Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

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.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18641
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Karan M » 22 Nov 2019 17:23

Nikhil T wrote:
Karan M wrote:Order too few tanks. Then crib about lack of license production driven indigenization. Brilliant.


What surprised me was that he disputed Arjun’s superior performance as compared to the T90, which has been the chief argument to procure more Arjuns. All in all very disappointing chat and maybe now the lack of Arjun orders is not as surprising to me.


If he is a T-90 guy, the moon will disintegrate before he acknowledges the Arjun is superior. You have to account for the fact that the operator of any equipment keenly identifies with it. If you had wanted to put him on the spot, you could have put out details of the Arjun's FCS, GCS, Suspension etc to prove how superior its armament fire control and accuracy is, however what would have been the point? All you'd have done is proven your point and vitiated the environment.

Fact is lets see what the IA is planning for the T-90s. Add commanders sight (which still won't be anywhere as capable as that on the Arjun), upgrade its FCS (again, an outcome discerned from the match-up vs the Arjun), add an APU/ECS - again, to match the ability of the Arjun to operate around the clock, add a new ballistic computer - again derived from the Arjuns to allow it operate indigenous weapons. A new MRS, again to improve gun accuracy, and derived from the Arjun face-off.

What the IA cannot do is change the design to add extra protection - Arjun Mk1A has the ammo blast panels tested and inducted. The T-90 can't implement anything similar. The crew are literally sitting in a tub of ammo.

In short, he was mistaken and the AHQ/DGMF are doing whatever they can to rectify some of the T-90S's glaring deficiencies keeping our budget/available engineering capabilities in mind.

Its been a decade since we've been scouting for an ECS/APU solution for the T-90, with worldwide RFIs, we still haven't found a single answer.

And as regards FSAPDS, he is only partially correct. The T-90 operates the Mango round (DOI 1986 in Russia) and it is only now being license assembled at OFB. The first few tranches should be in service with the IA by now. The other rounds are HEAT/HE variants, and the Refleks round, which too is being license assembled at BDL.

The problem with the T-90 exists to the point that the only way to increase performance is to replace the entire gun system, and hence there is a RFI out for that as well. For the Arjun, you can retrofit a new gun without any challenge from the design owner. The designer and manufacturer are both Indian.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2636
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby nam » 23 Nov 2019 03:41

I always wondered why didn't we consider putting in 125MM gun along with single piece ammo on Arjun.

It took me a while to figure out that a single piece 125MM ammo is way too heavy for a human to load it inside the tank!

One prime reason Russians went with two piece ammo!

I don't think any tank employs 125MM single piece ammo.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8117
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Pratyush » 23 Nov 2019 10:32

nam wrote:I always wondered why didn't we consider putting in 125MM gun along with single piece ammo on Arjun.

It took me a while to figure out that a single piece 125MM ammo is way too heavy for a human to load it inside the tank!

One prime reason Russians went with two piece ammo!

I don't think any tank employs 125MM single piece ammo.


When using the autoloader the weight of the round has no importance. The 2 piece round is because of the artificial limits placed on Soviet tanks by kruschev. And the resulting autoloader design and placement.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2636
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby nam » 23 Nov 2019 13:12

I am referring to the need to manually keep the round inside the tank.

Manual or auto loading to a barrel comes later. 120MM is the max a human can lift in an ops environment.

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2308
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Prem Kumar » 23 Nov 2019 14:18

Nikhil T wrote:That’s a possibility. He serves with T90 right now but he’s relatively senior and has driven in Arjun. My takeaway was the lack of enthusiasm for an indigenously produced world class tank.


Frankly, the import-lobby needs a kick up their rear end. China is leapfrogging us (& even the U.S) in AI, swarm drones, nano-tech, rare earth materials, genetics etc etc & we have these grumpies who bitch about everything desi. Read the Paulraj interview about how scary some of the Chinese advances are.

All this "lets take everyone along" approach is going to kill us in the next decade. We will watch the 3rd Industrial Revolution bus go right past us.

We need our leaders (Modi, Doval, Shah, Rajnath etc) kick some butt and make everyone fall in line. If people don't, they should be made to pay for it - visibly. Its starting to happen slowly & must accelerate.

Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2229
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Vips » 28 Nov 2019 03:38

India pays Russia $1.2 billion in technology transfer fees for T-90S tanks.

India has awarded a $3.12 billion contract for local production of 464 T-90S main battle tanks after paying a technology transfer fee to Russia.

The contract was signed with little fanfare earlier this month. The deal stipulates that Russian original equipment manufacturer UralVagonZavod and arms export agency Rosoboronexport will be paid $1.2 billion for technology transfer, while India’s state-owned Ordnance Factory Board will be paid $1.92 billion for local production of 464 T-90S tanks, according to an Indian Ministry of Defence official.

India will pay the Russian defense companies in roubles, Russia’s currency.

The MoD official described the price tag of the technology transfer as too high, noting that domestic production of the tanks will increase to 80 percent from the current level of 40 percent.

A senior OFB executive said complete localization of T-90S tanks in India is impossible, as a large number of parts must continue to be imported. The parts that will be locally produced include panoramic night sights, thermal imaging fire-control systems and explosive reactive armor, he added. However, the engines and transmission system that makes up 45 percent of the cost of a T-90S tank will come from Russia. (It does not mention if the TOT for manufacturing the T90 barrel has been given- Under the previous T90 deal Russians refused to part with the technology after initially agreeing and signing on it)

Another MoD official said Russian defense companies will have to undertake full production and localization guarantees. In addition, both OFB and the two Russian firms will be penalized by the MoD should the project hit production delays or cost overruns. (Did the babudom spell out clearly on how it will be determined on who is responsible for the cause of the delay and/or cost overruns between OFB and Russian companies?)

OFB and UralVagonZavod are expected to manufacture 120 T-90S tanks per year and complete the project within four years. Rosoboronexport executives in India declined to comment on the deal.

The T-90S tanks are to be manufactured at OFB’s Heavy Factory in Avadi, southern India, but more than a dozen ordnance factories will carry out assembly of subsystems imported from multiple Russian defense companies.

A senior Indian Army official said greater localization of the tank does not significantly help because life cycle support is not included. Because of this, the official argued, the service ends up paying three times more than the original cost of the tank.

The Army currently operates 1,100 T-90S tanks, of which 300 were directly procured from Russia.

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9965
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby sum » 28 Nov 2019 05:01

Sad sad state of affairs

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20147
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Philip » 28 Nov 2019 07:29

Neither is support for Arjun perfect due to the high % of imported items, many difficult to source as they're no longer being produced, affecting the operational availability of A-1.Limited orders of Arjun from the IA make it very tough to set up a support system.Just days ago at a meet to promote more manufacturers taking up defence component manufacture ,with a view to establishing a good support chain for various items, industrialists criticised the general approach saying that there were too few orders to justify the high expenditure in setting up units, slow evaluation process of items developed and lots of red tape to tie it all up.Not worth the effort.

The problem with international imports is that the MOD drafts the agreements NOT the end-user and like the Scorpene, etc. some components acquired later from the OEM have price escalation clauses for delays. This results in a win-win situ for the OEM. I do not know the full picture of T-90 production at Avadi, but a few years ago a detailed report predicted major problems of production given the backlog of upgrades for T-72s, etc.Which is why this extra 400+ MBTs is being acquired in such fashion.

The end-user should lay down its full requirements, support required, " X" years of spares, performance guarantees, delivery schedule, etc. and penalty provisions. The MOD should stick mainly to pricing issues in the contract, not technical unless it integrates the forces into the MOD. One analyst said that foreign firms come with a battery of experienced and expensive lawyers who manage to get the agreements/ contracts so drafted to benefit them more than the MOD.

Our delay in decision- making also affects us.The classic case of the second batch of Talwars supposedly offered to us at the same price of the first 3.Despite reminders, the MOD dithered and not much later finalised the order but at higher cost.I think in recent times we've been warned about the same escalatory clauses by the US over lightweight arty. and naval helos.

In recent times,even during the DM's recent visit , agreements have been signed with Russia in setting up JVs in India, manufacturing and stocking of spares, etc. , which will support a variety of Sov./ Ru weapon systems to resolve the long- standing issue.

Haridas
BRFite
Posts: 546
Joined: 26 Dec 2017 07:53

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Haridas » 28 Nov 2019 07:46

Prem Kumar wrote:
Nikhil T wrote:That’s a possibility. He serves with T90 right now but he’s relatively senior and has driven in Arjun. My takeaway was the lack of enthusiasm for an indigenously produced world class tank.


Frankly, the import-lobby needs a kick up their rear end. China is leapfrogging us (& even the U.S) in AI, swarm drones, nano-tech, rare earth materials, genetics etc etc & we have these grumpies who bitch about everything desi. Read the Paulraj interview about how scary some of the Chinese advances are.

All this "lets take everyone along" approach is going to kill us in the next decade. We will watch the 3rd Industrial Revolution bus go right past us.

We need our leaders (Modi, Doval, Shah, Rajnath etc) kick some butt and make everyone fall in line. If people don't, they should be made to pay for it - visibly. Its starting to happen slowly & must accelerate.


Saar, wish is good, but kicking 5 lakh butts (civvies, bureaucrats, greedy Lutyen & business men) is no ordinary problem.

But no amount of wishing will have any effect unless "YOU" contribute in your "karma" to address the issue. When billion drop of rain-cloud falls then the dirt can be swept away. Changing the world begins with "ME" first. But being a arm chair general behind computer screen will not even scare a fly shitting (sic) on the nose.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20147
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Philip » 28 Nov 2019 08:35

I've reckd. the order.Placed during MP's time as DM.464 T-90MS MBTs with Uralvagonzavod to be supplied in kit form to be assembled at HVF Avadi.The reason for such a deal was because HVF were way behind T-90 production.1000 ordered, only 350-400 built.The price amounting to around $3M a unit.

Why production was so slow is another issue, but in general, almost all DPSUs are delaying orders with systems from all countries. Apart from MBTs at HVF,Scorpene subs- 5yrs with huge cost escalation.Various warships like FFGs and DDGs, delays by MDL, etc.Aircraft built by HAL, Tejas delays, IJT, M2K upgrades too.OFB,delays and useless ammo. In short, the entire DPSU family comes up short, with one major exception, strategic missiles! Does the " D" in DPSU therefore stand for "Delay"? Without accountability of those in charge, change is going to be excruciatingly slow. First, the heads must be given full authority with needed powers to carry out their responsibilities with minimal or much reduced interference from the MOD .
The problem at HVF with such a backlog given such large orders is worrisome.

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1456
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Thakur_B » 30 Nov 2019 08:26

Image
Image

Arjun Mk1A now with the earlier missing armour module below sights and gun mantle and with what appears to be final configuration sensor housing for ATGM.

VikramA
BRFite
Posts: 168
Joined: 29 Aug 2018 15:41

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby VikramA » 30 Nov 2019 12:13

The gun mantlet still does not have armour protection.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18641
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Karan M » 30 Nov 2019 23:22

Dude, the gun mantlet is basically a block of armor.

Thakur, that's like 4 sets of sights. Two forward for the gunner, one for the commander panoramic, and then the one on the RCWS.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4321
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby srai » 01 Dec 2019 03:49

Any info on Arjun MK.2? Weight reduction is one.

Any plans for Mk1 upgrade to Mk1A?

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2636
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby nam » 01 Dec 2019 04:19

I think the MK1A base turret is smaller than Mk1, to make space for the addition of ERA. If it is an plug and play, MK1 might be upgraded.

Wonder if it from the Tank-EX program, which had a smaller turret than Arjun. How I wish they consider a auto-loader in MK2, to due away the 4 man and reduce weight.

MK1 was recently overhauled.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2636
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby nam » 01 Dec 2019 04:58

I feel the latest 464 T90 is the last of the T90 orders. Although i still think, IA would replace some of the older T72 with T90's. however it has to be seen if it happens, specially to get ROI on 80% local content.

If this is the last batch and given it has been signed off, I feel there is now a clear path for more Arjun induction. IA must have held off MK1A induction, until the those 464 T90s were ordered.

I also find the plans for Mk2 interesting. It could indicate, IA's confidence in CVRDE with plans to go from Arjun MK2 on to CVRDE designed FRCV. Or a way to keep CVRDE busy and get FRCV from outside. Since the MK2 hull is already been fabricated, I don't see IA can keep CVRDE distracted from FRCV for long.

It would be difficult for IA to convince GoI to import FRCV, if MK2 get inducted.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18641
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Karan M » 01 Dec 2019 06:43

Nam, the Mk1A turret is pretty much the Mk1 turret. The Tank-ex program is gone.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7699
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby rohitvats » 02 Dec 2019 10:34

- Recently, IA came out with RFP for 198 Wheeled AFV (8x8).
- I'm surprised it has not been mentioned on BRF yet.
- Before the usual shit-storm about import-pasand army hits this thread on this new requirement, putting out the context of the requirement, as gleaned from RFP:

- Army wants 198 Wheeled 8x8 AFV
- These are required to replace the BRDM-2 serving with Recce & Support Battalions (Wheeled).
- There are two types of R&S Battalions - Wheeled and Tracked.
- Tracked ones use BMP-2 while Wheeled ones use BRDM-2 and Jeeps.
- R&S Battalions are part of RAPID but it is understood that few infantry divisions in Punjab also have R&S battalions.

Link below is an excerpt from a larger episode on 17th Battalion, Brigade of the Guards. This battalion was earlier an ATGM battalion and had sent detachments for Kargil War. Sometime after that, it became a R&S (Tracked) battalion. Don't miss the battlefield surveillance radar.



- The AFV needs to have 30mm main gun and twin-missile mount with 4 km range F&F ATGM missile.
- As of now, 4km missile in our inventory Konkur-M; F&F missile in category could mean an import of new missile. Unless, of course, we can get a NAG (Medium) in this category.

- BTW, with IBG concept taking shape, it is likely that R&S strength might go up as well. And we need more such 8x8 AFV.
- And it is my considered opinion that NAG will also see employment with these R&S battalions.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7385
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Prasad » 02 Dec 2019 10:43

Nag isnt a light atgm like the man carried ones I know. How much of an ugly shoehorning would it need to be incorporated in a tracked vehicle for this?

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1456
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Thakur_B » 02 Dec 2019 11:57

Looks like Army is getting serious for Kestrel like platform.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4321
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby srai » 02 Dec 2019 18:05

What about DRDO-TATA WhAP/Kestrel 8x8?

Image
Image

Winter/Summer Trials and tested all around India the last few years.

Image
Image

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1456
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Thakur_B » 02 Dec 2019 20:18

The RFI could be a ploy to get Kestrel without allegations of favouritism.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4596
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Kartik » 03 Dec 2019 00:48

The question is - who else has the RFI been sent to?

It would be a really welcome move to see the WhAP Kestrel entering IA service. Can someone who knows a lot about IFVs do a comparison between the Kestrel and other IFVs such as the Stryker?

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2636
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby nam » 03 Dec 2019 01:29

To prevent any allegation of favoritism, there is a very simple method. Call it DRDO kestrel, instead of Tata Kestrel.. IA can give the order to DRDO.

Everyone knows DRDO Netra AWACS, DRDO Arjun MBT etc.

The fact is DRDO does not produce any of these!

agupta
BRFite
Posts: 230
Joined: 13 Oct 1999 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby agupta » 03 Dec 2019 05:14

Folks, RohitVats said R F P - and he's precise with his words (i.e., its not an RFI)

Not a new fishing expedition, its progress that concrete proposals are being asked for now... still late, but better than the alternative

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4596
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Kartik » 03 Dec 2019 06:00

A lot of interesting nuggets on the Kestrel WhAP

Tata Motors gears up for new ride


Tata Motors won the ICV bid in 2012, beating competitors such as India’s Larsen & Toubro and Ireland’s heavy-duty mobility systems manufacturer Timoney Technology. DRDO funded about 50% of the project and laid down the technical specifications of the vehicle. Tata Motors says it will not disclose the cost of development but says the Kestrel was built ground-up in a year and a half, with funds coming from the Rs 4,000 crore budget that Tata Motors sets aside for its standalone business every year. While the company also did not divulge the cost of a Kestrel, it does say that an equivalent vehicle sells for around Rs 23 crore.

Even though Tata Motors won the bid about five years ago, the government is yet to sign off on orders. Meanwhile, the Kestrel has been getting its tyres kicked and checked out. Mobility trials started in early 2014, followed by tests that included deep wading of the vehicle and the functioning of its hydro jets in the summer of 2015, firing trials to see how the weaponised turrets work in October 2015, and summer trials for extreme weather conditions last year in the desert town of Pokhran. Tata Motors is awaiting results from the DRDO, after which contracts are expected to be issued. Such long gestation periods are not uncommon in defence deals. The armoured Tata Safari Storme showcased in 2012, for example, was in approval and testing mode for four years before orders came through.

Step in, or in this case climb up and then jump inside the Kestrel, and you get a sense of its strength. A complex array of wires and switches, and metal sheets riveted down give you a hint of the complex workings of the vehicle, as well as its stability. It’s definitely not built for driver comfort; there’s barely enough airconditioning to keep from melting. What it can do is withstand bullets and grenades; ferry troops and deploy them rapidly in war zones; perform well whether on land or in water; and can continue to move at speed even when its tyres are blown out. Add high speed and low maintenance, and it’s easy to see why armoured personnel carriers are so popular, with over 30 leading nations using them.
..

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4596
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Kartik » 03 Dec 2019 06:04

And more

The Tata Kestrel armoured personnel carrier

association with the Indian Defence Research and Development Organization (DRDO) which has funded the development cost. The Kestrel weighs 22.5 to 26 tonnes depending on the configuration and it's powered by a Tata Cummins diesel engine that makes 600bhp (608PS). Tata refuse to share the torque figures but claim it's quite high. The Kestrel can carry up to 10 soldiers and a crew of two. Seats for the troops are equipped with an energy attenuating mechanism that shields them from the effect of blasts. The seats actually move and absorb the impact of the initial blast as well as the secondary slam down of the vehicle, reducing the severity of injuries to the spine and brain. In the style of the Russian army, the seating for soldiers is back to back, allowing them to use the 4 gun ports on each side.

The Kestrel has four-wheel steering on the front two axles and a relatively short turning radius of 19 metres. The double wish bone type independent hydro pneumatic suspension, along with the impressive wheel travel, provides excellent all terrain mobility and a fairly comfortable ride. Yes, though we did not get to drive the Kestrel, we did get a ride in it and found the ride comfort, acceleration, braking and overall performance to be quite impressive. All the eight tyres have run flat capability with central inflation (CTIS) as standard. The amphibious propulsion employs rear mounted twin waterjets that do not require any preparation before entering water. Only the Anti-Surge Vane is raised to ensure water flows over the roof. The Kestrel can achieve 100kmph on land and 10kmph in water.

The architecture of the Kestrel is modular with interchangeable snap-in modules. This means it's easy to customize and can be configured to play the role of a CBRN (equipped with chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear protection) reconnaissance (recce) vehicle. It can also be configured to be an APC, ambulance, missile carrier, or a command post, a field headquarters used by the commander of a military unit. The Kestrel can be a support vehicle for engineers working in the field and given the times we live in, it will surely be used for anti-insurgency and anti- terrorist operations.

The monocoque of the Kestrel comprises of a welded armour steel hull with applique and inner composite spall liner and depending on the configuration, it can withstand threat levels ranging from Stanag I to Stanag IV. Stanag standards are a NATO standardisation agreement covering the standards for 'Protection Levels for Occupants of Logistic and Light Armoured Vehicles'. Stanag I dictates that the vehicle should be able to withstand hand grenades, unexploded artillery fragmenting submunitions, and other small anti personnel explosive devices detonated under the vehicle. Stanag IV states, among other parameters, that the vehicle should be able to withstand a blast of a 10kg mine under either each tyre or under the vehicle. Interestingly, the protection modules of the Kestrel can be replaced in the field, increasing or decreasing protection levels as per the mission requirements. The belly has a blast guard that can provide up to Stanag III level protection.

As its modular, the Kestrel can accommodate different variety of weapon stations and a one man or two man turret (for all calibres) depending on its application requirements. It can be armed with a 30mm remotely operated cannon, a single 7.62mm co-axial MMG (medium machine gun) and an automatic grenade launcher. In addition, it's capable of being fitted with a Javelin anti-tank missile station with two fire and forget missiles.

The Kestrel doesn't just have firepower, it also has some smart stealth technology. This makes the Kestrel less visible to radar, infrared, sonar and other detection methods. Tata engineers have tried to create a bit of mechanical military camouflage by managing and limiting the engine and vehicle sound, heat and thermal footprint, EMI or Electromagnetic Interference and EMC or Electromagnetic Compatibility. To reduce the thermal footprint, the exhaust gases are passed through water to ensure they are cool when released in the atmosphere.

With all-terrain ability and a powerful engine, the Kestrel can cross a trench of up to 2 metres width and vertical obstacles as high as 0.7 metres! It also has an on-board winch to enhance off-road ability. In combat mode, the driver shuts his hatch and utilises multiple cameras with day and night vision to steer the Kestrel. When in water, he also has three periscopes to aid him. The engine is mounted on the left in the front for better ergonomics and optimum space utilisation. The driver and commander have their own roof hatches while the rear compartment for soldiers is accessible through a rear door and roof hatches. The Kestrel is 7.8 metres long, 2.95 metres wide and 2.28 metres tall. It uses a GPS system for navigation and can be fitted with UHF, VHF or HF wireless systems for communications.

As I write this, the Kestrel is undergoing trails and tests with the Indian army, for its amphibious mobility and manoeuvrability on mud, slush, deep waters, and over steps and across trenches. Ballistic testing for its ability to withstand attacks will also be done and it's likely that the Kestrel will be commissioned for field operations in the future.
...

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2137
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby John » 03 Dec 2019 06:12

^ That article was 2 years old fact we are still discussing a possible procurement is sad..

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18641
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Karan M » 03 Dec 2019 10:22

Well, the original Kestrel procurement was stated to be tied to a need for wheeled vehicles for UN deployment, hardly a critical need.
Now, its linked to R&S requirement as Rohit says, arguably a more operational need, and hence will receive greater priority.

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1815
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby srin » 03 Dec 2019 16:16

Is the Whap an APC or a wheeled ICV ? Or that distinction doesn't exist anymore?

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1456
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Thakur_B » 03 Dec 2019 21:35

One thing Kestrel has got going for itself is modularity. They have already worked out 20+ utility configurations. Moreover, we have seen it integrated already with 2 different types of turrets. The configuration IA is asking seems akin to the Kongsberg turret first shown in Defexpo 2014 which can house a 30/40 mm cannon and two AT4 ATGM. As the BMP turret is also shown to be compatible, no harm in exploring the Rafael upgraded turret for BMP which was being marketed with Kalyani group.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7699
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby rohitvats » 04 Dec 2019 00:26

agupta wrote:Folks, RohitVats said R F P - and he's precise with his words (i.e., its not an RFI)

Not a new fishing expedition, its progress that concrete proposals are being asked for now... still late, but better than the alternative


Sorry, my mistake.

Its an RFI - https://www.indianarmy.nic.in/writereaddata/RFI/687/RFI%20WH%20AFV%20.pdf under Buy Indian category. Another key point is that it has to be amphibious - which is expected as it has to cross canals in the operational area. This should give an idea about potential candidates.
Last edited by rohitvats on 04 Dec 2019 00:32, edited 1 time in total.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2636
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby nam » 04 Dec 2019 00:31

The most interesting part, I found about the Kestrel doing the demo during Def Expo 2018 was that it had an official Army registration.

Here it is:
Image



Note it was registered in 2017. How many DRDO prototypes do you see in IA registration?

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7218
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby nachiket » 04 Dec 2019 00:48

Can these be used to convert more Inf battalions into Mech Inf battalions? Will be more cost effective perhaps than equipping them with tracked IFV's of which we still do not have a replacement for BMP-2 anyway. It seems to have stalled more mechanization of the IA which the Kestrel can address perhaps, in addition to equipping the R&S squadrons. I was going to say the Mech Inf version can have a different turret config but the one they are looking at already has a 30mm gun plus ATGM's. So no need for more firepower. Actually I don't see why the R&S version needs ATGMs. Maybe possible to save some money there by having a simpler turret and only the new Mech Inf version will have ATGMs.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4321
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby srai » 04 Dec 2019 13:11

Looks like DRDO-TATA WhAP converted into a tracked variant.

Image

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby tsarkar » 04 Dec 2019 13:29

nachiket wrote:Actually I don't see why the R&S version needs ATGMs.

Recce & Support Battalions on detecting enemy formation actually do a light strike to disrupt the enemy, whether in offence or defence.

They fulfill the role of skirmishers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skirmisher

So they need long range firepower. The BRDM-2 carries 5 Konkurs ATGMs. The Nag & NAMICA were designed for this role.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Kakarat, Lisa, mmasand, navneeet, Nikhil T and 63 guests