An Insight into Al-Khalid II MBT.

[khanasifm]

Not sure if they are producing just this gun barrels or all artillery gun barrels , can save quite a bit large caliber guns barrels last few hundred rounds

 

[Ahmet Pasha]

@Bilal Khan (Quwa) found it. So what's the sitrep? Are Turks or any other nation still offering subsystems or does HIT want to make it entirely by themselves??

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

@Bilal Khan (Quwa) found it. So what's the sitrep? Are Turks or any other nation still offering subsystems or does HIT want to make it entirely by themselves??

Offers are there, not sure how HIT intends to pursue it, but we'll find out since the design is frozen and they're moving to prototype production. So if HIT took advantage of anyone's help, it will have likely decided by now.

 

[Great Janjua]

We need info about al khalid 2 when will the first prototype be shown

 

[his5850]

Please tell me is this any true ??
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reFIdntk72E&feature=emb_title

 

[Maxpane]

Please tell me is this any true ??

@Quwa @Dazzler

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

@Quwa @Dazzler

All his moaning about ERA makes no sense, specially since ERA is usually not placed during peacetime and can be placed by troops even in the field.

He mocked the mobility? Ironic how the same engine powers Oplot & older T-1 powers T-80UD, Oplot being heavier and UD having similar weight?

He also is wrong about the sights, it uses 3rd Gen sights by Sagem (built in Pak by Shibli).

The commander doesn’t really need a separate sight specially when he has a Hunter Killer available, which he didnt mention. However it is available to the commander, @Dazzler.

Also how the fk did he measure the protection offered? Be it the armour or the ERA?


I can go on and on.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Transmission is bad? It uses the SESSM500, same as Lecrec, is that bad?

 

[Tipu7]

All his moaning about ERA makes no sense, specially since ERA is usually not placed during peacetime and can be placed by troops even in the field.

The coverage of ERA on frontal turret arc is poor with numerous exposed areas. Not to mention that ERA is missing from Hull front and sides. (no ERA on turret roof either).
Shown below a bit comparison of Al Khalid with T90S. (Pic not for you but for understanding of other members)

 

[Invictus.inc]

True

The coverage of ERA on frontal turret arc is poor with numerous exposed areas. Not to mention that ERA is missing from Hull front and sides. (no ERA on turret roof either).
Shown below a bit comparison of Al Khalid with T90S. (Pic not for you but for understanding of other members)

View attachment 595243

A lot of fan boys out there that won't take any criticism
I agree with you
Most of our tanks are as vulnerable as it gets
No protection what so ever
As far as the argument of ERA being employed in the field
Dude you need to have ERA plates in the inventory first
What are they gonna put on the tanks Incase of war?
Sand bags like they did in Operation Al Mizan?

 

[HRK]

The coverage of ERA on frontal arc is poor with numerous exposed areas. Not to mention that ERA is missing from Hull front and sides. (no ERA on turret roof either).
Shown below a bit comparison of Al Khalid with T90S. (Pic not for you but for understanding of other members)

View attachment 595243

Bro you know better than me ....

 

[Tipu7]

Bro you know better than me ....
View attachment 595271
View attachment 595275
View attachment 595272
View attachment 595274

Yes there are some models displayed with much better ERA coverage than the ones which are in operational use. Problem is, majority of forward deployed AKs are not like that.
Plus, the gaps in front arc of Turret are very obvious even in those 'up armored' AKs. For example, notice AK Turret front ERA coverage with that of Type 96A.

You can easily spot the difference in ERA coverage on hull front also.
Interestingly, none of Tanks of Chinese origin have ERA coverage on sides of Hull.

Shown below are sides of AK (no ERA), and T80UD & T90S (ERA plates)

 

[HRK]

Yes there are some models displayed with much better ERA coverage than the ones which are in operational use. Problem is, majority of forward deployed AKs are not like that.
Plus, the gaps in front arc of Turret are very obvious. For example, notice AK Turret front ERA coverage with that of Type 96A.

View attachment 595287

You can easily spot the difference in ERA coverage on hull front also.
Interestingly, none of Tanks of Chinese origin have ERA coverage on sides of Hull.

Shown below are sides of AK (no ERA), and T80UD & T90S (ERA plates)

View attachment 595289

Dear Your point is not completely wrong and I agree we should seek modular composite armour for additional overall protection of our tanks, but that will
- Increase the overall weight of tank
- which will decrease power to weight ratio
- while increase the ground pressure
- which mean decrease in acceleration

unless we go for upgrade for engine and transmission, now tell me which other engine option is available to us other than 1200 hp Ukrainian engine .... ??? their 1,500 hp is still not operational IF I am not wrong.

