# Norinco VT-4 MBT



## Beast

China newest VT-4 MBT clear for export. Looks very modern, including the RCG on the turret.

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## Bratva

@DESERT FIGHTER @Dazzler Is it me or does it strikingly resemble Al-Khalid ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BDforever

Bratva said:


> @DESERT FIGHTER @Dazzler Is it me or does it strikingly resemble Al-Khalid ?


It is MBT3000, probable further upgrade of MBT2000/Al-Khalid


----------



## Bratva

BDforever said:


> *It is MBT3000*, probable further upgrade of MBT2000/Al-Khalid



Oh, Right.. nomenclature VT-4 confused me in to thinking it's another tank besides MBT-3000

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Water Car Engineer

Tweaks to the mbt 3000 series.







Which is a level up from MBT 2000, also an export model.


----------



## TimeTraveller

Great news for China...


----------



## The SC

They are looking more and more like the German leopards. Maybe the technology too...
Good work.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## UKBengali

This tank is sure to be a beast.

Any idea what the selling price may be?


----------



## 55100864

why the export visions all looks so beautiful, but our own toys looks ugly as shits, especially the painting.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## cirr

Video：

陆战之王：中日装甲力量对比-凤凰视频-最具媒体品质的综合视频门户

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Kompromat

Pakistan is reportedly testing this monster.



cirr said:


> Video：
> 
> 陆战之王：中日装甲力量对比-凤凰视频-最具媒体品质的综合视频门户



How do i download this?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Genesis

55100864 said:


> why the export visions all looks so beautiful, but our own toys looks ugly as shits, especially the painting.



first I like the painting, the desert look is American, because well that's where they are fighting. They would use woodland, if they were to fight in this environment.

Second, these tanks are super expensive, unless you are paying for it, we can't really afford to induct that many at the moment. We have too many other places that take precedent, and Type 96 is plenty to handle any type 72 as seen in the tank competition, and it's not bad against the t-90 either.


Also our new type 99 are almost exactly this.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Darth Vader

Horus said:


> Pakistan is reportedly testing this monster.
> How do i download this?


Did that for you and also uploaded on youtube and is that u aero ?




Try Idm for downloading Vidoes from Web

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Kompromat

Darth Vader said:


> Did that for you and also uploaded on youtube and is that u aero ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Try Idm for downloading Vidoes from Web



Thanks buddy, yes its me.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zarvan

Horus said:


> Thanks buddy, yes its me.


But confusion is still there weather this is AL KHALID II or that is different Tank ?


----------



## TeesraIndiotHunter

Al Khalid-Is, Al Khalid-IIs, Al-Zarrars, T-80UDs are the core of Pakistan Ground Force's tank corps.

Pakistan has hundreds of T-59s, T-69s, Type 85s etc etc that it needs to retire and replace them with something else.

I guess this is where advance Chinese tanks come in.

Type 3000 MBT and VT-4 MBT of China are very capable third generation tanks..and Pakistan Army is looking into these guys. If selected, these tanks will replace our older tanks like T-69s etc.

Pakistan's tank force consisting of Al Khalid-1, Al Khalid-IIs, Type-3000s/VT-4s, Al-Zarrars, and upgraded T-80UD will be one of the strongest in the world!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kompromat

Zarvan said:


> But confusion is still there weather this is AL KHALID II or that is different Tank ?



Different tank.


----------



## Zarvan

Horus said:


> Different tank.


Okay I believe you


----------



## cnleio

If VT-4 price cheap, it will be new SuperStar in World Tank Market.

VT-4 (MBT-3000) better than current PLA ZTZ96A, as same as chassis of latest ZTZ99A2 (1,500hp) but lower power maybe 1,000hp ~ 1,200hp tank engine. A 125mm gun.



























West quality, China price

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Beast

cnleio said:


> If VT-4 price cheap, it will be new SuperStar in World Tank Market.
> 
> VT-4 (MBT-3000) better than current ZTZ96A, as same as chassis of ZTZ99A2 (1,500hp) lower maybe 1,200hp tank engine.



I think the 1500hp tank engine is approved for export and is now install in VT-4. Rumour is the new 1650hp domestic engine is just ready for mass produce and will ensure the new ZTZ99A2 with thicker and higher turret will have same performance even with supposed increase weight as opposed to 1500hp engine.

If VT-4 is still using 1200hp engine, it will not able to get export order.


----------



## cnleio

Beast said:


> I think the 1500hp tank engine is approved for export and is now install in VT-4. Rumour is the new 1650hp domestic engine is just ready for mass produce and will ensure the new ZTZ99A2 with thicker and higher turret will have same performance even with supposed increase weight as opposed to 1500hp engine.
> 
> If VT-4 is still using 1200hp engine, it will not able to get export order.


If im right, PLA won't export current military equipment including ZTZ99A2's 1,500hp tank engine. But 1,200hp tank engine is OKay.


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

cnleio said:


> If im right, PLA won't export current military equipment including ZTZ99A2's 1,500hp tank engine. But 1,200hp tank engine is OKay.



MBT series is already a JV.

P.S: AK-II is under development at HIT and will be powered by a 1500 hp engine from Ukraine or EU.along with 10 major modifications.. Namely in armour/protection,firepowe,mobility etc..

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## GeHAC

cnleio said:


> If im right, PLA won't export current military equipment including ZTZ99A2's 1,500hp tank engine. But 1,200hp tank engine is OKay.


High configuration MBT3000 has a 1500hp electrically adjustable engine

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Zarvan

DESERT FIGHTER said:


> MBT series is already a JV.
> 
> P.S: AK-II is under development at HIT and will be powered by a 1500 hp engine from Ukraine or EU.along with 10 major modifications.. Namely in armour/protection,firepowe,mobility etc..


Man first they said MBT 3000 has 1200 HP engine now they say it will get 1500 HP engine AL KHALID II has same HP engine I am going to go crazy now I think we should wait for IDEX 2014 it will clear things

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aliaselin

Zarvan said:


> Man first they said MBT 3000 has 1200 HP engine now they say it will get 1500 HP engine AL KHALID II has same HP engine I am going to go crazy now I think we should wait for IDEX 2014 it will clear things


As an export model, it has four versions, 1200HP diesel engine，1360HP diesel engine, 1500HP diesel engine and 1500HP gas turbine for different customers，and the price correspondingly increase.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Zarvan

aliaselin said:


> As an export model, it has four versions, 1200HP diesel engine，1360HP diesel engine, 1500HP diesel engine and 1500HP gas turbine for different customers，and the price correspondingly increase.


 
I think mods off this forum should try to confirm news off tests from Army because there is serious confusion @Horus @Oscar @Fulcrum15

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## farhan_9909

From the Video

So we are testing this beast.











I can see a RCWS aswell

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Zarvan

farhan_9909 said:


> From the Video
> 
> So we are testing this beast.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can see a RCWS aswell


Man there would be many other countries too what is your point and who is this man ?


----------



## farhan_9909

Zarvan said:


> Man there would be many other countries too what is your point and who is this man ?



Pakistan is possibly evaluating this tank.And No,I believe Pakistan was the only foriegn country present during the test otherwise the video will have also shown them

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zarvan

farhan_9909 said:


> Pakistan is possibly evaluating this tank.And No,I believe Pakistan was the only foriegn country present during the test otherwise the video will have also shown them


And who was the man ? I mean from Pakistani side

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## farhan_9909

Zarvan said:


> And who was the man ? I mean from Pakistani side



Must be someone from Pakistan as ofcourse no civilian will be allowed to this event

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sulman Badshah

cnleio said:


> If im right, PLA won't export current military equipment including ZTZ99A2's 1,500hp tank engine. But 1,200hp tank engine is OKay.


It is 1300 HP i guess

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zarvan

farhan_9909 said:


> Must be someone from Pakistan as ofcourse no civilian will be allowed to this event


Well if you are right than person should be from HIT


----------



## Dazzler

this is NOT alkhalid 2, man why you folks forget things so quickly, alkhalid 2 is being manufactured at HIT, just wait for IDEAS 2014. Alkhalid 2 is a strictly HIT project, almost completed as we speak, powered by 6td-3 engine and other classified changes are incorporated in C4I, armour, FCS, not to mention it is slightly bigger and heavier than alkhalid.

There are certain changes i have noticed, even different from mbt 3000, which makes me suspicious that these changes were done on request you know by whom. hmm..

i have heard this is to replace 59s,s69s and even 85IIAPs provided it passes trials.

Overall, inducting VT-4 would mean more hazards for the enemy as army will have four advanced mbts in active service, all belonging to third generation

alkhalid-2 (high end)
alkhalid-1 VT-4 (high/medium end)
Alkhalid, (medium end)
t-80UD/ 84 (low end)

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Zarvan

Dazzler said:


> this is NOT alkhalid 2, man why you folks forget things so quickly, alkhalid 2 is being manufactured at HIT, just wait for IDEAS 2014. Alkhalid 2 is a strictly HIT project, almost completed as we speak, powered by 6td-3 engine and other classified changes are incorporated in C4I, armour, FCS, not to mention it is slightly bigger and heavier than alkhalid.
> 
> There are certain changes i have noticed, even different from mbt 3000, which makes me suspicious that these changes were done on request you know by whom. hmm..
> 
> i have heard this is to replace 59s,s69s and even 85IIAPs provided it passes trials.
> 
> Overall, inducting VT-4 would mean more hazards for the enemy as army will have four advanced mbts in active service, all belonging to third generation
> 
> alkhalid-2 (high end)
> alkhalid-1 VT-4 (high/medium end)
> Alkhalid, (medium end)
> t-80UD/ 84 (low end)


Well replacing T 59 and T 69 and Type 85 would mean even after Al Zarrar still close to 1000 Tanks to be replaced


----------



## Sulman Badshah

Dazzler said:


> t-80UD/ 84 (low end)


It is also comparable to AK .. In armour it is indeed tougher then ak


----------



## Stealth



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Dazzler

Zarvan said:


> Well replacing T 59 and T 69 and Type 85 would mean even after Al Zarrar still close to 1000 Tanks to be replaced



quite likely



Sulman Badshah said:


> It is also comparable to AK .. In armour it is indeed tougher then ak



no it is not, despite the fact that t-80ud has excellent armour, alkhalid has better armour modules, ceramic inserts and classified components that were never revealed.


----------



## kolinsky

Dazzler said:


> this is NOT alkhalid 2, man why you folks forget things so quickly, alkhalid 2 is being manufactured at HIT, just wait for IDEAS 2014. Alkhalid 2 is a strictly HIT project, almost completed as we speak, powered by 6td-3 engine and other classified changes are incorporated in C4I, armour, FCS, not to mention it is slightly bigger and heavier than alkhalid.
> 
> There are certain changes i have noticed, even different from mbt 3000, which makes me suspicious that these changes were done on request you know by whom. hmm..
> 
> i have heard this is to replace 59s,s69s and even 85IIAPs provided it passes trials.
> 
> Overall, inducting VT-4 would mean more hazards for the enemy as army will have four advanced mbts in active service, all belonging to third generation
> 
> alkhalid-2 (high end)
> alkhalid-1 VT-4 (high/medium end)
> Alkhalid, (medium end)
> t-80UD/ 84 (low end)


Brother, if Pakistan chooses VT-4, I think there will be no alkhalid-2 any more. There is unreasonable to equep two high end tank at the same time. India makes this kind of mistake, do not copy their mistakes.

I am impressed by the Integrated Battle Management System from alkhalid-2, it is the right direction of Pakistan to improve your own tanks. The gun, engine, turret, gear box can be imported from other countries. Think about that the GB turned off their tank industry, they may never produce new tanks. The development route of Pakistan tanks are not wrong but not optimal.

I donot think alkhalid-2 is comparable to VT-4, just because there are few countries has complete tank industry, there is also few countries can design own guns, engine, turret, and gear box. However, many countries builds their own plugins.Some components like IBMS costs not so much and fit to the user cases, and the most important thing is: it can be integrated to any Pakistan tanks, improve the infomation warfare level, and they are the key components in to 4th generation tanks.

To improve T85IIAPs, just put a T96A turret, remove all components you cannot get, install the Pakistan plugins like IBMS for information warfare, maybe a new engine, finito~~~ cheap and impressive upgrade~~the score? at least 3.5 generation,

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dazzler

kolinsky said:


> Brother, if Pakistan chooses VT-4, I think there will be no alkhalid-2 any more. There is unreasonable to equep two high end tank at the same time. India makes this kind of mistake, do not copy their mistakes.
> 
> I am impressed by the Integrated Battle Management System from alkhalid-2, it is the right direction of Pakistan to improve your own tanks. The gun, engine, turret, gear box can be imported from other countries. Think about that the GB turned off their tank industry, they may never produce new tanks. The development route of Pakistan tanks are not wrong but not optimal.
> 
> I donot think alkhalid-2 is comparable to VT-4, just because there are few countries has complete tank industry, there is also few countries can design own guns, engine, turret, and gear box. However, many countries builds their own plugins.Some components like IBMS costs not so much and fit to the user cases, and the most important thing is: it can be integrated to any Pakistan tanks, improve the infomation warfare level, and they are the key components in to 4th generation tanks.
> 
> To improve T85IIAPs, just put a T96A turret, remove all components you cannot get, install the Pakistan plugins like IBMS for information warfare, maybe a new engine, finito~~~ cheap and impressive upgrade~~




yeah i told HIT guys to do this but they dont listen 

From early speculations, AK-2 is better than the VT-4, even in engine and transmission


----------



## kolinsky

The SC said:


> They are looking more and more like the German leopards. Maybe the technology too...
> Good work.


 not more and more like......they are......


----------



## Dazzler

speaking of armour, alkhalid armour against HEAT round, notice no penetration beyond the partial first layer



























kolinsky said:


> not more and more like......they are......




thats a tall claim my friend


----------



## kolinsky

Dazzler said:


> yeah i told HIT guys to do this but they dont listen
> 
> From early speculations, AK-2 is better than the VT-4, even in engine and transmission


I am new here, i donot know why you gays like 1500 hp engines. Look at T99G, 80kph, that is not tank, but Farrari. 1300hp for 52 ton VT4 is comparable to 59 ton LeopardA7. 

If the AK2 is really better, 



Dazzler said:


> speaking of armour, alkhalid armour against HEAT round, notice no penetration beyond the partial first layer
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thats a tall claim my friend


no, indeed they are......maybe not directly from Germany, aber stammt aus Detschland~~~(originated from germany)


----------



## Zarvan

Dazzler said:


> yeah i told HIT guys to do this but they dont listen
> 
> From early speculations, AK-2 is better than the VT-4, even in engine and transmission


Even with older Tanks even than we were operating lot off different Tanks


----------



## Dazzler

kolinsky said:


> I am new here, i donot know why you gays like 1500 hp engines. Look at T99G, 80kph, that is not tank, but Farrari. 1300hp for 52 ton VT4 is comparable to 59 ton LeopardA7.
> 
> If the AK2 is really better,
> 
> 
> no, indeed they are......maybe not directly from Germany, aber stammt aus Detschland~~~(originated from germany)



its not about speed friend, its about torque, the faster the acceleration, the better, it also reduced ground pressure


----------



## kolinsky

Dazzler said:


> its not about speed friend, its about torque, the faster the acceleration, the better, it also reduced ground pressure





55100864 said:


> why the export visions all looks so beautiful, but our own toys looks ugly as shits, especially the painting.


Ugly is another word for violence aesthetic...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jf Thunder

its so awesome, we should buy a bunch, then our tank force will be a real beauty, imagine the Al Khalids, VT 4 and the Zarrars, running towards the enemy screaming and jumping, that will be one awesome sight


----------



## Syed Hussain

What I am concerned about is that if China is not inducting a machine that it built then it means something is not right or is "less" about it...whether it's MBT-2000(Al-Khalid) or the FC-1(JF-17)...they were designed & produced by China but they never made it into service with Chinese Forces but were made for export only.
But on the other hand we see China putting so much effort into Type-99 MBT & J-10, producing it in big numbers.
But I think the "less price tag" was enough for us(Pak) to gor for FC-1 & MBT-2000 instead of J-10b & Type-99...!


----------



## Europa

the gun installed on the top looks kinda new generation
new generation china is revolutionary different from the older

new generation chinese university students training, physically well built, taller and more confident 












this is new china, indeed

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## kolinsky

Europa said:


> the gun installed on the top looks kinda new generation
> new generation china is revolutionary different from the older
> 
> new generation chinese university students training, physically well built, taller and more confident
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> this is new china, indeed


When I was in uni, we still used type 56 rifle. Now we have 95 for students. How time flies.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Europa

kolinsky said:


> When I was in uni, we still used type 56 rifle. Now we have 95 for students. How time flies.



you got it, good observation


----------



## kolinsky

Europa said:


> you got it, good observation


However type 95 is in service for a long time, the first block of 95 has been off duty for years. I think the students just use the old type rifles not the new 95-1. The trainning lasts usually only one month, shorting lasts a half day.


----------



## cnleio

Europa said:


> the gun installed on the top looks kinda new generation
> new generation china is revolutionary different from the older
> 
> new generation chinese university students training, physically well built, taller and more confident
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> this is new china, indeed





kolinsky said:


> However type 95 is in service for a long time, the first block of 95 has been off duty for years. I think the students just use the old type rifles not the new 95-1. The trainning lasts usually only one month, shorting lasts a half day.



This is not real Type95 or Type95-1 rifle. There'r all Rubber Gun for student and newbie military trainning, the shape just looks like type95 ...

Fake type95, rubber gun

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## kolinsky

cnleio said:


> This is not real Type95 or Type95-1 rifle. There'r all Rubber Gun for student and newbie military trainning, the shape just looks like type95 ...
> 
> Fake type95, rubber gun


At my time, I get a real thing but rubber bullets for basic training.....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zarvan

Syed Hussain said:


> What I am concerned about is that if China is not inducting a machine that it built then it means something is not right or is "less" about it...whether it's MBT-2000(Al-Khalid) or the FC-1(JF-17)...they were designed & produced by China but they never made it into service with Chinese Forces but were made for export only.
> But on the other hand we see China putting so much effort into Type-99 MBT & J-10, producing it in big numbers.
> But I think the "less price tag" was enough for us(Pak) to gor for FC-1 & MBT-2000 instead of J-10b & Type-99...!


Mr China is really interesting country they to sell weapon can design and develop new Tank or Ship or fighter Jet according to requirement off other country no problem with weapons


----------



## kolinsky

Zarvan said:


> Mr China is really interesting country they to sell weapon can design and develop new Tank or Ship or fighter Jet according to requirement off other country no problem with weapons



yep, at the same time Pakistan has given us much information about westen weapons as well. I mean the return for doing this is more than you think.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pakwarrior1

Zarvan said:


> But confusion is still there weather this is AL KHALID II or that is different Tank ?


Hey man its a different tank...this is a VT-4 series while the Al Khalid belongs to the T-90 series, there isn't very much difference in the chassis I am guessing but the avionics sure look and feel different...even the hydraulics and gun scope look completely different...

Not to mention a different size gun and a completely different firing and accuracy rate...I don't have the numbers yet maybe the admin can help me with that?



kolinsky said:


> yep, at the same time Pakistan has given us much information about westen weapons as well. I mean the return for doing this is more than you think.


I think this had basically come the tool of the trade, we give you guys the technology and schematics you need to build us a newly designed weapon (reverse engineering and the sort) ...not that there is anything wrong with it, it's just that people have a very skewed view of professionalism.

If it can get the job done, then hell yes it can be useful.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dazzler

al right guys time to wake up, the event the video is from is "Norinco Armour Day" and many delegates from many countries are invited, not just pakistan.


----------



## Syed Hussain

kolinsky said:


> yep, at the same time Pakistan has given us much information about westen weapons as well. I mean the return for doing this is more than you think.


 Well indeed Sir, from F-16 to their PW-100 engines, SNIPER XR pods & AIMRAM-120 etc...Pakistan has shared a lot with it's all weather Friend, but the difference in military as well & economical might between the two countries prevents Pakistan from playing it's true role. Many may deem it as just a talk but Pakistan is a key point for China in it's way toward becoming a world power at same level as US(& then surpass it).


----------



## Desert Fox

Zarvan said:


> But confusion is still there weather this is AL KHALID II or that is different Tank ?


If it turns out that the MBT-3000/VT-4 is the Al-Khalid II then that will be TRULY EMBARRASSING for Pakistan because the Chinese are developing our Tanks for us and all of our indigenization hype was nothing more than brain farts. 



TeesraIndiotHunter said:


> Al Khalid-Is, Al Khalid-IIs, Al-Zarrars, T-80UDs are the core of Pakistan Ground Force's tank corps.
> 
> Pakistan has hundreds of T-59s, T-69s, Type 85s etc etc that it needs to retire and replace them with something else.
> 
> I guess this is where advance Chinese tanks come in.
> 
> Type 3000 MBT and VT-4 MBT of China are very capable third generation tanks..and Pakistan Army is looking into these guys. If selected, these tanks will replace our older tanks like T-69s etc.
> 
> Pakistan's tank force consisting of Al Khalid-1, Al Khalid-IIs, Type-3000s/VT-4s, Al-Zarrars, and upgraded T-80UD will be one of the strongest in the world!


First lets hope the Al-Khalid and the MBT-3000 aren't the same Tank before we reach any conclusions.


----------



## SBD-3

Horus said:


> Pakistan is reportedly testing this monster.
> 
> 
> 
> How do i download this?


Here is the translation of video description
King of Land Warfare: armored forces in Japan
Description: Japanese 13-in 8 × 8 wheeled motorized chariot exposure, which is the second after 10 tanks, Japan has developed a new type of armored fighting vehicles. Out media speculation China is also the latest 99A2 tanks Asia's leading, who dominate the field in Japan chariot?
No mention of Pakistan....


----------



## cnleio

VT-4



> 最为先进的外贸坦克VT-4坦克与VT-1的不同主要在动力系统方面。_VT-4采用了1200马力发动机和CF-1000系列综合传动的一体化动力包_，整体性能较原先的乌克兰动力包有很大提高。其他方面，VT-4则可以看做是VT-1的升级版。在本次装甲展中，VT-4的澎湃动力彰显无遗。


VT-4 MBT using 1,200HP tank engine and CF-1000 hydraulic power pack.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Zarvan

SBD-3 said:


> Here is the translation of video description
> King of Land Warfare: armored forces in Japan
> Description: Japanese 13-in 8 × 8 wheeled motorized chariot exposure, which is the second after 10 tanks, Japan has developed a new type of armored fighting vehicles. Out media speculation China is also the latest 99A2 tanks Asia's leading, who dominate the field in Japan chariot?
> No mention of Pakistan....


First this Tank is MBT-3000 or VT-4 not 99A2 so who ever translated is a genius


----------



## SBD-3

Zarvan said:


> First this Tank is MBT-3000 or VT-4 not 99A2 so who ever *translated is a genius*


Google is indeed....


----------



## Beast

From the video, the VT-4 turret gun stabiliser is extremely advance and stable that it is able to maintain stagnant while the whole chasis is rotating on uneven surface.


----------



## luciferdd

cnleio said:


> VT-4
> 
> 
> VT-4 MBT using 1,200HP tank engine and CF-1000 hydraulic power pack.


The whole power pack maybe a little expensive though it is cheaper than the similar products from the germanny...
It maybe the only but a big problem for Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zarvan

Well September has started any body can tell when will tests start


----------



## Europa

Dazzler said:


> al right guys time to wake up, the event the video is from is "Norinco Armour Day" and many delegates from many countries are invited, not just pakistan.



this one a shorter video in hd


----------



## Ramesh N

farhan_9909 said:


> From the Video
> 
> So we are testing this beast.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can see a RCWS aswell




Really dude.... you have eagle's eye...


----------



## kolinsky

Desert Fox said:


> First lets hope the Al-Khalid and the MBT-3000 aren't the same Tank before we reach any conclusions.


Why? If they are the same Tank, AK2 may be in service very soon, because the video shows the progress of VT4 

You should know the logic of the video, why they give a picture for two happy Pakistani before the test of VT4? 

Yes, you will have it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zarvan

kolinsky said:


> Why? If they are the same Tank, AK2 may be in service very soon, because the video shows the progress of VT4
> 
> You should know the logic of the video, why they give a picture for two happy Pakistani before the test of VT4?
> 
> Yes, you will have it.


They are not same Tank Al Khalid II is being done in HIT and it would be shown for first time in IDEX 2014


----------



## nk2120132471

well,i think we really need something to be clarified(or disccussed).

1,About MBT3000's engine: MBT3000 is using same engine as 99A(the official name of newest type 99 tank,which some people in forum call it 99A2 or 99G or whatever.I'm quite sure about the name..).But the engine of 99A is 1500hp.MBT3000 adjusted its power to about 1300hp(or 1200hp,which i'm not very sure) ,to gain a better lifetime.

2, 99A seems to have same transmission systems as MBT3000.They both use Steering Wheel to control.( which i thought MBT3000 were better than 99A,and 99A used lever to control.)But there is no pic to confirm this.

3,speed: I've never heard 99A can run as fast as 80km/h..... maybe it's on highway?...it's not important.you can take it as a joke.

4.amor.99A's is similar to 1m RHA? some people say that,but i'm not sure.

5.family tree:
VT1A=china export version MBT2000,there is a little different from Al Khalid like ERA or sth.i'm not sure.
VT2=looks very like 96 series.
VT3=kind of modified 59
VT4=MBT3000.nearly same chasis of 99A.But its turrent looks like an upgrade mbt2000.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Desert Fox

kolinsky said:


> Why? If they are the same Tank, AK2 may be in service very soon, because the video shows the progress of VT4
> 
> You should know the logic of the video, why they give a picture for two happy Pakistani before the test of VT4?
> 
> Yes, you will have it.


VT-4 is impressive and i hope that Pakistan does acquire a large number of them to replace our aging fleet of Type-59's/69's, but the AK2 is supposed to be Pakistan's own indigenous effort and if it turns out that they're both the same Tank then that would only prove that the Chinese have been designing and testing our Tanks for us because we are incapable of doing so on our own.


----------



## Beast

Desert Fox said:


> VT-4 is impressive and i hope that Pakistan does acquire a large number of them to replace our aging fleet of Type-59's/69's, but the AK2 is supposed to be Pakistan's own indigenous effort and if it turns out that they're both the same Tank then that would only prove that the Chinese have been designing and testing our Tanks for us because we are incapable of doing so on our own.



Talk is cheap, acquiring this beast in large number needs lots of money.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zarvan

Beast said:


> Talk is cheap, acquiring this beast in large number needs lots of money.


We would get them with TOT and produce according to our needs


----------



## TeesraIndiotHunter

Desert Fox said:


> If it turns out that the MBT-3000/VT-4 is the Al-Khalid II then that will be TRULY EMBARRASSING for Pakistan because the Chinese are developing our Tanks for us and all of our indigenization hype was nothing more than brain farts.



True that!!!




> First lets hope the Al-Khalid and the MBT-3000 aren't the same Tank before we reach any conclusions.



Well, according to all reports...and senior members who have connects in HIT...Al Khalid-II is a different tank than VT-4 with different gun, suspension/transmission etc, and engine etc.

Lets wait and see...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

Zarvan said:


> We would get them with TOT and produce according to our needs


 It will still cost lots of money. Production line? Material? Train crew? You are talking as if TOT don't cost money. In order to get better percentage of TOT, a large license fee needs to be paid.

The best solution is to buy this in a small quantity to form a elite mechanised. AK1 and AK2 will form the remaning.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## kolinsky

Beast said:


> From the video, the VT-4 turret gun stabiliser is extremely advance and stable that it is able to maintain stagnant while the whole chasis is rotating on uneven surface.



To be honest, this stabilizer is not camparable to Leopard A7. I have seen the Leopard A7 once, its vertical responding time it shorter, the horizontal I cannot tell.


Desert Fox said:


> VT-4 is impressive and i hope that Pakistan does acquire a large number of them to replace our aging fleet of Type-59's/69's, but the AK2 is supposed to be Pakistan's own indigenous effort and if it turns out that they're both the same Tank then that would only prove that the Chinese have been designing and testing our Tanks for us because we are incapable of doing so on our own.



No offensive. The whole industry of Pakistan is incapable to build high quality tanks. So do isreal. Metallurgical industry is the key of tanks from chasis, turret, gun, engine to armor. That is a huge project, if Pakistan has no strong metallurgical industry. Isreal also imports steels to build their own tanks. As I said, to develop a new version for Pakistan should be a serious problem. The best thing is to build yourselves adaptive control component for upgrading. Some parts, e.g. guns, american also use german guns, just buy one, but the controlling is always in secret, you can do yourselves and be adaptive. Once tech break through, all tank can be upgraded. So do the sensors, research the sensors, and you can sale them with the chinese tanks, When we want to save our secret, we may use a Pakistan sensor instead. 

You must imported many parts for AK2. Look at K2 of Korea, they buy many parts but still buggy.To build a new Tank is much harder than upgrade one. The price of K2 is unbelievable, as well as the Altay from Turky and Arjun. I donot think this tech routine is a good choice for the countries want to develop own tanks, their price are more than 8 mil dollors per each. The isreal airforce's routine is very interesting, they buy era breaking platforms and build their own applications on the platform. When new platform is available, just integrate their applications to the new platform, Sometimes the USA buy components from isreal for their own flights.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Beast

kolinsky said:


> To be honest, this stabilizer is not camparable to Leopard A7. I have seen the Leopard A7 once, its vertical responding time it shorter, the horizontal I cannot tell.



Prove it. I doubt your words. 






Mind you. This is probably the most common variant of Type96A send for competition. They are better one in PLA. And I can bet VT-4 will be much much better than this Type96A.


----------



## nomi007




----------



## kolinsky

Beast said:


> Prove it. I doubt your words.



I just see the video of VT4 and i have seen the exhibition of a Leopard A7 in Germany. If the camera is fixed, when the VT4 driving throw the hill, there are small responding times. As far as I remember Leopard A7 has a very stabilized gun, I can not feel the responding time. The horizontal i donot know. VT4 overcomes Leopard A7, that is the real thing to prove.....

The T96a movie has a even ground, come on....


----------



## Zarvan

Beast said:


> It will still cost lots of money. Production line? Material? Train crew? You are talking as if TOT don't cost money. In order to get better percentage of TOT, a large license fee needs to be paid.
> 
> The best solution is to buy this in a small quantity to form a elite mechanised. AK1 and AK2 will form the remaning.


If we would get them than we would go for at least 500 off these but I think number would be 800

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

kolinsky said:


> I just see the video of VT4 and i have seen the exhibition of a Leopard A7 in Germany. If the camera is fixed, when the VT4 driving throw the hill, there are small responding times. As far as I remember Leopard A7 has a very stabilized gun, I can not feel the responding time. The horizontal i donot know. VT4 overcomes Leopard A7, that is the real thing to prove.....
> 
> The T96a movie has a even ground, come on....



First of all, you are assuming lots of thing. When VT-4 going down hill. Are you sure its main gun stabiliser is on? You are assuming its lock on which I doubt as its travelling. It will be hilarious if you are just come to your conclusion just based on its travelling mode which proves nothing.

As for the video of Type96a. Its travelling off road. Can you show a video of Leopard A7 going for a foreign competition going at that speed ,off road and yet still score 3 out of 3 shots with no mistake? In compeition, especially a foreign compeition. There is no way to rig that shot. While I have seen many western demonstration video or promotion video will always show you the good side and always present the best with plenty of edition.

As I say, prove it. Instead of your assumption and groundless speculation that Leopard A7 has better stabiliser gun than VT-4 based on stereotyping.



Zarvan said:


> If we would get them than we would go for at least 500 off these but I think number would be 800



I think is a tall order.


----------



## kolinsky

Beast said:


> First of all, you are assuming lots of thing. When VT-4 going down hill. Are you sure its main gun stabiliser is on? You are assuming its lock on which I doubt as its travelling. It will be hilarious if you are just come to your conclusion just based on its travelling mode which proves nothing.


Come on, if the stabilizer is off, the gun is stabilized by whom?

What is your point? Donot debate for debate, yah? My fellow.

As a Chines, moment I have no bare face to say VT4 overcomes Leopard A7, whatever..... just say what you like.


----------



## Beast

kolinsky said:


> Come on, if the stabilizer is off, the gun is stabilized by whom?
> 
> What is your point? Donot debate for debate, yah? My fellow.
> 
> As a Chines, moment I have no bare face to say VT4 overcomes Leopard A7, whatever..... just say what you like.



If stabilizer is off while it's travelling, does it mean the gun will drop off by itself? So what do it needs to be stabilise? I do not get what you trying to ask?

And now you are avoiding my question with many of your assumption which I needs to clarify with at least video or some facts.
Yet you come out nothing concrete which proves you are just rubbishing.

Remember you are the one who bring in leopard a7 in this thread the first place, not me. Now prove it instead of avoiding my question with stereo typing.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## kolinsky

Beast said:


> If stabilizer is off while it's travelling, does it mean the gun will drop off by itself? So what do it needs to be stabilise? I do not get what you trying to ask?
> 
> And now you are avoiding my question with many of your assumption which I needs to clarify with at least video or some facts.
> Yet you come out nothing concrete which proves you are just rubbishing.
> 
> Remember you are the one who bring in leopard a7 in this thread the first place, not me. Now prove it instead of avoiding my question with stereo typing.


hah, if the stabilizer is off, why do they make a video for us to watch, what is the thing to watch? What kind of idiot will make such a film in the exhibition.

I mean you should say what somebody else can believe you. Even I am doubt about VT4 is really better than T96A, from the rough statistic may be, the details may be not. Generally VT4 < 99A2 < Leopard A7, that is the sequence I can believe, your ordering, i am sorry.

Yes i brougt Leopard A7 to this thread, so what? So I am responsible to give you all information about A7? I am not a spy, you asked a wrong person. What is wrong with you?


----------



## Dazzler

Beast said:


> It will still cost lots of money. Production line? Material? Train crew? You are talking as if TOT don't cost money. In order to get better percentage of TOT, a large license fee needs to be paid.
> 
> The best solution is to buy this in a small quantity to form a elite mechanised. AK1 and AK2 will form the remaning.



it is a standard procedure between norinco and HIT since the famous type-59 mbt deal, followed by type-85IIAP. VT-4 (IF bought) will follow a similar course


----------



## Zarvan

Dazzler said:


> it is a standard procedure between norinco and HIT since the famous type-59 mbt deal, followed by type-85IIAP. VT-4 (IF bought) will follow a similar course


If you have sources in Army try to confirm weather tests have started or not


----------



## Dazzler

Zarvan said:


> If you have sources in Army try to confirm weather tests have started or not



will have to visit some friends


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

The 50th stupid thread with Sufi zarvan repeatin the same thing again and again..all over a tid bid from a forum member..


Going for MBT-3000 doesn't even make sense when HIT is working on AK-2!


----------



## Beast

kolinsky said:


> hah, if the stabilizer is off, why do they make a video for us to watch, what is the thing to watch? What kind of idiot will make such a film in the exhibition.
> 
> I mean you should say what somebody else can believe you. Even I am doubt about VT4 is really better than T96A, from the rough statistic may be, the details may be not. Generally VT4 < 99A2 < Leopard A7, that is the sequence I can believe, your ordering, i am sorry.
> 
> Yes i brougt Leopard A7 to this thread, so what? So I am responsible to give you all information about A7? I am not a spy, you asked a wrong person. What is wrong with you?


 
Once again u are avoiding my question. Why would they on the stabilizer when they are doing obstacles course? They want us to know how good it's off road capabilities not how good it's stabilizer of gun when going those slope. 

And China is both the maker of Type96a and later the VT4. Why would they make a inferior tank out of a non top of line tank for export, just to shoot their own foot. You just make comment for the sake.


----------



## Zarvan

DESERT FIGHTER said:


> The 50th stupid thread with Sufi zarvan repeatin the same thing again and again..all over a tid bid from a forum member..
> 
> 
> Going for MBT-3000 doesn't even make sense when HIT is working on AK-2!


Mr if you look at history we always had several kind off different Tanks and I think we would go for both MBT-3000 and AK-2 @Dazzler if you can confirm from Army it would be great


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Zarvan said:


> Mr if you look at history we always had several kind off different Tanks and I think we would go for both MBT-3000 and AK-2 @Dazzler if you can confirm from Army it would be great


That would create a logistical nightmare:

AK-I
AK-II
T-80UD
AZ
MBT-4000
T-85IIPs(even if it is phased out.. Still a lot of different types of tanks).


Again AK-II is the new high end tank..


----------



## Zarvan

DESERT FIGHTER said:


> That would create a logistical nightmare:
> 
> AK-I
> AK-II
> T-80UD
> AZ
> MBT-4000
> T-85IIPs(even if it is phased out.. Still a lot of different types of tanks).
> 
> 
> Again AK-II is the new high end tank..


That is why I am saying some body from forum may be mods or some member with inside sources need to confirm weather we are testing this Tank and if yes why we want to induct it when we are working on AK-2


----------



## nalan

kolinsky said:


> Come on, if the stabilizer is off, the gun is stabilized by whom?
> 
> What is your point? Donot debate for debate, yah? My fellow.
> 
> As a Chines, moment I have no bare face to say VT4 overcomes Leopard A7, whatever..... just say what you like.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aliaselin

kolinsky said:


> Generally VT4 < 99A2 < Leopard A7


Firstly, there is no tank called 99A2
secondly, there is no tank called Leopard A7 but Leopard A7+
Thirdly, Leopard used watered down Chobham armour
Fourthly, some types of Leopard A7+ upgraded from Leopard A4, which have only L44；as a matter of fact, there is no Leopard A7+ in service


----------



## nk2120132471

it doesn't matter whether MBT3000 is AK II or not.

It's more important to see what system AK II will have.Gas-hydraulic suspension? ukrain6TD-3 engine?

And though korea dont have a long history of making tank,it still make K1 and K2.which seems to be a competable tank.With systems of foreign country,you can make a tank which fits your country.not that difficult


----------



## Zarvan

DESERT FIGHTER said:


> The 50th stupid thread with Sufi zarvan repeatin the same thing again and again..all over a tid bid from a forum member..
> 
> 
> Going for MBT-3000 doesn't even make sense when HIT is working on AK-2!


That is why I am saying some body from this forum needs to confirm from Army weather we are testing this Tank and if yes why when we are working on AK 2


----------



## aliaselin

kolinsky said:


> first hand resource


 So many nonsense to make up to be scientific
Whey you talk about Chinese things, where is your citation? You even did not know what you were really talking about but you said you were scientific

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## kolinsky

Beast said:


> Once again u are avoiding my question. Why would they on the stabilizer when they are doing obstacles course? They want us to know how good it's off road capabilities not how good it's stabilizer of gun when going those slope.
> 
> And China is both the maker of Type96a and later the VT4. Why would they make a inferior tank out of a non top of line tank for export, just to shoot their own foot. You just make comment for the sake.



Assume that the NORINCO gays idiotically swtich off the stabilizer when they are doing obstacle course without showing the function of stabilization, and later they will show the stabilization in another course with obstacles or just on an even ground, or they even donot want to show the stabilizations at all to imply this shit VT4 even donot have stabilizer at all. Whatever the video fits to which condition, thhere are two conclusion, and one is correct: The NORINCO is idiot, or VT4 is rubbish. May be the 3rd choice, yes, you are!

Please watch the video again, make it clearly, what is showing, they are showing the horizontal stabilization , but the vertical is not, that is a nice assumption. If they do this, i will say there is no vertical stabilization at all. Otherwise, why they are so reluctantly to show? If so, your fail the exhibition and makes your product rubbish.

What is an exhibition, they want to show some thing, want to persuade others to buy something, not to test their production. Just have common sence.


----------



## Europa

@kolinsky 

you are wrong. 

i am not a norinco gay, nor am i a chinese, i would still say, you are simply wrong. just because vertical stabilization wasn't video graphed, you can't say, vertical stabilization was absent. yes, you can say that vertical stabilization should have been video recorded and shown, thats a good suggestion. but you are acting like an obstinate child. 

as far as i know, vertical stabilization is not a big deal and a new generation tank like this must be having that feature. norinco was not born yesterday, they are more professional than you may ever imagine. and also customers are not stupids, they know this tank is worth the money. thats why they are going to buy it. 

the actual issue is price for customers, not some idiotic technical claim as you are making here. you simply can't base your assumptions and draw a conclusion based on some video recording which was meant to be for rough demonstration. i can assure you that vertical stabilization is present there, you will see in future. please stop acting like a child! professional posters are laughing at you.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## kolinsky

Beast said:


> So many nonsense of your explanation. Why not you say when combat aircraft doing acrobatic exercise shall on the fire control radar.
> 
> You only on the necessary device when needed. In VT4 case, they are doing obstacles course to demonstrate off road capabilities. Why would they need to on the gun stabilizer? Would it improve its off road better? The answer is No. You can never judge a tank main gun stabilizer by its travelling mode unless it's fire on the move.



I said the stabilizer is on, just check the video again. I am not doing a logic exercise with you. Unless you tell me all that video shown is done manually, otherwise your point is undermined.

Please check other tank demo video. The off road capabilities is not demonstrated alone. To drive a tank off road is the basic function of a tank, nothing to show. In the biathlon, it is possible the gun is not targeted, but in an exhibition, they always targeted. When a tank pass over obstacles it can also aim to the target. This is very important to a modern tank. In the video, the gun is obviously targeted to some where. So I said the responding time is longer than Leopard, otherwise the responsing time is counted as infinity. The responsing time is from the changes happened to adapt the change. If there is no response, the time is infinity, and logically also longer than any tank even a T34.

When I was in ILA this year. Aircraft I cannot tell. The attack hilicopters is targeted in some cases. Have you ever been in an exhibition?


----------



## kolinsky

Europa said:


> @kolinsky
> 
> you are wrong.
> 
> i am not a norinco gay, nor am i a chinese, i would still say, you are simply wrong. just because vertical stabilization wasn't video graphed, you can't say, vertical stabilization was absent. yes, you can say that vertical stabilization should have been video recorded and shown, thats a good suggestion. but you are acting like an obstinate child.
> 
> as far as i know, vertical stabilization is not a big deal and a new generation tank like this must be having that feature. norinco was not born yesterday, they are more professional than you may ever imagine. and also customers are not stupids, they know this tank is worth the money. thats why they are going to buy it.
> 
> the actual issue is price for customers, not some idiotic technical claim as you are making here. you simply can't base your assumptions and draw a conclusion based on some video recording which was meant to be for rough demonstration. i can assure you that vertical stabilization is present there, you will see in future. please stop acting like a child! professional posters are laughing at you.


The absence of vertical stabilization is not my opinion. The @Beast gay made the assumption and use this assumption to rebut me #83. @nalan even gave me a picture to show me the virtical was stabilized by a stick #95. Even so they wanted to tell, VT4 is better than T96A.

Anybody knows there is vertical stabilization, but they also should show it. The responsing time is very important to the performance of stabilizer. You cannot say, I have the stabilizer, so can we skip it in the show? I will ask why? Is there some tech. problems? There is big difference, if the gun takes one minute or one second. That is my opinion, from I saw in Germany, the responsing time of a Leopard is shorter. I cannot feel the responsing time, but VT4, I feel it. It is my opinion, it's nothing about nationalism, or national pride. Even there is someone @aliaselin want to prove that I am not a Chinese.

The demo shown us the gun is targeted to somewhere, otherwise the moving of the gun and the rotating turret is meanlingless. For a professional show, the absence of stabilizer must be made by an idiot. If they donot including the stabilizer, they implies the stabilizer is not ready, that is very important. They show functions and performances in purpose, and the time limit constraints the number of scenarios, so they have to show as many functions as possible in one scenario. The stabilizer is always shown with off road disorder sections.

I said argue for the sake of arguing is not right.



Beast said:


> So many nonsense of your explanation. Why not you say when combat aircraft doing acrobatic exercise shall on the fire control radar.
> 
> You only on the necessary device when needed. In VT4 case, they are doing obstacles course to demonstrate off road capabilities. Why would they need to on the gun stabilizer? Would it improve its off road better? The answer is No. You can never judge a tank main gun stabilizer by its travelling mode unless it's fire on the move.


Why not, why not, why not????? The question is not why it should be switched on, the question is why not! It is not should be switched on, it ought be, it must be, it has to be switched on. It is not driving a tank in your garden, it is a professional show. It is not a show you can stabilize the gun with a stick, if you are really want to sale the tank. Please give me facts, the stabilizer is off. I watched the aiming of the gun, you should tell why you have this freaky assumption not logical reasoning, say what you saw.


----------



## Beast

kolinsky said:


> The absence of vertical stabilization is not my opinion. The @Beast gay made the assumption and use this assumption to rebut me #83. @nalan even gave me a picture to show me the virtical was stabilized by a stick #95. Even so they wanted to tell, VT4 is better than T96A.
> 
> Anybody knows there is vertical stabilization, but they also should show it. The responsing time is very important to the performance of stabilizer. You cannot say, I have the stabilizer, so can we skip it in the show? I will ask why? Is there some tech. problems? There is big difference, if the gun takes one minute or one second. That is my opinion, from I saw in Germany, the responsing time of a Leopard is shorter. I cannot feel the responsing time, but VT4, I feel it. It is my opinion, it's nothing about nationalism, or national pride. Even there is someone @aliaselin want to prove that I am not a Chinese.
> 
> The demo shown us the gun is targeted to somewhere, otherwise the moving of the gun and the rotating turret is meanlingless. For a professional show, the absence of stabilizer must be made by an idiot. If they donot including the stabilizer, they implies the stabilizer is not ready, that is very important. They show functions and performances in purpose, and the time limit constraints the number of scenarios, so they have to show as many functions as possible in one scenario. The stabilizer is always shown with off road disorder sections.
> 
> I said argue for the sake of arguing is not right.
> 
> 
> Why not, why not, why not????? The question is not why it should be switched on, the question is why not! It is not should be switched on, it ought be, it must be, it has to be switched on. It is not driving a tank in your garden, it is a professional show. It is not a show you can stabilize the gun with a stick, if you are really want to sale the tank. Please give me facts, the stabilizer is off. I watched the aiming of the gun, you should tell why you have this freaky assumption not logical reasoning, say what you saw.


The stabilizer is clearly shown in the last 30 seconds of the video where the tank made a salute to the VIP. Off road and they definitely off it. As simple as that. VIP will be more concern about its off road obstacles performance, firing accuracy and stabilizer which is clearly demonstrated in the few last moment and mind you. Whole chassis turning and turret gun is almost complete stagnant.

And you are the one making assumption doing off road course will need stabilizer. Nobody is buying your idea.


----------



## 1ong1ong

kolinsky said:


> I said the stabilizer is on, just check the video again. I am not doing a logic exercise with you. Unless you tell me all that video shown is done manually, otherwise your point is undermined.
> 
> Please check other tank demo video. The off road capabilities is not demonstrated alone. To drive a tank off road is the basic function of a tank, nothing to show. In the biathlon, it is possible the gun is not targeted, but in an exhibition, they always targeted. When a tank pass over obstacles it can also aim to the target. This is very important to a modern tank. In the video, the gun is obviously targeted to some where. So I said the responding time is longer than Leopard, otherwise the responsing time is counted as infinity. The responsing time is from the changes happened to adapt the change. If there is no response, the time is infinity, and logically also longer than any tank even a T34.
> 
> When I was in ILA this year. Aircraft I cannot tell. The attack hilicopters is targeted in some cases. Have you ever been in an exhibition?



Do you know what's the meaning of "on" of a tank stabilisation system?

1) The system works on different modes. They may turn on one or both of the 2-axis (H & V).

2) Even with both of H&V are activated, it still contains sub-mode. You have option to turn on range finder only. It means the gun *will not* be stabilised even the stabilisation system is on---- for advanced MBT fire controlling system, *range finder and gun are not fixed physically* like what we see on T-72, you have to on/off together, buddy.

This active-standby mode has its advantage, it will not only save a lot of energy, but also always be fire-ready.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## kolinsky

kolinsky said:


> not driving a tank in your garden, it is a professional show. It is not a show





1ong1ong said:


> Do you know what's the meaning of "on" of a tank stabilisation system?
> 
> 1) The system works on different modes. They may turn on one or both of the 2-axis (H & V).
> 
> 2) Even with both of H&V are activated, it still contains sub-mode. You have option to turn on range finder only. It means the gun *will not* be stabilised even the stabilisation system is on---- for advanced MBT fire controlling system, *range finder and gun are not fixed physically* like what we see on T-72, you have to on/off together, buddy.
> 
> This active-standby mode has its advantage, it will not only save a lot of energy, but also always be fire-ready.


then draw a picture, just demo. what the path of the gun is moving by your assumption. Let's check which one is correct. The gun jumped a little, when the tank drives down from the small hill. What is the mechanism used?



Beast said:


> The stabilizer is clearly shown in the last 30 seconds of the video where the tank made a salute to the VIP. Off road and they definitely off it. As simple as that. VIP will be more concern about its off road obstacles performance, firing accuracy and stabilizer which is clearly demonstrated in the few last moment and mind you. Whole chassis turning and turret gun is almost complete stagnant.
> 
> And you are the one making assumption doing off road course will need stabilizer. Nobody is buying your idea.


just draw the path how the gun should move by your assumption. Whether the gun is pointing to somewhere can be seen by the path.


----------



## 1ong1ong

kolinsky said:


> then draw a picture, just demo. what the path of the gun is moving by your assumption. Let's check which one is correct. The gun jumped a little, when the tank drives down from the small hill. What is the mechanism used?
> 
> 
> just draw the path how the gun should move by your assumption. Whether the gun is pointing to somewhere can be seen by the path.



Its not assumption as you assumed. It's the way how it works which is major difference between latest and older.


----------



## Jungibaaz

Stick to English please, speaking in any other language is against the forum rules.


----------



## nalan

kolinsky said:


> The absence of vertical stabilization is not my opinion. The @Beast gay made the assumption and use this assumption to rebut me #83. @nalan even gave me a picture to show me the virtical was stabilized by a stick #95. Even so they wanted to tell, VT4 is better than T96A.


you said by whom,i told you right?yes,the gun is fixed,"virtical stabilized "is closed and fixed by that stick.correct me


> but they also should show it


they show it through fire
i do not understand what your point?


----------



## cnleio

Inside VT-4 (MBT-3000)


----------



## AsianLion

VT4 / MBT 3000 is a significant downgraded version of type 99G tank in service with China....how true is that.

Any future co-production between Pakistan and China ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## itaskol

AsianUnion said:


> VT4 / MBT 3000 is a significant downgraded version of type 99G tank in service with China....how true is that.


some key technic can not be export.such like own version of shell and armor. must make downgraded export version.

but some other tec can be tested on export version, such like remote control gun on vt4.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## nalan

it is export version.but hard to say it is downgraded.just integration


----------



## nalan

look at this big swimming gun even fire on the water.think about it,at least we are not short of experience.


----------



## 帅的一匹

The Youku link of Norinco weapon exhibition day video

中国兵器装甲日完整版，MBT3000/VT4，VN1，ST1，军用卡车—在线播放—优酷网，视频高清在线观看

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 帅的一匹

UKBengali said:


> This tank is sure to be a beast.
> 
> Any idea what the selling price may be?


5 million USD per

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Genesis

AsianUnion said:


> VT4 / MBT 3000 is a significant downgraded version of type 99G tank in service with China....how true is that.
> 
> Any future co-production between Pakistan and China ?



it's downgraded like a porsche. We strip it of some optional equipments and some communication equipments and other things like armor thickness and stuff, but we do it for a reason.

One our customers may not have that much money to begin with and want a downgraded version.

Two, those things like armor thickness, and communication devices and a few other things are really top secret.

Three and most importantly, we want people to upgrade to their own liking, so we provide a shell of some kind and you just add what you like to it. 

This way, the price is down, we keep our secret and you get the tank you can afford and want.

In this sense any and all production, unless you want the bare minimum, must be co-production of some kind.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kompromat

wanglaokan said:


> 5 million USD per



Could be higher or lower in the case of Pakistan as we are going to strip down this machine and optimize it just like AK series. Pakistan's VT-4, if the deal goes through would be quite different from the NORINCO variant.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 帅的一匹

Horus said:


> Could be higher or lower in the case of Pakistan as we are going to strip down this machine and optimize it just like AK series. Pakistan's VT-4, if the deal goes through would be quite different from the NORINCO variant.


I think China will sure offer lower price if Pakistan shows interests in it. Or we could just transplant MBT-3000 tech on MBT-2000.


----------



## Skull and Bones

Jungibaaz said:


> Stick to English please, speaking in any other language is against the forum rules.



Babu, hamkaa ingrazi nahi awathe.


----------



## Kompromat

wanglaokan said:


> I think China will sure offer lower price if Pakistan shows interests in it. Or we could just transplant MBT-3000 tech on MBT-2000.



Lets see how it turns out. VT-4 seems to be a very good choice for replacing our T-50, 60 and 85 series.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## S. Martin

Nice looking! From the video, this new crab seems to have a much better mobility than type 96A. I'm suprised to see that it is equiped with a remotely operated gun, while none of PLA's vehicle has it!



DESERT FIGHTER said:


> That would create a logistical nightmare:
> 
> AK-I
> AK-II
> T-80UD
> AZ
> MBT-4000
> T-85IIPs(even if it is phased out.. Still a lot of different types of tanks).
> 
> 
> Again AK-II is the new high end tank..


 Too many model definitely is not a good thing to PAK army!


----------



## luciferdd

wanglaokan said:


> I think China will sure offer lower price if Pakistan shows interests in it. Or we could just transplant MBT-3000 tech on MBT-2000.



Someone had said that 的 cost price of the 150HB+CH1000A powerpack is above 0.8M$...
The Hydraulic Power Transmission System can never be cheap what ever you get it from china or germanny


----------



## 帅的一匹

luciferdd said:


> Someone had said that the cost price of the 1500HB+CH1000A powerpack is above 0.8M$...
> The *Hydraulic Power Transmission System* can never be cheap


That's why it's so expensive compared to MBT2000


----------



## AsianLion

wanglaokan said:


> That's why it's so expensive compared to MBT2000



So MBT 3000 is similar to type 99 than MBT 2000?

Whats the price of MBT 3000?


----------



## XiaoYaoZi

china's t80 tank,technology in the 1980s
search 国产80坦克 in youku
my register time is not enough,I cant post link


----------



## qwerrty



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Zarvan

qwerrty said:


>


From many sides it looks like Abraham


----------



## monitor

looks like copy of abraham


----------



## +4vsgorillas-Apebane

monitor said:


> looks like copy of abraham





Zarvan said:


> From many sides it looks like Abraham



Whos is this Abraham?

Lincoln? Simpson? Abraham who wanted to sacrifice this son?

...........................................

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## monitor

+4vsgorillas-Apebane said:


> Whos is this Abraham?
> 
> Lincoln? Simpson? Abraham who wanted to sacrifice this son?
> 
> ...........................................


 No this Abraham is the America's main battle tank Abraham named after General Creighton Abrams, former Army Chief of US.


----------



## +4vsgorillas-Apebane

monitor said:


> No this Abraham is the America's main battle tank Abraham named after General Creighton Abrams, former Army Chief of US.



I know of the Abrams but have never heard it called Abraham before. Please forgive this humble gorilla.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## qwerrty



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AsianLion

MBT/3000/VT4/ Al Haider codename comparison to Type 98/99 and Type 99G / ZTZ 99G? What do chinese think on this comparison and similarity here ? Is it same as Russian T72 or Abraham tanks?

copy pasting for you:

I donot know how reliable or if any good Chinese Sinodefence.com Forum is, but Miragedriver(respected member) and tank expert (TerraN_Empire) reply below:

Miragedriver:


> Question: What relation is the MBT-3000 to the Type 98/99 tank?
> 
> MBT-3000 is now called VT-4, is the current version of VT-1/MBT-2000 after major upgrade?
> 
> TerraN you know more about this, can you help me out. Thanks



TerraN_EmpirE:


> @ Mirage: As to a relationship between this and the Type 99? T99 is longer, heavier and wider well VT4 is just a little taller they may share the same gun both are listed as 125mm smooth bores. the engines may be related but VT4 is inferior.
> 
> Turrets look close as to the hull chassis ( both have 6 road wheels). They seem to me to be kissing cousins. likely sharing elements of there Chassis, possibly guns, basic fire control systems, hatches perhaps base turret and automotive parts. Armor wise hard to guess we know it has modules on it's hull this might be composite or ERA or both. the hull armor is likely closely related but probably not as advanced as that found on the latest 99 tanks maybe the same armor used on the first of the 99's. Both tanks likely use the same accessory systesm in terms of options for RWS or Commanders MG, coax and Smoke grenade



PAKISTANI CUSTOMISED VERSION NG MBT ' AL HAIDER MBT ' WILL be BETTER THAN VT4/ MBT3000 OR TYPE 99...BECAUSE PAK ARMY HAS ACCESS TO WESTERN AND MADE IN PAK TECHNOLOGY, WHICH CHINESE TANKS LACK !!​


----------



## Beast

AsianUnion said:


> MBT/3000/VT4/ Al Haider codename comparison to Type 98/99 and Type 99G / ZTZ 99G? What do chinese think on this comparison and similarity here ? Is it same as Russian T72 or Abraham tanks?
> 
> copy pasting for you:
> 
> I donot know how reliable or if any good Chinese Sinodefence.com Forum is, but Miragedriver(respected member) and tank expert (TerraN_Empire) reply below:
> 
> Miragedriver:
> 
> 
> TerraN_EmpirE:
> 
> 
> PAKISTANI CUSTOMISED VERSION NG MBT ' AL HAIDER MBT ' WILL be BETTER THAN VT4/ MBT3000 OR TYPE 99...BECAUSE PAK ARMY HAS ACCESS TO WESTERN AND MADE IN PAK TECHNOLOGY, WHICH CHINESE TANKS LACK !!​


Lol.. then JF-17 supposed to be the most superior plane because of the same reason?

Cut the nationalistic scrap and give some logical reason.


----------



## AsianLion

Beast said:


> Lol.. then JF-17 supposed to be the most superior plane because of the same reason?
> Cut the nationalistic scrap and give some logical reason.



What if u think, Chinese all equipment and everything is so superior why no other country bought from you and y the west calls Chinese as copied and inferior.... How many J10s with AESA have you SOLD yet, the supposed to be the most superior plane and even better than FC-1s ? y Pakistan does not buy J10s or J31 stealth jets ? lol.

Lets be clear, Am not under estimating Chinese Indigenous Work, but saying that if ever, ever Pakistan Next MBT is VT4 then it will not all be Chinese equipment , it would mostly be Western, South African, Ukrainian, Turkish and largely made in Pakistan parts and systems.

Pakistanis exactly know what is really good stuff which Chinese have/make/it offers as export and what it needs to do, to totally customise for its own terrain, environment and battle plans...is that logic enough.

 If mbt3000/vt4 fails tests as the next generation Al Haider tank....it might be some Western, Ukrainian or South Korean Tank, which Pakistan is also being currently tested, as a future Joint Venture. VT4/mbt3000 / type 99 needs to be much better; a generation ahead of MBT 2000 / AK, which it may or may not be currently.


----------



## Beast

AsianUnion said:


> What if Chinese all equipment and everything is so superior why no other country bought from you and y the west calls Chinese as copied and inferior...LoL. How many J10 have you SOLD yet, the supposed to more superior than JF17 ? lol.
> 
> Lets be clear, Am not under estimating Chinese, but saying that if ever, ever Pakistan Next MBT is VT4 then it will not all be Chinese equipment , it would mostly be Western, South African, Ukrainian, Turkish and largely made in Pakistan parts and systems.
> 
> Pakistanis exactly know what is really good stuff which Chinese have/make and what it needs to totally customise for its own terrain, environment and battle plans...is that logic enough.
> 
> Personally I doubt mbt3000/vt4 is the next generation Al Haider tank....it might some western tank or South Korean which Pakistan is also currently testing, as Joint Venture. VT4/mbt3000 / type 99 needs to be much better; a generation ahead of MBT 2000, which it may or maynot be.



Lol.. another ill inform member. Checkout the Chinese weapon export to foreign countries Thread and see how much Chinese weapon have we export. Many of our weapon export are not covered becos Chinese always keep low profile on those export to reduce criticism from west. Even our PL-45 SPH to Algeria and VT-2 MBT export to Morocco are uncovered by Jane defense news and not reported by any Chinese media.

As for JF-17,it's mainly a Pakistan project, which we just play along with Pakistan. We are not concern whether it gets export or not. Our main fighter export is L-15 and has sold to Venezuela and Zambia.

J-10 has never been offer for export except PAF but given your limited budget. It has been stalled.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Beast

AsianUnion said:


> i think u are ill, ill informed
> *link: China Officially Offers Pakistan J-10 Variant*
> *Although am pretty confident that PAF does not need J10s as it is still not up to its specifications and it is very happy with JF-17 block I to II and III upgrades.*
> *Anyway what about other countries, any other country wants to buy J10s, J11s or J31s, anyone yet ?*
> *Second, I need how many billion dollars Chinese export, last I heard despite Indian and West Pak had exports around $400m-$0.5 billion. You can keep the profile low per ur wishes.*
> *-: Lets get back to the topic in hand about the new VT4/MBT 3000 Tank in export market.*




Did you read my post properly? I say j-10 is not for export except PAF. So your point?

China military export is rank 3rd after USA and Russia. And the report is an independent survey from Sweden body. This report is quite widely reported. I am surprised you are not aware of it.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## AsianLion

@Beast I got your point, thanks !!!

But I Gotta wonder about the Chinese mindset though. They build a high tech main battle tank, basic armour, scaled down version and make the controls look like some cheap plastic toy.

[视频]我国主战坦克跻身世界先进水平_新闻台_中国网络电视台


----------



## atlantis_cn

Beast said:


> Lol.. another ill inform member. Checkout the Chinese weapon export to foreign countries Thread and see how much Chinese weapon have we export. Many of our weapon export are not covered becos Chinese always keep low profile on those export to reduce criticism from west. Even our PL-45 SPH to Algeria and VT-2 MBT export to Morocco are uncovered by Jane defense news and not reported by any Chinese media.
> 
> As for JF-17,it's mainly a Pakistan project, which we just play along with Pakistan. We are not concern whether it gets export or not. Our main fighter export is L-15 and has sold to Venezuela and Zambia.
> 
> J-10 has never been offer for export except PAF but given your limited budget. It has been stalled.



"play along with Pakistan"? How retard are you? Please stop showing off your arrogance which brings shame to every Chinese member here.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Beast

AsianUnion said:


> @Beast I got your point, thanks !!!
> 
> But I Gotta wonder about the Chinese mindset though. They build a high tech main battle tank, basic armour, scaled down version and make the controls look like some cheap plastic toy.
> 
> [视频]我国主战坦克跻身世界先进水平_新闻台_中国网络电视台
> 
> View attachment 51639


 Cheap plastic toy? That control is from easier to control than standard track control layout. Inside the tank, is all digitised.



Embedded media from this media site is no longer available


And at least Chinese modern mbt stabilizer and fire control is at least one generation ahead of Russia T-72.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

atlantis_cn said:


> "play along with Pakistan"? How retard are you? Please stop showing off your arrogance which brings shame to every Chinese member here.


Sometime reality is hard to accept. JF-17 spec in the first place is already a mistake. You say I am retarded then how many JF-17 has been be exported besides Pakistan after induction for 5 years? Who's the retard?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AsianLion

Beast said:


> Sometime reality is hard to accept. JF-17 spec in the first place is already a mistake. You say I am retarded then how many JF-17 has been be exported besides Pakistan after induction for 5 years? Who's the retard?



Let me tell you clearly. Pakistan is very happy with its JF17 Block I, Block II and eventually Block III upgrades. There is no chance it is going to leave that for another 15-20+ years.

Second point is export, mostly it is the Americans who have always stopped our sales prospect to the prospective countries and India comes at the second.

Neverthless, after 15+ years how many French Rafale jets it got export, almost everyone says it is a failed project, which is wrong too. Let me come to Chinese Air force if J10 is not for sale, then what aircrafts for sale, J11s...how many J11s it got sold ??

Thirdly, China and Pakistan are one and the same thing, as we think like, like Brothers...so Chinese/Pakistan sales are not as counted as really a export order, unless it is necessary to make ones country lift its sales status, normally world doesnot count it as a customer-business relationship too.

lastly, customers still want improvements on Jf17s like the AESA radar, and other improved parts, countries definately want a replacement in FUTURE, so donot worry about that, and remember currently capacity is low, Pakistan and Chinese factories are not even able to full fill PAF orders yet, talk abt exporting.

lets get back to mbt 3000 / vt4 possible future Al Haider tank here. ok.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Beast

AsianUnion said:


> Let me tell you clearly. Pakistan is very happy with its JF17 Block I, Block II and eventually Block III upgrades. There is no chance it is going to leave that for another 15-20+ years.
> 
> Second point is export, mostly it is the Americans who have always stopped our sales prospect to the prospective countries and India comes at the second.
> 
> Neverthless, after 15+ years how many French Rafale jets it got export, almost everyone says it is a failed project, which is wrong too. Let me come to Chinese Air force if J10 is not for sale, then what aircrafts for sale, J11s...how many J11s it got sold ??
> 
> Thirdly, China and Pakistan are one and the same thing, as we think like, like Brothers...so Chinese/Pakistan sales are not as counted as really a export order, unless it is necessary to make ones country lift its sales status, normally world doesnot count it as a customer-business relationship too.
> 
> lastly, customers still want improvements on Jf17s like the AESA radar, and other improved parts, countries definately want a replacement, so donot worry about that, and remember currently capacity is low, Pakistan and Chinese factories are not even able to full fill PAF orders yet, talk abt exporting.



J-11 is not for export. Who told you that J-11 which is a licenses copy of su-27 is allowed for export? We have a gentle agreement with Russia bottom not to export any of our J-16,J-15 and J-11b aircraft.

I never say JF-17 is a failure for PAF but China is not very supportive for it to export becos we need to share profit with Pakistan. L-15 Will be the main fighter jet for our export product as an affordable fighter/trainer and 100 percent profit goes to China. With cheap loan and backing from China, it easily got deal from Venezuela and Sainsbury more to come evenings not debut for PLAAF.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AsianLion

Beast said:


> Cheap plastic toy? That control is from easier to control than standard track control layout. Inside the tank, is all digitised.
> 
> 
> And at least Chinese modern mbt stabilizer and fire control is at least one generation ahead of Russia T-72.



Yes I didnot say control is easier or not, but the look of it do look like a toy, no bad intend here.

Secondly, One of the problem areas earlier of similar VT1A and VT2(T-96) and especially MBT2000 understood to be the chassis, especially the Chinese-designed and -built power pack as it also led to T-90II NORINCO failed project abandonment, which finally Pakistan had to completely buy the license and from near scratch it started building into Al Khalid MBT now. This whole T-90II programme has been subjected to a number of delays, especially the development of the MBT 2000.

The new high tech, MBT 3000 with Chinese power pack , and Chinese gun and armour are again a problem especially pakistan.

When you talk about Chinese modern stabilizer, a generation ahead of Russian T-7 it is quite a funny statement, nevertheless, a generation ahead will only take you to T80 or a max T-90 series, while Pakistan is now looking at T99A series and other world MBTs as replacement to its most oldest fleet of T-69,T59 etc etc.

last but not the least, older Chinese tanks had the problem of rust, hope the new MBT 3000 has resolved the problem of rust !!!

Also not to forget, Chinese smoke filled ENGINES are a definite no for Pakistan, hence it went with reliable and much improved Ukrainian UT6G-2 Engines.



Beast said:


> I never say JF-17 is a failure for PAF but China is not very supportive for it to export becos we need to share profit with Pakistan. L-15 Will be the main fighter jet for our export product as an affordable fighter/trainer and 100 percent profit goes to China.



Really donot understand such defensive, closed mindset of chinese...y would China not want to sell its top line fighter aircrafts, rather just a trainer jet which u call it is a the most super fighter jet L-15 :

And If China is NOT supportive of JF17 then why would it invested $500 million in development. come on you can do better than this, get some proper logic.


----------



## Beast

AsianUnion said:


> Yes I didnot say control is easier or not, but the look of it do look like a toy, no bad intend here.
> 
> Secondly, One of the problem areas earlier of similar VT1A and VT2(T-96) and especially MBT2000 understood to be the chassis, especially the Chinese-designed and -built power pack as it also led to T-90II NORINCO failed project abandonment, which finally Pakistan had to completely buy the license and from near scratch it started building into Al Khalid MBT now. This whole T-90II programme has been subjected to a number of delays, especially the development of the MBT 2000.
> 
> The new high tech, MBT 3000 with Chinese power pack , and Chinese gun are again a problem for export customers especially pakistan.
> 
> When you talk about Chinese modern stabilizer, a generation ahead of Russian T-7 it is quite a funny statement, nevertheless, a generation ahead will only take you to T80 or a max T-90 series, while Pakistan is now looking at T99A series and other world MBTs as replacement to its most oldest fleet of T-69,T59 etc etc.
> 
> last but not the least, older Chinese tanks had the problem of rust, hope the new MBT 3000 has resolved the problem of rust !!!
> 
> 
> 
> Really donot understand such defensive, closed mindset of chinese...y would China not want to sell its top line fighter aircrafts, rather just a tainer jet which u call a fighter jet L-15: come on you can do better than this.
> 
> View attachment 51782



Clearly , you do understand type96a is the most low end modern tank mass equipped PLA. Yet the stabilizer is ahead of Russia mass equipped T-72mbt. So you can imagine what will be our high end Type99A2 uses. It will be even a step ahead of our type96a.

For China to export high end aircraft. The market is still not ripe yet. Most countries will lots of money will buy US aircraft. Due to stronger allies and tradition. That's why L-15 is an Jack of all trade with good price for countries with limited budget. It need not be the best But remain affordable to them. So that they will not blow up their budget and fancy aircraft grounded due to lack of funds like Greece air force.

And we do not need to export our best. Becos,we do not really in need of money.


----------



## Pak_Sher

Beast said:


> Did you read my post properly? I say j-10 is not for export except PAF. So your point?
> 
> China military export is rank 3rd after USA and Russia. And the report is an independent survey from Sweden body. This report is quite widely reported. I am surprised you are not aware of it.


Chinese Military hardware has come a long way in quality and reliability. J10 will be a good edition for the PAF.


----------



## Infra_Man99

Looks could be deceiving. A BMW sedan or Lexus SUV has a much more stylish interior, but I'm guessing the Chinese tank's interior is a lot tougher.


----------



## Zarvan

AsianUnion said:


> What if u think, Chinese all equipment and everything is so superior why no other country bought from you and y the west calls Chinese as copied and inferior.... How many J10s with AESA have you SOLD yet, the supposed to be the most superior plane and even better than FC-1s ? y Pakistan does not buy J10s or J31 stealth jets ? lol.
> 
> Lets be clear, Am not under estimating Chinese Indigenous Work, but saying that if ever, ever Pakistan Next MBT is VT4 then it will not all be Chinese equipment , it would mostly be Western, South African, Ukrainian, Turkish and largely made in Pakistan parts and systems.
> 
> Pakistanis exactly know what is really good stuff which Chinese have/make/it offers as export and what it needs to do, to totally customise for its own terrain, environment and battle plans...is that logic enough.
> 
> If mbt3000/vt4 fails tests as the next generation Al Haider tank....it might be some Western, Ukrainian or South Korean Tank, which Pakistan is also being currently tested, as a future Joint Venture. VT4/mbt3000 / type 99 needs to be much better; a generation ahead of MBT 2000 / AK, which it may or may not be currently.


Mr we are not buying J-10 because we are short off money secondly many countries have bought Chinese equippment and west most off the times lie

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 帅的一匹

MBT3000 is for making money from 狗大户。


----------



## AsianLion

wanglaokan said:


> MBT3000 is for making money from 狗大户。


From you, you mean!

MBT 3000 needs to be upgraded massively.


----------



## 3BOOM

Bratva said:


> @DESERT FIGHTER @Dazzler Is it me or does it strikingly resemble Al-Khalid ?


hi Bro, can Pakistan produce mbt2000 all by yourself now?


----------



## Malik Alashter

狗大户。

Is that means (( big dog ).


----------



## aliaselin

Malik Alashter said:


> 狗大户。
> 
> Is that means (( big dog ).


No，it indicates the super rich customers like UAE, Saudi and Kuwait by Chinese military lover, and we are so envy with that they can afford some really good equipements produced by China but PLA can not due to budget shortage in our poor old days . Iraqi is also considered as 狗大户 in 1980s.

In NORINCO's target list, VT-3: low end; VT-2: medium customer; VT-1A(MBT-2000): medium to high end customer while VT-4(MBT-3000): high end customer.


----------



## Kompromat

aliaselin said:


> No，it indicates the super rich customers like UAE, Saudi and Kuwait by Chinese military lover, and we are so envy with that they can afford some really good equipements produced by China but PLA can not due to budget shortage in our poor old days . Iraqi is also considered as 狗大户 in 1980s.
> 
> In NORINCO's target list, VT-3: low end; VT-2: medium customer; VT-1A(MBT-2000): medium to high end customer while VT-4(MBT-3000): high end customer.



I don't think middle eastern nations would go for VT-4 when they can easily afford a crap load of Abrams and Leos.


----------



## S. Martin

AsianUnion said:


> Let me tell you clearly. Pakistan is very happy with its JF17 Block I, Block II and eventually Block III upgrades. There is no chance it is going to leave that for another 15-20+ years.
> 
> Second point is export, mostly it is the Americans who have always stopped our sales prospect to the prospective countries and India comes at the second.
> 
> Neverthless, after 15+ years how many French Rafale jets it got export, almost everyone says it is a failed project, which is wrong too. Let me come to Chinese Air force if J10 is not for sale, then what aircrafts for sale, J11s...how many J11s it got sold ??
> .


I think China is unwilling to sell J10 at this stage, because it's its top advanced main frontline figther, exporting to other parties may lead to the disclosure of its high technology. Another factor is that J10' productivity still cannot fullfil PLA's demand, no extra products can be offered for sales. For J11 and its series, reasons are similar with J10 in addition that it's involved with intellectual property rights, which is claimed by Russia, so you can see that China never publicly advocate J10/J11 series for export.



AsianUnion said:


> Thirdly, China and Pakistan are one and the same thing, as we think like, like Brothers...so Chinese/Pakistan sales are not as counted as really a export order, unless it is necessary to make ones country lift its sales status, normally world doesnot count it as a customer-business relationship too.
> .


I'm afraid that China/Pak don't have enough productivity to build extra JF-17 for sales.



AsianUnion said:


> Let me tell you clearly. Pakistan is very happy with its JF17 Block I, Block II
> 
> lastly, customers still want improvements on Jf17s like the AESA radar, and other improved parts, countries definately want a replacement in FUTURE, so donot worry about that, and remember currently capacity is low, Pakistan and Chinese factories are not even able to full fill PAF orders yet, talk abt exporting.
> 
> lets get back to mbt 3000 / vt4 possible future Al Haider tank here. ok.


Agree. JF17 will have bright export prospects. Current bottleneck is productivity, sales service and engines availability.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sulman Badshah

3BOOM said:


> can Pakistan produce mbt2000 all by yourself now?


Produce many parts .... and assemble many parts


----------



## aliaselin

Horus said:


> I don't think middle eastern nations would go for VT-4 when they can easily afford a crap load of Abrams and Leos.


No matter they will buy or not，NORINCO should have the high end product off the shelf. This is a commercial strategy for any mature company

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## S. Martin

If VT-4 is really a powerful beast, maybe China can use it to hold some tank contests similar to Russian's world tank competion. It's good chance to demonstrate tank's capabilities. China can design better competition rules including armor test and moving shoot test.


----------



## Zarvan

S. Martin said:


> I think China is unwilling to sell J10 at this stage, because it's its top advanced main frontline figther, exporting to other parties may lead to the disclosure of its high technology. Another factor is that J10' productivity still cannot fullfil PLA's demand, no extra products can be offered for sales. For J11 and its series, reasons are similar with J10 in addition that it's involved with intellectual property rights, which is claimed by Russia, so you can see that China never publicly advocate J10/J11 series for export.
> 
> 
> I'm afraid that China/Pak don't have enough productivity to build extra JF-17 for sales.
> 
> 
> Agree. JF17 will have bright export prospects. Current bottleneck is productivity, sales service and engines availability.


China is ready to sell J-10 we don't have money to buy them


----------



## S. Martin

Zarvan said:


> China is ready to sell J-10 we don't have money to buy them


Yet I can't find formal information about J-10 export in chinese media. But it's possible that it is just not reported, just like before some weapon export deals were not reported in my country and we found them from foreign magzines. If it's true, I think it may be a special treatment to Pakistan due to special relation between our two country.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

S. Martin said:


> Yet I can't find formal information about J-10 export in chinese media. But it's possible that it is just not reported, just like before some weapon export deals were not reported in my country and we found them from foreign magzines. If it's true, I think it may be a special treatment to Pakistan due to special relation between our two country.



Premier wen did mention about selling Pakistan J-10 but I guess financial problem did hinder the deal. Other than that, J-10 is not clear for export for other countries. I always have a laugh when the western cock up news of China desperate trying to sell J-10 to countries like Myanmar and venezula with no success. The truth is J-10 specification is still a state secret. Its dogfight capabilities is in fact closely guarded and China military is loaded with money. PLA don't need to sell its best to get funding. It just need approval from top and money will fall from sky. Remember PLA is the best funded after US armed forces. No other countries come close.
China military sales usually will place bilateral relationship first over money.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## conworldus

I think tanks will be phased out because they consume too much diesel and have questionable survival capability. Even the best tanks the Leopard won't stand a hair chance against mediocre attack choppers.

China should start the development of the next generation land combat vehicle. I envision something that combines high stealthiness, high mobility, medium armor, sensors, and datalink. An all purpose, all terrain, mobile combat machine that provides firepower, anti-air, and act as an infantry command center. The unit should be significantly lighter than tanks so that each Y-20 would be able to carry two at least.

Imagine deploy two or three of these bad boys with a few squads of elite infantry, it would wreck havoc everywhere they go.


----------



## Super Falcon

Israel and usa working on laser tanks which can cut through anything from steel concrete missiles etc if it is future than we must look where we want to be heading


----------



## conworldus

Super Falcon said:


> Israel and usa working on laser tanks which can cut through anything from steel concrete missiles etc if it is future than we must look where we want to be heading



Laser can certainly be a possible future but right now it still consumes too much power and miniaturization has been an issue.

The future of warfare I think will rely far more on system than individual unit. Computerized datalink that can network all vehicles, infantry, and air support effectively would be the key to defeat the opponents. Vehicles that fit the requirement would require smaller but more effective weapon than tank guns for sure. Imagine each vehicle would also act as a local command center. If destroyed, the system would intelligently allocate the command to a different vehicle.

This is why I think tanks, being so clumsy and expensive, would soon be obsolete all together. Lighter, faster, all terrain high tech vehicle would be the way to go.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AsianLion

Possible this tank will be stripped and inducted with Made in pakistan systems, called NEXT GENERATION 'HAIDER TANK' PROJECT.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GeHAC

Super Falcon said:


> Israel and usa working on laser tanks which can cut through anything from steel concrete missiles etc if it is future than we must look where we want to be heading


I can tell its impossible in 20 years.Even the US can not solve energy supply problem for combat-use high power laser beam currently.
Even so,our current 3.5gen tanks can engage such tanks by creating smoke to block and relying on millimeter-wave radar to fight back if such tank is true.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## skybolt

*Norinco VT-4 MBT (Al Haider)*
*at IDEAS 2014*

*













*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Beast

It's a mistake Pakistan uses Ukraine gas turbine engine for its tank. VT-4 will rectify the problem with its 1200 hp engine power.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zarvan

skybolt said:


> *Norinco VT-4 MBT (Al Haider)*
> *at IDEAS 2014*
> 
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


Did you asked our military guys at Ideas that weather we are looking to induct these or not ?


----------



## Beast

Zarvan said:


> Did you asked our military guys at Ideas that weather we are looking to induct these or not ?


Very likely many component of VT-4 will be used on al kalid II.


----------



## Zarvan

Beast said:


> Very likely many component of VT-4 will be used on al kalid II.


This is not AK-2 and its AK-1 which is our Tank and will be shown next year that will be our Main MBT than Al-Haider if we go for it


----------



## Zarvan

Beast said:


> China newest VT-4 MBT clear for export. Looks very modern, including the RCG on the turret.


When will China start producing this Tank ? And some members claimed Pakistan is testing this are tests complete and what are the results any information ?


----------



## Beast

Zarvan said:


> When will China start producing this Tank ? And some members claimed Pakistan is testing this are tests complete and what are the results any information ?


This tanks is for export. Production will depend on customer. They put an order and a deposit, production will start ASAP.


----------



## Daniel808

*Improved Version of VT-4 MBT / MBT-3000*

It appears a few design changes have been made to:
1) Headlights
2) Side skirts
3) Turret add-on armor now resembles that of Type-99
4) Grenade dispensers have been relocated
*5) New Commander sight from Type-99A2*
6) No remote weapons station on this version
*7) Added a milli-wave ballistic radar for Active Self Defence System.*
8) an Addition of some sort of (optical) sensor assembly atop the turret between the hatches
9) Re-designed undercarriage structure
*10) Additional sensors assemblies can be seen in each turret frontal corner (Possibly cameras and/or milli-wave radars for active self-defense System?)*
11) an Unknown sensor on the turret (highlighted with green box).

These are the differences I can spot. If you see more, please point them out.

*Improved Version of VT-4 MBT / MBT-3000 Photos*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Reashot Xigwin

* RTA Signed for VT-4 MBT *




Chinese VT-4 Main Battle Tank (photo : fyjs)

Source in RTA told TAF that the Royal Thai Army signed the contract last month with the undisclosed number of tank and contract value. But the aim is to field a battalion of VT-4.

Eelier, RTA ordered the 50 T-84 Oplot-M from Ukraine to meet the requirement of 200 new main battle tank. But the unrest in Ukraine delayed the delivery.

*If RTA satisfied with the Chinese tank, the source said, they will order for to meet all unfilled requirement of 150 tanks.
"Even the VT-4 will be manufacture in China but the contract require technology transfer to Thailand.* Defense Technology Institute will be one of the technology receiver"

Delivery is expected in 2 years.
(TAF)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Zarvan

Reashot Xigwin said:


> * RTA Signed for VT-4 MBT *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chinese VT-4 Main Battle Tank (photo : fyjs)
> 
> Source in RTA told TAF that the Royal Thai Army signed the contract last month with the undisclosed number of tank and contract value. But the aim is to field a battalion of VT-4.
> 
> Eelier, RTA ordered the 50 T-84 Oplot-M from Ukraine to meet the requirement of 200 new main battle tank. But the unrest in Ukraine delayed the delivery.
> 
> *If RTA satisfied with the Chinese tank, the source said, they will order for to meet all unfilled requirement of 150 tanks.
> "Even the VT-4 will be manufacture in China but the contract require technology transfer to Thailand.* Defense Technology Institute will be one of the technology receiver"
> 
> Delivery is expected in 2 years.
> (TAF)


I have serious questions on procurement policy of Thailand but after Pakistani trials I think China would have massive changes and improvements on VT4


----------



## aliaselin

Reashot Xigwin said:


> * RTA Signed for VT-4 MBT *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chinese VT-4 Main Battle Tank (photo : fyjs)
> 
> Source in RTA told TAF that the Royal Thai Army signed the contract last month with the undisclosed number of tank and contract value. But the aim is to field a battalion of VT-4.
> 
> Eelier, RTA ordered the 50 T-84 Oplot-M from Ukraine to meet the requirement of 200 new main battle tank. But the unrest in Ukraine delayed the delivery.
> 
> *If RTA satisfied with the Chinese tank, the source said, they will order for to meet all unfilled requirement of 150 tanks.
> "Even the VT-4 will be manufacture in China but the contract require technology transfer to Thailand.* Defense Technology Institute will be one of the technology receiver"
> 
> Delivery is expected in 2 years.
> (TAF)


Lol， in my opinion, MBT-3000 is the most suitable MBT for soft soil in SE Asia , with a balanced weight and protection.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

Zarvan said:


> I have serious questions on procurement policy of Thailand but after Pakistani trials I think China would have massive changes and improvements on VT4


That is some serious accusation. VT-4 is a great tank. Too much smearing on China military equipment. VT-4 is won based on quality and sophistication. It's control/power is unique and world class.

Chinese modern tank has prove to have outstanding gun stabiliser which Thai Oplat T-84 can't matched.






The Chinese type 96 is one of our worst modern tank in PLA service. Yet is gun accuracy is unmatched by any Russian T-72.

You can imagine the VT-4 which is far more powerful than Type96 tank will be multi-times better in everything.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Zarvan

Beast said:


> That is some serious accusation. VT-4 is a great tank. Too much smearing on China military equipment. VT-4 is won based on quality and sophistication. It's control/power is unique and world class.
> 
> Chinese modern tank has prove to have outstanding gun stabiliser which Thai Oplat T-84 can't matched.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Chinese type 96 is one of our worst modern tank in PLA service. Yet is gun accuracy is unmatched by any Russian T-72.
> 
> You can imagine the VT-4 which is far more powerful than Type96 tank will be multi-times better in everything.


Your T-99 A2 is great Tank but not this one. This totally failed in our Desert tests.


----------



## Beast

Zarvan said:


> Your T-99 A2 is great Tank but not this one. This totally failed in our Desert tests.


There is no concrete proof besides fake facebook comment I see. All the fake account.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

Zarvan said:


> I have serious questions on procurement policy of Thailand but after Pakistani trials I think China would have massive changes and improvements on VT4



The VT4's failure in Pakistan is not tantamount to it being an ineffectual platform or that it will face similar issues in Thailand.


----------



## cirr

Zarvan said:


> Your T-99 A2 is great Tank but not this one. This totally failed in our Desert tests.





Zarvan said:


> Your T-99 A2 is great Tank but not this one. This totally failed in our Desert tests.



No，no，no。

The VT-4 is one of the finest tanks on the market，with a price tag to boot。

It was perhaps too expensive to Pakistan's liking。

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Beast

SinoSoldier said:


> The VT4's failure in Pakistan is not tantamount to it being an ineffectual platform or that it will face similar issues in Thailand.





cirr said:


> No，no，no。
> 
> The VT-4 is one of the finest tanks on the market，with a price tag to boot。
> 
> It was perhaps too expensive to Pakistan's liking。


There is reason why Thailand buy VT-4 and they will not be disappointed. The only disappointed will be some US led Pakistanis lacky forumer who loves to smear and tainted sino Pakistan r/s with fake lies. They are part of CIA led operation against China.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## C130

it's a good tank the VT-4

not sure which one I would chose between the VT-4 and T-90MS


----------



## Sulman Badshah

Zarvan said:


> This totally failed in our Desert tests.


MBT 3000 only had some issues with engine in hot environment .. It was impressive in in firepower though


----------



## Zarvan

Sulman Badshah said:


> MBT 3000 only had some issues with engine in hot environment .. It was impressive in in firepower though


I think @Dazzler also pointed other things which it lacked. Pakistan was impressed by OPLOT M but its 1500 HP engine is not fully ready yet.
@balixd @DESERT FIGHTER


----------



## 帅的一匹

Zarvan said:


> Your T-99 A2 is great Tank but not this one. This totally failed in our Desert tests.


RTA rejected T90 and choose VT4, it tells everything. China tank is not garbage.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Tiqiu

wanglaokan said:


> RTA rejected T90 and choose VT4, it tells everything. China tank is not garbage.


RTA cancelled T84 contract because Ukraine could not deliver what was promised.
The new Chinese deal is:
50 VT4s @ US4 million;
1300 HP water cooling turbocharged diesel engine;
125 mm smoothbore;
RWS.

RTA delegation in China

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Dazzler

Tiqiu said:


> RTA cancelled T84 contract because Ukraine could not deliver what was promised.
> The new Chinese deal is:
> 50 VT4s @ US4 million;
> 1300 HP water cooling turbocharged diesel engine;
> 125 mm smoothbore;
> RWS.
> 
> RTA delegation in China



Let it through your heads, only QN ignorant would underestimate Chinese expertise and skills in battle tank manufacturing, heck, their new mbts offer great bang for the buck and very acceptable performance under most conditions.

However, people should keep in mind that its failure in bahawalpur tamewala region doesn't make it a bad tank by any means. Even M-1A1 failed during tests here, and failed quite miserably with its engine overheating, FCS malfunctions and even ecs gone bonkers. 

The point is that i would taka a VT-4 over t-90MS any day due to its features and improvements. However, each country has different requirements related to the terrain it intends to operate the tank, which is where VT-4 is so far, not a good choice for Pakistan. 

On a side note, I am glad Thailand finally settled for something other than Oplot.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## 帅的一匹

Tiqiu said:


> RTA cancelled T84 contract because Ukraine could not deliver what was promised.
> The new Chinese deal is:
> 50 VT4s @ US4 million;
> 1300 HP water cooling turbocharged diesel engine;
> 125 mm smoothbore;
> RWS.
> 
> RTA delegation in China


4 millions USD per really bangs for the Bucks. Why VT4 win over T90 in RTA's bidding?


----------



## Tiqiu

wanglaokan said:


> 4 millions USD per really bangs for the Bucks. Why VT4 win over T90 in RTA's bidding?


This post from Chinese forum may expla


wanglaokan said:


> 4 millions USD per really bangs for the Bucks. Why VT4 win over T90 in RTA's bidding?


http://mil.huanqiu.com/observation/2016-05/8930966.html
【环球网军事5月15日报道 记者 刘昆】据“泰国武装力量”网站5月13日报道，泰国皇家陆军已经于4月份和中国方面签订了购买一个营MBT-3000（VT-4）坦克的合同，据估计数量约为50辆，合同金额尚未公布，预计两年内交付完毕。

　　文章称，由于乌克兰局势持续动荡，泰国向其订购的200辆T-84“堡垒”坦克迟迟无法交付，这使得泰国方面开始寻求新的替代品，此时MBT-3000主战坦克出现在了泰国军方的视野中。

　　泰国军方表示，如果首批订购的50辆MBT-3000坦克令人满意的话，将会继续购买150辆该型坦克。值得注意的是，泰国方面还提出了要求，就是即使全部的MBT-3000主战坦克都在中国生产，也需要向泰国转让生产技术。


　　军事观察人士表示，据报道，在泰国陆军前些年举行的下一代坦克招标中，由于中国当时不允许在外贸型的MBT-2000主战坦克上装备国产发动 机，只能配备乌克兰发动机，因此泰方最终选择了乌克兰的T-84“堡垒”坦克。根据之前的报道，MBT-3000的出口价格约为400万美元每辆，因此这 样算来，中泰此次坦克合同金额约合2亿美元。

　　MBT-3000坦克重52吨，长10.1米，宽3.4米，配备了国产1300马力的水冷式涡轮增压柴油发动机，最大越野速度高达75 公里，在火力上，MBT-3000配备了1门125毫米滑膛炮，自动遥控武器站，能够发射各种炮弹和炮射导弹，采用了新型的“猎-歼”火控系统，能够准确 击中5000米的目标。

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Beast

wanglaokan said:


> RTA rejected T90 and choose VT4, it tells everything. China tank is not garbage.


The real garbage is those fake pakistanis forumer telling pack of lies. They will brag about how good American weapon is. Yet the Saudi Abram M1A2 cook easily after hit by an ATGM? The saudi M1A2 has the same configuration as US one. The only downgrade is the armour and yet the blown off ammo feature failed to work and cook the whole tank alive? I thought the American brag how safe their tank is and how they value their crew? LOL.. What a joke. Just another junk with useless feature.

The American and their lacky are famous in overstate their equipment and full of bragging. Against well organised and modern Chinese weapons, the US weapons flaw and poor reliabilties will be seriously exposed.













C130 said:


> it's a good tank the VT-4
> 
> not sure which one I would chose between the VT-4 and T-90MS


VT-4 outclass T-90MS.

Reactions: Negative Rating Negative Rating:
1 | Like Like:
2


----------



## 帅的一匹

@Beast is it economical to TOT VT4 for just 150 tanks? I don't think we should bring TOT in the table for every deal. It takes hell loots of blood and sweat of engineers to make it a successful product.



Beast said:


> The real garbage is those fake pakistanis forumer telling pack of lies. They will brag about how good American weapon is. Yet the Saudi Abram M1A2 cook easily after hit by an ATGM? The saudi M1A2 has the same configuration as US one. The only downgrade is the armour and yet the blown off ammo feature failed to work and cook the whole tank alive? I thought the American brag how safe their tank is and how they value their crew? LOL.. What a joke. Just another junk with useless feature.
> 
> The American and their lacky are famous in overstate their equipment and full of bragging. Against well organised and modern Chinese weapons, the US weapons flaw and poor reliabilties will be seriously exposed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> VT-4 outclass T-90MS.


Russian tanks perform pathetically in the tank contest especially the shot accuracy is miserable.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

wanglaokan said:


> @Beast is it economical to TOT VT4 for just 150 tanks? I don't think we should bring TOT in the table for every deal. It takes hell loots of blood and sweat of engineers to make it a successful product.



Dont be fooled by the term TOT. It just teaches you how to make the hull and those simple mechanism. Main gun secret, engine and system will still need to be import.

TOT is a very loose term. Indian brag about how Russian allow TOT of AL-31FP engine for their Su-30MKI and yet they still can't make a simple Kaveri engine? How much has Indian absorbed from those TOT?

You seriously believe Russian allow real TOT for their engine?  Same as China term for TOT. The Turkish FD-2000 deal collapse becos China refused the crucial TOT wanted by Turkey defence. Chinese are no idiots. The real idiots are those who think TOT from other country is some magic formula. 



wanglaokan said:


> @Beast is it economical to TOT VT4 for just 150 tanks? I don't think we should bring TOT in the table for every deal. It takes hell loots of blood and sweat of engineers to make it a successful product.
> 
> 
> Russian tanks perform pathetically in the tank contest especially the shot accuracy is miserable.



The pathetic Russian tank even needs to jam brake to get their shot together and some still missed the stationery shot. 

While Chinese Type96A continue to maintain steady speedy speed to knockout all targets on move.

In the end, Chinese tank did not win the competition becos Russian cheat by awarding high percentage to racing while little percentage on shooting. Plus they put a 1100HP engine on their T-72 for competition while Chinese used an real operation type96A(800HP engine) with no modification to enter the contest. Of cos, we let the Russian won. They are the host and let them have some face.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 帅的一匹

Beast said:


> Dont be fooled by the term TOT. It just teaches you how to make the hull and those simple mechanism. Main gun secret, engine and system will still need to be import.
> 
> TOT is a very loose term. Indian brag about how Russian allow TOT of AL-31FP engine for their Su-30MKI and yet they still can't make a simple Kaveri engine? How much has Indian absorbed from those TOT?
> 
> You seriously believe Russian allow real TOT for their engine?  Same as China term for TOT. The Turkish FD-2000 deal collapse becos China refused the crucial TOT wanted by Turkey defence. Chinese are no idiots. The real idiots are those who think TOT from other country is some magic formula.
> 
> 
> 
> The pathetic Russian tank even needs to jam brake to get their shot together and some still missed the stationery shot.
> 
> While Chinese Type96A continue to maintain steady speedy speed to knockout all targets on move.
> 
> In the end, Chinese tank did not win the competition becos Russian cheat by awarding high percentage to racing while little percentage on shooting. Plus they put a 1100HP engine on their T-72 for competition while Chinese used an real operation type96A(800HP engine) with no modification to enter the contest. Of cos, we let the Russian won. They are the host and let them have some face.


TOT is a loose term, can't export key technology.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## cirr

6 million USD apiece. Not cheap!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 帅的一匹

cirr said:


> 6 million USD apiece. Not cheap!


With world top class weapon system and engine, it can't be cheap.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Arsalan

Zarvan said:


> I have serious questions on procurement policy of Thailand but after Pakistani trials I think China would have massive changes and improvements on VT4


The requirements were not same either!


----------



## cirr

VT5

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Beast



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------

