Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Post Reply
narmad
BRFite
Posts: 226
Joined: 10 May 2005 09:47
Location: Mumbai
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by narmad »

BEML’s $275 mn deal with Polish firm under scanner Confusing Header NOT CBI

A $275 million deal between state-owned BEML and Polish arms firm Bumar for supply of 204 armoured recovery and repair vehicles (ARRV) has reportedly got into trouble for alleged irregularities following an audit in Poland.
The Bharat Earth Movers Ltd-Bumar contract got the approval of the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) last October when Gen VK Singh was still the Indian Army chief.
The deal envisages supply of Bumar’s WZT-3 ARRVs to the Indian Army for its 1,500 Soviet-origin T-72 Ajeya main battle tanks.
BEML will build the ARRVs through technology transfer from Bumar, which has an Indian subsidiary called Bumar India.


The auditors, according to the report, conveyed to state prosecutors that the Indian ARRVs contract is “not profitable” as Bumar had tied up with a third party (BEML) for supply of its products to the Indian Army.. The auditors, who went through Bumar’s documents on the ARRV deal with India, concluded that the Polish firm was allowing 36 percent of the Indian contract worth $100 million to be cornered by BEML.First i thought this was to be under CBI Scanner

His successor Krzysztof Krystowski was quoted by the news report as having admitted that the Indian order for ARRVs could not be implemented in its current form and that the company was now considering a renegotiation of the deal.
neerajb
BRFite
Posts: 853
Joined: 24 Jun 2008 14:18
Location: Delhi, India.

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by neerajb »

Kartik wrote:
A Sharma wrote:DRDO episode on ARJUN MBT- INSIDE OUT on Discovery Channel on 8th September- Saturday at 1800 hr, 13th September- Thursday at 0900 hr and 22nd September- Saturday at 1800 hr.

Can somebody record and post on youtube
TIA
Did anyone record this on Sept 8th?
I have it with me on pen drive but the problem is my DTH service provider encrypts it so that one can't reproduce it other than the specified set top box. If there is a way around, I'll be happy to upload it to youtube.
ashdivay
BRFite
Posts: 116
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 14:10
Location: India
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by ashdivay »

Hi Guys,

we am making camo patterns of Indian Army Armourd vechs for a Simulator Software. we require Hi-Res pics of Armoured Vechs of Indian Army. If anyone is intrested in contrubuting ,please email me "ashdivay AT gmail DOT com". We could give you a free License for the simulation software for your personal use.

Regards
Ash
yantra
BRFite
Posts: 185
Joined: 28 Jul 2010 03:46

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by yantra »

Seems ominous for Arjun..

http://bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/newsrf.php?newsid=19713

....Rogozin, who will co-chair the Inter-Governmental Commission meeting on Trade, Economic, Scientific, Technological and Cultural Cooperation (IRIGC-TEC) with External Affairs Minister SM Krishna here on Monday, said that Russia was ready to cooperate with India in producing a transport plane with a payload of six tonnes as well as developing battle tanks.
RajD
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 29 Mar 2011 16:01

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by RajD »

Cross posting from http://ajaishukla.blogspot.in/2012/10/s ... industry.h
Quote/ Setback for private defence industry. The future of the Future ICV project looks gloomy.
MoD might re-tender ambitious Future Infantry Combat Vehicle project, 2 years after calling for and getting bids. / Unquote.
Tamasha begins all over again. :evil:
Regards.
Rajendra
member_23364
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 39
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by member_23364 »

Slightly OT here, but any news on the number of T-90's inducted into IA?

wikipedia lists the number of T-90's in IA as 620 but this is dated back to Aug 2009

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-90
narmad
BRFite
Posts: 226
Joined: 10 May 2005 09:47
Location: Mumbai
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by narmad »

RajD wrote:Cross posting from http://ajaishukla.blogspot.in/2012/10/s ... industry.h
Quote/ Setback for private defence industry. The future of the Future ICV project looks gloomy.
Regards.
Rajendra
Thirdly, and most ambitiously, the FICV should hold its own on the mechanised battlefield, even against much more heavily armed tanks. According to the specifications, the FICV should “destroy enemy tanks, infantry or fortifications in conjunction with armour or independently.”
What exactly is an EOI ? Would you have selection based on "Expression of Interest" with such vague requirements ? shouldn't there be a GSQR which would specify the details of say
the actual projectiles the FICV should be able to handle ?

