What's new

Pakistani & Indian Artillery

Thanks for the clarification on the new Heavy ERA on the zarrar.

Has the autoloader been changed in the al zarrar recently?If not then this round doesn't change the t-72 ajeya.al zarrar equation.
The new round would be for al khalid or ak-new version.

Indian army ammunition.


Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Standard mango round.500 mm penetration.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us
OFB APFSDS round copied and upgraded from israeli APFSDS round.500 mm basic round.610 mm penetration in upgarded round.Improved round under development for arjun mk2.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us
On the right.New advanced lekalo round for t-90.650mm penetration.

All talks and BS.

Come here when Arjun makes it to a real battlefield.
 
. .
@AUSTERLITZ

What are you on about ? what kind of circus is this ?


That destroyed Al Zarar tank is just one example, and there is nothing wrong with it being destroyed. There are several M1 Abrams destroyed too at the hand of insurgents far less ferocious than Taliban.
NO tank can survive surrounded / ambushed by 5-10 RPG hoarding foot soldiers.

Put his in your head, there is no such thing as ABSOLUTE ARMOR. you hear me ? now get that in your head and don't come back until each and every cell in your brain has been reprogrammed to understand that.

Abrams was destroyed by advanced rpg-29 by a hit just over the tracks.This one frontal armour,thats all i was saying.Pakistani taliban don't have advanced RPGs ,old rpg-7s maybe.They shouldn't penetarte frontal armour.But yes suicide bombers,i can't say how much damage they would do. if they rammed in on the tank.
This original discussion spiralled out of control from a comparison between t-72 ajeya and al zarrar between me and desert fighter.I guess we have both said our part more or less and he made quite a few good points too,especially the ERA equipped al zarrar pics.We can return to artillery.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
You must be an ignorant retard, Then why didn't the indian had drink in Lahore Gymkhana.
 
.
Abrams was destroyed by advanced rpg-29 by a hit just over the tracks.This one frontal armour,thats all i was saying.Pakistani taliban don't have advanced RPGs ,old rpg-7s maybe.They shouldn't penetarte frontal armour.But yes suicide bombers,i can't say how much damage they would do. if they rammed in on the tank.
This original discussion spiralled out of control from a comparison between t-72 ajeya and al zarrar between me and desert fighter.I guess we have both said our part more or less and he made quite a few good points too,especially the ERA equipped al zarrar pics.We can return to artillery.

Are you trying to troll?

Abrams was slightly damaged when that RPG-29 hit. A few roadwheels fell off and the track was damaged. A MOBILITY kill. Not a real K-Kill of a tank. It will take much more than a RPG-29 to destroy an Abrams front or side.

Pakistan Taliban has old RPG-7 with outdated PG-7V upgraded version with 450 mm penetration. Al-Zarrar was penetrated from turret side and there was catastrophic propellant explosion.

salman108, Abrams survived being surrounded by almost 10 tanks. RPG footsoldiers would be slightly more effective in this case since co-axial mg is woefully inaccurate.

ERA alone isn't enough to provide protection.
 
.
@AUSTERLITZ Pakistan also uses Tungsten rounds.... one example:

qycz04.jpg


Are you trying to troll?

Abrams was slightly damaged when that RPG-29 hit. A few roadwheels fell off and the track was damaged. A MOBILITY kill. Not a real K-Kill of a tank. It will take much more than a RPG-29 to destroy an Abrams front or side.

Pakistan Taliban has old RPG-7 with outdated PG-7V upgraded version with 450 mm penetration. Al-Zarrar was penetrated from turret side and there was catastrophic propellant explosion.

salman108, Abrams survived being surrounded by almost 10 tanks. RPG footsoldiers would be slightly more effective in this case since co-axial mg is woefully inaccurate.

ERA alone isn't enough to provide protection.

Not really those bastards do have RPG-29s... i have seen a few videos... of them firing...

As for Abrams vs iraqi troops... the little said the better... the iraqi soldiers were untrained conscripts etc,extremely demoralised tht they couldnt even fire at the americans with accuracy... and in some cases had even had built POW camps themselves before the americans arrived..
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
@AUSTERLITZ Pakistan also uses Tungsten rounds.... one example:

qycz04.jpg




Not really those bastards do have RPG-29s... i have seen a few videos... of them firing...

As for Abrams vs iraqi troops... the little said the better... the iraqi soldiers were untrained,extremelu demoralised tht they couldnt even fire at the americans with accuracy... and even had built POW camps themselves before the americans even arrived..

Of course pakistan uses tungsten rounds,in training just about everybody does.DU round is unhealthy.Penetration of that seems low though,around 400 mm.PA probably concentrated on DU round.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
Of course pakistan uses tungsten rounds,in training just about everybody does.DU round is unhealthy.Penetration of that seems low though,around 400 mm.PA probably concentrated on DU round.

Thts bcoz this round is pretty old... and probably being replaced..Or replaced...

A few new rounds:


intv8n.jpg



As for DU rounds...:

Pakistan’s new generation MBT, the Al-Khalid II is a generational leap in capability over every tank Pakistan has employed with the possible exceptions of the Al-Khalid and T-80UD.

The tank is externally very similar to the Al-Khalid, due to the success of it’s basic external design (though the turret’s volume is slightly larger). Internally, however, the tank is not nearly as similar. While only 55% of the Al-Khalid’s components were essentially new (the rest were derived from existing designs), the new Al-Khalid II utilizes no components from any MBT other then the Al-Khalid. 35% of it’s components were not in the Al-Khalid. This makes the Al-Khalid II a substantially superior tank. Near every component has been changed in some way, some minor, some major. The fire-control system has been refined and improved in it’s speed at acquiring targets and making firing available in all conditions, particularly at high-speed over rough terrain. The commander is now available to acquire two targets independently, as opposed to one in the Al-Khalid. The laser-range finder has been made more robust, while the night-vision systems and all sights have been made more sensitive.
In general, near all components have been made more robust, as part of the Army’s drive to make the tank an ultra-reliable marvel of engineering. This is partially necessitated by a heavier design and more powerful (by 150hp) engine.

Perhaps the greatest advance in the tank’s design is it’s armour. While maintaining the modular and thus easily modifiable armour of the Al-Khalid, it has added another “layer.” The Al-Khalid II’s armour is made up of as much as 6 layers of armour, a base layer of steel, a layer of ultra-hard composites (to defeat long rod penetrators), another more minimal layer of steel (all of these layers being spaced to prevent penetration by a HEAT warhead), a layer of Kevlar to defeat minor threats to the tank (like small arms and smaller armour-piercing threats), and then a layer of nERA (non-explosive reactive armour, in this case, rubber), and then finally a layer of (selectively applied) bricks of either composites (often employed in peacetime to save costs and maintenance) or ERA (explosive reactive armour) to defeat HEAT-type threats. The tank is also equipped with more effective damage control (like explosive suppression) systems.

The tank’s armament is the same, but it has been made more lethal through the addition of more effective supporting systems. The autoloader maintains it’s speed of loading at 8-rounds a minute, but the carousel now holds 28 rounds, allowing more rounds to be stowed at ready. The new indigenous Niaza-II 125mm DU round (penetration: 650mm at 2,000m) is a significant improvement to the older Niaza rounds on the Al-Khalid. This is partially achieved through a longer penetration rod.

Upgrading the Al-Khalid to Comparable Standard:
The Al-Khalid tank was specifically designed with modularity in mind. As a result, the Niaza-II will be employed on the tank, once significant numbers are manufactured. In addition, the armor has been upgraded to Al-Khalid II standards (roughly). An upgrade package for the Al-Khalid has been designated Al-Khalid IB, this will probably be employed on all Al-Khalid MBTs eventually.

Deploying the Al-Khalid II:
Pakistan requires 1200 Al-Khalid II, to replace the Type 59, Type 69, and Type 85-IIAP. Only 300 of these 1200 tanks (the Type 85-IIAP) are the only tanks considered capable enough to soldier on to 2020. Thus, 900 replacement tanks are required fairly rapidly, with 300 more needed thereafter. The procurement schedule will be as follows:
2012: 100, 2013: 200, 2014: 200, 2015: 200, 2016: 200, 2017: 150, 2018: 150


The 2017 & 2017 national procurement will decrease to allow for exports, and due to decreased demand to replace the Type 85s. By 2014, this will allow the Type 59s, and by 2016 the Type 59s. Some of the 100 Al-Khalid II’s listed to enter service in 2012 (initial entry) will actually be built in late 2010, so that the tanks can trial (about 15) in 2011, in 2012 the tanks are projected to be cleared for service entry, as 100 of them reach the army.

After 2016, the Al-Khalids will be upgraded en masse to Al-Khalid IB standard, as factory burden decreases. After 2014, some Al-Khalids may be upgraded for trials type purposes.

Defence Science & Technology Organization (DESTO) (21c)

More about Babur II and Shaheen III in the link as well..


For more info on rounds... @Dazzler !
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
650 mm is very good for subcontinent.With hunter killer system,track while moving and combat management ystem plus euroepan FCS this would give it very strong and accurate firepower.
 
.
@AUSTERLITZ Pakistan also uses Tungsten rounds.... one example:

qycz04.jpg




Not really those bastards do have RPG-29s... i have seen a few videos... of them firing...
@AUSTERLITZ, I find it funny that a nation using DU would rely on Tungsten for training. Actually, WHA alloys are twice or thrice as costly as DU alloys. These might have been early rounds as @DESERT FIGHTER says.

