MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 06 Aug 2015 08:16

IMVHO And with all due respect, ignoring such attacks is no longer an option now.

It's just a plain battle for survival now.

It will be messy and dirty just like actual wars but it will need to be done. By those who know how.

The MBT Arjun may better the T 90 now or sometime soon but why and how should it also be expected to beat a 'future' concept which is itself not defined completely yet ?

member_29151 · Post by **member_29151** » 06 Aug 2015 10:41

made some tweets regarding arjun to PMO ,defence minister and ADGPI .
Hopes are Less BUt lets See if i Get a Reply From them.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 06 Aug 2015 10:50

There is one very simple yardstick with which to measure the truth with.Were the dimension/weight parameters given to the DRDO/CVRDE,etc. reg the MBT requirement. The dimensions of the bridges and culverts haven't changed overnight,the railway wagons too,so both dimensions and weight must've been given at the start,or was it at all? Did the IA then deceive the designers further allowing them a free hand to make modifications only to pounce upon them at a later date (now).This can be easily verified by the DM/MOD to sift the truth from the garbage.

srai · Post by **srai** » 06 Aug 2015 11:53

Manish_P wrote:...

The MBT Arjun may better the T 90 now or sometime soon but why and how should it also be expected to beat a 'future' concept which is itself not defined completely yet ?

It is about iterative development i.e. from Mk.1 -> Mk.2 -> Mk.3 -> Mk.4 -> etc. You don't just jump to some "unknown futuristic" concept without building up capability and understanding. That is why this whole FRCV is laughable; they are asking some foreign companies to not only design the tank but also specify what it should be! The IA simply doesn't get the iterative approach and even worse it seems it doesn't understand its own doctrinal needs.

srai · Post by **srai** » 06 Aug 2015 12:01

Philip wrote:There is one very simple yardstick with which to measure the truth with.Were the dimension/weight parameters given to the DRDO/CVRDE,etc. reg the MBT requirement. The dimensions of the bridges and culverts haven't changed overnight,the railway wagons too,so both dimensions and weight must've been given at the start,or was it at all? Did the IA then deceive the designers further allowing them a free hand to make modifications only to pounce upon them at a later date (now).This can be easily verified by the DM/MOD to sift the truth from the garbage.

You are basically asking chicken or egg which came first question. Look, at the beginning you are not going to know a lot of things unless you have experienced people who have done it before and who can tell you what is possible or not possible because of xyz. Both the user and developers were in the dark. Now DRDO, having gained experienced in building Arjun MBT, can point out to IA the ludicrous nature of their FRCV/FMBT requirement.

member_29151 · Post by **member_29151** » 06 Aug 2015 12:04

srai wrote:
Manish_P wrote:...

The MBT Arjun may better the T 90 now or sometime soon but why and how should it also be expected to beat a 'future' concept which is itself not defined completely yet ?
It is about iterative development i.e. from Mk.1 -> Mk.2 -> Mk.3 -> Mk.4 -> etc. You don't just jump to some "unknown futuristic" concept without building up capability and understanding. That is why this whole FRCV is laughable; they are asking some foreign companies to not only design the tank but also specify what it should be! The IA simply doesn't get the iterative approach and even worse it seems it doesn't understand its own doctrinal needs.

true they just need star wars weapons to play! anything less is not good.though T90 passes that bar by Army not known Standards.The Role Of DGMF is highly Suspicious.

member_29151 · Post by **member_29151** » 06 Aug 2015 20:08

I got my tweet Reply From Lt Gen H S Panag(R) ‏@rwac48
HE says : "Main problems r weight and high maintenance requirements for Arjun."

I tried to upload a picture of that tweet but doesn't know how to do that.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 06 Aug 2015 21:37

Kumar Vinod wrote:I got my tweet Reply From Lt Gen H S Panag(R) ‏@rwac48
HE says : "Main problems r weight and high maintenance requirements for Arjun."

This is the standard reply every Army guy gives when asked about the Arjun. Most people will take it to mean the DRDO messed up and made a tank which was too heavy. Gen Panag and his colleagues will never speak about the fact that the IA GSQR necessitated a heavy tank or the fact that it's heaviness is due to much better protection and crew-comfort and the new demands by the army that made the Mk2's weight go up even further..

member_29151 · Post by **member_29151** » 06 Aug 2015 22:04

nachiket wrote:
Kumar Vinod wrote:I got my tweet Reply From Lt Gen H S Panag(R) ‏@rwac48
HE says : "Main problems r weight and high maintenance requirements for Arjun."
This is the standard reply every Army guy gives when asked about the Arjun. Most people will take it to mean the DRDO messed up and made a tank which was too heavy. Gen Panag and his colleagues will never speak about the fact that the IA GSQR necessitated a heavy tank or the fact that it's heaviness is due to much better protection and crew-comfort and the new demands by the army that made the Mk2's weight go up even further..

ya ! I don't get it ! they want everything and want the tank under few KGs.
plus Maintenance ...124 is not good number to have large spares part .. more the tanks more the spare.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 06 Aug 2015 22:07

Kumar Vinod wrote: ya ! I don't get it ! they want everything and want the tank under few KGs.

This was basically what the FMBT nonsense was all about. Abrams level protection in a T-72 sized tank. Unsurprisingly, it went nowhere.

member_29151 · Post by **member_29151** » 06 Aug 2015 22:18

nachiket wrote:
Kumar Vinod wrote: ya ! I don't get it ! they want everything and want the tank under few KGs.
This was basically what the FMBT nonsense was all about. Abrams level protection in a T-72 sized tank. Unsurprisingly, it went nowhere.

I guess even Abrams also cant full fill the dreams of army only tank available is T90 for army .. which is even reject by Russia.

Hobbes · Post by **Hobbes** » 07 Aug 2015 06:44

Kumar Vinod wrote:I got my tweet Reply From Lt Gen H S Panag(R) ‏@rwac48
HE says : "Main problems r weight and high maintenance requirements for Arjun."
I tried to upload a picture of that tweet but doesn't know how to do that.

A few points here:
1. Gen. Panag was in the Infantry (mechanized infantry) and so would not have the inside scoop on the Arjun controversy.
2. He retired from the Army in 2008, at which time the truth about the merits of the Arjun were not widely known outside of the DRDO. Also IIRC he had other problems on his mind at the time - from what I remember he took early retirement because he was superseded.

What I suspect is that Gen. Panag is just repeating what he has heard from other officers, especially those in the Armoured Corps, and has not applied a great deal of thought to the issue since it was never in his area of responsibility. I'd suggest that you reply to his tweet pointing out (a) the stellar performance of the Arjun vis a vis the tin can; (b) the fact that the low ground pressure of the tank makes the so called weight problem a non issue and one that is at best moot; (c) the fact that the Western heavies are all in the same weight range; (d) that the weight issue for the Arjun Mark II has in fact been misrepresented, and that the 67 ton weight inclusive of the mine plough is plain FUD, since combat deployments will not include the plough; (e) the suspected sabotage in the 2008 trials because of which the DRDO had to place safeguards on the tank. I am sure you can find enough points for a page worth of tweets.

Gen. Panag is an upright officer who actively fought corruption in the Army (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harcharanjit_Singh_Panag), and I am sure he would be very interested in the real facts behind the Arjun controversy.

JMT....

srai · Post by **srai** » 07 Aug 2015 07:03

nachiket wrote:
Kumar Vinod wrote: ya ! I don't get it ! they want everything and want the tank under few KGs.
This was basically what the FMBT nonsense was all about. Abrams level protection in a T-72 sized tank. Unsurprisingly, it went nowhere.

Yep. After DRDO pointed out that the IA's FMBT concept was unworkable, guess what the IA did? It went and issued FRCV RFI to foreigners. We can be sure that they will all say the samething as DRDO told them years ago but will suck up chunk of money in the process. What a waste of resources and time for next few years! Yet, the IA will continue to soldier on its night-blind T-72 past obsolescence

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 07 Aug 2015 07:05

@ Kumar Vinod.

Thank you for your efforts!

Do thank the good general for his revert and please engage him (and others) as suggested by Hobbes.

I am not a twitter user. Will try to see if I can do something similar by emails

member_29151 · Post by **member_29151** » 07 Aug 2015 08:04

Dear sir ,
I live in avadi Chennai and seen arjun tank and t90 very close . by just seeing anybody can tell heavy armoured plating on arjun .

niran · Post by **niran** » 07 Aug 2015 08:37

some information from unmentionable sources hence TIWW,

i hear MOD was told about this high maintenance of Arjun, he requested for figures was given figures, to which he replied and ordered (in place of requested)

the details of parts changed/consumed in INR and man hours, also while you are at it the details of consumption/km on the move and stationary, list the parts by their name,use, price, code and manufacturer

rest assured gents Arjun gonna get a fair treatment.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 07 Aug 2015 10:53

Hobbes wrote:
Kumar Vinod wrote:I got my tweet Reply From Lt Gen H S Panag(R) ‏@rwac48
HE says : "Main problems r weight and high maintenance requirements for Arjun."
I tried to upload a picture of that tweet but doesn't know how to do that.
A few points here:
1. Gen. Panag was in the Infantry (mechanized infantry) and so would not have the inside scoop on the Arjun controversy.
2. He retired from the Army in 2008, at which time the truth about the merits of the Arjun were not widely known outside of the DRDO. Also IIRC he had other problems on his mind at the time - from what I remember he took early retirement because he was superseded.

What I suspect is that Gen. Panag is just repeating what he has heard from other officers, especially those in the Armoured Corps, and has not applied a great deal of thought to the issue since it was never in his area of responsibility. I'd suggest that you reply to his tweet pointing out (a) the stellar performance of the Arjun vis a vis the tin can; (b) the fact that the low ground pressure of the tank makes the so called weight problem a non issue and one that is at best moot; (c) the fact that the Western heavies are all in the same weight range; (d) that the weight issue for the Arjun Mark II has in fact been misrepresented, and that the 67 ton weight inclusive of the mine plough is plain FUD, since combat deployments will not include the plough; (e) the suspected sabotage in the 2008 trials because of which the DRDO had to place safeguards on the tank. I am sure you can find enough points for a page worth of tweets.

Gen. Panag is an upright officer who actively fought corruption in the Army (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harcharanjit_Singh_Panag), and I am sure he would be very interested in the real facts behind the Arjun controversy.

JMT....

unrelated to the present discussion, but........

A retired Lt Gen not having the inside scoop on ANYTHING that is going on in the IA??

shaaram karo, yaar.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 07 Aug 2015 18:02

One reason why the Arjuns are not being serviced properly could be because the parts are not being ordered and delivered to the operational unit.

There seems to be this big huge conspiracy going on at multiple levels.

Now that the fauj has been forced to induct the tank, attempts are still on to sabotage its performance and make it a Maruth.
Such is the hold of the people who are hell bent on retarding the nation's progress - they've tried their best to hold back the aviation sector, pretty much everything that they could import.

srai · Post by **srai** » 07 Aug 2015 18:29

^^^
True.

It's not just Arjun that has serviceability issues in the IA; if we look through audit reports and panic purchases it is similar with T-90 and other IA platforms. This whole shenanigan says more about the IA being inept when it comes to maintaining its purchases than the platforms themselves. It seems they aren't quite versed in the ways of long-term product lifecycle support and management.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 08 Aug 2015 04:27

India, Russia in talks to jointly produce helicopters, tanks, aircraft and ships

The Indian Defense Ministry’s statement did not specify the armor slated for joint production. Meanwhile, TASS sources said Russia and India could jointly produce up to 400 Kamov Ka-226T multi-purpose helicopters, from 3 to 6 modernized Project 11356 Talwar-class frigates and also the newest Armata tanks.

The negotiations on Armata tanks are at their initial stage.

Hobbes · Post by **Hobbes** » 08 Aug 2015 05:54

chetak wrote:
unrelated to the present discussion, but........

A retired Lt Gen not having the inside scoop on ANYTHING that is going on in the IA?? shaaram karo, yaar.

It is quite obvious that you have no idea of how retired officers and babus keep abreast of happenings in their former fiefdoms and related areas. No fault of yours, since you probably come from a different background. However, that does not excuse the inaccuracy of your statement, exemplified by the capitalized "anything". Read on and get enlightened.

You do understand, I hope, that retired officers are not invited to visit their former offices or commands on work related matters, or participate in discussions and decision making. They are after all retired. What happens is that the retired officer in question meets his former colleagues at the officers' mess or club or some social happening, has a few drinks with them and over the course of the evening exchanges some thoughts on how things are going. It is also pertinent to note that the General in question was an infantryman, and so in all probability his conversations would revolve around infantry issues and things pertaining to his old regiment rather than on Artillery, Armour, Signals etc. He might casually remark on the Arjun, saying "What is going on with the armour chappies, there seems to be a lot of furore around the Arjun" or words to that effect. He would have no reason to go any deeper, since (a) he is retired; and (b) armour was not his forte.

And that leads to why the use of the term "anything" is about as accurate as a Paki missile - sure he may possibly have inside information on some things if he is well connected, but not everything, and it is my belief that deep knowledge of the Arjun's issues does not fall within the ambit of those things he would be well informed about.

Hobbes · Post by **Hobbes** » 08 Aug 2015 06:01

Gagan wrote:One reason why the Arjuns are not being serviced properly could be because the parts are not being ordered and delivered to the operational unit.

There seems to be this big huge conspiracy going on at multiple levels.

Now that the fauj has been forced to induct the tank, attempts are still on to sabotage its performance and make it a Maruth.
Such is the hold of the people who are hell bent on retarding the nation's progress - they've tried their best to hold back the aviation sector, pretty much everything that they could import.

This makes a great deal of sense. One moment everything is going swimmingly, the Arjuns are performing really well, and bang! out comes a news report from a tainted source (Manu Pubby) that they have serious reliability issues. What if someone had thrown some figurative sand into the logistics bearings, i.e. sabotaged the spares supply chain in desperation since there seemed to be no other way to make the tank look bad and bring it down to the level of the T-90? The sabotage could be at any stage, from the procurement (Army -> MoD), shipping or local logistics.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 08 Aug 2015 06:34

That is the oldest, dirtiest trick in the book. Every 2bit purchase staff does this in Corporate India.

Little wonder the East India Company was able to enslave us. Keep on going for round 2. Everyone learn Mandarin though this time. We will be flying lice for 200 years.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 08 Aug 2015 06:35

Disgraceful for a proud nation to have traitors like these.

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 08 Aug 2015 07:04

1000 years of getting our @SS kicked while importing technology does not seem to be an adequate lesson to us.

member_29151 · Post by **member_29151** » 08 Aug 2015 10:51

i think if we cant buy our own damn tanks and love videshi maal..!! then Make in India Seems a Drama

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 08 Aug 2015 11:56

See, most of these news/rumors are coming from Russian news source or from comedians. Nothing negative from MOD.

and wave.

member_28454 · Post by **member_28454** » 08 Aug 2015 20:48

Gentlemen,
It would be good to write a solid and hard-hitting article for a magazine such as Swarajya.
And once it is published, make sure that it gets distributed widely.
Does anyone know the editors to see if there is interest in publishing something like this?

BTW, IA officers can change once they leave their institutional setting and start facing real facts. A case in the point is Ajay Shukla.

arshyam · Post by **arshyam** » 08 Aug 2015 21:24

Saurav Jha already blogs at Swarajya (does he also do so here

?), perhaps we can ask him to consider writing about it again? His previous articles on this topic are buried deep in the IBN Live site and is probably not read by anyone expect people from BRF/DFI (I have it bookmarked). Also, Swarajya apparently asked BRF to document the LCA saga in an article. Perhaps the next article can be on the Arjun. The only problem as I see it is the lack of first hand info on BRF - we all rely on articles by Ajai Shukla or SJha (see page 1 of this thread itself). We need some fauji inputs to bring something new to the table. Anyone has contacts in IA/Armoured Corps?

nelson · Post by **nelson** » 08 Aug 2015 23:55

Hobbes wrote:
Kumar Vinod wrote:I got my tweet Reply From Lt Gen H S Panag(R) ‏@rwac48
HE says : "Main problems r weight and high maintenance requirements for Arjun."
I tried to upload a picture of that tweet but doesn't know how to do that.
A few points here:
1. Gen. Panag was in the Infantry (mechanized infantry) and so would not have the inside scoop on the Arjun controversy.
2. He retired from the Army in 2008, at which time the truth about the merits of the Arjun were not widely known outside of the DRDO. Also IIRC he had other problems on his mind at the time - from what I remember he took early retirement because he was superseded.

What I suspect is that Gen. Panag is just repeating what he has heard from other officers, especially those in the Armoured Corps, and has not applied a great deal of thought to the issue since it was never in his area of responsibility.....

JMT....

Hobbes wrote:
chetak wrote:
unrelated to the present discussion, but........

A retired Lt Gen not having the inside scoop on ANYTHING that is going on in the IA?? shaaram karo, yaar.
.... It is also pertinent to note that the General in question was an infantryman, and so in all probability his conversations would revolve around infantry issues and things pertaining to his old regiment rather than on Artillery, Armour, Signals etc. He might casually remark on the Arjun, saying "What is going on with the armour chappies, there seems to be a lot of furore around the Arjun" or words to that effect. He would have no reason to go any deeper, since (a) he is retired; and (b) armour was not his forte.

And that leads to why the use of the term "anything" is about as accurate as a Paki missile - sure he may possibly have inside information on some things if he is well connected, but not everything, and it is my belief that deep knowledge of the Arjun's issues does not fall within the ambit of those things he would be well informed about.

Contrary to the perception that Mechanised Infantry is Infantry on wheels or tracks, the truth is far away. They are more mechanised/ armoured warfare oriented than anyone here may like to believe.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... t-mech.htm

Lt Gen Panag himself commanded Strike corps - Sudarshana chakra.

http://twitpic.com/6vwuy3

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 09 Aug 2015 00:29

arshyam, in a true democracy, designated arm chairs have much more control on questioning the arms purchase than the lower ranked fauj. [of course it has to be logical]

k prasad · Post by **k prasad** » 09 Aug 2015 11:55

Gagan wrote:India and China will never fight a true war.
There will be either a shadow war in some third country, or a border skirmish.

Now do we have enough deployed along the border to give a solid thappad in such a border skirmish?
Artillery that out guns and outnumbers them hain ji? The answer is no.

IA's fear of heavy tanks is from what the IA did to the Pakistani advance in 65 at Patton Nagar.
While the Paki tank brigade was resting for the night hidden in a sugarcane field, the IA flooded the field with water. The next day the Paki tanks were stuck in the soft mud and were taken out one by one.

The pakistanis have made a lot of water lakes in the areas adjoining the indus river, where they hope to delay and trap the IA's armour.

The problem with the light russian tanks is their sheer lack of armour protection - that's why they are lighter.

Both are not valid concerns here. Weight isnt the primary concern as such.

1) Arjun's ground pressure is markedly lower compared to T-90S. When it come to muddy ground, the T-90 will get bogged down faster.

2) Arjun's fording ability is better than the T90s.

3) Arjun is better powered, and should have the advantage in terms of mobility. The Renk Gearbox is better too - all of which will certainly help.

The only possible cons with the Arjun are its weight and its width - the former more due to existing IA bridging infrastructure, the latter due to possible transportation logistics.

However, the latter might not be a big issue. And the former is something that the Army can easily work on and fix. The tail shouldn't wag the dog. But in this case, the army prefers it that way. Hence, their stance. The argument could be made that Pakistani bridges aren't strong enough. But seriously - do we really think that Pak will leave any of their bridges standing once we break through their lines? Also, once we do break through with the Arjuns, we can always move the T-90s in very quickly and send them through

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 09 Aug 2015 18:31

And, in the time they have talked - for decades - the IA + MoD could have solved every problem there is out there.

Russia nor Germany need to play any role on the topic of a "tank".

Wonder why the IA sat on its hinds for all these years knowing very well that an "Armata" was being hatched in Russia? Why did the IA not start an Indian effort that paralleled the Russian effort? Did 2025-2027 suddenly appear as a problem in 2015? Or did a "FRCV" suddenly appear in 2015?

Now more FUD:

jul, 2015 :: India will depend on foreign tanks like the Russian Armata

Another "expert"

Earlier this month, defense expert Samir Patil from India's Gateway House analytical center said his country was willing to buy the Armata platform or some of its elements for future development of their own tank.

Picklu · Post by **Picklu** » 09 Aug 2015 21:59

ALH also had parts issue in earlier days. It takes some time to sort out the spare parts supply chain particularly for the desi inexperienced MIC (both public and private). A sizable order matters.

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 09 Aug 2015 23:35

It does not matter if its not super duper werld class can-fly, can-shoot missiles-out-the-wazoo, can-shoot-atgms,AAMs,torpedos, lay mines, carry a towed sonar, act as awacs and fire apfsds rounds while being light as a bee and run on water and fly on its own to the front and auto repair itself and need only 1 man to operate. It is our tank and we should bloody well use it and make it better. The IA is not just the user. It is a part of the country's defense and it is hence duty bound to play its part. Its part is not just to pick up a gun and shoot. Only idiots and children think that way. If you want to be relevant and fight tomorrows war as well as today's, you need to plan. You cannot sit in your chair today and say 'eh bring me the supa dupa tank for tomorrow, I don't care where it comes from'. That is what the IA seems to be doing with the INSAS as well as the Arjun. And for god sakes, what the heck is MOD doing instead of bashing heads together and getting things done. Oh I forgot, we spent ten years blacklisting every arms manufacturer and getting a clean image.

If the IA cannot and will not see the reason for the arjun, its derivatives and a future homespun tank, assorted platforms, its time to change a few personnel there.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 10 Aug 2015 02:03

Reading in another thread that somewhere in the 70s Indians made a great artillery gun. Some foreign entity/ties played games and had that effort shut down.

I very seriously feel that is what is happening now.

I suspect the options are oil + Armata or less oil.

Read somewhere, past day or so, India interested in 4000 Armata. Cheap oil along with that too I am betting.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 10 Aug 2015 03:16

It is interesting to sit back an see if India will go down or beat these unpatriotic, corrupt, media persons/procurement mafia/babus/defence personnel who would like her to be a slave to foreign suppliers and remain a banana republic?

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 10 Aug 2015 09:41

The problem is that the IA is 3 decades behind the IN,and the IAF 2 decades behind,in self-reliance thought and action. If the IA is hooked onto a 3-crew MBT,with lesser weight than a 4-crewed tank,then it should've made its requirements v.clear when the Arjun was being developed. The general tendency that ahs prevailed for long is that the desi DPSUs talk more and deliver less.Now that may have been true in the past,but there has been improvements in recent times with some programmes like Akash,etc. It is now the responsibility of the MOD to sift the truth from the chaff and prepare a roadmap for future FMBTs,whatever.

vaibhavkashyap · Post by **vaibhavkashyap** » 10 Aug 2015 11:18

Hi all,

I have been following MBT Arjun and its development for a long time and this thread definitely made me feel feel proud that finally Arjun has managed to beat all the skepticisms associated with itself or for that matter any other platform/system developed by India.

2 cents from my side on this issue:

1) There is lot of propaganda by proponents of different tanks. Commercial reasons are the biggest reason behind such a big propaganda in favor of comparable tanks or in some cases it is patriotism. Especially when a layman searches for 10 best MBTs, he may not be able to find any mention of Arjun anywhere. Even T-90 gets a commendable rankings in a random search ( while Arjun has beaten T-90 in many of the operational parameters recently is not something known to a common people)
2) Mostly for Arjun, people will always criticize the problems in the development and how it has been delayed and various design issues ( Weight, width, power to weight ratio and the end user(IA) being very unhappy being its overall performance.
3) General perception is that it is being forced upon its end users.
4) While I do not agree with the propaganda against Arjun but this is what is being fed to the common people all over.
5) People at forums like bharat-rakshak have different sources of information and they may not swayed by the generic propaganda against Arjun but that may not be the case with common people.
6) When we are pitching for Arjun, I believe that a small propaganda can also be launched targeting common people and that will help to some extent in influencing the policy making towards defence acquisition ( a bigger pressure group- as there will be more people who are more keen on Make in India even though they may not be following defence related issues). A small propaganda can be on the forums like Quora or any forum which google should be able to capture and recommend. Someone having a good credibility over here ( I believe they should be many)can also publish an article in international defence journals about the recent successful performance of Arjun.
7) I also believe that in the present configuration, MBT Arjun may not be the best tank for us- but its success will define any future development of not only future MBTs for IA but the experience gained through its development and deployment will also help the development of other platforms and if we leave Arjun now, it will not only lead to the wastage of whatever money we have invested but also the experience and the capabilities we have developed all along.

Regards,
Vaibhav

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 10 Aug 2015 18:48

During the Cold War,India never had the most sophisticated def. eqpt,either from east or west,though the Russians were very accommodating by giving India improved versions of their eqpt. not generally known.With usage and experience,we refined their designs surprising even the OEMs. These were acquired in large qtys. tx to 'friendship" prices.

The problem today is that replacement and modernization of that eqpt. is long overdue.While Russian wares are no longer available at 'friendship" rates,they're generally cheaper than western options. realising this,we began decades ago trying to develop our own designs.However,as Dr.Pillai in his book on BMos well put it,entirely indigenous efforts come late and by the time they come may be overtaken by newer tech. Hence his espousal for the JV option,BMos being a huge success. Arjun has been an indigenous effort even though much eqpt. is firang in origin and arrived late,by which time we acquired/ordered large qtys. of T-90s. How the concept of the MBT has factored in IA armoured warfare doctrine,tactics,logistics,etc. is unknown to us.

Nevertheless,120+ Mk-1s are in service.If there are teething problems it must be accepted for new eqpt.Even CAG reports on the T-90s showed that they required improvements. The issue now is the Mk-2. The key Q to be asked is whether the MK-2 has made the grade in the latest tests,or met almost all of its required parameters.If it has then the GOI has no alternative but to kick IA ass and order a second batch of Arjuns and also see that the required support,spares issues which the IA is complaining about are rectified. One can understand if the state of the MK-2 was like the IJT,but it isn't and reputed to be even better than the MK-1,incorporating the dozens of improvements that the IA demanded.With a huge number of MBTs required for the IA,there is enough room for several hundreds of Arjuns complementing the T-90s and T-72UGs. Indian indigenous effort must be rewarded.