Daily Archives: June 21, 2016

Eurosatory 2016: IHS Jane’s talks about North China Industries (Norinco) Artillery Systems

IHS Jane's

Published on Jun 21, 2016

Christopher F Foss talks about North China Industries (Norinco) Artillery Systems on display at Eurosatory 2016.

****-END-****

PLZ-05 155mm: Details

Norinco AH4 gun-howitzer: Details

Analysis of MBT-3000 vs OPLOT protection level

There seems to be no question in terms of the modern FCS on the MBT-3000 and the powerpack but it seems the weak point of the MBT-3000 as I myself have concern on is the protection level.

An article in the blog “Below the Turret Ring” dated Freitag, 27. Mai 2016 also pointed out that the protection level seems less than the OPLOT.

However, I understand that there are very little choice it was either MBT-3000, T-90A, T-90MS the later two are obviously very dated but reliable and battle proven.

If the Chinese threw in better turret and side protection I have no doubt that this will be a good MBT

Quote:

“The MBT-3000 however appears to be a major downgrade compared to the T-84M tank in many aspects. The coverage with explosive reactive armor (ERA) is rather low and has even a few gaps in the frontal profile. The quality of the ERA is also questionable, compared to the heavy multi-layer Duplet ERA of the T-84 (using up to three ERA layers) the Chinese ERA seems to be considerable thinner. While the MBT-3000’s ERA solution is only applied to the frontal area of the vehicle, the T-84 has ERA protecting most of the tank’s sides and roof.
In general the protection appears to be downgraded, as the turret design of Chinese tanks provides less armor coverage along the frontal arc and reduces the safe maneuvering angles. Unless the Chinese composite armor is a lot stronger, it seems very unlikely that the MBT-3000 can reach the same protection level as a T-84 Oplot-M tank.
In terms of FCS, both tanks seem to have different benefits. While the T-84 Oplot-M follows the old Soviet tradition of having separated day and night sights for the gunner, which unnecessarily increases the complexity of the tank and can affect the gunner negatively, it also has a much larger commander’s sight with unobstructed view to the left and right sides. On the MBT-3000 the gunner has a unitary sight for day and night operations, but the commander’s sight is smaller (which can affect the performance) and it’s field of view will be reduced due to the gunner’s sight having a similar overall height.”

End Quote

Read full article: HERE

MBT-3000: Details

OPLOT (T-84M): DetailsRoyal Thailand Army at work 3

U.S. Navy Deploys 4 Growler Aircraft,120 Troops to Philippines Amid South China Sea Tensions

Breitbart-Logo

by EDWIN MORA 20 Jun 2016

The U.S. Navy has deployed four E/A-18G Growler aircraft and 120 troops have arrived to assist the Philippines with monitoring its sea borders amid continuing tensions over territorial claims in the South China Sea.

Stars and Stripes reports that the U.S. carrier-based electronic warfare planes and Navy personnel arrived at the former American Clark Air Base in the Philippines’ northernmost island, Luzon, on Wednesday. The detachment will train Philippine military pilots and “support routine operations that enhance regional maritime domain awareness and assure access to the air and maritime domains in accordance with international law,” said the U.S. 7th Fleet in a statement issued Wednesday.

According to the 7th Fleet, the VAQ-138 expeditionary squadron detachment from Whidbey Island, WA is at least the second American military group to deploy to the Philippines since Pacific Command established a new U.S. air contingent program in April. The contingent was approved by “the Government of the Philippines to promote interoperability and security cooperation,” notes the Navy fleet, adding that the Philippine military “offered to host the U.S. Air Contingent at Clark Air Base to train with their FA-50 fighter pilots and support units which are located there.”

China, which claims to own virtually the entire South China Sea, has built numerous artificial islands on the reefs of the region’s Spratly Islands and used them to develop military and civilian infrastructure. The Spratly Islands have become the epicenter of mounting tensions between China and the United States.

China has asserted ownership of both natural and artificial islands in the South China Sea. “In recent years, satellite imagery has shown China’s increased efforts to reclaim land in the South China Sea by physically increasing the size of islands or creating altogether new islands. In addition to piling sand onto existing reefs, China has constructed ports, military installations, and airstrips—particularly in the Spratly Islands,” reports the Council on Foreign Relations.

Six nations — China, Taiwan, Vietnam, the Philippines, Brunei, and Malaysia — have competing claims over the South China Sea region, a vital waterway through which more than $5 trillion of trade sails each year. In response to China’s growing aggression in asserting territorial claims and carrying out military-style operations near Philippine shores, the Filipino government has recently sought new support from the United States.

“The assistance comes amid concerns that China’s artificial island-building in the South China Sea will target Scarborough Shoal, which lies about 140 miles west of the main Philippine island of Luzon,” reports Stars and Stripes, to the recent U.S. Navy deployment to the Philippines. “The shoal is little more than a few rocks jutting out of the water at high tide but is claimed by both the Philippines and China.”

“U.S. officials have discussed helping the Philippines build a ‘credible minimum deterrent’ to defend and monitor its borders,” it adds. “Long focused on internal security, the Philippines needs more ships and aircraft to watch over the waters surrounding its many islands, according to regional security analysts.”

In January, the highest court in the Philippines approved the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement, which allows the United States to deploy troops to Philippine bases on extended rotations. “The agreement does not allow the U.S. to control its own bases on Philippine soil, as it did with Clark Air Base and Naval Base Subic Bay until the early 1990s,” points out Stars and Stripes. 

@breitbart.com

****-END-****

E/A-18G Growler: Details