One of the members here pointed out
that that unit was not actually M1
A1 but an inferior variant.
Anyways, it is possible that M1A1 Abrams was not prepared for operations in Bahawalpur type environment back then [in the 1980s]. Additionally, we didn't give US a chance to customize its product per our needs. For example, we could have requested a solution for the issue of "sand ingestion" from this company:
http://donaldsonaerospace-defense.c...F112255-Military-Ground-Vehicle-Equipment.pdf
"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
What happened in Bahawalpur in the 1980s, is completely invalid today. If we are to judge an M1 MBT variant today, we need to concentrate on its evolution over the course of years and what it can do today. We need to stop living in the past.
As for pitting Type-59 against an M1A1 Abrams in the battlefield; Iraq did this in 1991 and results are in front of everybody. Just another reason to not take Bahawalpur-based account [very] seriously.
---
Based on revelations in this very forum, I get the impression that we are giving developers of Oplot-M and VT-4 ample chance to customize their products per our needs. Both
failed in their [initial] trials in Bahawalpur, right?
---
Can you tell me why we testing Oplot-M and VT-4 when we have Al-Khalid?
You seem to look at these matters in
black-and-white ways, my friend. A battlefield scenario of the scale and intensity of the Persian Gulf War (1991) is likely to establish conditions for engagements [each varying from the other] in which superiority of weaponry and training of soldiers will be subject to stresses unlike in any trials.
Battle of 73 Easting occurred in "stormy conditions," and without involvement of Apaches and A10s.
Details in following sources:-
https://www.defensemedianetwork.com...ng-and-the-road-to-the-synthetic-battlefield/
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/10-lessons-the-battle-73-easting-15332
https://www.quora.com/During-the-ma...r-not-by-the-main-gun-of-opposing-Iraqi-tanks
A notable account:-
"I say that because there was at least one well-publicized instance of an M1A1 tank from the 24th Mechanized Division taking direct fire from sub-1000m range by T-72 tanks, three of them. The first shot bounced off the frontal turret armor with the M1A1 crew destroying that tank. The second shot, from a different tank, also bounced off the frontal turret armor, and the M1A1's crew destroyed that tank. The third shot, from a third tank at about 400 m penetrated the aluminum side sponson box of the turret but not the turret armor itself. This tank then hid behind a sand berm, which the M1A1 crew shot through and destroyed the third tank."
Want to test Al-Khalid or Type-59 like that? Good luck.
Al-Khalid is a fairly decent MBT and might endure a modern-era round or two but Type-59 will be toast in a single shot.