Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

kamdev
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 13
Joined: 06 Jun 2002 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby kamdev » 30 Jun 2002 11:07

i could not reply earlier as their is 5 hours power cut in delhi.

welcome to land of abundance then(USA) :) )

Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Raj Malhotra » 30 Jun 2002 11:38

Part 4

Military equipment is based on the doctrine and technical abilities of the concerned nation. A lot of our projects suffer because of following reasons: -

1. There is no military doctrine, hence the GSQRs that are fixed have no rationale
2. The GSQRs donot have any connection with our technical capacity
3. The projects are under funded
4. There is no sense of urgency or fire in the belly to do it
5. There is absence of pride in the services for the indigenous efforts
6. There is no attempt to brief the media on indigenous attempts which ultimately prevents the media in making informed opinions about the indigenous attempts
7. The import lobby has lot of clout, capability to grease the files and political blessing. Most of the delay in indigenous projects takes place at file stage rather than anything else.
8. There is no co-ordination between the army and DRDO and they seem to have adversarial relation

Most of these facts are well known and need no elaboration. But it would be instructive to compare the military doctrine around which other western tanks were built.

Abrams-USA- it is today a heavy ~72 tons tank. The focus is on providing very heavy armour and powerful gun using DU penetrators. The disadvantage is that it uses gas turbine engine to propel the tank that is fuel guzzler. So the Americans accepted this disadvantage in order to take heavy armour because they wanted to have a fast tank that could fire on the move.

Challenger-2 UK-it is heavy ~60 (70?) tons tank with underpowered engine of 1000hp, heavy armour, accurate rifle gun and good ammo load. The disadvantage is that the tank moves very slowly and its two-piece ammo slows the firing rate. But it fits the doctrine wherein it was supposed to fight in Europe against the numbers of Red Army from prepared positions while slowly retreating to a new position as soon as it was likely to be overrun.

Leo-2 Germany-this tank had very heavy armour on its turret. It was supposed to go hull down and fight against the Red Army and try to prevent Germany being overrun. It had a powerful gun (which was also adopted by USA for Abrams) but also it was heavy and armour was biased towards the turret. As the engine capacity of MTU-series has improved the Germans have added more armour to top and glacis. Weights today 62 (65?) tons.

Le clerc France- this tank came after the other tanks so France had the benefit of learning from them. They decided to rely on sophisticated electronics and autoloader to make tank lighter and so its almost 5 tons lighter compared to its western counterparts. To make the engine size smaller they went in for SACM wartsila engine that is complicated, costly and fuel hungry.

Merkava – Israel- moved the tank engine to front to protect its soldiers. This tank has always been underpowered because they focused on the armour at the expense of increased weight as they realized that most of the areas around Israel are flat.

Russian tanks- have already been discussed above

T- (?) Japanese- small tank with small fuel tank intended to fight in hull down situation on their islands. Use costly ceramic armor with something like leo-2 layout.

(The aforesaid is off course simplification all the way)

The point I am trying to make is that all nations/tank designs have to accept some sort of give and take in order to build a tank. Now as regards Arjun I have never heard any rationale but only criticism and I think the reason is that Indian army requirements were ridiculous all the way.

Like it must have lots of armour but it should be light.
Like it must have a big and powerful engine but then it should not be wide.

These were all mutually contradictory requirements, which cannot be fulfilled by tank manufacturer in the world.

So one wonders what is the basis of GSQRs? Who makes them and how can the person be held accountable?

Some of the demands that were specified as minimum requirements were also excessive. Take for example the requirement for APU in 1994 that has still not been incorporated in the tanks of German army (whose leo-2 are considered the best tank in the world).

Army wanted to put in top attack protection and all electric GCS that was scotched by strong opposition from the DRDO. The whole thing smacks of trying to run the project aground.

When T-90 was tested in Rajasthan it supposedly had heat related engine breakdowns and there was reportedly disputes whether the engines were producing 840hp or 1000hp. Inspite of this the way was cleared for procurement.

On the contrary when Arjun was tested army added an additional weight of 4 tons of trawler on the tank and then tested it in full June heat in Rajasthan for full mobility. I wonder how T-90 would have fared on similar testing.

So who made the GSQRs that required such sort of testing? Why such testing is not comparative i.e. field both Arjun/Karan and T-90 side by side!

Army as we all know refused to order Arjun till it was perfect. But services have no difficulty in paying for untested products like Ka-31 helos, Su-30 MKI etc.

Arjun was not accepted due to alleged accuracy problems. Reportedly the missile of T-90 is giving problems and has still not been delivered. So why not impose the same requirement there?

Now the most important criticism of Arjun was it was heavy and big (Gole). This can be tackled with Karan. But there does not seem to be any enthusiasm for Karan by the army and after 6 months of testing they want more. How many months t-90 was tested for?

Probably it takes time for thinking up all the reasons to shoot down another indigenous project.

I think we should hand over Arjun/Karan project to private sector who will create a level playing field by playing the media and greasing the way.

Anybody who deals with GoI at any level in India knows that using excuses to kill unwanted projects and studied oversights to promote others is well known.

Now coming back to Karan/Arjun brotherhood, it is very obvious that Arjun chassis has to be changed. It can be done now, after 15 LRIP tanks, after first batch of 15+ 55 or after all 124 but it is now commonly felt that chassis is outdated. If the production line of Arjun was already set up we would have problems but now we can simply adopt the existing resources of T-72 chassis to make a very contemporary tank.

Chassis is the cheapest part of the tank but normally cannot be changed, as it requires redoing the whole production line. With Karan we get over this difficulty.

There is no point trying to develop a new tank chassis for Arjun and waste a decade more. What is to be appreciated is that we are not adopting an old chassis but are able to fit the firepower and protection of Arjun on a “smaller” frame which would not have been possible even couple of years back.

Also with new requirements/developments in missiles/tank guns, for protection tanks will be further required to have: -

Slopes on the turret
Top attack protection on roof
Mine protection on bottom

This will take the weight of Arjun up by to around 70 tanks. If we adopt Karan then even with additional protection the weight will be in the region of 55 tons. This will allow us to use the present logistical facilities developed for Arjun. If we stick with Arjun then a new round of criticism will start as to logistical chain (whatever little) developed will be rendered useless.

In military use, the power of Karan will allow us to effectively implement our “attrition policy”. With superior firepower and accuracy we will able to hit Pakistan tanks at a greater distance, with more accuracy and at a higher rate.

If we provide the Karan with top attack protection also then it can go in few km into Pakistan dig down (hull down) and Pakistan will not be able to take it out. Tanks will not be able to get near or penetrate the heavy armour of turret armour of Karan. Missiles/artillery will not be (as) effective due to top attack protection. (So many ARVs that have been imported may yet come in useful for digging down into Pakistan soil). The capture of limited territory will prevent the situation escalating to so called nuke scenario while also giving us adequate territory to use as bargaining chip and to prevent Pakistan claiming victory by default.

Additionally due to narrow frontage of some possible battlefields in lower J&K we would need disproportionately better tanks than Pakistan and not necessarily try to take them by numbers.

We can also indulge in brief incursions and teach a lesson attack.

While IAF has developed some sort of doctrine around its study of gulf war and PGMs, I suppose army should also do some thinking. While a wide sweep of USA in Kuwait/Iraq may not be possible but definitely we can try to emulate them by not loosing a single tank while decimating Pakistan.

Economically it is well recognized that domestic production is the only safe course in the war situations. Too much dependence on Russia is also not good. The sale of M-17 to Pakistan is a thin edge of the wedge. Also by funding Russian technology we are ultimately aiding China (and then Pakistan).

Also at the sake of repetition, putting Karan in production will allow us to prevent too many diverse lines of production and concentrate on one tank and build it in numbers.

Concluded

[I have added part 4 to my first post also]

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20623
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Philip » 30 Jun 2002 13:53

Whatever has happened to the DRDO's indigenous and laudworthy effort Tank "X",unveiled at the recent DEFEX in Delhi,where an Arjun turret was carried on a T-72 chassis?This to some extent mitigates the weight and size problems faced with Arjun.

Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Raj Malhotra » 30 Jun 2002 15:42

Originally posted by kamdev:

welcome to land of abundance then(USA) :) )
Delhi is safer :D

Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Raj Malhotra » 30 Jun 2002 15:43

Originally posted by philip fowler:
Whatever has happened to the DRDO's indigenous and laudworthy effort Tank "X",unveiled at the recent DEFEX in Delhi,where an Arjun turret was carried on a T-72 chassis?This to some extent mitigates the weight and size problems faced with Arjun.
I write 8000 word first post and Philips asks Sita kaun thi :)

Incidentally does anybody know how many prototypes have been built and how many are on order for Tank-ex/karan?

