What's new

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

VT-4 if comes with APS is something pakistan would not have been able to produce any way

if alkhlaid can match t90 then it is worth while, and production number should be increased

if alkalid is able to replace all other tanks, then i would call it massively sucessfull program,we have several other tanks to be replaced

however, we need indigenize component of alkhalid too, including the engine
In WW2, during the Wehrmacht's French campaign, Rommel was commanding 7 Panzer Div. In order to cross a certain river, some bridging equipment was sent to and meant for a sister Panzer Division, the 5th Panzer Division. Rommel got hold of that equipment, used it for 7th panzer Division for crossing the river. I am not pointing out success of Rommel's Ghost Division. One division's resources are used by another Division to achieve success, which is good, since they are both on the same side, but keep reading.

In 1971, GOC of 23rd Infantry Division, Major General Iftikhar Janjua who had at his disposal his own Division plus 2 x Infantry brigades, 1 x armored Brigade and 2 x artillery Brigades. His troops were able to capture area of Chhamb near Tawi River, North west of Jammu. So from where did the extra troops come from? Obviously an Infantry Division was diluted and its troops were sent to join 23rd Infantry Division, which means that on its own 23rd ID could not have been successful. Start getting an idea how replacements will be found in war.

In 1965, 1st Armd Div had lost 97 Tanks in Indian territory and then retreated, later whatever was left of 1st Armd Div was sent over to Sialkot to reinforce 6th Armd Duv (ex 100th Indp Armd Grp) . What if 1st Armd Div retreated, then was given replacement of lost tanks and was sent to another sector, not Sialkot ? IA had just 1 x Armd Div, PA had 2 x Armd Divs. Pakistan could have opened a new front in 1965, but there were no tank replacements. Lt Col. Nisar's 25th Cav was not even subordinate to 6th Armd Division, in fact, by the time 6th Armd Div started pouring in regiment by regiment, Lt Col. Nisar's regiment had caused such a shock and awe to Indian Army's 1st Armd Div from which the Indians never recovered. Would 1st Armd Div be sent to Sialkot after 6th Armd Div, if 6th Armd Div had replacements of its own for losses it could incur ? I dont think so.

On the Eastern side, PA had 5 x Infantry Divisions in 1971. There were 2 x AD Hoc Divs, with one Division having strength of a brigade only. The rest of the Divisions were never of full strength. The Command diluted units from different formations, then made new commands as Ad Hoc formations. Result remained the same. There was no question of replacements or reinforcements. Just adding more HQs attained nothing, except that more administrative staff and officers were now thrown in for handling more HQs.

In 1971, Now Brig from Lt Col, Brig Nisar formed Changez force composed of 2 x Armd Regts and 1 x MIB to delay an advance of an IA Infantry Division. he succeeded in doing so and his force suffered some tank losses, there were no replacements. Changez force completed its task and was sent back. Had the tank replacements been there, could Brig Nisar go on an offensive to annihilate the retreating IA Infantry Div ?

Yes, i know that im giving examples of 65 and 71 and this is 2020, even the name of the Armor School has been changed and new tactics have been introduced, new strategies have been formed, new tanks have been inducted, but are there replacements for losses ?

Tipu7 said that how about giving more Armored Regiments/tanks to Infantry formations. This is a good idea, even i advocated that Infantry Div should have an Armd Bde instead of a lone Armd Regiment. But when war erupts, as soon as the 6th Armd Division faces tank losses and there will be no replacements, the Corps HQ will allot the Armd Regts of Infantry formations to 6th Armd Div if the Ops need to be continued. This will lower the offensive capability of the infantry Division as it gets diluted.

The good thing is that in 1965 and 1971, M4 shermans and even M-47 Pattons had a habit of bogging down in terrain or having other mechanical failures, so if a formation started off with 15 tanks, by the end of journey it would have 8-10 operational tanks as it wouldn't wait to recover bogged down or broken down tanks. Today the MBTs are more reliable mechanically. The Armd Divs have full compliment of armor and infantry and supporting artillery and AD. If someone reads PA history, they would find that PA formations were mentioned as an example as 4 Punjab minus 1 x Company captured xyz hill. So one wonders if an Infantry battalion is 4 x Coys, it means 3 x Coys of 4 Punjab were able to secure the area so where is the 4th Company? More often than not, its not held as reserve, yes sometimes its held as reserve but its usually found out that this company was deployed elsewhere or was used to reinforce another infantry battalion for an attack on enemy positions. This habit of diluting formations in PA should be put to an end. All formations should be equipped to the teeth to be able to complete the task with their subordinate forces. Corps HQ should be able to reinforce them using units from its own pool, not from another fighting formation rendering that formation to half strength and thus useless in more than one sense.

