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

[Reichmarshal]

and neither of them are as good at CAS As F16s, F18s, JF17s, or literally any other fighter jet. Theyre both overrated and rather bad at their job.

Wt r u talking about....the ac uve mentioned they are capable of delivering a2g ordinance from a distance.
But we are talking about CAS ( close air support) for that u have to go in low constantly....in the process they take up punishment that is second to none but still remain air worthy most of the time n do their job n return to base.
The 16s n the 17s n the 18s that u mention above would be blown to bits at those altitudes n in those types of missions.

 

[Dazzler]

PA VT4s have 1200HP engine like all VT-4s, 1500HP was a myth. 1200 is more than enough for it to carry side-ERA. Even if it’s FY4 and not FY2, but regardless, it will slow the tank down a bit, any weight will.

AK protection level has been the same since it was introduced in 2001, it has not seen any armor changes, at least none significant enough to mention. It used to carry side ERA once upon a time and was even seen with a somewhat decent side armor package, but it never saw widespread use. PA can still equip them with armor/ERA on the side if it wants to, it’s just a question of wether the mobility trade off is worth it for them. As for exact armor numbers, nobody can give you those for the AK, not even most of HIT, and what’s on the internet is nearly all false, I can tell you this much, it can withstand its own APFSDS followed by its own HEAT projectile (and the other way around, which is a much harder thing to do given how HEAT messes with composite armor) on the turret, without ERA.

1500hp is not a myth. The engine can reach 1300 or 1500 through torque converter similar to ARMATA but at the cost of MTBO, and engine life. PA chose the 1200 configuration for it's version whereas Thai versions are 1300hp.

 

[Princeps Senatus]

Wt r u talking about....the ac uve mentioned they are capable of delivering a2g ordinance from a distance.
But we are talking about CAS ( close air support) for that u have to go in low constantly....in the process they take up punishment that is second to none but still remain air worthy most of the time n do their job n return to base.
The 16s n the 17s n the 18s that u mention above would be blown to bits at those altitudes n in those types of missions.

The 'close' in CAS refers to the distance b/w friendly and hostile ground troops i.e they are in contact. It has nothing to do with the distance the support is provided from. Before the advent of SOWs and PGMs, CAS had to rely on dive bombing and strafing. This is no longer the case.

Also for your information, A F-16 is much much faster than a A-10 making it much harder to hit by AAA or MANPADS/SHORADS. A-10 being more durable doesn't make it less vulnerable. It's still a sitting duck for AD.

 

[iLION12345_1]

Wt r u talking about....the ac uve mentioned they are capable of delivering a2g ordinance from a distance.
But we are talking about CAS ( close air support) for that u have to go in low constantly....in the process they take up punishment that is second to none but still remain air worthy most of the time n do their job n return to base.
The 16s n the 17s n the 18s that u mention above would be blown to bits at those altitudes n in those types of missions.

It’s well proven that F-16s, FA-18s (that A means attack btw, just as in A-10) and the F35C (which FYI is specifically designed for this stuff) are much more potent at CAS than A-10s.
The A-10s performance is mostly a hyped up myth which has been disproven many times, especially after the campaigns in Iran and Iraq. It’s armor is nearly useless against missiles and there are little to no instances of it taking fire (The kind of fire it can survive is only taken at low speeds and altitudes (trust me, it can’t fly as slow and low as people think) and is so rare to come by that it might as well be non existent). It is definitely not as good of a counter to enemy fire as speed and agility, The A-10 is only useful in COIN maybe where SAM threats aren’t present, or when you have total air superiority as the USAF might, unlike Russia in Ukraine where SU-25s are getting shot down all the time, or in India-pak where air superiority will be hard to come by.

The proper fighters can carry all the stuff the A-10 can (and more), fly further and faster, and be more accurate at delivery while also being much safer/able to hold their own in A2A even in A2G roles. Gun strafing is not really a thing anymore, which is perhaps the only unique thing about the A10 due to its cannon. A bomb delivered from 50 feet up and 5000 feet up will have the same effect in this case, one is just safer. That’s modern CAS for you.

1500hp is not a myth. The engine can reach 1300 or 1500 through torque converter similar to ARMATA but at the cost of MTBO, and engine life. PA chose the 1200 configuration for it's version whereas Thai versions are 1300hp.

I’m aware, I’ve already mentioned it here and here https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/m1-trials-in-pakistan.409993/page-10#post-13984487

But in regards to PA, the 1500 HP is indeed a myth.

It has a 1200HP engine, this is confirmed news, there is no source to back up the claim that it has 1500HP. I too believed that at the start but I’ve personally confirmed it with HIT.
You can technically tune the engine to make 1500HP if you want, or de-tune it to 1000, but the tuning is done so as to achieve the perfect combination of range, reliability and power output. This is true for all tank engines.

You can’t go on an offensive with speed alone, the sides of the VT-4, and all Pakistani tanks (and by extension Indian tanks too) are weak, mainly because none of them have been powerful enough so far to carry significant side armor without a mobility penalty, this is less of an issue on the VT-4. The main threat to MBTs is infantry, and infantry can flank a tank. Putting on side armor is much cheaper (and at times also lighter) than an APS system.

Can’t comment on the drone launching capability, that’s easy enough to add. But PA has other place to put funds right now.


View attachment 896319View attachment 896320View attachment 896321View attachment 896322View attachment 896323View attachment 896324
Top to bottom: Al-Zarrar with side ERA package.
UD with its 1/3rd side covered in extra armor (also seen in Indian T90S models, but with Kontakt 5 ERA instead). All PA UDs have it.
AK with full side skirt, this is not armor, rather a anti-thermal signature measure.
AK with Side armor similar to UD, used to be commonly seen, now not so much.
AK with a full side armor kit, doesn’t cover all the way down, but is still a lot better than nothing, especially if they put ERA on top, was not seen outside some models at HIT.
AK with Shtora APS. The IR dazzlers on the cheeks are obsolete stuff, PA didn’t buy the system (thankfully), but I wish they got the LWRs (nodes above the barrel) and the automatic smoke deployment and threat targeting systems that come with shtora. Some companies (ALTCOP and GIDS) made such systems locally too, but they were never employed in large numbers, only seen on a few AKs and AZs, they’re basically the most basic form of an APS.

 

[Dazzler]

It’s well proven that F-16s, FA-18s (that A means attack btw, just as in A-10) and the F35C (which FYI is specifically designed for this stuff) are much more potent at CAS than A-10s.
The A-10s performance is mostly a hyped up myth which has been disproven many times, especially after the campaigns in Iran and Iraq. It’s armor is nearly useless against missiles and there are little to no instances of it taking fire (The kind of fire it can survive is only taken at low speeds and altitudes (trust me, it can’t fly as slow and low as people think) and is so rare to come by that it might as well be non existent). It is definitely not as good of a counter to enemy fire as speed and agility, The A-10 is only useful in COIN maybe where SAM threats aren’t present, or when you have total air superiority as the USAF might, unlike Russia in Ukraine where SU-25s are getting shot down all the time, or in India-pak where air superiority will be hard to come by.

The proper fighters can carry all the stuff the A-10 can (and more), fly further and faster, and be more accurate at delivery while also being much safer/able to hold their own in A2A even in A2G roles. Gun strafing is not really a thing anymore, which is perhaps the only unique thing about the A10 due to its cannon. A bomb delivered from 50 feet up and 5000 feet up will have the same effect in this case, one is just safer. That’s modern CAS for you.


I’m aware, I’ve already mentioned it here and here https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/m1-trials-in-pakistan.409993/page-10#post-13984487

But in regards to PA, the 1500 HP is indeed a myth.

Factually incorrect. It's NOT a myth. These engines can be tweaked if PA wants which is still an option PA can exercise if the need arises.

 

[SQ8]

and neither of them are as good at CAS As F16s, F18s, JF17s, or literally any other fighter jet. Theyre both overrated and rather bad at their job.

They were great for the battlefield of the 70s and early 80s.. and required air cover to accomplish their tasks as proven in GW1.
Both the A-10 and Su-25 rose to fame because of the COIN environment they were most useful for and excelled. The Taliban have no ADGE as such so you needed an asset able to drop a tom and cut them into pieces with a 30mm - the same goes for the frogfoot.. the Chechens had no ADGE so it gained fame.

 

[iLION12345_1]

Factually incorrect. It's NOT a myth. These engines can be tweaked if PA wants which is still an option PA can exercise if the need arises.

Do PAs VT-4s have 1500 HP currently? No. Does PA plan to use them that way anytime soon? No. When I asked HIT if it was economically and reliably feasible to run the VT4s engine at 1500 HP with the current setup, y’know what they said? No.

PA has no need to ruin perfectly good engines by running them entirely out of spec. It’s rated for 1200-1300HP in the VT4s configuration. That’s like saying a corolla engine can make 300 HP if I slap a turbocharger on it, so it’s a 300 HP engine, even if in the Corolla it’s making 140HP.

Maybe PA will make those modifications someday to make it feasible. People were claiming that PAs VT4s were already running at 1500HP while they weren’t, that’s “factually incorrect”

I never said they couldn’t make that power, quite the contrary, just that they don’t currently. Don’t grasp at straws to prove a point that I didn’t even question.​

 

[Dazzler]

Do PAs VT-4s have 1500 HP currently? No. Does PA plan to use them that way anytime soon? No. When I asked HIT if it was economically and reliably feasible to run the VT4s engine at 1500 HP with the current setup, y’know what they said? No.

PA has no need to ruin perfectly good engines by running them entirely out of spec. It’s rated for 1200-1300HP in the VT4s configuration. That’s like saying a corolla engine can make 300 HP if I slap a turbocharger on it, so it’s a 300 HP engine, even if in the Corolla it’s making 140HP.

Maybe PA will make those modifications someday to make it feasible. People were claiming that PAs VT4s were already running at 1500HP while they weren’t, that’s “factually incorrect”

I never said they couldn’t make that power, quite the contrary, just that they don’t currently. Don’t grasp at straws to prove a point that I didn’t even question.​

Calm down. Keep it civil. Don't push it

 

[TigerOfMysore]

In the famous words of Rodney King: "Why can't we all just get along."

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

They were great for the battlefield of the 70s and early 80s.. and required air cover to accomplish their tasks as proven in GW1.
Both the A-10 and Su-25 rose to fame because of the COIN environment they were most useful for and excelled. The Taliban have no ADGE as such so you needed an asset able to drop a tom and cut them into pieces with a 30mm - the same goes for the frogfoot.. the Chechens had no ADGE so it gained fame.

I said it before, but the Italian-Brazilian AMX came both 10 years too late and 10 years too early.

It was 10 years too late because it missed the PAF's first dedicated attack aircraft requirement in the 1970s, i.e., the program that led to the PAF's request for 110 A-7 Corsairs from the U.S.

The AMX came 10 years too early because around a decade after its production ended (1999), the PAF may have sought this type of aircraft for its COIN and CT requirements (2009-). Moreover, the neat thing about the AMX was that while it could be a good COIN/CT platform, it had the specifications to serve as a conventional CAS asset too (albeit with guided SOWs).

 

[Signalian]

I’ve often argued that the PA is too big for its own good and it needs to downsize, but I’m in the minority regarding that opinion, I know how the situation is, it’s far worst across the border. No military is ever 100% ready to mobilize at any time, they bank on the fact that when and if a conflict starts, there will be an influx of funds to mobilize the corps that aren’t ready enough to mobilize as is. This is even more present in European militaries, who almost entirely rely on this system due to recent cuts (Germany being a big example, their logistical and readiness nightmares are pretty public). Only with the recent Ukraine conflict have they started increasing their readiness levels. By comparison Pakistani and Indian forces have much higher readiness levels due to the nature of their conflicts.

However it would be very inaccurate to compare PAs readiness levels now to Kargil, it was already proven inaccurate in the time leading up to the standoffs in the 2000s and more recently in 2019. A lot has changed, and wars aren’t fought with 100% mobilization anymore anyways, more like smaller skirmishes, hence quality over quantity must be the aim and not Vice versa. Pakistan and india are taking their time to understand that, whoever does it first will be in a better position.

and I’m not sure where you got access to actual readiness assessments to back up those claims either, true or not.

Thats why most formations are present in cantts near the border. PA has lesser MBTs, lesser APCs, lesser mountain troops, lesser helis and gunships, lesser towed guns but more SPG, comparable in drones and missiles to India.

PA doesn't throw a Corps level force in battlefield straightaway, it usually starts with a Brigade or Division level Ops. Out of 9 Corps HQ, only 4 x Corps HQ can be thrown into combat with full compliment of all units under that Corps HQ and even then only 2 x Corps HQ (I & II Strike Corps) maybe ordered to cross the border and both of those corps HQs will be putting ahead 2 x Divs most probably in combat ( 1 x Armor Div, 1 x Infantry Div), while the third Infantry division will be in reserve.

X-Corps cannot simultaneously start an offensive with all its formations, some of the divisions will be on defensive straightaway. This is where PA lacks the punch to liberate Indian occupied Kashmir. FCNA may use a brigade level force for an offensive along the LOC, but elsewhere it will be on defensive throughout the war. 19th ID will be covering 23rd ID and 12th ID, protecting their flanks, so it may have a brigade prepared to launch an offensive.

XI and XII Corps will send one division each to X-Corps and V-Corps, so it gets diluted straightaway. V-Corps HQ cannot be sent armored reinforcements from anywhere so the Corps Comd will know that before committing 25th Mech Div against India. There is no armor reserve for XII Corps to assist V-Corps where as XXXI Corps has a duty to defend a long stretch of land (semi desert/desert) , therefore 26th Mechanized will play a pivotal role.

Up in north, XXX-Corps may form a bridgehead for I-Corps, but by itself XXX-Corps cannot launch a full offensive owing to terrain and Indian forces it is facing. That leaves II-Corps to jump off between or from IV-Corps and XXXI-Corps assigned areas into Indian territory. IV-Corps would be defending all entrances into Lahore and Northern Punjab.

This is not a rosy picture for an Army with 500,000+ standing army.

 

[farooqbhai007]

Thats why most formations are present in cantts near the border. PA has lesser MBTs, lesser APCs, lesser mountain troops, lesser helis and gunships, lesser towed guns but more SPG, comparable in drones and missiles to India.

PA doesn't throw a Corps level force in battlefield straightaway, it usually starts with a Brigade or Division level Ops. Out of 9 Corps HQ, only 4 x Corps HQ can be thrown into combat with full compliment of all units under that Corps HQ and even then only 2 x Corps HQ (I & II Strike Corps) maybe ordered to cross the border and both of those corps HQs will be putting ahead 2 x Divs most probably in combat ( 1 x Armor Div, 1 x Infantry Div), while the third Infantry division will be in reserve.

X-Corps cannot simultaneously start an offensive with all its formations, some of the divisions will be on defensive straightaway. This is where PA lacks the punch to liberate Indian occupied Kashmir. FCNA may use a brigade level force for an offensive along the LOC, but elsewhere it will be on defensive throughout the war. 19th ID will be covering 23rd ID and 12th ID, protecting their flanks, so it may have a brigade prepared to launch an offensive.

XI and XII Corps will send one division each to X-Corps and V-Corps, so it gets diluted straightaway. V-Corps HQ cannot be sent armored reinforcements from anywhere so the Corps Comd will know that before committing 25th Mech Div against India. There is no armor reserve for XII Corps to assist V-Corps where as XXXI Corps has a duty to defend a long stretch of land (semi desert/desert) , therefore 26th Mechanized will play a pivotal role.

Up in north, XXX-Corps may form a bridgehead for I-Corps, but by itself XXX-Corps cannot launch a full offensive owing to terrain and Indian forces it is facing. That leaves II-Corps to jump off between or from IV-Corps and XXXI-Corps assigned areas into Indian territory. IV-Corps would be defending all entrances into Lahore and Northern Punjab.

This is not a rosy picture for an Army with 500,000+ standing army.

More APCs compared to Indians no ? Recent developments point towards PA filling out the Gap b/w Sukkur and Karachi sector which has long been neglected I would say.

 

[iLION12345_1]

I’m just mildly tired of some people having rock hard egos just because of a blue or red tint on their names. Not the first time I’ve seen it around the forum and I’m not afraid to call it out. It’s almost as if people feel threatened when someone else is correct about something. But I digress, my post was in poor taste.

In the famous words of Rodney King: "Why can't we all just get along."

 

[iLION12345_1]

Thats why most formations are present in cantts near the border. PA has lesser MBTs, lesser APCs, lesser mountain troops, lesser helis and gunships, lesser towed guns but more SPG, comparable in drones and missiles to India.

PA doesn't throw a Corps level force in battlefield straightaway, it usually starts with a Brigade or Division level Ops. Out of 9 Corps HQ, only 4 x Corps HQ can be thrown into combat with full compliment of all units under that Corps HQ and even then only 2 x Corps HQ (I & II Strike Corps) maybe ordered to cross the border and both of those corps HQs will be putting ahead 2 x Divs most probably in combat ( 1 x Armor Div, 1 x Infantry Div), while the third Infantry division will be in reserve.

X-Corps cannot simultaneously start an offensive with all its formations, some of the divisions will be on defensive straightaway. This is where PA lacks the punch to liberate Indian occupied Kashmir. FCNA may use a brigade level force for an offensive along the LOC, but elsewhere it will be on defensive throughout the war. 19th ID will be covering 23rd ID and 12th ID, protecting their flanks, so it may have a brigade prepared to launch an offensive.

XI and XII Corps will send one division each to X-Corps and V-Corps, so it gets diluted straightaway. V-Corps HQ cannot be sent armored reinforcements from anywhere so the Corps Comd will know that before committing 25th Mech Div against India. There is no armor reserve for XII Corps to assist V-Corps where as XXXI Corps has a duty to defend a long stretch of land (semi desert/desert) , therefore 26th Mechanized will play a pivotal role.

Up in north, XXX-Corps may form a bridgehead for I-Corps, but by itself XXX-Corps cannot launch a full offensive owing to terrain and Indian forces it is facing. That leaves II-Corps to jump off between or from IV-Corps and XXXI-Corps assigned areas into Indian territory. IV-Corps would be defending all entrances into Lahore and Northern Punjab.

This is not a rosy picture for an Army with 500,000+ standing army.

The Indian army has been downsizing, slowly, but it is. While the PA is never going to face the entirety of the IA, regardless of the size of the two forces, when it comes to mass mobilization, Pakistan will always fall behind. So I understand why PA needs to be rather large.

My point is that small-scale skirmishes seem to be not only more common but also more possible between the two nations than all out war, so maybe quality over quantity can be helpful there, especially when funds are this short. It’s still a miracle PA manages to keep a balance despite the shortages, but for how long? The economy doesn’t seem to be getting better any time soon.

Plus I don’t think PA should start reducing the amount of regiments or active troops it has, my point about downsizing is more specifically related to a sort of curse that many Pakistani organizations suffer from, they’re bloated, they have more people to do a certain thing than required, or certain people for no task at all, and often times this leads to said thing being done worst than it would with just one person responsible for it. I think with some reorganization PA can downsize efficiently by assigning more tasks to lesser people, there might be some workplace complaints though.

To add to that, With better equipment, the same 500K troops might be able to achieve more and cover more area, reduce casualty rates and increase mobility, than maybe 600K troops with lesser equipment? There’s definitely a balance to be had, I’m not sure if we’re at said balance right now.

 

[iLION12345_1]

The Indian army has been downsizing, slowly, but it is. While the PA is never going to face the entirety of the IA, regardless of the size of the two forces, when it comes to mass mobilization, Pakistan will always fall behind. So I understand why PA needs to be rather large.

My point is that small-scale skirmishes seem to be not only more common but also more possible between the two nations than all out war, so maybe quality over quantity can be helpful there, especially when funds are this short. It’s still a miracle PA manages to keep a balance despite the shortages, but for how long? The economy doesn’t seem to be getting better any time soon.

Plus I don’t think PA should start reducing the amount of regiments or active troops it has, my point about downsizing is more specifically related to a sort of curse that many Pakistani organizations suffer from, they’re bloated, they have more people to do a certain thing than required, or certain people for no task at all, and often times this leads to said thing being done worst than it would with just one person responsible for it. I think with some reorganization PA can downsize efficiently by assigning more tasks to lesser people, there might be some workplace complaints though.

To add to that, With better equipment, the same 500K troops might be able to achieve more and cover more area, reduce casualty rates and increase mobility, than maybe 600K troops with lesser equipment? There’s definitely a balance to be had, I’m not sure if we’re at said balance right now.

To be more specific, I remember an officer had once come up with a report in the PA regarding initiative given to NCOs and younger officers and noticed a downward trend in how many individual tasks and initiatives were being given to this part of the forces and how this was effecting their decision making prowess. It has led to a trend in recent times where even senior NCOs, JCOs and younger officers are having to consult more senior officers over the most minor of things.

I’ve also heard this same thing from friends and classmates who ended up enlisting as officers, that they are responsible for tasks that ideally an NCO or JCO should be accomplishing on their own power of decision. This was apparently much less of an issue 15-20 years ago than it has become now.

The most dangerous downsides to it are the fact that these same NCOs, JCOs and YOs are then less willing to take important decisions during actual combat or combat exercises, leading to a need for an officer to be present where he ideally shouldn’t be.

So maybe we need an efficient downsizing where more tasks and initiatives are given to lower ranks in the hopes of getting them better accustomed to decision making. It’s always been clear that PA unlike more developed nations armies’ has a much higher ratio of officer to soldiers because of the Education gap, but I think now is about the right time to stare closing that gap for good. I remember just 15 years back, there were NCOs in the PA that hadnt even completed primary education. Now you need to have completed your FSC, that’s a major improvement, this can be taken a step further now, and I’m sure it will naturally as the literacy rate rises.

I also feel like there is a need to somewhat slow down the promotions from 2LT-LT-Captain. By the time someone is passing out from the PMA, they should already be an officer in command, of course experience comes with time, but having been among foreign forces as well, I feel like there is more of this trend of 2LTs and LTs feeling like “trainees” in the PA because of their young ages and quick promotions (which coincidentally are also a result of PA having a lot of officers)

Now I’m definitely not qualified to comment on how to actually fix these issues or If they are even issues at all, maybe they’re a better way to go about things than other forces do. But it’s just what I’ve observed.

And this downsizing, if any, might have the side effect of opening up more funds and hence pointing back towards better equipment.