Tank fleet upgrades

[Keysersoze]

There have been a number of different forms of tank upgrades such as the Al-Zarrar that have been much discussed in many a forum. I recently came across a article that showed an upgrade that looks very interesting. It was a German upgrade of a T-55 Tank. Whilst the applique armour used may have been surpassed by newer forms, the basic idea would seem to be better than that seen on the Al- Zarrar. With angled ERA/NERA panels on the turret. front.

 

[JK!]

What I would like to see is the T80UM2 Black Eagle upgrade applied to our Type 59 MBTs or any tank in our inventory.

I know that the upgrade for T80 tanks but the basics of the upgrade applied the Type 59s in service would make this better than Al Zarar. I particulalry like the fact the vehicle emphasises crew safety and has very thick frontal armour for direct engagment.

The first website gives details about the armour and the second is a general overview of the vehicle.

http://armor.kiev.ua/fofanov/Tanks/MBT/640_armor.html

http://armor.kiev.ua/fofanov/Tanks/MBT/b_eagle.html

Note this is more of a personal desire and lacks thought of costs etc...

 

[JK!]

The latest Edition of Janes Tanks guide features entries for a lot of post Soviet countries with various vehicle upgrades.

These include Poland, Croatia, Slovenia and Romania.

The first two countries have upgraded T72 MBTs whilst the last two upgraded T55 MBTs.

I have also seen some very interesting pictures of former Iraqi army T55 MBTs with an interesting enhanced armour package thought to be based on the principle of Chobham armour.

 

[falcone]

Does anyone know what the Al-Khalid II is supposed to be (an upgraded Al-Khalid or a completely new tank)?

 

[JK!]

Does anyone know what the Al-Khalid II is supposed to be (an upgraded Al-Khalid or a completely new tank)?

Wikipedia has mentioned some future plans under the PAK army section with some interesting information regarding AK2.

Conflicting reports suggest either an extensive upgrade of the present AK or another suggests a wholly western design influence with technology transfers from Turkey.

Problem with that is that Wikipedia is easily edited so it sometimes provides conflicting information anyway like the number of AH1 cobras in service. It doesn't help that this information is based on rumours.

Personally I would like to see something like the Chinese Type 99 but with the western crew protection influence like the T80UM2 Black Eagle. All possible efforts should be taken to ensure commonality with the current Al Khalid in sub systems.

 

[falcone]

Thanks mate!

 

[falcone]

Another question: is there an advantage (besides the elimination of the need for an extra crew member) for having an auto-loader as opposed to a semi-automatic loader?

 

[JK!]

The only major western tank i know that uses an autoloader is the French Leclerc.

Other nations like the US or Germany don't because it hinders the hierachy of training tank crew.

A loader in the M1 Abrams is at the bottom of the ladder and through experience works his way up through driver, gunner and finally commander.

Does anyone know what are the tank training facilities of Pakistan?

 

[falcone]

Thanks again!

 

[zraver]

The only major western tank i know that uses an autoloader is the French Leclerc.

Other nations like the US or Germany don't because it hinders the hierachy of training tank crew.

A loader in the M1 Abrams is at the bottom of the ladder and through experience works his way up through driver, gunner and finally commander.

Does anyone know what are the tank training facilities of Pakistan?

Not true, a 4 man crew offers signifigant batltefeild advantages over a three man crew. (not each tanks commander has other duties so cannot be counted on for crew duties)

3 bodies to maintence and logistics duties vs 2

loader can serve as air/missile/infantry guard whiloe moving to contact

loader can trade places with the driver to maintain the advance

3 bodies vs 2 for night watches

Loader is easier to replace in the feild than a broken autoloader

more space in the bustlerack means all the ammo can be protected and acessed at the same time (Lecclerc only has 22 ready rounds)

 

[EagleEyes]

According to Osama in a recent visit to HIT, he has mentioned that all the armoured vehicles of the Pakistan Army will have the NBC protection. IBMs for the Al-Zarrar is under trials.

About the Al-Khalid, he has said that Pakistan can produce 1 tank per week and can double it via double-shifts.

Al-Khalid's gun at 14 degrees above can shoot football sized target at 14 Km! Thats right gentlemen, I made them say this twice!

Al-Khalid can effectively fire on a tank at the range of 2-3.5 km. It is using a Chinese composite armour on all of the frontal side in addition to ERA and steel armour. Al-Khalid is available with different configuration depending on the needs from $2-4 million. Also a lot of equipment of the tank has been acquired from Europe.

There has been no news of Al-Khalid 2 however they do mention that there will be an upgrade which will call it Al-Khalid 1 not 2 and its trials will start from this summer while production version will be out in 2008 or 2009.

For economical reasons Pakistan is not making engines but staff is fully capable of doing so. Thanks to Osama for this info.. owner of www.JF-17.com

With best regards.

 

[zraver]

AK (plus colum)

affordable
hunter-killer technology
good power to weight ratio and good dash speed
sanction proof
armor maximized to the front (makes the msot use of the limited weight for armor)
low tech but effective ULF BMS system

AK (minus)
torsion bar suspencion with limited fire on the move envelope
short rod penetrator limits gun perfromance
exposed ammo
three man crew
very little room for modernization
short barrel life
little to no side hull or rear protection vs light anti-tank weapons
older thermal vision technology

All things being equal, its the equal of the T-90S but it doens't give Pakistan any real edge over India, and it is decidely inferior to the Arjun in a number of important ways that have direct battlefeild applications. It's hunter-killer capability is nice but crew protection and comfort is sub standard like all T-series tanks and Pakistan's sabot round is less than impressive even with DU- its just to short. The big weakness is its fire on the move envelope somewhere around 12-35kph comapred to the Arjuns 0-40Kph+ This means when moving the Arjun is more accurate at the lower and higher ends of the spectrum meaning it enjoys a real accuracy advantage. In combat you want to go as fast as possible, haivng to slow down to fire-draws fire.

Honestly Pakistan's best be tis to ditch the dead end Chinese design and get a western MBT. Even 200 of one of the big 3 would completle yunhinge India's tank superiority. As An American I prefer the Abrams, but Vickers (GD) has a long history of arms sales to Muslim countries and the Challanger II is leathal.

 

[JK!]

Hey Zraver,
do you know if the Arjun have the seperate ammo compartments and blow out panels for increased crew protection?

Plus you mentioned little room for modernisation so what could we do to Al Khalid or look for in the design of AL Khalid 2 in addition to rectifying the shortcomings you have mentioned?

 

[zraver]

Arjun has buslterack storage so I assume it has blow out panels its very simple technology after all, my only question is the fac tthat it uses two peace ammo. I am 75% it has blow out panels.

As for modernizing the AK, I saw pics of what lookied like a pre-production Type 99 being evaluated by Pakistan. With Chinese muntions (if they work as claimed) that would give you equal gun power. But there is not much that can be done about the torsion bar suspencion modern T tank deriviatives have gone about as far as you can go there. One other isea is to get ahold of the Ukraine and see if they can mod a turret lke they did for thier T-72-120 to move all your ammo into a bustle rack and go with a magazine style autloader. This would greatly reduce the chanc eof catasphrophic kills due to BAE. But that type of an upgrade would be very expensive and time consuming.

I understand why Pakistan picked up the AK when it was offered, but its now become an albatross whose battlefeild usefulness is probalby going to be limited. Hopefully peace will prevail, becuase despite some high profile upgrades the pakistani army seems to be taking a back seat to the Navy and Airforce.

 

[Quwa]

zraver, is it possible that PA may procure 200-300+ of the future Turkish MBT? I don't know about now, but last I checked Germany and South Korea were the final contenders for cooperation with the main Turkish firm involved in the tank project. Theoretically this project would allow Pakistan to import Western MBT technology and locally manufacture at least some of it. In terms of price, I hope the Turkish MBT does not cross the unit cost of the Leopard 2. Besides the Turkish MBT and Leopard 2, are there any excess M1A1s around?

As for Al Khalid II: At this point the 'tip top' Al Khalid would use a 1500hp German diesel engine and apparently 120mm Rheinmetall cannon, as well as anti-tank missile capability, Shtora-1 armor defence system, SAGEM MATHIS thermal imaging and IBMS w/data-link. The Al Khalid II might be the MBT-2000 series counterpart to the Chinese T-99, and ultimately form the backbone of the PA tank forces in the long-run. I suspect the AK-2 would use a 1500hp engine, armor defence system, anti-tank missile, IBMS w/data-link and possibly 120mm cannon.