Al-Khalid MBT And Pakistani Armour

[sayareakd]

AL KHALID I prototype (2008)

notice the thick sideskirts

where is the pic ??

 

[farhan_9909]

AL KHALID I prototype (2008)

notice the thick sideskirts

i.imgur.com/xwlHi.jpg

 

[sayareakd]

AL KHALID I prototype (2008)

notice the thick sideskirts

compare that to production version.

 

[farhan_9909]

there are no new pics of al khalid

and adding era is nt a big deal

even this picture is from 2006

www.defencetalk.com/pictures/data/4661/medium/AL-KHALID1.jpg

 

[farhan_9909]

compare that to production version.

this is the basic Al khalid
and these are just very thin metal layer..they wont even give protection against a ak47

while the prototype is of Al khalid I

let me show you the mass produced Al khalid I


img404.imageshack.us/img404/3683/alkhalidi.jpg

img88.imageshack.us/img88/7813/alkhalidi2.jpg

i49.tinypic.com/9jqedi.jpg

 

[sayareakd]

i fount these pics it appears this is production version

 

[farhan_9909]

i fount these pics it appears this is production version

indeed they are the production variant bt of BASIC AL KHALID(production stopped in 2009)

since late 2009 the mass production of AL KHALID 1(upgrades posted in previous page) started


pictures of mass produced AL KHALID 1 with oplot kinda thick sideskirts

img404.imageshack.us/img404/3683/
alkhalidi.jpg

img88.imageshack.us/img88/7813/
alkhalidi2.jpg

i49.tinypic.com/9jqedi.jpg

 

[LurkerBaba]

^
Farhan, please post images within

tags

 

[farhan_9909]

^^
The gunner was focused on Target A
The Commander on Target B

Meanwhile the Taliban RPG operator who should have been Target C went and ruined everything.....

Result: 1 smoking Al-Kabab.

common sense is nt as common in.some people i guess
the tank in the picture is al zarar

in swat it got hits from multiple rpg's

even than the crew survived and after repair the tank was put into service again

this proved the reliable of AZ armour

and increased the crew confident to a great extent

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Infraction Given

 

[Armand2REP]

You miss the heavy protection part. Which means that they find earlier tanks inferior in protection, what to say of export version.

Maybe, but China doesn't want Ukrainian engines when they prohibit export as happened in Chile. T99 is far heavier than AK, most likely more layers of armour, but who knows how good? Their steel process for armoured vehicles has not been up to par in the past. Have they discovered the even dated Chobham technology?

 

[farhan_9909]

Maybe, but China doesn't want Ukrainian engines when they prohibit export as happened in Chile. T99 is far heavier than AK, most likely more layers of armour, but who knows how good? Their steel process for armoured vehicles has not been up to par in the past. Have they discovered the even dated Chobham technology?

making a heavier is nt a much difficult task

such as in the case of russia
within a short time they can field western kinda heavier tanks

bt some countries doctrine is different

well about armour


remember that even a country with worst manufacturing capability

tries ther level best to field much better defence product.
underestimating china's tech is nt a good idea

And a khalid 2 is underdevelopment with weight roughly equal to leclerc.

 

[vishwaprasad]

Maybe, but China doesn't want Ukrainian engines when they prohibit export as happened in Chile. T99 is far heavier than AK, most likely more layers of armour, but who knows how good? Their steel process for armoured vehicles has not been up to par in the past. Have they discovered the even dated Chobham technology?

Hi, I think Chobham armor is used only on M1 and Challengers and heard that its the best armor in the world. Why France rejected it and opted for perforated armor for its Leclercs?

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Hi, I think Chobham armor

Is also used on Arjun besides other tanks, Leo2 also use similar suit..

 

[Damian]

Hi, I think Chobham armor is used only on M1 and Challengers and heard that its the best armor in the world. Why France rejected it and opted for perforated armor for its Leclercs?

I wonder how many times I will need to say this... eh.

First, Chobham is nothing more than a stupid name given by the press. The only one accurate and official codename for the British special armor development was, is and will be Burlington.

And there were plenty of different Burlington armor variants, one variant have even integrated explosive reactive armor in to it's structure during R&D phase.

Now, the Americans of course used Burlington, but altered it's design at least twice, the known configurations made by Ballistic Research Labaoratory are known as BRL-1 and BRL-2, and Americans even changed for some time the codename of armor to Starflow (or something like that, I do not remember accurately, need to check in articles I have).

So the original M1 used armor configuration same or close to BRL-1, and M1IP/M1A1 used armor configuration same or close to BRL-2, and this is where Burlington armor ends it's service in USA. In 1988 Americans completely left behind Burlington armor, and use their own design. It is close to Burlington in overall concept but much more advanced, use new materials (among them steel (SHS, HHS or maybe THS?) encased depleted uranium alloy (probably in form of plates)), and there are probably other differences not known to me. This new armor do not have any official codename, there are only known 3 generations of this armor (1st generation fielded in 1988, 2nd generation fielded in 1990-1993 and 3rd generation fielded in 1999, and possible unspecified upgrade from 2008-2012 period).

British were the only users of the original Burlington armor on Challenger 1, but replaced it with much more advanced Dorchester armor in Challenger 2.

Germans recived documentation of Burlington from UK, and probably used gained knowledge, but altered design per their needs.

France also probably used Burlington documentation to develop their own design.

Ok next thing is that description of Burlington (Chobham) on Wikipedia and such sites is based on completely outdated sources, and is inaccurate.

Burlington do not use, or use very little ceramics, neither it is primitive passive design described as "ceramic tiles encased in honeycomb structure". Burlington was probably first composite armor with working mechanism typical for different types of dynamic protection. It means it's design concept is close to NERA (Non Energetic Reactive Armor) design, and projectiles defeating mechanism is based on:

- increasing penetrator/shaped charge jet erosion;
- inducting yaw to penetrator;
- breaking structure of shaped charge jet;
- breaking penetrator in to smaller fragments;
- changing penetration trajectory etc.

In fact Leclerc armor is very close in it's design as far as I know, to the Burlington, but of course altered per French needs.

But literally, all modern western composite armors are bastard childs of Burlington special armor development program.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

As for Al Zarrar tank, it's protection is simple and primitive spaced armor, on some variants it is visible something similiar to ERA.

I can't find a photo, but there was one of destroyed Al Zarrar, with heavy damage on turret front with removed right turret side outer screen, inside was nothing more but air, and I doubt that there was any type of armor filler there, who would take it? Insurgents? And what they would do with it?

Not to mention that this:

common sense is nt as common in.some people i guess
the tank in the picture is al zarar

in swat it got hits from multiple rpg's

even than the crew survived and after repair the tank was put into service again

this proved the reliable of AZ armour

and increased the crew confident to a great extent

In relation to this:

Is a complete nonsense, that seems to not know about.

Al Zarrar seems to use 125mm smoothbore gun with two piece ammunition. This vehicle do not have isolated ammunition compartments with blow off panels. This means that any armor penetration, can end with immediate ammunition deflagration and death of a crew.

Another and complete nonsense is talk about repairing this vehicle. Nobody repairs vehicle that is completely burned out, simply because it is immposible due to structural damage of armor made by heat of fire. To put it in a simple words, armor just lost it's characteristics due to heat.

So rebuilding this vehicle actually means to cut it in to pieces, remelt it and build a completely new vehicle. Even Americans were not just simply rebuilding these M1's that burned out, but they cut them in to pieces, remelted them, and builded new turrets, hulls or complete vehicles when nececary.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

As for Al Zarrar tank, it's protection is simple and primitive spaced armor, on some variants it is visible something similiar to ERA.

I can't find a photo, but there was one of destroyed Al Zarrar, with heavy damage on turret front with removed right turret side outer screen, inside was nothing more but air, and I doubt that there was any type of armor filler there, who would take it? Insurgents? And what they would do with it?

Clear Photo..

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Pakistani Niaza 125mm DU 550mm at 2km naiza DU round

Was thinking, IMI CL-2579 archiving same penetration at 2kms, Why such DU heavy round preform so bad ?

Further what is the muzzle velocity ?

 

[sayareakd]

here is another tank

looks like side skirt is rubber like material.

 

[Armand2REP]

Hi, I think Chobham armor is used only on M1 and Challengers and heard that its the best armor in the world. Why France rejected it and opted for perforated armor for its Leclercs?

Tanks have a service life up to 40 years. Over that amount of time armour technology improves. Fixed armour is for life while modular is easily changed and replaced with even more advanced packages. The advantages don't end there. Replacement of damaged modules is easily done in the field while damage to fixed armour compromises the tank. Emptying modules in low threat situations also improves logistics.

 

[farhan_9909]

interview of PA officials

some points

Crew of the destroyed Al- Zarrar MBT survived without injuries and tank was recovered as neither turret of chassis of Al-Zarrar MBT was penetrated which also proved the recent upgrade was successful

According to the soldiers participating in this furious battle fought in first week of this recent attempt by the Pakistan army to clear out the areas from Taliban militants, they were attacked from three sides by different militant groups that have divided themselves into smaller groups of four to five. First attack was through improvise explosive devices which resulted in destruction of the tanks and afterwards Taliban started firing at them, they say that it was very difficult for them to access the direction of the fire and strength of the enemy. Soldiers involved in this fight say that it took us some time to estimate their positions and after that we started counter attack by sending our troops to surround them

According to the commanding officer of this advance force, they were very fortunate that none of their troop involved in this operation was killed and all thirty five of them were able to survive this attack. This report is based on the program of AAJ TV which included the interviews of the Pakistani army personals involved

Grande Strategy: How Al-Zarrar MBT was destroyed

 

[farhan_9909]

.

exactly

look at this photo..the main turret is nt penetrated..it is just the armour upgrade on alzarar (the original t59 turret doesnt has such armour bt rather a bare turret)

compare al zarar turret armour upgrade with this bare turret t59