China 2025 Victory Day Parade (preparations, new equipment)

yeetmahboi said:
Those are too haphazardly stocked to be reloads.
Click to expand...
Nothing haphazard about it IMO, they're angled to cover where the under-turret-front launchers won't cover. Note that the MICV has the same under-turret-front arrangement, but not the roof-mounted one, which argues both sets are smoke dischargers.
 
Uuuuiiiuu said:
That MBT is packed with sensors.
Click to expand...
It actually seems to me to be seriously short of sensors. It's got one sensor turret integrated in the RWS and what's possibly a fixed gunners sight at front left, so does that mean the RWS is also the commander's hunter-killer sight? In which case that RWS has to do at least two, if not three tasks - commander's sight, close defence, and possibly counter-UAV, which could leave it needing to point in three directions at once.
 
mokahete said:
Can also potentially be used to cut/destroy undersea cables of taiwan, with less chance of being detected and intercepted.
Click to expand...
Wrong form-factor for that kind of job, IMO. Whenever you see underwater engineering ROVs they're all kind of squat, with multiple thrusters to give them the manoeuvrability needed to do the job. This is built to go in one direction, not to engage in precise 3D manoeuvring.
 
DWG said:
It actually seems to me to be seriously short of sensors. It's got one sensor turret integrated in the RWS and what's possibly a fixed gunners sight at front left, so does that mean the RWS is also the commander's hunter-killer sight? In which case that RWS has to do at least two, if not three tasks - commander's sight, close defence, and possibly counter-UAV, which could leave it needing to point in three directions at once.
Click to expand...
The theory is that the CITV is retractable, if you look at the turret there are two circular cutouts. One of them might be the CITV. The gunner sight is probably integrated into the turret face. Quite alot of stuff is flush with this vehicle from the looks. Even the APS launchers might be retractable as it was on the prototype.
 
This parade is going to have some really cool gear on display that is for sure. Pretty impressive array of systems.
 
Tomboy said:
The theory is that the CITV is retractable, if you look at the turret there are two circular cutouts. One of them might be the CITV. The gunner sight is probably integrated into the turret face. Quite alot of stuff is flush with this vehicle from the looks. Even the APS launchers might be retractable as it was on the prototype.
Click to expand...
I don't think there is any conceivable reason to make CITV retractable. That optics takes best visible position on the vehicle, with best FoV.
It is CITV.
RWS is commander's quick reaction weapon (which most likely can engage drones), and CITV is enough to work as a fire control director for it. Early warning in this setup will be done necessarily by other sensors, which it has in abundance.

Also, btw, it's literally the same optics as on new airborne IFV CITV...
 
Last edited:
DWG said:
It actually seems to me to be seriously short of sensors. It's got one sensor turret integrated in the RWS and what's possibly a fixed gunners sight at front left, so does that mean the RWS is also the commander's hunter-killer sight? In which case that RWS has to do at least two, if not three tasks - commander's sight, close defence, and possibly counter-UAV, which could leave it needing to point in three directions at once.
Click to expand...
They are under retractable hatches.
 
Nx4eu said:
I believe all are supposed to fit in the Type 055's UVLS
Click to expand...
I'm not arguing that all of those could/would be designed to fit into the big UVLS tubes.

But what mission would each one do? There's two different HGVs and a hypersonic cruise missile in play, plus a high-supersonic cruise missile.
 
Scott Kenny said:
I'm not arguing that all of those could/would be designed to fit into the big UVLS tubes.

But what mission would each one do? There's two different HGVs and a hypersonic cruise missile in play, plus a high-supersonic cruise missile.
Click to expand...
All designs have unique flight profiles, and maneuverability profiles coupled with extremely high speed. I believe an attack combining multiple different types of hypersonic missiles may prove incredibly difficult to completely defend against. Personally, they all seem to be anti-ship orientated.
 
Nx4eu said:
All designs have unique flight profiles, and maneuverability profiles coupled with extremely high speed. I believe an attack combining multiple different types of hypersonic missiles may prove incredibly difficult to completely defend against. Personally, they all seem to be anti-ship orientated.
Click to expand...
Valid point.
 
Nx4eu said:
Wave rider HGV: YJ-17
Biconical HGV: YJ-20
HCM: YJ-19
YJ-12 successor --> YJ-15

View attachment 781776
View attachment 781777
View attachment 781778
View attachment 781779

I believe all are supposed to fit in the Type 055's UVLS
Click to expand...
If I recall correctly YJ-15 might be a follow up of the YJ-12 which are carried by canisters on smaller vessels like the 054A/B and potentially corvettes. 052D also has strike length VLS tubes so everything else is also expected to be on the 052D as well. 095's VLS is also speculated to be of similar dimensions so that could also carry these missile whenever they get launched.
 
There are times and topics to discuss China's geopolitical situation (hopefully on someone else's forum) but this is neither the time nor the place for it. Please restrict the discussion to the Victory Day Parade and any new or updated systems that are displayed at said parade.

Deleted off-topic posts.
 
The anti-drone system will be an important topic... That square giant truck (said to be a laser weapon) really scared me .:oops:
 
More photos
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_2025-08-17-06-18-01-521_com.tencent.mobileqq.jpg
    Screenshot_2025-08-17-06-18-01-521_com.tencent.mobileqq.jpg
    1,012.7 KB · Views: 104
  • Image_721207674448576.jpg
    Image_721207674448576.jpg
    162.6 KB · Views: 110
  • Image_721209153887325.jpg
    Image_721209153887325.jpg
    164.4 KB · Views: 105
  • Image_721214480353104.jpg
    Image_721214480353104.jpg
    153.6 KB · Views: 104
  • Image_721215887788729.jpg
    Image_721215887788729.jpg
    168.6 KB · Views: 108
  • Image_721217360861072.jpg
    Image_721217360861072.jpg
    154.6 KB · Views: 103
  • Image_721218640696696.jpg
    Image_721218640696696.jpg
    158.5 KB · Views: 110
trajan said:
Sorry for being a bit maniacal, my point was that these Chinese vehicles would have significantly higher defences than our (US military) vehicles.
Click to expand...
This is just a light tank, the armor won't be thick
 
I *believe* these UCAVS haven't been posted here yet. Doesn't look like anything groundbreaking. If anything I wonder why one has such a strange tarpaulin on top (is it even a tarpaulin?), but judging from the variety of tarps seen in the other photos I'd say it's a non-factor. EDIT: They're actually visible on page 1's satellite photos! These are close-ups from today, I'd guess.
 

Attachments

  • 123.png
    123.png
    334.4 KB · Views: 74
  • 1234.png
    1234.png
    560.2 KB · Views: 68
  • 12345.png
    12345.png
    261.3 KB · Views: 73
the number of new stuff is increasingly staggering year by year. I think it's important to acknowledge being a engineer making it into these defense companies is highly prestige and bring great honor in china while here there's huge stigma here. Their talent pool will continue to grow past us as the best and brightest keep goin for these majors.
 
Tomboy said:
Well, there are rumors of a heavier vehicle in development that is not based on this vehicle, so I assume proper Type 99A replacement? I guess this vehicle is meant to replace Type 096As and supplement ZTQ-15s while the heavier vehicle might be only to replace Type 99As up north hence probably limited procurement numbers.
Click to expand...
Currently, the information I have is that the 55-ton chassis and the 125 new artillery system were largely phased out around 2018-19. I remember seeing a picture that seemed to be testing the chassis for active defense testing or destruction testing, maybe this one.
Judging from the current situation, the existing configuration of armored vehicles matches up with some images from 2016, indicating that this configuration may have been under discussion long ago, and both sides were competing in a relatively closed intelligence environment.
In a way, it can also be considered military intelligence transparency, but it seems that everyone has overlooked this possibility of design.
 

Attachments

  • {Y4_NV](W7GOWXUG`4}0JUA.png
    {Y4_NV](W7GOWXUG`4}0JUA.png
    339.7 KB · Views: 74
nothebug said:
Currently, the information I have is that the 55-ton chassis and the 125 new artillery system were largely phased out around 2018-19. I remember seeing a picture that seemed to be testing the chassis for active defense testing or destruction testing, maybe this one.
Judging from the current situation, the existing configuration of armored vehicles matches up with some images from 2016, indicating that this configuration may have been under discussion long ago, and both sides were competing in a relatively closed intelligence environment.
In a way, it can also be considered military intelligence transparency, but it seems that everyone has overlooked this possibility of design.
Click to expand...
Well, I do hope PLAGF eventually procures a heavier MBT to replace the Type 99A. I've heard that the heavy version of the tank shown this year has been killed off hence either they no longer intend to procure a MBT similar to the Type 99A or they are working on something else.
 
Remember that ground vehicles are expected to grow 20% in weight from introduction to end of service life. A tank that starts out at 55 tons will end up at 66 or more.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom