Some snaps of OplotM & VT4 testing in Pakistan

[Yukihime]

Surprisingly, Thailand just accepted another batch of Oplots despite supposedly cancelling the deal. There is something that keeps them thinking and inducting more of these beasts despite having opted for VT-4s in 2016.

The latest batch was inducted in December 2017.
http://en.interfax.com.ua/news/economic/476619.html

Just a point of view, may be a bit difficult to see delightful message from this batch of delivery for an ancient contract of 49 oplot signed at 7 years ago (2011) which is still in delay, whereas the pessimistic view about Ukraine Kharkiv Morozov's ability of executing weaponry contract is strengthened again.

Mar 2011 Thailand signed a contract with Ukraine buy 49 T-84-M Oplot. During the month of 2/2014, 5 the first Oplot-M was delivered to the Royal Thai Army. In the five years since the tank deal was signed, Malyshev Factory has only provided Bangkok with about 20 T-84-M, as of the end of 2016, despite the fact that the deadline was originally set for 2014.

In 2015, the Ukraine plant did not produce a single T-84-M, hence no delivery. On other hand it was reported that due to the battle loss with russia side military groups, the ukraine army had to put some of the earlier produced oplot into battlefield as replacement of the loss of T-64BV which were captured by the opponents.

(oplot produced for Thai army were spotted on ukraine battlefield)

April 2017, Royal Thai Army signed contract for inducting the better performing VT-4. Stimulated by this message, Kharkiv started piecing together again the oplot for Thai Army, however the process struggled.
Jun 12 2017, 6 oplot started to be transported to Thailand, with 5 more on Dec 13 of the same year.
In Jan 2018, although another small batch was handled to the Thai Army, it still couldn't fill up the initial contract of total 49 tanks.

 

[Yukihime]

Mar 2017, a group of Royal Thai Army representatives inspected whether Kharkiv could still manufacture T-84-M oplot to meet Thai's quality requirements, which was just two months before Thai turned to sigh the contract with china.

At the end of 2016, Malyshev Factory announced they were trying to improve the tank assembly to 120 per year. Nonetheless, judging from various evidences, the factory was suspected to be renewing old parts from its warehouse.

May 28 2017, some pics leaked from Ukranian observer Malyasov displayed product line in Malyshev, which was re-polishing a few poorly maintained old T-84 for Ukraine Army's usage with 'modernized' equipment.

T-84 in the pictures were indeed the T-80U tanks manufactured during the time of Soviet. Pic showing the 'modernized' modification including line of armor boxes on its turret. Judging from the size and shape, these small armor boxes could not be those higher versions mounted on oplot-M for Thailand.

 

[Beast]

Going for Oplot M will be a mistake for PA. Ukraine cant delivered and most of their tech especially electronic are outdated.

 

[Yukihime]

possible reasons why VT may not be PA's best choice:

1. VT-4 costs even higher than Ukranian solution:
reports about oplot-M 2011 deal revealed T84-M cost was around 4.5m
price of basic vt4 stays at 5.8m ever since debut in 2012, however with equipments mounted on Thai version, the additional cost is uncertain but set to increase
Thailand's economy keeps growing at fast rate since 2012, while investment from china grown 4 times. With much smaller tank fleet and current 5.7B defence buget, they certainly used to look up when purchasing.

2. VT-4 requires more invest behind the scene
china has pursued a big jump on power packs in last decade. If PA adopts vt, the silos have to get totally upgraded to support two different kind of machinery which makes almost no sense to PA who relies on matured technology they could master in complex terrain.

[Royal Thai Army show case on media day, live fire gun and remote-controlled MG, transmission demo of stable 360degree turning that none of russia/ukraine mbt could have done]

what's best for PA? the most cost-efficient way based on PA's current case maybe receiving help from Ukranians on continuous upgrade of the 6DT while mocking up a better turret. considering opponent's ground vehicle level, better FCS significantly outweigh the fency battlefield information concepts...

among all uncertainties the most certain thing is that PA is definite to be smart. they may have already figured out their route long before, that neither vt or oplot had ever been an option in their shoes. so it's highly possible the current 'test' between oplot and vt in PAK is just a show case where PA could learn what improvements should be made on alkhalid II.

 

[ARMalik]

The only way Oplot would make sense if both Ukraine and PA manufactures these simultaneously meaning transfer of Oplot tech to PA. This would ensure quick production rate, and customization required by PA. Otherwise, Chinese VT is the way to go.

 

[Dazzler]

Going for Oplot M will be a mistake for PA. Ukraine cant delivered and most of their tech especially electronic are outdated.

possible reasons why VT may not be PA's best choice:


[Royal Thai Army show case on media day, live fire gun and remote-controlled MG, transmission demo of stable 360degree turning that none of russia/ukraine mbt could have done]

You made a false claim, Alkhalid, and Oplot can all execute stable 360 degree pivot rotation.

 

[Beast]

You made a false claim, Alkhalid, and Oplot can all execute stable 360 degree pivot rotation.

Their 360 pivot rotation is not stabilize while Chinese VT-4 one is full stabilized ,lock on target. This is critical especially in urban confine warfare.

VT-4 is the real deal and the RTA realise that. They paid the Ukraine money and Ukraine refused to pay back thai a single cent even the RTA wants to cancel the deal. RTA has no choice but to receive whatever Ukraine provided. Typical East Europe business dealing.

 

[Dazzler]

Their 360 pivot rotation is not stabilize while Chinese VT-4 one is full stabilized ,lock on target. This is critical especially in urban confine warfare.

VT-4 is the real deal and the RTA realise that. They paid the Ukraine money and Ukraine refused to pay back thai a single cent even the RTA wants to cancel the deal. RTA has no choice but to receive whatever Ukraine provided. Typical East Europe business dealing.

Watch 21 minute onwards, it is Al khalid-1 fresh from the factory.

Here is oplot, watch 1:20 onwards

 

[Beast]

Watch 21 minute onwards, it is Al khalid-1 fresh from the factory.

Are you a joke? The VT-4 perform a 360 degrees chassis turn with turret fully stabilize and lock on target. While you provide a video of Al Khalid with full tank turning and no sign of gun stabilise and turret lock? They are not the same and more or less demonstrate the technology gap.

I give an apple and you claim orange is the same? Are you desperate?

 

[Dazzler]

Are you a joke? The VT-4 perform a 360 degrees chassis turn with turret fully stabilize and lock on target. While you provide a video of Al Khalid with full tank turning and no sign of gun stabilise and turret lock? They are not the same and more or less demonstrate the technology gap.

I give an apple and you claim orange is the same? Are you desperate?

It is you who are a joke. Your patriotism never lets you see the reality.

You are too ignorant to even talk to. VT-4 is nothing but a fancy little reincarnation of MBT 2000 and it shows. If you had seen closely, the tank remains stable during turn and will have no difficulty pointing the gun on the target so there is no rocket science here. Modern FCS and stabilized systems facilitate this, so your claim that only VT-4 can achieve that due to some super tech goes down the drain.

 

[Cookie Monster]

PA doesnt want to go the Alkhalid route again where they had to source most things from abroad including engine and transmission and built some on their own. It had cost us 10 long years and millions $ to import thermal imagers, gun control and environment control systems.

They are busy with AK-1 and testing Ak-2 configurations hence they need a "complete" weapon system in the Al Haider mbt whichever contender is chosen.

That's what they want to avoid and that's why both contenders were given a chance to improve, improvise and re-compete.

But since all that time and effort was already spent sourcing gun control systems, thermal imagers etc. for Al-Khalid...wouldnt' it make more sense to keep going that route in Al-Haider project as well and incorporate the same subsystems in it as Al-Khalid? This uniformity would lead to better maintenance/support of both tanks and might even lower the overall cost of these subsystems since Pak will be acquiring them in greater numbers than before.

 

[Beast]

It is you who are a joke. Your patriotism never lets you see the reality.

You are too ignorant to even talk to. VT-4 is nothing but a fancy little reincarnation of MBT 2000 and it shows. If you had seen closely, the tank remains stable during turn and will have no difficulty pointing the gun on the target so there is no rocket science here. Modern FCS and stabilized systems facilitate this, so your claim that only VT-4 can achieve that due to some super tech goes down the drain.

Please do not diver the topic of stabilizing gun. You have so far failed to prove any point of Al Khalid and Oplot-M demonstrate the kind of sophistication of superior gun stabilizing. Everybody have the eyes to see my point.

Nothing to do with nationalism. The joke is on you. Feel free to rebuke my point rather than dwell on your useless personal opinion.

Watch from 11.40s of what is world class stabilizing for tanks which is not available for obsolete.

Steering of VT-4 is well known of having the same handling like a sportcar achieved by fully digitalised automatic transmission. This is something Al Khalid and Oplot M and western tank cant offer.

 

[Dazzler]

But since all that time and effort was already spent sourcing gun control systems, thermal imagers etc. for Al-Khalid...wouldnt' it make more sense to keep going that route in Al-Haider project as well and incorporate the same subsystems in it as Al-Khalid? This uniformity would lead to better maintenance/support of both tanks and might even lower the overall cost of these subsystems since Pak will be acquiring them in greater numbers than before.

There is enough in house R&D in place to make necessary systems and components. No need to go back to the drawing board at turn of each decade.

The Al khalid project already shares a lot of commonality with both Chinese as well as Ukrainian tanks so the overall cost of ownership, maintenance and rebuilt/ upgrade will still remain low regardless of which mbt is chosen.

Please do not diver the topic of stabilizing gun. You have so far failed to prove any point of Al Khalid and Oplot-M demonstrate the kind of sophistication of superior gun stabilizing. Everybody have the eyes to see my point.

Nothing to do with nationalism. The joke is on you. Feel free to rebuke my point rather than dwell on your useless personal opinion.

Watch from 11.40s of what is world class stabilizing for tanks which is not available for obsolete.

Steering of VT-4 is well known of having the same handling like a sportcar achieved by fully digitalised automatic transmission. This is something Al Khalid and Oplot M and western tank cant offer.

Digital transmission has been around for decades, it is just that China built one recently. Transmission has nothing to do with handling, rather it is the stabilizers that are responsible for it.

And China still uses clones of 2E28 stabilizers, when Russia and Ukraine hava moved to 2E42-4 jasmin and beyond. If someone ever let you see inside, you will find a reworked 2E28 sitting inside the VT-4 as well.

Same is the case with autoloader and other subsystems. Now do some homework on the role of stabilzers in mbts before beating your o mighty China drum here again.

 

[Beast]

Digital transmission has been around for decades, it is just that China built one recently. Transmission has nothing to do with handling, rather it is the stabilizers that are responsible for it.

And China still uses clones of 2E28 stabilizers, when Russia and Ukraine hava moved beyong 2E42-4 jasmin and beyond. If someone ever let you see inside, you will find a reworked 2E28 sitting inside the VT-4 as well.

Same is the case with autoloader and other subsystems. Now do some homework on the role of stabilzers in mbts before beating your o mighty China drum here again.

I advise you dont talk nonsense when you know nothing about VT-4. More or less demonstrate of your limited understanding of VT-4 when you claim VT-4 is inferior. Typical western mindset that knowing little equivalent to inferior.

Even a so called modern Leopard 2 tank steering is so primitive compare to VT-4. Not to mention other inferior tanks. Digital automatic transmission eliminate the previous difficult handling and steering a tank and make anybody who knows how to drive an automatic car, knows how to drive VT-4. This is not possible for Leopard, Abram M1A2, Al Khalid and Oplot-M.

 

[Dazzler]

I advise you dont talk nonsense when you know nothing about VT-4. More or less demonstrate of your limited understanding of VT-4 when you claim VT-4 is inferior. Typical western mindset that knowing little equivalent to inferior.

Kid,

the old school stabilization is just one of the many things that are still being used in Chinese mbts. Need i remind you that your folks have still not mastered the thermal image technology? The best they have in VT-4 is still uncooled, and touches 8-12M at best, which barely makes it second generation.

Uncooled thermal imagers will not last a day in Tamewala, Cholistan region. Thats what happened to the first trial as well.


I can take you to kindergarten when it comes to tanks and armor. I am opening another thread and inviting you to come and discuss things there. Lets see if your patriorism helps you there or not.