ANALYSIS: PAKISTAN’S VT4 ACQUISITION

[Dazzler]

Protection is an essential aspect of each main battle tank, but protection level vary across main battle tanks. VT-4 is a good product in its own right but it cannot be better than others in every aspect imagined. There are limitations to any machine.

Therefore, it make sense to buy some, to replace older ones. Machines have an operational life and an expiry date.

Protection without adequate mobility and fire power is next to useless. VT-4 with fy-4 is clearly better protected when compared to the MS. Keep in mind that the M-S is essentially M version for export. For own use, Russians have the S-M version which they dont intend to export.

The MS is still a glorified export variant of the SM, which the VT-4 can easily handle. FYI, VT-4/ got a digital FCS and new generaton ECS even before PLA's own 99A mbt. When it comes to export, Chinese dont hesitate in meeting customer's demands, fy-4 on VT-4 being a test case.

Trivia: Type-90II was designed to have a shelf life of 100 years

 

[Tipu7]

For own use, Russians have the S-M version which they dont intend to export.

The Russian version is called T-90M, not T-90SM.

 

[Arsalan]

The Russian version is called T-90M, not T-90SM.

T-90SM or MS are basically the same thing. Its an upgraded export version of T-90S.
@Dazzler

 

[Dazzler]

T-90SM or MS are basically the same thing. Its an upgraded export version of T-90S.
@Dazzler

Not true

 

[Arsalan]

Not true

So what are the main differences between MS and SM?

 

[Dazzler]

The Russian version is called T-90M, not T-90SM.

UVG makes it complicated. SM does exist.

 

[Dazzler]

So what are the main differences between MS and SM?

Factory designation of "90M Breakthrough" was S-M.

 

[Reichmarshal]

We need to replace at the very least 1000 + Tanks urgently..that can't be done by hit. So we need to buy tanks off the shelf n that's where vt4 comes in.

HIT has been retooled n the capacity inhanced but it has its hands full with the manufacture of al Khalid1 and a major overhaul of t80ud. This in addition to rnd of al khalid2.

The best thing starting from the first trials vt4 has an excellent engine so much so that PA wanted norinco to give it just the engine, this is before the removed the chinks.

We need to get over the obsession of oplot as Ukraine is not the same since the war which has created huge deficiencies in its whole manufacturing process.
Already PA had a bad experience with the over haul of t80ud as Ukraine was basically demanding an arm n a leg, prices that were more than the price of a new tank !
So it's with Russian/Chinese and some Ukrainian help that we are overhauling the ud.

Things are more complex than wt meets the eye.

 

[waz]

Quwa Premium Excerpt
ANALYSIS: PAKISTAN’S VT4 ACQUISITION
ShareTweet

Author Profile: Usman Ansari is a journalist specializing in defence issues and presently based in Pakistan. He is Pakistan Correspondent for the US media group Defense News, and Chief Analyst for the British naval news monthly Warships – International Fleet Review. He has a BA in International History and International Politics, and MA in Global Security, both from Keele University, UK.

By Usman Ansari

Pakistani MBT modernization programs since the 1980s successfully focused on countering India’s T-72M1. While India’s Arjun MBT program is largely irrelevant and had a negligible impact on further Pakistani developments, T-90MS purchase dictated a stopgap counter acquisition due to Pakistan’s MBT upgrade program running behind schedule.

Pakistan’s MBT modernization program involved incremental Type-59 upgrades culminating in the Al-Zarrar, an opportunistic stopgap T-80UD acquisition, and localized Type-69II and Type-85APII production leading to the development and manufacturing of the Al-Khalid-series.

The Al-Khalid is based on the NORINCO Type-90II, but customized in line with Pakistan’s requirements. Its more advanced variants, namely the Al-Khalid I and Al-Khalid II, should have met Pakistan’s future MBT needs. In fact, the ongoing Al-Khalid II development indicates that this program is still active.

The VT-4 purchase is purely a stopgap measure dictated by the investment shortfalls that stymied Al-Khalid production[1], and therefore, its continued development.

News | China’s state-owned NORINCO announced that it will deliver two customized VT4 main battle tanks to an undisclosed customer. Reports suggest that the VT4s are meant for the Pakistan Army… | Read More

While the T-80UD and Al-Khalid had varying degrees of parity with India’s T-90S, the considerably better protected T-90MS demanded a counter response the cash-starved Al-Khalid program could not readily provide.

While Ukraine’s Oplot-P has comparable protection to the T-90MS, questions over Kiev’s ability to basically deliver an order (as proven with the Thai contract[2]), ultimately decided the competition in favour of the VT-4.

However, as a counter to the T-90MS, the VT-4’s effectiveness is debateable.

In the triad of armour, mobility, and firepower MBT design characteristics, Pakistan values firepower and mobility over protection. This approach is partially dictated by the weight limits of bridge and road infrastructure.

End of Excerpt (258/1,322 words)

You can read the complete article by logging in (click here) or subscribing to Quwa Premium (click here).


https://quwa.org/2020/05/31/analysis-pakistans-vt4-acquisition-2/

Hi Usman, the T-90MS v VT-4 debate has been done in detail here. The VT-4 is far more effective.
It's not a stop gap measure either rather part of a bigger buy.

 

[Arsalan]

Factory designation of "90M Breakthrough" was S-M.

"We have already prepared the T-90MS [the export version of the T-90M] for a foreign customer and tested it and by decision of Russia’s Defense Ministry we have held R&D work, as a result of which we have developed a good T-90M. And now, as far as I understand, the T-90M ‘Proryv’ [Breakthrough] will be the main battle tank in the army," the general said as Russia was celebrating Land Forces Day on October 1.

The T-90M Breakthrough was also reported as MS at some places, SM at others. I think they are pretty much same. May be different designation for export and local use but not great difference in the actual hardware.

Can you share what are the differences between SM and MS versions? That would help.

 

[bananarepublic]

Protection without adequate mobility and fire power is next to useless. VT-4 with fy-4 is clearly better protected when compared to the MS. Keep in mind that the M-S is essentially M version for export. For own use, Russians have the S-M version which they dont intend to export.

The MS is still a glorified export variant of the SM, which the VT-4 can easily handle. FYI, VT-4/ got a digital FCS and new generaton ECS even before PLA's own 99A mbt. When it comes to export, Chinese dont hesitate in meeting customer's demands, fy-4 on VT-4 being a test case.

Trivia: Type-90II was designed to have a shelf life of 100 years

Wasn't the Type-99II designed in order to develop a baseline tank and a starting point for further indigenous tank development?
.
To be fair Pakistan does not necessarily put their tanks on neat shelves , all of them get rought treatment on the field

 

[Armchair]

We need to replace at the very least 1000 + Tanks urgently..that can't be done by hit. So we need to buy tanks off the shelf n that's where vt4 comes in.

HIT has been retooled n the capacity inhanced but it has its hands full with the manufacture of al Khalid1 and a major overhaul of t80ud. This in addition to rnd of al khalid2.

The best thing starting from the first trials vt4 has an excellent engine so much so that PA wanted norinco to give it just the engine, this is before the removed the chinks.

We need to get over the obsession of oplot as Ukraine is not the same since the war which has created huge deficiencies in its whole manufacturing process.
Already PA had a bad experience with the over haul of t80ud as Ukraine was basically demanding an arm n a leg, prices that were more than the price of a new tank !
So it's with Russian/Chinese and some Ukrainian help that we are overhauling the ud.

Things are more complex than wt meets the eye.

Thanks for the excellent explanation. Have a question: how is the AZ upgrade program coming along?

 

[Dazzler]

Thanks for the excellent explanation. Have a question: how is the AZ upgrade program coming along?

Close to 600 59/69s are upgraded. Chances are that the program may see converting of 700 vintage mbts. As of 2019, the upgrade program continues..

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/mbt-modernization-program-a-step-in-the-right-direction.660224/

Wasn't the Type-99II designed in order to develop a baseline tank and a starting point for further indigenous tank development?
.

I believe you meant 90II and not 99II?

 

[bananarepublic]

Close to 600 59/69s are upgraded. Chances are that the program may see converting of 700 vintage mbts. As of 2019, the upgrade program continues..

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/mbt-modernization-program-a-step-in-the-right-direction.660224/



I believe you meant 90II and not 99II?

Yes Type-90II would love your info on this, Pakistans and Chinese tanks development seems to be wrongly attributed to 1to1 copies of eastern designs.

 

[Reichmarshal]

Thanks for the excellent explanation. Have a question: how is the AZ upgrade program coming along?

PA decided against continuing the AZ program, some time back.