MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

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.
Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11004
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Gagan » 14 Jun 2017 07:11

I know, Manohar Parrikar, would have sat the Army, DRDO guys down and solved the issue after a series of discussions and appropriated responsibility and ground rules.
That is how he solved the LCA - very similar set of problems perhaps.

Don't know if Arun Jaitley has the time or the patience for delving this deep

KrishnaK
BRFite
Posts: 947
Joined: 29 Mar 2005 23:00

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby KrishnaK » 14 Jun 2017 07:55

Gagan wrote:The question I have is: Is the Arjun's 1400 HP engine a mass produced item?
If yes, why is an indian company not producing it here, cheaper than the foreign manufacturer and trying to capture its market?
If no, why is an indian company not producing it here, and india pay the indian company, instead of the foreign company?
Development cost is higher in India, because the cost of capital is much higher/ability to undertake risk much lower. Private indian companies will not be able to undertake as much risk as say ones in the west. I do not think comparisons with offshore development or even R&D centers is right. Those engineers access to a know how/technology of the parent company.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50572
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby ramana » 14 Jun 2017 08:49

Gagan, It maybe mass produced in Germany. 500 engines is not a mass production item for engines.

Vivek K
BRFite
Posts: 1877
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Vivek K » 14 Jun 2017 09:10

Well then IA should place an order for 1500 Arjuns!

Marten
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2176
Joined: 01 Jan 2010 21:41
Location: Engaging Communists, Uber-Socialists, Maoists, and other pro-poverty groups in fruitful dialog.

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Marten » 14 Jun 2017 09:41

The strategic partner business should have been initiated at the sub-component level. Give them a tax holiday of five or seven years and watch the cos fall over each other to set up base in India. What stops any of the private partners from setting up a plant in India? If the MoD DF secy truly wishes to enhance indigenous capabilities, then we must first set up specific parks and clusters like the AeroSEZs set up at Nagpur, Bangalore. That kind of infrastructure and a tax holiday, plus single window clearance of imports (capital assets need a lot of paperwork thanks to babudom's need for greasy palms!) would go a long way! Of course, without orders or firm commitments, why would anyone invest in an expensive tech such as engines? We still do not have a new generation made in India car engine (other than tractor derived ones), and here we are talking of tank engines! The requirement for reliability and easy maintenance is to an order higher!

Arjun is only a symbol of what could be achieved by indigenous design. We confuse this with indigenous manufacture. DRDO is a research lab, and like the IA, it is not their mandate to set up partners. it is that of the MoD, or at least that of the Secy Defence Production. Why are these entities then not finding ways to enable local manufacture/assembly of such critical components. The answer may partly lie in revelations such as Adm Nanda's co being an agent or involved in engine import/delivery. Insiders who know the cumbersome procedures can hold the defence capabilities of the entire country hostage to their knowledge of the labyrinthine processes set up to control the capabilities of not just the armed forces, or the research organizations, but indeed the country itself. Blaming DRDO or IA DGMF or MoD is pointless in that it changes nothing. I hate admitting this, but the Arjun will not get more orders. However, I am willing to wager a bottle of desi (Sula/4 seasons, not CSD) wine that we will see balloons floated for a "light" tank within the next three years with orders flowing to MaRussia in seven years.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50572
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby ramana » 14 Jun 2017 10:14

Congress C system uses arms purchases as funding mechanism. 69 years in power they did this. After Gandhji was killed funding from business houses dried up.Just transactional. So right from beginning arms imports became funding sources. Now for imports, local industry should not be allowed to become viable. This message is drilled into ministers, babus, procurement branches. Takes some more years to retire those holdovers.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4087
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby srai » 14 Jun 2017 10:20

ramana wrote:^^ I had posted a news paper link that showed that MoD antiquated procurement process had tied up the orders for spares for Arjun and now they have been smoothened and spares are now available.
Its in this very thread....


Exclusive: On 'overweight', next-gen Arjun tanks, DRDO chief says they 'missed the point'
...
Dr Christopher listed enhanced protection and better versatility as among the improvements in the MkII over its earlier avatar, 124 of which stand inducted in the army. "Development is about achieving targets and not really looking for maintenance related facilities and we are working on the deliverables," he said.
...


The above snippet highlights a fundamental issue in how indigenous products are being procured. DRDO is an R&D entity. Production is with HVF Avadi, a DPSU, who uses various local and foreign Tier 1- 3 companies for parts/components. End user is the IA. MoD (and various government entities) executes the financial & contractual agreements. But who is making sure there are enough spare parts on order and the lifecyle support management? How long is that feedback loop i.e. how long from user part order to delivery? That is what Parrikar was able to fix by bringing in together the developer, manufacturer, end user and MoD.

On the other hand, for an imported system, like T-90S, India deals with one export entity, such as Rosoboronexport, for executing the main contract. The inner-workings are managed by that entity. That is the main difference.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby shiv » 14 Jun 2017 10:45

srai wrote:On the other hand, for an imported system, like T-90S, India deals with one export entity, such as Rosoboronexport, for executing the main contract. The inner-workings are managed by that entity. That is the main difference.

T-72, T-90 and Sukhois have one more advantage that is usually mentioned in passing. Great familiarity of existing Indian defence infrastructure with Russian products and materials and commonality of components.

Russia built the ecosystem - we joined it. We did not build a complete manufacturing ecosystem of our own. Unnecessary and premature pride at India's "IT prowess" blinded the nation into believing that we had a degree of development in manufacture that we did not have. It is only in the last 3-4 years that we are seeing the names Mahindra, Tata and L&T on BRF. A decade and more ago people right here on BRF were saying that the solution would be to "Privatize and hand the projects to Infosys and WIPRO". That in itself indicated deep ignorance about what the hell needs to happen among a typical group of educated Indians that BRF represents

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19613
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Philip » 14 Jun 2017 10:51

Posted in the China watch td,how the PLA is inducting a new light tank into the Indo-Tibetan theatre. I've deliberately coined this new word to describe the region and its "Indian-ness"! Just like the Indo-China sea (ICS).This is a counter to the PRC claiming Ar.P as southern Tibet.Tibet is part of "Greater India",since we are the home of Buddhism.Something we've neglected while China is building a Nalanda equiv.,intl. Buddhist centre, in a jiffy.It is trying to appropriate Buddhism.

Back to the light tank. Well over a year ago,I postulated the IA acquiring alight tank for the mountains. We seem to be inducting upgraded T-72s as far as possible,but one is sure that a light tank such as the Russian 2S25 Sprut-SD ,just 18t,based upon the BMP-3 chassis,but with a 125mm smoothbore main gun.A T-72 weighs a whopping (by comparison) 40t+. Arguably,2 light tanks could be transported by air by our heavy lift aircraft instead of just one T-72. Will we see a future demand for such a beast? Is there any further news on BMP-3 prod. in India,or have we dumped the idea? If so,the light tank based upon the same slightly modified chassis could have a desi turret based upon the Arjun main gun (120mm),etc.

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/ ... k-in-Tibet
t-near-India-border/4461497292158/
China deploys new tank in Tibet, near India border
By Elizabeth Shim Contact the Author | June 12, 2017

Xcpts:
China is expanding its military presence in Tibet with a new tank, according to state news media. Photo by Stephen Shaver/UPI | License Photo
June 12 (UPI) -- China deployed its latest military tank, the Xinqingtan, in an area of Tibet near the Indian border.

Chinese news site Guancha reported Monday Beijing is increasing military buildup in Tibet in a show of force designed to deter the Indian military.The Xinqingtan includes a 105-millimeter tank gun, a 35-millimeter grenade launcher and a 12.7-millimeter machine gun.
The guns have already been adjusted to a high angle so they are ready for mountain operations, according to the report.
The tank is relatively light at 35-38 tons. It produces 1,000 horsepower on an 8V150-type engine.

Guancha stated the Xinqingtan's technology and firepower is "far more advanced" than the Russia-made T-90S tanks deployed by India. :rotfl:

tandav
BRFite
Posts: 250
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 08:24

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby tandav » 16 Jun 2017 14:09

Chinese Light Tanks in the Indo-Tibet Theatre are equipped with High power Laser Dazzlers that have offensive uses also. Laser Dazzlers are deemed illegal by many international conventions but have still been deployed by PLA/PLAAF/PLAN on active combat duty in Tanks/Helis/Recce Vehicles. These devices have the ability to physically and permanently blind Indian Soldiers manning the front lines while the Chinese troops inside the Troop carriers and Tanks will be safe guarded by relying on Electronic/TV displays. In the first wave of Chinese attacks we need to ensure that such assassins mace type technologies do not disable our war fighting abilities on the Chinese borders.

Potentially the non export version of the VT-5 from NORINCO
http://www.military-today.com/tanks/vt5.htm

Rishi Verma
BRFite
Posts: 1019
Joined: 28 Oct 2016 13:08

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Rishi Verma » 16 Jun 2017 14:51

Marten wrote:.....snip

Arjun is only a symbol of what could be achieved by indigenous design. We confuse this with indigenous manufacture. DRDO is a research lab, and like the IA, it is not their mandate to set up partners. it is that of the MoD, or at least that of the Secy Defence Production.


Kind request, if you have never manufactured anything then please dont fill pages with hog manure.

It is indeed DRDO's mandate to develop systems that is manufacturable. Secretary of Defense (production) doesnt have a magic wand that will take any junk in DRDO cow shed and get it manufactured!!

The original designer (DRDO) should provide detailed documentation of where every screw nut or cotter pin will come from, its tolerance, and specs to great detail (be it a rifle, plane or tank) - apart from proving technology and performance.

And only the DRDO can visit, assess, and qualify an outside manufacturing partner

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1569
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Manish_P » 16 Jun 2017 15:46

Philip wrote:Back to the light tank. Well over a year ago,I postulated the IA acquiring alight tank for the mountains. We seem to be inducting upgraded T-72s as far as possible,but one is sure that a light tank such as the Russian 2S25 Sprut-SD ,just 18t,based upon the BMP-3 chassis,but with a 125mm smoothbore main gun.A T-72 weighs a whopping (by comparison) 40t+. Arguably,2 light tanks could be transported by air by our heavy lift aircraft instead of just one T-72. Will we see a future demand for such a beast? Is there any further news on BMP-3 prod. in India,or have we dumped the idea? If so,the light tank based upon the same slightly modified chassis could have a desi turret based upon the Arjun main gun (120mm),etc.


As the good doctor has been known to say - the counter to a stealth fighter need not always be a stealth fighter

Adequate numbers of man portable anti-tank missiles would give the chinese lots to think about, leave aside the LCHs and Rudras darting between the mountains and valleys picking them off.

There are several good reasons why tank battles are left to be done mostly on the plains

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7840
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Pratyush » 16 Jun 2017 16:26

ramana wrote:Gagan, It maybe mass produced in Germany. 500 engines is not a mass production item for engines.



Ramana when it comes to diesel engine. The application defines the production run. For a tank a run of 500 can be huge. Like it is for challanger of the italian Arterie c1. In both the cases the production run is under 500. But the maker has had the ability to design and produce engines. Something that is only recently been acquired by indian companies such as Tata and Mahindra.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby shiv » 16 Jun 2017 17:14

Rishi Verma wrote:
Marten wrote:.....snip

Arjun is only a symbol of what could be achieved by indigenous design. We confuse this with indigenous manufacture. DRDO is a research lab, and like the IA, it is not their mandate to set up partners. it is that of the MoD, or at least that of the Secy Defence Production.


Kind request, if you have never manufactured anything then please dont fill pages with hog manure.

Post reported. This post is by no means a "kind request". People should be allowed to express opinions and make mistakes on a non professional forum such as BRF without attracting vicious put-downs from people desperately thrashing about claiming to represent the acme of expertise and knowledge on a given subject. If knowledge is there it must be shown as many BRFites do, and not claimed boastfully. The ability to express and explain is a skill that cannot be compensated for by any amount of blowing one's trumpet.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11004
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Gagan » 16 Jun 2017 17:52

Verminator is going to get a visit from a Breaper

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19613
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Philip » 16 Jun 2017 18:58

ATGMs,manpads,etc., are defensive weaponry.The need for some armour where the terrain allows it,would be to the advantage of the side that possesses it.Remember how the Zoji La Pass was secured by the IA in '48."Fortune favours the bold",and Gen."Timmy" possessed just the right stuff in this unique display of creative military thinking ,design and execution.Cheers to the memory of all those who were rsponsible for Zoji La!

https://www.himalayanclub.org/hj/60/13/ ... e-zoji-la/
The tanks made the crucial difference. Since September 1948 infantry attempts to dislodge the enemy from the pass had proved futile. Time was of the essence and if the Leh garrison was not relieved by November 1948 the whole of Ladakh would be lost to India when winter snow snapped road communications. When the conventional approach failed, Major General Thimayya turned to psychology. First (with strawberries and cream!) he charmed Meher Singh the legendary Air Chief into personally landing their Dakota on the untried Leh airstrip to prove its worthiness then sent in a company of Gorkhas to strengthen its garrison. Then in a last gamble of the dice to get men into Leh by road, Thimayya decided to clear the Zoji La by calling in the cavalry. This was an unprecedented decision since tanks had never been used at such altitudes and may not even function on the severe gradient. Based on his experience of war in the Burmese hills however 'Timmy' knew that more than blasting bunkers the mere sight of tanks made the most hardened of soldiers throw in the towel. The new Indian army had no winter clothing available for the freezing undertaking and was often reduced to dry rations. With the temperature at minus 20 degrees Fahrenheit each man was supplied two blankets to survive the cold. The general personally handed over diwali sweets to all the men involved in the assault.

The tank squadron was kept perfectly concealed in an enlarged cave in the lee of the pass, its existence unknown to both armies. The greatest imponderable was whether a tank would operate in the oxygen-thin air of the Zoji La? Doubters were many and luckily there were more on the Pakistani side. When it was reported to Pak sector headquarters that tanks were storming the Zoji La, the official reaction was to laugh at the idea and dismiss it as an Indian ruse to pass off jeeps disguised as tanks. :rotfl: To add to the irony, only the driver rode in the tank, the rest of the crew were ordered to walk behind in case of accidents. At places the trail was so narrow the tread of the tank overlapped the edge.

D-day could be not later than 31 October when winter snow would prevent access till the following June. This closely guarded secret operation was named 'Sparrow' after the nickname of commandant of the 7th Cavalry Lt Col Rajinder Singh. Bad weather on the 31st made the planned assault impossible and on the morning of the 1 November the forecast was more snow. It was now or never. 'To hell with the meteorological report' said Thimayya and ordered the attack to begin. His gamble paid off and the falling snow would turn out to be his ace since it blanketed out enemy awareness of what was about to hit them. Despite the narrowness of the road, its alignment served the purpose and the tanks rumbled up (long before Yankee politicians thought of it) to shock and awe the opposition. Within four hours Ladakh had been - in effect -liberated, though it took the best part of November and only after fierce hand-to-hand fighting for Kargil to be taken. A month and a cease-fire later Leh was safe as part of the Indian union.

So convinced was the Pakistani command that tanks could never ascend the pass that they neither positioned anti-tank guns nor laid mines, with the result that all seven tanks got through to their objective without any loss to man or machine. When the leading tank (called 'Chindit') crested the Zoji La out of the mist, the astonished Pakistan sector commander radioed his blase superior and was told amidst choice expletives 'not to be so bloody stupid.' (The expletives would be repeated in the Matyayan bungalow visitors book when Gian Singh on behalf of the victorious Gunners wrote: 'We maroed (hit) the B.C's left right and centre' ( B.C's in the vernacular referring to a sensitive part of the anatomy.)

When some visiting Indian dignitaries were taken to Gumri to view the site of the victory, they collapsed from the cold and had to be revived with brandy and rum. At this time in the Indian Parliament a motion had been tabled to discontinue the supply of rum to Indian troops but on realising how the genie in the bottle could contribute to success on the battlefield there were some second thoughts on the subject. To prove the proposition that the Zoji La is more of a passage than a pass it took the victors more than two days to reach Machhoi and tank support had to be enlisted again before Dras was taken on 15 November. The tanks returned to Baltal the same day the Zoji La was sealed in for winter. At Gumri were 300 brand new jeeps waiting to be delivered to Leh. They were along with supplies and rations completely snowed under. The following May to the huge relief of General Virender Singh

Vivek K
BRFite
Posts: 1877
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Vivek K » 16 Jun 2017 20:02

Hakeem ji, correct me (no flame bait) but it seems to me that you seem to have had an "awakening" regarding roosi maal.

Russia built the ecosystem - we joined it. We did not build a complete manufacturing ecosystem of our own. Unnecessary and premature pride at India's "IT prowess" blinded the nation into believing that we had a degree of development in manufacture that we did not have. It is only in the last 3-4 years that we are seeing the names Mahindra, Tata and L&T on BRF.


The bolded part is akin to Trummmp asking Bama to tone down the "American Exceptionalism" part because it offended other nations. Lets come to the manufacturing part - what makes you say that about India's manufacturing sector? Take the following sectors

a) Automotive - in the 60s and 70s India was producing about 30,000 cars annually divided amongst two dominant manufactures. With foreign investment and growth of the private sector - about 3.4 million passenger vehicles were sold last year. The industry features large players like TELCO that own Jaguar - Land Rover.
b) Telecom - In the early days when a child was born, the second thing parents did after registering the birth would be to register for a phone connection for the child so that at the time of his marriage they could "gift" him a telephone line. The story of India's telecom growth was a phenomenon that we all saw take hold in the early 2000s. Today the number of landlines and cellphone subscribers is about 1.18 billion. Again the growth was made possible in part through disinvestment and introduction of the private sector into telecom.
c) IT - Y2K gave wings to a new industry which in 2015 generated revenues of $145 billion. Here again it was the private sector that led the effort.
d) Chemicals and Petrochemicals - A vibrant sector with large scale (private) industries; Seventh largest producer of chemicals worldwide and third largest producer in Asia. (by output) Fourth largest global producer of agro chemicals. The estimated size of Indian chemicals sector stands at approximately USD 139 billion.

I could go on with space sector, and others.

The industrial revolution is taking hold and promises better and higher paying jobs. Shouldn't the military support this revolution to bring in high paying jobs, alleviate poverty, strengthen economic security, allow an independent foreign policy and the ability to morph into a "real power" and not one that only participates in exercises but has limited ability fight for extended periods? In every war the MOD and RM go begging around the world for munitions. With true make in India of the fantastic weapon systems "integrated" by DRDO a lot could be achieved. With time as demand grows, backward integration of engines and the like can be achieved as well.

India needs to shake off its colonial yoke and totally ban imports of weapon systems.

Marten
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2176
Joined: 01 Jan 2010 21:41
Location: Engaging Communists, Uber-Socialists, Maoists, and other pro-poverty groups in fruitful dialog.

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Marten » 16 Jun 2017 20:14

Rishi Verma wrote:
Marten wrote:.....snip

Arjun is only a symbol of what could be achieved by indigenous design. We confuse this with indigenous manufacture. DRDO is a research lab, and like the IA, it is not their mandate to set up partners. it is that of the MoD, or at least that of the Secy Defence Production.


Kind request, if you have never manufactured anything then please dont fill pages with hog manure.

It is indeed DRDO's mandate to develop systems that is manufacturable. Secretary of Defense (production) doesnt have a magic wand that will take any junk in DRDO cow shed and get it manufactured!!

The original designer (DRDO) should provide detailed documentation of where every screw nut or cotter pin will come from, its tolerance, and specs to great detail (be it a rifle, plane or tank) - apart from proving technology and performance.

And only the DRDO can visit, assess, and qualify an outside manufacturing partner

Your engineering knowledge may well be amazing (kudos if that is indeed the case), but ability to read and comprehend is quite limited. Read my post again. "Mandate to set up" is whose? Who sets out DPP and assigns ownerships? There is your answer!

Specs and blueprints or certification of a process does not equate "setting up". So take a deep breath and pick something you're really aware of, and understand before shooting off your mouth.
PS: Why pick needless fights if you're not aware? :)

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6921
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Indranil » 16 Jun 2017 23:59

shiv wrote:
Rishi Verma wrote:Kind request, if you have never manufactured anything then please dont fill pages with hog manure.

Post reported. This post is by no means a "kind request". People should be allowed to express opinions and make mistakes on a non professional forum such as BRF without attracting vicious put-downs from people desperately thrashing about claiming to represent the acme of expertise and knowledge on a given subject. If knowledge is there it must be shown as many BRFites do, and not claimed boastfully. The ability to express and explain is a skill that cannot be compensated for by any amount of blowing one's trumpet.

Hakeem, I don't see your report. I agree with you on this.

Gagan wrote:Verminator is going to get a visit from a Breaper

I was about to, but I see Marten's very responsible reply above. I will let Marten shepherd this discussion back to the subject at hand. But, I am closely monitoring this.

Rishi sahab,
As for the rules of posting on this forum, you are breaking many. I don't know how much longer I can continue to be this lenient. We have banned posters for much less. Let the substance of your post speak for the substance in you. Right now, you are making an awful amount of noise. You know what that is associated to.

jayasimha
BRFite
Posts: 400
Joined: 09 Feb 2011 17:31

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby jayasimha » 26 Jul 2017 13:21

https://drdo.nic.in/drdo/whatsnew/FTC_2018_BROCHURE.pdf

23 February 2018
National Technical Seminar
on
FUTURE TECHNOLOGIES FOR COMBAT VEHICLE ELECTRONICS
Venue: ARJUN Auditorium CVRDE, Avadi, Chennai

Contact Details Smt. V. Jayashree Sivakumar, Scientist G, Addl Dir (Electric Drive), CVRDE Convener – FTC2018 Combat Vehicles Research and Development Establishment Avadi, Chennai – 600054 Tamil Nadu
Email : nts.ftcve2018@cvrde.drdo.in

About the event
Combat Vehicles Research & Development Establishment (CVRDE), one of the premier establishments of Defence Research and Development Organization (DRDO) proposes to conduct a national level technical seminar on “Future Technologies for Combat Vehicle Electronics”, paving the foundation to develop a centre of excellence in combat vehicle electronics

Call for papers Original research articles in english in IEEE format broadly in-line with the scope of the seminar is invited. Abstracts/Manuscripts are to be communicated to :

nts.ftcve2018@cvrde.drdo.in

The manuscripts in IEEE format will be peer-reviewed prior to acceptance. Accepted manuscripts will be published in electronic format and will be considered for publication in ‘Defence Science Journal’.
Important Dates:
Submission of abstract : 06 September 2017
Notification of acceptance : 20 September 2017
Submission of full manuscript: 04 December 2017
Author/Delegate registration: 14 February 2018

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5835
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Rakesh » 26 Jul 2017 22:49

T-90S MBTs - not Arjun MBTs - of the Indian Army, to take part in Tank Biathlon 2017 at Moscow, Russia.
https://twitter.com/livefist/status/889753491505164289

The above link takes you to Facebook. I am reposting the entire article in here, for those who cannot access Facebook at work.

Pictured here are Indian Army T-90S tanks outside Moscow this week for the Tank Biathlon 2017, part of Russia's annual military games. The showpiece event involves tanks from a list of countries that include a Chinese crew with T-96s.

This year, the first year that India is fielding its ranks, the Indian Army isn't fielding the Arjun MBT at the event, despite widely being expected to do so, and, according to sources receiving a suggestion from the Russian military to the effect. A decision that is at once perplexing and yet, unsurprising.

India's participation at the Tank Biathlon is always a big deal. It adds enormous stature to a young event. It also gives India a chance to stretch its legs at an event that involves tanks from China. But here's the thing: until at least May this year, there appeared to be the welcome possibility that India would field the indigenous Arjun MBT, and not the T-90S that it receives from a cookie-cutter production line at the Heavy Vehicles Factory outside Chennai. Sources at the Russian Embassy tell Livefist there was genuine anticipation that India would send three Arjun Mk.1 tanks to the Tank Biathlon 2017. In the end, India decided to 'play safe' and field its T-90S. Russian MoD representatives coordinating the invitations and participation had even suggested that India consider bringing the Arjun this year. Sadly, the Army didn't think it was a good idea.

The Indian Army in a statement today said, 'The Tank Biathlon competition is an international event conducted as part of the International Army Games held every year since 2013 at Alabino Ranges, Russia. International Army Games involve 28 events organised in five Countries i.e. Russia, Belarus, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and China. The Indian Army team has been participating in the competition for the past three years since 2014. The team stood 6th in the previous year out of the 17 countries which participated in the event in July 2016. This year, for the first time, the team would be participating with own T-90 tanks which have been shipped to Russia.'

The Tank Biathlon, it should be said, has so far largely featured T-72 tanks. The Indian Army must have its reasons for deciding against getting the Arjun Mk.1 to participate, though they aren't immediately clear. For one thing, the Arjun Mk.1 has actually out-tanked the T-90 in comparative trials imposed on it over years by the Armoured Corps. The question is this: would the sprints, long races and obstacle courses actually have suited a platform like the Arjun MBT more? Or was the Army faced with the same quandary that sees the Arjun confined to desert terrain and far from the plains of Punjab. Should the Army have bitten the bullet this year and fielded an Arjun instead of a T-90S? Or was this the safest possible play?

The apparent diffidence is surprising. And again, not really. As Livefist has reported for years, the Arjun remains saddled with a skeptical customer that has agreed to induct two regiments of a tank that has apparent weight issues (and this new hurdle that popped up this year: https://www.livefistdefence.com/2017/03 ... -tank.html) and technological shortcomings that hold it back like a plough. However, the Army has come round to a tank that is far better than it had initially suspected. The Arjun Mk.2, a far improved version under test, has run into familiar troubles over weight and transportability issues, further slowing its path into service and making substantially bleaker the type's overall potential to see service in significant numbers.

True, it makes sense for the Army to field its mainstay battle tank at an international event, a tank that it operates over 1,500 of across variants -- and not a type that it operates just 124 of in a specific desert sector. The Biathlon, after all, is an event about skill and prowess and not at its core a stage to showcase equipment (most tanks at the event are Russian origin anyway). But it's difficult to ignore the anticipation that was palpable this year to see the Arjun in the courses outside Moscow from July 29.

The Army's decision not to field the indigenous tank is therefore probably only part of a larger exercise in writing off the Arjun.

Marten
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2176
Joined: 01 Jan 2010 21:41
Location: Engaging Communists, Uber-Socialists, Maoists, and other pro-poverty groups in fruitful dialog.

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Marten » 26 Jul 2017 23:09

Who would want an embarrassing repeat of Tincan trials in India? That too in a global stage with unbiased media coverage and neutral or at least less biased referee teams.

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2231
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby abhik » 27 Jul 2017 00:02

Somebody needs send an anonymous letter to the MoD questioning why we are buying more T90s where Arjun is available.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19613
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Philip » 27 Jul 2017 13:33

Abhik,it's like flogging a dead horse.We've been debating this for almost decade now. For better or worse the IA and MOD have decided that the T-90s/upgraded T-90s, will be the principal MBT for the IA for the next decade,acquiring around 1500+ of them.Around 1000+ T-72s will also be upgraded to almost T-90 std.There was one report that the wish no. is around 4500 MBTs.The key issue in not ordering more Arjuns has been stated as weight and size,limited terrain/transportable capability..and extra cost too.
Here's a report which analyses the issue,Arjun,etc.aks why more As can't be ordered.I think that eventually another batch of A-2 will be ordered,but in the context of the "dragonfire" in the Himalayas,mountain warfare and eqpt.,weapon systems,ammo,etc.,even perhaps light tanks,required for a long drawn out spat,perhaps with Pak too,will consume much of the def. budget in emergency purchases,etc. I wouldn't be surprised if more med/heavy helos,attack helos,were ordered/leased asap along with more C-130Js.There is a good MI-17 variant with considerable attack firepower,retaining its reg. troop payload that could be very useful for the current stand-off.

http://www.financialexpress.com/india-n ... ia/440862/
HomeIndia news Russia’s upgraded T-90 battle tanks to give Indian Army ‘unmatched’ firepower against Pakistan!
Russia’s upgraded T-90 battle tanks to give Indian Army ‘unmatched’ firepower against Pakistan!
Giving a much-needed boost to the Indian Army's attack capabilities, Manohar Parrikar-led Defence Acquisition Council (DAC) has cleared a deal for buying upgraded versions of Russia's powerful T-90 tanks for Rs 13,448 crore.
By: Smriti Jain | Updated: November 8, 2016

Kersi
BRFite
Posts: 149
Joined: 31 May 2017 12:25

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Kersi » 27 Jul 2017 14:27

ramana wrote:Congress C system uses arms purchases as funding mechanism. 69 years in power they did this. After Gandhji was killed funding from business houses dried up.Just transactional. So right from beginning arms imports became funding sources. Now for imports, local industry should not be allowed to become viable. This message is drilled into ministers, babus, procurement branches. Takes some more years to retire those holdovers.


ONGC (new projects) was a major source of funding. This has dried up. Defence is a major source today. No govt is going to let it go

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1569
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Manish_P » 27 Jul 2017 15:51

Philip wrote:Here's a report which analyses the issue,Arjun,etc.aks why more As can't be ordered.


What report are you referring to sir ?

If you are referring to the news article whose link you have posted then it also contains a statement from an ex IA Colonel which states that "Arjun may be a heavier tank, but it's on-the-move strike precision is unparalleled"

Kashi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3002
Joined: 06 May 2011 13:53

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Kashi » 01 Aug 2017 10:24

Livefist‏@livefist

EXCLUSIVE: Russian military suggested it, but Indian Army decides not to field Arjun MBT at Tank Biathlon 2017. https://www.facebook.com/Livefist/posts ... 72642371:0

Image

jayasimha
BRFite
Posts: 400
Joined: 09 Feb 2011 17:31

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby jayasimha » 09 Aug 2017 13:29

July 2017 paper on

Design Configuration of a Generation Next Main Battle Tank for Future Combat
A. Hafeezur Rahman, Ameer Malik Shaik, J. Rajesh Kumar, V. balaguru, and P. Sivakumar
Combat Vehicles Research and Development Establishment


publications.drdo.gov.in/ojs/index.php/dsj/article/download/11426/5924

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50572
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby ramana » 18 Aug 2017 21:30

Very good summary of the Arjun Mk2 and the case for making more of it by Col.(R) Arun Kumar

Dated Sep 2014

Creating Capability : Main Battle Tank

http://www.defproac.com/?p=982

He suggests 500 of them.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11004
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Gagan » 19 Aug 2017 08:04

Whatever people may say, the Arjun is deployed where it matters - the deserts of the Thar

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7840
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Pratyush » 19 Aug 2017 08:43

Looking at the t 90 pic minus the era. It dosent look like it has slopped armour. So why are critics of Arjun carping about Arjun not having slopped armour.

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1230
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby sudeepj » 19 Aug 2017 10:13

Pratyush wrote:Looking at the t 90 pic minus the era. It dosent look like it has slopped armour. So why are critics of Arjun carping about Arjun not having slopped armour.


Cause they were lying.

Vivek K
BRFite
Posts: 1877
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Vivek K » 19 Aug 2017 11:05

So the best defence for the Pakis is to publish wrong capacities of their bridges - say 35 tons. Then we will need to reject even T-90s and look for unobtanium from roos!

jayasimha
BRFite
Posts: 400
Joined: 09 Feb 2011 17:31

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby jayasimha » 19 Aug 2017 15:33

http://publications.drdo.gov.in/ojs/ind ... 11432/5931

trends in Sighting Systems for combat Vehicles
Zahir Ahmed Ansari, Avnish Kumar, Rajeev Marathe, and Madhav Ji Nigam
-Instruments Research and Development Establishment, Dehradun - 248 008, India
-Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee - 247 667, India

jayasimha
BRFite
Posts: 400
Joined: 09 Feb 2011 17:31

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby jayasimha » 19 Aug 2017 15:37

http://publications.drdo.gov.in/ojs/ind ... 11541/5917

carbon Fiber composites: A Solution for Light Weight
dynamic components of AFVs (armoured fighting vehicle)

Subodh Kumar Nirala, Sarath Shankar, Dhanalakshmi Sathishkumar,
V. Kavivalluvan, and P. Sivakumar

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2663
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby kit » 19 Aug 2017 15:59

Kersi wrote:
ramana wrote:Congress C system uses arms purchases as funding mechanism. 69 years in power they did this. After Gandhji was killed funding from business houses dried up.Just transactional. So right from beginning arms imports became funding sources. Now for imports, local industry should not be allowed to become viable. This message is drilled into ministers, babus, procurement branches. Takes some more years to retire those holdovers.


ONGC (new projects) was a major source of funding. This has dried up. Defence is a major source today. No govt is going to let it go


Maybe true ., purchases of a certain magnitude in whatever flavour is always coated with commissions except for maybe Gov to Gov purchases.Someone will pocket it somehow so why not let those chaps be licensed to do so and in the open? .. maybe they can be taxed suitably as well :mrgreen:

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2663
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby kit » 19 Aug 2017 16:00

Vivek K wrote:So the best defence for the Pakis is to publish wrong capacities of their bridges - say 35 tons. Then we will need to reject even T-90s and look for unobtanium from roos!



the 90s crashed out of the tank biathlon .. not so good for PR !!

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3870
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Manish_Sharma » 19 Aug 2017 16:20

Vivek K wrote:So the best defence for the Pakis is to publish wrong capacities of their bridges - say 35 tons. Then we will need to reject even T-90s and look for unobtanium from roos!

Such reasons don't apply to imported maal !

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3870
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Manish_Sharma » 19 Aug 2017 16:24

kit wrote:
the 90s crashed out of the tank biathlon .. not so good for PR !!

Our manufacturing, maintenance & skills of Armoured Corps will be blamed; foreign entity will always be defended by media crooks.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2663
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby kit » 19 Aug 2017 16:33

Manish_Sharma wrote:
kit wrote:
the 90s crashed out of the tank biathlon .. not so good for PR !!

Our manufacturing, maintenance & skills of Armoured Corps will be blamed; foreign entity will always be defended by media crooks.


i think this might be a good opportunity for the Arjun to come out good !! Does the biathlon specify any weight category btw


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: brar_w, CRamS and 45 guests