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.
Manish_Sharma wrote:Arjun tank outruns, outguns Russian T-90
India’s home-built Arjun tank has emerged a conclusive winner from its showdown with the Russian T-90. A week of comparative trials, conducted by the army at the Mahajan Ranges, near Bikaner in Rajasthan, has ended; the results are still officially secret. But Business Standard has learned from multiple sources who were involved in the trials that the Arjun tank has outperformed the T-90 on every crucial parameter.
The trial pitted one squadron (14 tanks) of Arjuns against an equal number of T-90s. Each squadron was given three tactical tasks; each involved driving across 50 kilometers of desert terrain and then shooting at a set of targets. Each tank had to fire at least ten rounds, stationary and on the move, with each hit being carefully logged. In total, each tank drove 150 kilometres and fired between 30-50 rounds. The trials also checked the tanks’ ability to drive through a water channel 5-6 feet deep.
The Arjun tanks, the observers all agreed, performed superbly. Whether driving cross-country over rugged sand-dunes; detecting, observing and quickly engaging targets; or accurately hitting targets, both stationery and moving, with pinpoint gunnery; the Arjun demonstrated a clear superiority over the vaunted T-90.
“The Arjun could have performed even better, had it been operated by experienced crewmen”, says an officer who has worked on the Arjun. “As the army’s tank regiments gather experience on the Arjun, they will learn to exploit its capabilities.”
With the trial report still being compiled --- it is expected to reach Army Headquarters after a fortnight --- neither the army, nor the Defence R&D Organisation (DRDO), which developed the Arjun tank in Chennai at the Central Vehicles R&D Establishment (CVRDE), are willing to comment officially about the trials.
The importance of this comparative trial can be gauged from a list of those who attended. Witnessing the Arjun in action were most of the army’s senior tank generals, including the Director General of Mechanised Forces, Lt Gen D Bhardwaj; strike corps commander, Lt Gen Anil Chait; Army Commander South, Lt Gen Pradeep Khanna; and Deputy Chief of the Army Staff, Lt Gen JP Singh. The Director General of Military Operations, Lt Gen AS Sekhon also attended the trials.
Over the last four months, the army had systematically signalled that it did not want to buy more Arjuns. The message from senior officers was: 124 Arjun tanks have been bought already; no more would be ordered for the army’s fleet of 4000 tanks. The comparative trial, or so went the message, was merely to evaluate what operational role could be given to the army’s handful of Arjuns.
“The senior officers who attended the trials were taken aback by the Arjun’s strong performance”, an army officer who was present through the trials frankly stated. “But they were also pleased that the Arjun had finally come of age.”
The army’s Directorate General of Mechanised Forces (DGMF), which has bitterly opposed buying more Arjuns, will now find it difficult to sustain that opposition. In keeping out the Arjun, the DGMF has opted to retain the already obsolescent T-72 tank in service for another two decades, spending thousands of crores in upgrading its vintage systems.
Now, confronted with the Arjun’s demonstrated capability, the army will face growing pressure to order more Arjuns.
The current order of 124 Arjuns is equipping the army’s 140 Armoured Brigade in Jaisalmer. With that order almost completed, the Arjun production line at the Heavy Vehicles Factory (HVF) in Avadi, near Chennai, needs more orders urgently. The Rs 50 crore facility can churn out 50 Arjuns annually. That would allow for the addition of close to one Arjun regiment each year (a regiment is authorised 62 tanks).
Tank experts point out that conducting trials only in Mahajan does not square with the army’s assertion that they are evaluating a role for the Arjun. Says Major General HM Singh, who oversaw the Arjun’s development for decades, “If they were evaluating where the Arjun should be deployed, they should have conducted the trials in different types of terrain: desert, semi-desert, plains and riverine. It seems as if the army has already decided to employ the Arjun in the desert.”
The Arjun’s sterling performance in the desert raises another far-reaching question: should the Arjun --- with its proven mobility, firepower and armour protection --- be restricted to a defensive role or should it equip the army’s strike corps for performing a tank’s most devastating (and glamorous) role: attacking deep into enemy territory during war? Each strike corps has 8-9 tank regiments. If the army recommends the Arjun for a strike role, that would mean an additional order of about 500 Arjuns.
