What's new

The Armor Division of Pakistan Army

. . .
JD-3 dazzler

@iLION12345_1 @PanzerKiel
1. Effectiveness of these systems?
2. Does PA incorporate them(no need to answer if part of OPSEC)
An active protection system can be of two types, Hard-kill systems like the Trophy and GL5/GL6 which defeat incoming projectiles with their own projectiles, or soft-kill which intend to protect the tank by other means such as IR Dazzlers (Shtora) and Laser Dazzlers (JD-3). Laser warning receivers along with automation smoke deployers are technically also soft Kill APS systems.
Generally the Hard kill systems are thought to be more effective, more expensive and preferred.

This JD3 system is a very strange one and often the topic of discussion among tank enthusiasts. Many (including me) doubt it’s effectiveness because of its strange (claimed) working principle. A now deleted video from a Chinese news documentary showed that it is intended to basically burn through objects (they used a thick piece of pinewood in the example) and hence said that it could do the same to optics and prevent the enemy ATGM or tank from firing at you. However this would need an extremely powerful laser, one that would need a very large and sudden power source (most likely a capacitor, but to have energy to melt a tank optic said capacitor would need to be absolutely huge). What it could possibly do is blind enemy optics and ATGMs as long as it’s pointed at them (unless wire guided, which again is a little confusing, because when the system was first seen most ATGMs were wire guided, and this system would not have the range to reach out to ATGM launchers anyways, another reason it is somewhat questionable, unless it is blinding ATGMs themselves, which would require it to move extremely fast and accurately, something that’s easy for a projectile but not so much for a small turret).

All this being considered, I doubt the capability of the system and though PA has shown interest in it and trialed several other APS systems, I doubt it will ever be inducted in the PA. If anything it is likely nearing replacement in the PLA itself with their new GL6 Hard kill systems (that are offered for VT4 as well), something the PA is more interested in too. The JD3 is only used in ZTZ99 and 99A, which may suggest something specific in the tank meant to power and use said system.

Currently the only tank in the PA with any version of an APS is the VT4 with its LWRs and automatic smoke deployment. AK was considered with VARTA (Ukrainian version of Shtora), but not inducted, because the system was already obsolete by then.
 
.
An active protection system can be of two types, Hard-kill systems like the Trophy and GL5/GL6 which defeat incoming projectiles with their own projectiles, or soft-kill which intend to protect the tank by other means such as IR Dazzlers (Shtora) and Laser Dazzlers (JD-3). Laser warning receivers along with automation smoke deployers are technically also soft Kill APS systems.
Generally the Hard kill systems are thought to be more effective, more expensive and preferred.

This JD3 system is a very strange one and often the topic of discussion among tank enthusiasts. Many (including me) doubt it’s effectiveness because of its strange (claimed) working principle. A now deleted video from a Chinese news documentary showed that it is intended to basically burn through objects (they used a thick piece of pinewood in the example) and hence said that it could do the same to optics and prevent the enemy ATGM or tank from firing at you. However this would need an extremely powerful laser, one that would need a very large and sudden power source (most likely a capacitor, but to have energy to melt a tank optic said capacitor would need to be absolutely huge). What it could possibly do is blind enemy optics and ATGMs as long as it’s pointed at them (unless wire guided, which again is a little confusing, because when the system was first seen most ATGMs were wire guided, and this system would not have the range to reach out to ATGM launchers anyways, another reason it is somewhat questionable, unless it is blinding ATGMs themselves, which would require it to move extremely fast and accurately, something that’s easy for a projectile but not so much for a small turret).

All this being considered, I doubt the capability of the system and though PA has shown interest in it and trialed several other APS systems, I doubt it will ever be inducted in the PA. If anything it is likely nearing replacement in the PLA itself with their new GL6 Hard kill systems (that are offered for VT4 as well), something the PA is more interested in too. The JD3 is only used in ZTZ99 and 99A, which may suggest something specific in the tank meant to power and use said system.

Currently the only tank in the PA with any version of an APS is the VT4 with its LWRs and automatic smoke deployment. AK was considered with VARTA (Ukrainian version of Shtora), but not inducted, because the system was already obsolete by then.
That is an odd mechanism - I would think any laser that powerful would need a powerpack and internal hardware to achieve that - hardware that takes up space where perhaps ammunition or other systems might go.
@jhungary - any thoughts from you on the bold?
 
