The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Michael
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 78
Joined: 28 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Michael » 01 Aug 2002 00:32

We're way off the subject of armor now, but with its high operational altitude and 16 Vikhr missiles, the new Mi-17's seem to have been purchased with bunker-busting in mind. Up in the mountains the Mi-17's could provide far more accurate and flexible fire support for an Indian advance than artillery or airstrikes would be capable of. MANPAD's are still a major problem, though.

Rangudu
BRFite
Posts: 1751
Joined: 03 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Rangudu » 01 Aug 2002 00:38

What are the different types of tank rounds in India's arsenal?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50385
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby ramana » 01 Aug 2002 00:51


Rangudu
BRFite
Posts: 1751
Joined: 03 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Rangudu » 01 Aug 2002 01:01

Thanks Ramana!

Arun A
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 62
Joined: 13 Jul 2001 11:31
Location: Fairfax, VA, USA
Contact:

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Arun A » 01 Aug 2002 02:00

http://www.nation.com.pk/daily/today/editor/opi4.htm

the idea is more of interaction and for that matter our major/heavier weapons are not essentially locally produced. Take the case of Al-Khalid which is a Chinese gift and it had taken a good decade and over to put a regiment or so (31 Cav) on the ground. A product which is result of co-production will not sell, howsoever cheap it may be. Our aircraft and some of the missiles are again of Chinese origin and if a buyer is interested he will better negotiate with the original producers and not us.

jrjrao
BRFite
Posts: 861
Joined: 01 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby jrjrao » 04 Aug 2002 18:24

Nitin, your comments on this latest article by Rahul Bedi, which says:

(1)"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."

(2)"Entrenched in India, Soltam is involved in upgrading 180 130 M 46 field guns to 155/39 calibre and 155mm/45 calibre under a contract worth around $4.07 million. But according to the MoD spokesman, the retrofit is facing "quality problems". Senior artillery officers also admitted privately that Soltam's upgrade programme is not only "flawed" but "over-ambitious".

Soltam, however, told Jane's Defence Weekly that any problems were minor and the programme was continuing to the satisfaction of the customer, a claim Army officials discount privately."

Guest

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Guest » 04 Aug 2002 22:51

(1)"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 2) adding to the MBT's overall cost of around Rs.15 crores to Rs.20 crores each."
1) BEML said a few days back that it was tooling up to produce the Arjun Chassis.
2) MoD's annual report says tht Arjun productionization is on.
Dont trust everything thta the press says. To get a good idea of what is happening look out for news from the production agencies etc.

Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Raj Malhotra » 05 Aug 2002 00:56

Arjun is definitely on, I talked personally to DRDO people working on it at Def Expo and they said that they were sticking to schedule of 15 in 2003 and rest in 2004-5.

though my personal speculation is that if germans refuse to sell engines then france may step in.

Guest

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Guest » 05 Aug 2002 01:00

Read the article carefully and you see Rahul Bedi's brand of journalism at work.

subra

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby JCage » 05 Aug 2002 01:14

JRJ,

You might wanna read my hosannas to Rahul bedi in the Launcher & Missile discussion folder -4th page!
That JACKASS is a blot on the reps of nosy defence corrospondents who publish something...new or upto date.
And bugger is biased.He publishes articles with a slant.

Ok my ire apart..
Arjun FCS is *new*.Its a european one.This FCS was validated in the past two years and has cleared all trials possible.ranging from this,that, to,...pot that colonel's topi at xxxx km etc.
The performance was so good the Arjun project Director an ARmy appointee -General-wanted to take the Arjun to Canada to compete in teh CAT gunnery trophy against M1's and Leopards.CAT also
includes the Leo1c1A5 which has one of the best FCS in the world today.His exact words:" All problems have been resolved".This at Defexpo!
Ok for more details there's the thread on Arjun -to be or not to be-started by RaJ m in the Miltech archive.A long read but a FAQ in some ways.
Operational mobility....

Hey IA is getting systems online to meet op mobility.Some 25 or so Sarvatra's Bridge layers by BEML which can handle Arjun's weight for example.The Railway work should also be on track.
All this is carried out without a by-your-leave.
Eg who knows about railways running neck to neck services during kargil without any extra surcharge...or using bogies to make agni mobile.Till it was revealed.So work will be going on,rest assured!

Re Soltam..there might well be some problems,but they'll be resolved.The IA will see to that.

Regards,
Nitin

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby JCage » 05 Aug 2002 01:24

Apart from MOD report 2001 saying ARjun is "on" we have:
DRDO report 2001 confirming Arjun success and LSP on.
OFB report 2001 saying preparations for production in progress and facilities being quickly put in place.
News sources dating from 2000 onwards detailing successful armor trials,successful testing of a squadron's worth in desert conditions,new FCS and success of the same.Army aiding in productionising ammo in 1999.
The Army project director confirming that "all problems are over".
George Fernandes **parliamentary** statements confirming 124 ARjuns are being produced .
And lots more...

All this vs a dork journo with an agenda.

Regards,
Nitin

jrjrao
BRFite
Posts: 861
Joined: 01 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby jrjrao » 05 Aug 2002 02:06

Nitin, thanks. I guess we just gotta expect such stories to pop up periodically until such time as Arjun begins churning in the sands of Thar.

And with the three-way competition heating up for the 155mm contract (trials in Rajasthan going on right about now), I am going to be a bit skeptical about the unattributed attacks on the Soltam upgrade job.

But meanwhile, I do expect Brainless Clueless to pick up and regurgitate the Bedi report in some Paki paper real soon!

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby JCage » 05 Aug 2002 02:20

JRJ,

Exactly!Till we see the Arjuns zooming about,every journo worth his salt(or dung) will see fit to take pot shots.Why bother with research etc?

Oh BC will definitely regurgitate this !Best part is that desi hacks are repuking 70% indian tank fleet isnt operational ..started by loverboy BC two yrs back.Musta taken them so long to realise that he's of their ilk.

But BC is sulking nowadays. :(
Sukhoi MKI deliveries musta hurt him!After all he wrote about Indooo incompetence and ruuuussskiie lethargy.And nook wars are bad for fatsos Mr and Mrs BC .

member_4537
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 2
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 05:32

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby member_4537 » 05 Aug 2002 02:47

Hi Guys

Can any of "informed" guys can make an objective and honest analysis of war with TSP sometime this winter.

My goals would be
1. Creation of Sindhudesh, Pashtoland, liberation of Kashmir,
2. Liberate our brethren in Pakistan by a Total elimination of terrorist army of TSP, wipe out their terror factories, nuclear production, ..all wmd.
3. Access to central asian states via Afghanistan for trade, energy etc.

Many would say I am dreaming, however one has to imagine before creating. Secondly, it is possible with political and military will.

Ashutosh
BRFite
Posts: 150
Joined: 04 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Ashutosh » 05 Aug 2002 03:39

Originally posted by saam:
Hi Guys

Can any of "informed" guys can make an objective and honest analysis of war with TSP sometime this winter.

My goals would be
1. Creation of Sindhudesh, Pashtoland, liberation of Kashmir,
2. Liberate our brethren in Pakistan by a Total elimination of terrorist army of TSP, wipe out their terror factories, nuclear production, ..all wmd.
3. Access to central asian states via Afghanistan for trade, energy etc.

Many would say I am dreaming, however one has to imagine before creating. Secondly, it is possible with political and military will.
Saam:
1) Wrong thread.
2) Wrong thread the second time.
3) We have no brethren anywhere, don't shove words in other peoples' mouths.
4) To me it looks like you are a TSPian, the language you've used (like "liberation of Kashmir") sorta rings a bell from my past visits to the "other" forum.

Admins, feel free to delete my post later on.

Rudra
BRFite
Posts: 599
Joined: 28 May 2001 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Rudra » 05 Aug 2002 04:13

every new system including upgrades will have
teething troubles esp in harsh indian conditions.
50C desert, cold, rainy.

so too the Soltam or any project will have initial
phase of tinkering and fixing.

I am sure the Klub, Brahmos, Tank-Ex and co will
all provide fodder for the complaint mill in the
years to come.

Rangudu
BRFite
Posts: 1751
Joined: 03 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Rangudu » 05 Aug 2002 05:38

nitin,

Do you have any answers for:

1. Is T-72M1 the only combat Tank variant of the T-72 in India's tank inventory?

2. Do we have any plans of upgarding some T-72s with Kontact-5 ERA?

3. Does anyone have any links on the Karna project?

Thanks :)

Rangudu
BRFite
Posts: 1751
Joined: 03 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Rangudu » 05 Aug 2002 05:51

As far as Arjuns are concerned, I think DRDO should take the 1st production tank to a weapons show abroad and invite BC, Bedi, Sawhney and a few others for a joyride...

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby NRao » 05 Aug 2002 09:58

On a side note as a FYI:

Defense-Update: Merkava Mk4 Detailed

jrjrao
BRFite
Posts: 861
Joined: 01 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby jrjrao » 05 Aug 2002 11:04

An old blurb about Soltam's previous experience with upgrading M-46 130mm guns to 155mm.

This is a Russian made M-46 130mm field gun, re-barreled and re-breeched for a 155mm NATO howitzer. Israel had captured hundreds of M-46 field guns over the years, and instead of scrapping them, made them able to use standard 155mm ordinance. A defect in the gun, where the weapon can be fired without the breech being totally closed and locked, was corrected. A pneumatic rammer, driven by an air compressor, was added to ease loading. Finally, a muzzle brake is added that clears the crew of blast and overpressure, something lacking on the original M-46 gun.
http://www.pmulcahy.com/israeli_towed_guns.html

harishn
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 27
Joined: 05 Jul 2002 11:31
Location: Bombay

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby harishn » 05 Aug 2002 11:17

Defense-Update: Merkava Mk4 Detailed ..........only one word .... WOW .
Arjun is good, Karan may be better..........but i want Merkava Mk4 ! This is the next Gen Tank. Time to dump Russian armour and set up join production of Merkava Mk4. Better late than never. Just make sure u find an alternate source for engine :D . One more point for all those super patriots.....dont preach to me about the merits of Arjun and Indigenous tanks !!! ..join production...and join development. Israeli desert condition is lot more similar to Indian conditions than the russian tundra. Only decent and non abusive posts welcome :roll:

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby JCage » 05 Aug 2002 11:50

Originally posted by Rangudu:
nitin,

Do you have any answers for:

1. Is T-72M1 the only combat Tank variant of the T-72 in India's tank inventory?

2. Do we have any plans of upgarding some T-72s with Kontact-5 ERA?

3. Does anyone have any links on the Karna project?

Thanks :)
1.yES.For now.

2.AFAIK,no.The "official" Combat Improved Ajeya T-72M1 incorporates ERA developed by HEMRL and productionised by OFB.

3.KArna..self plug here. :)

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/MONITOR/ISSUE4-5/nitin.html

Regards,
Nitin

Muns
BRFite
Posts: 269
Joined: 02 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Muns » 05 Aug 2002 12:38

Googled up this sometime back. Seems to have confused his Tank-ex and Karna. I think its in czech...i tried babel fish for russian translation no luck.....maybe someone can get something new from it?

http://www.mainbattletanks.czweb.org/

Rangudu
BRFite
Posts: 1751
Joined: 03 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Rangudu » 05 Aug 2002 18:52

Nitin,

Thanks!

Is Tank-Ex the same as Karna?

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby NRao » 06 Aug 2002 00:57

The latest India Today has an article on Indo-Israeli coop in defence.

Amonmg the usual Phalcon, barak, etc is a armour piercing shell made of depleted uranaium for the T-72 and T-90.

Umrao
BRFite
Posts: 547
Joined: 30 May 2001 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Umrao » 06 Aug 2002 01:04

yes It is in Czech

Rudra
BRFite
Posts: 599
Joined: 28 May 2001 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Rudra » 06 Aug 2002 01:04

er,nathan...could you let us know whats the weight
of this mk4. over at acig someone was saying 100tons. with a 1500hp engine. compare to arjun
at 56t. plus it has a higher profile.

its a slow moving rhino meant for defensive and
seige ops, not a desert raiding competition. its
ok for israel, but nobody else has gone for that
concept as israeli needs are different. they cannot defend in depth. they have to stand and
fight and need a portable fortress, mobility and
logistics are second thoughts.

a quick search shows Mk3 had a 1200hp engine
and 69 tons weight. the Mk4 has 1500hp engine
but its weight could have gone up.

its very poor hp-per-tonne, massive ammo loadout
(50 120mm rounds, 8000rds plus MG), immense
layers of armour and turret protection is indicative
of its unique designed role.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby NRao » 06 Aug 2002 05:52

RS,

It does not seem to be THAT bad:
Merkava Mk 1 - 4 Comparison

Also of interest:
Vectop Tank Sight System
Merkava Based ARV Designed for Merkava Mk4
GD883 Diesel Power Pack

However, I am not sure if India at THIS point in time can take advantage of any of the feature/s. I would imagine that some of them may come in handy in the future.

Let us at least field A good/acceptable/whatever tank first, we can then think about different versions and upgrades, etc.

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby JCage » 06 Aug 2002 09:41

Rangudu---Karna=Tankex.
Being a Mahabharata lover all these years i do admit that my favourite character was Karna.As an archer,he could make Arjun eat grass. :)
Anyway hope both bro's grace the IA this time around!

Originally posted by Niranjan Rao:
The latest India Today has an article on Indo-Israeli coop in defence.

Amonmg the usual Phalcon, barak, etc is a armour piercing shell made of depleted uranaium for the T-72 and T-90.
Israel afaik doesnt make DU shells.However we did buy a humongous number of 125mm APFSDS from them in view of quick procurement due to Op Vijay exigencies.These being equal in performance to Indian DRDO/OFB T2 A APFSDS.

Regards,
Nitin

Muns
BRFite
Posts: 269
Joined: 02 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Muns » 06 Aug 2002 12:47

From what i remember Karna only lost his invincibility after cutting out his armor and giving it away......nothing in reference to tank ex of course.... ;)

Harry Van
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 73
Joined: 14 Jun 2002 11:31
Location: Bangalore

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Harry Van » 06 Aug 2002 13:41

And since the Karan is lighter than the Arjun by around 10 tons , it won't get stuck in the mud like last time around !!!

Harry Van
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 73
Joined: 14 Jun 2002 11:31
Location: Bangalore

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Harry Van » 06 Aug 2002 13:54

Originally posted by Rudra Singh :

its a slow moving rhino meant for defensive and
seige ops, not a desert raiding competition. its
ok for israel, but nobody else has gone for that
concept as israeli needs are different. they cannot defend in depth. they have to stand and
fight and need a portable fortress, mobility and
logistics are second thoughts.

a quick search shows Mk3 had a 1200hp engine
and 69 tons weight. the Mk4 has 1500hp engine
but its weight could have gone up.

its very poor hp-per-tonne, massive ammo loadout
(50 120mm rounds, 8000rds plus MG), immense
layers of armour and turret protection is indicative
of its unique designed role.


A better thing to do would be to build a concrete underground bunker and place a turret mechanism on top , with heavy armour.In other words an immobile dug-in tank , with only the turret(heavily armoured ) and the gun sticking out.

The advantage is you can pack a lot of ammunition inside such a fortification.Around 100 rounds of different types , both anti-personnel and anti-tank.Also it can have a very long gun barrel 1.5 to 2.0 times what a moblie tank carries which will enhance accuracy.And also a higher calibre say 205mm to 255mm , which will give a longer range and also heavier payload capability in case of HEAT and/or HESH.Also since ist immobile we can build a gun and a gun loading system which enables us to fire longer ammunition.Which means we can fire APFSDS with L:D ratio of even 1:50 or possible 1:100 or anything in-between.It could have its own sensors or better still a centralized sensor can serve many such fortificatiosn.Advantage is if they are knocked out in a sustained battle , the only loss is gun and metal armour , not really much.A passive IR sensor at a remote location can remain undetected and serve other fortifications.

It goes without saying that these need to be defended by MANPADS to keep HELOS away.If we can even give a good concrete roof above the turret and gun it could even withstand direct shelling.

But since such pre-built systems can be detected early on even during peace time and targeted with sustained pressure during war befoer sending in the tanks , a better thing to do would be to build a moblie tank to such specifiactions mentioned above , with light hull armour and heavy turret armour and then quickly slip them inside a crater dug up after the invasion has begun.Or we can go for a combination of both immobile and mobile versions.

harishn
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 27
Joined: 05 Jul 2002 11:31
Location: Bombay

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby harishn » 06 Aug 2002 14:08

----------------------------------------------------------
er,nathan...could you let us know whats the weight
of this mk4. over at acig someone was saying 100tons. with a 1500hp engine. compare to arjun
at 56t.. plus it has a higher profile.
---------------------------------------------------------

Link : http://www.defense-update.com/directory/merkava-comparison.htm

This clearly shows the weight as 65T for Mk4. How can higher profile matter if no other tank can take it down!! please read about its ability to coordinate attack with helo and ground troops.

-----------------------------------------------------------
its a slow moving rhino meant for defensive and
seige ops, not a desert raiding competition. its
ok for israel, but nobody else has gone for that
concept as israeli needs are different. they cannot defend in depth. they have to stand and
fight and need a portable fortress, mobility and
logistics are second thoughts.
-------------------------------------------------------------

Before going Nuclear the Indian strategy was to cut of pakistan in two. now that is not the strategy ,so how important is speed? In war scenario i would expect the tank to advance slow and steady, rather than rush forward like the charge of the light brigade, with adequate air coverage. besides its speed is 55km/hr.

What does 'they cannot defend in depth' mean?

Tanks are supposed to be mobile fortress!

Logistics can be solved by having the Tank based in Rajastan or gujarat, instead of transporting them from elsewhere. Earlier we had no massive Air superiority, now we do(wrt TSP, of course). Besides basing the armour in Rajastan will provide good flow of capital to the state which is suffering from its 5th year of drought.

Harry Van
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 73
Joined: 14 Jun 2002 11:31
Location: Bangalore

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Harry Van » 06 Aug 2002 14:31

What does 'they cannot defend in depth' mean?

It means they don't have much of territory.No room for maneouvering(I have to maneouver with the spelling of this word).They can't get back and hit back or any such thing.Tel Aviv is just 70 km from Syrian border.So you have to fight and defend every inch of your territory.

Before going Nuclear the Indian strategy was to cut of pakistan in two. now that is not the strategy ,so how important is speed? In war scenario i would expect the tank to advance slow and steady, rather than rush forward like the charge of the light brigade, with adequate air coverage. besides its speed is 55km/hr.

It is stunning to see the army reject tanks on the basis that they are heavy.A tank is supposed to be heavy ! thats what makes it a tank ! Primary thing is it has armour and so cannot be stopped by machine gun fire or small arms or grenades.FCS and mobility are secondary things.If the army feels the heaviness is slowing down the tank , then they should reject it as under-powered or low-HP engine.they cannot say its heavy !!!

Best thing would be to give the IA a maruti car fitted with Thales thermal imager , FCS and GCS.I guess they will be glad with such a thing !!!

harishn
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 27
Joined: 05 Jul 2002 11:31
Location: Bombay

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby harishn » 06 Aug 2002 16:03

I think weight might be a criteria when moving on sand. maybe that can be compensated by wider track belts. If the issue is to cross wet soggy ground, well i suggest dont invade Bangladesh :p . The other problem can be destroying roads which heavy tanks use. But Tanks are used only when we r at war or close to war, and then bad roads will be the least of our worries.

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5038
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Surya » 06 Aug 2002 17:49

The deserts of the GUlf are different from the THar. The desert in Israel/Gulf is more hard while in Thar it is extremely soft. So any comparisons need to keep that in mind

Rudra
BRFite
Posts: 599
Joined: 28 May 2001 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Rudra » 06 Aug 2002 18:51

Russia did this dig-tank-into-crater thing to
stand a chance against better armoured panthers,
tigers and Mk4s during initial stage of battle.

NATO too had presurveyed locations where challys,
Leos and M1s could drop hull down against invading
T-series. When it got too close, it was back to
next prepared line with another element at that
position covering the withdrawal....this way they
could attrit the T-series at long ranges in
relative safety.

India has to manage about 300km from jump-off points in bikaner , barmer region to the Indus.

Theres a old book called "Chieftain" about the
adventures of a Chieftain(brit army) tank crew
during WWII. eventually they stop the invasion in
west germany but then it turnes nuclear and they
perish.

john hacketts WWIII also has good stuff though I
forget the exact details. iirc it had the concept
of "stay-behind" SF hiding in forests with ATVs
and light 4x4s to get behind the first echelon.
These would target the huge logistics chain,
locate leadership camps (corps,div HQs) and either
raid themselves or call in airstrikes. They would
move only at night and co-ordinate with elements
of german home guard who were expected to defend
their hometowns. the regular wehrmacht would
withdraw slowly with rest of NATO as per plan to
save their vital armour.

saint
BRFite
Posts: 109
Joined: 19 Jun 2002 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby saint » 07 Aug 2002 22:33

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

Why is this consistent policy of hating all that is indigenous... even before it is waiting cabinet clearing on the bhim project, now IA decides to change the design/platform!????

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

Looks like, its the IA that is bashing ARJUN and not DDM or any external force. "They" are all within the defence organization and I see a lot of value in getting commissions [legalized corruption value {LCV}] for these deals. "they" have become "inside job-ers" - kangrezized and bajpayied forces.!!! :( so what if they have raised the price.. if its good get it, till everything is indigenous!!!

And read this about imported ones, that has high LCV valued deals :

Entrenched in India, Soltam is involved in upgrading 180 130 M 46 field guns to 155/39 calibre and 155mm/45 calibre under a contract worth around $4.07 million. But according to the MoD spokesman, the retrofit is facing "quality problems". Senior artillery officers also admitted privately that Soltam's upgrade programme is not only "flawed" but "over-ambitious".

Hard to swallow words:

The Army's presentation, backed by "persuasive" senior officers, now advisers to Denel ..... "Had the scheme gone through, India would have been a tied customer and South Africa could have charged astronomical sums for the two weapon systems,"
...
And, once the Bharatiya Janata Party-led coalition assumed office in 1998, they developed stronger intelligence, security and, reportedly, even nuclear links.
...


web page

Michael
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 78
Joined: 28 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Michael » 08 Aug 2002 07:30

Take it from someone with his own fair share of personal experience in Army mechanized operations: Mobility is Overrated.

Firepower and protection matter more. In practice it matters litte if your tank is 15mph faster than the other guy's tank. It's not a race, it's combat. Mostly creeping around and being tactical - even when you're on the offense. Not a lot of high-speed dashes. Remember that tanks always work in tandem with a lot of other AFV's and various vehicles, many of which are slow. Often the tanks are supporting dismounted infantry, and you don't get any slower than that.

I'll take a dog-slow tank with heavy armor and massive firepower over a T-series anyday.

I think all the Merkavas are brilliant and also very practical designs. This should be no surprise; if anybody knows how to build a tank for combat, it's the Isrealis.

Rudra
BRFite
Posts: 599
Joined: 28 May 2001 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Rudra » 08 Aug 2002 07:37

Mike, there are both issues of larger# of cheaper
units needed to cover large front and stuff like
fuel consumption.


Return to “Military Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest