Clone of a certain US vehicle?

Seems to keep the general lines of Chinese APC's, just (maybe, hard to tell exactly) lenghtened and with some navalisation - seems to be smaller than EFV and perhaps designed for just one squad, no?

IIRC that's just the amphibious version of the Chinese ZBD-97 (the one with BMP-3 turret). Although why they need to further amphibize the already-amphibious ZBD is beyond me.

because amphibious for PLA means swimming directly from the mainland to one of those off shore islands?

More like swimming from the mainland to Taiwan..

well, the 100 miles strait is a bit much even for EFV (formerly knows as AAAV). Marine Corps over the horizon landing doctrine calls for launch from ships 25 miles from shore. GlobalSecurity specs credits EFV with 65 nautial miles range at 20knots. EFV is of course a much bigger IFV than the Type97.

Not all IFV's are equally 'amphibious'. For instance, comparing an ocean going landing craft type like the AAV-7 to say, a BMP is disingenious. A lot of 'amphibious' vehicles will not sink in still water and can use their tracks to push themselves to the other side of a river with little current. That's not the same as an amphibious vehicle with water jets (AAV-7). It would probably be better to seperate vehicles into the category of IFVs that are amphibious for river opperations and true Amtracks.

Tank turret

Nice camo

Indeed.

Who was in charge of uniform design? Ali G? They want to be invisible when charging in open boats towards the beach ( ), yes, but when they are on dry land? What then?

Didn't you guys get the memo? The new Marine Amphib's are being built in China to save the DoD big money...

As for the Cammo, probably good in surf and urban areas...like Taipei etc...

Only if they are going to a gangsta hip hop party in Taipei...

Can you imagine sitting in one of those buckets over water for 5+ hours ? I find it hard to imagine you'd be in top combat shape after that!

A LOT better than what the guys hitting Normandy experienced.

which is why I question the feasibility of swimming directly across the Taiwan Strait.

New AAV to the left of Type-96G.

Being in one of those things in the open ocean for 5 hours would be a lot worse than the few minutes the troops endured in landing craft at Normandy. As to what the reception the other end would be like in comparison, your guess is as good as mine.

With the huge forward trim device and the waterjets, I suppose it could come close to AAV7 performance in coastal waters. So they might be looking at underway launch from a stern well ship or splashing from the bow doors of an LST/LCT type vessel and swimming to a beach. But I would not have much hopes for it in surf. I wonder where the waterline and center of buoyancy rest on that thing at combat load??

PRC to Taiwan [or the reverse] is, of course, a shipping event, not for craft.

Actually, what is most reminds me of is that partial size mock up hull that Jacques has in his front yard







What are the red horizontal things?
The bow on that thing is going to make negotiating any slope nigh impossible.





You like that? How about this? -



Nothing says camouflage like orange!

Stairs

thanks! I see it now!

I wish! I would need to have a front yard to do something that cool, not the postage stamp with green hair I have now... maybe i cn convince Camp Ripley to do full scale mockups of interesting OpFor vehicles?

Entering service in numbers now...

In service with PLA Marine Corps.

Somehow managed to read the thread title as, "New Chinese Ambitious AFV" - which resulted in me being a little disappointed...

We still need to see the freeboard [part above the waterline] waterborne, then we will know if it can be called Amphibious, or just 'Ambitious'....

About the camouflage; there's a tiny chance that it can be turned with different camouflage pattern on the other side.
This camouflage seems to be useful only in specific urban, rocky, coastline, night and smoke conditions.

It would of course also reduce small arms fratricide of both parties.

A bit like this you mean?...

Even in the fuzzy second photo, they look as if they are rolling on the bottom, rather than actually floating.

Yes, definitely touched down, starting to collapse the forward trim vanes. Note the sea chop, not even rollers, but turbid enough for these. Note the distant vehicle in the upper pic, he looks like he is floating, with very little of the upper hull visible. Are these loaded? Is that an outboard motor contraption on the stern of the foregound vehicle in that upper pic?

If everythng goes bad, they all crawl out the turret hatch?

Good luck, they will need it! Makes one prefer a helicopter!

This will lend a whole new meaning to the words 'naval warfare'.... imagine, fleets of ZBD-97s and Amphigav!ns locked in life-or-death combat on the high seas!! My god, the carnage!! Bring on the 8-inchers!! Fetch me my cutlass and stand by to repel boarders!!

Sparky must be soiling his drawers right about now...

Is the Mercury outboard standard equipment?

I've seen at least one previous amphib where this was standard equipment, or at least several examples in the same photo had them. Actually it doesn't seem like a horrible idea; its a little clumsy and leaves your amphib motor unarmored but it makes up a lot in simplicity. Having the main engine drive pump jets (AAV-7) or extra propellers (USMC LAV-1's) is perhaps a more complete but expensive solution. Particularly if you plan to only use the equipment one way...

That said barring a lot of jerry cans on the roof of the vehicle I don't see how they could cross the straight fuel wise. And if they did over load them with fuel they would need very calm seas to cross with that free board. You could practically sink an assault wave just driving a tug boat across their line of advance. And yes, combat readiness of the crew after such a voyage I expect to be abysmal. I suspect operationally if such an invassion were planned they would be lowered into the water or driven off a causway ramp from a larger ship, perhaps a simple Ro-Ro or car carrier ship re-tasked.

In the clearer two vehicel shot, the foreground vehicle with the "Mercury" outboard is a BMP-1. My guess is that it neded the outboard to actually get moving in teh surf as it only has its tracks to propel it. Kinda like taking the old M113 out for a swim...

As for the AAV in the background, it ooks like it has the same barrel as the BTR-3E Ukrainian variant...long 30mm with the back half reinforced with "bars"? Or is this a local chinese copy/design?

Now, has anyone confirmed what the two variants are? There is a long barreled version, most of the photos above, that seems to be fire support/anti-tank and there is a short barrelled version, as mentioned with the BTR-3E style gun, that would be a APC?

The front vehicle in that photo is the Type-86G amphibious modification of the Type-86 (WZ501). This has served in the armoured regiment of PLAMC for some years. Behind is the ZBD-04 AAV which appears to be replacing the ZSD-63C amphibious APC in marine infantry battalions. The ZDB-04 does sport a gun/turret visually very similar to the Ukrainian one - perhaps other Tanknetters can confirm the origin (I mean you Baron Harkonen). ZBD-04 is nothing to do with ZBD-97, which is the Army one with the old BMP-3 turret.
ZTL05 is the fire support variant with 105mm turret gun.

OK, on these last three shots, I'd say that the freeboard looks survivable. Like the USMC 105mm howitzer-armed LVTH-6, though, it will have sharply restricted ammo capacity waterborne vice on land.

BTW, these are still ship-to-shore equipment items; nobody should even think of crossing the straits this way!

I was really curious about that outboard motor as well.

That begs the question if it would be more effective to come up with an outboard motor arrangement that can feed off the main fuel tanks and later jettisoned or removed if not needed rather than all of those integrated prop and or water jet systems?

CACI, Inc. had an ingenious sea sled it was marketing c.1988 but I have never found a sign of it on the web. The version I rode that year carried an LAV-25. Certified for state 3 seas, it used a pair of Detroit Diesels and waterjets to hit the beach after cruising in planing mode after a well deck launch. The controls were remoted to the vehicle commander via a cable, so he was his own coxswain, tossing the box aside as he drove off. The company claimed it could go at least to amtrac size/weight, perhaps MBT. Whether it worked or not, it was doomed in the eyes of the USN, for it was too cheap, threatened all kinds of procurement programs!

Yeah, I knew I woudl get "scolded" for using russian instead of chinese designators.

On an aside, I think these would make for some freaking cool 1/35 models. The massive trim vane of the ZTL05 just has a cool look.

Do we know what speeds the ZTL-05 or the ZBD-04 can do in the water, or is that classified?

Nice cutaway...