Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 04 Aug 2020 19:42

https://twitter.com/livefist/status/129 ... 14216?s=20 ---> On the Indian Army's urgent hunt for light tanks amidst tensions in Ladakh, a prescription from Major General BS Dhanoa (retd):

1. Upgrade/up-gun BMPs
2. L&T-DRDO solution (K9 chassis + new turret)
3. Improve high-altitude infrastructure for existing armour

Full Interview:

ArjunPandit · Post by **ArjunPandit** » 04 Aug 2020 21:33

Good interview, I liked the following points...

1. Army is not all unhappy about Arjun and there is a genuine realization of challenges. Now if he's representative that's a question but the fact BSD mentions others were happy too should point. He does talk about the role in desert.

2. Usage of BMP2 v/s a light tank and further enhancing BMP2 with domestic alternatives.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 04 Aug 2020 21:34

https://twitter.com/singhshwetabh71/sta ... 49159?s=20 ---> ANI is now reporting that Army is considering to choose an ICV from WhAP (understandable) Stryker (OK sure) and Humvee (WTF ?). Its also reporting that Army is to make a decision very soon, and that WhAP does have preference over American counterparts. Possibly the weirdest news today.

* Wheeled Armored Amphibious Platform (WhAP) ---> https://www.tatamotors.com/product/defe ... le-kstrel/

* Stryker ---> https://www.gdls.com/products/stryker-a ... ialty.html

* Humvee ---> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humvee

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 04 Aug 2020 21:39

Rakesh wrote:https://twitter.com/singhshwetabh71/sta ... 49159?s=20 ---> ANI is now reporting that Army is considering to choose an ICV from WhAP (understandable) Stryker (OK sure)& Humvee (WTF ?). Its also reporting that Army is to make a decision very soon, and that WhAP does have preference over American counterparts. Possibly the weirdest news today.

https://twitter.com/livefist/status/129 ... 56385?s=20 ---> Our view: Would be absurd to even consider an import when Tata Motors' and DRDO's Kestrel Wheeled Armoured Platform (WhAP) is ready & tested. Now's the time to get these out there in numbers & plan a Mk.2. #AtmaNirbharBharat

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 04 Aug 2020 21:44

https://twitter.com/Maverick_bharat/sta ... 15265?s=20 ---> Indian Army to procure armoured infantry combat vehicles.

* Contenders:
✓Tata WHAP
✓Humvee
✓Stryker

* Front Runner:
✓Tata WhAP

YashG · Post by **YashG** » 04 Aug 2020 23:03

Rakesh wrote:https://twitter.com/Maverick_bharat/sta ... 15265?s=20 ---> Indian Army to procure armoured infantry combat vehicles.

* Contenders:
✓Tata WHAP
✓Humvee
✓Stryker

* Front Runner:
✓Tata WhAP

Oh you dont buy indigenous WHAP now and then no one should be allowed to utter 'Atma Nirbhar Bharat' again.
Never a better time. Tatas, Mahindra, Kalyani are among the few companies who have actually done R&D to produce miltech and we dont place enough orders. Unless we dont, how will a MIC emerge! I miss Parikkar. PMO should appoint someone who is passionate about cleaning up the mess in MoD and not worry about their political fortunes & fully commit to set this right. Oh please do a 'Jaishankar' for MoD.

nam · Post by **nam** » 05 Aug 2020 00:15

How did Styker in to the picture? Didn't any of the European kit participate in the RFI/RFP?

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 05 Aug 2020 00:25

Rakesh wrote:https://twitter.com/singhshwetabh71/sta ... 49159?s=20 ---> ANI is now reporting that Army is considering to choose an ICV from WhAP (understandable) Stryker (OK sure) and Humvee (WTF ?). Its also reporting that Army is to make a decision very soon, and that WhAP does have preference over American counterparts. Possibly the weirdest news today.

* Wheeled Armored Amphibious Platform (WhAP) ---> https://www.tatamotors.com/product/defe ... le-kstrel/

* Stryker ---> https://www.gdls.com/products/stryker-a ... ialty.html

* Humvee ---> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humvee

I sincerely hope this news is wrong. But I wouldn't be surprised if this was true. Imagine comparing Humvee with kestrel. Totally different vehicle designs.

But then this is the same army that orders a Grand total of 6 no. apache combat helicopters. God knows for what. What exactly do they hope to achieve with this no.?

A similar procurement disaster is being replicared wrt small arms. Sig sauers, caracals, ak 203s and what not.

Our strategic leaders which includes mil top brass clearly do not visualize our military as a serious war fighting force. We are lucky that PRC's capabilities will be limited by Tibet's high altitude in any future conflict. Anyways just like in Kargil, the day will be saved by junior officers and Jawans.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 05 Aug 2020 10:43

TWITTER:

@rahorekaran17:

A very interesting and readable economic analysis of the advantages of an indigenous wpn pgm as against an imported system. Here Shaunak Agarkhedkar compares the Arjun project and the T90.
These aspects are more often than not lost sight of.
https://t.co/EoQzjkpS6Q

The immense loss that is being inflicted on our MIC and on our indigenisation efforts by sidelining the MBT Arjun is reflected by Shaunak in economic terms. And as I have always maintained the Arjun way outclasses the T90.

Well done @shaunakSA. More power to bright lads and lasses like you!!!
https://twitter.com/rathorekaran17/stat ... 72705?s=19
_____________________

https://shaunak.substack.com/p/domestic ... ce=twitter

Domestic Military-Industrial Complex - Part TwoMBT Arjun vs T-90MS - a case study

Shaunak Agarkhedkar

Last month I simulated the economic benefits of investing in domestic products as opposed to purchasing products from OEMs in other countries. Today I’ll tweak the simulation and do an apples-to-apples comparison between procuring the MBT Arjun Mk.1A vs the T-90MS. The assumptions will be on the conservative side; a worst-case scenario of sorts for the Arjun. For example, the simulation does not assume any economies of scale for the Arjun, but the economies are already baked into the T-90’s per unit cost.

The simulation is made even cooler by the fact that I’ve now written it in Python.

I am assuming that all T-90MS are imported, and the value added to them domestically is negligible. I am also neglecting the knock-on effects of domestic R&D associated with procurement of the Arjun (like subsystems that get utilised for upgrading other tanks with the Indian Army, etc.)

Domestic Military-Industrial Complex - Part TwoMBT Arjun vs T-90MS - a case study

Shaunak Agarkhedkar12 hr4

Subscribe

Last month I simulated the economic benefits of investing in domestic products as opposed to purchasing products from OEMs in other countries. Today I’ll tweak the simulation and do an apples-to-apples comparison between procuring the MBT Arjun Mk.1A vs the T-90MS. The assumptions will be on the conservative side; a worst-case scenario of sorts for the Arjun. For example, the simulation does not assume any economies of scale for the Arjun, but the economies are already baked into the T-90’s per unit cost.

The simulation is made even cooler by the fact that I’ve now written it in Python.

I am assuming that all T-90MS are imported, and the value added to them domestically is negligible. I am also neglecting the knock-on effects of domestic R&D associated with procurement of the Arjun (like subsystems that get utilised for upgrading other tanks with the Indian Army, etc.).

Supplier levels

Like last time, only 3 levels of suppliers are considered, and they’re assumed to pay three kinds of taxes: corporate tax, GST (on components procured domestically), and income taxes paid on salaries of employees.

Taxes flowing back

The taxes flow into the following year’s central government budget, and are redirected to MBT procurement in proportion to the percentage of central government budget allocated to Defence. This is an additional nuance I’ve incorporated from last time. So if 24% of the central govt. budget goes to Defence, only 24% of the taxes collected from the domestic MIC involved in Arjun Mk.1A production is redirected to the following year’s Arjun procurement.

Budgetary excess

However, since we are procuring the same number of units for both tanks in any given year, and since the procurement budget grows organically as well as due to a proportion of the supply chain taxes flowing back, we end up with a situation where for each year we have an excess. This can be utilised to buttress or replace those bridges that were believed to be incapable of supporting the Arjun’s weight. Or it can be used to procure more Arjun Mk.1A tanks.

Such a scenario does not arise in case of the T-90MS tank.......

Note: Rest of article contains lots of Tables so not possible to post here, please go on link and read it there

kvraghav · Post by **kvraghav** » 05 Aug 2020 12:51

I think this deal for ICV is pretty much with the Striker. There is lack of some global competition here. Buying the Kestrel did not warrant a competition . The Kestrel seems like just a token participation and not make it a single vendor buy. The Kestrel has still not gone through the mandatory summer-winter-rainy seasons test i think. The Humvee is again a non contest because of being more in the LSV category. Wonder why they did not go with a Govt-Govt deal for the stryker?

YashG · Post by **YashG** » 05 Aug 2020 13:34

kvraghav wrote:I think this deal for ICV is pretty much with the Striker. There is lack of some global competition here. Buying the Kestrel did not warrant a competition . The Kestrel seems like just a token participation and not make it a single vendor buy. The Kestrel has still not gone through the mandatory summer-winter-rainy seasons test i think. The Humvee is again a non contest because of being more in the LSV category. Wonder why they did not go with a Govt-Govt deal for the stryker?

Any particular reasons? Why not WHAP.

OTOH - WHAP can go in water, so can we take it for a bath in Pangong Tso - if need be.

kvraghav · Post by **kvraghav** » 05 Aug 2020 15:38

YashG wrote: OTOH - WHAP can go in water, so can we take it for a bath in Pangong Tso - if need be.

If we wanted that, We did not need a competition between the three. I think we can order Kestrel directly since this a co development between DRDO and Tata. This is kind of a govt collaboration project since DRDO is involved and might not pass though the tender flow.

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 05 Aug 2020 17:17

kvraghav wrote:
YashG wrote: OTOH - WHAP can go in water, so can we take it for a bath in Pangong Tso - if need be.
If we wanted that, We did not need a competition between the three. I think we can order Kestrel directly since this a co development between DRDO and Tata. This is kind of a govt collaboration project since DRDO is involved and might not pass though the tender flow.

Actually because Pvt sector is involved they have to go tender process. Else it becomes single vendor situation.
The Stryker is just an after thought....
Kestrel it will be...

Barath · Post by **Barath** » 05 Aug 2020 17:19

aditp wrote:What could be the point of comparing 8x8 AFV with a 4x4 tactical utility vehicle. Looks like the usual rigmarole of consigning indigenous development to oblivion has started again!

Don't agree for the simple reason that where were the requirements before ? My guess : This is Ladakh confrontation and lack of prior thought combined with a reactionary army and free hand with emergency funds creating something new as requirement

The previous requirement for Whap was 200 for UN Indian deployments and since the army liked it, 200 via RFI for Punjab and Rajasthan requirements
https://www.defencenews.in/article/Indi ... les-809777

So nothing has affected previous requirement, (or hastened it)

The new requirement is Eastern Ladakh and I take it they don't know what they want yet (no other way to explain 4x4 HMMV, 8x8 amphib Kestrel and 4x8/8x8 Stryker all being lumped in)

I also considered if the others were listed just as a sham to go for the desired one, but it's still too divergent.

If anyone can point to earlier APC requirements in the army, I would be grateful.

nam · Post by **nam** » 05 Aug 2020 17:31

ks_sachin wrote:Actually because Pvt sector is involved they have to go tender process. Else it becomes single vendor situation.
The Stryker is just an after thought....
Kestrel it will be...

Hopefully services should realize this is the way to go about, if they want to bypass DPSU & OFB. Get a project, ask DRDO to develop it and it will involve the private sector. Create a "IA will choose between the two" to prevent a single vendor situation. Since DRDO is involved, cannot blame "cronyism", services get private vendors and DPSU are sidelined. They will get the MIC they want.

MoD babus know this very well... that's why they try to restrict private orders, push for "ToT" or ask DPSU or OFB to run their own "development" like Dhanush, FICV or Amogh ATGM!

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 05 Aug 2020 17:58

Barath wrote:
aditp wrote:What could be the point of comparing 8x8 AFV with a 4x4 tactical utility vehicle. Looks like the usual rigmarole of consigning indigenous development to oblivion has started again!
Don't agree for the simple reason that where were the requirements before ? My guess : This is Ladakh confrontation and lack of prior thought combined with a reactionary army and free hand with emergency funds creating something new as requirement

The previous requirement for Whap was 200 for UN Indian deployments and since the army liked it, 200 via RFI for Punjab and Rajasthan requirements
https://www.defencenews.in/article/Indi ... les-809777

So nothing has affected previous requirement, (or hastened it)

The new requirement is Eastern Ladakh and I take it they don't know what they want yet (no other way to explain 4x4 HMMV, 8x8 amphib Kestrel and 4x8/8x8 Stryker all being lumped in)

I also considered if the others were listed just as a sham to go for the desired one, but it's still too divergent.

If anyone can point to earlier APC requirements in the army, I would be grateful.

That is just it.

We are getting our knickers in a test because of some rumour on Twitter?

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 05 Aug 2020 18:03

nam wrote:
ks_sachin wrote:Actually because Pvt sector is involved they have to go tender process. Else it becomes single vendor situation.
The Stryker is just an after thought....
Kestrel it will be...
Hopefully services should realize this is the way to go about, if they want to bypass DPSU & OFB. Get a project, ask DRDO to develop it and it will involve the private sector. Create a "IA will choose between the two" to prevent a single vendor situation. Since DRDO is involved, cannot blame "cronyism", services get private vendors and DPSU are sidelined. They will get the MIC they want.

MoD babus know this very well... that's why they try to restrict private orders, push for "ToT" or ask DPSU or OFB to run their own "development" like Dhanush, FICV or Amogh ATGM!

M
Nam Sirji I was just being "authoritative" without an iota of knowledge.

However you make an interesting or.

I think the services perception of DRDO is slowly changing for the better.

However OFB is a gone case. It is better we ask the OFB employees to stay at home on full pay and get Pvt sector partner with DRDO on manu

Sirji Dhanush did not come from MoD. I believe a former DG Arty took the bull by the horns...

nam · Post by **nam** » 05 Aug 2020 18:23

ks_sachin wrote: However you make an interesting or.

I think the services perception of DRDO is slowly changing for the better.

However OFB is a gone case. It is better we ask the OFB employees to stay at home on full pay and get Pvt sector partner with DRDO on manu

Sirji Dhanush did not come from MoD. I believe a former DG Arty took the bull by the horns...

If you go in more detail on DRDO's projects nowadays, majority of it's suppliers are from private sector. DRDO now has it's own "private" MIC, parallel to DPSU & OFB. DRDO doesn't want to take flak for DPSU's QC issues anymore.

DRDO cannot prevent MoD from forcefully giving production orders to DPSU for it's projects. So DRDO has now found a way around it. Since it own's the IP, It gives out ToT of it's design to private companies at zero cost

The former DG also mentioned in one of his article that the hate between DRDO & OFB is so much, that it refused to share the BMCS tech with OFB! We have a peculiar MIC

ParGha · Post by **ParGha** » 05 Aug 2020 18:35

Barath wrote:If anyone can point to earlier APC requirements in the army, I would be grateful.

In 1960s and 70s, APCs were the sole requirement for the Indian mechanized battalions. Wheeled APCs were favored for easier and cheaper maintenance, and OT SKOT were imported from Czechoslovakia. The Yom Kippur War changed everything, from the performance of BMPs to widespread use of ATGMs, it became clear that armored regiments cannot operate without close infantry support in IFVs. The APC concept therefore took a backseat, with the exiting APCs limited to a few sectors and/or recce role; BTR-80s later filled the SKOT's role in the mechanized units that were still Wheeled. The introduction of IFVs and its distinct role (not just a battlefield-taxi) also spurred the setup of the Mechanized Infantry Regiment.

You will need 50 x APCs per wheeled battalion, plus 16 x APCs for the ACC&S and 16 x APCs for the President's Bodyguard Cavalry.

navneeet · Post by **navneeet** » 05 Aug 2020 19:55

The Ukrainian Army Learned The Hard Way—Don’t Idle Your Tanks When The Russians Are Nearby

Six years ago, Russian forces located, isolated then destroyed a powerful—on paper, at least—Ukrainian armored group. The July 2014 assault holds important lessons for today’s tankers

Ukrainian commanders exposed themselves to attack when they failed to appreciate the inherently mobile—and independent—nature of tank operations. Instead of commanding their units while on the move, they clustered around a command post, awaiting orders. That made them a target.

On the morning of July 11, Russian forces hacked the Ukrainian command post’s network and jammed its radios.

“At about 4:30 A.M., the Ukrainians lost the ability to communicate due to Russian cyber and electronic attack,” Fox explained. “The formations, prostrate and unable to communicate, were then ruthlessly attacked by Russian multiple-launch rockets and run-of-the-mill tube artillery.”

“The battle and campaign are best served when armored formations are unleashed and allowed to wreak havoc against their adversary.”

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2 ... 6404472fbe

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 05 Aug 2020 20:06

A good, not very technical, overview of US attempt to develop its next generation of armoured vehicles. Thing to note is the how they have changes their approach to development, IMO something for us to learn.

Barath · Post by **Barath** » 05 Aug 2020 23:28

ks_sachin wrote:
That is just it.

We are getting our knickers in a test because of some rumour on Twitter?

There's far too little information or confirmation to get too heated up. But it's not completely dismissed as ANI is often close to the government, and it's not just a tweet

https://www.aninews.in/news/national/ge ... 0804163457

If this holds up, then there should be more info down the line.

Barath · Post by **Barath** » 05 Aug 2020 23:39

abhik wrote:A good, not very technical, overview of US attempt to develop its next generation of armoured vehicles. Thing to note is the how they have changes their approach to development, IMO something for us to learn.

There have been 3 prior attempts to replace the Bradley and this is the 4th. The prior attempt in the OMFV program itself came badly unstuck.

https://breakingdefense.com/2020/01/fai ... ment-omfv/

https://www.defensenews.com/2020/03/16/ ... t-failure/

As the video touches upon, the army fixed aggressive detailed requirements with little flexibility and an aggressive schedule to the point industry complained, bae withdrew, rheinmetall asked for more time to ship their prototype because they couldn't get permits (they effectively proposed submitting it at their own location) and was rejected, resulted in a single bidder situation.. with flaws. And even then, army futures wanted to go ahead and army acquisition didn't.

After the ripping congress gave them, the 4th attempt goes a bit in the opposite direction, with a few goals and leaving it up to the vendors. At least it won't be the same failure mode

And that saga is with the best private western players involved.

Given the repeated failure of the us army , you'll pardon me if I wait for the next attempt to go further before certifying it as the one true procurement way to follow.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 06 Aug 2020 02:10

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/129 ... 95682?s=20 ---> All the 'Atmanirbharta' rhetoric will go down the drain if the American STRYKER is chosen over the desi Tata-DRDO Kestrel (WhaP) 8x8 for the wheeled APC requirement.

pushkar.bhat · Post by **pushkar.bhat** » 06 Aug 2020 18:09

Humvee - Seriously, could they get better tin cans. Our boys are way better protected in BMP-2's. I mean didn't someone show them the discovery channel and youtube video's of Humvee's getting blown up in IRAQ due to IED's. I wouldn't use them in Kashmir and Nax areas forget Tibet.

k prasad · Post by **k prasad** » 06 Aug 2020 19:43

I recommend watching "The Pentagon Wars" on Amazon Prime. It's a hilarious but true story of the Bradley development and testing. Just to give an idea of the kind of nonsense that happens even in Unkil MIC.

srin · Post by **srin** » 06 Aug 2020 21:06

^^ I did, and I'm now beginning to think that a Bradley M3 is a good model for a light tank

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 06 Aug 2020 21:42

Yes. A Clip from it was posted on a different thread earlier

gpurewal · Post by **gpurewal** » 06 Aug 2020 21:45

^^^^
I was thinking about the Arjun program when I first saw that movie.

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 10 Aug 2020 04:50

Rakesh wrote:https://twitter.com/livefist/status/129 ... 14216?s=20 ---> On the Indian Army's urgent hunt for light tanks amidst tensions in Ladakh, a prescription from Major General BS Dhanoa (retd):

1. Upgrade/up-gun BMPs
2. L&T-DRDO solution (K9 chassis + new turret)
3. Improve high-altitude infrastructure for existing armour

Back in the day around 15 years back DRDO made a light tank based on BMP-II and a french GIAT 105mm turret. Project was later dropped.

THen around 2010 there was a tie up between BEML and BUMAR from poland to make the Anders Light tank. The Anders light tank concept was pretty sleek, basically an FICV with an unmanned turret. Poles had made a universal chasis but did not have money to develop it further.

Then this too disappeared.

I suppose there must be a spare 105 mm GIAT turret lying around in DRDO stores. Slap it on kestrel and call it a day.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 10 Aug 2020 21:22

https://twitter.com/livefist/status/129 ... 14208?s=20 ---> India's 'Self-Reliance Week' events include "Nag Missile Carrier (NAMICA) - Launch of indigenous product" on August 13th. Unclear what this is. The current NAMICA is a modified BMP-II license-built by the OFB in Telangana.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 11 Aug 2020 01:19

What is left to be "launched" now for the NAMICA? The NAMICA has been ready for a while. Order the damned thing or cancel it. We don't need another wild goose chase like the Arjun where it is perennially under development with no orders anywhere in sight.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 11 Aug 2020 08:23

https://www.gunnersshot.com/2020/08/evo ... by_10.html

Lt. Gen Ravi Shankar says BMP wont take more than a 40mm. His path forward is via K-9 and eventually put a 105mm/120 mm tank gun. I would like the 120 mm Arjun rifled cannon.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 11 Aug 2020 08:32

Rakesh wrote:https://twitter.com/livefist/status/129 ... 14208?s=20 ---> India's 'Self-Reliance Week' events include "Nag Missile Carrier (NAMICA) - Launch of indigenous product" on August 13th. Unclear what this is. The current NAMICA is a modified BMP-II license-built by the OFB in Telangana.

This is the best solution for light tank requirement in Ladakh and Sikkim/Arunachal. The differentiation problem in desert noonday temperatures doesnt exist at those theaters.

As a follow up, cost reduction program to bring down unit missile cost needs to be done. And a wire guided version for static targets like bunkers and relatively low mobility targets like cargo/personnel trucks so that these can be cheaply taken out. Both objectives are doable in the short term.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 11 Aug 2020 08:40

tsarkar wrote:
Rakesh wrote:https://twitter.com/livefist/status/129 ... 14208?s=20 ---> India's 'Self-Reliance Week' events include "Nag Missile Carrier (NAMICA) - Launch of indigenous product" on August 13th. Unclear what this is. The current NAMICA is a modified BMP-II license-built by the OFB in Telangana.
This is the best solution for light tank requirement in Ladakh and Sikkim/Arunachal. The differentiation problem in desert noonday temperatures doesnt exist at those theaters.

As a follow up, cost reduction program to bring down unit missile cost needs to be done. And a wire guided version for static targets like bunkers and relatively low mobility targets like cargo/personnel trucks so that these can be cheaply taken out. Both objectives are doable in the short term.

Our problem as always is that we start digging a well after getting thirsty. The NAMICA should have been ordered a long time ago while the issues with the Nag sensor in hot desert environments were sorted out in parallel. If it is ordered now, it will be a while before the first lot of vehicles and missiles are delivered. It is useless for the current standoff. Same for the LCH, although in that case at least the three prototypes are available.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 11 Aug 2020 17:29

ramana wrote:https://www.gunnersshot.com/2020/08/evo ... by_10.html

Lt. Gen Ravi Shankar says BMP wont take more than a 40mm. His path forward is via K-9 and eventually put a 105mm/120 mm tank gun. I would like the 120 mm Arjun rifled cannon.

IIRC, one of the OFBs has displayed a BMP with giat 105 mm turret as a prospective light tank. Perhaps the testing of that vehicle convinced the army that BMP will not be a viable option for a light tank candidate.

But at the same time, if the BMP can take a 40 mm piece then a redesigned turret with 40 mm turret along with twin launchers for 3rd gen ATGM should be doable and be actively sought to be implemented. Till the FICV comes on line.

Perhaps a new line of vehicles can be developed similar to the CV 90 family of Sweden. With suitable active protection system it should be able to replace a MBT as well.

On a related but secondary note.

Ever since I learnt about active protection system which could deal with APFSDS shots. I have be wondering if a heavy armoured fighting vehicle with passive armoured protection still has a place on the modern battlefield.

RKumar · Post by **RKumar** » 11 Aug 2020 17:38

Rakesh wrote:https://twitter.com/livefist/status/129 ... 14208?s=20 ---> India's 'Self-Reliance Week' events include "Nag Missile Carrier (NAMICA) - Launch of indigenous product" on August 13th. Unclear what this is. The current NAMICA is a modified BMP-II license-built by the OFB in Telangana.

Heartening to see a hope of ray, we will see if IA and MoD really place the orders for NAMICA as well as LCH.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 17 Aug 2020 23:41

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/129 ... 05158?s=20 ---> Here's a stunning shot of the NAMICA tank destroyer developed by DRDO and built by OFB. The platform carries six Nag (Prospina) 3rd Gen anti-tank guided missiles in ready to fire mode. All six can be launched in a span of 20 seconds.

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/129 ... 97984?s=20 ---> Here's one more of the NAMICA launching a Nag (Prospina) ATGM. For those who came late, the Nag now boasts a 640 x 512 MWIR seeker instead of the older LWIR seeker.

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 23 Aug 2020 22:25

Possibility: Arjun Tank with Rheinmetall 130 MM Gun | अर्जुन टैंक 130 MM गन के साथ

k prasad · Post by **k prasad** » 24 Aug 2020 00:41

130 mm means a heavier gun, heavier rounds, and fewer rounds.Considering the Arjun is already 'overweight', not sure how upgunning it will help that case. Also, whats wrong with the current Arjun rifled gun? This seems like a foreign OEM offering a shiny new object. Lets see if it actually makes sense for our needs.