Bharat Rakshak

Consortium of Indian Defence Websites
It is currently 30 Jul 2014 09:49

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 355 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 9  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 18 Apr 2008 23:22 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 21 Oct 2006 20:41
Posts: 62
Sanku[no need for the Sir when adressing me :) ]
Quote:
Sir; I would not read so much into it -- perhaps the Army guy was harsh -- but in my opinion extrapolating it to an extent is not correct.

Well..suit yourself. In my opinion though the language has been made deliberately shrill with definite motives and not at all commensurate with the magnitude of actual problems. It is not that the particular Army guy was harsh the report was harsh itself.And not only the report;on separate occasions there has been comments made such as:
What we have today is a mid-level technology. What we need is a tank of international quality,' Kapoor said last November.
So what exactly is mid level in the Arjun..and if it is so what other higher level options does the IA have today in terms of technology?

Quote:
Well the shell is overall plauged by problems T 90 is just one of them -- it is not clear that T 90 could not fire the shell because it was faulty or because the shell was faulty -- off hand it seems that it was a mismatch issue. Whats that got to do with the tank?

The reports say that the T-90 wasn’t configured to fire the shell..and the shells were duds.Whatever the actual issue is ,its still a major problem with the program.


Quote:
I am aware; but my contention is that they are different no comparison.

I think the two cases provide interesting and significant comparing characteristics.


Quote:
Lot of trouble and expense? Dont think it was LOT -- it was just exactly ONE subsystem and expense on the same is not really known. Did the army really spend far more than it normally would on a T90 because of TIs if so how much? A far greater expense would have been because Avadi was slow in making T 90s.

>problem with the TI camera and FCS
>Problem with shells
"The unreliability of the Indian made shell is so serious that the army did not use it in critical numbers in the last two war games that were carried out in Punjab and Rajasthan".
>problem with engine overheating and derating
>problem with Russia delaying in giving ToT
>problem with BDL difficulty in manufacturing refleks
>>continuing problems with torsion bar
>other problems such as:
"lack of cooling systems leading to uninhabitable temperatures over 60C degrees (over 140F) inside the tank, and reports that at least one armored regiment had an in-service rate of just 25% for its T-90s"


And it did cost a lot.F.e. 700 crores lost due to shells.Another example:
As for the T-90, Indian Army chief Gen. Deepak Kapoor has admitted that Russia's delays in the technology transfer had pushed back its production here.
Transfer of technology is a complex process due to different perceptions on either side on what exactly this involves. There have been delays but in the long run, the transfer will take place and indigenous production of the tank will commence,' he said earlier this.

India had purchased 310 of the tanks in 2001 and was to produce under licence another 1,000 T-90s. However, delays in the technology transfer prompted India to sign a contract with Russia in 2006 for 347 tanks to ensure adequate force levels.

The cost of the additional 347 tanks was 4900 crore.

Quote:
By all indications yes; including the exercises the T 90 has been a part of.


Links to any news report would be helpful.During Ex Ashwamedha 2007 Arjuns performed perfectly where as t-90s ended up having torsion bar problems.So participation in exercises is not sufficient.

Quote:
Well if was so they would not have ordered the 124 maintained a regiment; did tests and kept engaged with DRDO/CVDRE/Avadi for over 20 years now? Please dont say ALL the delay was ONLY IA fault.


Well nowhere have I said that all of the problem is the army’s.The blame has to go bothways.but the point being made is that considering the significance of inhouse efforts in the long term the army should cut the developers a bit more of the slack.The incidents happening in recent times IMHO shows that there is still room for the army to develop a more mature attitude towards all of this which haven’t been the case.

Quote:
No why should there be; there is no process for that -- Arjun has reports since its Indian development -- there are reports on all Indian developments -- there are none on acquisitions.

Well I don’t know.The point I was making is that these kind of reports given by the army in the manner that was ,could seriously affect the future of indigenous efforts.On the other hand if similar problem regarding imported content is overlooked points to a serious malady in the institution.

Quote:
Let the testing bear that out; shall we; as we agreed in the baseline there are problems still however that does not seem to have slowed down the army. WHY is the bloody OFB taking so long.

Yes..lets wait and see.

Quote:
Yes and they are doing the same with Arjun

Sorry, lets disagree there.

Quote:
however the tanks have different pedigree and Arjun needs lots more hand holding T 90 was up and running with far less. Army is still hand holding Arjun in terms of LSP tests etc.

And a lot more hand holding should be given particularly looking to the future.F.e. the plan is to manufacture 1000 t-90s by 2020.If development is allowed to continue ,in all probability an Arjun will make mincemeat of the already obsolete T-90 in 2020.

Anyway how far the commitment and long term vision of the army goes will be evident in a few days I am guessing.

Quote:
It is not IA for sure; must be DDQA.

I am not saying it’s the IA.I am saying if they are saying in the report that DGQA isn’t maintaining the quality of Arjun then it’s a problem with the DGQA and not with the tank since the same authorities also do QA for other products.

Quote:
Why should IA by blamed for not driving the MoD when the power and responsibilty and structure is other way around?

Agreed the IA cannot be blamed and the less said about the Mod the better..But then again whats keeping them from being proactive?If developing and inducting a tank(Arjun) is made a top priority [and thery are the end users!!]why not try to make it smoother by ironing out the *deleted* keeping them from atleast making the right kind of noises?And this is how we come to the point that the army is not at all integrated with the development.Are they even interested?And that’s a problem which has to be solved for avoiding future Arjun type experiences.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2008 01:49 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30
Posts: 2879
Armed forces prefer Russian armour.

The battle lines have been drawn. At stake is the future of one of India's most prestigious defence products: the Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT).

In its 29th report, which was tabled in Parliament earlier this week, Parliament's Standing Committee on Defence writes that it is "startled" to be told that the tank had performed poorly in winter trials, and that it was miles away from meeting the army's requirements.

Business Standard has come to know from three different members of the Standing Committee on Defence that it is more than "startled" — it is frankly disbelieving of the army's deposition.

In its last annual report for 2007-08, the committee was told by the ministry that the Arjun tank was “a product unique in its class", an improved system over the T-72, Rs 6-8 crore cheaper than its contemporary system in the West, far superior (in firing accuracy) to the other two tanks (T-72 and T-90), driven for over 60,000 km and fired more than 8,000 rounds and “there was no problem."

After the army representative slammed the Arjun, the Standing Committee chairman, Balasaheb Vikhe Patil, as well as the defence secretary and several other members agreed that the committee would formulate a clear policy on India's tank of the future.

Underlying this decision is the belief amongst most members of the Standing Committee that the army is biased against the Arjun tank and is in favour of continuing to use the Russian T-72 and T-90 tanks. There were clear factual inaccuracies in the army's deposition before the Standing Committee. The most glaring of them is the army's suggestion that it is carrying out trials on the Arjun's performance.

In fact, the army has already accepted the Arjun for introduction into service, based upon its driving and firing performance over the years. After firing trials in summer 2006, the trial report (written by the army) said: "The accuracy and consistency of the Arjun has been proved beyond doubt."

The ongoing trials in Pokhran that the army is citing are Accelerated Usage cum Reliability Trials (AUCRT). In these, two Arjun tanks were run almost non-stop for 3,000 kilometres, not to judge performance, but to evaluate the tank's requirement of spare parts, fuel and lubricants during its entire service life.

In fact, it is the Arjun's developer, the Central Vehicle R&D Laboratory (CVRDE), Avadi, that has long demanded comparative trials, where the performance of five Arjuns would be gauged against five Russian T-90s and T-72s. The army has consistently sidestepped that invitation.

The army has also testified incorrectly to the Standing Committee about four engine failures during the recent AUCRT. In fact, sources closely associated with the trials say, the problems were with four gearboxes manufactured by German company Renk AG. A world leader in transmission systems, Renk representatives are already in Pokhran and Avadi, analysing and resolving the problem.

The army does not mention, but problems were also experienced with four hydro-pneumatic suspension units (HSUs) which leaked after the Arjuns had run 2,000 kilometres.

But the Arjun's makers say 2,000 kilometres is the service life of the suspension; normally they would have been replaced before the point at which they leaked.

Officers closely associated with the Arjun, as well as several members of the Standing Committee on Defence, contrast the army's approach to the Arjun with the navy's acceptance of indigenous projects.

They say the navy has achieved striking success in building its own warships, by associating itself with the project right from the design stage; warships are accepted into service and many hiccups overcome during their service lives. In contrast, the army is resisting accepting the Arjun until every last hiccup is resolved by the DRDO.

An application to interview the army's Director General of Mechanised Forces (DGMF) was approved by the MoD eight months ago. However, the DGMF has not granted an interview so far because of "scheduling problems."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2008 02:34 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 25 Mar 2003 12:31
Posts: 152
Vipul wrote:


Ajai Sukla ki jai ho :D (taking cover)

Atleast someone is supporting DRDO and is taking on the Jihad against Army's double standards


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2008 02:51 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 16 Mar 2002 12:31
Posts: 318
I believe we should not drag the infantry into in while we are on witch-hunting spree :) Is army's report available for public to see? I don't believe it is a simple case of armoured corps having acquired special taste for Russian tanks. Is this the case of loosing big picture while continuing petty fights or some genuine reason? Armoured corps cannot blindly assign quantitative numbers to failures of Arjun without measuring it relative to other tanks in their inventory. To make a convincing case army has to show comparative performance of T90 under similar conditions.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2008 09:29 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Posts: 25379
Location: NowHere
comparison of tests has to happen when applied similar level playing test setup for t90 as well. ddm info is less to establish that.. now its mandatory for Arjun developers to seek "right to information", and ask IA to present the tests and how it was claiming one over the other.

