Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17050
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Rahul M » 08 Oct 2011 04:39

1. also 45 if my calculations are right.

2. Indep armd bde : 3 X armd rgt + 1 X mech inf btn
mech bde (I) : 2 X mech inf btn + 1 X armd rgt

Vinito
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 85
Joined: 16 Jun 2009 18:33

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Vinito » 08 Oct 2011 05:48

I came across this picture in a magazine that in the 80's the Ukraine had looked at the possibility of using a bustle mounted loader in order to accomodate a 120mm Leclerc type gun and one piece ammo. They had even exhibited the concept in many Middle East countries as well. Isnt moving to this type of auto loader beneficial as it will lead to usage of longer range rounds?
Image

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7734
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 08 Oct 2011 08:03

Rudradev wrote: About how many combat vehicles (IFVs, APCs) are in a mechanized infantry battalion attached to an armoured division?

Also, standalone (independent) armoured brigades include a mech.inf. battalion-size formation, and independent mech.inf. brigades include a battalion/regiment sized tank formation... correct?


Mechanized Infantry - 52 AFV/Battalion. Part 2 Rahul da has already answered.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17050
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Rahul M » 08 Oct 2011 09:41

rohit, could I have a break up of the 52 ? the BMP's in soviet use had 45 to a btn IIRC. AFAIK IA uses the same structure.

Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3525
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Rudradev » 08 Oct 2011 10:11

Rahul M, is the figure of 45 AFVs per battalion based on this?

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/100-60.pdf

See page 170 of the pdf (field manual pg 3-4)

Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3525
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Rudradev » 08 Oct 2011 10:17

I've also often wondered. US Mil Field Training manuals see countries as having either an armour and mechanized-based OPFOR, described in FM 100-60

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/100-60.pdf

Or an infantry-based OPFOR (lower tech), described in FM 100-63

http://keekles.org/~bryan/Downloads/TEO ... 0Force.pdf

Which category does IA fit under? I suspect it is somewhere between the two. Probably closer to 100-63 on the average but some corps at the level of 100-60 or better.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7734
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 08 Oct 2011 22:38

Rahul M wrote:rohit, could I have a break up of the 52 ? the BMP's in soviet use had 45 to a btn IIRC. AFAIK IA uses the same structure.


Nope, I'm positive it is 52.

Please see the link here: http://orbat.com/site/cimh/index.html

It is as given in the link - some items might not be there.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7734
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 08 Oct 2011 22:49

@Rudradev saar, we're no where close to the TOE mentioned in the above manuals. Our strike forces are partially mechanized and IMO, a bit off balance. While Strike Corps have Armored Divisions, there are no Mechanized Divisions to keep pace. RAPIDs are partially mechanized.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17050
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Rahul M » 08 Oct 2011 23:02

thx. here's the actual link.
http://orbat.com/site/cimh/miscel/India ... 20TOEs.htm (scroll down)
the number is 58, not 52.

section - 1 BMP
platoon - 3 X section + 1 HQ = 4 BMP
Coy - 3 X platoon + Coy HQ (2 BMP) = 12 + 2 = 14.
Btn - 3 X Rifle Coy + Btn HQ (3 BMP) = 45
which is the number I arrived at, same as soviet army.
@ RD, soviet army field manual from US DOD right ?

the balance 13 BMPs come from support elements like mortars, signal etc. however these are mostly specialized versions and not the basic BMP. so both numbers are correct after a fashion.

do note that unlike infantry battalions, mech inf has 3 instead of 4 companies and even there the size of dismounted troops i.e boots on ground is smaller per unit. 3 out of the 10 in a section are attached to the vehicle. no wonder there are many who oppose wholesale mechanization of infantry.

I do hope IA creates a motorised infantry standard without disturbing the organizational structure of the inf battalion, which can be based on cheaper wheeled APC's with rudimentary protection and firepower. protection from 12.7 mm ammo and provision for bolt-on armour plus a 12.7 mm remotely operable gun.
something like the stryker minus the gold plating.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7734
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 08 Oct 2011 23:26

^^^I was talking about the total number of BMPs in the unit. On the number of BMPs with rifle companies, the number is correct.

rahulm
BRFite
Posts: 1136
Joined: 19 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby rahulm » 09 Oct 2011 09:03

Rahul M's numbers at Btn. level are correct excluding WWR.

Kersi D
BRFite
Posts: 1383
Joined: 20 Sep 2000 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Kersi D » 09 Oct 2011 10:26

Singha wrote:the mystery is why no russian entity has ever got blacklisted. IMI, denel, Stkinetics have all made the honour roll already.


No Russian entity has ever got black listed

Because
Russians are our friends.
They do not bribe our people to get orders.
Russians are our friends.
They supply good on time.
Russians are our friends.
They give as per our requirements.
Russians are our friends.
They do not increase the prices halfway thru a (fixed price) contract.
Russians are our friends.
And Russians have lot of "friends" perhaps in the MoD !!
Russians are our friends.


K

It is this bloody foolish Western AKhans that disturbs the business environment by not supplying goods on time (I think they have given before time)

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17050
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Rahul M » 11 Oct 2011 13:49

Shrinivasan wrote:Does IA have a GSQR for a light tank? Any updates on FICV?

yes RFI for 200 odd light tanks for use in mountains.

D Roy
BRFite
Posts: 1176
Joined: 08 Oct 2009 17:28

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby D Roy » 11 Oct 2011 16:45

No Russian entity has ever got black listed


Nope.

Cooperation Defence from Russia is one of the blacklisted firms.

Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3727
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Vipul » 13 Oct 2011 22:52

India clears $275 mn order for T-72 tank recovery vehicles.

India on Thursday cleared a repeat order worth Rs.1,350 crore ($275 million) for 650 armoured recovery and repair vehicles for its 1,500 T-72 Ajeya main battle tanks.

The Cabinet Committee on Security, which met here under the chairmanship of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, cleared the defence ministry's proposal and approved the orders to be placed with defence public sector undertaking Bharat Earth Movers Limited (BEML), according to government sources.

The defence PSU will build the armoured recovery and repair vehicles through technology transfer from Polish company Bumar, with which it had signed an agreement on this, the sources said.

BEML and Bumar came together in February 2003 when they signed a memorandum of understanding

Virupaksha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 3110
Joined: 28 Jun 2007 06:36

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Virupaksha » 13 Oct 2011 23:05

and Russia has also started using a one-stop sales counter called Rosonoport pretty similar to the US which does as government to government sales.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8100
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby nachiket » 13 Oct 2011 23:49

Virupaksha wrote:and Russia has also started using a one-stop sales counter called Rosonoport pretty similar to the US which does as government to government sales.

It's Rosoboronexport .

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7734
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 13 Oct 2011 23:50

650 ARV for 1,500 T-72 and I'm thinking 1,600 odd T-90?

That makes 1:5 ratio of ARV:MBTs....pretty large, I think.

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Surya » 14 Oct 2011 01:07

Wouldn't it also be for BMPs ??

Plus if we get our SPHs - if ever :((

Shrinivasan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Location: Gateway Arch
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Shrinivasan » 14 Oct 2011 06:53

rohitvats wrote:650 ARV for 1,500 T-72....

this is indeed a large number, may be considering the large fleet of FICVs, existinf T72s and T90s and the BMPIIs.
There is also a move to induct ARVs on the Arjun Chassis... All this should help our Armoured and Mech corps...

Shrinivasan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Location: Gateway Arch
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Shrinivasan » 14 Oct 2011 06:54

Surya wrote:Wouldn't it also be for BMPs ??
Plus if we get our SPHs - if ever :((
hope the day when SDRE SPHs thunder across the Thar comes true...

Nikhil T
BRFite
Posts: 1286
Joined: 09 Nov 2008 06:48
Location: RAW HQ, Lodhi Road

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Nikhil T » 14 Oct 2011 08:11

Vipul wrote:India clears $275 mn order for T-72 tank recovery vehicles.

India on Thursday cleared a repeat order worth Rs.1,350 crore ($275 million) for 650 armoured recovery and repair vehicles for its 1,500 T-72 Ajeya main battle tanks.

The Cabinet Committee on Security, which met here under the chairmanship of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, cleared the defence ministry's proposal and approved the orders to be placed with defence public sector undertaking Bharat Earth Movers Limited (BEML), according to government sources.

The defence PSU will build the armoured recovery and repair vehicles through technology transfer from Polish company Bumar, with which it had signed an agreement on this, the sources said.

BEML and Bumar came together in February 2003 when they signed a memorandum of understanding



One of the few contracts where the repeat order is cheaper?

2004 - 228 ARV for 1000 crore : Rs 4.38 cr/ARV
2011 - 650 ARV for 1350 cr : 2.07 crore.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3263
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby tsarkar » 14 Oct 2011 08:51

Many older T55 based recovery vehicles are being replaced. Very good move, the capabilities will support deployment in trans Himalayan areas where there was no armour deployment until now. India operates close to 3500+ tanks

Shrinivasan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Location: Gateway Arch
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Shrinivasan » 14 Oct 2011 09:52

tsarkar wrote:Many older T55 based recovery vehicles are being replaced. Very good move, the capabilities will support deployment in trans Himalayan areas where there was no armour deployment until now. India operates close to 3500+ tanks

Older T55 based variants could be used as mine plows etc. Hopefully these ARVs come with significant power and not under-rated like our T72s.

Jamal K. Malik
BRFite
Posts: 638
Joined: 27 Mar 2009 23:03

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Jamal K. Malik » 14 Oct 2011 13:34


pralay
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 519
Joined: 24 May 2009 23:07
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby pralay » 27 Oct 2011 09:34

How pixels could make tanks invisible
The military is often the first to get its hands on new technology. From GPS location to mobile communications, the armed forces use the latest innovations to get every tactical advantage they can.

Marc Cieslak looks at new technology that could allow tanks to become invisible to infra-red sensors at first, then the naked eye in a few years' time.

negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13112
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby negi » 27 Oct 2011 09:47

Kersi D wrote:
No Russian entity has ever got black listed

Because
Russians are our friends.

This is actually true for they know us more than Unkil and Oirope and have at a certain level penetrated(for lack of a better word) our defense procurement establishment.

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

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 27 Oct 2011 10:37

lots of ladies from eastern europe work in bollywood now (indian female dance extras are not seen anywhere even 1%, its 100% east european pros or sometimes israeli casuals). the KGB has ready hooks into using some of its own 'assets' in such cachement areas to provide 'services' to those that need some gratification.

chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby chackojoseph » 27 Oct 2011 14:44

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/indian-army-desperately-needs-modern-artillery/196719-61.html

While the Army plans to induct a total of 1600 Russian-origin tanks, a mix of T-90M Bhishma and the older T-90S, the indigenous Arjun MBT has finally proved its mettle. Though substantially heavier than the T-72s and T-90s, the Arjun has proved to be more capable in terms of firepower and armour protection, if certain sources in the Army are to be believed. Till now, around 248 Arjun tanks have been ordered and a regiment of tanks (numbering around 90) are already in service.

There were certain technical issues with the Russian T90 series tanks in terms of their performance in the extreme desert climate but Army HQ sources are saying they have been sorted out.


:)

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7734
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 27 Oct 2011 18:20

^^^Good to see the mainstream media getting hang of real situation rather that x years in making and y crores and sh*t like that

VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2395
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby VinodTK » 23 Nov 2011 01:45

Five armoured regiments to receive 'Standards' by India's President at Patiala on 27 Nov.
CHANDIGARH: Her Excellency Pratibha Devi Singh Patil, the President of India, the Supreme Commander of the Indian Armed Force will be presenting ‘The Standards’ to five Armoured Regiments (5 Armoured Regiment, 6 LANCERS, 70 Armoured Regiment, 73 Armoured Regiment and 74 Armoured Regiment) on 27 November at Patiala under the aegis of Headquarters 1 Armoured Division. This is only the second time in the history of independent India that five armoured regiments are getting standards on one day.

akimalik
BRFite
Posts: 133
Joined: 14 Apr 2010 11:27

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby akimalik » 23 Nov 2011 09:31

chackojoseph wrote:Till now, around 248 Arjun tanks have been ordered and a regiment of tanks (numbering around 90) are already in service.


CJ Sir, any news if this order of 248 may be getting enhanced?

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

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 23 Nov 2011 10:07

i think further order may be placed if/when the Arjun mk2 trials run to completion....they were supposed to have started already in June with some changes and final set of changes read for unit test in June2012.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arjun_%28t ... rjun_Mk-II

so Mk1 production is capped @ 248.....by the time its all done, Mk2 should be production ready in 2014.....and will get produced until FMBT is ready I hope.

pralay
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 519
Joined: 24 May 2009 23:07
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby pralay » 23 Nov 2011 16:01

The recent development of DMR 1700 makes the FMBT picture much clear.
I guess the low weight of FMBT will be achieved by using DMR1700 hull and may be turret.
They must be already planning to use it (if they are not, then FMBT can be 40ton baby using the new alloy :D ).
chako ji can you try to check this with your sources?

Future seems really promising :D
FMBT 8)

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby srai » 24 Nov 2011 03:50

Singha wrote:...

so Mk1 production is capped @ 248.....by the time its all done, Mk2 should be production ready in 2014.....and will get produced until FMBT is ready I hope.


As per Chacko's reports, Arjun Mk1 is only 124 units. The follow-on order was switched to Mk2 version by DRDO as the timing of that order (late 2010/early 2011) meant first delivery could only begin in 30 months (i.e. late 2013); by which time, Mk2 would be ready. This made sense to switch the 124 units follow-on order to the Mk2 version instead of the Mk1.

There is also an intent to order another 124 Arjun Mk2. This brings the total (ordered and intended) to 372 Arjun MBTs [248 Arjun Mk2 and 124 Arjun Mk1].

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36416
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby SaiK » 24 Nov 2011 07:39

http://www.bharatrakshak.com/NEWS/newsr ... wsid=16845
balle balleeeya! but where is the bharat pack? no story about the new 1.5k engine.

interesting third party review done (Israelis )

krishnan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7342
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 12:58
Location: 13° 04' N , 80° 17' E

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby krishnan » 24 Nov 2011 07:52

For years the army criticised the Arjun as too heavy for India’s road and rail infrastructure; now it wants modifications that will make the Arjun heavier. Fitting Explosive Reactive Armour (ERA) plates on the tank has boosted crew protection, but also increases the weight by one and a half tonnes. An equivalent increase comes from added mine ploughs, which churn up the ground ahead of the tank, uprooting explosive mines that would otherwise blow up the tank.


CVRDE chief, Dr P Sivakumar, an award-winning transmission specialist, is jubilant. “Earlier the army was criticising my Arjun [for weighing too much]. But, after seeing its cross-country performance, even compared with a lighter 40-tonne tank like the T-90, they realise that the Arjun moves like a Ferrari. Even at 65-66 tonnes, it will beat any MBT in the desert,” he promises.

Gurneesh
BRFite
Posts: 465
Joined: 14 Feb 2010 21:21
Location: Troposphere

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Gurneesh » 24 Nov 2011 08:00

Pic posted on Broadsword depicting proposed changes...

Image

T90esq bolt on ERA, Remote MMG station, and new sight are clear.

Also blow off panels on the turret behind the ERA tiles (gray area) ?

Could those 4 triangular gray thingies on the top corners of the turret be APS ?

And what about that green thing on the left side of the turret.

All tanks might not carry the plough, so weight increase might not be that noticeable given the improvements in transmission.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36416
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby SaiK » 24 Nov 2011 08:03

@$8M it should beat Ferrari by value as well. In a crash, you can forget with Ferrari. But Arjun will not only protect the jawans inside, but the whole 1billion. /just musing on a jingo note.

nice

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

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 24 Nov 2011 09:43

>> Also blow off panels on the turret behind the ERA tiles (gray area) ?
or could be the APU.

Could those 4 triangular gray thingies on the top corners of the turret be APS ?
>> laser warning receivers

And what about that green thing on the left side of the turret.
>> looks like the smoke grenade launcher is redesigned into a vertical look now...in Mk1 is was a horizontal row of tubes in same place

agreed that ploughs are not always needed...the first assault through prepared minefields might need a good number of lead tanks to mount ploughs probably to cut a safe path for those following....after breaking through might as well shed ploughs and move nimbler. a unarmed arjun, with 2X thick armour and a more comprehensive and wide plough as a IDF style MKI armoured bulldozer might be a useful idea.

afair when abrams tanks moved through baghdad into the presidential palace to take up 'residence' ploughs were fitted to deal with mines but later and prior footage shows most of them had no ploughs in the desert...


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests