PA TANKS comparison with contempory tanks

Discussion in 'Pakistan Army' started by Manticore, Feb 25, 2009.

  1. Manticore

    Manticore SENIOR MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    10,095
    Ratings:
    +110 / 17,638 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    i searched for top ten tanks and did not find alkhalid there.. i also dont know at which rank the alkhalid stand.


    please compare the specs of alkhalid with these tanks
    leopard,
    t84,
    t80 ud
    t72
    m84..
    t90
    type99
    challenger etc


    plz tell me where do our upgraded alzarar and alkhalid stand in the tank ranking and that if we have some newer variants coming up?


    like the aircrafts, is there a 4th/ 5th gen category division in tanks aswell?

    thanks

    information regarding alkhalid tank is available here , which can be used for comparison
    http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakist...nk-type-90-iim-mbt-2000-information-pool.html
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
    Last edited: Apr 14, 2009
  2. Mav3rick

    Mav3rick SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2008
    Messages:
    4,330
    Ratings:
    +6 / 2,514 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    Yes there are generations amongst Tanks as well and Al-Khalid is considered a 3rd Generation Tank (The latest Generation of Tanks) comparable to most modern tanks. It is also rumored that a more advanced version Al-Khalid II has been under development for some time.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 3
  3. Super Falcon

    Super Falcon ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2008
    Messages:
    10,663
    Ratings:
    +0 / 3,209 / -4
    but can al khalid have a kill over t90, leopard or abram for that matter plz reply
     
  4. Moscow

    Moscow BANNED

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2008
    Messages:
    1,055
    Ratings:
    +0 / 715 / -0
    The following is a comparison between the T-90S/ Bhishma MBT and the Pakistani Al Khalid. The T-90M, which the Indian Army will be receiving by the year's end is an improved version of the T-90 series with welded turret, V-92S2 engine and ESSA thermal viewer as opposed to the T-90S, which was a simplified export version with cast turret, R-173 radio, 1V528 computer and V-84-1 engine.

    Crew

    AL-Khalid = 3
    T-90S = 3

    Combat Weight

    Al-Khalid = 48,000 kg
    T-90S = 46,500 kg

    Engine

    Al-Khalid = 1200 horsepower
    T-90S = 840 horsepower

    Maximum Speed

    Al-Khalid = 72 km/hr
    T-90S = 65 km/hr

    Maximum Range

    Al-Khalid = 450 kms
    T-90S = 500

    Vertical Obstacle

    Al-Khalid = 0.85 m
    T-90S = 0.85

    Fording

    Al-Khalid = without preparation 1.4 metres
    T-90S = without preparation 1.2 metres

    Trench

    Al-Khalid = 2.7 m
    T-90S = 2.8 m


    Armament

    Al-Khalid

    (main): 1 x 125 mm gun 125mm Smooth Bore, Chrome Plated, Auto fret aged
    Circular Carousel Type: (Cassette Type) 22 Rounds / Minute 6-8

    FCS/GCS : Type: Image Stabilized (3rd generation director type stabilization), Optics: LASER protected (coaxial): 1 x 7.62 mm MG
    (anti-aircraft): 1 x 12.7 mm MG
    Smoke grenade dischargers: 2 x 6, can also lay smoke screen by injecting diesel into the exhaust outlets at the rear

    GUNNER SIGHT : Type Integrated, Bi-axis Stabilized Day/Night, Tl, LRF
    Magnification Dual, 3x & 1 Ox
    Field of View 20° & 6°

    COMMANDER SIGHT:
    Type Panoramic,
    Bi-Axis stabilized,

    LRF, 2nd Generation IIT
    Hunter-Killer Capability
    Magnification 7.5x
    Field of View 7 . 5
    LRF : Type ND YAG
    Range200 ~ 5000m
    AUTO TRACKER: Tracking Error < 0.1 mils Interfaced with Gunner Day Sight & Tl


    T-90S

    1 x 125mm 2A46M smoothbore gun with 43 rounds.
    ...............1 x 12.7mm NSVT anti-aircraft gun with 300 rounds. [1]
    ...............1 x 7.62mm PKT co-axial machine gun with 2000 rounds.
    ...............1 x 5.45mm AKS-74 rifle, carried on storage rack, with 300 rounds.[2]

    [1] The 12.7mm NSVT, mounted on the commander's contra-rotating copula which can be aimed and fired under complete armour protection, uses the PZU-7 machine gun sight and the 1ETs29 (with vertical stabilization) machine gun FCS (Fire Control System).

    [2] The locally-produced 5.56mm INSAS Assault Rifle will likely be used instead.


    Smoke Grenade Launchers: Mounted either side of the turret is a bank of six electrically operated 81mm smoke grenade launchers which are in a new low-angle configuration compared to those fitted to earlier Russian MBTs. The quick forming aerosol screening system comprises the four laser radiation sensors (two coarse and two fine receiving heads), the Type 902A Aerosol Forming Grenade Launch System dispensing 81mm 3D17 aerosol grenades and associated controls. The aerosol screening system detects laser illumination, determines its direction and type (laser range-finder or designator), generates warning signals, both audio and visual, and lays in automatic or semi-automatic modes, quick forming aerosol screens within three seconds at a distance of 50 to 80 metres from the tank. In addition, the tank can also lay its own smoke screen by injecting diesel fuel into the exhaust outlet located on the left side of the hull.

    The 2A46M smoothbore gun is stabilised (Zhasmin 2E42-4 system) in two axes and is fitted with a thermal sleeve. The gun tube can be replaced without a need for dismantling inside the turret. The gun can fire various ammunition including APFSDS-T (Armour Piercing Fin Stabilised Discarding Sabot - Tracer), HEAT (High Explosive Anti-Tank), HE-FRAG (High Explosive Fragmentation) as well as shrapnel projectiles with time fuzes. In addition it can also fire a special HE-FRAG projectile that can be detonated over the target using the tank's fire-control system. Maximum rate of fire is at 7 rounds per minute. The gun can also fire the 9M119 Refleks-M (NATO: AT-11 Sniper-B) anti-tank guided missile system. The range of the missile is 75 to 5000 metres and takes 14.2 seconds to reach maximum range. The system is intended to engage tanks fitted with ERA (Explosive Reactive Armour) as well as low-flying air targets such as helicopters, at a range of up to 5 km. Hit probability is over 80%. The missile system fires either the 9M119 (3UBK14 weapon system) or the 9M119M (3UBK20 weapon system) missiles which have semi-automatic laser beam riding guidance and a hollow charge warhead. Missile weight is 23.4 kg. The gun's automatic loader will feed both ordnance and missiles.

    Self-Protection

    The hull and turret are protected by both conventional armour-plating and the latest generation Kontakt-5 ERA which provides protection against APFSDS (Armour Piercing Fin Stabilised Discarding Sabot) and HEAT (High Explosive Anti-Tank) type projectiles. In addition to being fitted to the hull and turret, ERA panels are also fitted either side of the hull front to provide lateral protection to each side of the driver's compartment. The tank also has NBC (nuclear, biological and chemical) protection equipment. The TShU1-7 Shtora-1 countermeasures system is not fitted.

    Fire Control & Observation

    The T-90S has the 1A45T IFCS (Integrated Fire Control System) which is automatic, but has a manual override for the commander. The IFCS comprises the gunner's day/night fire-control system, gunner's IR sight or thermal imaging sight, and commander's day/night sight-observation system. The fire control system comprises day sight-rangefinder with missile guidance channel, armament stabilizer and ballistic computer. The system is used by the commander for gun and machine gun fire control.

    Propulsion

    The T-90S will be powered by a 1,000 hp V-92S2 four-stroke V-12 diesel engine. This new engine, fitted with a turbo-supercharger, offers impressive specific power and specific fuel consumption characteristics. The tank can carry up to 1600 litres of fuel in the main, armour plated fuel tanks and fuel drums. The tank is provided with a snorkel for deep fording (up to 5 metres of water) with equipment which can be deployed in 20 minutes. The mechanical transmission includes primary reduction gear, two planetary final gearboxes and two planetary final drives. The running gear features torsion bar suspension with hydraulic shock absorbers at 1, 2 and 6 road wheel stations and tracks with rubber-metallic pin hinges.

    Miscellaneous Information

    A new track has been developed and tested for the T-90S that not only has a longer life but also has replaceable rubber pads that can be quickly removed. Standard equipment includes NBC protection, fire detection & suppression system, nose-mounted dozer blade and a deep fording kit. The tank is fitted with an air conditioning system for operations in high ambient temperatures.



    link :-withheld
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 19
  5. Super Falcon

    Super Falcon ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2008
    Messages:
    10,663
    Ratings:
    +0 / 3,209 / -4
    so which one u think is bettter
     
  6. metalfalcon

    metalfalcon SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2008
    Messages:
    2,053
    Ratings:
    +0 / 1,354 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Bahrain
    @ Moscow.

    According to your data Given above i have observed that Al-Khalid has a Slight Edge over T-90, Am i Correct in my Analysis ?
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 3
  7. sweetboy

    sweetboy FULL MEMBER

    New Recruit

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2008
    Messages:
    26
    Ratings:
    +0 / 9 / -0
    if the given information is true then al khalid is better than t-90s:agree:
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  8. saiko

    saiko FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2009
    Messages:
    137
    Ratings:
    +0 / 51 / -0
    Well nobody officially releases protection data but it is telling that Rheinmetall cancelled their 140mm gun project on the basis that the 120mm L55 was sufficiently strong (with the proper ammunition) to deal with all modern threats. They at the very least would likely have access to the Leopard 2 protection data (if not actual tanks available for testing).

    Any tank with a modern main gun + quality APFSDS rounds will probably be able to take out any other tank frontally. At what range I'm not sure.. and the only real exception being the 1 shot immunity offered by heavy ERA plates. At the very least, the Russian Kontakt-5 ERA could stop the Rheinmetall 120mm L44, but only for one shot (although that's probably all that's needed since everyone is running around with silver bullets).
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 3
  9. Abu Zolfiqar

    Abu Zolfiqar First Line of Offence

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2009
    Messages:
    22,190
    Ratings:
    +20 / 23,269 / -3
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan

    is there any way to find out the link? This is very interesting.
     
  10. niaz

    niaz PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2006
    Messages:
    3,616
    Ratings:
    +115 / 6,538 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Never in the history of warfare, there has been a complete matching of the forces else no army will ever win. Also there are numerous cases where victory has depended upon luck more than any thing else.

    In the WWII German tanks as well as tank commanders were definitely superior to the Russian T-34 and Russian tank commanders. However T-34 prevailed due to sheer numbers and that it was far more rugged and able to operate in the Russian winter which was bane of the German Panzers and Tigers.

    Only way superiority of an equipment and people who operate it can be proven is in the battlefield. So far only the US Abraham, Challenger (Gulf War) and Israeli Merkava are battle proven. Neither T-90 nor Alkhalid have engaged each other in anger.

    The point I am trying to make is that discussion is purely theoretical and one cannot prove or disprove superiority of Alkhalid over T-90 by comparing the same on paper. All one can say is these two pieces of armour are roughly evenly matched.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 25
  11. Moscow

    Moscow BANNED

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2008
    Messages:
    1,055
    Ratings:
    +0 / 715 / -0
    @abu zolfikar the link cannot be posted sorry about that.

    @superfalcon i guess al-khalid haas the edge on paper because as niaz said its only a threoritical comparison.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  12. hellfire

    hellfire SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,581
    Ratings:
    +49 / 4,576 / -0
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    well the tanks may seem superior on paper, but then what is the deciding factor is the skills of the crew in confrontation and also the luck along with factors like ratio of engaging forces, air-cavalry operation concept etc

    point to be noted is that T-90 Bhishma taken by IA have not been taken with either Kontakt-5 or Shtora protection suites
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
  13. hellfire

    hellfire SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,581
    Ratings:
    +49 / 4,576 / -0
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    the improved arjun version is pretty interesting though
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 3
  14. niaz

    niaz PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2006
    Messages:
    3,616
    Ratings:
    +115 / 6,538 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United Kingdom

    My thanks to you are due the fact that Arjun verses Khalid is probably a better discussion point as T-90 is purely Russian. Arjun on the other hand is totally indigenous and Khalid also incorporates a lot of indigenous effort.

    IMO, on paper Arjun, if the engine and heating problems can be resolved, with better protection and 10 tons heavier, appears to be superior to Al Khalid.

    You might remember that M-1 Abrams was tested by PA during Zia time (Zia lost his life on the way back from the tests in Bhawalpur desert) and was rejected. Understand M-1 was found to be too heavy for our road bridges and for fighting on the mud flats of Punjab.

    I am pretty sure that DRD must have taken all of this into consideration when designing Arjun. Nevertheless, I believe that whereas on the dry sands of Rajasthan desert; Arjun may prove more effective, on the irrigated soft mud plains of Punjab (Gurdaspur/Shakargarh are where Chowinda battle was fought) 55 tons weight of Arjun will be an impediment to its mobility. Al Khalid on the other hand is only 46 tons, therefore should score over Arjun in mobility if not in anything else.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 3
  15. S-2

    S-2 PROFESSIONAL

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2007
    Messages:
    4,210
    Ratings:
    +0 / 2,509 / -0
    You might remember that M-1 Abrams was tested by PA during Zia time (Zia lost his life on the way back from the tests in Bhawalpur desert) and was rejected. Understand M-1 was found to be too heavy for our road bridges and for fighting on the mud flats of Punjab.

    Well, I guess under more functional stresses of battle from the Saudi, Kuwaiti, and Iraqi deserts to agricultural reaches of the Tigris and Euphrates valleys we've been able to employ the M1A2 (an even heavier version than you'd have likely tested under Zia which was, my guess, the base M-1 w/M-68 105mm cannon still).

    As a defensive weapon falling back upon it's own log train in a Pakistani Punjab defense scenario, it may have been unbeatable. In the offense, as far as your log train and combat engineers will permit at speeds that truly shock.

    You've got to be able to bridge in the east to attack. Couldn't you today bridge a 70T capacity?
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1