What's new

PA TANKS comparison with contempory tanks

Alkhalid tank does not only have era , it has laser threat warning system and active protection system too ... Dont underestimate the tank However I have one question that Alkhalid AA gun can be operated from inside but i dont see the gun to be mounted on any rolling system rather than a small poll fixed :/ any one knows something about it ?

The ERA layout on Al Khalid doesn't cover the weak-zones completely... Besides the plates used are very thin and ineffective against any APFSDS round or Tandem Charge warhead rounds and CLATGM.

There is Laser paint warning system however no Active Protection system is present either in the Hard kill or passive kill department.
 
.
The ERA layout on Al Khalid doesn't cover the weak-zones completely... Besides the plates used are very thin and ineffective against any APFSDS round or Tandem Charge warhead rounds and CLATGM.

There is Laser paint warning system however no Active Protection system is present either in the Hard kill or passive kill department.
1-Have you even seen a live khalid tank? or you have operated one? or have you designed it?
2-This is an information pool, if you like to have a debt on the issue, open a new thread.
Mods please do the cleaning.....
 
.
1-Have you even seen a live khalid tank? or you have operated one? or have you designed it?
2-This is an information pool, if you like to have a debt on the issue, open a new thread.
Mods please do the cleaning.....

1.Have you seen each and every military equipment which you talk about ?.. Or is a criteria that only those people who have seen, Operated and designed Al Khalid can talk about it... or point out the flaws.

2. I am not debating on the issue I have just corrected a user on his post.
 
.
1.Have you seen each and every military equipment which you talk about ?.. Or is a criteria that only those people who have seen, Operated and designed Al Khalid can talk about it... or point out the flaws.

2. I am not debating on the issue I have just corrected a user on his post.
1-Thats why you dont find me on very select sections/threads on this forum, not everywhere......I hope it helps......
2-You should be able to back your definitive statements with approperiate proofs,else clearly state that its your opinon.
 
.
1-Thats why you dont find me on very select sections/threads on this forum, not everywhere......I hope it helps......
2-You should be able to back your definitive statements with approperiate proofs,else clearly state that its your opinon.

1. Thats your opinion.. you must be a military service man to know more than those machine which you see live... and talk about it.
2. I showed the thin ERA tiles of Al Khalid(page 14-15).. I can mark out improper ERA covering(If you can't see for yourself.).
Besides No APS has been found on any Al Khalid under the service of PA till date.
 
.
You are shouting for nothing, you have been proven wrong on Nozh Era issue so better not make false claims again. Reason for thin ERA covering is the thickness of conventional armour on AK and AK-1. More than 700 mm on turret without ERA and more than 600mm around glacis. VARTA is already in ACTIVE service but they are not going to show it for your sake. 23rd March parade has not taken place for three years now otherwise you would have seen it.


Jingoism aside.

Lack of knowledge or false knowledge is harmful... both for one self and others.
When I proved there bis not Nozh ERA armor on any tank PA whatsoever means there isn't... you could not come with a single proof of even comparable ERA system on Pakistani T-80UD/Al Khalid tanks... while I showed you in picture that the ERA on T-80UD/Al Khalid is not Nozh.

The conventional armor on Al Khalid is NOT 700mm.... forget about glacis being 600mm not even M1A2/Leo2A6/Arjun have such a thick armor there.

VATRA is not an Active protection system(not hard kill neither soft kill)... It is a self protection Leaser jammer.. that too was only evaluated on Al Khalid... And is not there in service... Besides that using such a device makes the frontal armor weak as does shorta jamming eyes on T-90.

In-spite of all these Al Khalid doesn't become a bad tank... it still is a potent armor machine.
 
.
I can tell you with authenticity that 90% military discussions on many forums is nothing more than speculation and estimates. For example, fighter and other radar ranges vary to a great extent than what is publically known. The link i gave is a good estimation of plenty of information collected by the person in his own capacity, an effort worth appreciation. Neither do i have any issues with arguing with you but you keep raising issues that been discussed to death before. AK ERA thickness and protection levels and an absence of an APS? Bring something new at least because AK-2 is around the corner with plenty of eye candy.

The blogger you posted as link has simply exaggerated figures for certain MBTs(mainly Western).. and several wrong data posted.

As I said I don't know much about armor... however I can still point out at least 10 errors without even scrolling much of that page.

Thats the problem with you people you make an eye candy out of military equipment.. certainly that won't suppress the flaws it has neither it would negate it.

The main Armor thickness of Al Khalid is about 400mm... which If is ceramic based composite filling would amount to 600-650mm RHA on commander's side and 550-600mm RHA on gunner's side of the turret(considering it to be world class and not typical Chinese)... and thats the only two places where the armor is present on Al Khalid and the rest of it is RHA and steel... of varied thickness.
While the frontal armor(If has ceramic based composite filling).. would amount to 700-900mm for HEAT(depending on round) and the RHA equivalent or 50mm less for KE(depending on round).

ERA present is certainly crap(sorry if it hurts)... its only good against RPG-7 and HEAT rounds(vintage.. age old).. its of no use against both Tandem charge aswell as KE rounds.
 
.
It is not even funny anymore,, problem is that you love to dig the same trench over and over while protecting your ego. There is enough data on this very thread to satisfy your age old queries but you chose to argue on non issues still. One thick hide chap you are.
 
.
It is not even funny anymore,, problem is that you love to dig the same trench over and over while protecting your ego. There is enough data on this very thread to satisfy your age old queries but you chose to argue on non issues still. One thick hide chap you are.

Make me untrue.... I showed you the photo+data and supported it with proper analysis from my side.
Do the same.. else don't make a baby cry of ego and what you have talked of before... all you have been doing is posting blogs and here and there half news which doesn't even make a Hint... and you make one out of it.
 
.
I hope next time you won't ask others to keep aside their jingoism before you put aside yours.

Here is an operational AK with the system which you just claimed was evaluated. This is an operational AK with a formation unit being displayed.

Now after this i would say you self delete your jingoistic posts trying to show as if you working at HIT or are the designer of AK.

And delete your self analysis posts which have no backing or technical support.

qeWL8.jpg



http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakist...nk-type-90-iim-mbt-2000-information-pool.html


I know about this esteemed photo of Al Khalid tank.

Only If you did get why I said the word "Evaluated".. even this image would show you.
Al Khalid needs ERA protection to save its self against enemy fire... main armor is insufficient.

Now due to the turret design the ERA cover on Al Khalid is already not covering all of the frontal turret where the main armor is present.. specially the more vulnerable lower part.

Adding this would significantly increase the problems of the designers.. as evident from this photo where you have ERA all over the tank except the Turret.

Now except this photo there isn't any other photo of Al Khalid with shorta(Vatra) eyes... either they are still working on it or they have left it... its not a system which would provide much of a significant advantage in the battle field... against a full ERA cover on the turret.

I hope this answers you... or If you have any better reasoning or statement from some official of sort... would like to read that.

And this was only a part... there is not a single verification of the absurd claims made regularly on this thread about the Ukrainian Nozh ERA armor being used on Al Khalid or T-80UD of PA... neither do you have any thing which proves the thickness of the main armor to be of 700mm on turret and 600mm on glacis... not even RHA equivalent of those armor is as measured.
 
.
I know about this esteemed photo of Al Khalid tank.

Only If you did get why I said the word "Evaluated".. even this image would show you.
Al Khalid needs ERA protection to save its self against enemy fire... main armor is insufficient.

Now due to the turret design the ERA cover on Al Khalid is already not covering all of the frontal turret where the main armor is present.. specially the more vulnerable lower part.

Adding this would significantly increase the problems of the designers.. as evident from this photo where you have ERA all over the tank except the Turret.

Now except this photo there isn't any other photo of Al Khalid with shorta(Vatra) eyes... either they are still working on it or they have left it... its not a system which would provide much of a significant advantage in the battle field... against a full ERA cover on the turret.

I hope this answers you... or If you have any better reasoning or statement from some official of sort... would like to read that.

And this was only a part... there is not a single verification of the absurd claims made regularly on this thread about the Ukrainian Nozh ERA armor being used on Al Khalid or T-80UD of PA... neither do you have any thing which proves the thickness of the main armor to be of 700mm on turret and 600mm on glacis... not even RHA equivalent of those armor is as measured.

Maybe because there was none taken, your approach to disproving it is fairly ridiculous.
If you have not seen a photo of it , it doesn't exist?
Very Childlike.. seeing is believing?
 
.
Maybe because there was none taken, your approach to disproving it is fairly ridiculous.
If you have not seen a photo of it , it doesn't exist?
Very Childlike.. seeing is believing?

I have a reasonable argument to support why such a photo was not seen again... on other PA tanks.
ERA here is more important than that fancy gadget... here.
 
.
It is not even funny anymore,, problem is that you love to dig the same trench over and over while protecting your ego. There is enough data on this very thread to satisfy your age old queries but you chose to argue on non issues still. One thick hide chap you are.

bro, isn't it better we PASS on this now? just assume you are in a rapid fire round and need to quickly move to next thing! :)

The information is all available, the data is all provided by you, by many others on this very forum, i bet these men have read all this, they realize they were wrong but its just a matter of accepting this.
EGO is a hard thing to ignore,, lets move on!
:tup: :tup:

I hope next time you won't ask others to keep aside their jingoism before you put aside yours.

Here is an operational AK with the system which you just claimed was evaluated. This is an operational AK with a formation unit being displayed.

Now after this i would say you self delete your jingoistic posts trying to show as if you working at HIT or are the designer of AK.

And delete your self analysis posts which have no backing or technical support.

qeWL8.jpg



http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakist...nk-type-90-iim-mbt-2000-information-pool.html
I bet Taimikhan, the image wont be visible to some members here!
:P
Thanks for sharing!
:pakistan:
 
.
these I worked on, so I can tell you their size.
The Radio is about 10x15x7.. The autoloader/cooling/aircon/etc electronics are all solid state which comes in various shielding not exceeding 6x6x6. The mechanicals are a tight fit(you cannot move around much).
Im looking for a video that shows the interior so that you can judge.
I dont have a theory, I only see a tank.. make the radio.
If you have expertise(say of five to ten years) in the field where you can say with authority(preferably a diploma or degree) in armoured vehicle engineering that it is impossible to do so.
I would believe you.. till then.. Ill believe the other claim.
Im just a judge here who has actually seen the thing and spoken to the people who make it..rather than be a couch potato critique

Here's a nice collection of Images to show you with various ERA fittings.

I have most of the photos in the video got a few more.. thanks for that.
All the Russian and Chinese MBT have small crew compartment same with Al Khalid the turret has been made bigger to accommodate latest electronic devices and cooling equipment.

A tank is not such a complex a thing that you can't understand it without diploma(and etc.)
I don't know much about armor and its composition... however most of the MBTs follow a general limit of upto what extent you can put armor in size with the turret.

If you were inside Al Khalid you would've noticed the Armor starts right beyond the Gunners sight,
from there you can make an estimated measure.... the blocks are of steel with composite fillings inside them.
Generally if the composite is 400-500mm thick(depending on quality) RHA equivalent would be about 600-650mm for KE round and 800-900mm for HEAT... which is very good... none of the KE rounds of IA can penetrate such armor from 2km... even the best ones used on T-90S.

However the ERA seen here is of concern... it is good if you are facing the HEAT rounds fired by T-72.. However for a tandem charge or KE round.. it's insufficient.

And as seen in the video most of the configuration(including the one which PA follows doesn't cover the lower part of turret where the hits are generally made on ERA equipped tank
 
Last edited by a moderator:
. .
Back
Top Bottom