Arjun thread

gopal.suri
BRFite
Posts: 191
Joined: 26 May 2007 17:22

Postby gopal.suri » 22 Apr 2008 07:27

The Ministry of Defence (MoD), meanwhile, watched mutely. With the Arjun ploughing through endless trials — 15 Arjuns have already run 75,000 km, and fired 10,000 rounds in the most extensive trials ever — the army insisted on another tank. In the late 1970s, the army bought the T-72; in the 1990s, the T-90s came along. But despite thousands of crores of rupees paid to Moscow, the Russian tanks have been raddled with problems; now hundreds of crores more are being spent in upgrading their night fighting capabilities, navigation equipment, radio sets, and their armour. Tens of Indian soldiers have died as the barrels of Russian tanks burst while firing.


Here Army follows tranch1, tranch 2 concepts.

By the way, i have a serious doubt that all option T-90 will be more than a full option Arjun.

karan_mc
BRFite
Posts: 695
Joined: 02 Dec 2006 20:53

Postby karan_mc » 22 Apr 2008 07:51

Armies attitude seems to be like " Ghar ki murgi dal barabar " .DRDO should try selling Arjun out of the country if possible gift them off even whole of 128 which will be going to army ,i know what army will do with tank ,will use them in parades and some excersie and then keep them in cold storage for the rest of the year same way they do it with old weapons and ammunitions ,i could love to see Arjun in action in some other countries battle rather sit in cold storage in Indian Army storage facility ,seriously DRDO should stop entertaining Indian army now ,neither Scrap the tank or enter it into production ,it is kinda embarrassment for the whole India how is cat fight is going for years now

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Postby Sanku » 22 Apr 2008 10:22

Shukla's article is nonsense -- quoting unnamed sources he says the generals do not want Arjun; without any reasons?

After Arjun has been "inducted" in 2000? What will the mythical "procurement brass" (BTW which division of army is the procurement brass) go and say tell the Chief -- sorry Chief my wife doesn't like it? Who will then put it into a letter and send it to the Def Min who will then say "yeah; the lady's wish must be honored" and then call for DRDO head to say -- off with the Arjun -- who will return and tell everybody -- sorry boys the tank is not a hit with the ladies?

Is this how the Indian system works? If that is the case we may as well shut down the entire GoI today including not only the Arjun program but the entire DRDO; MoD IA; Civil services and the lot.

A simpler explanation is that Army has reported reliability issues which will be fixed in the process of induction.

But how many copies will Shri Shukla sell if he writes the above?

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

Note the nice falsifying tactics that Shukla uses -- "tens of soliders have died because the Russian tanks barrel busted" -- which tank exactly? And why? Could it be poor maintenance or use post the life time of the tank? Could it be user error? Or wait a minute -- could it be "OFB SHELLS" which were faulty?

But no far easier to lump it Army wants T series :roll:

what a juvenile piece of writing.

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

Again the Tank has gone after tests after tests and MoD watched mutely -- why? Could it be the simple reason that the tanks till 96 did not pass the tests for the stage? Eh?

Is his case that Arjun's should be brought without testing?

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

Another shocking disclaimer -- T 90s require upgrades -- Yeoww I am shocked -- this must be the first time additional equipment is brought to upgrade a def equipment -- man how could these guys not get everything right in the first place!!

OMG

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

Face it folks -- Arjun has been put through paces jointly decided between DRDO and IA. If DRDO thought that IA was being stupid -- it should have said so. It didnt -- the fact remained that DRDO agreed that it will deliver XYZ by such and such time. Which was the baseline for testing etc.

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

And could Shri Shukla list what are the problems T 90s remain raddled (raddled?) with today?

Guy is out for cheap noise making
Last edited by Sanku on 22 Apr 2008 10:33, edited 1 time in total.

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Postby vina » 22 Apr 2008 10:30

Sanku wrote:Is this how the Indian system works?


This is how it works. Keep pushing it endlessly in "tests" , so that it goes into cold storage or put it in some incredible babu labyrinth so that it can never come out ever.

Start bad mouthing that stuff and plant articles in DDM or get your associated lobbies to plant stories, so that the entire thing becomes a huge media circus and too hot for anyone to even touch. Net result.. That damn thing never sees the light of the day in 20 years and your objectives are achieved..

Meanwhile go to the MoD and say.. 'orrible Pakis have got 400000000 T-80s, so we need 1000 T-90s, as of NOW , or if the shooting starts, we will get skewered.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Postby Sanku » 22 Apr 2008 10:42

vina wrote:
Sanku wrote:Is this how the Indian system works?


This is how it works. Keep pushing it endlessly in "tests" , so that it goes into cold storage or put it in some incredible babu labyrinth so that it can never come out ever.


Uh which tests so far have been wrong tests to do or had falsify results -- or different between T 90 and Arjun? And who is delaying Arjun prodcution at Avadi since 2000 no dount IA too :roll:

There is much that is wrong with the system but nothing on the ground suggests that it suffers from the same ones that you list.

Apart from Arjun -- which other product has this situation been repeated with? If not why?

Why did the mythical procurement brass not do the same with Dhruv for example?

Blaming all on IA is easy scapegoat finding process and not real analysis.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20447
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Postby Philip » 22 Apr 2008 11:08

There seems to be a serious credibility gap between the IA and the DRDO,with each sticking to its "guns",so to speak about the Arjun's reliability and performance when compared to the T-90.Both sides are using the media to get their voice heard.I can't understand why a definitive testing exercise cannot be agreed upon involving both the IA and the DRDO and a neutral observer force in the form of "experts" drawn from ex-army and scientists.The deficiencies spotted can be then listed (major or minor) and the tank's performance correctly evaluated .The truth will then out,but as Pontius Pilate famously said and especially in the Indian context,"what is the truth?".

PS:Alternatively,put them (top officers/boffins from both sides) both in a room and let them out only when they've reached a final solution! The "room" preferably a tent in Siachen!

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Postby Sanku » 22 Apr 2008 11:13

Philip wrote:The deficiencies spotted can be then listed (major or minor) and the tank's performance correctly evaluated .The truth will then out,but as Pontius Pilate famously said and especially in the Indian context,"what is the truth?".


Philip; if one is not biased against IA or looking for scapegoats -- what you have suggested is precisily what is happening. Iterative improvements towards a acceptable product with both DRDO and IA getting their points across to each other.

The confusion is caused by the noise in DDM -- and I submit that it is not because of either IA or DRDO but "other" vested interest.

niran
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5411
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 16:01

Postby niran » 22 Apr 2008 11:14

Sanku wrote: And who is delaying Arjun prodcution at Avadi since 2000 no dount IA too :roll:



Sanku Sir, IA has till date ordered a whopping 124 "Arjun". As far as I
remember IA first order for T90 was a mere 390 tanks.

Since no definite order, therefore the producer will have to think, "what shall I do with this production line?"


(a) Throw them to the puppies at nukkad and let them play with it.
(b) Sell them to the friendly neighborhood kabari(I not speaking about the manpower).
(c) Make a museum and let free entry for school kids on weekdays.
(d) Donate the whole production line and technology to our
very pally equal-equal friend on the western border.
Sir wake up. no one is dissing IA. Only The treatment IA give Arjun
that is incorrect.(to say the least)
Last edited by niran on 22 Apr 2008 11:34, edited 1 time in total.

kvraghav
BRFite
Posts: 801
Joined: 17 Apr 2008 11:47
Location: Some where near the equator

Postby kvraghav » 22 Apr 2008 11:18

Why did the mythical procurement brass not do the same with Dhruv for example?

what options did they have if they delayed dhruv??
my point is if they have options they always prefer foreign things

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Postby Sanku » 22 Apr 2008 11:19

And the phenomenal thing about saying T 90s are being used as an excuse to delay Arjun's -- hey the Army doesnt need to do that -- there is ample space for two large MBTs and given the stellar track record of OFB (and to an extent CVRDE) in meeting time lines it was inevitable that Arjun would not be ready when IA wanted it -- why do they need to lie they can simply show the Def Min the numbers. that alone would have ensured that T 90s would have come.

:smirk:

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Postby Sanku » 22 Apr 2008 11:23

kvraghav wrote:
Why did the mythical procurement brass not do the same with Dhruv for example?

what options did they have if they delayed dhruv??
my point is if they have options they always prefer foreign things


Dhruv is not the only helo in its class is it -- in any case IA + IAF is going for 312 new Helos. It could have scuppered the Dhruv too.

From wiki -- comparable machines

# Agusta A109
# Bell 222/230
# Bell 427
# Eurocopter EC 145
# Sikorsky S-76

kvraghav
BRFite
Posts: 801
Joined: 17 Apr 2008 11:47
Location: Some where near the equator

Postby kvraghav » 22 Apr 2008 11:32

Dhruv is not the only helo in its class is it -- in any case IA + IAF is going for 312 new Helos. It could have scuppered the Dhruv too.

From wiki -- comparable machines

# Agusta A109
# Bell 222/230
# Bell 427
# Eurocopter EC 145
# Sikorsky S-76

do you know how much a dhruv cost?
please compare the price of dhruv to the above mentioned aircraft and why not more dhruvs than go to the 312 new ones?
Last edited by kvraghav on 22 Apr 2008 11:34, edited 1 time in total.

Raymond
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 62
Joined: 21 Oct 2006 20:41

Postby Raymond » 22 Apr 2008 11:33

The significant points for me are:

1> they say they will not accept the Arjun unless it improves considerably. What benchmarks it must meet remain undefined.

2>15 Arjuns have already run 75,000 kilometers, and fired 10,000 rounds in the most extensive trials ever ---

3> Army soldiers from 43 Armoured Regiment, which operates 15 trial Arjuns, praise the tank whole-heartedly.

4> The tank’s developers, the Combat Vehicles R&D Establishment (CVRDE) at Chennai, has been clamouring for face-to-face comparative trials, where the Arjun, the T-72 and the T-90 are put through the same paces. After first agreeing --- and even issuing a detailed trail directive in 2005 --- the army has backed away from comparative trials. Instead, it told the MoD that it was buying 124 Arjuns, and trials were needed only to ascertain its requirements for spares. While doing these trials --- which have nothing to do with the Arjun’s performance --- the army has testified before the Standing Committee on Defence that the tank’s performance was suspect.

d_berwal
BRFite
Posts: 513
Joined: 08 Dec 2006 14:08
Location: Jhonesburg

Postby d_berwal » 22 Apr 2008 11:39

Surya wrote:Jagan

Sorry - I mean in a similar ACURT process.

a non stop 2000 or 3000 km run the way they ran the ARjun.


Sorry to inform you it was not a non stop process..... in case of Arjun... they did 1000km each in about 3 months in the last ACURT

for T-90 trials Igorr mentioned how engines were tested in trials

during INduction in the first 2 regts the training tanks 3-4 per sqdrn meaning 10-15 per regt ended up doing the complete 11000km in just 4-6 months without any failure....

In couple of excersises in 2002-03 T-90 strike elements ended up doing 1000+ km in just 8-10 days with just breaks for eating

The first major war games T-90 took part in the war games finished 24+ hrs before they were scheduled to end as T-90s demonstrated there excellent night fighting capabilities ....

In some of the mock battels single T-90 troop were taking on elitist T-72 sqdrns and winning the battle in just 20-30 min flat @ night @ closed hatches........ the first 2 regts tested the T-90 so brutally that even the russians were surprised how is the MBT still functioning.....

every nut and bolt was tested to the extreme by IA then only the follow on order cameup.... the ppl who test these mbt are the ones who will go to battle in them... not the DRDO or AVDHI or BRFits or MoD ppl so ppl cut some slack to the ppl who test them... if they do a mistake they will "DIE"... from my personal experience they will never PLAY with Lives of their TROOPS ever....

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Postby Sanku » 22 Apr 2008 11:39

kvraghav wrote:
Dhruv is not the only helo in its class is it -- in any case IA + IAF is going for 312 new Helos. It could have scuppered the Dhruv too.

From wiki -- comparable machines


do you know how much a dhruv cost?
please compare the price of dhruv to the above mentioned aircraft and why not more dhruvs than go to the 312 new ones?


Well thats true for all Indigenous program vs imports. Your point was there are no imports if there are other options -- that is clearly not true. Dont change the question and side step now. :D

vivek_ahuja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2223
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 16:58

Postby vivek_ahuja » 22 Apr 2008 11:40

Sanku,

the Dhruv and Arjun cases are somewhat different.

The problem stems not from a blanket IA mindset for any and all indegenous products, but by the specifics involved in each case. The Dhruv was not scuttled and so forth because the fundamental problem never was the availability of foreign products for the same. It was accepted without all the Arjun fanfare because the people using it had no prejudices of previously used equipment from foreign imports.

But even this is not the entire picture. For that you need to see the doctrinal picture. The Dhruv fit like a piece into the jigsaw puzzle that was doctrine for the IA Airborne component and so it was inducted, ironed out and is now being put through the paces. The pilots flying it and the people commanding the units and in charge of acquisitions are all too aware of the flying environment and their requriements from the Indian perspective, and the Dhruv was built to that idea, so there was no problem.

When the Arjun, and the general Mechanized forces are concerned, the same is not applicable. Unlike the Helicopter Ops, there is not a single narrow road to follow for both ops and the corresponding technology. Here there are wildly different roads and their own corresponding technologies.

To this effect the IA has had an entire generation that had been brought up on the concept of fast moving operations with russian tanks built for that very job. These guys are now Generals.

The Arjun is a move towards the Western concept of armor, and that has an entirely different doctrine involved which the Generals brought up on Soviet doctrine do not agree to. And hence all these objectives like "make the tank light weight like the T-72" kind of arguments.

The problem has never been thought of as to what the Indian environment actually requires, and if I may say so, there is also a component of supersized egos and pride involved

-Vivek
Last edited by vivek_ahuja on 22 Apr 2008 11:43, edited 1 time in total.

kvraghav
BRFite
Posts: 801
Joined: 17 Apr 2008 11:47
Location: Some where near the equator

Postby kvraghav » 22 Apr 2008 11:42

Your point was there are no imports if there are other options -- that is clearly not true. Dont change the question and side step now.

and why not follow on orders instead of new class of helos?
you can always extend production facilities.because they have options isint it?

d_berwal
BRFite
Posts: 513
Joined: 08 Dec 2006 14:08
Location: Jhonesburg

Postby d_berwal » 22 Apr 2008 11:45

Raymond wrote:The significant points for me are:

1> they say they will not accept the Arjun unless it improves considerably. What benchmarks it must meet remain undefined.

benchmarks are thre but CLASSIFIED
2>15 Arjuns have already run 75,000 kilometers, and fired 10,000 rounds in the most extensive trials ever ---

they were prototypes only the XV no of them was cleared for production 8 yrs back
3> Army soldiers from 43 Armoured Regiment, which operates 15 trial Arjuns, praise the tank whole-heartedly.

They better praise it they have been involved with gthe MBT from 3decades now
4> The tank’s developers, the Combat Vehicles R&D Establishment (CVRDE) at Chennai, has been clamouring for face-to-face comparative trials, where the Arjun, the T-72 and the T-90 are put through the same paces. After first agreeing --- and even issuing a detailed trail directive in 2005 --- the army has backed away from comparative trials. Instead, it told the MoD that it was buying 124 Arjuns, and trials were needed only to ascertain its requirements for spares. While doing these trials --- which have nothing to do with the Arjun’s performance --- the army has testified before the Standing Committee on Defence that the tank’s performance was suspect.
see AVDHI makes T-90, T-72 and ARJUN if they are really interested in 1-vs-1 battle why haven't they done 1-1 test in their test arena why ask army to do trials...... do trials and send the report to MoD or IA or GoI......... Why R they NOT doing SO???

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Postby Sanku » 22 Apr 2008 11:45

Raymond wrote:The significant points for me are:


Same for me with difference

1> they say they will not accept the Arjun unless it improves considerably. What benchmarks it must meet remain undefined.


No they do not say this Shukla says this. Do you really think that IA will approach the MoD with undefined criteira?

This alone says that Shukla is passing gas.

2>15 Arjuns have already run 75,000 kilometers, and fired 10,000 rounds in the most extensive trials ever ---


Most extensive trials for what? A brand new tank? How many hours and tests have the T family done before the first user test?

3> Army soldiers from 43 Armoured Regiment, which operates 15 trial Arjuns, praise the tank whole-heartedly.


Which is as should be.

While doing these trials --- which have nothing to do with the Arjun’s performance --- the army has testified before the Standing Committee on Defence that the tank’s performance was suspect.


Performance is a whole range of factors -- maintainability is a aspect of performance -- we say that a car has poor performance when it breaks down often.

How could it give a clean chit without testing reliability -- now it has and has specifically mentioned reliability as a issue.

Reliability != performance is a lack of understanding on Shukla's part; IMVHO deliberate one.

kvraghav
BRFite
Posts: 801
Joined: 17 Apr 2008 11:47
Location: Some where near the equator

Postby kvraghav » 22 Apr 2008 11:45

The Arjun is a move towards the Western concept of armor, and that has an entirely different doctrine involved which the Generals brought up on Soviet doctrine do not agree to. And hence all these objectives like "make the tank light weight like the T-72" kind of arguments.

But wasnt the requirements for arjun given by the army itself isint it??

vivek_ahuja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2223
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 16:58

Postby vivek_ahuja » 22 Apr 2008 11:49

kvraghav wrote:
The Arjun is a move towards the Western concept of armor, and that has an entirely different doctrine involved which the Generals brought up on Soviet doctrine do not agree to. And hence all these objectives like "make the tank light weight like the T-72" kind of arguments.

But wasnt the requirements for arjun given by the army itself isint it??


The people who were in charge when creating the requirements had come up through the ranks on western tanks, not russian ones. The guys who are in charge now have come up through the ranks on Russian armor.

You see the difference between the two?

d_berwal
BRFite
Posts: 513
Joined: 08 Dec 2006 14:08
Location: Jhonesburg

Postby d_berwal » 22 Apr 2008 11:49

ajay pratap wrote:
Sanku wrote: And who is delaying Arjun prodcution at Avadi since 2000 no dount IA too :roll:



Sanku Sir, IA has till date ordered a whopping 124 "Arjun". As far as I
remember IA first order for T90 was a mere 390 tanks.

Since no definite order, therefore the producer will have to think, "what shall I do with this production line?"


(a) Throw them to the puppies at nukkad and let them play with it.
(b) Sell them to the friendly neighborhood kabari(I not speaking about the manpower).
(c) Make a museum and let free entry for school kids on weekdays.
(d) Donate the whole production line and technology to our
very pally equal-equal friend on the western border.
Sir wake up. no one is dissing IA. Only The treatment IA give Arjun
that is incorrect.(to say the least)



1st order of T-90 was 310 Mbt secont 347 mbts

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Postby Sanku » 22 Apr 2008 11:52

vivek_ahuja wrote:The problem has never been thought of as to what the Indian environment actually requires, and if I may say so, there is also a component of supersized egos and pride involved


Vivek I agree with your posts in entierty; please note the argument I was making was against a far different kind of objection sort of blanket "IA bad bad doesnt know"

Of course your points will require a different debate -- I for one just want to say that your points are correct but not complete -- apart from the reasons you listed -- It does seem that Arjun is still being given a fair chance -- the problems are expected as well.

It is entirely the attitude of "take the tank it will fly because its made in India" -- the other extreme which put IAs back up -- since they start being suspicious of the claims.

However you and a handful others are the only people I can have the above debate with since the others havent yet ceased from paroxyms of anger of that vague and probably incorrect article by Shukla. :D

Raymond
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 62
Joined: 21 Oct 2006 20:41

Postby Raymond » 22 Apr 2008 11:56

Sanku wrote:Shukla's article is nonsense -- quoting unnamed sources he says the generals do not want Arjun; without any reasons?

The generals should be asked why they dont want.What has got Shukla to do with it?
What will the mythical "procurement brass" (BTW which division of army is the procurement brass)

This is just nitpicking.The procurement brass is the part of the army/people responsible for procurement of equipments.
A simpler explanation is that Army has reported reliability issues which will be fixed in the process of induction.

So if the army just has some reliability issues why not order some more Arjuns?
Note the nice falsifying tactics that Shukla uses -- "tens of soliders have died because the Russian tanks barrel busted"

True fact.
-- which tank exactly?

T-72 .
And why?

Metallurgical problem with the barrels.
Could it be poor maintenance or use post the life time of the tank? Could it be user error? Or wait a minute -- could it be "OFB SHELLS" which were faulty?

See above.
Again the Tank has gone after tests after tests and MoD watched mutely -- why? Could it be the simple reason that the tanks till 96 did not pass the tests for the stage? Eh?

Maybe there are some other vested interests.
Is his case that Arjun's should be brought without testing?

Definitely not and it seems that the Arjun has gone through various extensive tests and passed with flying colours.
T 90s require upgrades -- Yeoww I am shocked -- this must be the first time additional equipment is brought to upgrade a def equipment -- man how could these guys not get everything right in the first place!!

The point Shukla was making that even after first evaluating the tank and then acquiring them the tanks still had problems which needed to be fixed/upgraded.Its not as if the tanks are second hand 20 yr old models.They are infact brand new, still requiring upgrades.
Face it folks -- Arjun has been put through paces jointly decided between DRDO and IA. If DRDO thought that IA was being stupid -- it should have said so.

Is there any protocol or feedback mechanism whereby the DRDO can make such comments about the Army?Whom should the DRDO complain to about the army?How do you know they already havent done it?
It didnt -- the fact remained that DRDO agreed that it will deliver XYZ by such and such time. Which was the baseline for testing etc.

Conjecture.
And could Shri Shukla list what are the problems T 90s remain raddled (raddled?) with today?

Sure he can.Ecen I can say that till today there is no a/c in the tank.
Guy is out for cheap noise making

Not so sure this time.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Postby Sanku » 22 Apr 2008 11:57

d_berwal wrote:
ajay pratap wrote:
Sanku wrote: And who is delaying Arjun prodcution at Avadi since 2000 no dount IA too :roll:



Sanku Sir, IA has till date ordered a whopping 124 "Arjun". As far as I
remember IA first order for T90 was a mere 390 tanks.

Since no definite order, therefore the producer will have to think, "what shall I do with this production line?"



Ajay Sir; lets first get Avadi take baby steps before asking it to run -- the guys who cant make 124 tanks on time (they are taking twice as much time) you will expect them to make 1000?

How; on what basis of confidence? What does follow on order have to do with getting the first batch on time.

Now if Avadi had made 124 tanks well in time and was twiddling its thumbs what you say may even be considered. At the present -- not enough orders is a excuse to to hide the incompetence w.r.t managing production time lines.

Blame the army its easy is the motto here :rotfl:

krishnan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7342
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 12:58
Location: 13° 04' N , 80° 17' E

Postby krishnan » 22 Apr 2008 11:59

Sanku wrote:Performance is a whole range of factors -- maintainability is a aspect of performance -- we say that a car has poor performance when it breaks down often.


It can also break down if you dont maintain it properly. Performance is also depended on how well you main that particular thing.

kvraghav
BRFite
Posts: 801
Joined: 17 Apr 2008 11:47
Location: Some where near the equator

Postby kvraghav » 22 Apr 2008 12:04

Ajay Sir; lets first get Avadi take baby steps before asking it to run -- the guys who cant make 124 tanks on time (they are taking twice as much time) you will expect them to make 1000?

and avaidi is supposed to manufacture 1000 t-90 tanks isint it?

Raymond
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 62
Joined: 21 Oct 2006 20:41

Postby Raymond » 22 Apr 2008 12:05

d_berwal wrote:
benchmarks are thre but CLASSIFIED

How do you know?
they were prototypes only the XV no of them was cleared for production 8 yrs back

But they still cleared the extensive trials.
They better praise it they have been involved with gthe MBT from 3decades now

So what if ther are involved?Atleast they find it praiseworthy.

see AVDHI makes T-90, T-72 and ARJUN if they are really interested in 1-vs-1 battle why haven't they done 1-1 test in their test arena why ask army to do trials...... do trials and send the report to MoD or IA or GoI......... Why R they NOT doing SO???

Wrong logic.The equipment have to be trialled by the user not the manufacturere.There is no value of the opinion of the manufacturer about the equipment as far as the user is concerned.So it is the army who has got to do the trials.

d_berwal
BRFite
Posts: 513
Joined: 08 Dec 2006 14:08
Location: Jhonesburg

Postby d_berwal » 22 Apr 2008 12:05

krishnan wrote:
Sanku wrote:Performance is a whole range of factors -- maintainability is a aspect of performance -- we say that a car has poor performance when it breaks down often.


It can also break down if you dont maintain it properly. Performance is also depended on how well you main that particular thing.


in reference to there ARJUN user trials recently...

Who was responsible for maintaining these 2 ARJUNS which took part in trials.... DRDO/ AVDHI

Why did DRDO/AVDHI bring two poorly maintained mbts for Trials ? or ?

raja_m
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 20
Joined: 22 Apr 2008 09:33
Location: Bhulok

Postby raja_m » 22 Apr 2008 12:08

Arjun's Fate might have been decided at least 5 months back, at least according to Janes-

India eyes new MBT despite Arjun's arrival

The Indian Army is seeking a new generation main battle tank (MBT) even as it prepares to receive the locally designed Arjun MBT that has been over three decades in the making.

"What we have today [Arjun] is mid-level technology. What we need is a tank of international quality," India's army chief General Deepak Kapoor said :evil: in New Delhi at an international seminar on armoured fighting vehicles

Source - http://www.janes.com/news/defence/land/ ... _1_n.shtml[url]

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Postby Sanku » 22 Apr 2008 12:10

Raymond wrote:
Sanku wrote:Shukla's article is nonsense -- quoting unnamed sources he says the generals do not want Arjun; without any reasons?

The generals should be asked why they dont want.What has got Shukla to do with it?


How do we know the generals have said so -- because Shukla writes so -- So given that this entire debate is only because Shukla said so -- you bet he has everything to do with it.

What will the mythical "procurement brass" (BTW which division of army is the procurement brass)

This is just nitpicking.The procurement brass is the part of the army/people responsible for procurement of equipments.[/quote]

This is not nitpicking this is understanding the complex reality that there is NO procurement brass which is common in Army vs. passing fiats on a mythical body (not your statment BTW)

So if the army just has some reliability issues why not order some more Arjuns?


BECAUSE YOU DO NOT KNOW IF THE ISSUES ARE BECAUSE OF DESIGN FLAWS OR NOT. IF IT IS YOU WILL FIRST FIX THE DESIGN. YOU DO NOT WISH TO ORDER 500 TANKS WITH EACH HAVING THE SAME PROBLEM. NOTE DESIGN INCLUDES MANUFACTURE PROCESS DESIGN.

Do you want to first manufacture 1000 faulty tanks and then fix them all; or make 124 get them right and then make the rest non faulty.

THIS IS BASIC MANUFACTURING ENGINEERING EVEN IN SHRINK WRAPPED SOFTWARE.


Note the nice falsifying tactics that Shukla uses -- "tens of soliders have died because the Russian tanks barrel busted"

True fact.
-- which tank exactly?

T-72 .
And why?

Metallurgical problem with the barrels.[/quote][/quote]

Not true -- post a link to substantiate. OTOH YOU YOURSELF HAVE ALREADY POSTED THE SHELLS LINK.

Maybe there are some other vested interests.


And maybe the moon is made of green chesse -- the question is not answered -- why did MoD for 30 years and all the Def Mins not object?

All corrupt -- for 30 years the entire lot ? All except DRDO

:rotfl:

This is ridiculous you know.


Definitely not and it seems that the Arjun has gone through various extensive tests and passed with flying colours.


Then why did DRDO agree to AUCRT. Please that is like saying because a baby passed std 1 tests he should automatically get into IITs :roll:


The point Shukla was making that even after first evaluating the tank and then acquiring them the tanks still had problems which needed to be fixed/upgraded.Its not as if the tanks are second hand 20 yr old models.They are infact brand new, still requiring upgrades.


Bull shit (for Shukla) -- the first are 8 years old now -- and the technology has moved on -- secondly -- the upgrades are for T 72. If you note he does not say what exactly -- uses vauge hand waving arguments.

Is there any protocol or feedback mechanism whereby the DRDO can make such comments about the Army?Whom should the DRDO complain to about the army?How do you know they already havent done it?


There is -- the parliamentary board itself -- thats where all the parties come to bitch. IA did -- what stopped the DRDO?

It didnt -- the fact remained that DRDO agreed that it will deliver XYZ by such and such time. Which was the baseline for testing etc.

Conjecture.


Bolloks; this is written in the parliamentary report. No conjecture.

And could Shri Shukla list what are the problems T 90s remain raddled (raddled?) with today?


Sure he can.Ecen I can say that till today there is no a/c in the tank.


No a/c because you didnt buy one is a problem :shock: :eek: :rotfl:

this is hilarious.

Shukla jee is taking all the Injuns for a grand ride and lauging all the way to the bank.
Last edited by Sanku on 22 Apr 2008 12:28, edited 2 times in total.

kvraghav
BRFite
Posts: 801
Joined: 17 Apr 2008 11:47
Location: Some where near the equator

Postby kvraghav » 22 Apr 2008 12:12

and why bash ajay shukla
he was one person who bahed the arjun the most.read his previous arjun post.If he has a change of heart then there must be something.
He was a person who done some hours in t-72 isint it?

krishnan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7342
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 12:58
Location: 13° 04' N , 80° 17' E

Postby krishnan » 22 Apr 2008 12:12

Not just shukla jee also lots of army men are laughing their way to the bank

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Postby Sanku » 22 Apr 2008 12:12

kvraghav wrote:
Ajay Sir; lets first get Avadi take baby steps before asking it to run -- the guys who cant make 124 tanks on time (they are taking twice as much time) you will expect them to make 1000?

and avaidi is supposed to manufacture 1000 t-90 tanks isint it?


Would it be too much to ask if you could first find a dictionary and check the meanings of assembly and manufacture?

Perhaps the quality of discourse would go up 10000X?

Raymond
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 62
Joined: 21 Oct 2006 20:41

Postby Raymond » 22 Apr 2008 12:12

Sanku wrote:No they do not say this Shukla says this. Do you really think that IA will approach the MoD with undefined criteira?

They could always change the criteria according to their wish.Remember the changing of the GSQRs?

Most extensive trials for what? A brand new tank? How many hours and tests have the T family done before the first user test?

Well I dont know.But clearly according to Shukla and also Maj. Gen. Singh those trails were extensive.On the same note I can ask what trials did the T-90 go through?Did it do 75000 kms or fire more than 10000 rounds?

Which is as should be.

Since they are impressed with the equipment.

Performance is a whole range of factors -- maintainability is a aspect of performance -- we say that a car has poor performance when it breaks down often.

No if the car cannot do 40 km /hr on a flat road then you can say it has poor performance.OTOH if the car oil has to be replaced after just 100 kms then you say it has poor maintainability.

How could it give a clean chit without testing reliability -- now it has and has specifically mentioned reliability as a issue.

The army has clearly said that the tank has "performed" very poorly , not that it has maintainance issues.

Reliability != performance is a lack of understanding on Shukla's part; IMVHO deliberate one.

Well IMVHO army has mixed that up , not Shukla.

d_berwal
BRFite
Posts: 513
Joined: 08 Dec 2006 14:08
Location: Jhonesburg

Postby d_berwal » 22 Apr 2008 12:13

Raymond wrote:
d_berwal wrote:
benchmarks are thre but CLASSIFIED

How do you know?

thats also "CLASSIFIED"
they were prototypes only the XV no of them was cleared for production 8 yrs back

But they still cleared the extensive trials.

yes they did clear trials but not the USER TRIALS
They better praise it they have been involved with gthe MBT from 3decades now

So what if ther are involved?Atleast they find it praiseworthy.

IT is praiseworthy, but it still has problems which need to be rectified before mass induction

see AVDHI makes T-90, T-72 and ARJUN if they are really interested in 1-vs-1 battle why haven't they done 1-1 test in their test arena why ask army to do trials...... do trials and send the report to MoD or IA or GoI......... Why R they NOT doing SO???

Wrong logic.The equipment have to be trialled by the user not the manufacturere.There is no value of the opinion of the manufacturer about the equipment as far as the user is concerned.So it is the army who has got to do the trials.

see My point was if 1-vs-1 trials have to be done they can be done without IA involvement also.........

Who is asking for these 1-vs-1 trials ? not IA... Then? DRDO/AVDHI/CVRDE

they all have MBT assets with them and can do a 1-vs-1 comparison and send the report... why are they not doing this? what are they afraid of?

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Postby Sanku » 22 Apr 2008 12:19

Raymond wrote:
Sanku wrote:No they do not say this Shukla says this. Do you really think that IA will approach the MoD with undefined criteira?

They could always change the criteria according to their wish.Remember the changing of the GSQRs?


Yes they could and when they have its documented. Read the book d_berwal gave or read FIDNS.


What was the last time GSQRs were changed?

If they are changed this time why doesnt Shukla say so?

He is passing gas.

Well I dont know.But clearly according to Shukla and also Maj. Gen. Singh those trails were extensive.On the same note I can ask what trials did the T-90 go through?Did it do 75000 kms or fire more than 10000 rounds?


The answers have already been given by Igorr; and you should KNOW before making allegations; IF YOU DONT KNOW DONT BLAME OTHERS.

Which is as should be.

Since they are impressed with the equipment.


Which still does not mean AUCRT is not necessary.

No if the car cannot do 40 km /hr on a flat road then you can say it has poor performance.OTOH if the car oil has to be replaced after just 100 kms then you say it has poor maintainability.


Your definition of performance is not a engineers definition or a common definition. That is your definition alone. I have seen many occasions where they are used in common.

The army has clearly said that the tank has "performed" very poorly , not that it has maintainance issues.


And I say that performance includes that.

Reliability != performance is a lack of understanding on Shukla's part; IMVHO deliberate one.

Well IMVHO army has mixed that up , not Shukla.


So the debate in the end is only on the basis of what I and you understand as the meaning of a word? Let it be.

Let Shukla first post what are Army's objection then we can take him seriously -- till then he is passing gas.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Postby Sanku » 22 Apr 2008 12:23

krishnan wrote:Not just shukla jee also lots of army men are laughing their way to the bank


that is a baseless accusation -- IAs conduct has been exemplary in this regard -- the max it can be accused of is being wedded to T 90 light tank doctrine.

That is precisely the sort of one line comment which degrade the quality of discussion and make it a rediff chat board types.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Postby Sanku » 22 Apr 2008 12:25

kvraghav wrote:and why bash ajay shukla
he was one person who bahed the arjun the most.read his previous arjun post.If he has a change of heart then there must be something.
He was a person who done some hours in t-72 isint it?


Shukla jee was an idiot when he was bashing Arjun -- he may have had a change of heart -- but could he have a change of mind?

Nope -- once an idiot always an idiot.

Remember he is a journo looking for sensation -- and the same he has been in T 72 was not used in his defence when he was bashing Arjun was it.

Lets not be fanboys here -- its does not help anyone.

kvraghav
BRFite
Posts: 801
Joined: 17 Apr 2008 11:47
Location: Some where near the equator

Postby kvraghav » 22 Apr 2008 12:27

Would it be too much to ask if you could first find a dictionary and check the meanings of assembly and manufacture?

Man,just go to wikipedia and check.ok and its up to you to improve the quality.chack wether its assembly or manufacture.you wont give 2.5 billion to assemble something englis prafesaar.


Return to “Mil-Tech Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests