Al-Khalid based on T-72 ?

Gollevainen said:

Well like i said, Al-Khalid is ofcourse better than standart T-72 and perhaps even better than T-72M, it should be, othervise the chinese designers would have been quite incapaple. The question was that wheter it was "based" on T-72, not if it better, ofcourse tank wich have been able to learn from it's orgins mistake should be superior.

Click to expand...

the T-72 M is the crap version Iraq/india got Dont think its better then a a Russian t-72A

adeptitus said:

Moving forward, if we're talking about today, I'd aim for better relations with Washington to get local assembly deal on M1A2's like Egypt. The Abrams MBT is battle proven and maintained 90% operational readiness through the Gulf Wars. Since we're talking about "local assembly" from kits, there are no R&D cost involved.

If Pakistan was able to obtain both the EE-T1 and the M1A2, it'd have a nice mix of light (39-42 ton EE-T1) and heavy (69.5 ton M1A2) MBT's that use the same NATO 120mm ammo, in addition to being part-owner of Engesa of Brazil.

Click to expand...

Pakistan doesn't need the Abrams. How much money would they get out of it? NONE! The Al-Khalid is cheaper and its systems are very capable. Plus it will be available for export and money can be made. I see no need for the EE-T1 either, the Al-Khalid is just as capable.

The pakistan want nor need the Abrams M1A2, cos it to expensive to acquire and maintain. They just dun have the economices abilites.

1) The Pak was already using the Type 85 when the Al-Khalid was contract was sign. They were already using auto-loading 125mm, I can't see any reason why the Pak when want to move to western 120mm. It would just increase of logistic burden.

2) It a possiblely the Pak would of got the Russian 9M119 or it chinese copy with the Al-Khalid, which can out range any Tank weapon in the 1990's, will not untill these newer ext. range run being delovoped by the western world become operational.

It possible that the BK-27 HEAT could get in the hand of the PaK too.

3)

2) The EE-T1 is likely to be equipped with more advanced technology at the time (~1990).
3)Brazil does not have the same arms export restriction as US or EU.

Click to expand...

Well you are talking about 1990, it 2006 it possible for Fire control and armor to be upgraded.

It true that most of the design problems can me fixed with just an upgrade.
But there is alot of cheap off the shelf or commercial technology by now which is better then Chinese, or Pak 80's or early 90's technology.

Anyway according to some soure FAQ and other. It point out there is a possible that the Fire control computer being a France GEC-Marconi Centaur fire, or IMO chinese copy. The France always had some kinda tech trade relation with China.

British Barr and Stroud thermal now "Thales Optronics Ltd" is also a possible, but it this i believe is Doubtable.

The Al-Khalid has Ukrainian 6TD 1200hp which is one of the most most reliable tank engines in the conditions of hot climate, possible better then most gas turbine.

4) Economically and a value for money point of veiw the Al-khalid is better then the M1A2 and possible the EE-T1. For a marginal price they got a small, high firepower, high speed tank, with an easy to upgrade armor design.
IMO u can't get anything of the better for the same price.


5) Yeah i though the Indian had a big rhino T-72 upgrade project and i hear rumor that the upgrade T-72 is on par with the Al-kalid. Al-Khalid are Pak best tank it may be a costly by IMO is wise for the Pak may wanna improve the armour as much as they can early in the program, cos it be a waste of money if they had to go bak and change 200-300 set of tank armour. IMO as I stat many time.. the modular design armour package is one of thes best thing on never gen. of Chinese tank.

the T-96 is developed from the T-85 the first version has the L-7 gun but later on the weapon used on T-98 was added the t-85M also has this

Click to expand...

Yeas...just like i said. Type 96 was a stopcap version when the Type 90 failed to fullfil the requirements of thrid gen. tank of PLA. The new design, type 98 would take some time so the PLA decided to make a 125mm fitted version of Type 80 (by fitting the turret of Type 90 to Type 85, an improved version of type 80) to have lowcost, theoricaly adequate tank.

adeptitus said:

If we were to step back to the time when the Al-Khalid deal was first signed, I'd probably want to approach Brazil to bail out Engesa and co-produce the EE-T1 Osório MBT with 120mm GIAT G1 gun:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

My reasons are:

1) Both the EE-T1 and Al-Khalid/MBT-2000 are light weight MBT's (42-46ton) and would make a fair competitive comparison.

2) The EE-T1 is likely to be equipped with more advanced technology at the time (~1990).

3) Brazil does not have the same arms export restriction as US or EU.

4) After Saudi cancelled their EE-T1 order, Engesa filed for bankruptcy and laid off 3,000 employees. If Pakistan was able to step in during this time and make a "white knight" bail-out offer, I believe Pakistan would've been in a strong position to dictate purchase terms.

5) Brazilian government would be happy at the Pakistan offer to bail out its defense industry, and produce the EE-T1 for the Brazilian Army to use. The Brazilian government may even chip in to share the cost of Engesa bail-out with Pakistan.

==========

Moving forward, if we're talking about today, I'd aim for better relations with Washington to get local assembly deal on M1A2's like Egypt. The Abrams MBT is battle proven and maintained 90% operational readiness through the Gulf Wars. Since we're talking about "local assembly" from kits, there are no R&D cost involved.

If Pakistan was able to obtain both the EE-T1 and the M1A2, it'd have a nice mix of light (39-42 ton EE-T1) and heavy (69.5 ton M1A2) MBT's that use the same NATO 120mm ammo, in addition to being part-owner of Engesa of Brazil.

Click to expand...

The EET osorio was a good "export tank" but it was never a direct threat to NATO top end. For instance the brazilians stood by their 105mm istead of the 120mm simply cut th the ammo count down to 36 RtF rounds. Not to mention the quality of the gun (a french G-1 i think) was a real disgrace. On the other hand the Osorio would suffer probably the same fate the older "under 400" generation tanks did. Be blown up to pieces by lack of decent armour. The EEt was a older concept the same way the Abrams is today but with crappy armour and would recquire a complete redesign!

Egypt does not posses any M1A2 it has older M1A1 with the nifty 105 m68e2 main guns. The ammo on the esorio was indigenious and not up to NATO standarts. It was rather a "short stroke" round for ~2000m combat.

Oh and most important the EET project is dead and rotten.

Keeping in mind in the early 80's the APFSDS rounds fired TYPE 89 tank destoyer 120mm/50 calibre smoothbore gun had muzzle velocity of 1,660m/s and a maximum fire-range of 2,500m. It was design to penetrate the front armour of the T-72 MBT at 2,000m distance of and can penetrated 450mm armour at dat distance. The lastest French 120mm/52 calibre smoothbore gun had muzzle velocity of 1,790m/s using APFSDS.

IMO, the 125mm Gun with chinese APFSDS would be quite effective, but i dun think there is any info about the performance of the chinese gun.

Hope some one can give me more info about it?

Have you guys forgetten why Pakistan is indigionising or trusting countries who do not care who they sell too or is a close friend.

Remember the wars pakistan fought, everytime it was sanctioned. why i ask why did the americans sell the pakistanis the weapons when even a child knows if theres a war they are going to use them. :nono:

sorry i am pissed off about why do the americans sanction pakistan after going to war, if trully want peace everyone should disarm but that BS idealism wont happen.

However even Brazil i believe would stop selling if enough pressure was applied. in conclusion Pakistanis are wise to not trust America due to past experiences and i believe american public would be happy if we were crushed by India. Sorry if the tone of article sounds agressive. But i follow the policy of Bismarcks realpolitiks.

Well in most case there are many countries who dun trust the America, but they aviod causing trouble to them too. It really hard for most of the smaller countries leader, it like a choice of Chinese or America, and ethier way it going to case some kind of trouble, economices wise or in some case military wise.

But for the Pak they have every reason not to trust the America, it nature dat they choose China as their big bother cos of what happen in history.they know if ever the America sanction them again it going to hurt there encomice in some way, but they going China to look up too. Any if the Pak can get close enough, the Chinese probably help them politically, militarily, economically they know they are China only way to gain access to the middle east, and IMO if the chinese leader think the Pak is a trustable ally,allying with them would do more good then bad.

Sorry for being off topic.

Nethappy said:

Well in most case there are many countries who dun trust the America, but they aviod causing trouble to them too. It really hard for most of the smaller countries leader, it like a choice of Chinese or America, and ethier way it going to case some kind of trouble, economices wise or in some case military wise.

But for the Pak they have every reason not to trust the America, it nature dat they choose China as their big bother cos of what happen in history.they know if ever the America sanction them again it going to hurt there encomice in some way, but they going China to look up too. Any if the Pak can get close enough, the Chinese probably help them politically, militarily, economically they know they are China only way to gain access to the middle east, and IMO if the chinese leader think the Pak is a trustable ally,allying with them would do more good then bad.

Sorry for being off topic.

Click to expand...

Acknowledged can we please now discuss the topic.

What type of tank would you have designed if you were in charge of the project

A few comments:

* I think the EE-T1 is a better comparison to the Al-Khalid, because the two are similiar in weight class. It'd be unfair to compare the Al-Khalid to the M1A2 due to large weight gap.

* Since Engesa was facing bankruptcy, I believe Pakistan could've came in with a strong bargaining position for part-ownership and technology transfer. Additional manufacturing facilities could be built in Pakistan, and thus dodge potential arms sanctions.

* Pakistan and PRC's joint projects, such as the Al-Khalid/MBT-2000, K-8, and FC-1, seem to result in products that the PLA & PLAAF doesn't want for themselves.

* Red not dead is correct - Egypt's locally assembled M1A1, not M1A2, my bad. I recall they requested a 120mm gun & ammo upgrade package some years ago, but am not sure if it's been completed.

FreeAsia2000 said:

What type of tank would you have designed if you were in charge of the project

Click to expand...

I think a good question to ask is, does Pakistan need a Heavy MBT, or possibly high-low mix? Pakistan does not own any heavy MBT's in the same weight class as M1A1/M1A2, Merkava 4, or Challenger 2.

The Indo-Pakistan border is probably one of the last remaining locations with potential for large scale MBT battles. It's said that in the 1965 war, close to 1,000 tanks were deployed from both sides. How well would Pakistani's lighter MBT's perform in the future, against the much heavier Arjun Mk1?