What's new

Al-Zarrar MBT | News,Updates & Discussions.

Of course, those have been commonplace on tanks since WW2.
I should rephrase my question.

Were the turret traverse speed and gun elevation/depression improved in any way over the Type 59? If I am not wrong, the Type 59 doesn't hold up well in that regard, so is Al-Zarrar better? I am not sure how important they are, but I would think with the FCS and sight upgrades they would also upgrade those systems.
 
.
I should rephrase my question.

Were the turret traverse speed and gun elevation/depression improved in any way over the Type 59? If I am not wrong, the Type 59 doesn't hold up well in that regard, so is Al-Zarrar better? I am not sure how important they are, but I would think with the FCS and sight upgrades they would also upgrade those systems.
The gun elevation and depression angles are entirely different for the Al-Zarrar as compared to the Type 59, and so is the electronic movement mechanism, that’s simply because the whole gun is new, the breech is new, it uses two piece ammo instead of one piece like originally, and the FCS means the stabilizers are new, so there’s no way that could be kept original.

As for the traverse drive, the one in the type 59 was comparable to the one in the T54A, which could rotate the whole turret in about 21 seconds. The T72 did not improve on this, having a similar 20 second turret traverse speed. This was brought down to under 10 seconds in the T90S. I’ll be honest I’m not entirely sure if it got a new turret traverse drive. The turret was raised from the hull and weighs considerably more than the standard Type 59 turret, so I would assume they did, because if not the traversal rate would be abysmally slow, if not impossible with the original drive, however I can’t confirm that entirely.

PS: keep in mind the AZ has a modern stabilizer system unlike the Type 59, so it can effectively double its turret traverse to get on a target by rotating its hull in the opposite direction, of course that’s not always possible, but it’s just another advantage of stabilization.
 
.
It’s “main armor” does not consist of reflecting plates or spaces since neither of those really exist on the tank, it’s just a misconception.

There are two production models of the Al-Zarrar (plus three prototype models that never made it to production).
Both have extra armor added to the front of the hull in the form of steel and composite, over the existing Type 59 armor.
And neither have any extra armor added to the turret, Both simply have thin metal plates attached over the existing Type 59 turret, those are not meant to serve as reflecting plates or spaced armor since that’s not how neither of those work. They are simply to make it easier to put ERA on to the turret, a practice which itself was dropped after the first production batch since the ERA was not deemed to add enough protection for its weight. They did experiment with somehow adding extra armor onto the existing Type 59 turret in the form of composites (one of the aforementioned prototypes that sits at HIT currently), but it didn’t work well because of the shape of the turret.

So the “Main armor” of the Al-Zarrar is just Type 59 armor on the turret and some steel+composite addition over the existing Type 59 armor on the hull, neither of which is enough to stop modern APFSDS or AT threats, but enough to shield the crew from basic weapons like RPGs.

Indeed the AZ was never meant to have good protection, such would be hard to do with the small amount of funds allocated to the project. It overcomes that by having a Modern FCS/GCS and sighting system along with a good gun and modern ammo, allowing it to take out threats like the T72 before they can engage it. Infact the Al-Zarrar has similar engagement ranges (and better firepower) than a T90S in Indian service, due to its better gun and modern ammo.

That being said, HIT recently created a new upgrade package for the Al-Zarrar, which consists of an entirely new turret, much like the ones found on AK and Type 85, with proper composite arrays in the cheeks and better design, along with a much thicker addition to the front of the hull, among other upgrades like a new FCS, radios etc. This was showcased at IDEAS recently, it remains to be seen wether PA purchases this new upgrade for its existing (or new) Al-Zarrars, but it would considerably solve the protection shortcomings of the tank.

All that being said, I don’t see how it is “very good” at surviving chemical weaponry compared to any other tank. Infantry is always the biggest threat to any tank, no matter how well protected, this is even more so the case with the AZ and it’s poor protection. If anything it is better suited To long range tank duels than anything to stay alive, along with its small size. And while in a perfect world the tank would be retired, not frontline or second line, due to the nature of the border and it’s size, it will very well be serving in a frontline role (which keep in mind, a frontline role for a tank is always that of infantry support, that is the tanks entire job, infantry support) until it is supplanted by VT4s, which will not be soon.
That is very informative I never knew it had composite arrays is there any details on those?
 
.
That is very informative I never knew it had composite arrays is there any details on those?
Similar composite composition to AK series, of course the layout is different because it’s thinner and differently shaped, but the composition is likely of the same steel-based composite AK series uses, because that’s what HIT is familiar with. You can find photos of AZ Hull upgrades for both the older models and the recently unveiled one online, from production lines.
 
.
Any new details on new Al-Zarrar mod?
 

Attachments

  • 019.jpg
    019.jpg
    107.6 KB · Views: 63
  • 020.jpg
    020.jpg
    265.7 KB · Views: 66
  • njstBDC-nik.jpg
    njstBDC-nik.jpg
    199.1 KB · Views: 60
  • YQbmj87yo5g.jpg
    YQbmj87yo5g.jpg
    324 KB · Views: 61
.
Any new details on new Al-Zarrar mod?
Not many. It is likely not too major of an upgrade technologically because AZ is meant to be low cost. The turret and hull armor is clearly upgraded. There might be changes to the FCS and there is a proposal to switch the thermals from THETIS to Catherine FC for commonality with other PA MBTs, however this might not happen, especially if they just apply this upgrade to existing AZs instead of upgrading more Type 59s.

