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

[vi-va]

It's not my responsibility to provide proof. You claim Armata is the best tank first, you should provide proof. But I can list some Russian data here, you can search around if you want to know the well known facts.

Russia APFSDS development history:

1. 3bm42
2. 3BM46 Depleted uranium
3. 3BM42M monobloc tungsten alloy rod penetrator

View attachment 733866
The one in the middle is 3BM42. No saddle-shaped sabot. Just take a look, you will know this is 10-20 years behind western one back than.

View attachment 733867
This is Russia 3BM66 and 3BM44-1, start using saddle-shaped sabot, 10-20 years behind.


View attachment 733877
Russia 3BM66 and 3BM44-1 are trying to catch up with Rheinmetall Rh-120 APFSDS

German 120mm Tank Ammunition

This blogpost takes a look at the history and specifications of German 120mm tank ammunition. It will include parts with speculative...

germanarmor.blogspot.com

View attachment 733873

View attachment 733874

View attachment 733875

View attachment 733876

View attachment 733870

Rheinmetall Rh-120 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

View attachment 733872
View attachment 733871


View attachment 733868
This is Russia 2A46
Chamber pressure 500+MPA
Muzzle energy 9+MPA, far behind Chinese one which is 11+MPA


View attachment 733869
This is latest Russia APFSDS, aluminium alloy sabot. While western one and Chinese one is Carbon fiber composites.

The proof is everywhere, I think it's enough.

Basically, Russia APFSDS is 10-20 years behind, this is well known.

Some more Russia ASPFDS development history pictures FYI:

Soviet 3BM-9 APFSDS

Soviet 3BM-15 APFSDS

Soviet 3BM-22 APFSDS

Soviet 3BM-32 APFSDS

Soviet 3BM-42 APFSDS

Soviet 3BM-42 APFSDS

Germany DM-13 APFSDS

Germany DM-13 APFSDS

US M829 APFSDS

US M829A2 APFSDS

British L23A1 APFSDS

APFSDS is no magic, billions of money, new materials, tens of thousands of test, new theory, and the cycle goes on, money, new materials, test, new theory.

Because of Soviet collapsed, Russia lack of investment, while the west and China keep investing, that's how it becomes today.

Armata is not mature at all. I can assure you Russia won't buy it in bulk. It need at least 5-10 years to be mature, most likely 10 years.

Russia electronic lag behind much more than other areas. Have you ever heard of Russia semiconductor chips? No.

Engine, transmission, come on. Germany is best so far.

Germany MT883Ka501

China150HB which is not the best China currently has. The best is in the ZTQ-15 tank.

Russia engine, transmission is at least 10-20 years behind.

Engine, transmission are no magic, billions of money, new materials, tens of thousands of test, new theory, and the cycle goes on, money, new materials, test, new theory.

Russia lack of investment, while the west and China keep investing, that's how it becomes today.

 

[iLION12345_1]

It's not my responsibility to provide proof. You claim Armata is the best tank first, you should provide proof. But I can list some Russian data here, you can search around if you want to know the well known facts.

Russia APFSDS development history:

1. 3bm42
2. 3BM46 Depleted uranium
3. 3BM42M monobloc tungsten alloy rod penetrator

View attachment 733866
The one in the middle is 3BM42. No saddle-shaped sabot. Just take a look, you will know this is 10-20 years behind western one back than.

View attachment 733867
This is Russia 3BM66 and 3BM44-1, start using saddle-shaped sabot, 10-20 years behind.


View attachment 733877
Russia 3BM66 and 3BM44-1 are trying to catch up with Rheinmetall Rh-120 APFSDS

German 120mm Tank Ammunition

This blogpost takes a look at the history and specifications of German 120mm tank ammunition. It will include parts with speculative...

germanarmor.blogspot.com

View attachment 733873

View attachment 733874

View attachment 733875

View attachment 733876

View attachment 733870

Rheinmetall Rh-120 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

View attachment 733872
View attachment 733871


View attachment 733868
This is Russia 2A46
Chamber pressure 500+MPA
Muzzle energy 9+MPA, far behind Chinese one which is 11+MPA


View attachment 733869
This is latest Russia APFSDS, aluminium alloy sabot. While western one and Chinese one is Carbon fiber composites.

The proof is everywhere, I think it's enough.

Basically, Russia APFSDS is 10-20 years behind, this is well known.

Again, you are looking at Russian and western ammunition that is 30 YEARS OLD. Russia inducted 3BM69 “Vacuum 1” and 3BM70 “vacuum 2” in 2005. Both of which have 1000+ mm of pen/0 deg at 2km. Something NO CHINESE APFSDS has ever achieved. Chinese APFSDS was achieving numbers of 460/0 deg (the 125-I) in the 90s while Russians had did this in the 80s with the 3BM42 “Mango” , which was also a much more advanced design overall at that time. Even the Russian 3BM59 Svinets (740mm/0 deg at 2km) from early 2000s is superior to BTA-4 (600mm/0 deg at 2km) which is what China was making in the early 2000s. Given these numbers there’s absolutely no way 125-III even comes close to Vacuum series.
and what is the “3BM66” and “3BM44-1”? Neither of these rounds even exist. BM46 is mango, Russian round from the 80s. Current Russian rounds are BM69 and BM70. The picture you posted is of Svinets APFSDS from late 90s. Not the most Russian modern APFSDS as 3 more designs have come since.

“This is Russian 2A46” is a useless argument because it’s been modernized so many times. that’s like saying the Leo 2 is a bad tank because it’s old . Just having higher pressure doesn’t make the gun instantly better, especially when there’s a dozen other metrics to consider. Compare the most modern variant of the 2A46 then. USA and Germany are already looking to replace their guns with 130 and 140MM.

DM63 is a round from NINETIES and has better penetration than what China was making in the Mid 2000s. The next German round will be closer to Vacuum series, again far surpassing anything China makes, which you consider better, despite there being no numbers available to back that up.

You did the exact same with your second post, a bunch of pictures of Russian APFSDS from the times when China couldn’t even make APFSDS and was copying Russian designs.
you did the same with the engine, you post a picture and say “there you go it’s 20 years behind Chinese designs”
Do you realize that literally all helicopter, jet and missile engines/turbojets China uses are of Russian origin because they are better? How are current Chinese engines better when you have absolutely nothing to prove this. The discussion isn’t that Russia is behind the west, it’s that China is behind both of them. Russia still makes the best ammunition and armor (Vacuum and Malachit) of any tank producing country, while western electronics, engines, transmissions and sights are still the best.

I don’t doubt that China is catching up very rapidly to western and Russian tech, but it’s simply not there yet. Chinese defense industries are still a few years behind Russians in most categories, especially in tank making. And at least a decade behind still compared to American and European ones. Just 20 years ago literally all Chinese designs were French or Russian copies. Many of the things still are, but China has caught up quick and will surpass them, just not yet.

Anyways, we should get back on topic.

 

[vi-va]

Again, you are looking at Russian and western ammunition that is 30 YEARS OLD. Russia inducted Vacuum 1 and 2 in 2005. Both of which have 1000+ mm of pen/0 deg at 2km. Something NO CHINESE APFSDS has ever achieved. Chinese APFSDS was achieving numbers of 460/0 deg (the 125-I) in the 90s while Russians had did this in the 80s with the Mango, which was also a much more advanced design overall. Even the Russian Svinets from early 2000s is superior to BTA-4, which is what China was making in the early 2000s. Given these numbers there’s absolutely no way 125-III even comes close to Vacuum series.
and what is the “3BM66” and “3BM44-1”? Neither of these rounds even exist. BM46 is mango, Russian round from the 80s. Current Russian rounds are BM69 and BM70.

“This is Russian 2A46” is a useless argument because it’s been modernized so many times. that’s like saying the Leo 2 is a bad tank because it’s old. You just post a picture or something and say “this is why Chinese xyz is 20 years ahead” without any reason. While China was copying everything Russian and western 20 years ago. Just having higher pressure doesn’t make the gun instantly better, especially when there’s a dozen other metrics to consdier

DM63 is a round from NINETIES and has better penetration than what China was making in the Mid 2000s. The next German round will be closer to Vacuum series, again far surpassing anything China makes, which you consider better, despite there being no numbers available to back that up.

You did the exact same with your second post, a bunch of pictures of Russian APFSDS from the times when China couldn’t even make APFSDS and was copying Russian designs.
you did the same with the engine, you post a picture and say “there you go it’s 20 years behind Chinese designs”
Do you realize that literally all helicopter, jet and missile engines/turbojets China uses are of Russian origin because they are better? And that China was copying Russians engines until the 2000s? How are current Chinese engines better when you have absolutely nothing to prove this. The discussion isn’t that Russia is behind the west, it’s that China is behind both of them. Russia still makes the best ammunition and armor (Vacuum and Malachit) of any tank producing country, while western electronics, engines, transmissions and sights are still the best.

I don’t doubt that China is catching up very rapidly to western and Russian tech, but it’s simply not there yet. Chinese defense industries are still a few years behind Russians in most categories, especially in tank making. And at least a decade behind still compared to American and European ones. Just 20 years ago literally all Chinese designs were French or Russian copies. Many of the things still are, but China has caught up quick and will surpass them, just not yet.

Anyways, we should get back on topic.

China may be the one of country who did the most research on Russia weapons, and first hand experience on almost all Russia weapons.

The claim 1000+ mm of pen/0 deg at 2km, I don't want to debunk, I don't know where the data comes from.

But one thing for sure, Russia military complex is famous on marketing. I never trust those numbers.

Chinese did a lot of research, we knew how to manipulate those data for marketing, but the truth is Russia invested much less.

US military budget 700-800 billions USD
China 250-300 billions USD
Russia 44-55 billions USD.

I don't think Americans and China lag behind because of low IQ, if they have the same level of IQ, the money itself can kill any chance that Russia take the lead.

Just take a look at Stealthy Fighter Jet, Destroyer, Russia far behind, lack of investment and technology.

 

[iLION12345_1]

China may be the one of country who did the most research on Russia weapons, and first hand experience on almost all Russia weapons.

The claim 1000+ mm of pen/0 deg at 2km, I don't want to debunk, I don't know where the data comes from.

But one thing for sure, Russia military complex is famous on marketing. I never trust those numbers.

Chinese did a lot of research, we knew how to manipulate those data for marketing, but the truth is Russia invested much less.

US military budget 700-800 billions USD
China 250-300 billions USD
Russia 440-550 billions USD.

I don't think Americans and China lag behind because of low IQ, if they have the same level of IQ, the money itself can kill any chance that Russia take the lead.

Just take a look at Stealthy Fighter Jet, Destroyer, Russia far behind, lack of investment and technology.

I believe Russian numbers the same as Chinese ones, because in the past Russia has backed up its numbers with tests, and other countries have tested their equipment.

Russia is slowly falling behind due to their economy now, especially after Soviet Union. China has surpassed Russia in naval tech yes. But J20 is just as unproven as SU57 for now, and T14 is still the better tank, though Russia is having issues producing both because they have no money. Their development is good because of their experience but it will not be for too long if their economic situation doesn’t improve.

the difference is that China is progressing much more rapidly than Russia and even the west, soon it will overtake both because it has the people and the money. J20/J31 and whatever tank China makes next will develop much further and be produced a lot more.
China has made more progress in the last decade than both combined. I don’t doubt Chinese technology like many people in the west who brush it off just as copies, but it is important to make a fair comparison. I personally hope in 10 years time China overtakes them both anyways. Because Pakistans advancement in this regard is tried to China too. So in that sense whatever lead Russia or the west had in the past will really not matter.
Sorry if I was a little rude earlier. I did not mean to be, and thank you for having a civil discussion

 

[vi-va]

I believe Russian numbers the same as Chinese ones, because in the past Russia has backed up its numbers with tests, and other countries have tested their equipment.

Russia is slowly falling behind due to their economy now, especially after Soviet Union. China has surpassed Russia in naval tech yes. But J20 is just as unproven as SU57 for now, and T14 is still the better tank, though Russia is having issues producing both because they have no money. Their development is good because of their experience but it will not be for too long if their economic situation doesn’t improve.

the difference is that China is progressing much more rapidly than Russia and even the west, soon it will overtake both because it has the people and the money. J20/J31 and whatever tank China makes next will develop much further and be produced a lot more.
China has made more progress in the last decade than both combined. I don’t doubt Chinese technology like many people in the west who brush it off just as copies, but it is important to make a fair comparison. I personally hope in 10 years time China overtakes them both anyways. Because Pakistans advancement in this regard is tried to China too. So in that sense whatever lead Russia or the west had in the past will really not matter.
Sorry if I was a little rude earlier. I did not mean to be, and thank you for having a civil discussion

Thank you, my Pakistan friend.

I hope the weapons development of Pakistan goes well, which need a stable government, a secure society, and prosper economy.

As long as both China and Pakistan stand firmly together, we both have a bright future.

Back to topic, I basically agree with you that India tank is 2nd generation, maybe 2nd+, but 3rd- generation.

In South Asia, VT-4 is good enough to counter balance India ones. If India upgrade their tanks, Pakistan can upgrade armor and ammunition as well.

 

[iLION12345_1]

Thank you, my Pakistan friend.

I hope the weapons development of Pakistan goes well, which need a stable government, a secure society, and prosper economy.

As long as both China and Pakistan stand firmly together, we both have a bright future.

Back to topic, I basically agree with you that India tank is 2nd generation, maybe 2nd+, but 3rd- generation.

In South Asia, VT-4 is good enough to counter balance India ones. If India upgrade their tanks, Pakistan can upgrade armor and ammunition as well.

I hope the same, as long as China and Pakistan are working together there’s a lot that can be done. Pakistan has a lot to learn from China.

Indians often make fun of “joint projects” but really everything made in the west is a join project because it’s simply cheaper and gives a better output. Maybe they just complain because no one wants to work with them, because all modern Chinese tech is in high demand

And that’s true, VT-4 and other Pakistani tanks too can easily be upgraded, Pakistan will only upgrade them when India starts to catch up, but until then China will be another generation ahead.

 

[vi-va]

Some more Russia ASPFDS development history pictures FYI:

View attachment 733894
Soviet 3BM-9 APFSDS


View attachment 733895
Soviet 3BM-15 APFSDS




View attachment 733885
Soviet 3BM-22 APFSDS



View attachment 733886
Soviet 3BM-32 APFSDS



View attachment 733887
Soviet 3BM-42 APFSDS



View attachment 733888
Soviet 3BM-42 APFSDS



View attachment 733889
Germany DM-13 APFSDS



View attachment 733890
Germany DM-13 APFSDS




View attachment 733891
US M829 APFSDS



View attachment 733892
US M829A2 APFSDS



View attachment 733893
British L23A1 APFSDS

APFSDS is no magic, billions of money, new materials, tens of thousands of test, new theory, and the cycle goes on, money, new materials, test, new theory.

Because of Soviet collapsed, Russia lack of investment, while the west and China keep investing, that's how it becomes today.

Armata is not mature at all. I can assure you Russia won't buy it in bulk. It need at least 5-10 years to be mature, most likely 10 years.

Russia electronic lag behind much more than other areas. Have you ever heard of Russia semiconductor chips? No.

Engine, transmission, come on. Germany is best so far.
View attachment 733879
Germany MT883Ka501


View attachment 733880
China150HB which is not the best China currently has. The best is in the ZTQ-15 tank.

Russia engine, transmission is at least 10-20 years behind.

Engine, transmission are no magic, billions of money, new materials, tens of thousands of test, new theory, and the cycle goes on, money, new materials, test, new theory.

Russia lack of investment, while the west and China keep investing, that's how it becomes today.

Comparison of WHA（Tungsten Heavy Alloy）and DU
说到穿甲弹不得不提钨铀之争，一般来说贫铀合金弹芯的侵彻性能在同等情况下较钨合金弹芯高10-15%，实验表明两者的明显区别在于贫铀合金材料的临界绝热剪切应变率和临界绝热剪切应变值较低，易于发射绝热剪切断裂，具有“自锐”效应，即穿甲侵彻过程中残余弹体不出现“蘑菇头”，导致侵彻阻力增大，侵彻力降低。

1. Pure W 纯钨
2. WHA（Tungsten Heavy Alloy）高密度钨合金
3. DU-3/Ti 一种贫铀合金（含Ti/V，钛/钒）

同等弹芯直径条件下，贫铀合金弹孔直径最小，穿甲阻力最小。

DU disadvantage
但是贫铀合金也有缺点，除了健康环保问题外，铀的熔点为1133°C，而钨的熔点在3370°C，熔点决定材料被高速冲击时的流变极限强度。贫铀合金的弹性模量约合普通钢相等，为钨合金的二分之一左右，也就是说钨合金的刚度比贫铀合金要大，以美制长径比30弹芯，10MJ动能为例，如果着速在1750m/s以上，那么贫铀合金的流变极限劣势就会开始显现，自锐性就会开始下降。



Penetration data 下图为不同材料的弹芯在不同着速下对不同材料目标的穿深线图。

1. WHA（Tungsten Heavy Alloy）高密度钨合金
2. DU（Depleted Uranium）贫铀
3. Steel 钢
4. Target 目标
5. BHN（Brinell Hardness Number）布氏硬度，后面的数字越大，材料越硬。

 

[LKJ86]

ZTZ-99A tank

 

[Inception-06]

ZTZ-99A tank

What he says about the US WW2 film, what he says abou the current middle eastern conflict äs related to tanks. How is thisVideo related to the VT-4 ?

 

[iLION12345_1]

Can anyone provide me with sources for the names or specifications of the thermals and the FCS? Like the range and performance and such?
Some members here are knowledgeable about these things but it’s hard to use their words as a source in a document or a video.

 

[Abid123]

Pakistan currently has 176 VT-4s in service and with 300 planned in total. In my opinion 300 is a low number. We have 160 1st generation Type-69 tanks and 400 1st generation Type 59 tanks. We need to desperately replace these 1st generation tanks with VT-4. I think Pakistan Army should consider 500 VT-4 tanks.

 

[Beast]

Pakistan currently has 176 VT-4s in service and with 300 planned in total. In my opinion 300 is a low number. We have 160 1st generation Type-69 tanks and 400 1st generation Type 59 tanks. We need to desperately replace these 1st generation tanks with VT-4. I think Pakistan Army should consider 750 VT-4 tanks.

I am not sure how long will it take to replaces those as these tank per pieces are at least $5 million each. It will take some time plus production capacity will also be another factor.

 

[Abid123]

I am not sure how long will it take to replaces those as these tank per pieces are at least $5 million each. It will take some time plus production capacity will also be another factor.

I have heard that the Type-99A only costs around 3 million USD. Is it true? Is the VT-4 or Type-99A better? It will probably take around 10 years+ to replace all of the 1st generation tanks. Also Al Khalid ll will enter service in 2022. It could be that Al Khalid ll is basically a pakistani version of the VT-4. So my 750 number of VT-4 is a little high. 500 VT-4 should be enough for Pakistan Army, considering that Al Khalid ll is coming next year....

 

[iLION12345_1]

I have heard that the Type-99A only costs around 3 million USD. Is it true? Is the VT-4 or Type-99A better? It will probably take around 10 years+ to replace all of the 1st generation tanks. Also Al Khalid ll will enter service in 2022. It could be that Al Khalid ll is basically a pakistani version of the VT-4. So my 750 number of VT-4 is a little high. 500 VT-4 should be enough for Pakistan Army, considering that Al Khalid ll is coming next year....

Type 99A is more expensive and superior to VT-4, Especially when it comes to protection and the advanced ammunition it can fire, but technology and sensory wise they are close. VT-4 (the Pakistani variant at least) may have better mobility.

AK-2 service is unlikely in 2022. AK-1 was just started last year (keep in mind AK-1 revealed in 2014 is not the same as the one that recently started production. The recent one was upgraded to make up for the late production.) Depending on what they want from the AK-2 we could see it anywhere from a couple of years to over 5 years later. But 2022 is too optimistic.

VT-4 will be inducted in large numbers, Likely 500+, if China makes more advanced versions of it, like VT-4A down the line, we will see Pakistan order that instead.

It will not take “10+” years to replace 1st Gen tanks. Type 59 is not in active service, most have been replaced by AZ and or are being replaced by VT-4, AK-1. Type 85 and UDs have been modernized too. Few type 69s remain in service, they will be gone in a couple of years at most, we will not be seeing any non-modern tank in service beyond 2025, by 10+ years we will be looking to replace Al-Zarrar.

 

[Jamie Brooks]

ZTZ-99A tank

Why does he say at 1:25 (整个对99A坦克来说呢) jiǔjiǔA instead of jiǔshíjiǔ A tank? Was it not Ninety nine A and rather called Nine Nine A ? Do Chinese follow this type of naming ? If you know the correct naming please enlighten me.