If both Army and DRDO are correct, and if its DDM thats playing by the balls with firangies... then its time, they get screwed as well. Aren't there laws for the newsmen as well?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2008 09:34 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 26 May 2007 17:22
Posts: 191
Look at the commonalities here and here

[quote]Ajai: The ongoing trials in Pokhran that the army is citing are Accelerated Usage cum Reliability Trials (AUCRT). In these, two Arjun tanks were run almost non-stop for 3,000 kilometres, not to judge performance, but to evaluate the tank's requirement of spare parts, fuel and lubricants during its entire service life.

Chacko: The AUCRT trials are army’s internal trials and hence is out of scrutiny of the media and the third parties. Right from the beginning of the (even before) trials, it was forgone conclusions about the color the Indian Army would give to the Arjun Tanks performance during the trials. Now since the trials were Army’s readiness for inducting Arjun tank, but, being the user, it has the right to comment about the performance of the tank in trials. As was expected this particular loophole seems to have been exploited by some officials.

Ajai: In fact, it is the Arjun's developer, the Central Vehicle R&D Laboratory (CVRDE), Avadi, that has long demanded comparative trials, where the performance of five Arjuns would be gauged against five Russian T-90s and T-72s. The army has consistently sidestepped that invitation.

Chacko: Last year, Combat Vehicle Research Development Establishment (CVRDE, a unit of Defence Research and Development Organisation) was ready for a comparative trial between Indian Army’s imported T-90S and the license produced T-72 versus the home grown Arjun Tank as asked by army. The Indian Army officials realizing that the national media is scrutinizing the tanks performance, pulled out of the trials and went for a “accelerated usage cum reliability trialâ€


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2008 09:47 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Posts: 25379
Location: NowHere
I guess there are enough evidences for a high level inquiry into this obsession of IA's T90s. Of course that needs to be done at a sophisticated strategic levels.. but going by the balls that everything Arjun is cr@p like thing hurts the nation more than anything, when the T90s themselves are not comparable to the platforms and performances.

Its the laws alone that can help here.. we need a RAW analysis and further, a probe to settle this matter.. And a test, to prove that T90s are equally tested on the same parameters.

Hey, we have seen many multi billion $$$ cancellations on helos, 155 guns, etc.. but all non-russkie ones.. and with russkies, we have no scam at all.. no descrepencies at all.. is another conspiracy driven status, that has to be seen.

This is all wrong for IA now.. for having to bash Arjun this way.. its really bad for the nation as well. If its the security that matters, then why Arjun makes them insecure, while T90s makes them more secure?

something are not BS, but a whole lot more .... afraid nobody wants to touch it cause, Arjun's case is a touche~.. that it would expose IA in a terrible shape, hence they are protecting and covering up under the security blanket.

kudos!~.. lets get back to workshop and fix Arjun again. no other option.. blame the supplying nation rather.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2008 10:00 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 15 Aug 2004 17:09
Posts: 1031
8.18 During evidence before the Committee, a representative of the Army clarifying the position regarding performance of Arjun Tank submitted as under: -

“Sir, we have just carried out the trial in winter. The tanks have performed very poorly. There have been four engine failure so far. The tanks have done about 1,000 kilometre each. There has been a problem. The Defence Minister has been apprised by the Chief. I think, two or three days back, he has written a DO letter giving the exact position. So, a lot of improvements have to be done before the Army will be satisfied on the Arjun tank.â€


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2008 10:04 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Posts: 25379
Location: NowHere
so be it!.. let Arjun be a trash!.. under the name of security, and keeping IA's strategic sense, its important that Arjun is kept at same security level as T90s. If T90s balls break up and IA keeps it secret cause of defence related hush hush.. so is Arjun should be.

Hence, why would Arjun gets shuklawed and showed into a bad marketing name, and the whole world knows about these? Is Arjun supposed to protect IA anyway in the future or not? if IA feels a 0.0000001 chance, it should keep all these information at strategic level as well, giving both T90 and Arjun the same respect.

fair enough IA?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2008 10:33 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 15 Aug 2004 17:09
Posts: 1031
That rest with the political leadership. If the political leadership finds any deliberate attempt to scuttle the Arjun tank for an inferior system, they must be booted out of the Army. There must be no place for such people in the IA.

Another important aspect is that why is people worried about the T-90 when it comes to the Arjun. It's not Arjun's problem if the T-90 stops after running 1km or half a kilometer and explodes into a fireball if hit and cannot fire accurately. It's a problem for the Army. The Army guys will suffer in war because of these problems. Now with regard to the Arjun, the responsibility of the team is to make it 100% perfect, so that the Army cannot complain about any problem since none exists. With that the political leadership can ask the army to altogether replace all T series with the Arjun series.

