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
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20773
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by Karan M »

Ah, just read the so called JV means the OFB itself. Great!!! Expect usual russian "delays" in TOT and OFB wringing its hands and producing sub caliber rounds as well.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by NRao »

"JV" and "Russia" seem to have found a hold to sell within India.
member_28482
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 22
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by member_28482 »

What are the possibilities that the Army would Induct Arjun MK-2 without missile firing capabilities.

Is it mandatory to have missile firing capabilities, If yes why not Drdo develop its own.

Even for anti tank ammo's we need russia??? Its shame for OFB's :<
Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4218
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by Prem Kumar »

India, Russia to sign deal for anti-tank ammunition

Wait! I thought they already had enough anti-tank ammunition:

a) Torsion Bar
b) Lahat mis-firing
c) DGMF Bharadwaj
Rony
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3512
Joined: 14 Jul 2006 23:29

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by Rony »

[ If you had bothered to point out that these defense establishments and tanks can be susceptible to attack by Islamic fundamentalists living in these Muslim dominated areas, your post would have made sense; to use the word "ROPer" makes it seems the whole Muslim community is a risk and you bracket the entire community in one basket. We don't have space for such generalizations.

I'm letting the link to the story stay - rohitvats


Tanks trundle through Avadi
Last edited by rohitvats on 24 Apr 2014 15:07, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: crass generalization removed. - rohitvats
member_28305
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 41
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by member_28305 »

My house is in Avadi..
Its a regular Sight (T72/T90/Arjun)..
Most days we can hear them firing test rounds.. every time our windows vibrates.. :) :)
member_20317
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3167
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by member_20317 »

Closer to the CRPF Main Road probably the vibrating beds could be the reason they have so many kids running after MBTs.

Actually Avadi factory employees are also very SDRE only. You will never see their tanks as intimidating. Instead they make their tanks look like some Bollywood Victoria Carriage. Very approachable lovely only.

Image

The impact of Bhishma on the town's population explosion!

Image

They do exercises on the Bari Brahmana river bed and parallel road, just outside Jammu too. You can see the tanks and BMPs up close, there too passing very close to settlements. Though did not hear any firing during my 2 month stay.
RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5620
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by RoyG »

Apparently, this is the new 120mm thermobaric/frag round developed for the Arjun by DRDO. Looks deadly.

http://giant.gfycat.com/UncommonFewKodiakbear.gif
Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5128
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by Manish_Sharma »

^Woooowwwww !!!

Image
abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3090
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by abhik »

^^^
Source?
member_26622
BRFite
Posts: 537
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by member_26622 »

That's serious firepower! Want to see one blowing up a Paki militant hideout!

What pains is the string of T-90's dressed up as Bhisma while a lone Arjun?

How many Arjuns's have been ordered so far and what's holding up follow on orders? Continuing development and deployment of Arjun is better of than one of foreign purchases and nose bleed prices for imported shells (500 million $ for 66K shells, each at $6,500 :eek: :shock: :eek:

Russia seems to look at India as a cash milking cow now-a-days.
aditp
BRFite
Posts: 448
Joined: 15 Jul 2008 07:25
Location: Autoland

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by aditp »

Two videos on the Tata Kestrel 8x8 wheeled infantry combat vehicle



Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20773
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by Karan M »

abhik wrote:^^^
Source?
Supposedly a DRDO vid - they are putting up videos of their journals nowadays. Could be from one of those.
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21233
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by Prem »

Russian tank T-90 (1000HP) stuck in the mud

darshhan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2937
Joined: 12 Dec 2008 11:52

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by darshhan »

Even gold plated equipment cannot make up for cowardice and incompetence. Iraqi Army was never interested in fighting the ISIS. Neither it developed any serious capabilities to do so. This is even when it had requisite time to do so. Any half decent observer could have predicted that after Syria, the sunni fundamentalists would target Iraq.
John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3447
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by John »

darshhan wrote:Even gold plated equipment cannot make up for cowardice and incompetence. Iraqi Army was never interested in fighting the ISIS. Neither it developed any serious capabilities to do so. This is even when it had requisite time to do so. Any half decent observer could have predicted that after Syria, the sunni fundamentalists would target Iraq.
A Tank without medium caliber gun that can engage ambushes from above and active protection system is practically useless in urban warfare. BTR-4 would have been more useful than M1s but that deal fell thru if i recall.
member_26622
BRFite
Posts: 537
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by member_26622 »

Article says it was without the depleted uranium armor ? Is US holding this back and why so?

The balance seems to have shifted back to infantry carrying armor denial weapons - low cost solution to expensive beasts. By the way, Tanks have always been vulnerable in urban areas.
John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3447
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by John »

Tanks are vulnerable in almost any environment nowadays with proliferation UAVs and IEDs but IMO urban environment they are simply not even effective without remote controlled gun to engage any experienced RPG squads. Strange to see america give M1A1 without TUSK to Iraq.
rkhanna
BRFite
Posts: 1171
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 02:35

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by rkhanna »

Just read on another forum (the related link is in Russian so no point posting) that India and a Host of Other Asian/Central Asian Countries will be sending contingents to the Russian Tank Biathlon this year. (Western Nations have boycotted it)

China is the only country sending its own Tanks and crews (Type 96?), all others including India will be using Russian T-72s... The Russian poster of the above link item stated that China was the only country who could afford sending a tank team to Russia to participate.


Anybody have any additional information on the above?
RKumar

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by RKumar »

Ordnance factory develops system to airlift LFG
JABALPUR: Indian Army may be soon able to chopper-lift artillery guns to its mountain posts. The Army along with the ordnance factory has developed an indigenous system for lifting the lighter 105mm light field gun (LFG). The equipment has been tested successfully and the ordnance factory which developed it hopes to bag a bulk production order.

The equipment, 'apparatus airlift', was developed at the century old Gun Carriage Factory in Jabalpur. The factory also manufactures the LFGs. These guns are currently the most deployed 'howitzers'of the Army. Developed indigenously in 1980s, the LFG has a range of 17 kms which can be extended up to 20 kms by making a slight modification in the artillery shell. The 155mm howitzer guns have almost double the range.

At present the Army moves the guns to its mountain posts by road on trucks or on mule-back after dismantling the LFGs. The airlift equipment has been tested successfully and it is expected that the Army will soon place orders for this product, said SP Yadav, general manager of GCF.

The equipment can be attached to Army's MI-17 helicopter as well as Navy's Sea King. Although it looks like an ordinary attachment on which the gun is air lifted, the engineering skill lies in ensuring that the gun is lifted along its centre of gravity only. This ensures the stability of both the gun and the chopper. The gun has to be lifted by keeping it in the same position as when it is placed on the ground. The gun should be placed in the same position through out or else the gun may get damaged if it is offloaded in the wrong position. Also, if the gun wobbles while being airlifted it can affect the stability of the chopper which can cause the chopper to crash, said the official.

The 105mm LFG weighs around 2,100kg, and the ultra light guns of 155mm calibre which the Army plans to purchase are almost double the weight. The present 155mm Bofors gun weighs almost 12 tonnes.

The indigenously developed equipment is only capable of helping airlift 105mm guns. Army will be buying the equipment for airlifting 155mm ultra light guns along with the weapon.

The ordnance factory has also developed a mounted version of the 105mm gun. The gun can be placed on a truck and fired. This increases its mobility and enables it to be fired even while shifting positions. The gun was test-fired recently and the ordnance factory hopes that the Army may place an order for its bulk production, said Yadav.

Recently, the factory had developed an indigenous barrel for Russian T-90 tanks. A barrel has to be changed after around 200 to 250 shells are fired. Earlier, the Army had to completely depend on Russia for the supply of the barrels but now it won't be needed as the factory has finally developed the T-90 barrels, he added.

-ordnance factory has developed an indigenous system for lifting the lighter 105mm light field gun
- a mounted version of the 105mm gun.


120 Millimetre MBT Arjun Armament System
Barrel life 500 EFC
- So it seems that Arjun barrel can fire at least double the rounds.
- developed an indigenous barrel for Russian T-90 tanks (no ToT)
krishnan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7342
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 12:58
Location: 13° 04' N , 80° 17' E

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by krishnan »

that 120 mm gun for arjun is old news
RKumar

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by RKumar »

Based on the above article ... I was trying to make only these 2 points:

1. There was long drawn battles on the BRF that T-90 smooth barrel is better as compared to Arjun's rifted barrel. I turned out to be other way around. Sadly IA is still chasing their own tail.
2. There were also reports that Russia transferred T-90 barrel technology, which is also not true.

And other 2 points were ...

1. We might never see ultra light imported 155mm guns (35km). We have 105mm guns (17-20km) which can be airlifted with existing helo fleet.
2. There might be two mini-trucks (hopefully with 1 gun + 1 ammo configuration) or one truck (gun + ammo) mounted version of the 105mm gun suited for mountain warfare.
uddu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2091
Joined: 15 Aug 2004 17:09

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by uddu »

120 Millimetre MBT Arjun Armament System
Barrel life 500 EFC
- So it seems that Arjun barrel can fire at least double the rounds.
- developed an indigenous barrel for Russian T-90 tanks (no ToT)[/quote]

Yalla Yallah..what am i hearing..So one Arjun now equivalent to two Nanha Mujahid T-90's. Sharam Sharam on the Russians. After making tanks for such a long time from World war-II they are still behind sdre's in technology? I think Russia must have Arjun as their MBT in their arsenel to defencd against Western Imperialists. Let's export Arjun to our beloved friends. Expect Philiiphosky to come defending T-90's.:)
John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3447
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by John »

Unless they are tested side by side in similar env and proj. tha is bad comparison even Rheinmetall 120 mm advertised as 500 has lasted less than 50 rounds on fied.
member_22539
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2022
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by member_22539 »

^Translation of above: How dare you SDREs claim that the Arjun is better than the mighty TFTA Russian T-90s. Show some respect you brownies, Russia has been making tanks long before even your independence. There is no way any Indian tank can be better than Russian TFTA maal. /sarc off
JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4567
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by JayS »

Arun Menon wrote:^Translation of above: How dare you SDREs claim that the Arjun is better than the mighty TFTA Russian T-90s. Show some respect you brownies, Russia has been making tanks long before even your independence. There is no way any Indian tank can be better than Russian TFTA maal. /sarc off
:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3447
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by John »

Arun Menon wrote:^Translation of above: How dare you SDREs claim that the Arjun is better than the mighty TFTA Russian T-90s. Show some respect you brownies, Russia has been making tanks long before even your independence. There is no way any Indian tank can be better than Russian TFTA maal. /sarc off
I love to get in on chest thumping too but pointing out you are comparing quoted specs (T-90 are quoted at 600 IIRC) with the actual usage as i said even Leo 2 barrels have lasted in certain situations less than 50 far less than 500 advertised because there are lot of factors come into play in the field. This is not the same as comparing engine MTBO.
vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5836
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by vishvak »

Arun Menon wrote:^Translation of above: How dare you SDREs claim that the Arjun is better than the mighty TFTA Russian T-90s. Show some respect you brownies, Russia has been making tanks long before even your independence. There is no way any Indian tank can be better than Russian TFTA maal. /sarc off
I am not sure if we can compare it this way i.e. export version of T-90s with our own authentic and original. We shouldn't miss this difference and stick to what suits us the best, without much ado. For example, USA had given 2-bit pakis Pattons (M47) in 1965 (By the way, wiki page on battle of Longewala doesn't even mention Patton or USA supplied tanks) as also C-130 used by pakis to bomb Indians (BR link). We should not miss that we fought with what we got (In battle of Longewala -2 soldiers killed) and T-90 are part of Indian army war fighting capability.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by Austin »

Chennai based CVRDE to design futuristic tank
Chennai: The city based Combat Vehicles Research & Development Establishment (CVRDE) would soon come up with a futuristic battle tank that would trace an incoming missile from the enemy camp and retaliate with its own missile combining passive and active protection systems.

CVRDE director Dr P. Sivakumar on Monday said that their laboratory had embarked on a mission to develop a futuristic battle tank that would come with active protection system to safeguard the tank from Fin Stabilized Armour Piercing Discarding Sabot (FSAPDS) ammunition, the most lethal kinetic energy ammunition, capable of destroying all known tank armour. FSA PDS travels at a speed of over 1,700 metres per second and no country in the world has developed a technology to protect their tanks from such a lethal kinetic weapon.

“Countries like Israel, Russia, Germany and Sweden have technology for ammunition that travels at 1,000 metres per second and we are the first country to work in kinetic energy threats (missiles that travel at over 1,700 metres per second),” Dr Sivakumar said while speaking to DC on the sidelines of an international conference on energy materials at Sathyabama University.

Pointing out that CVR DE had incorporated softkill technology (passive protection technology) in main battle tank Arjun Mark 2, the eminent scientist said that if the enemy fires a missile using an infrared weapon, softkill passive technology in Arjun mark 2 would jam the infrared rays as it had only passive technology.

“Suppose the enemy fires a laser guided missile or a beam rider missile (BRM), etc, in such cases the futuristic battle tank will have laser sensors, which will identify whether it is fired from laser guided machine or BRM. The active protection system would launch grenades, which will generate smoke. By this process, we are going to hide our tank and the tank would also retaliate at the enemy by launching a missile. This way we are combining passive protection system and active protection system in a battle tank,” he said.
RKumar

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by RKumar »

Does anyone know what happened with Arjun MK-2, Dhanush artillery gun, Trichy Assault Rifle pre-production trials??
vic
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2412
Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by vic »

All three in unending trials.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20773
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by Karan M »

Very interesting so it seems Trophy, Iron Fist etc cant intercept APFSDS and CVRDE wants a system which can. My guess would be that this will be a JV or adapting/developing a variant if an existing system.
Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4218
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by Prem Kumar »

How would you even detect an FSAPDS in the air unless you detected the muzzle flash? Even then, how do you kill it?

The soft/hard kill options seem to refer to missiles, RPGs etc and just armor protection against FSAPDS
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20773
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by Karan M »

No, its hard kill against FSAPDS. You basically have to take Trophy/Iron Fist to the next level. Radars detect incoming FSAPDS and a rocket round of your own, explodes near the FSAPDS and deflects it/destabilizes it at the very minimum (ideal would be to fragment it). Any yaw/deflection in the FSAPDS can reduce its penetration by a huge amount.
See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VrAUTP6rTg
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20773
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by Karan M »

Current soft kill system is also Israeli. CVRDE specializes in system integration. My working assumption would be they will have the foreign partner tie up with an Indian one/DRDO labs to get this done. For instance, VEM Technologies +IRDE customized the Israeli HK sight for Arjun MK2 and with TOT, VEM is assembling it in India.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by Austin »

IIRC Israels where claiming their newer APS were capable of taking out APFSDS besides ATGM's and RPG's
Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4218
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by Prem Kumar »

Karan: at 1 Km/s (Mach 3), even at extreme range of say 4 KM, the AP round will hit the target in 4 seconds & it has an extremely small radar cross section. Missile defense against susbsonic missiles/RPGs is one thing (plus the missiles will have a higher RCS).

It just boggles my mind how an active defense of the Trophy kind is possible against AP rounds. If something like this achieved, it will be a stupendous achievement!
rkhanna
BRFite
Posts: 1171
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 02:35

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Post by rkhanna »

Tank biathlon Photos

The Russian final of Tank biathlon 2014 part 1 - Competition, static displays of T-72B3M/B4 and T-90A
The Russian final of Tank biathlon 2014 part 2 - Military vehicles displays

I posted an article on this before. Apparently India has sent a crew to compete as well. However the Chinese are the only ones taking their own tanks (Type 96s) All other crews are using Russian supplied T72s
Post Reply