Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

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

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

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

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

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

Regards,
Seetal

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.
ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4970
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby ShauryaT » 10 Nov 2017 23:50

tsarkar wrote:Western tanks are built around firing APFSDS & protecting against APFSDS and war has move beyond that. The primary threat to tanks are proliferating RPG, mines, cheap ATGMs, helicopters and finally tanks. He said Longewala was the last tank battle fought in the Indian Subcontinent and it wasnt tank vs tank. Large Tank vs Tank battles, while appealing, will be rare in future. More common would be Battle of Basantar that saw tanks leading combined arms forces.
Isn't the Brigadier depicting a quintessential recent experience of western nations who have not fought a war with near-peers? IOW: Is not the prioritized threat scenario being described essentially non-conventional, maybe even urban? To what degree is this applicable to Indian forces? Having said that, support the IA's move to build its future fleet in the 45 tonnage category. It is extremely important that we are able to get the right balance of weight and armor, balance agility, and strength. The battlespace for India is changing to the plateau and the mountains and away from the plains.

nam
BRFite
Posts: 504
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby nam » 11 Nov 2017 01:34

sudeepj wrote:
If this is system is deployed on Paki armor, how exactly will BMP firing ATGMs deal with such a threat?


Tandem warhead missile( not the traditional ones). One warhead triggers the APS, the real one sneaks through.

Just like the traditional ones which are designed to trigger ERA and then explode. In this case much earlier.

Mihir
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 838
Joined: 14 Nov 2004 21:26

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Mihir » 11 Nov 2017 03:50

JayS wrote:Very interesting post. This encourages me to put a point that I have been thinking over for a while now, which I didn't dare putting on BRF before looking at how even Doval was poopooed when he said that tank battles is a thing of past (to be frank even I was not convinced at that time about what he said, but then he is NSA for a reason perhaps). Why not do away with Tanks altogether, (in phased manner perhaps), and tackle tank attacks from enemies using anti-tank measures such as Attack helis, armoured UAVs, MANPADs, PGMs and as you mentioned lightly armoured vehicles with anti-tank missiles..? What is it that tanks still bring on table for us considering our requirements vis-à-vis bakis and chinis..?

This tanks-as-tank-destroyers doctrine was very shortlived and only designed to meet the requirements of one Army (NATO) fighting in a very specific geographical area (Western and Central Europe). For the vast majority of their existence, tanks have been used for two main purposes: (1) breaking through heavy enemy fortifications as part of a combined-arms formation and (2) wreaking mayhem in an enemy's rear. If you look at it from that perspective, tanks are still useful.

I'll disagree with tsarkar's friend's view that "German heavy tanks performed superlatively in WW2". They didn't. They were shitty tanks that suffered from high rates of mechanical failure, high fuel consumption, and bad mobility. I had touched upon these issues in my post here.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17598
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Philip » 11 Nov 2017 04:58

Sh.,there was a report which said that even our T-72s were too heavy for the mountains.A yr. before the Chins revealed the presence of their light tank I had advocated acquiring a light tank like the Ru Sprut which has an MBT size main gun, 125mm, but light armour only.Just under 20t.Eqhipped with ERA it could still come in at under 21-22t,half the weight of a 45t MBT and easily transportable by our transports incl. C-130s.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47896
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby ramana » 11 Nov 2017 05:44

Tsarkar, Thanks for the insight from your friend.

That Tlger tank gun is what ended up on Indian Sherman's by way of France. CVN 75-50....
He is referring to Battle of Bastogne

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 884
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Manish_P » 11 Nov 2017 09:38

Mihir wrote:
JayS wrote:I'll disagree with tsarkar's friend's view that "German heavy tanks performed superlatively in WW2". They didn't. They were shitty tanks that suffered from high rates of mechanical failure, high fuel consumption, and bad mobility. I had touched upon these issues in my post here.


<OT> Mihir ji. Thanks for the post (i had gone through it earlier as well). I had read some interesting studies of US and Russian Tank kill ratio against Germans in WW2. Accurate records were found to be lacking even after all these decades, but i had read one rare study by an American tanker who IIRC later retired as a Lt. Colonel. There were a lot of statistics covering multiple theatres and operations in his comprehensive study and the summary was that American tanks had very favorable kill ratios while both attacking, defending and particularly in ambush operations.

