Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

chola · Post by **chola** » 05 Sep 2020 17:16

k prasad wrote:^^^ found the benchmark comparison on reddit. Notice the number of relaxations granted to the T-90.

My god. We relax the conditions for the import over the homegrown product. In all other countries they would slant the contest towards their indigenous entrants. We onlee.

nandakumar · Post by **nandakumar** » 05 Sep 2020 18:23

If there is an audit remark there is also an 'auditee' response. Standard internal audit practice. With out the Defence Ministry response, the picture is not complete. Mind you I am not saying that T90 was not favoured. It is just that viewed purely on technical grounds the allegation is not fully established.

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 05 Sep 2020 18:31

k prasad wrote:Great chart, Manish.

It is a very interesting study, done not by a defense analyst (at least i am not aware if he is), but rather an author, Shaunak Agarkhedkar, and i think into AI (He is founder CEO of a company in the field of AI, based in Pune)

Thanks to poster Manish_Sharma for bringing it to this forum on page 16

I request you to go through the study. you will really find it worth your time.

Link - https://espionage.substack.com/p/domestic-military-industrial-complex-8bf?r=76zzo&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&utm_source=twitter

I remember seeing a comparative table of Arjun vs T-90 performance in trials, but I can't find it now. I wish I had it.

Are you referring to the trials of 2014?

You can google the CAG report Number 35 of 2014

You will see the comparison table as ANNEXURE-XIX around page 297. I have included it below for quick reference.

However, if you have time, i would request you to go through the detailed findings (there are lot) about the changes, delays, failures etc of the Arjun saga

Anyway the image:
<removed - as it is already posted on previous page>

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 05 Sep 2020 18:39

nandakumar wrote:If there is an audit remark there is also an 'auditee' response. Standard internal audit practice. With out the Defence Ministry response, the picture is not complete. Mind you I am not saying that T90 was not favoured. It is just that viewed purely on technical grounds the allegation is not fully established.

You have a point about the auditee response

But take a look at some of the parameter conditions.

For example, firing of the armor piercing ammo. Why was the speed set lower for the T90. Was it that the enemy on spotting the T90 would go 'hey slow down, let's give it a sporting chance to hit us. Better not piss off Putin'

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 06 Sep 2020 13:04

ks_sachin wrote:
Karan M wrote:
This is sadly not always the case. In many cases they do. In some they don't and the procurement is messed up. The T-90 tanks are a perfect example of that. There is a substantial need for a long term IA procurement and program management office with both R&D and civilian representation.
You commented on something I redacted in my original post. However you are right but what you say applies to pretty much any Armed FOrces procurement. However can you please elaborate....?

The fundamental broken issue is at three levels in the SQR - one is need vs good to have, second is the inability to map need to actual requirements (as versus setting some particular capability to achieve that requirement, which biases the EOI etc towards one vendor) and then finally, the inability to threat forecast and set what is realistic or genuinely state of the art and strike a balance between the two. All these require genuine subject matter experts who develop these skills over a program like the Arjun or Pinaka but then retire and are forgotten. So and so major retires as a brigadier and his experience hard won through a multi-stage development program is left to wither. They also need DRDO and civilian industry reps as partners to help with specific items. I have seen EOI which are literally absurd - either too less for any meaningful threat already extant OR so high that the best arms vendors would hesitate to apply (and so the EOI is withdrawn). The AF need product and program management organizations to keep these guys in and retain their knowledge after they do get things in place.

The fourth thing is to helm programs - again ad hoc, procurement oriented. The IA needs guys to work with domestic orgs as service representatives and build a genuine belief in domestic items. These guys will act as a bridge between the services and civilian side. The services - institutionally modeled on the Brit set up, are not designed to have hierarchy questioned and allow some Israeli type behavior. Hence you need institutional i.e. organizational support. No maverick Captain will be able to stand up to a panel of Lt Gens and swing the day. This means he needs to be part of an org which backs him and is hence able to lobby for him, and also back him, career wise so that he can professionally grow and take a stand where it matters. And he is backed up by his seniors who too are part of the IA setup, some deputed from their parent branches and have their own clout and support.