But Business Standard has learned that senior officers are hesitant to induct the Arjun into strike corps. Sources say that the Arjun will be kept out of strike formations on the grounds that it is incompatible with other strike corps equipment, e.g. assault bridges that cannot bear the 60-tonne weight of the Arjun.
Old news and I am not questioning the quality of the tank....
I want to know if there are different logistical / infra or other considerations to be exercised if we wanted to employ the Arjun in the mountains.
I really want to know....since we have so many experts...
Rsatchi wrote:
All I can say is if there is 'Jhadap' only then the true strength of Arjun will come to fore. Remember the little 'Gant' and later the sobriquet the 'Sabre Slayer'!
That does not answer my question...
So you are saying that the performance of the Arjun in the plains will be the same as in the High Altitudes or you are saying that you like me do not know the answer to that question?
Our lack of investment in to sabot rounds, means Arjun won't add more value than a T90.
Arjun doesn't have the issue of autloader limiting the sabot length, however we haven't exploited this opportunity. Not to mention poor numbers of sabot production...
T90's sabot limitation can be compensated to some extent by the atgm, but it is an expensive alternative.
nam wrote:Our lack of investment in to sabot rounds, means Arjun won't add more value than a T90.
Arjun doesn't have the issue of autloader limiting the sabot length, however we haven't exploited this opportunity. Not to mention poor numbers of sabot production...
T90's sabot limitation can be compensated to some extent by the atgm, but it is an expensive alternative.
Does the size of Arjun have any say in whether it can be deployed in Ladakh?
That is what I want to know.
nam wrote:Our lack of investment in to sabot rounds, means Arjun won't add more value than a T90.
Arjun doesn't have the issue of autloader limiting the sabot length, however we haven't exploited this opportunity. Not to mention poor numbers of sabot production...
T90's sabot limitation can be compensated to some extent by the atgm, but it is an expensive alternative.
Does the size of Arjun have any say in whether it can be deployed in Ladakh?
That is what I want to know.
Iirc unlike some of the t series it might not fit into the transports so difficult to airlift.
ks_sachin wrote:
Does the size of Arjun have any say in whether it can be deployed in Ladakh?
That is what I want to know.
I think size wise, Arjun can go, in majority of the places where T90 can go. There are enough space in the valleys, where armor are able to move. There might be other issues that needs to be considered.
In areas where land is soft, ice river beds etc, due to it's weight there might be issues. Other consideration like how does the MTU engine perform at those heights. Transportation wise we could air lift it in C17.
The Chinese have been using T99 at heights, which is in similar class as Arjun. But fundamentally don't send Arjun in to areas, where it might face issue. Depsang & Demchock, two areas are open for armor. Arjun will work perfectly fine there, if the logistics are sorted.
ks_sachin wrote:
Does the size of Arjun have any say in whether it can be deployed in Ladakh?
That is what I want to know.
I think size wise, Arjun can go, in majority of the places where T90 can go. There are enough space in the valleys, where armor are able to move. There might be other issues that needs to be considered.
In areas where land is soft, ice river beds etc, due to it's weight there might be issues. Other consideration like how does the MTU engine perform at those heights. Transportation wise we could air lift it in C17.
The Chinese have been using T99 at heights, which is in similar class as Arjun. But fundamentally don't send Arjun in to areas, where it might face issue. Depsang & Demchock, two areas are open for armor. Arjun will work perfectly fine there, if the logistics are sorted.
So essentially there is no hope in hell of Arjuna going there in the near future..
So much for some of the fanciful thinking here.....
ks_sachin wrote:
That does not answer my question...
So you are saying that the performance of the Arjun in the plains will be the same as in the High Altitudes or you are saying that you like me do not know the answer to that question?
Sachin Arjun needs to be inducted in sufficient numbers and to be integrated into the strike corps
Needs to be part of war-games to answer your question
I don't know the answer. How can I answer if people who are supposed to use it are not ready to induct and trial it in the 'Yudh Abhyas' no??
ks_sachin wrote:
So essentially there is no hope in hell of Arjuna going there in the near future..
So much for some of the fanciful thinking here.....
I wouldn't say there is no chance in hell. It is probably a case of if it is worth the effort. The building blocks to take Arjun in to Ladakh is there. However the number is too little to induct a completely new type. Moreover Arjun's advantages like faster fire on the move is not going to be useful, given the lack of space.
If we see Type 99 rolling in, IA might induct Arjun to balance the odds. But as said earlier, lack of numbers and lack of investment in upgrading Arjun's ammo is not working in it's favor.
ks_sachin wrote:
Old news and I am not questioning the quality of the tank....
I want to know if there are different logistical / infra or other considerations to be exercised if we wanted to employ the Arjun in the mountains.
I really want to know....since we have so many experts...
If it's best for the battle it is best for the battle. Arjun has conclusively proved itself over T-90 and if we are withholding it from deployment in the Eastern sector vis-a-vis T90 then it does not make any sense. If the heft and might of Arjun is used to argue why T-90 is better in this sector then T-90 will lose that merit to T-72. So, in essence is Arjun is deemed better than T-90 in the western sector, and if T-90 loses out to T-72 in the Eastern sector based on maneuverability, and range metrics why have T-90 at all?
It feels like it's only the wish of some vested interests that is keeping Arjun from deploying in the Eastern sector. Arjun would whoop these bat eaters to kingdom come while taking a beating which the T-90 cannot accomplish.
How are they getting the T-90s into Ladakh? The IL-76s were barely able to take off from Chandigarh with stripped-down T-72s, so I'm curious if they have up-engined the IL-76s to lift heavier T90s or they are transporting major components separately? FWIW, the tanks that fly to Ladakh never come back since they are too heavy to be lifted from the thin-air. Essentially, they become Sector stores.
"Centurion was better protected. Poona Horse tanks were hit repeatedly without penetration, they continued to fight. Connect this with Arjun MBT Issues.
3. Centurion fires superior anti tank ammunition penetrating Patton at 2000m. Patton 90 mm AP could not penetrate Above 1000m"
What do you think how the Arjun MBT would fare in a similar battle today
"In my assessment it is a potent tank. Any tank man would be privileged to crew."
ParGha wrote:How are they getting the T-90s into Ladakh? The IL-76s were barely able to take off from Chandigarh with stripped-down T-72s, so I'm curious if they have up-engined the IL-76s to lift heavier T90s or they are transporting major components separately? FWIW, the tanks that fly to Ladakh never come back since they are too heavy to be lifted from the thin-air. Essentially, they become Sector stores.
ParGha I saw the armd squadron in the 17 Div AoR.
My dad commanded the relevant brigade. Need to ask him how they tanks got there as the nearest airport was Bagdogra.
The Col GS of 54 Div During Op PAwan is a close family friend and he talked about inducting the t72s into SL - interesting to say the least.
However weight has a huge bearing having seen the roads leading up to the plateau..Not to mention maintaining a heavier tank...
Walking 10 steps at around 17000 ft was like running a marathon...
The question from this “chamcha” as a poster has called me is the performance of things like ground pressure etc at that high altitude considering the issue of engine derating etc that Hari Nair sir mentioned. I am not an engineer so would be good to know.
ParGha wrote:How are they getting the T-90s into Ladakh? The IL-76s were barely able to take off from Chandigarh with stripped-down T-72s, so I'm curious if they have up-engined the IL-76s to lift heavier T90s or they are transporting major components separately? FWIW, the tanks that fly to Ladakh never come back since they are too heavy to be lifted from the thin-air. Essentially, they become Sector stores.
ParGha I saw the armd squadron in the 17 Div AoR.
My dad commanded the relevant brigade. Need to ask him how they tanks got there as the nearest airport was Bagdogra.
The Col GS of 54 Div During Op PAwan is a close family friend and he talked about inducting the t72s into SL - interesting to say the least.
However weight has a huge bearing having seen the roads leading up to the plateau..Not to mention maintaining a heavier tank...
Walking 10 steps at around 17000 ft was like running a marathon...
The question from this “chamcha” as a poster has called me is the performance of things like ground pressure etc at that high altitude considering the issue of engine derating etc that Hari Nair sir mentioned. I am not an engineer so would be good to know.
The ground pressure from the tank should not be affected by altitude since the mass of the tank would remain static. I cannot find any engine performance figures from MTU, and I don't believe they will be available to the general public.The engine performance would need to be taken for time of year (air density being higher in winter vs summer), and the RPM the engine is running at (since performance figures change between high speed and low speed).
If somebody does know these figures, I don't believe they would be at liberty to share them.
ks_sachin wrote:
ParGha I saw the armd squadron in the 17 Div AoR.
My dad commanded the relevant brigade. Need to ask him how they tanks got there as the nearest airport was Bagdogra.
The Col GS of 54 Div During Op PAwan is a close family friend and he talked about inducting the t72s into SL - interesting to say the least.
However weight has a huge bearing having seen the roads leading up to the plateau..Not to mention maintaining a heavier tank...
Walking 10 steps at around 17000 ft was like running a marathon...
The question from this “chamcha” as a poster has called me is the performance of things like ground pressure etc at that high altitude considering the issue of engine derating etc that Hari Nair sir mentioned. I am not an engineer so would be good to know.
The ground pressure from the tank should not be affected by altitude since the mass of the tank would remain static. I cannot find any engine performance figures from MTU, and I don't believe they will be available to the general public.The engine performance would need to be taken for time of year (air density being higher in winter vs summer), and the RPM the engine is running at (since performance figures change between high speed and low speed).
If somebody does know these figures, I don't believe they would be at liberty to share them.
Thanks mate. That makes sense. I am not an engineer so will take your word for it.
What weight penalty does the altitude impose on the C17?
Landing with that weight at high altitude is not a problem. Only taking off with that weight at high altitude is a problem, will need very long runway, if it can be done at all.
What weight penalty does the altitude impose on the C17?
Landing with that weight at high altitude is not a problem. Only taking off with that weight at high altitude is a problem, will need very long runway, if it can be done at all.
Exactly! The plane is flying at high altitudes with the load after take off
If there is a chance to take off with the tanks from Ladakh, it will probably be in winter (higher air density, thus more lift for the wings, and thrust for the engines).
Regarding the need to counter the Chinese Light Tank in Ladakh, if only we could have had a modern indigenous ATGM with an IIR seeker mounted on a proven lightweight highly mobile IFV platform to use in this scenario. Oh wait...
Indranil wrote:What do you mean by landing will not be a problem?
On an episode of "Mighty Planes", they talked about the design of the wing airfoil and placement of the engines, so that the C-17 can approach the runway at a slower speed, hence have a smaller stopping distance. If the runway is paved, they can deploy reverse thrust as well.
Indranil wrote:What do you mean by landing will not be a problem?
Early morning landing (when cold air is denser) on a good weather day for safe approach/touchdown with sufficient runway length to stop with reverse thrusters of C17. As you probably know C17 uses engine exhaust directed to the flaps to create an accelerated air flow that reduces landing speed.
sivab wrote:
Landing with that weight at high altitude is not a problem. Only taking off with that weight at high altitude is a problem, will need very long runway, if it can be done at all.
Exactly! The plane is flying at high altitudes with the load after take off
If there is a chance to take off with the tanks from Ladakh, it will probably be in winter (higher air density, thus more lift for the wings, and thrust for the engines).
Agree with you. Air has to be dense enough for safe approach/landing as well, but it should be less of an issue for landing (due to the way C17 uses engine exhaust to slow speed down during landing) than for take off assuming clear weather.
There is a humongous amount of calculation that needs to go in, density altitude being just one. What happens if they need to go around - what's the decision altitude ? What happens if there is a failure of a single engine ? How much fuel can they have, without going over the MTOW.
And lastly ...
Putting the T-72 in Leh was comparatively the easiest part of the whole deployment game. From Leh, these metal giants would have to cross Chang La and reach Darbuk to be deployed in the NE part of Ladakh. Chang La is not an easy pass to negotiate for wheeled vehicles, for tanks it is even more difficult. A truck on rubber wheels weighs about 6-8 tons and can be pushed. If a T-72 stops, who or what will push it along the road. Most surely Chang La cannot remain closed because of a reluctant T-72. The answer would have been to retrieve it with an ARV. Imagine the delay involved in all this. But to the credit of the cavalry officers and men, they went to Darbuk across Chang La, exercised in that area and had much to learn and teach their friends in the Armoured Corps, and strategic planners in New Delhi.
^^^ All landings with heavy loads require detailed calculations, even for commercial flights landing at sea level. No surprise about that for military flights. There are videos on youtube with pilots explaining some of the calculations for commercial flights.
Now, flying a tank to Thoise is going to be very interesting. Then it wouldn't need to go over Chang La or Khardung La and can directly go to DBO using the new DSDBO road. Very interesting if a C17 can do it. Another story from BRF portal - on flying Bofors to Thoise
Before we go into the details of flights into Thoise, it is relevant to understand how the max AUW for a landing at Thoise was determined. The Shyok valley at Thoise is very much narrower than the Indus valley at Leh. The lateral distance, North-South, between the peaks is not more than about 2 kms. The valley becomes even narrower as the Shyok river flows onto Chalunka region of Partapur sector. Khardung La, the link between Leh and Thoise, is way to the East near Tri-Junction and to get to it after an overshoot on RW 29 at Thoise, means turning around through 180 degrees in the Shyok valley. Those of us who know Thoise, will shudder at this prospect. The reader may well ask what has Khardung La, a road pass, got to do with the IL-76? Just as it is for vehicles, so is it for aircraft, Khardung La is the lowest point on the mountain range that separates the Indus from Shyok. Readers who may have never gone to Thoise, and even for those who have, need to be mentally with the pilots and navigators as they are deliberating and deciding what should be the max AUW for a landing at Thoise.
The overriding factor in this decision is, when should the IL-76 commence an overshoot on the approach for RW 29, so that it can climb to the desired height, and safely turn around within the Shyok valley, to either make another approach, or escape to Leh across Khardung La at a height of 5. 6 kms. It is a breath taking exercise. To decide on the max AUW for landing at Thoise, we decided to conduct trials at Agra and simulate conditions as prevalent at Thoise. The Doppler in the IL-76 allows the navigator to read off the drift from a predetermined path. Till now we were landing in Thoise at an AUW in excess of 140 tons. While that by itself may be acceptable if recorded in the aircraft Log Book Form 700, the factor of overshoot and turn-around had to be reconsidered. There was a major lacuna in the SOP with safety implications. It needed rectification to ensure that an overshoot can be safely executed at Thoise. So what we did was to make an approach at Agra at a height of 3370 metres. Why 3370 metres? Thoise is at an elevation of 3070 metres, and at a distance of 6 kms from touchdown the aircraft would be at 3370 metres. Why 6 km? If the IL-76 is to overshoot, thereafter lose one engine and yet be able to climb to the desired height, which we will come to later, and do a 180 degree turn to come back over Thoise, fly Eastwards and cross Khardung La at the prescribed height of 5.6 km, then that overshoot must be initiated at a distance of at least 6 kms East from the beginning of Thoise runway. If the aircraft comes any closer, it may not be able to clear the ridges West of Thoise, and execute a safe turn around, it would probably crash into the mountains and become a statistic.
srin wrote:Now, flying a tank to Thoise is going to be very interesting. Then it wouldn't need to go over Chang La or Khardung La and can directly go to DBO using the new DSDBO road. Very interesting if a C17 can do it. Another story from BRF portal - on flying Bofors to Thoise
How many sorties I wonder to move an armd regt to Ladakh.
Last edited by Rakesh on 23 Jul 2020 17:02, edited 1 time in total.
Reason:How many times must mods edit your post? Please stop quote large posts to put one liners?
srin wrote:Now, flying a tank to Thoise is going to be very interesting. Then it wouldn't need to go over Chang La or Khardung La and can directly go to DBO using the new DSDBO road. Very interesting if a C17 can do it. Another story from BRF portal - on flying Bofors to Thoise
How many sorties I wonder to move an armd regt to Ladakh.
Between 60-80 sorties I guess. But if you could do that in a day that is big.
^^^ I'll take Leh and not Thoise, where I'm doubtful of the tank airlift capability.
I think most of the landings happen during early morning before the temperature rises (and reduces density) and I'm not sure of night landings (fighters do it, and civil aircraft don't) given the treacherous terrain. That means there can only be few sorties per day per plane from a nearby airport like CHD. So even for a squadron of C17s, will take several days to move a regiment.
C-17 is absolutely the best plane in its class. No questions asked. But there is a lot of marketing hype as well. For example, it was a big problem for Boeing to have the flaps extended into the jet exhaust region (check your civilian planes, there is a cutout). This is the fancy technology of having exhaust passing through the flaps to create lift. But our vodka burners had it for a long time. Also they have thrust reversers as well.
In general, air density limits both take off and landing speeds and weights. IF C17s can lift Arjuns to Leh, it will be a spectacle indeed. I have my doubts. Probably possible if C17s go there with very little fuel to spare (+ reserves), refuel there and come back.
