Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20153
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby Philip » 06 Oct 2015 12:21

I have quoted from a v.recent report posted by another member. There is not discrepancy in the costs. Here's an interesting if dated report from Janes on the T-90.Previous posts have emphasised the incremental upgrades in T-90 armour and defensive weapon systems. Please read carefully the test results.One presumes that the IA has conducted tests as to the capability of T-90s to various types of projectiles and missiles.Naturally,such results will be classified,but one seriously doubts that the IA would buy a so-called "tin can".


Jane's International Defence Review 7/2007, pg. 15:
"IMPENETRABLE RUSSIAN TANK ARMOUR STANDS UP TO EXAMINATION"
By Richard M. Ogorkiewicz

Claims by NATO testers in the 1990s that the armour of Soviet Cold War tanks was “effectively impenetrable” have been supported by comments made following similar tests in the US.

Speaking at a conference on “The Future of Armoured Warfare” in London on the 30th May, IDR's Pentagon correspondent Leland Ness explained that US Army tests involving firing trials on 25 T-72A1 and 12 T-72B1 tanks (each fitted with Kontakt-5 explosive reactive armour [ERA]) had confirmed NATO tests done on other former Soviet tanks left behind in Germany after the end of the Cold War. The tests showed that the ERA and composite Armour of the T-72s was incredibly resilient to 1980s NATO anti-tank weapons.
In contrast to the original, or 'light', type of ERA which is effective only against shaped charge jets, the 'heavy' Kontakt-5 ERA is also effective against the long-rod penetrators of APFSDS tank gun projectiles, anti-tank missiles, and anti-armour rotary cannons. Explosive reactive armour was valued by the Soviet Union and its now-independent component states since the 1970s, and almost every tank in the eastern-European military inventory today has either been manufactured to use ERA or had ERA tiles added to it, including even the T-55 and T-62 tanks built forty to fifty years ago, but still used today by reserve units.

"During the tests we used only the weapons which existed with NATO armies during the last decade of the Cold War to determine how effective such weapons would have been against these examples of modern Soviet tank design. Our results were completely unexpected. When fitted to the T-72A1 and B1 the 'heavy' ERA made them immune to the DU (Depleted Uranium) penetrators of the M829A1 APFSDS (used by the 120 mm guns of the Cold War era US M1 Abrams tanks), which are among the most formidable of current tank gun projectiles. We also tested the 30mm GAU-8 Avenger (the gun of the A-10 Thunderbolt II Strike Plane), the 30mm M320 (the gun of the AH-64 Apache Attack Helicopter) and a range of standard NATO Anti Tank Guided Missiles – all with the same result of no penetration or effective destruction of the test vehicles. The combined protection of the standard armour and the ERA gives the Tanks a level of protection equal to our own. The myth of Soviet inferiority in this sector of arms production that has been perpetuated by the failure of downgraded T-72 export tanks in the Gulf Wars has, finally, been laid to rest. The results of these tests show that if a NATO/Warsaw Pact confrontation had erupted in Europe, the Soviets would have had parity (or perhaps even superiority) in armour” – U.S. Army Spokesperson at the show.

Newer KE penetrators have been designed since the Cold War to defeat the Kontakt-5 (although Kontakt-5 has been improved as well). As a response the Russian Army has produced a new type of ERA, “Relikt”, which is claimed to be two to three times as effective as Kontakt-5 and completely impenetrable against modern Western warheads.

Despite the collapse of the USSR, the Russian Tank industry has managed to maintain itself and its expertise in armour production, resulting in modern designs (such as the T-90, the T-95 and mysterious Black Eagle) to replace the, surprisingly, still effective Soviet era tanks. These tests will do much to discount the argument of the “Lion of Babylon” (the ineffective Iraqi version of the T-72M) and export quality tanks being compared to the more sophisticated and upgraded versions which existed in the Soviet military’s best Tank formations and continue to be developed in a resurgent Russian military industrial complex."


Christopher Foss of Janes' on the latest T-90MS.
T-90ms: a big step forward
http://survincity.com/2013/11/t-90ms-a- ... forward-4/

T-90ms: a big step forward
British magazine IHS Jane’s International Defence Review published an article by Christopher F. Foss on a brand new Russian tank T-90ms. Creator — the expert on armored vehicles and armament of the Army.

He not only browser such recognizable in the midst of military professionals of magazines like IHS Jane’s International Defence Review and IHS Jane’s Defence Weekly, and the editor of a noble yearly directory Jane’s Armour and Artillery («armor and artillery»), His outlook on T-90ms, certainly deserves attention.

With its main battle tank, which owns Oversize EFFICIENCY IN URBAN criteria Our homeland is aimed at EXPORT MARKETS

Christopher F. Foss

Russian Uralvagonzavod has developed an improved version of the main battle tank (MBT) T-90S, which is currently being aimed at the export market. Compared with baseline model newcomer modification popular as T-90ms, different improvement of all 3 components of the triad armored vehicle: firepower, mobility and protection, designed to improve the overall efficiency of its urban criteria. What elements or T-90ms very similar to elements of the tank Leopard-2 PSO firm Krauss-Maffei Wegmann, created for peacekeeping operations.

In the Russian time Our homeland disposed of 4 tank plants. Now she has only one — «Scientific and Production Company» Uralvagonzavod «in Nizhny Tagil. Besides promoting MBT T-90ms on the world market the company continues to sell the previous model T-90S tank commander T-90SK also fighting vehicle fire support «Terminator.» The latter was developed in accordance with the requirements of the Russian army, but was among the programs, suspended in 2010 Game «terminator» was sold to Kazakhstan, where the machine for the first time appeared in the parade in 2011

T-90ms armed upgraded 125-mm smoothbore gun 2A46M-4 (in fact refers to the gun 2A46M-5 — approx. Edition), which is claimed to provide a significantly higher accuracy compared with the previous models, and the dispersion of the shells has decreased by least, 15%. Unlike models 2A46M its trunk chrome that provides overcharge his vitality. He also resettled ejector shroud thermal protector and accounting system thermal meander of the gun barrel, which allows the gunner to inspect the line of sight through the bore without departing from the tank.

As with all family tanks T-72 autoloader placed below the turret and provides loading of the gun shell, and then charge with partly burned down sleeve, from which a shot can only pan. In ammunition includes 22 ready to use the shot (projectile and charge) plus 18 shots available in reserve. Previously, all spare shots were placed in the tank hull, but T-90ms most of them moved to the aft part of the tower, in what is now expelling installed panels on the roof. Other 125-mm ammunition stored in the fighting compartment, but in a separate section to increase crew survivability.
The actual composition of ammunition 125mm gun will depend on combat tasks performed by tank. The tank can carry a full range of everyday shooting ammunition, including armor-piercing discarding sabot projectile feathered (BOPS), cumulative projectile (COP) and high-explosive/fragmentation (CFC). He can also shoot the guided missile laser-guided 9M119M at a range of 100 to 5000 m Projectile 9M119M resettled tandem HEAT warhead and is capable of hitting targets outside the firing range of the main armament. From the gunner requires detain crosshair tools and associated illumination laser spot on the target to the rocket hit the target, which can take up to 15 seconds at maximum range.

Coupled with the gun 7.62-mm machine gun PKTM (6P7K) is set to the right of the main armament and ammunition has a standard 2000 rounds.
Installed on the roof of the tower 12.7-mm machine gun 6P7K (in fact, this gun is 7.62 mm, but in its place by the customer can be installed mnogokaliberny anti-aircraft gun — approx. Edition) in remotely controlled weapon stations. It can rotate 316 degrees in azimuth and range from -10 to +45 degrees in elevation to hit targets in urban labyrinths. Food machine gun carried by 2-magazine capacity of 400 rounds each, and from the probable shooting on the move.

T-90ms resettled computerized fire control system (FCS), which allegedly allows the crew to hit stationary and moving targets, including when the tank itself is in motion, with the highest probability of hitting the target with the first shot in virtually all weather criteria . This MSA contains a digital ballistic computer and a set of sensors, including sensor criterion shooting, mounted on the roof, and automatic target tracking. There is also an emergency sight, associated with the main armament and located in front of the main gunner’s sight.

On the roof of the tower there is a separate stabilized commander’s panoramic sight, having a television and thermal channels, a laser rangefinder and that allows to implement the principle of «hunter-shooter.»

The commander also has day periscopes for radial observation. Cover flap tower can be closed or partially tilted backwards, like an umbrella, raised.

Place gunner Resettled stabilized TV / teplovovizionnym sighting system which includes a laser rangefinder with maximum range of 7500 m and the sight missile guidance 9M119M.

Russian tanks usual drawback was the lack of thermal sights, because T-90ms in standard configuration is a big step forward, and significantly improved situational awareness tank makes applicable for use in urban criteria. For example, apart from the sights and periscopes, four cameras provide almost radial charts, transferring images on monitors commander and gunner. Any camera has a field of view of 95 degrees in azimuth and 40 degrees elevation.

As the power plant is used forced a 12-cylinder diesel engine in the power-92S2F 1130 hp coupled with the automatic transmission. Through this 48-ton tank is equipped with a power density of 22.9 ps / m, sufficient for the traffic on the highway at a speed of 60 km / h

T-90cm able to overcome a ford deep 1,2 m without preparation and up to 5 m — with special equipment.

IMPROVED BOOK

In the basic model T-90 was used absolutely welded housing made of metal armor with improved frontal armor plate, and the tower was absolutely cast and had a built-in armor. Last version of the T-90ms has the hull and turret with improved armor that provides overcharge protection from ammunition hitting the top.

This superior set of armor includes not only the protection of dynamic modules (RS), and passive armor elements in modules that in case of damage can be rapidly changed.

Rear hull and turret equipped bars, providing more effective protection against rocket-propelled grenades, and in the fighting compartment are also provided-proof screens to protect the crew from the secondary fragments.


Active protection of ammunition semi-active laser guidance system provides automatic smoke-screens. This system consists of multiple laser sensors are located so as to provide a radial scan location. Upon detection of laser hazards, the crew is alerted by visual and audio means, and in the direction of danger put a gun spray Zahav. In addition, the tower can be rotated in the direction of the machine with the following danger actuation 81mm smoke grenade launchers mounted on either side of the tower.

T-90ms is also equipped with electrical protection system capable allegedly neutralize anti-tank mines, kitted electric detonators.

This also installed armored vehicle combat control and navigation system, which allegedly can be integrated directly to division.

Outside on the rear left side of the tank’s hull mounted auxiliary diesel-electric installation, providing the main function of the T-90ms, when the main engine is shut down to save fuel.

T-90ms is also equipped with equipment for self-entrenching installed on the front armor plate, which can be used, and to overcome obstacles. Standard equipment auxiliary equipment includes fire fighting system, NBC protection system and a communication system crew.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20153
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby Philip » 06 Oct 2015 12:52

Good video clips of Foss of Janes' on the LeClerc and Korean MBT here.
http://tankandafvnews.com/2015/03/17/ch ... clerc-mbt/
IDEX 2015: Christopher Foss talks about the Nexter Leclerc Main Battle Tank
Christopher F Foss, Editor, IHS Jane’s Land Warfare Platforms and filmed by Patrick Allen, IHS Jane's correspondent
17 March 2015

member_22539
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2022
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby member_22539 » 06 Oct 2015 13:46

Philip wrote:I have quoted from a v.recent report posted by another member.


It would be nice if you can repost it. I have no problem admitting a mistake.

jayasimha
BRFite
Posts: 400
Joined: 09 Feb 2011 17:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby jayasimha » 07 Oct 2015 19:28

^^^^

I dont know why, this came to my mind

http://www.las-vegas-shows-reviews.com/ ... beginning/


..
lets wait for suitable ________ and let the discussion proceed.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby Gyan » 07 Oct 2015 20:12

Arjun costs includes the cost of production line. While T-90 cost not only excludes the cost of production line but also many components which are standard on Arjun.

Paul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3546
Joined: 25 Jun 1999 11:31
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby Paul » 07 Oct 2015 21:51

After the DM bit the bullet on the LCA, the next tiger to tame is the army on the pnding decision order T90s for the Chinese border. There are counter arguements which say Army can order Arjun for the western border and the T90s there can be moved to DBO. Will have to see how this comes out

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby Viv S » 07 Oct 2015 21:56

Gyan wrote:Arjun costs includes the cost of production line. While T-90 cost not only excludes the cost of production line but also many components which are standard on Arjun.


Like the base armour, ERA and main gun. :lol: And air conditioning without which, its been burning through TI sights valued at $500K a pop.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7385
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby Prasad » 07 Oct 2015 22:41

Paul wrote:After the DM bit the bullet on the LCA, the next tiger to tame is the army on the pnding decision order T90s for the Chinese border. There are counter arguements which say Army can order Arjun for the western border and the T90s there can be moved to DBO. Will have to see how this comes out

Absolutely no new T90 orders anymore. Enough "import" even if the T90 we make ends up being half indian.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4324
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby srai » 08 Oct 2015 03:23

Viv S wrote:
Gyan wrote:Arjun costs includes the cost of production line. While T-90 cost not only excludes the cost of production line but also many components which are standard on Arjun.


Like the base armour, ERA and main gun. :lol: And air conditioning without which, its been burning through TI sights valued at $500K a pop.


We see it time and again the same old story. Russian equipments come with artificially low acquisition prices only to be followed by huge hidden costs of making them actually functional/serviceable. There are those who tend to selectively only remember the initial low prices.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16405
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby NRao » 08 Oct 2015 06:13

It is one thing for a poster on BR to have amnesia and something else for a few 100 Indians to go through the same motions and fall asleep at night.

Amazing!!!

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1815
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby srin » 08 Oct 2015 14:51

Philip wrote:Srai's post in the arty td.
The MoD has cleared 124 Arjuns for series production, but military sources said that with the arrival of the Russian T-90s main battle tank, its chassis would now be "diverted" to Bhim. The Army wants to acquire around 100 to 120 SP 155mm weapon systems in completed condition or as kits and build indigenously the remaining 400 to 450 in order to arm around 30 mechanised infantry regiments. These systems are meant to counter some 150 American M109A2 SP guns with the Pakistan Army.

The Army, meanwhile, has rejected Arjun, which continues to face problems with its fire control system and gun accuracy at battle ranges and has poor operational mobility because of its weight and width. The manufacturers of its German MTU 838 Ka-510, 1,400 hp diesel engine have also raised their price, significantly adding to the MBT's overall cost of around Rs.15 crores to Rs.20 crores each. The 310 Russian T-90s tanks that India has bought and which it plans to build indigenously under licence at the Heavy Vehicles Factory at Avadi in Tamil Nadu are priced at around $1.02 million apiece.


If this report/costs are even approx. accurate,one could buy two-3 T-90s for just one Arjun. $1.02M works out to about 6.5 cr. Along with one crew member less,its capital,operating and manpower costs would be much higher than a T-90. That may be a key reason why the IA is reluctant on Arjun,as the IA plans to possess about 4500 MBTs by 2020.


1996 called. They are offering Sukhoi-30s at Rs5100 crore for 40 aircraft(only 130 crores per aircraft). The LCA is far more expensive at 200 crores in 2015. Let's get rid of LCA and buy more Sukhois. :roll:

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4324
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby srai » 08 Oct 2015 15:04

^^^
Philip ... that article was written by Rahul Bedi, whose reputation as a DDM is well known. In any case, it's an old article written around 2002. Much have come to pass since then.

member_22539
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2022
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby member_22539 » 08 Oct 2015 15:46

^Oh please, like he doesn't know that.

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1815
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby srin » 08 Oct 2015 16:12

Of course, he did. Let's look at the fallacies in the logic, shall we ?
a) Assuming that exchange rate is the same between 2002 and 2015
b) Assuming that DDM cost analysis is correct
c) Assuming that T-90 price includes everything - nope, we had to import missiles, ammo and thermal sights on top of it
d) Assuming that there is no such thing called time value of money
e) Comparing the price to an Arjun that hadn't even entered production.


Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1457
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby Thakur_B » 18 Oct 2015 18:59

Overdrive magazine reviews the Kestrel.
http://overdrive.in/features/the-tata-k ... l-carrier/

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby Singha » 26 Oct 2015 14:04

http://www.benning.army.mil/armor/armor ... 995web.pdf

there is a nice writeup on the fight by the kuwaiti 35th 'shaheed' brigade on the night of the iraqi invasion in 1990. despite a few hours warning, and partial loading of ammo and supplies in the night they were able to cause heavy casualties to the medina and hammurabi divs before withdrawing across the KSA border the next afternoon after hours of heavy fighting.

the were the only one of the 4 kuwaiti brigades to deploy in time for a fight.

its well worth a read .... shows how large scale war even at brigade level is like a chess game - positions, sensors, comms, ammo, trained crews, reliable eqpt, resupplies down to water all contribute to the overall game.

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1457
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby Thakur_B » 27 Oct 2015 06:31

Anyone heard any chaiwalla info on NaMiCa? Three years since the platform was last tested.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby Singha » 27 Oct 2015 11:32

looks like DOA to me because IA does not want TSP/PLA style specialized AT units with heavy TOW/Kornet class ATGMs.
they seem comfortable with tens of thousands of konkurs and Milan2T that BDL is producing.
we also have some limited number of Kornets somewhere - not sure who uses it.

Nag will live on as Helina in the LCH which is nearing IOC.

for bunker busting they seem ok with unloading 125mm rounds from tanks downrange

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1457
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby Thakur_B » 27 Oct 2015 16:41

^^ NaMiCa to me seems indispensable in Tibetan plateau, with good line of sight, ability to be airlifted by Il-76 and C-17 and ability to take down enemy armour beyond their strike capabilities.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby Singha » 27 Oct 2015 16:47

IA top brass is still to execute its tibet pivot and consider the PLA its primary problem. when that happens things will move.

bharat karnad has recommended dismantling 2 of the 3 strike corps and standing them up with right tools as MSCs. in a atmosphere of limited funding, makes sense to me.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4324
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby srai » 27 Oct 2015 16:56

^^^

NAMICA won't get inducted if the IA keeps changing goalpost. The NAG missile has been ready for 5 years now and NAMICA, as originally designed, could have been inducted some 3 years ago. The initial order is for a measly 13 NAMICAs and 400-odd NAGs. New design changes could have continued as Mk.1A/2 iteration path following those initial production/inductions, but the IA seems to want to either keep waiting for a "perfect" system or is using another delay tactic. The total requirement, at one point, was stated as 200 NAMICAs and some 8000 NAGs.

Picklu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2024
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby Picklu » 27 Oct 2015 20:09

I believe the thinking in MOD is that armour and anti armour - both are relatively lower priority right now with adequate no of T-90 is present to hold the fort for time being at least. Hence despite the chaiwala info from Niranulla, Arjun did not go anywhere and LCA is being prioritized.

I think MOD is prioritizing based on financial situation. Rafale was a massive outflow about to happen and NaMo-Parikkar combo gave LCA the highest focus to save us from that without compromising squadron numbers. There is no such impending order for tank import right now.

LRSAM, MRSAM are done deal so I think the next focus would be on upgraded Akash to protect the SRSAM flank from import lobby. Already Insas update has been given higher priority and import lobby thwarted.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4324
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby srai » 28 Oct 2015 07:39

Picklu wrote:...
There is no such impending order for tank import right now.
...


Didn't the IA want to order the latest variant of T-90 for the mountain armor brigades? Some 300 units or something like that from what I remember.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby Singha » 28 Oct 2015 09:18

cancelled I think, along with most of MSC due to funds crunch. it was preceded by the idea of importing 300 polish anders light tanks.

Picklu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2024
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby Picklu » 28 Oct 2015 23:13

Also, any t-90 import is a repeat order as we already have license for 1000 more.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16405
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby NRao » 28 Oct 2015 23:22

JTull wrote:http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/defence-ministry-to-clear-military-deals-worth-rs-5000-cr/articleshow/49561226.cms

...
Parrikar, who is set to leave for Russia on Friday, is also likely to discuss the possible acquisition of two new Kilo class submarines for the Indian Navy that is battling with a depleted underwater fleet. India currently operates nine Kilo submarines under the Sindhughosh class and had lost one to a major explosion at the Mumbai harbour in 2013.

The two submarines are being offered as a quick option to fill gaps as St Petersburg already has a line of advanced Kilo class submarines under production for the Russian Navy as well as a Vietnamese order.

...


The government is set to clear two major military purchases from Russia days before Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar's visit to Moscow, including a comprehensive upgrade of India's Ilyushin transport aircraft fleet and the acquisition of 150 new armoured fighting vehicles

BharadwajV
BRFite
Posts: 116
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby BharadwajV » 28 Oct 2015 23:47

NRao wrote:The government is set to clear two major military purchases from Russia days before Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar's visit to Moscow, including a comprehensive upgrade of India's Ilyushin transport aircraft fleet and the acquisition of 150 new armoured fighting vehicles

From 2013:
http://indianarmy.nic.in/writereaddata/RFI/26/rfi131109.pdf
In a written response to the Lok Sabha, Antony said the estimated Rs8bn ($0.14bn) project involved armament upgrade of BMP-2/2K infantry fighting vehicle (IFV) to BMP-2M standard, and acquisition of a new powerpack for the IFV.

http://www.army-technology.com/news/newsindian-army-upgrade-bmp-22k-infantry-fighting-vehicle-fleet


So the new order must be for the BMP-2M!

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18656
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby Karan M » 29 Oct 2015 00:19

Its almost as if IA has its own definition of BMP-2M and is asking about for it?!?
http://indianarmy.nic.in/writereaddata/ ... 131109.pdf

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18656
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby Karan M » 29 Oct 2015 00:22

Looks like IA looked at BMP-2M, said nice concept and now wants equivalents?
http://www.defproac.com/?p=1730

Matches news here
http://defencenews.in/article/Indian-Ar ... ed-FICV-29

Russians are gonna be pissed, lol.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7699
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby rohitvats » 29 Oct 2015 08:16

This 150 more IFV is to be manufactured by OFB and one report which I read said the model is BMP-2/2K.

That 150 number is in a sweet spot to account for 2 x mechanized infantry regiments. Hope another infantry division is being converted into RAPID configuration.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby Singha » 29 Oct 2015 08:24

what is position on the domestic upg to BMP2 that OFB had proposed in collab with Tula? it was supposed to put new armour and thermal sights on the BMP2.

rkhanna
BRFite
Posts: 1159
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 02:35

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby rkhanna » 29 Oct 2015 13:10

Wiki tells me that Russia offered the BMP-3 to India with ToT if we killed our own program. I remember reading somewhere that the BMP-3 was indeed trialed in India and Failed GQSR.

Anybody know what were the failure points? To my mango eyes the BMP-3M looks like an impressive beast.

pragnya
BRFite
Posts: 728
Joined: 20 Feb 2011 18:41

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby pragnya » 29 Oct 2015 14:15

is this inducted? seems BMP with an artillery gun.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVRaqWft ... e=youtu.be

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby Singha » 29 Oct 2015 14:37

the BMP3 might be ok as a light raiding tank. but its layout is the worst of any IFV in modern era. even IA could not find a way to pass it I suppose.
--

The vehicle has an unconventional layout. The engine is in the back of the vehicle to the right (unlike most other IFVs, which have the engine located forward in the hull). As a result, the driver is seated forward in the hull (in the center) together with two infantrymen (one on each side of the driver). The vehicle has a double bottom and the engine is located under the floor of the vehicle (troops enter/leave the vehicle over the engine).[14] The remaining five infantrymen are seated aft of the two man turret

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby Singha » 29 Oct 2015 14:43

http://www.oxygino.com/site/wp-content/ ... 5-um-8.jpg
http://www.oxygino.com/site/wp-content/ ... -um-13.jpg

its a death trap for the 5 troops cramped around the back of turret if something blocks their crawling tunnel exits.
the engine below the floor means none can sit in that space, they have to crawl out of the back

the two in the front cannot dismount under fire at all through their hatches.

its the 'camel' of the IFV world - a horse designed by commitee

if you just want a lightly protected heavily armed amphibious raiding tank with a 3-man crew it is probably ok

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby Austin » 29 Oct 2015 14:49

^^ There is a new BMP-3 variant called Dragoon which per Janes report Saudi and Iraq wants to buy
they have added a new 57 mm Gun and moved Engine on front

http://www.janes.com/article/54972/iraq-saudi-arabia-reportedly-interested-in-placing-major-bmp-3-orders

A new version of the BMP-3 is being developed called the Dragoon that rectifies the vehicle's most glaring flaw by moving the engine to the front, thereby freeing up more space for the infantry in the rear. The Dragoon also has the new AU-220M weapon station with a 57 mm gun.


Picture of BMP-3 Dragoon 57 mm gun

Image

Paul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3546
Joined: 25 Jun 1999 11:31
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby Paul » 29 Oct 2015 21:02

Putin had personally lobbied for the BMP 3 some years ago but did not go through

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16405
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby NRao » 29 Oct 2015 21:16

Paul wrote:Putin had personally lobbied for the BMP 3 some years ago but did not go through


He had a condition on it though. He wanted India to stop designing her own.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9 , 2014

Postby Viv S » 29 Oct 2015 21:34

Karan M wrote:Its almost as if IA has its own definition of BMP-2M and is asking about for it?!?
http://indianarmy.nic.in/writereaddata/ ... 131109.pdf


E mail ID. we dte@yahoo.com

:groan:


Return to “Mil-Tech Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 28 guests