Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

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.
Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 864
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Thakur_B » 09 Jul 2017 19:44

This project needs a reboot with Kestrel and FICV. Fix that 105 mm remote autoloading turret from Stryker. Watch the Leninovs and Stalinovs and Putinovs of this forum unleash a verbal diarrhea on even thinking about attempting to design something where Rodina already has a product :D :D

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7315
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Pratyush » 09 Jul 2017 20:01

Indeed, the state of domestic automative industry lends it self to a new series of armoured vehicles to be designed and developed in India.

All it will require from the army is a well conceived GSQR.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19130
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Austin » 09 Jul 2017 20:56

http://www.janes.com/article/72090/russ ... ast-market
An annual report released by Russian tank manufacturer UralVagonZavod (UVZ) revealed a series of T-90 deals with Middle East countries.

The report was published on the UVZ website, but later removed after Russian defence analysts revealed the customers it identified using code numbers.

According to these analysts, the report stated that UVZ is planning to implement orders that Iraq and Vietnam have placed respectively for 73 and 64 T-90S/SK tanks, to finalise Kuwait's order for 146 T-90MS/MSK tanks, and work to secure an Indian order for 356 T-90MS tanks.

Katare
BRFite
Posts: 1805
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Katare » 09 Jul 2017 21:51

tsarkar wrote:
kurup wrote:Can somebody id the truck ??

That is a German MAN military truck trialled as alternative to Tatra. MAN had developed a series called HanuMAN to replace its older ShaktiMAN. Great capabilities that did not come L1.


Curious as to who was the L1? Did they get inducted and were they meant to replace Tatras? Does this mean the tatra cluster **** is finally over?

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3248
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Rakesh » 09 Jul 2017 21:57

Private firms miss out on Rs 2,400 crore armoured vehicle upgrade deal
http://ajaishukla.blogspot.in/2017/07/p ... crore.html

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7571
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby rohitvats » 09 Jul 2017 23:00

Pratyush wrote:Indeed, the state of domestic automative industry lends it self to a new series of armoured vehicles to be designed and developed in India. All it will require from the army is a well conceived GSQR.


More than anything else, it requires breaking the Defense PSU monopoly and penchant of MOD to award everything in-house.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 46906
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby ramana » 10 Jul 2017 02:41

Rohitvats and others here is history of development of M1 tank in US and all its problems and how they were overcome:


History of Abrams Tank development


a lot can be appiled to Arjun

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19130
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Austin » 10 Jul 2017 09:58

Hectic moves within the defence ministry suggest the Modi government is working to end one of the government's last monopolies - ordnance factories.

Repainting the white elephant

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 864
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Thakur_B » 10 Jul 2017 20:46

^^ Ideally it should be initiated with verticalisation of the OFB
Weapons and Munitions (small arms, artillery, munitions), Vehicles division (MPVs, APCs, IFVs, Tanks and others) and everything else.
First two can be retained, everything else sold off.

abhik
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby abhik » 10 Jul 2017 22:00

Thakur_B wrote:^^ Ideally it should be initiated with verticalisation of the OFB
Weapons and Munitions (small arms, artillery, munitions), Vehicles division (MPVs, APCs, IFVs, Tanks and others) and everything else.
First two can be retained, everything else sold off.

Some of the DRDO labs like CVRDE should be merged with this entity. Separating out production and R&D capabilities hasn't really worked out.

Karan M
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 14104
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Karan M » 10 Jul 2017 22:31

worst idea ever. keep drdo far far away from OFB. you"ll otherwise lose whatever cvrde has done. instead give cvrde full autonomy to chhose its partner, whether tata or bharat forge or whoever for whatever subsystem and see the results. bharat forge has developed a 125mm on their own whereas OFB couldnt even make existing units to proper specs.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10317
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Gagan » 10 Jul 2017 23:06

Is there merit in having a flyweight tank like the cheenis have deployed in Tibet?
Given the state of the roads and bridges in POK and Pakistan, would a light, big powerful engine tank with a big 120-125 mm gun be worthwhile to pursue?

Bala Vignesh
BRFite
Posts: 1816
Joined: 30 Apr 2009 02:02
Location: Standing at the edge of the cliff
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Bala Vignesh » 10 Jul 2017 23:15

Gagan wrote:Is there merit in having a flyweight tank like the cheenis have deployed in Tibet?
Given the state of the roads and bridges in POK and Pakistan, would a light, big powerful engine tank with a big 120-125 mm gun be worthwhile to pursue?

While it does have its advantages in terms of increased mobility in restricted terrain, any direct hit on the system would destroy it and the crew instantly. With that in mind, I think for us it would be better to handle the situation asymmetrically by arming the troops there with increased nos of with more capable ATGM's and use helicopters like Rudra in larger nos.

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 972
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby sudeepj » 10 Jul 2017 23:32

Gagan wrote:Is there merit in having a flyweight tank like the cheenis have deployed in Tibet?
Given the state of the roads and bridges in POK and Pakistan, would a light, big powerful engine tank with a big 120-125 mm gun be worthwhile to pursue?


Without active armor, no. With active armor, definitely yes! The only anti tank weapons such a vehicle will face in the mountains are going to be infantry operated missiles and air delivered anti tank weapons, not main gun fired FSAPDS. If these infantry operated missiles can be dealt with active armor, while air cover is provided by fighters, such a vehicle can be viable. Against proper tanks firing high velocity FSAPDS, it will be toast.

abhik
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby abhik » 10 Jul 2017 23:33

There is a lab that designs tanks, with no production facilities and there is a factory that manufactures tanks with limited R&D. Merging the two seems like the most logical thing to do.

As far as issues with OFB are concerned, you can try to avoid it like a hooker with herpes or see it as a problem to solve. Just a matter of perspective.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10317
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Gagan » 11 Jul 2017 02:33

Maybe with an engine in front like the Merkava, and make it a hybrid tank + APC
ERA as an added bonus

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19130
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Austin » 11 Jul 2017 21:26

Indian Army to upgrade 693 BMP-2 ICVs

http://www.janes.com/article/72183/indi ... bmp-2-icvs

India’s Ministry of Defence (MoD) has approved the INR24 billion (USD371 million) upgrade of 693 Indian Army (IA) BMP-2/2K Sarath infantry combat vehicles (ICVs) to BMP-2M standard.

This includes equipping the licence-built ICVs with advanced thermal imaging sights for night-fighting capabilities as well as with modern integrated fire control systems.

India's Defence Acquisition Council (DAC), headed by Defence Minister Arun Jaitley, awarded the ICV upgrade on 8 July to Bharat Electronics Limited (BEL) and the Ordnance Factory Board (OFB), both of which are state-owned companies.

The OFB unit in Medak licence-built around 1,250 BMP-2/2Ks between 1987 and 2007, all of which needed upgrading.

Industry sources said that by awarding the contract to OFB and BEL, the MoD has contravened its own Defence Procurement Procedure (DPP)-2016 that dictates competitive bidding in the acquisition process.

Senior IA officials told Jane’s that the ICV upgrade was “arbitrarily” awarded to the two state-owned companies without user trials, and that the approval of the OFB/BEL-designed fire control system was sanctioned merely on a “performance demonstration”.

Mandatory maintainability, quality assurance, and electro-magnetic interference trials were not carried out, a senior industry executive told Jane’s on condition of anonymity.

“Under pressure from the army, which wanted the ICV upgrade to be fast-tracked, the MoD also ignored several indigenous private sector companies who had developed assorted technologies for the BMP-2 upgrade,” the source said.

Many of these potential vendors were involved in the MoD’s long-pending Future ICV programme and wanted to try out their technologies in the BMP-2/2K upgrade project, the source added.

The IA and MoD did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 46906
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby ramana » 12 Jul 2017 00:21

Indian Army to upgrade 693 BMP-2 ICVs

http://www.janes.com/article/72183/indi ... bmp-2-icvs

India’s Ministry of Defence (MoD) has approved the INR24 billion (USD371 million) upgrade of 693 Indian Army (IA) BMP-2/2K Sarath infantry combat vehicles (ICVs) to BMP-2M standard.

This includes equipping the licence-built ICVs with advanced thermal imaging sights for night-fighting capabilities as well as with modern integrated fire control systems.

