Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

[Austin]

Sir with due respect ... I am not blood thrusty moolah...

We need the capacity to wipe PA quick then concenrate on other front

Well even if we develop the capacity and if the capacity is converted into action , any wiping out of PA will result in use of Tactical Nukes by them , if this such wipe dents their capability greatly.

But any way that is not my point , the point is if IA inducts Arjun , will PA respond with a matching heavy tank and their only reliable , cheap and free source is US , if PA gets Abrams will that be a concern for IA ?

[RKumar]

But any way that is not my point , the point is if IA inducts Arjun , will PA respond with a matching heavy tank and their only reliable , cheap and free source is US , if PA gets Abrams will that be a concern for IA ?

let the PA bleed by competing with us. The big difference, Arjun is local produced so it is cheap and their's imported. No matter how much discount they get... still at the end of the day they have to spent something. In doing so, may be they will spend less on Nuclear bum and more on conventional weapons.

Second advantage, during war time they need to depend upon external country for lot of things (e.g. Kargil... they had F-16 but could not use it because of limited spares) when we have local stuff so have more freedom to choose when, where, against whom to use.

[Austin]

On a different note, the PA did evaluate the M1 in the 'glory days' of Zia and friends, but rejected it. Probably too expensive, not mention it would sink like a stone in the soft sands of the Thar(high ground pressure).

Yes it did and most of the firing from M1A1 missed their targets in a demo given to Zia and then the same day while returing back Zia died in crash.

The ground pressure of Arjun is 0.84 and M1A2 0.96 kg/sq cm , Not sure of M1A2 will exactly sink in Thar.

[RKumar]

Well even if we develop the capacity and if the capacity is converted into action , any wiping out of PA will result in use of Tactical Nukes by them , if this such wipe dents their capability greatly.

Having capacity is, itself very big advantage during peace as well as war time. What is IA aiming for, kindly answer for me...

1) capacity to wipe PA, will do so if required.
2) capacity to beat PA
3) capacity to fight and keep stalemate with them (IA having 2 times the losses of the PA, because of our army size)
4) capacity to get defeated by PA (upto 60% loss)
5) capacity to wipped out by PA (more then 60% loss)

In my understanding Pak will use Nuke, in first 2 cases anyways. With last 3 cases we lose.

[aditp]

Will there be apprehension in IA mind if India inducts Arjun in large number , PA may opt for M1A2 Abrams from US as counter response. I would expect the PA to react in some ways to Arjun induction and FMS is just a call away.

If only it be so, another reason to induct theArjun in large numbers. The gas guzzling Abrams, will only accelerate the abdul next door's drive towards bankruptcy.

[shyamv]

As mentioned, this is going to be highly unlikely to be ever put into practice, but would be interesting to discuss as a theory. It's just a coincidence that the Arjun's weight is close to that of a Tiger 1 while the T-90s weight is close to that of a Panther.

Well it certainly is a possibility, but the issue will be logistics and terrain.

To operate a tank needs a large support train, which is even more important in case of Arjun (for various reasons) so splitting them and spreading them thin does not make sense to me

T 90s are more than good enough to break through pretty much anything the Paki's have, unlike the Germans, who were numerically inferior, IA is not going to be either numerically or qualitatively inferior, hence the need for German tactics may not exist.

Sanku saar,

Can you (or any one with the more knowledge on these matters) please elaborate a little on what exactly constitutes the support train? What components of the train would have to be different for Arjun vs T-90?

My assumptions:
I'm assuming fuel trucks would not have to be changed. It might be a question of the how many gallons/litres of fuel would be consumed by T-90/Arjun. Or do they use different fuel? Trucks carrying spares for T-90 can also be used to carry spares for Arjun. Trucks/vehicles carrying ammo for T-90 can also carry ammo for Arjun. Any other spares for T-90 that can be carried by truck can also accomodate Arjun spares.
Transporting the tanks is where I think is the biggest issue. Are our railcars capable of carrying Arjuns? If not what modifications need to be made to the rail cars? Will it even be feasible?
Other support vehicles that would constitute the attack force/defensive unit would essentially be the same regardless of what tank is used.

Please feel free to correct me if I'm barking up the wrong tree

Thanks

[Sanku]

Can you (or any one with the more knowledge on these matters) please elaborate a little on what exactly constitutes the support train? What components of the train would have to be different for Arjun vs T-90?

Sanku suffices please. Since you specifically asked me, I will give an answers the best that I can. Others can definitely add their bit. Overall the discussion is on right lines IMVHO, I do however have my own takes (predictably)

1) Fuel would be same AFAIK they both use diesel engines of similar robustness w.r.t. fuel, but yes different fuel consumption would be the case, as well as different rate of consumption of other spares and different times that are needed for each tank to reequip and overhaul in battle field. These will complicate the planning (not saying its insurmountable just pointing to details that would need to be considered)

2) Trucks will be common. The question is what spares you will carry. The number is ultimately fixed with respect to both the number of trucks and the tonnage that you carry. The spares that are carried are also as per statistical data experience based. Should 10 spare tracks be carried per troop? Or do you carry 15 with buffer? What happens to unused buffer? Can the buffer be reduced if you have two troops of same tank as compared to one?

3) Transporting the tanks will indeed be a major issue, along with spare numbers for tank carriers. There already are tank carrying rails and road vehicles, the question is do you want to spread them (say you have 10 tanks, 1 carrier per tank and 3 spares, if you split your 10 tanks into 1 each how will you split the buffer?)

4) Other critical equipment would be BLT especially in context of PakJabi terrain and defence systems

[Rahul M]

Transporting the tanks is where I think is the biggest issue. Are our railcars capable of carrying Arjuns? If not what modifications need to be made to the rail cars? Will it even be feasible?

how many times would this point be repeated year after year ?
many people including Col Shukla has mentioned numerous times(2-3 years ago ?) that the arjun wagons have been produced and are being used. it's also complete nonsense that one needs two kinds of wagons for the T-90 and arjun. the wagons that can carry arjun can also carry the T-90.

3) Transporting the tanks will indeed be a major issue, along with spare numbers for tank carriers. There already are tank carrying rails and road vehicles

, the question is do you want to spread them (say you have 10 tanks, 1 carrier per tank and 3 spares, if you split your 10 tanks into 1 each how will you split the buffer?)

far from being a major issue, it's a non issue.
what you are saying is the equivalent of "I need two holes to be made in the door, one for the puppy and one for the dog"

4) Other critical equipment would be BLT especially in context of PakJabi terrain and defence systems

the T-72 BLT can already handle the arjun and it is in the process of becoming the most numerous BLT version in IA, superceding the old and obsolete BLTs(which were based on vijayanta if memory serves right)

[Sanku]

what you are saying is the equivalent of "I need two holes to be made in the door, one for the puppy and one for the dog"

Correct, but in this case you have 100 puppies and 150 puppy doors made in total of 1000 door in your huge mansion.

Now you get 10 dogs.

It will take time and money to convert the doors, hai na.

4) Other critical equipment would be BLT especially in context of PakJabi terrain and defence systems

the T-72 BLT can already handle the arjun and it is in the process of becoming the most numerous BLT version in IA, superceding the old and obsolete BLTs(which were based on vijayanta if memory serves right)

Well I dont know the numbers frankly, but if it is happening I hope it happens sooner, because it will give IA much more flexibility in where they can use which tank.

[Rahul M]

Rohit for the blind love you have for your favorite toy of DRDO you and many people out here has resorted to character assassination of IA which is very clear from yours and statement from others
............

Austin, please do not sully the discussion by this kind of ad hominem arguments,it's not expected from you. if an entity is (arguably) making a wrong decision, discussing it on its merits DOES NOT amount to character assassination. if you feel the view is wrong, you are free to oppose it with facts and arguments, as you have done so far. ad hominem comments will NOT be tolerated on BR in whatever form.
furthermore, if you (or anyone else) finds anything objectionable to any postor's comments that is not directly related to the thread argument, it should be brought to the notice of the mods by reporting the post and adding your own comments therein and NOT by posting in the thread
regards.

[Rahul M]

sanku ji, AFAIK production of kartik BLT (based on vijayanta) has stopped and the T-72 BLT is in production. arjun BLT too is ready for some years now. both these versions are said to be able to take the arjun. so that part of the argument is moot.

even the kartik BLT is MLC-60 and can possibly (I'm not sure) carry the Mk1 arjun with modifications.

Correct, but in this case you have 100 puppies and 150 puppy doors made in total of 1000 door in your huge mansion.

Now you get 10 dogs.

It will take time and money to convert the doors, hai na.

in actuality IA has a very low number of BLT's as compared to its forces, AFAIK it still depends on the cumbersome pontoon bridges, it needs to acquire a very large number of BLTs in the near future, so the question of replacing large amount of existing infrastructure DOES NOT arise.

to modify your story :

Correct, but in this case you have 100 puppies and 150{5 not 150} puppy doors made in total of 1000 door in your huge mansion.

Now you get 10 dogs.
{which I should have done yesterday and bought 100 of them. puppies grow up to dogs, I should have thought about that possibility in the first place ! and if puppies are not puppies but small dog breeds then woe is me for buying chihuahuas as guard dogs !
although I must say the description fits the T-90 to a proverbial 'T' }

[shyamv]

Can you (or any one with the more knowledge on these matters) please elaborate a little on what exactly constitutes the support train? What components of the train would have to be different for Arjun vs T-90?

Sanku suffices please. Since you specifically asked me, I will give an answers the best that I can. Others can definitely add their bit. Overall the discussion is on right lines IMVHO, I do however have my own takes (predictably)

1) Fuel would be same AFAIK they both use diesel engines of similar robustness w.r.t. fuel, but yes different fuel consumption would be the case, as well as different rate of consumption of other spares and different times that are needed for each tank to reequip and overhaul in battle field. These will complicate the planning (not saying its insurmountable just pointing to details that would need to be considered)

2) Trucks will be common. The question is what spares you will carry. The number is ultimately fixed with respect to both the number of trucks and the tonnage that you carry. The spares that are carried are also as per statistical data experience based. Should 10 spare tracks be carried per troop? Or do you carry 15 with buffer? What happens to unused buffer? Can the buffer be reduced if you have two troops of same tank as compared to one?

3) Transporting the tanks will indeed be a major issue, along with spare numbers for tank carriers. There already are tank carrying rails and road vehicles, the question is do you want to spread them (say you have 10 tanks, 1 carrier per tank and 3 spares, if you split your 10 tanks into 1 each how will you split the buffer?)

4) Other critical equipment would be BLT especially in context of PakJabi terrain and defence systems

So essentially, the same infrastructure can be used for both the tanks (with minor modifications/adjustments). That should eliminate the logistics concerns for not making Arjun the MBT or ordering more numbers.

Question(s) regarding terrain: Are there any issues related to terrain where Arjun could not cope but T-90 was able to do so? From IA point of view, I think this is a valid point point. During the trials/test, were the Arjun tanks tested in those terrains? If so, how did Arjun fare? Were T-90 tanks subjected to the same tests and if so, how did they fare?

[akash_k]

u should try digging up the archived threads.. all these issues have been discussed already in the past.

regards,

[Rahul M]

Are there any issues related to terrain where Arjun could not cope but T-90 was able to do so?

the reverse can be true but this can't be. the T-90 has a higher ground pressure than the arjun and much lower value of HP/tonne (reduced even further by its defective engine) and therefore has a much lower mobility.

higher ground pressure also means that the T-90 is far more likely to destroy less than top end quality roads(which are seemingly the norm in India).

the concerns about bridges were the only ones that seemingly made sense but if you look closely even that one does not. the pakistani side is riddled with canals and similar structures for the express purpose of stopping IA's armoured assault. is there anyone with an iota of common sense who thinks PA will NOT destroy whatever bridges that exist over these if they retreat ?
destroying bridges on retreating is established practice for more than two millenia now.

therefore all these discussions on whether the t-this or t-that can cross over these bridges is rather moot.

[Shalav]

Do we anticipate PA to procure equal number of M1A2 Abrams via FMS when IA inducts Arjun ?

Further downthread...

Will there be apprehension in IA mind if India inducts Arjun in large number , PA may opt for M1A2 Abrams from US as counter response. I would expect the PA to react in some ways to Arjun induction and FMS is just a call away.

Not really - why would the US or the UK give the Chinese access to Chobham armour? Even after all these years its composition and construction are still secrets.

If the pak get only the hull without the armour, whats the point in buying expensive M1A2's for them?

[Singha]

us and uk have moved up from basic early 1980s chobham armour
to next gen versions and "dorchester armour" which has "nodules" of some metal implanted within the laminates.

the chinese would have obtained some samples using their poeple in egyptian repair depots or iraqi insurgents probably.

the worry is Unkil has several 1000 older M1A1HA in this boneyards.
dusting them off and sending them to pakistan is not too costly an
affair and they would still be good enough (after electronics are refurbished and brought active) to defeat the T-series.

the only result between M1-any and T-any so far has been a sound thrashing for the T, no matter how many excuses one makes, it must be understand many of the M1s in iraq-1 and iraq-2 were older models (esp the marine ones) and the iraqis
were overwhelmed by relatively small nos of M1s and artillery fire in the really hot battles....

I strongly support Unkil donating 500 M1A1HA for free to Pakistan
and bearing the cost of uprating them and zero-houring them.

[SandeepS]

...
1) Fuel would be same AFAIK they both use diesel engines of similar robustness w.r.t. fuel, but yes different fuel consumption would be the case, as well as different rate of consumption of other spares and different times that are needed for each tank to reequip and overhaul in battle field. These will complicate the planning (not saying its insurmountable just pointing to details that would need to be considered)

2) Trucks will be common. The question is what spares you will carry. The number is ultimately fixed with respect to both the number of trucks and the tonnage that you carry. The spares that are carried are also as per statistical data experience based. Should 10 spare tracks be carried per troop? Or do you carry 15 with buffer? What happens to unused buffer? Can the buffer be reduced if you have two troops of same tank as compared to one?

3) Transporting the tanks will indeed be a major issue, along with spare numbers for tank carriers. There already are tank carrying rails and road vehicles, the question is do you want to spread them (say you have 10 tanks, 1 carrier per tank and 3 spares, if you split your 10 tanks into 1 each how will you split the buffer?)

4) Other critical equipment would be BLT especially in context of PakJabi terrain and defence systems

1. FOL (Fuel, Oil, Lubricants) requirements will be different (except for fuel) for Arjun and T-90 given their different engines, transmissions and other sub-systems. As a result, based on consumption patterns worked out during Arjun's AUCRT, their FOL stocks and supply logistics will be different too. Some of these FOL might be common but in case different OL are used on Arjun then the same will require supply-chain to be organised and sometimes even imported

2. Support vehicles can be broadly classified as general/admin and technical vehicles. The general veh like 1-ton, 3-ton, m/c, etc are obviously not an issue and are common across IA. Its some of the technical vehicles like ARV (Armoured Recovery Veh) which provide repair and recovery in battlefield conditions which need to be different based on the type and class of eqpt that they are supporting. These veh have to be able to winch, tow and lift Arjun and its innards and hence, it is possible that existing ARV for T-90 might not be suitable especially their ancillary fitments like air compressors, generators, cutting and welding eqpt, etc.

3. Spares for Arjun will obviously be different and the same will require their own set of specific equipment for inspection, repair and installation on Arjun. Consequently, the workshops and training will also be different along with their consumption and replenishment plans

4. Ammo is obviously different but ammo carrier/loader veh can be common

5. BEML has developed BFAT wagons (Bogie Flat Arjun Tank) for rail-transporting Arjun (and T-90, T-72, BMP-II) but their numbers are going to be dictated by number and transportation demands of Arjuns. The more prevalent wagon which can be used for T-72, T-90 cannot be used for Arjun, hence location and nos of BFAT becomes a constraint

6. Pontoon bridges are classified up to 60 tonnes so should be able to carry Arjun in it current specification

I believe these points have been covered previously but then this thread/forum members have immense patience to revisit the same discussions for the sake of newbies so why not once again.

[Austin]

Not really - why would the US or the UK give the Chinese access to Chobham armour? Even after all these years its composition and construction are still secrets.

Hmm the access etc is not really a concern , its not that as soon as Paki get Abrams , Chinese will be cloning in their factory and US will maintain a tight control over their hardware as it is the case of any US supplied hardware to pakistan.

If the pak get only the hull without the armour, whats the point in buying expensive M1A2's for them?

No one will buy the hull/chasis without the armour , if what Singha says is true they will upgrade the existing M1A1 fitted with ding dong and give it to Pak.

I am looking at it this way , PA will complain that they are not the one to introduce heavy tank and they need to counter balance India and with their begging bowl will go to US and US with a little croc tears and love for counter terror will donate couple of hundered Abrams derivative to PA to fight Talibans , atleast Tanks are more useful than F-16 Block 52 to fight talibans.

I think any large scale employment of Arjun by IA will be music to PA and dream run to US industry.

Any way it will be interesting if ever M1A2 comes face to face with Arjun Mk2 in a tank versus tank battle , much like the epic Duryodhan versus Bhim fight

[Rahul M]

I think any large scale employment of Arjun by IA will be music to PA and dream run to US industry.

sure, just like the PAKFA for IAF means US will provide free of cost F-35's to them. clearly the only solution is to stop all procurement programs and disband our armed forces.

[Austin]

Well do not read and dissect too much wearing Arjun glass , I was just thinking how PA would try to respond to Arjun deployment.

As far as weapons procured by x country getting a matching response from y , yes thats a fact of life and hence its called "Arms Race"

[Singha]

I dont think anyone is suggesting that we drop Arjun for fear of
unkils freebies.

but the point is once we introduce a new toy in the 'game' we need
to make sure its good and deployed in strong numbers. the pakis
are masters at crying and whining to get into unkil's boneyards and
coming up with huge numbers of still-good kit in response. they also
move fast - witness the speed at which the same midas tankers
we took 5 yrs to order and induct have been inducted , or the Mi17v,
or the ereyie...while we hem and haw over MRCA, the F-solah will
arrive as a shrink wrapped package.

124 arjuns doesnt scare anyone. 1000 would elicit a response if the
pakis lost confidence in their t80 and khalids to fight the threat....esp if we put in a BMS, a L55 cannon with higher muzzle
velocity firing next-gen ammo and a commanders thermal sight.

[Austin]

Austin, please do not sully the discussion by this kind of ad hominem arguments,it's not expected from you. if an entity is (arguably) making a wrong decision, discussing it on its merits DOES NOT amount to character assassination. if you feel the view is wrong, you are free to oppose it with facts and arguments, as you have done so far. ad hominem comments will NOT be tolerated on BR in whatever form. furthermore, if you (or anyone else) finds anything objectionable to any postor's comments that is not directly related to the thread argument, it should be brought to the notice of the mods by reporting the post and adding your own comments therein and NOT by posting in the thread
regards.

Rahul I do not think its a fair comment and more so a fair judgment , I think Rohitvats and Vivek K were resorting to personal attack and flame bait.

But next time I will bring it to the notice of mods , its my fault that I did not do it earlier as took into in the right spirit.

[Rahul M]

fine, so why should we not apply this excellent logic to the PAKFA too and advocate we halt all efforts towards procuring 5 gen fighters ?

just asking.

Well do not read and dissect too much wearing Arjun glass

uncalled for. just a few posts back I have made a request, please keep it. surely no one believes that it is very difficult to substitute T-90 for arjun in this sentence and throw it back ? do you want to go that way ? if not then why make such comments ?

[Rahul M]

Rahul I do not think its a fair comment and more so a fair judgment , I think Rohitvats and Vivek K were resorting to personal attack and flame bait.

But next time I will bring it to the notice of mods , its my fault that I did not do it earlier as took into in the right spirit.

if so PLEASE report them, don't counter attack. please.

[Austin]

but the point is once we introduce a new toy in the 'game' we need
to make sure its good and deployed in strong numbers. the pakis
are masters at crying and whining to get into unkil's boneyards and
coming up with huge numbers of still-good kit in response.

Right in that context I was thinking how PA will react and Abrams seems to me easier and logical choice , both are heavy tanks and worthy competitor.

[Shalav]

us and uk have moved up from basic early 1980s chobham armour
to next gen versions and "dorchester armour" which has "nodules" of some metal implanted within the laminates.

True. OTOH the composition & construction of even the 'basic' Chobham armour still is a secret. There are no publications which show pictures of the armour layout let alone the compounds used in the construction of the ceramics. Probably because the Russians and Chinese do not have it yet, and the US and UK know they do not have it yet.

There is no reason to believe they will let the Chinese have access to Mk1 Chobham armour even if they have upgraded to Mk2. After all Mk2 is still a derivative of the Mk1 and studies can determine the best ways to defeat or clone this technology even if it starts with a Mk1 version of the armour.

Hmm the access etc is not really a concern , its not that as soon as Paki get Abrams , Chinese will be cloning in their factory...

Cloning is definitely a concern, else why keep the composition and construction of even the basic armour secret - one can only conclude that they know the Chinese do not have it and are not close to having it. Furthermore the time it takes is to clone the armour is immaterial. After 20 years the Chinese have not managed to get something equivalent to the Chobham. Possession of the M1 by pak will allow the Chinese easy access to the armour, at some point or the other, which is a lot worse than them not having access to it at all. After all the US cannot keep a 24/7/52 guard on the tanks to discourage Chinese access to them. How will they guard against "The tank fell into the river" type of excuse by the PA. They recover it and suddenly they find a few scores of Chobham tiles are missing! Regular maintenance will require subsystems to be contantly removed and moved back to base for overhaul, it will be impossible to guard against a few pieces misplaced for a few days and then mysteriously being found again.

No one will buy the hull/chasis without the armour

Which is why I mentioned there is no point in them buying the hulls without the armour.

The pak may opt for the M1 - but they are not. If I have been following the discussion correctly your point is the induction of the Arjun may bring the M1 to the Indian Subcontinent. That IMVHO is a circular argument. One cannot decide the make up of our armoured corps based on what the enemy may or may not purchase in response. It will lead to paralysis in decision making. My request is lets not go there. Please ignore this if I have misunderstood the thrust of your argument.

[Austin]

fine, so why should we not apply this excellent logic to the PAKFA too and advocate we halt all efforts towards procuring 5 gen fighters ?

just asking.

We should be worried if Pak manages to get JSF and why not may be a Chinese 5th gen fighter who knows , if Unkil has such a big heart any thing is possible.

Didnt they eat grass , chinese shit but got Nuclear weapons and counter balanced India ?

Well do not read and dissect too much wearing Arjun glass uncalled for. just a few posts back I have made a request, please keep it. surely no one believes that it is very difficult to substitute T-90 for arjun in this sentence and throw it back ? do you want to go that way ? if not then why make such comments ?

May I did not communicate it well , let me put it this way do not see every thing I write with respect to my perceived objection to Arjun or pro T-90 tilt.

What I am asking is a simple question , what could be PA option if IA deploys Arjun in huge numbers , Abrams seems to me a logical choice.

[Rahul M]

or T-99. but that is costly. if unkil gives M1A1 for free nothing better than that for PA. might be the one which iraq is supposed to get. would be the diesel powered version sans the turbines.

[Austin]

Cloning is definitely a concern, else why keep the composition and construction of even the basic armour secret -

AFAIK the composition and construction on Indian Kanchan , Bishma Armour , ERA like Kaktus and K-5 and even western armour is secret .

I mean if proliferation of technology to Chinese is a big concern why should US even sell arms to Pakistan in the first place.

[Singha]

the F-solah-52 and P3 also has technology the chinese havent mastered yet. even the phalanx-mki and harpoons are better than
what the plan has in those categories.

Unkil has a lot of love for the munna. only the high operating cost
of M1s (unkil wont pay for the jet fuel) might deter the pakis. if
it were a diesel engine we'd be seeing pakis all over the boneyard.

[Vivek K]

What I am asking is a simple question , what could be PA option if IA deploys Arjun in huge numbers , Abrams seems to me a logical choice.

Thank you for equating Arjun to the Abrams. We need to build up our forces to the threats they face now and in the future. If TSPA gets the Abrams, then Arjun Mk2 must be designed to counter that acquisition. Such an argument should not be used to hold back deployment of the Arjun. This is a self-defeating argument kind of like the one Nehru used in 1962 (it ran something like) - "If we use the IAF then the war will escalate".

[Shalav]

The F16 block 52 does not have anything the Chinese do not already have or can't get from the Russians. IIRC the radar on those F16s are still the same old AN/APG-66 that the paks already have and not the latest AN/APG-68's equipping the Israeli falcons. There is nothing classified on the AIM120 anymore. Anyway I believe like the Taiwanese AIM120s, the US keeps the missiles in their custody till needed (needs verification). What else is there? Mission computers, the Chinese got better versions from the Russians with the Su30 MKK versions.

The P3's have been with pak for a long time, and what they are getting are the P3C's which is equivalent or slightly upgraded tech to what they already have; which definitely is lower tech than the P3 AERIES II of the Hainan Island incident. There is no mention of upgraded mission computers etc... AFAIK - they are getting refurbished US Coast Guard versions not USN versions - Again nothing the Chinese don't already have or can't get from the Russians.

Singha, upgrade does not necessarily mean secret technology not available elsewhere. The Chobham armour OTOH is secret technology definitely not available elsewhere. This is a completely different ball game. Why would the US or even the UK which owns the technology give the Chinese access to something like this?

[Rahul M]

the F-solah-52 and P3 also has technology the chinese havent mastered yet. even the phalanx-mki and harpoons are better than
what the plan has in those categories.

Unkil has a lot of love for the munna. only the high operating cost
of M1s (unkil wont pay for the jet fuel) might deter the pakis. if
it were a diesel engine we'd be seeing pakis all over the boneyard.

a diesel engine version of M1 powered by a 1500hp MTU engine already exists.

[Rahul M]

please go easy on eff-solahs and sons in this thread for landlubbers.

[negi]

Given the kind of espionage PRC has been able to carry out within high security establishments in Unkil , Chobham and other decade old concepts might have already been mastered by the Chinese.

[shyamv]

1. FOL (Fuel, Oil, Lubricants) requirements will be different (except for fuel) for Arjun and T-90 given their different engines, transmissions and other sub-systems. As a result, based on consumption patterns worked out during Arjun's AUCRT, their FOL stocks and supply logistics will be different too. Some of these FOL might be common but in case different OL are used on Arjun then the same will require supply-chain to be organised and sometimes even imported

2. Support vehicles can be broadly classified as general/admin and technical vehicles. The general veh like 1-ton, 3-ton, m/c, etc are obviously not an issue and are common across IA. Its some of the technical vehicles like ARV (Armoured Recovery Veh) which provide repair and recovery in battlefield conditions which need to be different based on the type and class of eqpt that they are supporting. These veh have to be able to winch, tow and lift Arjun and its innards and hence, it is possible that existing ARV for T-90 might not be suitable especially their ancillary fitments like air compressors, generators, cutting and welding eqpt, etc.

3. Spares for Arjun will obviously be different and the same will require their own set of specific equipment for inspection, repair and installation on Arjun. Consequently, the workshops and training will also be different along with their consumption and replenishment plans

4. Ammo is obviously different but ammo carrier/loader veh can be common

5. BEML has developed BFAT wagons (Bogie Flat Arjun Tank) for rail-transporting Arjun (and T-90, T-72, BMP-II) but their numbers are going to be dictated by number and transportation demands of Arjuns. The more prevalent wagon which can be used for T-72, T-90 cannot be used for Arjun, hence location and nos of BFAT becomes a constraint

6. Pontoon bridges are classified up to 60 tonnes so should be able to carry Arjun in it current specification

I believe these points have been covered previously but then this thread/forum members have immense patience to revisit the same discussions for the sake of newbies so why not once again.

I do appreciate your patience with this newbie . These points were not covered previously in a concise and consolidated fashion (like you have done). Passing references have been made but as you have noticed the thread seems to go off tangents at the most inappropriate moments.. .

What I'm trying to get at, with my questions, is the actual reason (technical) the IA prefers T-90 over Arjun. I want to go about it without reducing the argument to various accusations. Therefore, the focus is on technical merits/de-merits. Yes, these have been discussed to death. But what I want to do is focus on one aspect at a time and thrash out all details of that aspect with having the discussion derailed.

So, it would be safe to assume that logistics would not be as big of a problem as made out to be. Sure, it would involve replacing/upgrading equipment. But I wouldn't consider those issues as a show-stoppers.

Now to 'Eastern' tank philosophy. What exactly is this philosophy? I have seen this question posed a couple of times and have not seen a satisfactory answer. If there are other sources/links that describe this, please do share. I would like to know why Arjun does not fit that philosophy.

[Viv S]

On a different note, the PA did evaluate the M1 in the 'glory days' of Zia and friends, but rejected it. Probably too expensive, not mention it would sink like a stone in the soft sands of the Thar(high ground pressure).

Yes it did and most of the firing from M1A1 missed their targets in a demo given to Zia and then the same day while returing back Zia died in crash.

The ground pressure of Arjun is 0.84 and M1A2 0.96 kg/sq cm , Not sure of M1A2 will exactly sink in Thar.

The M1A2 supposed to have a ground pressure of 15.4 psi which works out to be about 1.06 kg/sq cm I think. That's about 25% higher, although I admit it may still be low enough to operate in the Thar.

[Viv S]

What I'm trying to get at, with my questions, is the actual reason (technical) the IA prefers T-90 over Arjun. I want to go about it without reducing the argument to various accusations.

Its basically logistics and 'lets not rock the boat'. The army brass while as patriotic as they come, are rather set in their ways. They have certain preconceived notions and its takes an effort to change that view. But, the fact to take away is that news is getting around and the Arjun is here to stay. I remember speaking to one officer(now a brigadier) who informed me in the course of our discussion, that the T-90 can even fire a missile through its barrel now. He's was ofcourse a bit surprised to learn of the LAHAT. Heck... Col. Ajai Shukla aka Broadsword is the most prominent example of how the army is coming around to our 'jingo' POV. Give it time. For now another two regiments are more or less certain, I fervently hope the DRDO doesn't do a ... well 'DRDO' on the Arjun MkII.

[Manish_Sharma]

Here is a Tank comparison Chart:
http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/1463 ... arison.jpg

[Misraji]

^^^
BTW,

Thanks to Singha, was reading up a bit on Gulf War tank battles.
As he pointed, tin-cans got hit pretty hard. This was in the particular
battle that I was reading about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_73_Easting,
Amrikhans could do that much damage because they possessed superior night-fighting-equipment
(sigh ... unlike our dear Catherine.... )

Reaching 70 Easting at 16:22, the lead cavalry troops of 2nd "Cougar" Squadron knocked out a screen of eight Iraqi T-72 tanks. Three kilometers beyond, T-72s could be seen in prepared positions at 73 Easting. This was the Iraqi Brigade Assembly Area.

Fearing the loss of surprise, E-Troop's commander, Captain H.R. McMaster, decided not to wait for heavier units to come forward and engage the Iraqis. McMaster ordered E-Troop to advance and engage the Iraqi tanks in a hasty attack.

E-Troop consisted of 13 M3 Bradleys, two M106 mortar carriers, one M577 command track, a M981 FIST-V, and 10 M1 Abrams tanks from 3d Squadron's M- ("Mike") Company.

Armored battles in the open desert are generally decided very quickly; 73 Easting was no exception. The 2nd ACR surprised the enemy and penetrated the Iraqi positions so quickly that they were unable to recover. Superior American night vision equipment turned the poor weather into a U.S. advantage.

The 2nd ACR, which advanced between the Iraqi 12th Armored Division and the Tawakalna Division, was the only American ground unit to find itself decisively outnumbered and out-gunned. Nonetheless, the 2nd ACR's three squadrons, along with the 1st Infantry Division's two leading brigades, destroyed two Iraqi brigades (18th Mechanized Brigade and 37th Armored Brigade) of the Tawakalna Division. The 2nd ACR alone destroyed about 85 tanks, 40 personnel carriers and more than 30 wheeled vehicles, along with several anti-aircraft artillery systems during the battle. The equivalent of an Iraqi brigade was destroyed at 73 Easting; it was the first ground defeat of the Republican Guard. Within 24 hours, most of the other Iraqi brigades were gone.

~Ashish.