Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2581
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby nam » 14 Jan 2019 15:04

Austin wrote:Singha guru read my snippet on IA dhagha

With 13 % just available for modernisation IA can just hope for BMP and T's series upgrade there is no money for any thing else.


This is an interesting point. Despite "less money" T90 are been inducted at 100 per year. We have 3 times( increasing) the T80 in Pak inventory, which was the reason for T90 buy in the first place!

Compare this with the Pinaka and artillery buy.

If IA & MoD really wants it, they can get things done.

The advantage of buying local is you can manage different ways of paying vendors. GoI can easily give a interest free loan with couple of years of installment holiday from one of the PSU banks, if push comes to shove. They can pay back, once MoD pays.
Last edited by nam on 14 Jan 2019 15:07, edited 1 time in total.

mody
BRFite
Posts: 531
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby mody » 14 Jan 2019 15:05

We already have the T72 deployed in Ladakh and north Sikkim. With the 1,000 HP engine, the performance would improve. More then enough to take on any light tank. If China deploys the Type 99, then we have to start thinking about how to get the Arjun up there. Also the main problem is getting the tank up there. Not operating the tank on the Tibetan plateau.

On the FICV front, it has been a total mess right from day 1. They go the ATAGS way and develop with DRDO and private sector in partnership. Use all the available in house tech and buy off the shelf purchasable sensors and electronics from abroad. 100% of the IP would be in house. Use the tech developed to also upgrade the BMP2s. Ideally we should have 5,000-6,000 FICVs.
The engine tech for FICV is available in house with private companies. 400-500 HP is doable. Gearbox would be a little more challenging.

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

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Austin » 14 Jan 2019 16:03

The FICV and New MBT will definitely come but the time lines will be stretched in decades , after all the T and BMP will have to be replaced eventually.

Unless Army can increase the OPEX ratio from 87:13 to 60:40 where 40 % is CAPEX they cannot plan much less buy any thing new in numbers.

GOI should support the IA Chief plan , IA can put plans but MOD/GOI might reject it , The other option is to significantly increase defence spending to 3 % of GDP which wont happen any time soon

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4324
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby JayS » 14 Jan 2019 20:10

Austin wrote:The FICV and New MBT will definitely come but the time lines will be stretched in decades , after all the T and BMP will have to be replaced eventually.

Unless Army can increase the OPEX ratio from 87:13 to 60:40 where 40 % is CAPEX they cannot plan much less buy any thing new in numbers.

GOI should support the IA Chief plan , IA can put plans but MOD/GOI might reject it , The other option is to significantly increase defense spending to 3 % of GDP which wont happen any time soon


Not the first time Army is trying to reduce the flab. but I hope they have thought it through. Last time before Kargil 50000 troops were reduced by the way of suppressing vacancies. Post Kargil, IA swelled by 150000 personnel.

Anyhow the impact of current planned reduction is expected to only 6000Cr per year. I don't think then gonna make much of a dent. I don't think IA and MoD are on different pages given the start of reduction in flab was by MP but he concentrated on reduction on the non-core branches like Farms (Why the f IA even had farms till now..? :-? ) and MRO to some extent. A big area to cut the flab is on MRO side. I think not just IA but even IAF should try to reduce all MRO related activities to civilians. Pvt companies can do the work at much more cost effective way. Only the on-base Maintenance work should be kept in-house. Second is of coarse Man power, but its better that IA itself takes care of this part rather than MoD forcing something on them. The current IGB based restructuring is trying to make some impact. But I feel its less than needed and hopefully next COAS will carry forward the work.

Regarding the Defense budget, GOI spends whopping $15B merely on pensions. This figure is not included in normal defense budget. Including this and other such heads, the Defense expenditure is slightly above 3%. So even if we see some manpower reduction, its gonna take decades to have much of an impact of it on overall OPEX for GOI. I don't think the defense budget which is what we typically take as Defense budget (that is excluding pension and other such expenses) will even go to 3% in foreseeable future. The only true way to improve situation on CAPEX side is broad scale indigenization where we leverage our lower production cost and punch as per our PPP and not absolute GDP in USD. Until we keep importing majority of our equipment, we will always be spending more like a 2-3T economy. With across the spectrum indigenization we can spend like a 10T economy with the same budget.

souravB
BRFite
Posts: 533
Joined: 07 Jun 2018 13:52

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby souravB » 15 Jan 2019 23:57

We could look into the ASCOD family of armoured vehicles for our FRCV requirement if the price is right.

It has a 120mm turret for a 40T class vehicle.
Probably TATA proposed FICV solution will be based on this vehicle.

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1435
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Thakur_B » 16 Jan 2019 06:59

^^ Tata wants to go ekla chalo re. They have gained enough experience with Kestrel WhAP.

souravB
BRFite
Posts: 533
Joined: 07 Jun 2018 13:52

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby souravB » 16 Jan 2019 07:12

Thakur_B wrote:^^ Tata wants to go ekla chalo re. They have gained enough experience with Kestrel WhAP.

I thought TATA had a partnership with Bharat Forge and General Dynamics for FICV. The other competitors were Reliance and OFB.

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1435
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Thakur_B » 16 Jan 2019 08:39

Image
Kestrel with turret.

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

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Austin » 16 Jan 2019 13:02

Kestrel looking good

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2581
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby nam » 16 Jan 2019 14:26

Kestrel came out in 2015. It has been 4 years for what is a land platform, and not even a frontline kit.

No orders placed, not even LSP. And we expect our industry to create kits similar to western capability.

rkhanna
BRFite
Posts: 1158
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 02:35

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby rkhanna » 16 Jan 2019 14:33

nam wrote:Kestrel came out in 2015. It has been 4 years for what is a land platform, and not even a frontline kit.

No orders placed, not even LSP. And we expect our industry to create kits similar to western capability.


and not to forget -- All the while funding the development on their own

Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2170
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Vips » 16 Jan 2019 19:13

There is no way the chinese stooge Communists party unions/ Con-goon party and the Babu bureaucracy will allow a private sector MIC to come up in India.
China for obvious reasons will unleash its dogs to stop india from progressing, Corrupt congress has a blood lust for kickbacks from import of military hardware and babu's dont want to miss their favorite past time of sitting on files and making meaningless notations on them.

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2507
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby abhik » 16 Jan 2019 19:46

Lets not make excuses for those in government, it's not like the DM came out and said - "My hands are tied, we can't do shyte because of the unions and babus onlee". Rather stick to facts (even if they are inconvenient).

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1435
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Thakur_B » 17 Jan 2019 07:27

souravB wrote:
Thakur_B wrote:^^ Tata wants to go ekla chalo re. They have gained enough experience with Kestrel WhAP.

I thought TATA had a partnership with Bharat Forge and General Dynamics for FICV. The other competitors were Reliance and OFB.


Sourav ji, it seems that I was wrong on that one. Tata wants to proceed with FICV under Make-II (self funded) category instead of Make-I (govt funded) which would put the other bidders at a serious disadvantage right away. Tata seems to have done their homework and would like to go for the kill. Kestrel WhAP program in collaboration with DRDO seems have boosted their confidence.

IIRC in the WhAP program, DRDO designed the Hull and Armour (from their learnings from Abhay IFV project) and Tata provided the power train and the engine and manufactured the prototypes.

Kestrel WhAP was designed around IA's amphibious requirements and they have already done the groundwork for 20+ variants (ambulance, command centre, etc.), so that is a major heads up against the competition already.

souravB
BRFite
Posts: 533
Joined: 07 Jun 2018 13:52

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby souravB » 17 Jan 2019 08:43

Thakur_B wrote:
IIRC in the WhAP program, DRDO designed the Hull and Armour (from their learnings from Abhay IFV project) and Tata provided the power train and the engine and manufactured the prototypes.

Kestrel WhAP was designed around IA's amphibious requirements and they have already done the groundwork for 20+ variants (ambulance, command centre, etc.), so that is a major heads up against the competition already.

Thakur sahab, WhAP and FICV are two separate requirements. one as the name suggests is wheeled platform for different requirements. Mostly combat support roles.
FICV/FRCV/FMBT however one calls it is going to be a family of more combat oriented vehicles. And I agree Tata is very proactive and has a heads up in this and already showed some designs. Also partnering with heavyweights like Bharat Forge and GD helps.
Let's hope IA can finally decide what it wants and some progress being made in this. One can hope for atleast a few prototypes.

ashishvikas
BRFite
Posts: 434
Joined: 17 Oct 2016 14:18

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby ashishvikas » 19 Jan 2019 15:19

L&T FICV hull and chasis can be seen in this picture..

https://twitter.com/IndianDefenceRA/sta ... 2001530880

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

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Austin » 21 Jan 2019 11:32

PM Modi take ride in K-9 Vajra Self Propelled Howitzer built by Larsen & Toubro


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

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Austin » 21 Jan 2019 11:33

PM Modi dedicates L&T Armoured Systems Complex to the nation


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

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Austin » 21 Jan 2019 11:34


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

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Singha » 21 Jan 2019 11:50

the ficv proto looks very soothing and roomy, with a 76mm gun or 40mm cannon hard for me to tell. seems to be spaced armour module bolted to side of the infantry compartment outside of the tracks to defeat ATGM threats.

however FICV proj has yet to ford its first DCB obstacle - our massive bereaucracy and lobbies.

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

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Austin » 21 Jan 2019 17:36

Army Eyes 3,000 Tank-Busting Missiles From France For Infantry: Report

https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/army-ey ... topstories

ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2945
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby ArjunPandit » 21 Jan 2019 21:52

our no.s of ATGM rqmts are seriously astronomical. This is in addition to the huge stock we already have. Is our stock expiring en masse or we are planning to fight ww3 in style of battle of kursk.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2581
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby nam » 21 Jan 2019 22:17

ArjunPandit wrote:our no.s of ATGM rqmts are seriously astronomical. This is in addition to the huge stock we already have. Is our stock expiring en masse or we are planning to fight ww3 in style of battle of kursk.


Not really. Let's take T90. Average 5 rounds per tank, that is 5k for 1k tanks or 7.5k for 1.5k tanks.

Then ATGM for BMPs.

Then for all the infantry companies or battalion. Then attack choppers.

Considering the induction of APS, the count can only increase.

Regarding fighting WW style wars, Russia which lost WW1, was producing 1 million shells per month!

When the balloon goes up, the numbers we have will look exhaust really fast.

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

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Austin » 23 Jan 2019 09:35

This is interesting video to watch specially Tanks running on frozen

indianarmy tank running on frozen Teesta river at 15 thousand ft in north Sikkim along China border

https://twitter.com/neeraj_rajput/statu ... 3239669762

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7837
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Rakesh » 06 Feb 2019 03:23

Vips wrote:RInfra to deliver parts prototypes for Arjun Mark II ahead of schedule.

One of the main requirements, according to experts, was to reduce the weight of the tank as well as incorporate an anti-tank missile firing capability. The weight of Mark II has been reduced to less than 50 tonnes. The updated model has over 90 improvements over the previous version. Also, it largely relies on indigenous components.

I am late to this party (as Vips post is from Sept 2018 and on Page 86 of this thread), but I came across a picture from a similar article to the one Vips posted above. Check out the side profile of that turret. Damn sleek! Is that the new Mk2 turret? Forgive this mango abdul, if this is old news.

By the way, I asked google chacha and it gave me this ---> 50 tonnes = 55 US tons OR 49+ imperial tons. What unit of measure does the Indian Army use? I doubt it is the US ton.

Image

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7837
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Rakesh » 06 Feb 2019 03:25

Found some more pictures (this is old news onlee...SORRY!) :oops:

But damn, that turret looks gorgeous!

Image

Image

Image

Image

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

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Austin » 15 Feb 2019 13:33

RAFAEL's suite for Future Armored Vehicles (IAV 2019)


Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7837
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Rakesh » 20 Feb 2019 00:11

Thread Locked


Return to “Mil-Tech Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Vamsee and 2 guests