Comparison : Pakistani Al Khalid-1 MBT vs Israeli Merkava IV MBT !

[AUz]

Ok..the chances of these tanks going against each other in the battle-field are very low. So keep it civil and no need to troll...

Note : Blue highlight = Advantage over the other tank

Weight :

Al Khalid-1 : 48 tons
Merkava IV : 65 tons.

Speed :

Al Khalid-1 : 72 km/h
Merkava IV : 64 km/h

Main Armament :

Al Khalid-1 : 125 mm smooth bore gun
Merkava IV : 120 mm smooth bore gun

Payload Capacity :

Al Khalid-1 : 49 rounds
Merkava IV : 48 rounds

Engine :

Al Khalid-1 : KMDB 6TD-2 6-cylinder diesel 1,200 hp (with upgrade)
Merkava IV : General Dynamics GD883 (MTU883) diesel 1,500 hp

Power/Weight :

Al Khalid-1 : 26 hp/tonne
Merkava IV : 23 hp/tonne

Armour :

Al Khalid-1 : Composite armour, RHA, ERA
Merkava IV : Composite matrix of laminated ceramic-steel-nickel alloy, ERA etc

Operational Range :

Al Khalid-1 : 500 km
Merkava IV : 500 km

Protection :

Al Khalid-1 : VARTA active protection system
Merkava IV : TROPHY active protection system

ATGMs :

Al Khalid-1 : Kombat , 9M119 Refleks (AT-11 Sniper) etc
Merkava IV : LAHAT

-----------

Feel free to point out any mistakes I made.

Al Khalid-1 is right up there with latest Merkava IV , with Merkava having a slight edge due to superior electronics etc.

Israel is producing Merkava since 1970's , while Pakistan started to produce Al Khalid much later. So it is great to see Pakistan producing tanks as capable as Al Khalid-1

Al Khalid-1 edges Merkava IV in firepower and mobility..while Merkava IV has better armor and protection system (Israelis are obsessed with soldiers' protection).

Have your say...

PS : There is alot of talk about which ATGM is superior...LAHAT or Kombat. Both ATGMs have their own advantages over the other...so lets keep it that way. This is why I didn't high-light any of the tank in ATGM category.

 

[Armstrong]

I don't know how fruitful such discussions are seeing that Tanks are designed keeping in mind a certain 'threat perception' & our 'response' to it ! Because this is unique for each country so would their designed product be ! Which is not to say that there aren't comparable abilities but rather to say that Tanks, like anything else such complex for that matter, are designed keeping in mind certain opportunities & threats & exploiting certain other strengths & overcoming weaknesses in response to that ! The Al-Khalid 1 & the Merkav IVs are to operate in scenarios where their respective Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities & Threats in a classical SWOT analysis would be much different than the others & hence so will be the platform designed to combat them !

 

[third eye]

I don't know how fruitful such discussions are seeing that Tanks are designed keeping in mind a certain 'threat perception' & our 'response' to it ! Because this is unique for each country so would their designed product be ! Which is not to say that there aren't comparable abilities but rather to say that Tanks, like anything else such complex for that matter, are designed keeping in mind certain opportunities & threats & exploiting certain other strengths & overcoming weaknesses in response to that ! The Al-Khalid 1 & the Merkav IVs are to operate in scenarios where their respective Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities & Threats in a classical SWOT analysis would be much different than the others & hence so will be the platform designed to combat them !

Well put.

For instance the front engine of the Merkava gives it distinct advantages like crew protection for the driver, space in the rear for a variety of applications - something created out of necessity .

Mere statistical comparisons do not make a complete picture.

 

[AUz]

Armstrong and Third eye : Offcourse! That is why I started my by stating that these tanks won't be going against eachother...

 

[Wright]

Why does the AK look like a Russian tank?

 

[third eye]

Armstrong and Third eye : Offcourse! That is why I started my by stating that these tanks won't be going against eachother...

Advantage or edge over one another is a relative term & has to be seen in the context of the user.

Israel like S Asian countries does not have the luxury of dedicated Armour/ Mechanised Infantry etc. They for reasons of expediency would like to combine as many roles a weapon platform can perform. Hence the design of their tanks are tailor made for their tactical doctrines.

S Asian countries on the other hand buy / create a weapon system and build a doctrine around it.

 

[AUz]

Why does the AK look like a Russian tank?

It is derived from T-90 II tank ...

 

[gangsta_rap]

It is derived from T-90 II tank ...

Say Type instead of "T",you might confuse some people who cant distinguish between the two.
@Wright It "Looks" like a Russian tank because the way they chose to place the ERA at the front kinda looks like how they did it on the T-90.Otherwise it looks almost exactly like the post Cold War PLA tanks

 

[A1Kaid]

Merkava tank is optimal for urban warfare, that is one of its intended uses. Overall, in my opinion the Merkava all-around is a technologically superior tank, however in tank warfare other factors such as speed, firepower, and terrain also matter. I would say Al Khalid could take on the Merkava in battle and as usual it will come down to who hits the first shot and penetrates first in quick succession may well take 2 hits or more. Merkava has better armor protection but has weak points as well so angle of attack matters as well, same for AK although with inferior armor protection but superior speed.

In desert terrain I think AK may well triumph over Merkava if used properly, that's my opinion I am no expert. Though one interesting thing to look at is the zoom magnification on the sights on both tanks that will tell us how accurately a tank can possibly hit far away targets.

 

[Thorough Pro]

Ok..the chances of these tanks going against each other in the battle-field are very low. So keep it civil and no need to troll...

Engine :

Al Khalid-1 : KMDB 6TD-2 6-cylinder diesel 1,200 hp (with upgrade)
Merkava IV : General Dynamics GD883 (MTU883) diesel 1,500 hp

How does the higher horsepower gives an edge to Merkava over AlKhalid, when both speed and power to weight ratios are in ALKhalid's favour?

 

[A1Kaid]

Ok..the chances of these tanks going against each other in the battle-field are very low. So keep it civil and no need to troll...

Engine :

Al Khalid-1 : KMDB 6TD-2 6-cylinder diesel 1,200 hp (with upgrade)
Merkava IV : General Dynamics GD883 (MTU883) diesel 1,500 hp

How does the higher horsepower gives an edge to Merkava over AlKhalid, when both speed and power to weight ratios are in ALKhalid's favour?

That's what I'm thinking the 300 additional horsepower advantage the Merkava tank engine has over the AK is neutralized by the fact the AK is considerably faster than the Merkava with less hp.

 

[jagjitnatt]

Man: 2 Legs
Buffalo: 4 Legs

Why are people still comparing specs that don't mean anything. When you compare no. of rounds, Al Khaled tops, but do you try to think what type of rounds and variety of rounds fired from both tanks? The range and the armor piercing capability of the rounds?

Merkava can easily get a kill ratio of 7:1 or so against the Al Khaled, they are not even in the same league.

Ok..the chances of these tanks going against each other in the battle-field are very low. So keep it civil and no need to troll...

Engine :

Al Khalid-1 : KMDB 6TD-2 6-cylinder diesel 1,200 hp (with upgrade)
Merkava IV : General Dynamics GD883 (MTU883) diesel 1,500 hp

How does the higher horsepower gives an edge to Merkava over AlKhalid, when both speed and power to weight ratios are in ALKhalid's favour?

That's what I'm thinking the 300 additional horsepower advantage the Merkava tank engine has over the AK is neutralized by the fact the AK is considerably faster than the Merkava with less hp.

As I said in my previous posts, these specs only confuse people. Its not the Top Speed of the Tank that is important, but the acceleration in various terrains. Eg: Arjun Mk II will have lower top speed but higher acceleration.

If a tank has a top speed of 100 km/h but takes 10 min to reach there, its useless, whereas a tank with 50 km/h top speed with faster acceleration is better.

Merkava is tuned to have good acceleration from stand still.

 

[AUz]

Why are people still comparing specs that don't mean anything. When you compare no. of rounds, Al Khaled tops, but do you try to think what type of rounds and variety of rounds fired from both tanks? The range and the armor piercing capability of the rounds?

Yes. I have read/studied things in detail...but I didn't want to make things long so I just kept in short and to the point in my OP. Al Khalid-1 and Merkava IV both carry EQUALLY sophisticated rounds. Actually , son , Kombat ATGM fired by Al Khalid-1 has MORE "armor piercing capability" than LAHAT. But LAHAT has some modes like "Lofted trajectory" that gives it certain edge. This is why , I didn't touch this topic...Because kids like you don't know squat about anything so they start b*tching....

Other than that both Al Khalid-1 and Merkava IV carry different types of rounds like APFSDS, HEAT-FS , HE-FS, DU etc etc whateves..

Just a fun fact though : Muzzle Velocity of Al Khalid-1 is also superior to that of Merkava IV..means if Merkava IV and Al Khalid-1 fire same round on same armor , Al Khalid-1 will inflict more damage on the armor as compared to Merkava IV....opppppsssss

Lets dissect your post further...

Merkava can easily get a kill ratio of 7:1 or so against the Al Khaled, they are not even in the same league.

Well it means that if Merkava can get 7:1 against Al Khalid , it will able to get 14:1 against Arjun (if that tank is ready lmao!) ..

Anyways : This 7:1 ratio comes out of your behind because specifications , record , common sense doesn't support it...

Explain your 7:1 ratio thingy..

BTW , in one tank forums...some foreigners (Americans mostly) were discussing a hypothetical battle-situation between Al Khalid and Merkava IV...

5 on 5 near Lebanon border... and the result : Merkava wins by ONE! Means , 4 Merkavas get destroyed in the battle and 5 Al Khalids (operated by Lebanese soldiers trained by Pakistan Army)...

Now these guys are WAY,WAY more knowledgeable about tank warfare than your little chota sa bharti heart....They took atleast 15 variables in this 'battle-simulation' and went in great detail..(even discussed the weather factor lol)....I wonder why they missed the 7:1 ratio?

Oh by the way, they weren't even using Al Khalid-1 in their "supposed battle" , but simple Al Khalid. Now, looking at the specs of Al Khalid-1 vs Merkava IV....you can easily infer what the result can be in a desert environment...

But again..who am I talking to? you? Who can't even comprehend the information available...

Let me show you how ...

As I said in my previous posts, these specs only confuse people. Its not the Top Speed of the Tank that is important, but the acceleration in various terrains. Eg: Arjun Mk II will have lower top speed but higher acceleration.

If a tank has a top speed of 100 km/h but takes 10 min to reach there, its useless, whereas a tank with 50 km/h top speed with faster acceleration is better.

Merkava is tuned to have good acceleration from stand still.

Ummm...genius... Al Khalid-1 has Power/Weight ratio of 26 hp/tonne while Merkava IV has Power/Weight ratio of 23 hp/tonne....so what makes you think that "acceleration" rate of Al Khalid-1 is lower than that of Merkava?

Both Al-Khalid-1 and Merkava accelerate from 0-32km/h in 7 to 10 seconds...Al Khalid-1 is superior to Merkava even here (Thanks to superior Power/Weight ratio of Al Khalid-1)...but the difference was SO small and insignificant that I didn't put it in the OP .... Its like saying "Oh, Al Khalid-1 takes 2 second more to accelerate from 0-32km/h than Merkava and hence Merkava has an "edge" in this area..or vice versa whatever" ..lol...

Now, you can continue with your 7:1 mental masturbating though...

 

[third eye]

There was nothing in post No 11 that merited the kind of response I just read in Post No 12.

These type of responses take away the interest in a professional subject.

Evidently the intention of this thread seems to be to establish that AK is way better than Merkava.

So be it.

 

[Zarvan]

Armstrong and Third eye : Offcourse! That is why I started my by stating that these tanks won't be going against eachother...

What if Arab countries buy it which is neighbor of Israel than they can come face to face what ever is the case a lot will also depend on the Man using those Tanks if Al Khalid gets better men than even if Merkava is slightly better still Al Khalid 1 can completely destroy Merkava