MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 17 Oct 2017 21:12

I agree that the warfighter sees things in a way we can't. But we have seen the failures of 2 t 90s in biathlon. We have seen the results of the comparative trials of the arjun and the tin can . As reported by CAG.

Inspite of that the IA has stuck to the tin can. So you may be optimistic. But I will be happy when I see orders for arjun and by the 1000s.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 17 Oct 2017 21:18

If India is to be a "power" of any capability, it must get past such blatant corruption. Wasting money by sending billions overseas makes India as a whole weaker and also subjugates it foreign policy - ESPECIALLY when a superior local product is available. A domestic weapon generates a) a warfighting capability unequalled to the purchased system - upgrades and resolution of design issues can be done for a negligible cost whereas every little upgrade on a purchased system costs billions; b) High paying jobs - defense sector jobs the world over pay well; if the multiplier effect of these is taken into account, the Arjun would actually be FREE compared to the tin can.

And then there is the possibility of a whole Indian MIC producing tanks that could be exported to friendly countries.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 17 Oct 2017 21:20

shiv had posted about the various sub-system on Arjun and where they are imported or made locally. It would be good for cost and risk reduction to maximize the local manufacture.

shiv wrote:
If you break up a tank into parts you could get
1. Body armour: made in India
2. Gun - possibly made in India
3. Engine - imported, built under license
4. Transmission: imported
5. Tracks - Indian
6. Wheels: Indian
7. Basic instruments and sensors - Indian
8. IR viewer, gun aiming system, electronics for slaving gun to gunsight, gun stabilization servo controls - probably imported (don't know)
9. Seats, upholstery - Indian
10. Air conditioning Indian
11. Radio/comm - possibly Indian
12. Countermeasures/munitions: partly Indian/partly imported?

If the above list is accurate then the Arjun is a disaster. Some of the most critical, difficult to make, difficult to design and failure prone stuff is imported. How can you stock up spares if you don't know how many will fail

Can we try to find out about the ones with

Thanks, ramana

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 17 Oct 2017 21:22

ramana wrote:shiv had posted about the various sub-system on Arjun and where they are imported or made locally. It would be good for cost and risk reduction to maximize the local manufacture.

But in the absence of large orders no one will start to make the items at home.

PS. Is there a reason why a lot of indian customisation of t 90 can't be used in Arjun.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 17 Oct 2017 22:59

The engine is fully imported
DRDO has recently come out with a domestic engine designs

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 17 Oct 2017 23:17

Gagan, Can you give a link or the blurb? What are the plans to get those designs made?

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 17 Oct 2017 23:39

ramana wrote:Gagan, Can you give a link or the blurb? What are the plans to get those designs made?

So now does the Arjun have to pass this hurdle too? Local engines will come if there is a large order. No one makes an engine for 50 tanks.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 18 Oct 2017 01:36

OK. This DRDO page has a table for the Arjun Mk1 I think.

https://www.drdo.gov.in/drdo/English/in ... pg=mbt.jsp

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 18 Oct 2017 01:46

LINK: http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/t ... 820614.ece

Dated 2015 article

The Combat Vehicles Research & Development Establishment (CVRDE), Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), Ministry of Defence, Government of India is currently working on the development of an Unmanned Ground Vehicle (UGV), a new concept in military operations, according to P. Sivakumar, Scientist `H’, Director, CVRDE.

Talking to newspersons on the sidelines of InoVIT 2015, the State Level Science Contest for School Children on the VIT University campus here on Saturday, Dr. Sivakumar said that the UGV would be capable of carrying out surveillance and mine detection, besides operating in nuclear and bio-chemical area.

“We are developing the technologies and have completed all trials. We are asking the Army what it wants”, he said.

The CVRDE Director further added that the DRDO is in the process of developing indigenous technology for Army tanks, repair vehicles and surveillance.

Self-propelled gun

One of the semi-indigenous equipments developed recently by the DRDO is the Arjun Catapult, a self-propelled gun which can fire an object at a distance of 27 km. This has been developed by integrating an imported Russian gun on the chassis of the Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT) Mark-I. Forty such guns are to be developed by the DRDO, he said.

The DRDO has also developed a totally indigenous Carrier Command Post Track (CCPT) vehicle which provides details about a firing operation.

Work is to be commenced soon on an indigenous Armoured Repair and Recovery Vehicle (ARRV) which is to be developed in association with the Bharat Earth Movers Limited (BEML), Bangalore. This vehicle will go and carry out the necessary repairs whenever a military tank develops snag and is struck somewhere.

Dr. Sivakumar said that the DRDO has formulated the plan for the Next Generation Main Battle Tank. It is currently in the process of developing the engine, active and protective systems, electrical and control systems, and the technology for the tank. “If the Army gives its quality requirements, we will go ahead and develop the prototype”, he said.

Asked about the progress in the development of Arjun MBT Mk-II, the DRDO official said that following the pointing out of shortcomings in its features, 53 improvements were made in the design in the first year of the development of the tank, and 85 improvements in the second year.

The maximum trial is over. Following a problem in the missile, the Armament Research and Development Establishment (ARDE), Pune developed an indigenous missile, and the Army has approved it in principle.

The quality evaluation by the Directorate General of Quality Assurance is going on, while the maintenance evaluation has started. The entire evaluation would be completed within six to nine months, he said.

That ARRV was accepted by the RM Nirmala Sitharaman.
Looks like the Arjun Catapult is also in service.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 18 Oct 2017 02:28

ramana wrote:
One of the semi-indigenous equipments developed recently by the DRDO is the Arjun Catapult, a self-propelled gun which can fire an object at a distance of 27 km.

That's great news. With ATAGS getting qualified in a year or two, would they use that gun for follow on orders? Would that allow longer range firings?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 18 Oct 2017 04:06

From my little knowledge the shock levels from guns are the most severe loading.

The ATAGs can use 6 charges due to its large chamber volume(1.5l) and obviously has more higher shock impulse (area under the curve) at firing then the 130mm or the Dhanush (smaller charges and lesser chamber volume).

So I don't ATAGS will be put on this chassis.

But the K9 is truck mounted system and could be mounted on the Arjun chassis.
As you know this is a 52 cal system.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 18 Oct 2017 08:03

Vivek K wrote:
ramana wrote:Gagan, Can you give a link or the blurb? What are the plans to get those designs made?
So now does the Arjun have to pass this hurdle too? Local engines will come if there is a large order. No one makes an engine for 50 tanks.

The issue with engines is the ability to design them. Up until now in india we lacked the ability to design and build engines. Once this hurdle is crossed. You will see specialised engines for unique applications.

So more than orders it is the design and development capacity that matters.

You see this all the time with European tank engines. With the exception of MTU all engine makers have miniscule tank engine production runs and there is no problem.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 18 Oct 2017 08:07

The gun barrel mated with a new recoil management system can be used with SPH. This is what was done by the Russias for 2 separate generations of 152 SPH. MASTA and Astikya. Along with the 122 mm SPH, that uses the d 30 barrel.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 18 Oct 2017 18:23

This was published a few months ago?
The FMBT program is being worked on, and this is a 1500 HP engine for it I think.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 18 Oct 2017 20:57

Its for the future MBT program.
Sorry it looks like a concept.

What I want to know is what's the plan for Arjun Mk2?

The German import engine has fixed hp and the Arjun weight keeps growing.
The hp/tonne measure is power to weight ratio which determines its agility.
From tank specifications what is optimum hp/ton ratio? 20 to 30?

Maybe we can take examples of tanks and calculate this measure.

prahaar · Post by **prahaar** » 18 Oct 2017 23:57

T-90 23.5
M1 24-27
Leclerc 27.5
Leopard 24
Arjun 24->20 (Mk1->Mk2)

Mk2 weight will kill the tank program :-(. All numbers from Wikipedia.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 19 Oct 2017 06:30

With a 1500 HP engine MK2 will be above 23

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 19 Oct 2017 06:49

How about we compare Arjun to the threats it is likely to face? The M1, Leclerc or the Leopard are not coming to fight India tomorrow. So need to be realistic. Also is the DRDO 1500 HP engine only a concept or is there a prototype?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 19 Oct 2017 07:36

Can we look at all diesel mfg folks in India and see what they make and most likely to succeed in making a 1500 hp diesel engine which fits in Arjun Mk2?

I think the Earthmover guys have a good chance.
BEML : http://www.bemlindia.com/mysore_ed.php

Max is 700 hp engine now.

The MoD MII projects issued on 20 Feb 2017 has requested for a 1000 hp engine for T72 and T 90 substitution and engine life 650 hours.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 19 Oct 2017 08:08

Cummins has a 950 bhp engine:

https://www.cumminsindia.com/engines/of ... tion/qsk23

and a 750 to 1500 bhp engine

https://www.cumminsindia.com/engines/of ... tion/qst30

Dimensions (mm) 1905 x 1483 x 1744 mm
Weight (Kg) 3328 Kg
Emissions
US EPA Tier II compliant

EU Stage II compliant

Now, what does it take to fit one in an Arjun or modify to fit?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 19 Oct 2017 08:09

Can we compare this to the current Arjun imported engine from Germany?

The prototype of the Arjun Mk.2 is fitted with a German MTU MB 838 Ka-501 diesel unit, developing 1 400 hp. The same engine is used on Arjun Mk.1. However, it seems that production tanks will be fitted with a more powerful engine. It is speculated that the new engine will be the Cummins QSK-38 turbocharged diesel unit, developing about 1 500 hp. It should be coupled with a French transmission.

Heck with 5 minutes google I too came up with the Cummins series!!!!

This means the QSK series has the footprint and will do the work with a turbocharger.
The German MTU engine also needs a turbocharger developed by India.

Ok next problem?

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 19 Oct 2017 13:14

ramana wrote:Maybe we can take examples of tanks and calculate this measure.

Sir, i attempted to make a chart from available information on Wikipedia, Army-Technology etc

I tried to upload an image but am not able to do so for some reason

Here is the link to the image

Would appreciate if someone can post the image inline within a post

prahaar · Post by **prahaar** » 19 Oct 2017 13:18

Manish_P wrote: Here is the link to the image

Would appreciate if someone can post the image inline within a post

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 19 Oct 2017 13:30

^ Thank you, Prahaar ji

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 20 Oct 2017 05:20

Thank s a lot.

So Arjun Mk2 is closest to Merkava.
How does it compare to it?

Next how does it compare to its challengers?

With Pak ones in particular?

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 20 Oct 2017 20:40

Ramana sir. I have attempted to capture the comparison points for some 15-20 MBTs

* Sources - Wikipedia, Army Technology, Army Recognition, Tank Nut Dave, Fprado etc
(please note that there were occasions of variations in numbers across different sources. Typically 5% to 10%)

Image 1 - Arjun, Pakistani and Russian MBTs - Specifications Comparison

Image 2 - Western, Japanese and Korean MBTs - Specifications Comparison

PS: Again am facing trouble with the image tag

. Would like to request Prahaar ji to kindly post the two images inline. Thanks in advance.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 20 Oct 2017 21:24

Thanks for your efforts.
The Image 2 is for tank competitions!!!

The Image 1 tells us how it could perform against likely challengers.
We know IA plans to use it in the desert regions.
So fording and snorkel is irrelevant.

The height at 2.32 m is slightly higher than the 2.3m. This matters for detection on a ridge.
Both tanks have ERA which if effective gives protection.
The hydro-pneumatic suspension allows for firing on the move.
Now boils down to 120 mm rifled vs. the 125mm smooth bore.
We saw Arjun (120mm) vs. T72s(125mm) face off in India where the 120mm did very well wrt accuracy and range .
The Arjun can also fire a missile?
At 68 tonnes it has more protection than less heavy tanks provided its in the right places!

To overcome the bridge problems the Arjuns should be based near the border along with depots to ensure high availability.

And to ensure unity of purpose the Arjuns should be in Independent Armored brigades.

.

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 20 Oct 2017 22:07

Only glad to contribute, Ramana ji.

I had actually included the rows for armor protection (front) but had hidden them as either the information is very sparse (as expected) or the discrepancies are too varied (especially between the western and eastern sources).

I will make another attempt to collate them later.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 20 Oct 2017 22:24

So that info is available?

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 21 Oct 2017 00:20

Extremely sparse. And only for some. And that too in broad terms (front glacis protection against APFSDS and HESH). Finally very very difficult to cross confirm across sources.

Likewise for main gun penetration capabilities. That has another problem - comparable uniformity. For example, you will get Tank A main gun with Ammo X has penetration of Y mm at a distance of Z km, while Tank B main gun with Ammo L has penetration of M mm but at a distance of N km.

Hence I thought better to leave it out for now..

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 21 Oct 2017 00:33

Ok. For guns
The parameters are : Muzzle velocity, weight of the round, and the length to diameter of the round. Lets not bother with distance. Closer will get more and farther will be less.

So lets compare 120mm rifled gun to 125mm smooth bore gun.

Don't bother about the rest. They will be marginal improvements. Off course US M1 has that DU round.

Front glacis is the most thickest armor and noting that would help understanding resistance to direct shots (akin to head shots). Side and top armor is less and that's fine.

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 21 Oct 2017 00:55

Incidentally I was quiet surprised to read claims about Al Khalid being capable of firing pakistani 125 mm DU rounds 'Naiza'. Reversed engineered by the Chinese perhaps?

Kakkaji · Post by **Kakkaji** » 23 Oct 2017 04:35

Necessary changes made to main battle tank Arjun Mark II: DRDO

The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) Chairman S Christopher today said necessary modifications have been made to the advanced version of the indigenous Arjun Mark II main battle tank as recommended by the Army. The DRDO chairman expressed confidence that the tank will be accepted by the Army. The Army had asked for 93 improvements to the tank which includes the capability of firing the anti-tank LAHAT missile, laser protection suite and improved armoured protection for the vehicle.

“We have done the modifications… it will go through the trials and there is a possibility that Arjun MK II (battle tank) will be accepted by Army and two regiments have already agreed to induct the tanks,” said DRDO Chairman

As per DRDO, Arjun Mark II can fire missiles, has advanced explosive reactive armour panels, mine plough, automatic target tracking, advanced land navigation system, digital control harness and advanced commander panoramic sight among other features. Arjun will have a better gun barrel with an equivalent firing charge (strength of the barrel to sustain firing) of 500 rounds against the T 72’s 250 rounds.

sum · Post by **sum** » 23 Oct 2017 07:55

Not sure why we continue this dog and pony show and how the designers have any motivation to improve (other than the extremely self motivated types) when they know the end result is just a brick wall?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 23 Oct 2017 08:17

ramana wrote: We know IA plans to use it in the desert regions.
So fording and snorkel is irrelevant.

Not so sure about this. India now has canals across the Rajasthan desert all the way down to a latitude south of Jaisalmer and in a do or die battle we would need fording capability to cross our own canals. Such canals did not exist at the time of the Longewala battle and it must have been a cake walk to Jaisalmer from the border

Further south in Pakistan in the Sindh area there are canals that are 40 km away. Assuming an Indian assault that simply rushes across the desert - doing those 40 km in a day they will all get held up at the canals where defences can pick off the tanks.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 23 Oct 2017 08:20

ramana wrote:
So lets compare 120mm rifled gun to 125mm smooth bore gun.

Smoothbore allows the launch of missiles, which rifled does not AFAIK.

Technically smoothbore is supposed to be less accurate at longer ranges but fin stabilization and guidance may make up for this.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 23 Oct 2017 08:26

Fording and Snorkeling in the Punjab or in the Thar.
There are a series of bunds and Canals dug out on the Pakistani side. Further there are lakes both natural and artificial for improving ground water in Sindh and South Punjab that act as defences.
While it is true, that with the advent of bridges etc, this might be only minimally needed, but the army does prepare for the worst case scenario.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 23 Oct 2017 08:27

The Arjun's rifled guns are Lahat capable

srai · Post by **srai** » 23 Oct 2017 08:43

shiv wrote:
ramana wrote:
So lets compare 120mm rifled gun to 125mm smooth bore gun.
Smoothbore allows the launch of missiles, which rifled does not AFAIK.

Technically smoothbore is supposed to be less accurate at longer ranges but fin stabilization and guidance may make up for this.

Arjun MBT's rifled gun firing LAHAT

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 23 Oct 2017 08:44

I am no expert here and my own information is patchy from reading here and there rather than by an intensive research thesis on the outcomes of tank battles through history. Most of these are tank versus tank, and do not take into account the deadly effect of tank versus no tank on the other side

My own information is "mixed" in that while there are many descriptions of WW2 tank battles where a higher caliber, longer range gun was an advantage and thinner armour was a disadvantage, there are many stories of smaller caliber guns being effective because they were able to get closer, or some other unexpected disadvantage like Pakistan Pattons simply catching fire because the fuel tanks they carried caught fire.

I seriously doubt if a massed tank thrust in future is going to be met exactly by a defending tank force. I would have thought that anyone who plans an attack using tanks will plan the attack to avoid defences and take and hold an objective. Defences in the India Pakistan context have been "ditch cum bund" defences and minefields that tanks either cannot cross or are held up where they can be targeted by defences. Nowadays "defences" would be anti tank missiles - perhaps even carried by men, or on vehicles, helicopters and aircraft. And of course TacNukes in case of Pakistan.

At attacking force would have to plan for precisely these types of defences. Perhaps and artillery barrage to suppress local defences followed by an attach supported by air power and mobile anti-aircraft defences along with the attacking force.Mine clearing vehicles to lead the attack and clear a track. Bridging to cross obstacles. Individual tank vs tank advantages and disadvantages would have to be equalized by some other modality. Ultimately the reliability and maintainability of the tanks will be crucial. I have also read some oddball facts that have little to do with armour or firepower. Things like rubber pads on tracks for tanks that can go along roads. Absence of those will churn up those roads and make the roads difficult to use by vehicles and men (and the logistics tail) that follows.