What's new

T90 Compared with Al Khalid

You made the claim that the T-90 is overhyped by Russians, you made the claim that the T-90 can not withstand 700mm penetration even with ERA. That was proven to be a lie, the T-90 withstood hits from a Kornet that according to the manufacture can penetrate 1200mm armor. Even without ERA the T-90 withstood anti tank weapons capable of 650mm RHA. Clearly you lied.

As for your claim that "no apfsds penetrators were used", open your eyes and read my source again, they were used:



APFSDS
  • T-90: ERA-equipped target could not be penetrated. Furthermore, after firing the crew entered the vehicle, activated it and was able to execute the firing sequence.
    Without ERA, one round penetrated.
  • T-80U (data available only for stripped target): One round almost penetrated (3mm hole in the inner lining, no visible equipment damage); two penetrated to 1/2 thickness; one missed the target completely; one hit the gun.



Your other point about the T-80UD having superior armor to the T-90--the T-80U in that test uses the same armor as the T-80UD and it was clearly inferior to the T-90 in armor penetration testing. I don't care about the "478BE", your tactic is simple, you make a claim where you outright lie then start either avoiding proving your claim with sources or you tap dance around your claim and change the subject into something else, you never mentioned anything about a Ukrainian built 478BE. You mentioned T-80UD, so top trying to tap dance your way out of a lie by mentioning another tank altogether.

Also in your picture of a supposed hit to the Al-Khalid proves nothing, we can't even see if it really is an Al-Khalid, lets even say that it is true, your tactics are deceitful, on one hand you posted pictures of a T-90 with damage where you claimed the T-90 was penetrated even though you provided no proof, on the other hand you posted pictures of a hole in a supposed Al-Khalid that never penetrated. There is also a question of APFSDS penetrators, Pakistani APFSDS rounds are less then spectacular.

Yep, as I thought, u r clearly losing it, surf back a few pages and dig out which t-80ud I talked about and under what "pretext". I am literally inclined to believe you are losing your cool as well as the argument. Which penetrators were used can you name them? There is a difference between a HEAT round and a apfsds u know right?

And the funny bit, the picture was taken by me, and is off the alkhalid frontal armour being tested, and trust me, it is the alkhalid armour, not m1 armour :rofl:

Link to the post:
https://defence.pk/threads/pa-tanks-comparison-with-contempory-tanks.22400/page-42page-42
 
.
You made the claim that the T-90 is overhyped by Russians, you made the claim that the T-90 can not withstand 700mm penetration even with ERA. That was proven to be a lie, the T-90 withstood hits from a Kornet that according to the manufacture can penetrate 1200mm armor. Even without ERA the T-90 withstood anti tank weapons capable of 650mm RHA. Clearly you lied.

As for your claim that "no apfsds penetrators were used", open your eyes and read my source again, they were used:



APFSDS
  • T-90: ERA-equipped target could not be penetrated. Furthermore, after firing the crew entered the vehicle, activated it and was able to execute the firing sequence.
    Without ERA, one round penetrated.
  • T-80U (data available only for stripped target): One round almost penetrated (3mm hole in the inner lining, no visible equipment damage); two penetrated to 1/2 thickness; one missed the target completely; one hit the gun.



Your other point about the T-80UD having superior armor to the T-90--the T-80U in that test uses the same armor as the T-80UD and it was clearly inferior to the T-90 in armor penetration testing. I don't care about the "478BE", your tactic is simple, you make a claim where you outright lie then start either avoiding proving your claim with sources or you tap dance around your claim and change the subject into something else, you never mentioned anything about a Ukrainian built 478BE. You mentioned T-80UD, so top trying to tap dance your way out of a lie by mentioning another tank altogether.

Also in your picture of a supposed hit to the Al-Khalid proves nothing, we can't even see if it really is an Al-Khalid, lets even say that it is true, your tactics are deceitful, on one hand you posted pictures of a T-90 with damage where you claimed the T-90 was penetrated even though you provided no proof, on the other hand you posted pictures of a hole in a supposed Al-Khalid that never penetrated. There is also a question of APFSDS penetrators, Pakistani APFSDS rounds are less then spectacular.
"Abay bhai, kin jahilon ke saath larr rahe ho?" - I think a senior member got mixed up and asked this question to the wrong party !!

I am literally inclined to believe you are losing your cool as well as the argument.
But the fact is @ptldM3 is providing with relevant sources which proves his point, and though you started strong but we saw you doing just evasive maneuvers in the last page.

:offpost::offpost::offpost::offpost::offpost:
literally inclined
inclined-1266945462.jpeg

Shouldn't it be "Figuratively"??
 
.
Yep, as I thought, u r clearly losing it, surf back a few pages and dig out which t-80ud I talked about and under what "pretext". I am literally inclined to believe you are losing your cool as well as the argument. Which penetrators were used can you name them? There is a difference between a HEAT round and a apfsds u know right?

And the funny bit, the picture was taken by me, and is off the alkhalid frontal armour being tested, and trust me, it is the alkhalid armour, not m1 armour :rofl:

Link to the post:
https://defence.pk/threads/pa-tanks-comparison-with-contempory-tanks.22400/page-42page-42



I'm losing my cool? I am not the one making claims that are literally all lies. When will you acknowledge that you were wrong, or flat out lied about the T-90 protection level? Most of your claims are opinions that you can not back with sources if your life depended on it. The T-90 withstood being hit by a weapon that can penetrate 1200mm armor, you claim that the T-90 can not even withstand a 700mm with ERA. Clearly you were caught lying.

As for the T-90 that was tested we specifically know what type of RPG's and anti tank missiles it was hit with, what we don't know exactly is what type APFSDS round was used but the author stated it was likely a 3BM42. As for HEAT and APDSDS i know the difference, and never have i hinted that i did not know the difference, so why ask such a dumb question?

Your link does not work either and who said anything about the armor being an Abrams? You need some sleep you are imagining things.
 
Last edited:
.
I'm losing my cool? I am not the one making claims that are literally all lies. When will you acknowledge that you were wrong, or flat out lied about the T-90 protection level? Most of your claims are opinions that you can not back with sources if your life depended on it. The T-90 withstood being hit by a weapon that can penetrate 1200mm armor, you claim that the T-90 can not even withstand a 700mm with ERA. Clearly you were caught lying.

As for the T-90 that was tested we specifically know what type of RPG's and anti tank missiles it was hit with, what we don't know exactly is what type APFSDS round was used but the author stated it was likely a 3BM42. As for HEAT and APDSDS i know the difference, and never have i hinted that i did not know the difference, so why ask such a dumb question?

Your link does not work either and who said anything about the armor being an Abrams? You need some sleep you are imagining things.

Let me help you with AK armour pics...tests were conducted in early 2001


YfiP785.png
 
.
Let me help you with AK armour pics...tests were conducted in early 2001


YfiP785.png



All i see is a flash which could be anything and knowing your history of dishonesty i would not be surprised if it has nothing to do with the Al-Khalid, an i do not care if it was real, you are free to believe the Al-Khalid can drive vertically up walls and on water for all i care. what matters is that you lied about the T-90 penetrations figures going as far as claiming that the Russians exaggerate T-90 figures. Just be a man and admit you lied and then don't do it again. Furthermore, i noticed you quickly dropped your claim that Russia can not maintain even an engine with 1250hp yet i provided proof that they have an engine with over 2000hp, not only that but it has better fuel efficiency then it's Ukrainian counterpart even though it has 50% more cylinders. Unlike many other members your claims do not go unchecked.
 
.
another just before the penetrator was fired...notice six layers as installed inside the composite armour cavity...


3yh7onn.png


All i see is a flash which could be anything and knowing your history of dishonesty i would not be surprised if it has nothing to do with the Al-Khalid, an i do not care if it was real, you are free to believe the Al-Khalid can drive vertically up walls and on water for all i care. what matters is that you lied about the T-90 penetrations figures going as far as claiming that the Russians exaggerate T-90 figures. Just be a man and admit you lied and then don't do it again. Furthermore, i noticed you quickly dropped your claim that Russia can not maintain even an engine with 1250hp yet i provided proof that they have an engine with over 2000hp, not only that but it has better fuel efficiency then it's Ukrainian counterpart even though it has 50% more cylinders. Unlike many other members your claims do not go unchecked.


dont be so defensive mate, there is more to come. i am yet to complete my argument on fire control and apfsds penetrators you know :coffee:
 
.
another just before the penetrator was fired...notice six layers as installed inside the composite armour cavity...


3yh7onn.png





Stop avoiding the questions, you lied about the T-90 armor figures, and many other things. Do you want me to pull up your old quotes and show everyone with actual sources that you lied on many occasions?

another just before the penetrator was fired...notice six layers as installed inside the composite armour cavity...






dont be so defensive mate, there is more to come. i am yet to complete my argument on fire control and apfsds penetrators you know :coffee:


Stop avoiding the topic, you keep dogging questions, or to be precise changing topics once you are caught in a lie.


Spare everyone your arguments about the Al-Khalid having a superior fire control your last proof consisted of a facebook video of a Type-59 shooting at a mountain. I can only guess your APFSDS arguments and what you will make up next.
 
.
Stop avoiding the questions, you lied about the T-90 armor figures, and many other things. Do you want me to pull up your old quotes and show everyone with actual sources that you lied on many occasions?

Iit is you who is seeking a hiding route not me, i am still here

you proved nothing regarding engine reliability and issues related to the performance to the V series and i mean NOTHING! the only thing u gave was a freaking company brochure/ I got no answer why the might V seris failed miserably in india where it was suppose to perform better right, that too repeatedly, but the rival 6td prved its valour in the same desert in pakistan??

Regarding the fire control system, the t-90 FCS obviously falls short on few accounts for starters it lacks the morwe important component of hunter killer aid for the gunner. All it does is to provide basic cueing info and commander over ride function in case of emergency, and integrate information from some sensors while needs manual for others.

These are the characteristics of a very basic FCS system, not a powerful, multi channel FCS like the one installed in the Alkhalid. And another thing i forgot, the latest incarnation of this FCS is a multicore 32bit computer with more targets tarcking and cueing facility. it is installed in the AK-1

"Abay bhai, kin jahilon ke saath larr rahe ho?" - I think a senior member got mixed up and asked this question to the wrong party !!

But the fact is @ptldM3 is providing with relevant sources which proves his point, and though you started strong but we saw you doing just evasive maneuvers in the last page.

:offpost::offpost::offpost::offpost::offpost:
inclined-1266945462.jpeg

Shouldn't it be "Figuratively"??
the only thing you guys excel after trolling is to have cheap shots such as this. Buff off kid. This discussion is above your IQ level

@ptldM3

seems like you were offended from that type-59 video, calm down mate its alright :rofl:


SOmething interesting for you, here is the armour thickness values for the ONJECT 478BE being used by pakistan, dont mistake with the OMSK t-80U please :)

T-80UD hull composition and assumed protection:

hull composition:
(for 0. degree)
66mm RHA
gap for ERA on hull
135mm RHA
80mm ceramics
135mm HHS
gap whit distanser
80mm ceramics
135mm RHA.

Protection is at least:
630-640mm vs APFSDS without ERA
750mm vs HEAT without ERA

Turret composition for 30 degre (perpendicular to the surface):

98mm cast steel (HB270)
30mm air gap whit holders
25mm SHS or RHA plate
40mm ceramics
25mm SHS or RHA plate
40mm ceramics
50mm SHS or RHA plate
50mm HHS plate
190mm cast steel (HB270)

This layout give protection (for 30. degree):
~500mm vs APFSDS(!) without ERA
~550mm vs HEAT without ERA
Those valuesa are for smaller LOS in turret front (550mm LOS) for 0. degree when LOS is the biggest (circa 700mm LOS) we had much greater protection:
~630mm vs APFSDS, without ERA
~700-750mm vs HEAT without ERA

For this values shoud be added protection given by ERA (Kontakt-5 and it's Ukrainian clone)
+120mm RHA vs APFSDS in style like M829
+500-600mm RHA aginst HEAT warhed
Of course ERA shoud not be count as main armour for sevral obious resons:
1) HEAT warhed (SC) whit precursor will canceled ERA so it will be main armour vs main SC warhed
2) difrent APFSDS and HEAT warhed will be response in difrent way. In reaction whit ERA - for one (example: 3BM42,M829A1, or MILAN) ERA casette can reduce penetration abilities a lot , but for other cases (DM53, DM63) ERA will not reduce penetration at all. In other way ERA will help but whit marginal effect. So it's really fluent factor - depend on type of At-weapons.



pretty decent values if it is able to resist M829A1
 
.
Iit is you who is seeking a hiding route not me, i am still here

you proved nothing regarding engine reliability and issues related to the performance to the V series and i mean NOTHING! the only thing u gave was a freaking company brochure/ I got no answer why the might V seris failed miserably in india where it was suppose to perform better right, that too repeatedly, but the rival 6td prved its valour in the same desert in pakistan??






What does this have to do with you flat out making up lies about the T-90 armor that was clearly debunked. As for engines, all engines can overheat, just because at one point Pakistani 6TD engines supposedly did not overheat does not mean that they will never overheat or that they have not overheat. The argument was regarding power, which you started first, by claiming that Al-Khalids 1200hp engine is superior to the T-90s 1000HP engine, you can provide no dyno chart comparing HP and torque through out different RPM ranges.





Regarding the fire control system, the t-90 FCS obviously falls short on few accounts for starters it lacks the morwe important component of hunter killer aid for the gunner. All it does is to provide basic cueing info and commander over ride function in case of emergency, and integrate information from some sensors while needs manual for others.





It does just a fine job in accurately calculating target for the gun. One must also notice that you like to compare older T-90s with newer Al-Khalids, The T-90AM and even the T-72 variants have new fire control systems, and "hunter killer" aids. Yawn....i am getting bored with your stale arguments.





These are the characteristics of a very basic FCS system, not a powerful, multi channel FCS like the one installed in the Alkhalid. And another thing i forgot, the latest incarnation of this FCS is a multicore 32bit computer with more targets tarcking and cueing facility. it is installed in the AK-1






Cool story bro, since you like to deviate from topics, i will do the same, while the Al-Khalid got a new computer and can track "more targets" Russia has a new tank that is equipped with radar that tracks both ground and air targets. It also has a hard kill active defense system, a new gun, new munitions, new computers, new engine and the safest crew protection layout of any tank. I should not have even mentioned the T-14, now you will make up claims that you have classified information on the T-14, and that the might Al-Khalid which can drive on water because it was blessed by god can take out a T-14 at 50km away.
 
.
What does this have to do with you flat out making up lies about the T-90 armor that was clearly debunked. As for engines, all engines can overheat, just because at one point Pakistani 6TD engines supposedly did not overheat does not mean that they will never overheat or that they have not overheat. The argument was regarding power, which you started first, by claiming that Al-Khalids 1200hp engine is superior to the T-90s 1000HP engine, you can provide no dyno chart comparing HP and torque through out different RPM ranges.

It does just a fine job in accurately calculating target for the gun. One must also notice that you like to compare older T-90s with newer Al-Khalids, The T-90AM and even the T-72 variants have new fire control systems, and "hunter killer" aids. Yawn....i am getting bored with your stale arguments.



Cool story bro, since you like to deviate from topics, i will do the same, while the Al-Khalid got a new computer and can track "more targets" Russia has a new tank that is equipped with radar that tracks both ground and air targets. It also has a hard kill active defense system, a new gun, new munitions, new computers, new engine and the safest crew protection layout of any tank. I should not have even mentioned the T-14, now you will make up claims that you have classified information on the T-14, and that the might Al-Khalid which can drive on water because it was blessed by god can take out a T-14 at 50km away.

dont you kow the t-72B3 lacks proper FCS and has improved visual aids t make up for that and to keep costs down? Even the slingshot has the similar FCS to t-90 excluding few tricks

Stop shouting bonkers, answer the reliability issue with your V series and when will it be addressed? The whole T-90 saga is fun to sy the least. Now you brought the Armata into equation. Why you want me to ddbate its credentials too? :P
 
Last edited:
.
It does just a fine job in accurately calculating target for the gun. One must also notice that you like to compare older T-90s with newer Al-Khalids, The T-90AM and even the T-72 variants have new fire control systems, and "hunter killer" aids. Yawn....i am getting bored with your stale arguments.

y.
Actually the Al Khalid (basic) has the hunter kill and FCS. Its hunter kill capability is retained in improved variants and FCS has been replaced by domestic made, further improved FCS.
 
. . .
@ptldM3

Bro although you are wasting your Military knowledge here but here is the link of Indian T 90 with Hunter killer ability.

UralVagonZavod - News


do one thing, check the product page, see they are offering two different variants of t-90S, the simple S and the enhanced S with slightly different featureset and improved fcs in the latter, offered elements of this to the indians as an upgrade. would be fun. India may well become the only country to buy the same weapon system with three different specifications and pay more money, similar to their ammo deal. Boy, your defence procurements really are a screwed up mess:coffee:

for reference:

T-90S - UralVagonZavod - Special products


T-90S Modernized - UralVagonZavod - Special products
 
.
do one thing, check the product page, see they are offering two different variants of t-90S, the simple S and the enhanced S with slightly different featureset and improved fcs in the latter, offered elements of this to the indians as an upgrade. would be fun. India may well become the only country to buy the same weapon system with three different specifications and pay more money, similar to their ammo deal. Boy, your defence procurements really are a screwed up mess:coffee:

for reference:

T-90S - UralVagonZavod - Special products


T-90S Modernized - UralVagonZavod - Special products
Your inferiority complex regarding Cheap Chinese products has no limit this thread is an example of it and i am bookmarking it now and as for your shit arguments and changing subjects first have some basic knowledge about western and Indian inputs in T 90M.

Don't quote me again
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom