Iran announces a new tank called Karrar

[Penguin]

in the other forum people were comparing this tank photos with Iranian T72s and were saying it's just a T72 upgrade with turret change.

but anyway Iranian Zulfaghar tanks is pretty similar to American Abrams too, when did they export it to Iran?

A T-72 upgrade with a turret change.....? Where would that turret come from? And what a coincidence it should look so much like that of T-90SM. Given that T-90 is a further development of T-72, I would still say T-90SM.

As for comparing Zulfaghar and Abrams .... neh, lets not go there.

 

[Fafnir]

A T-72 upgrade with a turret change.....? Where would that turret come from? And what a coincidence it should look so much like that of T-90SM. Given that T-90 is a further development of T-72, I would still say T-90SM.

As for comparing Zulfaghar and Abrams .... neh, lets not go there.

Considering that both russia and iran have said theres no plans to supply or purchase the t90sm and that iran is still under an arms embargo that prohibits the supply of weapons like this,then I for one am more than a little dubious that this is anything more than a t72 with a new,possibly even just a mock up,turret that just looks somewhat like a t90sm,also one feature that certainly isnt correct on it is the remote gun station not only does it not look like the one on the t90sm but its lacking the integrated panoramic viewer as well.The other thing of course is that you have no less a person than the Commander of the Land Forces of Iran, Brigadier General Ahmad Reza Purdastan stating that they will not be buying the t90sm.
Iran did appear to be interested back in late 2015 but for whatever reason changed its mind early in 2016.
http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13941113001057
http://tass.ru/en/defense/876496
http://en.trend.az/iran/politics/2492407.html

 

[mohsen]

A T-72 upgrade with a turret change.....? Where would that turret come from?

The same where which Zolfaghar turret came from!

And what a coincidence it should look so much like that of T-90SM. .

It's not coincidence. our T72s needed an upgrade. somebody has deliberately used their design. also T90MS was unveiled in 2011.
it's a good bargain!

Given that T-90 is a further development of T-72, I would still say T-90SM.
As for comparing Zulfaghar and Abrams .... neh, lets not go there.

you can as well call Zolfaghar as Abrams, no problem. yet, differences also remain in their place.

 

[Penguin]

The same where which Zolfaghar turret came from!

you can as well call Zolfaghar as Abrams, no problem. yet, differences also remain in their place.

No you can't. Not in the last place because the US hasn't been (offering to) work(ing) with Iranian defence forces and military industry while Russia has.

Besides, the early marks Zulfiqar are clearly not based on (or "modelled after") M1 Abrams.

http://www.armyrecognition.com/iran...pecifications_description_pictures_video.html
+
http://www.armyrecognition.com/iran...pecifications_description_pictures_video.html

And no one would confuse this Mk3 with an M1 Abrams, even if it was made to resemble it on the surface somewhat

Considering that both russia and iran have said theres no plans to supply or purchase the t90sm and that iran is still under an arms embargo that prohibits the supply of weapons like this,then I for one am more than a little dubious that this is anything more than a t72 with a new,possibly even just a mock up,turret that just looks somewhat like a t90sm,also one feature that certainly isnt correct on it is the remote gun station not only does it not look like the one on the t90sm but its lacking the integrated panoramic viewer as well.The other thing of course is that you have no less a person than the Commander of the Land Forces of Iran, Brigadier General Ahmad Reza Purdastan stating that they will not be buying the t90sm.
Iran did appear to be interested back in late 2015 but for whatever reason changed its mind early in 2016.
http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13941113001057
http://tass.ru/en/defense/876496
http://en.trend.az/iran/politics/2492407.html

Only the TASS article seems relevant, but deals with Russia's intention to sell.

Newer than the other 2 articles is this one:
http://www.timesofisrael.com/iran-defense-chief-said-eyeing-arms-deal-with-moscow/
It says
"Iranian Defense Minister Hossein Dehghan is planning to raise the purchase of warplanes and tanks during an upcoming meeting with his Russian counterpart in Moscow, Iran’s semi-official news agency Fars reported Friday, citing Russian media.
An official at the Iranian Embassy in Moscow said it was “quite possible” that the April 26-27 talks between Dehghan and Sergei Shoigu would include the issue, Fars said, again quoting the Interfax news agency."

IMHO - but do correct me if I'm wrong - a defence minister outranks any military commander (or at least it does in states where there is civilian rather than military rule). And as far as the Defence minister is concerned, we have 2 articles here that give conflicting signals.

also T90MS was unveiled in 2011.

First unveiled in 2011, its had a number of different names, in both the West and in Russia. it was initially called the T-90MS as well as the Uralvagonzavod MS. From 2013 it was called the T-90SM, as well as T-90S Modernized, as well as T-90C M or T-90CM and also SM-modern modernezirovat in Russian. Developed and manufactured by Uralvagonzavod, the company call it the T-90SM and T-90S Modernized.

also one feature that certainly isnt correct on it is the remote gun station not only does it not look like the one on the t90sm but its lacking the integrated panoramic viewer as well.

Once established, that fact alone - no integrated panoramic commander sight - pretty much rules out the claimed T-90SM equivalency or transcendancy.

 

[Fafnir]

No you can't. Not in the last place because the US hasn't been (offering to) work(ing) with Iranian defence forces and military industry while Russia has.

Besides, the early marks Zulfiqar are clearly not based on (or "modelled after") M1 Abrams.

http://www.armyrecognition.com/iran...pecifications_description_pictures_video.html
+
http://www.armyrecognition.com/iran...pecifications_description_pictures_video.html

And no one would confuse this Mk3 with an M1 Abrams, even if it was made to resemble it on the surface somewhat

Only the TASS article seems relevant, but deals with Russia's intention to sell.

Newer than the other 2 articles is this one:
http://www.timesofisrael.com/iran-defense-chief-said-eyeing-arms-deal-with-moscow/
It says
"Iranian Defense Minister Hossein Dehghan is planning to raise the purchase of warplanes and tanks during an upcoming meeting with his Russian counterpart in Moscow, Iran’s semi-official news agency Fars reported Friday, citing Russian media.
An official at the Iranian Embassy in Moscow said it was “quite possible” that the April 26-27 talks between Dehghan and Sergei Shoigu would include the issue, Fars said, again quoting the Interfax news agency."

IMHO - but do correct me if I'm wrong - a defence minister outranks any military commander (or at least it does in states where there is civilian rather than military rule). And as far as the Defence minister is concerned, we have 2 articles here that give conflicting signals.


First unveiled in 2011, its had a number of different names, in both the West and in Russia. it was initially called the T-90MS as well as the Uralvagonzavod MS. From 2013 it was called the T-90SM, as well as T-90S Modernized, as well as T-90C M or T-90CM and also SM-modern modernezirovat in Russian. Developed and manufactured by Uralvagonzavod, the company call it the T-90SM and T-90S Modernized.


Once established, that fact alone - no integrated panoramic commander sight - pretty much rules out the claimed T-90SM equivalency or transcendancy.

I would have thought that the Trend and fars articles were the most relevant as they respectively have both the defence minister and the head of the land forces both saying the same thing ie they wont be buying the t90sm but will instead be building an indigenous design.Now you`re right of course that a defence minister might outrank the head of the land forces but when both of them are saying the same thing that to me at least is pretty good proof that both of them are on the same page message wise.As for the israeli article all it does is quote some unnamed official who says its "quite possible" that there might be talks about buying weapons,in other words its just repeating the same old stuff that we`ve heard before and personally I`d take the word of both the defence minister and the head of the land forces over the rather vague quote by an unnamed official,now it is of course quite possible that they might still be interested in buying the t90sm in the future but that doesnt mean that the karrar tank on show is a t90sm.Lastly at the bottom of the trend article the director of Uralvagonzavod says that they would be happy to allow license production of the t90sm if the UN sanctions on the country are lifted and the only other way around that is to request a waiver from the security council which the us would very likely oppose.

 

[Penguin]

I would have thought that the Trend and fars articles were the most relevant as they respectively have both the defence minister and the head of the land forces both saying the same thing ie they wont be buying the t90sm but will instead be building an indigenous design.Now you`re right of course that a defence minister might outrank the head of the land forces but when both of them are saying the same thing that to me at least is pretty good proof that both of them are on the same page message wise.As for the israeli article all it does is quote some unnamed official who says its "quite possible" that there might be talks about buying weapons,in other words its just repeating the same old stuff that we`ve heard before and personally I`d take the word of both the defence minister and the head of the land forces over the rather vague quote by an unnamed official,now it is of course quite possible that they might still be interested in buying the t90sm in the future but that doesnt mean that the karrar tank on show is a t90sm.Lastly at the bottom of the trend article the director of Uralvagonzavod says that they would be happy to allow license production of the t90sm if the UN sanctions on the country are lifted and the only other way around that is to request a waiver from the security council which the us would very likely oppose.

I'm aware, from Sipri general trade register of arms sales, that Iran produced 422 T-72S tanks under licence from Russia from 1993-2001, that it received 104 T-72M1 tanks from Poland from 1994-1995 and 37 T-72M1 tanks from Belarus starting in 2000. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equipment_of_the_Iranian_Army#Vehicles) That makes a total of 563 T-72M1. Apparently, the Iranian army has an operational fleet of 480 T-72M1 and T-72S since 2002 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-72_operators_and_variants#Current_operators). The possibility of unlicensed production is suggested (but, given the decline in numbers above, not so likely unless opting for a smaller fleet of new built units, only partially replacing older vehicles as these wear out, only partially refurbishing or modernizing older units).

So, this means a domestic development of T-72M1 is a possibility. Still, this does not explain the high degree of apparent similarity with T-90SM, particularly where turret design and reactive and slap armors armors of both hull and turret are concerned. A mock up could simply be a way to prepare for a domestically assmbled T-90MS variant, forthcoming at a later date. Covert Russian involment cannot be rules out in the current environment. A T-72M1 development will likely not equal T-90SM. See Russia's own T72B3M and note the lack of e.g. commander panoramic sight in Karrar.

 

[Hassan Guy]

I don't get it, where is the tank?

 

[LeGenD]

That's not right.

Enlighten me.

 

[Malik Alashter]

Designing an indigenous MBT platform need more than 2 billion dollars ; and with this money , many countries can buy 200-250 advance tanks from main producer ...

you right except it's better to spend the money for r&d and own the know how than buying.

 

[SOHEIL]

you right except it's better to spend the money for r&d and own the know how than buying.

What do you expect from a loser?