China's NEW Giant Infantry Vehicle is a Nightmare

Подписаться 1,6 млн

Просмотров 3,4 млн

50% 1

Get a 14-day free trial with our sponsor Aura and see where your personal information is being sold online: Aura.com/task
FUBAR & Grill T shirt:
ru-vid.comO47642182...
To put this into a barney style context that even I can comprehend. Modern infantry fighting vehicles of the past 4 decades usually range from merely 18.7 tons like the Russian made BMP-3, up to a modest 43 tons with the German Puma IFV. However, the VN-20 stands in a weight-class all its own. At 50 tons, the VN-20 is one of, if not the heaviest infantry fighting vehicle in the world.
Video Edited By: Michael Michaelides
Written By: Chris Cappy and Patrick Griffin
I mean just look at this image for scale of a human standing next to the giant towering creature. Us short kings would need a booster seat and a step ladder just to get into it. But what do you really get in return for all that extra lbs. The vehicle has room for 3 crew to work the insane number of weapon systems plus 6 dismounted Chinese infantry soldiers in the rear compartment who are ready to rock. This is when it dawned on me. When looking at its specifications and capabilities the VN-20 we’re looking at shock trooper vehicle. This thing is meant for assault offensive take ground operations meant to punch through stubborn defensive lines.
But this extra armor and weapons creates major trade offs. One of the possible limitations with the heavier standard weight could limit the VN-20 from adding additional armor and weapon packages in the future. Although I’m not sure what extra armor you could possibly hope to toss on there. According to reports allegedly it’s equipped with Level 6 STANAG 4569 rated armor which means it can stop incoming 30mm cannon rounds so the American’s bradley would bounce right off it essentially. Allegedly, allegedly!
Task & Purpose is a military news and culture oriented channel. We want to foster discussion about the defense industry.
Email capelluto@taskandpurpose.com for inquires.
#TANK #CHINA #WAR

Опубликовано:

31 май 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 8 тыс.

@Taskandpurpose Год назад

Get a 14-day free trial with our sponsor Aura and see where your personal information is being sold online: Aura.com/task

@filipvucaj2475 Год назад

It's like a fuckin' modern nazzi tank The Maus WTF🤨!?

@brokeandtired Год назад

Its obviously taken influence from the Israeli Heavy "Namer" APC. Which is based on a Merkava Chasis. Its a heavy assault APC. And its clearly been given a huge cannon so it can double as a fire support vehicle.

@rocko7711 Год назад

Amazing work

@michaelm6597 Год назад

sir... that is not an ifv, that is a tank with extra crew compartment :P

@andreapehjerne8490 Год назад

More propaganda. Have a Bud light.

@James_randomleters Год назад

Whoever designed that thing is DEFINITELY an Imperial Guard Warhammer 40k player.

@ivanivanovitchivanovsky7123 Год назад

They’re getting closer to making a Chimera with a bigger gun

@Mirari1986 Год назад

@@ivanivanovitchivanovsky7123 Maybe...Multilasers incoming?

@mackmind Год назад

I was looking for this comment. China is 40k years "ahead" 😂

@LordGrantius Год назад

The drums at the rear - we just need sponsons to have ourselves a troop carrying Baneblade

@puddingsimon2626 Год назад

There most likely not, they just saw that design and thought it’s good and effective, and given the average iq and experience Chinese army officials have. . . . Well

@xiphoid2011 Год назад

Wait, that giant maus of an IFV carries only 6 soldiers? I was thinking it must at least carry 12 to 15.

@speakingwithoutnet Год назад

That might make it useful.

@yankee1376 Год назад

All that meat and no potatoes.

@thomaszhang3101 Год назад

It’s just extremely thick skinned to survive punishment.

@danysainz-gootenberg7809 Год назад

The Bradley is taller by half a meter

@breadman32398 Год назад

I was thinking the exact same. A giant battle bus with a cannon would explain the weight, but only 6? Then it's the same as most other IFVs.

@Jim17724 6 месяцев назад

The problem with it is that it is not designed for self use, but for selling abroad (you can guess to who by looking at the camouflage). The buyers don't lack money. The Pla is equipping the 04a at the moment and is having a new type soon

@dhrumilbarot1431 8 дней назад

who? do tell

@OnxGrid 5 дней назад

@@dhrumilbarot1431 Desert dominant country, Pakistan and Nigeria

@TenofSwords 2 месяца назад

[Quote from 'The Pentagon Wars' HBO movie] Col. Robert Laurel Smith: That's one hell of a cannon. Jones: That's the problem. Col. Robert Laurel Smith: What is? Jones: You go out on the battlefield with this pecker sticking out of your turret, and the enemy's going to unload on you with everything they got. Might as well put a big red bullseye on the side. Col. Robert Laurel Smith: But it's a troop carrier, not a tank. Jones: Do you want me to put a sign on it in fifty languages, "I am a troop carrier, not a tank, please don't shoot at me"?

@ZearthGJL Год назад

One thing to note is that with the weight of the vehicle, it'll be limited by which bridges can handle it's weigh.

@rush1er Год назад

Shhhhhh! Don't talk about her weight out loud! Xi's already got an eating disorder!

@Pricklesthebedbug Год назад

@@rush1er xi isn't overweight, he's just storing honey in his belly so he can hibernate in his bunker when his war fails too

@buckcherry2564 Год назад

I sure hope they dont plan to attack anyone across a body of water with it...the logistics just to haul 6 dudes around...oof

@GeorgeOrwell-yz6zx Год назад

@@rush1er Can you confirm or deny Xi is 5 months pregnant?

@austinwhite3132 Год назад

Not to mention transport will be a pain in the ass

@darrellmaynard1588 Год назад

The rear facing machine guns are for stopping tailgating and keeps the dismounted troops from getting back into the vehicle if not authorized to do so.

@liamjudd9816 11 месяцев назад

😂😂😂 Nice

@kuhluhOG 10 месяцев назад

"keeps the dismounted troops from getting back into the vehicle if not authorized to do so" wouldn't just keeping the door closed be simpler?

@nexii1479 10 месяцев назад

They already have the suicide helmet for that

@warmak4576 9 месяцев назад

Commie 101, always casualties, no mater whoes.

@mclovin2408 9 месяцев назад

@@kuhluhOGit’s not about that, it’s about sending a message to the rest of their soldiers.

@EcnalKcin 6 месяцев назад

This reminds me of an army story my dad told me that he got from a buddy that was there. Apparently, some years ago, there was an initiative to turn an Apache into an electronic warfare vehicle. The original design called for a modest system suite, and someone higher up in the command structure liked it and approved it. However, word got around of what the project's intent was, and that it had been approved already. Pretty soon all the senior R&D officers with any pull on the base were having their own pet systems added on to it. Everything from signal monitoring, to radar jamming equipment. Then the big day came. A bunch of generals came down from Washington to see the initial test flight. So they powered up the Apache...and brought it full power...and it couldn't lift off the tarmac. They had put so many systems on it that they had exceeded it's maximum lift capacity. The end result was a scathing memo regarding changes to approved designs, and a lesson for everyone of what design by committee actually looks like.

@dylanthomas12321 5 месяцев назад

Your dad was so right. There's many such stories in industrial design. A famous world leading Korean seeing machine maker, circa 1970s 80s, decided to make the most advanced sewing machine ever. Every homemaker would die to have one. They added so many features, functions, automation, The thing could practically cut you a suit or dress on it's own. Only problem, nobody could figure out how to use it. Zero sales. It was sometimes taught by professors in business s

@dylanthomas12321 5 месяцев назад

Also reminds me of Bill Gates in 80s 90s Microsoft. As the new operating system or apps came together, he'd make them do a build every night. It had to work with thousands of 3rd party programs, insane, at a certain point he'd say say stop. Good enough. Not a quote. But we used to call it good enough software development. It was the same in WWII, we mass manufactured tanks, Germans made the best, by hand. Game over

@dylanthomas12321 5 месяцев назад

Toyota in the 80s did the same. An engineering group designed the perfect exhaust system, costly but it would outlast the damned car! It was a marvel. A wise man killed the project. These nutty things arise throughout history.

@rabbitramen 5 месяцев назад

Look into the history of the British R-101 airship program designed by a government committee with almost unlimited funding using innovative, but untested and redundant systems vs. the rival R-100 built by private industry with a limited budget and employing known and proven technology. The end results are self evident.

@nicoEmt187 5 месяцев назад

There probably was the one smart higher-up who was told "this thing will never lift of, its too heavy!" by the Engineers. And his Response was: "Good, lets show them their Stupidity". At least in my Head-Canon that's how it went ^^.

