Pak Army Chief Witnesses Induction of VT-4 Tanks into Strike Formations

[Hassan78610]

How many of these we have now?

 

[Keysersoze]

Slightly higher quality, removed all the Non-interesting bits. View attachment 784297View attachment 784298View attachment 784299View attachment 784300View attachment 784301View attachment 784302View attachment 784303

There has been a change to the armour on the side (From the original design). Slightly different armour panels where the smoke launchers were. Might be addressing the frontal arc issue that we discussed previously. Additional blocks of ERA? On the top of the turret front and the storage areas have slat type armour with what appear to be NERA panels behind. Side armour appears wider.
These appear to be TUSK type modifications against Man portable HEAT weapons.

 

[iLION12345_1]

There has been a change to the armour on the side (From the original design). Slightly different armour panels where the smoke launchers were. Might be addressing the frontal arc issue that we discussed previously. Additional blocks of ERA? On the top of the turret front and the storage areas have slat type armour with what appear to be NERA panels behind. Side armour appears wider.
These appear to be TUSK type modifications against Man portable HEAT weapons.
View attachment 784307

The Added ERA Roof was present from the start on Pakistani VT-4s, we talked about all the changes in the Pakistani VT-4s over the normal ones (there are many) over a year or so back in the VT-4 channel. However the changed turret geometry (as well as the extended cage) was only noted a few months back, when the tanks made their first appearance in gujranwala. It’s certainly better than what was seen originally (in both the non-Pakistani VT-4s with FY2 ERA and the earlier Pakistani ones with FY-4) but it doesn’t improve the frontal arc. Side armor is the same as in the first batches (However is not present in non-Pakistani ones). It’s just an armored steel-plate, not much more protection, but it’s definitely better than nothing, especially against HE/HEAT threats.

(The first two deliveries of Pakistani VT-4s seem to be slightly different from all the tanks that have came after, the later ones got some other Upgrades too apart from the turret changes and the relocation of the smoke dischargers).

The picture you’ve posted is of a VT-2 and not a VT-4 however.

 

[imadul]

I was looking if VT-4 has a separate ammo compartment which will blow out if a projectile pierces ammo compartment giving crew better chance of survivability. But it does not have that.

 

[Keysersoze]

I was looking if VT-4 has a separate ammo compartment which will blow out if a projectile pierces ammo compartment giving crew better chance of survivability. But it does not have that.

Yeah the autoloader precludes that. I believe the newer T90s have increased armour around the autoloader to prevent cook offs.

 

[iLION12345_1]

I was looking if VT-4 has a separate ammo compartment which will blow out if a projectile pierces ammo compartment giving crew better chance of survivability. But it does not have that.

It doesn’t have that. But its ammo is stored in a similar fashion to the Al-Khalid, in armored storage boxes located inside the crew compartment, these are also lined with Kevlar for spall protection and have their own fire and explosion suppression systems, in case of ammo cook-off, this system can theoretically go off fast enough to inhibit a deadly explosion or fire And save the crew. Thats apart from the ammo stored in the auto-loaders in both tanks, however I don’t know if VT-4 received any extra armor particularly for it’s auto-loader carousel, same with the AK-1. It does have a new auto-loader, but more protection, that’s unknown.

These systems aren‘t as ideal as proper blow-out panels, but they’re certainly a major step up than just having ammo everywhere about the cabin as in T72, T80 and T90S models.

Yeah the autoloader precludes that. I believe the newer T90s have increased armour around the autoloader to prevent cook offs.

The T90MS models do, T90S is the original one, it doesn’t have that. Loose ammo is a bigger danger than the one in the auto-loader, at least with the auto-loader the ammo is at the center of the tank, not as easy to hit.

 

[Warking]

I thought it was world of tanks at first, had to look closer, the UI and colors are similar but it’s thankfully not that. That being said, recently the South Korean army was using War Thunder to train its tankers, not sure how I feel about that one xD.

Beta tanker: war thunder for training
Sigma tanker: Uses UI with 2000's graphics and 25 frames per second for training

 

[maverick1977]

The BMS seems to be very advanced. On par with M1A2s

 

[Reichmarshal]

How good the Al-Khalid 2 is depends on how good the army wants it to be, I think as of now, they want the next iteration of the Al-Khalid to bring it closer to the VT-4, instead of making some sort of next generation tank, this means it’ll be in production a lot sooner (and this goes along with the words of the HIT chairman). So we will be seeing some technologies that are missing in AK-1 (but present in VT-4) be added.

However I would not expect any sort of major redesign yet. But we will see where it goes. The AK-1 is already a very potent machine, If we can make AK-2 comparable to the VT-4 in most metrics, then we have a very powerful local tank already.

AK series of tanks of Pakistan Army armored Corps form the tip of the spear, everything else complements
them including VT4.
AK 1 from the on set was made to be better than wt ever PA was going to buy off the shelf to be its main stay
When AK 2 is going to made its going to be better than any thing out their, otherwise the point of the whole exercise would become foolish and PA would be better off procuring more VT 4.

ps: in one of my earlier post I have stated the reason for procuring vt 4, which by the way was not its first choice other than the engine.

 

[imadul]

It doesn’t have that. But its ammo is stored in a similar fashion to the Al-Khalid, in armored storage boxes located inside the crew compartment, these are also lined with Kevlar for spall protection and have their own fire and explosion suppression systems, in case of ammo cook-off, this system can theoretically go off fast enough to inhibit a deadly explosion or fire And save the crew. Thats apart from the ammo stored in the auto-loaders in both tanks, however I don’t know if VT-4 received any extra armor particularly for it’s auto-loader carousel, same with the AK-1. It does have a new auto-loader, but more protection, that’s unknown.

These systems aren‘t as ideal as proper blow-out panels, but they’re certainly a major step up than just having ammo everywhere about the cabin as in T72, T80 and T90S models.

The T90MS models do, T90S is the original one, it doesn’t have that. Loose ammo is a bigger danger than the one in the auto-loader, at least with the auto-loader the ammo is at the center of the tank, not as easy to hit.

Protection for tanks and fighting vehicles is must to keep them relevant. Any sorts of internal compartment design and ERA can do only as much.
I would think HIT or some private/public org must be researching an indigenous APS. A soft kill APS should be developed and then fused with a hard kill APS later on.
Israeli Trophy APS may be a gold standard but indigenous research and development can lead to many additional innovations.
HIT and related institutes must invest heavily in APS as these can find applications on many platforms including fighter aircrafts, ships, command and control installations, bunkers and many more.
Buy Afghanit if russian are ready to sell.

 

[iLION12345_1]

AK series of tanks of Pakistan Army armored Corps form the tip of the spear, everything else complements
them including VT4.
AK 1 from the on set was made to be better than wt ever PA was going to buy off the shelf to be its main stay
When AK 2 is going to made its going to be better than any thing out their, otherwise the point of the whole exercise would become foolish and PA would be better off procuring more VT 4.

ps: in one of my earlier post I have stated the reason for procuring vt 4, which by the way was not its first choice other than the engine.

Lmao. No. VT-4 out-classes the AK-1 in many aspects: Protection (by a lot), mobility (by a lot), Firepower (the FCS and GCS may be comparable, may be slightly better on the AK-1, but The VT-4 currently uses more modern ammo). VT-4 has a CITV, AK-1 does not, major advantage. VT-4 has 360 degree Cameras and LWRs, AK-1 has neither. VT-4 has Auto-boresight, AK-1 doesn’t. VT-4 has significantly better C4I, a better data-link system, better ERA, better Software and MFDs. Better Stabilizers.
I could keep going for an hour, but the bottom line is that the VT-4 is significantly superior to the Al-Khalid-1 in nearly every metric, the basic goal of the Al-Khalid-2 is to bring the Al-Khalid closer to the VT-4 in terms of performance by adding some basic stuff that is missing to it. This doesn’t make AK and AK-1 a bad tank (it’s still better than the T90S india has), but it’s not comparable to the VT-4. Please do not make stuff up.

The reason for the VT-4 induction is as simple as it gets, Because we needed an off the shelf purchase to speed up the replacement of old tanks while also raising new regiments.
I don’t know what you mean by “whole exercise of buying VT-4 becoming foolish”, that makes absolutely no sense. PA literally got their VT-4s massively upgraded before buying them.
And It also makes no sense for everything to be ”complementing AK”, not only because the AK isn’t the most superior tank, but simply because a tank being superior or inferior doesn’t decide who complements what, different tanks are used in different terrains according to what works better.

Original AK is old anyways, it’s an early 2000s tank, same as T90S. it cannot be compared to modern ones like AK-1 and VT-4.

Protection for tanks and fighting vehicles is must to keep them relevant. Any sorts of internal compartment design and ERA can do only as much.
I would think HIT or some private/public org must be researching an indigenous APS. A soft kill APS should be developed and then fused with a hard kill APS later on.
Israeli Trophy APS may be a gold standard but indigenous research and development can lead to many additional innovations.
HIT and related institutes must invest heavily in APS as these can find applications on many platforms including fighter aircrafts, ships, command and control installations, bunkers and many more.
Buy Afghanit if russian are ready to sell.

A hard kill APS is one of the hardest things to actually make. While I obviously support indigenous work on it, we will likely end up buying a Chinese system (the GL-5).

 

[waz]

The VT-4 is the most superior tank in the Pak/Indo theatre and what’s even better there will be hundreds of them very quickly.
Cold start will have holes punched into it literally…

 

[Dazzler]

The main part of it is the box the soldier was sitting in, it simulates tank movement realistically too.

Old tech. 6DOF motion platform exhibiting realistic movements is available for AK sim for over a decade.

 

[WarKa DaNG]

Instead of retiring PA should upgrade all their tanks, As the war will be short but violent and it means Airforces will be working around and strike aircrafts will be taking AFVs and IFVs. I think barely a week after the start of war there will be no tanks left. A better quality tank is best but a medicore quality upgraded tank will be also good to have it on the field

 

[ZY-CN-CA]

Now drones attack so much.

How can these tanks air defense when they are vanguard? have like HQ-17 OR PGZ-07 ?


HQ-17

PGZ-07