Which is the World's Best Tank??

[gf0012-aust]

woot i guess so far the Al-Khalid ROXORS!! just like i thought :D

and from wat ive heard thier one of THE most deadliest tanks in the world, because they have this type of radar that can detect enemy tanks..which only France and Pakistani tanks can do.

French tanks are good? Thats news to me, they're so successful that they are closing down the factory as they can't get any additional buyers. The French tanks had significant problems in Iraq with their gun stabilisation systems and had to slow down to 20kph to fire on the move, as opposed to Challengers that were acquiring, firing and targetting at speed.

As for a FCS that can spot other tanks - targetting and acquisition systems have been around for a long while. If the French have managed to convince you that they made something special, then maybe I could interest you in buying sand. (another words, its bollocks)

The record for a long distance kill is with both an M1a2 and a Challenger.
the only record that the french have managed to break with their tanks are:

1) self promotion
2) cost per unit
3) self promotion (again)

They (the french) may make the best hypersonic missiles in the world, but they are far from having anything special in the MBT arena. Its in the top 5, but its nowhere near the top 3.

btw, I've dealt with French weapons/ballistics manufacturers - so my exp is based on 12 months of frustration at their absolute arrogance that everything they did was the best in the world - with no empirical proof to substantiate their claims. (the Rafale being another classic example of french arrogance about technological superiority) - Buy a Mirage 2000 - its cheaper and can do just as much to within 5% at a fraction of the Rafales cost

[Majin-Vegeta]

hehe kool..i guess i was wrong :P o well

[gf0012-aust]

no worries, didn't , mean to sound so harsh, I've just had some bad experiences and issues of broken trust with some French companies... ;)

[Aussie Digger]

I know what you mean, gf, it's a little bit off topic but not ALL French equipment is the best surprisingly... The Australian Army openly admitted that it went for the Tiger ahead of AH-64D, because the AH-64D was too capable for our requirements, ie: too expensive for us... The Tiger won because it best met the essential value for money criteria, not because it was the best. I think the Leopard 2 will be selected for Australia for the same reason, particularly with the flood of second hand Leopards on the market. My bet is for the Aussie Army going for second hand Leopard 2 A4's that will be refurbished to A6 standard. I hope they buy enough to equip an ENTIRE regiment for a change. I've heard reports that they will only be able to get 60 or so, enough for a combined arms battle group but that's about it. Not enough for a mechanised brigade, which is what the army is supposed to have...

[elkaboingo]

not all french equipment is the "best" the guys who designed leclerc need a good kicking. but the only thing good about the tank is its electronics besides that its pretty bad.

@ gf
for the 'best' tank thing i was kinda responding to all those who say, "oh my country's tank is the best in all conditions."

i was also talking about those who say "oh its not the tank, its the crew. those t-72's really posed a threat to us." its really hard to say its the crew when your tank is invincible to the enemy.

[gf0012-aust]

not all french equipment is the "best" the guys who designed leclerc need a good kicking. but the only thing good about the tank is its electronics besides that its pretty bad.

@ gf
for the 'best' tank thing i was kinda responding to all those who say, "oh my country's tank is the best in all conditions."

i was also talking about those who say "oh its not the tank, its the crew. those t-72's really posed a threat to us." its really hard to say its the crew when your tank is invincible to the enemy.

;) - understood. I guess I was giving some latitude in the fact that tanks of similar capability will see an end result that (outside of the fog of war issues) will be determined by crew training, capability and the soundness of the combined arms doctrine (if a theatre action) and armoured doctrine (if fighting outside of a combined arms event.

eg an M1A1, Challenger, Leclerc, Leo2A6, Japanese Type 90, Russian T-90 could come down to crew training - especially if the M1a2, Chally 2 and Leclerc had not destroyed an enemy before the opfor could get within an effective and sustainable killing range.

Its hard to have some technical discussions without treading on national pride - which is not my intent ;)

[yutong chen]

About how many tanks are in a regular tank division?

[gf0012-aust]

a russian armored division of about 9500 men has 325 tanks

a U.S. armored division of approximately 16,500 men has 324

[Aussie Digger]

It is much like I posted the other day. The Australian Army is actively "shopping" for upgraded Swiss Leopard 2A4's. Hopefully at least 100 would be purchased to enable 1 Armoured Regiment to be completely equipped and brought back to 3 Sabre Squadrons. The supportability issue could be resolved easily by the government actually buying sufficient spares to support the tanks for years if needs be. Major conflicts seem to be getting shorter in duration and higher in intensity as the years go by, so hopefully the logistics "problems" shouldn't be too bad.

[gf0012-aust]

It will be interestimng to see what we do with our Leo 1's when we get our new tanks. I'd rather keep some as infantry support. But I'd bet that we give them to the Philippines. We could always give them to NZ as staff cars... ;)

[Aussie Digger]

I wouldn't be surprised to see them given as a gift to help support the "war on terror" or some such. Either that or they'll be put into war storage. I don't think you'll see them retained in any sort of service. It would be difficult to justify politically why you bought a new tank when you still used the old one in our current political climate. Apparently you can't even contemplate purchasing a defensive surface to air missile system in this country without creating "controversy" and creating allegations that you're "sparking an arms race"...

