Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

[ramana]

Ramana sir, are we about to see you do another exhaustive investigation

You are welcome to ignore it no?

What I know is we need to look at everything and not ignore warning signs.

d_berwal has brought quite a bit of useful info.

What do you make of the info he gave?

[Manish_Sharma]

One does understand the difference between real & reel situations of course; Asal Uttar & all that. Then, why have we been participating without fail every year?

Excercise, War Games are having different parameters, tactics being used as one part of whole system infantry -artillery-gunships etc. While these seem like simpleton marathon type of competition Sridhar ji.

[ramana]

I think we need to stop the cursory and unfair assessment of people who are no longer here to defend their view points. Actually this knee jerk assessment of things after T-90 failed in biathlon is also not right . Platforms beyond a point are just that i.e. platforms ; T-90 is better than a Abrams and LeoA5 when you look at it from the pov of Russians their 'need' is to field a tank in numbers which will make the whole proposition prohibitively expensive for even the Americans and Germans . Remember the design of Russian tanks is based on their philosophy to field light-medium armor in enough 'numbers' if someone can build Abrams or Merakavas in similar numbers with similar resources and money then sure no problem. Before we evaluate a platform it's design philosophy and objectives need to be accounted for lot of Russian military equipment was not made with idea of long usage and maintenance it was made from pov of easy to mass produce , use for x hours and replace it in entirety because latter was easier to achieve . The GSH guns on AC are actually built on similar lines .

The issue with us is we are trying to evaluate platform versus another platform when debate is not around T-90 vs Arjun (at least beyond a certain point it is useless) ; the debate is around when does India get to achieve an ability where we can build and fix our tanks without any dependence on entities who you cannot guarantee will be able to supply us in times of need. I mean in the short term if you see things even Arjun won't fair any better in this department as lot of it's components are imported however what needs to be done is to take steps to get to that final state where only components which are a 'commodity' need to be imported but critical parts be made in-house . Arjun is Indian not because all of it's every component is made in India , it is Indian because if given the components we can build it here and maintain it on our own with T-90 that is not the case .

Bravo for the last bolded statement.

As for the Russian idea of light and medium tanks in enough numbers, the lessons of Asal Uttar are not well understood.

In my view, India won the Battle of Asal Uttar for the following reasons:

0) The 4th Grenadiers RCL guns of which Abdul Hamid PVC personally accounted for 7 Patton tanks which was 10% of the Patton tanks destroyed at Asal Uttar
1) The flooded sugarcane fields and the double horseshoe formation by Lt. Col Salim Caleb in that created the ambush
2) The superb shooting by the Centurion tank crews who let off three shots for every one by the Patton tanks. IOW the Indian tanks out shot the Patton tanks. Lt Col Caleb had the crews practice hard with the co-axial machine gun to ensure their skills were honed.
3) The frontal/mantlet armor of the Centurions that resisted head on shots from the Patton's 90 mm guns. This allowed the Centurions to fire head first instead of sideways that added to the accuracy. So here the heavy armor helped the tank to outshoot the Patton.
4) The up-gunned Shermans with CN 75-50 at close range shot up the ~15 Patton tanks. In other words the Patton tank could not use its superior tank gun due to tactics and terrain. So you need a longer range gun that is accurate.
5) Ineptness of the Pak armored crews in the 6th Armored Division which was formed in 1964. The same was not true of their 1st Armored at Chawinda.


In fact the M1 Abrams first got design changes after the US Army realized Sherman tanks with CN 75-50 were able to penetrate the armor of Patton tanks.

What this means is India needs a heavy tank that can out gun and out shoot the Pakis. The Russian philosophy of tank design does not meet this objective. Recall that the T-55s were up-gunned with the 105mm tank cannon. Also shows why IA needs 85K ATGMs.

If T-72 is the mainstay it needs at-least up-gun with the 120mm Arjun cannon as its more accurate and delivers a stronger punch.


I am still trying to read about Chawinda to find out what happened there?

[ramana]

One does understand the difference between real & reel situations of course; Asal Uttar & all that. Then, why have we been participating without fail every year?

