JohnAbrams21 Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 PGZ-07?http://www.armyrecognition.com/china_artillery_vehicles_and_weapon_systems_uk/pgz-07_twin_35mm_self-propelled_anti-aircraft_gun_data_sheet_specifications_description_pictures.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KV7 Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 PGZ-07?http://www.armyrecognition.com/china_artillery_vehicles_and_weapon_systems_uk/pgz-07_twin_35mm_self-propelled_anti-aircraft_gun_data_sheet_specifications_description_pictures.html Interesting as modern SPAAG are getting to be quite rare thing - although this can apparently take 4 missiles it would be fair to say it is a gun based system. The Chinese truck mounted CIWS platform (LD-2000) also quite interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark_Falcon Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 PGZ-07?http://www.armyrecognition.com/china_artillery_vehicles_and_weapon_systems_uk/pgz-07_twin_35mm_self-propelled_anti-aircraft_gun_data_sheet_specifications_description_pictures.html Interesting as modern SPAAG are getting to be quite rare thing - although this can apparently take 4 missiles it would be fair to say it is a gun based system. The Chinese truck mounted CIWS platform (LD-2000) also quite interesting. Where are the missiles mounted? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KV7 Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 (edited) Missiles can apparently be mounted outside of the guns, 2X2, although maybe it was a project that never was carried through. I might be wrong though. Edited May 3, 2017 by KV7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KV7 Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 Here we go:'The PGZ07 can be upgraded with the addition of 2 x 2 FL-3000 / HQ-10 missiles with a maximum range of 9000 m, although currently operational PGZ07 units have guns only.'http://defenseupdates.blogspot.com.au/2012/12/china-upgrades-tracked-spaag-from-pgz04.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark_Falcon Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 Here we go: 'The PGZ07 can be upgraded with the addition of 2 x 2 FL-3000 / HQ-10 missiles with a maximum range of 9000 m, although currently operational PGZ07 units have guns only.' http://defenseupdates.blogspot.com.au/2012/12/china-upgrades-tracked-spaag-from-pgz04.html Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr King Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 I imagine SPAAG's are going to make a come back as militaries wrestle with how to best defeat drones and micro drones. Probably going to see combo SPAAG / Missile / ECM platforms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KV7 Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 Note China has an AHEAD type round for its 35mm gun which is used on quite a few platforms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark_Falcon Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 I imagine SPAAG's are going to make a come back as militaries wrestle with how to best defeat drones and micro drones. Probably going to see combo SPAAG / Missile / ECM platforms. Or laser platforms such as what the US Army has worked up for the Stryker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr King Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 I imagine SPAAG's are going to make a come back as militaries wrestle with how to best defeat drones and micro drones. Probably going to see combo SPAAG / Missile / ECM platforms. Or laser platforms such as what the US Army has worked up for the Stryker. Yeah agreed, though I don't think most will have the laser tech. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lastdingo Posted May 4, 2017 Share Posted May 4, 2017 I imagine SPAAG's are going to make a come back as militaries wrestle with how to best defeat drones and micro drones. Probably going to see combo SPAAG / Missile / ECM platforms. Drones can fly between trees and buildings, even inside buildings. Dedicated vehciles would too rarely be in a position to intercept.I rather expect RCWS (remote controlled weapon stations) with 5.56 to 20 mm calibre gun and a +90°/-15° x 360° field of fire with 24/7 useful sensor and laser rangefinder.The 12.7 to 20 mm guns would also be relevant against helicopters. Software-based radios CAN be programmed to serve as jammers. Vehicle-mounted radars could thus be linked to a simple (Yagi) directional antenna mounted on the RCWS and directed at drones. This antenna could jam (particularly if several vehicles are doing this at the same time) the radio downlink of the drone IF the drone's radio link is covered by the range of bandwidths of the vehicle radios. Cheap missiles like RBS-23 (likely too simple to defeat high end combat aircraft) can serve as battleield ShoRAD against expensive munitions (cruise missiles, ATACMS-like missiles, drones above 5,000 ft)), while expensive missiles (vertically launched air combat missile derivatives such as AIM-120, Meteor, MICA, IRIS-T SL etc) may serve as air defence against high end platforms. At the lowest end small arms (possibly including shotguns) and nets (particularly for bivouac) may serve as defence againt sparrow bird-sized micro drones.Autonomous small bird-like drones with EFP warhead and days of endurance could become a terrible threat to the troops (and the tires + other exposed important components of vehicles). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonJ Posted May 14, 2017 Share Posted May 14, 2017 Training that included parachuting a few ZBD03s More in spoiler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonJ Posted May 14, 2017 Share Posted May 14, 2017 Continued.. more in spoiler http://slide.mil.news.sina.com.cn/k/slide_8_193_50724.html#p=6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonJ Posted June 14, 2017 Share Posted June 14, 2017 More in spoiler The last two said to be from Lhasa,Tibet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavin-Phillips Posted June 14, 2017 Share Posted June 14, 2017 Nice looking vehicle. I'm not too sure of what to make from the results of a Google search on the ZBD-03 which came up with "The ZBD-03 is derived from the BMD-3", is there any truth to that? The Russian airforce still uses the venerable IL-76 to ferry around BMD's among others, what kind of transport aircraft does the PLAAF use for the same purpose? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonJ Posted June 14, 2017 Share Posted June 14, 2017 Nice looking vehicle. I'm not too sure of what to make from the results of a Google search on the ZBD-03 which came up with "The ZBD-03 is derived from the BMD-3", is there any truth to that? The Russian airforce still uses the venerable IL-76 to ferry around BMD's among others, what kind of transport aircraft does the PLAAF use for the same purpose? I can't say much for the ZBD-03. They have 17 or so Il-76s but they recently developed their own version called the Y-20. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavin-Phillips Posted June 14, 2017 Share Posted June 14, 2017 I can't say much for the ZBD-03. They have 17 or so Il-76s but they recently developed their own version called the Y-20. Thanks JasonJ, that Y-20 aircraft looks quite the business! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nemo Posted June 16, 2017 Share Posted June 16, 2017 (edited) Nice looking vehicle. I'm not too sure of what to make from the results of a Google search on the ZBD-03 which came up with "The ZBD-03 is derived from the BMD-3", is there any truth to that? No. While there may be some subsystems that are copied (e.g. air drop/landing system), the ZBD-03 is definitely not a copy. For one thing, ZBD-03 is front engine with door in the back, while BMD series is rear engine with hatches at top. Edited June 17, 2017 by nemo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonJ Posted June 19, 2017 Share Posted June 19, 2017 (edited) Edited June 19, 2017 by JasonJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Warford Posted August 2, 2017 Share Posted August 2, 2017 Impressive video of the parade celebrating the 90th anniversary of the PLA...it's a long video, so you might want to start at about 30:30... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Warford Posted August 21, 2017 Share Posted August 21, 2017 Here are two grabs from a pretty good Norinco promotional video showing both the VT-4 and the VT-5 live-firing on the range. The VT-4 hit the target panel but missed the tank image. The VT-5 did better, hitting pretty much on the turret ring of the tank image painted on the target panel... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KV7 Posted August 21, 2017 Share Posted August 21, 2017 (edited) The VT-5 is a strange project. It is to heavy to be air mobile and lacks the firepower to engage modern armor. I think a missile/cannon combo would make more sense, even more so if the cannon has some AA capability. The armor is also going to fall into the middle ground where it is more than enough to stop cannon but not enough to stop many dedicated AT weapons. Edited August 22, 2017 by KV7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonJ Posted August 21, 2017 Share Posted August 21, 2017 The VT-5 is a strange project. It is too heavy too be air mobile and lacks the firepower to engage modern armor. I think a missile/cannon combo would make more sense, even more so if the cannon has some AA capability. The armor is also going to fall into the middle ground where it is more than enough to stop cannon but not enough to stop many dedicated AT weapons.It's main purpose seems to be for the export market. So in that case it is probably meant for a certain niche within the AFV market. Maybe it's targeting customers that are mostly still using T-55s and are still too poor to afford anything like a T-90S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KV7 Posted August 21, 2017 Share Posted August 21, 2017 (edited) The VT-5 is a strange project. It is too heavy too be air mobile and lacks the firepower to engage modern armor. I think a missile/cannon combo would make more sense, even more so if the cannon has some AA capability. The armor is also going to fall into the middle ground where it is more than enough to stop cannon but not enough to stop many dedicated AT weapons.It's main purpose seems to be for the export market. So in that case it is probably meant for a certain niche within the AFV market. Maybe it's targeting customers that are mostly still using T-55s and are still too poor to afford anything like a T-90S. I don't think it will be cheaper than a Type 85-IIA (as exported to Pakistan) or much cheaper than a Type 96 even and they at least have a gun that is a serious threat to any armor with modern ammunition. Edited August 21, 2017 by KV7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nemo Posted August 21, 2017 Share Posted August 21, 2017 The VT-5 is a strange project. It is too heavy too be air mobile and lacks the firepower to engage modern armor. I think a missile/cannon combo would make more sense, even more so if the cannon has some AA capability. The armor is also going to fall into the middle ground where it is more than enough to stop cannon but not enough to stop many dedicated AT weapons. China developed the light tank VT-5 is based from for it's military requirement -- operating in the rice paddy of the Southern China and mountains of Tibet. Whether it fits the requirement of the potential customers is another matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now