The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Michael
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 78
Joined: 28 Jun 1999 11:31

The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Michael » 30 Jun 2002 04:17

Let's have a thread for talking about and comparing the state of India and Pakistan's armored forces.

Key points to cover:

1) How far along is the Al-Zarrar upgrade project for Pakistan's older Chinese tanks? What all does the Al-Zarrar upgrade entail?

2) What is the status of India's T-72 upgrade program, and what does it entail?

3) How many Al-Khalids has Pakistan produced and what is their rate of production?

4) What is the percentage of tanks on both sides which possess proper night vision equipment? I'm talking about good passive IR integrated into the gunner and commander battle sights. Light-enhancing devices paired up with IR searchlights don't count as proper night vision, by the way, since they broadcast your position to everyone within 50 miles and cannot be freely used.

5) What is the percentage of tanks on both sides with laser rangefinders? Better yet, laser rangefinders integrated into the gunner's FCS? In other words, how many Indian and Paki tanks are still relying on old-school firing techniques (not aided by a computerized FCS) that result in vastly decreased accuracy and an inability to fire on the move.

These are just some points to get started on. Let's not needlessly poo-poo every Pak development either. Let's be objective and realistic.

I'll get things started with this report:

IA to have 124 T-90S by end of summer
http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/2002/06/28/stories/2002062802141200.htm

Michael
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 78
Joined: 28 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Michael » 02 Jul 2002 00:00

Aw come on guys, throw me a bone.. :D

Umrao
BRFite
Posts: 547
Joined: 30 May 2001 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Umrao » 02 Jul 2002 00:06

mike GOI is thinking more of "amor" than armor!! under unkils facilitation!!

Rangudu
BRFite
Posts: 1751
Joined: 03 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Rangudu » 02 Jul 2002 00:30

As far as Al Khalid goes, TSP currently has a couple of dozen supposedly.

This report from Yawn says that TSP plans to add another 300 al-Khalids by 2007.

Michael
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 78
Joined: 28 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Michael » 03 Jul 2002 22:30

Anybody know how many of Pakistan's T-59's have received the Al-Zarrar upgrade?


Michael
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 78
Joined: 28 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Michael » 05 Jul 2002 09:38

kamdev I was hoping for credible info. I've already looked at most of the Paki sources you quoted but they're too vague and full of fluff to take seriously.

Too bad this thread evoked no interest. I was hoping for some good, dispassionate analysis of the state of Indian and Pakistani tank forces. Maybe the more knowledgeable members that I remember from before just aren't visiting BR right now. Oh well I'll try this thread again some time in the future.

P Chupunkar
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 30
Joined: 24 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby P Chupunkar » 05 Jul 2002 09:47

Mike there are a number of threads which have compared Al-Zarrar/Al-Khalid with Arjun/T-90. Please take a look at the Military Archives.
This topic has almost been beaten to death out here in BR.

karthik.k
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 19
Joined: 05 Oct 2001 11:31
Location: India

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby karthik.k » 06 Jul 2002 01:05

Mike,
IMHO, it is not that your thread has not generated any interest. It is just that the questions you ask seem to be too precise to evoke any answers with the current public domain information available. For example, I searched for Al-Zarrar on google, only to find no (to my recollection) information on the current status of the project.

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby JCage » 06 Jul 2002 01:38

Simbly tooo bhored with puki tanks saaar.Please to excuse. :D

Regards,
Nitin

Roop
BRFite
Posts: 255
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Roop » 06 Jul 2002 04:24

Simbly tooo bhored with puki tanks saaar
Tsk, tsk, Nitin! You need to pay more attention to your spelling. Don't you know it should be "Zimbly", not "Simbly"? :lol:

Harry Van
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 73
Joined: 14 Jun 2002 11:31
Location: Bangalore

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Harry Van » 26 Jul 2002 22:34

But i like his grammar.Its too good !

Rudra
BRFite
Posts: 599
Joined: 28 May 2001 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Rudra » 26 Jul 2002 22:58

With the imminent volume production of Dhruv, pls
post something on what you would see as a
dominating force of armed Dhruv's and followed by
LAH, in terms of avionics, missiles, numbers and
upfront cost. how should they be structured and
distributed into IA ?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53428
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby ramana » 26 Jul 2002 23:21

GD I saw the specs for the Dhruv for the IAF and IA version. Looks very good with 8 ATGMS and the 20mm cannon. Should make mincemeat of any TSP tanks.

Some questions:
- Why was the 20mm cannon chosen?
- Was the 23mm gun of the Mi-35 too heavy? And does this mean IA/IAF have to get new 20mm ammo?
- What ATGMS are they thinking of using?
- Why were the first eight units split among the three services and Coast Guard? Was it to iron out any deployment bugs?
- Also any thinking about fitting an optical sight?
- Could the Nag be used with a Laser designator( ground based) to improve its effectiveness? or all the algorithms be changed and cause further delay in deplyment?

saint
BRFite
Posts: 109
Joined: 19 Jun 2002 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby saint » 26 Jul 2002 23:23

I feel dhruv must have a variant to deliver nags, that will automatically load another one, once fired. Wonder if that is possible on a helo? If yes, how many nags could it carry?

Nandai
BRFite
Posts: 175
Joined: 14 Jul 2000 11:31
Location: Sweden

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Nandai » 26 Jul 2002 23:51

Ramana, the cannon on that pic is it the 3-barreled gatling gun used on the Cobra? If so, is it a very good idea to procure an american gun, if they feel like slamming some sanction on India in the future.
Wouldnt it be better to use a french, south african, russian or perhaps some indigenously developed gun?

Nandai
BRFite
Posts: 175
Joined: 14 Jul 2000 11:31
Location: Sweden

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Nandai » 26 Jul 2002 23:57

Sai, what would be the point? Better to have 8 or more ready-to-fire missiles, you could carry re-loads in the cabin, I think british Army Lynx antitank helos use to carry TOW re-loads in the cabin. But imagine having to land somewhere close to the front to reload your missiles, a helicopter on the ground is one very vulnerable helicopter. It must surely be better for it to fly to some forward-located airbase and reload there, could get some tea and scones too.

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby JCage » 27 Jul 2002 00:42

Originally posted by ramana:
[qb]GD I saw the specs for the Dhruv for the IAF and IA version. Looks very good with 8 ATGMS and the 20mm cannon. Should make mincemeat of any TSP tanks.

Some questions:
- Why was the 20mm cannon chosen?
- Was the 23mm gun of the Mi-35 too heavy? And does this mean IA/IAF have to get new 20mm ammo?
Dont know this for sure,but i belive the Armed forces like the yank style "individual ball turret" with good traverse etc.IIRc yes its lighter.And the yanks are supposed to be the leaders in this tech area..ie gatling style helicopter mounted chain guns on the chopper chin.

- What ATGMS are they thinking of using?
Nag!
However,it could be used with the russian Ataka series of ATGM's too.We got the latest variant/version along with the recent order of new variant 40 Mi17's which carry the same.No big deal in retrofitting the ALH to carry the same till the Nag is online.

- Also any thinking about fitting an optical sight?
Yes indeed!A stabilised sight has been demonstrated and shown to work.
With FLIR to boot.I cant find the exact link but my meory is still around.A Laser rangefinder would also be needed.

Details and pics should be on the IRDE website at www.drdo.org and the BR article on Nag under the missiles section.

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/MISSILES/Nag.html
http://www.drdo.com/labs/electronics/irde/achieve.shtml

While teh IRDE link doesnt carry exactly labelled pics,a gyro stabilised sight + FLIR has been developed and demonstrated for Nishant.
Same tech and system here .Besides they must have used a stabilised sight for the Mi17 test.
From the indigenous POV,we can make the LRF,camera,stabilisation system/mount etc.The FLIR may have to be imported as the IA will most probabaly want a 2nd generation FLIR/TI.

Also we can always buy the same.Israel makes a series of optronic sights MOSP etc and FLIR/TI too.One example being the Sight/s on the Mi25/35 upgrade.

- Could the Nag be used with a Laser designator( ground based) to improve its effectiveness? or all the algorithms be changed and cause further delay in deplyment?
Nag is IIR,ie heat seeking.So it wouldnt need the laser designator and isnt designed for the same.The other version being the MMW version for any weather engagements and which would permit fancy techniques like engagement at distances not good enough for the IIR seeker to get proper resolution.The basic difficulty or rather challenge in Nag is to get this very fast,top attack missile to hit mobile targets moving very fast themselves.That too in the correct mode.
I do believe that a front attack mode also does exist but the challeneges mentioned above remain.

Neither does it(IIR) have a fibre optic/wire guided link etc or man in the loop technique (negative point being it slows chopper and makes it a big immobile target).IIR is look,lock and fire.So the algorithms,processor and control surfaces have to be super fast.And meet GQSR's of high reliabilty and Pk%.
Sorry for the ramble but i believe Laser guided version of Nag is quite some ways off.Till they finish at least IIR and MMW versions to full Army satisfaction.

Regards,
Nitin

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53428
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby ramana » 27 Jul 2002 01:24

Thanks Nitin for the insight. From the Nag link you gave "Eight missiles are carried in two quadruple launchers. Launchers mounted on either side are linked to a nose-mounted stabilized thermal sight and a laser range-finder package.

The weight is signicant for the ALH. That means the Russian 23 mm cannon wouldnt work. I hope the powers that be also procured enough 20mm ammo and are getting it made in IOF. BTW there is diff in the Gatling type(GE mini gun) and chain guns(Hughes?). Any idea which is it?
I was thinking about the ground based laser designator as one would be needed for the Krasnopol when it gets inducted. And IIR sight should get benefit if such a designator is available for that augments the IR signal.

The Israeli sight is the Tamam one already selected for the Mi-17 upgrade package right?

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby JCage » 27 Jul 2002 02:09

Mention not, Ramana.Glad to contribute!

>>>>>>>The weight is signicant for the ALH. That means the Russian 23 mm cannon wouldnt work. I hope the powers that be also procured enough 20mm ammo and are getting it made in IOF. BTW there is diff in the Gatling type(GE mini gun) and chain guns(Hughes?). Any idea which is it?

A pic posted by Shiv from Aeroindia showed a three barrelled cannon...Post pokhran i think this plan went kaput.Like the original Allied signal engines.I think we can tap the french for a single barrelled version or one similar to the one on the combat support Tiger helicopter for the French Army (Tigre HAP) which is equipped with a 30 mm AM-30781 automatic cannon from Giat. Rate of fire is 750 rounds per minute.

I dont believe any firm orders have been placed for any type yet or the ammo at OFB.The usual procedure would be to lic produce and get tech transfer to OFB.

>>>> I was thinking about the ground based laser designator as one would be needed for the Krasnopol when it gets inducted. And IIR sight should get benefit if such a designator is available for that augments the IR signal.

Thats an interesting idea although i think the IIR seeker may have to be substantially reconfigured for homing into the centre of the cone formed by the reflected laser beam.

Another advantage of the present system is that it is essentially passive.When lasers are used the Laser warning system on the tank (pretty much standard nowadays)would be activated and the tank commander pops anti thermal smoke to disrupt the lock.And maneuvers to boot.So the Nag wins out in this situation.No warning.

However the LRF may trigger the system.One more reason for MMW.

However while Pakistan does manufacture(or claim to) LW systems , i'm yet to see the ALkhalid quoted as having one.Cost grounds perhaps.Or china didnt hand over blueprints yet.And neither do the older ones T59M,T85-2AP etc.So all good victims for Nag IIR.

Krasnopols are confimed as finalised by army in 1999 -2000(post kargil acquisition )itself.This per Army press release.
Interestingly previous reports (open source) indicate that 6-8 Laser designators were part of the entire Krasnopol deal.A small no. imho but still a beginning.

>>>>The Israeli sight is the Tamam one already selected for the Mi-17 upgrade package right?

I'll have to check up.IIRc the Israeli "peak" upgrade was still in progress or hasnt been revealed yet.Its been repeatedly offered at any rate.

The Mi 25/35 one is in full flow if not completed by now.That of course having "NVG,nvg compatible lighting,FLIR,TV camera,Helmet Mounted Display(day and night),doppler interfaced GPS".

IAF has also been updating their Mi 17's and other choppers with NVG capability for night ops.
However the army has undertaken NVG compatibility and acquisition for its chopper fleet.It began with the cheetahs.All this per official press releases from last year and the year before.

The Mi17'V-I's Atakas i presume come along with a russian sensor and acquisition package.The IAF release says: "new helicopters will have better avionics,GPS,all weather radar and higher payload".SIPRI confirms unknown no. of AT16/9M120 Atakas ordered in 2000 for the 40 choppers.This apart from the various other reports at that time mentioning the same.

More on the Ataka.
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/shturm/index.html

The Ataka missile, which carries the Russian designation 9M120 and Nato designation AT-9, is an upgraded version of the Shturm missile. It is fired from existing Shturm launch vehicles. The Ataka has a longer range of 6,000 m and is slightly heavier. Warhead options include a tandem shaped-charge HEAT (high explosive anti-tank) warhead for deployment against advanced main battle tanks provided with explosive reactive armour (ERA), a blast warhead to defeat light armoured vehicles, field fortifications and small ships and a rod warhead to engage helicopters and other air targets. The Ataka missile also equips the Mi-28N combat helicopter.
SIPRI also says we got 800 of the earlier AT 6 for the Mi25/35's.(description in the link).

Regards,
Nitin

member_4539
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 2
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 05:32

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby member_4539 » 27 Jul 2002 03:08

Is there any programme with DRDO to develop a chopper like Apache or something which Can take out all PAKI tanks hovering at a distance of 30km,

I think Army should buy some attack choopers instead of buying tanks .

saint
BRFite
Posts: 109
Joined: 19 Jun 2002 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby saint » 27 Jul 2002 03:33

vinnie, its called the LAH. light attack helo.

I think we require both chopper and tanks, one is vulnerable with out the other.

Guest

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Guest » 27 Jul 2002 06:05

vinnie, its called the LAH. light attack helo.

I think we require both chopper and tanks, one is vulnerable with out the other.
Isin't the LAH still on the drawing boards. Until then how will we counter the threat from a helicopter like a dedicated attack helicopter like the Cobra (Puki cobra).

member_4539
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 2
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 05:32

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby member_4539 » 27 Jul 2002 06:25

[B]vinnie, its called the LAH. light attack helo.
-----------------------------------------
Sai , Is this the one that you are talking about, Iam not sure this will have the same features as Apache :)

http://www.geocities.com/HotSprings/2839/lah.html

Guest

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Guest » 27 Jul 2002 06:42

vinnie,

check out this jpg from the BR archives.
Light Observation Helo (LOH) and the Light Attack Helo (LAH) in the front and in the background respectively.
link: http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/MONITOR/ISSUE4-5/rajloh.jpg

Rudra
BRFite
Posts: 599
Joined: 28 May 2001 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Rudra » 27 Jul 2002 07:16

Until then how will we counter the threat from a helicopter like a dedicated attack helicopter like the Cobra

..the usual medicines. sa16, tunguska, schilka,
small SAMs.

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2123
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby John » 27 Jul 2002 08:03

wondering what AAM is carried by Dhruv? and wasn't Ka-50/52 being considered by the IA.

Guest

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Guest » 27 Jul 2002 08:39

The leading contender for the AAM on the Dhruv would be the Matra Magic-2, perfect for short range engagements, or maybe even the R-60. Only time can tell as to which of these AAM's will be selected.

Nandai
BRFite
Posts: 175
Joined: 14 Jul 2000 11:31
Location: Sweden

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Nandai » 27 Jul 2002 13:26

Originally posted by vinnie:
Is there any programme with DRDO to develop a chopper like Apache or something which Can take out all PAKI tanks hovering at a distance of 30km
30km, getting a bit ambitious are we, the longest range for any normal ATGM is just about 10km, Hellfire, Vikhr. The only ATGM that I know of that has a 20km+ range is the Israeli Nimrod, but it is one mother of a big missile. It is available both in ground launched and air launched versions and has got some very neat features, like flying below the clouds in bad weather.

http://www.iai.co.il/dows/dows/Serve/level/English/1.1.4.2.11.html

Nitin, wasnt the new Mi-17s supposed to be armed with the Vikhr ATGM, not Ataka?

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby JCage » 27 Jul 2002 15:13

>>>>>>>Nitin, wasnt the new Mi-17s supposed to be armed with the Vikhr ATGM, not Ataka?

Nandai,indeed so.But the whole family iirc is mor or less the same.The russians keep calling each incremental/superior derivative a new name.Shturm,ataka,vikhr.

Yes,its the Vikhr per memory.But SIPRI's nomenclature is the Ataka.
IIRC,the Vikhr is also Laser guided ,would be interesting to see the guidance system.

Nandai
BRFite
Posts: 175
Joined: 14 Jul 2000 11:31
Location: Sweden

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Nandai » 27 Jul 2002 15:38

Yes, the russians have a way of making it very difficult for people to keep track of all the names they give to their systems, which they tend to change on a regular basis just to screw with us.
The Vikhr has laser guidance as standard, but can be equipped with IR and even radar guidance as an option. The biggest advantage of the Vikhr is its range, 10km compared to 4km for the Ataka. Do you know if the Ataka is supersonic like the Vikhr? Couldnt the Ataka be for something else
I cant find any entry at the SIPRI page, could you perhaps point me to it, the only ATGM entry I found is for the AT-6.

Nandai
BRFite
Posts: 175
Joined: 14 Jul 2000 11:31
Location: Sweden

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Nandai » 27 Jul 2002 15:42

I think there are 2 versions of Vikhr, one with a shorter range and laser only guidance, could that have something to do with this?

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby JCage » 27 Jul 2002 15:47

Nandai,
Try the Indian arms purchases etc from 92-to 2001.Available at their main website.In PDF.
It has a brief comment on the same .

More later.The questions bugging me too.

Regards,
Nitin

Nandai
BRFite
Posts: 175
Joined: 14 Jul 2000 11:31
Location: Sweden

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Nandai » 27 Jul 2002 16:16

Okey, found it, but it doesnt make any sence, it says AT-16/9M120. But according to this site the AT-16 has the russian name 9M121, and the AT-9 is called 9M120.
The AT-9 and AT-16 are related, the 16 is the 9s bigger brother, with longer range and according to some sources double warheads.
:whine: Why ohh why cant they make life a bit easier for people like us, why do they have to confuse us all the time. Bugger!!! :whine:

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby JCage » 28 Jul 2002 01:29

:roll: Whatever was supplied,AT-16 is not 9M120.All russian sources confirm the difference between the Ataka and the Vikhr.

At any rate i'd wager tandem warheads were in the deal.Bye bye ERA etc.

Regards,
Nitin

Michael
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 78
Joined: 28 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Michael » 28 Jul 2002 09:32

Regarding the IAF Mi-17's with Vikhr, here's an excerpt from BR's own IAF section:

"In May 2000, India and Russia signed a $170 million deal for 40 additional Mi-17 helicopters. These are of the Mi-17-1B variant, which have more powerful engines and enlarged side doors, allowing quicker disembarkation of personnel. The first four choppers were delivered on 19 October 2000 and the last batch will reach India in mid-2001. The helicopters will be fitted with sixteen Vikhr-V (AT-16) anti-tank guided missiles after all 40 helicopters have been delivered."

What's the status of this purchase? Have all the helos been delivered and if so, have they been fitted with the AT missiles yet?

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby JCage » 28 Jul 2002 10:21

Mike.
Iirc,the chopper deliveries began quite some time back.

Nandai
BRFite
Posts: 175
Joined: 14 Jul 2000 11:31
Location: Sweden

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Nandai » 28 Jul 2002 13:24

I agree Nitin, I hope it is the bad ass version of the Vikhr, tandem warheads, supersonic, 10km range and can also wreck havoc against slow moving air targets, like Cobra attack helicopters.

Found a picture of it.
<img src="http://www.jed.simonides.org/missiles/atk/vikhr_series/vikhr.jpg" alt="" />

A question about Nag, is it supersonic, or subsonic?

Nandai
BRFite
Posts: 175
Joined: 14 Jul 2000 11:31
Location: Sweden

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Nandai » 28 Jul 2002 13:37

Found some more pix.

Vikhr M on Su-25
http://www.aeronautics.ru/sukhoi/su25042.jpg

Kh-29T and Vikhr M on Su-25
http://www.aeronautics.ru/sukhoi/su25044.jpg

MPS-410 Omul ECM pod, R-77 and Vikhr M on Su-25
http://www.aeronautics.ru/sukhoi/su25046.jpg

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby JCage » 29 Jul 2002 07:45

Mike,
IAF release:"All 40 Mi17 1V's were received in 2001 and have been duly operationalised".


Return to “Military Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests