T-80 and T-85 MBTs of Pakistan along with Al Khalid and Al Zarrar

[alimobin memon]

I have putted all three layers with max around 780-890mm. Now whether u agree or not is up to you. And Please Arjun Arjun leave it this is not a versus thread we are putting details of the tank, Arjun is an excellent no doubt but no comparison. Given the weight of the A K I agree it cant have very heavy base armour but MBT 2000 had itself the base armour of 600 mm. But MBT 2000 was the A K version during the 2001 era later HIT produced A K with more better armour but due to its weight it cant be more than 650 mm. Adding Era it has added around at least 150 mm of extra protection to the front making it 800 mm.

Composite armour add on on the "front" i said only add more punch so 890 max can be estimated. I am not an Hit official so I can't give the exact figure. Furthermore According to Janes book The A K has defeated most of KE rounds at front hit That HIT was able to get in bore of 120 and 125 mm.
You are repeating my words simply U admitted that with era it can have around 790 mm But I am telling u figures that Not just janes but People from army I know. My Uncle's first words were when I had discussion with him he said simply, " He heard news that Al Khalid is in mass production even after t 80 because Pakistan army tested all rounds it had in armor corps and A K " Survived. Including T 80 UD.

And You are probably Drunk Considering Type 99 has bad turret armor. It has withstand more than 6 rounds Direct at close range with No Penetration at all at front.



But It also mentions that to defeat ERA too.


I am not just estimating the round powers. 620 mm was in production since 2010. further development is in process.

I am pretty sure that Pakistan army declares assests little late. Agree that india has better DU round but u must consider when arjun side armour cant be more than 550 mm considering heavy tank It is still going to give a huge problem for its own. protection.

 

[Keshav Murali]

@alimobin memon,

I agree with the 790 mm estimate with all three layers.

And You are probably Drunk Considering Type 99 has bad turret armor. It has withstand more than 6 rounds Direct at close range with No Penetration at all at front.

As for me being drunk, here is what an analyst working for 20 years in this field says:

In fact ZTZ-99 is awfull design. I still can't understand why they used a basic T-72 layout, and then get idea to put there bigger engine, which in the end means unnececary bigger internal volume, bigger size of hull, bigger weight and no increase in protection.

In fact compared to many newer T-72 variants, like T-72BM, ZTZ-99 is less protected.

Especially interesting is a fact that Chinese designers never bothered to provide sufficent protection for hull sides. These silly thin sheet metal/rubber side skirts, does not offer any significant protection, and the side hull armor is as like in most designs, max 80mm thick, which in the end means that in possible conflict with India, the Indian infantry teams, might be very dangerous in ambushes with Carl Gustav 84mm RCR's. The best tactic would be to aim in the side hull directly beneth the turret and side hull sponson and slightly above road wheels, to hit ammunition storage and autoloader.

Also the turret sides of ZTZ-99 are weakly protected, and due to turret geometry are not that well hidden behind front turret armor, so hitting them will be easy.

Another hint is the exposed edge where ZTZ-99 front turret armor meet side armor, this is also exposed weak zone. And there are many, many more.

And the other is fact that there is only 400 mm space for composite armour in Type 99 and 99A1 turret. This expert said this for ZTZ-99 and ZTZ-99A1. And it survived 9 hits from 105 mm armament and 7 hits from 125 right? The best possible 105 round China has penetrates 500 mm. The best 125 round China has will penetrate 650 mm. Nothing special by Type 99A1. And these hits were taken by the hull.

That's why China is redesigning turret of ZTZ99A2 and KM.

But It also mentions that to defeat ERA too.

It will defeat ERA but not base armour

I am not just estimating the round powers. 620 mm was in production since 2011. further development is in process.

No I said that you might be overstating latest round penetration as 680 mm. The 680 mm round might be in development. That's what I meant.

 

[alimobin memon]

@alimobin memon,

I agree with the 790 mm estimate with all three layers.


As for me being drunk, here is what an analyst working for 20 years in this field:



And the other is fact that there is only 400 mm space for composite armour in Type 99 and 99A1. This expert said this for ZTZ-99 and ZTZ-99A1. And it survived 9 hits from 105 mm armament and 7 hits from 125 right? The best possible 105 round China has penetrates 500 mm. The best 125 round China has will penetrate 650 mm. Nothing special by Type 99A1. And these hits were taken by the hull.

That's why China is redesigning turret of ZTZ99A2 and KM.



It will defeat ERA but not base armour



No I said that you might be overstating latest round penetration as 680 mm. The 680 mm round might be in development. That's what I meant.

Im talking about A2 That is now replacing the turret and design of type 99 in chinese arsenal.Getting hit 7 times by 650 mm penetration power round is one hell of a news dude. It is special . A2 has 1000mm of armour and 1200 mm with era against KE and thats the one operational in China

Bk 27 will defeat ERa and base armour both if not. Then that round needs to be phased out of course even ww2 round will defeat era actually era just reacts to any Round greater than 30mm. All has to do with the impact of round on era that's all any round can destroy era. it is specially mentioned to say that Era and base armour both which is obvious.

BK 27 and 29 are russian rounds assembled in China. I was talking about Bk 29 it is specially design to defeat both. 27 is indeed heat round u are right.

 

[Keshav Murali]

Im talking about A2 That is now replacing the turret and design of type 99 in chinese arsenal.Getting hit 7 times by 650 mm penetration power round is one hell of a news dude. It is special . A2 has 1000mm of armour and 1200 mm with era against KE and thats the one operational in China

Nothing special in the least. 1980's Burlington armour (used in original M1 and Challenger 1) took a combined 18 hits from two different CE rounds penetrating 650 mm and 720 mm respectively. 18 hits, you read that right. And that was in 1980. All modern composite armours are designed to last 20 to 25 hits without damage. Type 99A2 is nothing special in that aspect. One M1A1 survived more than 30 hits on the frontal hull during tests with known Russian ammunition (3BM42)

Armour rating of Type 99 is highly overrated, actual armour rating of Type 99A2 hull is 800±50 mm vs KE and 1200 mm vs CE with ERA. And LOS thickness of armour would be, in this case of the hull is 800 mm. Not more. Actual armour rating of Type 99A2 turret is 700±50 mm vs KE and 1100 vs CE with ERA. LOS thickness is close to only 600 mm. You are overrating it by a wide margin.

As for Bk 27 and 29, HEAT rounds are at only 2/3rd of their effectiveness on composite armour. And maximum penetration achieved by 125 mm Triple Tandem warhead like BK 27 is at maximum 800 mm against steel. Against composite, penetration will be at max 550 mm.

 

[Keshav Murali]

I am pretty sure that Pakistan army declares assests little late. Agree that india has better DU round but u must consider when arjun side armour cant be more than 550 mm considering heavy tank It is still going to give a huge problem for its own. protection.

India doesn't have DU weapons at all. We depend on WHA - heavy tungsten alloys. Arjun side armour on turret is 350 mm ± 50 mm for first block and only 100 mm from the second block. NERA and extra composite armour is going to be added. Side armour on hull is rated at 450 mm ± 50 mm right now, NERA will raise this to 650 mm at maximum vs KE and 950 vs CE, not more.

 

[DARKY]

Type 85 II-AP has protection of 500 ± 50 mm against shaped charge warheads, it may not be assured penetration with T-72 HEAT round.

Best KE round of PA Naiza DU has been estimated at 500 mm certified penetration and 560-570 mm possible penetration, equalling 3BM42 "Mango" against RHA but will perform much worse against composite armours since construction of Naiza is simple DU penetrator with heavy steel sabot.

1. How did you conclude 550mm protection against shaped charge.

2.KE round has little effect of composite structure...... the intresting part would be the angle at which it strikes the armor... which is usually 60 degree hence the actual force on armor is cosine of the original value.

 

[Keshav Murali]

1. How did you conclude 550mm protection against shaped charge.

2.KE round has little effect of composite structure...... the intresting part would be the angle at which it strikes the armor... which is usually 60 degree hence the actual force on armor is cosine of the original value.

1. T-72B values without ERA. T-85-II is very similar in composite technology (the time period) and very similar ERA blocks. But against more modern T-72 upgrades made by Russia (T-72BM) and Ukraine, Type 85 doesn't even stand a chance.

2. Actual force depends on Muzzle energy of the penetrator.

Actually DU ignites and disintegrates rapidly after penetration of composite armours, DU performs better than WHA at longer ranges against composites due to more mass but WHA performs better at close range against composites.

 

[Keshav Murali]

@DARKY, another thing, 3BM42 "Mango" was most expensive round designed in Soviet Union. It had good reason to be so since it had special segmented penetrator with front segment angled to reduce aerodynamic drag and had excellent lightweight sabot design and good WHA alloy penetrator, it performed better than M829 and almost as well as the M829A1 "Silver bullet". And it fit in traditional autoloader and had poor length.

SU fell and Russia abandoned APFSDS development for a few years, this is the reason why they are scrambling to catch up right now with 3BM42M "Lekalo" (also known as 3BM59 "Svinets-1") which takes in the principles of "Mango" and uses composite extra light sabot like M829A3 so that more muzzle energy is transferred to the penetrator and slightly thicker 700 mm long penetrator with enviable performance almost equalling DM-53 and about 50 mm lesser than DM-63 against composites, that is to say 700 mm ± 20 mm penetration performance is possible.

Actually DM-53 performs better than DM-63 on steel but DM-63's superior multi-segment design makes sure that it performs better against Heavy ERA and composites.

And Russia has 3BM60 "Svinets-2" DU round based on "Lekalo" with even longer penetrator and redesigned sabot with newer propellant charge, Svinets-2 should have performance comparable to DM-53.

I have posted images of both these new penetrators in the previous page.

 

[alimobin memon]

1. T-72B values without ERA. T-85-II is very similar in composite technology (the time period) and very similar ERA blocks. But against more modern T-72 upgrades made by Russia (T-72BM) and Ukraine, Type 85 doesn't even stand a chance.

2. Actual force depends on Muzzle energy of the penetrator.

Actually DU ignites and disintegrates rapidly after penetration of composite armours, DU performs better than WHA at longer ranges against composites due to more mass but WHA performs better at close range against composites.

T72 is not the mightiest tank now chill out dude. Type 85 IIAP with 1740 m/s of muzzle velocity it can Defeat the armour of t72 in range of ~2km or less not greater And t72 and Type 85 IIAP wont be engaging more than that of range. Because There is no more than armor with era in t72 than 650mm max in front. so side will be less and that Type 85 can defeat. with Bk 27 and 29 it has even greater penetration with Bk 29 as said before can defeat an armour greater than 700 with "ERA".

The T 80 UD and Al Khalid are made to face t90 and arjun. Never ever think its t72. Time has passed The main gun of all the tanks al zarrar, Type 85 IIAP , t80 UD , and Al Khalid are now better than first inducted.

 

[Keshav Murali]

T72 is not the mightiest tank now chill out dude. Type 85 IIAP with 1740 m/s of muzzle velocity it can Defeat the armour of t72 in range of ~2km or less not greater And t72 and Type 85 IIAP wont be engaging more than that of range. Because There is no more than armor with era in t72 than 650mm max in front. so side will be less and that Type 85 can defeat. with Bk 27 and 29 it has even greater penetration with Bk 29 as said before can defeat an armour greater than 700 with "ERA".

I was never heating up, so why do I need to chill out?

T-72 may not be the mightiest, but newly produced T-72BM if inserted with T-90AM composites and "Relikt" ERA modules are used, it becomes a credible threat. Still, that's costly

For penetration, muzzle velocity alone isn't enough. Round with the most certified penetration i.e. M829A3 has a pitiful muzzle velocity of only 1555 m/s. The round matters more than the velocity, but velocity can still make a slight difference.

Yes, Type 85-IIAP can penetrate sides with APFSDS and BK 27, BK 29 but frontal is tough. As I said, even if protection against KE is deficient, composites reduce HEAT effectiveness to 2/3, old T-72B frontal hull against KE is 520 mm and against CE is an astounding 900 mm. This demonstrates why APFSDS are preferred over HEAT when taking on tank with composite armour.

And BK 27 and 29 both can have a maximum penetration of 800 mm ± 50 mm as per Ukrainian sources. Pity, T-72B armour can defeat them.

No, T-80UD and Al-Khalid were not made to face T-90 and Arjun. They are being modified to face them. T-90S and T-90A armour proved vastly superior to T-80U but T-80UD was supposed to equal them. T-90MS of which IA has bought 354 is undeniably superior in protection. I don't underestimate anything, I will not compare T-80UD or Al-Khalid to a T-72M. The main gun of all the tanks has not improved, au contraire, it is the ammunition which has.

 

[alimobin memon]

I was never heating up, so why do I need to chill out?

T-72 may not be the mightiest, but newly produced T-72BM if inserted with T-90AM composites and "Relikt" ERA modules are used, it becomes a credible threat. Still, that's costly

For penetration, muzzle velocity alone isn't enough. Round with the most certified penetration i.e. M829A3 has a pitiful muzzle velocity of only 1555 m/s. The round matters more than the velocity, but velocity can still make a slight difference.

Yes, Type 85-IIAP can penetrate sides with APFSDS and BK 27, BK 29 but frontal is tough. As I said, even if protection against KE is deficient, composites reduce HEAT effectiveness to 2/3, old T-72B frontal hull against KE is 520 mm and against CE is an astounding 900 mm. This demonstrates why APFSDS are preferred over HEAT when taking on tank with composite armour.

And BK 27 and 29 both can have a maximum penetration of 800 mm ± 50 mm as per Ukrainian sources. Pity, T-72B armour can defeat them.

No, T-80UD and Al-Khalid were not made to face T-90 and Arjun. They are being modified to face them. T-90S and T-90A armour proved vastly superior to T-80U but T-80UD was supposed to equal them. T-90MS of which IA has bought 354 is undeniably superior in protection. I don't underestimate anything, I will not compare T-80UD or Al-Khalid to a T-72M. The main gun of all the tanks has not improved, au contraire, it is the ammunition which has.

Ok so you are telling me the my pakistan army officials are wrong and you are right on the sense that AK and T80 was not inducted to Face t90 ? Let me tell you T90 MS may have the latest armour but the Newly AK armour is Classified being inducted in Ak 1. So u cant say T90 MS has superior until stated. Ak II is yet to come.
Type 85 II AP has not just being upgraded to III standard after The HIT development on era All the pakistani tank are getting that era since 2010.
FYI New armour for ak 1 withstand all known rounds of Nato and Asian origin available to pakistan. So Type 85IIAp may have bad protection but That was IIAP. III standard and HIT's indigenou era has yet to come. I am not saying Type 85 "Improved" is better than T72 but it surely does have firepower to face the T72 which is surely not greater than 700mm with ERA. BK 29 was made to fulfill Requirements for t72 to have power to Defeat Abrams with era. And at the other hand T 72 main gun is equivalent to 85 so nothing to be happy about dude.

Front armor of any tank today is thick Even Abrams will have problem to penetrate todays tank even Leopard. Thats why it has become sole tactic to always prefer to engage a tank at its Weak spots than the Front.

Theoritically All tanks when fire their round hits the enemy tank not less than at the incidence of 40 degree so almost all tanks can only penetrate with atleast the angle I mentioned max could be aroung 480 - 520 mm of penetration unless the tank is static. This fire power is not enough to Penetrate almost any tank frontal armour today Even old tanks Are improved to have atleast 550mm with ERA. So My friend Even Type 85 of pakistan army with Hit improvement and III standard. Should be impenetrable by T72 provide that angle is around atleast 40 or so ...

Since the WW2 it has been kept in mind to Ambush and flank a tank.

 

[Keshav Murali]

Ok so you are telling me the my pakistan army officials are wrong and you are right on the sense that AK and T80 was not inducted to Face t90 ? Let me tell you T90 MS may have the latest armour but the Newly AK armour is Classified being inducted in Ak 1. So u cant say T90 MS has superior until stated. Ak II is yet to come.
Type 85 II AP has not just being upgraded to III standard after The HIT development on era All the pakistani tank are getting that era since 2010.

T-90MS is superior to T-80UD, I don't speculate about Al-Khalid. Also, you inducted both Al-Khalid and T-80UD long before we bought T-90. You were aiming for superiority, not parity.

FYI New armour for ak 1 withstand all known rounds of Nato and Asian origin available to pakistan. So Type 85IIAp may have bad protection but That was IIAP. III standard and HIT's indigenou era has yet to come. I am not saying Type 85 "Improved" is better than T72 but it surely does have firepower to face the T72 which is surely not greater than 700mm with ERA. BK 29 was made to fulfill Requirements for t72 to have power to Defeat Abrams with era. And at the other hand T 72 main gun is equivalent to 85 so nothing to be happy about dude.

AK1 surviving all rounds is no surprise to me since Arjun survived all Russian and Israeli rounds in 2000 and then armour was upgraded. Rounds available to PA are at best Chinese Type-IIM modified slightly longer variant and KEW-A1 which might have been provided (when Abrams trials maybe?) with penetration of MAXIMUM 600 mm. AK-1 has not proved itself, at least, not yet .

BK 29 was made for penetrating Abrams, but it will fail at penetrating the T-72BM itself. So, it is not impressive. CE rounds with at least 152 mm diameter will be required for penetration within 10 years into the future.

Front armor of any tank today is thick Even Abrams will have problem to penetrate todays tank even Leopard. Thats why it has become sole tactic to always prefer to engage a tank at its Weak spots than the Front.

Abrams will have minimal problem penetrating ALL in-service tanks except other members of the big three and Leclerc. Yes Weak spot engagement is more reliable.

Also, I never claimed T-72 will be able to penetrate Type 85-IIAP from the front but both are capable of taking each other out from the sides, regardless of upgrades.

Since the WW2 it has been kept in mind to Ambush and flank a tank.

A more appropriate statement would be, since the beginning of warfare, people kept in mind that flanking is very effective method to eliminate all enemy defences, many forces including Greek flanked enemy fortress after they were dug in, leaving them exposed.

As for tanks, Germans recognized the need when the Matilda II appeared, Allies recognized the need when the Tiger Ausf.E appeared.

 

[alimobin memon]

T-90MS is superior to T-80UD, I don't speculate about Al-Khalid. Also, you inducted both Al-Khalid and T-80UD long before we bought T-90. You were aiming for superiority, not parity.



AK1 surviving all rounds is no surprise to me since Arjun survived all Russian and Israeli rounds in 2000 and then armour was upgraded. Rounds available to PA are at best Chinese Type-IIM modified slightly longer variant and KEW-A1 which might have been provided (when Abrams trials maybe?) with penetration of MAXIMUM 600 mm. AK-1 has not proved itself, at least, not yet .

BK 29 was made for penetrating Abrams, but it will fail at penetrating the T-72BM itself. So, it is not impressive. CE rounds with at least 152 mm diameter will be required for penetration within 10 years into the future.



Abrams will have minimal problem penetrating ALL in-service tanks except other members of the big three and Leclerc. Yes Weak spot engagement is more reliable.

Also, I never claimed T-72 will be able to penetrate Type 85-IIAP from the front but both are capable of taking each other out from the sides, regardless of upgrades.



A more appropriate statement would be, since the beginning of warfare, people kept in mind that flanking is very effective method to eliminate all enemy defenses, many forces including Greek flanked enemy fortress after they were dug in, leaving them exposed.

As for tanks, Germans recognized the need when the Matilda II appeared, Allies recognized the need when the Tiger Ausf.E appeared.

Bk 29 failed int tests was later re visioned. T 90 ms is indeed better than t 80 UD

Your knowledge regarding the Max Penetration is 600 mm for Chinese rounds, That is Quite an good Penetrator However there have been new and almost 50% more powerful Perpetrators. Additionally the ATGM's.

 

[dray]

Keshav Murali, alimobin memon, & DARKY, you guys seem to have deep knowledge about tanks...this is an excellent discussion. I am trying to understand one thing, though this is totally off-topic, but if you can still share some info...

Western tank designs mostly prefer 4 crew members team, commander, gunner, driver, & loader. But Russian designs & all its derivatives prefer 3 crew members team, commander, gunner, driver, & an auto-loader. Can you guys tell me the advantages & disadvantages of both the design concepts? In other words, I want to know the pros & cons of a manual loader vs auto-loader. And since a 4 crew members team makes the tank bigger & heavier to accommodate 1 extra person, does it also offer some significant benefit to justify the bigger size, extra weight, & more cost?

 

[alimobin memon]

Keshav Murali, alimobin memon, & DARKY, you guys seem to have deep knowledge about tanks...this is an excellent discussion. I am trying to understand one thing, though this is totally off-topic, but if you can still share some info...

Western tank designs mostly prefer 4 crew members team, commander, gunner, driver, & loader. But Russian designs & all its derivatives prefer 3 crew members team, commander, gunner, driver, & an auto-loader. Can you guys tell me the advantages & disadvantages of both the design concepts? In other words, I want to know the pros & cons of a manual loader vs auto-loader. And since a 4 crew members team makes the tank bigger & heavier to accommodate 1 extra person, does it also offer some significant benefit to justify the bigger size, extra weight, & more cost?

According to my knowledge having a 4 crew tank can have no more than 58tons of weight. m1 , Leopard and challenger are 4 crew tanks but they weight around the 62 tons. that explains they have Heavy armour. But having a huge armour has nothing to do with Crew.

The most common auto loaders store their ammunition in the turret basket, increasing the possibility of a catastrophic explosion should the armor around the hull or turret be penetrated.
More armor protection, and isolation/separation of the ammunition from the crew compartment has traditionally been available in tanks with a human loader, which can decrease the possibility of cook-off, or protect the crew in case of an ammunition explosion.

Auto loader has increase in rate of fire , and Decreases over all tank weight but if jammed could take a greater time than to replace a crew for loading manually as mentioned above the Manual loader is safer for tank crew survival.

Cost has a relation to the weight of the tank.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoloader#Rate_of_fire