Pakistani T-80UD(6DT-2E) - Improved excellence

2 Likes

The 478BE-1 is enough at 11.0, and the body of the T-80UD at 12.0 is like a piece of paper, which will be easily broken down by the M1 and Leopard 2.

I feel that this specific variant of the BM Oplot-P, based on Pakistan, is very suitable for appearing as a 12.0, modified from the T-80UD, with excellent maneuverability and protection, solving the problem of firepower through compatibility with Chinese ammunition (since this car is theoretically based on the Pakistani T-80UD). Moreover, this car is different from the Thai T-84M, which can enrich the in-game vehicles.

4 Likes


https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/fTZo4NOpJrJl
this doesnt make anysense, when the other technical mod said this for another bug report:

https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/2mZaLYmghVbq
does this not imply that if the vehicle can use it it can have it in game no matter what reason??

2 Likes

And can someone re-write this bugreport to include pictures of pakistani UD from different angle with also Ukranian 478BE as well as to show them that the turret have visual difference

https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/09JJOsQK35nC

i think only the engine may be wrong as this is the obj 478BE and not the 478BE-1 (which had the new turret).

478BE has the smoke grenades mounted along the frontal arc of the turret

478BE-1 has the smoke grenades mounted in quad launchers at the turret sides

2 Likes

ah i see, anything about the power pack though?

Actually since we are not 100% certain if the two T-80UDs with 6TD-II in Pakistan Army are 478BE or 478BE-1, we cannot be certain which one this will be or what it should be.
What we do know is this: if it has the 6TD-II engine, then it must have the MBT-2000 transmission
If it has the 6TD-I engine, then it is the standard T-80 transmission

1 Like

Theoretically, Pakistan should have more T-80UDs with replacement engines, not just those two.

And, my guess is that the future Pakistani subtree should look like this: Obj.478BE(10.3/10.7)->Obj.478BE-1(6TD-2)(11.0/11.3)->BM Oplot-P(12.0). Because the level of protection of the body of the T-80UD at 12.0 is far from enough, I added the BM Oplot-P.

3 Likes

well the 2 number is the minimum that we have, with time, more must have been upgraded

as for the subtree that i hope for,
image
(BRs may be outdated)

4 Likes

@soviet_MoonMan

Can I suggest that you rename the suggestion to the T-80UD 478BE-1/6DT-II as we’re getting a T-80UD 478BE as an event vehicle? If this specific T-80UD variant was to ever be added for China it would likely follow the same naming scheme as the already existing T-80UD 478BE.

1 Like

Nice plan, although a bit dated on br. But I want to ask, is there any difference between those Al Khalid and VT-4? There are so many.

already working on it 😅

  • Al Khalid (base model) is slightly better than Type-85IIA/AP,
  • Al Khalid I has ERA like MBT-2000 fully kitted out,
  • Al Khalid II has better composite and ERA (new turret armour that looks like VT-4)
  • VT-4P is slightly worse than VT-4A1 in game with no side ERA
  • Al Haider (VT-4PA1 ← not official designation but for clarification) is the license produced version which will receive the most upgrades and Hard-kill APS

EDIT: There is actually another variant of the Al Khalid I with even more ERA

3 Likes

Thanks for your efforts, dude.Also I have a question, does the VT4 (or Hydra) in Pakistan have a side ERA?

Not as far as ive seen

1 Like

The T-80UDs domestic kinetic penetrator has been acknowledged in a bug report possibly hinting to the addition of it in-game. As I predicted the T-80UD 478BE has been added into the files of the game at the BR of 10.7 with 3BM42, China has absolutely nothing there at that specific BR and giving it the Naiza APFSDS and moving it up to 11.0 would be a more logical change.

Bug Report

Community Bug Reporting System

3 Likes

though it’s not as good as 11.0 MBTs, and there are too many already, I’d rather remove it’s thermal and move it to 10.3

Remove the thermals on the 478BE and I including many others will not grind the event, or for the T-80UD for the very least. I’m not wasting my time on a 1:1 replica of the already existing T-80UD in the USSR TT minus the premium benefits (which makes it absolutely not worth your time).

Only the first 15 batches of T-80UDs delivered to Pakistan lacked actual thermals and this is because they were former USSR T-80UDs taken from Ukrainian reserves. The far majority of the 320 delivered to Pakistan had thermals and removing it would be a ahistorical feature.

We already have a T-80U-E1 present at 11.7, the T-80UD 478BE would function near identical to it minus the worse transmission but superior firepower thanks to the Naiza APFSDS.

The Naiza funny enough would also be the best kinetic penetrator China would have in its entire TT, this will more than make up for the bad transmission and especially at 11.0

2 Likes

yeah im in favour of it being 11.0 with thermals. Maybe reserve the naiza for the T-80UD 478BE-1 at 11.7?
at 11.0 3BM42 would perform just fine. but hey just for a good MBT at 11.0

2 Likes