Off topic link GSQR
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12195
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by Pratyush »

^^^

IMO, given the change in the attitude WRT, the FICV. It will be for the best if the tender in it current shape is cancelled and an imported solution is implemented.

If not, then I fear, that the, FICV will face the same fate as the Arjun. With the difference being that some Pvt sector Indian entity will bleed for it.
Shrinivasan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Location: Gateway Arch
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by Shrinivasan »

Pratyush wrote:IMO, given the change in the attitude WRT, the FICV. It will be for the best if the tender in it current shape is cancelled and an imported solution is implemented.

If not, then I fear, that the, FICV will face the same fate as the Arjun. With the difference being that some Pvt sector Indian entity will bleed for it.
Nobody will bleed for this... let alone the pvt players... this is a strawman created by Con-gress to fleece the pvt players. elections are coming right... need to fill the coffers... some hocus-pocus file notes would be pulled out (Already the preamble has been written "DPP has it covered"), and the deal will proceed... hopefully the IA will get a fighting machine of its choice!!!
sarabpal.s
BRFite
Posts: 348
Joined: 13 Sep 2008 22:04

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by sarabpal.s »

Shrinivasan wrote:
Pratyush wrote:IMO, given the change in the attitude WRT, the FICV. It will be for the best if the tender in it current shape is cancelled and an imported solution is implemented.

If not, then I fear, that the, FICV will face the same fate as the Arjun. With the difference being that some Pvt sector Indian entity will bleed for it.
Nobody will bleed for this... let alone the pvt players... this is a strawman created by Con-gress to fleece the pvt players. elections are coming right... need to fill the coffers... some hocus-pocus file notes would be pulled out (Already the preamble has been written "DPP has it covered"), and the deal will proceed... hopefully the IA will get a fighting machine of its choice!!!
Bulls_eye :evil:
Pranav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5280
Joined: 06 Apr 2009 13:23

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by Pranav »

The Trophy Brigade

July 6, 2012: Israel has completed equipping all the Merkava tanks in an armor brigade with the Trophy APS (Active Protection System). Two years ago the first battalion of Merkavas was so equipped. Last year Trophy defeated incoming missiles and rockets in combat for the first time. This included ATGMs (Anti-Tank Guided Missile), possibly a modern Russian system like the Kornet E. This is a laser guided missile with a range of 5,000 meters. The launcher has a thermal sight for use at night or in fog. The missile's warhead can penetrate enough modern tank armor to render the side armor of the Israeli Merkava tank vulnerable. The Kornet E missile weighs 8.2 kg (18 pounds) and the launcher 19 kg (42 pounds). The system was introduced in 1994, and has been sold to Syria (who apparently passed them on to Hezbollah and Hamas). A few weeks before the ATGM intercept Trophy defeated an RPG warhead (an unguided rocket propelled grenade fired from a metal tube balanced on the shoulder).

All this came a year after first equipping Merkava tanks with APS. As designed to do, Trophy operated automatically and the crew didn't realize the incoming RPG warhead or missile had been stopped until after it was over. That is how APS is supposed to work.

more at http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htarm/20120706.aspx
Raja Ram
BRFite
Posts: 587
Joined: 30 Mar 1999 12:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by Raja Ram »

Gentle Rakshaks,

I am no expert in such things, but I have the following questions.

1. In an era of fast moving battles and conflicts that involve, high precision, standoff capabilities used to decimate a theatre from afar followed by fast and quick moving of forces to occupy, clear and establish control over that theatre, do MBTs have a clear cut and valid role to play? If so, what could be that role?

2. In our own context, given the terrain that we face against China and the terrain that we face against Pakistan, do we foresee in any conflict massed Armor Battles like Khemkaran types any more?

Since this thread has some Tank gurus, I thought it will be a good place to get some objective answers.
Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by Sanku »

Raja Ram wrote: I am no expert in such things, but I have the following questions.
Raja Ram ji, if you dont mind some answers from a fellow non-expert, I would like to try and answer your question(s).

But first off, I wonder if you have been reading Vivek's recent scenario, that in a dramatic setting quite beautifully brings out the answers to all your questions with both pro/cons of the deployments addressed.

Now to my take on the same:
1. In an era of fast moving battles and conflicts that involve, high precision, standoff capabilities used to decimate a theatre from afar followed by fast and quick moving of forces to occupy, clear and establish control over that theatre, do MBTs have a clear cut and valid role to play? If so, what could be that role?
First off, yes, you are of course perfectly right in characterizing today's battle field as one where need qualities are -- high precision, standoff capabilities used to decimate a theater from afar followed by fast and quick moving of forces to occupy, clear and establish control over that theatre.

Now if we look at each piece in the above characterization:
1) high precision, standoff capabilities used to decimate a theater from afar -- these capabilities require a platform, in most minds, such capabilities are associated with a/cs, cruise missiles, or long range rockets like Pinaka.

However, what must be kept in mind is that near and far are relative terms, for a infantry company facing an entrenched position, a tank 1 km behind the lines, laying down destructive power also fulfills the role.

Also a/c strikes are costly to operate, Pinaka and other such weapons still need spotters close to the target for acquisition, long range system always suffer from target acquisition in general (what if the opposing force has decided to move out or hide in the interim) a long term presence can not be maintained. Etc etc.

The point of the ramble above is that, there are no silver bullets, different combat situations require, specific tools (heck despite all the fire power, a infantry rifle and a bayonet are still critical) --- and tanks to are evolving to become platforms which deliver high precision, standoff capabilities (tube launched missiles etc)

Now lets look at the second part of the puzzle
2) fast and quick moving of forces to occupy, clear and establish control over that theater -- now how do you do it in practice?

Move troops through Armored carriers, air/heli-born moves (like in 71).

In such moves, tanks play a integral part in "moving fast and moving everywhere", providing "movable hard points" for high fire power and survivability which ensures that the territory is held.

Especially in this section, tanks still play a role which can not be still supplanted by other techniques. They are best ways for holding positions and moving from one to other quickly.
2. In our own context, given the terrain that we face against China and the terrain that we face against Pakistan, do we foresee in any conflict massed Armor Battles like Khemkaran types any more?
Well there are only two/three spaces for massed tank battles, such as Rajasthan deserts and Khemkharan area. This is not a new development, or a factor which has changed with time and newer technologies and developments.

By massed tank battles, we are talking of a multiple tank divisions slogging it out directly against one another.

However, other areas in and around Pok, Ladhakh and even in Burma/BD riverine/forest area -- the space and opportunity for embedded tank squadrons with infantry with some tanks being "light tanks" (PT-76) still exists.

Net net -- I would say that tanks continue to be as much a mainstay today, as they were before.

Even in Iraq, even with complete decimation of most Iraqi armor and other heavy formations through stand off means, the final punch through could only be achieved through M-1s.

Heck even the "peace keeping" operations finally needed M-1s for "pacification" exercises since even ICV were getting decimated by Iraqis through guerrilla tactics -- and finally took the burnt of hit and run before they achieved pacification.
member_22539
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2022
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by member_22539 »

It is curious that doubts about the future role of tanks still exist for some these days. I would have understood it, if was in the preceding decades, a time when increasingly accurate and deadly missiles were making life hard for tanks . But these days, to rehash the same arguments would be plain ignorance. Not only do we have soft countermeasures against missiles these days like lock-on warning devices, jamming devices, etc., we are also seeing the birth of new golden age for tanks and armor in general. We see active protection systems like Trophy get better by the day and soon will be perfected to the extent that the only thing that would be able to have the hope of penetrating such defences would be high velocity tank rounds (some day that might be defeated too, but by then we would use tank mounted lasers/railguns/gauss cannons, etc.) At the same time, we will never be able to completely get rid of real armor protection thanks to high-calibre small-arms and the need to enter cities in future conflict scenarios. So, the way I see it, the demise of the tank has been greatly exaggerated, particularly so these days. Their use in not only Iraq, but Afghanistan as well is ample proof of their continuing indispensability.
Pranav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5280
Joined: 06 Apr 2009 13:23

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by Pranav »

Arun Menon wrote:It is curious that doubts about the future role of tanks still exist for some these days. I would have understood it, if was in the preceding decades, a time when increasingly accurate and deadly missiles were making life hard for tanks . But these days, to rehash the same arguments would be plain ignorance. Not only do we have soft countermeasures against missiles these days like lock-on warning devices, jamming devices, etc., we are also seeing the birth of new golden age for tanks and armor in general. We see active protection systems like Trophy get better by the day and soon will be perfected to the extent that the only thing that would be able to have the hope of penetrating such defences would be high velocity tank rounds (some day that might be defeated too, but by then we would use tank mounted lasers/railguns/gauss cannons, etc.) At the same time, we will never be able to completely get rid of real armor protection thanks to high-calibre small-arms and the need to enter cities in future conflict scenarios. So, the way I see it, the demise of the tank has been greatly exaggerated, particularly so these days. Their use in not only Iraq, but Afghanistan as well is ample proof of their continuing indispensability.
At the minimum, any tank will have to be able to resist the kind of A2G attack with high speed missiles (e.g. Brimstone) that turned Gaddafi's tanks into death traps.

A good write-up on the capabilities of Brimstone - http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2012/03/t ... e-missile/
VikramS
BRFite
Posts: 1885
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by VikramS »

Raja Ram ji:

All the high precisions stuff looks good on recruitment videos, and video games.

After all the high-tech hellfire is done, it is the grunt in boots who finally marches in to control the land. And the grunt needs tanks. They need the armor for protection, the gun for mop-ups, and the bulk to intimidate.

Look at Af-Pak: The drones rule the air, but at the end of the day it is the boots on the ground who truly matter.
Raja Ram
BRFite
Posts: 587
Joined: 30 Mar 1999 12:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by Raja Ram »

Thanks gentlemen, it gives me a better perspective. Will also read up Vivek's scenario.
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14332
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by Aditya_V »

Pranav_> its not the Tank's job to defend against A2g , thats the job SAM's with the Tank regiment.
RKumar

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by RKumar »

Army set to try more lethal T-90 tank

:(( :(( :((
The Army is in the process of getting a new and more lethal version of the Russian origin T-90 tank. The Armoured Corps will soon get the latest version of these tanks that will aide quicker retaliation and have gadgets to automatically track targets among its improved features.

A total of 236 of the latest version of the tanks have been ordered, said top sources, while explaining that additional features will be incorporated on the existing T-90 platform with no change in the engine or its traction. However, there is no immediate plan to upgrade the existing fleet of such tanks spread across 20 regiments.

The T-90, along with the upgraded T-72 tanks, form the bulwark of India’s defensive and offensive capability along the sensitive Western border with Pakistan. Two regiments of the indigenous ‘Arjun’ tank have been added at 12 Corps Jodhpur in Rajasthan.

