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.
jaysimha
BRFite
Posts: 636
Joined: 20 Dec 2017 14:30

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby jaysimha » 30 Jun 2018 16:55

http://www.imrmedia.in/events/uploads/events/brochure/file/Info%20Brochure%20FRCV%202016.pdf
May 2016 kumbh mela on future ready combat vehicle posting for records only.

ParGha
BRFite
Posts: 859
Joined: 20 Jul 2006 06:01

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby ParGha » 02 Jul 2018 17:50

SP isn’t the most reliable source, but it resonates with what I have read about T90 and Armatas from many Russian analysts: over complicated, maintenance hogs which decrease unit autonomy at marginal technical advances. IA would have been better off sticking to T72s and upgrading them with better engines and electronics.

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5177
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby RoyG » 02 Jul 2018 18:31

ParGha wrote:SP isn’t the most reliable source, but it resonates with what I have read about T90 and Armatas from many Russian analysts: over complicated, maintenance hogs which decrease unit autonomy at marginal technical advances. IA would have been better off sticking to T72s and upgrading them with better engines and electronics.


T-90 = T-72BM

Picklu
BRFite
Posts: 1653
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Picklu » 03 Jul 2018 03:46

ParGha wrote:SP isn’t the most reliable source, but it resonates with what I have read about T90 and Armatas from many Russian analysts: over complicated, maintenance hogs which decrease unit autonomy at marginal technical advances. IA would have been better off sticking to T72s and upgrading them with better engines and electronics.


hush!!!!

The Russia rakshak lynch mob is on your way

You are missing the obvious grand success that T-90 achieved without firing a single shot : it killed Arjun (along with Indian Tank Industry) and preserved India as a Russian Tank exporting (read dumping) ground for the next couple of decades

They are trying their best with BMP3 also but looks like Injuns got smart and managing with upgrade BMP2

mody
BRFite
Posts: 370
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby mody » 03 Jul 2018 19:09

nash wrote:
Trikaal wrote:http://idrw.org/arjun-mk-2-set-to-lose-3-tons-of-weight/

Arjun Mk-2 after incorporating 84 improvements gained over six tons over the MK1 and now weighs at 68.6 tons. but this is about to change and on instances of the Indian Army, DRDO has again started working on to carry out structural improvements and also develop a reconfigured Hull with new improved advanced armor material which will allow it to lose 3 tons in total weight.

Indian Army had asked for weight optimized Mk-2 in 2016 and work begin soon after by DRDO put results will not be quick since reconfiguration of an accepted design will mean more painstaking and also slow developmental work which will keep the Mk-2 out of production before it is revalidated again by Indian Army in fresh trials.

Experts are already questioning what advantage a 65.5 tons Mk-2 will bring over 68.6 tons Mk-2 in its area of operations. In past, even 62 tons MK1 was criticised for being overweight and hardly 80 of the tanks were inducted or operational within Indian Army at this given point.

46 ton Russian developed and locally manufactured T-90A Main Battle Tank is still quite popular with the Indian Army and over 1200 already are in service with Indian Army even though T-90A was outgunned and outmaneuvered by Arjun MBT in direct field trials years ago.

Source- IDRW


Great, just great, job well done and Arjun-MkII successfully delayed further. Not sure who i should congratulate of this great job.


DRDO should take up the process of weight reduction from 68 tons to 65 tons, only if IA/MoD give assurance of placing the order for the tanks, once the weight has been reduced. A minimum order quantity of 472 tanks or 8 regiments worth should be required to take up any further development of Arjun tanks and for that matter any MBT.


Also, the engine should be changed from MTU 838-1400 HP engine to MTU-893 1500 HP engine. The MTU-838 engine is obsolete and has not been in production for almost 2 decades. They will have to produce the engine, only if CVRDE places the order for the same.
On the other hand, the MTU-893 engine is the latest engine being used for German tanks and also has more power. It is also smaller and lighter then 838 engine. We can replace the engine and add airconditioning to the tank.

Upgrade the 124 Arjun MK1 to MK2 standard as well, replace the chassis completely with new built ones, with the new engine. The old chassis can be used for Bhim with new turret developedwith Gun based on ATAGS.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50066
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby ramana » 04 Jul 2018 00:01

mody wrote:
DRDO should take up the process of weight reduction from 68 tons to 65 tons, only if IA/MoD give assurance of placing the order for the tanks, once the weight has been reduced. A minimum order quantity of 472 tanks or 8 regiments worth should be required to take up any further development of Arjun tanks and for that matter any MBT.


{Fat chance. The officers who came up with the requirement will retire and new ones will come who want hover ability. Besides how dare DRDO ask for economic lot quantity as IA is divorced from logistics and all the sundry stuff. They see, they like, they ask. Rest is your problem. And they will ask for odd lot to ensure your costs go up.}

Also, the engine should be changed from MTU 838-1400 HP engine to MTU-893 1500 HP engine. The MTU-838 engine is obsolete and has not been in production for almost 2 decades. They will have to produce the engine, only if CVRDE places the order for the same.
On the other hand, the MTU-893 engine is the latest engine being used for German tanks and also has more power. It is also smaller and lighter then 838 engine. We can replace the engine and add airconditioning to the tank.

{Some assumptions are being made here: One IA wants more power. When weight has gone down why more power! If it costs more to re-start the engine production after 2 decades, not their problem. Also which supplier will resart a engine mfg line for 472 engines? Second if MTU-893 is being used for German tanks little chance it will exported to India. And thirdly airconditioning will be a later improvment. }


Upgrade the 124 Arjun MK1 to MK2 standard as well, replace the chassis completely with new built ones, with the new engine. The old chassis can be used for Bhim with new turret developedwith Gun based on ATAGS.

{This does not have some illogic. So won't be accpeted.}



Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19366
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Philip » 04 Jul 2018 03:19

Cost,cost,cost.This in the ultimate analysis is why Arjun comes off second best to the IA .The IA want to outnumber the Pakis with as many MBTs as possible.The AW doctrine understandably with tbousands of Ru MBTs in the inventory will take its cue from the Russians who overwhelm their adversaries with superior nos. of mass produced MBTs
With only a paltry 124 A-1s, difficult to support becos of non- availability of spares for firang components, that too a more expensive buy one- for-one, Arjun is a hard sell even if its weight is marginally reduced.

I would advise the DRDO/ CVRDE to pin down the IA on the next futuristic MBT's design parameters and concentrate on developing the next MBT asap as even if more A-2s are ordered in the % of the inventory the numbers will be barely 10 to 15% max of the total inventory.The upgrading of legacy T-72s, some 1500 I think, to almost T-90 std. will cost far less than building new A series.

ArjunPandit
BRFite
Posts: 1126
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby ArjunPandit » 04 Jul 2018 03:32

perhaps this thread should be limited to news only and no discussions, if the mods are against closing. It has become a whine playground rather than stating facts

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5177
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby RoyG » 04 Jul 2018 03:41

Philip wrote:Cost,cost,cost.This in the ultimate analysis is why Arjun comes off second best to the IA .The IA want to outnumber the Pakis with as many MBTs as possible.The AW doctrine understandably with tbousands of Ru MBTs in the inventory will take its cue from the Russians who overwhelm their adversaries with superior nos. of mass produced MBTs
With only a paltry 124 A-1s, difficult to support becos of non- availability of spares for firang components, that too a more expensive buy one- for-one, Arjun is a hard sell even if its weight is marginally reduced.

I would advise the DRDO/ CVRDE to pin down the IA on the next futuristic MBT's design parameters and concentrate on developing the next MBT asap as even if more A-2s are ordered in the % of the inventory the numbers will be barely 10 to 15% max of the total inventory.The upgrading of legacy T-72s, some 1500 I think, to almost T-90 std. will cost far less than building new A series.


Cost drops with orders. One would think you would quit peddling your bullshit after a thorough debunking but you're like a parakeet that keeps repeating and shifting goal posts. People see right through it. Why not once and for all give everyone a break after years and just admit that you have a visceral hatred for Arjun and you prefer that shit Tin Can-72BM just b/c its Russian. Trust me people will respect you more for being upfront. Just be done with it and call it a day...

ArjunPandit - I agree.

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2187
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby abhik » 04 Jul 2018 08:21

MTU 883 (not 893?) Combined with Renk transmission called the "europack" is itself from the early 90's. I don't see any reason why they won't sell it.

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4471
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Neshant » 04 Jul 2018 11:33

The Arjun is looking like it will be a 100 year tank project.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7800
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Pratyush » 04 Jul 2018 11:51

Why not cancel the program. This is a waste of taxpayers money.

This is an unwanted orphan child, no one wants it.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9675
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Aditya_V » 04 Jul 2018 12:07

Pratyush wrote:Why not cancel the program. This is a waste of taxpayers money.

This is an unwanted orphan child, no one wants it.


Expect for those who worked on it and delivered.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7800
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Pratyush » 04 Jul 2018 12:51

Who cares if it is designed by Indians and ment to work in Indian conditions.

The Indian army dosent want it.

If you doubt. Please look at the requirements issued for Arjun and compare how many requirements are met by the tin cans.

mody
BRFite
Posts: 370
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby mody » 04 Jul 2018 13:00

abhik wrote:MTU 883 (not 893?) Combined with Renk transmission called the "europack" is itself from the early 90's. I don't see any reason why they won't sell it.


Sorry MTU-883-Ka500 CRI or we can also opt for MTU-883-Ka502 rated at 1630 HP!!

MTU 838 Ka-501 Rated power max. 1030 Kw or 1400 HP. Speed max. rpm 2400 . Length: 1810mm Width: 1940mm Height: 1110mm, Mass (dry) 1950Kg. Engine main data Bore/Stroke mm 170/175 Cylinder displacement l 3.97 Displacement, total displacement: 31.7 Litres.

As opposed to this, the MYU-883 Ka-502 is rated has max power 1200 KW or 1630 HP, Max speed 3,000 rpm.
Length: 1488 mm, Width: 972mm, Height: 742mm, Mass(Dry): 1,800 Kgs. Total displacement 27.4 Litres.

You can get an extra 230 HP, reduce the engine size, and reduce the weight by 150 Kgs. Add air conditioning to the tank.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2533
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby chola » 04 Jul 2018 13:34

mody wrote:
nash wrote:
Great, just great, job well done and Arjun-MkII successfully delayed further. Not sure who i should congratulate of this great job.


DRDO should take up the process of weight reduction from 68 tons to 65 tons, only if IA/MoD give assurance of placing the order for the tanks, once the weight has been reduced. A minimum order quantity of 472 tanks or 8 regiments worth should be required to take up any further development of Arjun tanks and for that matter any MBT.




Everyone, please. This is not new. It is a damn Catch-22 death sentence handed to the Arjun MK2 by the Army itself since its appearance in 2014. We had long discussions over this. In my mind, DRDO should do nothing and go use the team and resources to design a 45-ton that the Army say they like.


https://www.livefistdefence.com/2017/03/big-new-hurdle-for-indias-arjun-battle-tank.html

The Arjun Mk.II currently weighs 68.6 tons — a full six tons over the MK.I, owning entirely to the 73 improvements the Army demanded on the newer tank. The Army has stated, in no uncertain terms, that the 68.6 ton weight of the Arjun Mk.II is too much for ‘seamless application in semi-developed and developed sectors of the Western Front’. In other words, the Arjun Mk.II, the Army says, can’t be forward deployed beyond the deserts, in the event of active hostilities with Pakistan.
. . .
While the DRDO gets busy trying to redesign the Arjun Mk.II’s hull/turret structures and use new materials, the Army has already written off the exercise. In fact, at the very same September 2016 meeting where the DRDO committed to a 3 ton weight reduction, the Army stated, ‘There are no major advantages from tactical and operational point of view with 65 t weight reduction also. It is felt that even weight reduction to 62 tons (equal to that of Arjun MBT Mk-I) may not provide any significant tactical/ operational advantages.’


To summarize:

1) Army said MK1 was already overweight but wanted 73 improvements that increased MK2 by 6 tons,

2) DRDO agrees to 3 tons reduction on MK2 while keeping all improvements,

3) Army then said they cannot use MK2 even with reduction of 6 tons back to original weight of MK1(!!!)

These are requirements that are never meant to be met. We have already shed enough tears over the Arjun. The Army doesn’t want it no matter what DRDO does. Not worth the aggravation on our part.

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2187
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby abhik » 04 Jul 2018 17:41

Pratyush wrote:Why not cancel the program. This is a waste of taxpayers money.

This is an unwanted orphan child, no one wants it.

Might as well shut down all the DRDO army focused labs, they are making mostly unwanted orphans.

mody
BRFite
Posts: 370
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby mody » 04 Jul 2018 18:58

chola wrote:
mody wrote:
DRDO should take up the process of weight reduction from 68 tons to 65 tons, only if IA/MoD give assurance of placing the order for the tanks, once the weight has been reduced. A minimum order quantity of 472 tanks or 8 regiments worth should be required to take up any further development of Arjun tanks and for that matter any MBT.




Everyone, please. This is not new. It is a damn Catch-22 death sentence handed to the Arjun MK2 by the Army itself since its appearance in 2014. We had long discussions over this. In my mind, DRDO should do nothing and go use the team and resources to design a 45-ton that the Army say they like.




The point is a 45-50 Ton tank with which specs? The Army has not laid down the GSQR for the FMBT project even after all these years.
If they really didn't want anything to do with Arjun, they shouldn't have given the list of 73 improvements for Arjun MK2. 10 years of wasted effort and tax payer money for what? When IA gave the list of improvements, it was a given that the weight of the tank would rise further.

They should have instead done the following:
1). They should have accepted the Arjun MK1 in 2006-7, placed an order for around 500 total units, including the 124 MK1 produced.
2). List of the improvements required, to be incorporated over a period of time, as and when the tech became available.
3). Release GSQR for FMBT, with a three man crew and autoloader with a weight about 50-55 Tons.

If DRDO would have started working on a three man crew tank, with a turret based auto loader like the Le Clerc, they could had the basic tank ready by now. Electronics and sensors can always be upgraded later.


IA should realise that the base technologies for a very good tank have been developed and proven by DRDO. The main gun, the ballistic computer, the fire control software, the hydropneumatic suspension, the gun stabilization system, the composite armour, ERA bricks etc. are all world class and much better then the Tin cans. I'm sure I am missing a lot of other parts that have been developed indigenously as well.
Use all of these for a reduced width 3-man crew tank weighing around 55 tons and we have a winner.

Absolutely mind boggling that why this is not plain enough for everyone to relealize. Giving the argument that they are just too used to the Tin Cans and hence don't want a much more modern and superior machine, which will have different maintenance requirements is just stupid.

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1217
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby sudeepj » 04 Jul 2018 22:06

The best way to salvage something out of the Arjun fiasco is to use some of the Arjun technologies to make the locally produced T90 and T72 fleet better. A better autoloader, a bustle to store the propellant, modular armor will all improve the T90 significantly and also make that fleet a lot more survivable.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50066
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby ramana » 05 Jul 2018 03:11

The fast track procurement process for Rifle, Carbine, and LMG shows IA GQSR process is completely broken.and flawed.
And yet IA armored corps persists as the top generals have not shown leadership and are allowing childish tantrums.
Gen. Rawat needs to have a talk with these 'dash to India,reenact Guderian battles with Russian tanks".

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6206
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby nachiket » 05 Jul 2018 06:52

sudeepj wrote:The best way to salvage something out of the Arjun fiasco is to use some of the Arjun technologies to make the locally produced T90 and T72 fleet better. A better autoloader, a bustle to store the propellant, modular armor will all improve the T90 significantly and also make that fleet a lot more survivable.

I'm curious. Arjun does not have an autoloader and it does not use 2 piece ammo like the T series (so propellant and projectile is not stored separately in Arjun). So how will you improve T-90's autoloader with Arjun tech?

ks_sachin
BRFite
Posts: 475
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby ks_sachin » 05 Jul 2018 15:08

sudeepj wrote:The best way to salvage something out of the Arjun fiasco is to use some of the Arjun technologies to make the locally produced T90 and T72 fleet better. A better autoloader, a bustle to store the propellant, modular armor will all improve the T90 significantly and also make that fleet a lot more survivable.

Put lipstick on a pig but its still a pig although t90 is by no means a bad pig.
Having said that what you have suggested is not possible - not without significant redesign. And pray how do we improve autoloader when we have never de eloped one?

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19366
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Philip » 06 Jul 2018 16:44

Yes.The small arms fiasco is shameful.It is ridiculous that 7 decades aftef independencewe cannot produce our small arms requirements locally.

Arjun is now heavier by the weight of a light tank to the T-90.Fat chance the IA will wa t more.They have enough excuses for not doing so.The DRDO too fell for the 73 " improvements" bait, increasing the weight instead of as mentioned in an above post not tried to produce a 3 man MBT around 50+t.
They still have a window of opportunity with the FMBT whatever.Otherwise the Armata will be seen at R- Day parades in the future.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7800
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Pratyush » 06 Jul 2018 17:20

Is there a GSQR for FMBT?.

Can anyone share what the Indian army GSQR for FMBT is. Has it been released to the DRDO.

To those who say that the DRDO failed to make xyz improvement to mk2. Can they tell me how many of those improvements are actually a part of the t 90. Preferably a side by side comparison.

Philip I am asking you to show us the areas where the t 90 has features that the Arjun mk2 lacks.

Let me get you started with blow off turrets. Compared to blow off panel's for the mk2.

But what to do. You are incapable of appreciating Indian designed tank with the features that t 90 lacks.

Don't really understand why the IA sticks with tin cans.

They failed in Russia. Not once but twice.

Perhaps they think that getting men killed in situations they could survive in an Arjun is an example of bravery.

ks_sachin
BRFite
Posts: 475
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby ks_sachin » 07 Jul 2018 03:45

Philip wrote:Yes.The small arms fiasco is shameful.It is ridiculous that 7 decades aftef independencewe cannot produce our small arms requirements locally.

Arjun is now heavier by the weight of a light tank to the T-90.Fat chance the IA will wa t more.They have enough excuses for not doing so.The DRDO too fell for the 73 " improvements" bait, increasing the weight instead of as mentioned in an above post not tried to produce a 3 man MBT around 50+t.
They still have a window of opportunity with the FMBT whatever.Otherwise the Armata will be seen at R- Day parades in the future.

Just think through what you have written WRT to the Arjun. Seriously mate guys like you and some others here are why the knowledgable posters leave this forum. You should change your handle to BRF newbie.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19366
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Philip » 07 Jul 2018 15:23

Facts are facts! I suggest you take a hearty dose of your own advice as your information boundary appears limited.Please read my post in full.

Pl ck. the weight of the T- series MBTs in service with the IA and weight of light tanks around the world and the
66 or 68t A-2.It will be a revelation to you.

Just some.
Sprut.Ru.18t.
CV-90.-25t.
Scimitar-8t.
BMD-4 13.6t
BMP-3 18.7t.

T-90..46t
T-72 41 to 45t
Arjun-2....68t
Last edited by Philip on 07 Jul 2018 15:55, edited 1 time in total.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7800
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Pratyush » 07 Jul 2018 15:29

Did it ever occur to you that the Indian army asked for Arjun to be the way it is.

Do you even understand why Soviet tanks are designed the way they are. When the red army was happy with 60 ton tanks. What compelled them to go with tin cans.


Why don't you learn and share with us your learning. Please share sources when you do.

Don't post a long post unless you are stating the facts.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19366
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Philip » 07 Jul 2018 16:00

Sources are aplenty if you know where to look.Exactly what I've postulated.The IA has tricked the DRDO/ CVRDE into accomodating the "73 improvements ", and are now saying that the A-2 is obese! They have little interest in more Arjuns for a variety of reasons and one chief one as stated ad nauseum is the higher cost.A-2 too has a lot of imported ( westrrn) components and is not fully desi.So they can argue as with the A-1s experience, the future difficulty of obtaining spares, etc. at high cost too.
The IA want to outnumber the PA in armour very substantially.I think an inventory figure of MBTs by 2020 was reported as around 4500.So cheaper tincans of which they have thousands in service is preferable to them.

Sources:In 2013 Defence Industry Daily put the inported content of A-1 as 58%.Cost was around $4M.T-90S was just under $3M. Locally built T-90S tanks were to cost us just $2.5M. In 2016 the DAC approved 118 A-2s for 6, 600cr. AKA said in 2011 that an A-2 would cost around $8M. Our T-90MS , latest version of which we're getting 400+ are costing us today $4.5M.

So you can see the huge cost difference which the IA can use v.effectively against buying Arjuns ,with a cash strapped GOI and defence budgets that have little money for capital expenditure, most used up for salaries and pensions, etc.

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4471
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Neshant » 07 Jul 2018 16:28

Its time to kill the Arjun project.
It is wasting valuable resources on something that will not be produced.

It's a lesson on incompetent project management and how disastrously things can turn out when proper engineering requirements are not solidly established from the start.

It also highlights the deeply flawed process of defence equipment procurement.
It's the reason no private companies ever wants to deal with defence equipment research, development or production for the govt.

Doing so ends up being a long, arduous journey of run arounds with no orders to show for at the end and inevitable bankruptcy of the company.

Worst business to be in is trying to develop and sell armaments to the Indian military.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7800
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Pratyush » 07 Jul 2018 17:27

Neshant wrote:Its time to kill the Arjun project.
It is wasting valuable resources on something that will not be produced.

It's a lesson on incompetent project management and how disastrously things can turn out when proper engineering requirements are not solidly established from the start.

It also highlights the deeply flawed process of defence equipment procurement.
It's the reason no private companies ever wants to deal with defence equipment research, development or production for the govt.

Doing so ends up being a long, arduous journey of run arounds with no orders to show for at the end and inevitable bankruptcy of the company.

Worst business to be in is trying to develop and sell armaments to the Indian military.


Not when you are Russia when it is army goods.

jaysimha
BRFite
Posts: 636
Joined: 20 Dec 2017 14:30

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby jaysimha » 07 Jul 2018 18:17

This type of dual is not new and not going to end in near future( that too in MBT dhaaga)...

If army treats arjun that way, then how come they are accepting and other platforms like ALH, missiles itd. itd.. certainy alh when it was introduced was not as good as it is today. ALH also has a firangi engine / cockpit items but still it is widely accepted and used as desi product without cribbing about % of imported items. That too a helicopter is always flown by an officer. so the specs/standards, i assume, is much much higher/ stringent than an MBT.

IMVHO mbt imports from russia is a Gordian Knot.. 1 modiNDA / 1 COAS cannot untie/revert it in 1 term.
may be patience is virtue. remember parrikar telling many times " we are in such a mess I cant tell"

Army has 1 branch DTe of Indigenisation
https://indianarmy.nic.in/Site/FormTemp ... s4+eoe8w==
They are so happy and proud about how Indian industry is coming forward to fill the gaps in army in majority of the cases.

Meanwhile BRFites in national capital can attend kumbh melas where armored corps people also attend. They have vouched that arjun is one of the best product of Indian effort.

That too Kumbh melas of CII. Lt.Gen Subrata Saha now retd. is now in CII. It will be a golden opportunity.
http://cii.in/VideoDetail.aspx?enc=vibt ... tR1P7JRnE=
Last edited by jaysimha on 07 Jul 2018 18:38, edited 3 times in total.

jaysimha
BRFite
Posts: 636
Joined: 20 Dec 2017 14:30

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby jaysimha » 07 Jul 2018 18:26

https://indianarmy.nic.in/writereaddata ... 220817.pdf
This is a very short old list where Army is interested to get parts locally for tincans

and this is what they have committed to do
https://indianarmy.nic.in/writereaddata ... /DOI-2.pdf

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2533
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby chola » 07 Jul 2018 18:33

jaysimha wrote:Meanwhile BRFites in national capital can attend kumbh melas where armored corps people also attend. They have vouched that arjun is one of the best product of Indian effort.


There is no “good” explanation for this treatment from the Army brass if the ones actually driving the machines praise it.

The bad explanations include commanders institutionalized with Russian doctrines, colonels honey-trapped by leggy blonde Natashas and, worse of all, infiltration of IA leadership by our own Philip.

ks_sachin
BRFite
Posts: 475
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby ks_sachin » 08 Jul 2018 02:50

Philip do you even know what i am alluding to in your post?
Think before you write!!!!
DRDO should do this and that my foot!!!

PratikDas
BRFite
Posts: 1875
Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Contact:

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby PratikDas » 08 Jul 2018 03:08

jaysimha wrote:BRF is like chocolate..... majority sweet but some nuts here and there...

:rotfl:
Very true

sarabpal.s
BRFite
Posts: 338
Joined: 13 Sep 2008 22:04

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby sarabpal.s » 08 Jul 2018 07:06

Philip wrote:Facts are facts! I suggest you take a hearty dose of your own advice as your information boundary appears limited.Please read my post in full.

Pl ck. the weight of the T- series MBTs in service with the IA and weight of light tanks around the world and the
66 or 68t A-2.It will be a revelation to you.

Just some.
Sprut.Ru.18t.
CV-90.-25t.
Scimitar-8t.
BMD-4 13.6t
BMP-3 18.7t.

T-90..46t
T-72 41 to 45t
Arjun-2....68t

without recognition of IFV and Tins shortcomings, you blaming weight , well arjun can have them in his nutrition diet of war any time head on just bring it

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19366
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Philip » 08 Jul 2018 09:50

"Infiltration" by one Filipov.Ha!Ha!

I am merely an observer of time and tidings and since BRF's inception in hhe last century have become quite cynical about many aspects of our entire approach to security, defence and foreign affairs.Please, I'm not belittling the efforts of our boffins in developing Arjun 1 and 2 over decades, but putting it into context of the IA's AW doctrine and approach to procuremen
Just the other day I was talking to an exec. of one of our top def. cos. in the pvt. sector ruing another delay in a certain w.system for a service which we require, which they've developed and the "two steps forward, one step backward" attitude of the MOD.Sometimes its 3 steps backwards with years wasted with repeated cancellations of tenders- the " no single vendor" policy which happens when some pull out and only one OEM is left standing, etc.

The IA's armoured warfare doctrine has evolved over decades and our experience with wars we've fought.Gen.Sunderji was a great visionary.We bought the T-72 aeons ago during the Cold War when little western eqpt. was available to us.It was capable, cheap and easy to operate, etc. This is all history now.The T-90 was its improvement bought over a decade ago! So it is wrong to belittle the IA for not ordering Arjun which arrived late, was overweight , costlier and required some tweaking.The entire support infra.is geared to supporting the smaller and lighter T-series.Modifying the infra for the A- series will be both time-consuming and z costly affair over and above the A-series extra cost which I've given above.
A-2 now fits into the IA's armoured warfare doctrine like a sq. peg in a round hole.A few more may be ordered as a fig leaf to desi ingenuity, but in my opinion A-2 may have a short future.Its technology developed though a different story.

It takes years to select, get approval and finally get into service a major weapon system.The IA did not order T- series MBTs yeterday but planned for them years ago.Look at the fiasco in the IAF over the MMRCA, now reduced to merely an MRCA! I've attended every air show since inception except the last. Show after show we see and hear the same platitudes and promises of decisions being taken and systems arriving. "Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose".

Pity the services who have to soldier on with eqpt. long past its pension date.The failure to integrate future planning of the services with the DRDO/ DPSUs is why we're tangled in knots and delays, not to mention strained finances.The IN is in better shape thanks to the vision of its past chiefs who had to build a modern navy on a shoestring budget and had to design and construct them themselves managing the DPSU yards with ex- IN admirals.Sadly the other two services have not emulated the IN.
Last edited by Philip on 08 Jul 2018 13:39, edited 1 time in total.

ks_sachin
BRFite
Posts: 475
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby ks_sachin » 08 Jul 2018 10:17

Philip wrote:"Infiltration" by one Filipov.Ha!Ha!

I am merely an observer of time and tidings and since BRF's inception in hhe last century have become quite cynical about many aspects of our entire approach to security, defence and foreign affairs.Please, I'm not belittling the efforts of our boffins in developing Arjun 1 and 2 over decades, but putting it into context of the IA's AW doctrine and approach to procurement.

Just the other day I was talking to the head of one of our top def. cos. in the pvt. sector ruing another delay in a certain w.system for a service which we require, which they've developed and the "two steps forward, one step backward" attitude of the MOD.Sometimes its 3 steps backwards with years wasted with repeated cancellations of tenders- the " no single vendor" policy which happens when some pull out and only one OEM is left standing, etc.

The IA's armoured warfare doctrine has evolved over decades and our experience with wars we've fought.Gen.Sunderji was a great visionary.We bought the T-72 aeons ago during the Cold War when little western eqpt. was available to us.It was capable, cheap and easy to operate, etc. This is all history now.The T-90 was its improvement bought over a decade ago! So it is wrong to belittle the IA for not ordering Arjun which arrived late, was overweight , costlier and required some tweaking.The entire support infra.is geared to supporting the smaller and lighter T-series.Modifying the infra for the A- series will be both time-consuming and z costly affair over and above the A-series extra cost which I've given above.
A-2 now fits into the IA's armoured warfare doctrine like a sq. peg in a round hole.A few more may be ordered as a fig leaf to desi ingenuity, but in my opinion A-2 may have a short future.Its technology developed though a different story.

It takes years to select, get approval and finally get into service a major weapon system.The IA did not order T- series MBTs yeterday but planned for them years ago.Look at the fiasco in the IAF over the MMRCA, now reduced to merely an MRCA! I've attended every air show since inception except the last. Show after show we see and hear the same platitudes and promises of decisions being taken and systems arriving. "Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose".

Pity the services who have to soldier on with eqpt. long past its pension date.The failure to integrate future planning of the services with the DRDO/ DPSUs is why we're tangled in knots and delays, not to mention strained finances.The IN is in better shape thanks to the vision of its past chiefs who had to build a modern navy on a shoestring budget and had to design and construct them themselves managing the DPSU yards with ex- IN admirals.Sadly the other two services have not emulated the IN.

I agree with you. But there is nothing new in what you write. All the points you mention have been debated ad nauseaum. So what is your point!!!

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19366
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Philip » 08 Jul 2018 13:44

Who questioned my earlier posts and their facts about the weight of Arjun, etc.? Facts arc facts which are unpalatable to some who see the issue of A- series procurement purely as a " nationalistic" necessity, not in total context of the issue.

RKumar
BRFite
Posts: 965
Joined: 26 Jul 2009 12:29
Location: Evolution is invention, explosion is destruction.

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby RKumar » 08 Jul 2018 21:36

^ sir you are stuck in the past, pls try to move ahead. T-72s will not stand a chance against modern MBTs. We need to move ahead, there is no other way than ordering Arjun-2 orders - it can be delayed but can’t be killed. I didn’t know what the hell is going on between IA, MoD and GoI, I would cancel T-90 production or T-72 upgrade orders. Order only Arjuns, better to have these monsters then lots of pussy cats.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Eric Leiderman and 17 guests