P Chupunkar
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 30
Joined: 24 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby P Chupunkar » 30 Jun 2002 17:55

Well what is the final answer in term's of Arjun.
1) its being deployed
or
2) Its not being deployed

and
1) Its a dud
2) Its a dud but some useful tech has been developed and can be used for eg. in tank ex
3) Its a not a dud and will be operational pretty soon.
4) I don't know

Rudra
BRFite
Posts: 599
Joined: 28 May 2001 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Rudra » 30 Jun 2002 18:59

Karan carries only 22 rounds for whatever reason.
How were they able to fit the arjun turret on
the much smaller turret-ring of the T-72 ? this
means there is some rack space above waist level
but floor area is same as t-72.

they need to increase the ammo stowage somehow.

does arjun carry all rounds in the bustle ? if so
what is in the karan bustle ?

subhendu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 14
Joined: 31 Oct 1999 11:31
Location: World Travler

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby subhendu » 30 Jun 2002 22:16

If the FCS and armour is what its claimed to be then the solution is simple:

-Upgrade the engine to the 1500 hp Watsila one
-Upgrade the logistics to support the Arjun (i.e. rail cars, transports, etc)
-Continue with the Karan (Tank Ex?) type upgrade for some of the T-72s

They should consider the Leo2A6 type bolt on armour for the Arjun. It would more or less be unchallleged in the western border against TSP. For the North we would continue to use the T-72s and Karans. For the east use the T-72s and T-55s.

It will require more investment and is a costly solution, however it will payoff with overall improvement of the logistics chain, increased experience for local industries, and superior firpower on the battlefield.

In some ways the Army's Arjun decision has some parallels with the Air Force's decision to procure Su-30MKIs. Did the IAF really need it? Probally not, but it added undeniable superiority against the PAF and extended reach into China. Now that they have it are they complaining? ;)

It might be a large MBT compared to the ones the Army is use to...but thats what they put in the GSQR. Once the Arjun, along with the T-90s, Rhino upgrades, and Karans are in place there is no questioning who would dominate the battlefield.

Solutions made easy... :cool:

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby JCage » 30 Jun 2002 22:35

Originally posted by P Chupunkar:
Well what is the final answer in term's of Arjun.
1) its being deployed
or
2) Its not being deployed

and
1) Its a dud
2) Its a dud but some useful tech has been developed and can be used for eg. in tank ex
3) Its a not a dud and will be operational pretty soon.
4) I don't know
Wait tillmore Open source stuff comes for exact numbers.Arjun works.But cost consideration may give the future to karna numbers wise rather than the Arjun.After some 300/400 Arjuns.They will be deployed.

Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Raj Malhotra » 02 Jul 2002 02:02

Originally posted by Rudra Singha:
Karan carries only 22 rounds for whatever reason.
How were they able to fit the arjun turret on
the much smaller turret-ring of the T-72 ? this
means there is some rack space above waist level
but floor area is same as t-72.

they need to increase the ammo stowage somehow.

does arjun carry all rounds in the bustle ? if so
what is in the karan bustle ?
Actually tank-ex/karan has stowage for 32 rounds. compared to 39 for arjun.

P Chupunkar
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 30
Joined: 24 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby P Chupunkar » 02 Jul 2002 02:08

Since it makes more economical sense to go for karan (in big number's atleas for now), will the existing powerplant on the T-72 do or are they still developing the indigenous 1500 HP powerplant which is supposed to smaller in size than that obtained from the germans.
Basically the question is whether the powerplant an issue for karan like it is for arjun ? If the wartsila engine is the alternative to the german powerplant, how reliable are the finn's as a defense supplier ?

Ananth
BRFite
Posts: 346
Joined: 16 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Ananth » 03 Jul 2002 01:28

Admins Phuleessee,archive this thread.

Thanks to Raj and Nitin for enlightening junior members like me.

-Ananth

ragupta
BRFite
Posts: 349
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby ragupta » 04 Jul 2002 19:37

There is a need for second Tank Assembly line, close to the border near Rajasthan/MP area, preferably as a joint sector project between public and private industries.

Arjun must not be cancelled, it Bhim is viable option then Arjun MBT-I/II certainly can. It will be a heavier tank, if it is useful and meet certain objectives better than light weight tanks then it must be in our arsenal.

T-72s can be upgraded to tank-ex standards, this will be with western components which seems to be more favourable to any army including Indian Army. T-90 can be the eastern standard tank with russian tank.

T-55s must be opened up to private industry for R&D, tweaks, ideas and concept generation, which can help them gain skills, and perhaps salvage some of them for some useful roles, not necessary as front line but even as a irritation value to the enemy, will also add to the numbers. At the platform can be used to some good use.

It is not necessary for all our tanks to be frontline MBT.

Rudra
BRFite
Posts: 599
Joined: 28 May 2001 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Rudra » 04 Jul 2002 19:57

T55s and Vijayantas can imo be converted to
mortar and ATGM carriers by using a simpler and
modified turret. large scale training can also
be imparted on some. command tanks, comm tanks,
ARVs, recon assets, AP radar carriers, nuisance
tanks, short barrel low pressure howitzers....
....the talents of the indian automotive and
machinery industry must be harnessed to come up
with cheap and useful ideas.

as Raj said, there's no great reason to be buying
ARVs from poland when we make and even export a
whole range of heavy machinery & vehicles.