A lot was due to the operational strategy, training and tactics (with use of support elements) as much as the machines themselves. Have been trying it locate it past 2 days but no success (they were excerpts from his book). Will try to see if i can locate it </OT>

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1059
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby sudeepj » 11 Nov 2017 11:02

nam wrote:
sudeepj wrote:
If this is system is deployed on Paki armor, how exactly will BMP firing ATGMs deal with such a threat?


Tandem warhead missile( not the traditional ones). One warhead triggers the APS, the real one sneaks through.

Just like the traditional ones which are designed to trigger ERA and then explode. In this case much earlier.


You mean when the shrapnel from the APS grenades hit the missile, only the precursor charge will blow up and not the main charge? Pass on what you are smoking please.

Mihir
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 838
Joined: 14 Nov 2004 21:26

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Mihir » 11 Nov 2017 12:39

Hi Manish, was the book "Attrition: Forecasting Battle Casualties and Equipment Losses in Modern War", by Col. Trevor Dupuy?

nam
BRFite
Posts: 504
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby nam » 11 Nov 2017 13:31

sudeepj wrote:
nam wrote:
Tandem warhead missile( not the traditional ones). One warhead triggers the APS, the real one sneaks through.

Just like the traditional ones which are designed to trigger ERA and then explode. In this case much earlier.


You mean when the shrapnel from the APS grenades hit the missile, only the precursor charge will blow up and not the main charge? Pass on what you are smoking please.


You saying there is no shrapnel and blast in era?

You already have what I smoke.

RKumar
BRFite
Posts: 886
Joined: 26 Jul 2009 12:29
Location: Evolution is invention, explosion is destruction.

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby RKumar » 11 Nov 2017 14:39

Philip wrote:Sh.,there was a report which said that even our T-72s were too heavy for the mountains.A yr. before the Chins revealed the presence of their light tank I had advocated acquiring a light tank like the Ru Sprut which has an MBT size main gun, 125mm, but light armour only.Just under 20t.Eqhipped with ERA it could still come in at under 21-22t,half the weight of a 45t MBT and easily transportable by our transports incl. C-130s.


May be army should say they need 20 tons tank not 45-57 tons tanks. :rotfl:

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17598
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Philip » 12 Nov 2017 02:46

I think that the latest ERA tiles are supposed to defeat tandem rounds as well.Protecting the tracks a problem though.

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3960
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Rakesh » 12 Nov 2017 05:18

Army guns for 1,770 ‘smart’ tanks to replace ageing Soviet machines
http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/nation ... 96292.html

The Indian Army has drawn up a requirement for approximately 1,770 new generation “smart” battle tanks to replace the ageing fleet of Soviet-origin T-72 tanks that have been in service for over 30 years. The new tank, dubbed Future Ready Combat Vehicle, would be developed by a foreign manufacturer on a proven armoured fighting vehicle design and will be the base platform for developing other need-based family variants like bridge layer tank, trawl tank with mine ploughs, armoured recovery vehicle and self-propelled base for other arms. The Ministry of Defence has issued a fresh request for information (RFI) — a similar request was floated in 2015 —after inviting global partners for the project that would also involve transfer of technology and import offsets and indigenous content relevant for 40 to 50-year life cycle. The backbone of the Indian armoured corps is made up of T-72 tanks, which were inducted in the mid-1980s, and its successor T-90 tanks that began entering service in the 2000s. A project is also underway to upgrade the T-90 tanks with better gun sights and missiles.

Detailing the required specifications, the RFI states that the proposed tank is likely to be employed in varied terrain, including high altitude, arid, riverine and mountainous under varied temperature conditions ranging from minus 30 to 50 degrees Celsius. The specifications on terrain and climate come in the backdrop of the Army raising two armoured brigades for deployment along the northern borders. The Army already has based some armoured and mechanised infantry elements comprising T-72s and BMPs in high-altitude areas. Traditionally looked upon as platforms for high-maneuver warfare in the plains, tanks have had limited employment in the mountains, with notable instances being Zoji La pass in 1947 and Chushul in 1962. A few years ago, the Army drove up a T-55 tank to an altitude of 17,000 feet along the Tibetan Plateau to evaluate performance in extreme cold. China is also known to maintain large mechanised formations in Tibet. The “future technology” enabled tanks are expected to maintain operational readiness and combat overmatch over the adversary, will be employed for “rapid dominance in an expanded battle space characterised by real time awareness, all terrain agility and high mobility, precision lethal firepower, multi-layered protection and conduct of sustained day and night operations in all terrains,” the RFI states.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7514
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Pratyush » 12 Nov 2017 10:57



I just was able to read the RFI and what struck me was the quoted section

Essential Parameters. The Future Ready Combat Vehicle will be a tracked fighting vehicle of Medium Weight Class (All up combat weight not to exceed 50Tons ± 15%) and should present a small target signature. It should be capable of all weather, day and night operations. All systems should be able to operate in an ambient temperature range of minus 30C to plus 50C.


At the higher range it seems to be asking for the weight of the Arjun Mk1. At the lower end it is asking for T 72.

The second important aspect is that it is asking for proven base model. I am not sure that such a vehicle exists, outside of the Armata.

Third important aspect is the ability to be transported by existing in service Tank transporters. that gives us a broad base le of the dimensions of the vehicle.

This rest of the document is applicable to any other tank in service in the world. Regardless of its origin East/ West.

lastly If this roject goes through, what wll it do for the proposed buy of the approx. 450 T90 upgraded models.

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 954
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Thakur_B » 12 Nov 2017 11:53

Image

Arjun mk2 being tested inside anechoic chamber for EM emissions.

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1375
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby srin » 12 Nov 2017 12:12

Philip wrote:Sh.,there was a report which said that even our T-72s were too heavy for the mountains.A yr. before the Chins revealed the presence of their light tank I had advocated acquiring a light tank like the Ru Sprut which has an MBT size main gun, 125mm, but light armour only.Just under 20t.Eqhipped with ERA it could still come in at under 21-22t,half the weight of a 45t MBT and easily transportable by our transports incl. C-130s.


Whenever I hear "light tank", I always wonder what are you trading off. What's being compromised to shave off weight - firepower, protection or mobility. Just adding ERA to a light tank - will it be adequate against a HEAT round of another tank or contemporary tandem warhead ATGMs ? And after adding ERA, how did the weight just go up by so much ?

sahay
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 3
Joined: 11 Apr 2017 19:45

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby sahay » 12 Nov 2017 13:21

Pratyush wrote:The second important aspect is that it is asking for proven base model. I am not sure that such a vehicle exists, outside of the Armata.

Both Leclerc and K2 Black Panther satisfy the weight and engine requirements. However, once you factor in the requirement for the platform to "lend itself to development of a family of combat vehicles, based on modularity and standardisation of platform", the case for Armata becomes much stronger. The requirement for completely remote controlled secondary armament also favours the Armata.

Zynda
BRFite
Posts: 1280
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 00:37
Location: J4

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Zynda » 12 Nov 2017 14:28

Rakesh wrote:The Ministry of Defence has issued a fresh request for information (RFI) — a similar request was floated in 2015 —after inviting global partners for the project that would also involve transfer of technology and import offsets and indigenous content relevant for 40 to 50-year life cycle.

Why was the similar request in 2015 did not materialise? Probably nobody came forward seeing that none of their products can meet the above requirements. Why does IA/MoD think any manufacturer would respond now? (Expect probably Armata which has "progressed" in development/"proven" platform compared to 2015 ?)

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47896
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby ramana » 13 Nov 2017 02:11

srin wrote:
Philip wrote:Sh.,there was a report which said that even our T-72s were too heavy for the mountains.A yr. before the Chins revealed the presence of their light tank I had advocated acquiring a light tank like the Ru Sprut which has an MBT size main gun, 125mm, but light armour only.Just under 20t.Eqhipped with ERA it could still come in at under 21-22t,half the weight of a 45t MBT and easily transportable by our transports incl. C-130s.


Whenever I hear "light tank", I always wonder what are you trading off. What's being compromised to shave off weight - firepower, protection or mobility. Just adding ERA to a light tank - will it be adequate against a HEAT round of another tank or contemporary tandem warhead ATGMs ? And after adding ERA, how did the weight just go up by so much ?