Do you have those videos right now? I could positively identify the RPG-29 if I had a video. Till date, only RPG-7 has been seen, I cannot imagine how TTP has access to advanced Tandem warheads, Russia has not supplied them to the subcontinent at all. Thanks in advance.

Also your tungsten rounds seem to have comparable length to our 125 but penetration is much lesser. (We have DRDO sources on the record saying 125 mm rounds achieve 500 mm penetration a few years back and posters to go along.)

Have you moved completely to DU?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
Thts bcoz this round is pretty old... and probably being replaced..Or replaced...

A few new rounds:

intv8n.jpg

The new APFSDS-T round of yours in this image, has been estimated to have a penetrator length of no more than 550 mm. More than 3VBM-17 "Mango" but still, very low length and a completely obsolete sabot - ring sabot. Velocity loss for this ammunition will be much more than the usual 50-60 m/s, maybe even 100 m/s since sabot is quite big and still not composite. A very experienced analyst who has access to classified German data expressed doubt that this round is modern in any way. It does not seem to be modern.

Naiza seems to have longer penetrator with better sabot. Why move away from it to this thing?

DESERT FIGHTER said:
The new indigenous Niaza-II 125mm DU round (penetration: 650mm at 2,000m) is a significant improvement to the older Niaza rounds on the Al-Khalid. This is partially achieved through a longer penetration rod.

Longer penetration rod, is possible and this is very good for Pakistan. When will photos be available for this new round?
 
.
in todays digital war time are gone for artillery it is now who rules skies will rule land and sea thats for sure
 
.
@AUSTERLITZ, I find it funny that a nation using DU would rely on Tungsten for training. Actually, WHA alloys are twice or thrice as costly as DU alloys. These might have been early rounds as @DESERT FIGHTER says
.

We use them both... but not much info abt them on POF site... not even about DU rounds...
Do you have those videos right now? I could positively identify the RPG-29 if I had a video. Till date, only RPG-7 has been seen, I cannot imagine how TTP has access to advanced Tandem warheads, Russia has not supplied them to the subcontinent at all. Thanks in advance.


My mistake... they actually use these:

2ywz6de.jpg


Also your tungsten rounds seem to have comparable length to our 125 but penetration is much lesser. (We have DRDO sources on the record saying 125 mm rounds achieve 500 mm penetration a few years back and posters to go along.)

Older round:

125 mm APFSDS 17 - 18 approx 460 mm Min


Have you moved completely to DU?

Read above..
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
The new APFSDS-T round of yours in this image, has been estimated to have a penetrator length of no more than 550 mm. More than 3VBM-17 "Mango" but still, very low length and a completely obsolete sabot - ring sabot. Velocity loss for this ammunition will be much more than the usual 50-60 m/s, maybe even 100 m/s since sabot is quite big and still not composite. A very experienced analyst who has access to classified German data expressed doubt that this round is modern in any way. It does not seem to be modern.

Not really dude here are the specs of the previous or older round... :

2mmzpcp.jpg


TECHNICAL DATA
Complete Round
Length 1084.5 mm
Weight 21.47 Kg
Projectile
Projectile Tungsten alloy core with discarding sabot and fin stabilisation
Length 555 mm
Weight 7.370 Kg
Main Cartridge Case
Case Semi combustible Cartridge Case with steel base & cover
Length 406.5 mm
Propellant 16/19 single base Granular 16/19
Weight of propellant 6 kg (approx)
Primer Electric/Percussion Primer Number 2
Secondary Cartridge Case
Case Semi Combustible with projectile
Length 678 mm
Propellant Granular 16/19 2.550 kg (approx) and Tubular 19/1-25 0.8 kg
Performance
Muzzle velocity 1730 metres/sec
Services pressure at 21oC 4845 Kg Cm2
Accuracy at 1000 metres:
SD (Horizontal) 0.3 mil
SD (Vertical) 0.3 mil
Penetration at 2,000M 460mm, against RHA target at Zero Obliquity, conforming to DEF-STAN 95-13/2
Packing
Main Charge Structure & Secondary Charge Structure are packed separately in fibre glass seal humidity proof containers then finally filled fibre glass seal humidity proof containers are packed in a steel box.
Size of Box 82 x 50 x 26 cms
Gross weight 53 kgs
Colour & marking Service brown with yellow/white stenciling

So i guess the round will have much more penetration power than 460mm, against RHA target at Zero Obliquity, conforming to DEF-STAN 95-13/2....


Naiza seems to have longer penetrator with better sabot. Why move away from it to this thing?

We arent moving... just using both of them..


Longer penetration rod, is possible and this is very good for Pakistan. When will photos be available for this new round?

Dude even specs of older Naiza rounds arent posted on the official POF website...
 
. .

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom