M1 trials in Pakistan

[Raja Porus]

460 ordered directly From China (176 fully assembled, the rest in Semi-complete state to be assembled at HIT). 110 from HIT (Full assembly at HIT with CKDs). Then another 110 from HIT (Planned). And even that might not be the end of it, depends on just how much the PA wants to replace with the VT-4.

320 for 6th Armd div, 88 for 8th IABG(I Corps), 88 for I Corps reserve armd bde. That leaves 88 for another armd bde... Wonder which one will that be.

1200HP

Wasn't it 1500?

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

320 for 6th Armd div, 88 for 8th IABG(I Corps), 88 for I Corps reserve armd bde. That leaves 88 for another armd bde... Wonder which one will that be.


Wasn't it 1500?

1,200 hp to 1,300 hp turbocharged IIRC.

 

[LeGenD]

Watch from 6:00. results vs M1A1 which wasn't as perfect as thought.

Thanks for this informative share.

It looks like M1A1 had some shortcomings in the 1980s. I accept this.

I have yet to find an article which explains WHAT shortcomings were experienced in trials of M1A1 in desert environments of Saudi Arabia and Pakistan in the 1980s and HOW these were addressed in later variants.

I suppose I should write one.

The M1 perform badly in our desert area, the sand and conditions in our desert is said to be deferent from ME.

It was also maintenance heavy tank and PA didn't wanted a tank which broke down in middle of war zone.

Sand thin like talcum powder is found in desert environments of the Middle East as well.

Title: Ordnance
Year: 1991
Publisher: US Army Ordnance Center and School

The FIRST known working prototype of an air filteration system to counter the problem of sand ingestion in the gas turbine engine of M1A1 is disclosed in 1988 in following paper:

Murphy, J. P., & Camplin, H. (1988, June). A Compact, High Efficiency, Self-Cleaning Air Filtration System for a Vehicular Gas Turbine Engine. In Turbo Expo: Power for Land, Sea, and Air (Vol. 79191, p. V002T04A006). American Society of Mechanical Engineers.

Perhaps trials of M1A1 in desert environments of Saudi Arabia and Pakistan in the 1980s, motivated Americans to produce the air filteration system disclosed in the aforementioned paper? But mass production and application would not be possible before 1990.

It worked:

M1A1 Abrams Killing it in Persian Gulf

M1A1 Abrams blast from the past. A nice little clip from the Gulf War in 1991.

www.military.com

But GAO report published in 1992 disclosed that there was a push for improving the air filteration system in use, and also fuel efficiency of the gas turbine engine:

"Abrams crews were impressed with the power and performance of the Abrams’ turbine engine, but they were concerned about its high fuel con- sumption and the need to frequently clean air filters in the sandy desert environment. Refueling was a constant concern, and faulty fuel pumps further compounded the problem. The harsh desert environment demanded frequent air filter cleaning because sand-clogged filters reduced engine power and speed. In extreme cases, sand damaged engines. Army officials are aware of the probIems with high fuel consumption, unreliable fuel pumps, and sand ingestion. They are working on solutions to improve fuel economy, fuel pump design, and the air filtration system. Abrams crews also identified other desired tank improvements, including better sight magnification and resolution and the addition of an identification of friend or foe system, a turret/hull reference indicator, and driver’s and commander’s thermal viewers. Army officials said these and other enhancements were being considered for future Abrams improvements."

Better air filteration system(s) were introduced by Donaldson Aerospace in subsequent years:

Donaldson Aerospace
http://donaldsonaerospace-defense.com › ...PDF
Filtration Solutions For The Defense Industry

Much more advanced and capable variants of M1 are produced by now.

Discussion about the latest M1A2 SEPv3 variant in following thread:

M1A2 'Abrams' MBT gets ANOTHER upgrade | M1A2 SEP V4

 

[Sayfullah]

460 ordered directly From China (176 fully assembled, the rest in Semi-complete state to be assembled at HIT). 110 from HIT (Full assembly at HIT with CKDs). Then another 110 from HIT (Planned). And even that might not be the end of it, depends on just how much the PA wants to replace with the VT-4.

What tanks are they replacing? Or are they adding to our current tank inventory?

 

[HAIDER]

In 1987, an M1A1 Abrams Tank was tested in Pakistan and its performance was terrible according to Pakistani accounts. A (Pakistani) major [in a documentary] claimed that even the Chinese Type 59 tank is better then the M1A1 Abrams Tank.

My point of contention is that if M1A1 Abrams Tank was so bad, how come it performed marvelously in diverse environments ranging from deserts to urban settings during the Persian Gulf War 1991 and Operation Iraqi Freedom? If Pakistani accounts are to be taken seriously, then M1A1 Abrams Tank should have been a failure.

