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.
vera_k
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2874
Joined: 20 Nov 2006 13:45

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby vera_k » 12 Aug 2017 22:34

Indian tanks crash out of international military games after engine troubles

The fan belt snapped in the first tank. The reserve tank was then deployed for the race but its entire engine oil leaked just two kilometres before the end...it could not complete the race. It was sheer bad luck that led to the Indian team being disqualified


Looks like 1 unit overheated, and the other unit was not maintained correctly.

DrRatnadip
BRFite
Posts: 324
Joined: 31 Dec 2016 00:40

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby DrRatnadip » 12 Aug 2017 22:54

http://m.timesofindia.com/india/indian- ... 036298.cms

"The fan belt snapped in the first tank. The reserve tank was then deployed for the race but its entire engine oil leaked just two kilometres before the end...it could not complete the race. It was sheer bad luck that led to the Indian team being disqualified," said an officer.
[We need fresh and honest battle between T90 vs Arjun..I am very sure Arjun will trimph with great margin..Our beast needs a fair chance..]

RKumar
BRFite
Posts: 880
Joined: 26 Jul 2009 12:29
Location: Evolution is invention, explosion is destruction.

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby RKumar » 12 Aug 2017 23:21

ha ... I told you it was all fault of IA and of the crew ... they dont know how to perform the maintenance. Hail T-90 ... Arjun is shitty tank :rotfl:

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19171
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Austin » 12 Aug 2017 23:22

Viv S wrote:
Austin wrote:Indian Tankers did not do much well in tank competition
Much like last year this year performance was much to be desired

Please. Don't blame the tank crews for the reliability of their equipment.


The same equipment is used by every one 18 countries , even if you disqualify the current situation as sheer bad luck even then it's 10 days into competition and last I saw we stood 6th or 7th behind even small cis countries.

Last year too when all went well Indian tank crew was not in top 5

Marten
BRFite
Posts: 1955
Joined: 01 Jan 2010 21:41
Location: Engaging Communists, Uber-Socialists, Maoists, and other pro-poverty groups in fruitful dialog.

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Marten » 13 Aug 2017 00:14

Please be direct with your assessment, Austin. What is it that you want to say?

Vips
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 50
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Vips » 13 Aug 2017 00:19

A lemon is a lemon is a lemon. Whether T90 or T90S aor the latest T90 SM on which Indian Army is going to spend big bucks. Now the Natasha lobby will start blaming defects and problems in Indian screw driver giri for the fiasco in the competition.

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3264
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Rakesh » 13 Aug 2017 00:30

Guys, look at it this way. After this fiasco, perhaps senior leadership in the Army will look at the Arjun in a more favorable light. Regimental / Unit izzat is everything in the Army. Time for that 'izzat' to bear fruit.

Sid
BRFite
Posts: 1479
Joined: 19 Mar 2006 13:26

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Sid » 13 Aug 2017 00:44

T-90 in the race

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Aip60jufsWM
[youtube]v=Aip60jufsWM[/youtube]

nam
BRFite
Posts: 315
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby nam » 13 Aug 2017 02:33

The way I look at it, we will not see many reports in Indian MSM in the near future on why Arjun is a failure because t90 is better.

The tone will be both have their own areas where they excel.

If armoured bosses thought Arjun was crap, this would have been the best opportunity to get it off their back. Send it to Russia, see it fail make a huge huha and dump.

Instead they are now in a tricky situation. Hope something good comes out of all the drama.

nam
BRFite
Posts: 315
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby nam » 13 Aug 2017 02:56

Austin wrote:
Viv S wrote:Please. Don't blame the tank crews for the reliability of their equipment.


The same equipment is used by every one 18 countries , even if you disqualify the current situation as sheer bad luck even then it's 10 days into competition and last I saw we stood 6th or 7th behind even small cis countries.

Last year too when all went well Indian tank crew was not in top 5


How was the targeting performance of Indian crew? That is probably more important than oil leaks.

Out of the teams probably we are the only ones who are on constant alert of being pushed in to war with Pakistan any moment. So I don't expect out kit to be in a shape for games, given the constant excerises they are subjected in thar desert.

Might sound like a execuse, but that's my view.

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9474
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby sum » 13 Aug 2017 04:19

nam wrote:
How was the targeting performance of Indian crew? That is probably more important than oil leaks.

Out of the teams probably we are the only ones who are on constant alert of being pushed in to war with Pakistan any moment. So I don't expect out kit to be in a shape for games, given the constant excerises they are subjected in thar desert.

Might sound like a execuse, but that's my view.

Shouldn't it be other way around then since we would be having a set of well tuned crew and machines?

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3225
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Cosmo_R » 13 Aug 2017 04:28

OFB is an anachronism. We have met the enemy and he is OFB

Shankk
BRFite
Posts: 216
Joined: 30 Jan 2006 14:16

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Shankk » 13 Aug 2017 06:39

Austin wrote:
Viv S wrote:Please. Don't blame the tank crews for the reliability of their equipment.


The same equipment is used by every one 18 countries , even if you disqualify the current situation as sheer bad luck even then it's 10 days into competition and last I saw we stood 6th or 7th behind even small cis countries.

Last year too when all went well Indian tank crew was not in top 5


Hmm. Although you didn't mean it, you are making a case that tin cans are consistently leaving us inferior in the battlefield. I was almost certain that it must be those dhoti clad morons in DRDO/Avadi that are messing up but then I remembered, they are the same people who also built Arjun that beat the sh!t out of these tin cans. :(( :((

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21138
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby SSridhar » 13 Aug 2017 08:32

Marten wrote:Please be direct with your assessment, Austin. What is it that you want to say?

Marten, he is direct. He says we have not been in the top 5. Now, that's a fact. Excuses/misfortunes can be anything.

Couldn't we have sent two teams, one of T-90s and another of Arjuns? Or, is it limited to just one team?

BTW, the T72s of some CIS have done very well.

Marten
BRFite
Posts: 1955
Joined: 01 Jan 2010 21:41
Location: Engaging Communists, Uber-Socialists, Maoists, and other pro-poverty groups in fruitful dialog.

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Marten » 13 Aug 2017 08:56

SSridhar wrote:
Marten wrote:Please be direct with your assessment, Austin. What is it that you want to say?

Marten, he is direct. He says we have not been in the top 5. Now, that's a fact. Excuses/misfortunes can be anything.

Couldn't we have sent two teams, one of T-90s and another of Arjuns? Or, is it limited to just one team?

BTW, the T72s of some CIS have done very well.

There are two aspects to this: Kalina is used by every make, so how would any gunner miss a target unless they have failed to come to a full stop before taking aim? T-72 mechanical breakdowns are supposedly more than 90A/S/MS. I still do not know why a fan belt replacement would take more than 15 minutes -- does it require an engine dismount? Tried understanding the rules related to this, but didn't look hard enough. Are they not allowed to fix a pipeline leak with Mahindra M-Seal or Rin bar as they do on the field, and then move on?

Secondly, my guess is that everyone involved, including Russkiya maal lovers, would prefer that the operator team is blamed (since every one's machines are performing equally well.) They under-performed last year despite using machines provided by the hosts. They also under-performed each of the previous years using a mix. I don't see how the crew can escape blame even though they are doing their best. Only thought is that the T-90 versions we have are not rugged enough for Russian exercises. :D

Given all of this, and the lack of orders/supply chain for spares for the Arjun, it is best that we never field the Arjun until we have first managed to give and then deliver another order worth 500 units. Imagine flying out an Arjun or two and then lacking basic spares because well, we only want one type of MBT operating, and it's not the one we ordered.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19171
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Austin » 13 Aug 2017 10:06

:cry:
Marten wrote:Please be direct with your assessment, Austin. What is it that you want to say?


We need to be better trained prepared for the event , Send our own desi tank Arjun , if Chinese can bring their own tank we should too .

Last but not the least 1 tank going down can be sheer bad luck both tanks not working can't be just bad luck but more than that , time too look into it and fix it for good

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19171
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Austin » 13 Aug 2017 10:13

Tank Biathlon Result


RussianDefence.com
RussianDefence.com @Russian_Defence
·
3h
Replying to @Russian_Defence
Russia claimed top place in the Tank Biathlon 2017 finals, Kazakhstan, China & Belarus came 2nd, 3rd, 4th respectively



Note that Kazakhstan and Belarus operated T-72 B3 ,Russian T-90 the Chinese had better tanks in terms of engine power against T-72 and T-90 still Kazakhstan came in 2nd , so a better tank won't give you any bigger advantage and competition is more that having a better tank. All the good reason we need to take Ajun next time

DavidD
BRFite
Posts: 840
Joined: 23 Jun 2010 04:08

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby DavidD » 13 Aug 2017 11:11

Russia used T72B3 as well, which has the most powerful engine of all the tanks present at 1130hp, same as the Indian T90 though the T90 weighs a bit more.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7323
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Pratyush » 13 Aug 2017 11:48

Guys, no arjun at any cost. Only t 90. It is all OFB fault. We must order another 1500 form mother russia.

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3680
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Manish_Sharma » 13 Aug 2017 12:16

Marten wrote:Please be direct with your assessment, Austin. What is it that you want to say?



Don't blame russian equipment.

Blame it on Bharatvarsh's Sena.

AdityaM
BRFite
Posts: 1763
Joined: 30 Sep 2002 11:31
Location: New Delhi

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby AdityaM » 13 Aug 2017 12:17

Next year no Indian tank of T series will fail. Next year India will not compete only.
Why compete & reveal your chinks in the armour

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 682
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Gyan » 13 Aug 2017 12:31

It's obvious 100% tanks suffered non repairable defects which are being under played. Difficult to believe mother Russia or the repair teams could not provide a can of oil or fan belt. Perhaps during a war, Chinese & Pakis will call time out or lend a hand.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 46943
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby ramana » 13 Aug 2017 12:32

What was the pedigree of both the T90s sent?
The engine oil after 2 km looks very fishy.
Who ever was in charge of maintaining the tanks needs to be accountable.

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 692
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Manish_P » 13 Aug 2017 12:42

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

nam
BRFite
Posts: 315
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby nam » 13 Aug 2017 13:23

sum wrote:
nam wrote:
How was the targeting performance of Indian crew? That is probably more important than oil leaks.

Out of the teams probably we are the only ones who are on constant alert of being pushed in to war with Pakistan any moment. So I don't expect out kit to be in a shape for games, given the constant excerises they are subjected in thar desert.

Might sound like a execuse, but that's my view.

Shouldn't it be other way around then since we would be having a set of well tuned crew and machines?


Not really. A six month old car covering 100k miles/km is not going to be in good shaped compared to a 1 month old with 10k. I don't know the state of the tank that participated, however don't see IA maintaining a garage queen for the sake of this competition. It would have picked up the least used tank, where "least used" might be 1000km covered in harsh Thar summer.

Hence as I mentioned, for me it is more important to know about the skills of the crew in target engagement rather than broken belt or oil leaks. These are war machines, they will break down and can be fixed. Crews and skills cannot be replaced.

Ofcourse all this without knowing the full details. There might as well been a maintenace lapse. Hopefully armour bosses will take the right lessons.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 682
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Gyan » 13 Aug 2017 13:53

The only lesson that needs to be taken is reducing imports.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 21138
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby SSridhar » 13 Aug 2017 15:33

Marten wrote:Given all of this, and the lack of orders/supply chain for spares for the Arjun, it is best that we never field the Arjun until we have first managed to give and then deliver another order worth 500 units. Imagine flying out an Arjun or two and then lacking basic spares because well, we only want one type of MBT operating, and it's not the one we ordered.

Lack of orders can be no argument at all. We sent Tejas to Bahrain airshow with very little orders too.

The supply chain argument is even less convincing. After all, this is a contest and one goes with just essentials or most likely failure-prone components, just as it would have been for T-90.

It is more likely that there is entrenched antipathy for Arjun. We could not have done worse than the T-90s.

Kashi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2388
Joined: 06 May 2011 13:53

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Kashi » 13 Aug 2017 16:49

SSridhar wrote:It is more likely that there is entrenched antipathy for Arjun. We could not have done worse than the T-90s.


How many failures does T-90 have to undergo before this mindset will change...

Sid
BRFite
Posts: 1479
Joined: 19 Mar 2006 13:26

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Sid » 13 Aug 2017 18:38

Do we have a transport plane which can carry Arjun to Russia for such deployements, can C-17 do this job. Else we will have to either hire a Tu-224 or ship it somehow.

Talking about transportation, is compatibility with projected transportation system ever part of any GSQR so that dimensions and weight constraints are taken care of early in the design phase.

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 692
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Manish_P » 13 Aug 2017 18:55

Kashi wrote:
SSridhar wrote:It is more likely that there is entrenched antipathy for Arjun. We could not have done worse than the T-90s.


How many failures does T-90 have to undergo before this mindset will change...


If, there is entrenched apathy, then it will probably require a generational change. As things stand now it seems the Armata has more chance than the Arjun, as our future MBT

ArjunPandit
BRFite
Posts: 384
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby ArjunPandit » 13 Aug 2017 19:10

Now this is where Indian mic involved with Arjun should step up ... Even false they should have come all guns blazing against t 90.. Humiliated it and released a tfta video and used nationalistic fervor to do the rest..
If not anything this doesn't do anything worse to Arjun the tank

ragupta
BRFite
Posts: 302
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby ragupta » 13 Aug 2017 19:32

ArjunPandit wrote:Now this is where Indian mic involved with Arjun should step up ... Even false they should have come all guns blazing against t 90.. Humiliated it and released a tfta video and used nationalistic fervor to do the rest..
If not anything this doesn't do anything worse to Arjun the tank


++100%

d_berwal
BRFite
Posts: 511
Joined: 08 Dec 2006 14:08
Location: Jhonesburg

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby d_berwal » 13 Aug 2017 20:05

ramana wrote:What was the pedigree of both the T90s sent?
The engine oil after 2 km looks very fishy.
Who ever was in charge of maintaining the tanks needs to be accountable.


Well the Tanks belong to 7 Cav and they are from 2010-11 time frame. (if one has patience one can see the number in front of driver, try and freeze a frame when the tank is getting out of Anti-Tank Ditch)

Well the sequence of events is as follows (nothing fishy, look at the semi-final race 3 video in you tube):
- at the time of 3rd crew change the Tank no 1 was replaced with No 2 ( my guess the crew noted the engine oil issue. We were allowed to use another tank as we had 2 tanks qualify for Semi-finals-"my guess")
- Crew No 3 was with Tank no 2 and this one had a Fan belt issue.
- Now the Tank no 1 was reused as a back up tank and had a engine failure due to oil leakage just 2 km short on the last lap. (risk was taken to reuse the Tank No 1 which already had issue and finally the luck wore off)

Now the overall Semi-final guidelines were:
- Each crew is to run 4 laps (3-5 km) overcoming obstacles and engaging targets on three firing lines. Gun firing on move; coaxial MG firing at halt.
- 3 rotating crews from each team using only one tank.
Lap Details: (order to be choose by crew i think so)
1st lap – speed race
2nd lap – gun flank firing on move at three targets
3rd lap – AA MG firing at targets 2 targets
4th lap – coaxial MG firing at three targets

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5941
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby vina » 13 Aug 2017 20:14

:rotfl: :rotfl: . 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.

Marten
BRFite
Posts: 1955
Joined: 01 Jan 2010 21:41
Location: Engaging Communists, Uber-Socialists, Maoists, and other pro-poverty groups in fruitful dialog.

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Marten » 13 Aug 2017 20:32

SSridhar wrote:
Marten wrote:Given all of this, and the lack of orders/supply chain for spares for the Arjun, it is best that we never field the Arjun until we have first managed to give and then deliver another order worth 500 units. Imagine flying out an Arjun or two and then lacking basic spares because well, we only want one type of MBT operating, and it's not the one we ordered.

Lack of orders can be no argument at all. We sent Tejas to Bahrain airshow with very little orders too.

The supply chain argument is even less convincing. After all, this is a contest and one goes with just essentials or most likely failure-prone components, just as it would have been for T-90.

It is more likely that there is entrenched antipathy for Arjun. We could not have done worse than the T-90s.

No quibbles there. In service tanks are currently non functional due to lack of spares. I doubt if CVRDE is able to keep suppliers interested. The apathy is so deep that it is deep animosity except by the sole unit that operates the Arjun. A senior colleague is a recently retired tanker and makes no bones of the fact that the Arjun was and is unwanted. I don't to use harsh phrases but some accountability must be fixed for those that created/enabled/allowed this wild goose that has left us in this current situation.

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 974
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby sudeepj » 13 Aug 2017 20:43

Indian T90s in this competition did not have any ERA on the front part of the turret. This is the first time they were seen in this avatar.. Is this a norm or just happened to be the case for these tanks? Off and on, there were stories that indigenous Kanchan armor was used in the armor cavities of the T90 welded turret as the Russians refused to part with their armor tech. Perhaps the Kanchan is considered strong enough and no ERA is needed on that part?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 46943
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby ramana » 13 Aug 2017 21:04

d_berwal wrote:
ramana wrote:What was the pedigree of both the T90s sent?
The engine oil after 2 km looks very fishy.
Who ever was in charge of maintaining the tanks needs to be accountable.


Well the Tanks belong to 7 Cav and they are from 2010-11 time frame. (if one has patience one can see the number in front of driver, try and freeze a frame when the tank is getting out of Anti-Tank Ditch)

Well the sequence of events is as follows (nothing fishy, look at the semi-final race 3 video in you tube):
- at the time of 3rd crew change the Tank no 1 was replaced with No 2 ( my guess the crew noted the engine oil issue. We were allowed to use another tank as we had 2 tanks qualify for Semi-finals-"my guess")
- Crew No 3 was with Tank no 2 and this one had a Fan belt issue.
- Now the Tank no 1 was reused as a back up tank and had a engine failure due to oil leakage just 2 km short on the last lap. (risk was taken to reuse the Tank No 1 which already had issue and finally the luck wore off)

Now the overall Semi-final guidelines were:
- Each crew is to run 4 laps (3-5 km) overcoming obstacles and engaging targets on three firing lines. Gun firing on move; coaxial MG firing at halt.
- 3 rotating crews from each team using only one tank.
Lap Details: (order to be choose by crew i think so)
1st lap – speed race
2nd lap – gun flank firing on move at three targets
3rd lap – AA MG firing at targets 2 targets
4th lap – coaxial MG firing at three targets


So these are fairly new tanks and could not have seen much service to have fan belt broken or oil leaks. What is the history of fan belt breaking? Also it broke on the Tank #2 which may be didn't see much service. Were these two tanks overhalued at the depot before sending to the competition?

How did they perform in the shooting part of the competition: Lap 2, Lap 3, and Lap3?

d_berwal
BRFite
Posts: 511
Joined: 08 Dec 2006 14:08
Location: Jhonesburg

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby d_berwal » 13 Aug 2017 21:31

ramana wrote:
So these are fairly new tanks and could not have seen much service to have fan belt broken or oil leaks. What is the history of fan belt breaking? Also it broke on the Tank #2 which may be didn't see much service. Were these two tanks overhalued at the depot before sending to the competition?

How did they perform in the shooting part of the competition: Lap 2, Lap 3, and Lap3?


Fan belt broken is what is in the news. Its a Rubber part can break.

Oil leak is more of a maintenance issue (my view) (these kind of machines have oil pressure sensor, thus they knew there is a problem and it was replaced with Tank No 2. Even if you top up oil when Tank No 1 was reused it was just a plain Know Risk taken, they were just hopeing it will last till end)
( now if CAG were to audit this, they will blame the officer who authorized the reuse of Tank No 1 with know issue of oil leak. They will do an audit noteing saying Officer XYZ knowingly used an equipment which had an engine issue and as a result had a engine running without engine oil, resulting in loss of an engine costing GoI 2-3 cr approx.)


Both Tank No1 and Tank No 2 were part of Individual Race of stage 1. (Plus there was a Tank No 3 which missed semi-finals by 60 Sec)

Each Crew Did 4 laps.

What I observed was over all for all countries in semi-finals:
- No 3 crew was first to start and then No 2 crew and then best crew to end like a Relay race.

As for Shooting we were better but firing on move should have been better.

China strategy was we have a light tank with greater hp ratio so just be fast, miss target and do penalty laps and they did this and were FAST, quite fast.

IA does not have a policy of out of turn overhaul of equipment. So no chance the Tanks were jsut overhauled.

Out of All the Tanks used T-90 had the weakest engine as per specifications.

T-90 engine = V92S2 735 KW / 1000 BHP weight 46.5T
T-72B3 = = V92S2F 840 KW / 1130 BHP weight 44.5T
Type-96B = rumored to be a 1000-1200 HP engine weight 42T

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 682
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby Gyan » 13 Aug 2017 23:07

Is fan belt a rubber part? I thought it was woven composite plastic & steel material. Really Really strong.

ArjunPandit
BRFite
Posts: 384
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - August 9, 2014

Postby ArjunPandit » 14 Aug 2017 05:04

Missing Rohit Vats ... His posts on Arjun vs t90 were stuff of legend


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: arunsrinivasan, Cain Marko, Nitesh, VKumar, Yahoo [Bot] and 44 guests