Which is the World's Best Tank??

[adsH]

at the end of the day in tanks platform does not make a difference the US stroop said this too if they had been in the Iraqi T72 and the iraqis in the Abrahm the US would still of beten the Iraqi's its all down to trainning. and i hate this Attitude where the Indian and Pakistani Media's protary what ever they have and make as the best it is obvious that they have good weapons but to Consistantly say that there equipment is better than others. Others who have hundred years of desert war and other land war experience is ridiculous. :smokingc:

 

[Roger Smith]

It is so weird and funny to notice that 31% or 22 members claimed that "Al-Khalid" is the best MBT in the world better even in technology then American, German, Russian, Chinese MBT., where as HIT producing Al-Khalid has no infrastructure on R&D or technology for advancement of any MBT., as HIT is based on an assembly production only.

Al-Khalid is a chassy of T-59 incorporated with 1200 HP engine from Ukraine.

Can anyone enlighten me on what bases is "Al-Khalid" MBT the world best MBT? :help :?

 

[adsH]

It is so weird and funny to notice that 31% or 22 members claimed that "Al-Khalid" is the best MBT in the world better even in technology then American, German, Russian, Chinese MBT., where as HIT producing Al-Khalid has no infrastructure on R&D or technology for advancement of any MBT., as HIT is based on an assembly production only.

Al-Khalid is a chassy of T-59 incorporated with 1200 HP engine from Ukraine.

Can anyone enlighten me on what bases is "Al-Khalid" MBT the world best MBT? :help :?

Dude when you said that there is no R&D there there at HIT it may be true atleast at the moment.(HIT is PRODUCTION FACILITY THERE R&D COMES FROM OTHER PLCAES) but when you say "Al-Khalid is a chassy of T-59 incorporated with 1200 HP engine from Ukraine." this is just wrong Al-Khalid is a Ukrainian version of the Russian T-90 what india is Buying. Ukraine built it with Pakistan becasue Pakistan paid for R&D and china supported pakistan. China does not care for those tanks becasue they are too expensive they have T80 production. Ukraine gained new designs for there next generation Tanks and pakistan gained experience by this colaboration no one is in it for a Joke!! this is serious war fare they wouldn't induct somthing cheap and cheesy into there army!!. and T-59 is Smaller how can you say it is the same '"Chassy" as Al-Khalids Granted its not the best Tank IN the world like the INdians Claim theres is(Argun)!!!. ArGUN the Ultimate Beast, it has an Engine the Size of an elaphant (not a bad thing i am sure it came Form Russia so its not bad) there war fare system i am sure was the product of Russia's scientist back breaking labour but that's not the point here Argun is a Great vehicle i am sure it can Kick Al-khalids Butt!! if it ever got into serial production. apperently the Indian army is more keen on building T90s which are cheaper to run maintain and Build. T-90 is thet product of many years of war fare expereince argun and Al-Khalids are new in design they will need years of improvement.!

Ukrainans are the equals of Russia in tanks the Russians chose Gas turbine as there engine where as Ukrainians chose Deisel engines as there main source of engines. the ukrainians are strapped of cash so they would not spend there money and there extensive R&D sum on some Bull's on redesigning there T-59 to look like Al-khalids. T-59 were redesigned by the HIT R&D in pakistan to make them Al-zarars those are similar to Al-khalids just smaller in size and older in design.
It does not matter what we say here on this forum. at the end of the day what matters is when those tanks are on the battle feild which ones could fight effectively. this is what i don't like about people who say we have this you have that. that type of attitude is just bulls on a battle feild at the end of the day the soldier that is laced with weapons but doesn't know how to operate his rifle or fight will get chewed up by a civilian who know how to fight and defend!!!
All the people here seam to focus too much on Equipment here they should realize the main budget of the Military is not used to purchase equipment rather it is used to maintain and train and pay there soldiers to make them able to fight and operate there vehicles Equipment etc if you can't use that Awsome ARgun Alkhalids Or Al-Zarars or even the Abhrams or any tank in the world that you operate all you are is a sitting Duck for the opnent , marked out as a target.

 

[Aussie Digger]

Well everyone else is in this pointless mine's better than yours debate, so I'll join in too. The Australian armies new M1A1 tanks, will be the best tank in the world. There you go, completely unqualified, just like most other arguments in this post...

 

[adsH]

Well everyone else is in this pointless mine's better than yours debate, so I'll join in too. The Australian armies new M1A1 tanks, will be the best tank in the world. There you go, completely unqualified, just like most other arguments in this post...

Lol !! AD i did say Trainning is important you can put your qualified team in a T-72 and your oponent in a modern tank the team with a high level training and the smartest ones would always winn!! wouldn't you agree. Granted plaatforms make differences but it is always the Tank crew that makes decisions right one or wrong ones. :smokingc:
Are those M1A1 updated !!

 

[Aussie Digger]

The tank itself is being "zero-timed" ie: remanufactured to a brand new state. In addition it's fire control systems and command control and communication systems are being brought to a higher than M1A2 SLEP standard. The armour and main armament are remaining the same though, I understand we will be acquiring the latest German made 120mm APFSDS ammunition, with a hardened Tungsten penetrator. We will also be acquiring a type of ammunition (such as a "canister round") that is specifically designed to support infantry operations as opposed to mainly anti-tank operations as well, as this role is envisaged to be more suitable for Australian Operations. I agree about training. Some of the Aussie tank operators are among the best there are. With a world class tank to back them up, Australia will enjoy a tremendous (though small) tank capability, for the first time in a while... My last post wasn't aimed at anyone in particular ,just those who continually state their countries equipment, training, doctrine etc is better without any supporting statements whatsoever. These types of arguments generally degenerate into country and nationality bashing that is utterly pointless in my view...

 

[corsair7772]

The Al-Khalid in not a chassy of the T-59. Thts the Al-zarar. The Al-khalid is basically incorporates features from T-50s, T-60s and T-80s. Thus instead of building a tank from scratch, Pakistan has made a fine MBT without requiring much of an R&D department which exists in HIt only for upgrading matters. And AD is right, every1 is boasting on their own tanks and debates. Being a pakistani i wudnt say the Alkhalid is the best but rather that its a fine tank and deserves to be in the top 5.

 

[Revival_786]

Yeah, many tanks are very similiar in overall capabilities. You can't really say a individual tank is "the best" but which tanks are highly effective in battle.

 

[gf0012-aust]

/excerpt on

"There are many other factors that have to be considered beyond the (main) gun however (etc), like armor, power plant, fire control, command and control system, servicability, strategic mobility, tactical mobility, availability.

... finally, you have to consider whether it is a proven platform or not. The obvious way to do this is to rank all tanks considering all potential factors.

Then take your ranked list and rank it again based on whether the platform is operationally (i.e. combat) proven or not. When you are done with that you will have a fairly accurate representation. Now, apply those ranking factors to your national military doctrine and strategy and military capabilities and re-rank them all again based on those factors.

Now you will know which tank is best for your country."

/excerpt off

outside of the above processes, all you have is an exercise in chest beating and national allegiance...

 

[tatra]

Interesting how all major MBTs these days share German MTU engine (this includes versions of Chally 2, M1A2, Merkava 4, K1, Ariete. some verions of Leclerc and of course Leopard 2 ) and 120mm smoothbore (M1A2, Merkava 2-4, K1A2, Ariete, Leclerc and of course Leopard 2).

Of course, there are quite a few MBTs no that share a Ukranian engine and 125mm gun too

Suggests to me there are 2 basic design philosophies or archtypes, with the rest of differences being minor.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Interesting how all major MBTs these days share German MTU engine (this includes versions of Chally 2, M1A2, Merkava 4, K1, Ariete. some verions of Leclerc and of course Leopard 2 ) and 120mm smoothbore (M1A2, Merkava 2-4, K1A2, Ariete, Leclerc and of course Leopard 2).

Of course, there are quite a few MBTs no that share a Ukranian engine and 125mm gun too

Suggests to me there are 2 basic design philosophies or archtypes, with the rest of differences being minor.

The fact is that when you have platforms that are so close in technical issues and development, the crunch gets down to training, especially dissimilar training.

The indigenous variations on tanks assumes that they're built for perceived localities of conflict. The killer is not whether the tank is a singularly capable autonomous unit, it's how it's integrated into a combined arms process.

Outside of that it's just a chest beating exercise and is as relevant as whether a rolls royce is better than a bentley (assuming that quality is an issue).

 

[tatra]

I still would prefer a Maybach

So would I, I only used the Roller and Bentley analogy as they still superficially look similar.

I prefer Mercs, the Bentley is just a big Volkswagen now, and the Roller is just a funny looking BMW

(I will now wait for Winter to "snot" me)

 

[adsH]

I still would prefer a Maybach

So would I, I only used the Roller and Bentley analogy as they still superficially look similar.

I prefer Mercs, the Bentley is just a big Volkswagen now, and the Roller is just a funny looking BMW

(I will now wait for Winter to "snot" me)

LOL whats wrong with Rolls they still do make the best luxury cars in the world last time i checked there car was the Phantom i rember looking at its designing facility in coventry there workers are the only workers in the automotive world that wear expensive three piece suites to work lol !! i am sure the work force in toyota japan would go on stirke when they see these peopel at work!!!! lol
infact when BMW took over the nonprofitting Rolls the CEO(of BMW) had always been so impressed with the quality (rolls) had achieved that he didn't change any thing the work continued as-usual with some new facilities deing provided.

 

[Winter]

I still would prefer a Maybach

So would I, I only used the Roller and Bentley analogy as they still superficially look similar.

I prefer Mercs, the Bentley is just a big Volkswagen now, and the Roller is just a funny looking BMW

(I will now wait for Winter to "snot" me)

Ukranian mechanical reference to global defence technology on one hand, something quite horrendous as a delightful verb on the other. Having reread your post more than a dozen times I can assure you I have no idea what you're going on about...

All those DaimlerChrysler-owned automobile giant industries getting out of hand...? Re-releasing a luxury brand is one thing, bringing people down with impossibly-ridiculous phrases is something else

Funnily enough, for the price of a Rolls you could probably acquire a small army of Soviet-bloc tanks. Oh! the irony...

 

[adsH]

I still would prefer a Maybach

So would I, I only used the Roller and Bentley analogy as they still superficially look similar.

I prefer Mercs, the Bentley is just a big Volkswagen now, and the Roller is just a funny looking BMW

(I will now wait for Winter to "snot" me)

Ukranian mechanical reference to global defence technology on one hand, something quite horrendous as a delightful verb on the other. Having reread your post more than a dozen times I can assure you I have no idea what you're going on about...All those DaimlerChrysler-owned automobile giant industries getting out of control or something else...?

Funnily enough, for the price of a Rolls you could probably acquire a small army of Soviet-bloc tanks. Oh! the irony...

hey thats great so now we know that the Russians Tanks would come back into demand and Armored Vehicle manufactures would have a serious competitor DEAD SERIOUS!! lol you'll probably see Pd. Musharaf in his new Alkhalid rather than the Maybach or mercs he got as gifts off the saudis lol!!! interesting if you could add new leather comfy seats with Aircon and wood interioirs and extra suspensions and paint the MBT's Metalic Black lol!!!

 

[gf0012-aust]

To be frank, I think I've lost the intent on the direction of my post as well, it was cloaked around the issue of an analogy originally, but appears to have derailed somewhat..

Still, at least we managed to keep the religious, neo conservative, theological conflict out of the thread for a while.. :roll

 

[srirangan]

woah guys...

let's be rational and not so patriotic, there is no way the Al Khalid is the best tank in the world.. And the Arjun is good but has failed in the desert environment..

So the poll shd be a contest betw the Abrams and the T-90; the rest aren't in this league as yet ..

 

[adsH]

i think alkhalid is a good design its in the same league as the T-90 its basic configuration is of the T-80 U but enhanced further with better Electronics and Computers so i would say its better in performance then the Russian T-90, T-90 has desert operation problems over heating while the Ukrainians are known for there brilliant engine designs, Alkhalid is basically Ukrainian T-90. it passed all its parameter test including High and low Temp Operation and desert mobility test, its armor is probably less capable then of the argun becasue they have compensated it for mobility under desert conditions. the ABrams is of a completly differnt league, it is designed as a much more well armoured and a hihg powerd vehicle. it has probably got better onboard systems but its not feasible for the ASian nations army basically because they would cost too much to operate. and all the Abram were designed for a fully integrated warfare with air support when required so i doubt it fit the asian states requirements.

 

[srirangan]

None of the Russian or Western tanks do well in desert conditions. One of the main reasons the Arjun MBT failed was that it was based so much on western design that it failed to handle the dust and heat of the Thar.

 

[Aussie Digger]

Really? Both the Abrams and Challenger 1 and 2 did quite well in GW 1&2, much better than any opposing Soviet Bloc designed tank at any rate, (including upgraded T-72 variants operated by Iraq).