Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 19 May 2010 20:37

The new 124 tank order would have come even if the trials had issues.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 19 May 2010 20:38

The FMBT IMHO is another MMRCA in making all hype no substance , I am certain 10 years from now we will be discussing what constitutes FMBT and no further that we are right now in this debate.

For sure if TSP collapses.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 May 2010 20:43

Tank threats from TSP is really not a concern , our overall superiority is quite comprehensive over TSP and even if TSP acquires 500 M1A2 that will not radically change.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 19 May 2010 20:45

Then call it a day and watch a Bollywood movie. Why worry about FMBT?

KrishG · Post by **KrishG** » 19 May 2010 20:48

Austin wrote:
Amongst all that I have read on Mk2 , Ajai shukla to me looks more reliable in that Mk2 is not a radical new tank over Mk1 but an incremental but effective upgrade over Mk1 , although it would be anybodys guess how long will DRDO take to come up with a production ready prototype of Mk2 and how much time Avadi will take to get things right from their end.

I don't remember Ajai Shukla mentioning anything about the changes on Arjun Mk-2. His article on the possibility of Arjun being ordered after it bet T-90 in trials revealed that all Arjun-Mk 1s ordered henceforth would have ERA, ability to fire LAHAT etc.

Austin wrote: I think it will not be easy to change the engine of Arjun without it going through some rigorous trials and delaying the whole process and its really not worth it.

True indeed but wouldn't that send all the money and effort spent on developing an indigenous 1500 hp engine down the drain. IIRC last time we heard of that project DRDO was searching for partners/consultants to help in the development of the engine.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 May 2010 21:00

KrishG wrote:I don't remember Ajai Shukla mentioning anything about the changes on Arjun Mk-2. His article on the possibility of Arjun being ordered after it bet T-90 in trials revealed that all Arjun-Mk 1s ordered henceforth would have ERA, ability to fire LAHAT etc.

Yes seven improvement over Mk1 and they would need to be integrated and tested its not a major change , yet its not something you can add on existing Mk1 production line. That justifies it calling Mk2 IMO.

Austin wrote: True indeed but wouldn't that send all the money and effort spent on developing an indigenous 1500 hp engine down the drain. IIRC last time we heard of that project DRDO was searching for partners/consultants to help in the development of the engine.

Well lets see when that 1500 hp engine from DRDO comes out

Then call it a day and watch a Bollywood movie. Why worry about FMBT?

Sure , but the defence wala , DRDO and import lobby have to justify their own existence with some future project and some major threat to national security so the FMBT takes life.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 19 May 2010 21:08

Then there is the "need" for a light tank - for the NE. Whatever happened to that?

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 19 May 2010 22:13

Austin wrote:Tank threats from TSP is really not a concern , our overall superiority is quite comprehensive over TSP and even if TSP acquires 500 M1A2 that will not radically change.

Please explain why threat from TSPA Armor is not a threat per se? And how 500 M1A2 will not change the situations?

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 19 May 2010 22:29

lol Rohitvats....Why bother?

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 19 May 2010 22:32

deleted

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 19 May 2010 22:34

RoyG wrote:lol Rohitvats....Why bother?

Booster rocket assisted dash for oldie status...

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 19 May 2010 22:40

rohitvats wrote:
RoyG wrote:lol Rohitvats....Why bother?
Booster rocket assisted dash for oldie status...

pralay · Post by **pralay** » 19 May 2010 22:59

when pak bought 300 T-80
we bought 1600 T-90

so
if pak buys 500 M1A2 ( 1 m1A2 ~= 2 T-90 and lets say 1 m1A3 ~= 3 T-90 to be in present )
we will buy 2667 M1A3 or 8001 T-90

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 19 May 2010 23:30

I am not negative about indigenisation.I am a v.strong advocate for it,lookat my posts in the IN thread.However,indigenisation will never be as successful for the IA and IAF if the current dispensation in charge of the DRDO,MOD,and lack of visionary approach by the two respective services remains static.There must be a change in approach that designs,devlops and produces weapon systems soley,in JVs or whatever ON TIME so that the services can use them when they are needed most not decades late!

Look at Arjun,how much of it after 34 years is desi.I am all for more Arjuns but the DRDO seems to have been caught sleeping as far as production rates are concerned and we do need a futuristic tank design from 2020 onwards.At given rates,we will have only 500 Arjuns in 10 years of production,simply not good enough.Perhaps a second Avadi is needed to be set up given the huge backlog of armoured vehicle production or perhaps BEML or soem other PSU or private heavyweight should start production too.We also need °horses for courses°,a light tank like the Russian one mentioned some time ago with a 125mm gun,for high alt. operations amd amphibious ops,which can be easily airlifted and acquired in larger number than a heavy MBT like the T.90 or Arjun.

In the end,the buck stops at the MOD and PMO with AKA and MMS.The amount of devotion they give to this most important ministry will detrmine the future of Indian indigenisation of weapon systems.They xcan do a lot better and faster too.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 20 May 2010 01:39

The imported components can and will come down IF the orders are large enough. It is not that India cannot build them within the country, just that it is not an economical resolution of the problem. the following during my google journey:

Feb, 2009 :: DRDO to make indigenous Arjun tank hi-tech

To my own surprise:

Presently, the local content is around 50 percent. The engine and power train has been imported from Germany.

“We plan to source engines from Cummins India for future orders. If more orders come by, we can reduce the imported content to 25 percent,” Sundaresh added.

My read is that the tide is changing for the better. Some old guards (like the Lt. Gen of DGMF) need to move on. "We are studying" (studying what remains to be seen) seems to be the catch-all phrase to hide behind - and worse, everyone accepts it. The other is that most do not have a vision and are actually afraid to build one. Most others have no capability for a "vision". But over all I am hopeful and actually expect some good things to happen. Again - more later.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 20 May 2010 06:41

NRao wrote:The imported components can and will come down IF the orders are large enough. It is not that India cannot build them within the country, just that it is not an economical resolution of the problem. the following during my google journey:

Feb, 2009 :: DRDO to make indigenous Arjun tank hi-tech

[/quote]

rohitvats,

When asked about the status of the Indian Army’s order for 124 Arjun tanks, CVRDE director S. Sundaresh said: “The order will be completed this year. We are confident of getting more orders, which would enable us to have more local component content in the battle machine.”

I told you so.... Arrun will get more orders. 124 is not the end of the line. There will be modifications in each batch etc etc..

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 20 May 2010 07:27

rohitvats wrote:Please explain why threat from TSPA Armor is not a threat per se? And how 500 M1A2 will not change the situations?

Because of the over whelming air superiority , systems like Smerch, DRDO MBRL ,Attack Choppers , Howitzer all of the above have capability to wipe out armour on the ground.

If you get the air superiority in the theater , armour on the ground are sitting ducks previous Gulf War has shown the same.

karan_mc · Post by **karan_mc** » 20 May 2010 07:33

cummins India website had this information on their website ,if we are going for cummins engine for Arjun then its the best thing that happen to the project i had some experience in working with Tata-cummins

Defence

* Wide range of diesel engines 100 hp to 2700 hp for -
o Tracked Vehicles - Main Battle Tanks, Infantry Combat Vehicles and Variants
o Wheeled Vehicles - Gun Towing, Trucks (Troops Carrying, Variants), Armoured Personal Carriers, etc.
o Ground Support Equipment - Mobile DG sets, Radars, etc.
* Value Packaging - Tailored to suit specific application requirements.
* Technical and Engineering support to Defence R&D organisations and Original Equipment Manufacturers.
* Cummins Defence products have an extensive customer base with the defence forces - Army, Airforce.
* Cummins engines are supported by a dedicated nation-wide service network.
* Re-power options available for equipment with other makes of engines.

Cummins has always been a pioneer in product improvement. Thus specifications are subject to change without prior notice. Illustrations may include optional equipment.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 20 May 2010 07:51

chackojoseph wrote: I told you so.... Arrun will get more orders. 124 is not the end of the line. There will be modifications in each batch etc etc..

That article was from 2009, so the current "fresh" order of 124 is what he was perhaps referring to. I am not too sure that there will be more on the Arjun front beyond these 124. A total of 248 is what I am suggesting. (My read is that Arjuns are great ................ but only in the Rajasthan sector.)

Thomas_S · Post by **Thomas_S** » 20 May 2010 07:58

Philip wrote:
Look at Arjun,how much of it after 34 years is desi.I am all for more Arjuns but the DRDO seems to have been caught sleeping as far as production rates are concerned and we do need a futuristic tank design from 2020 onwards.At given rates,we will have only 500 Arjuns in 10 years of production,simply not good enough.

Whats the point in making arjun 100% desi if the order goes like 124+(after 4-5 years) another124+....etc......
Why this piecemeal order for an indian product which is one of the best in the world and beats the hell out of the tin can even in the mk1 version?
At the same time the tin cans, even with all the problems gets 1600+ orders.....this logic is very difficult to understand....

Production rate can be increased IF there are bulk orders like the 1000+ the t-90 got.Instead we give 124+124 etc and then complain that the production rate is less

...what a logic.....

After 2020 suddenly the current tank designs becomes obsolete...an we need FMBT ONLY and not other tank....another great argument

Actually it should be read as either we want the T-90 or the FMBT

and not Arjun. Why? because its performance comes in between T-90 and FMBT. So T-90 is ok...but not ARJUN even though both are not the mythical FMBT.

Thomas_S · Post by **Thomas_S** » 20 May 2010 08:00

Austin wrote:
rohitvats wrote:Please explain why threat from TSPA Armor is not a threat per se? And how 500 M1A2 will not change the situations?
Because of the over whelming air superiority , systems like Smerch, DRDO MBRL ,Attack Choppers , Howitzer all of the above have capability to wipe out armour on the ground.

If you get the air superiority in the theater , armour on the ground are sitting ducks previous Gulf War has shown the same.

Then i wonder why we needed T-90. Wasnt just upgrading the T-72 enough since anyways the armour on the ground are sitting ducks ?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 20 May 2010 08:00

NRao wrote:The imported components can and will come down IF the orders are large enough. It is not that India cannot build them within the country,

“We plan to source engines from Cummins India for future orders[/b]. If more orders come by, we can reduce the imported content to 25 percent,” Sundaresh added.

What they are doing is procuring the same stuff through Indian subsidary of their foreign counter part or Lic Manf of the same by Indian companies , this will reduce the cost compared to direct import of the same component , but essentially the "indigenous" component will remain the same for the tank.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 20 May 2010 08:03

Thomas_S wrote:Then i wonder why we needed T-90. Wasnt just upgrading the T-72 enough since anyways the armour on the ground are sitting ducks ?

Well if PAF get the same air superiority and has the same kind of over whelming capability that India has over Pak , then no amount of Arjun or T-90 can do any any thing except be sitting ducks.

But the fact remains that PAF has no such capability but we do

Thomas_S · Post by **Thomas_S** » 20 May 2010 08:11

Austin wrote:
Thomas_S wrote:Then i wonder why we needed T-90. Wasnt just upgrading the T-72 enough since anyways the armour on the ground are sitting ducks ?
Well if PAF get the same air superiority and has the same kind of over whelming capability that India has over Pak , then no amount of Arjun or T-90 can do any any thing except be sitting ducks.

But the fact remains that PAF has no such capability but we do

So with the such a possibility i think its better to go for the better protected tank. At least some ducks could be saved....

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 20 May 2010 08:15

Sure so let PA import 500 M1A2 and save some lives from halal

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 20 May 2010 09:09

NRao wrote:
chackojoseph wrote: I told you so.... Arrun will get more orders. 124 is not the end of the line. There will be modifications in each batch etc etc..
That article was from 2009, so the current "fresh" order of 124 is what he was perhaps referring to. I am not too sure that there will be more on the Arjun front beyond these 124. A total of 248 is what I am suggesting. (My read is that Arjuns are great ................ but only in the Rajasthan sector.)

Very true. I did not see the date.

vivek_ahuja · Post by **vivek_ahuja** » 20 May 2010 09:12

Austin wrote:
Thomas_S wrote:Then i wonder why we needed T-90. Wasnt just upgrading the T-72 enough since anyways the armour on the ground are sitting ducks ?
Well if PAF get the same air superiority and has the same kind of over whelming capability that India has over Pak , then no amount of Arjun or T-90 can do any any thing except be sitting ducks.

But the fact remains that PAF has no such capability but we do

You know, operationally speaking, ground operations being affected by air ops has always been overrated as far as FEBA CAS ops are concerned (because attacking tanks and infantry is always more dramatic than attacking rear echelon trucks and transports and supply dumps) and Air Interdiction Ops have always been underrated in the general media. And yet, the latter is often the prime role of the supporting air forces as opposed to what we generally consider the role of attacking jets to be. The elimination of the open logistical train behind any combat ground unit is what attacking air forces do best. Tanks themselves present very tough ground targets to destroy regardless of whether you are using PGMs or not. Especially when there are nasty low-altitude air defenses prowling around (themselves difficult to find) and when things like weather, battlefield mobility and the fog of war are brought into the mix.

Case in point being the case of a certain Iraqi Tank Battalion commander who was quoted as saying after the Gulf War that when he entered Kuwait, he had 39 T-72 tanks. A month of Air attacks on his dug in vehicles and he had with him 32 T-72s remaining just prior to the US breaching operations (that is, the loss rate of tanks to precision guided muinitions and A-10 attacks had reduced his fighting capacity to around 80% over 30 days) and after twenty minutes of combat with US M1 tanks that had breached the Kuwaiti defensive line, he had no tanks left. But the losses to the air power and those to the M1 tanks is not made clear. While the M1s did destroy the majority of the remaining 80% combat ability of the Iraqi armored battalion, they did so within a short time mainly because the opposing T-72s were deployed in a manner that prevented them from taking aerial losses. They were not positioned on the battlefield with any measure of coherence and their morale had gone low with reducing supplies reaching them, destruction of their ammo dumps and so on. But the battlefield status of their tanks after a month of bombs falling was still very high when the M1s came in. But remember also that the period of air attacks was a month prior to the ground operations beginning.

The idea is of course that despite having numerical air superiority over the enemy, just the presence several thousands of enemy vehicles present will mean that the reduction of the enemy's fighting capability by air attacks alone will not be feasible in the time context of the indian sub-continent despite the high-tech brochure stuff on the accuracy of these weapons. If the enemy is dug in, and has at least a modicum of air defenses, the problem becomes even worse. The TSP forces are by no means the same as Iraqi forces when it comes to motivation and professionalism. Fact is, they will fight and fight hard. They will dig in their tanks or move them around a lot under a technologically competent air cover, which alone cannot by neutralized by anything in our arsenals. Just trying to track down the battlefield locations of low altitude missile batteries or individual missile vehicles is a daunting task. By the time they are reduced to an insignificant level, the attacking air forces themselves would have suffered depleting losses on their ability, further increasing the time required to suppress an enemy armored force.

fact is that Indian tank crews will face relatively intact enemy armored forces on the battlefield in the critical first few days of the war regardless of whether the IAF suppresses the PAF within that time frame (again a tall order in and of itself).

You need a well protected tank regardless of air power just based on the analysis of the mathematics of the system.

-Vivek Ahuja

pralay · Post by **pralay** » 20 May 2010 09:25

Austin wrote:
rohitvats wrote:Please explain why threat from TSPA Armor is not a threat per se? And how 500 M1A2 will not change the situations?
Because of the over whelming air superiority , systems like Smerch, DRDO MBRL ,Attack Choppers , Howitzer all of the above have capability to wipe out armour on the ground.

If you get the air superiority in the theater , armour on the ground are sitting ducks previous Gulf War has shown the same.

sar ji why did we waste money in t-90 then ? we could have bought more rambha or more attack hellos.

but to support and carry out ground operations we must have superior armor, else the enemy will exploit the loopholes. Air-support will not be available 24x7. plus to carry out aggressive operations good armor is essential, we can not expect the troopers to always run forward without any armor cover.

A proper mix of unit types will be always effective than large numbers of same unit type.(as in strategy games like AoE or RoN)

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 20 May 2010 10:14

sar ji why did we wasted money in t-90 then ? we could have bought more rambha or more attack hellos.

Deve Gowda asked the same question in 2002.

vic · Post by **vic** » 20 May 2010 12:12

karan_mc wrote:cummins India website had this information on their website ,if we are going for cummins engine for Arjun then its the best thing that happen to the project i had some experience in working with Tata-cummins

Defence

* Wide range of diesel engines 100 hp to 2700 hp for -
o Tracked Vehicles - Main Battle Tanks, Infantry Combat Vehicles and Variants

* Cummins has always been a pioneer in product improvement. Thus specifications are subject to change without prior notice. Illustrations may include optional equipment.

I think that Cummins India is 51% subsi of Cummins USA. So Isn't Cummins India controlled by Cummins USA or is it TATA "controlled" company. Also the IPR of the engines will be owned by TATAs or Cummins USA?

Also I thought the tank engine design programme was being spearheaded by DRDO with the aim to achieve close to Mtu893 specifications? IIRC There has been no reference to Cummins participating in development of Indigenous R&D of tank engine?

Also I think Cummins does not have any tank engine in the class on offer? On the other hand due to future orders cooling down MTU itself may be very interested in transfer of technology. Though adequate orders have to be given to justify setting up of manufactering plant for the tank engine. MTU was displaying 883 tropicalised at Indian def expos which means it is obviously interested in orders! I think that we should go for MTU 883 license manufacture for Arjun Mark2 while co-laborating for series after 893 for FMBT!

Some references!

http://livefist.blogspot.com/2007/11/ho ... egins.html

http://www.drdo.org/tender/desidoc/desi ... r07sp2.pdf

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 20 May 2010 13:27

>> Vivek Ahuja

Hey good to see you back here!!

Kailash · Post by **Kailash** » 20 May 2010 14:07

Mostly a collage of news articles from different sources

124 more Arjuns, but indigenous tank has 58% foreign content

Even though Arjun is said to be indigenous, nearly 58% (by cost) is foreign equipment. With India's push for integration in to the global defence-manufacturing value chain, today, it is not viable/cost-effective and therefore not desirable for India to aim for 100% indigenisation (like the Saras civilian plane). But after 3 decades of development if you only have 42% indigenous content then it is misleading to call it an indigenous platform. Understandably, unless you have large orders foreign vendors will not be interested in transfer of technology and will sell systems at higher prices. While reverse engineering is difficult, the percentage of indigenous content will go up over time and hopefully the public and private sector companies will have a larger participation in the program.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 20 May 2010 14:25

Vivek no body is disputing that you dont need a well protected tank and both the T-90 and Arjun are well protected tanks.

The fact still remains that PA tanks will be vulnerable to attack chopper and sheer fire power of the IA once we manage to establish Air superiority over a given area.

IA has inducted systems like Smerch and Pinaka which can be equipped with anti-tank intelligent sub ammunition which can attack the tanks on the most vulnerable top , the sheer number of attack choppers both heavy and light equipped with F&F Helinag can take care of any tank out there in a reasonable air superiority and air coverage provided by IAF.

Even if the tank is made immobile they can easily be taken out and are quite vulnerable , tanks them self have limited ability to defend them self against air attacks and even if they are accompanied by compliment of mobile AD system the IAF/IA can jam those or degrade it.

Most 155 mm Howitzer are now available with intelligent Anti-Tank round and can take out tanks from long standoff ranges much like a BVR missile would do for an aircraft ditto for MBRL , with the availability of UAV realtime intelligence has made the situational awarness much better then what one could think 20 years back.

PA is in a hopeless situation even if it gets 500 M1A2 considering that we have significant edge on many fronts and its only getting better , needless to say no war is without losses but IA/IAF does have a very significant and comprehensive edge over any PA onslaught.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 20 May 2010 16:01

what rubbish

what overwhelming superiorty are we talking about?

even without China we do not have any overwhelming superiority

karan_mc · Post by **karan_mc** » 20 May 2010 17:31

I think that Cummins India is 51% subsi of Cummins USA. So Isn't Cummins India controlled by Cummins USA or is it TATA "controlled" company. Also the IPR of the engines will be owned by TATAs or Cummins USA?

Also I thought the tank engine design programme was being spearheaded by DRDO with the aim to achieve close to Mtu893 specifications? IIRC There has been no reference to Cummins participating in development of Indigenous R&D of tank engine?

Also I think Cummins does not have any tank engine in the class on offer? On the other hand due to future orders cooling down MTU itself may be very interested in transfer of technology. Though adequate orders have to be given to justify setting up of manufactering plant for the tank engine. MTU was displaying 883 tropicalised at Indian def expos which means it is obviously interested in orders! I think that we should go for MTU 883 license manufacture for Arjun Mark2 while co-laborating for series after 893 for FMBT!

Some references!

http://livefist.blogspot.com/2007/11/ho ... egins.html

http://www.drdo.org/tender/desidoc/desi ... r07sp2.pdf

Cummins India in directly related to its mother company while Tata-cummins is a jv , Cummins India supplies engines to almost all the HCV (Heavy commercial vehicles ) players in India like TATA,AL,AMW,Eicher,Sawaraj Mazda , But Cummins also have a joint venture with Tata motors where they have a separate plant to manufacture this engines for their fast selling 10 ton vehicles mostly SK/SE series of trucks , any one who is associated with mining sector will know what cummins engine stands for ,it like a house hold name in that sector , to tell you a fact I have worked in HCV section of TATA motors and their Sk1613 model is available in two engine make one been TATA 697 and other been Tata cummins (TC ) which is priced Rs 70000 above with both having same specs , but still demand for TC engine models are high specially from Mining sector , first i thought it was typical mentality of Indian customers for foreign goods since Cummins been a American engine and they were ready to shed more money on same power,bhp, torgue ,and rpm rather then having Indian engine , but in due course of time i learned they are Mai Baap of Diesel engine and have lesser breakdowns and better engine life's , so coming back to DRDO article say it will be some what co development and cummins manufactures engines from 180 bhp to 2700bhp engine , i think many of the parts will be sourced from them for Arjun tank to make it cheaper , it is highly unlikely DRDO can built a engine on its own ,since private players in India like Tata and AL who have been building trucks for decades still depend on Foreign engine makers for Heavy trucks (25 ton and above)

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 20 May 2010 19:06

Austin,

Understandable.

However, IF AT ALL, it would mean - for sure - a redesign of the "MBT". With the advancements in technologies - specially communications - the tank would perhaps play a different role than what we are used to in the distant past.

I am struggling to put into words (in great part due to lack of time) why I think the Arjun - in its present form - is a non-starter for the future. Having said that - in a sentence - IMHO of course - it has to do with: funds India has (which IMHO is a great deal more than even 3-4 years ago - not an issue IMHO), technologies (Arjun "upgrades" will simply not suffice for a good solution IMHO) and expeditionary (political - the ChiPak thinking is passe, it is more Chi centric here on out and Indian "national interest" whether we like it or not or even plan for will dictate where we will go to push our weight) needs.

The point I am trying to make is: a) The role of the tank itself could morph into something we are not used AND 2) (as Austin posted) the surrounding "systems" (air crafts, UAVs, etc) have themselves changed so much that for the tank to fit into all this the tank itself MUST change. I simply do not see it being an object that it was 5-10 years ago.

The change I envision is NOT a knock on the Arjun. It is just a matter of time for change. Simple as that.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 20 May 2010 19:30

NRao wrote:
The change I envision is NOT a knock on the Arjun. It is just a matter of time for change. Simple as that.

I agree with the views (though as you said not fully fleshed out) -- I had made a cross post from Ramana, as to how a entire thrust by TSPA in 71 was neutralized by MBRL fire before they could even attack (in Khem Karan sector)

Thats was 71. Those issues have become even more important now.

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 20 May 2010 20:12

Welcome back Ahuja jee. Nice to see you back

Tanaji · Post by **Tanaji** » 20 May 2010 20:25

I am struggling to put into words (in great part due to lack of time) why I think the Arjun - in its present form - is a non-starter for the future. Having said that - in a sentence - IMHO of course - it has to do with: funds India has (which IMHO is a great deal more than even 3-4 years ago - not an issue IMHO), technologies (Arjun "upgrades" will simply not suffice for a good solution IMHO) and expeditionary (political - the ChiPak thinking is passe, it is more Chi centric here on out and Indian "national interest" whether we like it or not or even plan for will dictate where we will go to push our weight) needs.

I agree with the views

Is it me or does anyone find this logic bizarre ? "Arjun is not fit for the future in the current form" "It is time for a change"... which one can at least understand. If this is so, why is the T90 acceptable for the future (which is what we are going to be stuck with for the near future, all 1200 of them)? The T90 lobby raises nary a whimper when 1200 T90s get ordered, but the moment when the Arjun lobby questions why only 2 x 124 Arjuns, we get the above logic.

Add to the fact as per this lobby, the Army is not responsible for *anything* . It apparently does not set the doctrine, does not set the specs and is not responsible for selection either. So why are they complaining that Arjun is not "fit for the future"? You cant have it both ways... duck under the cover of "Army is not responsible for low Arjun orders because we dont do anything" and then say "Arjun is not fit for future" when as per the previous logic they have no say in any case!

vivek_ahuja · Post by **vivek_ahuja** » 20 May 2010 20:49

Austin wrote:The fact still remains that PA tanks will be vulnerable to attack chopper and sheer fire power of the IA once we manage to establish Air superiority over a given area.

Agreed. However, note that IA artillery is a different threat assessment altogether, but which does not change the nature of the mathermatics involved in any way. That is, tanks are still tough targets even for artillery when presented as a unit away from the system. By this I mean that the tanks are tough targets when you ignore the supply system behind and around them. You bombard an area with rockets and more often than not the tanks will come out unscathed, but their supply and support systems can be destroyed. As a whole, however, their long term ability to sustain and survive and initiate combat operations is severely degraded (not destroyed, mind you, since it only requires a new supply system to make up for the losses and rearm the tanks). On the short term, their ability to provide resistance to an IA assualt remains unchanged when considered tank-to-tank.

IA has inducted systems like Smerch and Pinaka which can be equipped with anti-tank intelligent sub ammunition which can attack the tanks on the most vulnerable top,

Most 155 mm Howitzer are now available with intelligent Anti-Tank round and can take out tanks from long standoff ranges much like a BVR missile would do for an aircraft ditto for MBRL , with the availability of UAV realtime intelligence has made the situational awarness much better then what one could think 20 years back.

have they been? I was not aware of that status within the IA.

What is the dispersal area of such sub-munitions when the artillery round deploys overhead as opposed to a typical deployment area of a Battalion worth of tanks and support units and also when they are on the move?

the sheer number of attack choppers both heavy and light equipped with F&F Helinag can take care of any tank out there in a reasonable air superiority and air coverage provided by IAF.

quoting by example, the deployment of much larger concentrations of AH-64s in the first gulf war ahead of advancing M1s is a case study. The vast majority of the Iraqi firepower destroyed on the ground were in fact first found to be relatively intact when encountered by lead elements of the advancing M1s with the odd battalion or company sized unit being destroyed on average by the Apaches. The point being that over such a vast front as found in that war (and much larger in our context) so that by the time period in which the ground elements advanced to contact, the attacking helicopters had very little time in which to destroy front-line combat units. At the same time, however, the apaches wreaked havoc on the supply units deep behind the front-lines while combat was ongoing at the FEBA so that reinforcements could not reach the front. This was of course because of the movement deployment of the approaching supply and reinforcement units was far more amenable to airborne attack than the dug in front-line units maneuvering to contact. As such, in the Indian context, the deployment of attack helicopters in the quantities that we would have would yield much better results when attacking soft-skinned rear-echelon units and should be used for front-line support only when extraordinary circumstances (such as a friendly unit being overrun or intelligence based tank lager found etc) present themselves. We simply must leave the IA Tank Corps to carry its own weight on the FEBA if the overall objective is to win the war and not fight "wars for a ceasefire" as is famous in the Indian sub-continent.

Even if the tank is made immobile they can easily be taken out and are quite vulnerable , tanks them self have limited ability to defend them self against air attacks and even if they are accompanied by compliment of mobile AD system the IAF/IA can jam those or degrade it.

How do you jam IR based missiles or massed unguided AAA, especially when they are scattered across the battlefield and camouflaged within the fog of war? More importantly, why present this as an added job for the IAF when the massive IA Tank Corps is sitting nearby?

-Vivek Ahuja