What's new

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

Why pak opted for VT 4 when pak could have opted for more advanced type 99 tanks

Because The ZTZ-99A is;
1. Not more advanced.
2. Not offered for export.
3. Does not share any parts or design language with existing AK series unlike the VT4, leading to easier logistics and training.
4. Is much heavier and hence not as good for Pakistani terrain.
5. Not offered for export.
6. Too expensive.

it was never actually an option.
 
.
Not that you needed to answer his post but since you did , please clarify some of these points.

Because The ZTZ-99A is;
1. Not more advanced.
How's that? Surely it is. Top of the line stuff in PLA service usually is compared to export maal. Pls explain.

3. Does not share any parts or design language with existing AK series unlike the VT4, leading to easier logistics and training.
What do you mean by 'design language' ?

In addition, a tank that is heavier and more expensive would be those things for a reason, no?
 
.
Not that you needed to answer his post but since you did , please clarify some of these points.


How's that? Surely it is. Top of the line stuff in PLA service usually is compared to export maal. Pls explain.


What do you mean by 'design language' ?

In addition, a tank that is heavier and more expensive would be those things for a reason, no?
Ignore the BS from @iLION12345_1

His saying is just like J-20 is not as advanced like J-10CE. He is very bitter PLA do not offer the best for export. But why? When Chinese spend their own effort and money make our products. We can decide what to offer or not. VT-4 is a step down from Type99A doesnt mean its bad compare to other western water down export or Russian monkey export. VT-4 is competitive as western export products.
 
. . .
We don’t know if 30 were retired, that was just an assumption, and if they were retired, then what about them? If we can’t keep them running, how can Ukraine? Pakistan can currently produce more spares and has more expertise in UDs than Ukraine does I’d say, their tank industry has nearly just died over the last decade.


They want anything they can get. They’d take Pakistans UDs over Abrams and Leos any day because they already use these, but they know getting abrams or Leo is more realistic right now.
We don't. There's a shortage of oil lubricant since Russia bombed the factory in Ukraine manufacturing it. It's a shitshow.
 
. .
You tell us? :p:

Supposed to be up-armoured, so how much would it weigh? Is it on the cards for PA? and when?
PA purchased 70ton capacity bridging equipment separately during when VT4 was acquired, and while considering other support assets in mind I think PA should be fine with a upto 60ton variant in terms of logistics. Previously all of PA's engineering capacity including Bridge layers, floating bridges etc were capped at 50ton before VT4.
 
.
PA purchased 70ton capacity bridging equipment separately during when VT4 was acquired, and while considering other support assets in mind I think PA should be fine with a upto 60ton variant in terms of logistics. Previously all of PA's engineering capacity including Bridge layers, floating bridges etc were capped at 50ton before VT4.
What about fixed, i.e. normal road bridges?
 
.
Not that you needed to answer his post but since you did , please clarify some of these points.


How's that? Surely it is. Top of the line stuff in PLA service usually is compared to export maal. Pls explain.


What do you mean by 'design language' ?

In addition, a tank that is heavier and more expensive would be those things for a reason, no?
To answer your first question, simply because it’s older. Over a decade older to be exact. I never said ZTZ-99A is worst than VT4, only that it’s not more technologically advanced. ZTZ-99A owing to its thicker armor and better design is definitely better protected than the VT4 and retains similar mobility despite this weight increase due to a more powerful engine output. It also has most of everything the VT4A1 does, just a bit older. Keep in mind both tanks fire the same ammo, and use the same ERA, but the base armor is thicker on the 99A.

VT4P (VT4A1) represents the best of Chinese tank technology at the moment when it comes to optics, stabilizers, FCS/GCS and electronic systems simply because it’s an entire decade newer. It’s still Chinese technology at the end of the day and they could easily put it on a new ZTZ-99.
I assume we will see an updated ZTZ-99A (ZTZ-99B) eventually with the hard kill APS systems China is offering for VT4 (GL5 and GL6, which are better than the APS system on the ZTZ-99A) and other technologies from the VT4A1 and perhaps even newer.

China does not have a need for the best tanks, they don’t have any adversaries with good tanks, the only two they have are india and Taiwan. Taiwan uses M60s and India uses stock T90S both of which look obsolete compared to a ZTZ-99A or a VT4A1, that’s why China doesn’t spent more money on upgrading its tanks, instead spending them on its navy or Air Force where it needs to contend with USA and needs cutting edge tech.