Survivability. Most heavily armed light tanks are suicide mission chariots. That AMX 13 had fabulous high velocity gun* and very light armor.

Reminds you of Samastapakas of Mahabharata war.

* Fabulous because of its history. Tiger had that gun. French shortened ther barrel and called it CVN 75-50. Shermans were upgunned with it and proved themselves in India and Israel.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1665
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby chola » 13 Nov 2017 04:49

Cross posting from LCA thread.

Horrible, cynical move by IA to use “Make On India” to drive a nail into Arjun II.

Up to Modi and Doval to stop this.

https://m.timesofindia.com/india/armed-forces-say-no-to-advanced-versions-of-tejas-arjun/articleshow/61620740.cms


Armed forces say no to advanced versions of indigenous 'Tejas', 'Arjun'

NEW DELHI: The armed forces have virtually given the thumbs down to the proposed advanced versions of the indigenous Tejas light combat aircraft and Arjun main-battle tank by strongly pitching for mega acquisitions of foreign single-engine fighters and futuristic armoured fighting vehicles through the 'Make in India' route under the 'strategic partnership (SP)' policy.


kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2115
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby kit » 13 Nov 2017 05:28

chola wrote:Cross posting from LCA thread.

Horrible, cynical move by IA to use “Make On India” to drive a nail into Arjun II.

Up to Modi and Doval to stop this.

https://m.timesofindia.com/india/armed-forces-say-no-to-advanced-versions-of-tejas-arjun/articleshow/61620740.cms


Armed forces say no to advanced versions of indigenous 'Tejas', 'Arjun'

NEW DELHI: The armed forces have virtually given the thumbs down to the proposed advanced versions of the indigenous Tejas light combat aircraft and Arjun main-battle tank by strongly pitching for mega acquisitions of foreign single-engine fighters and futuristic armoured fighting vehicles through the 'Make in India' route under the 'strategic partnership (SP)' policy.



They just found the loop hole in " make in India " to stop "made in India" .. hurray for imports :roll: ..they just wont give up those swiss holidays and paris jaunts

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10672
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Gagan » 13 Nov 2017 05:37

Why are the forces so set against some DRDO products?
Is it because the products are great on paper, but break down more often, have poor finishing, poor worksmanship - very likely because they are uber sarkari organizations.
Does DRDO sometimes make products which are a mish-mash of imported older generation imported products made in DRDO labs by fooling people that these are "Make in India"?
How true is the above?

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2139
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby tsarkar » 13 Nov 2017 13:47

Gagan wrote:but break down more often, have poor finishing, poor worksmanship

True for products like INSAS.

Lack of training on specific nuances of new equipment is also a factor. The Dhruv has its own nuances but that was not taught to BSF or Ecuador pilots. The DGCA report blames BSF pilot for the crash but also mentions that the pilot, otherwise experienced, was not trained on the specific nuances of the Dhruv. Same for Ecuador - we blamed the pilots.

If Dhruv was a car and the manufacturer blamed the driver for crashes, guess how many other drivers would buy the car? None.

Guess how many additional Dhruv BSF or Ecuador purchased? Nil. BSF dumped its Dhruv and purchased Mi-17. BSF Dhruvs are probably rusting on the ground after the earlier crash.

Military machines are complex and you cant expect people to learn by trial & error. Even experience people will not be aware of specific nuances.

The US & French do training and maintenance phenomenally well.

http://dgca.nic.in/accident/reports/VT-BSN.pdf

http://bsf.nic.in/en/air-wing.html

prahaar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2777
Joined: 15 Oct 2005 04:14

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby prahaar » 13 Nov 2017 14:23

TSarkarji, you are putting the Dhruv failure on DRDO? Last I checked it was HAL developed and manufactured the helicopter.

deejay
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 3502
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby deejay » 13 Nov 2017 14:25

TSarkar Sir, BSF has 06 Dhruv's waiting for overhaul (or getting ready). They are happy with Dhruv's as informed to us when we went to fob off something else. They are not happy with after sales support but like the machine. BTW, BSF sale is a civil sale and not a military sale which was for Ecuador.

If there is one theme that runs regularly with HAL in the market is customer support. High end products like aircraft and helicopter require a lot of hand holding and after sales support. In fact they even need a lot "during sale" support. HAL has to come up on these.

In India, import of aircraft is very difficult. In fact, aircraft are on the Negative list of imports due forex issues. It is really difficult to import. On top of it the time lines are stretched for acquisition. In this situation an in-country producer should be singing away to the bank. HAL is just not ready to grab the opportunity. Even their production rate for defined military sales is half of what global players have for unpredictable civilian sales. Every week, I come across opportunities which would be ideal for Dhruv but most of them will not even result in any helicopter sale as the buyer will just plain give up due to the red tape involved. At 7.5 Million dollar (US), a smaller Bell 429, H 145 or EC 145 are the preferred choice while a Dhruv which would beat them hollow at the same price and perhaps outperform the Bell 412 and AW 139 on most parameters still does not find preference.

The Indian aviation industry is unable to provide for Indian manufacturer or the Aviation Industrial Complex because the kings of this industrial complex is not interested in the customer.

Karan M
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 14454
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Karan M » 13 Nov 2017 14:44

deejay wrote:The Indian aviation industry is unable to provide for Indian manufacturer or the Aviation Industrial Complex because the kings of this industrial complex is not interested in the customer.


privatization or significant divestment of HAL+ liberal hiring policies are the only way to ensure HAL becomes more like a Brahmos or those R&D labs which are always scrambling to ensure products get accepted by services. the latter two dont have such policies but realize they are up against imports so survival is product acceptance. HAL bigwigs seem to have convinced themselves (helped by pvt sectors wont invest unless guaranteed profits behavior) that they are set up for a long run with GOI support and they will always get business.

Karan M
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 14454
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Karan M » 13 Nov 2017 14:59

Gagan wrote:Why are the forces so set against some DRDO products?
Is it because the products are great on paper, but break down more often, have poor finishing, poor worksmanship - very likely because they are uber sarkari organizations.
Does DRDO sometimes make products which are a mish-mash of imported older generation imported products made in DRDO labs by fooling people that these are "Make in India"?
How true is the above?


I think you need to spend some time looking at DRDO products in detail and not go by DDM or vested interest reports. If you can, go to some arms fair and actually check out DRDO designed systems. The fit and finish is equivalent or even superior to the imported gear, so hardly as you allege, poor finishing or poor worksmanship. The radars made by BEL from DRDO TOT for instance, for infantry, were every bit as polished as the israeli and french systems on display.

1st Gen/2nd Gen DRDO products had some reverse engineered gear because of lack of local experience and services interest in just "good enough". Today's DRDO products are in the 4th or 5th design iteration & hence rarely incorporate any hand-me-down element if at all. The only exceptions to the rule are platforms like the Arjun which perforce will have earlier items included with some older gen systems like the imported engine, which are retained because they work well. Don't fix what's not broken.

Next, services were against DRDO products in the past (and some still are), because they associated them with delayed, immature systems from an unproven ecosystem.
Add the forced mandate on DRDO to have them made at OFB, DPSUs etc, and the problem was multiplied manifold. INSAS and Pinaka ammunition or 125mm FSAPDS are all examples where OFB problems caused issues for the product.

Today, DRDO works with selected private and public partners and is not tied to DPSUs alone, which has made it far more agile in responding to new requirements & also reward partners with good QA with repeat orders and new JVs.
BEL for instance is a long time DRDO partner as are TATA & L&T. They produce a host of systems and components which are world class in quality & fit & finish.

The main thing is design experience & production experience. Both are necessary.

Our first radars, Indra-1, worked in trials, but started failing in extended deployments. The issues were around hardware reliability and so forth. Now, this was in 1980s. Three decades later, DRDO systems go through a gamut of extensive tests in lab level, then field tests, then acceptance tests, deployment etc to iron out most issues before production. That is because now the knowledge and infrastructure exists to adequately design working deployable systems.

We don't have the same level of infra in all areas - eg jet engines, but it does exist in many areas now. For instance when Tarang etc were made, good designs on the ground but it was deployment which showed reliability issues (from shock due to aircraft flying), blanking (due to Su-30 design) etc. Now, there are many more test facilities on the ground, a flying test bed (still not a full fighter, but still), reducing the chances of issues being missed (and fixed).

Karan M
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 14454
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Karan M » 13 Nov 2017 15:02

For an example of changed times under Modi GOI. Note TOT to two of India's better and proven explosive manufacturers, who are also competitors. This will allow DRDO (and these firms) to scale well across programs without having to constantly manage unionized DPSUs.

http://www.indiandefensenews.in/2017/11 ... scale.html

Terminal Ballistics Research Laboratory (TBRL), Chandigarh, signed two Licensing Agreements for Transfer of Technology (LAToT), with M/s Solar Industries India Ltd, Nagpur, and M/s Premier Explosives Ltd, Secunderabad, for the industrial scale production process of Fine β-HMX and Fine RDX, respectively, in September 2017.

β-HMX, also called octogen, is a powerful and relatively insensitive nitroamine high explosive, chemically related to RDX. Like RDX, the compound's name is the subject of much speculation, having been variously listed as High Melting Explosive, Her Majesty's Explosive, High-velocity Military Explosive, or High-Molecular-weight RDX.
RDX is an organic compound widely used as an explosive. Chemically, it is classified as a nitramide, and similar to HMX. A more energetic explosive than TNT, it was used widely in World War II.

Dr Manjit Singh, Director, TBRL, and industry representatives signed the agreements. Dr S Christopher, Chairman, DRDO and Secretary, Department of Defence R&D; Dr G Satheesh Reddy, and senior scientists from TBRL were also present on the occasion.

Karan M
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 14454
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Karan M » 13 Nov 2017 15:10

More examples:
https://www.drdo.gov.in/drdo/pub/newsle ... ber_17.pdf

ATAGS:

DRDO lab
Armament Research and Development
Establishment (ARDE), Pune, along
with other DRDO labs, viz., Instruments
Research and Development
Establishment (IRDE), Vehicle Research
and Development Establishment
(VRDE), Proof and Experimental
Establishment (PXE), Centre for
Artificial Intelligence and Robotics
(CAIR), and Defence Electronics
Applications Laboratory (DEAL)
Partners:
The endeavour has been supported
by Army through the Weapon Design
and Development Team. Private
Industrial Partners such as Tata Power
SED, Bharat Forge Limited, Mahindra
Defence, Punj Lloyd and Ashok Leyland
are involved in the development. BEL
and OFB also actively contributed in
realisation of critical items

BPJ - note TOT to MKU, not merely DPSU:

DRDO transferred the technology
of Bullet Proof Jackets (BPJ)
to M/s MKU Limited, Kanpur.
The jackets will be manufactured for
the Indian Army and paramilitary
forces personnel.

Speaking on the occasion,
Dr Christopher, urged the company to
absorb the technologies developed by
DRDO and maintain a strict vigil on the
quality of the Jackets.


Now the Pinaka:
http://www.financialexpress.com/industr ... 18/895488/

“Currently we are looking for missile assembling for ‘Pinaka’ rocket launcher. But any job related to rockets can be done and going forward missile integration as well,” Nuwal said, adding the transfer of technology agreement with the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) is already in place. “Once the construction is completed, we can then proceed for the assembling, subject to when the defence sector places orders,” he added.

SIIL’s facility in Nagpur manufactures HMX and HMX based compositions like Octol, Oma and Okfol for high explosive anti-tank ammunition and missiles like Akash, LR Sam, Invar and Konkur. It also manufactures propellants for BrahMos missile.


The OFB issues with Pinaka clearly led to this decision.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10672
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Gagan » 14 Nov 2017 03:38

KaranM
I don't need to go to Arms Fair to look at DRDO products !!!
Thank you very much

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17598
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Philip » 14 Nov 2017 04:54

The services being seen as a "captive market" where whatever built would be absorbed by the services, under GOI diktat , seen so far is now being shaken up by the Modi oversight of the MOD.OFB substandard ammo,etc. forcing us to import,is only making the job of pvt. industry to start replacing DPSUs for defence requirements easier.
However, in the case of Arjun, it can serve only as a niche MBT in the IA's inventory which is composed of 3500+ T--series of lower weight MBTs below 50t. Replacements for these 1000+ T-72s which may not be upgraded and the type/design is the big Q.
Last edited by Philip on 14 Nov 2017 05:19, edited 1 time in total.

Rishi_Tri
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 74
Joined: 13 Feb 2017 14:49

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Rishi_Tri » 14 Nov 2017 05:18

My tweet to NaMo..

Slow and Painful death for Indigenous programs. RIP Tejas, Arjun. We shall 100 arguments for Foreign Stuff but Not One for Indigenous products. #MakeInIndia @narendramodi @DefenceMinIndia

abhijitm
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2809
Joined: 08 Jun 2006 15:02
Contact:

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby abhijitm » 14 Nov 2017 09:31

I have a radical solution for this domestic vs foreign maal.

Create a customer. Create independent air force and army units with their own command structure and tasked to use only and only domestic products. no choice. Start will 1 squadron and 1 corps under one integrated command.. call it like Commander In Chief something. Give them special benefits so that talented people want to join. Call them Republican Guards or something. Give control of certain domestic systems only to them like icbm and strategic command, navigation system, millitary satellite constellation etc. Make them special.
Last edited by abhijitm on 14 Nov 2017 09:45, edited 1 time in total.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10672
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Gagan » 14 Nov 2017 09:44

No need for this.
Just hire a private marketing agency to market DRDO products to India and worldwide. Give them a black budget and freedom.

This is very easily done and will magically make many a problem disappear overnight.
Make Mota bhai, Sharad Pawar or Lalu Yadav the CEO of this company - just kidding, but you get the hint

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10672
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Gagan » 14 Nov 2017 09:44

If ISRO can have the Antrix, why can't DRDO have a similar marketer hain ji?

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10672
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Gagan » 14 Nov 2017 09:45

MoD needs to unleash the power of the ordinance factories and private defence manufacturers.
Currently the MoD has put them all in Liquid Oxygen !

abhijitm
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2809
Joined: 08 Jun 2006 15:02
Contact:

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby abhijitm » 14 Nov 2017 09:49

Gagan wrote:If ISRO can have the Antrix, why can't DRDO have a similar marketer hain ji?

ISRO can have corporates as their client who can be trapped using marketing arm. Arms sales is I believe highly political and difficult to elbow out. Hence I think force creating a small customer will help in long way. Have a customer first.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10672
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Gagan » 14 Nov 2017 09:57

Roosis created rosoboronexport for exactly this - scout for potential clients, use ANY means possible to complete sales.
They are not squeamish about using their intel agency for this either.

They have a branch in India called "Rosoboronexport India"

abhijitm
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2809
Joined: 08 Jun 2006 15:02
Contact:

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby abhijitm » 14 Nov 2017 10:23

Enemy of LCA or Arjun is not our armed forces. It is massive political mussles like russia, usa, europe and they play at multiple levels. We need some units to free of those political clutches so that domestic industry can get elbow room. This way those powers will have room in india, india will have something to offer them as quid pro quo, and at the same time domestic industry can run in parallel.

Kashi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2500
Joined: 06 May 2011 13:53

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Kashi » 14 Nov 2017 11:01

abhijitm wrote:Enemy of LCA or Arjun is not our armed forces. It is massive political mussles like russia, usa, europe and they play at multiple levels. We need some units to free of those political clutches so that domestic industry can get elbow room. This way those powers will have room in india, india will have something to offer them as quid pro quo, and at the same time domestic industry can run in parallel.


Those powers that you speak of assert their influence through multiple channels civilian and military. Even if you manage to hive off independent "units" (what would these units be like- civilian or military), they will still be under the overall control of someone.

Military units hived off from the rest of the armed forces will be still subject to civilian oversight and those powers can always leverage their influence there to get their way with the new units.

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2611
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby JayS » 14 Nov 2017 11:39

abhijitm wrote:I have a radical solution for this domestic vs foreign maal.

Create a customer. Create independent air force and army units with their own command structure and tasked to use only and only domestic products. no choice. Start will 1 squadron and 1 corps under one integrated command.. call it like Commander In Chief something. Give them special benefits so that talented people want to join. Call them Republican Guards or something. Give control of certain domestic systems only to them like icbm and strategic command, navigation system, millitary satellite constellation etc. Make them special.


I have better solution. Pokharan-3. :lol: :lol:


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: A Sharma and 34 guests