Viv S wrote:
So we now know that Avadi has been making Arjuns at 25 tanks a year. If we accept the extrapolation, this means Avadi was done some time June of 2012 or thereabouts.
March 2012 @ 30 tanks/year.
You do realize that these are all rough figures. Its not like the media reported figures are correct down to last day and decimal. Qublling over 25 or 30 tanks is entirely pointless at this level of granularity.
sanku wrote:
what is the down time between Mk I and II, and what is time needed for retooling.
And why do you need retooling? Set up a new production/assembly line for the Mk2, start drawing the T-90 production line down and let the Mk1 line continue to run at the very least until 2014.
Again T 90? You need to retool the Arjun line because you want
Arjuns to be Mk II standard. T 90 line has nothing to do with this.
Please dont keep bring in extraneous factors, a good discussion will degenerate.
Mk 2 production by 2013 was never possible. And the retooling argument is a clear non sequitur. Setting up a Mk 2 production line does not necessitate the shutting of the existing Mk1 line.
No you are wrong Mk 2 production was possible by 2013 IF all the tests last year are cleared. Why not?
Also you dont understand production lines I am afraid. A major improvement of a line does often neccessiates down time. Even if no down time was needed (for the sake of argument) -- we see max down time of about 6 months if things stay on schedule.
So as you can see, there is no should be no gap in MkI and MkII if things go according to plan. -- that is why the status of Mk II is critical.
If Mk II is late, then yes, the line will idle.
Question is, why does a mature Arjun tank's production merit closure albeit a temporary one, while the T-90 gets a pass?
Err because they are two ^^different products^^
And a T 90 cant magically transform into a Arjun line or vice versa?
Isn't the Army intransigence responsible for Arjun orders being placed piecemeal in an uneconomical fashion hamstringing the development of the program.
No proof whatsoever of that statement. IA ordered 124 tanks in 1999 which will be fulfilled in 2012. Army placed a 124 tank order in 2008-9 for Mk II which is yet to be executed.
Why did it take them so long to recognize the merits of the Arjun? .
Because the merits of Arjun were recognizable only post 2008. You cant ask IA to wait around for a road map in the fond hope it will some time come true. In fact they did precisely that for 25 years leading to a situation where no purchases were done for 25 years while they sat and waited.
It was not possible to wait any longer, it was already too late.
1. How much does 'massive' mean for a $3-4 million tank (in your opinion)?
Because the Russians already have a line in the motherland and the Indian Army could have a received a 'massively' discounted tank through direct import. No point in domestic production/assembly.
What are you talking about? T 90 line we are talking about is in Avadi. A captial expense has been made on the line. Why do you want it wasted in a fit of pique?
2. What the price paid in terms of logistics? The DGMF has recommended scrapping the FMBT and persisting with the Arjun platform. If the Arjun is to be standardized upon, what is the price to paid for those 900 additional tanks in terms of support and upgrades over the next 30 years.
You are not making any sense. As of now, Arjun is the non standard tank.
Logistics are in favor of T 72 and T 90. Yet Arjun is being persisted with because going forward, a mix of T 90 and Arjuns will exist.
There are 2500 T series (72/90) and the production of Arjun for all intents are purposes has just begin.
We still have enough T 55 etc and IA has had two or three tanks. So while standardizing on one tank might be a good goal, it is not going to happen in next 10-20 years in any case (already existing T will live that long)
It is also possible that IA will keep two lines of tanks, of different weights. It is a perfect reasonable approach. Till a 50 ton FMBT comes across
3. What is the price being paid in terms of valuable foreign exchange for the assembly of a Russian tank?
Are you being deliberately difficult? We are talking of manufacture here in Avadi.
Does the capital expended upfront overshadow the net cost paid in both money and capability?
Well net cost paid in terms of money is in favor of T 90s. In terms of capabilities till mK II comes across, T 90 is still ahead.
2) The Arjun line even if magically working at 50 tanks a year, is still not enough to meet the modernization needs. Setting up additional line, takes time, and Arjun Mk I has matured but still undergoing rapid changes for Mk II.
How is the objective of setting up an additional line to scale up production, served by shutting down the only existing production line?
Because that line has to be upgded. When equipment is upgd it goes offline. Basics
Every T-90 commissioned is one less Arjun that could have been inducted in the same position. That's a self evident fact. There's no sharing to be done here.
No Sir it is not a fact, let alone a self evident one. Sorry to say it is completely meaningless statement with no rhyme or reason. lack of supporting evidence can not be passed off as self evident statement.
Heck even T 72 will be upgded and will exist for next 20 years. You are complaining about T 90s?
Let Arjun replace the T 55 first
There are still 600 around in reserve storage.
