@XM803ENJOYER46 Regarding the official disclosure of this issue, I think it can start with the Type 99A tank. There is a saying on the Chinese Internet that "if it's too outdated, it can be shown." Mao Ning, the designer of the Type 99A tank, once disclosed in a media program that the penetration of the DTC 10 125 (under Chinese standards) fired by the Type 99A is no less than the main armor area of the Type 99A tank's body resistance to penetration (680mm).

@XM803ENJOYER46 Haha, indeed. But you need to consider multiple information sources. First, the Zhuhai Airshow. You know, North Industries has a heavy weapons booth every year, with exhibits including the Type 15 tank, the VT4 tank, the VT2 tank... There are also many 105mm armor-piercing shells (DTW 105, BTA2 (1.1m long), DTC 02 105 (PLA's third-generation 105mm armor-piercing shell for self-use)... These are all export products, so related customers can get approximate data standards, such as the length of the armor-piercing shell rod, and thus the relevant data leaks out. Secondly, there was once a 105mm armor-piercing shell rod that leaked on Xianyu (a Chinese second-hand trading platform) (hahaha, yes, you read that right). Thirdly, many netizens can obtain the overall picture from the details through the patents published by relevant research institutes (for example, a patent registered on May 21, 2020, named "A processing technology for a large aspect ratio sabot armor-piercing projectile base", with the patent number 202010435931.X, which is believed to be the nose cone design of the 105-4). Finally, as you said, Gaijin is simply a very great intelligence agency (once the manual of the Type 15 tank was leaked).

@CorporalWojak below

@CHRT2025 while all that seems reasonable, can we really trust those facts? I don’t think anything a world superpower will release about how they limit/allow APFSDS capabilities will be truly accurate.

Maybe it is right,
but if I were China I would NOT release a single document (except for the exclusive use of Gaijin.

@CHRT2025 That's actually very interesting, Thanks for the info!

@XM803ENJOYER46 I enjoyed it bro, you we're amazing! take care!

太快了这也，紧跟时事啊ψ(｀∇´)ψ

@CorporalWojak Here I'm referring to the fourth-generation 105mm armor-piercing shell, not the third-generation one (DTC 02 105). It should be noted that the third-generation 125mm armor-piercing shell can penetrate 680mm of homogeneous steel armor at a 90% probability at a distance of 2000 meters with a propellant temperature of 15 degrees Celsius (vertical semi-infinite target). The NATO testing standard is generally a 50% probability of penetration at 21 degrees Celsius (60° inclined target), which is a more lenient standard than China's V90. Under the same penetration depth data, the value measured by the NATO standard is usually about 8% to 12% higher than that of the Chinese standard.

Under the NATO testing standard, several representative NATO armor-piercing shells have a penetration depth of around 700mm at a distance of 2000 meters for the DM63, and around 750mm for the M829A4 (depleted uranium penetrator). Directly comparing the data, converting the 680mm penetration depth of the Chinese third-generation shell (V90) to the NATO V50 standard results in a penetration depth of approximately 740-760mm; however, considering the normalization effect in the NATO 60° inclined target test, the equivalent vertical penetration depth is around 720mm. The rod length of the DTC-10 125 is 680mm, while the new 105mm shell is 1.1m, which to some extent can make up for the speed issue.

@CorporalWojak yeah this is one of those topics where us measly citizens have very little full proof knowledge. Thanks for not getting all salty or anything, very rare to come by on the ol’ internet

《坦克是没有后视镜的》

@CHRT2025 "Should Have"

@XM803ENJOYER46 I understand bro and to an extent you are right, so good one on you!

"所以世界上的民族, 我们最大; 世界上的历史, 我们最长. 这不是偶然, 是当然."
- 傅斯年

@CorporalWojak The new 105-millimeter shell should have a penetration depth of over 680 millimeters.

好，把他们上市！

请问是否可以制作一个无模组版本，我真的很想要（同样我也会为其制作一个涂装）

Might i be able to get your assistance with building a turret?

@Taboritsky and yeah neither am I an expert 💀

@CorporalWojak I understand what you are getting at. A 120mm would be better in most cases. I’m just saying that kinetic energy is what matters most ( of course, it could result it higher ricochet chances ).

瞄准强敌打，瞄准强敌练！

Well, in fact, this tank is not designed for frontal combat, but for information warfare. Imagine that you are fighting on a plain thousands of miles away, and she has locked your tank. .......

@XM803ENJOYER46 I'm no fucking expert by the way I'm just having fun with the mental gymnastics of this, good one on you though, you're real good.

@XM803ENJOYER46 you're right about the velocity having the same Kinetic energy, while a lightweight shell does maintain speed for longer, the tradeoff is that when it impacts, it probably wouldn't have enough weight to punch through, it would probably just shatter or ricochet, you could use the argument that the older M1 models did use a 105, and in some case you might be right that a 105 can still be applicable to today's Armor on Armor engagements, but given the advancements on Composite protection and add-on protection, you would for sure, need more than just 1 105 shell to completely knock out a modern MBT, In Armor school, You are instructed that if you are seen, don't be acquired, if you are acquired, don't be hit, and if you are hit, don't die. With that said, if you have to take more than 1 shot to at least disable a modern MBT, you would immediately be acquired and destroyed if you don't act fast enough and reposition, It takes only a second for a well trained crew on an abrams to spot something in the thermals and immediately acquire the source. Maybe this Chinese 105 has a great material for it's ammo? I don't know, But my point is, Kinetic Energy is one thing to a successful Kinetic Penetrator Round, but Weight and Material plays the largest role to a successful penetration, If you don't have enough momentum to punch through a thick steel of armor with added ERAs or NERAs, the survivability onion is what could save you, which means that things have gone bad if you had resort to it.

@CorporalWojak since KE = 1/2 (mass*velocity)squared, a heavier, faster shell will be the best. But the heavier a shell gets, the harder it is to speed it up so some tank designs have a smaller, faster shell in order to save space in the crew compartment, a (usually) lighter gun breech and barrel, and ease of loading if it doesn’t have an autoloader

@CorporalWojak it is not a balance like you said. I will admit it will probably be less kinetic energy in total bc it’s most likely a similar velocity and weight/material.
However, a shell that weighs 20kg traveled at 1000m/s, it would have the same KE as a 30kg shell going 816m/s. Velocity is very important for a smaller shell that weighs less. It is more aerodynamic so it can maintain high speeds for longer.