Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

pralay · Post by **pralay** » 18 Apr 2010 13:58

Austin saar,

So do you mean that Arjun is not superior till the very moment govt orders it in bulk ?
And once it is ordered, at that exact moment it will be superior ?

or will you set up a new criteria to say that Arjun is inferior at that exact moment ?

At least you should not mind to accept that Arjun is superior than tin-90 for Indian war theater.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 18 Apr 2010 14:58

sameer_shelavale wrote:Austin saar,

So do you mean that Arjun is not superior till the very moment govt orders it in bulk ?
And once it is ordered, at that exact moment it will be superior ?

or will you set up a new criteria to say that Arjun is inferior at that exact moment ?

At least you should not mind to accept that Arjun is superior than tin-90 for Indian war theater.

No , what I meant is the GOI accepts and acknowledges the fact the Arjun is designed for IA and is superior , but words are not converted into actions and that the GOI is doing lip service.

Tell me If in the MMRCA race GOI selects x aircraft amongst the 6 in the race and MOD declares in Parliment that x was superior over the others and it was selected in the best interest of the country and IAF , should we consider the rest 5 inferior because GOI did not select it ?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 18 Apr 2010 16:51

couple of interesting videos here.

a couple of marine M1 fighting in the streets of falluja....using main cannons too...but lots of coax and turret 0.50cal fire (not sure of M1, but Leo2 carries 4000+ MG rounds)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmidb92H ... re=related

here a mixed patrol of bradley and hummers seems to come under fire. so they call forth a M1
who takes up position and fires 5 main rounds and 100s of MG shots into the bushes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7F_Oif4SP8&feature=fvw

and here is one of unit of 3rd ID attacking along a highway on baghdad outskirts, generally
beating up insurgents, foot soldiers, abandoned BMPs and such...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGQxR1FX ... re=related

have to say when the proper logistics are in place, these US armour divs can make roadkill
out of just about anyone except perhaps a well trained british/french/german division equipped
on a equal scale but that never happens because unkil has 1000s of M1s and 100s of attack
helicopters to throw at any problem

I wouldnt want to be in a T-90 facing a line of these steel beasts

saw another clip where a 'technical' type fidayeen pickup (or perhaps just some mad guy) intrudes into the highway right beside a column of abrams. the nearest abrams lowers its coax
and unleashes a hellacious burst of gunfire that shreds the rear musharaff of the pickup which
is like tossed off the highway like a elephant phooing aside a mongoose.

Bheem · Post by **Bheem** » 18 Apr 2010 23:42

Lets face it. T-90 orders, with spare parts, ammo, prodn & maintenance equipment and T-72 upgradation contract will all in all constitute around US$ 20 Billion over next 20-40 years. This means around US$ 4 to 5 Billion i.e. Rs. 20,000 to 30,000 crore of slush money would be involved. No peformance of Arjun can match it. Imagine T-90/72 lobby has Rs. 1000 crore to give away every year

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 18 Apr 2010 23:50

Bheem wrote:Lets face it. T-90 orders, with spare parts, ammo, prodn & maintenance equipment and T-72 upgradation contract will all in all constitute around US$ 20 Billion over next 20-40 years. This means around US$ 4 to 5 Billion i.e. Rs. 20,000 to 30,000 crore of slush money would be involved. No peformance of Arjun can match it. Imagine T-90/72 lobby has Rs. 1000 crore to give away every year

Sir, what you're saying is that it is imports lobby which is sabotaging the induction of Arjun Tanks in the Indian Army and decision makers in Army are doing it for their pockets are being lined. I will strongly suggest against making such accusations with out any corroborative evidence. Such a statement as you've made falls squarely in gross speculation territory and does no good to any one.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 19 Apr 2010 09:46

while specific particulars cannot be alleged, we do know the 'reach' and 'power' of the natasha lobby dont we? a 'system' built up over 40 years does not crumble or get scared easily. and there is strong support in the PSU defence factories as their job is easier with imported assembly manuals and creates jobs.

I dont think there is anyone in the political space to champion openly against more
natasha imports and investing more locally. to some extent their hands are tied by
our dependence on Rus for 'strategic' issues in the missile and SSN areas.

hshukla · Post by **hshukla** » 19 Apr 2010 10:47

Reg T72 Vs Arjun: Just to put things in perspective one of BR's tank gurus[an ex-armyman] pointed out that comparison between T72 and Arjun was moot since they were tanks in different class and T72 with its light weight had a different role...and hence fulfills a different objective of the army's war doctrine.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 19 Apr 2010 11:17

Hersh wrote:Reg T72 Vs Arjun: Just to put things in perspective one of BR's tank gurus[an ex-armyman] pointed out that comparison between T72 and Arjun was moot since they were tanks in different class and T72 with its light weight had a different role...and hence fulfills a different objective of the army's war doctrine.

So, now T-72 is a light tank? And hence, it has a different use in the Indian Army? hmmm....Let me guess, fly over the ditch-cum-bundh(DCB) defences of PA in Punjab and Shakargargh Sector

(the whole tank, mind you..not the turret onlee)...And Oh! don't tell this to the Russians - they always thought that T-72 was their Main Battle Tank and they were going to pulverize NATO with their Tank Armies equipped with..horror of horror...T-72; these Russians, they had the gall to take on the Western Armor might with their 'Light Tanks'.....But wait, did not Indian Army equip it's frontline Armored Brigade with T-72 from Sambha to Jodhpur? Damn...I'm bloody confused

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 Apr 2010 11:26

Well the SU could have had many tactics when taking on the might of Western Armour with their T- 72 supported by multiple platform , over and above do not underestimate the use of Tactical Nukes of which nearly 30 thousand the Soviets had

niran · Post by **niran** » 19 Apr 2010 11:35

rohitvats wrote:
So, now T-72 is a light tank? And hence, it has a different use in the Indian Army? hmmm....Let me guess, fly over the ditch-cum-bundh(DCB) defences of PA in Punjab and Shakargargh Sector (the whole tank, mind you..not the turret onlee)...And Oh! don't tell this to the Russians - they always thought that T-72 was their Main Battle Tank and they were going to pulverize NATO with their Tank Armies equipped with..horror of horror...T-72; these Russians, they had the gall to take on the Western Armor might with their 'Light Tanks'.....But wait, did not Indian Army equip it's frontline Armored Brigade with T-72 from Sambha to Jodhpur? Damn...I'm bloody confused

i thought the Ruski doctrine was to have the TFTA T80s as the MBT and SDRE T72s were to fill up the gap between two T80s. the main role of T72s were to act as cannon fodder and exhaust the western antitank
defenses, and follow (if any still left) the T80s. to crush the evil capitalist burgoiese west.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 19 Apr 2010 12:10

niran wrote:..I thought the Ruski doctrine was to have the TFTA T80s as the MBT and SDRE T72s were to fill up the gap between two T80s. the main role of T72s were to act as cannon fodder and exhaust the western antitank
defenses, and follow (if any still left) the T80s. to crush the evil capitalist burgoiese west.

Sir, even by the Russian standards of warfare, the bolded part is over the roof top. Such theories are pure bunkum. As for the T-80 bit, you're actually write...GSFG Armor Divisions were mainly equipped with these. T-72 was more numerous with Motor Rifle Divisions....

pralay · Post by **pralay** » 19 Apr 2010 12:21

On battlefield the class of the tanks don't matter,
What really matters is whether your tanks can take out enemy tank before the enemy takes you out or not, by any means including tactics, technology, firepower, armor or numbers, whaterver best feasible.

If Arjuns are more effective against t-series(or equivalent) which our enemies will have then we should not hesitate to opt for Arjuns.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 Apr 2010 12:34

I mean isnt it a case of my overall assets , my overall situational awareness versus theirs , rather then tank versus tank.

Lets say in a simple scenario where PA is equipped with T-80 but if I have LCH with helinag which spots the thing from 7 km away and fires a single or couple of helinag with F&F capability , no matter what tank is there on the other side , if even a single helinag hits it , at best the tank may be dead and at worst the tank may be out of action.

Now if you have air superiority and artillery support,MRLS with smart anti-tank rounds then there is nothing much best tank in the world can do for them. So in the end it may be my system versus their system , rather then my tank versus their.

pralay · Post by **pralay** » 19 Apr 2010 13:54

Now if you have air superiority and artillery support,MRLS with smart anti-tank rounds then there is nothing much best tank in the world can do for them. So in the end it may be my system versus their system , rather then my tank versus their.

Saar that also means that we don't need T-90 as we have ample of t72 tanks.

But this theory is not true, Tanks are not yet absolute and wont be absolute in near future. Otherwise we would have ordered 1000 Anti-tank choppers instead of t-90.

also
if
Tank A > Tank B in War Theater W
then
(Tank A + Fighterplane X + MRLS M + Artillery R) > ( Tank B + FighterPlane X+ MRLS M + Artillery R) in War Theater W

so obviously Tank A will be the best choice

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 19 Apr 2010 14:08

It is part of our country's peaceloving antiescalation doctrine. The combo of Arjun+Garud[LCH] would tilt the balance totally in our direction. Thus forcing beggar porkis to strike with nukes in battlefield.

So just that the poor porkis don't become too insecure, we are inducting Tin 90s. SACRIFICING OUR OWN TANK WHICH HAS BEEN COSTUM MADE FOR BHARATVARSH IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DEMANDS MADE BY ARMY.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 19 Apr 2010 14:40

the old yindu failing of being magnanimous in victory and wanting to win by too large a margin ... almost apologetic

Raye · Post by **Raye** » 19 Apr 2010 14:59

Army is the least corrupt organisation in our country. Its hard to digest corruption (as latest army bashing in BR suggests) , not professional rationale determined selection of t90 as our mbt. Still i have two questions for u Austin,

What is the doctrine of Indian Army really w.r.t armoured thrusts, can u provide some links, its bewildering why the army still prefering t90 as its mbt. since now Arjun seems to be the better tank, moreover its indegenous to our indigenous Antony Gonsalves. Army still prefers to limit Arjun to deserts after the trials, Why t90 or even t72's is preferafable still in other terrains. (T34 vs Tiger in WW2 ??)

Another confusing thing with Army is why the hell they wanted a western tank with their eastern doctrines. Its worst project management after lca with bad blood running between army n drdo as its long term implications.

What's the proffesional logic behind this philosophy, surely not everyone in army is corrupt or as dumb as we civilians assume.

Again another topic, the new generation anti tank weopons, including heli missiles which we should take into account considering future threats, t90 is plastic can, fine, but can Arjun withstand the latest anti tank weopons.This topics are explained in detail here in BR, but unsatisfactorally, since arjun's original parameters are classified. My point is why we need so many tanks in this age at the cost of the numbers of anti tank weopons(Garud included).

The third point is: lately i heard from someone, Defence Ministry trying to forge future partnership much in the established model of Navy- Drdo. Its probably in conceptual or skill building level. Maybe after 10 yrs we can hopefully see, an Army's directorate with Drdo designing a tank, or an Air Force's directorate designing a UCAV with hal, Afterall the baby is supposed to be of both, not a step child to either. Any confirmations?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 Apr 2010 17:03

Raye wrote:Army is the least corrupt organisation in our country. Its hard to digest corruption (as latest army bashing in BR suggests) , not professional rationale determined selection of t90 as our mbt. Still i have two questions

My opinion is least corrupt or most corrupt is not a relevant issue , rather then the guys who can influence are corrupt that matters , so even if the 1 % of the Politican,DRDO , Babus , IA are corrupt and are at the right place in the evaluation and decision making loop the job is done , the rest 99 % semi-honest are mostly irrelevant.

What is the doctrine of Indian Army really w.r.t armoured thrusts, can u provide some links, its bewildering

I just read about Cold Start , rest I am not a doctrine guy , some one else can help you here.

why the army still prefering t90 as its mbt. since now Arjun seems to be the better tank, moreover its indegenous to our indigenous Antony Gonsalves. Army still prefers to limit Arjun to deserts after the trials, Why t90 or even t72's is preferafable still in other terrains. (T34 vs Tiger in WW2 ??)

let assume for argument sake the IA may have some preference for T-90 over Arjun and presents a favorable report to MOD , that report has still to be vetted by MOD and GOI with inputs from agency like DRDO who has a capable competing product. ( do not underestimate the DRDO lobby within GOI )

So the bewildering part is not IA preffering T-90's ( assuming it did ) but GOI putting its approval to order this tank in the numbers that it did and the different dates that it did ( late Dec 2007 ) when GOI has the position that Arjun is designed for IA and is superior to T-90 and T-72. { was it just a lip service to encourage DRDO to rectify the faults if it had ? }

I am more keen to understand from GOI what is the rational for the purchase of such a large number of T-90 when admittedly a superior product is available from DRDO by their own admission.
( I do not want to just say GOI corruption etc etc because its a simplest thing to do and I do not have the evidence to prove the same )

As for the IA goes it will fight with what it has and what it gets ( same goes for other Defence Service ) , if GOI makes a decision now to purchase 1000 Arjun and cancel T-90 it will fight with Arjun , if it makes a decision to upgrade T-72 it will still fight with that.

All the defence service chief understands the simple fact that they have the authority to evaluate and recommend but not to choose , decision making is entirely GOI prerogative.

Even the IAF chief admitted recently that A-330 cancellation against IAF recommendation was not good as it delayed the whole affair , but accepted that its GOI that does the decision and they have to accept it.

Again another topic, the new generation anti tank weopons, including heli missiles which we should take into account considering future threats, t90 is plastic can,

Plastic can Really ? Based on some fan boy assessment of something that happened in Gulf war

Can some one show me a picture of IA T-90 getting blown to pieces from rounds fired by Arjun or T-72 , If not the picture can some one show me one statement from IA or DRDO which claim to have achieved such feat ?

Lets not get carried away by such unsubstantiated statements and then proclaim it as truth.

It would be an interesting exercise if a single helina or even Nag is fired at T-90 and Arjun and have a good video of the same.

This topics are explained in detail here in BR, but unsatisfactorally, since arjun's original parameters are classified. My point is why we need so many tanks in this age at the cost of the numbers of anti tank weopons(Garud included).

The parameters of Arjun and T-90 Bishma are classified , hence only MOD/GOI can make right assessment about its capability based on inputs from DRDO and IA.

But yes generally speaking Shaped Charge Tandem Warhead should be effective in dealing with advanced armour seen on Arjun,T-90 and other MBT.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 19 Apr 2010 17:48

Austin wrote: The parameters of Arjun and T-90 Bishma are classified , hence only MOD/GOI can make right assessment about its capability based on inputs from DRDO and IA.

I don't quite get this. The MoD/GoI is made up of bureaucrats and politicians. They do not have the wherewithal to "assess" complex weapon systems like a tank. The assessment has to be done by the IA's evaluation committees and their conclusions submitted to the MoD. The GOI would be more concerned with the financial aspect after the IA has submitted its conclusions. So if hypothetically if the IA says that tank A is better than tank B by amount C (I'm simplifying this example of course) the GOI/MoD has to accept it. It may then decide to overrule the IA and go for Tank B because the advantage enjoyed by Tank A over B is not enough to warrant the extra cost.

But in this case we already know from Ajai Shukla's article how the price of the T-90 was kept artificially low to make it seem that the Arjun was a lot more expensive. The GOI/MoD had no reason to refuse the IA's demand of choosing the T-90 over the Arjun. The price obfuscation, the army's refusal to conduct comparative trials all the while adamantly maintaining that the T-90 was superior makes one think that there is something fishy about the whole affair.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 19 Apr 2010 18:28

nachiket wrote:
I don't quite get this. The MoD/GoI is made up of bureaucrats and politicians. They do not have the wherewithal to "assess" complex weapon systems like a tank. The assessment has to be done by the IA's evaluation committees and their conclusions submitted to the MoD. The GOI would be more concerned with the financial aspect after the IA has submitted its conclusions. So if hypothetically if the IA says that tank A is better than tank B by amount C (I'm simplifying this example of course) the GOI/MoD has to accept it. It may then decide to overrule the IA and go for Tank B because the advantage enjoyed by Tank A over B is not enough to warrant the extra cost..........<SNIP>

The logic, my dear freind, is lost on people who don't want to see the obvious. As for the role of Army specific to the T-90 deal -

In reply to a question the Ministry of Defence stated that the T-90S Tanks were offered by Russia in December, 1997. A technical delegation was deputed to Russia in 1998 for conducting evaluation of the Tank. The delegation evaluated the Tank in Russian conditions and recommended its acquisition. (Role of the Army - Look at the beauty; T-90 were recommended to induction into IA after evaluating them in Russian conditions. How come IA did not then talk about the need for the tank to prove itself in Indian conditions? That so and so subsystem should work in Indian Thar in 60 degree temperature?)In December 1998, the Cabinet Committee on Security approved the proposal for acquisition of 124 fully formed Tanks and 186 Semi Knocked Down (SKD) and Completely Knocked Down (CKD) Tanks.(Role of GOI - tank approved on recco of Army)

The Price Negotiation Committee (PNC) recommended that the Tanks should be tried in Peak summer conditions in India. (This is the beauty. PNC asking the IA to conduct the trials of T-90 in Indian Army. Why did IA not see it necessary to trial the tank in Indian conditions? The same Army, which has made Arjun jump through hooplas time and again).Three T-90S Tanks were tried in Rajasthan during May-July 1999. Protection trial of the Tanks were also held in Russia during October-November 1999 which were witnessed by technical delegation from India. Based on these trials the Army headquafters prepared a General Staff Evaluation Report and recommended the induction of T-90S Tank into the service. (Again, the IA giving the inputs to the GOI) At present PNC is continuing its negotiations with the supplier M/s RVZ of Russia.

The latest set of arguments, red herrings actually, don't have legs to stand upon...

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 19 Apr 2010 19:26

^^ If this doesn't prove the injustice done to Arjun, the indiginisation efforts and the country itself what else can.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 Apr 2010 22:33

nachiket wrote:I don't quite get this. The MoD/GoI is made up of bureaucrats and politicians. They do not have the wherewithal to "assess" complex weapon systems like a tank. The assessment has to be done by the IA's evaluation committees and their conclusions submitted to the MoD. The GOI would be more concerned with the financial aspect after the IA has submitted its conclusions. So if hypothetically if the IA says that tank A is better than tank B by amount C (I'm simplifying this example of course) the GOI/MoD has to accept it. It may then decide to overrule the IA and go for Tank B because the advantage enjoyed by Tank A over B is not enough to warrant the extra cost.

Yes the primary technical assessment and evaluation is done by Defence Folks this case IA and the result is submitted to MOD, they are further vetted by Finance and all said and done it finally goes to CCSA which takes a final view on any procurement matters. DRDO views are always taken on such matters by GOI.

But saying that GOI decision can be mind boggling and many a times does not appear to be fair

For eg the financial aspect of the bid that you have raised is not the only issue GOI looks into , the recent example being IL-78 refueling tanker was financially the lower bidder ( if memory serves me right by a yard stick ) but IAF assessed A-330 was technically superior for what ever reasons and recommended to GOI , now GOI in its own assessment rejected the bid of A-330 as expensive ( over IL-78 ) but did not opted for IL-78 as the winning bidder because of lower cost , instead decided to redo the entire process again

Come back again to P-75 submarine ( SSK ) , its a whopping ~ $3.2 billion dollar deal ( reportedly U-214 entered the race at last moment at very attractive price but was rejected ) DCN Scorpene was awarded the contract and there were no trials conducted in Indian conditions to assess the performance of submarine and selection was made only on basis of paper performance , something accepted by CCSA

At no point of time was it ever thought to do some kind of competitive bidding between the first T-90 deal and last but IA assesment was accepted to go with T-90 by GOI , similarly there is no competitive bidding for C-17 but IAF assessment is accepted ( for the latter IAF does not have any experience in operating any American transport aircraft )

There are couple of example that comes to my mind where discretionary power of GOI is used to make or arrive at a decision hopefully in national interest in all cases.

But in this case we already know from Ajai Shukla's article how the price of the T-90 was kept artificially low to make it seem that the Arjun was a lot more expensive. The GOI/MoD had no reason to refuse the IA's demand of choosing the T-90 over the Arjun. The price obfuscation, the army's refusal to conduct comparative trials all the while adamantly maintaining that the T-90 was superior makes one think that there is something fishy about the whole affair

Surprisingly the very vocal DRDO is very quite on T-90 deal , it keeps insisting that Arjun should be accepted in certain minimum numbers and that it has passed all trials , but so far not openly opposed the T-90 deal ( nor do we know where does it stand on this matter ) , while on Barak-1 SAM deal it opposed the large procurement of that SAM , since Trishul was to be ready very soon except where IN insisted on operational reasons to buy some minimum numbers of barak system

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 19 Apr 2010 22:43

Yes but in each case that you mention - C-17 or the Submarines, there is no competition from a competent domestic product.

Seems like you are pushing the case of the T-90 farther than even the IA at this point of time. However, most here would be agreeable to Arjun and T-90 fighting together in IA. IA has used some choice words against the Arjun that riles us a lot. If the IA can buy 1300- 1500 T-90s, it must also buy a similar number of Arjuns and not order a mere 124.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 19 Apr 2010 22:52

All said and done, the core of Austin's point is valid, when GoI makes a decision (particularly of something as large as this) it is combination of Army tests + DRDO feedback into the system + MoD magic on "bigger picture" + Cabinet overall.

This has seen two/three cabinets, and many heads of IA and DRDO etc.

For better or for worse what has happened is the total decision of the entire GoI including DRDO (as per all available data).

That fact there is no getting away from.

------------------------------------------------

And tanks are not H Bums, H Bums GoI behaving queerly about I can understand, but mere tanks?

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 19 Apr 2010 23:50

Hmmmm! So when Bharat (Cabinet + MoD + IA) decides to buy C 17s from US its a fishy decision. But when same Bharat decides to buy T-90 by just.... just sending a committee watching it perform in Russia without any competition and without testing in Bhartiya conditions, while grinding Arjun in test after test rigourosly in Bhartiya conditions then it is justified?

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 20 Apr 2010 00:58

hmm go away for a week and what happens

Now the order for T 90 is the fault of MOD \ GOI\DRDO - everyone except the Armour procurement guys.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 20 Apr 2010 01:07

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 20 Apr 2010 07:47

No one organization is faulty , if there is fault its a systematic failure ....so fault starts from DGMF and goes straight up towards CCSA and every thing that comes in between.

Its a systematic failure not an individual or a specific organisation failure.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 20 Apr 2010 09:32

Austin wrote:No one organization is faulty , if there is fault its a systematic failure ....so fault starts from DGMF and goes straight up towards CCSA and every thing that comes in between.

Its a systematic failure not an individual or a specific organisation failure.

I guess that facts that if the IA had not reccomended T-90, there would have been no T-90 or asked for them in limited numbers as only stop gap measure....and we would have had only couple of hundereds of these.........are akin to mere fly in the ointment....

Seriously, of all the arguments I've heard against Arjun, this one is the most hilarious and I must add, imaginative....But one good thing that has some out from this latest round is how the focus of arguments has moved away from merits and demerits of Arjun to justification of T-90 induction.....and ofcourse, where the buck stops.

akimalik · Post by **akimalik** » 20 Apr 2010 09:39

rohitvats wrote:
Austin wrote:No one organization is faulty , if there is fault its a systematic failure ....so fault starts from DGMF and goes straight up towards CCSA and every thing that comes in between.

Its a systematic failure not an individual or a specific organisation failure.
I guess that facts that if the IA had not reccomended T-90, there would have been no T-90 or asked for them in limited numbers as only stop gap measure....and we would have had only couple of hundereds of these.........are akin to mere fly in the ointment....

Seriously, of all the arguments I've heard against Arjun, this one is the most hilarious and I must add, imaginative....But one good thing that has some out from this latest round is how the focus of arguments has moved away from merits and demerits of Arjun to justification of T-90 induction.....and ofcourse, where the buck stops.

Hi, this discussion seems to have degenerated into pin-the-tail ... as to who is the donkey of the decision !
Could we please come back to discussing the merits (or demerits) of Arjun v.s T90 and try and figure out which is best for what (seems like we have to live with T90 no matter what we say

).

Also, hats off to Austin...whose stamina to defend is astounding

...i visualize him to be like Bhishma

... absorbing all the barbs and yet continuing to fight.

But once again, I am an avid reader of these posts and would like to see technical discussions as opposed to enamoured discourses on one's favourite weapon systems.

With Humility & Regards

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 20 Apr 2010 09:41

And why should IA not recommend T-90 and GOI not accept that recommendation if both think it has merits and is vital for Indian National Security ? Because some folks on BR or Mr Ajai Shukla does not like it or has some different opinion over what IA and GOI thinks ?

So if the current round of "successful" trial does not come up with a matching response of "1000 Arjun Tanks" from GOI , will some one then blame the IA for manipulating the trials because GOI did not order 1000 Arjun's over 1650 T-90's ?

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 20 Apr 2010 09:57

Austin wrote:No one organization is faulty , if there is fault its a systematic failure ....so fault starts from DGMF and goes straight up towards CCSA and every thing that comes in between.

Its a systematic failure not an individual or a specific organisation failure.

Austin wrote:And why should IA not recommend T-90 and GOI not accept that recommendation if both think it has merits and is vital for Indian National Security ? Because some folks on BR or Mr Ajai Shukla does not like it or has some different opinion over what IA and GOI thinks ?

So if the current round of "successful" trial does not come up with a matching response of "1000 Arjun Tanks" from GOI , will some one then blame the IA for manipulating the trials because GOI did not order 1000 Arjun's over 1650 T-90's ?

Either ordering T-90 in sustantial quantity, giving repeat orders and sticking with it inspite of the various issues was a 'systematic failure' or IA was right to in reccomending the induction of the tank...it can't be both at the same time....make up your mind for you're speaking in two tounges here....

And as for the induction of Arjun, it is the Army which will reccomend the induction of Arjun - like it did for T-90, and the GOI will act on that. The fact that you've trying to spread the blame around will not make this reality go away....nor the fact that IA has never ordered Arjun...

bodhi · Post by **bodhi** » 20 Apr 2010 10:18

army writes down the GSQR.

DRDO makes a tank as per the GSQR.

Army does not want a tank which meets their own GSQR requirements.

Was weight a part of the GSQR...that is how heavy should it be?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 20 Apr 2010 10:25

rohitvats wrote: Either ordering T-90 in sustantial quantity, giving repeat orders and sticking with it inspite of the various issues was a 'systematic failure' or IA was right to in reccomending the induction of the tank...it can't be both at the same time....make up your mind for you're speaking in two tounges here....

That is "if" there is a systematic failure , I never said there was a systematic failure

Since the IA/GOI under various Chief/GOI/DRDO/MOD did order those tanks which is a fact of life , I do not see how all these institution and organization would have committed such a fatal mistake , there is definitely merit in T-90 purchase , atleast GOI seems to think so and thats what matters

And as for the induction of Arjun, it is the Army which will reccomend the induction of Arjun - like it did for T-90, and the GOI will act on that. The fact that you've trying to spread the blame around will not make this reality go away....nor the fact that IA has never ordered Arjun...

Really are you privy to the recommendation of IA , are you privy to DRDO views on the recommendation , are you privy to CCSA meeting and mom and what let GOI to approve this big purchase , are you privy to the trials of T-90 and merits of trials and the demerits of T-90 as submitted by IA.

Most here have a single minded agenda IA did not order Arjun blame the IA . All flaws rest with IA because it recommended T-90 , do not blame any one except the IA , why because they are incompetent to understand what they need and manipulated the trials.

Unfortunately the debate on Arjun has degenerated to blaming IA and this is something unfair and unwise.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 20 Apr 2010 10:47

Manish_Sharma wrote:Hmmmm! So when Bharat (Cabinet + MoD + IA) decides to buy C 17s from US its a fishy decision. But when same Bharat decides to buy T-90 by just.... just sending a committee watching it perform in Russia without any competition and without testing in Bhartiya conditions, while grinding Arjun in test after test rigourosly in Bhartiya conditions then it is justified?

BTW thats precisely why no one who has opposed the C17 has remotely worried about IAFs role.

Similarly of T 90 the matter goes beyond IA thats it. Its just that in case of T 90 the same reasons that make C 17 fishy cant be applied.

In fact when T 72s were first inducted it was a political decision mostly (like it would be if C 17s are gotten in)

Ashutosh Malik · Post by **Ashutosh Malik** » 20 Apr 2010 10:56

@ Austin on April 20.

"No one organization is faulty , if there is fault its a systematic failure ....so fault starts from DGMF and goes straight up towards CCSA and every thing that comes in between.

Its a systematic failure not an individual or a specific organisation failure."

Hi Austin,

Without going into the merits of the case of either side.

In the above paragraph of yours, my understanding is that you do mean to say that there was a systemic failure. You have written - "if there is fault its a systematic failure..". You have not written "if there is a systematic failure". My understanding therefore would be that you did mean to say there was a systemic failure!

Do correct me if I am wrong.

Best regards.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 20 Apr 2010 11:07

Ashutosh then its my bad that i did not communicated the way I wanted to .

May be I should I written it in the way ""if there is a systematic failure" , I stand corrected

Thanks.

dipak · Post by **dipak** » 20 Apr 2010 11:10

Austin saar - just a question, why should the IA not be questioned if they formulate the GSQR, and later disown the product?

Bodhi asked similar questions which you sideline and choose to ignore.

For the buck to stop at CCSA, it has to start somewhere - and it starts at IA.

So, if T-90 is ordered in thousands, it starts with IA.
And, if Arjun is ordered in token numbers, it starts again with IA.
In both cases, it is IA which is at the root of the decisions.

If CCSA thinks that certain tank is good enough/not good enough - it decides based on the recommendation of IA.
For, CCSA doesn't have technical expertise to evaluate tanks on their own.

PS: Back to lurking mode

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 20 Apr 2010 11:11

BTW on another note , have we heard from Pakistan Army that they are concerned about a superior heavy tank getting inducted in the IA and went to US with their begging bowl asking for MIA2 or something similar that matches Arjun if that concerns them ?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 20 Apr 2010 11:27

dipak wrote:Austin saar - just a question, why should the IA not be questioned if they formulate the GSQR, and later disown the product?

Bodhi asked similar questions which you sideline and choose to ignore.

For the buck to stop at CCSA, it has to start somewhere - and it starts at IA.

So, if T-90 is ordered in thousands, it starts with IA.
And, if Arjun is ordered in token numbers, it starts again with IA.
In both cases, it is IA which is at the root of the decisions.

If CCSA thinks that certain tank is good enough/not good enough - it decides based on the recommendation of IA.
For, CCSA doesn't have technical expertise to evaluate tanks on their own.

PS: Back to lurking mode

Oh my intention were never to avoid any question here , sorry if that is something you got , its just the pressure of time and other work that I may have missed answering those ( my salary does come come from Natasha or DRDO lobby

and my boss will not be too happy if he sees me doing this )

But coming back to the question , yes if IA did formulate the GSQR and persisted with it and DRDO did built a superior tank and IA now says it does not need it ( again its a unsubstantiated claim ) , then who is responsible for fixing all this mess ? ( if there is indeed a mess lot of assumption on my part )

I mean who is the supreme boss , who has the power and authority to rectify this ? Will IA rectify its own faults and punish the guilty if this is truly a fault on their part ? If it does not who else will do ?

( Didnt MOD AK intervened in Sukhna case and did justice or appears to have done something right )

Isnt it then GOI responsibility to correct the aberration and do justice , So do we expect the GOI to do something about it and if so why are they not doing something about it or waited till now ?

Will the last trials held do justice to Arjun and give them a 1000 plus order or we will just see 124 more Arjun mk2 and end of project ?

And we will still persist blaming the IA when there are checks and balances in place to rectify the situation ?

The buck ends with GOI , if GOI cannot rectify the situation no one in the chain can do it .