Al-Khalid tank (Type 90-IIM / MBT-2000) Information Pool

[Dazzler]

 

[Inception-06]

View attachment 338401

Al-Zarrar Tank Block-1

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Al-Zarrar Tank Block-1

Good eye... That is an AZ not AK.

 

[Dazzler]

Al-Zarrar Tank Block-1

Hence the bigger turret.

View attachment 338441

 

[Inception-06]

Hence the bigger turret.

View attachment 338440 View attachment 338441

@Dazzler what happen with the Type-1 Al-Zarrar, what was the technical function of the scirts around the turret (T-80UD has that also), I had read years ago about that, but I did forget to ask your opinion to this topic !

Would you support such Skirts for the Al-Khalid and Al-Zarar Tank ??

Al-Zarrar Tank Type-1

 

[Signalian]

 

[Dazzler]

@Dazzler what happen with the Type-1 Al-Zarrar, what was the technical function of the scirts around the turret (T-80UD has that also), I had read years ago about that, but I did forget to ask your opinion to this topic !

Would you support such Skirts for the Al-Khalid and Al-Zarar Tank ??

Al-Zarrar Tank Type-1
View attachment 338445


View attachment 338444

type-1 alzarrar turret offers less protection compared to the current version hence you see it even without ERA cassettes.

Rubber skirts protect against dust and reduce the RCS of the vehicle somewhat. No plans to use it with AK though

 

[Dazzler]

night targets..

scanning targets at night..

Gone fishing..

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Honest question.

Is the gap between the Oplot-M or MBT-3000 and - let's say - a heavily upgraded al-Khalid with a redesigned turret, next-gen composite armour tech, 1,500 hp diesel engine, new transmission, and updated electronics significant? In fact, the Oplot and MBT-3000 are late model developments of the T-84 and MBT-2000, respectively (but with the above changes in engine, etc).

We literally own the MBT-2000 platform, so why couldn't we just make al-Khalid II into an Oplot-M/MBT-3000 competitor? Cost can't be a real reason if someone is floating the idea of buying another tank model that isn't that much of a developmental leap from the al-Khalid. With the right subsystems - and a re-designed turret and next-gen armour tech - we could make an equivalent.

If we want another tank model, then we should be aiming for an entirely distinct category, e.g. very heavy (Altay) or very light (or I daresay unmanned). Not sure why another 45-55-ton tank design was even being considered, except perhaps to confirm design aspirations for a future al-Khalid...

@Arsalan @That Guy @Dazzler

 

[Dazzler]

Honest question.

Is the gap between the Oplot-M or MBT-3000 and - let's say - a heavily upgraded al-Khalid with a redesigned turret, next-gen composite armour tech, 1,500 hp diesel engine, new transmission, and updated electronics significant? In fact, the Oplot and MBT-3000 are late model developments of the T-84 and MBT-2000, respectively (but with the above changes in engine, etc).

We literally own the MBT-2000 platform, so why couldn't we just make al-Khalid II into an Oplot-M/MBT-3000 competitor? Cost can't be a real reason if someone is floating the idea of buying another tank model that isn't that much of a developmental leap from the al-Khalid. With the right subsystems - and a re-designed turret and next-gen armour tech - we could make an equivalent.

If we want another tank model, then we should be aiming for an entirely distinct category, e.g. very heavy (Altay) or very light (or I daresay unmanned). Not sure why another 45-55-ton tank design was even being considered, except perhaps to confirm design aspirations for a future al-Khalid...

@Arsalan @That Guy @Dazzler

Replacing obsolete fleet with relevant and state of the art MBTs including 59,69, and 85 II AP is the sole reason. Thats the theme behind Al Haider peoject. HIT cannot churn out enougb AKs to replace them on time.

 

[Sulman Badshah]

night targets..


View attachment 341927



View attachment 341928



scanning targets at night..

View attachment 341929


View attachment 341930



View attachment 341931



Gone fishing..

View attachment 341932

night engagement at 2 km ???

 

[Dazzler]

Workload comparison between Al Khalid and M1A2 SEP Tank


3.1. Workload analysis of crew in Al-Khalid tank
The workload of crew in Al-Khalid tank is calculated using the workload rating system based on IMPRINT (seeing Table 1).

Table 1.
Maximum workload of crew of Al-Khalid tank.

Crew member Maximum workload
Task under high workload
Total workload Vision Auditory Cognition Psychomotor
Commander 40 4.4 9.0 15.5 11.1
-
Answer and understand the information from crew;

-
Answer and understand the information from outside;

-
Control the auto loader;

-
Check the state of shooting.

Gunner 28.70 6.0 6.0 12.1 4.6
-
Surveillance;

-
Give driver the order when – shooting;

-
Choose working condition;

-
Answer and understand.

Driver 39.5 17.4 3.0 14.5 4.6
-
Observe and judge the forward terrain;

-
Monitor the instruments;

-
Control the driving direction of tank;

-
Look at the forward terrain.

Table options

It can be seen from Table 1 that the workloads of commander and driver are heavy, and their total workloads exceed 28-A crew member should endure the maximum workload in combat. In the process of firing on move, the driver needs to control the direction of tank, look at the forward terrain, keep the speed and driving direction tank, communicate with the commander and monitor the instruments at the same time. On the other hand, the workloads of commander's cognition and psychomotor are heavy, while the workload of vision is light; for the driver, the workloads of vision and cognition are heavy, while the workload of auditory sensation is light.

3.2. Workload of crew in United States M1A2SEP V2 tank
The United States M1A2SEP V2 is the newest version of M1A2. It integrates the System Enhancement Package (SEP), a.k.a the Army's Force XXI command and control system and the new technology achievements which were spirally developed from FCS. The maximum workload of each crew member is calculated based on the VACP model from IMPRINT, as listed in Table 2.

Table 2.
Maximum workload of crew of M1A2SEP V2 tank.

Crew member Maximum workload
Tasks under high workload
Total workload Vision Auditory Cognition Psychomotor
Commander 39.9 5.0 12.0 17.4 5.5
-
Answer and understand the information from crew;

-
Answer and understand the information from outside;

-
Check the state of shooting.

Loader 28.70 6.0 6.0 12.1 4.6
-
Surveillance;

-
Answer and understand;

Gunner 28.70 6.0 6.0 12.1 4.6
-
Surveillance;

-
Answer and understand.

Driver 38.30 14.1 0.0 19.4 4.8
-
Observe and judge the forward terrain;

-
Monitor the instruments;

-
Drive tank.

Table options

It can be seen from Table 2 that the workloads of commander and driver are heavy, too, and their limit workloads exceed 28. The heavy workload of commander concentrates in monitoring the battlefield, searching the targets, marking the situation map, and keeping communication with superior commanders and crew and cooperation. The workload of commander's cognition and auditory sensation is heavy. Driver endures the same maximum workload as in Al-Khalid tank, while M1A2SEP V2 tank has the ability to keep speed and driving direction. The workload of driver's vision and cognition is heavy. The workload of his auditory sensation, however, is 0. It is because that communication while driving will probably increase the workload of driver, and decrease the driving efficiency. The maximum workloads of gunner and loader are the same, and are significantly lower than those of commander and driver, but their cognition workloads are relatively heavy. Hence, gunner and loader can assist commander to undertake the task of monitoring the battlefield and searching the targets. So the commander can focus on communication and command.

3.3. Workload analysis of crew in two-soldier crew tank and discussion of new technologies and their applications
On the basis of the above analysis and calculation, the workload of tank crew is heavy during combat mission, especially for commander and driver. If the crew members are reduced to two, it will be difficult to finish the combat mission without the new technologies. On the other hand, one crew member is required to drive the two-soldier crew tank, the tasks, such as command, battlefield surveillance, target search and firing, must be completed by another member. The maximum workload of the crew in FCS two-soldier crew manned combat vehicle [4] is calculated based on the VACP model from IMPRINT, as shown in Table 3.

Table 3.
Maximum workload of crew in FCS two-soldier crew manned combat vehicle.

Crew member Maximum workload
Tasks under high workload
Total workload Vision Auditory Cognition Psychomotor
Gunner/commander 61 13 16 16 16
-
Answer and understand the information from driver;

-
Answer, check and understand the information from outside;

-
Shooting confirmation.

Driver 56 24 1 25 6
-
Observe and judge the forward terrain;

-
Monitor the instruments;

-
Look at the situation map;

-
Driving.

Table options

It can be seen from Table 3 that, compared with M1A2SEP V2, the workload of crew increases considerably because of the increased workloads of vision and psychomotor. The main reason is the increase in management task of situation map and the reduction of crew members.

It also shows that the workload of crew members in two-soldier crew tank is heavier than that in three-soldier crew tank. So the workload of crew members needs to be reduced by introducing the new technologies, and should not be higher than that in three-soldier crew tank at least; in other hand, the new functions, such as air surveillance, electro-optical countermeasures, electronic countermeasure and hard intercept ammo, must be automated.

The measures to reduce the workload of crew members include automatic target search, attributive judgment and automatic tracking; automatic calibration, one-button start, auxiliary driving (cruise, course keeping and obstacle avoidance); text-to-sound (TTS); situation map autoupdating, combat message auto-generation, etc. After introducing the new technologies, the workload of crew members in combat mode is calculated and analyzed based on IMPRINT, as listed in Table 4.

 

[CHI RULES]

Honest question.

Is the gap between the Oplot-M or MBT-3000 and - let's say - a heavily upgraded al-Khalid with a redesigned turret, next-gen composite armour tech, 1,500 hp diesel engine, new transmission, and updated electronics significant? In fact, the Oplot and MBT-3000 are late model developments of the T-84 and MBT-2000, respectively (but with the above changes in engine, etc).

We literally own the MBT-2000 platform, so why couldn't we just make al-Khalid II into an Oplot-M/MBT-3000 competitor? Cost can't be a real reason if someone is floating the idea of buying another tank model that isn't that much of a developmental leap from the al-Khalid. With the right subsystems - and a re-designed turret and next-gen armour tech - we could make an equivalent.

If we want another tank model, then we should be aiming for an entirely distinct category, e.g. very heavy (Altay) or very light (or I daresay unmanned). Not sure why another 45-55-ton tank design was even being considered, except perhaps to confirm design aspirations for a future al-Khalid...

@Arsalan @That Guy @Dazzler

One missing aspect is stealth features and low RCS which also required to be kept in mind as abouT Oplot M I have read that it's significantly stealthy apart from other next gen features, same is case with new developing designs.

Further a new choice should have top defense and effective hard kill system to counter new ATGMs.

 

[HRK]

Workload comparison between Al Khalid and M1A2 SEP Tank


3.1. Workload analysis of crew in Al-Khalid tank
The workload of crew in Al-Khalid tank is calculated using the workload rating system based on IMPRINT (seeing Table 1).

Table 1.
Maximum workload of crew of Al-Khalid tank.

Crew member Maximum workload
Task under high workload
Total workload Vision Auditory Cognition Psychomotor
Commander 40 4.4 9.0 15.5 11.1
-
Answer and understand the information from crew;

-
Answer and understand the information from outside;

-
Control the auto loader;

-
Check the state of shooting.

Gunner 28.70 6.0 6.0 12.1 4.6
-
Surveillance;

-
Give driver the order when – shooting;

-
Choose working condition;

-
Answer and understand.

Driver 39.5 17.4 3.0 14.5 4.6
-
Observe and judge the forward terrain;

-
Monitor the instruments;

-
Control the driving direction of tank;

-
Look at the forward terrain.

Table options

It can be seen from Table 1 that the workloads of commander and driver are heavy, and their total workloads exceed 28-A crew member should endure the maximum workload in combat. In the process of firing on move, the driver needs to control the direction of tank, look at the forward terrain, keep the speed and driving direction tank, communicate with the commander and monitor the instruments at the same time. On the other hand, the workloads of commander's cognition and psychomotor are heavy, while the workload of vision is light; for the driver, the workloads of vision and cognition are heavy, while the workload of auditory sensation is light.

3.2. Workload of crew in United States M1A2SEP V2 tank
The United States M1A2SEP V2 is the newest version of M1A2. It integrates the System Enhancement Package (SEP), a.k.a the Army's Force XXI command and control system and the new technology achievements which were spirally developed from FCS. The maximum workload of each crew member is calculated based on the VACP model from IMPRINT, as listed in Table 2.

Table 2.
Maximum workload of crew of M1A2SEP V2 tank.

Crew member Maximum workload
Tasks under high workload
Total workload Vision Auditory Cognition Psychomotor
Commander 39.9 5.0 12.0 17.4 5.5
-
Answer and understand the information from crew;

-
Answer and understand the information from outside;

-
Check the state of shooting.

Loader 28.70 6.0 6.0 12.1 4.6
-
Surveillance;

-
Answer and understand;

Gunner 28.70 6.0 6.0 12.1 4.6
-
Surveillance;

-
Answer and understand.

Driver 38.30 14.1 0.0 19.4 4.8
-
Observe and judge the forward terrain;

-
Monitor the instruments;

-
Drive tank.

Table options

It can be seen from Table 2 that the workloads of commander and driver are heavy, too, and their limit workloads exceed 28. The heavy workload of commander concentrates in monitoring the battlefield, searching the targets, marking the situation map, and keeping communication with superior commanders and crew and cooperation. The workload of commander's cognition and auditory sensation is heavy. Driver endures the same maximum workload as in Al-Khalid tank, while M1A2SEP V2 tank has the ability to keep speed and driving direction. The workload of driver's vision and cognition is heavy. The workload of his auditory sensation, however, is 0. It is because that communication while driving will probably increase the workload of driver, and decrease the driving efficiency. The maximum workloads of gunner and loader are the same, and are significantly lower than those of commander and driver, but their cognition workloads are relatively heavy. Hence, gunner and loader can assist commander to undertake the task of monitoring the battlefield and searching the targets. So the commander can focus on communication and command.

3.3. Workload analysis of crew in two-soldier crew tank and discussion of new technologies and their applications
On the basis of the above analysis and calculation, the workload of tank crew is heavy during combat mission, especially for commander and driver. If the crew members are reduced to two, it will be difficult to finish the combat mission without the new technologies. On the other hand, one crew member is required to drive the two-soldier crew tank, the tasks, such as command, battlefield surveillance, target search and firing, must be completed by another member. The maximum workload of the crew in FCS two-soldier crew manned combat vehicle [4] is calculated based on the VACP model from IMPRINT, as shown in Table 3.

Table 3.
Maximum workload of crew in FCS two-soldier crew manned combat vehicle.

Crew member Maximum workload
Tasks under high workload
Total workload Vision Auditory Cognition Psychomotor
Gunner/commander 61 13 16 16 16
-
Answer and understand the information from driver;

-
Answer, check and understand the information from outside;

-
Shooting confirmation.

Driver 56 24 1 25 6
-
Observe and judge the forward terrain;

-
Monitor the instruments;

-
Look at the situation map;

-
Driving.

Table options

It can be seen from Table 3 that, compared with M1A2SEP V2, the workload of crew increases considerably because of the increased workloads of vision and psychomotor. The main reason is the increase in management task of situation map and the reduction of crew members.

It also shows that the workload of crew members in two-soldier crew tank is heavier than that in three-soldier crew tank. So the workload of crew members needs to be reduced by introducing the new technologies, and should not be higher than that in three-soldier crew tank at least; in other hand, the new functions, such as air surveillance, electro-optical countermeasures, electronic countermeasure and hard intercept ammo, must be automated.

The measures to reduce the workload of crew members include automatic target search, attributive judgment and automatic tracking; automatic calibration, one-button start, auxiliary driving (cruise, course keeping and obstacle avoidance); text-to-sound (TTS); situation map autoupdating, combat message auto-generation, etc. After introducing the new technologies, the workload of crew members in combat mode is calculated and analyzed based on IMPRINT, as listed in Table 4.

For those who are having difficulty to grasp the tables in its posted format .... attached is the screenshot

http://ac.els-cdn.com/S221491471300...t=1476901262_6efef2c86dc77896962ffeec3d907d53

 

[Dazzler]

naked turret without frontal composite armor..very interesting details here..