NOTE: M1A1 Abrams Tank have been used in the deserts of Jordan and Afghanistan as well. Therefore, environment was never an issue.

A [BBC] documentary about the (deceased) Pakistan army chief Zia-ul-Huq contains footage of an [unidentified] gun firing a (dummy) round towards a target but misses it by considerable margin. This gun is claimed to be that of the M1A1 Abrams Tank.

However, this type of gun is (not) used in an M1A1 Abrams Tank (not even in the export model of this Tank). Therefore, I find this documentary misleading. And if Pakistani accounts are based on this footage, then they are equally misplaced and I find it strange that nobody attempted to critically evaluate this matter at official capacity.

Here is a photo of an M1A1 Abrams Tank:

The actual gun of an M1A1 Abrams Tank is [vastly] different from the gun shown in BBC documentary.

Now, here is PROOF of high accuracy of an M1A1 Abrams Tank: Imgur (A dummy round was fired towards the left-most target panel and hit the target. It shall be kept in mind that dummy rounds do not destroy targets.)

TAS (Target Acquisition System) of M1A1 Abrams Tank:

The Gunner's Primary Sight-Line of Sight (GPS-LOS), was developed by the Electro-Optical Systems Division of Hughes Aircraft Company. The night vision Thermal Imaging System (TIS), also from Hughes, creates an image based on the differences of heat radiated by objects in the field of view. The thermal image is displayed in the eyepiece of the Gunner's sight together with the range measurement to within 10 meters of accuracy, from a Hughes laser range finder, which is integrated into all of the fire control systems. The Abrams also has an onboard digital fire control computer. Range data from the laser rangefinder is transferred directly to the fire control computer, which automatically calculates the fire control solution. The data includes 1) the lead angle measurement, 2) the bend of the gun measured by the muzzle reference system of the main armament, 3) wind velocity measurement from a wind sensor on the roof of the turret and 4) the data from a pendulum static cant sensor located at the center of the turret roof. The Gunner or Commander manually inputs the data on the ammunition type and temperature, and the barometric pressure and the weapon is prepared for engagement.

Source: M1 Abrams Main Battle Tank

This disclosure is from a book of Steven J. Zaloga:

Pakistan tested the M1 tank, but disagreements with the US over its nuclear programme have prevented acquisition of the Abrams tank.

This disclosure is from a book of Pranay Gupte:

In Bahawalpur, Zia and his brass had watched a demonstration of the M1-Abrams, one of the most sophisticated tanks in the world. The manufacturer of the tank, General Dynamics Inc., was so keen to make a sale that the American company had trimmed the overall price of a package deal by $500,000 to $3 million per tank. Indeed Zia seemed so impressed by the tank's awesome capabilities that the General Dynamics executives at the scene were certain that a deal will be clinched.

Zia left the demonstration in his usual cheerful mood, pausing to chat with several local security personnel and others before he boarded the C-130. The plane took off with a roar, but in less than four minutes, while it was at an altitude of 4000 feet and still climbing, the aircraft lost radio contact with the control tower.

In the nutshell, we have conflicting accounts from different sources about this matter but I have provided (neutral) evidence that is enough to dismiss Pakistani accounts (and) the credibility of the relevant footage in the referred BBC documentary.

Therefore, all of the above leads to following questions:-

1. The M1A1 model tested in Pakistan was a prototype?
2. Pakistani accounts are FALSE?
3. Any technical information about this testing event?

Any meaningful input from the professionals is welcome but I will give preference to concrete information of the events, (not) fairy-tales like my uncle was an eye-witness and the tank was shit and blah blah.

Sir ji... Pak India's warzone/terrain is totally different from Iraq's terrain. Only light combat tank works in Pak-India border area . VT4 52 tons vs T55/62 40 tons and M1A1 is around 68 tons .... now you can guess the agility.

 

[iLION12345_1]

320 for 6th Armd div, 88 for 8th IABG(I Corps), 88 for I Corps reserve armd bde. That leaves 88 for another armd bde... Wonder which one will that be.


Wasn't it 1500?

That’s up to you guys to figure out
I can tell you this much. The next batch is green. But I have gotten a sneak peek into the brown ones too.

As for the engine, negative. PAs VT-4s are using the stock 1200HP engine as I suspected. regardless, it doesn’t matter, this 1200HP engine has nearly twice the torque the 6TD2E does. The VT-4 is extremely mobile already, it doesn’t need a 1500HP engine. (Keep in mind these engines are tune able to different power levels, you could hypothetically get 1500HP out of the same engine, but it would change the fuel burn and reliability characteristics a lot too). That’s why there’s some confusion between the 1200HP and 1300HP power figures of the VT-4. It makes both, depending on the fuel and the tuning setup (tank engines can run on all sorts of fuel).

What tanks are they replacing? Or are they adding to our current tank inventory?

Type 59s currently. Then Type 69s. Then If the army buys more, Al-Zarrars.

 

[iLION12345_1]

The Turks seem to be go-getters provided there's a genuine business opportunity. So, they could look at developing an entirely new 'eastern' Altay variant (with a 125 mm gun and other specific changes). However, you'd have to present a real market worthy of the investment. That or we work with Turkey to develop a heavier tank from the ground-up, but using the COTS Turkish inputs so as to control costs and complexity.

As you said, we’d need to present a real market, and I’m not sure there is one other than Pakistan, unless countries currently using Chinese and Russian tanks (inherently lighter models) want to switch to a much heavier tank. Then it’s also a doctrinal and logistical issue. The countries already using heavier western machines would want the normal altay (Qatar).

I assume That making a Easternized version of the Altay would require some *very* extensive reworking. Mainly because of the autoloader system. Or I could be entirely wrong and by some good design foresight they can do it rather easily (we got half an auto loader into a Type 59 after all…).
In the former case It might just prove more economical to design a new machine from the ground up, which to me seems more possible, especially with how much Pakistans own tank expertise has grown due to the AK series and now the VT-4, they could finally go from assembly and ToT into design after VT-4 production ends.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

As you said, we’d need to present a real market, and I’m not sure there is one other than Pakistan, unless countries currently using Chinese and Russian tanks (inherently lighter models) want to switch to a much heavier tank. Then it’s also a doctrinal and logistical issue. The countries already using heavier western machines would want the normal altay (Qatar).

I assume That making a Easternized version of the Altay would require some *very* extensive reworking. Mainly because of the autoloader system. Or I could be entirely wrong and by some good design foresight they can do it rather easily (we got half an auto loader into a Type 59 after all…).
In the former case It might just prove more economical to design a new machine from the ground up, which to me seems more possible, especially with how much Pakistans own tank expertise has grown due to the AK series and now the VT-4, they could finally go from assembly and ToT into design after VT-4 production ends.

I think the markets that originally bought from Russia could open up for both China and Turkey. So, for example, Algeria.

That said, I agree with you, Pak Army might be more interested in an original design project with Turkey than specifically the Altay. Basically, the Turkish industry is very different from what it was only 5 years ago. Their public and private sectors built vertical stacks for tank engines, armour, electronics, and much more because of all the obstacles they faced with foreign suppliers involved in the Altay MBT.

In a way, the Pak Army could literally open up a catalog and pick the engine, transmission, cooling, air conditioning, armour technology, etc. It just needs the help of a reliable and capable designer or engineering group to bring that stuff together. NORINCO is pretty much done with that kind of work; they'd rather you pick up a complete solution from their catalog. Turkey, however, seems to enjoy original design work, even for other countries (e.g., Jinnah-class frigate, the Kaplan light tank, etc).

 

[Metal 0-1]

it doesn’t matter, this 1200HP engine has nearly twice the torque the 6TD2E does.

Cuz you need torque more than the HRSPRS in said terrain

 

[Raja Porus]

can tell you this much. The next batch is green. But I have gotten a sneak peek into the brown ones too

V Corps already has AK and AK1s so it doesn't need any new tank.
II corps has T80UD and IV Corps doesn't need desert camo.
So this leaves us with 31 Corps.
14ID is equipped with T59s. Thus, it'll either be for 14ID or 35ID.

 

[alimobin memon]

T80UD of pakistan has same dna as russian tanks. isn't it useless as any hit on its turret means most probably it will just pop out the turret and instead of knocking out t80 completely kills it ?

 

[Signalian]

At that stage? Yes, very likely, if anything they might even have been eager. This was before the widespread adoption of 125MM Guns and ammunition by PA and they had mainly been using American tanks and ammo before it (M48A5s). So if the Abrams was inducted, we would likely see the PA still have 120MM as it’s standard and would probably even see local upgrades to the Abrams program during the embargo period. The Al-Khalid would still likely happen but also with a 120MM gun and more American influences. You could say the tank PA would skip entirely due to the Abrams would be the Type 85-IIAP and maybe the T80UD if they got them in enough numbers.

1988 M1A1.
1991 Type-85. (Maybe tested in Ex ZeM 1990, shown in 1993)
By 1996, Pakistan was testing T-80.
1997 T-80UD
2001 AK.
2004 AZ.
Thats a very short span. Then,
2021 VT-4

 

[iLION12345_1]

1988 M1A1.
1991 Type-85. (Maybe tested in Ex ZeM 1990, shown in 1993)
By 1996, Pakistan was testing T-80.
1997 T-80UD
2001 AK.
2004 AZ.
Thats a very short span. Then,
2021 VT-4

Makes sense if you look at it this way;

All the older ones are foreign purchases that weren’t produced in Pakistan (at least not in any large number. E.g out of the nearly 300 acquired, only 20 Type 85s were produced in Pakistan at the end of the 90s). But with the AK and the AZ it was local production, that gave room for local improvements and put an end to relying on multiple foreign models that were subject to the supplying countries issues (I believe PA would have gone for more UDs had Ukraine not had so many issues delivering and would eventually have made a local T84 Oplot version in that timeline of events).

The Al-Khalid was after all a Evolution of the Type 85, which we bought right at the tail end of the second generation of MBTs becoming Old (What I’m saying is, the Type 85 for the PA came at a time where modern 3rd gen tanks were already coming into existence) And the Al-zarrars a modernization of the existing Type 59s. Add to that the financial woes like none other during the WoT.

All of this would be different if we picked the Abrams. We would either likely have a couple thousand Abrams right now and their state would be similar to PAFs F-16s (I say the large number because US definitely had no supply issues) and wouldn’t have worked on a local tank (maybe still local upgrades though) or we’d have a few hundred Abrams and a Al-Khalid with a 120MM gun And other shared parts with western tanks (that is if the US refused to give us more than a few hundred Abrams).

V Corps already has AK and AK1s so it doesn't need any new tank.
II corps has T80UD and IV Corps doesn't need desert camo.
So this leaves us with 31 Corps.
14ID is equipped with T59s. Thus, it'll either be for 14ID or 35ID.

Assets do get shuffled sometimes, but generally you’re correct. I can never really remember which regiment has what and where it is

 

[Raja Porus]

All of this would be different if we picked the Abrams. We would either likely have a couple thousand Abrams right now and their state would be similar to PAFs F-16s (I say the large number because US definitely had no supply issues) and wouldn’t have worked on a local tank (maybe still local upgrades though) or we’d have a few hundred Abrams and a Al-Khalid with a 120MM gun And other shared parts with western tanks (that is if the US refused to give us more than a few hundred Abrams).

The situation, if PA selected Abrams would've been far more critical. For airforce, you can have stop gaps, air defence systems, suppression of enemy airbases etc. But not in case of what would be your mainstay fighting machine. Imagine in the 90s, EME officers running to the GHQ saying that they don't have spares for Abrams and will start eating into their war reserve (just like F16s). Moreover, even if PA bought Chinese stopgaps, the problems faced would be more complex. Imagine the dilemma facing commanders in using two completely different weight classes. Tactics, doctrine, training, employment, everything would've been different for each type ( what would happen if a bde cmdr, started using his lighter and lesser protected Chinese tanks "more aggressively" only because he was trained on and taught about tactics of heavy tanks).
The situation would become even more critical with India coming up with its Cold Start. In that case Pak armour would inevitably come up against IA and the condition of Pak armour would've been quite bad. Moreover since IA wouldn't have crossed any of our "defined" thresholds, we can't use our nuclear weapons and PAF would've already been in a bad state

Assets do get shuffled sometimes, but generally you’re correct. I can never really remember which regiment has what and where it is

Whenever you get to know about it next, lemme know.. I can remember such things for long time


Btw ISPR used to release videos of exercises, but it's been quite some time now... One reason why I hate politics.

 

[Signalian]

Imagine in the 90s, EME officers running to the GHQ saying that they don't have spares for Abrams and will start eating into their war reserve (just like F16s).

What about M-109 then, the main stay SP howitzer of PA's armored forces

All of this would be different if we picked the Abrams. We would either likely have a couple thousand Abrams right now and their state would be similar to PAFs F-16s (I say the large number because US definitely had no supply issues) and wouldn’t have worked on a local tank (maybe still local upgrades though) or we’d have a few hundred Abrams and a Al-Khalid with a 120MM gun And other shared parts with western tanks (that is if the US refused to give us more than a few hundred Abrams).

Legend ne bahut khush ho jana tha finally M1A1 found a place without getting rejected.

1000's of M1A1? Cant say, but modernization of armored forces would have been difficult then. T-59s were bought in 1000s since they were pretty cheap to buy but yet weren't suitable against T-72 and for operations in the desert. T-85 fell short also. T-80UD in 1000's would have been a massive punch. PA isn't even getting AKs in 1000's and now there is VT-4.