Excercise, War Games are having different parameters, tactics being used as one part of whole system infantry -artillery-gunships etc. While these seem like simpleton marathon type of competition Sridhar ji.

Yet both the T-90S sent by IA did not finish the competition due to mechanical component failures.
And it was not intense war game.

At the very minimum these games allow the reappraisal of maintenance and spares for T-90S.

[Indranil]

. The DGMF and the Indian Army, sabotaged the Arjun and killed it for THIS piece of S*it ? How did it pass any acceptance trials when it couldn't even complete an obstacle course (forget about coming first or last, just getting across the line would do ) and that too when TWO tanks (one back up of the other) both failed !

Clearly these are the same kind of PoS aka "Kakkoose" as the other PoS the Navy has got , the Mig 29 K . Amazing and simply unbelievable. Half the "equipment" (i.e. the TI sights active defence equipment..shtora and whatever) aren't installed and or simply don't work , even the friggin basic mechanicals are shot (come on, in this day and age, an engine belt snapping is absolutely nuts..it doesnt happen in civil life, those damn things are so reliable, can anyone here on the forum remember their car / truck engine belt snapping in the last 15 years, .. engine oil leaking ? phuck.. even the Royal Enfield Bullet, the original brit ones, which was legendary for leaving a puddle of oil behind when parked overnight has been fixed by the Indians via design fixes and made rock solid reliable , and this Kakoose leaks OIL wtf?).

I can at least rationalise it if the Army ditched a Desi maiden for an ultra hot & smashing foreign stuff, but the Army and Navy ditched a great Desi maiden for a dowdy, FUgly ,ding bat. Gosh, look at the pics of the Natasha the guy sent to get the Gorshkov done was bonking.. none would have given her a second glance in a street.

Vina,

You command respect here. Please post accordingly. Your points are good. Why ruin them with condescension?

[Indranil]

TO EVERYBODY,

DISCUSS TANKS, NOT MEMBERS OR THE INDIAN ARMY. I WILL BAN YOU WITHOUT NOTICE.

[Indranil]

Maybe these dabba tanks can be dug into position on the borders so that they don't need to use their fan belts or leaky engines!!

Just wondering - did IA order enough tow trucks for these tin craps? So how does it work in battle? Tow trucks follow the tanks since 50- 100% will break down in the desert? Proves my point that India is not capable of power projection outside its borders.

Fan belts (new) do not break unless the equipment does something unexpected. I am surprised that no one has said that the fan belt was from the Arjun!!

Imagine if an Arjun had suffered the problems that the T90 experienced. It is unbelievable that IA is ordering thousands of this Tank!

You have earned yourself a warning.

Gyan, you are on a very slippery slope.

[Mihir]

In my view, India won the Battle of Asal Uttar for the following reasons:

0) The 4th Grenadiers RCL guns of which Abdul Hamid PVC personally accounted for 7 Patton tanks which was 10% of the Patton tanks destroyed at Asal Uttar
1) The flooded sugarcane fields and the double horseshoe formation by Lt. Col Salim Caleb in that created the ambush
2) The superb shooting by the Centurion tank crews who let off three shots for every one by the Patton tanks. IOW the Indian tanks out shot the Patton tanks. Lt Col Caleb had the crews practice hard with the co-axial machine gun to ensure their skills were honed.
3) The frontal/mantlet armor of the Centurions that resisted head on shots from the Patton's 90 mm guns. This allowed the Centurions to fire head first instead of sideways that added to the accuracy. So here the heavy armor helped the tank to outshoot the Patton.
4) The up-gunned Shermans with CN 75-50 at close range shot up the ~15 Patton tanks. In other words the Patton tank could not use its superior tank gun due to tactics and terrain. So you need a longer range gun that is accurate.
5) Ineptness of the Pak armored crews in the 6th Armored Division which was formed in 1964. The same was not true of their 1st Armored at Chawinda.

Agree for the most part. But there are deeper reasons behind these successes. The brass' decision to set up a trap at Asal Uttar and to 'shepherd' Pakistani armoured units into it speaks to their excellent grasp of the lay of the land, and their superior understanding of our own, as well as the enemy's dispositions. The credit for that goes to a system that emphasised careful training, staff-work, and field-craft over ensuring the relative superiority of its equipment.

The superb shooting by the Centurion and Sherman crews, too, happened because their training focused on spotting and gunnery. Which also ties into field-craft ... you need to know what ground to hold in order to spot more efficiently. The Israelis did the same, and the successes of their tank units showed in the 1967 and 1973 wars.

What I will disagree with is the utility of the heavy tank on the battlefield. A tank has to carry out a host of functions, and tank-on-tank warfare is just one of them. Anti-infantry is just as important - perhaps more so in an age where the primary threat to tanks comes not from other tanks, but from highly nimble ATGM teams and mobile artillery batteries than can rain down accurate barrages on enemy positions. To meet the differing requirements that each function imposes, it has to be versatile, which a heavy tank is not.

In most cases, if your operational planning is done correctly, small differences in technology don't matter much. Zoji La, Chushul, Asal Uttar, and Phillora serve to illustrate this point rather nicely. A combined arms spearhead that achieves local superiority and surprise, and then manages to outflank and surround the enemy would win the engagement even if it was equipped with early-generation T-72s going up against the M1A2-whatever. In that sense, it is more important for your tank to simply show up for the engagement as opposed to possess the best armour or the most powerful gun.

It is here that a tank like the Arjun comes up short. The view in the Army is that it is unreliable and too heavy, and even if its issues are resolved, it will be too late. I've been told it's the equivalent of a Tiger, whereas the T-72/90 are like the T-34 and M4. On a one-to-one basis, the Arjun can beat the T-90, but it lacks the reliability and mobility to be quickly redeployed to a different sector and react to quickly changing situations. As part of a combined arms formation, they'd rather have the T-90, even with its flaws.

And that's why the narrative for making the Arjun's case needs to change. The Arjun should be inducted in numbers not because it is a superior tank, but because it is an Indian tank, and the advantages of sourcing equipment locally far outweigh the military disadvantage that acquiring an inferior product would impose.

Lastly, I'll leave this here for reference. On page 15, there is an article by a US Army LTC who saw action in the Second World War, and it speaks to the strengths of the M4 Sherman over German tanks that boasted superior firepower and armour. It would be helpful to see the T-XX vs Arjun debate through this lens.

“The American tank is not nearly as good as the German tank.” “Next to the German and Russian tanks, the American tanks are the best in the world.” Quotations, opinions, and comments similar to the two above, which have been widely publicized and caused widespread discussion, have been made by various individuals.

...

In making those statements, what standards did the persons involved use? What were the items and factors that they utilized in making their comparisons?

If they used simply the gun, the weight of the tank, and the width of the track and thereby the floatation of the tank as criterion, as I am sure they did, then I heartily concur with them that the German Tiger tank is unquestionably superior to the American Sherman tank. The German 88 is more powerful than any American tank gun used during the course of most of the war. The German tank is much heavier and therefore its armor is much thicker than that of any American tank. The tracks of the former are much wider, with perhaps a less vulnerable suspension system than that of the latter. If I stop here, as I am convinced so many have, there is no question but that the German tank is a much better one than our own. In this paragraph there is material, indeed, for some sensational headlines in newspapers in the States.

Today, however, let us not stop here. Let us go on! What is the fuel capacity of the German Tiger tank? How long and how far is it able to run on a tank full of gasoline? Does it burn much oil? What is the composition and life of its tracks? How many rounds of ammunition is it able to stow? What is the life (discounting its being hit in action) of a Tiger tank? Is its engine comparatively free of maintenance problems? If maintenance problems occur, are they easy to remedy? How long and how much skill is required to change an engine? Is the German tank able to move for long distances and continuous periods at a steady rate of speed? How is its endurance? Could 53 Tiger tanks, for instance, move from the vicinity of Fenetrange, France, in the Saar, to an area near Bastogne, Belgium, a distance of 151 miles, in less than twenty-four hours to answer a fire call, as did tanks of the Fourth Armored Division? Could a German Tiger tank be used for weeks of training in England, land in France and fight across the widest part of that country to the German frontier, race back to Belgium, retrace its steps again to the German border, and fight its way well into that country before being replaced? Could a German tank roll for several hours at a speed of twenty-five miles per hour in exploiting a breakthrough?

Did it occur to the critics of the American tank that perhaps questions like those listed above, the answer to which will all heavily favor the American tank, and many others like them should be considered before a decision is reached? Obviously not. I say most emphatically that such factors must be included before a thorough, honest, and fair comparison can be made and a sound and intelligent conclusion reached.

[Manish_Sharma]

It is here that a heavy like the Arjun comes up short. The view in the Army is that it is unreliable and too heavy, and even if its issues are resolved, it will be too late. I've been told it's the equivalent of a Tiger, whereas the T-72/90 are like the T-34 and M4.

You are wrong. I saw a program on Hindi news channel about Asal Uttar battle and a Sardar ji Tankman told how his tank was shot point blank by a Patton tank and he jumped out thinking it's going to blow up, but he saw that Patton ammo hit had no effect on his tank. He told other tankers that Patton ammo is impotent and then they proceeded to take out Patton's one by one.

Unreliable? Seeing oil leaks and belt breaking of t90 , what can be more unreliable?

Arjun also defeated t90 in on the move firing, in which Arjun hit 100% while t90 hit zero. I guess t80 across the border will be meaty targets for agile tiger Arjun firing on the move.

[Mihir]

Sardarji tankman's armour held up, and that's good. But my point is that armour didn't win that engagement. If the armour was inadequate, we would have perhaps lost more tanks but still won. If that weren't the case, then the 4 Mountain's obsolete Shermans wouldn't have smashed an assault by Pakistani M48s that were two generations newer.

And note that Sardarji's tank was a mission kill regardless of whether it was penetrated or not. Thick armour does not confer immunity. An anti-tank round that strikes the turret without penetrating has a high chance of causing shock damage to both vehicle and the crew. That's probably why Sardarji tankman abandoned his tank in the first place.

Unreliable? Seeing oil leaks and belt breaking of t90 , what can be more unreliable?

That's the view in the Army. You and I may not agree, but there are levels of unreliability they're willing to live with. The T-90, even with all its flaws, makes the cut. The Arjun doesn't as of now.

[ramana]

Yes. I was reading the details of the Battle of the Bulge and came across similar comments on the Sherman and why it was overall the winner.

When Maj. Gen Jetley added the CN 75-50 the M4 became a tank destroyer.

The Patton and the Centurion guns were based on the German 88.

The French CN 75-50 was based on the German KwK Panther gun 42/L70- 60(?). The French arsenal reduced the barrel length to fit in the AMX-13.

This conversion was done in Israel, Egypt, and Pakistan too.

The AMX-13 gun was used on old Shermans the world over.

[Mihir]

Ours were mostly upgunned with the PT-76's gun, weren't they, with a few vehicles also fitted with the CN 75-50?

[Picklu]

Unreliable? Seeing oil leaks and belt breaking of t90 , what can be more unreliable?

That's the view in the Army. You and I may not agree, but there are levels of unreliability they're willing to live with. The T-90, even with all its flaws, makes the cut. The Arjun doesn't as of now.

The proof of unreliability of Arjun? I am not comparing with T-90 at all here but the decision making is too much subjective and opaque.

What was ok earlier won't be acceptable for long. Rafale orders would be cut down to 36 and 83 Tejas mk1A would be shoved down the throat

or so I hope and prey

[Mihir]

There is no hard evidence; it's all anecdotal. A major problem area seems to be the wheels and tracks. The tank regularly throws its track, and bogie wheels shear off at times.

[Rakesh]

Manish-ji: I think you misunderstood what Mihir meant. While the Arjun is definitely a superior tank, it does not fit into the doctrine of the armoured corps. Whether that is a legitimate reason or a just a gripe, it appears to be an issue that the army does not want to elaborate on.

Mihir: Could you kindly elaborate on why the Arjun would be unreliable as per the Army? I cannot fathom the Army's rationale for heavy. It has a nomial ground pressure below the T-90 and is nearly on par with the T-72. What exactly does the Army want?

http://worldofdefense.blogspot.ca/2011/ ... r.html?m=1

[nam]

It also does not help when Army asks who is going to produce the tank, source of ammo etc.. and the finger get pointed in the direction of OFB.

Remember OFB is the only source of 120 MM single piece round for rifled gun. No one else produces it.

Atleast with Russians you pay them, they might send "something". With OFB it is a one way street..

[Mihir]

Hi Rakesh, see the post right above yours. The unreliability seems to refer to the mechanical aspect only. The thermal camera and DFCS were also notorious for packing up in the heat, but they were fixed around the 2004-05 timeframe. I wish I had hard numbers to substantiate this, but I do not. My posts are based on what I've heard from friends and connections. That's why I'm making it clear that these are the Army's views, and not my own.

The Army isn't releasing the AUCRT results for either tank anytime soon, not even for serious researchers. Perhaps when the CAG gets to auditing the T-90's performance, we'll have a better idea.

If you bring up the issue that the Arjun was built to the Army's GSQR; and point out that the Army should have foreseen issues with a heavy machine being mechanically unreliable and hard to transport, you get a lot a hemming and hawing and awkward attempts to change the topic.

[Rakesh]

Thank you Mihir. By not releasing the AUCRT trial results - I am assuming to not reveal operational capabilities or limits - it is fanning the flames for conspiracy theories.

[ramana]

Ours were mostly upgunned with the PT-76's gun, weren't they, with a few vehicles also fitted with the CN 75-50?

You mean from the AMX-13 tank which had the same CN 75-50 gun.

[ramana]

Mihir, I got to read the article Tank vs Tank in full. Very illustrative. So the analogy is T72 is the old Sherman M4 and T90 is the new Sherman M4A3ES. And the Arjun is like the heavy Tiger. Also note the mobility requirement for a fast paced war.The roads and bridges crossing weight limitations.

If you note the Sherman was awesome except when they encountered the Tigers. Maybe a mix is good to add two more regiments of Arjuns to existing 2 regiments.

And some capable engineer officer look at the maintainability aspects of the whole tank corps.

Wonder if Marten can talk to his friend to make comparison.

[ramana]

BTW pages 120 and on discuss the Imperial Japan invasion of India.

Any more back issues?

[ArjunPandit]

Arjun is dead! Long live indigenisation! We were using Centurions successfully 40 years back which is 56 tons tank. We simply do not have an indigenisation lobby or think tanks to support deep indigenisation. Babus and Politicos find it convenient to go along with motivated chorus created for imports. For instance, is Spike ATGMs really necessary? Whether any nation in the world except USA has bought such huge numbers of super costly IR seeker based ATGMs? Price of indigenous ATGMs is 1/10th of Spike but we will import Spike which may never be used in preference from say thermal Imagers which are immediate necessity for our largely night blind infantry daily fighting terrorists and naxalites. What is more essential 8000 Spike missiles or 80,000 NVDs which can end Night blindness of our infantry? Can we not provide seed money of Rs. 1000 crores which is being requisitioned for 30 years to set up IR seeker detector facility??

Gyan your questions are right and I too agree to most part of it, in light of info on public domain. My viewpoint has always been that people from armed forces will always know more than what we do. My contact with both the tanks is BRF, wiki pages and at best in DefExpo and the show pieces around NCR area.
Unless we all claim to be more intelligent than IA, know more than them in operating tanks, then its best that we question their logic, try to understand their decisions, but just stopping them of saying traitors by ignoring domestic products is not done. If one brings these points he'/she will be heard and respected.
As mods have already warned not to post on posters so I will refrain, but as a forum gentleman's code (if there is one), is it worthy of anyone to diss someone behind their back? Nothing further from me on this.

[YashG]

I was very dissapointed to hear that both the tanks had mechanical failures during the biathlon. I could make out two things from it -

1. indians didnt prepare very well for the biathlon - unlike China- they sent tanks that were not tested & ready for the biathlon. China on the other hand not only sent their tanks but they even modified them to perform better. This shows that their level of preparedness was way higher. The pattern for Chinese is consistent for another performing event - the Olympics. Wherever they have to perform for world honour - they prepare long and hard. Biathlon is a kind of military olympis for them and they want to come at the top!

2. I'm not surprised but disspointed about the above - It reflects the deeper problems that may be present in the indian forces - that of mainly equipment reliability & preparedness. While our mid-leadership that will be deployed operationally on groud is of the highest quality (NDA grads cut-off for India would be the highest in the world), they need to be supported by a hardware that doesnt fail them!

I think we should not brush the flaws brought out by the biathlon under the carpet. It should lead to a new kind of think ing - like how do we use Arjun instead of T90s or how do we repair/refurbish/maintain the existing hardware at its best and so on. I'm sure there are plenty of efficiencies waiting to be discovered. But a lot of hardware reforms ar enot possible without a thriving MIC. So wherever we face issues of supply & maintenance - we need to come up with new ideas.

For e.g. No matter what the t90 paltform capabilities be - a strectched supply chain of components - from russia to india has enough transfer points to bring both inefficiencies & cost spikes. All of these fatigue points leads to adjustments to maintenance structures at the forces end that maybe sub-optimal. The solution obviously lies in indeginization.

War peformace will be defined by how well the supply chains work - from country's hiterlands - to war front. This in itself is such a challenge. Adding another supply chain of ammunition & spares from other countries is an unwanted challenge we have to do away with!

[shiv]

I think we should not brush the flaws brought out by the biathlon under the carpet.

Who are "we" here? Taxpayers? Armoured warfare experts? Generals? Protectors of Bharat? Or self styled internet experts.

What I see on here is a trial by media. That is OK. This is just a forum full of anonymous people who are interested. But without getting any army inputs into this matter anything we say cannot be taken seriously by anyone other than ourselves. Hence the circular self praise, backslapping and self aggrandisement of being ahead of curve. This forum is a club where we believe and reinforce each others' opinions without any inputs from the actual parties that we talk about.

[Mihir]

Ramana, glad you enjoyed it

Ft. Leavenworth has archived the back issues here: http://cgsc.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/sear ... suppress/1

[vnms]

I think we should not brush the flaws brought out by the biathlon under the carpet.

Who are "we" here? Taxpayers? Armoured warfare experts? Generals? Protectors of Bharat? Or self styled internet experts.

What I see on here is a trial by media. That is OK. This is just a forum full of anonymous people who are interested. But without getting any army inputs into this matter anything we say cannot be taken seriously by anyone other than ourselves. Hence the circular self praise, backslapping and self aggrandisement of being ahead of curve. This forum is a club where we believe and reinforce each others' opinions without any inputs from the actual parties that we talk about.

In this case, empirical evidence suggests that one or more of the following could be cause:

1) Equipment is subpar
2) Maintenance is subpar
3) Preparations for this event could have been better.

Other than the above, I'm not sure what the Army could suggest. Other than sabotage.

[Gyan]

I believe in comparative trials it was proved that Arjun has better mobility than T-90. So there goes the whole Sherman Argument.

Then whole point of T-90 was its ruggedness and reliability but we have all seen 100% failure.

Why is the failure of T-90 not a matter of International Shame when failure of 33% of First batch of Akash missile proved these missiles were junk. Why all retired Jairnails who Diss Indian products missing from Media?

[uddu]

^^^Don't compare with Akash. Those reports of Akash are for the initial trials in 2014 before the final trials providing 100 percent success and later induction. T-90 is a in service system with years and years in the Army from 2001. That's 16 years.

[Kashi]

I think what Gyan is saying that the behin-the-scene forces who were actively dissing and smearing Akash system using media hit-jobs and "our sources said" are conspicuous by their absence in the light of T-90s embarrassing performance on their home turf.

[Manish_Sharma]

And note that Sardarji's tank was a mission kill regardless of whether it was penetrated or not. Thick armour does not confer immunity. An anti-tank round that strikes the turret without penetrating has a high chance of causing shock damage to both vehicle and the crew. That's probably why Sardarji tankman abandoned his tank in the first place.

No that's the thing, his tank worked fine after that, he got back into the tank and started fighting.

That's the view in the Army. You and I may not agree, but there are levels of unreliability they're willing to live with. The T-90, even with all its flaws, makes the cut. The Arjun doesn't as of now.

Think Tank BRF doesn't go by personal unsubstantiated anecdotes. This will give free pass to everyone in supporting their own arguments.

I think as vina puts it clearly, an this isn't unsubstantiated , but a fact these two tincan pehelwaans must have been prepared with lot of oil maalish and pampering, but turned out pathetic:

aren't installed and or simply don't work , even the friggin basic mechanicals are shot (come on, in this day and age, an engine belt snapping is absolutely nuts..it doesnt happen in civil life, those damn things are so reliable, can anyone here on the forum remember their car / truck engine belt snapping in the last 15 years, .. engine oil leaking ? phuck.. even the Royal Enfield Bullet, the original brit ones, which was legendary for leaving a puddle of oil behind when parked overnight has been fixed by the Indians via design fixes and made rock solid reliable , and this Kakoose leaks OIL wtf?).

Russian tech simply is in stone age.

[chola]

I believe in comparative trials it was proved that Arjun has better mobility than T-90. So there goes the whole Sherman Argument.

Then whole point of T-90 was its ruggedness and reliability but we have all seen 100% failure.

Why is the failure of T-90 not a matter of International Shame when failure of 33% of First batch of Akash missile proved these missiles were junk. Why all retired Jairnails who Diss Indian products missing from Media?

Natasha always gets a free pass. Beyond the T-90, these latest army games -- Tank Biathlon, Sea Cup, Avuadarts -- show Russki equipment to be inferior to even chini counterparts.

1) The Type 96B was asked to have its gun's auto-stabilizer disabled this year. 2016 videos show the Type 96B shooting on the move while the Russki T-72BM3 had to come to complete stop,

2) The cheap mass produced chini Type 056 corvette won out over the larger and latest Roos Steregushchiy class,

3) the WZ-10 beat the KA-52 and Mi-28 among competing attack helos,

4) the H6 won over the Tu-22 in the bomber contest,

5) the JH-7A over the Su-34 in fighter-bombers

6) J-8D over Su-24 in recon

Against the West, those chini systems are distinctly inferior. Against Russian crap, not so much.

But of course, we still buy from Natasha with misplaced confidence and little questioning. Nuts.

[Manish_Sharma]

Manish-ji: I think you misunderstood what Mihir meant. While the Arjun is definitely a superior tank, it does not fit into the doctrine of the armoured corps. Whether that is a legitimate reason or a just a gripe, it appears to be an issue that the army does not want to elaborate on.
http://worldofdefense.blogspot.ca/2011/ ... r.html?m=1

But Rakesh Saar, Arjun is creation of whatever army asked for, or whatever changes they asked for it was not just unveiled to them as a surprise gift.

Also the reasons Mihir gives may have been true 10 -15 years ago. The track + wheel problem aren't UNRECTIFIABLE. Mihir also says it will be too late, then let them say so openly and stop this continuous upgrading efforts.

The thing is govts after govts aren't able to SHOW Arjun faults, while tincan faults are there to be seen by whole world.

[Manish_Sharma]

Sorry I couldn't find Sardar ji clip, but here is another where he says that porki Patton Tank hit PL Joseph's tank but was no effect:

At 3:40

[shiv]

Who are "we" here? Taxpayers? Armoured warfare experts? Generals? Protectors of Bharat? Or self styled internet experts.

What I see on here is a trial by media. That is OK. This is just a forum full of anonymous people who are interested. But without getting any army inputs into this matter anything we say cannot be taken seriously by anyone other than ourselves. Hence the circular self praise, backslapping and self aggrandisement of being ahead of curve. This forum is a club where we believe and reinforce each others' opinions without any inputs from the actual parties that we talk about.

In this case, empirical evidence suggests that one or more of the following could be cause:

1) Equipment is subpar
2) Maintenance is subpar
3) Preparations for this event could have been better.

Other than the above, I'm not sure what the Army could suggest. Other than sabotage.

Please don't give me this stuff about empirical evidence. I saw too much of that in the Out of India thread by a troll.

Has anyone asked the army? Does anyone have inside info? if not - everything that is said here is a one sided trial based on third party media reports.

I am truly sorry I was tempted to post in this thread.

I am getting out and staying out

[YashG]

I think we should not brush the flaws brought out by the biathlon under the carpet.

Who are "we" here? Taxpayers? Armoured warfare experts? Generals? Protectors of Bharat? Or self styled internet experts.

We here are - policymakers - the govt, the babus & military leadership ( they are the ones who can either tell us better or do what is required). & the mango man like me can hope things do get set right.

What I see on here is a trial by media. That is OK. This is just a forum full of anonymous people who are interested. But without getting any army inputs into this matter anything we say cannot be taken seriously by anyone other than ourselves. Hence the circular self praise, backslapping and self aggrandisement of being ahead of curve. This forum is a club where we believe and reinforce each others' opinions without any inputs from the actual parties that we talk about.

Inputs from the people in the know is exactly why I come here. I hope someone here chips in here with info beyond what is available in the media make this discussion more useful. Mango people like me have been reading this forum for decades to learn & understand. I think more updated information available from those more in know is exactly what I'm looking for.

[YashG]

http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-new ... PK1MM.html

The article talks about a T90 heat operations issues & upgrade. The T90 that broke down in biathlon had fan belt failure. This issue aint new - we've heard about it. In terms of upgrade it talks about an 1200-1500 bhp engine (btw the Chinese were using an uprated 1200 BHP tank for the biathlon). I wonder if improving the engine rating has anything to do with the heating issues ?

What kind of upgrades will help in hot condition operation ( Russia is still colder - thar in anything will be so much more hot) ?

[Karan M]

LOL

"Degraded engine performance of T-90s, the mainstay of India’s tank fleet, is a concern for the army. The tanks are unable to operate for sustained periods in high temperatures due to radiator problems, revealed a report by the army design bureau earlier this year."

What in this tank works, i wonder?
Sights didnt work in sustained ops either.
Armor/ Gun tot was half baked
Ammo is useless against armor so we have to rely on expensive gun missiles.
..

Arjun works but hey t-90 is reliable.

[Kashi]

That is one crocked up tank...Tin can 90 is right...and we want to buy more of these?

Who makes these decisions anyway?

[Mihir]

"Degraded engine performance of T-90s, the mainstay of India’s tank fleet, is a concern for the army. The tanks are unable to operate for sustained periods in high temperatures due to radiator problems, revealed a report by the army design bureau earlier this year."

The reporter is writing about the compendium of problem statements that was released a while back. Here's a link to the document: ​

https://indianarmy.nic.in/makeinindia/P ... 0FINAL.pdf


It says:

​Title. Improving Cooling Efficiency of T-90 Radiator.

User Directorate(s). Directorate General of Mechanised Forces.

Type of Problem. Unsolved Problem.

What is the Problem (Need).

(a) Statement of Problem. The ​​radiators of the Indian manufactured T-90 Tanks are failing / not meeting the desired standards. The T-90 engine is a heavy engine and frequently operates under extreme temperature conditions. Optimum radiator function is critical for effective engine performance during operations, especially during high temperature conditions.

(b) Evolution of the Problem. The locally manufactured radiators do not function optimally.

(c) How it was Being Overcome. Problem has not yet been overcome. It inhibits operating the Tank for long durations or in high temperature conditions.

Who has the Problem.

(a) User (Skill Sets). Problem is being faced by Mechanised Forces.

(b) Operating Environment. In all operating conditions, and especially
during high temperature conditions.

Why is it Important to Solve. It is important to solve the problem in order to operate Tanks for sustained periods and especially under extreme temperature conditions.

7. Contemporary Solutions by Other Countries / Organisations. Proper design optimisation and quality control of the radiator.

8. Timelines. Research, manufacture of prototype and trials to be completed in one year.

[Mihir]

Maybe a mix is good to add two more regiments of Arjuns to existing 2 regiments.

+1

I believe some here (Rohit Vats?) proposed issuing the Arjun to holding corps in the desert. There aren't many bridges or culverts to traverse in the sector, and the Arjun's low ground pressure would open up many new axes for exploitation. And because it wouldn't be penetrating very far into enemy territory, reliability wouldn't be a huge issue. It would be at a reasonable distance from workshops and repair facilities. IMO, that's not a bad idea at all.

It would be inefficient in terms of logistics, but that's a fair price to pay for inducting a domestically designed and developed system into service.