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

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby srai » 26 Mar 2018 08:41

Rakesh wrote:...
Q1. Does anyone know if they will be ordering another 118 on top of the first 118 batch of Mk2s?

Q2. Is it possible to convert the Mk1s to Mk2s? How Mk1s are there now? Wiki Chacha says 248 Mk1s were built. Is that true?

Q3. How many tanks in an armoured regiment?
...

A1. No intent beyond 118. The final total quantities of Arjun it wants has not been disclosed by the IA.

A2. No Wiki is wrong. 124 Mk.1 were built and delivered between 2008-2012. The second order never materialized due to the IA waiting around to place an order. By then the production had completed. It takes at least 2.5 years from production order to first lot delivery. The decision was taken to switch the second order to Mk.2. The total order remains around 250 Arjuns (Mk1 and Mk2) at this point in time.

A3. 45 tanks per regiment. Additional quantities in reserves. Numbers in reserves have been reduced. So lesser numbers are being ordered from 124 to 118.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50616
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby ramana » 26 Mar 2018 10:38

How many tanks did Avadi say needed for economic production?

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19622
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Philip » 26 Mar 2018 11:37

I think that the turret dimensions being larger for the crew of 4, requires a greater no. of ERA tiles than that req. by the smaller T-90.Hence the extra weight.The turret hull/armour too must weigh a lot more.There's a huge diff. between a 45- 50t MBT and one 68t+.Almost 20t.That's the weight of a Sprut light tank.

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1340
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Khalsa » 26 Mar 2018 14:26

ramana wrote:How many tanks did Avadi say needed for economic production?


This question has different answers in different years.

I believe, continuing the mk1 into mk2 ... the number was less than 400.
Now I believe the number to be closer to 500 + mark.

There was sense in buying engine overhauling facility upfront had the order for 300 mk1s had been firmed up
but it never was...

now say with just another 118 Mk2... would you buy or build the engine overhauling facility.
There should be 4 regiments with pakka order to make any sense.

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

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby srai » 26 Mar 2018 14:51

ramana wrote:How many tanks did Avadi say needed for economic production?

500

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21978
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Austin » 26 Mar 2018 15:07

Arjun Mark-2 tank set to see light of day
In an important move, the ‘Made in India’ Arjun Mark-2 tank project is set to see the light of the day.

Chairman of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) Dr S Christopher in an interview to The Tribune said, “We have had a meeting with the Vice-Chief of the Indian Army where it was agreed on accepting Mark-2. Modalities are being worked out”. Once done, the acceptance of necessity (AON) for 118 will be revived, he added.

The AON is decided by the Defence Acquisition Council headed by the Defence Minister. A total of 93 modifications have been done on the first version of Arjun — 124 were inducted — in 2010-2011.

On being asked if the Army was okay with the weight of the tank, the DRDO boss said: “The weight (the tank is almost 68 tonnes) has been accepted; that is a major change”. Most modern European tanks are of the same weight, and tank-transporters (specialised trucks) for Arjun are available.
The DRDO has promised to set up a system to maintain the Arjun Mark-2 within India. It will be an annual maintenance contract with the Bharat Earth Movers Limited (BEML) as a possible agency, Dr Christopher said. On the trials, he said, “These have done 4,000 kms of run, the upgrades will be tested.”

On artillery guns, Dr Christopher said the Advanced Towed Artillery Gun Systems (ATAGS), of which the Army has agreed to accept 40 pieces to start with, will get a more powerful engine to enable rapid movement. The guns designed by DRDO have been made by two private companies under the transfer of technology.

The DRDO is keen to get a slice of the 1,580 towed guns the Army is looking to buy. “Both companies (Tata Power SED and Bharat Forge) are gearing up produce more. We need an order for 200-300 guns to tie up logistics,” he said.

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1470
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby nam » 26 Mar 2018 16:09

srai wrote:Blame game keeps being shifted to the next. You are giving MoD too much “power” ;)


Frankly in this case, I will laid down the blame squarely on MoD. It behaved like a parent, watching their two kids fight and try to make a compromise, instead of a solution.

It is quite simple. MoD pays for this circus. If IA does not want Arjun, MoD should ask DRDO to close the project and stop wasting resources. If it wants DRDO to continue, then better pay IA for the infra to induct Arjun.

If MoD want IA to fight with sticks, IA will fight with sticks. Instead it has let the issue fester.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19622
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Philip » 26 Mar 2018 20:23

Well,118 A-2 MBTs adds to the IA's tank strength and if the logistics and support are established as stated,its performance in service will no doubt lead to another batch later on. What needs to now be firmed up is the annual prod. rate,of course based upon speed of induction reqd. and seamless funding.In the IA's grand scheme of MBT things,where around 4000-4500 MBTs are reqd.,here is ample room 400-500 Arjuns.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50616
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby ramana » 26 Mar 2018 21:09

Philip, Let's talk armored corps doctrine?

Which country threat needs 4000 to 4500 tanks?

Except Lt. Gen Hanut Singh not one Tank general showed any Guderian like qualities. And they made sure he does not get top slot.

They want to fight El Alamein allover with a dash of Abhimanyu.

Trikaal
BRFite
Posts: 499
Joined: 19 Jul 2017 08:01

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Trikaal » 26 Mar 2018 23:22

Currently, IA has 124 Mk1, not 250. 250 was the proposed number, but then, the second order of 126 was never placed. This AON is for 118 Mk2 tanks, of which the army currently operates 0. So the final number after these 118 tanks are procured will stand at 242.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50616
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby ramana » 26 Mar 2018 23:38

Also something is wrong with Indian Army liaison with the DRDO projects. They say they have officers stationed at the factory and DRDO during development.
Yet after 124 Arjun Mk1 is inducted they have 93 improvements required for Arjun Mk2.
Next look at Dhanush, they had a team in the GCF collocated while designs are going on. Yet again when the development is over they have many 'improvements' which don't add to the firepower but are used to stop procurement.

So what is going on? Do those who get collocated just potted plants to show some cooperation?

Who come we never have an account of what their role during development was and why so many show stopping 'improvements' get added during trials?


Anybody with iota of development experience knows 85% of costs are set during development and changes after that lead to huge schedule and thus cost escalation.

Are personal whims of these folks hurting Army readiness?
Do they have the moral authority to hold up re-arming?

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6211
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby nachiket » 27 Mar 2018 00:20

Indranil wrote:Who will design and build 1400 hp engines for a grand total of 124 orders?

Indranil saar, that argument is yet another red herring from the good comrade. Of all the ostensible complaints that the IA has about the Arjun I doubt the Engine even makes the top 20 list. Even if the orders were 1240 instead of 124 and we weren't designing and building the engine ourselves, that is still better than importing the whole goddammed tank which somehow the same comrade or indeed the IA itself has no problems with.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6211
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby nachiket » 27 Mar 2018 00:26

The latest complaint about the missile not having a good enough minimum range simply means that the DRDO has been successful in making whatever were the last series of modifications requested on the Mk2 by the Army. They need to keep the wild goose chase going or they might have to cave in to the MoD and agree to procure the Arjun in numbers. We can't have that. So the latest hurdle is the missile not being able to be used below 1.2km range.

Now the question arises as to why would a tank commander choose to engage a target at 1.2kms with a slower missile instead of a faster and less easily intercepted APFSDS round. If you are going to be using missiles at that range might as well get rid of the main gun and turret altogether and convert all the tanks into NAG missile carriers. I'm just hoping there is someone in the MoD who will ask these question point blank.

Picklu
BRFite
Posts: 1720
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Picklu » 27 Mar 2018 00:57

The way to cut through the engine quantity logjam is via self propelled artillery on top of mbt orders.

I am advocating a CVRDE designed turret around Dhanush on Arjun Hull for last 3 years now.

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2292
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Katare » 27 Mar 2018 09:51

ramana wrote:Katare, Going by how services are clearing up pending decisions, I think the Arjun Mk2 will get two orders of 118 each.
Its affordable and supports Make in India.

It’s my turn to say “aapke muhn mein ghee shakkar”

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6934
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Prasad » 27 Mar 2018 10:22

Picklu wrote:The way to cut through the engine quantity logjam is via self propelled artillery on top of mbt orders.

I am advocating a CVRDE designed turret around Dhanush on Arjun Hull for last 3 years now.

get cvrde to do that AND private fellows to do that with their own gun on the Arjun hull. Risk mitigation with guaranteed orders no matter who wins. Buuuut we'll need to give orders. Add in ultra level automation with optionally manned systems and pretty sure they can knock one out to limited production in 5 years.

Zynda
BRFite
Posts: 1475
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 00:37
Location: J4

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Zynda » 27 Mar 2018 19:31

nachiket wrote:Now the question arises as to why would a tank commander choose to engage a target at 1.2kms with a slower missile instead of a faster and less easily intercepted APFSDS round. If you are going to be using missiles at that range might as well get rid of the main gun and turret altogether and convert all the tanks into NAG missile carriers. I'm just hoping there is someone in the MoD who will ask these question point blank.

Good point. Hopefully NS has a reputation of a straight shooter and she will be able to put forward some of these questions to IA.

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

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby srai » 27 Mar 2018 20:20

nachiket wrote:The latest complaint about the missile not having a good enough minimum range simply means that the DRDO has been successful in making whatever were the last series of modifications requested on the Mk2 by the Army. They need to keep the wild goose chase going or they might have to cave into the MoD and agree to procure the Arjun in numbers. We can't have that. So the latest hurdle is the missile not being able to be used below 1.2km range.

Now the question arises as to why would a tank commander choose to engage a target at 1.2kms with a slower missile instead of a faster and less easily intercepted APFSDS round. If you are going to be using missiles at that range might as well get rid of the main gun and turret altogether and convert all the tanks into NAG missile carriers. I'm just hoping there is someone in the MoD who will ask these question point blank.

:rotfl:

Yes, no need for the main gun. Make it a missile carrier instead! Why go the hurdle to fire a missile from a gun tube?

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

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby sudeepj » 27 Mar 2018 21:38

Hats off the Ms. Nirmala Sitharaman, I am beginning to think the MOD mess can only be sorted out under strong female leadership. It appears that male leadership can be easily pushed around by vested interests. Ms Sitharaman has a very strong reputation of being firm and an excellent negotiator.

1. She goes to HAL, sits in the LCA and clears the Mk1A orders. Naysayers and propaganda pushers can eat crow.
2. She goes to see the ATAGS, LSP orders for 40 guns each are places. Naysayers and propaganda pushers can eat crow.
3. She goes to see the Arjun MKII in action, order for 118 is cleared. Naysayers and propaganda pushers can eat crow.

Search on youtube and you can find the evidence of all three. Oh btw. I forgot to say, naysayers and propaganda pushers can eat crow.

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1340
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Khalsa » 28 Mar 2018 01:10

Picklu wrote:The way to cut through the engine quantity logjam is via self propelled artillery on top of mbt orders.

I am advocating a CVRDE designed turret around Dhanush on Arjun Hull for last 3 years now.


Bhim would have been awesome. I Still dream about Bhim Mk2.
Damn you Denel for wrecking that.

Bob V
BRFite
Posts: 387
Joined: 26 Jul 2009 04:29
Location: Out at the sea
Contact:

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Bob V » 28 Mar 2018 22:04

Did anyone discuss here regarding the weight reduction initiatives, undertaken on Arjun, especially the plans to introduce carbon-fibre based wheels ? Would it lead to a significant reduction in the tonnage ?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50616
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby ramana » 28 Mar 2018 22:55

Not much there. And jacks up costs with risk.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50616
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby ramana » 29 Mar 2018 02:07

In 1965 India had 186 Centurions organized into 4 regiments. 3 were with the 1st Armoured Div (Maj. Gen. Rajinder Singh Sparrow) and the 2nd Independent Armoured Brigade (Brig. Theograj) was reinforced with 1 regiment (3rd Cavalry under lt Col Caleb). This regiment played a big part in the Indian victory at Asal Uttar.

In contrast they had 90 AMX13 and 90 PT 76s, shows the emphasis on light tanks when you have equal number to the Centurions!

And 346 obsolete Shermans.

Facing them the Pak has 806 tanks: .These included 356 M47/M48 Pattons,308 Shermans,96 Chaffee light tanks and 50 M36 Jackson tank destroyers

I see same type of thinking in the IA armored corps: A lot of T72s like the Shermans and the AMX and PT 76s.
Bulk of T-90s and a miniscule Arjuns

ParGha
BRFite
Posts: 866
Joined: 20 Jul 2006 06:01

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby ParGha » 04 Apr 2018 18:30

Ramana, light tanks (Stuarts, AMX-13s and PT-76s) were used to devastating effects at Poonch, Zoji La, Chushul and the riverine deltas of Bangladesh. Given that Indian border is mostly mountains, marshes, jungles and fine sand deserts, the light tank regiments will always outnumber the heavy tank regiments for practical and economic purposes. Alternatively those regiments may just re-role to Dragoon / Heavy Mech Inf units with ICVs and MGS.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50616
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby ramana » 04 Apr 2018 21:36

ParGha wrote:Ramana, light tanks (Stuarts, AMX-13s and PT-76s) were used to devastating effects at Poonch, Zoji La, Chushul and the riverine deltas of Bangladesh. Given that Indian border is mostly mountains, marshes, jungles and fine sand deserts, the light tank regiments will always outnumber the heavy tank regiments for practical and economic purposes. Alternatively those regiments may just re-role to Dragoon / Heavy Mech Inf units with ICVs and MGS.


Yes I am keenly aware of the role played by light tanks in those battles.
However border skirmishes are defensive wars and to demand the tanks operate there as well as the plains robs the forces of a potent offensive weapon system. It hamstrings your heavy armor.

Maybe the mountain areas should have ICVs with multipurpose missiles and be delinked from armor corps.
Call them mechanized weapons carrier and not tanks.


BTW in Chaamb the AMX-13 didn't do that well when the Pak attacked with Pattons in 1965 Operation Grand Slam. This required the IAF to join the war.

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

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby sudeepj » 04 Apr 2018 21:46

The issue in Arjun vs T90 is not light armor vs heavy armor.. They are both playing the same role. The issue is, if a breakthrough is achieved, can the cavalry exploit it? Can it make 'fast flanking moves'.. If every 3-4 meter wide canal needs bridging equipment to cross, I dont think you can maintain the momentum of the attack. This is the reality. Even if Arjun were to be ordered in large numbers, I dont think it will see any deployment outside of Gujarat & Raj international borders.

The T90 is a deeply problematic tank but I dont think Arjun has a chance to replace it now. Energies are better focused on addressing T90 shortcomings and FMBT. Better ammo, better survivability, Active Protection, APU, AC.. all of these should and can be fixed.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6935
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Indranil » 05 Apr 2018 06:20

As part of structural improvement and weight reduction of Arjun Mk2 (called Arjun MBT MkII Alpha), they are trying to increase the under arnour fuel capacity using a ammunition cum Fuel tank. 26 round s of amunition will be stored in separate tubes secured through the bin and the fuel will be stored in the space left between the tubes.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50616
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby ramana » 05 Apr 2018 07:02

Have they thought about hazard of the fuel tank being hit an the rounds detonating from shock.

Storing ammo in a fuel tank is asking for the tank to go up in flames.

Pattons used to catch fire with the hydraulic oil catching fire.

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2292
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Katare » 05 Apr 2018 07:22

Diesel is pretty stable fuel not sure if it will explode creating shock waves that can detonate on a tank ammunition. Anyhow it looks and feels dangerous to store explosives inside a fuel tank.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50616
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby ramana » 05 Apr 2018 08:23

The ammo. Not diesel fuel. Explosives set off with shock.

suryag
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3147
Joined: 11 Jan 2009 00:14

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby suryag » 05 Apr 2018 10:10

Kya idea hai sirjee, good innovation

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19622
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Philip » 05 Apr 2018 11:12

Why I"ve been stressing the need for a few
hundred light tanks.If the Sprut's armour can be i.proved with better armour or ERA tiles it will still be in thd 20t+ range.

I think that the IA still want an overwhelming superiority in armour iver the PA, to blunt any offensive by them or race deep into southern Pak and use territory as a bargaining chip.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6935
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Indranil » 05 Apr 2018 12:27

Image

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50616
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby ramana » 05 Apr 2018 20:48

Philip wrote:Why I"ve been stressing the need for a few
hundred light tanks.If the Sprut's armour can be i.proved with better armour or ERA tiles it will still be in thd 20t+ range.

I think that the IA still want an overwhelming superiority in armour iver the PA, to blunt any offensive by them or race deep into southern Pak and use territory as a bargaining chip.



Philip. Look at the number of armored divisions in IA.

Eg:
https://www.globalsecurity.org/military ... /corps.htm


Total three divisions with three strike corps.
1st, 31st, and 33rd.

Each has three armd brigades: 90 tanks each.

So total armd divs inventory objective is 90*3*3 = 810. So say 90 more for reserves etc. It comes to 900 tanks.

Then add the 1 armd brigade per infantry division. Don't know how many are those.
Its possible a clever corps commander will ensure his armd brigades can work together and form a reserve armd division in a pinch. So he has two armd divsions in his corps.
But knowing doctrine he will be court martialed.

Mtn divisions could probably use the BMP with Konkurs as Nag is still a distant dream.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2520
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby tsarkar » 06 Apr 2018 19:51

URGENT REQUEST - Can someone share the link to the CAG report that mentioned different testing criteria for Arjun & T-90. I need it very urgently.

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1572
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Manish_P » 06 Apr 2018 20:25


nam
BRFite
Posts: 1470
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby nam » 06 Apr 2018 20:26

tsarkar wrote:URGENT REQUEST - Can someone share the link to the CAG report that mentioned different testing criteria for Arjun & T-90. I need it very urgently.


https://www.saiindia.gov.in/sites/default/files/audit_report_files/Union_Compliance_Defence_Army_Ordnance_Factories_35_2014.pdf

Page 281.

Just realized pdf is a treasure tore of information!

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2520
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby tsarkar » 06 Apr 2018 22:11

Thanks a lot!

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

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Kersi » 08 Apr 2018 20:10

Manish_P wrote:Sir

Page 297 - annexure XIX

Link - https://www.cag.gov.in/sites/default/fi ... 5_2014.pdf


It is very depressing to read these reports. Looks like entire OFB complex should be shut down ASAP.

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Cosmo_R » 08 Apr 2018 21:20

Kersi wrote:
Manish_P wrote:Sir

Page 297 - annexure XIX

Link - https://www.cag.gov.in/sites/default/fi ... 5_2014.pdf


It is very depressing to read these reports. Looks like entire OFB complex should be shut down ASAP.


OFB will soldier on regardless of orders. It's an employment scheme.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Chinmay, suryag and 44 guests