A Look at Indian Army's Main Battle Tanks

[DESERT FIGHTER]

The ERA picture you poster sir, is of a prototype and not the service Al-Khalid. But there still is the roof armour slope. Redesign of turret is essential, and I don't see it happening. As for Leopard not having blow off panels, it has never needed them - Leopard 2 has seen no combat service.

Blow off panels issue is not minor sir, people who designed Merkava MK.III thought in the same way you did, no blow off panels and improper ammunition container storage. The result? Simple RPG penetrated top armour and everything went up, pressurized containers of ammunition storage were easily penetrated and ammunition was ignited and the whole tank burned out.

Again a myth... only 5 were destroyed:



These are:
MK II: 2 (one destroyed by roadside bomb.)
Mk III: 1
MK IV: 2 (one destroyed by roadside bomb.)


Defense establishment favors Rafael tank protection system - Globes

Than again mbts are not built for urban warfare...

And Merkava MK.IV immediately received blow off panels - And no combat losses from penetration by RPG. I've done lot more research on blow off panels than you have sir, and the life of more than 50 people in the Abrams has been saved by blow off panels when IED exploded and ignited the ammunition.There was even a case when a M1 stuck in a bog was M-Killed (Mobility kill, tracks are taken out) and nearly out of ammunition was penetrated by HEAT round or APFSDS from rear?? twice and still managed to take out all the T-72 surrounding it. Without BO Panels, lots of lives will be lost on the battlefield.

Again read about the armour of AK in my post number..95.

Actually, 248 Arjun MK.I's have been delivered, orders of MK.II have yet to be given. So it's not 119.

http://www.google.com.pk/url?sa=t&r...BLSqtEVT-QtUhOU6MVf5hpw&bvm=bv.47534661,d.bGE

http://idrw.org/?p=20835#more-20835

And yes, low profile plays a role. But Al-Khalid is taller than Arjun! Arjun height is 2.32 metres while Al-Khalid height is 2.4 metres.

Well it does have IBMC,Hunter Killer,Speed,Maneuverability among other capabilities giving it an edge..

and Lol... Leo 2 is not battle proven so its okay that it doesnt have blow off panels? seriously?

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

ERA alone on the sloped roof armour visible on frontal aspect doesn't make a difference against 250 mm+ certified penetrators. You need to have base composite armour, it's missing. I repeat again, ERA alone isn't enough. The Leopard 2 has 200 mm of composite armour over which a thick NERA layer is also placed. And they consider even that as insufficient.

Kevlar is not good tank armour, it is used in the interior of the tank as anti-spalling liner. Standard for ALL tanks from 1960's. Even later T-55 variants use Kevlar for anti-spalling liner.

Again the same "myth" ... knock urself out:

http://www.google.com.pk/url?sa=t&r...LWF6LpgV6sck2UnMdoBxImQ&bvm=bv.47534661,d.Yms


http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakist...nk-type-90-iim-mbt-2000-information-pool.html

As for the claim that AK has more armour than T-80UD, I'm afraid that's may not be true. T-80UD is one of the best armoured tanks of T-series and has all round protection MORE than the Al-Khalid initial version. On the other forum, we don't even care about the other tanks - just the T-80UD. And the T-80 that was supplied to you has uparmoured T-84 welded turret. Which makes it even worse for us. T-80UD is more than a match for our T-90S and even match for our T-90MS, I'm afraid.

Do you think PA planners are idiots for not going for more T-80UD with AKs instead? and ur knowledge about AK is from forums? seriously? we have people on this forum who have worked on the project... people who have served in the army.. il take their word over your forum info..

As for crew bay fire suppresion and extinguisher, both T-90 and Arjun have it.

I wonder why your work horse T-90 doesnt have blow off panels?

P.S. Read the following article written on T-80UD by one of our armour experts back at the other forum:

h t t p : / / g o o . g l / c G D d 4 (REMOVE SPACES TO GET LINK)

Thank you very much... there is a reason why AK is much more preferred by tankers in PA ... over the T-80UD.

 

[Keshav Murali]

@DESERT FIGHTER, I am sleepy right now, let me answer tomorrow.

 

[Keshav Murali]

Again read about the armour of AK in my post number..95.

Well it does have IBMC,Hunter Killer,Speed,Maneuverability among other capabilities giving it an edge..

and Lol... Leo 2 is not battle proven so its okay that it doesnt have blow off panels? seriously?

Armour of Al-Khalid is not impenetrable, rather, it is inferior to later versions of the Big three: M1 Abrams, Challenger 2 and Leopard 2.

Actually I didn't mean that Leopard 2 doesn't need blow off panels. I said that it does not have combat experience and so German engineers think that blow off panels are not needed. Leopard 2 armour is sufficient to stop penetration of tank rounds.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Armour of Al-Khalid is not impenetrable, rather, it is inferior to later versions of the Big three: M1 Abrams, Challenger 2 and Leopard 2.

Actually I didn't mean that Leopard 2 doesn't need blow off panels. I said that it does not have combat experience and so German engineers think that blow off panels are not needed. Leopard 2 armour is sufficient to stop penetration of tank rounds.

And you know that coz you are a tank designer working for? as for Leopard 2... do you know how funny you sound? leo 2s were used in Afghanistan... also.. tell us why t-90 which is ur main work horse doesnt have them?

 

[Keshav Murali]

Again the same "myth" ... knock urself out:

http://www.google.com.pk/url?sa=t&r...LWF6LpgV6sck2UnMdoBxImQ&bvm=bv.47534661,d.Yms


http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakist...nk-type-90-iim-mbt-2000-information-pool.html

Already "knocked" myself out by reading those posts. Very unhealthy activity for my eyes.

Do you think PA planners are idiots for not going for more T-80UD with AKs instead? and ur knowledge about AK is from forums? seriously? we have people on this forum who have worked on the project... people who have served in the army.. il take their word over your forum info..

Al-Khalid has more frontal protection but not the same ALL-ROUND protection.

As for my information coming from forums, it comes from four people. Two Polish, One Norwegian and One German. The Polish and the Norwegians have spent half their life studying tanks and the Norwegian has been estimating armour values and making detailed 3D models for the past 25 years. The German has been studying ammunition for the past 15 years. I'll take the Norwegian's words that T-80UD side protection is superior to Al-Khalid. And one of the Polish men works for the Polish army.

Because he has been working in a company that makes tank simulators used by half the western armies with extremely (upto 95% accurate) accurate armour values.

I never said anything about PA planners, don't get emotional for no reason.

I wonder why your work horse T-90 doesnt have blow off panels?

Because Russian engineers didn't see the need for them, T-90 protection is vastly, and by vastly I mean 50% superior to old T-72. But still, I'd prefer if Russians think of blow off panels before putting Armata into production.

Thank you very much... there is a reason why AK is much more preferred by tankers in PA ... over the T-80UD.

Do you know the kind of reports I hear? Al-Khalid is unreliable, electronics explode, autoloader keeps failing, engine overheats and stuff like that - and they link to defence.pk.

Just rumours like those for Arjun.

I do not know if PA tankers prefer Al-Khalid over T-80UD for comfort, but if they do, they are right. Al-Khalid turret is much bigger, modeled on Western turrets and provides lot of space. But armour is placed based on Soviet model which was minimalistic and turret shape hid the weak spots. So Al-Khalid side turret armour is weak.

You fail to understand that nothing made by man is perfect, all tanks have weakspots and the fact that Al-Khalid is also imperfect. I fail to get your point - are you trying to say that Al-Khalid is perfect and completely invulnerable?

And you know that coz you are a tank designer working for? as for Leopard 2... do you know how funny you sound? leo 2s were used in Afghanistan... also.. tell us why t-90 which is ur main work horse doesnt have them?

Leopard 2 saw no COMBAT. It might have been deployed. But it saw NO COMBAT. Period.

I am not a tank designer and as I have mentioned in the previous post, I have sources just as reliable as yours.

And I have mentioned for T-90 in the previous post.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

Keshav asked me to post the following.

Flaws:

1. ERA coverage:
Al-Khalid's frontal aspect:


Uploaded with ImageShack.us
You see that? Lot of area is left uncovered. That's not good. The solution: More ERA blocks. Compare this with T-90S of IA.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

2. Roof armour
Al-Khalid's frontal aspect:


Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Is this clear now?

See also Chinese Type 96:


Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Complete redesign of turret as in Type 99A2 is needed. But modelling Al-Khalid 2 turret on Type 99A2 will be detrimental since Type 99A2 turret has very little space for composite inserts.

2keshav,sry for late posting.I wasn't in the net for 2 days.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Already "knocked" myself out by reading those posts. Very unhealthy activity for my eyes.

Yes... just like tungston is superior to DU and the suspension issue tht *** debunked...

Al-Khalid has more frontal protection but not the same ALL-ROUND protection.

LOL... Okay..

As for my information coming from forums, it comes from four people. Two Polish, One Norwegian and One German. The Polish and the Norwegians have spent half their life studying tanks and the Norwegian has been estimating armour values and making detailed 3D models for the past 25 years. The German has been studying ammunition for the past 15 years. I'll take the Norwegian's words that T-80UD side protection is superior to Al-Khalid. And one of the Polish men works for the Polish army.

Because he has been working in a company that makes tank simulators used by half the western armies with extremely (upto 95% accurate) accurate armour values.

And my info comes from people who have actually been involved in the project and those who are using them... i.e PA Armour corps officers.. who clearly rank AK far above T-80UD.

Because Russian engineers didn't see the need for them, T-90 protection is vastly, and by vastly I mean 50% superior to old T-72. But still, I'd prefer if Russians think of blow off panels before putting Armata into production.

In short it has no blow off panels... just like leo which you claim is not built for combat?

Do you know the kind of reports I hear? Al-Khalid is unreliable, electronics explode, autoloader keeps failing, engine overheats and stuff like that - and they link to defence.pk.

Yes i remember tht 1 post by some guy who heard abt it from a frnd who didnt make it to PMA... and claimed tht AK is used in war on terror... which is laughable to say the least...

Just rumours like those for Arjun.

Rumours or not only 119 in service...

I do not know if PA tankers prefer Al-Khalid over T-80UD for comfort, but if they do, they are right. Al-Khalid turret is much bigger, modeled on Western turrets and provides lot of space. But armour is placed based on Soviet model which was minimalistic and turret shape hid the weak spots. So Al-Khalid side turret armour is weak.

So turret shape hid the weaks spots but you know its armour is weak bcoz ? have you even seen it in real life?

You fail to understand that nothing made by man is perfect, all tanks have weakspots and the fact that Al-Khalid is also imperfect. I fail to get your point - are you trying to say that Al-Khalid is perfect and completely invulnerable?

Okay...

Leopard 2 saw no COMBAT. It might have been deployed. But it saw NO COMBAT. Period.

So does tht mean it was not "built" for combat? and countries operating them are for showing off suring parades?

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Keshav asked me to post the following.

Flaws:

1. ERA coverage:
Al-Khalid's frontal aspect:


Uploaded with ImageShack.us
You see that? Lot of area is left uncovered. That's not good. The solution: More ERA blocks. Compare this with T-90S of IA.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

2. Roof armour
Al-Khalid's frontal aspect:


Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Is this clear now?

See also Chinese Type 96:


Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Complete redesign of turret as in Type 99A2 is needed. But modelling Al-Khalid 2 turret on Type 99A2 will be detrimental since Type 99A2 turret has very little space for composite inserts.

2keshav,sry for late posting.I wasn't in the net for 2 days.

Here view the picture:

ERA over the top of turret.the ERA seem different than the older..might be the Local AORAK

PS: Posting pics of prototypes is not a really good idea.

 

[farhan_9909]

AORAK series ERA is said to be developed with ukranian assistance.

i can post the pictures of AORAK series ERA if members wants to

Al khalid might not be as good as the leo 2 or M1 or challenger etc

But agian pakistan is not suppose to fight with those countries

Al khalid will engage with t-72,arjun and t-90 and it can fairly be compared with all of them.

I had heard that all the basic Al khalid will be upgraded to AK1 standard..lets see if this come true.
but al khalid I is already in mass production..and production of basic al khalid is ceased since 2010.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

AORAK series ERA is said to be developed with ukranian assistance.

i can post the pictures of AORAK series ERA if members wants to

Al khalid might not be as good as the leo 2 or M1 or challenger etc

But agian pakistan is not suppose to fight with those countries

Al khalid will engage with t-72,arjun and t-90 and it can fairly be compared with all of them.

I had heard that all the basic Al khalid will be upgraded to AK1 standard..lets see if this come true.
but al khalid I is already in mass production..and production of basic al khalid is ceased since 2010.

Tell tht too our indian frnd here who thinks tht T-80UD is superior to AK..


Aorak ERA:

 

[Keshav Murali]

Yes... just like tungston is superior to DU and the suspension issue tht *** debunked...

In short it has no blow off panels... just like leo which you claim is not built for combat?

Rumours or not only 119 in service...

So turret shape hid the weaks spots but you know its armour is weak bcoz ? have you even seen it in real life?

So does tht mean it was not "built" for combat? and countries operating them are for showing off suring parades?

I never said that the Leo 2 was not built for combat. I said that Germany hasn't been involved in tank to tank or insurgent to tank fights in the past 50 years and they did not see need for blow off panels. Case in point, Leopard 2A7+ is rated as being much more dangerous to the crew than the M1.

More than 248 Arjun MK.I in service now, MK.II is undergoing trials. It is not 119.

I know people who have taken apart the armour of T-72 and Leopard 2 and examined thoroughly. One of the people I take my info from actually knows the composite armour composition of Leo 2A4. So, I'll take his words that T-72, T-80 and even T-90 side turret armour is at bare 60-70 mm minimum.

@DESERT FIGHTER, let's agree to disagree over the T-80UD and Al-Khalid comparison

Well, whatever I might say, Al-Khalid is still a competent tank and is a threat, a dangerous threat to our tanks.

It's not like I am trying to underrate the AK. It is a good tank.

But T-64 lineage will still rank above AK in my list.

 

[Koovie]

More than 248 Arjun MK.I in service now, MK.II is undergoing trials. It is not 119.

No, there are around 120 Arjuns in service now in two regiments.

 

[Keshav Murali]

No, there are around 120 Arjuns in service now in two regiments.

248 were inducted, no service for the other 128? 128 were ordered after the initial order. You are using old information

 

[Koovie]

248 were inducted, no service for the other 128? 128 were ordered after the initial order. You are using old information

Give sources pls