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.
Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2133
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Vivek K » 23 May 2019 08:46

The people that kept the Arjun out should be pointed out and tried for treason. Call a spade a spade. Tankers will unfortunately miss the superior armor of the Arjun in battle. It is unfortunate that the T90is given the name of one of our bravest heroes - Bhishma Pitahmah!

vimal
BRFite
Posts: 278
Joined: 27 Jul 2017 10:32

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby vimal » 23 May 2019 10:36

I think we should just lock all the indigenous weapons development thread. Gives me heartache every time.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18400
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Karan M » 23 May 2019 11:32

Why?
You do realize there have been significant positive movements in these programs in past 5 years. Don't worry so much.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18400
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Karan M » 18 Aug 2019 07:11

Heavy Vehicles Factory Avadi, Republic, with Major Arya
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iroue3sXXak

Look at the pride of the AGM about Arjun :D

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18400
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Karan M » 18 Aug 2019 08:10


Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20056
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Philip » 18 Aug 2019 11:56

Look, it is the IA that has chosen to have more T-90s than Arjun, not petty babus or politicos.If so, it must've been done for a good reason.To say or imply that all the previous chiefs or those in chargd of decisionx on armour are guilty of " treason", is extremely unfair. This issue has been debated ad nauseum.The simple truth is that the IA's armoured doctrine for over decades is based upon smaller, lighter, 3- man crew MBTs ( from T-72 induction) instead of the much heavier and more expensive Arjun which was a purported desi copy of the Leopard.Early prototypes will
show the similarities.Another 440+ T-90MS are being bought from Russia becos of Avadi's delays and backlog of work on hand.

Nevertheless the A-1A/ A-2 whatever has made much improvements and one feels that another batch may be seriously considered.The IA one feels is trying to gain a handy numerical superiority over Pak in armour for our new pro-active doctrine vs. Pak, Cold Start, quick action formations, etc., penetrating Paki defences , seizing and holding territory. However, most reports about our desi MBTs concentrate upon the FRCV future MBT/ family of AVs , where the IA want a desi something like the Armata ( IMR), a 45t MBT , 3 man crew with all the latest bells and whistles in weaponry, armour and counter- measures.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18400
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Karan M » 18 Aug 2019 23:06

No T-90MS are being bought. We on BRF also fell for incorrect media reports. T90S are being procured in kit form, usual Russian delay in TOT, accelerated need for tanks. T-90 in Indian service will be upgraded with Indian upgrades.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20056
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Philip » 19 Aug 2019 00:08

The Aug.IMR issue :
Says 464 T-90MS. 10 regiments.An estimated price of $ 1.93B approx. Some in kit form from UVZ the rest built by HVF.
Differences are 1500kg extra weight to 48t. Improved electronics and defensive systems.A new turret weapon station and an upgraded 125mm gun, plus a remote 12.7mm mg. The extra 464s will bring the T-90 fleet upto around 1600 when all are delivered.
These supposedly include 1000 T-90S and SM, around 150 SMs. Plus 1900 T- 72 M1s, out of which 1500 are being upgraded under project Rhino.300 upgraded so far.
On paper we have 3000MBTs in 65 regiments but a % are not fully fit.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7609
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Indranil » 30 Aug 2019 00:22

Design and development of Electric Gun and Turret Drive System (ELEGANT) project on ARjun Mk2 is in final integration and testing at CVRDE. CVRDE has floated a tender for transporting the tank from Avadi to Mahajan in the near future.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7767
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Rakesh » 16 Sep 2019 21:26

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/1173552653982261253 ---> What is this nonsense? ---> 'The army is also examining whether engines of its tanks and tracked vehicles such as infantry combat vehicles can be made in India.'

For the record: *V92S2 (T-90) and V-46-6 (T-72) engines have already been fully indigenized.*

VikramA
BRFite
Posts: 158
Joined: 29 Aug 2018 15:41

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby VikramA » 16 Sep 2019 22:54

Australian army has down selected the Rheinmetall’s KF41 Lynx and Hanwha’s AS21 Redback for its Land 400 Phase 3 IFV requirement. Considering the fact that rajnath was just in Korea and talked about " production " and " manufacturing " of Korean products in india + selection of k9 and k30 Biho AD by IA + upgrade of ' strategic ' relationship between India and Australia what are chances that india might select Korean AS21 as its FICV with TOT from Korea and supply to both IA and Australian army

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18400
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Karan M » 16 Sep 2019 23:06

Philip wrote:The Aug.IMR issue :
Says 464 T-90MS. 10 regiments.An estimated price of $ 1.93B approx. Some in kit form from UVZ the rest built by HVF.
Differences are 1500kg extra weight to 48t. Improved electronics and defensive systems.A new turret weapon station and an upgraded 125mm gun, plus a remote 12.7mm mg. The extra 464s will bring the T-90 fleet upto around 1600 when all are delivered.
These supposedly include 1000 T-90S and SM, around 150 SMs. Plus 1900 T- 72 M1s, out of which 1500 are being upgraded under project Rhino.300 upgraded so far.
On paper we have 3000MBTs in 65 regiments but a % are not fully fit.


Again, this is wrong. The DAC approval was for standard T-90s. The T-90 upgrade in India will involve upgrades w/indian industry. We arent buying T-90MS.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7767
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Rakesh » 17 Sep 2019 21:29

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/1173978139967361024 ---> A 1,500 HP power pack for the Arjun MBT family is being progressed as a national mission mode program. So, that is nothing new either. There will be more on this soon.

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2133
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Vivek K » 18 Sep 2019 01:09

Was a pvt sector company involved in selling Arjuns? Without that selling to the IA will be impossible. So 1500 HP or a 2000 HP engine development will not matter. First figure out the client and their style of functioning. A little distorted though since the client was actually supposed to prefer the Arjun over the T-90 tincan.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20056
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Philip » 18 Sep 2019 03:50

Karan media reports keep saying MS t-90s, including the IMR August issue featuring the "IA's MBTs, shape of things to come".Is there any MOD/ official statement that differs?

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18400
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Karan M » 18 Sep 2019 04:04



Please see this. I can corroborate what General AB Shivane is saying,from 7:50 onwards. Ironically, Maj Gen Arora (whom I deeply respect) is in the panel as well, but somehow IMR is carrying dated information.
The plan is to bring T-90s to a common standard using the private sector and Arjun tech, to a level similar to a MS standard in terms of FCS enhancement. They are already receiving elements like a MRS, Commanders TI sight with additional upgrades (in process) being a new auto-tracker, and ballistic computer (to bring the T-90s somewhat upto Arjun Mk2 level for its FCS) and they are also scouting for an APU. The import of T-90MS i think started someplace via Defense News and has become established due to the internet being an echo-chamber. The whole discussion is kind of moot, the compere keeps yacking about a tank which is not even entering service apparently.

Atmavik
BRFite
Posts: 640
Joined: 24 Aug 2016 04:43

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Atmavik » 19 Sep 2019 08:27

T 90s in Ladhak from the recent exercise . this the first i have learnt of t90s in this region.

https://twitter.com/manupubby/status/11 ... 5431220225

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7677
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby rohitvats » 19 Sep 2019 10:56

We seem to have a mixed independent armored brigade - 1 x T-90 and 2 x T-72 CIA.

Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2082
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Vips » 27 Sep 2019 21:49

AV reports today on Youtube that DRDO has developed Thermal Imaging Sights for T72 and T90 tanks. These are better then the currently installed ones. The sights for T72 tanks have a range of 3 Kms and the one for T90 is good for 4 Kms. 300 out of the 1000 ordered for T72 have been delivered.

shaun
BRFite
Posts: 976
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby shaun » 27 Sep 2019 21:55

Vips wrote:AV reports today on Youtube that DRDO has developed Thermal Imaging Sights for T72 and T90 tanks. These are better then the currently installed ones. The sights for T72 tanks have a range of 3 Kms and the one for T90 is good for 4 Kms. 300 out of the 1000 ordered for T72 have been delivered.


Why there is difference of 1 km ?? Is it because of power pack or space constrain ?

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11144
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Aditya_V » 28 Sep 2019 12:23

Looking at History, I dont think T series and Arjuns are direct competitors, Arjun is a Heavy Tank and designed as such and T series are medium tanks, T Series VS Abrams will be like the Battle of ProKhorovka or Battle of 73 Easting- where the Heavy tanks in a desert or flat but Hard ground during summer Russia- but when the ground is wet or a Bit Marshy or higher altitude- which most of our Borders are I things the Lighter T-Series with more mobility will have the upper hand.

T-Series is always cheaper to buy, easier to Transport and lesser maintenance, but will always have a handicap when longer ranged Battles are fought.

Looking at possible Tank deployments which the Army requires
1) China
- Ladakh and Sikkim sector- here a heavy tank will struggle much more than a medium tank, especially seeing places where T-72 ford partly Ice covered streams etc.

2) Pakistan
- Pallanwala, Jurian, Shakargarh Bulge 1 sector, 2nd sector Khem Karan, Firozpur, Fazlika Sector, Both Armies have the ability to flood these sectors. 3rd Sector - Rajastan and Gujarat Border- this is only area where I see the Heavier tank like Arjun will be a distinct advantage over the T-Series.

Thus, in the mid 80's Army wanted a Tank which could counter a possible Abrams buy by Pakistan which would have put us at a huge disadvantage at Rajastan border. And while seeing all this we should also note the improvements in ATGM.

So given all this I think the best Strategy is too

Split the requirement in 2 categories - Heavy Tanks and Medium Tanks

1) Medium Tanks have to be deployed in numbers, given the sectors required, indigenise the T series to the maximum extent possible, Engine, design, night vision equipment etc. - This is what the IA has been doing

2) Heavy Tanks, Make the Arjun have more powerful engine but a heavier Tank- and have it numbers of around 500. I think this why Arjun-II is getting plows etc. and more Armour etc.

Given the funding the constraints, IA seems to have chosen to put 1 before 2. 2 i a more Nice to have item for them, as we have no land to loose in the Southern J&K and Punjab border.

In between all this the some Journalists who have an axe to grind have deliberately put this Arjun VS T Series debate- many of being from IA Tank battalions would have been well aware of things I have put but deliberately chose to mislead an Indian public bread on bad history textbooks with no idea of miltary history or requirements. After all a Tank is a Tank. But for the IA- the medium T-Series and heavy Western Tank are 2 different animals.

The Arjun will always be costlier since it is a different category of Tank, like a Hatchback VS Psuedo SUV.

The IA strategy is different from the Russians or the West- The Russians believe in going in with lots of Medium Tanks but willing to accept Losses. The West wants Tanks better adapted to Desert where most of their wars are fought, and in Defense of Western Europe.

Thats probably why Iraq went in for T90's in spite of having Abrams- due to cost and terrian where they were fighting ISIS- they would be more than aware of Battle of 73 Easting where the Abrams decimated the T-72's.

While the Saudis have been hit badly fighting with Abrams in Mountainous terrain with the Houthis. T-Series is not a good in open Desert or Hard ground with long engagement distances and the more bulky Abrams is not good forlow mountain terrain where the Saudis have been fighting the Houthis.

Given our conditions we seem to need both types of Tanks with heavier Tanks in lesser numbers who kick the gate open for the medium tanks to follow.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2499
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby nam » 28 Sep 2019 12:46

Medium & heavy tank are actually misleading term.

X level of protection with smaller volume, will result in lower weight- T90
X level of protection with larger volume will result in higher weight - Arjun

Weight is a result of your design decision. You don't start with, I want to built a heavier tank and then design the features.

T90 has a smaller turret, while Arjun has larger. To provide the same protection level, smaller turret will have less weight. Lighter turret results in lighter chasis and need for less powerful engine.

Simple physics.

If technology allows you with built X level protection, large( or enough for crew comfort) volume AND lower weight, every one will lap it. IA is expecting DRDO to achieve this.

Who has done this? Who else the Japanese.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11144
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Aditya_V » 28 Sep 2019 12:50

But the Japenese have never fought a war to find its maintence etc. They thought Zero was a world better, till the Americans exposed its total lack of protection to the Pilot and stopped entering into turning fights with the Zero.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7041
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby nachiket » 01 Oct 2019 01:56

The concept of Medium and Heavy tanks died out decades ago and armies all over the world moved to the Main Battle Tank (MBT) concept. No reason to bring it back now. Arjun was always intended as an MBT, not a "Heavy" tank to complement "Medium" ones. It was built to the GSQR specified by the IA. A GSQR which was formulated when the pakis were looking to buy the M1 Abrams which caused panic in the IA and the only comparable tank available - the Leopard 2 was too expensive for us. Much like the paki acquisition of the F-16 caused panic in the IAF. IAF to its relief was able to acquire the comparable M2k and the Mig-29.

Arjun's only hope is if the Pakis decide to buy the Turkish Altay when it comes out or even the Chinese Type-99A triggering a second round of panic in the IA. But looking at their empty coffers this may not be likely in the near term.

mody
BRFite
Posts: 531
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby mody » 01 Oct 2019 18:28

Why the Arjun cannot be used in Ladakh or North Sikkim? Its ground pressure that is more important then the total weight of the tank. If the tank can be transported to North Sikkim or Ladakh, then there is no problem. The biggest problem will be in transporting the tanks up there.

Once there, actually the Arjun may perform better, due to a more powerful engines. The photos of the T90s lumbering up the slop in ladakh are evident enough. In North Sikkim, the altitude is even higher, going from 16,000 ft upto 18,000 ft. I have been to north Sikkim, north of the last Indian IA camp, upto altitude of 17,500 ft. The ground is flat and tanks can be used here. But the air is thin and fighting up there would be a real challenge. For regular diesel vehicles, the engine cannot be shut off, or it may not re-start. Also, the winds are so strong, that beyond 12 noon, when the winds really pickup, it is not allowed to go. Even SUVs may topple over, due to the force of the wind. Its called a place where stones fly, due the distance a small stone can travel if thrown well with the wind behind it.

In this kind of environment, having a strong engine would be a must. In fact for the Arjun MK2, we should have moved to the MTU 893 series 1600 HP engine, rather then continue with the old MTU 838 1400 HP engine. But I guess because there are no orders, no body has bothered.

jpremnath
BRFite
Posts: 201
Joined: 18 Dec 2016 21:06

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby jpremnath » 01 Oct 2019 20:37

nachiket wrote:Arjun's only hope is if the Pakis decide to buy the Turkish Altay when it comes out or even the Chinese Type-99A triggering a second round of panic in the IA. But looking at their empty coffers this may not be likely in the near term.


Never underestimate the Paki's ability to commit harakiri. I wont be surprised if they bite the bullet..sorry grass and buy the Altay.

GopiD
BRFite
Posts: 139
Joined: 18 Jul 2011 14:57

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby GopiD » 02 Oct 2019 02:00

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qpsg8gLI0lE

SECURITY SCAN - ARJUN 2

Not sure if this has been posted here. The experts from both DRDO and Army are pretty much saying the same things that we have been discussing here for eons. Seems like there is a lot of bad blood between these two orgs.

Interesting watch.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7609
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Indranil » 02 Oct 2019 02:05

Meanwhile the ELEGANT Turret is entering fabricaion phase for Mk1A.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8100
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Pratyush » 02 Oct 2019 09:35

I am always amazed at the emphasis being on weight. Never on ground pressure.

The lower ground pressure of Arjun makes it ideal for soft ground and marshes and deserts.

But almost no one seems to focus on that.

Most people think that a t 90 due to its lighter weight and higher ground pressure is more suitable then Arjun with its lower ground pressure.

Any way it's time to get Armata and kill Arjun for good. As it will never be inducted.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2499
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby nam » 02 Oct 2019 11:32

What happened to Arjun Hull that was been built by reliance infra and the boast reliance was making about delivering 6 months before schedule?

vimal
BRFite
Posts: 278
Joined: 27 Jul 2017 10:32

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby vimal » 02 Oct 2019 11:38

GopiD wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qpsg8gLI0lE

SECURITY SCAN - ARJUN 2

Not sure if this has been posted here. The experts from both DRDO and Army are pretty much saying the same things that we have been discussing here for eons. Seems like there is a lot of bad blood between these two orgs.

Interesting watch.


One of the comments from that video

Arjun suffers from two major problems. It can't fly and it is NOT made in Russia. The second problem being even worse than the first one. DRDO should take the blueprints to Russia, have it manufactured there, have it designated as T-100 and the army would place an order of five hundred tans immediately. Three generations of cavalry regiments have been trained on Russian equipment, and the battle tactics have been standardized around its capabilities and shortcomings. Then Arjuna tank - which has all the design features of NATO tanks - appears on the scene and stands out like a sore thumb. The initial trials were even sabotaged by some units. The generals are not all neutral and put their weight behind the Russian equipment. In one on one trials, Arjun made short work of T-90 and also survived tank fire at point blank range. Pakistan has nothing that comes even close to Arjuna. It is a sad fact that only Indian Navy supports indigenous efforts. Army and the IAF always look down upon Desi weapon systems.
One last comment. I am glad Lt. gen Mehta is not the man in charge of the western sector. With this type of commitment, preverication , and analytical ability, a successful outcome of the war in the desert against Pakistan would be very iffy. If the batteries of all fifty tanks run out at the same time, it is either sabotage or very worst of leadership by the colonel in charge of the regiment.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53205
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby ramana » 09 Oct 2019 03:30

I hope Rajnath Singh turns his attention towards Arjun Mk1A.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20056
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Philip » 09 Oct 2019 07:48

The Arjun has an extra problem, cost.Larger, heavier and an extra crew member has proportionately increased its cost considerably vs the T-90.There were some reports that obtaining imported components for A-1 were problematic as the OEMs had either stopped production or orders were slow in delivery.Thus the support infra for the A series was weak. We need to order at least 400 A series MBTs to be able to create the support infra.

The more T-90s we operate, the argument to buy more for ease of operations,support, cost, etc. becomes stronger.It appears that the IA want an overwhelming numerical ratio in MBTs vs Pak.Some figures say at least 4,500 MBTs are planned for the inventory which will include over 1000 upgraded T-72s. Other reports indicate that even Russia will acquire more T-90 MS MBTs, for much the same reasons and induct the Armata later as its key acquisition priorities seem to be N-subs , naval assets and advanced missiles.Even SU-35s are being acquired with the SU-57 production for a first batch of 72 at a modest prod. rate of 12/yr. to start off with.

vimal
BRFite
Posts: 278
Joined: 27 Jul 2017 10:32

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby vimal » 09 Oct 2019 07:55

^^ Philip, seriously??

Jay
BRFite
Posts: 159
Joined: 24 Feb 2005 18:24
Location: Gods Country
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Postby Jay » 09 Oct 2019 09:03

Philip wrote:The Arjun has an extra problem, cost.Larger, heavier and an extra crew member has proportionately increased its cost considerably vs the T-90


Bull****. What Arjun has is a 'duplicious customer' problem and it is very well illustrated by the likes of you and your ilk. We went through this nonsense multiple times and it is not the forums responsibility to remind you of that deliberate ignorance and frankly it's extremely rude of you to time and again inflict this attribute on us. I apologize in advance if this is coming across as rude, but your posts(on MBT Arjun) for most part seem incapable of good logic, or courtesy and are extremely deceitful with militant advocacy of Russian weapons.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: brar_w, ravikr, sanjayc, Shakthi, VickyAvinash and 68 guests