list of inaccuracy of Chinese ground vehicles

[Miki_Hoshii 2,449]

Im not the only one who thinks the entire hull in relation to the wheels and tracks is too high on the Type 63, right?

[CaID 8,996]

On 07/01/2020 at 12:02, Miki_Hoshii said:

Im not the only one who thinks the entire hull in relation to the wheels and tracks is too high on the Type 63, right?

yeah, you are right, they used the PT-76 track and not the Type 63 one. they are about the same but a bit different. the first wheel is a bit higher and the whole track system is higher wich make the space between the track and the mudgard over the track is much tighter.

 

i added it and a few other vehicles as well.

Edited February 12, 2020 by CaID

[BadOpinionHaver 2,092]

Thought I'd add some more bugs to this thread. I'll be reporting them properly when I get a chance, but if anyone wants to reply with some sources that would be cool.

• The ERA on the turret of the Type 59 D1 has no kinetic protection even though it's the exact same type of ERA that is on the hull (reported, waiting for mod approval)
• The Type 59D1 in game is actually a Type 59D (reported, waiting for mod approval)
• The Type 59D1 is missing it's reverse engineered soviet 9K116 ATGM (reported, waiting for mod approval)
• The gun mantlet on the Type 96 is 50mm when it should be ~300mm as it's essentially identical to that used on the T-54
• The frontal protection of the Type 96 is significantly lower than even the lowest estimates in the literature(this one is hard to verify, as technically the real protection is classified)

I'm also pretty sure the Type 96 is supposed to be able to fire some sort of ATGM but I may be mistaken on that

[Miki_Hoshii 2,449]

20 minutes ago, watch_your_fire said:

Thought I'd add some more bugs to this thread. I'll be reporting them properly when I get a chance, but if anyone wants to reply with some sources that would be cool.

• The Type 59D1 in game is actually a Type 59D (reported, waiting for mod approval)
• The Type 59D1 is missing it's reverse engineered soviet 9K116 ATGM (reported, waiting for mod approval)

I don't know too much about PRC vehicles, but isn't the ZTZ59D1 just a ZTZ59D that doesn't have ATGM capabilities? 

[BadOpinionHaver 2,092]

1 minute ago, Miki_Hoshii said:

I don't know too much about PRC vehicles, but isn't the ZTZ59D1 just a ZTZ59D that doesn't have ATGM capabilities? 

Nah the D1 mounts an older gun. The one we have in game is the 59D, you can tell because it has the newer Type 83 cannon. I think both should be able to fire ATGMs but the 59D definitely can.

http://sinodefence.com/type59-type69/

https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/china/type-59-variants.htm

http://fighting-vehicles.com/type-59d-tank/

http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product4191.html

https://tanknutdave.com/the-chinese-type-59-medium-tank/

[Taskforce404 210]

13 hours ago, watch_your_fire said:

Thought I'd add some more bugs to this thread. I'll be reporting them properly when I get a chance, but if anyone wants to reply with some sources that would be cool.

• The ERA on the turret of the Type 59 D1 has no kinetic protection even though it's the exact same type of ERA that is on the hull (reported, waiting for mod approval)
• The Type 59D1 in game is actually a Type 59D (reported, waiting for mod approval)
• The Type 59D1 is missing it's reverse engineered soviet 9K116 ATGM (reported, waiting for mod approval)
• The gun mantlet on the Type 96 is 50mm when it should be ~300mm as it's essentially identical to that used on the T-54
• The frontal protection of the Type 96 is significantly lower than even the lowest estimates in the literature(this one is hard to verify, as technically the real protection is classified)

I'm also pretty sure the Type 96 is supposed to be able to fire some sort of ATGM but I may be mistaken on that

In game it is neither real 59d1 nor real 59d.

 

the difference between 59d1 and 59d is the main gun.

59D1/WZ120C used first type 81a 105mm later type 83 105mm.

59D/WZ120D used type 94 105mm(some source might refered to type 83a). which has longer barrel and capable of shooting new type93 apfsds and atgm.

 

 

 

both of them used 580hp 12150L-7 diesel engine irl and same 2nd gen. fire control system.