Hiten · Post by **Hiten** » 06 Sep 2020 17:56

Fighting Night Blindness, Indian Army To Upgrade It's BMP II For Night Combat Capability

In an out of character manner, the Indian Army [IA] has cited the current, sensitive Border situation, in it's call, seeking Expression Of Interest [EOI] for the Armament Upgrade of BMP-2/2K.

https://www.spansen.com/2020/09/fightin ... my-to.html

k prasad · Post by **k prasad** » 06 Sep 2020 18:08

^^^ Or, as my mother would constantly tell me every time I was mugging the night before examinations, "Yuddhakale Shastraabhyaasam"

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 06 Sep 2020 20:21

Hiten wrote:Fighting Night Blindness, Indian Army To Upgrade It's BMP II For Night Combat Capability
In an out of character manner, the Indian Army [IA] has cited the current, sensitive Border situation, in it's call, seeking Expression Of Interest [EOI] for the Armament Upgrade of BMP-2/2K.
https://www.spansen.com/2020/09/fightin ... my-to.html

Amazing.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 06 Sep 2020 20:39

Hiten wrote:Fighting Night Blindness, Indian Army To Upgrade It's BMP II For Night Combat Capability
In an out of character manner, the Indian Army [IA] has cited the current, sensitive Border situation, in it's call, seeking Expression Of Interest [EOI] for the Armament Upgrade of BMP-2/2K.
https://www.spansen.com/2020/09/fightin ... my-to.html

I skim-read the entire EoI and did not find a single word saying it was an emergency purchase due to 2020 Ladakh Standoff.

https://indianarmy.nic.in/writereaddata ... verted.pdf

The Spansen website chaps are needlessly sensationalizing a standard EoI

FWIW, due to Moore's law and IA's Base Workshop capacities, ICV's are upgraded in batches, and EOI's issued regularly for new improved electronics for next batches. This is a very standard process worldwide.

Its like instead of buying iPhone 6 for entire workforce, one buys 200 iPhone 6 in 2015, 200 iPhone 7 in 2016, 200 iPhone 8 in 2017 and so one.

If one purchased iPhone 6 for entire workforce, it would be obsolete in 2020.

The cycle repeats. Eg DARIN III for oldest Jaguars.

Did anyone read the EoI before getting into auto wailing mode?

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 06 Sep 2020 21:54

Tsarkar sir, a question. Suppose we go for an import of a light tank (or even local manufacturing of IFCVs - eg Tata Kestrel) now, then will night fighting (sights, sensors) equipment be standard as part of the GSQRs?

Hiten · Post by **Hiten** » 06 Sep 2020 22:05

tsarkar wrote:
Hiten wrote:Fighting Night Blindness, Indian Army To Upgrade It's BMP II For Night Combat Capability

https://www.spansen.com/2020/09/fightin ... my-to.html
I skim-read the entire EoI and did not find a single word saying it was an emergency purchase due to 2020 Ladakh Standoff.

https://indianarmy.nic.in/writereaddata ... verted.pdf

The Spansen website chaps are needlessly sensationalizing a standard EoI

FWIW, due to Moore's law and IA's Base Workshop capacities, ICV's are upgraded in batches, and EOI's issued regularly for new improved electronics for next batches. This is a very standard process worldwide.

Its like instead of buying iPhone 6 for entire workforce, one buys 200 iPhone 6 in 2015, 200 iPhone 7 in 2016, 200 iPhone 8 in 2017 and so one.

If one purchased iPhone 6 for entire workforce, it would be obsolete in 2020.

The cycle repeats. Eg DARIN III for oldest Jaguars.

Did anyone read the EoI before getting into auto wailing mode?

