RIA Novosti: Pakistan intends to purchase Russian tanks T-90

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Stop posting nonsense which includes staged ISIS propaganda. Show me a single Al-Khalid surviving a direct hit from a TOW then come and bash the T-90. Here is some background on your claims and pictures in order.


1. The first picture is from a tank that was captured and blown up by Isis for propoganda purposes, Tiger Forces claimed it was just an upgraded T-72.

https://mobile.almasdarnews.com/article/busted-isis-pretends-destroy-syrian-t-90-tank-blowing-tank/

2. The second picture is a famous T-90 that survived a Hit from a TOW with no penetration.

3. Unknown tank, probably T-72 from Ukraine.

4. Turret from the same tank you posted in the first picture. You are reposting multiple pictures of ISIS propaganda claiming it to be different tanks.

5. T-72


No T-90 was used in Georgia or Ukraine—ever. The T-80 was never more advanced then the T-72. Apart from engine and auto loader both tanks had identical or very similar features in fact the T-90 which you claim is just a T-72 upgrade has a far thicker turret. From combat experience T-80 engines had a tendancy to burst into flames when hit in the engine and they consumed too much fuel, thus Russia preferred T-72s. In other words Russia used both T-80s and T-72s in combat and think that T-72s are better.

Forget the pics, it’s a fact that several T-90s have been destroyed .. and it’s not an invincible tank as you make it to be.

In the end it’s a upgraded T-72...

In testing the T-90 had far superior armor compared to the T-80. It withstood being penatrated more often then the T-80.

http://fofanov.armor.kiev.ua/Tanks/TRIALS/19991020.html

T-80 was called the champion of USSR..

It got a bad rep in Chechnya due to little trained soviet troops and its gas guzzling turbine engines that were introduced for the first time by USSR..

It had nothing to do with it’s armour and so on.

It was much more expensive .. and the cripple USSR & latter Russia didn’t have any choice but to go for T-72 upgrade due to economic crisis and later Ukraine getting independence and with it the Mashyev factory.

And in mid 90s Pak placed order for T-80 which Russia blocked citing use of Russian systems and thus Ukraine using elements of T-84 on Pak T-80UD (like welded turret,gun,FCS,ERA etc).

Modern T-90Ms are said to use the Armata cannon which is said to have a muzzle velocity that far exceeds even the Rhenmetal 120mm.

That’s great.. though no details of armata are public.

No Al-Khalid is in no way better then a T-90SM even modern Chinese tanks are constantly beaten by T72s and T-90s in the tank biathalon each year. Let’s be honest the Al-Khalid is not better then modern Chinese tanks yet those same Chinese tanks have lack luster performance.

I believe China doesn’t send its best tanks to Tank Biathlon either..they mostly send old Type-90s.

And the performance of T-90s isn’t over the top either... but than you will blame the indian service.

Also AK uses several Pak and western systems making it more than a match for any tank in its category.

Be it it’s KBA-3 inspired gun, IMBS,Hunter Killer ability ,EMP & Laser warning and jamming system and so on.

Even Russian T-90 uses foreign sub systems.

While Indians are forced to buy European imagery systems for their T-90s.. which also have heating issues and so onx

If you consider a slightly more powerful engine which consumes enououse amounts of fuel and is volunerable to fire then yes the Al-Khalid is better.

It’s not about the HPs .. it’s more about Power to Weight ratio ...

AKs ratio is 26.1.

T-90? Lesser than 20.

 

[Shabi1]

Regarding T-90 I seriously think its just PA doing window shopping and evaluating what features they can improve on AK from studying them. They have extensively evaluated L-139 and T-50, just to know what features the JF-17B needed.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Pakistan has to look for long term Russian Partnership
May be aim for 50 Tanks construction per year type agreement to gradually replace our older inventory

 

[ptldM3]

Forget the pics, it’s a fact that several T-90s have been destroyed .. and it’s not an invincible tank as you make it to be.

In the end it’s a upgraded T-72...

No one said it was in invincible but the fact is that you posted ISIS propaganda in which they supposedly captured an upgraded T-72 and blew it up by probably throwing grandes into the tank and they then they said it was a T-90.

The fact is several T-90s in Syria withstood TOW hits. Show me the Al-Khalid doing the same.

It had nothing to do with it’s armour and so on.

You do realize the T-90 has thicker armor, something I proved to you before in the past. In live fire tets the T-90 also outperformed the T-80 in withstanding direct frontal hits from Kornets and RPG-29s. Already posted a link about that too.

The T-80 is also more prone to catastrophic munition detonation from flanking attacks due to the locations of munitions in the auto loader and of course the engines are more easily prone to burning.


So yes it has everything to do with armor.

It was much more expensive .. and the cripple USSR & latter Russia didn’t have any choice but to go for T-72 upgrade due to economic crisis and later Ukraine getting independence and with it the Mashyev factory.

Firstly the T-80 was also produced in Omsk Russia. Secondly the T-72 was always favored because the operating costs were lower, its autolauder was more reliable and safer and it had better armor, on top of everything it was cheaper. The T-80 was inferior and only more expensive because of a turbine engine.

That’s great.. though no details of armata are public.

The manufacturer actually disclosed some details about its gun. We also know it has an unmanned turret, and the Afghanit active protection system, it has auto tracking and an engine that produces 2,200HP with no governers.

I believe China doesn’t send its best tanks to Tank Biathlon either..they mostly send old Type-90s.

Thats wrong they sent their brand new Type96B. The Type 99 would have performed even worse because of its weight.

And the performance of T-90s isn’t over the top either... but than you will blame the indian service.

In the tank competition the T-90 handedly beat the newest Chinese tanks. If that is not over the top then Chinese tanks are very poor.

Also AK uses several Pak and western systems making it more than a match for any tank in its category.

The Al-Khalid is comparable to the T-90, but is inferior to T-90SM despite most Pakistanis claiming it is superior.

Be it it’s KBA-3 inspired gun, IMBS,Hunter Killer ability ,EMP & Laser warning and jamming system and so on.

Even Russian T-90 uses foreign sub systems.

T-90s use the French Kathrine sights, which by now are considered mediocre compared to the systems Russia created for the T-90SM/T-14. Russia has been giving T-90s to Syria because they are inferior to T-90Ms, T-80BVs and future T-14.

It’s not about the HPs .. it’s more about Power to Weight ratio ...

AKs ratio is 26.1.

T-90? Lesser than 20.

And Diesel engines like the V-92s2 produce far more torque which is crucial. They are also far more fuel efficient and reliable and over all cheaper. T-90s now come with 1,130HP engines increasing power is not a problem, larger turbos and a software upgrade will get the engine pushing 1,500+HP but at the expense of fuel economy and reliability.

 

[HariPrasad]

T 90 is a very potent tank.

 

[帅的一匹]

T 90 is a very potent tank.

Tin can

Exact how has Russia cheated in the tank competition? Did they cause Chinese tanks to magically run slower? Did they cause Chinese tanks to miss and breakdown and lose a wheel? The excuses are petty, the entire competition is filmed from all angles, not sure how anyone would be able to “cheat”.

As for the T-50 and and Armata, you don’t know anything about either of the two, just fanboy speculation. The fact that the T-14 has an unmanned turret coupled with an active and passive protection system already puts it lightyears ahead of existing tanks in survivability. In other words if an IED blows off a turret from a Chinese tank, the crew is dead, if an ATGM penatrated the turret or any part of any Chinese tank the crew is likely dead or badly injured. The crew of the Armata sit in a well protected capsule around the glacius which is the most protected area of any tank.


The T-14 has a far superior gun to anything in China or the west, far superior engine (China cannot even get a good engine for Z-10). The list is long. Name one feature that China has on its tanks that is better then the T-14. Can you name anything?


And the fact that you ‘thanked’ someone for posting ISIS propaganda where they captured a T-72 and blew it up for propaganda shows you are not only clueless but desperate just to start a sneer campaign, which you do every time the Al-Khalid is mentioned anyways. Even worse is that you thanks a guy that claimed T-90s were blown up in Georgia, Chechen and Ukraine which is false and zero proof exists for those claims. In fact no T-90s have even seen battle in Ukraine or Georgia.

Our new generation of MBT is coming soon, so don't get cocky.

Your development path of new MBT and Stealthy fighter are off the track, it's not mainstay anymore. The front RCS of T50 is over 0.4 SQM, which is hundred times of J20. Laughing my *** off.

 

[ptldM3]

Tin can


Our new generation of MBT is coming soon, so don't get cocky.

Your development path of new MBT and Stealthy fighter are off the track, it's not mainstay anymore. The front RCS of T50 is over 0.4 SQM, which is hundred times of J20. Laughing my *** off.

Before calling a T-90 a tin can show everyone Chinese tanks surviving TOW hits in combat then then talk. The new Chinese tanks have pitiful protection which I will post with pictures below.