Now someone said that the T-90 is like Maruti and Arjun is like a Benz and hence cannot be compared. No need to compare them but if Maruti can be used as a taxi then why not the Benz. If the government has no problem with the mass production of the Arjun like T-90's, and if the government is ready to spend money for it, why is the army worried.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2008 11:02 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 20 Feb 2007 23:27
Posts: 571
Location: On a roller-coaster.
$$$

Purchase of the T-XX series results in a marked increase in moolah in the off-shore accounts of babus, politicians, political party funds, middlemen and jernails. Purchase of Arjun does not.

And that's it!

So Arjun has 1,000,000,000,000 faults while the T-XX series has descended from heavens and is flawless. Any T-XX problems that arise are the fault of ignorant yindoos who dont know how to properly operate the tank while Arjun cannot be bought as it has not yet demonstrated its ability to run @ 100 kmph on 'solar power' for 3,000 km non-stop and is incapable of firing the Agni-III from its barrel....

Here's what I would do if I was PM/Defence Minister to help settle this nonsense:
Quote:
Ok Mr. Army Chief, there's a T-90 in front of you and an Arjun tank in front of you. Pick either tank and be seated. The other tank will then fire a round from 2 km away into the tank in which you're seated. If you survive, we'll buy that tank.

Have a nice day!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2008 11:35 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 26 May 2007 17:22
Posts: 191
uddu wrote:
The Army guys will suffer in war because of these problems. Now with regard to the Arjun, the responsibility of the team is to make it 100% perfect, so that the Army cannot complain about any problem since none exists.


Its a polite request, please do not say this. In kargil, the youngsters were sent to be butchered. If it was not them, we would have a different situation.

Now objectively, those times the Siachin clothing was handed over to these youngsters as there was lack of high altitude clothing. Now that kargil war is has the high altitude clothing come? No!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2008 11:52 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Posts: 4457
Location: Duke Nukem
uddu wrote:
the responsibility of the team is to make it 100% perfect, so that the Army cannot complain about any problem since none exists.


Oh "problems" can be created where none exist !. My conspiracy detector is going woott.. wooott..

Zimble onree no ? .. Get some one to just add some contaminant to the transmission oil or substitute with another grade or whatever and it will be toast! There are myriad possibilities. .. The damage would have been done and with luck no one will be able to find it , unless, they actually chemically test the transmission fluid..

With the amount of cash in stake with the armor orders and the lobbies involved in it, sabotage is very well within the realms of possibility. lets wait for what the Renk guys say.. I seriously doubt that the battle proven Renk transmissions in worse conditions in places like the Gulf would get trashed like this. and that too with such basic reliability problems.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2008 12:56 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Posts: 598
Raymond wrote:

Quote:
Well the shell is overall plauged by problems T 90 is just one of them -- it is not clear that T 90 could not fire the shell because it was faulty or because the shell was faulty -- off hand it seems that it was a mismatch issue. Whats that got to do with the tank?

The reports say that the T-90 wasn’t configured to fire the shell..and the shells were duds.Whatever the actual issue is ,its still a major problem with the program.
If the shells cannot be firing from T-90 or T-72, so what tank they were made for? I wonder. And if the shells could be fired from only T-72, why the army scrapped them? Is it stupid?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2008 13:37 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Posts: 14660
Location: Chennai
vina wrote:
Oh "problems" can be created where none exist !.

Unfortunately, the Army is the Prosecutor, Jury, Judge & Executor rolled into one. There is no independent testing agency.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2008 15:08 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 22485
Location: Embarrassed by fresh-off-the-boat Indians
Ironically the more faults they find with Arjun the better it is. It is best to iron them out in peacetime and keep the development going.

Frankly - even if the Army magically said "OK we want Arjun now!" it would be 20 years before its demands could be met. So we need T-xx anyway.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2008 15:38 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 13 Feb 2007 22:17
Posts: 79
BRF Tank Gurus! Russia has a new gen tank " Black Eagle or Chyorny Oryol". Googling is giving lot of info. Is our IA eyeing this, junking " ARJUN"?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2008 16:30 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 08 Oct 2007 19:02
Posts: 118
I don't think this is just the case of army lining their pockets from kick back of foreign deals, I would not want our soldier to fight in machine which is not fully combat worthy, the drdo should scrap the arjun and just keep few numbers as technology demonstrators and work on another tank design with foreign partner(JV) if they can find one.

Anjun has become an embarrassment for the Army and also for the DRDO.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2008 17:21 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 17 Feb 2008 11:21
Posts: 178
Location: new delhi
rrao wrote:
BRF Tank Gurus! Russia has a new gen tank " Black Eagle or Chyorny Oryol". Googling is giving lot of info. Is our IA eyeing this, junking " ARJUN"?


Yes , I have seen that tank on net. It looks a lot different from present generation T-Series tanks. I have also read somewhere that there are talks about arming it with a new 145mm calibre gun instead of the present 125mm guns. But I still think India should try to develope it's own tank like those on the line of South Korea, Japan and Turkey.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2008 17:23 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 17 Feb 2008 11:21
Posts: 178
Location: new delhi
New update on Arjun from Ajai Shukla's Broadsword.

http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2008/04/ ... armed.html


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2008 17:25 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31
Posts: 996
While IN is trying to indigenise, IA is going the opposite way, everything they want is foreign:-


From INSAS to foreign carbines
from HP to imported pistols
Less said about 155mm gun saga the better
RPG and RCL imported
SAMs imported as IA rejected trishul and dragging feet on akash
Nag is going through trials while Kornet, konkurs etc being imported
Even new armoured vehicles are being offered from imports

etc etc


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2008 17:44 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 21 Oct 2006 20:41
Posts: 62
Igorr wrote:
If the shells cannot be firing from T-90 or T-72, so what tank they were made for? I wonder. And if the shells could be fired from only T-72, why the army scrapped them? Is it stupid?

According to reports,T-90s were supplied with Russian 125 mm rounds.[Don’t know which round because the designation in the report is different from the original Russian designation..(3BM44M??...because if it was the regular russian 125 mm round why get it from russia at all)] and that to use the locally made 125 mm hybrid round[for t 72 originally] the T-90 needed some modification[autoloader??] to fire it.Moreover those OFB manufactured hybrid shells had any problems as well.So there were scarcity of shells.
The point to all of this being there were problems in the T-90 program also.You cannot decide to import a new tank in such large numbers without first making definite arrangements for supply of its ammunition.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2008 19:10 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 01 Feb 2005 18:13
Posts: 598
Raymond wrote:
According to reports,T-90s were supplied with Russian 125 mm rounds.[Don’t know which round because the designation in the report is different from the original Russian designation..(3BM44M??...because if it was the regular russian 125 mm round why get it from russia at all)] and that to use the locally made 125 mm hybrid round[for t 72 originally] the T-90 needed some modification[autoloader??] to fire it.Moreover those OFB manufactured hybrid shells had any problems as well.So there were scarcity of shells.
Strange history IMHO. Any Russian round available for T-72 is good for T-90 too, it's strong fact. How they managed to develop a round that doesnt fit T-90 while still good for T-72, I'm just wonder. The barrel of T-90 gun can keep more pressure than the old T-72 guns, so I rather expect the opposite situation. They may be tried to use a local propellant with the original rods of 3BM44M, but if the barrel was blown, the problem was with the local propellant, or with its quantity, it's obvious.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2008 19:19 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00
Posts: 2687
Avid wrote:
The passions over Arjun vs. T-90 consistently overwhelm the thread and other discussion surrounding armor and artillery gets buried.


Avid, actually its not Arjun vs. T-90, its Army vs. Arjun. But both camp use T-90 for the argument in a different way. For ex. a person from, shall we say, Army camp said, Arjun cannot do what T-90 done during Brazen charriots wargame. And Arjun camp talk abt how Army is not showing the same treatment it shown to T-90 for the acceptance. Why the comparative trial was cancelled like that. It is Army vs Arjun.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2008 19:57 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 21 Sep 2001 11:31
Posts: 305
Location: Earth
Admins - thanks for creating a separate thread for Arjun Discussion.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2008 20:02 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Posts: 25379
Location: NowHere
Kanson wrote:
Avid wrote:
The passions over Arjun vs. T-90 consistently overwhelm the thread and other discussion surrounding armor and artillery gets buried.


Avid, actually its not Arjun vs. T-90, its Army vs. Arjun. But both camp use T-90 for the argument in a different way. For ex. a person from, shall we say, Army camp said, Arjun cannot do what T-90 done during Brazen charriots wargame. And Arjun camp talk abt how Army is not showing the same treatment it shown to T-90 for the acceptance. Why the comparative trial was cancelled like that. It is Army vs Arjun.


yes.. and its the russian passion that makes you say that is not vs. t90. if not for t90, what else army has in it other than the age old t72, to be so to say its army vs. arjun. army has become empowered by the russian system. further we talk about this, the pakis is gonna laugh at this already 1-10 crap.

this is the exact reason, i said these are things allowed by army, and it should be blamed to not accept arjun for what it is. i understand about defects and corrections.. the same are applied even for t90s. there is no level playing here, just because of the russian mafiaic clout or the passion for it, that makes them not to think anything else other than t90s.

let say, we market the arjuns as T-115, and sell it to Army.. they would gleefully accept it.. cause, there woudl be many backs that gets the scratches.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2008 21:23 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44
Posts: 1944
paging JC garu, paging JC garu, patient Arjun in ICU, and

[b]the Ñ


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 20 Apr 2008 10:08 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 10 Sep 2007 05:57
Posts: 3301
Location: Loud, Proud American
rrao wrote:
BRF Tank Gurus! Russia has a new gen tank " Black Eagle or Chyorny Oryol". Googling is giving lot of info. Is our IA eyeing this, junking " ARJUN"?

As far as I know, the Black Eagle project is currently sitting dead in the water since the manufacturer went bankrupt a few years ago. No one else has bothered to pick up the development work that was done so far for the project. Expect to see it around the same time when Duke Nukem Forever is released.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 20 Apr 2008 10:53 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 13 Apr 2005 01:55
Posts: 366
Yeah, where is JCage? Not seen him in a while..


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 21 Apr 2008 10:36 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 10 May 2005 10:26
Posts: 653
Rampy wrote:
Vipul wrote:


Ajai Sukla ki jai ho :D (taking cover)

Atleast someone is supporting DRDO and is taking on the Jihad against Army's double standards



Thats a pretty huge inside-out transformation from Ajai from his disposition 1-2years ago.. Good that atleast some of the DDM have begun to see the light.

So Arjun has won over one Colonel who was anti-Arjun.

It has to put down a few more colonels & Generals..

Pray...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 21 Apr 2008 11:32 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Posts: 4457
Location: Duke Nukem
rakall wrote:
It has to put down a few more colonels & Generals..

Pray...


No praying. The Army doesn't want Arjun. Period. This entire thing is a waste of time.

This Arjun thingy is not going to get decided on any logical /rational parameters and arguments. It is the army's H&D and undies in knots. It is CYA mode and that is what it is.

The problem is that the Army is institutionally incapable of doing any forward planning. All they are capable of is to do brochure reading, do comparison of what is available elsewhere and adapt that to India and at best evolve some tactical doctrines around it. They simply don't have it in them to conceptualize a battle plan /strategy , come up with weapon parameter /definition and then execute it via a vendor (DRDO or otherwise).

So, basically it is brouchure reading. Somebody in some brochure will say, "heavy tanks are passe" we need shock and awe and the future is Stryker like sytems.. the army goes Rah.. Rah.. Forget about the fact that the US itself will not go the Stryker route given the hard lessons it has learnt in Iraq.

Then the Army's armored division have grown up on a diet of T-XX tin cans over the past 40 years.. Funnily, the Russians atleast emphasized maneuver warfare with fast moving medium tanks massed together in thousands.. The Indian Army used the same Russian medium tanks as defensive static pill boxes .. The Army was not even in the Maneuver warfare and combined arms game until the late 80s/early 90s (after Sundarji ?).. In fact, given the Indian army's predilection to fixed /static defense games, an emphasis of armor and firepower over maneuver would have been the spec.. something like the Merkava that Isreal built after a careful analysis on the kind of battle that Isreal would typically fight (defensive /limited counter offensive against massed arab armour, mostly of eastern block origin)..

The Indian army sadly simply cannot come up with a battle plan and weapon spec like what Isrealis did for the Merkava or Unkil did for the M1A2 , the Germans for the Leo and why the Russians for the T series.. Now like the good old "mixed economy" , the Indian army does brochuritis and comes up with impossible specs like the firepower and armor of a Western Heavy, but the weight and footprint of a Russian light tank , and of course at prices at a fraction of a T-xx and must be 100% "indigenous" (whatever that means) to boot!.

Until the doctrinal mess up in the Army is cleared, someone actually can have the brains to do an analysis of a future battle plan (an impossibility because that would take brains .. and the army has none.. all the brains are in the air force and navy.. no one accused anyone in the army of being intelligent surely) and come up with specs for Indian conditions and then see what kind of war you want to fight (a quick offensive in Paki land riding on coattails of the path blazed open by the Air force in combined arms, a defensive holding territory battle snuffing out enemy armor and holding ground, or a mix of the two) ..And please.. No fanciful flights of fancy such as armor in Himalayas! .

So a suggestion. Put any further armor development on hold, until globally the direction /trend becomes clear (it will after the lessons of Iraq and Lebanon are fully digested) and the army can clearly adopt the trend. That is what the Indian Army can do.. Adopt a trend that has mass behind it (ie conventional wisdom).. .. They cannot think out of the box or think disrputively . They are incapable of it.

After the trend is clear, we can get DRDO/Pvt Guys/ Import / T-1XX / Some Ding Dong/ whatever as the "solution" . and the army will do a rubber stamp that will make it "fully tested in all conditions" with flying colors (like the T-90) and then they can sit back in Delhi on a "GSQR" for that (of course after making all the "payoffs" to the right money bags in right places).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 21 Apr 2008 12:04 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Posts: 12508
Location: In a sad place
This thread should be renamed as "IA evil evil evil thread" :roll:


Last edited by Sanku on 21 Apr 2008 12:34, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 21 Apr 2008 12:20 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 21 Oct 2006 20:41
Posts: 62
Where is gopal suri and FIDSN...some reports from that direction will be helpful to corroborate things.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 21 Apr 2008 12:31 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 10523
Location: India
What news about the so-called FMBT (future MBT) programme? I have been emphasising that it is apst time to start designing a new FMBT WITH the Army in the picture right from the start.Then there can be no way that the IA can wriggle out of a future product as far as the design parameters are concerned.we have learnt a lot from the Arjun project the hard way and there is no point in persuading a reluctant end-user to buy it if it isn't perfect.Perhaps a few hundred might eventually be produced which will be far below the IA's requirements.The design in any case is now also old and we should be looking to the future.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 21 Apr 2008 12:33 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Posts: 12508
Location: In a sad place
Raymond wrote:
Well..suit yourself. In my opinion though the language has been made deliberately shrill with definite motives and not at all commensurate with the magnitude of actual problems. It is not that the particular Army guy was harsh the report was harsh itself.And not only the report;on separate occasions there has been comments made such as:


The last I checked IA was working with DRDO and still wanted 3500 Arjun's; reading the language one way or the other is a exercise which can be done ad infinitum with no value -- nothing on the ground has changed without good reason.

Quote:
What we have today is a mid-level technology. What we need is a tank of international quality,' Kapoor said last November.
So what exactly is mid level in the Arjun..and if it is so what other higher level options does the IA have today in terms of technology?


Today? I dont think he is saying today -- and the manufacturing of tanks by OFB is certainly not world class today. The Chief is laying down a wish list for future and a vision -- he unfortunately has a real responsibility and can not be a Arjun fan boy -- so he will ask for the moon -- part of his job IMVHO.

Quote:
The reports say that the T-90 wasn’t configured to fire the shell..and the shells were duds.Whatever the actual issue is ,its still a major problem with the program.


The problem was with auto loader software -- which I believe has been corrected now -- the Russikes were playing hardball which they would do anyway -- this was not a option IA had -- just like the great IN which every body is praising to high heavens is groveling for the Groshkov.

Further; many of the shell problems that YOU listed were seen outside T 90 in T 72 itself; quality etc etc.

So lets not be too quick to judge here.

Quote:
I think the two cases provide interesting and significant comparing characteristics.


Hardly -- huge differences -- a import driven by immediate threat perception needs can never be compared to a internal R&D project -- that too one from a established tank maker and one from a total newbie.

"The unreliability of the Indian made shell is so serious that the army did not use it in critical numbers in the last two war games that were carried out in Punjab and Rajasthan".

What does the unreliability because of poor manufacture has to do with T 90 the shell is unreliable for every platform; period.

Quote:
>problem with engine overheating and derating


Yeah then how they are being used successfully in all the exercises today -- Brazen Chariots

Quote:
>problem with Russia delaying in giving ToT


That will always be true with imports-- the problem is that we landed in the import trap and no it was not only IAs fault.

Quote:
>problem with BDL difficulty in manufacturing refleks


Not T90s fault is it? Anyway that I believe is also sorted out.

Quote:
>>continuing problems with torsion bar


What continuing problems? How many reports -- when was the last report?

Quote:
>other problems such as:
"lack of cooling systems leading to uninhabitable temperatures over 60C degrees (over 140F) inside the tank, and reports that at least one armored regiment had an in-service rate of just 25% for its T-90s"


IA chose to not take air-con. :roll: not T 90 problem per se.

You are comparing the problems of a deployed tank with problems of tank that can be deployed since it does not pass basic tests.

Quote:
And it did cost a lot.F.e. 700 crores lost due to shells.Another example:


Shells is not a T 90 problem alone; I said that before and I will say that again.

You said initially it was because of tech problems; now you are saying its because of Tech transfer problems? Surely even you understand the difference -- a lot of the tech transfer problem was also because of Avadi not ramping up fast -- bashing Russians is fun but not productive.


Quote:
Links to any news report would be helpful.During Ex Ashwamedha 2007 Arjuns performed perfectly where as t-90s ended up having torsion bar problems.So participation in exercises is not sufficient.


How about the latest one -- Brazen chariots -- just google -- lots of post on this thread too

Quote:
Well nowhere have I said that all of the problem is the army’s.The blame has to go bothways.but the point being made is that considering the significance of inhouse efforts in the long term the army should cut the developers a bit more of the slack.T


NO; the tank must be ready as PER ARMY -- let CVDR/OFB take time but accepting a sub standard product for main deployment is not acceptable.

Supporting the program can be done in MANY ways outside accepting a product which is not right for the IA.


he incidents happening in recent times IMHO shows that there is still room for the army to develop a more mature attitude towards all of this which haven’t been the case.

Quote:
Well I don’t know.The point I was making is that these kind of reports given by the army in the manner that was ,could seriously affect the future of indigenous efforts.On the other hand if similar problem regarding imported content is overlooked points to a serious malady in the institution.


NOT true -- look at IAs acceptance of a whole range of systems from DRDO -- Pinaka; INSAS; NBC kits; WLR; Dhruva etc etc etc...

Cant say army is not for indigenous effort at all.

Quote:
Yes..lets wait and see.


Excellent that was my ONLY point all along :D

Quote:
Sorry, lets disagree there.


Cant help you wish to disagree can I?

Quote:
And a lot more hand holding should be given particularly looking to the future.F.e. the plan is to manufacture 1000 t-90s by 2020.If development is allowed to continue ,in all probability an Arjun will make mincemeat of the already obsolete T-90 in 2020.


Agree

Quote:
I am not saying it’s the IA.I am saying if they are saying in the report that DGQA isn’t maintaining the quality of Arjun then it’s a problem with the DGQA and not with the tank since the same authorities also do QA for other products.


For the end user it will be "tank" he refers to -- why should a Captian in the Armored bother about what is the chain that gets him a tank -- his job is else where.

Quote:
better..But then again whats keeping them from being proactive?


I can say from personal experience that IA being proactive is not looked at kindly by MoD at all -- all sorts of Nehruvian loss of control alarm bell start rignging.

The Navy was actually lucky -- because MoD TOTALLY NEGLECTED it -- army being the star (numbers of all sorts) -- as we know anything that happens in India happens when Babus think its to unimportant to interfere.

:P


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 21 Apr 2008 13:33 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Posts: 12508
Location: In a sad place
SSridhar wrote:
vina wrote:
Oh "problems" can be created where none exist !.

Unfortunately, the Army is the Prosecutor, Jury, Judge & Executor rolled into one. There is no independent testing agency.


That is not possible that is not how the civilian-mil hierarchy in India works. If IA says something and that is contented by Civvies; the Babu's are in final control.

It is farfetched to assume that trials would be spiked -- usually these are done by troops on the ground and the data sent up; to spike the data there would be a clear track for everyone in the Army to see and act on -- effectively what people are saying are the entire chain was corrupt including each person.

If not and the Army is deliberately lying -- its opening it self up to get screwed by any one who has the wish to do so in GoI; and it does not just have to today -- but for the entire life time of the people involved.

One will have to be more than greedy to do such a thing -- one will have to be extraordinarly stupid -- and not just one person -- the whole corps.
:lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 21 Apr 2008 13:39 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 11 Jun 2006 03:48
Posts: 2661
Location: Vote for Savita Bhabhi as the next BRF admin.
Army needs a kick in the nuts to get it's ego in line. So if the Thermal sights in T-90s consistently fail, but that is okay for the Army. They still go and keep ordering the $hit can to grease their pockets.

In the meantime make Arjun to jump through multiple hoops. With this report IA has bought some time but a investigative commission must be raised as to how the AUCURT trails were conducted. What were the parameters and how do the current line-ups of T-72 and T-90 $hitcans perform when the same trials are conducted.

Can an RTI be filed to find out who were the numbnuts involved in the AUCURT trials ?

Enough of feeding on imported toys at the expense of taxpayers money.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 21 Apr 2008 13:43 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Posts: 12508
Location: In a sad place
Nayak wrote:
Can an RTI be filed to find out who were the numbnuts involved in the AUCURT trials


NO RTI can not; however your assertion is that T 90 and Arjun have gone through different set of tests? Is it.

Can you back it up -- saying I didnt hear of it is not good enough.

There is too much of ignorance about how things real world being passed off as a virtue in this thread.

Next person who makes a allegation -- back it up.

Saying TI consistently failed? What consistently -- is it failing today? What was the rate of failure? How many failed -- how long did it take to fix the problem. Provide all the details.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 21 Apr 2008 13:45 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 10 Aug 2006 00:49
Posts: 917
Location: London
I would recommend DRDO to conduct the trails of Arjun vis a vis M1, Leopard, T-90, T-72, lecrec etc bring all these top guns for battlefield practice and see which one perform better, T-90, T-72 or Arjun again other each other. That would be a hard to ignore benchmark for Indian Army.


Last edited by ashish raval on 21 Apr 2008 13:47, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 21 Apr 2008 13:48 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Posts: 12508
Location: In a sad place
ashish raval wrote:
I would recommend DRDO to conduct the trails of Arjun vis a vis M1, Leopard, T-90, T-72, lecrec etc bring all these top guns for battlefield practice and see which one perform better, T-90, T-72 or Arjun again other each other. That would be a hard to ignore benchmark for Indian Army.


This is the kind of thought that bespeaks gap in understanding --- the issue is not battle field testing of dissimilar tanks -- the issue is what is needed by the IA in its operation and what it can get.

Arjun needs to clear reliability tests -- which once is done by DRDO with Renk or whatever the tank will be accepted. If DRDO cant -- Arjun wont make it.

Simple -- all the chest beating is completely misplaced.


Last edited by Sanku on 21 Apr 2008 13:52, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 355 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 9  Next

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group