Al-Khalid MBT And Pakistani Armour

[Dazzler]

Re: Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

HULL ARMOUR THICKNESS is one question ,but obviously you can't (couldn't) ID the difference between the 105mm and 125mm...
in post 8016 ,you mistook for the 105mm Type85/85II prototype as so called

it was related to Hull armour thickness, not tank main gun version.

and you don't know which one is the Type85III project, BTW, I made a mistake and the edit time was to the limit -------the attached armor block on Type85III is not ERA but ceramic armour block...

guess i wasted my years as an armour engineer at HIT, where were you before?

I have to say there were too many mistakes related to China stuff in your posts .....I didn't correct coz it's too many...
it is not so called ' pick and choose'...respecting the facts is the base of the discussion ...
--------------------

go ahead, do correct them, dont we all come here to share and learn?

450mm composite armour modul(turrent) + 80/100mm back plate would be more close to reality for the Type85IIAP of 1990 ....although some thickness increasing happened(it's true ...eg. the late Type96's thickness is a little bigger), I'm afaid so called 'more than 600mm' is another south Asia style exaggeration...the Hull Armour is always Weaker than the Turrent.

Pakistan Army tested 85IIAP's turrent composite armour modul and top front hull armour with the 100mm AT-gun ,125mm Tank Gun, and HEAT Warhead of some AT missile in May 1990. the result was well recorded in the book about Export tank projects history. so I know better the ability of these china tank armor... baseless exaggeration is not necessary...

Yes they did, they alsao tested it with some "undisclosed AT rounds" that i am not at liberty to discuss. The results were acceptable but not desirable, hence the search for a stop gap mbt besides the "in development" Alkhalid continued.

This weakness became more prominent when Ukrainians stepped in with their Object. 478BEH, a tank that had no perils in the region when inducted and still remains a vital threat. Details later.

Lastly, exaggeration is not a habit here, last i checked, the chinese were jumping with an impossible to fit apfsds penetrator (AZ autoloader dimensions are somewhere around 740-750mm at best) with a length of 800+mm!! To me, this is exaggeration of the highest level. They call it the holy grail of chinese anti tank ammo

You do have a comprehension issue, i said since induction, it has been upgraded twice, it is still in service, most recent upgradation comlpleted last year.

 

[Dazzler]

Re: Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

Sure? Are you sure?

for type-85IIAP, pretty much sure it was around that thick after the installation of new composite block, without ERA cassettes.

 

[Dazzler]

Re: Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

@methos


first batch inducted had 680-720mm turret, 470-520mm glacis thickness without ERA

Early prototypes (1997-99) had 600-640mm turret, 450-470mm nose/ glacis without ERA

 

[Dazzler]

Re: Tank Guns and Ammunition

@militarysta

something that might interest you

supposedly a new type of 125mm apfsds being made at POF factory, WAH Cantt... manufacturing process is being shown in pics, it is a tungsten carbide monobolic penetrator. I noticed some changes in rod length, shed some light please

the monobolic rod..

 

[Dazzler]

Re: Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

mbt 3000 shot to the close, notice new remote weapon station and other sensors/ improvements..

 

[Zarvan]

These are some pictures of AL KHALID and AL KHALID. The new beast AL KHALID II will be revealed soon. Pakistan is also looking to buy T-84 OPLOT M or some other Tank.

 

[Zarvan]

This is the AL ZARRAR which is in use of Pakistan Army. For some reason photos of initial AL ZARRAR prototyps are posted but not these ones.

 

[Zarvan]

The T-84 UD. We have 325 of these beasts.

AL KHALID

T-84 UD

AL KHALID

 

[Blackwater]

View attachment 5639
The T-84 UD. We have 325 of these beasts.
View attachment 5640
AL KHALID
View attachment 5641
T-84 UD
View attachment 5642
AL KHALID

congratulations to our brothers ,Chinese engineers for this product

 

[Zarvan]

congratulations to our brothers ,Chinese engineers for this product

Chinese engineers have nothing to do with current AK in use we did massive up grades and changes in them AK has now engine from Ukraine and other systems from France. And several other changes but you are free to live in denial

 

[sob]

The build quality looks good in the pictures. signs of a matured manufacturing process with tight quality control.

 

[Zarvan]

The build quality looks good in the pictures. signs of a matured manufacturing process with tight quality control.

AK 2 is real beast which is going to be revealed soon and Pakistan also tested MBT-3000 and T-84 Oplot M. T-84 Oplot M have although passed the tests but still Pakistan would test two more Tanks before deciding. This Tank will be other than AK-2.

 

[sob]

my take is different regarding the heavy tanks. IMO with the Israeli experience in GAZA, the American experience in Iraq and the Russian experience in Chechnya, they all involved fight against insurgents in city blocks where the tanks had almost zero mobility and needed sheer bulk to survive.

In a warfare the mobility and the agility of the tank will play a very large role and these heavy beasts will have problems.

 

[Zarvan]

my take is different regarding the heavy tanks. IMO with the Israeli experience in GAZA, the American experience in Iraq and the Russian experience in Chechnya, they all involved fight against insurgents in city blocks where the tanks had almost zero mobility and needed sheer bulk to survive.

In a warfare the mobility and the agility of the tank will play a very large role and these heavy beasts will have problems.

We are not using heavy Tanks against militants we are using our old T-69 and T-59 and only few Al Zarrar were used against militants

 

[sob]

No i was not specifically mentioning about your use of tanks. Mine was a general comment on Heavy Tanks.

 

[Zarvan]

yes .. they new one is Modernised AK .. It is called as AK1

the details i know are the tonnage is the same
Ammunition capacity increased to 49 125 mm rounds, 1,500 12.7 mm rounds and 7,100 7.62 mm rounds
identification and engagement range also increased
digital driver panel,
IBMS,
side-skirts,
track pads,
Autoloader rate of fire increased from 6 round/minute to 9 round per minute
Ukrainian Varta electro-optical jammer (disrupts laser rangefinders, laser designators and anti-tank guided missile tracking systems),
Sagem third-generation thermal imagers upgraded from 2nd generation thermal imagers ..
Improved NBC protection and air conditioning system

 

[Dazzler]

Add dual process fire control, auto torque adjuster, head mirror commander and gunner display, thermal imaging based night vision for commander/ gunner and driver instead of IIR tubes, Rehbar 2 BMS, new datalink and secure radios, auto transmission control, digital driver panel, new APU and AC, solid state autoloader and tracks to your list.

 

[Bornubus]

One of the greatest tank battles since WW2 has been the battle of Assal Uttar in 1965.

I would like to draw everyone's attention to the fact that in that war, canals were breached, causing massive flooding in the plains. Consequently, Pakistani tanks were stuck in the flooded plains and were sitting ducks for jeep mounted RCL guns of the Indian Army. This made Indian victory possible and destroyed the myth of the invincibility of the Patton Tanks.

I was wondering: What if India deployed regiment(s) of hovercraft armed with Nag missiles or RCL guns, breached the canals again, and faced the Pakistani tanks in the plains of Punjab with the hovercrafts? Be it grass, water or slush, a hovercraft will be highly agile and mobile and capable of engaging targets.

A typical hovercraft would look like this:
View attachment 1536

Pakistan outstripping India in the number of tanks, although a serious threat, can be overcome with some out-of-the-box thinking. If anybody thinks there are weaknesses or drawbacks to this idea, please fell free to comment.

N.B.: I posted this same comment at another Tank related thread.

Future induction of spike will be a game changer,it will serve the same purpose which RCL served in 65,just fire it and hide in sugarcane filed.

 

[Bornubus]

Re: Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology



11 years... this is 11 years old news! Are you aware how many things can change through 11 years?! And do you know that announcing something does not mean that deal will become reality? After 11 years you could even forgot or confuse some informations.



Well it seems you have a serious problem. First you do not understand how defence industry works, and that concepts and plans might change several times. Second is that Turkey, co developed Altay with South Korea, not Pakistan.

Is this seriously so hard to understand? Turkey did not signed contract with Pakistan, and choosed a country with more advanced arms industry base.

So no, armor technology transfer from Pakistan is old news, it seems that deal was never finalized, and Turkey choosen a better partner.

He @Dazzler is a known fanboy so no surprise.Like a retard he claims ancient news about Arjun and Bhishma, he is doing the same in this thread.

 

[Bornubus]

Re: Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology



3BM44 is the round designation, 3BM42 is the penetrator designation. Your "source" explicitly stated that Al-Khalid is immune to all 120 and 125 mm shells

Mango is 3BM44, Lekalo is 3BM44M, or perhaps 3VBM17 and 3VBM17M.

@Keshav Murali
@Kunal Biswas
@pmaitra

Could you shed some light on Ammo type used by Bhishma ?