Amitabh
BRFite
Posts: 270
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Amitabh » 04 Jul 2002 20:23

T-55s can also be converted into super-ICVs as the Israelis and Russians have done. I imagine the Indian army has looked into the idea.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20623
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Philip » 04 Jul 2002 22:37

Sorry Raj! I repeat the question yet again,what has happened to Tank "X"? BY this I mean,has the GOI /MOD/DRDO said anything further on the status of this tank?The tank has been unveiled,but are we going to build on it further? There have been programmes to upgrade the T-72s in service,bringing them almost upto T-90 capability.Are we going instead to upgrade part or all of our T-72s taking a cue from the hybrid tank "X"? Whichever option is taken,or even if both options can be pursued,as both T-90s and Arjuns are in service,we have a considerable amount of T-72s in service and a cost effective formula for the army is to upgrade them,which will save the army a considerable amount of money instead of just buying huge qtys of new tanks.Upgrades are important as has just been shown in Afghanistan by the use and performance of upgraded T-55s.

Umrao
BRFite
Posts: 547
Joined: 30 May 2001 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Umrao » 04 Jul 2002 22:57

the problem is if armed forces wait for DRDO and OFP to deliver then we have to freeze in wait mode for ever. Just look at the production rates of T-72 or HAL productivity.

This is the reason we import ammo from Bulgaria and ICVs from poland becasue no sooner you pay the bribes the material arrives, will it be the ones promised another story for somebody to enearth.

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby JCage » 05 Jul 2002 02:10

Umrao,
Its more a case of bribes per se by gents at Mod and elsewhere than just productivity which decide imports.Sometimes its exigency.T90 vs Arjun.

If orders are placed in advance fine.Ofb can do what it takes.Otherwise penny pinching in peacetime leads to rush during wartime and christmas for agents.And the goods arrive in part after the "crisis" is over.

The army should be proactive too.
Look at the case of the Op theater on trucks.
No reason to delay but done anyway.

They need to look at the IAF and IN and review methods to aid civilian developers and R and D orgs.

Regards,
Nitin

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3421
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Aditya G » 05 Jul 2002 12:42

I was going thru the Defexpo 2002 showdaily [20.feb.02] and noticed this:

<B>Defexpo News talks to P.D.Braquilangs, MD, Thales India</B>

DN: What were the important orders received in 2001 (in india)?

PDB: In India we have been selected for the Russian supplied T-90 programme. Thales has provided thermal cameras for all 124 tanks. Thales is also involved with the HJT-36 trainer. The company will provide cockpit instrumentation. We r also providing Ticketing systems for the Delhi Metro, and radar for the army and navy thru our Dutch subsidary.

-----

Thales eqipment will be produced by HAL at Lucknow.

Umrao
BRFite
Posts: 547
Joined: 30 May 2001 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Umrao » 05 Jul 2002 20:02

nitin>> I am very skeptical about MOD babus to really allow private sector to take to defence production in a big way. There are too many intrest groups who are raking the hay with out doing anything. Any change in the status quo requires atleast a 10 Kt explosion under the pants of Defence PSU.

ALso if you notice the industrialists (such as Tata's Walchands, etc) should great interest in starting institutions which were doing something in the cutting edge of technologies, atleast till GOI stepped in (HAL Hindustan Shipping TIFR, BARC all started with pvt sector funding and founding).

While it hurts to call a spade a spade ( and many a memebr pounces to accuse me of being a gulam of gora, when I say they have better commitment to charity, research and the attitude to give back to the community). We dont see a Dhirubai, or Mafatlal, or Amitabh doing any good to any institution like supporting a University or a reserach foundation.

Take a minute to listen/read the following.

http://www.npr.org/programs/morning/index.html

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/stores/detail/-/books/0684872870/reader/2/ref=lib_rd_TFFL/103-1603944-7677431#reader-link

you get my drift.

One of the reasons we dont have a Sony, Honda, or even Hyundai?

Shalav
BRFite
Posts: 588
Joined: 17 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Shalav » 05 Jul 2002 20:26

Umrao John,

I disagree re Ambanis, and Mafatlals. Know for a fact they supported SASMIRA.

Some other industrialist supported instituitions in Mumbai
</font>
  • <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> SP Jain</font></li>
  • <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> NM</font></li>
  • <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Mithibai</font></li>
  • <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Sydenham</font></li>
  • <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> JJ college</font></li>
  • <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">National College</font></li>
  • <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> A good number of graduate and post graduate colleges are named after industrialists who provided money for their initial set up.</font></li>
  • <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Some Hostels and buildings, in IIT Powai have been set up with money donated by industrialists. There are plaques commemorating this on the buildings.</font></li>
  • <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> I should not forget Somaiya. This industrialist supported instituition grew from one building to a position where they can almost claim to be a university. That is how much has been given back to the local VidyaVihar community. You should be aware of this being that you were in Godrej.</font></li>
  • <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Nanavati Hosp.</font></li>
  • <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Harkishandas Hosp.</font></li>
  • <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> JJ Hosp.</font></li>
  • <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Some buildings and hostels in the PG campus of Mumbai U are nameed after industrialists who provided initial set up costs.
    </font></li>
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">One could go on and on about instituitions set up with funds from industrialists who gave back to the community. Its not only the Tatas and Walchands who gave back to the community.
Where I grew up in Kalina, there were 4 english medium schools. One run by AI, one by IA, one was a convent run instituition and KES (Kalina Education Society) school. The KES school was set up and funded by local businesses in Kalina.

Your own seth Godrej allowed the EE Highway to run thru Godrej lands in Vindyvihar without charging for it. If that is not giving to the community - what in your eyes is?

Before complaining about industrialists not setting up instituitions today one should also ask the question as to how easy it it to do so with the govt. interference and bribe taking now?

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby JCage » 05 Jul 2002 22:22

Umrao,
I do respect your opinion for you have seen a lot of the formative processes involved with our defence capabilities.

But i must stress things have changed for the better and are continuing to do so as we speak.
Efforts are underway.

People do realise that the pvt sector needs to join in.Heck,CII has now been officially been given the green signal.

An anecdote.A year or so back,the present def secretary visited one of our PSU's dealing with armor protection for jawans.The MD/CEO/whatever requested that the PSU be made the sole company "in charge" of armor protection for infantry etc.Reply?Advice-in polite bureucratese-that the Company should continue to make india proud etcetc...Nothing else.
Tata's et al are entering the field.Have already entered in fact.

If i may digress and this has nothing to do with the Arjun...we buy so much from the israelis today.Why?
Their sheer tech scale and range of products is amazing.At affordable prices to boot.
And a majority of it in the aerospace field came to fruition via the Lavi with Uncle Sam's largesse taking care of regular needs.
We are going the same way with the LCA project with no chacha to take care of our actual cap ex.The real fruits of our labour will be seen a decade thence.Not now.(even though LCA subcomponents are being fitted in all the IAF upgrades)But the effort was made and despite the Jackasses in suits and boot's who inhabit some of our esteemed GoI positions..others have stuck to their task.So people with vision and determination havent all died out.

I take the liberty to cross post Raja Ram's response from the "problems in def research thread" by bibhas.

As for the problems, I think they have been adequately identified, and efforts are underway to change the situation. I believe in the next couple of plan periods, India will have a fairly well developed military industrial complex where DRDO will play the role of Project Manager and Research Controller with a lot of research and manufacturing being carried out in the private and public sector.

[b]There is a concerted effort by Defence Ministry and the Industry to achieve this. It is not going to happen overnight, and when it happens we can expect politicisation of the process as well. Just as in Disinvestment Policy, it will finally come through and the end result will be a succesful culmination of achieving the strategic goal of independence in technology and production of weapons.


Our endeavour in the Space and Nuclear efforts are but case studies of how this has happened.
This is exactly what is happening.
Eg L and T in the ATV or the Dhanush and a myriad other trinkets ....it has begun.

Regards,
Nitin

s_nick
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 9
Joined: 19 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby s_nick » 05 Jul 2002 22:31

Hi, i was wondering what an ICV is...???

Thankx
Nick

saint
BRFite
Posts: 109
Joined: 19 Jun 2002 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby saint » 05 Jul 2002 22:35

INFANTRY COMBAT VEHICLES?

dev
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 3
Joined: 06 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: NY

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby dev » 05 Jul 2002 22:38

Hi Nick,

I'm guessing that ICV stands for Infantry Combat Vehicle. It's not a very popular term though. The closest I can think of is AIFV, armored infantry fighting vehicle.

cheers!
dev

kamdev
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 13
Joined: 06 Jun 2002 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby kamdev » 07 Jul 2002 05:17

Defense News

July 05, 2002

India Further Delays T-72 Upgrades; Will Buy T-90s

By VIVEK RAGHUVANSHI, NEW DELHI

India decided in June to delay yet again the modernization of its T-72 main battle tanks and divert about $500 million for the continued purchase of T-90 tanks from Russia.

“The overhaul and upgrade of T-72 tanks, which still forms the mainstay of India’s main battle tank [fleet], will again be delayed due to lack of funds, as the purchase of T-90 tanks is more urgent in the face of the war-like situation with Pakistan,” a senior Indian Ministry of Defence official said June 24.

