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

[HRK]

I thought this had already been posted, otherwise I’d have done it a couple of days ago when Farooq tweeted about it.

It’s been known since the second trials that VT-4 was using a Pakistani Gun barrel. It’s basically the same one used in AZ, UG and AK series (although there were some minor modifications for the VT-4 in order to mate it to the slightly different gun breech).

It was done because the Chinese Barrel wasn’t front removable for easy maintenance + any indigenization is cheaper than none. I wonder if any other changes were made to HITs barrels over the 15 year or so period they’ve been in production.

The poster states that 87% of the barrels components are indigenous.

yes it was known from sometime but ... this is I think is the first official confirmation related to indigenous gun barrel

 

[Dazzler]

yes it was known from sometime but ... this is I think is the first official confirmation related to indigenous gun barrel

True. First time they've confirmed it officially and even showed guns to the world.

 

[Paul2]

In light of Ukraine war experience, both sides have long exhausted their replacement stocks for all barrels.

Both Ukraine, and Russia only have one barrel factory per country, which only make few hundred barrels per year at best.

NATO countries were a big surprise too. There are only 2 industrial scale manufacturers of autofretted barrels, both in EU: Rheinmetall, and Nexter owned.

 

[emotionless_teenage]

In light of Ukraine war experience, both sides have long exhausted their replacement stocks for all barrels.

Both Ukraine, and Russia only have one barrel factory per country, which only make few hundred barrels per year at best.

NATO countries were a big surprise too. There are only 2 industrial scale manufacturers of autofretted barrels, both in EU: Rheinmetall, and Nexter owned.

Other former warsaw countries produced tank barrel as well like Slovakia and Poland. These companies aren't as big as Rheinmetall but they're not mom and pop industry either

 

[LKJ86]

Via @鼎盛沙龙 from Weibo

 

[serenity]

GL-5 APS equipped? PLA's own do not use GL-5 but something more modern.

 

[iLION12345_1]

GL-5 APS equipped? PLA's own do not use GL-5 but something more modern.

PLA tanks have not been seen with a proper Hard kill system as of yet. GL5 is likely the best APS China makes (that is publicly known). And even then neither GL5 or the 99As system have top-attack defense capability.

That’s a VT4 at Zuhai.

 

[KampfAlwin]

GL-5 APS equipped? PLA's own do not use GL-5 but something more modern.

That doesn't look like GL-5, it looks like it can pivot up and down, unlike GL-5 which is fixed.

 

[serenity]

PLA tanks have not been seen with a proper Hard kill system as of yet. GL5 is likely the best APS China makes (that is publicly known). And even then neither GL5 or the 99As system have top-attack defense capability.

That’s a VT4 at Zuhai.

GL-5 is NOT the best APS China makes. Just because it is the only one offered for export does not make it the only one China makes. After the whole GL-5 becoming an available option on exported vehicles back in 2017 when it was shown publicly, many Chinese netizens questioned why the PLA's own tanks do not use GL-5 and the answer from PLA affiliated was that 1. APS for PLA vehicles are not photographed similar in how many Chinese weapons systems are simply not photographed or at least very rarely captured and the information is tightly controlled. 2. GL-5 is quite antiquated and long rejected by PLA. There is at least one system that is better and more modern of a APS type and only during wartime it might be shown and even then it would be unintended leaks of photos rather than state allowing it.

GL-5 is many decades old now and takes similar approach to old Soviet style APS systems. The newer ones require sensors that are too expensive to integrate in huge numbers. So even during wartimes the vast majority of vehicles wouldn't even be using APS unless it is a more mission critical component.

That doesn't look like GL-5, it looks like it can pivot up and down, unlike GL-5 which is fixed.

Yeah it looks like some variation of GL-5 but GL-5 like projectiles.

 

[iLION12345_1]

GL-5 is NOT the best APS China makes. Just because it is the only one offered for export does not make it the only one China makes. After the whole GL-5 becoming an available option on exported vehicles back in 2017 when it was shown publicly, many Chinese netizens questioned why the PLA's own tanks do not use GL-5 and the answer from PLA affiliated was that 1. APS for PLA vehicles are not photographed similar in how many Chinese weapons systems are simply not photographed or at least very rarely captured and the information is tightly controlled. 2. GL-5 is quite antiquated and long rejected by PLA. There is at least one system that is better and more modern of a APS type and only during wartime it might be shown and even then it would be unintended leaks of photos rather than state allowing it.

GL-5 is many decades old now and takes similar approach to old Soviet style APS systems. The newer ones require sensors that are too expensive to integrate in huge numbers. So even during wartimes the vast majority of vehicles wouldn't even be using APS unless it is a more mission critical component.



Yeah it looks like some variation of GL-5 but GL-5 like projectiles.

I said “publicly shown” for a reason. As it stands, a better APS system has NOT been seen from China, nor has it been seen equipped online Chinese MBTs. The system on the ZTZ-99 isn’t even a proper hard kill APS. My point still stands. A proper, top-attack defending, hard kill APS is one of the hardest things to make, I wouldn’t be surprised if even China hasn’t successfully made one yet considering their lack of attention towards tank based doctrine. Speculation is not proof.

You can say China has a ton of hidden tech and maybe you’d be right, but that doesn’t count until it’s confirmed. By that metric I can say Pakistan has a dozen hidden technologies too, and nobody can prove me right or wrong.

 

[Elernal]

I said “publicly shown” for a reason. As it stands, a better APS system has NOT been seen from China, nor has it been seen equipped online Chinese MBTs. The system on the ZTZ-99 isn’t even a proper hard kill APS. My point still stands. A proper, top-attack defending, hard kill APS is one of the hardest things to make, I wouldn’t be surprised if even China hasn’t successfully made one yet considering their lack of attention towards tank based doctrine. Speculation is not proof.

You can say China has a ton of hidden tech and maybe you’d be right, but that doesn’t count until it’s confirmed. By that metric I can say Pakistan has a dozen hidden technologies too, and nobody can prove me right or wrong.

I would like to say what you did not express, after this Russian-Ukrainian war PLA will only be more determined to emphasize the role of artillery, I also thought before that PLA will launch a new main battle tank like its western counterparts, but it seems that instead of upgrading these MBTs PLA thinks that upgrading the artillery equipment is more worth doing

 

[Sinnerman108]

I would like to say what you did not express, after this Russian-Ukrainian war PLA will only be more determined to emphasize the role of artillery, I also thought before that PLA will launch a new main battle tank like its western counterparts, but it seems that instead of upgrading these MBTs PLA thinks that upgrading the artillery equipment is more worth doing

Tank, is history.

it's infantry equipped with drones and smart weapons backed
with artillery without ricking air assets.

 

[iLION12345_1]

Tank, is history.

it's infantry equipped with drones and smart weapons backed
with artillery without ricking air assets.

Tanks are not history, and anyone claiming so needs to do more research. They are as relevant as ever.

I would like to say what you did not express, after this Russian-Ukrainian war PLA will only be more determined to emphasize the role of artillery, I also thought before that PLA will launch a new main battle tank like its western counterparts, but it seems that instead of upgrading these MBTs PLA thinks that upgrading the artillery equipment is more worth doing

They’re right imo. China doesn’t need better tanks, they don’t have anyone nearby that has anything to compare to what they have. And America isn’t really going to be invading China with its abrams (or vice versa). Most Tanks cannot be used in a conflict against India and Taiwan either. So it’s smart of them to invest money in the stuff they’d actually use like artillery, light tanks, jets and their naval fleet.

 

[serenity]

It is true but China since the 1950s emphasized artillery in ground forces. Definitely emphasized artillery over tanks. Tanks is not totally useless but compared to decades ago, much more useless.

 

[SQ8]

Tanks are not history, and anyone claiming so needs to do more research. They are as relevant as ever.


They’re right imo. China doesn’t need better tanks, they don’t have anyone nearby that has anything to compare to what they have. And America isn’t really going to be invading China with its abrams (or vice versa). Most Tanks cannot be used in a conflict against India and Taiwan either. So it’s smart of them to invest money in the stuff they’d actually use like artillery, light tanks, jets and their naval fleet.

When General Dynamics and the entire US military which leads the forefront in unmanned warfare - and the IDF which leads in hard kill systems believes the tank is still relevant - what is a single liner piecemeal statement on PDF worth?