What's new

Pakistan army had begun test on MBT 3000

whenever we listen to an analyst about threat from indian side, they would say that nasr is developed to counter massive armoured thrust from indian army, if we are so weak against india in this regard then why haven't we inducted tanks and APCs in large numbers so that we can resist against indian armoured thrust...we have been listening to this for so many years now but nothing significant has been added to our armoured forces
 
.
was AlKhalid a failure? Where it disappeared after only 300-600 units induction?
how much tanks do you want.. intending no in current scenario would be not more than 500-1000 tanks
in the end army would probably keep 2000 or so tanks with half of them al zarrar update other half a mix of al khalid 1/2 and the newer mbt 3000
 
.
whenever we listen to an analyst about threat from indian side, they would say that nasr is developed to counter massive armoured thrust from indian army,
You should go to a nasr related thread and view the topic there otherwise this will become another Nasr thread.


if we are so weak against india in this regard then why haven't we inducted tanks and APCs in large numbers so that we can resist against indian armoured thrust...we have been listening to this for so many years now but nothing significant has been added to our armoured forces

Pakistan isnt "so" weak against India. In 1948, 65 and 71, PA had to compromise on alot of factors during battles like:

1. Man power problem.
Pakistan Army was not only smaller than indian Army but Most of units were under strength. Reserves were even lower, so replacement from reserves was not possible. The units which suffered high causalities in war had to be brought to full strength by attaching personnel from other units.

Secondly, Pakistan Army would mix regular infantry with paramilitary troops to sometimes bring units to proper strength and show an increase in number formations to deceive Indian Army. This would obviously affect the performance of the unit since paramilitary didnt use heavy weapons neither was sufficiently trained but in reality it didnt affect performance at all.The use of national guard, scouts, hurs etc are examples.

Thirdly, PA would raise divisions instantly with a few units and then slowly bring it to full strength.

2. Equipment problem.
Starting with tanks, tank losses could not be replaced. Infact tank losses in armoured divisions and armoured brigades were replaced by shifting tanks from armoured units of infantry divisions. As an example, if PA enters war with total 1000 tanks with 400 tanks with armoured divisions and 600 tanks with infantry divisions. Then any loss in 400 tanks of armoured divisions will be replaced by shifting tanks from 600 tanks of infantry divisions, as there are no spare replacements. PA had no tank production facility and USA would enforce embargo during war.

Artillery and Air defence suffered the same problem. There was no tube artillery gun production like 105mm or 155mm. Infantry divisions would let their armoured regiments donate tanks to replace losses in premier armoured divisions but PA commanders wouldnt shift artillery from infantry to armoured formations and rightly so.
Secondly, authorised strength for a artillery regiments could be 12 or 18 guns. Heavy was usually 12 guns and medium or field would be 18 guns. But some artillery regiments wouldnt even have full compliment of guns to start with.

The Supply and Transport battalions never had full compliment of trucks. Civilian trucks were used many times. Some said its to deceive enemy, which is true but main problem was lack of trucks.


3. Ammunition problem.
In all wars it was seen that artillery would be the first to suffer this problem. In last days of 1965 war, Indians even started noticing that PA artillery bombardment had significantly reduced. This was because USA had put embargo and no one would supply Pakistan with ammo for 25 Pounder guns.

In Air defence units, the bullets were loaded into belts by leaving one gap between every bullet. so a belt of 50 bullets would be loaded with 25 bullets only to save ammo.

Tank crews had to be careful which round to be used where, HE or AP.Another problem was that Shermans used 76mm or 75mm ammo where as pattons used 90mm ammo. The ammo for 106mm RR guns became a problem because infantry as well armoured formation both used this weapon extensively.
Its also true that Pakistan Army used Indian captured weapons and ammunition many times but this was seen more in infantry weapons like LMG/HMG, mortars etc and to some extent with artillery guns.


After analyzing all these factors, PA soldiers performed excellently, even under strength and under equipment. At the borders rangers performed gallantly while equipped with only light weapons and they fought to the last man usually to stop Indian army from penetrating into Pakistan. At some posts , whole sections and platoons were wiped out, and there had a developed a psyche that retreating from post is dishonour. Still the ones who did fall back, were great asset to Pakistani regulars as rangers knew the border terrain well and acted as scouts.

Coming to current scene, the following areas needed attention in terms of weaponry.

1. Replacing Obsolete equipment.
Tanks needed replacement, especially Shermans and Pattons. The T-59 was backbone along with T-69, numbering around 1100. Half or more were then upgraded to Zarrar standard. Some others were given to FC.

The backbone of Artillery was 85mm 25-Pounders, they were replaced by a wide variety of 105mm,122mm,130mm, 155mm and 200mm guns. Even some of the replaced 105mm, 122mm and 155mm are already obsolete by todays standards.

Air Defence had better luck. They were given Stingers and Anza series and many replaced their AAA guns easily. Still Pakistan uses AAA guns like 35mm/37mm/40mm. They even received new radars.

2. Current war in the west of Pakistan.
PA had been engaged with TTP and other banned outfits. Most of the funds were directed towards modern weaponry encompassing a huge array of different weapons helicopters (transport and gunships), transport vehicles, IED protected vehicles, bullet proof vests, NVG's, new training facilities, increased surveillance equipment and protection equipment for all military facilities and cantonments, QRF's came into common existence etc

The doctrine of Army also changed to some extent from heavy weaponized formations to light and more mobile formations. As an example,the number of communication sets suddenly increased in the Army because when Americans came to train PA in 2001, it was found that US forces had a communication set for every 4 -5 soldiers able to operate independently. Pakistan Army on other hand had one communication set for a platoon level sometimes (30 soldiers). The Army felt for a need to modernise so more orders were placed.

Insurgency had been seen in the past but the devastating effect and level thats seen in the past 10-15 years was never seen in 50's or 70's or 80's etc. Although its true that US also funded training and gave heavy equipment under a funded program but currently Pakistan is modernising its forces on its own.

Even then, you can see that the first problem of under strength units and formations has been addressed by inducting 4th Battalion in PMA as well as large intake of troops from Balochistan, even though there had been loss of officers and soldiers in thousands in past ten years. So instead of raising new formations, most units were brought to full strength. Equipment shortage has been fulfilled to some extent now since 300+ new tanks have arrived along with newer Artillery like M-109, Panter etc along with MLRS. Still replacement in tanks and artllery is an ongoing process.
POF is also regularly producing ammo for tanks, artillery, air defence etc.
Aviation wing also got boosted with large number of transport helicopters and a few gunships. UAV and UCAV have also been inducted. replacements are required for older helis also like Llama, Alouette, Puma etc.
 
.
Well that is really good thing but for T-90 we have AL-KHALID I which we would show in IDEX 2014. Where are tests being done ?
ok lets not be so optimistic. Al-khalid is a good tank but not good enough to be par with upgraded T-90s. Alkhalid is more of a improved version of T-72 with some cosmetic changes.
 
.
ok lets not be so optimistic. Al-khalid is a good tank but not good enough to be par with upgraded T-90s. Alkhalid is more of a improved version of T-72 with some cosmetic changes.

The Al-Khalid has a far better weight to power ratio than T-90. It is hardly a T-72 with some cosmetic changes. Its chasis is based on MBT-2000 rather than T-72. Same as the turret and gun. Its not about being optimistic.

Are you an pakistan American? They tend to be quite ignorant on anything except American.
 
. .
Reliable source from China that PA had begun it's test on MBT 3000. Mounted with RCWS, third generation heat imaging device, 125mm Gun designed for launching Anti armor missle PG7(tandem heat body, effective range 5KM,Penetration RHA240/68 degree),1300 horse power diesel engine. Active counter system like GL5 on Type 99g could also choosed to mount on MBT 3000. MBT 3000 is the best platform China's got for export, PA will be the first client as expected. The overall weight is controlled at 52 tons means it can pass bridges and road in most part of Pakistan. As long as PA get it, you can effectively deal with T90.

Congratulation, another cooperation milestone for China and Pakistan.
It would be awesome of we could German Tanks..! They are the True beasts... Brawn and Muscles ..
 
.
AL KHALID 1 is great Tank against most T-90 versions. I have questions on T-90MS version @Dazzler @DESERT FIGHTER

AK-1 will stand firm against the MS, which is just a cosmetic upgrade of ths t-90S for exports. Russian army dont want any more t-90 xyz as they are all eyes at Armata.
 
. .
Back
Top Bottom