What's new

An Insight into Al-Khalid II MBT.

They were confirmed as ordered, and SIPRI confirmed this as well. But there was as yet no proof of delivery, unless @Ronin bhai or @Michael Corleone bhai knows something I don't.

I remember seeing an image claiming as such, but that later turned out to be a VT4 being unloaded in Karachi Port.
For vt4s here you go:
DG ISPR (@OfficialDGISPR) Tweeted:
#COAS visited Field Firing Ranges near Jhelum today to witness demonstration of state of the art, Chinese origin third generation Main Battle Tank VT-4. This potent war fighting machine will be employed in offensive role by strike formations after induction (1/5) https://t.co/csQv54XVDj I also saw the picture you are talking about and some said that it was a picture of vt5 in Bangladesh😆. He was wrong though
 
. .
Correct brother - VT4 has been inducted by Pakistan or being trialed at least. Not sure about the website report.

https://www.globaldefensecorp.com/2020/09/23/pakistan-inducts-vt-4-main-battle-tank/

For Bangladesh VT5 was ordered two years ago and has either been delivered or is close to delivery (ETA was Mid 2020). VT5 is of course smaller and lighter tank (36t), and much lighter than VT4 but those delivered to Bangladesh are different from PLA specs AFAIK. Bangladesh VT5s reportedly include 125mm gun and Western Sensors and Scopes. VT5 was ordered primarily to traverse mountainous terrain in our hill tracts area bordering Myanmar. VT5 is much more suited to that terrain than say VT4 or any other 50 plus ton tank.

As VT5 does not possess amphibious capability, there is strong likelihood that Bangladesh may also order ZBD 2000 amphibious tank, given 80% of our terrain is low lying land just above sea level.

Sorry for the off-topic segway.
I personally think that if they would have to buy one amphibious tank as well then light tanks should have been scrapped. Instead they should have gone for some heavier ones such as Pakistani AKs or Chinese VT4 or type 99. Because two light tanks don't go well
Bobby's own
What sir, 6th lancers, you're talking about? Babar iftikhars own
 
Last edited:
.
Ballistic Fire Control Computer (FCC) For Main Battle Tank (MBT)

Fire Control Systems (FCSs) plays a critical role in the battle effectiveness of a Main Battle Tank (MBT) whether it is high first-round-hit-probability, ballistic solution computation for projectile trajectory, or moving target engagement. FCS comprises of Fire Control Computer (FCC), sensors, and gun controller. Fire control computer computes the elevation and azimuth (pitch and yaw axis) angles, based on the ballistic algorithm. A 32-Bit ARM processor based FCC for 125mm smoothbore gun MBT has been designed, developed and tested. The development is a migration from traditional 8-Bit or 16-Bit controllers to a 32-Bit ARM processor, making the solution more efficient and effective. The developed solution is cost-effective and easily configurable to wide variety of Armoured Fighting Vehicles (AFVs). The ARM Cortex-M4 processor provides over 100 ballistic computational updates per second.
FCC computes the ballistic solution for static and moving targets. The FCC was fitted on a MBT and was rigorously field tested by firing armoured piercing (AP) shells at a range of 2000 meters. The accuracy for the ballistic computations by the fire control computer was within allowed error range. This paper presents the complete development cycle of fire control computer, implementation of ballistic algorithm, and testing of developed system

4-Figure8-1.png
5-Figure10-1.png
2-Figure4-1.png


4-Figure7-1.png
 
. . .
I don't what is being done but I really hope Pakistan brings in Turkey and basically develops a 55 tone version of Altay with 1500 HP engine most likely from Ukraine.
 
.
I don't what is being done but I really hope Pakistan brings in Turkey and basically develops a 55 tone version of Altay with 1500 HP engine most likely from Ukraine.
Not a good idea…not happening either. Too drastic of a change, we’re tying to upgrade a tank, not build a new one. AK-1 is already really good, doesn’t need a full redesign yet, just a better turret, which seems to be planned. Hull armor can be increased without changing the design.
 
.
I don't what is being done but I really hope Pakistan brings in Turkey and basically develops a 55 tone version of Altay with 1500 HP engine most likely from Ukraine.
Basically a K2 with a Ukrainian engine, since Pak army would prefer 3 man crews similar to the Koreans and its Autoloader is pretty good.
 
.
I don't what is being done but I really hope Pakistan brings in Turkey and basically develops a 55 tone version of Altay with 1500 HP engine most likely from Ukraine.
Too much expensive tank for us, PA cant afford
 
.
Why doesnt the PA invest in tank carriers? The Chinese have a few designs based off the old Type 59 and even the new VT4s that the PA is getting:



Even a few hundred of these would make a huge difference to the capabilities of our mechanized divisions. These also have the added benefit of having the engines placed in the front of the tank adding far greater crew protection/survivability.
 
.
Why doesnt the PA invest in tank carriers? The Chinese have a few designs based off the old Type 59 and even the new VT4s that the PA is getting:



Even a few hundred of these would make a huge difference to the capabilities of our mechanized divisions. These also have the added benefit of having the engines placed in the front of the tank adding far greater crew protection/survivability.
Down to Doctrine, PA doesn’t have much need for IFVs in its doctrine, especially not ones this expensive and large. If PA had to money to get thousands and thousands of these to use in armored assaults then maybe it would be possible, but just getting a few would mean they’d be out of place in the doctrine of light-armored APCs that are just used to deliver troops to their objective and are not meant to be used as fighting vehicles. China can afford this, Pakistan sadly cannot, even if they would make great force multipliers.
 
. .
Ballistic Fire Control Computer (FCC) For Main Battle Tank (MBT)

Fire Control Systems (FCSs) plays a critical role in the battle effectiveness of a Main Battle Tank (MBT) whether it is high first-round-hit-probability, ballistic solution computation for projectile trajectory, or moving target engagement. FCS comprises of Fire Control Computer (FCC), sensors, and gun controller. Fire control computer computes the elevation and azimuth (pitch and yaw axis) angles, based on the ballistic algorithm. A 32-Bit ARM processor based FCC for 125mm smoothbore gun MBT has been designed, developed and tested. The development is a migration from traditional 8-Bit or 16-Bit controllers to a 32-Bit ARM processor, making the solution more efficient and effective. The developed solution is cost-effective and easily configurable to wide variety of Armoured Fighting Vehicles (AFVs). The ARM Cortex-M4 processor provides over 100 ballistic computational updates per second.
FCC computes the ballistic solution for static and moving targets. The FCC was fitted on a MBT and was rigorously field tested by firing armoured piercing (AP) shells at a range of 2000 meters. The accuracy for the ballistic computations by the fire control computer was within allowed error range. This paper presents the complete development cycle of fire control computer, implementation of ballistic algorithm, and testing of developed system

View attachment 749266View attachment 749267View attachment 749268

View attachment 749271



Are there any plans for an active protection system on AK-2? Possibly one that can make its way to AK-1?
 
. .

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom