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.
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8499
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Pratyush » 16 Feb 2021 10:18

The point I am making is about the importance of roads in context of armour deployment.

What the PRC is doing is also contingent on the LOC that they have.

Absent good and secure LOC they don't really have the ability to do much.

Similarly if we have to bring tanks by air with our assets. Then the ability of the tanks to form a sufficient mass will always be in question.

But if road connectivity existed it would be relatively easy to reinforce the forces and also generate mass for any possible offensive action if we decided to do it.

Second and a more contentious point that I will make would be of tactical flexibility for the Indian army and if we start thinking in terms of not conceding a single inch of territory due to specific local conditions. What effect will it have on the ability of the forces to conduct efficient operations.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55371
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby ramana » 16 Feb 2021 12:09

fanne wrote:I don't think we have the means to transport Arjun on the LAC, or do we? if we can, then some 100 of Arjuns in Depsang plane will conclusively and decisively close any option for China.

You should be selected to head Armored Coros Center for such a fabulous idea.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55371
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby ramana » 16 Feb 2021 12:10

If you want to blast the PLA tanks then deploy K9 chassis based Tank Destroyers.

vimal
BRFite
Posts: 893
Joined: 27 Jul 2017 10:32

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby vimal » 16 Feb 2021 12:17

We can also use Reaper drones.

RKumar
BRFite
Posts: 1329
Joined: 26 Jul 2009 12:29
Location: Evolution is invention, explosion is destruction.

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby RKumar » 16 Feb 2021 15:03

Deploy damn flying tank LCH in far fewer numbers and a small number of whatever tanks to support the foot soldiers to hold on to the captured land.

arvin
BRFite
Posts: 430
Joined: 17 Aug 2016 21:26

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby arvin » 16 Feb 2021 15:12

Lot of creative ideas thrown here in last couple of posts.
Even P8Is that overflew Ladakh were capable of dropping Mk54 torpedos. That thing could sink a tank by momentum alone.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8354
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby nachiket » 16 Feb 2021 16:01

ramana wrote:If you want to blast the PLA tanks then deploy K9 chassis based Tank Destroyers.

Or use an already available solution waiting for orders - NAMICA.

srin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2086
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby srin » 16 Feb 2021 16:04

Yes, 114 Namicas will be ordered after GoI approves import of 1000 Armatas.

niran
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5469
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 16:01

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby niran » 16 Feb 2021 16:51

srai wrote:For lighter MBT go with crew-less turrets. There will be a gradual move towards unmanned fighting vehicles with few manned command ones.

DRDO FMBT/NGMBT concepts

eerily similar to italian design concept during 60ies Rinoceronte 60 to 70ies many countries began designing crewless turret tanks but selved mostly due to current engering and manufacturing conatraint
Last edited by Rakesh on 16 Feb 2021 22:12, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Please DO NOT quote pictures when replying. Post Edited.

niran
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5469
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 16:01

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby niran » 16 Feb 2021 16:54

no need to airlift Arjuns to Ladhak we have all weather tunnels and roads now usual transportation onree nothing fancy

Cyrano
BRFite
Posts: 963
Joined: 28 Mar 2020 01:07

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Cyrano » 16 Feb 2021 18:48

Saw the report on Aurjun Mark 1A. Looks like the Army put every possible feature they could think of into GSQRs. Usually such "to moon & back" requirements are given it is expected that the supplier will fail to produce the unobtainium demanded. CVRDE has ended up producing the behemoth will all the things asked, and of course it now weighs 58 tons or whatever. Not sure we should be laughing or crying on this achievement.

The Govt has called IA's bluff by ordering 118 of them. Has IA evolved combat doctrine and tactics for fight with such a heavy BT? If not, it will be forced to do so now.

Time for RM to add Heavy/Main/Medium/Light battle tanks and Tracked Infantry Combat Vehicles in the "no import list" along with Wheeled Armoured Fighting Vehicle (AFV) which is already on the list. If we can produce Arjun Mk 1A, there is enough expertise and maturity to produce all other stuff IA needs.

Atmavik
BRFite
Posts: 897
Joined: 24 Aug 2016 04:43

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Atmavik » 16 Feb 2021 20:50

ramana wrote:If you want to blast the PLA tanks then deploy K9 chassis based Tank Destroyers.



This has been in news recently. DRDO and L&T have proposed a light tank based on the K9 chassis. this will take a long time to develop and test.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 11024
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Rakesh » 16 Feb 2021 22:15

Cyrano wrote:...and of course it now weighs 58 tons or whatever...

Mk1A weighs 67 tons.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4451
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby kit » 16 Feb 2021 22:17

arvin wrote:Lot of creative ideas thrown here in last couple of posts.
Even P8Is that overflew Ladakh were capable of dropping Mk54 torpedos. That thing could sink a tank by momentum alone.

:(( ., torpedo a tank

Cyrano
BRFite
Posts: 963
Joined: 28 Mar 2020 01:07

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Cyrano » 16 Feb 2021 22:29

Even if enemy drops torpedos, Arjun Mark 1A will resist. The chassis is actually carved out of single block of hard monolith granite like Khajuraho temples. The torpedo will just bounce off Arjun like Gabbar & Co bounced off Sholay hill in Ramanagara. 8) :lol:

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4384
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby nam » 17 Feb 2021 01:03

More than T90 or Arjun, I wish we concentrate on a improvement in the gun and sabot rounds. Despite having the capability to built both of these, we are still stuck with Mango rounds.

It doesn't require major investment to design a new gun and round. But alas.. what a sad affair.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4451
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby kit » 17 Feb 2021 03:07

I would rather have armoured troop carriers that would follow a mass of attack helos blasting away chinese tanks instead of having our own tanks to duke it out with their tanks ? The army chief did recently say the age of tanks is over, looking at the carnage in the Armenia-Azeri war

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7102
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Anujan » 17 Feb 2021 03:16

srin wrote:Yes, 114 Namicas will be ordered after GoI approves import of 1000 Armatas.


Frustrating thing is that even massa is going the way of vehicle mounted long ranged anti-tank missiles for their versatility and transportability.

We already have a solution in Namica!

Someone should export massa stuff to Pakistan, Namica will be ordered in double time

https://www.popularmechanics.com/milita ... k-weapons/

disha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7580
Joined: 03 Dec 2006 04:17
Location: gaganaviharin

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby disha » 17 Feb 2021 07:20

Vivek K wrote:Weight - ground pressure of Arjun is less than the tin can. In the hills Arjun would be fine once flown there and beat the cr$p of the Chinese equipment.


I do not think problem is about flying in there. Problem is to think creatively and create a logistic chain that can be easily serviced. If Natashas serving wine are freely available, any army will have a unobtanium GSQR.

Leh to Chusul is ~5 Hr, ~250 km drive.

Can Leh be served as a base to churn out Arjun tanks? That is take Completely Knock down Kits or Semi Knock down Kits to Leh. Set up a shop there that continuously services at least 3 armoured regiments (say ~150 tanks). That base can as well service K9 Vajras and any other combination thereof.

Point is, if CheenCans show up with their measly T-15 tin cans which can hardly put a dent in the Arjun while the tin cans can be blown literally out of water by Arjun Mk 1As, then why deploy a light tank to counter a cheeni light tank! Deploy heavy armour since you have it, instead of shopping around to do a copy of CheenCan and counter their light tank with our own imported light tanks! If the CheenCans show up with 1000s of tin cans as some ppl think, then they do become sitting ducks for the LCH Rudra. Or the Namicas. Or the Helinas. The options are there if one looks beyond Natashas.

Ability to drive a vision and execute on it is not there.Note in peace time, the Leh Base can actually offer its services for manufacturing and maintaining heavy vehicles that is loaned to the Ladakh civil govenment to keep the roads open and facilitate governance.

Added later: In my original post the 2nd para from above was incomplete.
Last edited by disha on 17 Feb 2021 08:37, edited 1 time in total.

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3607
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby fanne » 17 Feb 2021 07:37

They also have t-99 which may (operative word may) outgun our t-90. Arjun outguns Chico’s t-99 by a mile. Two things for Arjun needs to be sorted out- weight related issue, transportation, what terrain it can fight in etc. and how much it’s engine get derated, what Is its effective speed etc.

In the current visual where Indian and Chinese tanks are but few 100 meters apart on a very tankable terrain, I would rather be in Arjun than in T-90.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55371
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby ramana » 17 Feb 2021 09:38

Atmavik wrote:
ramana wrote:If you want to blast the PLA tanks then deploy K9 chassis based Tank Destroyers.



This has been in news recently. DRDO and L&T have proposed a light tank based on the K9 chassis. this will take a long time to develop and test.



Please keep track of this program periodically here.

Thanks, ramana

RKumar
BRFite
Posts: 1329
Joined: 26 Jul 2009 12:29
Location: Evolution is invention, explosion is destruction.

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby RKumar » 17 Feb 2021 15:20

fanne wrote:In the current visual where Indian and Chinese tanks are but few 100 meters apart on a very tankable terrain, I would rather be in Arjun than in T-90.


<<Offensive content Edited by admin>>

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21353
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Philip » 17 Feb 2021 21:53

Let's face it,Arjun is simply too large to transport into Himalayan regions where there is also limited terrain for MBT action.We havf noplans to capture Tibet or Xinjiang! Our strategy is to blunt any Chin attempt to gobble up any more of our Himalayan territory, with some degree of offensive action into enemy territory as counterstrikes to keep him off balance.

A light tank is needed,spoke of this a few years ago,long before Galwan and right now on an emergency basis the Sprut is the best bet.The LT on a K-9 chassis will take a few years to develop.
Let it happen.We do need amphib . anks like erstwhile PT-76s which performed brilliantly in '71, for our amphibops in the future too. Right now the IA is best equipped to operate T-72s and T-90s.I asked a Q about A-2 production rate,when the 114 A-2s would be delivered.It's not good enough to simply develop " tech. demonstrators", the forces need combat ready milware in large nimbers.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 11024
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Rakesh » 17 Feb 2021 22:20

Was going to post this in the Indian Army history thread, but better suited here...

https://twitter.com/IndiaHistorypic/sta ... 37603?s=20 ---> 1964: Production of first indigenous Vijayanta tanks at Avadi, Tamil Nadu.

Image

Rsatchi
BRFite
Posts: 1023
Joined: 04 Aug 2019 22:03

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Rsatchi » 18 Feb 2021 13:24

https://indianexpress.com/article/india ... t-7193282/
Deployment of tanks at Rezing La turned the tables as per the General.
Does this mean Army think-tank has come around with their planning for future scenarios meaning there is a place for small/medium tanks portable enough for deployment in Ladakh
Will this lead to a mad rush for Russi-maal or 'Atmanirbharh'
What ever it is Army should come out with requirements and get things going

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2862
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Prem Kumar » 18 Feb 2021 13:34

Whatever tank the IA chooses, we need to make sure it has a rear-view mirror. Our jernails are very good at looking back at what someone else is doing & adopting it as our doctrine.

ks_sachin
BRFite
Posts: 1614
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby ks_sachin » 18 Feb 2021 14:13

Rsatchi wrote:https://indianexpress.com/article/india/general-y-k-joshi-interview-indian-army-pla-in-eastern-ladakh-india-china-disengagement-7193282/
Deployment of tanks at Rezing La turned the tables as per the General.
Does this mean Army think-tank has come around with their planning for future scenarios meaning there is a place for small/medium tanks portable enough for deployment in Ladakh
Will this lead to a mad rush for Russi-maal or 'Atmanirbharh'
What ever it is Army should come out with requirements and get things going

The army has always toyed with this. However infra and other operational necessities has meant that this was not that important. We had a squadron of t72 in Sikkim in 1987. Bloody hangar queens. It is not enough to have equipment. You have to plan how it will be used.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8499
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Pratyush » 18 Feb 2021 14:49

Keeping in view the challenges represented by the northern front where it may not be possible for armour to be deployed due to logistical constraints. We could design a new vehicle to deal with the challenge.

What I am thinking off, is an evolutionary development from DRDO Krestal, using the vehicle as a base and incorporating lessons learnt from it.

With the following main attributes.

1) 120 mm main gun.
2) auto loader with 20 + rounds.
3) Total ammunition supply 40 + rounds.
4) Low profile unmanned turret for the main gun. Total vehicle hight under 6 ft.
5) Protection against landmines, hits from 30 mm AP, API, HE. Against 155 mm airburst.
6) Active protection system, capable of dealing with APFSD, HEAT, ATGM, & RPG.

If such a vehicle is possible to be built then the light logistical footprint for the vehicle will make it easy to deploy to the inhospitable mountain regions where it may be possible for the PRC to use armour.

ks_sachin
BRFite
Posts: 1614
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby ks_sachin » 18 Feb 2021 15:03

Pratyush wrote:Keeping in view the challenges represented by the northern front where it may not be possible for armour to be deployed due to logistical constraints. We could design a new vehicle to deal with the challenge.

What I am thinking off, is an evolutionary development from DRDO Krestal, using the vehicle as a base and incorporating lessons learnt from it.

With the following main attributes.

1) 120 mm main gun.
2) auto loader with 20 + rounds.
3) Total ammunition supply 40 + rounds.
4) Low profile unmanned turret for the main gun. Total vehicle hight under 6 ft.
5) Protection against landmines, hits from 30 mm AP, API, HE. Against 155 mm airburst.
6) Active protection system, capable of dealing with APFSD, HEAT, ATGM, & RPG.

If such a vehicle is possible to be built then the light logistical footprint for the vehicle will make it easy to deploy to the inhospitable mountain regions where it may be possible for the PRC to use armour.

20 odd years of CI ops has created a strategic vaccum

Cyrano
BRFite
Posts: 963
Joined: 28 Mar 2020 01:07

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Cyrano » 18 Feb 2021 15:37

Rakesh wrote:https://twitter.com/IndiaHistorypic/sta ... 37603?s=20 ---> 1964: Production of first indigenous Vijayanta tanks at Avadi, Tamil Nadu.

As evidenced in a video report few pages earlier in this thread, the Avadi factory heritage structure has been preserved in a manner that would make ASI proud ! :rotfl:

Hope they use the 118 MK1A order to bring production facilities, tooling, processes & methods and QC into 21st century. Else this ultra feature rich tank will be crippled by production problems.

Rsatchi
BRFite
Posts: 1023
Joined: 04 Aug 2019 22:03

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Rsatchi » 18 Feb 2021 17:12

ks_sachin wrote:
Pratyush wrote:Keeping

20 odd years of CI ops has created a strategic vaccum

Sachinji
Part of this or most of blame should be apportioned to the Strategic thinkers/Baboos/Politicos
Insurgency was fomented and supported by the others probably for these reasons!
But we seem to have these action-reaction theme's going for few decades now with no forward planning

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2862
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Prem Kumar » 18 Feb 2021 17:16

ks_sachin wrote:20 odd years of CI ops has created a strategic vaccum


True! This CI-focus, tying down of a lot of troops, obsession with Pukistan, economic hollowing out of J&K have all been a victory for Pak/China, at a minimal cost to themselves.

Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3460
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Vips » 18 Feb 2021 20:38

Indian Army deploys K-9 Vajra howitzers in Ladakh for high altitude operations, more orders possible.

The K-9 VAJRA is the indigenised version of the basic K9 Thunder from South Korea. The self-propelled guns have a range of 38 kilometres and are manufactured by Mumbai-based rm Larsen & Toubro in partnership with a South Korean firm.

As Indian Army chief Gen Manoj Mukund Naravane inducted the last of the 100 K-9 Vajra guns ordered, three of these howitzers have been deployed for trials in high altitude mountainous area of Ladakh.

Three guns arrived in Leh yesterday and are being transported to a high altitude base to be tested if they can be used in high altitude areas against the enemy, top government sources told ANI on Thursday.

Based on the performance of the guns, the Indian Army would consider placing orders for two to three additional regiments of the self-propelled howitzers for mountain operations, sources said.

The Army chief has been monitoring the induction and operations of the howitzers produced in the Larsen and Toubro facility in Hazira near Surat in Gujarat.

The Indian Army placed orders for 100 of these guns from a South Korean firm and has been inducting them for the last two years in different regiments of the force. The K-9 VAJRA is the indigenised version of the basic K9 Thunder from South Korea. The self-propelled guns have a range of 38 kilometres and are manufactured by Mumbai-based firm Larsen & Toubro in partnership with a South Korean firm.

The Indian Army had not inducted any new heavy artillery since 1986 after the Bofors scandal rocked the nation.

With the induction of the K9 Vajras, Dhanush and M777 ultra-light Howitzers, the army is obtaining new inductions in its inventory. The next made in India howitzer is likely to be inducted in large numbers would be the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO)-developed Advanced Towed Artillery Gun System (ATAGS) system.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 11024
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Rakesh » 18 Feb 2021 20:57

Cyrano wrote:As evidenced in a video report few pages earlier in this thread, the Avadi factory heritage structure has been preserved in a manner that would make ASI proud ! :rotfl:

ASI :lol:

That is a good one.

niran
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5469
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 16:01

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby niran » 19 Feb 2021 15:56

Pratyush wrote:Keeping in view the challenges represented by the northern front where it may not be possible for armour to be deployed due to logistical constraints. We could design a new vehicle to deal with the challenge.

What I am thinking off, is an evolutionary development from DRDO Krestal, using the vehicle as a base and incorporating lessons learnt from it.

With the following main attributes.

1) 120 mm main gun.
2) auto loader with 20 + rounds.
3) Total ammunition supply 40 + rounds.
4) Low profile unmanned turret for the main gun. Total vehicle hight under 6 ft.
5) Protection against landmines, hits from 30 mm AP, API, HE. Against 155 mm airburst.
6) Active protection system, capable of dealing with APFSD, HEAT, ATGM, & RPG.

If such a vehicle is possible to be built then the light logistical footprint for the vehicle will make it easy to deploy to the inhospitable mountain regions where it may be possible for the PRC to use armour.

apart from crewless turret and active protection Arjun has all the properties and what is the weight?

jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5376
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby jamwal » 19 Feb 2021 16:07

People are claiming that K9 Vajra can be converted in to a light tank just by replacing 155mm gun with something smaller. Unfortunately, things are not so simple.

Weights:
K9: 50t
T-90 medium tank: 46-48t
T-15 light tank: 33-36t

Company says a smaller gun will decrease weight by 10t. Then it'll need autoloader, targeting system and reasonable armour which will increase weight by 6-10t. If they demand same features that Arjun has, then it'll be 55t+. In no case it's going to go below 40t. Light tank should be around 32-35t. So K9 chassis as a light tank is wishful thinking at the moment. A 105 or 120mm gun on Kestrel like US Stryker or Chinese ZBL is a much better, cheaper and faster option. If I have my way, then DRDO should go for a smaller 3 crewed Arjun with autoloader & 105mm gun
Image

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8499
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Pratyush » 19 Feb 2021 16:38

Niran,

The objective weight should be under 25 tons.

niran
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5469
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 16:01

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby niran » 19 Feb 2021 17:06

why do people say auto loaders will be lighter? how much a human loader weighs fully uniformed? no more than 80kg(including un passed urine and feces) auto loaders comes in 3 varieties mainly
1. ruski and Swedish type where relaoding starts after a round is discharged and gunner flips reload switch/lever
the lightest system till date was in Swedish STRV it weighed 170kg and best reload time was 40 seconds.
2. french variety with clip system similar to pistal and rifle clips lightest was in AMX 105 6round clip weighed at 210kg although shell loading interval was 10 seconds clip relaod was atrocious 2 to 3 minutes
3. revolver kind first developed by wyetalians here loading started as soon as empty chamber rotated away from breech average relaod time 10 seconds weighed a massive 250kg plus.
few points
1. human loader is quicker average 4 seconds for a normal trained loader
2. human weight is more than 2 times lighter than lightest auto loader.
3. auto loaders are mechanical system and all mechanical system will fail then manula reloading will take an awful long time it would be better to just leave the tank and run away to safety.
human loader if incapacitated then other healthy crew member can take over (usually gunner) fire rate remains 7naffected.

above 3 reasons and some more like inability to change round type inbetween reload IMVHO auto sucks
always remember the one pumping in most lead will win

niran
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5469
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 16:01

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby niran » 19 Feb 2021 17:12

Pratyush wrote:Niran,

The objective weight should be under 25 tons.

saar ability to withstand 155 airburst alone will need 50 to 60 tons of all round Armor.including of at least 200mm top side armour.

jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5376
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby jamwal » 19 Feb 2021 17:15

4 man crew usually needs more space than 3 crew + autoloader. Willing to be corrected if wrong.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Atmavik, brar_w, kvraghav, YashG and 43 guests