Pakistan Army has 570 VT 4 on order and with TOT

[KaiserX]

Tank is not obselete, because if that is true, then I can use the same argument and argue Infantry is now also obselete. Why spend hundreds of thousands of dollars (that's how much US spend on training a soldier, 250k for a regular soldier, up to 6 millions for SF) when you can get a cheap Mavic Drone for $1000 and put anti-personnel mine on them? Why not just disbanding the infantry crop?

If you have to move infantry in a battlefield, you will need to have armour, and when I say Armour, you don't just need tanks, you need IFV, APC, CFV, the whole lot. Because the alternative is for you to bum rush WW1 style.

Tanks are important to protect the flank of the infantry, and important to spearhead a counterattack, and important for dynamic defence. You cannot soften an enemy position with drone, you have to do that with tanks, because that gives you the direct fire advantage.

On the other hand, ever wonder while there are a lot of Ukraine drone footage destroying tank and there are few and far between on the other side? That's because drones have to be paired up with many ISTAR asset to be effective, if you are just a dude in the middle of battlefield launching a drone in a random direction, you aren't going to find anything, you need someone to tell you which area you want to scan with your drone, and what you are expecting. That's a lot of SIGINT, ELINT and SIGNINT as well as SATINT element involved. The reason why Ukraine can use their TB2 that effective is because someone, namely the US, is feeding them that intel, telling them where to strike and what to strike, because the US have a complete system monitoring battlefield, satellite, EC-135, compass call and so on, those asset provide real time information for the Ukrainian drone team, so they know what and where and how to look for Russian tank. It won't work like that if you don't have a complete ISTAR platform. And at this moment, only 2 countries in this world have the capability to do that. US and China, and even China can barely do it within a certain limit.

This is the same thing people saw footage of drone killing tank and think "Wow, that was easy" it's the same during Operation Desert Storm when we saw all those JDAM or any type of precision missile and projectile hitting target with pinpoint accuracy and declare Air Power is the king, thing is, most people don't know what had to be done to have that "Perfect" strike you saw on TV and thinking, that's easy, people in the know, like me, know inserting a SF team to lit up those target aren't easy, to maintain contact with said SF team aren't easy, to coordinate between interservice (Army-Navy or Army-Air Force) to make that strike is not easy, but yes, seeing a plane dropping ordinance and then target go boom is extremely easy. If you catch what I mean.

I dont understand how people have the mental capacity to make claims that tanks are obsolete especially when used to back infantry, stage offensive operations, and breaking enemy lines/fortification. Nothing else serves as good purpose by providing mobility, firepower, and protection in the way tanks do.

Tanks will be upgraded in the future. You will see tanks using more advanced composites, advanced next generation sensors, thermals, and sights. Mini drones will be integrated onto each tank to scout miles away providing detection of enemy units far far earlier than before. In certain scenarios these drones could even be modified to carry out autonomous suicide attacks against enemy tank. Tanks will be equiped with hard kill protection system and missiles used to defeat hard point detection systems. This will be the future of tanks. Inshort a future tank integrated with hard kill systems + autonomous scout drones will be force multipliers for infantry units.

 

[iLION12345_1]

Ah, so BTA 4 and Sejjel are different after all. I do wonder however how well these new APFSDS perform against Kontakt-5, since I haven't seen BTA 4 or any other Chinese APFSDS for that matter being advertised as counter-ERA as some western ones have been.


They have CITVs? I have never seen one with it.

Current Gen Chinese APFSDS (BTA-4 and DTC-10-125) are in fact tested against modern ERA and have proved effective. Sejjel is definitely not BTA-4, but it does look to be very similar to DTC-10-125, it could be a localized version of that with some changes, but as long as the penetrator is indigenous, I’d say the ammo is more local than foreign.

And No, Indian T90S do not have CITVs, they’ve been planning to add those for nearly a decade now and even signed a contract a few years back for delivery, but we’ve yet to see any T90S in Indian service with them.

 

[iLION12345_1]

Better protected? What a joke. The Ak series and chinese tanks havnt even been tested yet are compared to abysmal T-72 upgrades that has proven garbage since the first gulf war until todays ukraine war.

T90s armour protection isnt much different than the upgrade T72BVs used by the Russians. Both designs have significant issues with ammunition storage around the base of the turrent. Drop a small grenade on of the turrent and watch the whole tank explode. Or are you refering to the cheap russian ERA add ons as the best protection?

