132 (1959) Qīngxíng tǎnkè. Chinese first entirely domestic light tank

[Would you like to see this in-game?]
  • Yes
  • No
0 voters

caid’s suggestion #157


I want to make a suggestion for an interesting Chinese light tank, the 132 with 76mm

first of all, the tank’s name is 132轻型坦克. it can be translated by 132 light tanks but read as 132 Qīngxíng tǎnkè. it was not called WZ132 or object 132. it would be a huge mistake to give the wrong name which can lead to confusion with either a Russian tank or another Chinese tank.

the history of the 132 light tank started back in 1958 when China ordered the development of a new “modern” light tank. the concept was initially to create a tank weighting 16 for the sothern region of China. a downscalled version of the Type 59. the first concept been the 59-16 who might had been build but the information are making. a second concept who was officially named 131 light tank was build in 1959, this tank had issue with the engine who was too strong and the 85mm with autoloader. it was fallow by a refined design which was called the 132.
initially designed with an auto-loader and rangefinder, hydraulic transmission, and hydropneumatic suspension those features were dropped on the way due to technical issues. some been issue during the testing on the 131 light tanks, and others have been production issues. finally, the tank was designed much simpler with mechanical transmission and suspension, and a cast turret sometimes with a coincidence rangefinder and a vertical stabilizer. otherwise just a simple rudimentary tank. still, the tank offered decent mobility performance. the main issue was the armament which was a 76mm based on the Type 54 gun which was in turn a Chinese copy of the Soviet Zis-3 or based on the D-56T. it is unclear what was the exact gun name, some state it be the 60式76坦克炮 or 60-76T坦克炮 which could both translate as the Type 60 76mm tank gun. built by Factory 674 the tank was tested in Changxindian Tank School in Beijing. the tank featured a downgraded version of the Type 58’s engine which was reduced to 414 hp. the tank performed so well a production of 28 additional tanks were ordered for the National Parade of 1960. it was the same year the 132 light tank started his endurance test. the purpose was to test the reliability of the mechanic. the tank shows a few issues on that matter but nothing out of the ordinary. the autoloader were dropped at the same time as the gun couldn’t fire normally. The parade was finally cancelled and the 132 project was finally reformed. notably on the firepower. the 76mm was just too weak and the ammunition was hard to supply. with the withdrawal of the Type 54 and Zis-3 guns from the services, there was not going to be any more ammunition produced. ultimately the 132 were used as training vehicles and not tanks in full military service. the adoption of the Type 62 light tank which was a further refined tank based on the 132. Type 62 was more basic, cheaper and more effective than the 132.

Firepower

while the gun might seem impressive. it is not as good as it looks. it’s mostly due to the proportion of the tank which makes the gun look so high. the gun is called 60式76毫米坦克炮 and was designed by Factory 247. at the time it was regarded as a success. the gun was not completely finalized before 1962 and was the first domestic design made by China. this gun happens to be rather weak, which is one of the reasons they finally decided to go with the 85mm. the performance of the gun is unknown. the gun is either a derivative of the Soviet D-56TS or the Chinese Type 54 (which is a Chinese copy of the Zis-3). both guns have relatively the same performance. one of the features that led to the cancellation of this gun was the incapacity to have modern ammunition or to produce it. it could mean the BK-354M HEAT-FS was not available. the 132 was initially designed to have an autoloader, but this autoloader was not working. it was just not loading the round after shooting the one in the breech. the autoloader was removed and the tanks were successfully tested with manual loading. a decent feature of this tank is the vertical stabilizer. this shall give this tank a pretty welcome offensive ability. another is the Coincidence rangefinder visible on the turret. this allows the tank to be more effective in the longer range… if you think the rounds are strong enough to penetrate a target far enough to need the rangefinder. the elevation of the gun is unknown, but the -4 to + 22 of the 211 amphibious tank sounds like a good guess to me. the turret was intended to have hydraulic power. but it was also dropped. without it the rotation would be around 10°/sec. with it, it would be around 24°/sec. it’s up to Gaijin to decide if they want to give it or not. i would suggest giving it as it had it at some point and the model 1960 which is going to be suggested too didn’t have it. 26 rounds are carried in the tank. 24 are on the side of the hull next to the driver while 2 are in the turret. if there is so little ammunition carried, it was surely because it was intended to have an autoloader which was removed. still, even with 26 rounds, most players will be capable of playing a whole battle with ease. they will just need to watch their ammunition. the turret also features a coaxial machine gun. A roof-mounted 14.5mm heavy machine gun could be mounted, but it is not present in any photo even if the pintle is there.

Mobility
the tank’s weight of the model of 1959 is unknown. Thanks to the bad archiving of the time, it might be never known. but the model of 1973 is known to be 22.5 tonnes with a heavier and more powerful 100mm gun. the model of 1959 was controlled at a weight somewhere between 18 and 20 tonnes. for some reason the weight is vague, so I guess we should give it the middleweight of 19 tonnes until it’s specified more accurately. the engine is a 12150L一7 providing 309 kw or 414 hp. this is enough to power the tank to a speed of up to 65 km/h. it is to assume the transmission and gearbox are already the same as the Type 62.

Protection
the tank is a precursor/prototype of the Type 62. As such, it is almost certain it had the same armour level. this gives the tank a pretty decent protection level for a light tank. capable of taking a hit of some weaker gun, it allows it to have a versatile role and act as a medium tank if the situation allows it. this version should fall in a BR significantly lower than the Type 62 due to the weak armament. it allows us to assume it will face early 75mm with medium velocity. tank such as the T-34-76 and M4 medium tank would not always be capable of penetrating it in every situation. The chassis has 35mm of armour well sloped which makes it capable of taking a direct hit. the turret has approximately 50mm which is also fairly thick. The low profile cupola makes it have less weakness. The advantage stops there as the crew is rather small, with 3 men for this specific version and the side armour is only 25mm.

Sources

Photo

















4 Likes

Absolutely +1, for the tech tree. Do you think it would come between the 211 and Type 63 – given the stabiliser, rangefinder, and type 62-esque mobility/armour – or below the 211, because of the bad pen?

1 Like

surely bellow the 211. it would perform close to the M24 chaffee.

the mobility is good. the reverse is not great. the top speed is pretty good.
the armor is okay, it can take a bit of a hit, the crew is very small, the tank is also rather small
the firepower is weaker than the 75mm from the Sherman. there is a range finder, but with the rounds it has, it would barely matter, the stabilizer is a good asset, but the turret rotation and gun depression are not good.
I think it would fit well around 3.3 or 3.7. As it happens, it’s also a rank who is lacking of real Chinese design.

i also suggested the 211 amphibious tank with the same gun. it’s still pending.

2 Likes

Excellent. Really hope we see this and China’s other tracked light tanks

1 Like

Any domestic and interesting Chinese tank gets a +1 from me.

1 Like

+1 at 4.0 for this and 3.3 for the basic one

This has a turret traverse comparable to T-34-76, higher mobility, less armour, worse gun but with stab and LRF.

Edit: normal range finder

1 Like

it’s not a laser rangefinder but an optical rangefinder. like those found in the early M47 patton

2 Likes

I remember reading a while ago in the old Chinese forums that the Chinese 76mm is actually more comparable to the German 75mm than to the Soviet 76mm in penetration (some mainland Chinese user can verify this)

If given powered traverse it could easily go to the same BR bracket as the 76mm Shermans and the T-34-85s

1 Like

https://weibo.com/ttarticle/p/show?id=2309404650975800459811

Highlight: muzzle velocity of 1000m/s, 100mm RHA penetration at 1500m, shell type unknown

1 Like

that could be possible. but the source say nothing about the gun’s velocity, unless you subscribe to Temu and even after you subscribe it do not allow you to read the rest.

there is contradictory information bout the gun’s performance. many source state it was weaker than the 75mm Used by the M41 and even weaker than the 17-pounder of Russian 85mm. but they aren’t saying much about the gun performence

1 Like

The section in question

this is unlikely to be correct.

it would make this gun more effective than the 85mm against the tanks. it was precisely the reason they changed it for the 85mm, It packed more firepower. the 85mm is also a bit longer which makes it likely to have a bit more velocity. the main reason they wanted the 76mm as far as i can tell was because of the autoloader.

but this source is valuable as much as any, i do not have any proper source to state the true velocity. to only it seems off. A 76mm having a velocity of 1000 m/sec shall easily get a better penetration. a 75mm is has a round weighing about 6.5 kg. even the simple APHE can get to 120mm at this distance. 100mm at 1500m is the penetration of a simple basic AP round in a 76mm with a velocity just below 800 m/sec. if the velocity is 1000 m/sec, they would just need to make the projectile a solid shot and it would get around 140 mm at the same distance. they could hardly be so bad as to manage to nerf the projectile by mistake.

the 76mm M1 gun can achieve the same penetration with a velocity of 792 m/sec and an APHE

1 Like

it would be complicated. but i will check it out anyway even if at first view, the data seem to be unrealistic. i will experiment with the know Chinese rounds for the 76mm and the know Russian rounds, and see if the velocity of 1000 m/sec can give a penetration close to 100m at 1500m. i will do it once I am back from work.

maybe it would surprise me and give something that make sense.

2 Likes

turn out one WW2 soviet round could achieve this 100mm at 1500m with an MV 1000 m/sec (if we assume there is no angle)

The BR-350A (MD-5 fuse) which is an APHEBC would get pretty much around 100 mm of penetration at 1500m
this is the result I get when I give the round the velocity of 1000 m/sec and use the Ballistic Coeficient of the French PCOT-51P which is comparable in speed, size, and weight

This also matches the withdrawal of the Type 54 76mm field gun which was also using this round and the cancellation of the Type 60 due to the unavailable rounds and the incapacity to make better rounds. in 1960, 158mm at point blank is rather weak for a tank. the 57mm of the ZSU-57-2 achieved similar performance. the American 76mm M32 and the French 75mm SA50 were achieving 30-40% better anti-tank performance with conventional rounds despite having been designed 10 years earlier. that seems to check out. I will use this infos until more reliable info comes out.

1 Like