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

[IceCold]

@Dazzler I thought Pakistan produced some good quality tanks. Last time it was the lack of funds due to which many things were not incorporated in the Al-Khalids. So my question is if we have funds to look for a foreign tank, why not inject those funds in our local industry i.e Al-Khalids and take them to what was initially envisaged?

 

[araz]

Did you see any official claim from PA of Z10 failed the test in Pakistan? Lol? This is called friendship for face saving. PA will make every penny they spend bangs for the bucks. Who provide the best product and financial package/swap package will win the contract in the end. Business is cruel and realstic! Z10 failed the test means it shorts T129 in some parameters, doesn't means it's inferior. You need confidence in your country, just like me. I don't worry for Z10, cause I know it wil make its back some other day even stronger.
In VT4 and Oplot M competition, who will offer more TOT( especially engine package) will win the contract.

If you get any bummer, just lay it on me. Just grow up.

Another good post. I think you have hit it on the head. Trial followed by changes followed by retrial. No one says anything other than the equipment needs a few alterations to comply with client needs. This is business between friends and brothers. You use our expertise to analyse your product and point out deficiencies. Make the changes and come back for retrial. When you reach our standards( and before you get riled up again we have vast experience of seeing maintaining and trialing western products as well) we have a product to buy and you have a world class product to sell.
Look at the JFT Project. In the development process we suggested changes multiple times. Prototype 1 and 4 were radically different. The Chinese complied with the spirit of growth together and we have a really good product to sell now. This is good business and a win win situation. Nothing more nothing less.
Regards.
A

 

[FuturePAF]

The VT-4 needs to be evaluated as a long term solution, testing it to the same standards you would the Ukrainian Oplot or the Turkish Altay. In Fact the Turks could help point out where the VT-4 could improve and sell subsystems where needed to bring out the full potential of this design.

 

[帅的一匹]

The VT-4 needs to be evaluated as a long term solution, testing it to the same standards you would the Ukrainian Oplot or the Turkish Altay. In Fact the Turks could help point out where the VT-4 could improve and sell subsystems where needed to bring out the full potential of this design.

Altay is now looking for a proper engine package. The first batch was supposed to install German MTU engines, but the deal cancelled after Turkey-German relationship deteriorate. They might ask for help from UK or Ukraine.

 

[Beast]

The VT-4 needs to be evaluated as a long term solution, testing it to the same standards you would the Ukrainian Oplot or the Turkish Altay. In Fact the Turks could help point out where the VT-4 could improve and sell subsystems where needed to bring out the full potential of this design.

LOL.. Typical backward mentality where they think China is backward and needs Turkish advice. VT-4 is much higher standard than Altay and Oplot M. No joke. please do more research on VT-4 before making silly comment.

 

[Beethoven]

LOL.. Typical backward mentality where they think China is backward and needs Turkish advice. VT-4 is much higher standard than Altay and Oplot M. No joke. please do more research on VT-4 before making silly comment.

please try to understand nobody is degrading china or its products that it is completely obsolete....just some minor modifications to adjust the tank according to the requirements laid out by the pakistan army...so you see nothing to get worked up about

 

[Beast]

You asked what wrong you did? Please review your last couple of posts and tell me whether they are a good discussion or just angry posts from a child.
There must have been something wrong with BOTH engines as both broke down. PA sent both back for upgrades and retesting as is standard approach. For example the Abrahms M1 tank failed trials in Bhawalpur in 1988. These things happen as engines are designed with your terrain in mind and they are tested in harsher terrain and break down. One just does not start ranting nationalistic mumbo jumbo but accepts the fact that these tanks have been given a second chance with improvements to satisfy PA which signifies they are mostly good tanks with minor problems which need adjusting or rectifying.
A


Great post. We have nothing to argue about here.
A

There is no evidence of engine break down from VT-4 trial conducted by PA. This is confirmed by Chinese representative involved in VT-4 with Pakistan. There are simply too many fake news spreading around with regards to Chinese military hardware especially non Chinese website.

Prove me wrong and show hard concrete of VT-4 engine failed during the initial trial. Pls no heardsay or fake sources. Or even FB source, they are nothing but smearing.

please try to understand nobody is degrading china or its products that it is completely obsolete....just some minor modifications to adjust the tank according to the requirements laid out by the pakistan army...so you see nothing to get worked up about

That is not what most claimed. They claim the engine of VT-4 failed during the trial while they cant back their words with evidence. I have my source from Chinese wesbite and the trial is so far going great with no report of any engine or system breaks down. They are simply too many misinfo and fake news about Chinese military hardware circulating. I am just speaking the truth for VT-4. Its more like you all just cant believe VT-4 is a great tank. I am not asking too much for just a concrete evidence, right?

Its more of those slayer just beating around the bush to avoid providing evidence while cant back any of their lies?

 

[BERKEKHAN2]

I thought Oplot P was selected and we have placed an order of 100 Oplot P

Source please

 

[araz]

There is no evidence of engine break down from VT-4 trial conducted by PA. This is confirmed by Chinese representative involved in VT-4 with Pakistan. There are simply too many fake news spreading around with regards to Chinese military hardware especially non Chinese website.

Prove me wrong and show hard concrete of VT-4 engine failed during the initial trial. Pls no heardsay or fake sources. Or even FB source, they are nothing but smearing.


That is not what most claimed. They claim the engine of VT-4 failed during the trial while they cant back their words with evidence. I have my source from Chinese wesbite and the trial is so far going great with no report of any engine or system breaks down. They are simply too many misinfo and fake news about Chinese military hardware circulating. I am just speaking the truth for VT-4.

OK.
Just annswsr one thing. Why are the tanls back for retrial?
A

 

[FuturePAF]

LOL.. Typical backward mentality where they think China is backward and needs Turkish advice. VT-4 is much higher standard than Altay and Oplot M. No joke. please do more research on VT-4 before making silly comment.

The Turks and the Ukrainians are currently at war, their tanks have been engaged against modern ATGMs. The have learns lessons at the cost of the lives of their soldiers. The Turks also are operating in terrain similar to us, they have experience from their Israeli upgraded tanks; which survived an ATGM hit.

http://john1911.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Turkish-M-60T-Damage-864x362.jpg

I am speaking pragmatically. In fact I said the VT-4 needs to be judged at the same level as the Turkish and Ukrainian Tanks. The Turks may have a better understanding as to hot to use or place or redesign their soft and hard kill systems. Armor technologies and what composition really helps against these projectiles.

My comment was not meant as any disrespect to the hard working Chinese engineers that have made the VT-4, but learn and improving based on current battlefield engagements make a better tank. Knowledge that can benefit both Pakistan and China.

 

[Beast]

The Turks and the Ukrainians are currently at war, their tanks have been engaged against modern ATGMs. The have learns lessons at the cost of the lives of their soldiers. The Turks also are operating in terrain similar to us, they have experience from their Israeli upgraded tanks; which survived an ATGM hit.

http://john1911.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Turkish-M-60T-Damage-864x362.jpg

I am speaking pragmatically. In fact I said the VT-4 needs to be judged at the same level as the Turkish and Ukrainian Tanks. The Turks may have a better understanding as to hot to use or place or redesign their soft and hard kill systems. Armor technologies and what composition really helps against these projectiles.

My comment was not meant as any disrespect to the hard working Chinese engineers that have made the VT-4, but learn and improving based on current battlefield engagements make a better tank. Knowledge that can benefit both Pakistan and China.

VT-4 handling

vs

leopard A4

vs

M1A2 handling

See how different in terms of handling just between both tank. Russian T-90 tank still do not have automatic gears. This is just on handling. We still can touch on network and battle awareness plus fire control which VT-4 will be another level. VT-4 is designed to engage low level flying gunship.

 

[FuturePAF]

The Issue for me is not the engine. The Chinese engines are reliable. It potential shortfalls in Armour technologies and defensive systems. Here is a blog outlining lessons learned from the current war in Syria. Proof are the outlines of Armour technologies by various countries and we have video and pictures showing how these tanks stood up to getting hit. these are the lessons we need to incorporate into to any design, before our solders pay for these lessons to be learned first hand with their lives.

https://below-the-turret-ring.blogspot.com/

an example of something i just saw from reading these blogs in the optics need to be shield as soon as a projectile launch is detected towards the tank. maybe a quick closing steel panel. if a projectile doesn't penetrate it might have the ability to destroy the sensitive optics. protecting the optics can keep a tank battle worthy.

tank not penetrated; optics destroyed
http://i.imgur.com/yW15fRT.png
http://john1911.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Turkish-M-60T-Damage-864x362.jpg

the abrams has it
http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/coldwar/US/M1_Abrams/photos/Australian_M1A1_Abrams_tank.jpg

VT-4 has a panel that can come down over the optics, I see thaat, but from lessons learned on the battlefield that design can be improved slightly and we get a much more surviviable tank based on real world conditions

 

[Beast]

The Issue for me is not the engine. The Chinese engines are reliable. It potential shortfalls in Armour technologies and defensive systems. Here is a blog outlining lessons learned from the current war in Syria. Proof are the outlines of Armour technologies by various countries and we have video and pictures showing how these tanks stood up to getting hit. these are the lessons we need to incorporate into to any design, before our solders pay for these lessons to be learned first hand with their lives.

https://below-the-turret-ring.blogspot.com/

an example of something i just saw from reading these blogs in the optics need to be shield as soon as a projectile launch is detected towards the tank. maybe a quick closing steel panel. if a projectile doesn't penetrate it might have the ability to destroy the sensitive optics. protecting the optics can keep a tank battle worthy.

As opposed to what you claim, armour technology and defensive systems are both the strong point of VT-4. You will be surprised China these 2 areas are have even surpassed western. Its shall be a surprised to you, right?

The best is VT-4 is not even the best that Chinese has. Type99A2 has the hardest armour for a tank but its not for sale.

Look at the number of the ignorant comment on the youtube about VT-4. It just like PDF where most are ignorant and still think China is some backward countries that cant make better tank than others. Its not suprised most are so easily duped into believing VT-4 engine failed in the Trial.

 

[FuturePAF]

As opposed to what you claim, armour technology and defensive systems are both the strong point of VT-4. You will be surprised China these 2 areas are have even surpassed western. Its shall be a surprised to you, right?

The best is VT-4 is not even the best that Chinese has. Type99A2 has the hardest armour for a tank but its not for sale.

Frankly, I don't know. It needs to be evaluated as per the conditions it will face in the real world. real world conditions are being seen in countries like Syria and Ukraine. we are being offered the VT-4, so we need to know how that armor will do, not the armor of the Type 99A2.

https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-fu78J4DC9Io/WBdYhdvjfDI/AAAAAAAAAR8/DjjJAlzDUysED5VOzTVII1gY_FQ1_wIlwCLcB/s1600/Panzerung+Type+85+96+Al+Khalid.png

https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ggGzksjVIak/WBdYhUG1GpI/AAAAAAAAASA/TYM7xu9vRww5l0w8nSaQ_luP0tHZCvHKwCEw/s1600/Panzerung+Type+85+96+Al+Khalid+1.png

https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-W4xwMZFm...QIierE2Md93WNzhAVwaHmVyQCLcB/s1600/PzbJN2.jpg

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-yt3akiGx...5f_5Z2ESafAYQCLcB/s1600/Type85IIAP_turret.jpg

--------
please respond to the short coming listed in the following article. this is the core of my argument, we are being offered the VT-4, not the Type 99A2. we NEED to know it will work. our national survival could be at stake. we can't afford to ignore the issues raised the the link below.

Source: https://below-the-turret-ring.blogspot.com/2016/11/chinese-tank-composite-armor.html

 

[Zarvan]