Emergency purchase no one has claimed AFAIK. Timeline states completion in 2 yrs max.
Current Emergency purchases aren't going the Tender route either.
In case it missed anyone's attention, at the beginning of the EOI itself

the belligerence of our adversaries on the borders, necessitate that our capabilities are adequately built up to match the threat.

don't recall any earlier EOI/RFP/RFI prefixing call with prelude to external threats.
A similar BMP RFI IA had raised in 2016. Does not contextualize with external threats
https://indianarmy.nic.in/MakeInIndia/r ... 2%202K.pdf

Quite clearly, these are retrofits, as later batches of Sarath were able to function in the dark

Later productions of the BMP-II were integrated with Night operation capabilities from their Plant rollout.

likely that they integrated the LRDE developed solution. No Pvt. sector claimed to score on this one

DRDO's own Electronics & Radar Development Establishment [LRDE] has developed similar solution for the T-72 Tank & BMP-2.

likely a case of misinterpreting it as sensational, because the write-up is anything but.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 06 Sep 2020 23:37

From https://indianarmy.nic.in/writereaddata ... verted.pdf

Introduction

The terrain along our borders lends itself to conduct of large scale Mechanised operations and the belligerence of our adversaries on the borders, necessitate that our capabilities are adequately built up to match the threat.

This is a very generic introduction and is absolutely no citation of the current, sensitive Border situation as claimed in the DDM article below

In an out of character manner, the Indian Army [IA] has cited the current, sensitive Border situation, in it's call, seeking Expression Of Interest [EOI] for the Armament Upgrade of BMP-2/2K.

https://www.spansen.com/2020/09/fightin ... my-to.html

Please do explain how

belligerence of our adversaries on the borders

in the EOI becomes

current, sensitive Border situation

in the DDM article.

Adversaries have been belligerent during Pathankot, Uri, Pulwana, Balakot incidents etc.

And EOI will be followed by RFP. So the EOI is long term totally disconnected with the

current, sensitive Border situation

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 06 Sep 2020 23:42

Manish_P wrote:Tsarkar sir, a question. Suppose we go for an import of a light tank (or even local manufacturing of IFCVs - eg Tata Kestrel) now, then will night fighting (sights, sensors) equipment be standard as part of the GSQRs?

Depends on the circumstances -

If a whole system is required, then it will be part of the GSQR. Eg Apache Helicopters.

If better indigenous or third party systems are available, then its fitment can be requested like the "India Specific Requirements" of Rafale.

For example, asking Rafale to fit Litening because French EO pods arent good enough or Meteor on Su-30MKI because Russian AAM's arent as good as the Meteor.

Services do a lot of mix & match depending on the circumstances. If the OEM equipment is itself state of the art, Eg, Apache, C-130, then no third party systems are requested.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 07 Sep 2020 01:15

969 TISK equipped BMP2s are already in service.

TISK added a common thermal imager for the ATGM, cannon and machine gun.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 07 Sep 2020 05:39

The PLA light tank has a 105mm main gun. Why we've sent up T-series tanks with their more powerful 125mm main guns. Sprut amphib LT being looked as an immediate buy, has a 125mm gun.Its armour though could be improved with ERA Even if a little extra weight was added,it is still air portable and can be air-dropped with its crew. In the long run we need a desi amphib/ LT that suits the IA'S reqs. The Q of tracked vs wheeled AVs in the mountains is another point.We may require BTR type AVs,which our local auto majors have for some time now,have developed prototypes.

Jaeger · Post by **Jaeger** » 07 Sep 2020 13:52

~~If we do not use this opportunity to roll the K9 chassis into a CV family... light tank + ICV + APC + mortar carrier + SPAAG + command vehicle...~~ sorry I meant to say let's order 36 Spruts for now then throw open an RFP for 64 'Make' category light tanks and then sit for 15 years...

Vips · Post by **Vips** » 07 Sep 2020 19:39

Indeed there was a report that india may buy 45 Spruts as an emergency measure and DRDO/L&T will build a 'indigenous' light tank based on the K9 chasis and a Belgian gun.(indigenous - yeah sure)

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 07 Sep 2020 20:55

Vips wrote:Indeed there was a report that india may buy 45 Spruts as an emergency measure and DRDO/L&T will build a 'indigenous' light tank based on the K9 chasis and a Belgian gun.(indigenous - yeah sure)

The time taken to certify the K9 based solution and the import of sprut will most likely be nearly identical.
So focus should be on K9 based solution.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 07 Sep 2020 23:49

Philip wrote:The PLA light tank has a 105mm main gun. Why we've sent up T-series tanks with their more powerful 125mm main guns. Sprut amphib LT being looked as an immediate buy, has a 125mm gun.Its armour though could be improved with ERA Even if a little extra weight was added,it is still air portable and can be air-dropped with its crew. In the long run we need a desi amphib/ LT that suits the IA'S reqs. The Q of tracked vs wheeled AVs in the mountains is another point.We may require BTR type AVs,which our local auto majors have for some time now,have developed prototypes.

I don't think our T-series tanks are up against Chinese type-15's. If a T-72/90 can reach some place, Chinese Type-99's can too. The type-15's will be used in places where the larger tanks cannot reach or operate easily or be sustained logistically. Having a fire-and-forget ATGM carrier with modern sights and targeting equipment based on a light armored platform could have been very useful. Alas, where would we possibly find one?

Vips · Post by **Vips** » 08 Sep 2020 00:17

Pratyush wrote:
Vips wrote:Indeed there was a report that india may buy 45 Spruts as an emergency measure and DRDO/L&T will build a 'indigenous' light tank based on the K9 chasis and a Belgian gun.(indigenous - yeah sure)
The time taken to certify the K9 based solution and the import of sprut will most likely be nearly identical.
So focus should be on K9 based solution.

Certainly not. The time that will be taken by DRDO/L&T just to build the 3 prototypes has been mentioned at 18 months and then the testing and the required changes and then the actual production will take at least 36 months. Russians can supply 45 Spruts in less then 6 months. Russians are using the BMP-3 transmission and other common parts from BMP for their Spruts. For them to start or ramp up production will not be an issue.

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 08 Sep 2020 13:53

nachiket wrote:...Having a fire-and-forget ATGM carrier with modern sights and targeting equipment based on a light armored platform could have been very useful. Alas, where would we possibly find one?...

Nachiket ji (and Tsarkar sir), what are your thoughts on lightweight UGVs like the Rheinmetall Mission Master or even the ultra compact ones (although with penalty on speed) like the Belorussian Bogomol UGV.

They could be useful in ambushes and their ATGM capabilities (or even 30mm autocanon) would be potent against light tanks.

If the reliability factor is high, their light weight and compact dimensions would make it easier for logistics too.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 09 Sep 2020 00:28

I was being sarcastic and referring to the fact that the NAMICA has been thoroughly ignored in all this.

vivek_ahuja · Post by **vivek_ahuja** » 09 Sep 2020 00:33

nachiket wrote:I was being sarcastic and referring to the fact that the NAMICA has been thoroughly ignored in all this.

I, for one, found it hilarious that even in response to your sarcasm about the NAMICA being ignored, Manish_P offered all sorts of import options from around the world.

Oh the irony!

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 09 Sep 2020 10:28

I don't think that the 105mm shell of the Chin light tank will be able to penetrate the ERA enhanced armour of the T-90s and upgraded T-72s. The flat regions around DBO where tank / AV warfare is expected would be meat and drink for our heavier MBTs as opposed to their LTs. We too have 5km+ range ATGMs.
The presence and capability of attack helos on both sides will play a significant role too.

Hiten · Post by **Hiten** » 09 Sep 2020 13:17

Video Shows Indian T-72 Tanks Manoeuvring The World's Highest Battleground; OBJECTIVE: Neutralise Thrust Of Chinese Aggression In Ladakh

The recent escalation of aggression by the Chinese, on India's border with Tibet, brings into focus availability of options for an Indian pushback, in the event of further Han escalation. One among the many, thwarting PRC's attempt at crossing the Rubicon, would be India's Armoured Formations, deployed on the Ladakhi plains, located at the unimaginably challenging altitudes, in excess of 4,500 metres.

This interesting, undated video footage, above, shows a convoy of Indian Army's T-72 Tanks, executing manoeuvres in the icy Plateaus of the Ladakh region, bordering Tibet. Reports indicate that the Indian Army has stationed a Brigade-strength of, roughly, 174 T-Series tanks [3 Regiments] in Ladakh, under the Command of it's XIV 'Fire & Fury' Corps. Of these, two Regiments [116] are composed of the T-72 Tanks - one being 4 Horse, while the more advanced T-90 equipped 85th Armoured Regiment, completes the triumvirate.

https://www.spansen.com/2020/09/video-i ... adakh.html

John · Post by **John** » 09 Sep 2020 13:24

Vips wrote:Indeed there was a report that india may buy 45 Spruts as an emergency measure and DRDO/L&T will build a 'indigenous' light tank based on the K9 chasis and a Belgian gun.(indigenous - yeah sure)

Didn’t Russia abandon purchase of Sprut because they caught fire in a parade.

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 09 Sep 2020 13:30

vivek_ahuja wrote:
nachiket wrote:.. Manish_P offered all sorts of import options from around the world.

Oh the irony!

No Sir.

not 'suggesting import options'... rather asking a question about whether UGVs are an asymmetrical option to counter light tanks...

If I had to suggest import options I would have even included the URAN 9 from rodina to keep the Eastern block happy

mody · Post by **mody** » 09 Sep 2020 16:29

What are limiting factors for the Nag missile range, is it the solid rocket itself or the IIR seeker? If the range of Nag can be improved to between 5-6 kms, it would be able to out range most tank rounds and Namica would be able to remain relative safe.
If the missile rocket is capable of higher range, then on the northern borders, the seeker might be able to detect targets at range in excess of 4 Kms, due to the higher temperature differential. Also, if LOAL mode is possible then higher range might be possible.

The answer to Chinese light tanks is ATGMs and not our own light tanks. Chinese want to capture our land and hold it. We on the other hand, do not want to capture large amounts of land in Tibet and hold on to it. For most other regions where tanks can be used along the Tibet border, we have deployed T-72 and T-90 tanks and they should be more then sufficient.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 09 Sep 2020 17:37

Manish_P wrote:
nachiket wrote:...Having a fire-and-forget ATGM carrier with modern sights and targeting equipment based on a light armored platform could have been very useful. Alas, where would we possibly find one?...
Nachiket ji (and Tsarkar sir), what are your thoughts on lightweight UGVs like the Rheinmetall Mission Master or even the ultra compact ones (although with penalty on speed) like the Belorussian Bogomol UGV.

They could be useful in ambushes and their ATGM capabilities (or even 30mm autocanon) would be potent against light tanks.

If the reliability factor is high, their light weight and compact dimensions would make it easier for logistics too.

UGV's can be of two types - human operated and autonomous.

Human operated will obviously have more reaction time (UGV sensors see something, relay to human, human interprets it, sends command to UGV, UGV fires).

Autonomous will be good for scenarios they are programmed for. For scenarios they are not programmed for, they will fail.

Best is NAMICA or BRDM-2 or even Light Strike Vehicles

Another good vehicle was the Mahindra Axe that got shafted like all good things.

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 09 Sep 2020 18:18

tsarkar wrote: UGV's can be of two types - human operated and autonomous.

Human operated will obviously have more reaction time (UGV sensors see something, relay to human, human interprets it, sends command to UGV, UGV fires).

Autonomous will be good for scenarios they are programmed for. For scenarios they are not programmed for, they will fail.

Best is NAMICA or BRDM-2 or even Light Strike Vehicles

Tsarkar sir, points noted, thanks.

I was more inclined towards the human operated ones. And again only from ambush point of view (plus point being smaller logistical footprint as compared to armored IFVs), but then one would argue why not simply use man portable ATGMs, like the light weight compact Carl Gustaf M4s, so what if the poor infantry has to cart it.