India's Defence Acquisition Council (DAC), headed by Defence Minister Arun Jaitley, awarded the ICV upgrade on 8 July to Bharat Electronics Limited (BEL) and the Ordnance Factory Board (OFB), both of which are state-owned companies.

The OFB unit in Medak licence-built around 1,250 BMP-2/2Ks between 1987 and 2007, all of which needed upgrading.

Industry sources said that by awarding the contract to OFB and BEL, the MoD has contravened its own Defence Procurement Procedure (DPP)-2016 that dictates competitive bidding in the acquisition process.

Senior IA officials told Jane’s that the ICV upgrade was “arbitrarily” awarded to the two state-owned companies without user trials, and that the approval of the OFB/BEL-designed fire control system was sanctioned merely on a “performance demonstration”.


Mandatory maintainability, quality assurance, and electro-magnetic interference trials were not carried out, a senior industry executive told Jane’s on condition of anonymity.

“Under pressure from the army, which wanted the ICV upgrade to be fast-tracked, the MoD also ignored several indigenous private sector companies who had developed assorted technologies for the BMP-2 upgrade,” the source said.


{I think those anonmouse senior officials should resign instead of sniping behind anonymity. And these industry vendors can opt out of such a program. Thank you. IA needs this upgrade yesterday. Cant wait for interminable trials. Learn what's important. and when a decision is taken rally behind or ship ouit.

Many of these potential vendors were involved in the MoD’s long-pending Future ICV programme and wanted to try out their technologies in the BMP-2/2K upgrade project, the source added.

The IA and MoD did not immediately respond to a request for comment.


What is there to comment on scurrilous reports?

without clicking I guessed from Janes and tone of the article its by Rahul Bedi,

This wonder is a Left minded Defence reporter!!!

What kind of reporter is that?

One who questions all decisions that strengthen the military.

I have been following him for 20 years.

Karan M
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 14104
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Karan M » 12 Jul 2017 04:06

besides it makes ample sense to split the orders between a state owned firm and a pvt firm which anyhow got the order to fit over a 1000 vehicles with ti sights.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16737
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Philip » 12 Jul 2017 14:02

Good attempt,but Same 105 gun as the Chinko wonder.The Sprut with a 125mm gun would blast the panda long before it could reach firing range. I said earlier that we have almost all the ingredients of the Sprut design with us,manufacturing the same main gun for T-72/90 MBTs,plus have a variety of chassis available from BMPs that we've manufactured.The Sprut is from the same designer stable as the BMPs,so it should be easy for us to integrate the same.In fact,if it is lighter,one could even fit the Arjun's 120 mm main gun instead of the Ru 125mm main gun,salvaging something out of the Arjun dev. Armoured composite panels could be from our Kanchan prod.,plus lightweight ERA panels from either Ru or what we've developed ourselves.

An order of 500-600 light tanks ,also amphibious capable like erstwhile PT-76s,would do well both in the mountains and in other marshy terrain.There's plenty of that in the NE sector,which could easily be redeployed to the mountains. We've developed a lot of desi tech with the Arjun programme.Here is an opportunity to leverage on both Arjun tech and Ru tech from the T-series/BMPs. China planning to deploy 300 light tanks in TIbet has to be outnumbered by IA AVs twice that number.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6403
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Prasad » 12 Jul 2017 14:30

Oooooor pare down the Arjun itself into an Arjun lite and sell it to the army

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 682
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Manish_P » 12 Jul 2017 15:50

Philip wrote:The Sprut with a 125mm gun would blast the panda long before it could reach firing range.


The Sprut 125mm smoothbore gun has an effective range of around 2000m for APFSDS and it can fire ATGMs (around 4000m/5000m range). The chinese light tank with it's 105mm rifled gun might have an edge on regular rounds but it probably can't fire ATGMs.

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1284
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby srin » 12 Jul 2017 20:40

Not sure why we need such heavy calibre main gun in a "light" tank. Won't the turret itself weigh tonnes ?

Even a BMP can fire ATGMs these days. So, it might be better investing in very cheap ATGMs and equipping these tankettes with a couple of dozen of them. And maybe a 30mm gun to attack other IFVs, and choppers.
A modified BMP might do the trick.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7315
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Pratyush » 12 Jul 2017 20:53

Prasad wrote:Oooooor pare down the Arjun itself into an Arjun lite and sell it to the army


Better yet rename it t 91 and have Natasha's market it. :rotfl:

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3248
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Rakesh » 16 Jul 2017 07:39


Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3248
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Rakesh » 25 Jul 2017 04:41

System configuration for @DRDO_India's 1500 HP - 12
cylinder diesel engine meant for main battle tanks.

https://twitter.com/delhidefence/status ... 6411035648

All future tanks designed in India will be well below 50 tons.
I think 'strategic mobility' will be a prime mover behind design.

https://twitter.com/sjha1618/status/889168946028400640

Here are some preliminary design configuration images from
DRDO's current work on a future main battle tank.

https://twitter.com/delhidefence/status ... 8693309442

The FMBT is meant to be part of a family of 'Universal Combat Weapon
Platforms' being developed by DRDO's CVRDE

https://twitter.com/delhidefence/status ... 6035761152

niran
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5282
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 16:01

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby niran » 25 Jul 2017 06:36

srin wrote:Not sure why we need such heavy calibre main gun in a "light" tank. Won't the turret itself weigh tonnes ?

Even a BMP can fire ATGMs these days. So, it might be better investing in very cheap ATGMs and equipping these tankettes with a couple of dozen of them. And maybe a 30mm gun to attack other IFVs, and choppers.
A modified BMP might do the trick.

google for AMX 13t 105 and battle of Assal Uttar. AMX a light tank 13t denotes 13 ton in weight 105 is the gun caliber small light agile tanks with top dog gun mucho lethal combo.

SajeevJino
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 39
Joined: 03 Sep 2016 22:14

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby SajeevJino » 25 Jul 2017 11:49

niran wrote:
srin wrote:Not sure why we need such heavy calibre main gun in a "light" tank. Won't the turret itself weigh tonnes ?

Even a BMP can fire ATGMs these days. So, it might be better investing in very cheap ATGMs and equipping these tankettes with a couple of dozen of them. And maybe a 30mm gun to attack other IFVs, and choppers.
A modified BMP might do the trick.

google for AMX 13t 105 and battle of Assal Uttar. AMX a light tank 13t denotes 13 ton in weight 105 is the gun caliber small light agile tanks with top dog gun mucho lethal combo.


we used the AMX 13 75 tanks, not the 105mm cannons, AMX produced 75mm, 90mm and 105 mm cannons to fix in the AMX 13ton Tanks, we bought two squad of AMX 13 75, Total numbers around 150

Image

Flicker link for hi rejolujan https://www.flickr.com/photos/mohit_s/31455282571

Its better We mix both FICV/FMBT program and brings a single platform, which can fire 105mm cannon,

105mm Cannon act as Tank
30/40mm Cannon act as IFV

Kakarat
BRFite
Posts: 999
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Kakarat » 27 Jul 2017 17:56

A Defence Science Journal from DRDO on CVRDE future tank design

Design Configuration of a Generation Next Main Battle Tank for Future Combat

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 59317
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Singha » 27 Jul 2017 19:58


Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5404
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Indranil » 27 Jul 2017 22:38

DRDO (R&DE) has now come up with a plan to put a countermine flail system on top of a T-72 chassis. Weren't they planning to do so over an Arjun chassis earlier?

nam
BRFite
Posts: 296
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby nam » 27 Jul 2017 22:59

Kakarat wrote:A Defence Science Journal from DRDO on CVRDE future tank design

Design Configuration of a Generation Next Main Battle Tank for Future Combat


Vow The paper has some details......

Good to see the nerdy paper with all the formulas. True blooded designers. For the ones who say, we dont know how to build tanks, need to be shown this paper.

I hope this talent is utilised and get the next gen land warfare system out quickly.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19130
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Austin » 28 Jul 2017 12:06

Image

jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 4868
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby jamwal » 29 Jul 2017 12:03

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city ... 817744.cms

Muntra, country's first unmanned tank, rolls out from the Chennai lab

Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) has developed an unmanned, remotely operated tank which has three variants - surveillance, mine detection and reconnaissance in areas with nuclear and bio threats. It is called Muntra. Though developed and tested for the Army by Combat Vehicles Research and Development Establishment (CVRDE) in Avadi, paramilitary has expressed interest to use them at Naxal-hit areas. That will require a few modifications. as usual
The two remotely operated vehicles designed like an armoured tank were on display at an exhibition - Science for Soldiers - organised by DRDO as a tribute to former President APJ Abdul Kalam at CVRDe in Avadi.
Muntra-S is the country's first tracked unmanned ground vehicle developed for unmanned surveillance missions while Muntra-M is for detecting mines and Muntra-N is for operation in areas where there is a nuclear radiation or bio weapon risk.
The vehicle has been tested and validated at Mahajan field firing range in Rajasthan under dusty desert conditions where temperatures touched 52 C. Army comfortably tele-operated the vehicle. It has surveillance radar, an integrated camera along with laser range finder which can be used to spy on ground target 15km away - may be a crawling men or heavy vehicles.
The exhibition also showcased CCPT vehicle which is a remote command centre.
From a helmet-mounted night vision to nano-driven thermal and electromagnetic protection and laser weapons, DRDO showcased hundreds of products in an exhibition aimed at boosting the confidence of its employees and to change a negative perception towards the organisation in the government at heavy vehicles factory.
Besides heavy vehicles, DRDO labs also showcased a few inventions like a handheld wall penetration radar which if placed on a wall will project on a screen the presence of people inside a building and also a nano-based electro-magnetic shield which protects combat systems from electromagnetic attack and also a GSM monitoring system which helps to listen in on encrypted calls of mobile phones.
DRDO chairman S Christopher said the products displayed would convey the technical competence of the organisation to the soldiers and the society. He also said DRDO was working on installing AWAC (Airborne Early Warning and Control System) on an A330 aircraft. The system is now perfected for use on a smaller Embraer plane. The exhibition will be open to the public on Sunday.
Chennai: DRDO is looking for exporting version one or two of some weapon systems which become redundant for the Army because they have acquired newer versions, said its chairman S Christopher on Friday.
After inaugurating an exhibition that showcased a wide range of products that they were in talks with countries to export weapons and systems that are phased out by the Army due to acquisition of latest versions, he said, "Older versions are good for some countries which have shown interest. Some of the systems under development too could be exported. It would also create goodwill." He, however, did not reveal name of any country. He also said DRDO had urged the government to "allow us to test the products which we may not want immediately but can still be developed and exported. Torpedoes, rockets and missiles are a few products that are being considered for export." He gave the example of Pinaki rocket as latest GPS-driven ones have been developed.
Christopher also said DRDO products were ranked well world over. "We are fourth in the world in AWAC and fighter planes, fifth in missiles. Arjun is not far away from being the best among some countries."



As the thrust is on roping in private companies, DRDO is looking at capitalising on intellectual property. Private companies are being roped in because they are better placed to market and manufacture DRDO products and the Army seems to be more receptive when products are presented by private companies. Already 1 lakh crore has been generated in two years.
"If we can generate 5 lakh crore in five years we do not have to depend on government for funds," he said.


I saw a prototype 6 years back. To think that it's still not in production. :roll:

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 668
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Gyan » 29 Jul 2017 21:41

nam wrote:
Kakarat wrote:A Defence Science Journal from DRDO on CVRDE future tank design

Design Configuration of a Generation Next Main Battle Tank for Future Combat


Vow The paper has some details......

Good to see the nerdy paper with all the formulas. True blooded designers. For the ones who say, we dont know how to build tanks, need to be shown this paper.

I hope this talent is utilised and get the next gen land warfare system out quickly.


Look at their qualifications, they are not nerds.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32837
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby shiv » 30 Jul 2017 11:54

http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.co ... ese-tanks/
blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com
Debunking the hype on Chinese tanks
Lt General K J Singh
5-6 minutes

As the stand-off on Doklam extends into second month, it has raised serious questions on long-held belief that the border between Sikkim and Tibet is settled.

In absence of an agreement, on delineation and demarcation, mutual understanding has been based on an informal agreement on border conforming to a series of features, a sort of delimitation.

Notwithstanding this, there have been frequent pin-pricks, which have been downplayed by us.

In this age of satellites and GPS, two nuclear powers have continued to rely on stone heaps, referred to as Cairns on Kerang plateau in Northern Sikkim. Dragon has its own interpretation leading to silly game of dispersal and regathering of stone heaps. More importantly, Chinese periodically attempt to cut across the line of Cairns to test and stretch our deployment and surveillance. Tracks that Chinese construct in un-held areas unlike roads can take only limited traffic but they signal intention and potential for further mischief.

Chinese border management is based on Border Defence Regiments akin to our BSF / ITBP operating from bases like Yatung and Phari Dzong, who patrol to reiterate claims. Timing and choice of location of patrols is orchestrated to convey a message. Most objective comparison in various patrol stand-offs unequivocally establishes that Dragon is certainly not a ten feet tall super creature. It would be pragmatic to surmise that more like ‘Dr Deng’ of Hindi movies, it is to be feared for scheming nature. Our dealings in past have been defensive due to our belief in ‘peaceful rising’ China. Though slow but we are on a path of sustained capability building, which has been a relative success story in Sikkim. Has this pace combined with impending elections in Bhutan contributed to rattling of China and choice of location for stand-off?

What we are seeing is an aggressive Dragon, once again to borrow Bollywood analogy, the evil money lender, who considers it is his right to grab. Having established economic suzerainty in ASEAN, it promulgated, ‘Nine Dashes Line’ in South China sea and forced littorals like Philippines into meek submission. China is serving a dangerous brew of psychological warfare aided by media backed up with legal and cartographic manipulation. It is already beginning to have some effect as we hear informed voices warning us of possibility of ‘boomerang’ and even finding merit in Chinese claims.

Dolam is a pasture, grazing rights and permits for which have been traditionally controlled by Bhutan. Chinese on their part have been intimidating the grazers thereby shrinking the area to bolster their claim. Sikkimese documents describe Mt Gipmochi as Batang La, reinforcing our position, stand-offs is hardly a way to resolve delicate issue of tri-junction. In any case, what is the hurry to construct a road in unsettled pasture, where three claimants differ on its extent and there is an informal stand still agreement? If legal manipulation and cartographic aggression is going to be the new normal than we should focus on building matching capability using historic literature and local academia. Litigation in on going compensation cases in Sikkim High Court particularly recent judgement awarding compensation and revenue records need to be analysed, referenced and digitised.

It would be in order to correct the misperception that China, after they get to Zompleri ridge line, can roll down to Siliguri corridor. Treacherous mountainous jungle terrain and total absence of connectivity limits application of force levels and will reduce it to a slogging crawl. Such offensives need logistic sustenance, narrow Chumbi valley, dominated on both flanks, with limited deployment spaces and acclimatisation challenges is a virtual death trap. While granting credit to Chinese for favourable force ratios, its actual efficacy has to be discounted as force multipliers have severe limitation in application due to weather and terrain.

Though not immediate, it is a potent threat in the long term, above all, we have obligations to our neighbour and cannot be bullied into giving up our justified claim. Wisdom lies in nuanced backing off, which can be orchestrated as three step disengagement. India can start by pulling back to an agreed interim phase line, followed by Chinese disengagement and finally India completing the process. Embarrassment can be further minimised by finding low level scape goats, after all it was done at Sansha (Spartly).

DISCLAIMER : Views expressed above are the author's own.

VKumar
BRFite
Posts: 268
Joined: 15 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Mumbai,India

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby VKumar » 30 Jul 2017 18:13

India tests unmanned, remotely operated tank named Muntra. It has three variants for surveillance especially in nuclear, chemical sectors. It has a laser sight that enables it to identify man or machine even 15 km away.

jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 4868
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby jamwal » 30 Jul 2017 18:38

It is a BMP, not tank.

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3248
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Rakesh » 31 Jul 2017 01:02

Decision on $8 bn Futuristic Infantry Combat Vehicle deal likely by July end
http://www.financialexpress.com/economy ... nd/781419/

vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1391
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby vasu raya » 31 Jul 2017 01:37

jamwal wrote:It is a BMP, not tank.


As a civilian spinoff, they could use the AI module on vehicles plying on highways?


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: dhyana, sum, tushar_m and 39 guests