The Indian government will make a mistake if it further delays the modernization of T-72 tanks, said Mahindra Singh, a retired Indian Army major general. Singh said in a June 25 interview that India should proceed immediately with the T-72 modernization program, even if it means allocating extra funds, as the tank will continue to be the mainstay of India’s artillery.

More than 70 percent of the Indian Army’s 2,000 T-72 tanks are not battle-worthy, the Defence Ministry official said. The decision to put the modernization of T-72 tanks on hold has indefinitely delayed the formal solicitation of bids, scheduled for June.

Harry Van
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 73
Joined: 14 Jun 2002 11:31
Location: Bangalore

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Harry Van » 07 Jul 2002 14:28

Yes ICV is Infantry Combat Vehicle.The Russians invest a lot in that and have modified them to such an extent that they are almost equivalent to tanks.They can usually carry around 8-troops.They have fitted them with thermal imagers and a good AA gun and 2-4 tubes containing anti tank / Iglas(Anti-Aircraft) weapons.So every ICV is a potent antitank weapon and can easily tank on tanks...and concrete bunkers..with AA guns

They have independent mindset and design philosophy.They dont try to make a tank to western specifiactions..they try to find ways and means of defeating them...and evolve new ideas such as an ICV that can take both infantry and tanks and aircraft and sometimes even tow a 250mm mortar with 10 km range...only way its inferior to a tank is its armor...it is lightly armoured and cant take hard hits...actually this thing in some conditions emerges superior to a tank though the armour is a weak point...it could easily be defeated by compared to tank armour

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby JCage » 07 Jul 2002 15:32

They have independent mindset and design philosophy.They dont try to make a tank to western specifiactions..
And what EXACTLY are western specifications?

Amitabh
BRFite
Posts: 270
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Amitabh » 07 Jul 2002 19:24

The Israelis have developed the Achzarit infantry combat vehicle from the T-54/55 series.

Harry Van
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 73
Joined: 14 Jun 2002 11:31
Location: Bangalore

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Harry Van » 07 Jul 2002 22:36

QUOTE]And what EXACTLY are western specifications?[/QUOTE]

What I meant was Russian army does'nt force their engineers to make a tank that has all specs(like good FCS) of western tanks.Unlike our IA guys who want a tank with American sophistication , French lightness, Russian ruggedness....they should have accepted some tank initailly even though it was inferior , we could have upgraded on the way once they are inducted , and as and when our DRDO labs make breakthroughs or foreign stuff is available...I had that in mind when i said it dosent matter if our tank is initailly inferior ..they are many ways to defeat enemy tanks...

vinod_raman
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 7
Joined: 02 Feb 2002 12:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby vinod_raman » 07 Jul 2002 22:50

they should have accepted some tank initailly even though it was inferior , we could have upgraded on the way once they are inducted , and as and when our DRDO labs make breakthroughs or foreign stuff is available.
Harry, you make it sound extremely simple and easy task to keep adding technology to loads of equipment as and when it comes. When you make it first you try to get it right. You dont just make the tracks, fix a gun and engine and then say we shall add equipments as and when it comes. Having spent time and money, we can wait for sometime to get a tank (or Plane) that has the latest technology and is miles ahead of the competition.
It takes a hel* lot of time and money and technical prowess to keep integrating new hardware and s/w into these equipements. Its not like adding a new stereo player to one's car.

Unlike our IA guys who want a tank with American sophistication , French lightness, Russian ruggedness
What is wrong in asking and demanding the best of all worlds. If this is what suits our conditions then IA has every right to demand this of DRDO.

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby JCage » 08 Jul 2002 00:03

Vinod,Harry..
Yes the ARmy should have accepted an Arjun which wasnt exactly an Abrams.This would have "firmed" the project,cut out speculation and cleared the way for a phased improvemnt of specs.
However,from the Army point of view,they didnt want to get saddled with a "political" tank.Ie they were unsure whether the DRDO and others would have the technical ability to improve the tank and whether the finances for the same would be forthcoming from the politicos.
Also the Army has yet to integrate its R AND D with the civilian developers like the IAF is beginning to do,or have its own specific organisAtion a la the IN'S WEESE which has done yeoman work.
From DRDO's pOV,the army kept jiggling specs,technology proved hard to master,let alone acquire in the early days.Sanctions hit OEM's system support and critical components.Add to the above an exodus of techies.
Net,the effect of all the above has been undue delay.
Add technical limitations of knowledge and technology ,accelearted by selective sanctions...and you have an idea of how the Arjun was delayed so long.
However,despite the entire mess,the Arjun has come out.

Now all that remains to be seen is whether the Army and the MOD are willing to commit funds to support a superior INDIAN tank rather than depend upon a dated russian design with critical weanesses.

Regards,
Nitin

P Chupunkar
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 30
Joined: 24 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby P Chupunkar » 08 Jul 2002 05:30

Originally posted by nitin:
Vinod,Harry..
..However,from the Army point of view,they didnt want to get saddled with a "political" tank.Ie they were unsure whether the DRDO and others would have the technical ability to improve the tank and whether the finances for the same would be forthcoming from the politicos.
...Now all that remains to be seen is whether the Army and the MOD are willing to commit funds to support a superior INDIAN tank rather than depend upon a dated russian design with critical weanesses.
Are the germans willing to provide the powerplant in the current conditions or has the DRDO decided to procure the wartsila engine ?
Isnt there a turbine alternative that can be used to power the tank?
I just watched the discovery channel regarding the gulf war (especially tank battle's) and i must say that given the current tech (which will be made available to pakistan somehow or the other) T-series cannot stand a chance against these western tanks. I mean these T-72 were crushed like matchbox's. They showed snaps of when an armored regiment of the US crushed 27 tanks (all T-72 in the early 90's was almost state of art from russia) in just 23 minutes. It was just amazing, all the M1's were doing is locating target, firing, locating target again.
With respect to the T-90, what are the upgrades of the T-90 over T-72? Is there any improvement in the firing rate, the armor/protection etc.
I still think that arjun is a much more viable option and if there are any drawbacks we can collaborate with the french/isreali to shore up the weak-points. Arjun along with Nag top attack ATGM can easily crush any potential challenges that pakistan can throw up in the next decade.

VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2323
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby VinodTK » 08 Jul 2002 06:20

If the following story is true! It is ironic, that after 15 years of R&D India is still in the process of figuring out as to which of the Panadava’s, it is going to have for a MBT. On the other hand we have North Korea poor, starving, with all kinds of sanctions imposed on it (deservingly), and last but not the least technically backward was able to reverse engineer the T90. If the past is any indication in few years Indian T90’s will be facing the Paki T-2002 (probably procured at much cheaper price).

From Asia Times: “North Korea succeeded in developing a new main battle tank, the capabilities of which are nearly identical to those of the T-90 tank”

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Korea/DG06Dg01.html

Aditya Vikram
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 19
Joined: 01 Oct 1999 11:31
Location: Chennai,Tamil nadu,India
Contact:

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Aditya Vikram » 08 Jul 2002 18:15

P Chupunkar
I don't think you can compare the gulf war scenario directly and just belive some of the stuff which comes in american documentories which is pretty plain jingoistic stuff-I mean do they ever talk about the Apache not able to fire 4 of its hellfires on its left side so that they don't damage the rotorwing or how the Apache's were not used in Yugoslavia or 5 out of 7 pache's fighting at relatively low altitude is Shahikot were disabled by an enemy with nothing more than ak-47's and RPG's. or that most IRaqi solders didn't put a fight during the gulf war and merely surrendered.or that most of the damage was done by LGB's bombing tanks made redhot in the desert sun.

P.S. Do any of these programs ever compare NATO claims VS actuals for yugoslav armour destroyed during the Kosova war or how 1 MIg 25 got a F-18 inspite of 3 F-18's and 5 F-15's engaging it???????//?
or how come they state an F-22 costs $73million which is factual lie as the US GAO states that the present plan of induction is to buy with slight cost increases 71 F-22' for $14.9 Billion.
So I think some of the claims in wings etc can be ignored and need not be treated as if they are words from GOD.

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby JCage » 08 Jul 2002 18:46

PC,
The T90 is a heck of a lot better than a T72.Check the archives for the "armor tech thread" for armor specs.Giun is improved.Better FCS,long range ATGM's,and the Shtora 1 jammer.Also,the T72's in ODS were hardly the soviet best.At the time that would have been the T80.Not that it was an Abrams equivalent but still.
The T72's also lacked thermal imaging and had inferior non DU ammo.Any hit on the Abrams would be=no hit at all.Unless it was in the shot trap or in the rear.

Originally posted by Vinod T. Kumar:
If the following story is true! It is ironic, that after 15 years of R&D India is still in the process of figuring out as to which of the Panadava’s, it is going to have for a MBT. On the other hand we have North Korea poor, starving, with all kinds of sanctions imposed on it (deservingly), and last but not the least technically backward was able to reverse engineer the T90. If the past is any indication in few years Indian T90’s will be facing the Paki T-2002 (probably procured at much cheaper price).

From Asia Times: “North Korea succeeded in developing a new main battle tank, the capabilities of which are nearly identical to those of the T-90 tank”

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Korea/DG06Dg01.html
lets see.Pakis wont buy any North Korean tanks.They have committed themselves to their "indigenous" AlKhalid.And we have no clear indication that it is indeed the equla of the T90.Just a hypothesis and claims by NK.
And we all know how good their ding dongs,nodongs are.

advitya
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 50
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby advitya » 08 Jul 2002 18:58

Originally posted by Vinod T. Kumar:
On the other hand we have North Korea poor, starving, with all kinds of sanctions imposed on it (deservingly), and last but not the least technically backward was able to reverse engineer the T90. If the past is any indication in few years Indian T90’s will be facing the Paki T-2002 (probably procured at much cheaper price).
[/URL]
To quote Narayana: "Since my Yahoo profile says I'm 3 years old, this must be true".

Rudra
BRFite
Posts: 599
Joined: 28 May 2001 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Rudra » 08 Jul 2002 19:53

ha! NK_t90,hope the PA buys 5000 of these.

t90 has about the same pwr-weight ratio as t72.
(heavier but bigger hp).better ammo, fcs, composite armour, era upgrades, newer sights,
...its more survivable and obviously less prone
to repair issues than t72s 15 yrs old. however
same achilles heel of autoloader, means ammo
stored inside working area. one explosion and
its all gone. t72s can be upgraded with some t90
systems but india has cancelled it for now to
reserve $500mil for t90 project.

I would think karna with the t90 engine is a lot
more survivable due to arjun armour, gun, 120mm
shots, ammo stored in bustle. a thick sheet of
arjun armour on front hull would also help. I
dunno how much road racing is needed, I prefer the
british "chieftain" concept of a obese and slow
rhino that can indulge in a mad brawl with less
armoured foes (t80, khalid) and take them down one
by one.

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby JCage » 08 Jul 2002 21:31

Reading the Asia times report by Isenberg(the yahoo armstrade group chap) is giving me a ROTFLMAO attack! :p
All he has to go on is one South Korean report.No facts whatsoever.
And mind you,the Russians would hand over a T90 and its Kontakt tech as well as composite armor tech for....pray what?North Korea is eking out its foreign exchange by aiding missile proliferation...a couple MRBM's here,a few there.
And they have hundreds of millions to give the Russians for transfer of tech?Ha! :roll:
God knows to the rest.

But then its really silly when someone alludes the "sky is falling" and "pakistan will buy North Korean T90's" when even the original "article" fails to conclude anythin' like that.

Rudra,
The Challenger Mk2 has a 1500 hp powerplant and is maneuverable.Not a slug at any rate.
Check out this thread for some nic pics of the C2.
Beaut isnt it?

http://63.99.108.76/ubb/Forum13/HTML/000900.html

Regards,
Nitin

Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Raj Malhotra » 08 Jul 2002 22:46

Sorry Raj! I repeat the question yet again, what has happened to Tank "X"? BY this I mean, has the GOI /MOD/DRDO said anything further on the status of this tank? The tank has been unveiled, but are we going to build on it further?
Peace man, I was just pulling your leg a little and also trying to point out as to why does my finger tips are hurting.

The answer to your questions are:-

Don’t know but there seems to be distinct lack of enthusiasm

Nothing further has been said on public fora

Don’t know.

(My personal feeling is that two import lobbies being respectively of “T-72 upgrade” and “T-90 further license production” are fighting it out. This is why one is seeing a lot of motivated reports as to how our tanks are cr*p. As evidently DRDO has no lobbying capacity therefore first these import lobbies will win and then anything remaining will go to Arjun/karan. )

There have been programmes to upgrade the T-72s in service, bringing them almost upto T-90 capability.
Going by orders for polish FCS around 250 T-72s will definitely be upgraded. Rest time will tell. But I have full faith in middlemen appointed by Poland to get the needful orders.

Lastly I think that an upgrade for a Russian tank is practically a new tank. The mechanicals of Soviet Union doctrine equipment has short life and in an upgrade almost everything is replaced. The hull of a tank has infinite fatigue life for practical purposes. Even the armour can be replaced in the hull/turret cavities and with add ons.

Also I have no faith that OFB can build anything. For building military equipment one has to be like engineering giants that combine expertise in mechanicals, electronics, electricals and computers. OFB is like a process industry that can only operate a ready made imported production line with no input. At maximum it can perhaps indigenize a screw driver or a bolt once in awhile. On top of it, OFB is incompetent, no ambition and corrupt.

Anybody who disagrees with me can instead of writing a long post give one example of

“weapon system” which is indigenous, contemporary and mass produced.

Hence I donot think karan or Arjun will ever be mass produced in “indigenous” versions. LCA will not have an indigenous engine. (Out of context but let me say the issue with Kaveri is not as much as its lack of performance but the fact that critical components are imported. –refer snecma claims to supply a lot of components of Kaveri.)


Return to “Mil-Tech Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests