My only guess would be cost. That is something that we don't know as of know. Maybe it is a good compromise to get most bang for the buck, or maybe it is penny wise, pound foolish. Let's hope the people involved have thought through this well.
yes, if this is the better version of already proposed upgrades for T-72. Does anyone know about the status of combat improved Ajeya program? how many were upgraded and what's the duration. Maybe Atharva is a successor or taking a share of CIA. My main concern is that it feels bad to limit a significant chunk of our armored manpower to a fundamentally old design that we are going to keep using well into future. Just like Mig-21.Yagnasri wrote: ↑12 Jan 2024 05:35 Many decisions of the IA regarding the Tanks do not make sense to mango people. But at least in this case, they are using local products. Plus, as we are only proposing to upgrade just 1000 and not all, maybe they are using only good hulls. Anyway, some good upgrade is better than nothing.
One would hope that a bigger share of funds is diverted to Arjun/FMBT/Zorawar, and we move on from Russian designs and not continue to upgrade them (at least the T-72. T-90s would obviously continue for a few decades ).
A new design (it is well beyond an upgrade like CIA) like Atharva might easily consume a decade before properly entering service, and the utility might not be that great compared to new designs by that time.
The more we flog them, the more our infra/logistics/workshops will be tied to them and make it costlier for new designs to be inducted (remember the bridge). It would be good if we can upgrade and sell them to other armies that need them more.
It is good that IA is using local products, it is just that mango people feel the same local products/ecosystem can be better utilized in a different upgrade path (specialist vehicles/UGV/pillboxes/replaced with T-90 like Pratyush said), based on our limited knowledge.
How these people became and continue to serve as Armoured Corps officers is baffling.