What's new

Pakistan Army's VT-4 Main Battle Tank | Updates & Discussions

I know it's currently undergoing trials, but I hope Pakistan puts in a bulk order for 1,500 tanks (built in China and Pakistan). The VT4 is a superior platform to the T-90A, and the T-90MS comes just a little short. The army would be fielding an excellent tank which has won the admiration of Western pundits, who we all know aren't the greatest fans of Chinese hardware.
maxresdefault.jpg
 
I know it's currently undergoing trials, but I hope Pakistan puts in a bulk order for 1,500 tanks (built in China and Pakistan). The VT4 is a superior platform to the T-90A, and the T-90MS comes just a little short. The army would be fielding an excellent tank which has won the admiration of Western pundits, who we all know aren't the greatest fans of Chinese hardware.
maxresdefault.jpg
i would rather want pakistan to joint build a modified version otherwise we cant afford that number
 
i would rather want pakistan to joint build a modified version otherwise we cant afford that number

I mentioned that, Pakistan can offset costs. But the need is crucial now ,especially with India operating over 1,600 T-90's alone.
 
ALTAY OPLOT will be killing combo and AK is in backup we must be having best tank como in region
 
T-72, T-90, Al khalid, Type-99 all versions, VT-4, Type-85/ 96 all versions, use the same AZ type autoloader.

SizzlingImmaculateCockatoo-size_restricted.gif



The T-64, T-80, T-84 and Oplot all utilise MZ type autloader.

giphy%2B%25281%2529.gif

Which one is better?
 
M1A1 failed in Pakistan is a fact so keep refuting it all you like.
I would like to clear one thing: since I am in the academics, I am sensitive to expressions (and context) accordingly.

1. Your disclosure is an account.
2. Evidence is provided to corroborate an account.
3. In the absence of evidence, your account may or may not be true* (a fact).

*Since you insist that your account is true, then I have to make sense of provided information; your account might be true because M1 Abrams was not 'optimized' for sustained operations in the Cholistan desert (or similar environments) back then, in the 1980s. Such optimizations officially commenced in 1990.

M1 Abrams was first retrofitted with an 'air filter' for sustained operations in the desert environments in 1990 (to prevent talcum powder like sand from creeping into its engine - sand ingestion phenomenon). After the Persian Gulf War (1991), the original 'air filter' was replaced with the vastly superior PJAC system from Donaldson.

PROBLEM: In Desert Storm, the M1 Abrams could only travel as few as 12 miles (20 km) before the filters needed to be changed.

SOLUTION: The M1 Abrams requirement pioneered the first PJAC Air Cleaner back in 1991. On a 1,560 mile dust course at Yuma Proving Grounds, a non-pulse jet equipped M1A1 had to stop and service filters ten times. The M1A1 equipped with the PJAC never had to stop to service the filters. Now the PJAC is offered on many ground vehicles and is used by governments all over the world.


Source: http://www.emea.donaldson.com/en/aircraft/support/datalibrary/071714.pdf

Cheers.

It missed targets on the move is also a fact.
Which gun was mounted on it? Its stabilizer was not working? Crew was Pakistani?

Your disclosure leads me to consider following possibilities (or a combination thereof):-

1. Crew was not up to the task.
2. Main gun might not be 120 mm M256 but inferior 105 mm M68A1.
3. The unit malfunctioned*.

*Machines are not infallible; parts can develop faults and disrupt functionality of the entire system subsequently.

I recall that a few M1 Abrams units malfunctioned in the Arabian desert environments in 1990; defective parts were the most likely culprit in these cases.

its powerpack heated to undesired levels is also a fact. You may not find it documented, but there is a BBC documentary exposing the M1A1 fiasco to some degree so take it or leave, its up to you. However, if you want someone to hand you documentation on what actually happened in Tamewala/ Cholistan and Bahawalpur trials, forget it.
Alright, my friend.

Keep in mind that experience is an unparalleled teacher, and objective of testing is to uncover potential shortcomings. They likely saw an opportunity to test their product in Bahawalpur and learn from such exposure.

M1 Abrams is a versatile platform, and it has undergone lot of improvements since its inception.

You conveniently overlooked several important points in trying to prove the might of your favorite mbt.

The fact is that M1A1, like any other weapon system in the world, is as vulnerable in the battlefield without adequate air cover as any.
Of-course.

However, M1 Abrams was designed in the manner, as to offer better protection that contemporary Main Battle Tanks at the time.

"The driving force behind the development of the M1 Abrams was crew survival, and the tank's shape comes from composite armor developed towards this purpose. Special armor is also used in the forward track skirts. Of the fifty-five 105mm rounds, three were kept on the turret floor in spall-resistant covers, eight were stowed in an armored compartment in the hull behind the engine bulkhead, and the rest were stowed in the turret bustle behind armored blast doors. Blowoff panels in the hull ammunition compartment and the turret bustle vented ammunition explosions away from the crew compartment. The TC's hatch incorporated an open protected, or umbrella, position, which allowed visibility while still providing overhead protection."

Excellent information in this link: http://afvdb.50megs.com/usa/m1abrams.html

Yes there have been improvements and it showed much better performance in the first gulf war and stuff. it could even fire the M829A1 silver bullet that literally shredded the Asad babil's frontal armor. In However, during the war, the tank regiments had convenient supply and maintenance chains to support it throughout the war. The air cover was there, and Apaches and Thunderbolts rarely left them isolated in the desert.
:tup:

The technology in these mbts was also played a conclusive role. What on earth a downgraded Asad Babil could have done against a top of the line mbt? Even one on one confrontation, the result would be obvious. It was not even a competition.
:tup:

On-board technologies
was my point of contention as well, throughout the course of this discussion. This is why I argued that a Type-59 derivative cannot match and/or outperform an M1A1 Abrams derivative under any circumstances (assuming the two are in perfect working order).

Even the original M1 Abrams was/is a generational leap from Type-59 derivatives in capabilities by virtue of its vastly superior onboard technologies and design. Full stop.

What happened in Bahawalpur should not be taken at face value, by a professional. We need to focus on the technical aspects of the products in question and how they fared against each other in the battlefield.

M1 Abrams derivatives literally smoked any Main Battle Tank (MBT) that was pitted against them by the Iraqi armed forces in 1991 such as T-54, Type 59, T-62, Type 69 and T-72M1 (Lion of Babylon). I am counting strictly Tank-to-Tank engagements.

I live a real world and have worked on some prestigious projects so i may know, have seen and operated things up close that some of you fanboys can only dream of.
Look! I respect your exposure and professionalism. And I look forward to your valuable input for military-related matters.

However, I have seen that Pakistani military officials tend to develop "superiority complex" on average, and this is a problem. I will not generalize; some are very decent and groomed. However, military officials are also people, and as subjective as civilians on average.

More importantly, never (ever) underestimate the versatility and knowledge of civilians in general. I am not in the military but I am not a layman either. And I am not short on connections - scores of my relatives are in the military and/or veterans. A few in positions that many will never attain during the course of their lives. I won't boast further.

Education shape civilizations, and define their holistic competence. Pakistan Army would be nothing without unconditional support of Pakistani civilians. Keep this fact in mind.

Civilians are the backbone of any country. USA is miles ahead of Pakistan in productivity and power projection due to its vastly superior education system and institutions.

Above all, I appreciate your input. We can get in touch.

He is right.. the Abrams did fail...! Gen Zia fiasco??? Je was returning after witnessing the tests ... along with the americans.

And the tests were held in “Khairpur Tamme’wali”...

However that said... the abrams wasnt fielding the 120mm canon rather a 100+mm gun... atleast from what can be gathered from the video.

There is a video of it... il find it for you.
OK, bro. Appreciated. :tup:

A machinery can certainly fail in an environment for which it is not optimized at the time of testing.

M1 Abrams was something new back then, and not ready for operations in certain environments at the time. Therefore, Pakistani accounts might be true to large extent.

However, M1 Abrams in its current shape - is a beast of engineering.
 
I would like to clear one thing: since I am in the academics, I am sensitive to expressions (and context) accordingly.

1. Your disclosure is an account.
2. Evidence is provided to corroborate an account.
3. In the absence of evidence, your account may or may not be true* (a fact).

*Since you insist that your account is true, then I have to make sense of provided information; your account might be true because M1 Abrams was not 'optimized' for sustained operations in the Cholistan desert (or similar environments) back then, in the 1980s. Such optimizations officially commenced in 1990.

M1 Abrams was first retrofitted with an 'air filter' for sustained operations in the desert environments in 1990 (to prevent talcum powder like sand from creeping into its engine - sand ingestion phenomenon). After the Persian Gulf War (1991), the original 'air filter' was replaced with the vastly superior PJAC system from Donaldson.

PROBLEM: In Desert Storm, the M1 Abrams could only travel as few as 12 miles (20 km) before the filters needed to be changed.

SOLUTION: The M1 Abrams requirement pioneered the first PJAC Air Cleaner back in 1991. On a 1,560 mile dust course at Yuma Proving Grounds, a non-pulse jet equipped M1A1 had to stop and service filters ten times. The M1A1 equipped with the PJAC never had to stop to service the filters. Now the PJAC is offered on many ground vehicles and is used by governments all over the world.


Source: http://www.emea.donaldson.com/en/aircraft/support/datalibrary/071714.pdf

Cheers.


Which gun was mounted on it? Its stabilizer was not working? Crew was Pakistani?

Your disclosure leads me to consider following possibilities (or a combination thereof):-

1. Crew was not up to the task.
2. Main gun might not be 120 mm M256 but inferior 105 mm M68A1.
3. The unit malfunctioned*.

*Machines are not infallible; parts can develop faults and disrupt functionality of the entire system subsequently.

I recall that a few M1 Abrams units malfunctioned in the Arabian desert environments in 1990; defective parts were the most likely culprit in these cases.


Alright, my friend.

Keep in mind that experience is an unparalleled teacher, and objective of testing is to uncover potential shortcomings. They likely saw an opportunity to test their product in Bahawalpur and learn from such exposure.

M1 Abrams is a versatile platform, and it has undergone lot of improvements since its inception.


Of-course.

However, M1 Abrams was designed in the manner, as to offer better protection that contemporary Main Battle Tanks at the time.

"The driving force behind the development of the M1 Abrams was crew survival, and the tank's shape comes from composite armor developed towards this purpose. Special armor is also used in the forward track skirts. Of the fifty-five 105mm rounds, three were kept on the turret floor in spall-resistant covers, eight were stowed in an armored compartment in the hull behind the engine bulkhead, and the rest were stowed in the turret bustle behind armored blast doors. Blowoff panels in the hull ammunition compartment and the turret bustle vented ammunition explosions away from the crew compartment. The TC's hatch incorporated an open protected, or umbrella, position, which allowed visibility while still providing overhead protection."

Excellent information in this link: http://afvdb.50megs.com/usa/m1abrams.html


:tup:


:tup:

On-board technologies
was my point of contention as well, throughout the course of this discussion. This is why I argued that a Type-59 derivative cannot match and/or outperform an M1A1 Abrams derivative under any circumstances (assuming the two are in perfect working order).

Even the original M1 Abrams was/is a generational leap from Type-59 derivatives in capabilities by virtue of its vastly superior onboard technologies and design. Full stop.

What happened in Bahawalpur should not be taken at face value, by a professional. We need to focus on the technical aspects of the products in question and how they fared against each other in the battlefield.

M1 Abrams derivatives literally smoked any Main Battle Tank (MBT) that was pitted against them by the Iraqi armed forces in 1991 such as T-54, Type 59, T-62, Type 69 and T-72M1 (Lion of Babylon). I am counting strictly Tank-to-Tank engagements.


Look! I respect your exposure and professionalism. And I look forward to your valuable input for military-related matters.

However, I have seen that Pakistani military officials tend to develop "superiority complex" on average, and this is a problem. I will not generalize; some are very decent and groomed. However, military officials are also people, and as subjective as civilians on average.

More importantly, never (ever) underestimate the versatility and knowledge of civilians in general. I am not in the military but I am not a layman either. And I am not short on connections - scores of my relatives are in the military and/or veterans. A few in positions that many will never attain during the course of their lives. I won't boast further.

Education shape civilizations, and define their holistic competence. Pakistan Army would be nothing without unconditional support of Pakistani civilians. Keep this fact in mind.

Civilians are the backbone of any country. USA is miles ahead of Pakistan in productivity and power projection due to its vastly superior education system and institutions.

Above all, I appreciate your input. We can get in touch.


OK, bro. Appreciated. :tup:

A machinery can certainly fail in an environment for which it is not optimized at the time of testing.

M1 Abrams was something new back then, and not ready for operations in certain environments at the time. Therefore, Pakistani accounts might be true to large extent.

However, M1 Abrams in its current shape - is a beast of engineering.
Discussed to death here;

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/m1-t...separating-facts-from-the-myths.409993/page-5
 
Forget that thread. I was a bit of a jerk at the time.

MODS can remove it.

What makes you think you sound any different this time around?

There is nothing more to add. M1A1's failure in Pakistan is a historic fact.

Deny it all you like.
 
What makes you think you sound any different this time around?

There is nothing more to add. M1A1's failure in Pakistan is a historic fact.

Deny it all you like.
Did you read my response? I cannot be more friendly, forthcoming and appreciative then that.

I am (not) denying your account. Otherwise, I would have simply stated "I disagree. Thank you."

Bro, learn to have a discussion first.
 
What makes you think you sound any different this time around?

There is nothing more to add. M1A1's failure in Pakistan is a historic fact.

Deny it all you like.
That's straw man argument,in any given theatre of OPS in world M1A1 will be enjoying unlimited Air Cover and Scores of Hellfire missiles to cover it's every failure.I don't think any tank crew after knocking down US Army M1A1 would be able to tell the tale citing A-10,AH-64 and AH-1z's hovering above to provide cover or cover the failure.
 
Did you read my response? I cannot be more friendly, forthcoming and appreciative then that.

I am (not) denying your account. Otherwise, I would have simply stated "I disagree. Thank you."

Bro, learn to have a discussion first.

What a well thought out and excellent number of posts you wrote. Its a shame Dazzler does not have the decency to talk in a civilized manner and lashes out with personal innuendos.

Please do write more on this forum. I know less about tanks than air force stuff but would love to hear your thoughts on
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/rethinking-the-tank-al-khalid-2-the-future.545239/
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/whither-now-the-attack-helicopter-problem-for-pa.545613/

If you would be so kind as to oblige.
 
What a well thought out and excellent number of posts you wrote. Its a shame Dazzler does not have the decency to talk in a civilized manner and lashes out with personal innuendos.

Please do write more on this forum. I know less about tanks than air force stuff but would love to hear your thoughts on
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/rethinking-the-tank-al-khalid-2-the-future.545239/
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/whither-now-the-attack-helicopter-problem-for-pa.545613/

If you would be so kind as to oblige.

Don't have time to parrot the same thing over. You were embarrassed in another thread right? Now taking cheap shots to compensate for that.
 
I know it's currently undergoing trials, but I hope Pakistan puts in a bulk order for 1,500 tanks (built in China and Pakistan). The VT4 is a superior platform to the T-90A, and the T-90MS comes just a little short. The army would be fielding an excellent tank which has won the admiration of Western pundits, who we all know aren't the greatest fans of Chinese hardware.
maxresdefault.jpg
Sorry but VT 4 hardly impressed any one in the Army when it first came to trials. OPLOT was the one which we liked only issue was engine. Both got changes so let see who wins now
 
Sorry but VT 4 hardly impressed any one in the Army when it first came to trials. OPLOT was the one which we liked only issue was engine. Both got changes so let see who wins now

Says who, link please?
 
Back
Top Bottom