Pakistan's Al Khalid Tank Gets Updated

[BanglaBhoot]

Pakistan's Al Khalid Tank, widely considered one of the most competent Main Battle Tanks (MBTs) in the global arms market, has received an update, according to GrandeStrategy sources. This new version of Al-Khalid is said to be ready for production, although orders are yet to be placed for production to begin. The Al Khalid II is said to have a new armor that has been tested to defeat all known 120mm and 125mm rounds. This "special" armor is a major technological breakthrough for Pakistan. The tank has received a new transmission and revised electronic turret control.

The Al Khalid II has a new Integrated Battle Management System (IBMS) and active threat-protection system, the latter being an upgrade from the passive system in the earlier model. The tank is now perhaps the most heavily weaponized per tonnage of any tank, being able to carry 49 125mm rounds, 1,500 12.7mm and 7,100 7.62mm rounds.

Rumors suggest that Saudi Arabia is ready to procure the Al Khalid II but not going through with the deal because of differences with the political administration in Pakistan. Rumors also indicate that these relate to the kickbacks demanded by Pakistan's infamously corrupt President Asif Zardari, nicknamed "Mr.10%".

Grande Strategy: Pakistan's Al Khalid Tank Gets Updated

 

[Patriot]

This is true, according to a very senior member on PAKDEF..PA has done the following with Al Khalid Tank.

1- Trials at 55 C were successful with very fine dust not making any impediment on the engine and performance of the tank.

2- Turret power control now is all electrically controlled backed by manual control (KSA)

3- A new European Renk LSG 3000 transmission has been incorporated (KSA)

4- There is some type of ‘special’ armor has been installed. During trails this ‘special’ armor (on the hull and turret) tested through live firing which defeated all types of 120 & 125 mm tank projectiles. (PA & KSA)

5- Modifications have been completed which resulted in increasing the 125 mm rounds from 39 to 49

6- Ammo storage for 12.7 & 7.62 mm has increased from 1,000 to 1,500 and 4,000 to 7,100 rounds respectively, thus, making Al-Khalid the most heavily weaponized tank in the world.

7- The power pack (engine, transmission & cooling system) can be removed in 30 minutes and reinstalled in 35 minutes.

8- KSA Al-Khalid will be equipped with A/C, APU, DDP (PA also), IBMS (PA also), and active threat-protection system

 

[arslan_treen]

^ great news for pakistan i just hope ppp gov can utllise the Nawaz sharif card now as he has the best relation with ksa !!!

 

[owais.usmani]

I doubt Saudi Arabia will buy Al-Khalid. They always go for the most expensive stuff avalaible in the market.....................
................which obviously, Al-Khalid is not.

 

[owais.usmani]

I have got a small question, if any military professional here can answer: Given the extensive armor upgradation Al Khalid has got as has been mentioned above, would the new Al Khalid tank would be able to sustain a direct attack from a modern anti tank missile such as Hellfire? I mean, in case of a hit, would the crew survive?

Thank you.

 

[H2O3C4Nitrogen]

I doubt Saudi Arabia will buy Al-Khalid. They always go for the most expensive stuff avalaible in the market.....................
................which obviously, Al-Khalid is not.

They have Abraham MBTs . They did showed interest but they preffer to buy US milletery Hardware.

 

[owais.usmani]

I have got a small question, if any military professional here can answer: Given the extensive armor upgradation Al Khalid has got as has been mentioned above, would the new Al Khalid tank would be able to sustain a direct attack from a modern anti tank missile such as Hellfire? I mean, in case of a hit, would the crew survive?

Thank you.

bump bump, any military professional, senior member, anyone!!

atleast tell me if it is a stupid question!!

 

[niaz]

I have got a small question, if any military professional here can answer: Given the extensive armor upgradation Al Khalid has got as has been mentioned above, would the new Al Khalid tank would be able to sustain a direct attack from a modern anti tank missile such as Hellfire? I mean, in case of a hit, would the crew survive?

Thank you.

Hellfire II in its anti tank version is specifically designed to destroy advanced/reactive armour. It is has a fragmentation warhead. The answer to you question is probably ‘No’

 

[Penguin]

bump bump, any military professional, senior member, anyone!!

atleast tell me if it is a stupid question!!

AGM-114A through AGM-114E Hellfire
Target: Tanks, armored vehicles.
Warhead: 8 kg (18 lb) shaped charge HEAT.
> Can't deal with Explosive Reactive Armor

AGM-114F 'Interim Hellfire'
AGM-114K Hellfire II
AGM-114L Longbow Hellfire
AGM-114P Hellfire II
Target: All armored threats
> all have a 9 kg (20 lb) tandem shaped charge HEAT warhead.
> these can all defeat Explosive Reactive Armor

AGM-114M Hellfire II
Target: Bunkers, light vehicles, urban (soft) targets and caves
Warhead: Blast fragmentation/incendiary
> Not intended to deal with armor (but probably could, though not bij penetration but by fire)

AGM-114N Hellfire II
Target: Enclosures, ships, urban targets, air defense units
Warhead: Metal augmented charge (MAC) (Thermobaric)
> not intended to deal with armor (but probably could, though not by penetration but rather by overpressure)

AGM-114 Hellfire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Mercenary]

I would be more concerned with some of the Russian missiles that India has.

They were devastating against the Israeli Tanks in Lebanon in 2006.

 

[Penguin]

Russian Anti-Armour Weapons and Israeli Tanks in Lebanon
...
The Kornet-E and Metis-M systems, with their much higher level of effectiveness, were clearly present in very small numbers, but accounted for the majority of Israeli losses. This allows one to conclude that Israel made an issue of the possession of these new systems by Hezbollah mostly for political, rather than strictly military, reasons. On the other hand, if Hezbollah had a large number of Kornet-E and Metis-M systems, the Israeli tank attack in Lebanon could have been completely repelled. Modern Russian weapons proved to be quite effective against the newest Western equipment.

The old types of anti-tank guided?missile systems have shown themselves to be extremely ineffective. And since the majority of anti-tank forces in the world are equipped with precisely this old generation of missile systems, the results of recent warfare in Lebanon should sound an alarm, and provoke considered reflection regarding the purchase of modern anti-tank weapons, such as the Kornet-E.

[link not working]

 

[nightrider_saulat]

indian t-90 bhisma are no match to our superior al-khalids
in any sense
i think T-80UD vs T-90 would be a real tough competition in any future indo-pak war

 

[echo 1]

I do not think we should to overconfident with our tank nightrider_Sultan, Im not saying our tank is any lesser of a tank compared to other tanks heck our tank crews were able to survive in an Al- Zarrar from a direct IED attack so I dont think our Al-Khalid should have any probles but lets not give our Indian counterparts an excuse to say anything.

 

[Beskar]

I would be more concerned with some of the Russian missiles that India has.

They were devastating against the Israeli Tanks in Lebanon in 2006.

Indeed. But it wasn't just a single kind of ATGM, Hezbollah procured ATGMs from various sources during the 2006 war.

Some of them were;

Russian Kornet ATGMs.

The elderly yet aging Russian Sagger ATMGs with a 24 pound missile with range of 3000 meters. The missile was driven to its target using a "Joystick" controller. These were also heavily used against the Israeli's back in the "Yom Kippur" war by Egyptian forces.

Iranian's sent TOW missiles from the 1970's.

Russian 9M111 Fagot.

And finally, Syria sent the French made MILAN ATGM which has a 35 pound launch unit, firing a 16 pound, wire guided missile, with a maximum range of 2,000 meters.

I believe Indians currently are using the advanced upgrade of MILAN ATGMs. According to wiki;

Around 30,000 built under license by Bharat Dynamics. Indian Army has recently placed an order of approx USD 120 million for 4,100 Milan-2T ATGMs.

MILAN uses a tandem HEAT warhead that can easily destroy ERA plates on any battle tank. Trouble for Al-Zarrar but not sure what it'll do to Al-khalid-II's "Special" armour.

As for the 2006 Lebanon war, ATGM's (Both latest and elderly) proved deadly against Israeli's modern battle tank, The Merkava.

To better understand the effects of ATGM's on armour, here's an extract from a report published by Israel (State-sources aren't always reliable) regarding armour damage from ATGMs during the 2006 Israel-Hezbollah conflict. Actual numbers may vary.

Of the 23 members of the armored corps killed in action, 15 were killed by ATGMs (Anti-Tank Guided Missiles), and seven by mines. The cause of death for the other 1 is not recorded specifically. Most probably gunfire hitting a vehicle commander with his head out of a hatch to get a better view of the situation. Over half of the armor casualties are attributable to just 3-4 incidents. The ATGM Merkava tank deaths are all accounted for by just 6-7 hits.

There were 14 APCs (armored personnel carriers) hit by ATGMs. In two of these incidents, seven troops in the vehicles were killed. APCs got perforated 11 times. The APCs involved were Achzarits (rebuilt, turretless, T-55 tanks) and Pumas (rebuilt, turretless, Centurion tanks). Three APCs hit mines, killing 5 infantrymen in two incidents (4 in one vehicle). Some 90 percent of these APC casualties all occurred in one night. In comparison, 14 infantrymen were killed by ATGMs fired at buildings. The vast majority of the infantry casualties were still caused by bullets, grenades, and shell fire (including PRGs).

Despite the many hundreds of engagements, there are only 8-9 recorded incidents where Hezbollah ATGM fire was able to cause deaths inside armored vehicles, and four times where AT fire killed troops in buildings.

Another extract from a different source;

The Israelis, as they have in all past wars, collected detailed information on each tank that was hit by enemy fire. Israel won't, for obvious reasons, release all this information. But they have provided some data. There were "several hundred" Merkavas sent into southern Lebanon in 2006. Of those, ten percent were hit by enemy fire (including mines and roadside bombs). Merkava faced modern anti-tank guided missiles (ATGM) for the first time in 2006. Only 18 tanks were seriously damaged, and only a third of those were from several hundred ATGMs fired by Hizbollah. Only two of the 18 heavily damaged tanks were destroyed, and both of those were damaged by roadside bombs. In those two cases, the tank was over the bomb when it was detonated.

 

[blain2]

T-90s, Al-Khalids, T-84s...the only difference between these tanks would be how well trained the AC crews and leadership are if put to test. Effectively employing armour is far more important than just comparing tanks that are nearly equal in performance and firepower.