Norinco VT-4 MBT

[Beast]

hah, if the stabilizer is off, why do they make a video for us to watch, what is the thing to watch? What kind of idiot will make such a film in the exhibition.

I mean you should say what somebody else can believe you. Even I am doubt about VT4 is really better than T96A, from the rough statistic may be, the details may be not. Generally VT4 < 99A2 < Leopard A7, that is the sequence I can believe, your ordering, i am sorry.

Yes i brougt Leopard A7 to this thread, so what? So I am responsible to give you all information about A7? I am not a spy, you asked a wrong person. What is wrong with you?

Once again u are avoiding my question. Why would they on the stabilizer when they are doing obstacles course? They want us to know how good it's off road capabilities not how good it's stabilizer of gun when going those slope.

And China is both the maker of Type96a and later the VT4. Why would they make a inferior tank out of a non top of line tank for export, just to shoot their own foot. You just make comment for the sake.

 

[Zarvan]

The 50th stupid thread with Sufi zarvan repeatin the same thing again and again..all over a tid bid from a forum member..


Going for MBT-3000 doesn't even make sense when HIT is working on AK-2!

Mr if you look at history we always had several kind off different Tanks and I think we would go for both MBT-3000 and AK-2 @Dazzler if you can confirm from Army it would be great

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Mr if you look at history we always had several kind off different Tanks and I think we would go for both MBT-3000 and AK-2 @Dazzler if you can confirm from Army it would be great

That would create a logistical nightmare:

AK-I
AK-II
T-80UD
AZ
MBT-4000
T-85IIPs(even if it is phased out.. Still a lot of different types of tanks).


Again AK-II is the new high end tank..

 

[Zarvan]

That would create a logistical nightmare:

AK-I
AK-II
T-80UD
AZ
MBT-4000
T-85IIPs(even if it is phased out.. Still a lot of different types of tanks).


Again AK-II is the new high end tank..

That is why I am saying some body from forum may be mods or some member with inside sources need to confirm weather we are testing this Tank and if yes why we want to induct it when we are working on AK-2

 

[nalan]

Come on, if the stabilizer is off, the gun is stabilized by whom?

What is your point? Donot debate for debate, yah? My fellow.

As a Chines, moment I have no bare face to say VT4 overcomes Leopard A7, whatever..... just say what you like.

 

[aliaselin]

Generally VT4 < 99A2 < Leopard A7

Firstly, there is no tank called 99A2
secondly, there is no tank called Leopard A7 but Leopard A7+
Thirdly, Leopard used watered down Chobham armour
Fourthly, some types of Leopard A7+ upgraded from Leopard A4, which have only L44；as a matter of fact, there is no Leopard A7+ in service

 

[nk2120132471]

it doesn't matter whether MBT3000 is AK II or not.

It's more important to see what system AK II will have.Gas-hydraulic suspension? ukrain6TD-3 engine?

And though korea dont have a long history of making tank,it still make K1 and K2.which seems to be a competable tank.With systems of foreign country,you can make a tank which fits your country.not that difficult

 

[Zarvan]

The 50th stupid thread with Sufi zarvan repeatin the same thing again and again..all over a tid bid from a forum member..


Going for MBT-3000 doesn't even make sense when HIT is working on AK-2!

That is why I am saying some body from this forum needs to confirm from Army weather we are testing this Tank and if yes why when we are working on AK 2

 

[aliaselin]

first hand resource

So many nonsense to make up to be scientific
Whey you talk about Chinese things, where is your citation? You even did not know what you were really talking about but you said you were scientific

 

[kolinsky]

Once again u are avoiding my question. Why would they on the stabilizer when they are doing obstacles course? They want us to know how good it's off road capabilities not how good it's stabilizer of gun when going those slope.

And China is both the maker of Type96a and later the VT4. Why would they make a inferior tank out of a non top of line tank for export, just to shoot their own foot. You just make comment for the sake.

Assume that the NORINCO gays idiotically swtich off the stabilizer when they are doing obstacle course without showing the function of stabilization, and later they will show the stabilization in another course with obstacles or just on an even ground, or they even donot want to show the stabilizations at all to imply this shit VT4 even donot have stabilizer at all. Whatever the video fits to which condition, thhere are two conclusion, and one is correct: The NORINCO is idiot, or VT4 is rubbish. May be the 3rd choice, yes, you are!

Please watch the video again, make it clearly, what is showing, they are showing the horizontal stabilization , but the vertical is not, that is a nice assumption. If they do this, i will say there is no vertical stabilization at all. Otherwise, why they are so reluctantly to show? If so, your fail the exhibition and makes your product rubbish.

What is an exhibition, they want to show some thing, want to persuade others to buy something, not to test their production. Just have common sence.

 

[Europa]

@kolinsky

you are wrong.

i am not a norinco gay, nor am i a chinese, i would still say, you are simply wrong. just because vertical stabilization wasn't video graphed, you can't say, vertical stabilization was absent. yes, you can say that vertical stabilization should have been video recorded and shown, thats a good suggestion. but you are acting like an obstinate child.

as far as i know, vertical stabilization is not a big deal and a new generation tank like this must be having that feature. norinco was not born yesterday, they are more professional than you may ever imagine. and also customers are not stupids, they know this tank is worth the money. thats why they are going to buy it.

the actual issue is price for customers, not some idiotic technical claim as you are making here. you simply can't base your assumptions and draw a conclusion based on some video recording which was meant to be for rough demonstration. i can assure you that vertical stabilization is present there, you will see in future. please stop acting like a child! professional posters are laughing at you.

 

[kolinsky]

So many nonsense of your explanation. Why not you say when combat aircraft doing acrobatic exercise shall on the fire control radar.

You only on the necessary device when needed. In VT4 case, they are doing obstacles course to demonstrate off road capabilities. Why would they need to on the gun stabilizer? Would it improve its off road better? The answer is No. You can never judge a tank main gun stabilizer by its travelling mode unless it's fire on the move.

I said the stabilizer is on, just check the video again. I am not doing a logic exercise with you. Unless you tell me all that video shown is done manually, otherwise your point is undermined.

Please check other tank demo video. The off road capabilities is not demonstrated alone. To drive a tank off road is the basic function of a tank, nothing to show. In the biathlon, it is possible the gun is not targeted, but in an exhibition, they always targeted. When a tank pass over obstacles it can also aim to the target. This is very important to a modern tank. In the video, the gun is obviously targeted to some where. So I said the responding time is longer than Leopard, otherwise the responsing time is counted as infinity. The responsing time is from the changes happened to adapt the change. If there is no response, the time is infinity, and logically also longer than any tank even a T34.

When I was in ILA this year. Aircraft I cannot tell. The attack hilicopters is targeted in some cases. Have you ever been in an exhibition?

 

[kolinsky]

@kolinsky

you are wrong.

i am not a norinco gay, nor am i a chinese, i would still say, you are simply wrong. just because vertical stabilization wasn't video graphed, you can't say, vertical stabilization was absent. yes, you can say that vertical stabilization should have been video recorded and shown, thats a good suggestion. but you are acting like an obstinate child.

as far as i know, vertical stabilization is not a big deal and a new generation tank like this must be having that feature. norinco was not born yesterday, they are more professional than you may ever imagine. and also customers are not stupids, they know this tank is worth the money. thats why they are going to buy it.

the actual issue is price for customers, not some idiotic technical claim as you are making here. you simply can't base your assumptions and draw a conclusion based on some video recording which was meant to be for rough demonstration. i can assure you that vertical stabilization is present there, you will see in future. please stop acting like a child! professional posters are laughing at you.

The absence of vertical stabilization is not my opinion. The @Beast gay made the assumption and use this assumption to rebut me #83. @nalan even gave me a picture to show me the virtical was stabilized by a stick #95. Even so they wanted to tell, VT4 is better than T96A.

Anybody knows there is vertical stabilization, but they also should show it. The responsing time is very important to the performance of stabilizer. You cannot say, I have the stabilizer, so can we skip it in the show? I will ask why? Is there some tech. problems? There is big difference, if the gun takes one minute or one second. That is my opinion, from I saw in Germany, the responsing time of a Leopard is shorter. I cannot feel the responsing time, but VT4, I feel it. It is my opinion, it's nothing about nationalism, or national pride. Even there is someone @aliaselin want to prove that I am not a Chinese.

The demo shown us the gun is targeted to somewhere, otherwise the moving of the gun and the rotating turret is meanlingless. For a professional show, the absence of stabilizer must be made by an idiot. If they donot including the stabilizer, they implies the stabilizer is not ready, that is very important. They show functions and performances in purpose, and the time limit constraints the number of scenarios, so they have to show as many functions as possible in one scenario. The stabilizer is always shown with off road disorder sections.

I said argue for the sake of arguing is not right.

So many nonsense of your explanation. Why not you say when combat aircraft doing acrobatic exercise shall on the fire control radar.

You only on the necessary device when needed. In VT4 case, they are doing obstacles course to demonstrate off road capabilities. Why would they need to on the gun stabilizer? Would it improve its off road better? The answer is No. You can never judge a tank main gun stabilizer by its travelling mode unless it's fire on the move.

Why not, why not, why not????? The question is not why it should be switched on, the question is why not! It is not should be switched on, it ought be, it must be, it has to be switched on. It is not driving a tank in your garden, it is a professional show. It is not a show you can stabilize the gun with a stick, if you are really want to sale the tank. Please give me facts, the stabilizer is off. I watched the aiming of the gun, you should tell why you have this freaky assumption not logical reasoning, say what you saw.

 

[Beast]

The absence of vertical stabilization is not my opinion. The @Beast gay made the assumption and use this assumption to rebut me #83. @nalan even gave me a picture to show me the virtical was stabilized by a stick #95. Even so they wanted to tell, VT4 is better than T96A.

Anybody knows there is vertical stabilization, but they also should show it. The responsing time is very important to the performance of stabilizer. You cannot say, I have the stabilizer, so can we skip it in the show? I will ask why? Is there some tech. problems? There is big difference, if the gun takes one minute or one second. That is my opinion, from I saw in Germany, the responsing time of a Leopard is shorter. I cannot feel the responsing time, but VT4, I feel it. It is my opinion, it's nothing about nationalism, or national pride. Even there is someone @aliaselin want to prove that I am not a Chinese.

The demo shown us the gun is targeted to somewhere, otherwise the moving of the gun and the rotating turret is meanlingless. For a professional show, the absence of stabilizer must be made by an idiot. If they donot including the stabilizer, they implies the stabilizer is not ready, that is very important. They show functions and performances in purpose, and the time limit constraints the number of scenarios, so they have to show as many functions as possible in one scenario. The stabilizer is always shown with off road disorder sections.

I said argue for the sake of arguing is not right.


Why not, why not, why not????? The question is not why it should be switched on, the question is why not! It is not should be switched on, it ought be, it must be, it has to be switched on. It is not driving a tank in your garden, it is a professional show. It is not a show you can stabilize the gun with a stick, if you are really want to sale the tank. Please give me facts, the stabilizer is off. I watched the aiming of the gun, you should tell why you have this freaky assumption not logical reasoning, say what you saw.

The stabilizer is clearly shown in the last 30 seconds of the video where the tank made a salute to the VIP. Off road and they definitely off it. As simple as that. VIP will be more concern about its off road obstacles performance, firing accuracy and stabilizer which is clearly demonstrated in the few last moment and mind you. Whole chassis turning and turret gun is almost complete stagnant.

And you are the one making assumption doing off road course will need stabilizer. Nobody is buying your idea.

 

[1ong1ong]

I said the stabilizer is on, just check the video again. I am not doing a logic exercise with you. Unless you tell me all that video shown is done manually, otherwise your point is undermined.

Please check other tank demo video. The off road capabilities is not demonstrated alone. To drive a tank off road is the basic function of a tank, nothing to show. In the biathlon, it is possible the gun is not targeted, but in an exhibition, they always targeted. When a tank pass over obstacles it can also aim to the target. This is very important to a modern tank. In the video, the gun is obviously targeted to some where. So I said the responding time is longer than Leopard, otherwise the responsing time is counted as infinity. The responsing time is from the changes happened to adapt the change. If there is no response, the time is infinity, and logically also longer than any tank even a T34.

When I was in ILA this year. Aircraft I cannot tell. The attack hilicopters is targeted in some cases. Have you ever been in an exhibition?

Do you know what's the meaning of "on" of a tank stabilisation system?

1) The system works on different modes. They may turn on one or both of the 2-axis (H & V).

2) Even with both of H&V are activated, it still contains sub-mode. You have option to turn on range finder only. It means the gun will not be stabilised even the stabilisation system is on---- for advanced MBT fire controlling system, range finder and gun are not fixed physically like what we see on T-72, you have to on/off together, buddy.

This active-standby mode has its advantage, it will not only save a lot of energy, but also always be fire-ready.