Al-Khalid tank (Type 90-IIM / MBT-2000) Information Pool

[RAMPAGE]

Ideas 2016 ...

You sure, cuz we've heard nothing for quite some time?

 

[Sulman Badshah]

n

You sure, cuz we've heard nothing for quite some time?

not sure about Ideas 16 either ... but heard about it

 

[majid mehmood]

i hope this helps
the nation newspaper
Sunday, 29 June, 2014



KARACHI - Pakistans Al Khalid Tank is widely being considered one of the most competent Main Battle Tanks (MBTs) in the global arms market. The Al Khalid II is said to have a new armor that has been tested to defeat all known 120mm and 125mm rounds. This special armour is a major technological breakthrough for Pakistan. The tank has received a new transmission and revised electronic turret control.
This was stated by Syed Muhammad Ali, the first certified military concept tank designer of Pakistan, while talking to The Nation.
He said that the Al Khalid II has a new Integrated Battle Management System (IBMS) and active threat-protection system, the latter being an upgrade from the passive system in the earlier model.
The tank is now perhaps the most heavily weaponized per tonnage of any tank, being able to carry 49 125mm rounds, 1,500 12.7mm and 7,100 7.62mm rounds.
He said that Al-Khalid is modern battle tank developed by Heavy Industries Taxila (HIT).
Al Khalid consists of all the modern technologies required by latest generation tanks. Alkhalid is fitted with Ukranian engine that generated 1200 horse power. It has six forward automatic transmission. Its top speed is 72km/h. It weighs 47 tonnes.
Al-Khalid is operated by a three man crew; a driver, a gunner, and a commander.
Al-khalid consist of a self loading 125m smooth bore gun. It can also fire HEAT and APFSDS (Armor Piercing Fin Stabilized Discarding Sabot) rounds. It automatically load, fire and eject the empty case.
Because of self loading gun, the crew number is reduced. The gun is equipped with a stabilizing system which provides accurate shot of the target even if the tank is moving.
It also comes with an imaging system which enables the crew members to track down various targets and engage them. It is also equipped with a 7.62mm co-axial machine gun and a 12.5mm anti-aircraft gun mounted above it.
In terms of sheer numbers, Forecast International expects Pakistans Al Khalid, the Type 98 of the Peoples Republic of China, and the Russian Federations T-90 (including Indias licensed T-90S production program) to continue to dominate the market.
In the international market for main battle tanks, the days of U.S. and European domination over new production are long gone.
Al Khalid is also equipped with night vision devices that enables it for combat at night time. It also has protection for NBC (Nuclear, Biological & chemical) warfare and thus the crew member would be safe in case of NBC fallout.
Al-Khalid can also be fitted with Explosives Reactive Armor (ERA).
Al-Khalid is currently in service with the Pakistan Army. Pakistan also export Al Khalid to various countries like Saudi-Arabia.

 

[Woody Nerd]

We should also produce large amounts of Drones to target enemy tanks and APCs in case of an armoured onslaught! I suppose 1 Burraq UAV can have the capability to target 3 tanks in one sortie, if we develop it a bit further with anti-tank laser guided missiles. One missile one tank, seems reasonable to me

 

[araz]

We should also produce large amounts of Drones to target enemy tanks and APCs in case of an armoured onslaught! I suppose 1 Burraq UAV can have the capability to target 3 tanks in one sortie, if we develop it a bit further with anti-tank laser guided missiles. One missile one tank, seems reasonable to me

Other solutions maybe in hand and are being looked at. Perhaps this might translate into a new product or changes might be brought about in our own drones based on the concepts being studied. We need to be a bit patient.
A

 

[Woody Nerd]

Other solutions maybe in hand and are being looked at. Perhaps this might translate into a new product or changes might be brought about in our own drones based on the concepts being studied. We need to be a bit patient.
A

If this is the official stance, then its very reassuring!
However, i wish we were not very overt in showing our capabilities here on internet or in the ISPR statements. Takes out the element of surprise since walls have ears...

 

[A2Z]

We should also produce large amounts of Drones to target enemy tanks and APCs in case of an armoured onslaught! I suppose 1 Burraq UAV can have the capability to target 3 tanks in one sortie, if we develop it a bit further with anti-tank laser guided missiles. One missile one tank, seems reasonable to me

Our drone have already become nightmare for our enemies. You can not expect what we might reveal when the day comes since our armed forces like to maintain the element of surprise.

 

[Dazzler]

On 9thJune 2015, THALES OPTRONCIS & SHIBLI ELECTRONICS were awarded another major successive Contract for the Up gradation of 125mm Tanks i.e T 80 UD ,AL Khalid with Catherine Fire Control System.


This order thus establishes the Strong Customer satisfaction and confidence on the Industrial Organization, Product and Systems delivered by THALES & SHIBLI ELECTRONICS.




- See more at: Shibli | THALES OPTRONCIS & SHIBLI ELECTRONICS were awarded another major successive Contract

 

[princefaisal]

Total quantity of Al-Khalid Tanks in Pakistan Army = ?
How many Al-Khalid tanks are manufactured annually in Pakistan?

 

[aliaselin]

My new finding: MBT-3000 chassis shape looks the same as MBT-2000. They use inferior chassis to prevent the enemy shell compared to other Chinese built tank which use upper chassis

If we compare the two without reactive armor, then we can see:

If we compare 99 to 99A， the engineer has added one layer of armor to 99

Form the shape change we know that MBT-3000 turret has added one layer of armor to MBT-2000

 

[Dazzler]

My new finding: MBT-3000 chassis shape looks the same as MBT-2000. They use inferior chassis to prevent the enemy shell compared to other Chinese built tank which use upper chassis
View attachment 278488
View attachment 278489

If we compare the two without reactive armor, then we can see:
View attachment 278492
If we compare 99 to 99A， the engineer has added one layer of armor to 99
View attachment 278493
View attachment 278494

Form the shape change we know that MBT-3000 turret has added one layer of armor to MBT-2000

You provide your customers with an MBT having an inferior chassis? That's a shame really.

 

[LowPost]

You provide your customers with an MBT having an inferior chassis? That's a shame really.

Nah pal, he means the tank on the image below the first one but I believe you understood the 'pun'

 

[Dazzler]

Nah pal, he means the tank on the image below the first one but I believe you understood the 'pun'

On a serious note, he compared the chassis in a crude way which is not how one should compare them.

 

[aliaselin]

You provide your customers with an MBT having an inferior chassis? That's a shame really.

well, I mean MBT-2000/3000 put the major armor at the down part of the chassis, in Chinese it is called: 首下迎弹; for other Chinese tank it use:首上迎弹
eg：MBT-2000, MBT-3000 and M1A2 use "首下迎弹"
while T-90, type 99 and Challenger 2 use “首上迎弹”
This is a good way to trace the development route of the Chinese tank, and it hints that MBT-2000/3000 design concept is different from type 99; when we refer to the published materials, they are indeed developed by different chief engineers

 

[Dazzler]

well, I mean MBT-2000/3000 put the major armor at the down part of the chassis, in Chinese it is called: 首下迎弹; for other Chinese tank it use:首上迎弹
eg：MBT-2000, MBT-3000 and M1A2 use "首下迎弹"
while T-90, type 99 and Challenger 2 use “首上迎弹”
This is a good way to trace the development route of the Chinese tank, and it hints that MBT-2000/3000 design concept is different from type 99; when we refer to the published materials, they are indeed developed by different chief engineers

Even if what you said is the truth, what on earth does make the mbt2000/ 3000/ M1A2 series inferior to the latter? Afterall, its just a different design approach by different designers right?