mysterious
New Member
I would very much be interested in hearing some hard facts about Al-Khalid from you Gary in the same was as you just compared a bunch of other tanks. :smokingc:
T-98 vs Arjun
- Thread starter dabrownguy
- Start date
- Status
mysterious said:
I'd like to see what has been changed inside the tank. It is a T-62 derivative, and that means that there are some clear limitations.
eg: weapons pit
storage pit
interior volume - is it a new gun?, and if so what is the extra space intrusion
how much room has been taken up with the new drivetrain (not just engine)
I'm not a fan of ERA as it is a one time solution - after that the tank is vulnerable and all recent history shows that MANPAT teams try multiple kill attempts. The fact that the Chally2 survived is testament to its armour - now even the US considers Dorchester to be superior in some respects to DU.
what armour has changed? I doubt whether it has as if it was DU derivative then the tank would be some 20% heavier, the engine and transmission would change, and it would "sit" very differently.
Thats why we know that the Chinese tanks don't have DU armour - even though they claim that they do - the tank fails a number of assessments indicating its fitment (and these can't be avoided)
The Al Khalid looks as though it is a rebuilt light MBT circa 45 tonnes - and as such it would have a great degree of difficulty against a 60tonne heavy MBT.
If anyine can provide some details on it beyond the normal marketing "feel good" documents, then I'm happy to give a more detailed opinion.
mysterious
New Member
Well I can atleast tell you that other than the 'feel good' marketing documents the gun is 125mm which wasn't the case before in a standard T-62 (if its true that Al-Khalid is a derivative of that). They do claim that Al-Khalid has DU armour I think. Well ofcourse you cannot compare Al-Khalid to a 60-tonner 'cuz its been designed to suit the needs of the subcontinent. Hence, I would be glad if you compared it to tanks within its own catagory (ones that it is likely to face-off with) rather than comparing it to a Chally2 or an Abrams. And if you could shed some light on Al-Zarrar as well, that would be great. Hope to read your reply when you get up in the morning or afternoon (taking in to account that you've gone to bed at 4am). :smokingc:
gf0012-aust said:
Uhm, correct me if I'm wrong but ... isn't it the case that Denel is providing the T6 artillery turret which is to be mounted on Arjun chassis to form the Bhim 155/52 SPGH? If you had said that a South African fire control system would be integrated into Arjun, it would not have caused me a frown. However, I have heard nothing to the extent that Denel is providing the turret of the Arjun MBT. So, my question is: "are different systems being confused here?"
mysterious said:
If fact, you might argue that comparing tanks is only marginally useful as the most deadly MBT adversaries are: long range ground and attack-helicopter and (soon) UCAV launched ATGWs, laser-guided artillery and mortar rounds, gunfire and precision bombing by Su25/A10 and other aircraft. Against these threats, I think I'ld rather be in a Merkava IV / Challenger II / M1A2 Abrams / Leopard 2A6 etc class MBT than in a T72/90, T80/84, Al Khalid/Type 98 class MBT.
dabrownguy
New Member
First hit first kill in Asia these days. The Arjun is probabily the only well armoured tank in SA right now. :alian
doggychow14
New Member
the arjun still, however is not ready and it is not 100 percent indigenous. it has parts from different countries put into 1 tank.
doggychow14 said:
As if the Al Khalid is ...
MODS PLEASE CLOSE!!!!
EVERYBODY IS REPEATING WHAT WAS ALREADY SAID A MILLION TIMES.
EVERYBODY IS REPEATING WHAT WAS ALREADY SAID A MILLION TIMES.
EVERYBODY IS REPEATING WHAT WAS ALREADY SAID A MILLION TIMES.
EVERYBODY IS REPEATING WHAT WAS ALREADY SAID A MILLION TIMES.
- Status