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

[Viking 63]

So which bloody tank PA will be using in Cholistan Desert if everything is Failing??

 

[LeGenD]

So which bloody tank PA will be using in Cholistan Desert if everything is Failing??

Import the cutting-edge M1A2 SEP V3. Its engine is robust and equipped with a (self-cleaning) filter system to counter sand ingestion.

Just kidding.

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.

Thanks for your insight.

They had addressed the matter of sand ingestion by 1991: http://donaldsonaerospace-defense.c...F112255-Military-Ground-Vehicle-Equipment.pdf

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

@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.

The soviets suffered T-80 losses in Grozny not T-72.

That too due to several issues , parts, untrained crews for a brand new tank ... a gas guzzling turbine engine.

All these forced the soviets to go for the cheaper t-90 upgrade of t-72.. instead of the most advanced but expensive,gas guzzling T-80.

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.


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

My father commanded FC ... we sent troops to Armour School,Nowshehra for training..

 

[Fieldmarshal]

Even though the VT 4 passed the recent trial with flying colours n the Chinese r very eager for PA to induct it in nos.
But as things stand right now PA in not very keen to induct VT 4.

 

[Leclan]

i think not. china is not that eager. we can sell from VT1 to VT4, cheap one to the expensive one. PA just buy the affordable, effective ones. as Taihland already buy VT4 rather than oplot,it is proven a competable product

 

[royalharris]

We really don't care which one PA will induct, just buy the one Suitable for you when you need it

 

[Fieldmarshal]

i think not. china is not that eager. we can sell from VT1 to VT4, cheap one to the expensive one. PA just buy the affordable, effective ones. as Taihland already buy VT4 rather than oplot,it is proven a competable product

In the scheme of things , wt u think does not really matter.
Wt I am telling u is wts the actual ground reality n wts traspiring on the ground !

 

[FuturePAF]

In the scheme of things , wt u think does not really matter.
Wt I am telling u is wts the actual ground reality n wts traspiring on the ground !

For what reason is the PA not keen on buying the VT-4 at this time; is it the cost? any limitation in capabilities? or something else?

 

[HRK]

For what reason is the PA not keen on buying the VT-4 at this time; is it the cost? any limitation in capabilities? or something else?

first of all we must not think that PA is not interested in VT-4 retrial itself speak about the seriousness of Pakistan with this tank but before to have favourable decision for VT-4 Pakistan Army must deiced about the future of AK-I & AK-II.

 

[LeGenD]

The soviets suffered T-80 losses in Grozny not T-72.

Both T-80 and T-72 actually.

Sergei Lebov and Yuri Medved would only be allowed a short visit to the combat zone prior to their return flight to Moscow and the bumpy drive back to the Russian Armor Development Center at Kubinka. The report they were to present had very quickly become one of the highest priorities in the Russian Army. Their mission was to inspect as many of the damaged and destroyed Russian armored vehicles in Chechnya as was physically possible. In addition to the large number of destroyed light armored vehicles, the two inspectors were able to examine 23 various T-72 main battle tanks (MBTs) and 10 T-80BV premium tanks (PTs). While not all the damage done to these tanks by the rebels was severe, some of it was indeed catastrophic. In one case, two Russian T-72A MBTs destroyed during the battle around the presidential palace in Groznyy looked like some strange monument to the fighting with their disembodied turrets arranged neatly on the street next to their destroyed hulls. Lebov and Medved had the task of piecing together the cause of these decapitations. This type of work was not new to the inspectors. They had seen similar destruction on the battlefields of Desert Storm and in the former Yugoslavia. It was clear to both men that what ordnance scientists called a “munitions event” was the cause of the turret-hull separations. The ignition of the Russian tank’s onboard ammunition following penetration of the armor, would frequently cause an explosion powerful enough to blow the doomed tank’s turret off the hull and high into the air.

Source:

 

[Cookie Monster]

Domestic CH1000 integrated engine compartment, can provide both 1300HP and 1500HP. For Pakistan, yes!

View attachment 447089
Man, Pakistan don't have to ditch Oplot M for VT4. You can make it both. Or using VT4 tech to improve AK tanks.

Thailand royal army had both Oplot M and VT4.

View attachment 447096

That would be an unnecessary cost and complication. PA would do just fine with Al-Khalid and VT4(or OPLOT-M depending on which one gets selected) as the high/low mix. Having two tanks(along with all the support/maintenance facilities etc) is much simpler than having three. If OPLOT-M is selected instead of VT4, perhaps the VT4 tech can still find its way into upgraded Al-Khalid tanks. Last I heard they r working on Al-Khalid II.

If PA decides to ditch Ukraine for Chinese MBT ( Al-Haider ) project, i will say go fot T-99A if available .. Is China manufacturing any 1500 HP engine for MBT ? if yes which one ? and is it available for export ?

I agree. If Pak goes for a Chinese tank to fulfill the role of "Al-Haider", PA should go for T99 and not VT4. Since PLA would be inducting T99 in huge numbers, it might turn out to be an economically sound option. Not to mention that it would increase interoperability between China/Pak army.

 

[YeBeWarned]

@Signalian you are wasting your time with this Legendary guy .. i tried to debate with him and eventually i had to put him in the Ignore list everything to him is a D measuring Contest between his mighty America and rest of the world .. for him an American or its technology/system can't failed. . leave him alone this guy needs help

 

[LeGenD]

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.

I am not sure what your problem is but I have access to genuine reports and accounts to assess the performance of M1A1 Abrams MBT - not hearsay and stories. And this would be my final response to you in regards to this matter.

Advances in thermal imaging technology gave the Abrams crew the ability to find targets in all conditions, be it at night or through smoke and haze. Seeing the enemy is vital, but it is only the first step: the Abrams must also be able to destroy the target. Some aspects of hitting a target have been addressed in the Gun Accuracy section.

Another crucial contributor to meeting this challenge is the gun stabilization system. To improve accuracy of firing while the tank is moving, the Abrams, like most versions of the M60 Patton tank, is equipped with a gun turret drive stabilization system that isolates the gun platform from the effects of vehicle pitch, roll, and yaw. The system makes automatic adjustments to keep the gun trained on the target. This equipment is essential to the tank’s ability to fire accurately on the move. The M60A1 had such a system, which was designed and built by Cadillac Gage [178]. Subsequent redesign by Chrysler for the Abrams corrected for deficiencies in the M60A1 system [179]. Over rough terrain the M6OA1 had a stabilized hit probability of approximately 75 percent at 1,500 meters, at 15mph. Under the same conditions, the M1A1 has a hit probability of 95 percent at 2,200 meters at 25mph [180]. What really sets the Abrams’ lethality apart from the M60 is the digital fire-control system. The advances discussed above—improved munitions, higher muzzle velocities, gun stabilization—combine with the fire-control system to make the Abrams a singularly formidable threat.

The Abrams’ digital fire-control system can be thought of as combining two primary elements: the sensors that collect any information that might affect the flight of the round and the digital ballistic computer that integrates the information and generates an accurate firing solution. The sensors include the laser rangefinder, cant sensor, muzzle reference system, wind sensor, and atmospheric temperature and pressure sensors. Of these, the laser rangefinder and muzzle reference system in particular deserve further discussion. The laser rangefinder replaced the dual mirror-based coincidence rangefinder found on the M60A1 [181]. The M60’s rangefinder needed constant adjustment and was susceptible to temperature and moisture. It took a well-trained crew 7–10 seconds to put a round on target. The Abrams’ rangefinder, on the other hand, reduces the round-on-target time to 2–3 seconds from target acquisition and has a range three times greater than that of the M60A1 [182].

Declassified report: http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a476340.pdf

Disclosures of the declassified report are [100%] consistent with the accounts of admirable performance of M1A1 Abrams in the Persian Gulf War (1991): http://washingtonguard.colliertech.org/news/archive/fo-abram.shtml

M1A1 Abrams is a proven design and regarded among the best in the world. Same cannot be said for Type-55, Type-59, Type-69, T-62, T-72 and even T-80.

In-fact, Pakistan offered its domestically revered Al-Khalid MBT to Saudi Arabia and a unit was dispatched to the client country for trials in 2016. I am not sure what happened but the export variant of M1A2 Abrams came on top.

And in-case you didn't knew, Al-Khalid MBT feature (WESTERN) FCS and GCS for its main gun.

It is highly probable that US did not dispatch a genuine M1A1 for trials in Pakistan (could be inferior M1 variant). Of greater significance is the observation that Zia-ul-Haq and his team were assassinated soon after the trials. It is possible that the culprits - responsible for assassinating Zia-ul-Haq and his team - might also have sabotaged the trials in question. Who the bloody hell knows? If they can kill Zia-ul-Haq, they can sabotage some trials as well. Truth can be stranger then fiction at times.

If you wise enough - you will understand. If not - then "Earth is Flat."

@Signalian you are wasting your time with this Legendary guy .. i tried to debate with him and eventually i had to put him in the Ignore list everything to him is a D measuring Contest between his mighty America and rest of the world .. for him an American or its technology/system can't failed. . leave him alone this guy needs help

Some people will never learn.

A member here trying to tell me that only Soviet T-80 failed in Chechnya but I provided evidence of my assertion that both Soviet T-80 and T-72 failed in Chechnya and blow-outs of Soviet T-72 were similar to that of Iraqi T-72.

People like you are the source of problem in Pakistan actually - ill-mannered, easy-to-delude with conspiracy theories and rigid to the core; keep burying your heads in the sand. Your kind just like those Arab pagans who did not pay heed to teachings of Allah Almighty and his messenger.

Like I said - ignorance is a dead end.

 

[Signalian]

@Signalian you are wasting your time with this Legendary guy .. i tried to debate with him and eventually i had to put him in the Ignore list everything to him is a D measuring Contest between his mighty America and rest of the world .. for him an American or its technology/system can't failed. . leave him alone this guy needs help

Yeah, you are right, i had a discussion with him 2 years ago on same topic, this time i got offended when he dissed a Lt Col of Pakistan Army, while he himself is nothing, a nobody, someone who would never even appear on TV in his lifetime, an online member whom the world doesn't even know while he is accusing a military officer for being uninformed and lacking education, whereas that military officer has years of experience and has been brought on the TV program to spread knowledge. After i tried to put some sense into him, he started to talk more against Military Officers. Its better to discuss things with someone someone who has knowledge, unlike him.

The funniest part is when he said he goes for "what makes sense to him", i laughed my head off at his level of intellect and then i put him on ignore list.

 

[LeGenD]

Yeah, you are right, i had a discussion with him 2 years ago on same topic, this time i got offended when he dissed a Lt Col of Pakistan Army, while he himself is nothing, a nobody, someone who would never even appear on TV in his lifetime, an online member whom the world doesn't even know while he is accusing a military officer for being uninformed and lacking education, whereas that military officer has years of experience and has been brought on the TV program to spread knowledge. After i tried to put some sense into him, he started to talk more against Military Officers. Its better to discuss things with someone someone who has knowledge, unlike him.

The funniest part is when he said he goes for "what makes sense to him", i laughed my head off at his level of intellect and then i put him on ignore list.

FACT # 1: Pakistani Army does not use M1A1 Abrams MBT
FACT # 2: Pakistani military officials do not have much (exposure to) and experience with M1A1 Abrams MBT due to the obvious
FACT # 3: The military officer in question cited a Pakistani report to draw a comparison between the results of Type-59 MBT and M1A1 Abrams MBT - very ambiguous and questionable
FACT # 4: Nobody is infallible in his judgement 24/7

The TV show in question is definitely informative but might also be scripted. That Wajahat guy once tried to put his words in the mouth of an interviewee that Operation Neptune Spear was a facilitated raid. This is the reality of our celebrities.

I have nothing against a Pakistani military official, and normally respect their input. In-fact, I tend to highlight their remarks for matters I am not privy to. However, I have sufficient wisdom and confidence to question somebody who hasn't done his homework in regards to a topic that I happen to be familiar with.

It is impossible for Type-59 MBT to match (or exceed) the performance of M1A1 Abrams MBT because there is massive difference in the technological capabilities of the two, assuming that both MBT are functioning properly and manned by a trained crew. Pakistani report is ambiguous and a few members here pointed out what was wrong at the time of trials.

US Army use M1A1 Abrams MBT and Americans are in a much better position to comment on its performance and how it fared against Type-59 and several other MBT in the battlefield. The maximum I can do is to share relevant information from one of their declassified reports and accounts of Persian Gulf War (1991) to support my argument - why M1A1 Abrams MBT is better than Type-59 MBT and many others.

Do some of you understand the concept of education? Or is this an alien notion to some?

As for being a nobody and never appearing on TV - keeping assuring yourself, if this assumption helps you sleep better at night. Appearing on TV is not a benchmark of competence for anybody - it is about publicity and having the right connections.

One of the American military officials (i.e. Mike Page) was questioned about Al-Khalid MBT on quora and his response is below:

"The simple truth is that we don’t know how the Al-Khalid tank would fare in combat against the M1A2 Abrams.

From reading a description of the Al-Khalid it could be quite a dangerous adversary against any modern tank. There are three key points though that cause me to doubt the viability of the Al-Khalid:

1. It is built from components from a number of different Western countries. The fire control is western designed (not sure who manufactures it); the gun is of French design but built in Pakistan, ammunition is made in Pakistan, the engine is from Ukraine, the transmission from France. These are delicate matters because a foreign power can cut off supply of critical components on a moment’s notice. I have my doubts that the arrangement works as well as advertised.
2. It uses a three-man tank crew with an auto-loader for the main gun. This is a Soviet era design concept that has never proven to be effective in extended wartime scenarios. A tank is a difficult beast to maintain and operate. A three man crew cannot withstand the rigor of combat as well as a 4 man crew. A numerically larger crew is preferable to fewer - always.
3. The tank has no known history of combat. Without a combat record - one can only speculate that the tank will perform as advertised or expected. It may be 100% spot on - or, it may be shown to have glaring shortcomings that were not foreseen in development and peacetime operations. How are we to know?

Finally, the performance of the tank cannot exceed the performance of its crew. The selection, organization, training, leadership, and motivation of the tank crew is the number one determinant of which tank survives and which tank is defeated."

https://www.quora.com/How-would-the-Pakistani-Al-khalid-MBT-stand-against-Western-MBTs-like-Abrams

Very professional and neutral, if you ask me.