Baised Criticism on MBT-2000 in Pak Media.

[ROMMEL]

Hey Guys,

I want you to read this article written in the friday times by some lady. There are gross misstatements and wrongly represented facts. I am writing a letter to the editor undlyling the factually incorrect statements and judgements that this lady has made. However, I want you guys to read it too and give your opinion about what else is wrong in her article that should be brought to light. I will post my reply here before sending it to the editor. Your comments are necessary and welcome.

here is the link

http://www.thefridaytimes.com/news6b.htm

Cheers,

[Amad Rana]

" Friday time is Indian mouth piece in Pakistan". they are Pakistanis but their heart is still Hindu-Stani ,if its up to me I will deport these scum bags back to new Delhi that is where they belong .

[ROMMEL]

That is not the point here rana. The magazine may have some biases but the readership is quite Pakistani and they have to be enlightened. So lets not blame anyone but put across fallacies in the articles.

Cheers,

[Rafi]

Guys this woman is talking total crap, and i doubt she has much knowledge on military matters, even if she does it is sheer negative speculation, also insulting statments such as "given the education of soldiers" makes her seem abit vindictive.

But i would say that this speaks volumes for the freedom of speech in Pakistan, that this woman can speak her mind even when what she says is reprehensible makes us one of the freest societies in the Muslim world.

[M Ahmed]

Salamzz,
This lady is a Ph.D from the UK in defence studies although I don't know about which is her field of specialisation in defence studies.I know her indirectly as she did teach a course in the Department of International Relations,Q.A.U.She taught my junior batch there and her course had something to do with weapons technology in modern warfare.I don't know if she really knows much about weapons as a specialist would know. It was only recently that she came from abroad.
regards.

[yasser]

Al khalid is in production at the momment, Pak is the only nation have started production of its own tank! Full stop!

Its not the best in the world.
Somew of its components are foreign .
But it is in production which is more then can be said for any other third world nation.

If Pak army has accepted it that is good enough for me!

[SyedA]

her comparison of al-khalid with t-59 and t-69 shows how much she knows about the tank. I read a lttle more than half the article. I don't think the article is even worth reading. She gives nothing of significance when she is comparing the al-khalid with T-90S and t-72. Even the tanknet guys regard al-khalid a very potent tank.

She should have at least talked to HIT or a tanker before she wrote this article.

[Sultan]

The comment she made of the Al Khalid being a cross between the t69 and t59 was mentioned a number of times by Indian sources and the goons on BR. Im guessing that she took one look at the propganda BS spewed out by the Indians and based her article on those false facts.

[osman]

I have read some of her articles on Pak navy, i must say her articles have never impressed me much and neither does her on Alkhalid, her depth of knowledge is at best average . Time she be put in her socks.

[Gul Khan]

She is comparing T72 with Al-Khalid I say she is high on Afghan stuff.

Only a moron will compare 70s techology with 90s.. enuff said..

To shut her up can some one provide the specs of T72 and Al-Khalid for comparision.

[H Khan]

Dr. Ayesha wrote Al-Khalid was not part of the fire display during the weapons exhibition held last year. Therefore, independent experts do not have any reports on its performance as yet.


I know for a fact the reason behind Al-Khalid not participating in the firing range. HIT and PA did not want "other people" to gauge the heat signature of the Al-Khalid's 125 mm cannon. Simple as that!

[majithia]

The MBT-2000 is a cross between the Chinese T-85 and T-69 tanks. The project was launched around the mid-80s with the blessings of former chief of army staff, General Mirza Aslam Beg, and was meant to fill the technological gap within the Pakistan army by exploiting indigenous sources at the least cost and within a minimum time period. Although the tank has yet to prove its mettlewhich can only happen once it has been put into service for a few years army sources say the machine is pretty rugged, robust and can meet the service's requirements.

My comments: She generalized this complex product clearly undermining Pakistan's efforts to become self sufficient with under lying sarcasm about tank ability to withstand the rigor of a typical tank battle. This clearly shows her inability to understand tank's design (technical), operational specification and parameters. It is like somebody asks me to critique Shaukat Aziz's fiscal policies.

However, considering that the final factory production was at least six years behind schedule, it would have been wiser to simply claim that the tank presents "the best option" in meeting the Pakistan army's current operational requirements. It would also be more apt to compare the tank with the Russian T-72, which is presently the mainstay of the Indian army, rather than making comparisons with the American M1A1 Abraams, the German Leopards or the French Lecler,c unless sufficient data regarding the tank's performance has been generated.

My Comments: Not sure if the tank full scale production is six years behind schedule, only Rommel can give us some facts. But she is totally ignorant about the challenges of producing a product of such mammoth proportions. In US and Europe most industrial products (tanks , fighters) have been plagued by multitudes of problems. FMC's Bradley fighting vehicle went through chronic problems of design, pilot and production delays in spite of the fact that in was designed in the heart of Silicon Valley in San Jose Ca where dozens of vendors were literally next door. I do not understand what her expectations were where Pakistan's many vendors were thousands of miles away and it was Pakistan's first major attempt to undertake such a gigantic project.

On paper, the specifications are better than the Russian T-72 and comparable to the T-90S tank. It must also be kept in mind that while Al-Khalid was being developed, other countries continued to make incremental changes in their existing tank designs and technologies. Interestingly, Al-Khalid was not part of the fire display during the weapons exhibition held last year. Therefore, independent experts do not have any reports on its performance as yet.

My comment: How could Pakistan make incremental changes to brand new product. There is nothing wrong comparing Al Khalid's spec with Russian and other tanks. I am not sure what she is trying to say here. Why Al Khalid was not part of fire display during weapons exhibition, again Rommel would be in a better position to comment.

The tank was essential for the armored corps which is heavily dependent on low-quality Chinese tanks like the T-59, T-59II, T-69, T-69II and the T-85. The army also has a limited number of American M-48 A5 tanks of Korean War vintage that denote obsolete technology.

My comments: If Chinese tanks are low quality, I wonder what option she would suggest to Pakistan armored Corps? Replace them with horses. Does she even know how these tanks have been maintained in the last 30 years and what Pakistan learned from this experience?

The plan to acquire a better quality tank coincided with General Beg's great passion for developing self-reliance in defense technology leading to the conception of the idea of producing an MBT locally. Given Pakistan's lack of capability for original designing of military equipment and technological and industrial backwardness, the planners opted for using the existing tank designs. This was done to save money that could otherwise have been wasted in producing an original design. Moreover, the current design ensured interoperability with the existing fleet in terms of both completely built unit and spares and components. The product development strategy was therefore good. However,the tank manufacturers in Taxila seemed to overestimate their capability to perfect a design within the shortest possible period.

My comments: We all know Pakistan's industrial base and its capacity to produce a tank of Al Khalid caliber was a true technical marvel in my opinion.Keeping design so modular and inter changeable is again a logistical and technical feat in my opinion and of course we will see many design problems which is part of learning curve and I am sure there would be many design iteration and each batch would be better than the next.This is a part of normal design and production cycle and I am sure Al khalid's EOL would be very long for her kind information.

One reason for the delay related tothe choice of the engine. The Chinese manufacturer insisted on a Chinese engine while the Pakistanis wanted the American Perkins engine, even though the designing was done by the Chinese and the Pakistan army had only chipped in with conceptual input. The GHQ in Rawalpindi finally settled for the Ukrainian 1200 HP engine that cost about US$0.25 million per piece.

My comment: We knew all this already. Army obviously was looking for the best engine and it is hogwash that army was only involved in just conceptual input,again she is quite ignorant about the design phases of a product of such scale.

The tank is fitted with a laser range finder, night vision devices and a global positioning system. Besides, it has a modern fire control system and has a multi-target acquisition capability.All of these components are of foreign origin.

My comments: That is perfectly fine with the people who decided to have key components from a reputable sources.

In fact, one of the problems that may be encountered after the tank is fully operational relates to its front-line repair and maintenance. According to one officer from the armored corps, there will be a need to develop the capability to service the tank in the field. Given the level of education of the soldiers, it will be a task to repair the high-tech components without sending the tank back to the depot.

My comment: There are several level of maintenance, some are called FRU while others are LRU and when you can build a tank, maintenance would be through army's proven procedures already established. Tank is not repaired by soldiers as she suggested, again army must have thought about all the how to go about it.

Although Pakistan adopted a cheaper option in producing the tank by not starting from the drawing board like India, most of the value-added components are imported. This includes the steel used in manufacturing the machine. In this respect, the production of Al-Khalid reflects problems encountered by any third-tier manufacturer from a developing country. Like the Indian Arjun, that uses about 55 percent local components and that too of the mechanical parts, it is only the main frame and other steel parts that were produced indigenously.

My comment: Value added components from proven vendors were important and it was good decision and again it is only the beginning in the tank making for Pakistan not the end and the teething problem.

A tougher task would be to find a market for Al-Khalid. First, the cost is still unknown. Although the MBT-2000 has been produced at a cheaper cost than other comparable tanks, the final cost depends on variation in the cost of components acquired from foreign manufacturers. Experts believe the price of the components is likely to go up the minute plans for mass production of this tank are released. Second, there is still no evidence that the Heavy Industries Complex at Taxila has established a manufacturing line for spares. Third, selling major weapon systems like tanks is a game played with political influence and allurement of kickbacks. One wonders if Islamabad has sufficient capacity to do both.

My comment: As a matter of fact Pakistan would have little problem in selling tank to Muslim and third world countries if we can beat the price looking at the exorbitant cost of western tanks. We need a good marketing arm in HIT.

Therefore, while the production of an indigenous tank is certainly an achievement for an industrially and technologically deficient state, one only hopes that the tank meets the expectations of its manufacturers.

My comments: Pakistan army will never compromise country's security by inducting a substandard tank that could jeopardize Pakistan's existence.

Majithia

[H Khan]

Majithia sahib,

This is what one calls dissection reply! ;)

[Amad Rana]

. So lets not blame anyone but put across fallacies in the articles. ROMMEL ,I am not talking about technical aspects or other capabilities of AL KHALID,we at pakdef know much better than she does,their is nothing new in her article .only thing is ,she is trying to create doubts about AL-KHALIDS in the minds of people ,specially potential buyers under the instructions of her bharat matta ,and that is seems like her hidden agenda .these people can't stomach pakistani made tank ,and hence shiting about it , any time we try to bust these friday time people in the past they cry freedom of press with the help of six-pack joes. cheerz

[Shoaib]

Assalamu aleikum,

Correct me if I am wrong guys, but one thing that I noticed in the article which I belive to be a factual error is:

'The tank is fitted with a laser range finder, night vision devices and a global positioning system. Besides, it has a modern fire control system and has a multi-target acquisition capability. All of these components are of foreign origin. '

Laser range finder, and the night vision devices are produced by Pakistan. Not sure about theother parts, but this I am pretty sure about. Will try to find sources and then get back.

W'salam

[ROMMEL]

Well, Let us get some facts here.

1. It is totally untrue that al-khaled did not take part in the firing display. I am not sure which firing display she is talking about, but if she means the firing display that was done for IDEAS2000 at somaini beach. Al-khaled was definately there. Rahter there were two al-khaleds. Both APDS and HEAT rounds were fired. There were over 70 ppl there, a lot of them foreigners military ppl. I can get u pics of the tanks rite after they came back from the firing display. As for the heat signature, I am not sure if one can get a heat signature of the tanks sitting 5Km away on a hot day and while all the people were frisked for having unauthorized stuff.

2. About the GPS, LAser Range Finder and Nite vision device. What she is writing is BULLDUNG!!! The NVD is made in Pakistan by Al-tachanique Corporation of Pakistan (ATCOP), the laser range finder by Dr. A. Q. Khan Research Labs (KRL) and for GPS it is imported for the first few tanks but Advanced Engineering Research labs (AERO) make them in pak for PAF and they may make it for pak tanks if the order size is large (the cant setup a a manufacturing faciity for 15 sets, it dosent make economic sense).

3. Al-khaled has got nothing to do with the T-59 or T-69. It is a completely new chassis (Based on T-85). New engine, hull, electronics, FCS, etc etc.

4. Pakistan Army does not USE M48 no more.

5. Yes, the tank was to be inducted in 1996 but due to sanction it went behind schedule. This was the main reason we got T-84 as a stop gap measure.

6. In view of the threat from India (Incl. the acqusition of T-90) the current army requiremts are well met. Al-khaled is for meeting the requirement of the army for the nxt 15 years.

This is crap, I gotta write a reply underlining the wrong arguments in her article. I hope that is to be done by tomorrow if i find time.

Cheers,