Add onthe T90s failed highly talked about laser jammers (ukraines laser jammers proved far more affective).

Lastly the T72/T90s abysmally slow reverse speed at 5-10km and you have a recipe for disaster



Better protected? What a joke. The Ak series and chinese tanks havnt even been tested yet are compared to abysmal T-72 upgrades that has proven garbage since the first gulf war until todays ukraine war.

T90s armour protection isnt much different than the upgrade T72BVs used by the Russians. Both designs have significant issues with ammunition storage around the base of the turrent. Drop a small grenade on of the turrent and watch the whole tank explode. Or are you refering to the cheap russian ERA add ons as the best protection?

Add on the T90s failed highly talked about laser jammers (ukraines laser jammers proved far more affective).

Lastly the T72/T90s abysmally slow reverse speed at 5-10km and you have a recipe for disaster



Better protected? What a joke. The Ak series and chinese tanks havnt even been tested yet are compared to abysmal T-72 upgrades that has proven garbage since the first gulf war until todays ukraine war.

T90s armour protection isnt much different than the upgrade T72BVs used by the Russians. Both designs have significant issues with ammunition storage around the base of the turrent. Drop a small grenade on of the turrent and watch the whole tank explode. Or are you refering to the cheap russian ERA add ons as the best protection?

Add on the T90s failed highly talked about laser jammers (ukraines laser jammers proved far more affective).

Lastly the T72/T90s abysmally slow reverse speed at 5-10km and you have a recipe for disaster

Yes, significantly better protected. I don’t know why people think T72 and T90S are the same thing. T72B and early T90 were similar yet, it is an upgrade of the former after all, but T90A and S are entirely different moving forward. Anyone who thinks so otherwise is just bashing Russian armor for the sake of bashing Russian armor.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, the basic design of all Chinese tanks, AK and VT4 included, is absolutely shit, because China prior to ZTZ-99 didn’t know how to design a good tank (They finally learned when they got a T72 and reverse engineered it to design the ZTZ-99).
I’m not saying this is indicative of their modern tank design, I’m certain if China was to design an MBT now it would surpass anything Russia can come up with, but such was not the case in the 90s when the AK was conceived.

The T90S’ frontal armor arc is about 30 degrees bigger than the AK series (which has the smallest frontal armor arc of any modern MBT). The AK also has very poor ERA coverage, partly due to its bad design, and partially due to a weak engine, unlike the T90S, which as I mentioned before has a much higher torque figure and significantly better K5 coverage (something PA is looking to remedy with FY-IV, which is better than K5, and a more powerful engine). On top of that, the T90S has better base armor. I’m not saying the AK isn’t well protected by any means, it’s definitely adequate, but it’s not T90S level.

“Cheap” Russian ERA (K5 is better than any ERA Pakistan has ever made, and Chinas FY-IV only has slightly higher protection numbers than K-5, meanwhile Russians have two generations of ERA beyond that) is better than No ERA. And AK and VT4 series has the exact same carousel arrangement as the T72 and T90, so if penetration occurs, the turret will fly off in exactly the same manner. Yes AK and VT4 do a bit more to isolate its ammo than the T90S by putting them in armored bins, but these bins are not isolated from the crew or closed off, nor do they have blast panels, and can still be penetrated or reached by a grenade.

These tanks have been tested plenty in trials, and PA is well aware of the strengths and shortcomings of its own armor and it’s enemies, if you don’t admit to your enemies strengths, then those very things will put you in the dirt, so I’m glad PAs planned don’t display the same arrogance as you, there’s a reason why the PA has always maintained such a major edge on modern ammunition over the IA.

As for the jammers. I assume you mean Shtora Suite. That was developed in the Cold War and was effective in its early days, it was already obsolete by the 90s and Russia and Ukraine are both well aware of that and have stopped equipping it on new tanks. The same suite was offered to india who rightfully rejected it, and to Pakistan by Ukraine (under the name “Varta”, who also rejected it).
Im not sure which Ukrainian laser jammers you mean were “better” than Russian ones, because the Ukrainian one is just a renamed and rebadged Russian jammer with the exact same specs. Both of which are obsolete since the 90s.
The reason the suite is still seen these days is because the jammers aren’t the only part of it, it also comes with LWRs and automatic smoke and targeting systems which are very effective and still useful, that’s the part of the suite both Ukraine and Russia want to keep.

And I already mentioned the reverse speed of the T72/T90S as a major weakness that our armor doesn’t have, I don’t see how that relates to the armor protection.

I have no bias for Russia or Ukraine, I am simply talking about technology objectively. The reason Russian armor has failed so badly in Ukraine is because they don’t know how to use it, they haven’t maintained it, they aren’t following proper doctrine and their crews (much like the ones faced by the US in desert storm) are not good, which means they cannot use their machines well.

Ukraine has displayed no better usage of tanks, simply because it has so few, the reason it’s winning is because of better tactics and hundreds of billions of dollars worth of modern weapons from NATO, otherwise Ukrainian defense industry failed over a decade before this war even started, not having produced anything that good in a while, don’t compare it to Russian tech. (Again, I’m not saying that somehow makes Russia better or that their technology is excellent or best in the world, only that it is obviously far better than Ukraine, but they have no idea how to implement it and are hence getting beat).

 

[ziaulislam]

I dont understand how people have the mental capacity to make claims that tanks are obsolete especially when used to back infantry, stage offensive operations, and breaking enemy lines/fortification. Nothing else serves as good purpose by providing mobility, firepower, and protection in the way tanks do.

Tanks will be upgraded in the future. You will see tanks using more advanced composites, advanced next generation sensors, thermals, and sights. Mini drones will be integrated onto each tank to scout miles away providing detection of enemy units far far earlier than before. In certain scenarios these drones could even be modified to carry out autonomous suicide attacks against enemy tank. Tanks will be equiped with hard kill protection system and missiles used to defeat hard point detection systems. This will be the future of tanks. Inshort a future tank integrated with hard kill systems + autonomous scout drones will be force multipliers for infantry units.

People just see how 2000 tanks were destroyed in ukriane
They also tend to see what cluster bombs do to tanks..

Tanks are probably futile in pak India war scenario where airpower will decide the war

If PAF loses then 10,000 or 20,000 tanks doesn't matter IAF will do a massacre of any armour

If PAF hangs on then sure tanks are useful

Pakistan lost tons of tanks to airpower even in 1960s when PAF did better and modern guided weapons didn't exist


Antitank weapons is whole different domain...India has every variety of those and tanks won't survive a single hit from 100,000s of those weapons

Yes, significantly better protected. I don’t know why people think T72 and T90S are the same thing. T72B and early T90 were similar yet, it is an upgrade of the former after all, but T90A and S are entirely different moving forward. Anyone who thinks so otherwise is just bashing Russian armor for the sake of bashing Russian armor.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, the basic design of all Chinese tanks, AK and VT4 included, is absolutely shit, because China prior to ZTZ-99 didn’t know how to design a good tank (They finally learned when they got a T72 and reverse engineered it to design the ZTZ-99).
I’m not saying this is indicative of their modern tank design, I’m certain if China was to design an MBT now it would surpass anything Russia can come up with, but such was not the case in the 90s when the AK was conceived.

The T90S’ frontal armor arc is about 30 degrees bigger than the AK series (which has the smallest frontal armor arc of any modern MBT). The AK also has very poor ERA coverage, partly due to its bad design, and partially due to a weak engine, unlike the T90S, which as I mentioned before has a much higher torque figure and significantly better K5 coverage (something PA is looking to remedy with FY-IV, which is better than K5, and a more powerful engine). On top of that, the T90S has better base armor. I’m not saying the AK isn’t well protected by any means, it’s definitely adequate, but it’s not T90S level.

“Cheap” Russian ERA (K5 is better than any ERA Pakistan has ever made, and Chinas FY-IV only has slightly higher protection numbers than K-5, meanwhile Russians have two generations of ERA beyond that) is better than No ERA. And AK and VT4 series has the exact same carousel arrangement as the T72 and T90, so if penetration occurs, the turret will fly off in exactly the same manner. Yes AK and VT4 do a bit more to isolate its ammo than the T90S by putting them in armored bins, but these bins are not isolated from the crew or closed off, nor do they have blast panels, and can still be penetrated or reached by a grenade.

These tanks have been tested plenty in trials, and PA is well aware of the strengths and shortcomings of its own armor and it’s enemies, if you don’t admit to your enemies strengths, then those very things will put you in the dirt, so I’m glad PAs planned don’t display the same arrogance as you, there’s a reason why the PA has always maintained such a major edge on modern ammunition over the IA.

As for the jammers. I assume you mean Shtora Suite. That was developed in the Cold War and was effective in its early days, it was already obsolete by the 90s and Russia and Ukraine are both well aware of that and have stopped equipping it on new tanks. The same suite was offered to india who rightfully rejected it, and to Pakistan by Ukraine (under the name “Varta”, who also rejected it).
Im not sure which Ukrainian laser jammers you mean were “better” than Russian ones, because the Ukrainian one is just a renamed and rebadged Russian jammer with the exact same specs. Both of which are obsolete since the 90s.

And I already mentioned the reverse speed of the T72/T90S as a major weakness that our armor doesn’t have, I don’t see how that relates to the armor protection.

I have no bias for Russia or Ukraine, I am simply talking about technology objectively. The reason Russian armor has failed so badly in Ukraine is because they don’t know how to use it, they haven’t maintained it, they aren’t following proper doctrine and their crews (much like the ones faced by the US in desert storm) are not good, which means they cannot use their machines well.

Ukraine has displayed no better usage of tanks, simply because it has so few, the reason it’s winning is because of better tactics and hundreds of billions of dollars worth of modern weapons from NATO, otherwise Ukrainian defense industry failed over a decade before this war even started, not having produced anything that good in a while, don’t compare it to Russian tech. (Again, I’m not saying that somehow makes Russia better or that their technology is excellent or best in the world, only that it is obviously far better than Ukraine, but they have no idea how to implement it and are hence getting beat).

No Pakistani tank can with stand a single hit from any of Indian anti tank weapons
Much heavier leapard tanks couldn't in Syria

 

[R2D2]

Q- Why did we make Al-Khalid locally if we are now getting 679 VT4s' from China? Same goes for JF-17. F-16 was designed in 1972 and even today the performance is good. Why do our designs become obsolete within 10 years?

 

[iLION12345_1]

People just see how 2000 tanks were destroyed in ukriane
They also tend to see what cluster bombs do to tanks..

Tanks are probably futile in pak India war scenario where airpower will decide the war

If PAF loses then 10,000 or 20,000 tanks doesn't matter IAF will do a massacre of any armour

If PAF hangs on then sure tanks are useful

Pakistan lost tons of tanks to airpower even in 1960s when PAF did better and modern guided weapons didn't exist


Antitank weapons is whole different domain...India has every variety of those and tanks won't survive a single hit from 100,000s of those weapons


No Pakistani tank can with stand a single hit from any of Indian anti tank weapons
Much heavier leapard tanks couldn't in Syria

Vice versa too. That’s why I always say that infantry with a modern ATGM is the biggest threat to tanks. Forget ATGMs, even the RPG7 can achieve upwards of 500MM of penetration with a Tandem warhead, that’s enough to go through the sides and rear of any tank in the subcontinent and the front of a few older ones. An Alcotan, TOW, Spike or any other modern AT weapon will go right through tank armor.

That’s why it’s so important to have infantry and air cover for tanks as they advance. That’s the purpose of combined arms. Infantry can enemy armor, but when you’re outnumbered or have to push through the open, then you absolutely need armored cover so the infantry can move forward, at the same time while the tank can help push, it can’t survive if anti tank threats like AT infantry isn’t eliminated.

That’s also why APS systems are so important nowadays, they can protect a tank against nearly any ATGM threat, and that’s why PA is getting its hands on such systems too. IA will too eventually.

Q- Why did we make Al-Khalid locally if we are now getting 694 VT4s' from China? Same goes for JF-17. F-16 was designed in 1972 and even today the performance is good. Why our designs become obsolete within 10 years?

Because Al-Khalid was made in 2000 and the VT4A1 came in 2021. That’s a 20 year gap, would PA just wait 20 years to get VT4 and have no modern MBTs in the time being?

20 years is no small time, and the Al-Khalid is not obsolete at all. The AK-1 is still the second best MBT in service anywhere in the subcontinent.

Also keep in mind that the VT4 is a continuation of the VT1, the VT4 would not exist today if Pakistan had not Made the Al-Khalid. It only makes sense that HIT is now beginning to produce the VT4 after finishing AK orders, VT-4 is basically AK-2. The unfortunate part is that it came from China and not from us, the WoT and corruption sapped out resources, and don’t even get me started on the poor mentalities of the people that were supposed to ensure this development, that’s a whole new can of worms.

As for the F16 and JF-17, that’s just a very poor comparison, both the aircraft are of different types, different weight classes, different roles and different costs. One we can make locally, one we can’t even buy imported now, so which one is more useful for us? The F16 of 1974 isn’t the F-16 of 2022, it has been modernized. The F-16 of 1974 didn’t even have BVR. The JF-17 block 3 outrages any F-16 in the PAF inventory, but of course the F-16 will have higher performance, it’s bigger and thrice the cost.

 

[ziaulislam]

Vice versa too. That’s why I always say that infantry with a modern ATGM is the biggest threat to tanks. Forget ATGMs, even the RPG7 can achieve upwards of 500MM of penetration with a Tandem warhead, that’s enough to go through the sides and rear of any tank in the subcontinent and the front of a few older ones. An Alcotan, TOW, Spike or any other modern AT weapon will go right through tank armor.

That’s why it’s so important to have infantry and air cover for tanks as they advance. That’s the purpose of combined arms. Infantry can enemy armor, but when you’re outnumbered or have to push through the open, then you absolutely need armored cover so the infantry can move forward, at the same time while the tank can help push, it can’t survive if anti tank threats like AT infantry isn’t eliminated.

That’s also why APS systems are so important nowadays, they can protect a tank against nearly any ATGM threat, and that’s why PA is getting its hands on such systems too. IA will too eventually.

But problem is IMO we don't have any significant air power

I would rather have PA operate al zarrar old tanks and get extra squadron of j10 instead of getting 500 modern tanks or gunships (again very vulnerable to man portable SAMs) simply because IAF vastly is superior to PAF and that's what would matter in Pakistan India war

We saw how tanks did recently in Syria and Russia

We also saw how gunships did in Syria and Russia
MANPADs will destroy these gunships like flies

Yes APS is next step but I don't think these tanks have them

 

[iLION12345_1]

But problem is IMO we don't have any significant air power

I would rather have PA operate al zarrar old tanks and get extra squadron of j10 instead of getting 500 modern tanks or gunships (again very vulnerable to man portable SAMs) simply because IAF vastly is superior to PAF and that's what would matter in Pakistan India war

We saw how tanks did recently in Syria and Russia

We also saw how gunships did in Syria and Russia
MANPADs will destroy these gunships like flies

Please stop using Syria, Ukraine and Armenia as examples for the Indo-Pak theatre, they could not be more different.

Where were the SHORADs in all three of those theaters? Was there any proper Air-war at all except for individual sorties? Were tanks deployed with proper doctrine and infantry? Were APS systems used?

Not a single rule of modern combined arms warfare was followed in those regions so how can we expect our doctrines to be compared with those? If india or Pakistan deployed their forces like Russia did, then even Nepal could take out both countries at once. But india and Pakistan have been preparing nearly every single day for this war, neither will make this mistake. And you can never prepare on the basis of your enemy making a mistake.


The J-10s are the domain of the Air Force. A VT-4 is more useful to the PA than a J-10, a J-10 is more useful to the PAF than a VT-4. Do you see any other modern armies cutting funding from one arm to provide to another? That would lead to absolute chaos. Each thing has its own use and purpose. Selling a few VT4s won’t get us a few J-10s, nor will that suddenly make PAF better than the IAF, all it’ll do is handicap the PA. that’s not how modern defense acquisitions work.

by that metric you can say that all of Indias forces are vastly superior to ours. Because on paper they most definitely are, they have more of nearly everything, they have generally more modern weapons, a much better Industry and far more money. So how do we beat them? On tactics, training and small scale warfare. Modern wars aren’t all out pandemonium, if you want to use Russia as an example then we’ve seen the same there too, or even better, take local examples over the last 20 years. We’ve had isolated standoffs in 2002, 2007 and 2019. Those are the face of modern warfare, so instead of huge, lumbering forces, we need smaller, more modernized units in all our arms, to win small scale skirmishes, and on that, Pakistan can possibly hope to match india.

Otherwise for all our sake, hope a war never breaks out, because we have nukes for a reason.

Ah, so BTA 4 and Sejjel are different after all. I do wonder however how well these new APFSDS perform against Kontakt-5, since I haven't seen BTA 4 or any other Chinese APFSDS for that matter being advertised as counter-ERA as some western ones have been.


They have CITVs? I have never seen one with it.

My bad, i just saw that I wrote CITVs in the original post, I meant TIs for the gunner (Catherine FC).

 

[Mav3rick]

I don't know right now because been a while since I moved away from the field, but we are faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar behind in metallurgy, almost all aspects of it.

That's what Abdul Qadeer Khan was so good at, right? Metallurgy? So we could invest the expertise in Nuclear field but not apply the same to other fields? And what about the ToT on Al-Khalid's during the 90's? Why couldn't we work with China/Turkey or some other country to overcome these technicalities and leapfrog generations for the next MBT?

We are investing a big chunk on Defense and the result should be an industry which could eventually sustain itself by exporting defense equipment (currently limited to around 500M USD of exports?). I think a big failure is the failure to invest in public-private ventures like the US does. Every equipment of the US military is produced by private contractors under guidance of the Military and in public-private partnerships; working with the US we could not figure this out and still our public-private partnership is limited to Drones.

 

[alimobin memon]

Yes, significantly better protected. I don’t know why people think T72 and T90S are the same thing. T72B and early T90 were similar yet, it is an upgrade of the former after all, but T90A and S are entirely different moving forward. Anyone who thinks so otherwise is just bashing Russian armor for the sake of bashing Russian armor.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, the basic design of all Chinese tanks, AK and VT4 included, is absolutely shit, because China prior to ZTZ-99 didn’t know how to design a good tank (They finally learned when they got a T72 and reverse engineered it to design the ZTZ-99).

I’m not saying this is indicative of their modern tank design, I’m certain if China was to design an MBT now it would surpass anything Russia can come up with, but such was not the case in the 90s when the AK was conceived.

The T90S’ frontal armor arc is about 30 degrees bigger than the AK series (which has the smallest frontal armor arc of any modern MBT). The AK also has very poor ERA coverage, partly due to its bad design, and partially due to a weak engine, unlike the T90S, which as I mentioned before has a much higher torque figure and significantly better K5 coverage (something PA is looking to remedy with FY-IV, which is better than K5, and a more powerful engine). On top of that, the T90S has better base armor. I’m not saying the AK isn’t well protected by any means, it’s definitely adequate, but it’s not T90S level.

“Cheap” Russian ERA (K5 is better than any ERA Pakistan has ever made, and Chinas FY-IV only has slightly higher protection numbers than K-5, meanwhile Russians have two generations of ERA beyond that) is better than No ERA. And AK and VT4 series has the exact same carousel arrangement as the T72 and T90, so if penetration occurs, the turret will fly off in exactly the same manner. Yes AK and VT4 do a bit more to isolate its ammo than the T90S by putting them in armored bins, but these bins are not isolated from the crew or closed off, nor do they have blast panels, and can still be penetrated or reached by a grenade.

These tanks have been tested plenty in trials, and PA is well aware of the strengths and shortcomings of its own armor and it’s enemies, if you don’t admit to your enemies strengths, then those very things will put you in the dirt, so I’m glad PAs planned don’t display the same arrogance as you, there’s a reason why the PA has always maintained such a major edge on modern ammunition over the IA.

As for the jammers. I assume you mean Shtora Suite. That was developed in the Cold War and was effective in its early days, it was already obsolete by the 90s and Russia and Ukraine are both well aware of that and have stopped equipping it on new tanks. The same suite was offered to india who rightfully rejected it, and to Pakistan by Ukraine (under the name “Varta”, who also rejected it).
Im not sure which Ukrainian laser jammers you mean were “better” than Russian ones, because the Ukrainian one is just a renamed and rebadged Russian jammer with the exact same specs. Both of which are obsolete since the 90s.
The reason the suite is still seen these days is because the jammers aren’t the only part of it, it also comes with LWRs and automatic smoke and targeting systems which are very effective and still useful, that’s the part of the suite both Ukraine and Russia want to keep.

And I already mentioned the reverse speed of the T72/T90S as a major weakness that our armor doesn’t have, I don’t see how that relates to the armor protection.

I have no bias for Russia or Ukraine, I am simply talking about technology objectively. The reason Russian armor has failed so badly in Ukraine is because they don’t know how to use it, they haven’t maintained it, they aren’t following proper doctrine and their crews (much like the ones faced by the US in desert storm) are not good, which means they cannot use their machines well.

Ukraine has displayed no better usage of tanks, simply because it has so few, the reason it’s winning is because of better tactics and hundreds of billions of dollars worth of modern weapons from NATO, otherwise Ukrainian defense industry failed over a decade before this war even started, not having produced anything that good in a while, don’t compare it to Russian tech. (Again, I’m not saying that somehow makes Russia better or that their technology is excellent or best in the world, only that it is obviously far better than Ukraine, but they have no idea how to implement it and are hence getting beat).

Dont believe that. Chinese tanks actually have made some issues resolved regarding turret pop off and have made these improvements after series of tests.

Chinese tanks only disadvantage is the side armour. The side armour still is in 280mm to 350mm category but ak probably has around 280 to 300mm. Its too thin from sides for modern era.

Have you seen type 59 upgraded alzarrar sustaining so many rpg hits yet crew survived its a prime example of how well it performed than russian ones.

New alkhalid-is are getting same configuration in future batches to incorporate same vt4 style design of turret as seen pic shared from HIT facility in pdf forum.

If t90s is well protected than ak or vt4 as per you which is debatable then our apfsds are in full range to penetrate t90s front armour too.

T80ud came during ak time and both perform well and some cases ak performed well.

You need to understand ak is different from chinese origin general tanks. Pakistani input is there you know if we had so dumb experts why didnt we just blindly go for abrams during zia era. Which explains we have very different requirements.

Chinese are so rapidly improving I am shocked by behavior of people they still think its 70s or 80s where they had mediocre quality. Its different time. The optics have been performing well then ukrainian t80 ud tanks etc.

Secondly we are not targetting russia we are targetting India they dont have tanks that are better protected and have better armaments.

One more thing if shermans in israel with new gun can decimate tanks that were generation ahead so I can say ak with good armament is devastating for enemy.

 

[ziaulislam]

Please stop using Syria, Ukraine and Armenia as examples for the Indo-Pak theatre, they could not be more different.

Where were the SHORADs in all three of those theaters? Was there any proper Air-war at all except for individual sorties? Were tanks deployed with proper doctrine and infantry? Were APS systems used?

Not a single rule of modern combined arms warfare was followed in those regions so how can we expect our doctrines to be compared with those? If india or Pakistan deployed their forces like Russia did, then even Nepal could take out both countries at once. But india and Pakistan have been preparing nearly every single day for this war, neither will make this mistake. And you can never prepare on the basis of your enemy making a mistake.


The J-10s are the domain of the Air Force. A VT-4 is more useful to the PA than a J-10, a J-10 is more useful to the PAF than a VT-4. Do you see any other modern armies cutting funding from one arm to provide to another? That would lead to absolute chaos. Each thing has its own use and purpose. Selling a few VT4s won’t get us a few J-10s, nor will that suddenly make PAF better than the IAF, all it’ll do is handicap the PA. that’s not how modern defense acquisitions work.

by that metric you can say that all of Indias forces are vastly superior to ours. Because on paper they most definitely are, they have more of nearly everything, they have generally more modern weapons, a much better Industry and far more money. So how do we beat them? On tactics, training and small scale warfare. Modern wars aren’t all out pandemonium, if you want to use Russia as an example then we’ve seen the same there too, or even better, take local examples over the last 20 years. We’ve had isolated standoffs in 2002, 2007 and 2019. Those are the face of modern warfare, so instead of huge, lumbering forces, we need smaller, more modernized units in all our arms, to win small scale skirmishes, and on that, Pakistan can possibly hope to match india.

Otherwise for all our sake, hope a war never breaks out, because we have nukes for a reason.


My bad, i just saw that I wrote CITVs in the original post, I meant TIs for the gunner (Catherine FC).

Yes I am seeing PAF cutting it funds to fund Pakistan army..

PAF will struggle against IAF afterwards both navy and army will too.. regardless of what they have..

Not adopting to drone warfare and not keeping an eye on modern warfare in Syria Russia ukriane will be fatal mistakes that any professional army won't make

You see how Israeli disproportionately spends a lot on SAM, large airforce and tanks for particular risks and doesn't spend a lot on keeping a very large ground force or a large navy/surface fleet.

(Hamas rockets, disproportionately large arab opposition and counter insurgency respectively)

Do we do a similar threat analysis?? Or we simply buy what we want...

 

[Dazzler]

PA:
BM-42 (small number from Ukraine) and APFSDS/T (Local production of Chinese 125-1 APFSDS) in late 90s, Both rated at 460MM/0 degrees at 2000M.

Naiza DU (APFSDS/T with indigenous DU penetrator) in early 2000s, 550-570MM/0 degrees at 2000M.

Both were standard PA APFSDS until late 2010s.

BTA-4 with VT-4, possibly the best ammo that can be fired from all PA MBTs since Sejjel might be a bit longer. 600-650MM/0 degrees at 2000M.

Sejjel in 2021, 650+ MM at 0 degrees at 2000M. Has a longer penetrator than anything China makes at the moment, performance likely similar to Chinese DTC-10-125 used in ZTZ-99A (Which has the same overall dimensions as BTA-4, but a longer penetrator as well).

Unknown ammo with 720MM/0 Degrees at 2000M already tested, likely will only fit in AK-1, VT-4 and UD, however AK-1s autoloader will likely be put into AKs along with their ERA and other modernizations.

800MM + ammo being considered for future acquisition.

IA:

BM13 and BM15 since late 90s to 2016. 300MM/0 degrees at 2000M (This figure is matched by the Ammo used in PAs Type 59s and 69s with the 105MM Gun).
BM42 after 2016, 460MM/0 Degrees at 2000M.

And some will claim IA has the armored edge. The devil is in the details.

Funnily enough, the TIs IA installed in its T90S don’t work in the desert because of overheating, the T90S came with AC, but it isn’t good enough to cool the cabin in South Asian deserts, and there is no room for a larger AC unit (this problem has been apparent since 2006). They’ve been trying to install better ACs since, but have still not completed the program as far as I can tell. AK and VT4 don’t have this problem, however I’m certain UD, UG and AZ will suffer similar issues if deployed in the desert (some UDs already have).

Official penetration values for bm42 mango stated by Russians is no more than 420mm at 0 degrees @2000m. OFB AMK339 does just that.

Their best bet was IMI CL series (550mm at 2000m) but the company got blacklisted and the rest is history.

 

[AlKardai]

I dont understand how people have the mental capacity to make claims that tanks are obsolete especially when used to back infantry, stage offensive operations, and breaking enemy lines/fortification. Nothing else serves as good purpose by providing mobility, firepower, and protection in the way tanks do.

Tanks will be upgraded in the future. You will see tanks using more advanced composites, advanced next generation sensors, thermals, and sights. Mini drones will be integrated onto each tank to scout miles away providing detection of enemy units far far earlier than before. In certain scenarios these drones could even be modified to carry out autonomous suicide attacks against enemy tank. Tanks will be equiped with hard kill protection system and missiles used to defeat hard point detection systems. This will be the future of tanks. Inshort a future tank integrated with hard kill systems + autonomous scout drones will be force multipliers for infantry units.

In short, tanks will innovate rather than go extinct

 

[Trango Towers]

I also did not just say why tank were obsolete, I have already mention how or why drone are effective and when they are not.

I mean, I accept the fact that everyone has their view, and this is mine

Bro I read your post its good.
Most western militaries are changing their doctrine. They are focused on highly mobile heavily armed big bang for buck armies. Tanks are still vital support for infantry and for certain types of thrusts but the large scale tank vs tank battles are a thing of the past. My post re divergence of more funds to drones was to highlight the fact drones are cheap highly mobile fast and a single drone can engage multiple targets and cause mayhem. Exit the battle field and return at a time of his choosing. This is the future.
Tanks cannot be protected in the battle field. People are saying that effective air cover with SAMs and other systems is the answer but during war these systems get attacked 1st and often get taken out. Then what?

 

[AlKardai]

Bro I read your post its good.
Most western militaries are changing their doctrine. They are focused on highly mobile heavily armed big bang for buck armies. Tanks are still vital support for infantry and for certain types of thrusts but the large scale tank vs tank battles are a thing of the past. My post re divergence of more funds to drones was to highlight the fact drones are cheap highly mobile fast and a single drone can engage multiple targets and cause mayhem. Exit the battle field and return at a time of his choosing. This is the future.
Tanks cannot be protected in the battle field. People are saying that effective air cover with SAMs and other systems is the answer but during war these systems get attacked 1st and often get taken out. Then what?

Of course they get attacked first. The point is that you use other assets where specific ones fall short. If an AA system is about to get taken out, risking the safety of a tank squad, air support will be called in.
That's the entire idea of Combined arms warfare, to adequately use other assets where certain ones are weaker.