.
An active protection system can be of two types, Hard-kill systems like the Trophy and GL5/GL6 which defeat incoming projectiles with their own projectiles, or soft-kill which intend to protect the tank by other means such as IR Dazzlers (Shtora) and Laser Dazzlers (JD-3). Laser warning receivers along with automation smoke deployers are technically also soft Kill APS systems.
Generally the Hard kill systems are thought to be more effective, more expensive and preferred.

This JD3 system is a very strange one and often the topic of discussion among tank enthusiasts. Many (including me) doubt it’s effectiveness because of its strange (claimed) working principle. A now deleted video from a Chinese news documentary showed that it is intended to basically burn through objects (they used a thick piece of pinewood in the example) and hence said that it could do the same to optics and prevent the enemy ATGM or tank from firing at you. However this would need an extremely powerful laser, one that would need a very large and sudden power source (most likely a capacitor, but to have energy to melt a tank optic said capacitor would need to be absolutely huge). What it could possibly do is blind enemy optics and ATGMs as long as it’s pointed at them (unless wire guided, which again is a little confusing, because when the system was first seen most ATGMs were wire guided, and this system would not have the range to reach out to ATGM launchers anyways, another reason it is somewhat questionable, unless it is blinding ATGMs themselves, which would require it to move extremely fast and accurately, something that’s easy for a projectile but not so much for a small turret).

All this being considered, I doubt the capability of the system and though PA has shown interest in it and trialed several other APS systems, I doubt it will ever be inducted in the PA. If anything it is likely nearing replacement in the PLA itself with their new GL6 Hard kill systems (that are offered for VT4 as well), something the PA is more interested in too. The JD3 is only used in ZTZ99 and 99A, which may suggest something specific in the tank meant to power and use said system.

Currently the only tank in the PA with any version of an APS is the VT4 with its LWRs and automatic smoke deployment. AK was considered with VARTA (Ukrainian version of Shtora), but not inducted, because the system was already obsolete by then.
Sir, what happened to HIT's indigenous APS program ?
AK currently has LTS-1 Laser designator that detects different kind of laser designators and disrupts them or fires automatically generates smoke using smoke grenade ?
 
.
That is an odd mechanism - I would think any laser that powerful would need a powerpack and internal hardware to achieve that - hardware that takes up space where perhaps ammunition or other systems might go.
@jhungary - any thoughts from you on the bold?
There are several way to soft kill an ATGM, I wouldn't say it is not effective, but they are not preferred. Most tanker prefer hard kill for very obvious reason.

The thing about soft killing ATGM is, they can be as effective, if not more effective than trying to hard kill a projectile. The laser method you mentioned is to confuse or disrupt the tracker, I don't think they have enough power onboard to destroy the tracker of a missile. But you can definitely confuse it tho.

Most people think of soft killing an ATGM is on specific condition, however, I should say usually it would work with Man Portable platform, not really effective on vehicle borne or crew serve platform. Because most Man Portable system depends on human input to guide the missile. you would have to either guide the missile with wire or with IR or even lasing, all of which means you would have to follow the missile profile from the beginning to the end. Which mean when you put terrain and distant at play (which most people don't) You are talking about even if for half a second you lose sight of your target, the chance of hitting your target will drop significantly. Because we can't all shoot our ATGM at optimum condition, clear sky, no obstacle and open ground, when you put obstacle, distant and a target that are moving with considerable speed, it's a lot easier to lose sight picture than when you trying to kill a tank with ATGM in optimal range, without obstacle and your target is stationary.
 
Last edited:
.
Sir, what happened to HIT's indigenous APS program ?
AK currently has LTS-1 Laser designator that detects different kind of laser designators and disrupts them or fires automatically generates smoke using smoke grenade ?
LTS-1 never actually ended up in use on either the AK or AZ. HITs indigenous program never got far, making a modern hard kill APS is extremely difficult. Pakistan currently does not have this capability, even if it tried to make one it couldn’t. They could however definitely make modern local Laser warning receivers, I don’t know why they haven’t, but I assume it will end up on AK eventually as an upgrade.
 
.
There are several way to soft kill an ATGM, I wouldn't say it is not effective, but they are not preferred. Most tanker prefer hard kill for very obvious reason.

The thing about soft killing ATGM is, they can be as effective, if not more effective than trying to hard kill a projectile. The laser method you mentioned is to confuse or disrupt the tracker, I don't think they have enough power onboard to destroy the tracker of a missile. But you can definitely confuse it tho.

