I couldn’t agree with you more. EXACTLY type 10 only focuses on the critical compartment to achieve the balance between weight and protection. Which is the method I mentioned before: modifying armor layout. So how come VT5 couldn’t use the same method?
1 Like
VT5 is a larger size while being significantly lighter.
So it’ll never match T-series, Type 10, or ZTZ armor performance. That much we should be able to agree on.
All I’m here is seeking evidence that somehow a 33 ton tank slightly larger than a TAM-2C somehow protects against APCBC and not just HEAT rounds for at least the turret [I don’t expect the hull to do this cause hull protection tends to not be a focus of light tanks].
I just provide you with the evidence. The interviews reveal that VT5 can withstand firepower from GENI AND II MBTs, which use both APCBC and HEAT. The designer mentioned that they achieved this level of protection by using advanced and modern composite armor, which TAM 2C lacks.
1 Like
Those are claims. I AM NOT saying those claims are incorrect, all I am saying is that they are claims.
If those claims are true that the turret armor can resist APCBC of 200mm class, maybe evidence can be found.
I will keep those claims in mind of course.
1 Like
NP. I will keep looking for solid proof as well. But please do understand that finding solid proof of the latest PLA Lightweight Main Battle Tank(user manual, exact armour profile) is almost impossible. Even if we do, I hardly believe Gaijin will use it as a source. It will probably end up as another “Leakage of CLASSIFIED document”
3 Likes
It would have to be unclassified and unrestricted as well.
Either way, sometimes we must compromise with in-game representations of our favorite vehicles even if we have knowledge of inaccuracy.
Cause while the armor may be wrong, it will be BR’d with its in-game armor in-mind regardless of what that armor is.
1 Like
Hell yeah that means u r not escaping right？then tell me why a 33-ton light MBT that weighs almost as much as the T-54 with frontal and side armor can’t even withstand heavy machine gun fire? Or does this “VT5” have a turret basket that is completely non-existent in reality?and why it got a“non exist”basket？
1 Like
I think this is clear enough, VT-5 in factory. I was wrong about it having no composite hull armor, it has composite UPF armor, and also much thicker LPF armor
3 Likes
T-55:
6.2 meter hull length.
3.37 meter width.
2.4 meter height.
Type 15/VT5:
7.5 meter hull length.
3.3 meter width.
2.5 meter height.
Type 15 also has a turret with ammo storage [+mass] whereas T-54 doesn’t. That steel from the turret has to be placed around the new ammo storage.
The hull alone adds at least a ton of mass in material for the tracks and hull itself.
Heavier engine-transmission for a superior powerpack.
So on and so forth.
This post is not defending the current armor on-dev, it is explaining how something can be the same mass.
@NCC105
Photo or screenshot of video?
Either way that’s a neat image.
2 Likes
video screenshot
1 Like
afaik the first Z in ZTQ, ZTZ does not stand for “main battle”, it instead stands for “armored” (eg ZBL, ZBD, etc). the second Z in ZTZ does stand for “main battle”
1 Like
do you like gaijin’s 33 ton wooden tank hahahaha
5 Likes
Thx for the clarification. What I am trying to say is the ZTQ 15 is required to carry out the same mission as ZTZ99 or 96 when the deployment of heavy armor units is limited. You can see that by analysing how PLA deploys its heavy armor bridage. The eastern combat zone has no ZTZ99A but only 96A and ZTQ15, which means that these two types of tanks will carry the responsibility of armor assault
1 Like
Nice job dude
and with this thickness of UPF armor in large angle, I think it’s enough evidence it’s UPF and turret can stop 100/105mm ap.
3 Likes
Here is another pic that shows the base armor of VT5. As you can see, there is a chunk of additional add-on armor between the composite armor pack and hull
6 Likes
Also, I managed to find a few inside picture of the VT5 during the test drive, that may be able to help you with the modeling.
pic1 is taken in the gunner seat. I highlighted the turret ring. There is no turret basket under it. Pic 2 is taken in the driver seat, the turret is placed on the left portion of the picture. Again, empty space under the turret ring.
Link:
【【军武零距离】VT-5轻量化坦克】 【军武零距离】VT-5轻量化坦克_哔哩哔哩_bilibili
6 Likes
@Stona_WT
Hi there, I found some pictures that might help you modeling the VT5 inside layout.
pic2 is taken in the gunner seat. I highlighted the turret ring. There is no turret basket under it. Pic3 is taken in the driver seat, the turret is placed on the left portion of the picture. Again, empty space under the turret ring.
Link:
【【军武零距离】VT-5轻量化坦克】 【军武零距离】VT-5轻量化坦克_哔哩哔哩_bilibili
4 Likes
How was the VT5’s armor designed? As a light main battle tank supposedly capable of withstanding attacks from first and second-generation main battle tanks, how is it possible for its front to be easily penetrated by machine gun fire?
1 Like