more expensive scale. We really can’t know, because our current president has “signed off” on over 800 enactments of Congress, saying he will not obey the law as written. Unprecedented. Under his power he claims as Commander in Chief, he and he alone can make any decision he determines is “in the national security” arena. Unprecedented. Bush43 is acting “nice” for the November 7 election, but that is only temporary. He says the WOT will go on for decades, thus giving us the choice in 2008 not of electing a president, but in choosing our next Commander in Chief. Just as Rome was transformed from a Republic into an Empire. Times are dark over here.

Originally posted by donwhite

posted by Jihad213
With the advent of nuclear weapons they had to rethink how they fought wars. I sure hope the military vehicles aren't a joke like the cars they build there. [Edited by Don W]

Well, everything coming out of China today is top quality. That is why they have captured the manufacturing corner of the world’s economy. High quality, low prices. Unbeatable in the so-called “free market.” I heard a couple months ago that China was selling cars in Japan. I would think their cars a a cut above a Shanghai rickshaw to be able to compete in Tokyo.

Yeah, you only listen to your own twisted ideas? I REALLY hope your quality comment was a joke. Why did the chinese cars FAIL the euro crash test ratings? They almost made a new category for how crapy it did. I'd love to find the link, may be I'll have better luck this weekend.

They have cheap labor which is why they have the market cornered. I think more car companies will use china in the coming years, but not now as they think it will ruin there image- which is rightfully so. Cheap labor is the ONLY reason they have the market cornered.

I can't wait for the first chinese dealer to go up in LA, I will protest the HELL out of it. Add to the trade deficet with complete garbage.

F*** Malcolm Brickham (SP?) for bringing them over!!! Damn crappy visionary vehicles.

Originally posted by donwhite

I see the Chinese have ordreed 2 submarines from European makers. I forgot who. The subs are diesel, but said to be ‘super quite.’ Definitely upgraded WW2 German type U-Boats. Maximum depth, about 800 feet. Versus our nuclear subs going down to 2000 and coming back to tell. Diesel subs can run 22-25 knots surfaced, 15-18 knots underwater for maybe 2 hours, 4-5 knots for 24 hours. Our nuclear subs are actually faster underwater than on the surface. Around 45-48 knots, indefinitely. OK, so these Chinese subs are no threat to the US and we don’t need to build 6 of ours to confront 2 of theirs. At $2.5 billion each, that’s another 15 billion dollars saved. Thanks again, China.

Your not being serious are you? You are quite obviously not well versed on the latest submarine tech. To describe a non-nuclear, diesel electric sub as "Definitely upgraded WW2 German type U-Boats" is just stupid.

Assuming your correct about them purchasing a couple of Subs (most likely to copy tech and produce their own) from Euro countries, it would probably be from Germany, as they are the best in the world at non-nuclear submarines.

Even if they are not, we can take a German diesel electric sub as an example of the capabilities of a typical, modern non-nuclear sub.

The Type 212 is the newest non-nuclear sub in the German fleet.

It can stay submerged for up to 3 weeks without snorkelling, or up to 12 weeks using it's snorkel when needed. When submerged, it is silent with no exhaust heat at all, unlike a typical nuclear submarine.

It is faster underwater than surfaced, doing 20 knts. It's maximum depth is around 1500ft.