[dabrownguy]

Ok i am the refree for this open debate about the worlds best tanks. And i'll change the ranking when some one gives a good proof of one tanks superoirty. ok? (no old tanks, newest varietions of families)
Ranking,
1.Leapord 2 (with out a doubt)
2.M1A2 (proven)
3.Challenger (heavy and expensive, can't go wrong with money)
4.Lecrec (looks pretty good)
5.Markeva 4 (newest tank)
6.T-90 (Japanese)
7.Arjun (rifled gun and lahat)
8.That tank the South Koreans have...for got the name.
9.Type 98 (avtive laser defence)
10. T-90 (newest russian tank)
11. T-80 (proven)
12. Zabra (good tank)
13.Al-Khalid (can't think of unquicity)
14.....
15....

[The Watcher]

7.Arjun (rifled gun and lahat)


13.Al-Khalid (can't think of unquicity)


:lol another misinformed or should I say bias opinion... I don't know why you even put arjun at #7, it should have been #1. Anyway, some stats on Al-Khalid.

GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS
[/b]


Combat Weight - 46 - 48 Ton

Crew 3

Cruising Range 400 Km

Gross Horse Power to Combat Weight Ratio 25 HP / Ton

MMP 250 KN / m2

POWERPACK



Power  1200 HP

Cooling Water Cooled

Fuel Diesel (Multiple Fuel)

Transmission Fully / Semi Automatic

Turning Pivot / Skid

Final Drive Planetary Type </p>
<p>RUNNING GEAR



Tracks Rubber pads (replaceable)

Suspension Type Shock Absorber & Torsion bars

Bump Stop Hydraulic </p>
<p>PERFORMANCE



Max. Speed 70 Km / hr

Acceleration 0 - 32 Km / hr in 7-9 Seconds

Trench Crossing 2.7 m

Obstacle Crossing 0.85 m

Gradient / Side Slope 60 % / 40 %
ARMAMENT



Main Gun 125 mm Smooth Bore, Chrome Plated, Autofrettaged

Projectiles APDS - FS, HE - FS & HEAT - FS

Ammunition Type Separately Loaded (split type)

Co - axial MG 7.62 mm

AA MG 12.7 mm, Remote Firin</p>
AMMUNITION



Main Gun 39

AA MG 500

Co - axial MG 2000

Grenades 16 (12 Smoke, 4 HE) </p>
AUTOLOADER



Type Circular Carousel (Cassette Type)

No. of Rounds 22

Rate of Firing 6 - 8 Rds / min
FCS / GCS



Type Image Stabilized (3rd generation director type stabilization),
Hunter - Killer System

Optics Laser Protected


More here
http://www.depo.org.pk/products/hit/alkhalid.htm

And if Al-Khalid was so inferior that it had to be below some tanks you can't even name then why would countries like Turkey and Saudia show high interest in the tank and its development. :roll

[gf0012-aust]

My Top XX list: (and this is for use by Australia as there is no point in having a generic top "10", lists have to be relevant to the host nation, its warfighting doctrine and its likely theatre of operations)

1.a Leopard 2 A6
1.b Stridsvagn 122 (Swiss Leopard II A5)
2. M1A2 SEPD
3. Leopard 2 A5
4.a MIA2 Turbine
4.b MIA2 Diesel Europack
5. Leopard 2 A4
6. M1A1
7. Challenger 2 (Dorchester)
8. Challenger 2 (Chobham ser 2)
9. Challenger 1
10 Japanese T90. Italian Ariete
11 Leclerc

[Indus]

Top 10 tanks and their makers.

1. Leopard 2 (Germany)
2. M1A2 Abrams (USA)
3. Merkava MK-IV (Israel)
4. LeClerc (France)
5. Challenger 2 (U.K.)
6. T-90 (Russia)
7. Al-khalid (Ukraine-China-Pakistan)
8. Type 98 (China)
9. Arjun MK1 (India)

[mysterious]

interesting line up there...but i would put Al-Khalid just a lil higher owing to its specifications :smokingc: and what is this thing I'm reading on n on about Arjun tank and ppl putting it in their best tank of the world list... LOL I've read a lot about it and my straight forward opinion is that its a huge failure, an expensive one! So I really dont know how it got to the top 10 list ;)

[saraab]

13.Al-Khalid (can't think of unquicity)

:lolol
btw there is another unquicity for Arjun, its competing to be the heaviest tank in the world :lol

man how biased can this workd get !!!!

[mysterious]

yeah! Lets see when it comes to the marshy areas of sindh and lower punjab in warfar as to which tank survives and battles best. A 48 ton Al-Khalid or a 55.8 ton Arjun :smokingc:

[SHAKTI]

yeah! Lets see when it comes to the marshy areas of sindh and lower punjab in warfar as to which tank survives and battles best. A 48 ton Al-Khalid or a 55.8 ton Arjun :smokingc:

actually, al-khalid is rather slow for its really light weight.. Arjun is actually much more mobile even despite its behemoth weight.. which brings me to the fact that al-khalid is lacking in armor..

Arjun: on-road spd: 72km/hr
off-road spd: 40km/hr
24 hp/ton
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/LAND-FORCES/Army/Arjun.html

al-Khalid: on road spd: 70 km/hr
off road spd: 37 km/hr
25 hp/ton
http://www.depo.org.pk/products/hit/alkhalid.htm and globalsecurity.org

[mysterious]

I really dont think speed matters a lot when u're engaged in combat in the marshy n soggy land mass of sindh and punjab! If u're telling me India made a tank that would do good in Iraq, then that would hardly impress me as i dont think india wants to make its equipment with countries thousands of miles away from it in mind, rather than its neighbours and the land situation there :D

[gf0012-aust]

All tanks are designed to some extent with specific theatres of operation in mind - especially if they are indigenous.

From that perspective it makes it very difficult to start comparisons

eg The Arjun has heavy german and english influence in the design
the Al-Khalid has a strong russian and chinese influece.

if you look at the designs it becomes apparent that both countries armour doctrine is different.

to get an appreciation of the dissimilarities then its useful to look at the armour doctrine of the Warsaw Pact and NATO - there are some useful clues in there.

Dumbing it down to "my tank is faster, better, has a longer gun" etc oversimplifies the issues.

Tacticians and strategists emphasise logistics - not weapons

[dabrownguy]

I really dont think speed matters a lot when u're engaged in combat in the marshy n soggy land mass of sindh and punjab! If u're telling me India made a tank that would do good in Iraq, then that would hardly impress me as i dont think india wants to make its equipment with countries thousands of miles away from it in mind, rather than its neighbours and the land situation there
India funded the Arjun project back in the 70's when they realized the limited war sceinro in the Rajistan desert. The tank was called MBT-80 and was supposed to be inducted in the 80's but unfortunatly IA changed the tanks requirments and much of the tank had to be changed to meet the new high requirments. What they changed in the tank was the 120 mm smoothbore to 120 rifled gun and the wieght as well as the engine. Now the tank did fail its trails with a 1400 hp engine in the Rajistan desert. There were a lot of hicups with the Arjun but eventually every problem was fixed with a lot of foriegn help. The tank now uses 1400 hp German engine. Isreal has contributed a lot to the project. Arjun can fight on desert terrian easily. Punjabi isn't marshy! I lived there and its pretty hot and dry but the farms are pretty marshy, any tank can move around in Punjab with ease expecially Arjun. Now when tanks usaully fight they'll be moving and firing but that hardly happens because India has changed its armor doctrine from tank on tank battles which Pakistan still uses to a new doctrine with ATGM, helecopters and tanks. Only tanks can stop tank attacks so they're still needed because they become a unbreakable wall. Arjun won't require to move very much because it will shoot the enemy tank first. FSAPDS has a range of 4.6 km the LAHAT ATGM has a range of 6 km, so Arjun is more like a sniper.

[Red aRRow]

India has changed its armor doctrine from tank on tank battles which Pakistan still uses.

Any proof of that or are you just making that up by yourself??

BTW the Arjun uses a 1500 hp German engine...not a 1400 hp. It's basically the same engined by with an additional supercharger.

[dabrownguy]

Quote:

India has changed its armor doctrine from tank on tank battles which Pakistan still uses.


Any proof of that or are you just making that up by yourself??

BTW the Arjun uses a 1500 hp German engine...not a 1400 hp. It's basically the same engined by with an additional supercharger.
Read it on a forum. I have no proof but it seems to be true. India is interested in Milan 2, Spike and Nag ATGM's while Pakistan only inducted AK. Besides its obvious that tank on tank battles are rare.

[saraab]

i dont get it dabrownguy

first u say

Now the tank did fail its trails with a 1400 hp engine in the Rajistan desert.


and then

Arjun can fight on desert terrian easily.


u say punjab isnt marshi but the farms there are pretty marshi. well, since u've lived there u may know that there is farming all over punjab
so i dont find much place in punjab which in not marshi :roll

tell me that u didnt mean what i understood

[Red aRRow]

while Pakistan only inducted AK.

And the Al-Zarrar and the T-80 UD and Baktar Shikan ATGMs etc. etc.
I don't get your point.

[dabrownguy]

u say punjab isnt marshi but the farms there are pretty marshi. well, since u've lived there u may know that there is farming all over punjab
so i dont find much place in punjab which in not marshi

tell me that u didnt mean what i understood
Any tank can fight on farms. Its not that marshy their are roads.
And the Al-Zarrar and the T-80 UD and Baktar Shikan ATGMs etc. etc.
I don't get your point.
T-80 was for the Punjab region. They never thought about fighting large battles in the Rajistan desert until now.

[saraab]

i still dont get it.
are u trying to justify what u earlier said or am i unable to understand simple english :help :help :help

[mysterious]

Either thing could be true :lolol

[dabrownguy]

:mrgreen dude, I don't know. Think for your self, this is a free world after all.

[saraab]

dude, I don't know. Think for your self, this is a free world after all.

now i get ur point :lolol :lolol

[tatra]

I think the poll outcome reflects the demographic composition of this forum's audience more than it does the actual tank capabilities ...

[mysterious]

that doesn't have to be necessarily true.

[Indus]

I think the poll outcome reflects the demographic composition of this forum's audience more than it does the actual tank capabilities ...

That is so true yaar.. If this were really a poll of Worlds' #1 tank, then Arjun MK1, Al-Khalid, and T-98 should not have received any votes at all..

[Gremlin29]

You guys are so right! I think folks confuse the word "best" with "favorite".

[gf0012-aust]

Hence my comments earlier about not "liking" these types of polls.

They almost universally tend to reflect the polling and political demographics without any real reference to real world scenarios, logistics, a nations ORBAT, a nations perceived threat risk, platform reliability, platform complexity etc...


I'm having similar grief in another forum where the French insist that the Leclerc is the best tank in the world, all the empirical evidence in the world, all the post assessment docs from other countries, all the tech team evaluations in the world (where the Leclerc failed miserably) doesn't stop them from thinking that every single instance of rejection was absolutely wrong, yadda yadda yadda.

The easiest thing is just to let them stay convinced that theirs is the best tank in the world, and not say anything if they ever go to war and get blown up. As if that happens they will be arguing that they were all "gold bb" shots and not indicative of a real war.

:eek

[Gremlin29]

Arguing with the French? You silly man! :hehe

[ivan]

i thought that challenger 2 was best :?

[gf0012-aust]

In the tank trials run by the Australian Govt the 3 end contenders were the Abrams D, Chally 2 and LeoA4.

In some areas the Chally 2 was superior to the others. In the main the Leo2A4 was the preferred platform of choice by the tankers. The Govt was supportive of the Abrams.

Arguably, the Leo2A6 is regarded as the most powerful tank in the world, followed by the Leo2A5 and A4, The 3 tanks are quite close in all respects.

Personally I would have preferred the Leo2A4 with an A5 upgrade. But it's irrelevant now.

But, the Abrams and the Chally 2 share the record for the longest kill, Abrams are also the first tanks to be recorded with a dual kill from a single shot. ie one round passed through 2 x T72's at close range.

IIRC the Chally 2 has a better record at surviving multiple RPG strikes. There are a number of observor reports detailing multiple strikes from RPG's with no effect on the Armour. The Chally 2 armour is regarded as being better than the M1A2's.

The Leo2A6 is regarded as the more powerful shooter, it fires conventional rounds with the same punching power as a DU round from a shorter barreled Abrams.

As you can see, there's a combination of advantages with each platform.

[ivan]

if the aussies needed tanks ,just ask the uk goverment , they gave a load of chally 1 to jordon for free! i might ask if i can get a free chally 2 when they are replaced :mrgreen

[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 :D

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 :D

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]

[quote=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]

[quote=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) ;)

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).

[srirangan]

Doing better than Soviet stuff isn't always an achievement .. ;-) Abrams are pretty good though. I acknowledged that in my first post.

[gf0012-aust]

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.

The Arjuns problems have been due to overdesigning capability and putting in the wrong engine pack. As Aussie said, the M1's and Challys performed well. The US learnt long ago that the key to tank persistency was to make sure that the tankers regularly replaced filters in desert ops.

The Arjun should have been a good tank, in actual fact it could have been the most effective tank in the region, if they had defined their armour doctrine, matched the tactical requirement to that doctrine, tried not to turn it into a "land battleship" and then got a decent engine pack. It's core technology design parameters was based on the Leopards, as such it's core design principles were very competent.

Heavens knows why it stuffed up like that - it shouldn't have and someone should be held accountable.

[srirangan]

Just wait for the MBT2 .. It should be coming pretty soon :)

[Aussie Digger]

I see gf, that Australia's "new" M1A1's will have an "automatic" air filter cleaning device, some sort of device that creates a jet pulse of air to blow the sand away as I understand it. I guess this too was a result of the Gulf Wars eh?

[adsH]

like the british dyson vacuum cleaner :lol needs no filters just open the hatch all the dust blows out lol.

[srirangan]

:lolol

[P.A.F]

Introduction

Al-Khalid is one of the newest and one of the most deadliest tanks in the world, its a result of the advanced technology available in the world today. It meets severe desert conditions, with high performance. It represents the ideal integration of firepower, mobility and protection. This tank is created In Heavy Industries Taxila (HIT) Pakistan. Pilot production is underway since November 2000.

Al-Khaild Tanks Unique Abilities

Al-Khalid is capable of targeting the enemy in the dark of night. It is the only tank that has the ability to auto-track the enemy's tanks. Only French tanks have this capability. It is also as powerful as the German tank Leopard in terms of movement. The Al-Khalid tank's performance is much better than the Russian T-90-S tank, since its designed extreme temperatures.

Features & Fire Power

Al-Khalid has been designed with a 125mm (48 caliber) smooth bore, auto-frettaged and chrome plated gun which can fire APFSDS, HEAT-FS and HE-FS conventional ammunition and missiles. It is equipped with muzzle reference system, and bi-axis stabilization. Elevation and azimuth control is achieved by electro-hydraulic power drives. The tank is also equipped with a 7.62 mm-coaxial MG, 12.7mm externally mounted MG that can be fired with the hatch closed and grenade launchers.
The gunner is provided with a dual magnification day sight and the commander with a panoramic Hunter Killer sight for all around independent surveillance. Both sights are bi-axis image stabilized and have independent laser range finders.

Multi-Target Engagement Abilities

The commander has the ability of acquiring a target independently while the gunner is engaging a previously selected one.

Rate Of Fire

The automatic ammunition handling system, with 24 round ready-to-fire magazine further supplements the Hunter-Killer capability of the tank which can load at a rate of 8 rounds a minute. The presence of automatic target tracking system enables the tank to achieve a very high first round hit probability even while firing on a moving target while moving itself.
Night Vision
Night vision for the gunner and commander is achieved through a dual magnification thermal imaging sight. The powerful fire control system computer processes all the firing information, which includes inputs from its ten sensors and is integrated to both sights.
Fire Control
The ballistic computation time is less than one second. For accurate fire control, third generation gating facility has been provided. The result of such a modern fire control system is, routine first round hits on standard (8 ft x 8 ft) targets at ranges in excess of 2000 meters.
The tank with its 125mm gun has a remarkably stable platform, which is provided by a combination of soft recoil and an excellent suspension.

Wrapped around the fire control system are the ergonomic crew positions and controls. The tank commander, gunner and driver can virtually reach all their controls with little movement.
Engine
A 1200 horsepower super charged, diesel engine and semi-automatic transmission, provides mobility. An under Armour auxiliary power supply unit provides a significant reduction in fuel consumption during 'Silent Watch' and maintenance operations, as auxiliary functions can be performed without main engine power. The highly reliable suspension consists of torsion bars, hydraulic dampers and buffers that afford a high level of comfort for its crew.
Combat Weight & Speed
Besides a low silhouette, it is considerably smaller as compared to other modern tanks. Its maximum weight of 46 tons provides a double advantage; it is strategically easily deployed and is more agile. Its power to weight ratio, in excess of 26 HP/ton, gives the vehicle a maximum speed of around 70 km/h, acceleration from 0~ 30 km/h in less than 10 seconds.

Its low mean maximum pressure and the excellent ride given by its suspension make Al-Khalid an ideal vehicle to fight in any theatre of operation.
Armour & Protection
Al-Khalid has been designed to provide maximum protection and efficiency for its 3 men crew. Protection is afforded by use of modular composite Armour and explosive reactive Armour. Al-Khalid also offers enhanced protection through NBC, an effective Thermal Smoke Generation, Automatic Fire Extinguishing and Explosion Suppression Systems.
Limited Under Water Capabilities
The submerging system allows it to operate 5 meters under water. Navigation is assisted by the use of Global Positioning and Inertial Navigation Systems.

Al-Khalid & Arjun Tank

Al-Khalid is far more modern than India's Arjun, which took 25 years to be developed and is still not completed. Pakistan already has an edge over India in an armed conflict, but after the addition of Al-Khalid, Pakistan would be invincible in a land war.

[gf0012-aust]

I see gf, that Australia's "new" M1A1's will have an "automatic" air filter cleaning device, some sort of device that creates a jet pulse of air to blow the sand away as I understand it. I guess this too was a result of the Gulf Wars eh?

For any tank operating in a desert or fine dust environment it's an obvious requirement, so I really fail to see why all tank builders have not made it a requirement. At least we've installed an auto pressure cleaner - which will reduce the amount of TLC needed at each stopping point. The M1's are pressurised internally for NBC warfare - so the goo stays out of the cabin etc..

[adsH]

I see gf, that Australia's "new" M1A1's will have an "automatic" air filter cleaning device, some sort of device that creates a jet pulse of air to blow the sand away as I understand it. I guess this too was a result of the Gulf Wars eh?

For any tank operating in a desert or fine dust environment it's an obvious requirement, so I really fail to see why all tank builders have not made it a requirement. At least we've installed an auto pressure cleaner - which will reduce the amount of TLC needed at each stopping point. The M1's are pressurised internally for NBC warfare - so the goo stays out of the cabin etc..

I know that the MOD UK was working on a fix for our Tanks they were having problem related to dust but there are no pressure cleaners i guess as soon as the american adopt it we will get it too. i am sure we don't have such systems, i can bet Australia has better tank Abilities then the UK you guys have alot more desert like terain training. HOwever we have been in real wars in the Midle east multiple time, you would think we would have a cure for this dust problem, well recently we just do .

[manna]

DEstroyer , thx thx a lot for such a pain in excavating the details from the scum. u have realy put us much and more wiser about somethig wich was previously taking and believed blindflodedly, but know i think ir is quite obvious and apparent to all, i am not to denounce someone,s views but aim is to talk about facts here and benefit from each other , this is realy a marvellous job u have done , i will try to realy follow u in such persuits,pray for me ,and once again thx a lot for ur job done and realy very well done, :idea2

[srirangan]

P.A.F,
Your opinions are biased due to your over-patriotism. Al-Khalid aren't the best. So grin and bear it dude. Or else my Paid-Masonry cult members will haunt you forever .. /kiddin :-D

[adsH]

:lol siri, but did you look at the specs compare them with the T-90s of india i would think if any one makes good tanks its got to be the Russians, although i agree the A1 have gotten alot of battle feild tweaking they have been at war since it rolled out. but just compare the specs with (not the Patriotic Bulls on the list) t90s. you would find where the aRjun project went wrong, the Ukrainians and Pak compensated on armor for movement.

[Aussie Digger]

Yeah ADSH, the Australian Army really has had to learn how to deal with dust, given the terrible red "bull dust" we have to put up with down here. I don't know if that makes us better "desert fighters" than the British, but we have done very well in that (and most other types) of terrain.

[srirangan]

So are the Australian desert similar to the ones in South Asia and Middle East?

[Aussie Digger]

Pretty much, except they're actually drier than those if possible... Australia has the luck of being the driest continent on Earth...

[srirangan]

The one's here are unbelievably dusty. I live in New Delhi, and in the moths of April-May there's a local wind from the Thar Desert (Rajasthan/Pakistan) that blows over the city. Even though the distance, the effect is huuge. We can just imagine what the scene will be in the battle's in the desert.

[Aussie Digger]

I know what you mean, the dust in the Australian Outback is a bright red colour (due to a high iron content no doubt) and has a extremely annoying habit of being able to get absolutely anywhere into a vehicle etc, no matter how well insulated/protected. We don't get the problem in our cities (thankfully) but it's a problem in the Country.

[gf0012-aust]

I know what you mean, the dust in the Australian Outback is a bright red colour (due to a high iron content no doubt) and has a extremely annoying habit of being able to get absolutely anywhere into a vehicle etc, no matter how well insulated/protected. We don't get the problem in our cities (thankfully) but it's a problem in the Country.

A-D, if you ever decide to buy an ex Telstra Landcruiser at auction, make sure you beat the crap out of the dashboard from underneath. Half the desert is likely to fall out.. ;)

[Aussie Digger]

The last 4WD I bought at auction was a lovely little SR5 Hilux Extra Cab. It was an ex-water board ute with 40,000klms on the clock, not a scratch on it and the only off-road driving it had ever done was pull into someone's driveway... Wish I'd kept it really, I don't even own a 4WD now...

[Red aRRow]

A-D, if you ever decide to buy an ex Telstra Landcruiser at auction, make sure you beat the crap out of the dashboard from underneath. Half the desert is likely to fall out.. ;)

:lol :lol :lol :lol

[adsH]

everyones talking about deserts well i have lived in one too i lived in Riyadh, capital of Saudi. a mountainous region but its in the middle of the the Dam Desert land. there are no lakes no rivers nothing. water is more expensive then Petrol. and there used to be desert storms, and they were terrifying in nature has anyone ever seen an ARAB desert storm i think someone can dye in those conditions there are tons and tons of SAND blowing in the air you can't literally see your own front porch which happens to be a few meters away. its like when you look out side your house there is no sky there are no building just SAND REDISH yellowish sand!! (during a desert storm of cource its a fully developed city with nice sky scrapers)

[Deltared075]

Well, these machines never face each other since been produce..

All spec only on paper, how about you guys organize a deathmatch for them and then we know which beast is the best! agree?

[gf0012-aust]

Well, these machines never face each other since been produce..

Only 4 of them have seen battle. Only 2 of them have been involved in tank on tank combat.

Platform on platform comparisons are absolutely meaningless as parochialism tends to take primacy over logic.

If you are going to be logical and bring in real world parameters all you will do in here is get people over excited. ;)

All spec only on paper,

No, clearly untrue, see above. 4 of those tanks have seen combat, 2 have been theatre used, and 2 have been involved in meeting engagements. The rest are paper specs until they turn their wheels in combat and fire their guns in anger.

[Deltared075]

You said 2 tanks fought tank on tank?

which 2? which one win?

[mysterious]

Its Abrams and Merkava I think.

[gf0012-aust]

You said 2 tanks fought tank on tank?

which 2? which one win?

Meeting engagements: M1, Chally2, Merkava, Leclerc
Engaged by MBT main gun, M1, Chally 1, 2
Theatre engagements, M1, Chally 2

Both M1 and Chally 2 have been engaged in the frontal aspect and survived a sub 1000m main gun attack

M1 and Chally2 have both been engaged within 400m by MBT's bearing 125mm main guns and survived.

None of the M1's and Chally 2's engaged by OPFOR MBT's were disabled by other MBT's. In one instance a Chally2 has taken on 6 T-72's at sub 1000m and killed or mobility killed all 6 tanks in under 2 mins - this was while under sustained fire.

[WebMaster]

Gary, are there videos of these? Especially chally taking on 6 T-72s. :smokingc:

[Deltared075]

The 125mm main gun not the main point to destroy a modern tank, but it ammunition. Maybe their use the wrong ammunition? or they dun have better ammunition to penetrate the tank?

[gf0012-aust]

The 125mm main gun not the main point to destroy a modern tank, but it ammunition. Maybe their use the wrong ammunition? or they dun have better ammunition to penetrate the tank?

The 125 was developed by Russia as a counter to the 120 Rheinmetal (and derivatives) as they could not get the same "punch weight" with a same size round.

and believe me, the T's were using the right rounds to kill a tank. They just haven't managed to successfully kill a DU armoured or Chobham/Dorchester armoured tank.

The Chally2 is considered the "hardest" tank in the world. The M1 with DU round is rated similar to a Leo2A6

There's a quality difference at play here.

[Deltared075]

But the deathmatch i mean was between these 3rd generation tank! not with the 2nd genaration tank like t72

[gf0012-aust]

Gary, are there videos of these? Especially chally taking on 6 T-72s. :smokingc:

There is camera footage, but AFAIK it's still classified. I've tried to get a lead on who might have it but no luck to date.

The UK MOD is pretty tight on stuff like this.

[gf0012-aust]

But the deathmatch i mean was between these 3rd generation tank! not with the 2nd genaration tank like t72

You need to carefully read the thread responses. If the strongest armoured vehicles in the world currently are Chobham/Dorchester or DU armoured MBT's and they have taken on a full frontal strike at sub 1000m and a sub 400m range then thats a pretty strong testimony.

Did you want the US or Uk MBT's to shoot at the French to prove a point? ;)
A full strike be it blue on blue or blue on red, still constitutes a real and valid example of the effectiveness of armour.

The only tank with a stronger frontal aspect is the Merkava 4, and thats due to it's layout rather than armour type/layer

btw, the M1, Chally2, Merkava, Leclerc are Gen 4, not Gen 3

[Deltared075]

Well, then we never know which tank the best....

[Revival_786]

Ok... 6 T-72's... I gotta see that in action :)

[gf0012-aust]

Well, then we never know which tank the best....

Did you actually read and understand anything of which was posted??

I am beginning to wonder whether you have understood anything that has been posted in response. If you don't understand the answers then ask, otherwise it looks as though you are being deliberately obtuse.

[Proteus]

Hey. I am chinese and this is my first time been here,so hello to you all.
As for the the topic as Which tank is the world´s bast tank,I have to say it be the US M1A2. Is have very good balance firepower,speed and armord.

This list don¨s not have the japanise Type 90. It and the Israel Markava IV was vote in chinese magazine(Weapon mafazine)the best armord tank in the world. I think it sould have been in your list.

I like very much our own type 99,but I think it well take 2 Type99 to destory one M1A2(if it´s a typical coldwar scenario,the tanks meet each other in european openland).

As for Pakistan Al-Khalid,I am so sorry to say all the info which I have read(from Finland and from Chinese BBS),it was believe to be better the T-72,but not better then the type99 or russian T-90, which I think is better the type98. Is´t that why Pakistan army bought T-80U?

The India Arjun MBT,was as chinese say a "many counter build MBT(they buy every thing from other counter)". Did India army give it up? Or did the project still going on? If it is still on going,then I think they need move fast as Your AL-khilid is ready and chinese Type 99 is also ready.

Most the info which I get is from site like:miiltary.china.com,FAS....

[Deltared075]

Did you want the US or Uk MBT's to shoot at the French to prove a point? ;)
[/quote]

Why not?

[adsH]

Hey. I am chinese and this is my first time been here,so hello to you all.
As for the the topic as Which tank is the world´s bast tank,I have to say it be the US M1A2. Is have very good balance firepower,speed and armord.

This list don¨s not have the japanise Type 90. It and the Israel Markava IV was vote in chinese magazine(Weapon mafazine)the best armord tank in the world. I think it sould have been in your list.

I like very much our own type 99,but I think it well take 2 Type99 to destory one M1A2(if it´s a typical coldwar scenario,the tanks meet each other in european openland).

As for Pakistan Al-Khalid,I am so sorry to say all the info which I have read(from Finland and from Chinese BBS),it was believe to be better the T-72,but not better then the type99 or russian T-90, which I think is better the type98. Is´t that why Pakistan army bought T-80U?

The India Arjun MBT,was as chinese say a "many counter build MBT(they buy every thing from other counter)". Did India army give it up? Or did the project still going on? If it is still on going,then I think they need move fast as Your AL-khilid is ready and chinese Type 99 is also ready.

Most the info which I get is from site like:miiltary.china.com,FAS....

The Alkhalids are the One step up a new generation Tank its been built mainly by the Ukrainians, i don't see how it can't be as good as the Russian T90 variant which is an equal to Ukrain. Please people there is soemthing people miss out they call it pakistani Tank well relay it is but pakistan only worked with the Ukrainians and paid for all the R&D and production cost the T80U were bought to modernize the Army tanks, to fill the Gapp and i think it was a contract to actually get the Ukrainians help Pakistan with the The Alkhalids, when i look at the Alkhalid specs i don't see a T72 i see a newly built Tank. i don't think the T72 has a a modular Composite Armor or Explosive reactive amour or a 128 mm Main Gun. or a onbord mission computer night vision etc or a Auto target acquisitions computer. or any other new generation tank attributes, the Chinese t99 has problems that are not in the Alkhalids these are both similar Tanks they call it patato and the other call it pattao !! but the deficiency in the Type 99 has to be the Engine, if its chinese made i know the chinese were having problems with engines, the pakistani Tanks have ukrainian designed engines that are better then the Russian designed.

Al khalids are designed to operate in the most extreme climates , thats largely due to the fact that Pakistan has a climate that happens to be extreme and different. the Baloach Desert where its realy Hot and the Northern areas where its snowy and really chilly. so the design parameters for the vehicles were given to the Design team to Produce a tank that could operate in these conditions, the desert war fare is important for Pakistan as Tank battles usually occur near Rajistan Borders its a very fine sand, desert really hot !! and the saudis have already evaluated the Al khalids and they want to buyem but they are waiting till they can resolve there budgetary shortfalls.

Turkey has shown an interest in Buying or jointly producing the Alkhalid with Pakistan, i think they were evaluating the possibility of an upgrade on there old Abrams, they were going ot contract the Israelis for the Job but i think that got canceled for some reason, i would say just buy new ones it would surely be cost effective. Pakistan has never had a problem giving technology to Turkey Pakistan did give Turkey the tech to make cluster missiles when the Americans refused to supply them.

[Pathfinder-X]

Hey. I am chinese and this is my first time been here,so hello to you all.
As for the the topic as Which tank is the world´s bast tank,I have to say it be the US M1A2. Is have very good balance firepower,speed and armord.

This list don¨s not have the japanise Type 90. It and the Israel Markava IV was vote in chinese magazine(Weapon mafazine)the best armord tank in the world. I think it sould have been in your list.

I like very much our own type 99,but I think it well take 2 Type99 to destory one M1A2(if it´s a typical coldwar scenario,the tanks meet each other in european openland).

As for Pakistan Al-Khalid,I am so sorry to say all the info which I have read(from Finland and from Chinese BBS),it was believe to be better the T-72,but not better then the type99 or russian T-90, which I think is better the type98. Is´t that why Pakistan army bought T-80U?

The India Arjun MBT,was as chinese say a "many counter build MBT(they buy every thing from other counter)". Did India army give it up? Or did the project still going on? If it is still on going,then I think they need move fast as Your AL-khilid is ready and chinese Type 99 is also ready.

Most the info which I get is from site like:miiltary.china.com,FAS....

I consider the most balanced tank to be Leopard 2A6, not M1A2.

And about Type 99 taking on M1A2, that depends on the scenario. If both tanks fire at each other at the range of 2000 meters it would blow a hole in both. Apparently Type 99 might have the upper hand when it is about 5 to 4 km from M1A2, because it can successfully engage it with ATGM and laser(i have no idea how effective it is). But Type 99 lacks many protection features on western tanks, for example, there is a gap between the turret and hull in the front, if it is hit then the whole turrets might get blown off. It also lacks armor that seperates the crew from ammunition and fuel, which is bad for the survival of the crew in case the hull armor is penetrated.

as for Al-Khalid, it is developed from chinese Type 90, which is developed from T-72 aquired from chinese allies in the middle east in 1980's. The chinese themselves did not want Type 90 because of the poor performance, but sold it to Pakistan in the mid-1990's. Pakistan enhanced the original Type 90 with some asistances from Ukraine and Al-Khalid was developed. It is highly doubtful if it can match the Type 99 in terms of armor and firepower.

And no the indians did not gave up on the Arjun. Even though the original prototypes did not met the requirement, Indian will not give it up. A very simple reason really, India wants to be able to produce its own modern tanks, and Arjun gave them many experiences. I believe the new and improved Arjun MK2 will be a very fierce opponent for the Pak T-80U.

[adsH]

Ok path finder i think we're in disagreement!!, granted the Alkhalids could of been based on something the chinese found unacceptable to induct, but the Ukrainians do build equivalent Tanks to there Neighbor Russia, i hardly think the same chinese type 90 amour tech was used in the construction of the alkhalids, Pak Army would not put there people in something that might just get blown up its a relatively small professional army, granted it has some or many lackings but its not an Army that compensates on security of its Soldiers!! the Ukrainians use other countries to Fund R&D in exchange they gains new tech and alot of Cash!! the chinese have helped the Pakistanis alot in actually providing the base to produce numerous equipments in all three services, but looking at this case i would say the Alkhalids did go through a pritty much a comprehensive and Long development cycle with the Ukrainians the Armor may be similar to the T-80u but the Technology inside the Tank is brand spanking new, and again the equipments inside originated from china, and i hardly think something that is a piece of rejected "crap" (apologies') can be put up for sale and gain so much attention from prospect-full buyers.
The alkhalid does not have a poor performance its engine is Ukrainian designed for harsh weathers like desert its mobility is adequate for deserts conditions, it has been tested and trial'd extensively it has been demonstrated and evaluated by a number of Armies, your assertions about the poor performance based on its ancestor's performance is inaccurate, as i have mentioned above its a completly diffent platform based on a Ukrainian Designs,