Al - Haider VT-4 MBT - The Premier PA Ground Asset [Developments]

Lion said:
Easier said than done, HIT has been trying to do that for a while. They want to make a Chinese engine work with the Ukrainian transmission, but this is very hard to do, if they can’t figure it out (maybe they’ve already given up) they might go to an entirely Chinese power train, however this will require expensive and time-consuming hull modifications, it remains to be seen wether PA just keeps them as is for now and tries to produce as many Haider’s as possible.

PA has 100+ 6TD2E spares so they can last for a while, however ideally they want to use these for the UDs to keep them running for longer too, and use Chinese engines in the AKs, if this plan doesn’t come to fruition, we’ll see the UDs slowly retiring over the next few years.
Click to expand...
So shouldn't PA try to squeeze out a ToT from the Ukrainians considering their less than better circumstances? I'm not sure who we are trying to develop those 155s for but if those can be pledged for some technology transfer then why not.... I don't consider the soviet engines desirable but considering how it would be difficult to make adjustments as stated by you, should they choose this line ?... Another option for future AK modernization... Could we look into diesel electric hybrids with electric motor propulsion? I mean it is being used by a canadian firm for trucks...
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.


Points against use of battery because of it being an explosive material could be mitigated by using as small a battery pack as possible....
Using electric motors for propulsion & the diesel engine only as a generator could solve the gearbox issue.... It would also increase life of the engine and reduce overall wear and tear... It could also provide extremely good forward and reverse speeds with best torque values inconsiderate of RPMs....
 
Is there an APS for the Chinese VT-4? Is that a working thing? Pakistan can easily get that, I suppose.
 
Amir Mahajane said:
Is there an APS for the Chinese VT-4? Is that a working thing? Pakistan can easily get that, I suppose.
Click to expand...
APS is a broad term, the VT4 and Haiders in PA service already have passive APS systems, but I assume what’s being discussed here are hard-kill APS systems. In which case, yes, China does make two hard-kill APS systems for use with the VT4, namely the GL5 and newer GL6. PA has tested these and can buy these, and it might just do so for its Haider/VT4 fleet, however PA also wants APS systems on its older tanks where they’ll provide more benefit as compared to an already well protected VT4, and for those older tanks it doesn’t make sense to procure thousands of costly APS systems from China, hence a try at local production.
 
iron shrapnel said:
So shouldn't PA try to squeeze out a ToT from the Ukrainians considering their less than better circumstances? I'm not sure who we are trying to develop those 155s for but if those can be pledged for some technology transfer then why not.... I don't consider the soviet engines desirable but considering how it would be difficult to make adjustments as stated by you, should they choose this line ?... Another option for future AK modernization... Could we look into diesel electric hybrids with electric motor propulsion? I mean it is being used by a canadian firm for trucks...
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.


Points against use of battery because of it being an explosive material could be mitigated by using as small a battery pack as possible....
Using electric motors for propulsion & the diesel engine only as a generator could solve the gearbox issue.... It would also increase life of the engine and reduce overall wear and tear... It could also provide extremely good forward and reverse speeds with best torque values inconsiderate of RPMs....
Click to expand...

The ToT from Ukraine doesn’t make sense not because Ukraine wouldn’t give it, if anything I believe we could have gotten it from them at any point since we started AK production up until today. The reason we haven’t gotten the ToT is because HIT has no tooling, machinery or expertise to produce Power plants and engines, nobody in Pakistan does, there is not a single ICE engine made anywhere in Pakistan. Not even for a CD70, let alone a tank. This means that producing the engines locally after buying ToT and all the required training and tooling would give us a per-engine cost that’s nearly the same as an entire Al-Khalid tank, it simply doesn’t make financial sense. That’s also the reason Engines and transmissions weren’t included in the ToT for the Haider and they’re still imported from China. While my personal belief is that HIT should have gone through with it anyways and paid the extra cost if only to get engine R&D started in any firm in Pakistan for the first time in history, I understand the need for saving the money.
 
Lion said:
APS is a broad term, the VT4 and Haiders in PA service already have passive APS systems, but I assume what’s being discussed here are hard-kill APS systems. In which case, yes, China does make two hard-kill APS systems for use with the VT4, namely the GL5 and newer GL6. PA has tested these and can buy these, and it might just do so for its Haider/VT4 fleet, however PA also wants APS systems on its older tanks where they’ll provide more benefit as compared to an already well protected VT4, and for those older tanks it doesn’t make sense to procure thousands of costly APS systems from China, hence a try at local production.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the reply.
 
iron shrapnel said:
So shouldn't PA try to squeeze out a ToT from the Ukrainians considering their less than better circumstances? I'm not sure who we are trying to develop those 155s for but if those can be pledged for some technology transfer then why not.... I don't consider the soviet engines desirable but considering how it would be difficult to make adjustments as stated by you, should they choose this line ?... Another option for future AK modernization... Could we look into diesel electric hybrids with electric motor propulsion? I mean it is being used by a canadian firm for trucks...
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.


Points against use of battery because of it being an explosive material could be mitigated by using as small a battery pack as possible....
Using electric motors for propulsion & the diesel engine only as a generator could solve the gearbox issue.... It would also increase life of the engine and reduce overall wear and tear... It could also provide extremely good forward and reverse speeds with best torque values inconsiderate of RPMs....
Click to expand...

The 155s are for a gulf country.

I don’t think diesel-electric hybrid tech is ready for use in tanks on a large scale yet, certainly not on older tanks, maybe purpose built tanks built around that tech, that’s because batteries are very heavy, making a battery powerful enough to drive a tank, even for short periods of time, along with the combination of large enough motors, inverters and energy transfer machinery from the engine to the battery would add several tons to the weight of a tank, and then you’d need several tons on top of that to add armor protection for all these new components, water and dust proofing them to a standard not see in cars would add more weight, and then comes the question of training grunts to maintain these machines that are not at all similar to any machine currently in use anywhere in the army or the world.

It is certainly a possibility if not an inevitability in the future that army vehicles will start going electric, but the infrastructure would have to start being built from smaller vehicles before it gets to tanks, and changing the armies entire logistical system to fit in hybrid and electric tanks might just be a bigger and more costlier undertaking than fitting new engines into these.
 
Panzerkiel said:
What are the cruising ranges of our tanks?
Click to expand...
Solid answer tbh. Using wiki 400-500kms? So is it going to be a one time refueling only?

But then in khem kharan, our M47s(of 4th cav)had a range of ~150kms but faced refueling problems and ran out of fuel before reaching the milestone 32.
And from Kasur till Khem Kharan is 9kms as the crow flies.
 
Last edited:
Raja Porus said:
Solid answer tbh. Using wiki 400-500kms? So is it going to be a one time refueling only?

But then in khem kharan, our M47s(of 4th cav)had a range of ~150kms but faced refueling problems and ran out of fuel before reaching the milestone 32.
And from Kasur till Khem Kharan is 9kms as the crow flies.
Click to expand...
Point was, whether we intend to go 500 kms, or even half that deep inside enemy territory.

Khem Karan is a different case altogether. It was bad planning, logistics included... Tanks traveled on tracks even when they were deep inside Pakistan, therefore ran out of fuel.
 
Panzerkiel said:
Point was, whether we intend to go 500 kms, or even half that deep inside enemy territory.

Khem Karan is a different case altogether. It was bad planning, logistics included... Tanks traveled on tracks even when they were deep inside Pakistan, therefore ran out of fuel.
Click to expand...
We’re assuming traversal (driving range) -
But combat range is different is it not?
As in get to a point - engagement(with it’s maneuvering engine spikes/idling) then move on.

Rather
There is the operational range - then is the combat range(usually taken as 1/2 correct?)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Pakistan Defence Latest

Country Watch Latest

Latest Posts

Share this page

Back
Top