Malaysia to get delivery PT-91-M Polish Tanks in 2006

bcoy SG

It actually works both ways. If you cannot get a clear shot, neither can your opponent. It goes down to tactics, strategy, numbers, who is the attacker/defender, positions, etc.
I don't see Malaysia's armoured units operating in thick jungle, esp the MBT.
The lightly armoured wheeled APCs are used by their infantry units to move along the strategic north-south highway.

CenturionMBT SG

they may be able to operate in the jungle, but it is going to slow them down like hell. so some may simply choose the highway instead.

Matlaysia SG

Yo bro, cash is king... And if thats the case, I guess Mindef would go and form a air assult brigade.

Matlaysia SG

If they choose the highway, It makes the job even easier for the airforce. Just send a squardron of A-4 skyhawks to go after them with laser guided bombs and mavrick.

Matlaysia SG

IMHO, I think we might be limited with 20 apaches. If we look at coutries like Israel, Egypt and UAE, they are only armed with about 40 apaches. Hence, if they these countries face armour in such huge numbers and only have 40 of them, malaysian armoured brigades would not be too much for Saf to handle. In addition, if we want to get the MAF's armoured vehicles out of the way, we still have the bionex 25 with the 25mm bushmaster cannon

CX SG

Originally posted by Matlaysia:

IMHO, I think we might be limited with 20 apaches. If we look at coutries like Israel, Egypt and UAE, they are only armed with about 40 apaches. Hence, if they these countries face armour in such huge numbers and only have 40 of them, malaysian armoured brigades would not be too much for Saf to handle.

i agree... but i think there is some misconception about the role about the apaches in what we're saying... 20 is enough for us for now because the apaches are not meant to act alone... not unless u use them like the israelis sometimes... to chase palestinian terrorists and blow them up with hellfire... a bit overkill if u ask me Mr. Green

judging by the latest ops in iraq, the apaches are used to support ground troops, who have good AT elements as well... ATGMs and MBTs. hence, it complements and enhances AT existing capabilities, not replace it.

In addition, if we want to get the MAF's armoured vehicles out of the way, we still have the bion1x 25 with the 25mm bushmaster cannon

at best, that will only disable APCs and IFVs... it won't take out a tank... the best way to take out a tank in a tank vs tank battle, is either to dismount troops to shoot ATGM, or to use another tank.

just for info, people in armour will know that during exercises, bionix are not used to engage an enemy tank.

SingaporeTyrannosaur SG

"These PT-91 battle tanks with additional features are needed by the army. These are the most modern tanks in the world as they have various sub-systems from European countries and suited to Malaysia," he said after witnessing the signing of the contract for the purchase of the tanks and support vehicles.

Unfortunately the PT-91s are just a polish rehash on the old T-72, tanks which got fragged like crazy in the gulf wars one and two, without being able to even knock out a single enemy tank in return. Chances are, and likely are, that the PT-91 isn't going to be remotely anywhere near the most modern tank in the world unless the PT-91 upgrade provides revolutionary capabilities that are unheard of in the T-72. Given their price tag, anything which is affordable by malaysia, this is probably not the case.

What on earth do they need a NBC system for? Nipah virus?

Innocent_Malaysian SG

Im sure u are saying this without even knowing the systems onboard the PT-91 right?
Think before you say

|-|05| SG

hmm....the PT-91 looks good for the reigon but when compared to other MBT's in use today i'm quite shock that it's the lightest.....even lighter then the french and italian tanks!
EDIT:it's even lighter then the M60 and the OLIFANT MK 1B and for mis numbering

Innocent_Malaysian SG

it is PT-91 not PT-90

|-|05| SG

sorry my bad edited now

Matlaysia SG

opps.. sorry for the typo. It should be to disable IFV and APCs, we do not need the AMX-13, we can use the bionex 25 or even the amx-10P firesupport vehicle which has an even larger cannon than the amx-13.

Viper52 SG

I still think the answer is no. MBTs remain unsuitable for use in the regions terrain, with the Russian T-72 series (of which the PT-91 is a member) being the lightest, tipping the scales at 40+ tons.

What Singapore needs is a new class of tank, with sufficient firepower to match today's MBTs yet with sufficient mobility to traverse the unique demands of regional terrain. I might be speculating, but something has to give and armour protection would likely suffer(in varying degrees) as a result with the resulting slack in protection be taken up by electronic protection methods.

Thats the very reason why Singapore is going ahead with developing its own light tank. And that, IMO is a good move, even if it utilises mostly COTS technologies/parts as local industries have not reached the standards nor critical mass being present to justify developing it entirely from the ground up.

SingaporeTyrannosaur SG

Nonsense, I took a detalied look into the PT-91... and compared it with what I know about other MBTs.

It's easly to see that it's way overhyped by the Malaysian media, a large proportion of other modern MBTs, esp. western ones would be superior to it. I rank the PT-91 in the lower 35-40 percentile of MBT quality...

Malaysia as usual, wants to make it seem like they got some metal majic akin to the Abrams on their hand, but the truth is, it's a second-hand POS. And when those tanks start brewing up and immolating malaysian crew in them (a chronic and basic problem with the T-72 design), the "defence" minister will realize that he spoke too soon. The PT-91 is basicallya T-72 wannabe a high tech tank like the wester MBTs by slapping on a few toys, but in the end it's still a T-72 with the basic design flaws of poor crew protection and limited interior space, as well as a lously 125mm gun that's poorly underpowered and hurls sabots that can't even penetrate the side of an Abrams.

On the other hand, the PT-91 is simply a "gadgetized" T-72, type of which was fragged by the hundreds and destroyed utterly by Apache Hellfires and shot up by Abrams tanks, in come cases the sabots even destroying tanks hiding behidn sand berms by blasting through them, or destroyign two tanks by stataying them... yeah, it's a real good tank witha good track record the Malaysians have bought. Laughing

The Singaporean tatic? Wait till Malaysia gets lots of these tanks and waste their flaccid ringgit in their misguided attempt to impresse their neighbours with their
"military" "might" before getting something that's not only better, but provides far more bang-for-the-buck.

Sure a PT-91 only costs half that of a western MBT, but then again kill ratios are usually 4:1 or worse in battle (assuming they manage to kill anything at all), so Malaysia actually ends up deficet by half, best case seneriao.

|-|05| SG

destroyign two tanks by stataying them

Source? From what i know of Sabot rounds that the metal piece inside of the round can only breakthrough 1 tank's armour and not 2 as the extra blast ability of the round is not there to help push the metal piece through.....

SingaporeTyrannosaur SG

From post gulf war wreckage study where they found two T-72s knocked out in such away that it could only be taken out with one shot (by the way an Abrams commander reported knocking out two tanks in such a fashion eairler). Apparently the sabot penetrated on a path that allowed it enough mass to exit and still destroy the tank behind. I think it was also reported in Tom Clancy's armored cav.

Usually sabots will break up and join spall within the tank to destroy it, but not in the case of american DU sabots versus T-72.

There are several ways to understand how this is possible:

Firstly, unlike Tungsten, DU, when alloyed correctly is self-sharpening, meaning that when it penetrates the armor and starts to break up, the front nose of the projectile will fail in a constant way that makes sure that is is always pointy, while that of the Tunsten penetrator is blunted and slowed down considerably in armor material. Besides the increased density of DU, this also contributes to the increased preformance of DU penetrators over Tungsten. This means that the DU rod slug that penetrates the armor will still be as sharp as orginal form of the long rod penetrator.

So if the tank armor is weak enough (as in the case of the T-72/PT-91) the DU sabot can penetrate the tank and enter it with sufficent mass and sharpness to actually blast out the back (where the weak armor would be little trouble) and hit the tank behind. The fact that the T-72 behind could still be penetrated from the front by a already demassed and deformed penetrator means two things. Either the tank is really pitifully armoured or it had a weak joint like a turret ring hit, either way, the poor damage control ability of the soviet tank meant that even when any projectiles enter, the tank will almost surely blow up, hence, two kills.

In many other cases, exit wounds from the DU sabots were found in knocked out T-72s, meaning the armor of the tank was weak enough that sabot rod penetrators could still blast through without breaking up much, and with enough velocity to destroy another T-72 behind. Internal damage was mainly done via spall, rather then pieces of the sabot.

The British, using their tungsten penetrators, did some pretty fine work but didn't achieve as much amazing results with the american "silver bullets".

|-|05| SG

yea i know about how good DU is and stuff but the 2nd tank's armour being simply penertrated like that really really says alot about the armour.....i mean if thats the case a freaking HEAT round could knock out that tank?!

observe SG

but there are no Abrams/leopard 2/Challenger in SEA.
Unless there is an open conflict with the US (the only existing superpower)...there will never be a PT91M vs Abrams clash.

With what's available in SEA, i suppose PT91M is more that sufficient to knockout the other 60s era MBT and light tanks that it is likely to meet.

There is an old saying that if you and another guy meet a tiger....you need not have to be the fastest runner in the world to survive....just run faster than the next guy!

SingaporeTyrannosaur SG

I think they did also use HEAT rounds on T-72s and they penetrated.

Bradleys also managed to knock out some T-64s with the 25mm cannons, while most of the rounds were unable to penetrate, the T-64's optics were fouled and the crew concussed inside (thanks to the small internal space) and finally they fired enough rounds to get an entry through the turret ring or other weak areas. While this kind of damage would have just annoyed a western tank, the T-64s brewed up. Razz

observe SG

..how is this possible...did the iraqi had T64 ?
T64 is only used by the russian army....the next tank derived from the T64 is the T80U.
The Ukranians/pakistan had the T80UD.

i think you meant the T62.

« Previous Page Next Page »