Jump to content

Type 69 Ballistic Target - Replicating An Enemy


DMYEugen
 Share

Type 69 Ballistic Target  

68 members have voted

  1. 1. Would you like this vehicle to be added?

    • Yes
      54
    • No
      14
  2. 2. What BR do you think it should be placed at?

    • 7.7 or lower
      4
    • 8.0
      7
    • 8.3
      19
    • 8.7
      13
    • 9.0
      6
    • 9.3 or higher
      5
    • I said no
      14
  3. 3. How would you like to see this vehicle available?

    • Tech Tree
      20
    • Squadron
      6
    • GE Premium
      3
    • Pack Premium
      2
    • Event
      19
    • Battlepass
      2
    • Other (Please Explain)
      2
    • I said no
      14


TL;DR: A Type 69 fitted with extra armor on the turret and hull front meant to imitate a T-80U for ballistics testing.

AVvXsEj4UM6EGzx1INbAAZ5BF_lHx4hXY8Gqjmyd

 

History:

The Sino-Soviet Split in the early 1960s made relations between the Soviet Union and China rather tense. Even by 1994, this tension had not subsided and the release of the T-80U almost a decade earlier did not help things. Luckily, however, the development of the Type 99 MBT was coming along smoothly, although, there were concerns regarding its ability to defeat a T-80U. To put these concerns to rest, it was decided that ballistic tests on a T-80U needed to be performed, however, at the time, there was no way for the Chinese to get their hands on a T-80U to shoot at. What they could get their hands on were a few details of its armor as they had inspected a T-80U once before. Utilizing this information, they could make a similarly performing imitation. In October of 1994, the Chinese 123 Engineering General Office and The Installation Technology Institute jointly conducted a ballistic trials against a "hypothetical combat target". These trials would involve the prototype of the Type 99 MBT firing at a standard Type 69 fitted with the imitation armor.

 

The turret armor was as follows (Not necessarily in this order): 200mm of steel, 100mm of steel, 80mm of back plate steel, 20mm of middle layer steel, 100mm of fiberglass, 60mm of fiberglass, and some sort of ERA.

The hull armor was as follows (Not necessarily in this order): 100mm of steel, 50mm of steel, two 45mm fiberglass sheets, 50mm of steel, and some sort of ERA.

 

In addition to the armor, the Type 69 was equipped with the Type 99's sights and ballistic computer to see how they held up while under fire. The "crew" during this these tests consisted of dogs and goats. Five 125mm HE rounds were fired into the Type 69, with the tank being repaired after each shot. The first shot hit the left side of the turret face, destroying the ERA yet failing to penetrate the turret itself. That being said the main cannon still sustained damage along with the driver and gunner optics. The turret could no longer turn and the "crew" was seriously injured. The second shot also hit the left side of the turret face, which, again, yielded no penetration, however, the barrel and turret rotation mechanisms were damaged. The power unit and sighting device were destroyed. The third shot impacted the upper front plate, not penetrating the hull itself. The gun once again sustained damaged and horizontal control was lost. The fourth shot again hit the left side of the turret face, which yielded similar results to shots 1 and 2. The fifth shot impacted the front right fender and tore off the right track. None of the five shots penetrated the armor, however, it was clear that a penetration was not necessary.

 

Place In War Thunder:

I am perfectly aware that what I'm suggesting here is far from the norm and pushing the boundaries a little bit. Yes, it is a ballistic target built to be shot at, however, it was also a fully functional vehicle with several improvements over its base design. The armor added provided real protection and the tech it received from the Type 99 was, in essence, an upgrade. Even though this vehicle wasn't designed for combat, it has a place on the battlefield. Adding to this, we already have non-combat intended vehicles in War Thunder, the most notable of which is the VT1-2, designed specifically to test the concept of dual gun casemates. It's armor isn't even armor steel, it's structural steel. I feel that what I'm suggesting has a place in War Thunder. Depending on the BR bracket you find yourself in, your turret has the potential to take a lot of punishment. It's protected by a total of 400mm of steel and 160mm of fiberglass. Include the ERA and very few HEATFS and APDS shells will be able to get through. Your hull isn't as good, however, as it's only protected by 200mm of steel and 90mm of fiberglass. On top of that, there are very large areas that your added armor does not cover. Ideal playstyle would likely consist of sticking behind cover, only exposing your strong turret, and sniping from a distance. The tech inherited from the Type 99 prototype would likely make this easier. Considering the nature of this vehicle, I think it's only fair for it to come to War Thunder as a Chinese event vehicle, similar to the VT1-2.

 

Specifications:

Spoiler

Armament: 100mm Type 69 cannon and 7.62mm SGMT MG

 

Dimensions: 6.24m, 3.30m, 2.80m (L,W,H)

 

Weight: 36700~kg

 

Armor:

-Hull: Same as Type 69 in-game plus 100mm of steel and 90mm of fiberglass

-Turret: Same as Type 69 in-game plus 200mm of steel and 160mm of fiberglass

 

Crew: 4

 

Ammunition: Same as Type 69 in-game

 

Speed: 45~kph

 

Horsepower: 520hp

 

Pictures:

Spoiler

Armor on the turret:

AVvXsEi5k8eQcrSCmtSgD6A4O_GEpHz4MUmGMqCG

 

After the first shot:

AVvXsEgpCWGSFjHSCUFLp7Py9dXNeHT7ctRnp6iI

 

After the second or fourth shot:

Bznkijq.png

 

After the fifth shot:

kMkHLNd.png

 

Sources:

Edited by DMYEugen
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Senior Suggestion Moderator

Open for discussion. :salute:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Suggestion Moderator

+1

 

If this were added, it would actually not be the first ballistic test vehicle in the game. The supposed "Super Conqueror" is actually a similar vehicle. Anyway, I would definitely enjoy this as a quirky Chinese "heavy" tank for the mid-high ranks

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FYI: this is the very tank that proved Zhu Yusheng (祝榆生,ZTZ99's chief designer) concept of nuking enemies with HEFS shells (all 3 goats in the tanks were shocked to their kingdom come).

Should be interesting to see a tank with thick mock-up armor yet a disappointing gun:bomber: :crazy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is an interesting vehicle indeed, yet somehow hard to balance: it's frontal armor is more strong, but it only provides enhanced protection in a limited arc, while its firepower is staying the same and mobility(and turret traverse) is getting worse. So this thing can't get a BR too low because of its protection and laser range finder,  HEATFS and stuff, but its relatively low firepower and mobility makes it a bit hard to play in higher BRs (and let's not forget about up/down tiers)...

But anyway, I'd like to see this tank beeing added to WT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks interesting to me.  And even though it was intended as a target, as you said, it is fully-functional.  So I say why not?  +1.  Would be fun to try.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah from me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks really interesting but I don't think it would be very useful(Mobility and obvious weakspots..).

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they give it the modern 100mm round from the PTL02 and maybe make the reload the same as on the PTL, the vehicle would be plenty powerful for 9.7. Just a suggestion to help balance it, since at lower BRs it may be too tank-y. +1

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

I want more post-45 heavies

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...