I like the jeep-type fighting vehicles (one of my favorites of old is/was the vehicle-mounted recoil-less rifle of PVC Abdul Hamid fame) but was wondering whether tracked ones would be more suitable to the mountainous terrain

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 11 Sep 2020 22:40

Indian Defence Updates : MDL Starts 3rd P17A Stealth Frigate,118 Arjun MK1A Order, New Alliance Ready (starting @1:30 seconds)

Kakarat · Post by **Kakarat** » 15 Sep 2020 18:48

https://twitter.com/syedmohdmurtaza/sta ... 3462429697

The WhAP has landed in Leh.
Desi machines are getting real time deployment experience.
#IndiaChinaBorderStandoff

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 16 Sep 2020 22:25

https://twitter.com/delhidefence/status ... 47686?s=20 ---> Indications are that the order for 118 x Arjun Mk-1A Main Battle Tanks will be placed soon. Here's our walk around video of a Arjun MK-1A model detailing some of the features of the tank.

aditp · Post by **aditp** » 17 Sep 2020 15:10

nachiket wrote:....................
I don't think our T-series tanks are up against Chinese type-15's. If a T-72/90 can reach some place, Chinese Type-99's can too. The type-15's will be used in places where the larger tanks cannot reach or operate easily or be sustained logistically. Having a fire-and-forget ATGM carrier with modern sights and targeting equipment based on a light armored platform could have been very useful. Alas, where would we possibly find one?

Need not go far. Just need to marry the NAMICA turret with the Kestrel and we can have a fast and furious solution!

Prem Kumar · Post by **Prem Kumar** » 17 Sep 2020 15:28

Nachiket's question was rhetorical: he was referring no doubt to the Namica

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 17 Sep 2020 20:52

Prem Kumar wrote:Nachiket's question was rhetorical: he was referring no doubt to the Namica

Yes I mentioned that in a later post too. It has been conspicuously absent in the discussions about countering Chinese light tanks.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 18 Sep 2020 10:06

The Mahindra AXE looks like a v.good platform for an ATGM launcher equipped variant.Was there any such prototype made?Its
size is ideal for a combo of scout-cum-tank destroyer vehicle. Some side protective cladding could be added for bulletproofing too.The vehicle could carry at least 8-16 missiles using a twin-launcher system.

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 23 Sep 2020 15:13

There used to be a thread for the MBT Arjun.. can't find it now

DRDO successfully test fires laser-guided anti-tank missile from MBT Arjun

Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) on Wednesday successfully test fired the Laser-Guided Anti Tank Guided Missile (ATGM) from MBT Arjun at KK Ranges, Armoured Corps Centre and School (ACC&S) Ahmednagar.

Defence minister Rajnath Singh on Wednesday took to Twitter to congratulate DRDO on its latest feat. "India is proud of Team DRDO which is assiduously working towards reducing import dependency in the near future," said the Union minister.

dinesh_kimar · Post by **dinesh_kimar** » 23 Sep 2020 19:27

The above tweet shows the T-72 with Arjun turret, the Tank-EX, rather than Arjun.

No worries, DRDO is testing the same components- gun and turret - doing Arjun duty, should not impact the capability in any way.

Firing the laser shell is a fantastic achievement, even our best T-90 with Reflex isn't very capable beyond 1200 m, and not inducted much in many armies .

Arjun, though heavy, is indeed capable and formidable, and can take on a role similar to Merkava in our desert states / plains- Rajasthan, Gujarat and Punjab.

750 Arjuns were recommended by Rohit Vats saar a few years back to replace T-55 and T-72 tanks in western sector.

Kakarat · Post by **Kakarat** » 23 Sep 2020 19:50

dinesh_kimar wrote:The above tweet shows the T-72 with Arjun turret, the Tank-EX, rather than Arjun.

No worries, DRDO is testing the same components- gun and turret - doing Arjun duty, should not impact the capability in any way.

Firing the laser shell is a fantastic achievement, even our best T-90 with Reflex isn't very capable beyond 1200 m, and not inducted much in many armies .

Arjun, though heavy, is indeed capable and formidable, and can take on a role similar to Merkava in our desert states / plains- Rajasthan, Gujarat and Punjab.

750 Arjuns were recommended by Rohit Vats saar a few years back to replace T-55 and T-72 tanks in western sector.

The Image is not of the present test but a previous firing from Tank EX could have also been a LAHAT from long ago if yesterdays test was the first. Also from the back ground it looks to be ITR Balasore but yesterdays test was at Ahmednagar
There is a video of the yesterdays test available in the Missile thread