China Develops New "Super Tank"

Rich Thomas

Rumors about a new, more potent variant of the Chinese Type 99 main battle tank began circulating shortly after Xinhua News Agency released photos of what looked like a new and improved version of that armored vehicle in early 2008. As more photographic imagery and more information has come out of China, a clearer picture of the new "super tank," the Type 99G, has become available.

The visual differences indicate that the Type 99G has a new Active Protection System (APS) and an independent thermal imaging system for the tank commander. The tank also seems to sport a new electro-optical countermeasures package and a new laser designator warning system. Collectively, these improvements in the sensors and electronics mean the Type 99G is better able to find targets, more aware of when it is being targeted by an enemy, and better able to use small missiles to deflect or destroy incoming attacks.

The Type 99G main battle tank is also rumored to have a new diesel engine, developing 2,100 hp. This represents an increase of 600 hp over the engine used in previous versions of the tank. Some sources also indicate that the Type 99G uses improved materials technology in the armor and possibly the engine, resulting in a tank lighter tank with just as much armored protection. The Type 99A2, the previous version of the tank, was thought to weigh 58 tons, while the 99G is thought to weigh 54 tons. The road speed, off-road speed and range for the new Type 99G all remain unknown, but if the information about the engine and the construction bear out, the tank's power-to-weight ratio rises from 27.8 hp per ton to 38.8 hp per ton. By contrast, the American M-1A1 tank weighs 60 tons, has a 1,500 hp gas turbine engine, and has a power-to-weight ratio of 24.5 hp per ton.

Although little hard information about this latest Chinese tank is available to open source analysts, most experts believe the Chinese are adept enough to produce a first-rate armored vehicle. Larry Wortzel, vice chairman of the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, rated Chinese armor and communications equipment as good and their weapons as fair, but commented that their engine technology was poor. Wortzel indicated that the Chinese must still go to Europe or Russia for high performance engine designs and automotive components, and said "even with all their work on big Volvo buses and large trucks under license, they don't seem to have mastered that part of it yet."

Published by Rich Thomas - Featured Contributor in Travel

A Kentuckian and longtime resident of Washington, DC with an MA in international affairs, Thomas splits his time between American and Portugal. He works as a freelance writer both in print and online, writin...  View profile

2 Comments

Post a Comment
  • Bill Hanks8/6/2011

    :)

  • Bill Hanks8/6/2011

    :)

Displaying Comments

To comment, please sign in to your Yahoo! account, or sign up for a new account.