The Ministry of Defence (MoD)-operated Heavy Vehicle Factory (HVF) at Avadi on the outskirts of Chennai that licence-produces the T-90 in India has been tasked with adding the technical goodies to the existing platform. Work has already started on it, a source confirmed.

The key change will be a modern targeting system with an automatic target tracker. The gunner inside the tank has to “lock-on” a target. Once that is done, onboard computers keep a track of the target in a 360° radius. Fire can be directed at the target as and when. At present, the gunner has a tough time keeping track of the moving target while the tank is in motion.

The new version of the tank will also have a “correction input device”. This will assess all prevailing factors such as distance of target, height and temperature of the barrel and correct the line and trajectory of fire on its own.

The third incorporation will be a new muzzle reference system. At present, the front muzzle on the barrel of the tank needs to be aligned afresh each time the barrel position is lowered. The latest version of the T-90 will have a system by which the tank barrel will re-align itself to its earlier-programmed reference point, sources explained.

The add-ons are aimed at faster retaliation in the battlefield after the enemy has been spotted and will save precious time consumed on re-aligning and re-assessing the distance of targets.

The new tanks will also have an improved thermal imager that will give sharper pictures at nighttime from a distance of 3-4 km. The new thermal imager will pick up variations in temperatures of an advancing vehicle or human being and help the tank-commander better understand the looming threat. Existing thermal imagers do not detect variations in temperature.

The Indian upgrade is in line with that undertaken by Russia. At this year’s Def-Expo, the Russians had for the first time unveiled the ‘T-90-MS’, which has earned the sobriquet of “flying tank” in military circles. The tank showcased the latest turret with the ‘Kalina’ modernised targeting system that is integrated with the squad commander’s control system. It even had a more powerful engine.

The Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) had cleared a proposal to buy 10,000 Invar missiles for the T-90 tanks on October 18. Some of these will be purchased from Russian manufacturers whereas the remaining would be license-produced by Bharat Dynamics Limited (BDL) under the transfer of technology (ToT) agreement
Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by Surya »

The Indian upgrade is in line with that undertaken by Russia.
:eek:
At this year’s Def-Expo, the Russians had for the first time unveiled the ‘T-90-MS’, which has earned the sobriquet of “flying tank” in military circles
:rotfl:

wrong all Tin cans are flying tanks :) even philip saar will agree
sarabpal.s
BRFite
Posts: 348
Joined: 13 Sep 2008 22:04

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by sarabpal.s »

Perhaps trying cover the shortcoming of T90S expose by Arjun with MS.

we never know behind the scene result ever :((
Kersi D
BRFite
Posts: 1444
Joined: 20 Sep 2000 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by Kersi D »

Surya wrote:
The Indian upgrade is in line with that undertaken by Russia.
:eek:
At this year’s Def-Expo, the Russians had for the first time unveiled the ‘T-90-MS’, which has earned the sobriquet of “flying tank” in military circles
:rotfl:

wrong all Tin cans are flying tanks :) even philip saar will agree
T 90SuB travels underwater, Russia is inviting India for a JV for AIP for these tanks

And a new supe uber T 90SUGD can travel at 20 kmph, UNDERGROUND. It is under development of course with India (read Indian moolah)
ArmenT
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 4239
Joined: 10 Sep 2007 05:57
Location: Loud, Proud, Ugly American

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by ArmenT »

@Raja Ram: Sir, this question comes up every now and then. Here's something that I quoted a few years ago on that topic:
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 55#p849155

As far as military planners are concerned, it still applies in today's battlefield.
Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10390
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by Yagnasri »

What happend to IFV devlopment. We hear nothing after initial devlopment studies.
AdityaM
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2025
Joined: 30 Sep 2002 11:31
Location: New Delhi

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by AdityaM »

I was surprised to find the inside of a humvee to be fairly basic looking
Image
Image
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12195
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by Pratyush »

What are the chances that the UPG will be picked up as is. But the Arjun Mk2 will have to run through hoops before being inducted. I am now very confident that the IA FICV project will now be cancelled along with the indigenous FMBT.

Those requirements will now be met by the new Russian project aimed at replacing the legacy combat vehicle fleet by 2015.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by Austin »

The T-90 upgrade looks very basic compared to what MS has it , all that it has is a MRS and Autotracker over T-90 Bishma , there was a interview of DGMF posted some time back which mentioned more comprehensive upgrade include new APS and Cooling system.

Not sure what do they mean by new Thermal system giving sharper images unless they mean CITV as Catherine TI is used on both Indian and Russian T-90
RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5620
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by RoyG »

Hopefully get a clean DGMI/Gov and we induct Arjun in big numbers. Perhaps we may be able to slowly sell off our tin cans to other countries.
mody
BRFite
Posts: 1362
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by mody »

Funny that DDM never writes about the deficiencies of imported equipment's. Would have loved to see at the end of the article for the T-90 upgrade, that the Arjun MK-II incidently will have all of these things and more and that these short comings of the T-90 were exposed in the comparative trials with the Arjun. Any news reports about indigenous products always have the customary cost and time overrun rants written in them.

But that apart, I guess every Jingo has to except the fate that waits for the Arjun. It is never going to be inducted in numbers.
I only hope that some clean and smart people in the IA and MoD decide that the 3 regiments of MBT for Ladakh are the Arjun MK-II, as they might have to face the Chinese Type 99 or the latest chinese tanks.

Also if the three strike corps' are not going to be given the Arjun, fine, give them to the pivot corps. I would love to see 7 regiments of Arjun MK-II arm the X, XI and XII corps (XII already has 2 regiments of Arjun MK-I).
Plus the three regiments for Ladakh would mean a total of 10 Arjun MK-II regiments and 2 Arjun MK-I regiment. That would complete the minimum order requirement for the project and everyone can move on.
The pivot corps with Arjun MK-II can really cause Havoc in case of war and would seriously give nightmares to the pukes.

For the future develop a FMBT(Arjun MK-III), with a Le-clerc type Autoloader, three man crew, Active protection system, 1,500 HP engine, which would be smaller and lighter then the current MTU-838, engine. Do away with the ERA packs and reduce the height and width of the tank. New fully networked combat management system, APU, Air conditioning etc . etc.

With the above changes one will probably end up with a 55 Ton tank with 1,500 HP, with a lower silhouette and lesser width as compared to the Arjun. FMBT achieved.
Last edited by mody on 06 Nov 2012 17:19, edited 1 time in total.
Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by Sanku »

mody wrote: With the above changes one will probably end up with a 55 Ton tank with 1,500 HP, with a lower silhouette and lesser width as compared to the Arjun. FMBT achieved.
To be honest, I am beginning to think that the above will never happen -- the Mil-Ind complex shows no hurry to achieve the above in relevant time frames.

We can blame x, y or z, but clearly, the fixes and turn around found even in Arjun take ages. It is fine to have a good design and a bunch of prototypes with significant strengths in some dimensions.

But getting the kinks ironed out and rolled out quickly, and in numbers is not something that is happening. This needs fixing.

Cursing either the IA, or the Russian is NOT the solutions. They are not holding Arjun back. There is enough space if CVRDE can show some rapid movement.
jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5727
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by jamwal »

mody wrote:
Also if the three strike corpses are not going to be given the Arjun, fine, give them to the pivot corps.
:mrgreen:

There is no way to get Arjun in to Laddakh if bridge capacity is a real issue . Of course it can be dissembled and transported, but it wouldn't be a feasible in an emergency
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36424
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by SaiK »

Every other country's deal with IA is under scanner, except the big two cold-war enemies., especially the ever nexus-ed everything hidden under the scanner 70% market share erstwhile commies. How come? especially dealing with an indic group of well formed and organized to deal with any type of banana transactions?
mody
BRFite
Posts: 1362
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by mody »

Ladakh is supposed to get 1 independent Armour brigade, on permanent deployment.

In this case the Arjun can deployed in Ladakh, even if it has to be transported there initially in partially disassembled condition.

Also if they are going to base 1 brigade in ladakh or any kind of tank, they will have to develop the support structure like a repair and spares depot etc.
merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2153
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by merlin »

mody wrote:Ladakh is supposed to get 1 independent Armour brigade, on permanent deployment.

In this case the Arjun can deployed in Ladakh, even if it has to be transported there initially in partially disassembled condition.

Also if they are going to base 1 brigade in ladakh or any kind of tank, they will have to develop the support structure like a repair and spares depot etc.
First they need to get infrastructure in place to get the tanks to where they need to be. Currently it can't get deployed without an infrastructure upgrade.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by Austin »

Russia will make the Indian T-90 "digital"
Kits that make the tank "digital" - an automated control system (ACS), which is based on tank subsystem ESU TK "Constellation-2M". The set allows commanders to control units on the battlefield in real time, connecting all armored vehicles into a single information network.

- The tanks are displays showing all the tactical information about the location of friendly forces and enemy forces. With ACS commanders of all units receive tasks from higher headquarters, give orders, and control their execution, make changes in the plans. The interface is very similar to a computer game strategy, - he said.

Performed two sets of ACS - for linear and command tanks. Commander's system is more complex, equipped with additional displays. According to the source, the negotiations with India are conducted throughout the year, and the success of the talks facilitated by the fact that the main tank of Indian Army - Russian T-90.

Especially for customers Russians conducted additional tests and screenings "Constellation." Indian military check whether work set in the desert, the mountains, in crossing water obstacles. Most of them concerned whether the transmitter is to break through the dust and rain.

- Not everything went smoothly, the equipment and software had to be replaced. The hardest thing was to integrate our electronic brains with Indian, but we managed - said the defense industry.
rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7830
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by rohitvats »

jamwal wrote:
mody wrote:
Also if the three strike corpses are not going to be given the Arjun, fine, give them to the pivot corps.
:mrgreen:

There is no way to get Arjun in to Laddakh if bridge capacity is a real issue . Of course it can be dissembled and transported, but it wouldn't be a feasible in an emergency
JJ, the deployment is going to be on permanent basis - so, they can disassemble the tanks and transport it using the heavy lifters. Put them back together in Ladakh and they are ready to go. And as it is, more than the bridges, it is the width of the Srinagar-Leh road and the winding turns which will decide what can be transported by road.
rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7830
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by rohitvats »

merlin wrote:
mody wrote:Ladakh is supposed to get 1 independent Armour brigade, on permanent deployment.

In this case the Arjun can deployed in Ladakh, even if it has to be transported there initially in partially disassembled condition.

Also if they are going to base 1 brigade in ladakh or any kind of tank, they will have to develop the support structure like a repair and spares depot etc.
First they need to get infrastructure in place to get the tanks to where they need to be. Currently it can't get deployed without an infrastructure upgrade.
merlin, the tanks can go disassembled in the belly of heavy lifters. That should not be a problem. Also, there was a report which stated that IA has initiated the widening of Srinagar-Leh road to facilitate movement of T-90 tanks. The logistic tail to support armored bde in Ladakh sector should not be a problem at all for the army.
merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2153
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by merlin »

I was talking about Sikkim. All bridges there are not Class 70 so the Arjun cannot go on them as is. Also there is no airport to transport the tanks in one piece. They need to be dismantled and the pieces carted there and reassembled.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by shiv »

merlin wrote:I was talking about Sikkim. All bridges there are not Class 70 so the Arjun cannot go on them as is. Also there is no airport to transport the tanks in one piece. They need to be dismantled and the pieces carted there and reassembled.
The interesting to me here, would Chinese heavy tanks be able to enter Indian plains via such bridges and roads?
Post Reply