As for your glorious J-20, its overhyped like everything else. The Z-10 was also hyped until reports from Pakistan came out that it sucks badly, and it’s laughable that you pull classified RCS figures out of your behind:





Let’s look at one of your glorious newest super tanks and compare to the T-14, we already know the T-14 has an APS, better gun, better engine and has an unmanned turret but let’s look at basic:



T-14 vs Type99 interior:

T-14 interior is like a spaceship, Type99 is like a 1930s submarine.

Zero side armor besides sheet metal:

T-14 has 50-75% thicker armor for the roof, which is critical in modern urban warfare.

Computerized gun compared to manually operated machine gun.

 

[HariPrasad]

Tin can

TT90. Not type 99.

 

[帅的一匹]

Before calling a T-90 a tin can show everyone Chinese tanks surviving TOW hits in combat then then talk. The new Chinese tanks have pitiful protection which I will post with pictures below.




As for your glorious J-20, its overhyped like everything else. The Z-10 was also hyped until reports from Pakistan came out that it sucks badly, and it’s laughable that you pull classified RCS figures out of your behind:





Let’s look at one of your glorious newest super tanks and compare to the T-14, we already know the T-14 has an APS, better gun, better engine and has an unmanned turret but let’s look at basic:



T-14 vs Type99 interior:

T-14 interior is like a spaceship, Type99 is like a 1930s submarine.
View attachment 464459


Zero side armor besides sheet metal:

View attachment 464457



T-14 has 50-75% thicker armor for the roof, which is critical in modern urban warfare.


View attachment 464460


Computerized gun compared to manually operated machine gun.


View attachment 464458

China has all those technologies you mentioned. Just wait our new MBT, it's coming soon. Some LCD and cheap computerized gun is spaceship technology? How difficult to build a unmanned turret? Talking about your T50, is it too lazy to cheat Indians' money? You take them as fully retarded?

It didn't even have a side weapon bay for god sake.

I suddenly feel sympathizing India's misfortune.

It will be a big mistake if Pakistan give up its own tank industry development path to favor the same type of tanks owned by its enemy.

 

[ptldM3]

China has all those technologies you mentioned. Just wait our new MBT, it's coming soon. Some LCD and cheap computerized gun is spaceship technology? How difficult to build a unmanned turret? Talking about your T50, is it too lazy to cheat Indians' money? You take them as fully retarded?

China can’t even built a proper turbine engine and it’s tank optics have indentcal specs to outdated Soviet anologs, the heaviest and most moder Chinese tanks also have considerably thinner armor even compared to older T-90s...tin can indeed


China has no operational APS, there is a video of China testing their APS and its more primitive then the first Soviet designed APS of the 1970s, it’s not an insult but the truth. It just lobbed two very large explosive charges at a projectile, notice how the Chinese APS uses two and not one explosive projectiles to destroy an RPG, it means that it is very unreliable.


2 large mortars lobbed at an RPG is apparently considered an active protection system in China.

Anyone near that tank would be dead.



Here is the old Arena system, it uses one small squared charge which is seen in the upper right hand corner that accurately hit the incoming RPG. The Afghanit system is said to destroy both ATGMs and sabot rounds at long distances.

And yes the T-50 has side weapons bays, but this is not about the T-50.

 

[UserUnknown2025]

China can’t even built a proper turbine engine and it’s tank optics have indentcal specs to outdated Soviet anologs, the heaviest and most moder Chinese tanks also have considerably thinner armor even compared to older T-90s...tin can indeed


China has no operational APS, there is a video of China testing their APS and its more primitive then the first Soviet designed APS of the 1970s, it’s not an insult but the truth. It just lobbed two very large explosive charges at a projectile, notice how the Chinese APS uses two and not one explosive projectiles to destroy an RPG, it means that it is very unreliable.


2 large mortars lobbed at an RPG is apparently considered an active protection system in China.

View attachment 464474 View attachment 464478


Anyone near that tank would be dead.



Here is the old Arena system, it uses one small squared charge which is seen in the upper right hand corner that accurately hit the incoming RPG. The Afghanit system is said to destroy both ATGMs and sabot rounds at long distances.


View attachment 464477 View attachment 464475


And yes the T-50 has side weapons bays, but this is not about the T-50.

I see! The Russians are powerful indeed. The US must be on its knees begging for mercy right now. Soon it'll abolish NATO and give all of its money to Russia as a tribute. Soon, all the countries in the world will bow down to their Russian masters. @cirr what do you think about the alleged Russian "space" technology and our "1930" tech shown in these very detailed and comprehensive images, which totally shows every aspect of Chinese and Russian technology?

 

[ptldM3]

I see! The Russians are powerful indeed. The US must be on its knees begging for mercy right now. Soon it'll abolish NATO and give all of its money to Russia as a tribute. Soon, all the countries in the world will bow down to their Russian masters. @cirr what do you think about the alleged Russian "space" technology and our "1930" tech shown in these very detailed and comprehensive images, which totally shows every aspect of Chinese and Russian technology?

Are you feeling okay? I find it funny how Chinese members started unprovoked attacks on here about T-90 despite it serviving direct ATGMs hits in Syria, then they started bashing the T-14 tank and T-50. The cocky behavior from some Chinese members and inabilities to counter or support any claims is just nationalist chest pounding and trolling.

All I did was called out trolls, I then pointed out how super duper Chinese technology really is. You want tontinue trolling or debate facts? You want me to post some more embarrassing facts about Chinese tanks like how the newest ones have optics that have identical specs to outdated Soviet designs?

If there was a Russian member that would act as cocky and arrogant as some Chinese members I would quickly shun them. Maybe some people here could learn how to be fair, respectful and debate facts instead of troll.

 

[帅的一匹]

I see! The Russians are powerful indeed. The US must be on its knees begging for mercy right now. Soon it'll abolish NATO and give all of its money to Russia as a tribute. Soon, all the countries in the world will bow down to their Russian masters. @cirr what do you think about the alleged Russian "space" technology and our "1930" tech shown in these very detailed and comprehensive images, which totally shows every aspect of Chinese and Russian technology?

Amarta is based on the Soviet 915 project, still resting on its laurels. uses type 2A82 125mm gun than 152 mm they claim. like they brag about S400 can intercept 400KM away target. While 40N6 is never in place.
Yeh, Russian weapons are so fancy and invincible. Give them some applauds.
Still, it's a good if Pakistan can get some S400 and Su35.

Are you feeling okay? I find it funny how Chinese members started unprovoked attacks on here about T-90 despite it serviving direct ATGMs hits in Syria, then they started bashing the T-14 tank and T-50. The cocky behavior from some Chinese members and inabilities to counter or support any claims is just nationalist chest pounding and trolling.

All I did was called out trolls, I then pointed out how super duper Chinese technology really is. You want tontinue trolling or debate facts? You want me to post some more embarrassing facts about Chinese tanks like how the newest ones have optics that have identical specs to outdated Soviet designs?

All those Specification of T99A is classified, had you hacked into our data base?

 

[UserUnknown2025]

Are you feeling okay? I find it funny how Chinese members started unprovoked attacks on here about T-90 despite it serviving direct ATGMs hits in Syria, then they started bashing the T-14 tank and T-50. The cocky behavior from some Chinese members and inabilities to counter or support any claims is just nationalist chest pounding and trolling.

All I did was called out trolls, I then pointed out how super duper Chinese technology really is. You want tontinue trolling or debate facts? You want me to post some more embarrassing facts about Chinese tanks like how the newest ones have optics that have identical specs to outdated Soviet designs?

If there was a Russian member that would act as cocky and arrogant as some Chinese members I would quickly shun them. Maybe some people here could learn how to be fair, respectful and debate facts instead of troll.

Why would we counter nonsense with evidence? We merely reciprocate. BTW what's with you guys' animosity towards us; it seems as though you guys hate us more than those who made your country disintegrate (I am not making fun of you because I truly feel your pain)?

 

[ptldM3]

Amarta is based on the Soviet 915 project, still resting on its laurels.

The designers of the T-14 have stated it’s a clean sheet design. You are getting desperate to the point of making lies. At this point are so fixated with arguing that you can’t behave logically or even back a single claim with facts.

The Armata is based on nothing. It is a new design, there has never been any design in the Soviet Union that was remotely close to the T-14.

At the end of the day whatever insults and lies you make does not change the fact that the T-14 is considered the most advanced tank in the world and the only tank that has an unmanned turret giving it superior survivability.

uses type 2A82 125mm gun than 152 mm they claim. like they brag about S400 can intercept 400KM

It uses a brand new 2A82-M1, it has no relation to the to any previous gun besides being the same diameter. In fact it doesn’t even have a fume extractor. The designers have stated that the 2A82-M1 has about 20% higher muzzle energy then the Reheninmetal 120mm. Whatever lies you make doesn’t change the fact that it has more than enough power and range to destroy any tank.

All those Specification of T99A is classified, had you hacked into our data base?

You don’t need top secret clearance to see that the Type99A has zero side armor, no APS, thin roof armor and outdated interior, and yes looks are important in this case, it’s like comparing a 1970s cockpit to an all digital glass cockpit. It’s not difficult to see which has sensor fission better situational awareness and less workload on the operator.