Al-Khalid & Type 99 Comparison

[con]

Take a break

ATGM VS Tank

A ZTZ99 (Type 99) main battle tank was hit by a HJ-9 semi-active laser-guided anti-tank missile during a test
[YOUTUBE]

In an earlier testfire the target was a variant of T72, the HJ-9 bombed off the entire barbette of the poor beast.

HJ-9 and the 4X4 AAV are standard equipment of Chinese paratroops.

Why do they speakers on the front of the jeep? Do they go about announcing when they land into enemy terrority?

 

[JK!]

Why do they speakers on the front of the jeep? Do they go about announcing when they land into enemy terrority?

When the Americans first entered Baghdad in 2003 a news report showed a Humvee driving around whilst playing Drowning Pool "let the bodies hit the floor".

Also in Michael Moores Faranhit 9/11 American Tankers played "Burn MotherF****** Burn".

However, with the chinese its probably to blast out propaganda like the Germans in the film Enemy at the Gates as opposed to intimidation like the Americans.

 

[JK!]

Take a break

ATGM VS Tank

A ZTZ99 (Type 99) main battle tank was hit by a HJ-9 semi-active laser-guided anti-tank missile during a test

In an earlier testfire the target was a variant of T72, the HJ-9 bombed off the entire barbette of the poor beast.

HJ-9 and the 4X4 AAV are standard equipment of Chinese paratroops.

Does HJ9 have a top attack ability?

 

[kvLin]

Does HJ9 have a top attack ability?

I have no idea of that, see if the pic talks?

and this one (HJ-8) is said in service of the Pak Army.

anyway,dont take it seriously,I said just an interlude.

 

[Interceptor]

Keys,
There is something strange about the BMS image.

Also please observe the details on the button.
what is "Erase Object" and "Send Msg" ??

And what is "You are new a server" on the right hand bottom??

The details can be researched on the developers site.

http://www.carepvtltd.com/products/products.htm

 

[zraver]

Al-khalid is one of the best is business...
its power/weight ratio is 26hp/tonne which is highest in world...
its one of the lightest tanks in the world,which increases its manuverability...
The Al-Khalid has modular composite armour and explosive reactive armour, nuclear-biological-chemical defences, an effective thermal smoke generator, internal fire extinguisher and explosion-suppression system....
it accelerates from 0-30km/h in under 10 seconds...

The automatic ammunition-handling system for the main gun has a 24-round ready-to-fire magazine and can load and fire at a rate of eight rounds per minute.

The gunner is provided with a dual magnification day sight and the commander with a panoramic sight for all-around independent surveillance. Both sights are dual-axis image stabilized and have independent laser range finders. The commander has the ability to acquire a target independently while the gunner is engaging another one. The automatic target-tracking system is designed to work when tank and target are both moving. Night vision for the gunner and commander is achieved through a dual-magnification thermal imaging sight. Both sites are integrated with the fire-control system.

The Norinco fire-control system has inputs from ten sensors. The ballistic computation time is less than one second. The manufacturer claims routine first round hits on standard 8 ft × 8 ft targets at ranges over 2,000 meters.

Effective range: 200 m to 5,000 m
Sensor: laser ranging from 200 m to 9,990 m
Auto-tracking, firing four types of munitions, gunner's thermal imaging sight, commander's image intensification night vision sight, gyro-stabilized and UPS power supply system.

AL-khalid 2 will be hellova of a tank...it would be far superior than T-90,
M1A1/2,challenger 2,Leapord......

Puhh lease...

power to weight and overall weight are les simportant than ground pressure, here the AK's type 59 base hull with narrower/shorter tracks is a handi-cap.

Gunnery platform should be 12-25kph to achieve the 1st round hit percentage. Western MBT's are 0-45/50 kph. (Tanks shake a great deal at low and highspeeds)

The AK lacks signifigant side protection vs even the lightest of man-pads.

the battle-management system is not satalite linked (its GPS feature can be turned off by the US at will)

the tanks auto-loader is the older style limiting round leangth (short rod penetrator curse)

T type hull and turret layout means no enclosed ammuntion storage

3 man crew means tired crews in combat and a lack of an effecive airguard.

light weight means lost tonnage able to be devouted to armor



On a side note I think the screen shot of the battlemanagement system is a fake, looks like it has a software developers tag on it, and does not use the easily understood universal military symbols

 

[JK!]

Puhh lease...

power to weight and overall weight are les simportant than ground pressure, here the AK's type 59 base hull with narrower/shorter tracks is a handi-cap.

Gunnery platform should be 12-25kph to achieve the 1st round hit percentage. Western MBT's are 0-45/50 kph. (Tanks shake a great deal at low and highspeeds)

The AK lacks signifigant side protection vs even the lightest of man-pads.

the battle-management system is not satalite linked (its GPS feature can be turned off by the US at will)

the tanks auto-loader is the older style limiting round leangth (short rod penetrator curse)

T type hull and turret layout means no enclosed ammuntion storage

3 man crew means tired crews in combat and a lack of an effecive airguard.

light weight means lost tonnage able to be devouted to armor



On a side note I think the screen shot of the battlemanagement system is a fake, looks like it has a software developers tag on it, and does not use the easily understood universal military symbols

Al Khalid is smaller as well in length, height and width than say an M1 Abrams as well though I need to look to my copy of Janes Tanks to give more specific details.

It is one of my annoyances when AK is described as a very modern MBT when it lacks almost mandatory features like enclosed ammo compartments and blow out panels vital to crew survivability.

Having looked at the Type 90 MBT details at globalsecurity.org the origins of AK lie in studies of T72 MBTs which led to the development of Type 90. The only significant difference as far as I know is the engine from the Ukraine. Again having compared T72 and AK in my copy of Janes Tanks the dimensions are near on the same.
AK may be nothing more than a glorified version or improvement of the T72.

As for the autoloaders well alot of Russian Tanks like the T80 or T72 in service in Chechnya are lost beacause the autoloaders full of ammo get hit and explode destroying the tank.

Until AK has a protection upgrade like T80UM2 to address the problems I am a little sceptical about it.

 

[blain2]

Since this argument back and forth is going nowhere...let me try to end it by saying that Pakistani armoured Corps is pleased with its version of a glorified T-72 :toast: If we could have been able to afford it, we would have tried to build a tank to best the Abrams but that was never really the intention. The idea was to have a credible armour capability suited (after having studied the terrain and its challenges for 60 years and having faught two massive armoured wars against India) for the local areas. PAF would love to have J-35s, Army LeopardII and infantry something besided G-3, but such is life and reality. You make do with what you have and train hard.

One other point, for the folks (my fellow Pakistanis) who keep on repeating the mantra "ours is the best"..lets not embarrass everyone here. I deal with the same issues on other forums too where people go on and post these overly glorified posts about all things to do with PAF, indiginous production etc....so my advice is to take it easy and read a bit more and have a bit of humility. It may do you good to listen to Maj Gen Syed Absar Hussain's (DG DEPO) interview during IDEAS

where he talks about the market segment where Pakistan expects to play...its not the extremely high tech, rather its medium tech...so lets ground the claims in some reality here...AK is good enough for us...but its not the best out there..there are many others who have spent far more money and done research exceeding that put on the AK effort.

Now until and unless there is anythng new to contribute on this back and forth debate, lets not waste BW/CPU cycles here.

Regards

 

[Interceptor]

Puhh lease...

power to weight and overall weight are les simportant than ground pressure, here the AK's type 59 base hull with narrower/shorter tracks is a handi-cap.

Gunnery platform should be 12-25kph to achieve the 1st round hit percentage. Western MBT's are 0-45/50 kph. (Tanks shake a great deal at low and highspeeds)

The AK lacks signifigant side protection vs even the lightest of man-pads.

the battle-management system is not satalite linked (its GPS feature can be turned off by the US at will)

the tanks auto-loader is the older style limiting round leangth (short rod penetrator curse)

T type hull and turret layout means no enclosed ammuntion storage

3 man crew means tired crews in combat and a lack of an effecive airguard.

light weight means lost tonnage able to be devouted to armor



On a side note I think the screen shot of the battlemanagement system is a fake, looks like it has a software developers tag on it, and does not use the easily understood universal military symbols

You must have test driven it to criticize all of that in one go. BTW like the M1 is the top of the range.
http://www.janes.com/regional_news/americas/news/jdw/jdw030620_1_n.shtml

Give it wee thought you criticize something you havent seen in battle and please stop making up stuff I already told you no country I mean no country ever tells its armour secrets or even it commit charge you better be spy to know all the Al-Khalid secrets.

 

[Interceptor]

O yeah here is full coverge its bias btw its written by a US journal,
http://defensenews.com/story.php?F=1505664&C=airwar

 

[Interceptor]

O yeah Iraq delegation bought Pakistani ordinance AND YES THEY BOUGHT SOME AL-KAHLID'S I HAVENT YET HEARD ANY LOSSES HAVE YOU?

http://www.ideaspakistan.com/iraq visit to pakistan.htm

 

[Keysersoze]

You must have test driven it to criticize all of that in one go. BTW like the M1 is the top of the range.
http://www.janes.com/regional_news/americas/news/jdw/jdw030620_1_n.shtml

Give it wee thought you criticize something you havent seen in battle and please stop making up stuff I already told you no country I mean no country ever tells its armour secrets or even it commit charge you better be spy to know all the Al-Khalid secrets.

Errrr Interceptor Zraver knows his tanks. And I accept his knowledge in such matters. Just because someone says something you don't like it doesn't make it untrue. If you break down a tank into it's component parts it is very easy to see how effective how good it is......AND the M1 is a bloody good tank arguably the best.

What Blain said was true. Pak needed a Tank to handle other T-series tanks not fight against heavy tanks like the Merkava or M1.

 

[con]

O yeah Iraq delegation bought Pakistani ordinance AND YES THEY BOUGHT SOME AL-KAHLID'S I HAVENT YET HEARD ANY LOSSES HAVE YOU?

http://www.ideaspakistan.com/iraq visit to pakistan.htm

And where does it say in the article that Iraq has "bought" AK?

 

[Keysersoze]

O yeah Iraq delegation bought Pakistani ordinance AND YES THEY BOUGHT SOME AL-KAHLID'S I HAVENT YET HEARD ANY LOSSES HAVE YOU?

http://www.ideaspakistan.com/iraq visit to pakistan.htm

They HAVEN'T purchased any tanks (look at the bottom of the page you linked)

You can't have losses from tanks that are not there..........

 

[Interceptor]

Errrr Interceptor Zraver knows his tanks. And I accept his knowledge in such matters. Just because someone says something you don't like it doesn't make it untrue. If you break down a tank into it's component parts it is very easy to see how effective how good it is......AND the M1 is a bloody good tank arguably the best.

What Blain said was true. Pak needed a Tank to handle other T-series tanks not fight against heavy tanks like the Merkava or M1.

Its not something "I like" its to do with credible comments his critics complete over run by what he believes and its not that simple judging from far away. If you agree knowledge is something that is developed over time. I remember reading the second world war history, the Germans had the Panzer tank which was the equivelent of a M1/Merkava tank in those days and the Russians had a tank that was equivelent to nothing but it still beat the living hell out of the Panzer not because of luck but because of technique they used a very clever armour to protect their armour I wish I could type the article up but its just too long.

I critcise the M1 but I just showed it also has weakness and as you can see from the report its not the perfect tank. Not to boast about Al-Khalid; but a tank is not something that is easy defeat any tank of the matter. By the way keys Khalid bin Al Waleed if you read his book I have I love it he is the second greatest general in the world after Gengis Khan, he defeated the Romans who were 3 times the size of his army 90 thousand and Khalid's army only 30 thousand size weight commit charge this all was his secret he knew where to put his army stratigicly and make it undefeatable not one soldier in his army died.

Keys, I am not boasting about the tank but its just not easy to believe after reading history, Panzers and Leopards were like the ultimate in their time as battle tank systems but they still met defeat by the so called junk.