When China did need new tanks, particularly light tanks as seen in Ladakh, they developed the ZTQ-15, which is a very good light tank, I’d say it is also technologically ahead of the ZTZ-99A, again, simply because it’s newer, not because it’s better, surely the 99A has much better firepower and armor, it’s just nearly 12 years older.

And by design language I mean the fact that the VT4 is based on the VT1/Al-Khalid design, it retains the same basic design with upgrades, it’s the same shape, very similar layout and controls etc. The 99 is based on an entirely different design, I’m willing to bet there is significant commonality in the smaller parts of VT4 and AK, which is saving HIT quite some bother right now. Wouldn’t be the case with ZTZ-99.

ZTZ-99 is heavier because it’s bigger, has more armor, it’s more expensive because it’s not meant for export, which means China has to set up a new production line for it to cater for export customers, it can’t use the VT4 production line to produce those, it’s also more expensive because if China wants to order 99As for itself, then it has an issue with parts delivery. These are the seemingly little logistical things nobody thinks about, but are actually what dictate the cost of something. Let me put it like this, if I asked China to build me a JF-17 from scratch, it might cost them more than building a J-10C, despite the massive capability and size difference between the two, simply because China has an active J-10C production line, but not a JF-17 one. Moreover, we are producing VT4 locally, on the same machines and factories as AK, would not be possible with ZTZ-99, new parts, new manuals, new designs, all of this adds to the cost, and that’s only if we get ToT for that, we had to negotiate a lot to get full ToT for VT4 already.

Not always the case. Z-10ME is leagues ahead of Z-10
China only spends enough money on something as it needs, if something is beyond the capability it requires, it will not spend money on it, if anything PLA downgraded Z-10s before inducting them simply because they didn’t need the added capabilities, nobody around them had better Gunships in such numbers, the money can be better used elsewhere. The Chinese and the PLA are extremely smart with their spending, as they should be, when running an armed forces that massive.

The export customers (Pakistan in this case) needed more capabilities than PLA did, because for us the Z-10 was going to be the top of the line thing, so they added them for us, and once PLA itself trialed the Z-10M and ME. They actually added some of its upgrades that they liked to their own Z-10Ks as well.
 
.
You tell us? :p:

Supposed to be up-armoured, so how much would it weigh? Is it on the cards for PA? and when?
What do we know about VT4A1?
Everything, Because Pakistan is the reason the VT4A1 was created.

Pakistan did two trials for the VT4 and Oplot. In the first trials, the tanks were sent as offered by Ukraine and China, in the second, Pakistan asked both countries to upgrade the tanks according to the PAs specifications before sending them again, the result of that upgrade for the VT4 was what we see in the PA today, it didn’t just get new ERA, it got a whole host of upgrades. Comparing the Original VT4 (that Thailand and Nigeria bought) to the ones in the PA is like comparing Al-Khalid to Al-Khalid-1, it’s basically a new machine, and it came about because as always, Pakistan army wanted more, and China was more than happy to oblige to upgrade the machine in order to secure a massive export order. Before that, only the base model VT4 was offered for export.

And around a year after Pakistan got its upgraded VT4s, now VT4A1 is suddenly for export, and it has most of the upgrades that the Pakistani model did. That’s exactly how it went down the Z-10MEs development too.

In short, PA already operates VT4A1, it was the launch customer, everyone else only got offered it a year later.

You tell us? :p:

Supposed to be up-armoured, so how much would it weigh? Is it on the cards for PA? and when?
VT4 with FY-2 (original VT4) is around 52-53 tons. VT4A1 with FY-IV as in PA service is around 54-55 tons without the Side ERA equipped. Well below the 70 ton limit for PAs new bridgelayers, which were bought specifically for this tank, as before this we had no machine exceeding 50 tons and no bridgelayers capable of handling that either.
 
.
As for what upgrades PAs VT4s got, they’ve already been discussed in this thread before.
 
. .
Everything, Because Pakistan is the reason the VT4A1 was created.

Pakistan did two trials for the VT4 and Oplot. In the first trials, the tanks were sent as offered by Ukraine and China, in the second, Pakistan asked both countries to upgrade the tanks according to the PAs specifications before sending them again, the result of that upgrade for the VT4 was what we see in the PA today, it didn’t just get new ERA, it got a whole host of upgrades. Comparing the Original VT4 (that Thailand and Nigeria bought) to the ones in the PA is like comparing Al-Khalid to Al-Khalid-1, it’s basically a new machine, and it came about because as always, Pakistan army wanted more, and China was more than happy to oblige to upgrade the machine in order to secure a massive export order. Before that, only the base model VT4 was offered for export.

And around a year after Pakistan got its upgraded VT4s, now VT4A1 is suddenly for export, and it has most of the upgrades that the Pakistani model did. That’s exactly how it went down the Z-10MEs development too.

In short, PA already operates VT4A1, it was the launch customer, everyone else only got offered it a year later.


VT4 with FY-2 (original VT4) is around 52-53 tons. VT4A1 with FY-IV as in PA service is around 54-55 tons without the Side ERA equipped. Well below the 70 ton limit for PAs new bridgelayers, which were bought specifically for this tank, as before this we had no machine exceeding 50 tons and no bridgelayers capable of handling that either.
Thanks, your posts are informative. However, according to this army recognition article,

https://www.armyrecognition.com/def..._tank_with_more_protection_and_firepower.html

the changes in Vt-4A1 include a hard kill APS, drone launching capability and the below....

"The VT4A1 seems to be fitted with a new armor package, in fact, the design of the front and sides of the turret are different from the original VT4. The sides of the hull are also fitted with new armor plates which protect the entire upper part of the suspension. The VT4A1 maintains the original suspension consisting of six large dual rubber-tired road wheels with the drive sprocket at the front, idler at the rear, and track return rollers.

The roof of the turret is also fitted with a new ERA (Explosive Reactive Armor) to increase the protection of the tank against aerial or drone attacks. The tank seems also to be fitted with a new panoramic sight."


Do pakistani vt-4 have these changes especially different design for front and sides of turret and armour on turret roof?

Wouldn't changes to turret design be visible to defence observers given photos/videos of Pakistani VT-4's are available?
 
Last edited:
.
Thanks, your posts are informative. However, according to this army recognition article,

https://www.armyrecognition.com/def..._tank_with_more_protection_and_firepower.html

the changes in Vt-4A1 include a hard kill APS, drone launching capability and the below....

"The VT4A1 seems to be fitted with a new armor package, in fact, the design of the front and sides of the turret are different from the original VT4. The sides of the hull are also fitted with new armor plates which protect the entire upper part of the suspension. The VT4A1 maintains the original suspension consisting of six large dual rubber-tired road wheels with the drive sprocket at the front, idler at the rear, and track return rollers.

The roof of the turret is also fitted with a new ERA (Explosive Reactive Armor) to increase the protection of the tank against aerial or drone attacks. The tank seems also to be fitted with a new panoramic sight."


Do pakistani vt-4 have these changes especially different design for front and sides of turret and armour on turret roof?

Wouldn't changes to turret design be visible to defence observers given photos/videos of Pakistani VT-4's are available?
Hard kill APS has been offered on VT4 since day one, including on the original (GL-5 APS) So has drone launching capability, both are things nobody will buy with the tank, nor did Pakistan. They’re optional extras that can be purchased and put on later at any time, but are not realistic to buy when you don’t have enough money. Right now PA needs to induct these as fast as possible to replace obsolete Type 59s and 69s, that means forgoing expensive extra equipment, but surely in the Future PA plans to buy these add onns. Not only for VT4, but also it’s older models.
The VT4A1 is offered with a newer GL6 hard kill APS. Both GL5 and GL6 have been offered to PA already, GL6 was offered to PA even before it was available on the market. if we had more money, we’d be buying that right now for all our tanks I’m sure.

And yes, PAs VT4s have all those changes (and more), we’ve already discussed them many times in this thread when the tanks were first revealed. Just search up a photo of a Thai VT4 and then a PA VT4 and you’ll see what I mean.
All of those changes were seen for the first time on PAs VT4s, not VT4A1, VT4A1 is simply the PAs version of the VT4 being offered for export to other countries, it’s just that no foreign news sources reported on it, army recognition can only see the changes on the outside of the tank however, there’s many upgrades inside too that were discussed here.

Ignore the BS from @iLION12345_1

His saying is just like J-20 is not as advanced like J-10CE. He is very bitter PLA do not offer the best for export. But why? When Chinese spend their own effort and money make our products. We can decide what to offer or not. VT-4 is a step down from Type99A doesnt mean its bad compare to other western water down export or Russian monkey export. VT-4 is competitive as western export products.
So glad I muted you long ago. PDF has felt very peaceful since.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom