Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 28 Jan 2022 05:59

hnair wrote:k prasad, as others have pointed out, the MBTs with adequate turbocharging would do that and quite a few IA ones are already up there. The light tank for IA seems a brochure pushing effort which adds combat engineering load for questionable returns. Scouting or recce can be done by more nimbler wheeled vehicle with ATGM capability

Also depends on our strategy

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 28 Jan 2022 06:00

ks_sachin wrote:
nachiket wrote: Is it impossible to use T-72's in these areas?
There has been an Armd bed or regt in the are for the last 15 to 20 years if I an not mistaken

Which is why I was suspicious of the sudden call for light tanks (read Sprut-SD) after PLA showed up with their light tanks in Ladakh. Was the IA top brass unaware of what type of equipment could be deployed by the enemy in case of a conflict that they had to suddenly scramble for getting light tanks in the middle of a crisis? Not a very flattering picture of them if they can be surprised like that. On the other hand if they were aware of PLA having these tanks, why were they so reluctant to buy the NAMICA which would have been very useful in countering PLA light tanks?

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 28 Jan 2022 06:40

nachiket wrote:
ks_sachin wrote: There has been an Armd bed or regt in the are for the last 15 to 20 years if I an not mistaken
Which is why I was suspicious of the sudden call for light tanks (read Sprut-SD) after PLA showed up with their light tanks in Ladakh. Was the IA top brass unaware of what type of equipment could be deployed by the enemy in case of a conflict that they had to suddenly scramble for getting light tanks in the middle of a crisis? Not a very flattering picture of them if they can be surprised like that. On the other hand if they were aware of PLA having these tanks, why were they so reluctant to buy the NAMICA which would have been very useful in countering PLA light tanks?

Where do you want me to start?

John · Post by **John** » 28 Jan 2022 08:22

nachiket wrote:
ks_sachin wrote: There has been an Armd bed or regt in the are for the last 15 to 20 years if I an not mistaken
Which is why I was suspicious of the sudden call for light tanks (read Sprut-SD) after PLA showed up with their light tanks in Ladakh. Was the IA top brass unaware of what type of equipment could be deployed by the enemy in case of a conflict that they had to suddenly scramble for getting light tanks in the middle of a crisis? Not a very flattering picture of them if they can be surprised like that. On the other hand if they were aware of PLA having these tanks, why were they so reluctant to buy the NAMICA which would have been very useful in countering PLA light tanks?

NAMICA (BMP-2) doesn’t offer much protection can barely withstand small arms fire, while it may do well in role of tank destroyer it cannot be used to attack any well defended positions (not to mention it doesn’t even remote weapon system to engage any infantry).

k prasad · Post by **k prasad** » 28 Jan 2022 11:51

hnair wrote:k prasad, as others have pointed out, the MBTs with adequate turbocharging would do that and quite a few IA ones are already up there. The light tank for IA seems a brochure pushing effort which adds combat engineering load for questionable returns. Scouting or recce can be done by more nimbler wheeled vehicle with ATGM capability

likely, hnair-saar. I'm not sure what specific operational requirements require the light tank, so my comment above was predicated on an (unstated) assumption that the IA's request was based on specific need for such a platform that cannot be filled by T-90s up there. If the T-90s can work as well, then light tanks would be unnecessary. But that's something we don't really know, right?

Prem Kumar · Post by **Prem Kumar** » 28 Jan 2022 12:55

John wrote: NAMICA (BMP-2) doesn’t offer much protection can barely withstand small arms fire, while it may do well in role of tank destroyer it cannot be used to attack any well defended positions (not to mention it doesn’t even remote weapon system to engage any infantry).

In its dedicated tank-killer role, NAMICA would have been a big deterrent to an armored push by the PLA in Ladakh. With its high mast, well placed Namicas would wreak havoc with their shoot and scoot. If it was inducted, that is

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 28 Jan 2022 13:11

That is exactly why it was not inducted. If you remember the small matter of the missile seekers not being able lock on tank sized targets beyond 3.2 kms. During the hottest period of the day. During the hottest month of year. In the hottest part of the country.

I couldn't help but think in terms of that missile being a force multiplier for the T72 deployed against the PRC.

But that is just a waste of emotion.

souravB · Post by **souravB** » 28 Jan 2022 13:16

ks_sachin wrote: Where do you want me to start?

<muttering to myself> Can IA be looking for an Amphibious+Airborne tank. And this is an also case? </muttering to myself>

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 28 Jan 2022 15:21

Is it necessary to counter the Chinese light tanks with a Indian light tanks ?
My views, NO
If we are/were using our medium tanks T 72 etc. there is not need for any new tank
NAMICA could be used to counter these Chinese tanks.
I would say we have a large number of small wheeled vehicles (like Maruti Gypsy or Tata Storme or Mahindra Thar) packed with 6+ Nag or Amogha or whatever is the current name. Crew of 3 or 4.
Small nimble can go off-the-road. Low visibility. Low IR signal
Just like the RCL we used in 1965 and we stopped Paki Pattons
As someone suggested above, I hope this "light tank" requirement is a not ruse to buy Russian light tank, the Spruts. As emergenvcy purchase.
Just my views

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 28 Jan 2022 15:22

Noob question - does the PLA have Namica type vehicles in the region... if not, then why not - why are they going for light(er) tanks as well?

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 28 Jan 2022 21:30

Video: https://twitter.com/DefenceDecode/statu ... uz27MxPTVg ---> Ladakh Trials of the #DRDO-TATA WhAP (Wheeled Armoured Platform).

https://twitter.com/tataadvanced/status ... uz27MxPTVg ---> TASL's WhAP 8x8 (Wheeled Armoured Platform) conducted successful trials in Ladakh. WhAP is India’s First Amphibious Infantry Combat Vehicle (Wheeled), designed for optimized survivability, all-terrain performance, and increased lethality.

YashG · Post by **YashG** » 28 Jan 2022 21:35

The switch uav IA uses has endurance in excess of 5/6 hours and can scout upto kms and its man portable. Every namica or even tanks can have one attached to them serving as forwards eyes. This could take us into bvr tank warfare.

Atmavik · Post by **Atmavik** » 28 Jan 2022 21:44

Rakesh wrote:Video: https://twitter.com/DefenceDecode/statu ... uz27MxPTVg ---> Ladakh Trials of the #DRDO-TATA WhAP (Wheeled Armoured Platform).

https://twitter.com/tataadvanced/status ... uz27MxPTVg ---> TASL's WhAP 8x8 (Wheeled Armoured Platform) conducted successful trials in Ladakh. WhAP is India’s First Amphibious Infantry Combat Vehicle (Wheeled), designed for optimized survivability, all-terrain performance, and increased lethality.

Trial after Trial without orders

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 29 Jan 2022 00:31

John wrote: NAMICA (BMP-2) doesn’t offer much protection can barely withstand small arms fire, while it may do well in role of tank destroyer it cannot be used to attack any well defended positions (not to mention it doesn’t even remote weapon system to engage any infantry).

But the Light Tank (read Sprut-SD) was seemingly asked for exactly because the PLA showed up with their light tanks. So it seems obvious that it wasn't infantry support that was occupying the IA's minds but a counter to the PLA's tanks. Something which the NAMICA is well-suited for. As for engaging infantry, the NAMICA's can be deployed alongside regular BMP's which can engage enemy infantry quite well. The WhAP would do well in this role too but that is yet another story. And at 18t how much better is the Sprut's armor really going to be?

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 29 Jan 2022 09:56

If Armor is the nearly equal (protection against only small arms fire), then is the differentiating factor only the 40 odd rounds of the 125mm gun vs the 8 ATGMs?

Cheaper & more dumb rounds Vs costlier & less number of Missiles

(though the missile scores on range)

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 29 Jan 2022 10:32

I am slightly confused about the protection levels. Even the PLA light tank is only protected against 30 mm. But is nearly 35 tons and has a 1000 hp engine. However, i have to say that it is a fairly conventional vehicle.

With the lack of high calibre impact protection not being an issue for them.

But I am thinking that this much weight does give options to design a vehicle with excellent crew protection but at the expense of all round vehicular protection.

If we are taking the following form.

1) crew placed in the hull, under excellent armour.
2) ammunition placed in a separate compartment behind the crew.
3) remotely operated main gun in a pod. Like armata. Go for 120 mm compact tank gun. It can be used for vehicles weighing as low as 20 tons.
4) 2 seperate commanders independent thermal sights. One on top of the gun pod. Another top of a mast. ( Can do with the mast mounted sight only as well)
5) seperate gunners sight.
6) active protection systems.
7) whatever remotely operated machine gun mount the army select as standard.

I think that this vehicle can be the standard tank of the Indian army.

ShivS · Post by **ShivS** » 29 Jan 2022 20:32

Manish_P wrote:If Armor is the nearly equal (protection against only small arms fire), then is the differentiating factor only the 40 odd rounds of the 125mm gun vs the 8 ATGMs?

Cheaper & more dumb rounds Vs costlier & less number of Missiles

(though the missile scores on range)

An ATGM is very specialised - it knocks out tanks. A 120 mm gun can do damage to a much wider range of targets. Add the machine guns that a tank carries and it’s a powerful punch.

The IA has to base its capabilities on the threat assessment and capability assessment of its adversaries. Both those began changing dramatically after Galwan and have kept evolving since then. The force and infra build up by the PLA is quite remarkable and it gives them a set of tactical options that are new. The IA will need to adjust to that reality and equipment that was not considered for induction before these events may be needed.

Part of the game.

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 29 Jan 2022 22:34

Right. And if the main gun also fires the missiles (as the IA has asked for it in other platforms) then it gives good tactical flexibility, like a kind of multi-role platform.. is that it?

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 30 Jan 2022 17:40

CVRDE is starting tests of the 1500 hp power pack with transmission.

ShivS · Post by **ShivS** » 30 Jan 2022 19:45

Manish_P wrote:Right. And if the main gun also fires the missiles (as the IA has asked for it in other platforms) then it gives good tactical flexibility, like a kind of multi-role platform.. is that it?

Most light tanks will hope they never meet a MBT and need to fire a internally housed missile! For lesser targets a 105mm gun is enough.

Every tank is a compromise between protection, firepower and mobility. A light tank gives up tremendously with regard to armour and sacrifices some fire power for mobility. It’s not designed to face a MBT and it would be bad management if they ever met. In terms of firepower a 105 mm was the gun on most MBTs till the 1970s - it’s a pretty powerful weapon.

As an aside in 1962 it was the induction of light tanks that stopped the PLA from making further advances in Ladakh, so the location has history of using light tanks.

Saw some posts around NAMICA and it’s use. Ground vehicle based ATGMs are a valuable anti tank weapon when nothing else is available but these are soft skinned vehicles that are tremendously vulnerable to any cannon. At the normal operating horizon of 3-5 km, a 105 mm cannon or a 120 mm cannon can take out a NAMICA quite easily. I would love to see imaging masts of 7-15 feet on these vehicles that improve target sighting capabilities.

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 30 Jan 2022 20:18

^ No dispute about the MBT vs the Light Tank.

What I was trying to say was that is it the thinking of the IA (for the light tank) along the lines that it is a flexible platform for big Gun ops as well as missile ops, without much changes required in the field/forward posts, as compared to a NAMICA which is dedicated missile ops only.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 30 Jan 2022 21:41

Anyone advise how this works? In simple English please, for mango abduls like myself

https://twitter.com/VinodDX9/status/148 ... L5WWWQD-tQ ---> At least three Indian companies are offering See Through Armour Technology.

* Tonbo Imaging - Wolf Pack
* Anja Lens - Anja Bolt
* L&T

Picture: Tonbo.

ShivS · Post by **ShivS** » 30 Jan 2022 23:11

You see the mast behind the turret? That contains a set of imaging sensors that transmit the external world to screens in the vehicle.

The magic is the synchronisation of the image being sent inside with the demand by the screen operator. I believe that the screen can now be helmet mounted. As you move your head the image changes. Not sure of this part.

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 30 Jan 2022 23:48

A panoramic imaging system that intelligently integrates primary and secondary armament systems, and multiple sensors for day/night vision, is an ideal solution for the next-generation combat vehicle. It enhances situational awareness by giving a 360° view of the vehicle’s surrounding in the day or at night, in poor/no lighting, and bad weather conditions like snow, hail or dust storms. The vehicle crew has the capability to perform threat analysis quickly even in dangerous conditions.

Wolfpack our multi-spectral, panoramic imaging system is designed for enhancing situational awareness in real time.

Wolfpack comprises of multiple Minwolfs – individual systems with three day imagers and three thermal imagers, each system with an FOV up to 120° – that are positioned in different directions to deliver a high-resolution, fused visualization of the vehicle’s surroundings. This gives the system all-round visibility in the short- to mid-range in all kinds of lighting and weather conditions.....
Driver has a panoramic view of his surroundings in the most natural form despite the space constraints inside the AFV. Commander has increased situational awareness seamless video stitching and sensor fusion.

From tonbo's page https://tonboimaging.com/defense/soluti ... ugh-armor/

S_Madhukar · Post by **S_Madhukar** » 31 Jan 2022 03:30

I would think this should be a priority in a NBC environment…

Venu · Post by **Venu** » 31 Jan 2022 07:49

Its a see-through of your armor and not the enemies

The mast behind the turrents captures and projects the 360 degree live images either on a screen or on helmet mount.

Rakesh wrote:Anyone advise how this works? In simple English please, for mango abduls like myself

Atmavik · Post by **Atmavik** » 31 Jan 2022 09:17

there is a lot of talk of light tank, namica or armoure sph but suprisingly no discussion on the role of LCH in the ladhak theater. i think LCH armed with Helina and SANT will be a game changer.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 31 Jan 2022 09:22

Atmavik wrote:there is a lot of talk of light tank, namica or armoure sph but suprisingly no discussion on the role of LCH in the ladhak theater. i think LCH armed with Helina and SANT will be a game changer.

That is because this is the Armoured Vehicles thread. There has been plenty of discussion about the role of LCH in Ladakh in the LCH/Helicopters threads.

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 31 Jan 2022 10:11

Venu wrote:Its a see-through of your armor and not the enemies

The mast behind the turrents captures and projects the 360 degree live images either on a screen or on helmet mount.

Rakesh wrote:Anyone advise how this works? In simple English please, for mango abduls like myself

<OT>The F35 aircraft has sensor/cameras spread over the entire aircraft isn't it, that enable the pilot to 'see-through' the aircraft. Thought behind asking the question - is the basic tech the same or there is a difference. Another thought - the thinking for armored vehicles to have it as a mast is to enable it to rise about the dust and also to be able to hind behind dunes/walls etc is it?

Can't resist a joke (Pentagon Wars comes to mind) - hope some Navy admiral doesn't see the mast and ask for its submarine capabilities to be enhanced by giving provision to fire torpedoes

</OT>

stephen · Post by **stephen** » 31 Jan 2022 18:43

Venu wrote:Its a see-through of your armor and not the enemies

The mast behind the turrents captures and projects the 360 degree live images either on a screen or on helmet mount.

Rakesh wrote:Anyone advise how this works? In simple English please, for mango abduls like myself

I believe the Israelis have been working on this system, I think it is called the IronVision. Its similar to the F35 helmet technology where multiple cameras around the aircraft stitch the images to create an instantaneous and seamless image whichever side the helmet is facing.
Have always wondered, during the initial days if the F35 pilot was to look down and just saw the blank area, would he/she be scared shit enough to eject.

https://elbitsystems.com/media/See_Through_Armor.pdf
https://www.defensenews.com/industry/te ... 0effective

Nikhil_Naya · Post by **Nikhil_Naya** » 07 Feb 2022 13:45

Paanwaalah had some news for us...
WhAP (1.5) has cleared most trials. Weight loss has also happened. Turning radius improved! We could see some movement soon.
FMBT design has been 'finalized' almost and uses a lot of Arjun and Kanchan...

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 07 Feb 2022 14:27

Nikhil_Naya wrote:Paanwaalah had some news for us...
WhAP (1.5) has cleared most trials. Weight loss has also happened. Turning radius improved! We could see some movement soon.
FMBT design has been 'finalized' almost and uses a lot of Arjun and Kanchan...

I hope that the paanwala will eat a Banarasi paan in the next few days and share some sketches/ images at the usual shady sources.

Nikhil_Naya · Post by **Nikhil_Naya** » 07 Feb 2022 15:29

All I can say is that - its an Evolution - not a revolution (finally sense prevails)...But certainly something that is narrower, mobile and a 'Rocky Balboa'...

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 08 Feb 2022 08:33

Guys, please use the nomenclature Arjun-II or Arjun MKII for FMBT from now on. For Israel's Merkava, For Amrikhans Abrams, French Lecllerc, Rusi T''s we Indian's have our own Arjun.

Barath · Post by **Barath** » 08 Feb 2022 08:47

Nikhil_Naya wrote:Paanwaalah had some news for us...
FMBT design has been

All of that is all very well, but what is this tank supposed to do ? Where are the requirements? T90 has its place, Arjun has got its orders (Mk1, 1A), FRCV will replace T-72 and light tanks.

Is this FMBT supposed to be Arjun MKII for another 100 orders for desert ?

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 08 Feb 2022 09:15

Arjun MK-II aka FMBT will replace the 2000 plus T-72's in service.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 09 Feb 2022 00:42

https://twitter.com/TheDeadDistrict/sta ... oEYmRSgWWA ---> In the first three pictures is the Indian Army's T-90S MBT modernized with assistance of Ural Transport Machine Construction Bureau (UK BTM). Vehicle has been equipped with APU and AC. In the fourth picture, we can see the modernized T-90S and T90SK. Picture - July 2014 via Gur Khan.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 09 Feb 2022 00:47

Rakesh wrote: https://twitter.com/VinodDX9/status/148 ... L5WWWQD-tQ ---> At least three Indian companies are offering See Through Armour Technology.

* Tonbo Imaging - Wolf Pack
* Anja Lens - Anja Bolt
* L&T

Picture: Tonbo.

https://twitter.com/TonboImaging/status ... 8025596929 ---> We got there first and now we have a 30% SWaP reduced See Through Armor solution. Meet the shiny new STAR from our stables!

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 09 Feb 2022 13:13

If they put a fairing on it. It will look like R2D2.

mody · Post by **mody** » 09 Feb 2022 15:38

The Sprut for the light tank has been rejected by IA as per some YouTube channels. In fact some mentioned that IA officers sent to evaluate the Sprut, said it was not a tank at all and only a light tracked vehicle with a 125mm gun and turret. No armour protection whatsoever.
If a light tank does materialise, it will be DRDO-L&T offering only.

Good to hear about the requirements for the FMBT being frozen. Finally!!! With the DRDO Bharat pack 1,500 HP engine and gearbox coming alive, the prospects seem better. Hopefully the testing of the engine will be successful.