@tomfuller4205 7 месяцев назад

The main armament is a version of the weapon system fitted to the BMP-3. In that case the 100mm main gun is actually a gun/missile launcher which fires all sorts of conventional rounds AND the BM-117 ATGM. Why carry spare twin ATGM launchers also?

@MandaloretheSavage Год назад

Looks like the design team plays Imperial Guard (40k) and wanted to try making a Baneblade but wanted a starting experience.

@JoshuaC923 Год назад

😂😂😂

@abysso5786 Год назад

My thoughts exactly, when he showed the image of the rear with the man as comparison, I immediately thought it looked so much like a baneblade

@MajesticDemonLord Год назад

FEEL THE MIGHT OF THE BAAAAAAAAANEBLADE!

@abcdedfg8340 Год назад

My thoughts too. They forgot the side sponsons with the 100 mm and heavy bolter guns though. On the other hand, it does look pretty cool for the parade ground.

@TK4541 Год назад

This is better that my first thought of the Landraider.

@Jeremy-rp3in Год назад

Think a former Command and Conquer player who loved giant tanks as a teen got to see their dream come true in the PLA.

@LuoSon312_G8 Год назад

how long until unveiling of Overlords?

@TheMetalfreak360 Год назад

Mammoth tanks when?

@JohnGeorgeBauerBuis Год назад

@@TheMetalfreak360 I think we’ll see a Kirov airship or equivalent first, as the problem with a Mammoth Tank is that it’s really big and heavy, making it difficult to transport and requiring fording water instead of using a bridge (which is one of the things that did in the Maus, along with various production difficulties).

@BigBossIvan Год назад

Get out of my head.

@FM-fi4uy Год назад

As a C&C fan and their country neighbor, it's not my dream to be invaded by giant tank.

@peterhoulihan9766 8 месяцев назад

I'm guessing the machine guns are supposed to be used by the infantry to clear opposition before dismounting. A bit like a port gun. The two barrels of fuel look like they're long range fuel tanks supposed to be dumped before entering combat. There was a BMP design with a similar feature at one point: The exit hatch was a hollow fuel tank, but any remaining fuel was supposed to be dumped before getting near the enemy.

@Schimml0rd 6 месяцев назад

Lmao because fuel vapor isn't highly highly explosive 😂

@dddd-zj7sy 3 месяца назад

@@Schimml0rd just a fireball it will create, wont do shit to that 50 ton metal beast tho

@pierregrosjean6355 8 месяцев назад

-"How many canons do you want on the new IFV ?" -"Yes."

@kevinfidler6287 Год назад

Hauling 50 ton vehicles across the Tiwan Strait en-mass sounds like an excellent idea.

@heyhoe168 Год назад

It is heavier (!) then the T-90 MBT.

@philliphall5198 Год назад

There maded from south in America which is very dry and hard land China thinking way ahead

@john236613 Год назад

@@philliphall5198 Getting them across the Taiwan straight would be a logistical nightmare on its own, much less crossing the Pacific.

@CrystaTiBoha Год назад

"Never interrupt your enemy when he's doing a mistake." - some famous guy

@voidtempering8700 Год назад

@@john236613 Why would they be going to Taiwan?

@Jamesmatise Год назад

This looks like a fighting vehicle designed by committee. They had to keep making it bigger and bigger to accommodate everyone's ideas for what an infantry fighting vehicle should have.

@WellBattle6 Год назад

It’s for export though. I think it’s meant for African countries with heavy bush vegetation. In the bush, really large vehicles are preferred in order to actually see over the grass.

@MFitz12 Год назад

VN = export. Target market is the Middle East, particularly the UAE as a BMP-3 replacement.

@rookie.9175 Год назад

Probably saw the Namer AFV and decided to take a try at it, only to make a Namer Heavier, Carry less troops, and have less armor overall, but hey it has a cannon like a tank, the troop capacity if provably because of a carousel turret design, probably an autoloader like the Russians, so its a big PHAT juicy target for any grunt with a top attack ATGM

@larryt4884 Год назад

Made in China, during night shift.

@Jay-rb5rs Год назад

Funnily enough height wise its smaller than the bradley and puma I think it was just a bad picture or the guy was short

@shaunnichols1743 6 месяцев назад

I think the standards/precision is more significant from a maintenance/interchangeability standpoint. We've seen going all the way back to WW2 that an impressive vehicle on paper isn't much use if it can't be maintained in the field with easily sourced replacement parts. The VN-20 seems like it could have similar issues.

@diealready6274 8 месяцев назад

If they keep adding things to this vehicle I think it can eventually upgrade to one of those droid-carrying hover tanks in Star Wars with huge frontal armor and many many cannons... So much potential!

@imasealarparparparp2714 3 месяца назад

Make this man the general of the army

@MrZebeda Год назад

The external fuel barrels instantly reminded me of the BMP-1 where the doors of the passenger compartment are fuel tanks. - Comrade Lead Designer are you sure about it? - Da, you just have to advance all the time. If you don't turn around the enemy can't shoot at it!

@ruler898 Год назад

Tbf that was generally an auxiliary fuel tank used for travel so by the time combat started it would be empty. I'd hope this IFV does the same.

@MrZebeda Год назад

@@ruler898 yeah good point actually. Though still, you can get into combat earlier than expected and then you're screwed. In Chechnya, this happened to the Russians.

@MrZebeda Год назад

@@DeReAntiqua yeah I think you're right that this VN-20 will go the way of the Armata. Imagine how many of the freaking things you'd need to deploy just a company of soldiers, just the cost of that alone, not to mention the upkeep.

@generalchevez Год назад

@@MrZebeda costs don't really matter when you have slaves for a workforce.

@polaris6709 Год назад

If you’re getting shot in the ass on a vehicle I think that leaking fuel is among the last things on your mind. Personally I’d be more concerned about the projectiles penetrating the rear of my vehicle.

@emerald640 11 месяцев назад

They forgot to add a flame thrower and fuel tanks for it next to the fuel tanks. It also lacks a mine plow in front and helicopter rotors to get over large obstacles. It looks like a weapon out of Starship Troopers.

@BrokenCurtain 9 месяцев назад

They don't need helicopter rotors if they just spin the turret fast enough, like those Russian tanks.

@skttnm 9 месяцев назад

They didn't forget. The fuel in the rear is meant to be ignited by the rear machine guns. The flames will spew all over the place.

@simonspacek3670 8 месяцев назад

Flamethrower is great against trenches. In WWII Crocodile was excellent against trenches, especially when they used "wet squirt" (just splashing the flammable liquid, but not setting it on fire), because when you hold a rifle and somebody dumps a bucket of gasoline on you, do you want to pull the trigger? I'm not a gun expert, but I noticed that when you fire a rifle (gun, machinegun, musket, whatever), it goes with a nice flash of fire. Do you want an open fire when you are covered in gasoline or similar flammable liquid? If your other option is tossing the gun away, raising hands and surrendering of course.

@HarryPoggers44 7 месяцев назад

This made me bust out laughing. I'm still waiting for the day we actually implement some form of the crazy "metal storm" weapon system that could fire a (theoretical) 1 million rounds a minute. Those prototype vids were wild. Can you imagine a IFV with pods of those things using air burst or canister shot munitions....I think that would show the chines who can build the craziest bs, I mean, TOTALLY REAL AND FEASIBLE best IFV.

@aprinnyonbreak1290 6 месяцев назад

You know, they should really just make the turret work as a self contained system, so it can be pulled off and used as a gun by mechsuits and supersoldiers

@Spencer-vq7se 6 месяцев назад

I subscribed purely for the fact that you segmented your ad read in the playbar

@wintersbattleofbands1144 4 месяца назад

I only watch because he's sort of hot.

@strummi1 20 дней назад

Great videos man. Entertaining, fun and good info

@thomasdesmond2248 Год назад

Weight has always been an issue for crossing bridges. The larger size also makes it an easier target. No matter what armor you use. There is a munition that can penetrate it.

@saswatsethi2739 Год назад

Correct

@alexmarlow2508 Год назад

yes, but your enemy might not be fielding that munition that can penetrate it, better armor means better protection, aka more likely that whatever the enemy is using can't defeat the armor

@thomasdesmond2248 Год назад

@@alexmarlow2508 yes however before any armor becomes common use on the battle field. The United States has ways to defeat it. Such as in the case of hypersonic missiles. The Untitled States already has a laser system being deployed to shoot them down. As is often the case nations like Russia and China are really trying to play catch up.

@t.t7225 Год назад

It still weighs less than average mbt...

@user-jf6es6tr4y Год назад

It depends. Do you think you can shoot missiles without limits at any time?

@thewanderingrey8830 Год назад

This is probably the PLA's attempt to create a real life Space Marine Land Raider

@KungfufightU Год назад

That was my first thought upon seeing the tiny “guardsman” next to the rear hatch. I have no respect for Chinese leadership but hot damn if them being WH40k fans might change that.

@thewanderingrey8830 Год назад

@@KungfufightU they don't actively fight wars since 1979 so all they could do is play UN peacekeeper and play wargames. I am sure 40K is in the menu...

@littlekeyb6352 Год назад

Now i'm INTERESTED. Should be a primarch somewhere

@tali3san337 Год назад

I had the same thought and scrolled before making my own comment. If it can only carry 6 Chinese troopers, good luck in getting a terminator squad in there.

@Seamus.Harper Год назад

@@tali3san337Maybe those soldiers are wearing Terminator armor... they never specified what equipment they carry. 😮

@justtheflagguy727 6 месяцев назад

50 tons is a logistical nightmare

@aleemesmail8096 3 месяца назад

lmao an abrams is 60 tons

@isaacpahl690 3 месяца назад

@@aleemesmail8096 Abrams is a mbt it would clear like 12 ifvs if used correctly

@allemagneproducer 3 месяца назад

but made in china is mostly always done with shortcuts and cheaper materials and that goes also for their military as we seen (nukes filled with water???? wtf) @@aleemesmail8096

@keysersozefede Месяц назад

@@aleemesmail8096you are comparing an IFV with an MBT.

@aleemesmail8096 Месяц назад

@@isaacpahl690 alr idk sht

@eldrago19 8 месяцев назад

Seems like a similar design philosophy to the Bradley. It's got decent armour from the start but that 50 tonne weight limit is going to be horrible for going over bridges. We won't know how good it is until and unless it is trialled in battle.

@mauryeetss3561 Год назад

The inherent risk of larger IFVs is that if they are disabled/destroyed in battle, that’s a whole lot of weapons and materials lost in one instance. Also, a totaled 50 ton IFV is far more difficult to retrieve than a smaller 15 ton IFV. For the VN-20 to prove effective, it needs to be amazing as it has been advertised. This is the sort of risk America isn’t desperate enough or dumb enough to take.

@joelau2383 Год назад

It is a Chinese Merkava with smaller main cannon but additional auto cannon. It obviously can handle every target except MBT.

@skeletonofwisdom2922 Год назад

@@joelau2383The problem is, even a drone can zero it.

@joelau2383 Год назад

@@skeletonofwisdom2922 It is a 50ton armor vehicle, it has more armor than most vehicles against whatever hit it. Besides, they probably have drone station in the heavy vehicle to zero exposed enemy drone operators too.

@skeletonofwisdom2922 Год назад

@@joelau2383 Huh!! No. The bigger the vehicle the bigger the target. There is no apparent drone launching pod on this land whale and drone operators do their job sitting thousands of miles away. There are a number of US made missiles and drop bombs that would be happy to launch its turret up in the air.

@volairn70 Год назад

@@joelau2383 even if that were true, which definitely remains to be seen, armor isn't generally getting killed by armor in Ukraine. It is getting killed by precision artillery fires. This thing is a sitting duck when it comes to artillery.

@trygveplaustrum4634 Год назад

*Oh my gosh.* This infantry fighting vehicle can transport a maximum of *NINE PEOPLE?!* (3 crew + 6 passengers) I feel like a minivan would have similar carrying capacity, and perhaps greater maneuverability!

@truefoodsociety312 Год назад

For an army whose main advantage is people. Imagine if China put its resources to copying Toyota trucks, mounted with 50cal/manpads.

@liberty_freedom_justice Год назад

ROAST OF THE CENTURY

@Seth9809 Год назад

You're clearly a person who has no idea what a Bradley is.

@alexanderchenf1 Год назад

Yeah, FUCK Norinco. Toyota Sienna all the way

@RUTHLESSambition5 Год назад

You all listen to these people 😆😆He never seen it or used it smh imagine getting information from a person who has never seen it in person or used it. VERY RELIABLE

@tigershark7155 4 месяца назад

Those rear mgs, will be the first to go. We had 4 firing ports on the bradly, with 4 M4s cut down to screw into place. By the time I trained in 86, they were already removed and welded over. We still had a shit ton of vision blocks tho

@KlineStife 3 месяца назад

those fuel tanks look like something i'd see in a video game and go "lmao those silly gameplay balancing mechanics, that would never happen irl"

@STB-jh7od Год назад

1 of criticisms of original Bradley was it was so tall it would be an easy target, this thing dwarfs it. Wait, they mounted MGs facing rear UNDER fuel tanks-I get it's diesel, but when those tanks get shot, spew fuel, the guns would ignite it, so soldiers could be exiting IFV into burning fuel. Who needs flamethrowers when enemy is already burning their own men. FLAME ON!

@thomaszhang3101 Год назад

I think the external fuel tanks are only meant for marching. They go into combat either will empty tanks or have them removed before.

@zach11241 Год назад

Fried Chinese is pretty good!

@STB-jh7od Год назад

@Thomas Zhang That would require common sense, something most militaries lack. As a 15 year US Army veteran, I can attest to that, and China hasn't been in war since 1979, where lessons are learned, usually the hard way.

@ruskibot7745 Год назад

Those fuel tanks get taken off for the battle.

@STB-jh7od Год назад

@@zach11241 😁😄😁😄

@Sophie-and-Ken Год назад

I was armouring KBR trucks in Kuwait during the while the US was in Iraq. We were offered Chinese armour rated to stop AK47 rounds. The armour was so bad AK rounds blew right threw it. The 1/4 inch plate was made to metric 6mm where as US 1/4 inch armour is closer to 7mm. The armour was so soft we could drill trough it in seconds. My feeling is the Chinese have never mastered the manufacturing of armour plate which is why it NEEDS to be so heavy just to stand up to IFVs from the west.

@nHautamaki Год назад

Chinese steel is notoriously inconsistent. They are capable of high quality steel for their sales samples, then once the contract is signed, the dogshit starts flowing in

@yankee1376 Год назад

Government pays for armor plate, industry installs mild steel. Fortunes to be made.

@istoppedcaring6209 Год назад

to be fair, during the gulf war china was apparantly forced to reconsidder their quantity minded militairy

@briancrawford69 Год назад

They have issues manufacturing quality in lots of areas. Their jet engines aren't exactly top notch

@coryyoung7544 Год назад

@@nHautamaki honestly that sounds like every $60 knife set at least one of those knifes will last forever but the rest are trash.

@NigelDeForrest-Pearce-cv6ek 7 месяцев назад

Excellent and Outstanding Analysis!!!

@stevenr.rodriguez9997 8 месяцев назад

I greatly appreciate your honesty in your bias, and the inclusion of the sponsor message as a chapter. This video was very informative and entertaining, and I am for sure subscribing at the end of it.

@burnttoast111 Год назад

The full name of this vehicles is the VN20 is internally referred to as the "Fuqitaditon", and whenever an enhancement was suggested, the design team would say the say the vehicle's name, and work on integrating the enhancement. Also the main two guns seems to be inspired by the BMP-3, so that is kind of retro.

@theoriginalcornisgood2.0 Год назад

The concept of the gun was liked by the Chinese from the BMP3 so it was used on the ZBD-97 which started production in 1999 and the concept is now used on the vn20

@PlsHelpIforgotHowToBreathe Год назад

Severely underrated comment

@lovepeace9727 Год назад

BMP-3's 100mm gun is a genius design for that kind of vehicle. Allows you to carry fuck tonn of HE shells for fire support purposes, as well as ATGMs of all types.

@twitchykun Год назад

The machine gun placement is.....unusual.

@bradz9413 Год назад

Indeed unusual possibly revolutionary

@yankee1376 Год назад

I can easily imagine a panicked gunner chopping up his own guys.

@kurtwicklund8901 Год назад

A safety override can be included so the MGs will not fire with the ramp open.

@SoloRenegade Год назад

China mounted rear facing machineguns to shoot retreating PLA soldiers.

@sniperfi4532 Год назад

Would have been better imo to do what pmv,s like the bushmaster do and have hatches at the rear that soldiers can pop up and shoot from.

@praetorian4922 6 месяцев назад

I feel like it’s a extremely poor decision to make a IFV that doesn’t really have a good means of defending itself this freaking huge. Especially since it’s armor is really only rated to protect against 30mm. This thing would be extremely hard to miss with most AT munitions considering it’s the size of a small building.

@user-xd3kc4jw9x 4 месяца назад

这种东西是用来反步兵的

@ambasutori9053 3 месяца назад

Honestly yeah thats the thing that primarily confuses me, they take to the effort of using an MBT hull to achieve highest possible armor and it weighs 50 fucken tons, yet it can only stop 30 mills, even if impressive by IFV standard that does not justify the 50 tons

@Shilo-fc3xm 6 месяцев назад

Hey, Chris. "Has seven separate armaments on it". While I admit I sometimes have trouble counting to seven, I'm really good to counting to five...

@icy239 3 месяца назад

1. 100mm Main Gun 2. Coaxial Gun 3. RC MG on top of the turret 4. & 5. Anti-Tank missile launchers on either side of the turret 6. & 7. RC MG's mounted on the rear of the vehicle

@Shilo-fc3xm 3 месяца назад

@@icy239 Lol. I bow to you're greater knowledge, stand corrected and retract. Haha. Nice one, Icy.

@peterb2272 Год назад

I love the illustration of slat armour showing it totally failing to do anything to disrupt the incoming projectile.

@vinylrebellion Год назад

Why don't they rotate those blades to minimise gaps?

@peterb2272 Год назад

@@vinylrebellion the basic idea is not to set off the projectile but to break it. Thus the slats need to be close enough to catch it it, but to present a minimal surface area, but also be strong enough. Hence the slats are a certain size and set a particular distance apart and set sideways. The other thing to realise is that they only work against slow moving contact projectiles (e.g. RPG), which is why those top cover cope cages are utterly useless against missiles such as the top attack Javelin.

@will19125 Год назад

@peter b I am pretty sure that it doesn't work against Javalin because it is a tandem charge warhead. I am pretty sure that slat armour doesn't work against any tandem warhead, even for RPG.

@peterb2272 Год назад

@@will19125 You are correct, it wont work at all against Javelin, mainly because Javelin is not a relatively slow moving contact detonation projectile like an RPG7. And a tandem charge is there to defeat ERA. Slat armour is not ERA.

@JeZZGro Год назад

@@peterb2272 If we speak about perfect conditions where tanks is standing still, with a good andgle around 90° and you do not miss with javelin because of low acc.

@dl2839 Год назад

This IFV is sure to strain Chinese logistics in actually fueling the thing.

@Seth9809 Год назад

It's going to drink as much as a regular tank, which they have thousands of...are you stupid?

@ms3862 Год назад

Finally someone here finds the real problem and biggest problem with this vehicle. It's weights as much as a main battle tank and that means it GUZZLES fuel, fuel that China does not produce and must import and must preserve in a war to maintain supply lines. There is a reason why Japan, another country with no oil, was building small vehicles in WW2. In a war, China will quickly find out why this IFV is terrible when all the fuel depots it has to stick on the front line start getting blown up

@jakesully2868 Год назад

Yes, considering as soon as they get froggy, the west stops letting them get oil. Odd design.

@maximonkey1837 Год назад

Wouldn't they just get oil from Russia? I mean they have plenty of it and are kinda allies.

@ms3862 Год назад

@@maximonkey1837 Russia has lots of oil and yet but has trouble supplying its vehicles on the front, there is a big difference between having it and getting to where it should go

@MrPiquo 7 месяцев назад

I kind of find it an intriguing design, it sounds to me like the tank is designed from an economic supply line perspective rather than a combat operations perspective. The fuel tanks on the back look like extra fuel, not fuel for operations while in use. So a unit coming to support an ally unit can drop furl quickly just outside combat zones. Less fuel trucks are needed etc. The capabilities for firepower likely mean a reduced focus on main battle tanks while simultaneously providing extra rolls. if a army can use 250 of these vehicles instead of 200 main battle tanks that might be 30 less fuel trucks, 100 more efficient infantry support etc. They also aren’t limited to transporting infantry and can move other supplies in an urban combat zone where other vehicles are more vulnerable to insurgents. They can provide evac for injured personnel, a problem chine has had in their un peacekeeping duties. Those duties also indicate a lack of combat discipline so a thick armored transport vehicle may compensate some for scared infantry. I agree the machine guns on the back are likely to provide better coverage in urban environments. You present your front to the biggest bad on the field and use the guns to clear and protect against flanking infantry. Overall it almost seems to continue the idea of a single main battle tank that can fill even more roles. This is the opposite of navy doctrine that now eschews large ships for more smaller specialized ships. I wonder if the US had had a vehicle like this in Iraq and Afghanistan if way fewer soldiers would have died, also how big would our debt have been then.

@C-3POII45I4 Месяц назад

One key point that is missing is that weapons beginning with "VN" and "VT" are foreign trade products, the PLA does not equip them, and these weapons are heavily customised according to the customer's requirements, so a lot of the features look interesting.

@markfoster5004 9 месяцев назад

The rear-mounted mgs, exit ramp, and extra fuel tanks are a complete system. The muzzle flash of the heavy mgs ignites the fuel-soaked infantry, shocking the crap out of opposing forces and making them easier targets for supporting forces. It also motivates infantry to succeed. The 6 worst-performing infantry in each company get to ride in the first vehicle.

@MostlyPennyCat 4 месяца назад

And they're completely deaf too

@JohnJohnson-hu3um 4 месяца назад

not that the amount who exits will ever matter. Each of those holds 6 dudes?? 6

@MrWhiskers65 4 месяца назад

Reminds me of the T14!

@MrRoblcopter 4 месяца назад

Forget not that diesel does not ignite nearly as easily as gasoline does.

@TheBriarWolf 4 месяца назад

@@MrRoblcopterbut it does keep a lovely long burning flame

@Vert1cus Год назад

i want more companies to make weird things like this so i have cool stuff to use in warthunder in 10 years

@obsidianjane4413 Год назад

You forget how important the Chinese market is to Gaijin. Probably see it in game in a year.

@yuluoxianjun Год назад

@@obsidianjane4413 Gaijin is a russian company.Russian will rather to suck USA ass,but they wont admit that China is better than Russian.

@arnoldli890 Год назад

there are so many vehicles that can place on the CN tec tree, like VT4 VT4-2 VT5 ZTQ15 ZBD 04a

@onlyarandomusername Год назад

@@arnoldli890 next time use a comma (,) when typing more than one examples. it hurts my eyes reading chinese vehicle name, especially witout the use of a comma

@warrickmiller7651 Год назад

Can't wait to see the leaked specs too

@sinofpride1235 6 месяцев назад

That thing was built for a zombie apocalypse , yes, that explains the 2 machine guns in the back.

@ethanjones9765 8 месяцев назад

between the huge external fuel drums, ERA and, i would guess, autoloader that probably isn't isolated from the crew, this thing is really starting to look like an awfully elaborate rice cooker

@LinuxGalore Год назад

The whole vehicle design philosophy reminds me of Soviet era frigates with the firepower of a battleship. One huge problem with this concept, lots of ammo in a small space = enemy can aim just about anywhere and hit an ammunition magazine, then "BOOM".

@arandomcommenter412 Год назад

It worked both ways, any shot against it and it becomes the next space program, but if you get hit by it you, your ship, and your existence is getting vaporized

@tritium1998 Год назад

So you're now saying big US vehicles have a huge problem getting blown up.

@sumyunggui8750 Год назад

@@tritium1998 54 comments on this channel alone by you, yet nobody gives af. 👍😅

@WoobooRidesAgain 11 месяцев назад

BMP-3's should basically be classified as VBIEDs at this point. There are some very striking images of BMP-3's lost in Ukraine that genuinely look worse than the Sheridan wrecks from Vietnam.

@ellwoodwolf 11 месяцев назад

It’s actually only designed to drop off 6 biologically tainted soldiers.

@vanishingfolklore Год назад

The rear machine guns is reminiscent of multi turreted tank designs of the interwar period of the 1920s-1930s (The T28 and T35 etc) . It may be utilized to fire in trenches as the vehicle crosses over/drives over the trench in a side firing configuration- to suppress enemy infantry in the trench. I would assume the rear mg only fire when troops are inside the vehicle.

@klburroughsnz Год назад

Rear machine guns good for firing when running away

@vinylrebellion Год назад

Yeah I think there would be disable switch while door is open, so weakness is likely unfounded

@sharonrigs7999 Год назад

It's made in China. I'm sure it doesn't rely on safety features

@diclo383 Год назад

@@vinylrebellion ok but what's the point of the guns....

@thomashenshallhydraxis Год назад

That’s a great point; crossing trenches it could fire right down the line. Because trenches would have anti-armor weapons of some sort. Like something similar to RKG-3. Those things are perfect for trench urban warfare. Had to deal with those in Iraq and they always came out of alley to throw when we passed in deep urban areas. Harder to move around.

@farky50 6 месяцев назад

My dad was an engineer on a lot of military hardware. Funny thing is everything goes out to the cheapest bidder for most parts and come back not the spec and we end up spending more doubling or tripling the budget and time. Everytime. Precision manufacturing is expensive

@MrMikeV00 7 месяцев назад

People are raging on this thing for being the basic idea of a tank turned IFV but this seems like it is built to be first off the ramp on beach landings. Hence the rear guns. Purpose: penetrate shore defences with heavy armor and large caliber firepower, breach fortifications. Stop. Disperse and assault defences from rear with machine guns. Once you have acheived that, dismount troops and clear the fortifications. The fact they use a tank lower structure, means they are planning to pump out the numbers fast. I would suggest taking this thing very seriously. Not looking for affirmation. I know I am 100% correct. To be honest, I wouldn't call it an IFV. This is a new concept.

@josephmardesich5558 Год назад

This is like the WW2 German tank idea that was described as a land ship. It failed... Never came to fruition due to MANY holes in its ability to actually navigate various land types successfully without lots of maintenance and risk.

@drzaius8430 9 месяцев назад

Yep, the same exact problem the King Tiger faced.

@cristsan4171 9 месяцев назад

The whole 🌎 only able to supply metal enough for half of P1000 Ratte.

@Bob-hb5tr 9 месяцев назад

The Bradley claimed the Title of Land Ship many years ago...

@raffypasalo 9 месяцев назад

@@Bob-hb5tr I thought it was the LVTP-5

@erikseagrave4131 9 месяцев назад

@@Bob-hb5trBradley only weighs around 27 tons.

@yuzurucookie0227 3 месяца назад

I believe the VN20 aims to start a new and terrifying IFV assault capability inspired from WWII Blitzkrieg. Multiple of these heavily armoured IFV could be sent head-on to oversaturate enemy defense, while as they rapidly pushes through and beyond the line, the backward facing MG mow down enemy as it speed pass. The ideal execution would look like: Imagine youself holding a position A heavily armoured IFV speeds over It rushes pass you and is now on your flank Its MG spray you down Its troop then dismount and clean up Modern blitzkrieg?

@ThanksforcensoringmeYoutube 4 месяца назад

The Hooah notes were gold.

@corneliusmcmuffin3256 Год назад

It’s kind of like you combined the Namer with the BMP-3, then added ATGMs for good measure. It has the exact same main armament (100mm with coaxial 30mm) as the BMP-3, with the same basic hull layout as the Namer.

@williamspencer1978 Год назад

Theoretically seems to have a pretty solid use as an armored fire support vehicle that can also be integrated into front line armored combat without the same vulnerability as the Stryker MGS. Since it's based on a tank hull with similar protection, a 100mm gun that will likely be for anti-infantry and anti-emplacement operations with HEAT or HE, a 30mm auto cannon, an ATGM Launcher, and can carry 6 infantry, it should be pretty versatile and great in urban combat. This won't be the main Chinese IFV, but should still be able to be built in large enough numbers to allow the Chinese Army to integrate it on a doctrinal level.

@jayjay53313 Год назад

I wanted to say this and you have done it, good. Since IFV would get mostly into urban warfare, namer concept is most ideal but give it unmanned turret and thick top armor + mini CIWS to overcome top down attack missiles. Large IFV would give better protection too looking at Bradley & LAVTP-7 vulnerability in Iraqi Freedom

@accept00 Год назад

The Namer has Spike ATGMs

@ignacio3890 Год назад

Same layout who the t15 armata ifv and the same era

@voidtempering8700 Год назад

@@accept00The HJ-12 is roughly analogous with the Javelin, so it should be comparable to the Spike.

@ethanreyes9549 Год назад

You can make any war machine as big as possible. But at the end of the day it can still be punched through, you just made yourself a big target.

@u2beuser714 Год назад

It doesnt matter how big a military vehicle is, it would still be detected by its thermal signatures

@lynoluoch1891 Год назад

As proven in the war in Ukraine. The anti-tank systems available just makes these kinds of vehicles obsolete, unless you are fighting a bunch of dudes equipped with just Aks, sandals, and a couple of RPGs.

@LLAALALA Год назад

The Chinese name for VN20 is '战斗要塞' or battle fortress. Its designed to draw fire and be as big of a target as possiable. Not sure if that is a good tactic, but it sure can get the job of been shot at done putty well.

@buddermonger2000 Год назад

which is why the Russian tanks are so small

@Dotcando Год назад

The current war proves that size doesn't matter that much anymore. What matters more is that it has adequate protection.

@TheOneWhoSometimesSaysOk 8 месяцев назад

"not enuf dakka!" - chinese engineer probably

@chankenneth1650 Месяц назад

@taskandpurpose The "VN/VT Series" vehicles are intended for export purposes only, particularly for the Middle East countries (or UN Army). VN20 was initially designed for customers in the middle east rather than for PLA use. PLA used ZBD-04B (04A Heavy Armor Upgrade Version) and another new IFV is semi-heavy IFV developed from the ZTQ-15 light tank.

@chankenneth1650 Месяц назад

@taskandpurpose The geographical differences between southern and northern china are significant, and there are also neighboring India and Taiwan. In terms of armored vehicles(excluding tanks), there is a preference for light/medium-weight armored vehicles. IFVs are expected to have amphibious capabilities(04/04A/08/05). VN20 being an ultra-heavy IFV is not favored by the PLA. lt is highly likely that future PLA 4Gen MBT will lean towards being medium or light-weight rather than heavy, like the 99A. PLA decision-makers have started to question the significance of heavy armored vehicles and are increasingly leaning towards lighter options.

@TysoniusRex Год назад

It doesn't seem like the optimal design for an IFV: Only carries 6 soldiers, but needs a crew of three. Weighs almost as much as an MBT, but can't take the hits that an MBT can. It's going to burn through a lot of fuel as well. So, bigger hit on logistics.

@Phantom-bh5ru Год назад

cant take hits that a mbt can? actually it can prob take more. its frontal armor is likely simillar if not greater than the vt4 giving it MBT levels of protection. it also has era on the side which alot of MBTs dont even have. remember this weighs 50 tons, which is 2 tons less than the vt4 (The main battle tank this IFV is built on) but it lacks a tank turret and 125mm cannon and autoloader+ammo. so where is all that weight going? obviously extremely thick composite armor for its hull

@evankurniawan1311 Год назад

Even modern ATGM can absolutely trash MBT, this thing is basically IFV, that's bigger, heavier and more armoured than typical IFV. BUT the armour level didn't reached MBT, so basically just a big target

@elmohead Год назад

These things are as big as MBTs. If they have less pew pew, less armour... then what do they have inside? A sauna?

@killianlile173 Год назад

@@Phantom-bh5ru Good lord can you quit with the RU-CHINA propaganda? All your comments are out here claiming Russian and China has the best shit. It doesn't matter if this thing has ERA on the side when we've seen during the fighting in Ukraine that there's tons of ways to just hit vics from above.

@wesleyfravel5149 Год назад

@@Phantom-bh5ru The extra Weight went into the 100 MM cannon, the 30 MM Coaxil, The ammo and auto loader for both of those, the AT missiles, the machine guns, and probably a bunch into those barrels in the back. As well as the Seats and hydraulic for the hatch in the back for the infantry. In short, It has maybe the same protection as a tank, though in that case enjoy the giant fuel hungry monster that's gonna fuck up your logistics even more.

@mmcion1 Год назад

Thanks Cappy for always being curious and learning this stuff so that the average viewer can learn from the average infantryman.

@detleffegers3780 Год назад

There is no such thing as an average infantryman!

@SchwarzSchwertkampfer Год назад

7:19 he does not understand, that the machineguns are there to prevent either a brave or very st**** people, from sneaking in back of the tank. Still does not matter if the bloody thing is deployed wrong, it is just a tombstone.

@thedarkwolf2525 Год назад

@@detleffegers3780 To be fair there is no such thing as an average human

@user-sc8ev5sr1o 5 месяцев назад

Oh I love the fuel tanks right over the rear hatch that will really make a nice

@deschan2246 4 месяца назад

Big Target !!!😂 Huge fuel consumption, Distance limitations

@nemesisproject399 Год назад

I was with the first Stryker brigade to get the slat armor, actually the first Stryker brigade for the Army. I had no idea we had issues with the mobility other than extending the vehicle's size. I don't remember hearing anything negative about it, other than it was a pain to put on in Kuwait. Given we never trained on the vehicle after the armor was added, and just adapted to it in combat, I think we did well.

@redredleg4051 Год назад

3-2ID circa 2003? Good times.

@nemesisproject399 Год назад

@@redredleg4051 Yeah brother. 1-23 Tomahawk battalion.

@DirectedVerdict Год назад

I was in a Marine LAV company and the word we got about the striker is they kept rolling into canals due to the excessive weight collapsing the banks. We took over canal patrol duty from there and strykers ended up on patrol duty in the desert.

@nemesisproject399 Год назад

@@DirectedVerdict We had 2 in my regiment that did that. Maybe at some other time as well, I never heard. The way it happened, it would've happened without the slat armor, and would've happened to a LAV too. We lost 3 that night. "We took over canal patrol duty from there and strykers ended up on patrol duty in the desert." That's not what we were doing to my knowledge. We hit Samarra doing direct action missions, in city patrols, and traffic stops. The company I was with slept outside the city on the ground for that. Then we moved to Mosul to do the same, with some going to Balad and Tal-Afar. We didn't "patrol the desert", at least not my unit. This was 2004.

@hateferlife Год назад

Slat could be a pain in the ass when bent against the turn wheels. We had to winch the cage off the tires a couple of times. Stupid winch. My battalion had a couple run-ins with RKG-3s, to the best of my knowledge none of our Strykers took a RPG hit. I guess the slats were at least a deterrent? Luckily we carried 'MRE/water armor' on the top deck! Shaped charges lose steam RAPIDLY when the slug hits water. Doc got a concussion but it could have been worse. 2 SCBT 25th ID, N/NW of BIAP & Abu Ghraib AO 2007-09 Thank you to prior Stryker units for all the lessons-learned and advice!!

@rudolfyakich6653 Год назад

That was a PRECISE explanation of the IFV big enough to carry all six infantry men in total comfort.

@timbenjamin5454 2 месяца назад

The rear MGs could use a simple safety mechanism that prevents them from firing while while the rear door is open.

@jort93z 8 месяцев назад

Gotta love the big fuel tanks right above the only exit and the machine guns right next to it.

@Hollyclown Год назад

You’d think a massive target would be bad to use for island hopping, but what do I know?

@speakingwithoutnet Год назад

Especially since transport boats are China's biggest weakness.

@gelmir7322 Год назад

as demonstrated in Ukraine armor vehicles are vulnerable regardless of their size

@unknownhours Год назад

As long as it fits on an LCAC....

@yankee1376 Год назад

it is an island

@SoloRenegade Год назад

exactly, that's why Japan had few and smaller tanks in WW2.

@TheMagicalTouch Год назад

Size wise, it looks like something out of 40k

@Zunzurrun Год назад

I was thinking the same.... Paint it blue, add some transfer sheets and it's a damn marine Repulsor, weirdly placed machine guns included...

@rkbkirin5975 Год назад

FOR THE EMPEROR!

@andrewk.1310 Год назад

Likewise 😂 The emperor protects...sounds like the Chinese army is just as expendable as the imperial guard.

@GTgaming69 Год назад

Mom can we get Baneblade? No we have Baneblade at home. Baneblade at home: Ni Hao comrade

@Seth9809 Год назад

The Bradley is taller!

@13shadowwolf 7 месяцев назад

This is a sitting duck target vehicle. There are so many weapon systems that will absolutely destroy the VN-20. What I would do to counter this concept, is either drone strikes, or build a smaller vehicle that fired directed artillery from long range and used targting drones to make the calculations. Imagine taking a 155mm howitzer, and loading it with anti-armor round. The VN-20 is low an flat, send up drones, find the target, and drop 155mm rounds on it from above. Now take that idea, and build a smaller vehicle that has specific armor defeating ammo. The VN-20 is trying to cram too many concepts into one super vehicle, and that just becomes a major target on the battlefield. Build an A-10 Warthog, but a drone piloted plane, with twin rotary cannons, in the 60-100mm range. The VN-20's proflie is a big flat target from an aerial vehicle.

@Dingodile1997 5 месяцев назад

Guess the designers weren't thinking oh our troops will be vulnerable to explosives when they're disorientated from machinegun fire

@alexsmart5452 Год назад

"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake" dont point out the flaws, encourage them. for instance, diesel fuel tanks placement, very cool. Give the IFV great retro lines. Like a T62. The rear machineguns, have that IS7 ""deadly fortress of death" vibe.

@Autechltd Год назад

I'm pretty sure they took the 40k Space marine repulsor design (rear mounted machine gun shooting at dismounted troop included) and gave it tracks.

@CBRN-115 Год назад

Imperium of Man vehicle design is sexy

@studytime2570 Год назад

@@indiasuperclean6969 50 rein minh bee credited to a lovely ccp worker.

@jessemills3845 5 месяцев назад

Don't forget, China has A LOT of CARGO SHIPS, Mobility is really NOT AN ISSUE!

@user-martinpd 6 месяцев назад

Whoever designed that thing is DEFINATELY in love with me and pink and belongs to an orthograde species of 40 million years pedigree that cannot be defeated

@the_astrokhan Год назад

Reminds me of the landships that were built pre-WWII. There is a reason they stopped making them. They were too big and the multitude of weapons systems made them unable to focus on the one thing it was supposed to do really well...

@mochagoat1998 Год назад

I was thinking something similar. It’s trying to fit into one too many roles

@stephentraveler5291 Год назад

The Infantry can now have missiles that can turn them into scrape .

@FermentingSoysauce Год назад

Exactly my first thought. "Did they just get the ww2 update?" It's just a sitting target for hand-held anti tank weapons.

@user-ue2wd1rr1s Год назад

they say people learn from the last war. but you go way back.

@the_astrokhan Год назад

@@user-ue2wd1rr1s no further than their inspiration...

@SethAbercromby 9 месяцев назад

Size and weight by themselves aren't always the problem, but what an IFV needs to excel at are mobility, reliably and operational distance. An IFV should never have to expect to face armor in a direct fight. ATGMs can even the playing field a little, but like the name suggests, an IFV only wants to go up against infantry and other light armor. The VN-20 will likely operate as if it was a lighter tank, and get absolutely obliterated by anti-tank weapons.

@cplpuddingpop 8 месяцев назад

Not only that, but the design has to fit the use case. Currently the main conflict that China has on the horizon is against Taiwan, which is, ya know, an island. Imagine trying to lug a platoon of these monstrosities over the Taiwan strait. That's north of 250 tons, for IFVs for a whopping 30 soldiers, not counting crew.

@God-ch8lq 8 месяцев назад

@@cplpuddingpopand besides, sea and air warfare will be far more crucial when fighting against an island

@yecloud 8 месяцев назад

@@cplpuddingpopstop your nonsense dream. The weapons named VNxx is only for export, never in PLA. This op know nothing and talk 20 min nothing

@oron61 7 месяцев назад

This seems to be a lesson that can't be learned easiy. The US scolded South Vietam for using the M113 like a tank, and a few years later were scolding themselves for doing the same thing.

@Blorb137 6 месяцев назад

They are probably just trying to export them to people who bought the VF-4

@Bigdingdongslap 3 месяца назад

Everyone talking about the tank being too heavy for bridges but its too heavy for ships,sand,snow and mud so luck deploying it anywhere.

@karlk7070 5 месяцев назад

The name code suggests that these are for international sale. China's hilly & Taiwan's mountainous/amphibious environment both don't support heavy vehicles. The tanks that Chinese use are lighter than its competitors. The manufacturer particularly bragged about its protection gainst mines & roadside bombs so it is probably made for Middle Eastern old customers.

@bigmommadeadlock3945 Год назад

I love the fact that it's using a BMP-3 set up for it's main armament.

@simonyip5978 Год назад

It already used by the ZBD-04A IFV (100mm/30mm/coax mg). The original ZBD-04 was known as the Type 97 IFV so this weapons fit has been used by the PLA for well over 20 years.

@SabinStargem Год назад

Instead of the two remote guns, I would add a pillar to the tank with a remote controlled machine-gun blister at the top. The idea being, that would allow the guntower blister to rotate around, up, and down, to get at any infantry or drones within reach. The downsides would be visibility, and whether such a design can actually work.

@ritikshaw5868 Год назад

Add sails to the mast too. Added speed. And it can be a bigger target.

@kennys9644 Год назад

That's actually a great solution! Reminds me of the M3 Lee. Another possible downside to this would be raising vehicle height, thus providing a larger target, but I think the Chinese would actually consider this a bonus: more visibility!!!

@WamuroRiXi08 Год назад

Germany's Marder IFV did tried that before but removed it in later variants.

@bobthebuilder1360 Год назад

Instead of 2 machine guns it should be 2 40 mm grenade launchers. Shit make the smoke launchers shoot 40 mm grenades too

@Shvetsario День назад

@@bobthebuilder1360 That's some Warhammer 400k sht

@OgrabliatorKorovanov 4 месяца назад

they probably have some safety locks that disable mashinguns when that back door is opened

@nomadchad8243 4 месяца назад

I have a Norinco M14 and it has a pot metal bolt. Its known to crack at the lugs very quickly.

@unknownhours Год назад

On the topic of precision manufacturing, I once sent out a drawing with dimensions out to four decimal places. Instead of saying "no", like a sane person, they came back and asked "are you sure?". 0.0001 inches is getting down to the size of larger microbes.

@specialnewb9821 Год назад

Precision manufacturing in inches? 😬

@Typexviiib Год назад

@@specialnewb9821 ya, in the us inches is pretty standard in machine shops. As a die maker, inches is a more accurate scale if you're using normal micrometers. Metric mics measure to .01mm and standard mics measure to .0001 inch. .01 mm is .0004 inches, so I can accurately measure quite a bit smaller with my standard mics. Does it matter? Not unless you're in a climate controled room. You'll see more than .0003 of an inch change in size between summer and winter out doors with metal parts.

@EckCop Год назад

10ths matter for fine fits, particularly in unyielding materials.

@the-fantabulous-g Год назад

Also a cultural thing. The concept of “face” means they try to assume that the person meant what they want, and if they wanted something unreasonable like micron-level precision, they’d try in a slightly roundabout way to ask for you to reconsider what you’re asking. They’re trying to respect your wishes while telling you that you’re asking for something impossible. That, and language barriers too.

@unknownhours Год назад

@@the-fantabulous-g no, this was a us shop with an edm machine. I think they could have done it, but at higher cost and longer lead time than I would have wanted, but the fact that's even possible is wild. The dimensions were only supposed to go out to three places.

@whitemagicalhat2844 11 месяцев назад

A very large IFV of such specifications sounds like a good idea on paper, as the larger size and heavier tonnage would enable the vehicle to carry heavier engines, more firepower and larger capacity for more infantry...but then reality sets in. Larger profile means larger target for everything from man-portable anti-tank to kamikaze drones to artillery. Then the tonnage of the vehicle itself can also be a downside, because if such an IFV is lost or damaged, it becomes more difficult to retrieve and repair because of it's heavier weight. Sturdier and more buoyant pontoon bridges would also be needed to support heavier vehicles in a river crossing operation where such vehicles are not amphibious. Larger IFVs are additionally more expensive to mass-produce than smaller IFVs, in much the same way that MBTs are more expensive than IFVs. The additional space for more or larger caliber ammunition is also offset by the increased risk of ammunition detonation in the event of a successful penetration, but then again, a roomier crew compartment can offset this danger to some degree as well, and wet ammunition stowage has been a thing for a good while now. In theory, an IFV of such size would be able to advance and fight right alongside main battle tanks while carrying mechanized infantry. But in practice, against the popularity of cheap and readily available anti-tank weapons, modern artillery systems, and the relatively recent innovation of kamikaze drones, it would probably end up just becoming another target.

@supremegreaser2399 9 месяцев назад

I just want to say that all IFV’s are getting bigger than heavier, for example the puma is a chonker and so is the boxer.

@SpaceAtomz 9 месяцев назад

Pretty crazy it only holds 6 infantrymen

@aguywithahelmet 9 месяцев назад

@@SpaceAtomz Yeah

@kellerqc9110 9 месяцев назад

At 50 tons that baby must drink fuel like no one buisness and considering china division size its gonna be a fuel intensive army. Which remind me of another fuel intensive army who's a failure.

@skyper8934 9 месяцев назад

By looking at modern war between relatively new tech, with Russia and Ukraine, basically NATO vs Soviets, we saw how well or bad certain types of weapons do in reality. We all that it's way easier to destroy a tank then to defend it, that it's almost impossible to use it in urban areas and in the open you'll blow it up either from RPG, drones, Aircrafts, Mines and artillery. So MAYBE the Chinese wunderwaffen can do well in an Urban situation, as the heavy armor would have no problem at tanking RPG while all the firepower can and would suppress enemy troops. In this age, you either build an extremely tanky and expensive tank, or you go cheap. A T-55AGM costs roughly 500k, while a leopard 2 costs 6 millions. Why should you buy a Leopard 2 that can still get oneshotted by a T-55AGM, when you can buy 12 T-55AGM?

@alexbyrd7209 8 месяцев назад

If I am not mistaken Merkava is a tank and infantry vehicle as well. Same idea ?

@shockwave6213 4 месяца назад

Its certainly not the first IFV built on an MBT chassis. The Russian BMP-T Terminator on a T-72 hull and Namer IFV based on the Merkava are the best 2 examples I can think of

@KonigGustavAdolph Год назад

Those are going to look awesome for scuba divers 10 years from now.

@J_X999 Год назад

China's going to collapse 🥸

@jacobnormann6678 Год назад

For me this looks like a vehicle designed by manufacturers to be advertised as the ideal vehicle to attack hardened trench positions, where it could hit the positions with heavy weapons while approaching to clear a path, cross the trench, then use the rear MGs to fire to the left and right to suppress the trench while infantry dismounts and makes a beeline for the spot the vehicle crossed over

@jaketwigg1065 Год назад

Looks big and easy to shoot

@seaofenergy2765 Год назад

Infantry should not be dismounting while those rear facing guns are firing...

@jacobnormann6678 Год назад

@@seaofenergy2765 and that is why no one will remember your name

@seaofenergy2765 Год назад

@@jacobnormann6678 🤣 coherent response there Jacob Normann. Have you taken your medication? Btw its Ironic that someone with such a forgettable name would say that.

@modarkthemauler Год назад

@@jaketwigg1065 And is armored enough to need anti tank weapons to stop. Also becomes a bunker/turret when the tracks break but the hull itself isn't breached.

@arkadiuszjuszczak565 6 месяцев назад

Good luck servicing it with only just 3 people crew.

@Charlesbabbage2209 10 месяцев назад

The assumption with the rear mounted machine guns is that they can even be fired when the rear hatch is open. It wouldn't be terribly difficult to write a few lines of code to disable them when the hatch opens. Also, if you need to shoot those guns(because the enemy is out there), why would you open the hatch and give the six commandos the opportunity to become hamburger from enemy fire?

@riograndedosulball248 9 месяцев назад

Yeah but if the enemy is in your 6, everything is wrong already. Where is your support infantry, where are the other armoured units to support you, and why isn't the turret trained on the enemy yet? Rear mounted machine guns is an idea that was made obsolete in early WW2

@zachnar0125 9 месяцев назад

@@riograndedosulball248 They're planning for the Zombie Virus they unleash next......

@buck45osu 9 месяцев назад

@riograndedosulball248 it's like Japan making cruiser/carriers in ww2. If you are having to design for something like that, you have already lost the situation.

@aaaaaaaard9586 9 месяцев назад

If you think about it the design makes perfect sense. See the biggest enemy of CCP isn't US, Taiwan nor India, it's the Chinese people. Human rights activists, democratic protestors, Qi gong practitioners, martial arts instructors, real estate investment scam victims etc. It serves the ccp to have their IFV look huge and intimidating with a lot of guns to scare its civilians,.

@mustangmckraken1150 9 месяцев назад

If the enemy is behind you to the point that you need a machine gun the crew will soon be hamburger from missiles lol

@mackiesncheese 7 месяцев назад

I think the double machine guns are interesting as they would not be firing when the troops are exiting the tank as which means the enemy is already in the position to shoot anyone coming out.

@Windows98R 3 месяца назад

I feel like they missed the point of IFVs… they are meant to be plentiful, relatively cheap, easy to transport while being better than trucks or on foot. It isn’t supposed to be shoulder to shoulder with your gas guzzling MBTs. That’s a quick way to strain your resupply lines during an extended combat.

@bassett_green Год назад

3:06 for clarification, do the 6 infantry have to be Chinese? If so, are they included for free in the export version?

@Aurora4804 Год назад

Depending on the particular "export" location I'm sure that's the intention 😂

@SoloRenegade Год назад

Japan in WW2: built smaller tanks, had few of them, because of mountainous and island terrain made armored warfare difficult to impractical at times. China 2023: builds massive IFVs ignoring their terrain issues.

@kurtwicklund8901 Год назад

Japan's small tanks, in terms of size and number, was due mostly to competition for steel. The Navy won that competition. Besides, China is not Japan.

@SpaghetteMan Год назад

that's a false equivalence, most of Taiwan's main cities are facing China. If an invasion is to occur in Taiwan, there's going to be brutal city fights from day 1. Such a heavy IFV would almost be essential to push through defensive lines.

@nhatho1723 Год назад

@@SpaghetteManyeah you don’t get stuck in mud in cities. Mobility is not as important.

@miked999 Год назад

@@kurtwicklund8901 China needs these IFVs to fight Tibet when it declares independence

@matthewgibbs6886 Год назад

@@miked999 they going to make the pedo lama president

@phantomforester9337 9 месяцев назад

Maybe the smoke grenade launchers are reloadable from within the vehicle. They are mounted with their rear ends directly facing into the turret, whereas the launchers on the predecessor IFV are clearly attached on the outside.

@wesleyfravel5149 Год назад

My problem with this type of vehicle is it’s gonna be expensive to run do to the weight and fuel hungry to boot. I mean maybe it could work if it was to be assaulting with tanks to keep up with them? This seems like overkill on a vehicle meaning it’s simply not gonna be worth the added cost compared to say a Bradley or a BMP.

@Seth9809 Год назад

Uh no, it's lighter than a tank and it drinks as much as a tank. They have thousands of tanks..... This is likely going to cost as much as a Type-99, it has way less tech in it and the exact same armor.

@wesleyfravel5149 Год назад

@@Seth9809 You can have 1000s of anything, if it drinks as much as a tank, typically the most fuel hungry vics in an army, congrats, you need a lot more fuel to run your army. That mean more fuel trucks and storage, easier to target by enemy forces, and meaning your army may be brought to a standstill more easily. Ask the Russians what happens when you run out of fuel mid invasion.

@danielch6662 Год назад

The US is not selling Bradleys to third world countries in Africa and South Asia. Buying countries would likely end up using them as light tanks that carries their own supporting infantry. And 9 times out of 10, to keep the gov in power, rather than to fight neighbours.

@arthurmosel808 Год назад

Wonderfully awful for amphibious warfare. How many could carried on a landing ship.

@voidtempering8700 Год назад

@@arthurmosel808 Shy would they be in a landing ship?

@brianjohnson5272 9 месяцев назад

As i keep mentioning, a drone capable of carrying a 4 lb shape charge and detonating on it engine block a Shape charge pointed down can turn vehicles into very expensive lawn ornaments. Doing this while the troops are formed up behind said to be lawn ornament in a MINEFIELD and you not only halt an enemy push, you create a kill box for tank crew, infantry, and a nations economy.

@buddy3852 9 месяцев назад

Tank warfare is dying for many reasons

@joemancool 8 месяцев назад

The other issue is top down missile fire. The javellin has proven time and time again that no matter how much ERA and armor you slap on something your roof is still the most vulnerable thing on any vehicle, and this thing just screams BIG target for any javellins or AT systems. (I also saw on the vn20 it doesnt appear to have any ability to counter top down missile fire save suppressing the operator prior to launch. which is suprising because of how much we've seen from ukraine on the effectiveness on both top down missiles and drone based Armor fighting tech.

@brianjohnson5272 8 месяцев назад

@joemancool im also looking at, cost, needed training, availability, and speed of manufacture. I missile takes at least hundreds of thousands to produce. For that a lot of suicide drones like mine could be made.

@Ld7snake 6 месяцев назад

@@buddy3852not necessarily, you need to realize WHY tanks came about in the first place. you may see more drones being utilized to the point that tanks become obsolete because of drones being able to cheaply and reliably destroy tanks and armored vehicles safely and ,most importantly economical. you will see that you don’t need to spend billions of dollars on a single tank when a $100 drone from wal-mart and some shaped charges can destroy it in seconds. mark my words. you will see a greater emphasis on remote controlled vehicles that will be smaller and more efficient due to lack of needing a crew to man it. same thing goes for cyber warfare. you will reach a point of stalemate until innovation comes back to counter it

@ZZtop-ci3hi 4 месяца назад

@@buddy3852 tank warfare will never die. There’s no substitution and many people who study war history have said this countless times. Will they most likely become lighter, faster and better overhead protection? Sure but tank warfare IS NEVER going to end. Holy. So many people commenting the same useless shit.

@foxxowoxxowillow7855 Месяц назад

I think the problem with this vehicle, honestly, is that transporting troops just doesn't add much to it. It really wants to be something like the M10 Booker. A modern light tank kind of thing that can resist fire from most other light vehicles, while also being useful for supporting the infantry. But not necessarily a troop transport nor a tank meant to engage other tanks. However, it's just not a good IFV for transporting infantry, as its clearly much better suited to being a light tank focused on being a close support vehicle. So all having that does is just make it bigger, more complex, and heavier.

@elrondhubbard7059 9 месяцев назад

SASAC, or, State-owned Assets, Supervision and Administration Commission of the State Council. That sounds fun.

@thenegociater3387 Год назад

Reminds me of a Merkava MBT infantry carrier. The Merkava operates with essentially 0 logistical tail as it only drive around Israel (for now). Another angle could be reports of the BMP Terminator's combat effectiveness in Ukraine. Depending on which side's reports you subscribe to, it would heavily influence your perception of such a concept.

@guss77 Год назад

The comparison to the Namer IFV is apt - over engineered and under speced (though from this review the Namer specs will eat a VN20 for breakfast), it is so not cost effective that it isn't deployed in any capability except for vanity purposes - the Namer IFV never got a non prototype build, and Namer APC deployments are so behind the original hopes of 100 units in service, that AVD managed to develop a whole new (and much more cost effective) wheeled IFV from scratch in the time it took to deploy the few Namers that are currently in service.

@agentorange9867 Год назад

Russia lies at every single step they take. How can you even belive any of the russian claims at this point?

@lovepeace9727 Год назад

Merkava's armor is good, tho main problem of this vehicle is lack of firepower, but they are fixing it now, cuz M2 50 cal. on CROWS is simply not enough. BMPT terminator fucking shreds forests and trenches for monts now and only one was destroyed (crew abandoned it and ukrainians used heavy artillery to fully destroy it by hitting it's roof). Lots of videos and photos of this vehicle taking hits and making it back during high intensity combat situations, so yeah, heavy IFV with lots of firepower is a good thing to have, especially in infantry centric warfare we see these days. BTRT program soviets had back in the days - closest thing to prefect heavy IFV/APC in my opinion.

@guss77 Год назад

@@lovepeace9727 shredding forests is not a good use of military hardware, I believe... Generally, I think fielding heavy weaponry should be done on a dedicated platform - MBTs and similar. A well armored APC paired with a light tank will give you about the same amount of fire power in a much more effective package (in both hardware cost, personnel costs and deployment flexibility). If you can afford an MBT - so much better. For example, the German Puma IFV cost is about EUR 17M / unit. A Merkava 4 + Namer combo will set you back ~EUR 6 M , for which you get more infantry, more fire power and better trained operators (you don't have to train infantry troops to do all they do and on top of that operate a highly technical fighting vehicle).

@Furzkampfbomber Год назад

Please forgive my ignorance, but the BMP Terminator is the BMP modified for urban combat?

@gareththompson2708 Год назад

6 dismounts isn't very much. Particularly when you account for casualties (I seem to recall a post-WW2 infantry conference concluding that squads should be designed on the assumption that they will always be under-strength by at least 25%). In order to get a respectable squad size they will need to either have two IFVs to carry each squad, resulting in either very few squads per platoon, or a lot of IFVs per platoon, or do a complicated cross loading procedure like American Bradley platoons.

@dustycarrier4413 Год назад

Really, the biggest problem with this is that it's a light tank designed to be an IFV.

@imgvillasrc1608 Год назад

@@dustycarrier4413 As mentioned for its marketing, the VN20 is considered a heavy duty vehicle all rolled as one platform. That statement alone just proves that the idea of making an IFV-MBT hybrid is the worst of both worlds.

@voidtempering8700 Год назад

@@imgvillasrc1608 How is it an MBT hybrid, nothing about its role shows it to perform similar to an MBT.

@imgvillasrc1608 Год назад

@VoidTempering The hull armor is the same as the VT-4 (well, it is based on it), and the main gun is 100mm, more or less the same as what most Cold War MBTs were armed with.

@voidtempering8700 Год назад

@@imgvillasrc1608 It doesn't fulfill the role of an MBT though, the UAE might use it like that though. However, the role of an MBT is determined by doctrine, not its capabilities. Besides, it uses a low-pressure 100mm gun which is just an evolution of the 73mm gun that the original BMP-1 used. It uses almost the same turret as the BMP-3. That is not the gun of an MBT.