 

while in game the type 59d1 has all same parameters from type 59, old 520hp engine, no servo motor for turret and gun. 

 

a manually turret with 2nd gen. fire control system?? RIDICULOUS!!

 

 

and ERAs r not same. on turret is FY1 while on front hull is FY2.

 

[BadOpinionHaver 2,092]

On 13/02/2020 at 07:00, Taskforce404 said:

In game it is neither real 59d1 nor real 59d.

 

the difference between 59d1 and 59d is the main gun.

59D1/WZ120C used first type 81a 105mm later type 83 105mm.

59D/WZ120D used type 94 105mm(some source might refered to type 83a). which has longer barrel and capable of shooting new type93 apfsds and atgm.

 

 

 

both of them used 580hp 12150L-7 diesel engine irl and same 2nd gen. fire control system.

 

while in game the type 59d1 has all same parameters from type 59, old 520hp engine, no servo motor for turret and gun. 

 

a manually turret with 2nd gen. fire control system?? RIDICULOUS!!

 

 

and ERAs r not same. on turret is FY1 while on front hull is FY2.

I see... can you link a source? like I said I'm writing some bug reports.

[Taskforce404 210]

1 hour ago, watch_your_fire said:

I see... can you link a source? like I said I'm writing some bug reports.

https://www.wikiwand.com/zh-cn/59式坦克#/59D式

 

but it is in chinese

[BadOpinionHaver 2,092]

2 hours ago, Taskforce404 said:

https://www.wikiwand.com/zh-cn/59式坦克#/59D式

 

but it is in chinese

Thank you. Unfortunately the devs probably won't accept wikipedia as a source

[Miki_Hoshii 2,449]

1 hour ago, watch_your_fire said:

Thank you. Unfortunately the devs probably won't accept wikipedia as a source

Yeah

 

You'll need books, or ideally documents.

[CaID 8,996]

On 14/02/2020 at 15:55, watch_your_fire said:

Thank you. Unfortunately the devs probably won't accept wikipedia as a source

yeah, they rather like to use Tencent as source. tencent who use World of tank as source... world of tank who use wikipedia, rumor and teorical fact as source.

 

after all this, if Wiki pedia is not the best source, it's at least a good led to truth.

[BadOpinionHaver 2,092]

Still looking for help with my bug report on the ZTZ59D1. Does anyone know where I could find some official documents on this tank? I know it's being sold by the PLA as a modernization package to other nations, so maybe there's a sales brochure somewhere online....

If anyone has any info to share I'd really appreciate it

[TinyPolska26 130]

On 14/09/2019 at 10:48, CaID said:

T-34-76 (never into chinese service)

  Hide contents

while China do have some in museum, they was probably never used by the Chinese Army. they are likely to be ex-korean tanks sent in China for repairing during the Korean War (North Korea probably still have some in reserve)

 

 

 

Yes China never did operate them but they did service them for North Korea and ended up keeping a few since the war ended. The tank you used is pretty much the standard production model of the Mod 43, pointed joint where the ufp and lfp meet, and a cupola on top for the commander. Be it the one we do have right now is kinda accurate it just feels like a copy-paste 42 but with a third gear. I also looked up other mod 43s and sometimes this varies. But the one pictured above would be the best fit for China, and also what Gaijin showed would come with the vehicle thing. Also a fix to this would be giving it the Korea flag. Same can be said for the "Type 65" getting a Vietnam flag.

 

Chinese release tree showing the Mod. 43 

 

 

Edited April 9, 2020 by tinygerman26

[十大建設推動者蔣經國 15]

The turret rotation speed on CM11 and M60A3TTS in game took about 22 seconds to complete a 360 degrees rotation, however in real life they took about 13 seconds to complete.

Here's the video proof: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ljv_N-JZ5vw&t=1s   (Skip to 4:10)

Type96A, M60A3TTS and CM11‘s thermal sights in real life have better quality than the ones in game. In real life, Type96A uses 2nd gen thermals while M60A3TTS and CM11's AN/VSG2 sight is better than the early models of Leopard 2 and M1 Abrams. 
About the M60A3TTS and CM11's AN/VSG2 sight:

 

[Audrey_McKnight 23]

None of the Taiwanese tanks with CARC camouflage are accurate. They seem to have lifted a fictional camouflage pattern straight from World of Tanks for some reason, when the actual CARC camouflage used on M48 and M60 should be a normal CARC as used by every other western/NATO tank.

[GoddePro 1,147]

21 hours ago, Audrey_McKnight said:

None of the Taiwanese tanks with CARC camouflage are accurate. They seem to have lifted a fictional camouflage pattern straight from World of Tanks for some reason, when the actual CARC camouflage used on M48 and M60 should be a normal CARC as used by every other western/NATO tank.

this is true

however, they need separate camouflages to be distinguishable from the base tanks in SIM mode. 

[Snebze 192]

On 19/09/2019 at 19:38, Jane_J_Sargent said:

This has already been sent to the devs. CMD_Nomad sent it and confirmed it with me and a few others. Also as for the T-34 1943, that was also submitted to the devs so exxpect some of these changes to come into affect in 1.93. Or so I hope.

A bit odd that they still haven't, over 6 months later. The T-26-4 actually uses the correct hull for the version that they used (possibly sans vents. I'm no expert), so they may only have to make a new turret for that vehicle to make the Chinese T-26 correct.

[TinyPolska26 130]

On 04/06/2020 at 07:23, Snebze said:

A bit odd that they still haven't, over 6 months later. The T-26-4 actually uses the correct hull for the version that they used (possibly sans vents. I'm no expert), so they may only have to make a new turret for that vehicle to make the Chinese T-26 correct.

Well it used a turret similar to the BT-5, be it would need some modifying to have the horse shoe antenna, and the hull as well would need to be modified.

[GoddePro 1,147]

1 hour ago, Jane_J_Sargent said:

Well it used a turret similar to the BT-5, be it would need some modifying to have the horse shoe antenna, and the hull as well would need to be modified.

they would have to create the turret from scratch. It is similar, but 3d design is far more complicated than that

[TinyPolska26 130]

On 07/06/2020 at 00:15, GoddePro said:

they would have to create the turret from scratch. It is similar, but 3d design is far more complicated than that

True. But some one already is in the process of making the new Chinese T-26. All new design.

[HARSHKEEP 119]

On 07/06/2020 at 06:15, GoddePro said:

It is similar, but 3d design is far more complicated than that

You do know the modellers get paid for their work, right? A tank turret is not some incomprehensibly difficult object to model dude

[GoddePro 1,147]

3 hours ago, HARSHKEEP said:

You do know the modellers get paid for their work, right? A tank turret is not some incomprehensibly difficult object to model dude

if you've been around for long enough, you would see how often gaijin complains about how difficult it is to model these tanks. If it's anywhere near as bad as they say, then I doubt they would bother to do it for such a low priority

7 hours ago, Jane_J_Sargent said:

True. But some one already is in the process of making the new Chinese T-26. All new design.

I'm guessing this is an independent creator?

[BadOpinionHaver 2,092]

Glad this thread is moving again. The Type 59 D1 still has the same hand crank turret rotation as the T-54 despite having a two-plane stabilizer and moder FCS(which requires an electric turret drive), which is absolutely hilarious. It also has the same reload as the T-54, despite the fact that it's gun is a reverse engineered L7 and not a D-10T. Again, hilarious. Gaijin loves to copy-paste.

Spoiler

 

[OddPhenomena 1,015]

2 hours ago, watch_your_fire said:

Glad this thread is moving again. The Type 59 D1 still has the same hand crank turret rotation as the T-54 despite having a two-plane stabilizer and moder FCS(which requires an electric turret drive), which is absolutely hilarious. It also has the same reload as the T-54, despite the fact that it's gun is a reverse engineered L7 and not a D-10T. Again, hilarious. Gaijin loves to copy-paste.

  Hide contents

 

It is also still 9.0 in arcade for whatever reason, I have no idea why I should use this thing over the Type 69 II-G at 8.7.

Edited July 10, 2020 by Shamshael

[BadOpinionHaver 2,092]

Anyone feel like checking Baidu for some type 96 info? There's no way that BM42 Mango can penetrate the turret IRL, I seriously doubt our in game values