Al-Khalid & Type 99 Comparison

[Interceptor]

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..........

Ummm, that is an ambiguous article.

 

[Keysersoze]

Ummm, that is an ambiguous article.

There is no ambiguity. The article states the following;

In response to the requirement raised by the Iraqi delegation, Following equipment was offered:
HIT: Tanks Al- Khalid / Al-Zarrar, APCs M-113 & Security Vehicle "Mohafiz"
POF: G-3, MG1A-3, SMG Pak & Uniforms
IOP: NV equipment for rifle / MG
NRTC: VHF Communication Equipment
PMTF: 60mm, 81 mm and 120 mm Mortars

In addition to above, following equipment was offered for fighting terrorism in built-up area:-

"Bullet Proof Jackets"
"Security Bunker "Ahan"
"RPG-7 A / Tk Rocket Launcher"
"Bakhtar Shikan Mine Detector"

Which states that the Items were "offered"

A contract worth 80 Million Dollars was finally signed on 26 November 2004 for following:

HIT (Contract in Hand)
APC Talha Qty- 44
Security Vehicles Al Mohafiz Qty- 60
Armoured Guard Post 'Aahan' Qty- 300
Total Contract Value US $ 31 Million

POF (Contract in Hand)
Various Type of Arms & Ammo- US $ 49 Million

Which states the contracts that were signed. No tanks there.

 

[zraver]

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.

Dude, tank armore dprotection levels ar ea function of mass and materials. a tank in the 40 ton range ton range and built to support a billions of dollars army will not compete with a tank nearing 70 tons and built to support a hundred of billions dollars army. That simple logic aside the pics of the AK tell quite a bit. Torsion bar suspencion- its ok but all T-bars tend to vibrate the vehicle at low and high speeds. This is why MBT added a pnuematic element to smooth the ride out. Thes evibrations are critical to pushing the fire on the move element up and down the Kph range.

2a46 autloader from the T-72 family- carousel autloaders do not protected ammunition menaing the exposed poweder bags are trapped inside of a very narrow confine and a single spark has the potential to create a catasphrophic kill.

Ceramic armor- while the actual boron-nitrade formula and thus effectiveness might not be known, the placement of ceramic plates is and those reveal shot traps and even total gaps. the AK is designe dto take it on the chin and no where else. While all tanks have better protection to the front, the AK/ Type 90II is an unusal bird in the way it uses 21 century protection on the front, and ww2 era RHA on the sides

The simple fact is if you know what you ar elooking at, you can tell a tanks capability without needing to know its secrets.

BTW. during WW2 it was the Russians with the T-34/76 m.40 and the KV-1m.39 vs the Pz III G, Pv38, and Pz IV C/D tha thad the massive lead in armor but were beaten by the superior tactics of the German panzer crews. It was not until afte the Summer of 43 tha tthe Soviets were able to make real gains and they did it with massed wavs of attacks not battlefeild finese.

 

[kidwaibhai]

i think comparing al khalid to M1 is extremely stupid. people the generals in Islamabad did not design the al khalid to fight in europe with russian tank( that was the design specs for M1 i read that on a site) they designed a tank that could fight indian tanks in the deserts of rajistan so please the tanks are disigned for two different regions.
also the M1 is far far better than the al khalid

 

[con]

i think comparing al khalid to M1 is extremely stupid. people the generals in Islamabad did not design the al khalid to fight in europe with russian tank( that was the design specs for M1 i read that on a site) they designed a tank that could fight indian tanks in the deserts of rajistan so please the tanks are disigned for two different regions.
also the M1 is far far better than the al khalid

AK is also built to suit better the infra that PA already has(maintenance,training etc) and a low-cost option to keep up the numbers.
It is the best bang for buck that PA can afford and advantageous to have most of the parts are produced locally or in China,a sanction free source.

 

[JK!]

i think comparing al khalid to M1 is extremely stupid. people the generals in Islamabad did not design the al khalid to fight in europe with russian tank( that was the design specs for M1 i read that on a site) they designed a tank that could fight indian tanks in the deserts of rajistan so please the tanks are disigned for two different regions.
also the M1 is far far better than the al khalid

My intention was to compare the fact that as the M1 is wider and a little bit longer the latter weighs more than the Al Khalid.

Things like the extra protection is what I would like to see on the AK2.

The BBC has just featured the news that a Challenger 2 was penetrated in Iraq by an IED which I think justifies more protection in the eventuality of such a case for AK like blow out panels and a seperate ammo apartment from the crew.

 

[kidwaibhai]

i think that al khalid is in its primary evolutionary phase as time goes by i think more western equipment will be added but i strongly believe that one upgrade that is desparatly needed is hydronumonic suspension.

P.S i hope i have Hydronumanic right.

 

[Keysersoze]

i think that al khalid is in its primary evolutionary phase as time goes by i think more western equipment will be added but i strongly believe that one upgrade that is desparatly needed is hydronumonic suspension.

P.S i hope i have Hydronumanic right.

Hydro pneumatic dude. but it would be a big deal to get it fitted. it would mean a whole new base for the tank to be built upon.

I am hoping for better armour and main gun too.....

 

[zraver]

The BBC has just featured the news that a Challenger 2 was penetrated in Iraq by an IED which I think justifies more protection in the eventuality of such a case for AK like blow out panels and a seperate ammo apartment from the crew.

No tank in the world will stop an EFP to the lower hull from the side, nothing there but a thin steel shell. And in the case of the Chally or T series tanks, ammuntion.

 

[JK!]

For those of you who may be wondering about the T80UM2 black eagle that has certain protective features I keep going on about:

A new Russian MBT named Chiorny Oriol (Black Eagle) was shown for the first time at the second VTTV-Omsk-97 International Exhibition of Armaments, Military Equipment and Conversion Products held in September '97 in Omsk, Siberia region, Russia.

Until recently, there were hardly any details about the tank except for a couple of words and a poster on the Defendory 1998 held in Greece.

According to the information I have, this tank is being developed in cooperation with and for export to S.Korea and may even feature Korean thermal imagers. It will not be fielded with the Russian Army and seems to be entirely an initiative of Omsk Plant. It originates from the now-closed Nikolai Popov's design bureau at Leningrad Kirov Plant (LKZ) and is now developed by Alexander Morozov.

The tank is built on a T-80U chassis and will borrow most of its components including FCS from T-80U.

The most significant difference between the new tank and T-80 is the completely redesigned turret (at Omsk'97 a full-sized mock-up was presented) and the lengthened hull with 7 roadwheels per side.

The new turret will have a larger degree of protection than the current Russian MBTs. The steep slope of forward armor plates on the turret reflects designers' desire to maximize protection from APFSDS rounds in a duel situation, when tanks fight "face to face".

For additional protection, the tank is fitted with Kaktus ERA and the new Drozd-2 APS.

It was originally planned to install a 152 mm gun that is being developed for a future Russian MBT. However, since this tank is not going to be fielded with the Russian Army, it carries a 125 mm 2A46M-series gun.

Another innovation is a new automated ammo storage/loader, located in a turret bustle. It is separated from crew compartment by an armored bulkhead which greatly increases crew survivability. This design has several reasons. First, the Chechen war has shown that the carousel used in T-72/T-80/T-90 is too prone to ammo detonation when penetrated, invariably killing the crew. Second, adopted configuration also reduces Black Eagle's height by 400 mm by comparison with the T-80 (Perhaps a typo here, since this means that the tank is a mere 1.8 meters in height). Finally, horizontal ammunition arrangement in the turret bustle permits using longer (and therefore, more powerful) APFSDS rounds, unitary ammunition, simplified automatic loading process and increased rate of fire (expected to reach 10-12 rds/min).

Black Eagle's on-board information system monitors all essential systems of the vehicle, and permits automated data exchange with other tanks and headquarters.

The tank shall have a new 1200 hp 16-cyl. turbo-diesel engine and shall weigh around 50 tons.

VTTV-Omsk-99 exhibition have finally revealed the complete vehicle (referred by KBMZ as Item 640) without any netting. Several features became immediately apparent. It was apparent for the first time that the vehicle's hull is not taken directly from T-80U as was originally believed, but was significantly redesigned, the obvious change being the 7th roadwheel. It seems that most of the additional length has gone into the raised front hull protection and greater glacis obliquity. It also raises doubts if the tank indeed stays in Class 50. The active protection system appears to be Drozd, not Arena, derivative. Although the tank indeed carries the 2A46M maingun, it was stated that provision is made for installation of a new 152mm maingun. This implies that Omsk still hopes to win the hearts of the Russian military with this new tank.

http://armor.vif2.ru/Tanks/

 

[Keysersoze]

[YOUTUBE]

 

[Keysersoze]

Attached to the video was the following information


Chinese TYPE98 [ZTZ98] MBT Cactus Structure Composite Armor TEST by Hong Jian-9 ATM [Penetrate RHA：1200mm].

Cactus Structure Composite armor is the Composite armor which used a lot of heavy metal such as tungsten carbide [WC]....

TYPE98 [ZTZ98] MBT Cactus Structure Armor is penetrated by HJ-9 ATM and can confirm that smoke appears from a hatch.

It followed that this Composite Armor ability hurried up deployment of FY-4/FY-5 ERA in a Chinese PLA tanks

 

[con]

Attached to the video was the following information


Chinese TYPE98 [ZTZ98] MBT Cactus Structure Composite Armor TEST by Hong Jian-9 ATM [Penetrate RHA?1200mm].

Cactus Structure Composite armor is the Composite armor which used a lot of heavy metal such as tungsten carbide [WC]....

TYPE98 [ZTZ98] MBT Cactus Structure Armor is penetrated by HJ-9 ATM and can confirm that smoke appears from a hatch.

It followed that this Composite Armor ability hurried up deployment of FY-4/FY-5 ERA in a Chinese PLA tanks

That was a very interesting video. They just told the world how to know out their tank!

 

[ao333]

Arjun:

Indian design and armor
Israeli armament, fire control and navigation
German engines and tracks

War scenario: A chassis with nothing inside.

 

[Dazzler]

Good to see Mr. Zraver posting here after a long time. Al Khalid was never designed initially to counter Challys, Leopard 2a6s or M1A2s anyway. They were specifically designed to fight the Indian MBT inventory which comprised of Russian MBTs mostly. The Al Khalid 1 is the current version that is being supplied to Pak Army and we have already discussed what changes it has so it is a respectable tank anyway. However, AK2 will fulfill the heavy Armour category and it will likely be a contemporary to The European and American Tanks. Initial specifications suggest this although not many can be found.

Back to the topic. AKs can be compared with Type 99A1s in certain parameters only and vice versa. 99A1s are heavy MBTs, AK and even AK1 is not. AK1 definitely has an edge in terms of thermal imagers (sagem matis, third generation, French), fire control (French) and engine efficiency ( 6TD2, 1200 Diesel) but Armour, range and over all protection goes in favor of Type 99A1s and even 99Gs.