Most people think of soft killing an ATGM is on specific condition, however, I should say usually it would work with Man Portable platform, not really effective on vehicle borne or crew serve platform. Because most Man Portable system depends on human input to guide the missile. you would have to either guide the missile with wire or with IR or even lasing, all of which means you would have to follow the missile profile from the beginning to the end. Which mean when you put terrain and distant at play (which most people don't) You are talking about even if for half a second you lose sight of your target, the chance of hitting your target will drop significantly. Because we can't all shoot our ATGM at optimum condition, clear sky, no obstacle and open ground, when you put obstacle, distant and a target that are moving with considerable speed, it's a lot easier to lose sight picture than when you trying to kill a tank with ATGM in optimal range, without obstacle and your target is stationary.
What about FnF systems like Javelin?
 
.
What about FnF systems like Javelin?
I guess it could be fooled by something like an aircraft flare... I'm curious why nobody tried it before

Or something like an ALQ 144?
 
.
@Signalian As you highlighted many years ago how important armoured reserves are, the actual Ukraine-Russian war is showing more then anyone could think, Russia has activated T-62 series now T-55 and even T-34, while Ukraine has the Leopard-1 in frontline. I still support your concerns and concepts of building Tank reserves, after watching this Ukraine-Russian conflict, I write again that tank reserves should be a essential part of any war plannings. What I have seen and read about the actual ongoing eastern war theatre, Tank to Tank battles have been less than expected in Russian- Ukraine war, so there should not be any shy to charge older generation tank coupled with storm infantry. More then the strategic reserve argument, is the availability of 24 hour close fire support, which the Germans had mastered in world war 2 through their Sturmgeschütze and Hetzer series, related to Pakistani armoured Corps, I would suggest to put every single Tank which is retired in workable storage conditions. The impact of such a reserve force on the battlefield is magnificent, the Israelis had fought and won most of their wars with reserve forces/national guards, the German Wehrmacht had knocked out more modern Tanks with older equipment, then anyone can imagine. Janbaz Forces should be equipped and trained with Tank assault squadrons made of older type of Tanks. Even the regular infantry Battalions should get such attachments of retired tanks. Now criticism and thoughts please.

 
Last edited:
.
@iLION12345_1
Janbaz Force/National Guard on Training with third tier Tanks

F98F6D93-E688-4F8A-8D94-A65254967CC1.jpeg

 
. . .
@iLION12345_1
Janbaz Force/National Guard on Training with third tier Tanks

View attachment 921742
Those are army tanks they are training with. I see Al-Zarrars and Type 59s both.

@Signalian As you highlighted many years ago how important armoured reserves are, the actual Ukraine-Russian war is showing more then anyone could think, Russia has activated T-62 series now T-55 and even T-34, while Ukraine has the Leopard-1 in frontline. I still support your concerns and concepts of building Tank reserves, after watching this Ukraine-Russian conflict, I write again that tank reserves should be a essential part of any war plannings. What I have seen and read about the actual ongoing eastern war theatre, Tank to Tank battles have been less than expected in Russian- Ukraine war, so there should not be any shy to charge older generation tank coupled with storm infantry. More then the strategic reserve argument, is the availability of 24 hour close fire support, which the Germans had mastered in world war 2 through their Sturmgeschütze and Hetzer series, related to Pakistani armoured Corps, I would suggest to put every single Tank which is retired in workable storage conditions. The impact of such a reserve force on the battlefield is magnificent, the Israelis had fought and won most of their wars with reserve forces/national guards, the German Wehrmacht had knocked out more modern Tanks with older equipment, then anyone can imagine. Janbaz Forces should be equipped and trained with Tank assault squadrons made of older type of Tanks. Even the regular infantry Battalions should get such attachments of retired tanks. Now criticism and thoughts please.

That’s why it is imperative to quickly retire older tanks, because these tanks then end up in reserve and long term storage. Which means the best way to build a reserve is also to modernize. Now imagine if PA can buy enough VT4s to replace Al-Zarrars as well? That would create an extremely powerful reserve force. Most of indias armor reserve is currently composed of T72s, which are still superior to Type 59s and 69s.

All the Type 59s and 69s being retired due to induction of VT4 are being rebuilt and then put into cold storage as reserve tanks. Before the induction of VT4 started, Pakistani armored reserve was much smaller.
 
.

Latest posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom