T-80 and T-85 MBTs of Pakistan along with Al Khalid and Al Zarrar

[Keshav Murali]

Thanks for the compliment you too are good thats why I am discussing with u.

You're welcome sir. I like discussion with people who are informed in these matters

Furthermore it is rare that tanks fight face to face so even for today M1a2 has around 600 mm in its weak parts that is sides or hull against an KE and reality almost all tank to tank battles the tanks now use KE or DU rounds to fight so of course The M1a2 isn't as good as it is taken in reality that it is invincible. what m1a2 makes more powerful is that its main gun power and Range that it first fires then the most modern tanks I believe it has defeated an Armour at the range of over 7 km with Target designator. but in Urban areas the tank engagement is around the radius of 2 km max even that is rare.

according to the Iraq war studies it was found the t 72 lion of Babylon had the first hits in face to face fight due to urban areas but the poor iraqi variant did not had enough power as any t72 of Russian and soviet era. My point is simple The Type 85IIAP can defeat M1A2 sep in urban areas at the range of 2 km but with one condition that is the abrams side armour is towards the gun sight of Type85IIAP at the range of atleast 1.8km which is good for urban areas. t72 of today can even at greater range fight abrams as t72 is improved at the marvellous range. What the Type 85IIAp lacks is its self protection that it wont survive abrams even at ranges beyond 3km . So its chance of fighting and survivability is only in urban areas.

True about weakspots. However, Abrams has only one weakspot in frontal area, gap between turret and hull that is so small that it is impossible to hit unless enemy tank is within 100 metres. Also, Abrams side armour is rated at 500+ and with TUSK upgrade it becomes about 620-650. That's the upgrades - ARAT ERA is effective - it is based on Kontact-5. So Abrams is still tough nut.

L/44 M256 of Abrams is nothing special these days, it has been surpassed by L/55(German), 140 mm NPzK(German), 125 mm 2A82(Russia), 125 mm "Vitiaz"(Ukraine), 152 mm 2A83(Russia) and 140 mm "Bagheera"(Ukraine). Only special thing is M829A3 penetrator. M829E4 is going to be even more formidable. US penetrators perform better than others due to sabot construction. For example, sabot of 120 mm KE round usually weighs 3-3.5 kg. However, M829A3,E4 sabot weighs around 2 kg thanks to light weight composites. So more muzzle energy is transferred to the penetrator and performance is more

Type 85-II should be able to defeat Abrams side armour without ERA at ranges of 2km but with ERA is tough since China doesn't have segmented penetrator. Heavy ERA disintegrates penetrators , so Germans, Russians and Americans developed segmented penetrator of which only first part will disintegrate when it impacts heavy ERA. Since ERA also is neutralized, remaining segments penetrate base armour layer. Ingenious isn't it? Segmented APFSDS rounds so far are:

3BM42 "Mango" - questionable (Soviet Union)

3BM42M/44M "Lekalo" - confirmed (Russia)

M829A3 - confirmed (USA)

M829E4 - unknown (USA, in-development)

3BM59/60 "Svinets -1/2" - confirmed (Russia, in-development)

DM53 - confirmed, 5 segments (Germany)

DM63 - confirmed (Germany)

Vityaz - There is doubt that this ammunition exists (Ukraine)

All Soviet/Russian/Chinese tanks have advantage at 3+ km since they have missiles, but still they have to hit side or rear armour.

Type 85-IIAP protection is comparable to T-72B, so it's not really very good for 21st century, but good for 80's and OK for 90's. As you say, it's survivability is poor in open areas.

Abrams in reality hasn't seen the war against any capable tank but has only fought t60 series of soviet era and t72 assembled in iraq with poor quality just 300mm of front armour and 60 mm of side armour that is just suicide for tank crews.

Abrams is capable tank, hasn't seen a proper challenge.

 

[Keshav Murali]

Stupid its t59s who r modernized to Al Zarrar standards. and we offer updates of t54/55 tanks to Al Zarrar standard.

Type 59 is direct copy of T-54A

 

[Umair Nawaz]

Type 59 is direct copy of T-54A

Yes its a chinese copy of russian made t54.

 

[alimobin memon]

You're welcome sir. I like discussion with people who are informed in these matters



True about weakspots. However, Abrams has only one weakspot in frontal area, gap between turret and hull that is so small that it is impossible to hit unless enemy tank is within 100 metres. Also, Abrams side armour is rated at 500+ and with TUSK upgrade it becomes about 620-650. That's the upgrades - ARAT ERA is effective - it is based on Kontact-5. So Abrams is still tough nut.

L/44 M256 of Abrams is nothing special these days, it has been surpassed by L/55(German), 140 mm NPzK(German), 125 mm 2A82(Russia), 125 mm "Vitiaz"(Ukraine), 152 mm 2A83(Russia) and 140 mm "Bagheera"(Ukraine). Only special thing is M829A3 penetrator. M829E4 is going to be even more formidable. US penetrators perform better than others due to sabot construction. For example, sabot of 120 mm KE round usually weighs 3-3.5 kg. However, M829A3,E4 sabot weighs around 2 kg thanks to light weight composites. So more muzzle energy is transferred to the penetrator and performance is more

Type 85-II should be able to defeat Abrams side armour without ERA at ranges of 2km but with ERA is tough since China doesn't have segmented penetrator. Heavy ERA breaks penetrators apart, so Germans, Russians and Americans developed segmented penetrator of which only first part will break when it impacts heavy ERA. Ingenious isn't it? Segmented APFSDS rounds so far are:

3BM42 "Mango" - questionable (Soviet Union)
3BM42M/44M "Lekalo" - confirmed (Russia)
M829A3 - confirmed (USA)
M829E4 - unknown (USA, in-development)
3BM59/60 "Svinets -1/2" - confirmed (Russia, in-development)
DM53 - confirmed, 5 segments (Germany)
DM63 - confirmed (Germany)
Vityaz - There is doubt that this ammunition exists (Ukraine)

All Soviet/Russian/Chinese tanks have advantage at 3+ km since they have missiles, but still they have to hit side or rear armour.

Type 85-IIAP protection is comparable to T-72B, so it's not really very good and as you say, it's survivability is poor in open areas.



Actually, Abrams is capable tank, hasn't seen a proper challenge.

Exactly.
Type 85 III or T72B if fought with Abrams their will be ofcourse victory from abrams side but their will be enough loss for americans to think twice before attacking. Side armour of M1A2 sep the most advanced is not more than 650mm even with Era. So No matter what M1A2 has to cover its cover its sides in engagement to fight any Modern force that is , Iran, Pakistan even if both had no more capable tank than type 85III or T72 as their wont be long range engagement as even in desert it is too mountaneous to engage each other at long range but at most 3km . take it this way you and I agree both that World war 2 taught several weaknesses of all the armaments a force has. t34 by soviet performed the most even greater than IS2 and KV 1 due to its small weight and size it could defeat the superior armoured and firpowered tank the "Panther" but in real engagments t34 performed well because their were rare front to front fights and t34 was mostly able to penetrate the side armour easily and yes in urban areas t34 flanked only from side or rear but never front.

 

[Keshav Murali]

Exactly.
Type 85 III or T72B if fought with Abrams their will be ofcourse victory from abrams side but their will be enough loss for americans to think twice before attacking. Side armour of M1A2 sep the most advanced is not more than 650mm even with Era. So No matter what M1A2 has to cover its cover its sides in engagement to fight any Modern force that is , Iran, Pakistan even if both had no more capable tank than type 85III or T72 as their wont be long range engagement as even in desert it is too mountaneous to engage each other at long range but at most 3km .

Okay. You've cut straight to the point. M1A2 has the most side armour of MBT so you can know how weak side armour is in tanks. This is because if composites have to be used in large amount on sides and rear, tank will become as big as PzKpfW VIII Maus and unsightly, too heavy for railways and all associated problems.

take it this way you and I agree both that World war 2 taught several weaknesses of all the armaments a force has. t34 by soviet performed the most even greater than IS2 and KV 1 due to its small weight and size it could defeat the superior armoured and firpowered tank the "Panther" but in real engagments t34 performed well because their were rare front to front fights and t34 was mostly able to penetrate the side armour easily and yes in urban areas t34 flanked only from side or rear but never front.

World War 2 taught the world that tactics matter more than the vehicles in armoured warfare. 51,000 T-34 were built, it is natural that they perform well.

KV-1 was big, unreliable, poor armament and bad armour. T-34 was small (cramped, very low comfort level) but had well designed armour layout. T-34 was in atleast twice as many numbers as German tanks, Germans might have had better training but they were overwhelmed. T-34 rarely defeated the Panther except when there were several T-34 at close range. You must know one thing, when Panther was introduced, the first Panther knocked out three T-34 from 2.2 km range where T-34 couldn't even see them. Panther was meant for long range "sniping". Panther had pathetic side armour, this was reason why T-34 was successful. Actually Shermans were more successful against Panther than T-34.

Also, if Panther II had entered service, (Panther II was Panther with better side and rear armour and likely better engine and a reliable final drive) it would have been best overall tank of the war. In fact, after WW2 ended, new Soviet designs were put through trials against captured Panther tanks till 1946!

 

[alimobin memon]

Okay. You've cut straight to the point. M1A2 has the most side armour of MBT so you can know how weak side armour is in tanks. This is because if composites have to be used in large amount on sides and rear, tank will become as big as PzKpfW VIII Maus and unsightly, too heavy for railways and all associated problems.



World War 2 taught the world that tactics matter more than the vehicles in armoured warfare. 51,000 T-34 were built, it is natural that they perform well.

KV-1 was big, unreliable, poor armament and bad armour. T-34 was small (cramped, very low comfort level) but had well designed armour layout. T-34 was in atleast twice as many numbers as German tanks, Germans might have had better training but they were overwhelmed. T-34 rarely defeated the Panther except when there were several T-34 at close range. You must know one thing, when Panther was introduced, the first Panther knocked out three T-34 from 2.2 km range where T-34 couldn't even see them. Panther was meant for long range "sniping". Panther had pathetic side armour, this was reason why T-34 was successful. Actually Shermans were more successful against Panther than T-34.

Also, if Panther II had entered service, (Panther II was Panther with better side and rear armour and likely better engine and a reliable final drive) it would have been best overall tank of the war. In fact, after WW2 ended, new Soviet designs were put through trials against captured Panther tanks till 1946!

Agreed !

I forgot to mention about the Era for M1 abrams their is an solution provided by chinese known as Bk 27 and 29 rounds one of these rounds is heat and other is APFSDS. These are three layer rounds provide the "segmented penetrator princple"... to defeat era .

 

[Keshav Murali]

Agreed !

I forgot to mention about the Era for M1 abrams their is an solution provided by chinese known as Bk 27 and 29 rounds one of these rounds is heat and other is APFSDS. These are three layer rounds provide the "segmented penetrator princple"... to defeat era .

Source??

AFAIK BK-27 is an aircraft cannon

 

[alimobin memon]

Source??

AFAIK BK-27 is an aircraft cannon

Type 85 Main Battle Tank
here

 

[alimobin memon]

salam to everyone I want to start discussion on that Pakistan has two other MBT other than Al Khalid and Al Zarrar and those tanks are T-85 IIAP 300 off these tanks are in service and T-80UD which were brought by Ukraine and were upgraded with turret off T-84 and we have 320 off these Tanks so would like to know about what kind off these tanks are for how long we would keep them and their comparison with tanks off our beloved neighbor India


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-80UD#Ukrainian_T-80UD

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_88_tank_(China)
@ANTIBODY @nuclearpak @Aeronaut @WebMaster @desertfighter and others

I think u have got the answer about Type 85 but about Al Khalid The Actual armor protection is classified. However it is confirmed that Al Khalid 1 incorporates a indigenous era that give Al Khalid 1 protection to with stand any advance tank at first hit.

 

[surya kiran]

@Keshav Murali and @alimobin memon and @DARKY

have always wanted to ask somebody this question and you chaps seem to be quite knowledgable. From what you chaps are discussing it seems each tank has a weak point based on its configuration on the battlefield. Would it not be intelligent to r&d and build a atgm which can intelligently detect tank type variant and attack the weakspot or before firing the information is fed into the missile and then fired?

 

[DARKY]

Type 85 II AP is in service with Pakistan Army Which were later Upgraded to III standard after the problems were resolved. The Type 85 Can defeat the Actual armour of T72 of Russian origin So does the T72 can defeat easily the Type 85 Armour.

T-72M1M Ajeya main armor (60-70degree front arc)

450-550mm vs KE plus ERA heavy 1st gen... added upto 100-150mm extra protection.

The best KE round in service with PA nazia DU 450-500mm penetration at 2km... only used on T-80UD and Al Khalid.

Jingoism has its place but you can be realistic at times.

AFA Type85III is concerned protection is Hardly above 300mm... It can be shot down by HEAT fired from T-72 at distance upto 3-4.5km but it is not accurate enough.. at such distances always.

 

[alimobin memon]

T-72M1M Ajeya main armor (60-70degree front arc)

450-550mm vs KE plus ERA heavy 1st gen... added upto 100-150mm extra protection.

The best KE round in service with PA nazia DU 450-500mm penetration at 2km... only used on T-80UD and Al Khalid.

Jingoism has its place but you can be realistic at times.

AFA Type85III is concerned protection is Hardly above 300mm... It can be shot down by HEAT fired from T-72 at distance upto 3-4.5km but it is not accurate enough.. at such distances always.

Darky dude first read my posts carefully... I said Type 85 has no good survivability and also i said has 300 mm of horrible armour. and I agreed that only early models of t72 are comparable. Did I mentioned the Ajeya or one with kontakt 5 era ? but type 85 has the ability to defeat atmost 600 mm and atleast 550 mm of armour with KE round. That means even with kotakt 1 armor. I never mentioned the Ajeya indeed its better man. cool out! What so jingo ! about it

Naiza was first DU by pak their is newer variant with 680 mm was announced back in 2010 now there is one more in development exceeding 680mm

 

[Kloitra]

but type 85 has the ability to defeat atmost 600 km and atleast 550 km of armour with KE round. That means even with kotakt 1 armor. I never mentioned the Ajeya indeed its better man. cool out! What so jingo ! about it

That's some penetration ability dude! What does it uses, few tonnes of anti-matter?

 

[alimobin memon]

@Keshav Murali and @alimobin memon and @DARKY

have always wanted to ask somebody this question and you chaps seem to be quite knowledgable. From what you chaps are discussing it seems each tank has a weak point based on its configuration on the battlefield. Would it not be intelligent to r&d and build a atgm which can intelligently detect tank type variant and attack the weakspot or before firing the information is fed into the missile and then fired?

If Rheinmetall hasn't even thought about it How can any country think about R&d ?

That's some penetration ability dude! What does it uses, few tonnes of anti-matter?

Well that is your issue that u under estimated the Type 85 but their was the time for pakistan it was the most advanced available tank for them and indeed it is a good tank but it lacks long range I think the max effective range is 3km that is less than t72 advanced models. By the way anti matter Nice joke

 

[Kloitra]

Well that is your issue that u under estimated the Type 85 but their was the time for pakistan it was the most advanced available tank for them and indeed it is a good tank but it lacks long range I think the max effective range is 3km that is less than t72 advanced models. By the way anti matter Nice joke

Even if you call it under-estimation, I find it hard to believe that any tank with existing or near future technology can penetrate that much armor....

defeat atmost 600 km and atleast 550 km of armour with KE round

On a serious note, it is mm not km.