In the photos of the interior we can see a black colored box from Galelio Avionica, which is a company owned by Leonardo, which makes the FCS (THETIS-FCS) for older AZs. That box is likely the FCS, it could be a new one or just the older one with a new casing.

Other than that it will probably get the new POF APFSDS.

The only prototype that exists was at IDEAS when I visited HIT so I was not able to see it, hopefully when I see it next time I will have more info on it.
 
.
But we have at least 4 new turrets on the photo, so it may be in mass production
 
.
But we have at least 4 new turrets on the photo, so it may be in mass production
It is now, I meant that when I went there was only the prototype. It is not confirmed wether the army intends to use these turrets to upgrade existing AZs or produce new ones, but I believe it is more likely that they are making new AZs from their stocks of Type 59s.
 
.
I believe it is more likely that they are making new AZs from their stocks of Type 59s.

A relevant question would be :

Could the Al Zarrar make any useful contribution in Mechanized conflict with arch rivals, considering its Armour Protection level and use of ATGM by the the other side ?

Thanks
 
.
A relevant question would be :

Could the Al Zarrar make any useful contribution in Mechanized conflict with arch rivals, considering its Armour Protection level and use of ATGM by the the other side ?

Thanks
It most definitely can, only out of necessity however, not because it’s a modern machine.

See the Pakistan-india theatre is much different from say Ukraine or something we’d think of in the west. It’s a game of numbers more than anything, the borders, especially deserts and plains are very tank friendly, and historically wars here have been More drawn out geographically and not limited to smaller areas, hence the need for massive forces to cover entire borders instead of only responding to certain areas as needed.

In an ideal scenario the only MBTs serving in PA right now would be the 3rd Generation tanks, T80 and beyond, but the doctrine and terrain of both sides does not allow that. The Al-Zarrar is outdated, especially when it comes to protection, and that’s on top of the fact that PA still uses a good number of even older and even more hopelessly outdated Type 59s and Type 69s. But when you mention that the enemy uses modern ATGMs and AT weapons, you should also remember that they also use thousands of obsolete tanks. India has over 1000 T72M and M1s in service and reserve, don’t let the designation fool you, M1 means it’s the original tank from the 70s, they’re very basic much like our Type 59s, they’re not even equivalent to an Al-Zarrar (they probably have better protection, but the AZ is supposed to be like a glass cannon, it’s firepower and Combat range is on Par with tanks like T90S, it considerably outranges T72). Just like PA modernizes thousands of its older tanks, Type 59s and 85s, to keep them in service, so too does india, with its Combat Improved Ajeya Project where it modernized over 900 T72s.

In an ideal scenario, both countries would have retired these old machines over a decade ago, but once again, they need the numbers, if tomorrow Indian decides to downsize its tank fleet to modernize it faster, PA would happily follow suit, and Vice versa, but until one does it, the other can’t either, PAs tank fleet is already considerably smaller than IAs after all.

Where PA does make up is in its top-end, Indian T90S is only comparable to the older versions of the Al-Khalid, and even the Al-Zarrar can match it in firepower because IA has refused to upgrade its T90S with modern ammo, unlike the Al-Zarrar which can use the same ammo VT4 can.

Keep in mind, none of this makes the Al-Zarrar an objectively good tank, it’s still outdated, and to the crews that operate it, it is still a death trap if it gets hit by any modern AT weapon, even an RPG-7, that’s why I’ve always been a proponent of retiring and downsizing, but all the factors I mentioned above are basically the justification army planners can use to keep them in service on both sides.

That being said, the induction of modern ATGMs and Drones doesn’t mean tanks are going to become irrelevant, they’re more relevant than ever, especially in the indo-Pak region, however they most definitely need to evolve, hence the emphasis on APS systems from both sides recently. Moreover, it’s not a tanks job to fight UAVs and ATGMs, a tanks role is infantry support, it’s supposed to take out threats that the infantry might not be able to, meanwhile the infantry and Air-support and AD and artillery are supposed to make sure that tanks are kept safe from the things that they can’t engage, i.e. UAVs and ATGMs, that’s the entire idea behind combined arms warfare, whenever there’s An advancement that threatens one aspect of combined arms warfare, all the supporting elements must evolve accordingly to not let a single element fall behind, otherwise the entire system collapses.

India has more advanced and more numerous ATGMs than PA, that’s a fact, and PA can’t hope to counter that directly, it doesn’t have the funds, so the indirect counter is to train your troops and prepare your doctrine in such a way that you can use the advantages you do have to cover your deficiencies.


Also keep in mind that the atgm discussion isn’t limited To Al-Zarrar, any modern atgm would take out any PA tank just the same, VT-4, AK, AZ, they’re all one Top-Attack ATGM hit away from being dead, none of them have APS systems yet. Yes the crew might have a higher chance of surviving in the newer models, but even then it’s not a given. The same goes for the other side, no Indian tank is surviving a Hit from a TOW missile. Be it a T90 or a T72. That’s not the point, the point is to not get hit, the infantry has to make sure it’s tanks don’t get hit, the APS is a last resort if the infantry has failed to protect their tanks.


You can see this discussion can basically go on in circles if needed, each element has some deficiencies and some strengths that needs to be covered by the other, but to come back to yoir original question, yes, the Al-Zarrar is still useful. Should it still be in service? Absolutely not. But will it serve for another decade? Probably. PA is inducting VT4s as fast as it can to replace its legacy tanks, but with thousands of tanks to replace and a really weak economy, that’s not easy to do, hence you have to take stop-gap measures like upgrading AZs to keep them relevant until you can finally retire them.​
 
Last edited:
.
It most definitely can, only out of necessity however, not because it’s a modern machine.

See the Pakistan-india theatre is much different from say Ukraine or something we’d think of in the west. It’s a game of numbers more than anything, the borders, especially deserts and plains are very tank friendly, and historically wars here have been More drawn out geographically.

In an ideal scenario the only MBTs serving in PA right now would be the 3rd Generation tanks, T80 and beyond, but the doctrine and terrain of both sides does not allow that. The Al-Zarrar is outdated, especially when it comes to protection, and that’s on top of the fact that PA still uses a good number of even older and even more hopelessly outdated Type 59s and Type 69s. But when you mention that the enemy uses modern ATGMs and AT weapons, you should also remember that they also use thousands of obsolete tanks. India has over 1000 T72M and M1s in service and reserve, don’t let the designation fool you, M1 means it’s the original tank from the 70s, they’re very basic much like our Type 59s, they’re not even equivalent to an Al-Zarrar (they probably have better protection, but the AZ is supposed to be like a glass cannon, it’s firepower and Combat range is on Par with tanks like T90S, it considerably outranges T72). Just like PA modernizes thousands of its older tanks, Type 59s and 85s, to keep them in service, so too does india, with its Combat Improved Ajeya Project where it modernized over 900 T72s.

In an ideal scenario, both countries would have retired these old machines over a decade ago, but once again, they need the numbers, if tomorrow Indian decides to downsize its tank fleet to modernize it faster, PA would happily follow suit, and Vice versa, but until one does it, the other can’t either, PAs tank fleet is already considerably smaller than IAs after all.

Where PA does make up is in its top-end, Indian T90S is only comparable to the older versions of the Al-Khalid, and even the Al-Zarrar can match it in firepower because IA has refused to upgrade its T90S with modern ammo, unlike the Al-Zarrar which can use the same ammo VT4 can.

Keep in mind, none of this makes the Al-Zarrar an objectively good tank, it’s still outdated, and to the crews that operate it, it is still a death trap if it gets hit by any modern AT weapon, even an RPG-7, that’s why I’ve always been a proponent of retiring and downsizing, but all the factors I mentioned above are basically the justification army planners can use to keep them in service on both sides.

That being said, the induction of modern ATGMs and Drones doesn’t mean tanks are going to become irrelevant, they’re more relevant than ever, especially in the indo-Pak region, however they most definitely need to evolve, hence the emphasis on APS systems from both sides recently. Moreover, it’s not a tanks job to fight UAVs and ATGMs, a tanks role is infantry support, it’s supposed to take out threats that the infantry might not be able to, meanwhile the infantry and Air-support and AD and artillery are supposed to make sure that tanks are kept safe from the things that they can’t engage, i.e. UAVs and ATGMs, that’s the entire idea behind combined arms warfare, whenever there’s An advancement that threatens one aspect of combined arms warfare, all the supporting elements must evolve accordingly to not let a single element fall behind, otherwise the entire system collapses.

India has more advanced and more numerous ATGMs than PA, that’s a fact, and PA can’t hope to counter that directly, it doesn’t have the funds, so the indirect counter is to train your troops and prepare your doctrine in such a way that you can use the advantages you do have to cover your deficiencies.


Also keep in mind that the atgm discussion isn’t limited To Al-Zarrar, any modern atgm would take out any PA tank just the same, VT-4, AK, AZ, they’re all one Top-Attack ATGM hit away from being dead, none of them have APS systems yet. Yes the crew might have a higher chance of surviving in the newer models, but even then it’s not a given. The same goes for the other side, no Indian tank is surviving a Hit from a TOW missile. Be it a T90 or a T72. That’s not the point, the point is to not get hit, the infantry has to make sure it’s tanks don’t get hit, the APS is a last resort if the infantry has failed to protect their tanks.


You can see this discussion can basically go on in circles if needed, each element has some deficiencies and some strengths that needs to be covered by the other, but to come back to yoir original question, yes, the Al-Zarrar is still useful. Should it still be in service? Absolutely not. But will it serve for another decade? Probably. PA is inducting VT4s as fast as it can to replace its legacy tanks, but with thousands of tanks to replace and a really weak economy, that’s not easy to do, hence you have to take stop-gap measures like upgrading AZs to keep them relevant until you can finally retire them.​

Thanks for taking time to answer.
 
.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom