Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 23518
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby SSridhar » 13 May 2010 16:22

Old thread locked. Please post away here.
Last page of previous thread

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23314
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Austin » 13 May 2010 17:35

Wouldnt Arjun Mark 2 will be the one that the IA will be inducting post this trials with 7 changes that Ajai Shukla has mentioned , probably the GOI sanction is to fund those changes.

Samay
BRFite
Posts: 1144
Joined: 30 Mar 2009 02:35
Location: India

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Samay » 13 May 2010 19:17

SSridhar wrote:Old thread locked. Please post away here.
Last page of previous thread

yes,this would be a new beginning for DRDO and Arjun tank
Jai ho !!
http://livefist.blogspot.com/2010/05/finally-govt-orders-full-revamp-of-drdo.html

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

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby chackojoseph » 13 May 2010 19:31

Samay wrote:yes,this would be a new beginning for DRDO and Arjun tank
Jai ho !!


I told you in last thread that some very competent people are looking into this aspect. Read the part when someone came with a comment with T-90 commander that gun failed, broke down etc.

Pankaj C
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 8
Joined: 12 May 2010 14:49

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Pankaj C » 13 May 2010 19:37

There was a talk arlier of making the transmission by ourselves. We have some private manufacturers within India who make 40 T class trucks. Why cant these manufacturers be roped in to make a transmission for Arjun. :-? I agree, only the class of weight that these transmissions handle is common (when I say common, I mean heavy) and for all I know the tank transmisison may/would be a different ballgame altogether. But, these people at least have some experience with designing/making heavy transmissions. That is the only thing I see that can be leveraged here. :idea:

Just looking for an answer on how feasable does this sound. So, dont start pounding on me. :mrgreen:

Samay
BRFite
Posts: 1144
Joined: 30 Mar 2009 02:35
Location: India

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Samay » 13 May 2010 20:08

chackojoseph wrote:I told you in last thread that some very competent people are looking into this aspect. Read the part when someone came with a comment with T-90 commander that gun failed, broke down etc.

when? I havent anything about arjun's main gun or mk2
Last edited by Samay on 13 May 2010 20:08, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Surya » 13 May 2010 20:08

I love the arrogance of a reporter in somehow thinking he was responsible for this revamp :eek:

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

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby chackojoseph » 13 May 2010 20:24

Surya wrote:I love the arrogance of a reporter in somehow thinking he was responsible for this revamp :eek:


Who?

Added later...

If its me, I can simply fall on my knees and beg your pardon for the arrogance. 8)

Samay wrote:when? I havent anything about arjun's main gun or mk2


I did not get your point.

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

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Surya » 13 May 2010 22:05

chacko - relax

I meant aroor


It was our 8-part special front-page series, titled Delayed Research Derailed Organisation in late 2006 which set the ball rolling.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7619
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 13 May 2010 22:24

From The Hindu (link posted by SSridhar in last page of previous thread):

With Arjun’s performance in the comparative trials with Russian T-90 tanks coming in for praise and it proving itself to be a superior tank, the decision to go in for a second generation Arjun Mk-II tanks is only an indication that the Army would be inducting more of these tanks in the future.

Already, the Army has placed orders for 124 Arjun tanks of which about 50 tanks were finally handed over to it last year to form a regiment.


So, the better tank needs to have a MK-II while the inferior one is THE MBT of Indian Army? And Arjun will then need to go through another circus to prove it's worth and smallest of issues will be blown out of proportion?....This compared to when T-90 engine seized during trials and not a peep was heard from anyone....

Guess, business as usual at the DGMF Office...Hah! we sent those four-eyed geeks at DODO on another leather hunt.....Koi Hai? where is the Gin with Lime Cordial I had ordered? Damn..gets really hot in those T-90S...ADC, what happened to the "Environment Control System" RFP repsonse from our Russian brothers? Israeli one is better you say? Koi nahin..unko bhi bula lo....every one should have fair chance.....

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

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby chackojoseph » 13 May 2010 22:34

Surya wrote:chacko - relax

I meant aroor


It was our 8-part special front-page series, titled Delayed Research Derailed Organisation in late 2006 which set the ball rolling.


Ok, Thanks. It sounded same as one of the people who mailed me once. For a moment I thought it was you. Regret about it.

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

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby chackojoseph » 13 May 2010 22:38

rohitvats wrote:From The Hindu (link posted by SSridhar in last page of previous thread):

With Arjun’s performance in the comparative trials with Russian T-90 tanks coming in for praise and it proving itself to be a superior tank, the decision to go in for a second generation Arjun Mk-II tanks is only an indication that the Army would be inducting more of these tanks in the future.

Already, the Army has placed orders for 124 Arjun tanks of which about 50 tanks were finally handed over to it last year to form a regiment.


So, the better tank needs to have a MK-II while the inferior one is THE MBT of Indian Army? And Arjun will then need to go through another circus to prove it's worth and smallest of issues will be blown out of proportion?....This compared to when T-90 engine seized during trials and not a peep was heard from anyone....

Guess, business as usual at the DGMF Office...Hah! we sent those four-eyed geeks at DODO on another leather hunt.....Koi Hai? where is the Gin with Lime Cordial I had ordered? Damn..gets really hot in those T-90S...ADC, what happened to the "Environment Control System" RFP repsonse from our Russian brothers? Israeli one is better you say? Koi nahin..unko bhi bula lo....every one should have fair chance.....


You know, its not exactly like that. The thing is some stuff is flawed. For example, the prospective candidate for a post tries to mimic his boss to get into good books. It works both ways, bad and good. Somewhere the train breaks and a new direction starts.

IMHO, the new trend will have some kind of neutrality.

Raman
BRFite
Posts: 265
Joined: 06 Mar 2001 12:31
Location: Niyar kampootar onlee

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Raman » 13 May 2010 23:27

Has Arjun Mk II been fully spec'd out, or are things still in the air?

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3478
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Cain Marko » 13 May 2010 23:46

rohitvats wrote:So, the better tank needs to have a MK-II while the inferior one is THE MBT of Indian Army? And Arjun will then need to go through another circus to prove it's worth and smallest of issues will be blown out of proportion?....This compared to when T-90 engine seized during trials and not a peep was heard from anyone....

:evil: Some upstanding babu/neta has to force the IA to order a good 500 more so as to keep the lines running until MkII is ready.


CM.

Vivek K
BRFite
Posts: 1964
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Vivek K » 13 May 2010 23:53

I think that the T-90 acquisition is one of the biggest scams in IA's history and that is why there is such a dogged fight to keep the Arjun out. The IA has not delivered a verdict on the comparative trials even after the passage of so much time. Someone should see that this is spoiling the fair name of IA and also the nation.

Sab chalta hai, I guess. Mera Bharat Mahaan!!!

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7619
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 13 May 2010 23:55

Cain Marko wrote:
rohitvats wrote:So, the better tank needs to have a MK-II while the inferior one is THE MBT of Indian Army? And Arjun will then need to go through another circus to prove it's worth and smallest of issues will be blown out of proportion?....This compared to when T-90 engine seized during trials and not a peep was heard from anyone....

:evil: Some upstanding babu/neta has to force the IA to order a good 500 more so as to keep the lines running until MkII is ready.


CM.


How dare you make such an intelligent and otherwise, obvious reccomendation? ADC, get the MS to post him to Siachen..will do his hot brain some good....

nirav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2021
Joined: 31 Aug 2004 00:22
Location: Mumbai

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby nirav » 14 May 2010 02:16

Vivek K wrote:I think that the T-90 acquisition is one of the biggest scams in IA's history and that is why there is such a dogged fight to keep the Arjun out. The IA has not delivered a verdict on the comparative trials even after the passage of so much time. Someone should see that this is spoiling the fair name of IA and also the nation.

Sab chalta hai, I guess. Mera Bharat Mahaan!!!



:thinking aloud:

Looking at the sad state of affairs regarding Arjun induction, i wonder why cant the powers that be,play an artillery type scuttle on the Natasha Tank and its "acquisition" process !

Would be interesting to see Mr. 'Spotless white & clean' Lungi's reaction to it ...

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7236
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Prasad » 14 May 2010 04:02

scuttling acquisition processes is done to bring in more money. not to upset the existing gravy train. How does the arjun bring in the gravy?

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

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby chackojoseph » 14 May 2010 09:56

Vivek K wrote:I think that the T-90 acquisition is one of the biggest scams in IA's history and that is why there is such a dogged fight to keep the Arjun out. The IA has not delivered a verdict on the comparative trials even after the passage of so much time. Someone should see that this is spoiling the fair name of IA and also the nation.

Sab chalta hai, I guess. Mera Bharat Mahaan!!!


I am not going to bat for anyone. There is different aspects.

One is that they actually wanted a workable tank by their own definitions.

The other is that the the scandal could be "bad decision" and then hiding a bad decision.

Equipment decision are terribly big decisions. It takes a lot of time to time of its deployment and related stuff.

I would go slow on other aspects.

The reason I am speaking a moderate tongue this time and not my usual acid tongue for army. The objective was limited to fair trail of Arjun Tank. Which has been achieved by various factors working in tandem. Since the objective has been achieved, we have to let users and the policy makers to figure out if they are still non in favor of the tank or not. We also do not want an explicit statement form army or policy makers as long as they have taken a decision with all needed data.

Baring the grievance we have had with Armour section of army for its hostility to Indian products, I still think the Army is very competent is making an informed choice.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12530
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Sanku » 14 May 2010 10:07

Sorry boys, Arjun having a upgrade path discussion is GOOD thing and not a bad thing -- it is not some evil conspiracy to scuttle the tank. No one has said that Arjun Mk I orders will not be made till Arjun Mk II comes along.

The time to talk about Arjun Mk II is when Arjun is being made currently. GoI is NOT going to leave a 50 tank line in Avadi idle (even if Arjun was a poor tank) -- it would still get made and inducted.

I think the next order in 2011 time frame coincides neatly with completion of the first order of 124. The real deal that we jingos are interested in is how can the number be bumped up over 50 a year.

That is where we should be looking at -- I think we can safely assume a 50 Arjun a year order will happen -- minimum.

(This is what I have been saying for some 4 years now BTW -- that once the first 124 are made and tested orders WILL come)

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby vina » 14 May 2010 10:29

Baring the grievance we have had with Armour section of army for its hostility to Indian products, I still think the Army is very competent is making an informed choice


Sorry. I have always maintained that the Indian Army is like Sigmund Freud's Woman .. "After all these years of study, I still haven't been able to figure out what is it that a woman wants!" . Same with the Indian Army. It really doesn't know what it wants. Well, no one ever accused them of being intelligent anyways.

Among the three services, you know the well known stereotype.. The Airforce has the brains, the navy the smarts and brains and the Army all brawn and no brains. Just hang around with a bunch of Navy and Airforce types with a mug of beer and just wait until the conversation turns to the Army and the jokes that follow. :mrgreen: :mrgreen: .

Note this is true any country, not just India . Ask a US Marine in a bar what he think of the US Army .. :mrgreen: .. Hmm. One wonders how did somone with brains like Suderji end up in the Army and rise to become the Chief.

Heck even the NCC types (it was Air Force at the Madrassa and Navy in high school) used to rib the Army types ..

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

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby chackojoseph » 14 May 2010 10:47

vina wrote:
Baring the grievance we have had with Armour section of army for its hostility to Indian products, I still think the Army is very competent is making an informed choice


Sorry. I have always maintained that the Indian Army is like Sigmund Freud's Woman .. "After all these years of study, I still haven't been able to figure out what is it that a woman wants!" . Same with the Indian Army. It really doesn't know what it wants. Well, no one ever accused them of being intelligent anyways.

Among the three services,.....
Heck even the NCC types (it was Air Force at the Madrassa and Navy in high school) used to rib the Army types ..


If I look at army, I would split it into something like this:

1) Armour: Anti-Indian Products, now in confusion.
2) Artillery: Lost in the blue
3) Engineering: rationale
4) Signals: Proactive
5) Infantry: stretched out, Lost in the blue

etc etc.

I find Army to big to be generalized. If at all I castigate something in the army, its lack of leadership. It doesn't seem to be having a leader who can take stride in perspective.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23314
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Austin » 14 May 2010 13:08

How many Arjun Tanks of Mk1 did HVF managed to build so far ?

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12530
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Sanku » 14 May 2010 13:46

Austin wrote:How many Arjun Tanks of Mk1 did HVF managed to build so far ?


About 60-70 I think, I know (from MoD annual report) that by 2008-09 about 30 odd were delivered. The latest report does not have numbers.

I could be wrong, will need to recheck.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11063
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Gagan » 14 May 2010 16:43

Has the mango janta realized what has been done?
Now there is incontrovertible proof that the Arjun is a better product than the T-90.

Some one rightly said, the inferior but imported tank is the MBT, while the superior tank is sent back to the drawing board for a Mark-II version.

Why? Why?
Simple.

When Arjun Mark-II finally rolls out of avadi, it will have to contend with Russia's next gen tank. I predict that someone will by then have declared that the Mark-II is late and the army has to order the next gen Russian product (because Pakistan now has some new tank).

This cycle will repeat itself, I am certain. And before we know it, another decade on, and a Mark-III will be ordered.

The more things change, they still remain the same.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23314
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Austin » 14 May 2010 18:20

There will always be self doubting Thomases who would complain if GOI funds Arjun development or if it didn't they would blame the Army nothing cant be done about them. I think they would only believe if they touch Arjun Mk2 with their own hands or better drive it.

The Arjun Mk2 should not take any longer than 2 years as the changes are more of small incremental upgrades as Ajai Shukla mentioned in his blog ( ERA,CITV , Lahat etc ) and that could be the one that churns out of HVF say 3 years from now.

The key is to make sure that either HVF or some big public/private sector players gets involved and can do better then 50 Arjun production in two shift working most efficiently that HVF claims it can do , else at the current rate they will take more than a decade to churn out 500 tanks.

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

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Surya » 14 May 2010 18:25

Austin

thats not the point

To have incremental improvements you need to have a constant stream of orders hitting the production line with feedback. Every darn tank manufacturing nation does it and somehow we are going to miraculously skip this andproduce a Mk2 without problems ????

This is bullcr@p

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23314
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Austin » 14 May 2010 18:38

Well if you read Ajai Shukla article it says that DRDO is sweeting the order by improving and adding some incremental features and one needs money to fund ,test and produce the mark2 that is what the GOI has approved.

As to how many mark 2 will be produced is something the GOI has yet to declare but the bottle neck still remains HVF if a sizeable number needs to be produced in reasonable time.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7619
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 14 May 2010 18:40

How many MK-II are produced will depend upon how many Indian Army orders....and not GOI.

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

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Surya » 14 May 2010 18:43

shukla also says the production line needs to continue.


Thats what we are saying

a constant stream of orders must happen

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23314
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Austin » 14 May 2010 18:48

So let us wait till we hear on the numbers that will be produced , just because Ajai Shukla or Shiv Aroor has not put up in his blog , does not mean that GOI or IA will not have some numbers in mind.

The fact that GOI has decided to fund Mk2 is itself a very positive development and an indication of shape of things to come , lets be patient till we hear it from GOI/IA on the numbers.

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

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Surya » 14 May 2010 18:51

We have been waiting and waiting and waiting.....

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23314
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Austin » 14 May 2010 18:55

Surya wrote:We have been waiting and waiting and waiting.....


Then wait a little longer and be patient it pays

Vivek K
BRFite
Posts: 1964
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Vivek K » 14 May 2010 19:29

Yup, everyone lets wait for mark II then mark III then .... While the IA quickly buys two to three thousand tanks from Russia. This will be one of the biggest scams - several times the magnitude of the Bofors scam but in this case will shake the core of IA. Therefore patience is not an option. The longer the wait, the more the T-90 purchase, the bigger the problem will become. The time to act is NOW!

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

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Surya » 14 May 2010 19:47

Austin wrote:
Surya wrote:We have been waiting and waiting and waiting.....


Then wait a little longer and be patient it pays



Easy for a Rodina lover to say. :mrgreen:

Nope no intention to wait patiently for bullcrap games from Rodina lovers

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5181
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby RoyG » 14 May 2010 20:24

Vivek K wrote:Yup, everyone lets wait for mark II then mark III then .... While the IA quickly buys two to three thousand tanks from Russia. This will be one of the biggest scams - several times the magnitude of the Bofors scam but in this case will shake the core of IA. Therefore patience is not an option. The longer the wait, the more the T-90 purchase, the bigger the problem will become. The time to act is NOW!


What makes you think they'll be caught now if they weren't caught before? Most indians still believe that the arjun is garbage due to misinformation and disinformation carried out by the media and dgmf. The citizens of India will actually be happy to hear that the T-90 will be inducted in greater numbers! FMBT, boxy turret, rifled, weight, lack of infra, auto loader, DRDO, MKII, production, failures, cost overruns, etc etc etc could be recycled and used all over again. Meanwhile, more T-90s will be on there way and requirements will again change. Then again who really knows? We *seem* to be on track with artillery and maybe the army chief and GoI will step in to help make arjun the backbone of our MBT fleet.

KrishG
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 1294
Joined: 25 Nov 2008 20:43
Location: Land of Trala-la

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby KrishG » 14 May 2010 21:49

Austin wrote:The Arjun Mk2 should not take any longer than 2 years as the changes are more of small incremental upgrades as Ajai Shukla mentioned in his blog ( ERA,CITV , Lahat etc ) and that could be the one that churns out of HVF say 3 years from now.


Aren't those incremental upgrades for Arjun-Mk-1s' ordered henceforth by the Army ?
Mk-2 might indeed have some minor structural and other modifications. Even if we assume a prototype to be rolled out in 3-4 years times, willn't it have to undergo trials by CVDE and then acceptance trials by IA allover again given than it could possibly have a new engine among other changes ? And the army would point out flaws needing rectification and additional requirements after the prototypes when the prototypes are being tested. And by the time Mk-2 will be up the "Army standards" the claim that it is out-dated for it's time would pop-up again.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6809
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby nachiket » 14 May 2010 22:19

Austin wrote:The Arjun Mk2 should not take any longer than 2 years as the changes are more of small incremental upgrades as Ajai Shukla mentioned in his blog ( ERA,CITV , Lahat etc ) and that could be the one that churns out of HVF say 3 years from now.



If the changes are small and incremental, any Mk1s ordered now, can be easily upgraded to Mk2 standard later on. So why wait 2 years? Order them now, so that the production lines can at least be upgraded to produce more tanks per year. And no, the lines cannot be upgraded till a bulk order is confirmed because looking at the IA's track record regarding the Arjun there is no guarantee that they will actually order the Mk2 in large quantities once it comes out.

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5304
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Viv S » 14 May 2010 23:19

Shiv Aroor's apparently posting on the FMBT tonight. Should be interesting.

Tonight On LiveFist: The First Detailed Look At What The Indian Army Wants From Its Future Main Battle Tank (FMBT)
While discussions on additional numbers of the Arjun MBT are discussed, and at a time when a formal mandate has been handed to DRDO to get cracking on a Mark-II version of the Arjun, later tonight I'll be posting the first comprehensive look at the Indian Army's wish-list from the prospective Future Main Battle Tank (FMBT) that will be developed and built in India.

Craig Alpert
BRFite
Posts: 1442
Joined: 09 Oct 2009 17:36
Location: Behind Enemy Lines

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Postby Craig Alpert » 15 May 2010 00:08

EXCLUSIVE: India's Future Main Battle Tank (FMBT)
Courtesy ~ Livefist!!!!

.............

The Army insists that stealth be built into the FMBT from the ground up -- including paints/materials to provide limited invisibility in IR/visible spectrum and for scrambling and avoidance of detection. The Indian Army wants the tank to have an Identification Friend or Foe (IFF) system "to obviate chances of own tanks firing at each other in battle", and a whole new reliable and secure mobile communication system capable of data transmission, audio and video conference. Protection in the form of soft-kill system requires IR detectors, laser warning, radar warning and devices to instantaneously integrate these signals and control a countermeasure suite. Such systems are threat specific so all would have to be carried on a vehicle to gain protection against more than one part of the EM threat spectrum.
The new tank necessarily needs to espouse hybrid electric vehicle technology and incorporate digital vehicle electronics (vetronics) to provide intra-vehicle and inter-vehicle communication capability that will greatly improve sit awareness and enhance operational effectiveness.
For mobility, in order to achieve ‘extraordinary’ acceleration, the Army observes that it is necessary to couple the conventional diesel engine of the proposed tank to a turbine. The ‘Hyberbar’ engine will be able to accelerate from zero to full power at 1,500 hp in 2.8 seconds, while a conventional diesel engine requires 8-12 seconds. The quest for more compact power pack has led to renewed interest in gas turbines, which needs to be explored, the Army feels.

The Army wants an active suspension system with sensors, control units, and a hydraulic power source in combination, to automatically alter the suspension characteristics to more closely match the speed of the vehicle and the terrain profile, especially in Indian terrain conditions.
The Army has always held the view that signature management was almost completely ignored in the development of the Arjun. The Army hopes that lesson has been learnt now. Current and expected future threat scenarios require signature management measures of a multi spectral type, and they require an extremely short reaction time. The Army says it requires signature management in design measures, basic camouflage, additional camouflage and temporary camouflage.

Explosive Reactive Armour Now! The Army points out that the main battlefield threats against tanks are Anti Tank Guided Missile (ATGMs), unguided anti tank rockets and grenades; shaped charge High Explosive Anti Tank (HEAT) gun rounds; Kinetic Energy (KE) gun rounds; and top-attack weapons like intelligent sub-munitions, terminally guided artillery rounds, etc. There is a need for developing Explosive Reactive Armour (ERA). Given optimised designs, integrated ERA offers tanks highly effective protection against both the penetrators of Armoured Piercing Fin Stabilised Discarding Sabot (APFSDS) projectiles and the jets of shaped charge weapons, including those with tandem warheads.

The Army says it wants a high-performance armour system on its FMBT with advanced materials incorporating the following qualities (a) Reduced penetration by most lethal weapons, (b) Elimination of parasitic mass leading to a weight reduction, (c) Excellent corrosion resistance, (d) Inherent thermal and acoustic insulation properties.
The Army has stressed that the FMBT needs Infra Red (IR) detectors, target identification systems, laser warning systems, radar warning receivers and devices to coordinate their signal and instantaneously control a countermeasures suite. These countermeasures fall into two categories: soft-kill system and hard-kill system. The soft kill sensors must discriminate true and false targets and they must discriminate between missiles or other rounds that threaten the vehicle being protected and those that will miss or are aimed at other targets.
The Army wants an Automatic Protection Systems (APS) on the FMBT. The radar should determine threat levels adequately, and the self-defence rockets should not cause high levels of collateral damage, particularly to accompanying dismounted infantry.
Of course, weapons. Conventional tube weapons are the product of a mature technology, and have now reached a high level of performance. However, on account of the gas-dynamic processes of thermally transformed powder, the muzzle velocity of projectiles is theoretically limited to approximately 2,300 m/s. Contemporary tank guns still offer a considerable growth potential, and electronic guns will be able to exceed this and become an attractive proposition. Tank-fired missiles, which carry shaped-charge warheads, were susceptible to various countermeasures, especially reactive armour. The Army says it is reasonable to expect development of high velocity KE missiles with heavy-metal, long-rod penetrators to defeat current and future tanks both within and beyond line of sight. Such extended-range missiles would enable armoured vehicles to engage targets beyond the direct fire zone. The high/medium-energy level (100 kJ) vehicle-mounted laser is expected to be a lethality option against rockets, air vehicles, light ground vehicles, antennas of armoured vehicles and electro-optical sensors. Hard-kill system to provide full-spectrum defence against top attack weapons, ATGMs, guided missiles and gun-launched KE and HEAT rounds.
Fire Control System (FCS): Ground sensors, non-line-of-sight launch system and the network capability will enhance soldiers’ understanding of their situation in dynamic battlefield conditions by promoting a common perspective of enemy and friendly locations on digital maps and provide timely actionable intelligence.
Very importantly, the Army has stressed that there is a need to manufacture modern simulators using lasers, micro-processors and magnetic tapes, thereby creating near actual combat conditions during training. Development of driving, gunnery and tactical simulators.


PHEWWW man that's a LOONG wish list.. Based on my experience, it is VERY DOABLE with EXISTING technologies, however some bottlenecks might occur in terms of hybrid suspensions and tramsmissions, but other than that Stealth technoliges can be borrowed/modified from IAF with respect to data sharing and camofluge!!
Last edited by Craig Alpert on 15 May 2010 00:15, edited 1 time in total.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests