Pakistan Army's VT-4 Main Battle Tank | Updates & Discussions

[LeGenD]

I have read the sheer nonsense in your pointless posts already, similar to the way you tried your utmost to comprehend the trails with no sense of direction 2 years back.

This is a "discussion forum." We discuss different matters and attempt to address misconceptions here.

Your obsession with this M1 topic is evident as you are trying your best to derail this VT-4 thread into a new discussion. Also, your lack of understanding of Pakistan Army is reflected by the fact that you are trying to prove a Serving Military officer wrong who gave a statement on National TV.

That military officer is not the only saying that M-1 dismal firing report. The following narratives tell about M1 Abrams missing targets.

I am not trying to derail this topic. I didn't bring M1 related discussion into this thread - some of you were already discussing this matter and I intervened accordingly.

I have a question for you: does that "serving military officer" have any experience with M1A1 Abrams Tanks? Does he?

Do you understand the concept of technologies and physics that come into play in the functioning of weapon systems? Or is it all about deen amaan?

Type-59 is a obsolete design and it failed to defeat a single M1A1 in the Persian Gulf War (1991). Perhaps that "serving military officer" needs to test an M1A1 himself and study military history before he provides his esteemed input. His input is valuable in regards to Tanks of Pakistan army at most but he is not in the position to tell much about Western designs due to lack of exposure.

Now, one of our members pointed out the realities of the trials in Pakistan. I accepted his account because it makes sense and is not comical.

You keep burying your head in the sand. As I said: "Earth is flat."

In the book, a case of exploding mangoes, the writer gives the whole narrative:
View attachment 447498

This is a work of fiction - a comic novel.

Take it with a grain of salt.

A book by James farwell, The Pakistan cauldron, chapter 8.

View attachment 447499

@LeGenD

I can dig more out, if i keep searching but i am already satisfied with the word of a military officer. Don't bother me anymore on this topic.

I can show you books in which story is different. Again, what is your bloody point?

Ignorance is a dead end.

 

[Signalian]

Now, one of our members pointed out the realities of the trials in Pakistan. I accepted his account because it makes sense and is not comical.

Thank you mate, set aside facts/truth/reality but move on "sense", which could be true or false. I have been wasting my time all along. Adios.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

OPLOT will be a real contender to the upgraded T90 bhishm from IA (will outmatch most likely).

Conventionally, pakistan leaves a lot to be desired but this would be the decider since they do manage a large army especially Tank regiment compared to their size. PA leaves no stone unturned for themselves in most cases so I think they can purchase OPLOT.

Downside will be that it definitely won't come with ToT which should be acceptable since pakistan has no experience or intentions to make a new one.

T90 can be handled by even the old baseline AK.

Compare the specs and available data.

This is a "discussion forum." We discuss different matters and attempt to address misconceptions here.


I am not trying to derail this topic. I didn't bring M1 related discussion into this thread - some of you were already discussing this matter and I intervened accordingly.

I have a question for you: does that "serving military officer" have any experience with M1A1 Abrams Tanks? Does he?

Do you understand the concept of technologies and physics that come into play in the functioning of weapon systems? Or is it all about deen amaan?

Type-59 is a obsolete design and it failed to defeat a single M1A1 in the Persian Gulf War (1991). Perhaps that "serving military officer" needs to test an M1A1 himself and study military history before he provides his esteemed input. His input is valuable in regards to Tanks of Pakistan army at most but he is not in the position to tell much about Western designs due to lack of exposure.

Now, one of our members pointed out the realities of the trials in Pakistan. I accepted his account because it makes sense and is not comical.

You keep burying your head in the sand. As I said: "Earth is flat."


This is a work of fiction - a comic novel.

Take it with a grain of salt.


I can show you books in which story is different. Again, what is your bloody point?

Ignorance is a dead end.

The iraqis Military wasnt a professional forve,neither well trained... equipped with Asad e Babil aka monkey models.

The iraqi guards however was a different story and did manage to kill US armor.

However i do agree that time of 59 is gone.

 

[LeGenD]

T90 can be handled by even the old baseline AK.

Compare the specs and available data.


The iraqis Military wasnt a professional forve,neither well trained... equipped with Asad e Babil aka monkey models.

The iraqi guards however was a different story and did manage to kill US armor.

However i do agree that time of 59 is gone.

Bro,

Airstrikes and resultant degradation of communication channels and casualties demoralized certain quarters of Iraqi army which is understandable because they never experienced anything like this against Iran.

However, Iraqi Republican Guards held their ground and did their best. They had best equipment but US army still outclassed them.

I would not say that Iraqi tanks were bad; they were simply not on par with M1A1 and crew skills could not change the situation. M1A1 were scoring hits in day, night and even stormy conditions - courtesy of its onboard technologies and well-trained crew.

Iraqi accounts suggest that 'some' scored hits on M1A1 but shells bounced off - credit goes to quality of M1A1 armor which was revolutionary at the time.

There is nothing magical in Russian and Chinese MBT. Their design is a trade-off between protection and firepower on average. And Pakistan has budget- related considerations.

However, situation is different for Saudi Arabia. They evaluated M1A2, Al-Khalid and several more in their environments and chose the best option.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Bro,

Airstrikes and resultant degradation of communication channels and casualties demoralized certain quarters of Iraqi army which is understandable because they never experienced anything like this against Iran.

Off course..

But that does not negate the fact that Iraqi troops were unprofessional and using Iraqi assembled monkey models.

Neither does that negate the fact that Iraqi troops were so pathetic that some even built jails for themselves and moved into em before the Americans even sent boots on ground... or they fact that they were more busy looting Kuwaitis than anything ...

Iran you say...? Do you know the background of the Iraqi invasion ?

At the time, Iran was under going the Revolution ... 5000 Iranian pilots were behind bars, senior military leadership either exiled,dead or behind bars... giving Iraq the perfect chance to defeat the Iranians .. with western support!

And irony is that they got bogged down in khuzestan .. Iranian Arab province ...

However, Iraqi Republican Guards held their ground and did their best. They had best equipment but US army still outclassed them.

Guards were a small group .. hardly a few brigades at max... they simply couldn’t outclass a super power.

I would not say that Iraqi tanks were bad; they were simply not on par with M1A1 and crew skills could not change the situation. M1A1 were scoring hits in day, night and even stormy conditions - courtesy of its onboard technologies and well-trained crew.

Iraqi accounts suggest that 'some' scored hits on M1A1 but shells bounced off - credit goes to quality of M1A1 armor which was revolutionary at the time.

Sure .. you are comparing monkey model (with pathetic Iraqi crew) tank type from post world war era to a tank produced decades later by a super power ...

There is nothing magical in Russian and Chinese MBT. Their design is a trade-off between protection and firepower.

While the western tank offers better protection but lesser firepower and speed/off-road etc capability.


Than again ... the Israelis screwed the Syrians and others with inferior tanks...

 

[Path-Finder]

This is a thread about VT-4 under trials in Pakistan! Why in the F is M1 abrams being discussed? Mods?

 

[Ahmet Pasha]

@LeGenD it could just be that US never disclosed any Abrams loses because history is always writeen by the victor(just an opinion of mine)

But I've seen houthis destroy many Saudi Abrams and IFVs and AFVs. Even some Abrams in Syria.

Besides Israelis claimed Merkava to be indestructible and got a massive beating in 2006 Lebanon adventure.

But u r right about modernizations and US version being better.

Bro,

Airstrikes and resultant degradation of communication channels and casualties demoralized certain quarters of Iraqi army which is understandable because they never experienced anything like this against Iran.

However, Iraqi Republican Guards held their ground and did their best. They had best equipment but US army still outclassed them.

I would not say that Iraqi tanks were bad; they were simply not on par with M1A1 and crew skills could not change the situation. M1A1 were scoring hits in day, night and even stormy conditions - courtesy of its onboard technologies and well-trained crew.

Iraqi accounts suggest that 'some' scored hits on M1A1 but shells bounced off - credit goes to quality of M1A1 armor which was revolutionary at the time.

There is nothing magical in Russian and Chinese MBT. Their design is a trade-off between protection and firepower on average. And Pakistan has budget- related considerations.

However, situation is different for Saudi Arabia. They evaluated M1A2, Al-Khalid and several more in their environments and chose the best option.

 

[LeGenD]

@DESERT FIGHTER

We can discuss this matter in another thread. I will create it and invite you there.

However, bear in mind that Soviet T-72 demonstrated similar shortcomings in Chechnya. Easy to critic Iraqi productions when these Tanks were nowhere as good as M1A1.

 

[Signalian]

Moreover, an Indian order for 700 T-90S MBTs is expected to be placed in April 2018, which will eventually take the Indian Army’s total number of T-90S platforms to more than 1,500 vehicles, thus placing Pakistan at a distinct numerical disadvantage in terms of modern MBTs.

Although PA will remain at numerical disadvantage but AZ is also a modern MBT with all the upgrades done on it and with 500+ AZ in numbers, complemented by 700 (AK+T-80), the equation is not far out. T-85 III is also underestimated.

However i do agree that time of 59 is gone.

That's why FC has been made Armored-capable now

 

[niaz]

At the time of the Zia’s death, I had quite a few friends and relations serving in the Pak Army. I was sitting next to Lt Col in the Ordinance during a wedding. I asked his opinion about Zia’s crash and testing of M1 tank. He did not think that these two events were related and commented that apparently Abrams’ tank could not cope with the Cholistan desert sand.

It was an off the cuff remark and there is no way of telling if it was correct. However I came across the similar sand problem during Desert storm again.

Quote

Desert is impediment to U.S. tanks, aircraft

Posted: Thursday, December 19, 2002

By By Rachel Davis
Morris News Service

SAVANNAH, Ga. -- The U.S. military with its tanks and aircraft has the capability to dominate in any full-scale military action. But one fundamental problem consistently throws a kink in desert operations.

Toppling winds and suffocating heat also are a proven threat to American troops and their equipment. And such inclement weather could be a hang-up for any repeat showdown in the sand.

Unquote

http://cjonline.com/stories/121902/usw_desert.shtml#.Wlc9Jqhl-Uk

It is therefore probable that M1 tank units provided by the US for testing did not perform as well as T-59 in the Pakistani desert environment in 1988.

 

[Leclan]

VT4 is about 4-5million dollars each in international arm market. it is first "luxury product" of chinese land arm.it has same level transmission system as 99A(official name of the latest big one) ，engine is same bloodine as 99A too. U can aquire APS system if u are affordable. It has the latest fire control system like 99A.
here is the thing. VT4 is not a T72 like tank. T72 is designed cheap for massive equipment and for raid. on the other hand, tanks like vt4, Leo2, M1 they are expensive,they are for effective defense. Meanwhile, VT4 has an advantage of its weight.

 

[Leclan]

china has master the neccesary techniques of manufacturing a 1500hp disel engine,which means a reliable maintenance expect. it maybe not as that good as Leo2's power pack,but chinese institutes are upgrading it all the time， as 99A is using the nearly same thing. this is like Toyota Camery from 1 gen to 8th gen.

i can barely see the future on oplot, just personal view. look, we have millions of engineering graduates every year. that is a solid guarantee compared a country who is still in war itself on its own land.just facts. whats more , china has more complicated terrain than Ukraine, we need 99A work on Tibet Plateau, in -20℃ nortern cold icy province, in sothern wet provinces, in Xinjiang's high temprature desert. Just like china has the most Voice on highspeed train building. If china cannot figure out a tank with most adaptability ，i dont know how many countries can do that.

 

[ghazi768]

At the time of the Zia’s death, I had quite a few friends and relations serving in the Pak Army. I was sitting next to Lt Col in the Ordinance during a wedding. I asked his opinion about Zia’s crash and testing of M1 tank. He did not think that these two events were related and commented that apparently Abrams’ tank could not cope with the Cholistan desert sand.

It was an off the cuff remark and there is no way of telling if it was correct. However I came across the similar sand problem during Desert storm again.

Quote

Desert is impediment to U.S. tanks, aircraft

Posted: Thursday, December 19, 2002

By By Rachel Davis
Morris News Service

SAVANNAH, Ga. -- The U.S. military with its tanks and aircraft has the capability to dominate in any full-scale military action. But one fundamental problem consistently throws a kink in desert operations.

Toppling winds and suffocating heat also are a proven threat to American troops and their equipment. And such inclement weather could be a hang-up for any repeat showdown in the sand.

Unquote

http://cjonline.com/stories/121902/usw_desert.shtml#.Wlc9Jqhl-Uk

It is therefore probable that M1 tank units provided by the US for testing did not perform as well as T-59 in the Pakistani desert environment in 1988.

Yes, that is what I also heard from a friend in armour in those days that Cholistan's sands are one of the softest and this creates problems for almost all vehicles but M1 was found to be too heavy to operate there.

 

[WhyCry]

T90 can be handled by even the old baseline AK.

Compare the specs and available data.

I mentioned upgraded T90's. They surpass AK in all aspects unless I didn't account for false bravado.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

I mentioned upgraded T90's. They surpass AK in all aspects unless I didn't account for false bravado.

I don’t believe in jingoism.

You are free to post specs...

Baseline AK was discontinued in 2008... with an upgraded variant. AK I.

P.S; AK II will soon roll out.. running a 1500hp power plant with other major upgrades.