In short we are here seeking compromise on mobility while trying to increase the protection which again would not be effective against Guided Anti tank missiles of Indian Army ... so in any of this situation faster acceleration and superior mobility would be more desired element than to have 1000 mm armour protection at frontal arc

In context of AK series try to understand most of the pic of AK which we see in media are not shown in battle ready conditions .....

secondly frontal arc of AK turret in strip down condition have 650mm or above armour protection without additional plates of composite armour which are installed in arrow shape position with space configuration from main turret which add extra protection now plz tell me which tank round of Indian Army is capable to penetrate 650 mm armour .....???

The best HEAT round which India have is capable of 550 mm penetration which is decent but not enough against AK series, so bigger threat to our tanks are Guided Anti-tank missiles of Indian army than anti-tank rounds of Indian tanks ... as chances of survival after getting hit by those tanks round are more than ATGM.

 

[Tipu7]

Dear Your point is not completely wrong and I agree we should seek modular composite armour for additional overall protection of our tanks, but that will
- Increase the overall weight of tank
- which will decrease power to weight ratio
- while increase the ground pressure
- which mean decrease in acceleration

unless we go for upgrade for engine and transmission, now tell me which other engine option is available to us other than 1200 hp Ukrainian engine .... ??? their 1,500 hp is still not operational IF I am not wrong.

In short we are here seeking compromise on mobility while trying to increase the protection which again would not be effective against Guided Anti tank missiles of Indian Army ... so in any of this situation faster acceleration and superior mobility would be more desired element than to have 1000 mm armour protection at frontal arc

In context of AK series try to understand most of the pic of AK which we see in media are not shown in battle ready conditions .....

secondly frontal arc of AK turret in strip down condition have 650mm or above armour protection without additional plates of composite armour which are installed in arrow shape position with space configuration from main turret which add extra protection now plz tell me which tank round of Indian Army is capable to penetrate 650 mm armour .....???

The best HEAT round which India have is capable of 550 mm penetration which is decent but not enough against AK series, so bigger threat to our tanks are Guided Anti-tank missiles of Indian army than anti-tank rounds of Indian tanks ... as chances of survival after getting hit by those tanks round are more than ATGM.

Your points are valid but i am building argument settled by that RedEffect video. In that video, he has given a general evaluation of AK while keeping the Modern Threat Environment into perspective; an evaluation which is bench-marked by likes of T14, Leo2A6, M1A1SepV2 etc. However, once we consider our own specific requirements then situation changes as our tanks have to face India centric threats. Therefore our tank 'modifications' will be (1) as per the threats which we perceive from Indian armored and anti-armor forces and (2) our economic conditions. Hence forth two conclusions can be drawn,

1: Is AK good enough to face challenges posed by Indian armored forces while considering our economic limitations?
Definitely Yes.

2: Is AK good enough to compete with modern MBTs around the globe w.r.t ground based anti-armor threats present any where in World?
Definitely No.

In context of AK series try to understand most of the pic of AK which we see in media are not shown in battle ready conditions .....

I have seen AK in battlefield conditions, and with very limited ERA coverage. Perhaps army prefers mobility over protection and thus give little emphasis on putting up more and more armor around the tank. An example of it is Oplot-M conversion into Oplot-P. When Oplot-M was trialed in Pakistan, army highlighted certain 'modifications' and one of most physically prominent one was the removal of ERA from both sides of hull.
Contemporary, AK protection level is 'fine', however it will soon be demanding upgrades; including in the domain of armor, once T90MS and modern anti-tank weapons will proliferate in Indian army.

 

[HRK]

2: Is AK good enough to compete with modern MBTs around the globe w.r.t ground based anti-armor threats present any where in World?
Definitely No.

exactly but the question is

Is Al-Khalid an inferior design ....??
In my humble opinion NO ....

Could it be made compatible with other more modern contemporary tanks .... ???
Answer is Yes .... a Definitive Yes

Addition/Installation of
- Modular Composite Armour
- High power engine 1500 or above
- Next Generation TI sights

or in short comprehensive upgrade of Al-Khalid while maintaining the same Basic Design could give competition to any new modern tank, this is the beauty of this tank.

Perhaps army prefers mobility over protection and thus give little emphasis on putting up more and more armor around the tank. An example of it is Oplot-M conversion into Oplot-P. When Oplot-M was trialed in Pakistan, army highlighted certain 'modifications' and one of most physically prominent one was the removal of ERA from both sides of hull.

Exactly this is an example in which we can observe the operational preference of Pakistan Army