If VT-4 start taking losses, Higher Command could start taking VT-4 from other Regts as replacements thus reducing those regiments in strength (again you will hear 22 Cavalry minus 1 x Squadron) or detaching those regiments completely from their parent formations and allotting them to Armd Divs. It was in best interest to keep the AK production going and build extra tanks every year, throw them in storage and use them as replacements during war. Anyways PA would have sorted out this issue of replacing tank losses in war some how.
 
Those members asking for Local production of Tanks need to understand that NO ONE can match the production speed of the Chinese - no one in the World ! And that is why Pakistan had to buy these tanks due to time constraints but then also has a Local production for AK, and we all know how slow the production of AK has been. Again NO ONE can match the production speed and quality of the Chinese!
 
Yes I have nothing against the VT4 either...it's a great tank. My issue is not having a vision and too much splintering of the tank types...which would create inefficiencies and be a disadvantage in a prolonged war.

To reduce the number of types...and somewhat address the chronic shortage of funds...I think Pak should try to sell some or all of its T59/T69 to BD(or some other country that operates these already). In case of BD...depending on the condition of the tank...they can either cannibalize them or upgrade them to Durjoy standard(which is kind of similar to AZ).

Add that money to the budget of AK production and churn out more AKs. T80UD, T85s...and the rumored upgrades for them...are still capable and should serve longer. AZ can serve in areas where lighter tanks are needed on the eastern front...otherwise it can be used on the western front or put in storage(in case of a prolonged war...they may be needed to make up depleting numbers of tanks). At least this way T59/T69s can be removed from the various types...adding more AKs to create some semblance of uniformity.

With time AZ, T80UD, and T85s can also be phased out...but that's much further. Long term plan should be for two tank types...heavy/medium weight(like for example VT4 and AK...some variant)...
...or whatever else suits the army's needs. One thing is for sure...this "stop gap" purchases of a couple hundred this and a couple hundred that needs to stop.

I agree with you that we have to many types of weapons, but selling them would not bring the same value as just upgrade the complete fleet of T-series to Alzarrar Standard,I don’t know if Type-69 can be upgraded to Alzarrar Standard,and if the Alzarrar program is still running this can only be asnwered by @Dazzler, what are your thoughts on this vintage Tanks ?
 
In WW2, during the Wehrmacht's French campaign, Rommel was commanding 7 Panzer Div. In order to cross a certain river, some bridging equipment was sent to and meant for a sister Panzer Division, the 5th Panzer Division. Rommel got hold of that equipment, used it for 7th panzer Division for crossing the river. I am not pointing out success of Rommel's Ghost Division. One division's resources are used by another Division to achieve success, which is good, since they are both on the same side, but keep reading.

In 1971, GOC of 23rd Infantry Division, Major General Iftikhar Janjua who had at his disposal his own Division plus 2 x Infantry brigades, 1 x armored Brigade and 2 x artillery Brigades. His troops were able to capture area of Chhamb near Tawi River, North west of Jammu. So from where did the extra troops come from? Obviously an Infantry Division was diluted and its troops were sent to join 23rd Infantry Division, which means that on its own 23rd ID could not have been successful. Start getting an idea how replacements will be found in war.

In 1965, 1st Armd Div had lost 97 Tanks in Indian territory and then retreated, later whatever was left of 1st Armd Div was sent over to Sialkot to reinforce 6th Armd Duv (ex 100th Indp Armd Grp) . What if 1st Armd Div retreated, then was given replacement of lost tanks and was sent to another sector, not Sialkot ? IA had just 1 x Armd Div, PA had 2 x Armd Divs. Pakistan could have opened a new front in 1965, but there were no tank replacements. Lt Col. Nisar's 25th Cav was not even subordinate to 6th Armd Division, in fact, by the time 6th Armd Div started pouring in regiment by regiment, Lt Col. Nisar's regiment had caused such a shock and awe to Indian Army's 1st Armd Div from which the Indians never recovered. Would 1st Armd Div be sent to Sialkot after 6th Armd Div, if 6th Armd Div had replacements of its own for losses it could incur ? I dont think so.

On the Eastern side, PA had 5 x Infantry Divisions in 1971. There were 2 x AD Hoc Divs, with one Division having strength of a brigade only. The rest of the Divisions were never of full strength. The Command diluted units from different formations, then made new commands as Ad Hoc formations. Result remained the same. There was no question of replacements or reinforcements. Just adding more HQs attained nothing, except that more administrative staff and officers were now thrown in for handling more HQs.

In 1971, Now Brig from Lt Col, Brig Nisar formed Changez force composed of 2 x Armd Regts and 1 x MIB to delay an advance of an IA Infantry Division. he succeeded in doing so and his force suffered some tank losses, there were no replacements. Changez force completed its task and was sent back. Had the tank replacements been there, could Brig Nisar go on an offensive to annihilate the retreating IA Infantry Div ?

Yes, i know that im giving examples of 65 and 71 and this is 2020, even the name of the Armor School has been changed and new tactics have been introduced, new strategies have been formed, new tanks have been inducted, but are there replacements for losses ?

Tipu7 said that how about giving more Armored Regiments/tanks to Infantry formations. This is a good idea, even i advocated that Infantry Div should have an Armd Bde instead of a lone Armd Regiment. But when war erupts, as soon as the 6th Armd Division faces tank losses and there will be no replacements, the Corps HQ will allot the Armd Regts of Infantry formations to 6th Armd Div if the Ops need to be continued. This will lower the offensive capability of the infantry Division as it gets diluted.

The good thing is that in 1965 and 1971, M4 shermans and even M-47 Pattons had a habit of bogging down in terrain or having other mechanical failures, so if a formation started off with 15 tanks, by the end of journey it would have 8-10 operational tanks as it wouldn't wait to recover bogged down or broken down tanks. Today the MBTs are more reliable mechanically. The Armd Divs have full compliment of armor and infantry and supporting artillery and AD. If someone reads PA history, they would find that PA formations were mentioned as an example as 4 Punjab minus 1 x Company captured xyz hill. So one wonders if an Infantry battalion is 4 x Coys, it means 3 x Coys of 4 Punjab were able to secure the area so where is the 4th Company? More often than not, its not held as reserve, yes sometimes its held as reserve but its usually found out that this company was deployed elsewhere or was used to reinforce another infantry battalion for an attack on enemy positions. This habit of diluting formations in PA should be put to an end. All formations should be equipped to the teeth to be able to complete the task with their subordinate forces. Corps HQ should be able to reinforce them using units from its own pool, not from another fighting formation rendering that formation to half strength and thus useless in more than one sense.

If VT-4 start taking losses, Higher Command could start taking VT-4 from other Regts as replacements thus reducing those regiments in strength (again you will hear 22 Cavalry minus 1 x Squadron) or detaching those regiments completely from their parent formations and allotting them to Armd Divs. It was in best interest to keep the AK production going and build extra tanks every year, throw them in storage and use them as replacements during war. Anyways PA would have sorted out this issue of replacing tank losses in war some how.

bottom line, local manufacturing is needed to take Dehli period.. Pakistan should be able “capable” of producing 2 regiment size tanks every two weeks..
 
Last edited:
I agree with you that we have to many types of weapons, but selling them would not bring the same value as just upgrade the complete fleet of T-series to Alzarrar Standard,I don’t know if Type-69 can be upgraded to Alzarrar Standard,and if the Alzarrar program is still running this can only be asnwered by @Dazzler, what are your thoughts on this vintage Tanks ?
Yes I agree that selling them would bring very little money bcuz they would have to be sold very cheap for any buyers to be interested. I was just thinking out loud about the possibilities of reducing different types.

Other options could be just using them on the western front/cannibalizing them to maintain AZ fleet(for whatever commonality they might have)/storing them(for attrition)...or any mix of these. AZ program is done as far as I know.
 
Last edited:
Those members asking for Local production of Tanks need to understand that NO ONE can match the production speed of the Chinese - no one in the World ! And that is why Pakistan had to buy these tanks due to time constraints but then also has a Local production for AK, and we all know how slow the production of AK has been. Again NO ONE can match the production speed and quality of the Chinese!
Not only that import those production line will cost lots of money and delay. Japan apache and F-35 are very expensive per unit becos they import the production line which hikes the price per unit.

Most importantly , crucial component like engine still need to be imported. Mitsubishi heavy INC goes bankrupt becos of this incident and only to be bailout by Japanese government.

China is a reliable military supplier unlike US. I see no reason to import production line which only spikes per unit cost.
 
In WW2, during the Wehrmacht's French campaign, Rommel was commanding 7 Panzer Div. In order to cross a certain river, some bridging equipment was sent to and meant for a sister Panzer Division, the 5th Panzer Division. Rommel got hold of that equipment, used it for 7th panzer Division for crossing the river. I am not pointing out success of Rommel's Ghost Division. One division's resources are used by another Division to achieve success, which is good, since they are both on the same side, but keep reading.

In 1971, GOC of 23rd Infantry Division, Major General Iftikhar Janjua who had at his disposal his own Division plus 2 x Infantry brigades, 1 x armored Brigade and 2 x artillery Brigades. His troops were able to capture area of Chhamb near Tawi River, North west of Jammu. So from where did the extra troops come from? Obviously an Infantry Division was diluted and its troops were sent to join 23rd Infantry Division, which means that on its own 23rd ID could not have been successful. Start getting an idea how replacements will be found in war.

In 1965, 1st Armd Div had lost 97 Tanks in Indian territory and then retreated, later whatever was left of 1st Armd Div was sent over to Sialkot to reinforce 6th Armd Duv (ex 100th Indp Armd Grp) . What if 1st Armd Div retreated, then was given replacement of lost tanks and was sent to another sector, not Sialkot ? IA had just 1 x Armd Div, PA had 2 x Armd Divs. Pakistan could have opened a new front in 1965, but there were no tank replacements. Lt Col. Nisar's 25th Cav was not even subordinate to 6th Armd Division, in fact, by the time 6th Armd Div started pouring in regiment by regiment, Lt Col. Nisar's regiment had caused such a shock and awe to Indian Army's 1st Armd Div from which the Indians never recovered. Would 1st Armd Div be sent to Sialkot after 6th Armd Div, if 6th Armd Div had replacements of its own for losses it could incur ? I dont think so.

On the Eastern side, PA had 5 x Infantry Divisions in 1971. There were 2 x AD Hoc Divs, with one Division having strength of a brigade only. The rest of the Divisions were never of full strength. The Command diluted units from different formations, then made new commands as Ad Hoc formations. Result remained the same. There was no question of replacements or reinforcements. Just adding more HQs attained nothing, except that more administrative staff and officers were now thrown in for handling more HQs.

In 1971, Now Brig from Lt Col, Brig Nisar formed Changez force composed of 2 x Armd Regts and 1 x MIB to delay an advance of an IA Infantry Division. he succeeded in doing so and his force suffered some tank losses, there were no replacements. Changez force completed its task and was sent back. Had the tank replacements been there, could Brig Nisar go on an offensive to annihilate the retreating IA Infantry Div ?

Yes, i know that im giving examples of 65 and 71 and this is 2020, even the name of the Armor School has been changed and new tactics have been introduced, new strategies have been formed, new tanks have been inducted, but are there replacements for losses ?

Tipu7 said that how about giving more Armored Regiments/tanks to Infantry formations. This is a good idea, even i advocated that Infantry Div should have an Armd Bde instead of a lone Armd Regiment. But when war erupts, as soon as the 6th Armd Division faces tank losses and there will be no replacements, the Corps HQ will allot the Armd Regts of Infantry formations to 6th Armd Div if the Ops need to be continued. This will lower the offensive capability of the infantry Division as it gets diluted.

The good thing is that in 1965 and 1971, M4 shermans and even M-47 Pattons had a habit of bogging down in terrain or having other mechanical failures, so if a formation started off with 15 tanks, by the end of journey it would have 8-10 operational tanks as it wouldn't wait to recover bogged down or broken down tanks. Today the MBTs are more reliable mechanically. The Armd Divs have full compliment of armor and infantry and supporting artillery and AD. If someone reads PA history, they would find that PA formations were mentioned as an example as 4 Punjab minus 1 x Company captured xyz hill. So one wonders if an Infantry battalion is 4 x Coys, it means 3 x Coys of 4 Punjab were able to secure the area so where is the 4th Company? More often than not, its not held as reserve, yes sometimes its held as reserve but its usually found out that this company was deployed elsewhere or was used to reinforce another infantry battalion for an attack on enemy positions. This habit of diluting formations in PA should be put to an end. All formations should be equipped to the teeth to be able to complete the task with their subordinate forces. Corps HQ should be able to reinforce them using units from its own pool, not from another fighting formation rendering that formation to half strength and thus useless in more than one sense.

If VT-4 start taking losses, Higher Command could start taking VT-4 from other Regts as replacements thus reducing those regiments in strength (again you will hear 22 Cavalry minus 1 x Squadron) or detaching those regiments completely from their parent formations and allotting them to Armd Divs. It was in best interest to keep the AK production going and build extra tanks every year, throw them in storage and use them as replacements during war. Anyways PA would have sorted out this issue of replacing tank losses in war some how.
13 Punjab of Nisar/Changez Force was line infantry, not mechanized AFAIK.
 
The biggest question is,
What is the feasibility of such major Indo-Pak conflict where armored units fully mobilize, engage in combat and began to suffer major attrition losses?

I myself believe, there is little to nothing that such possibility exists. Due to lowering of nuclear threshold, we might jump to bigger guns even before reaching to such escalation threshold where major armored confrontation will take place at multiple fronts.

Our armored forces are pre-dominantly conventional deterrent, meant to cover up low spectrum conflict located below the threshold of tactical nuclear weapons and above the threshold of limited air combat. Our armored and anti-armor forces are meant for posturing that enemy must realize that it cannot impose land war over Pakistan (i) as it cannot achieve its military objective as it perceives it can, and (ii) without risking inadvertent escalation which can lead to nuclear conflict.

Indo-Pak conflicts of future will be swift and limited. Major wars of attritions like we observed in WW-II, 1965 and 1971 are no longer possible.
In WW2, during the Wehrmacht's French campaign, Rommel was commanding 7 Panzer Div. In order to cross a certain river, some bridging equipment was sent to and meant for a sister Panzer Division, the 5th Panzer Division. Rommel got hold of that equipment, used it for 7th panzer Division for crossing the river. I am not pointing out success of Rommel's Ghost Division. One division's resources are used by another Division to achieve success, which is good, since they are both on the same side, but keep reading.

In 1971, GOC of 23rd Infantry Division, Major General Iftikhar Janjua who had at his disposal his own Division plus 2 x Infantry brigades, 1 x armored Brigade and 2 x artillery Brigades. His troops were able to capture area of Chhamb near Tawi River, North west of Jammu. So from where did the extra troops come from? Obviously an Infantry Division was diluted and its troops were sent to join 23rd Infantry Division, which means that on its own 23rd ID could not have been successful. Start getting an idea how replacements will be found in war.

In 1965, 1st Armd Div had lost 97 Tanks in Indian territory and then retreated, later whatever was left of 1st Armd Div was sent over to Sialkot to reinforce 6th Armd Duv (ex 100th Indp Armd Grp) . What if 1st Armd Div retreated, then was given replacement of lost tanks and was sent to another sector, not Sialkot ? IA had just 1 x Armd Div, PA had 2 x Armd Divs. Pakistan could have opened a new front in 1965, but there were no tank replacements. Lt Col. Nisar's 25th Cav was not even subordinate to 6th Armd Division, in fact, by the time 6th Armd Div started pouring in regiment by regiment, Lt Col. Nisar's regiment had caused such a shock and awe to Indian Army's 1st Armd Div from which the Indians never recovered. Would 1st Armd Div be sent to Sialkot after 6th Armd Div, if 6th Armd Div had replacements of its own for losses it could incur ? I dont think so.

On the Eastern side, PA had 5 x Infantry Divisions in 1971. There were 2 x AD Hoc Divs, with one Division having strength of a brigade only. The rest of the Divisions were never of full strength. The Command diluted units from different formations, then made new commands as Ad Hoc formations. Result remained the same. There was no question of replacements or reinforcements. Just adding more HQs attained nothing, except that more administrative staff and officers were now thrown in for handling more HQs.

In 1971, Now Brig from Lt Col, Brig Nisar formed Changez force composed of 2 x Armd Regts and 1 x MIB to delay an advance of an IA Infantry Division. he succeeded in doing so and his force suffered some tank losses, there were no replacements. Changez force completed its task and was sent back. Had the tank replacements been there, could Brig Nisar go on an offensive to annihilate the retreating IA Infantry Div ?

Yes, i know that im giving examples of 65 and 71 and this is 2020, even the name of the Armor School has been changed and new tactics have been introduced, new strategies have been formed, new tanks have been inducted, but are there replacements for losses ?

Tipu7 said that how about giving more Armored Regiments/tanks to Infantry formations. This is a good idea, even i advocated that Infantry Div should have an Armd Bde instead of a lone Armd Regiment. But when war erupts, as soon as the 6th Armd Division faces tank losses and there will be no replacements, the Corps HQ will allot the Armd Regts of Infantry formations to 6th Armd Div if the Ops need to be continued. This will lower the offensive capability of the infantry Division as it gets diluted.

The good thing is that in 1965 and 1971, M4 shermans and even M-47 Pattons had a habit of bogging down in terrain or having other mechanical failures, so if a formation started off with 15 tanks, by the end of journey it would have 8-10 operational tanks as it wouldn't wait to recover bogged down or broken down tanks. Today the MBTs are more reliable mechanically. The Armd Divs have full compliment of armor and infantry and supporting artillery and AD. If someone reads PA history, they would find that PA formations were mentioned as an example as 4 Punjab minus 1 x Company captured xyz hill. So one wonders if an Infantry battalion is 4 x Coys, it means 3 x Coys of 4 Punjab were able to secure the area so where is the 4th Company? More often than not, its not held as reserve, yes sometimes its held as reserve but its usually found out that this company was deployed elsewhere or was used to reinforce another infantry battalion for an attack on enemy positions. This habit of diluting formations in PA should be put to an end. All formations should be equipped to the teeth to be able to complete the task with their subordinate forces. Corps HQ should be able to reinforce them using units from its own pool, not from another fighting formation rendering that formation to half strength and thus useless in more than one sense.

If VT-4 start taking losses, Higher Command could start taking VT-4 from other Regts as replacements thus reducing those regiments in strength (again you will hear 22 Cavalry minus 1 x Squadron) or detaching those regiments completely from their parent formations and allotting them to Armd Divs. It was in best interest to keep the AK production going and build extra tanks every year, throw them in storage and use them as replacements during war. Anyways PA would have sorted out this issue of replacing tank losses in war some how.
 
so could I ask ---choose which kind of Self-propelled anti-aircraft weapon?
 
A M1 Abrams tank blown apart by an IED ... most likely around 20 kg. When I meant a tank will be blown out of the sky ... I meant it loosely. But below is the reason why you still need a dedicated MRAP instead of a tank to face IEDs. There are some IEDs tanks can deal with but a majority of them will end in bad consequences.
View attachment 673041
That cannot be the work of a single IED.

Looks like that MBT was (intentionally) destroyed with considerable amount of explosives/firepower which could be utilized unopposed.

For reference:



Each MBT absorbed an otherwise combat-applicable attack and continued to offer mission support.
 
Is there an active protection system on our vt4s as i didn't notice one nor there was any mention about it by DG ISPR? Pictures would be appreciated
 
Those members asking for Local production of Tanks need to understand that NO ONE can match the production speed of the Chinese - no one in the World ! And that is why Pakistan had to buy these tanks due to time constraints but then also has a Local production for AK, and we all know how slow the production of AK has been. Again NO ONE can match the production speed and quality of the Chinese!
noone is asking pakistan to match chinese production, we dont need 20,000 tanks we just need 1000 tanks
 

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom