Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

srai · Post by **srai** » 16 May 2011 09:29

Gaur wrote:chackojoseph ji,
Thanks for the input. Even though -600 is too low a number (from where will the replacement of T-72s come?), it is still a number which exceeds our expectations from Army. Hope your perception turns into reality.

As per reports, it seems the 500 (or so) Arjun MTBs will be replacing the 500 T-55MBTs between now and 2020 timeframe. The 1,600 T-90MBTs are making up the required numbers (having replaced the Vijayanta MBTs) and IA's expansion to 65+ regiments. My guess is the 1,800 T-72s in service will only be replaced by the FMBT post 2020+.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 16 May 2011 09:40

Another of the info is, two of the vital categories where Arjun was been opposed may be demolished.

1) The logistics. 2) heavy, so not suited.

Since the deployment has begun, it will be employed suitably.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 16 May 2011 10:11

chackojoseph wrote:Another of the info is, two of the vital categories where Arjun was been opposed may be demolished.

1) The logistics. 2) heavy, so not suited.

It has not been demolished. It has been worked on to solve. That is what took time. Unfortunately not sensational enough.

Boring usual, sweat of the brow hard work at usual Indian speed.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 16 May 2011 10:41

Has anyone wondered what does deployment of Arjun with armored brigades in Jaisalmer and Suratgarh signify? Do you think it is a simple coincidence that they are part of formations which will not require forward deployment by rail? Another thing - the number of T-90 are good enough for only 29 regiments@55 per regiment. We need 65 regiments at minimum. Rest will have to come from Arjun and upgraded T-72s.

Also, as far as replacement is concerned, Arjun will replace T-72 and not T-55. AFAIK, most of T-55 were relegated to armored regiments integral to Infantry Divisions - (though some would be with (I) Armored Brigades). These T-55s can be expected to be replaced by T-72 and Arjun taking place of these T-72s.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 16 May 2011 10:57

Guys,

The question that I have after reading the Ajay Shuklaw report is, why can't the T90 FCS and the TI system be fitted to the T 72? Cause as I understand that these components will be be made in India shortly as a result of the TOT. If they aren't already being made India.

So why is it taking so long to decide the components for the T 72.

Or is it a result of the Defense procurement policy where every single Indian defense acquisition programme must be done through global tenders.

srai · Post by **srai** » 16 May 2011 11:16

rohitvats wrote:...

Also, as far as replacement is concerned, Arjun will replace T-72 and not T-55. AFAIK, most of T-55 were relegated to armored regiments integral to Infantry Divisions - (though some would be with (I) Armored Brigades). These T-55s can be expected to be replaced by T-72 and Arjun taking place of these T-72s.

From the news reports in 2010, it was reported that the Arjun MBTs were inducted into the 75th Armoured Regiment in Jaisalmer, replacing T-55 tanks in that regiment. But this could just be one-off.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 16 May 2011 11:32

srai wrote:
rohitvats wrote:...

Also, as far as replacement is concerned, Arjun will replace T-72 and not T-55. AFAIK, most of T-55 were relegated to armored regiments integral to Infantry Divisions - (though some would be with (I) Armored Brigades). These T-55s can be expected to be replaced by T-72 and Arjun taking place of these T-72s.
From the news reports in 2010, it was reported that the Arjun MBTs were inducted into the 75th Armoured Regiment in Jaisalmer, replacing T-55 tanks in that regiment. But this could just be one-off.

You're correct. Like I said, some of the armored brigades did have T-55. This can be one of the examples.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 16 May 2011 11:35

Arjun is not being replaced based on the tank type. it is bereplacement based on deployment type. S C is the most logical choice till the formation of the first unit is over. Once done, they will be differently deployed.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 16 May 2011 11:39

CJ, first unit was formed even before 75th Armored Regiment came into picture. 43rd Armored Regiment was the first unit and is with SW Command (based in Suratgargh). What is interesting is that first unit formed after 43rd is with a formation that is so forward deployed and close of IB. And another piece of co-incidence - both units are with armored brigades of RAPIDs.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 16 May 2011 12:02

Pratyush wrote: So why is it taking so long to decide the components for the T 72..

I am sorry, I may be mistaken, but I was under the impression that the work to upgrade 1000 T 72s to T 90 standards was already underway.

What am I missing?

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 16 May 2011 12:05

Right! I stand corrected again factually

I have been writing about 43 armour right from 2007. http://frontierindia.net/43rd-armour-re ... arjun-tank

Infact spoken to some.

I will rephrase this. 43 armour is the one which was testing and the infra is already there. The 75 is the first attempt to build a nacent Arjun regiment. This is after the comparission trials etc.

OT for rohitvats....

I just want to clarify the earlier tiff. See sometimes, I am not able to concentrate on posts due to pressure on FI and customers etc. So, I do write something where my thoughts. its purely impulsive. If there are errors, just point like your last post. its appreciated. But, if some beats around the bush, the tempers flare as there are enough issues already. Its a personal problem, but, it could help by pointed replies. I am sure a lot of people can identify with this problem.

If I am wrong, I have never been shy from regreting.

So I regret getting into the earlier tiff, which I had no intention. Just point out the fact. Even I am learning.

OT Off.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 16 May 2011 12:08

Sanku wrote: I am sorry, I may be mistaken, but I was under the impression that the work to upgrade 1000 T 72s to T 90 standards was already underway.

What am I missing?

As was I. Which is why I got confused and asked that question. When I read that the T 72 UPG was going very slowly. I can accept at a level that the Industrial capability to make the extra FCA & TI for 72 has not yet come on line. But the IA not deciding how to UPG the 72 is news to me.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 16 May 2011 12:10

CJ, point taken and will be adhered to in future.

43rd was the first regiment which has received the Arjun for trials from day one. Infact, went on a joyride on Arjun with them way back in mid-90s (first lot of 15 Arjuns).

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 16 May 2011 12:27

Pratyush wrote: But the IA not deciding how to UPG the 72 is news to me.

Can you please point me to which news report/source it came from, would like to look it up. Seem to have missed it.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 16 May 2011 12:38

15 or 12?

My prespective on Arjun I wil explain.

Back then we heard only bad news. It was more to find the correct version. Once found "give it a try." Once tried and successfull, "now induct it."

Now, the entire process is done. Now i suppose the Army has to induct it where it sees it ok. Army has to induct it on front as these tanks are new and have got no business within the borders in the event of war. They are the best judge on how to do it.

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 16 May 2011 12:46

CJ ji can your statement("Now i suppose the Army has to induct it where it sees it ok") be construed as a confirmation of Arjun's good offensive capabilities. I know nothing about deployment or strategies, but it makes sense to field your best bets against credible threats. Also i dont understand this, when Army says Southern command or South western command, I thought the command and headquarters will be based in Secunderabad or say Belgaum but they are based in Jaipur what is south about Jaipure

?

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 16 May 2011 12:50

Sanku wrote:
Can you please point me to which news report/source it came from, would like to look it up. Seem to have missed it.

Its a conclusion I have drawn from the quoted section. written by Ajay Shuklaw

The Link was posted in the last page of the thread, posting again for your reference.

since more than a thousand T-72s will continue to be in service beyond 2022, the army plans to spend Rs 5 crore per T-72 (it was bought for Rs 9 crore each) on retrofitting crucial systems, including the fire control system, main engine and night vision devices. This procurement has sputtered along for almost a decade with barely visible success.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 16 May 2011 13:00

SuryaG

Trust Army to do a good job on deployments.

Our job is to encourage indigenious. Unless its pushed, it won't grow. Even if they deploy Arjun in secondary roles, the FMBT "made in India" has more chance to be on frontlines.

The inter institution conflict should be checked as it has been the bane of the indeginisation. Entire set up has issues on certain areas (like all organisations). If we don't write about it, it will never be plugged or may be late. it dosen't mean push down the throat. Arjun, nag etc have been good products having troubles initially do to our lack experience building it. i even don't claim that I am the guy who did it. I just played my part.

We should not push our army on wrong things. We just have to ensure that good things should have good end.

I have been harsh of Army, dosen't mean I detest them. I have spent good part of life in services.

manum · Post by **manum** » 16 May 2011 13:35

I've question regarding the same...but What I understand is something however seriously I feel, wont be equivalent to a person who is dealing with it i.e. Army...

So as much I think...Is it that Arjun being larger than standard carrying bogey is a big trouble and even the bridges which are not really made for Arjun...?
is it that the time being taken to chew the induction of Arjun is to slowly familiarize the other facilities which support Arjun...so Arjun till MK2++/3 will be by default on Arjun platform, but what about FMBT, is it also going to be based on Arjun size or It'll be optimized to standard support machinery we have for tanks before Arjun...
Because FMBT is being touted as lighter compared to Arjun...so If FMBT is being made for T-90 based support machinery, Then its a bell for Arjun that it wont go beyond a limit...isnt it...

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 16 May 2011 13:36

Soutern Command HQ is in Pune while SW Command HQ is Jaipur.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 16 May 2011 13:41

Pratyush wrote:
Sanku wrote:
Can you please point me to which news report/source it came from, would like to look it up. Seem to have missed it.

Its a conclusion I have drawn from the quoted section. written by Ajay Shuklaw

The Link was posted in the last page of the thread, posting again for your reference.

since more than a thousand T-72s will continue to be in service beyond 2022, the army plans to spend Rs 5 crore per T-72 (it was bought for Rs 9 crore each) on retrofitting crucial systems, including the fire control system, main engine and night vision devices. This procurement has sputtered along for almost a decade with barely visible success.

Thanks, I read it as being a implementation issue in terms of acquisition of systems (releasing sanctioned money on time, purchase orders raised on time, fitting them in time etc) rather than a issue with decision making in terms of tank specification.

AFAIK that specs are frozen, but the implementation is spluttering.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 16 May 2011 13:46

manum wrote:I've question regarding the same...but What I understand is something however seriously I feel, wont be equivalent to a person who is dealing with it i.e. Army...

SNIP......

Because FMBT is being touted as lighter compared to Arjun...so If FMBT is being made for T-90 based support machinery, Then its a bell for Arjun that it wont go beyond a limit...isnt it...

You have nailed it as FMBT is intended to be at the moment. However, no one knows how many iterations will the FMBT prototype go through before the final product is arrived at. IT could well be that the final product will be very much different from both the T 90 and the Arjun. It may be a truly Indian solution to the problem.

The only thing certain ATM, is only time will tell the final shape of the vehicle.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 16 May 2011 13:59

manum wrote:I've question regarding the same...but What I understand is something however seriously I feel, wont be equivalent to a person who is dealing with it i.e. Army...

So as much I think...Is it that Arjun being larger than standard carrying bogey is a big trouble and even the bridges which are not really made for Arjun...?
is it that the time being taken to chew the induction of Arjun is to slowly familiarize the other facilities which support Arjun...so Arjun till MK2++/3 will be by default on Arjun platform, but what about FMBT, is it also going to be based on Arjun size or It'll be optimized to standard support machinery we have for tanks before Arjun...
Because FMBT is being touted as lighter compared to Arjun...so If FMBT is being made for T-90 based support machinery, Then its a bell for Arjun that it wont go beyond a limit...isnt it...

There were roads widened for T-90 to go to Ladhak. If will be there, they will do it. They did not ask for a new tank that are narrow.

New equipment comes with new things. Even TV at your home. If you say you can't do witha wall hanging LCD cause there is already a TV stand, then there is a problem.

Another thing is VCOAS reviews the project periodically. Arjun was wide and heavy all throughout. If they had thought that weight was an issue or width was an issue, then they should have acted accordingly ages back. Two most known names afrom Army have been associated with it. Saying that, I don't want to start a flame war.

We cannot be sure if Arjun MBT cannot go beyond a limit. It has proven an edge over T-90 and logically the ones deployed across. Don't think that UPG's might not bee needed even if FMBT comes. We will require a mix. figth gen dosen't mean that 4.5 gen is not required. AFIK, during the comparission trials , even the professional opponents (can't talk abt interests) were converted.

FMBT will not be made based on existing infrastructure. It will be foolish. it will be made based on the need of the hour and the support equipment will be made along side it.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 16 May 2011 14:05

Pratyush wrote: However, no one knows how many iterations will the FMBT prototype go through before the final product is arrived at. IT could well be that the final product will be very much different from both the T 90 and the Arjun. It may be a truly Indian solution to the problem.

The only thing certain ATM, is only time will tell the final shape of the vehicle.

They do not have a plan yet. Nothing concrete has evolved. FMBT will take good amount of time.

Gurinder P · Post by **Gurinder P** » 16 May 2011 14:31

Hello gents,

I was wondering if the IA engineering corps had any vehicle that is more or less in line with the British Army's Trojan AVRE, or if any are in development?

Here is the link for the English Beast,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trojan_%28vehicle%29

Gurinder P · Post by **Gurinder P** » 16 May 2011 14:32

[Accidental Copy >> SELF DELETE]

manum · Post by **manum** » 16 May 2011 14:49

chackojoseph wrote: There were roads widened for T-90 to go to Ladhak. If will be there, they will do it. They did not ask for a new tank that are narrow.New equipment comes with new things. Even TV at your home. If you say you can't do witha wall hanging LCD cause there is already a TV stand, then there is a problem.

I understood the point before I asked the question, but the thing is in comparison the changes in amount of logistics require to much of risk and investment? I mean Arjun being ordered in 600 is too less for ramping up of logistics to fit arjun module everywhere, it can happen that Arjun gets a fixed regional role which might again gather criticism or there is condition of bottleneck in rapid deployment...It's total calculation issue...

chackojoseph wrote:Another thing is VCOAS reviews the project periodically. Arjun was wide and heavy all throughout. If they had thought that weight was an issue or width was an issue, then they should have acted accordingly ages back. Two most known names afrom Army have been associated with it. Saying that, I don't want to start a flame war.

yes, I think today Army is realizing its in a situation, where it'll have to take a decision, FMBT is in 2020, till then what Arjun supply line will do, and who'll be held responsible?

chackojoseph wrote:We cannot be sure if Arjun MBT cannot go beyond a limit. It has proven an edge over T-90 and logically the ones deployed across. Don't think that UPG's might not bee needed even if FMBT comes. We will require a mix. fifth gen dosen't mean that 4.5 gen is not required. AFIK, during the comparission trials , even the professional opponents (can't talk abt interests) were converted.

Agreed, but the issue is not of common sense, its about the economics of various types. Arjun's good performance has caused some ironical questions to be faced.

chackojoseph wrote:FMBT will not be made based on existing infrastructure. It will be foolish. it will be made based on the need of the hour and the support equipment will be made along side it.

So why not commit to it now i.e. through Arjun we commit to FMBT...so all the infrastructural changes to be made as per Arjun module and let FMBT be lighter and probably smaller...

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 16 May 2011 15:02

Simple, FMBT requirement is not been announced. I know some idea exists, it has to be officially communicated. Untill then it is as good as not there.

P Chitkara · Post by **P Chitkara** » 16 May 2011 15:32

Last I heard through the net chatter - it will be a light(er) tank. This again is a deviation from what has been accomplished through Arjun. How will it be able to give the same protection or firepower that is available in Arjun today - please enlighten me if there is some new super duper brochure tech that is going to make that happen.

Building on top of the success instead of again treading relatively unchartered territory would have been the logical thing to do, right?

manum · Post by **manum** » 16 May 2011 15:59

P Chitkara wrote:Last I heard through the net chatter - it will be a light(er) tank. This again is a deviation from what has been accomplished through Arjun. How will it be able to give the same protection or firepower that is available in Arjun today - please enlighten me if there is some new super duper brochure tech that is going to make that happen.

Building on top of the success instead of again treading relatively unchartered territory would have been the logical thing to do, right?

That is what I am asking as well, that when we talk about Arjun induction, it says there is FMBT, if FMBT is extension of indigenous R&D, it has to be Arjun based!...
but 2020 is not far as it sounds actually, for a product development and induction.

But it is not necessary for FMBT to be on Arjun chassis, as it has to comply with many other requirement as well stealth so it might happen that FMBT takes everything from arjun except its size.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 18 May 2011 05:49

FMBT, T90, T72, Arjun even Al Khalid (just kidding)... let us get something, We need atleast 10 more Regiments of MBTs. I would prefer if the army orders 500 Arjuns. Just like the Army and the Airforce made a huge order for Akash SAM (and repeated the order), IA should order more Arjuns.

ParGha · Post by **ParGha** » 18 May 2011 06:33

Ouch for the T-90: Chief of Army (Russia), General Aleksandr Postnikov says in this article, that Russian-produced army equipment is worse than even the Chinese. General illustrated this with example of T-90, the 17th modification of a MBT first made in 1973, with a current price 118 million roubles. "Would be easier to buy 3 Leopards for this money" http://www.izvestia.ru/armia2/article3152771/ (use translator)

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 18 May 2011 09:44

ParGha wrote:Ouch for the T-90: Chief of Army (Russia), General Aleksandr Postnikov says in this article, that Russian-produced army equipment is worse than even the Chinese. General illustrated this with example of T-90, the 17th modification of a MBT first made in 1973, with a current price 118 million roubles. "Would be easier to buy 3 Leopards for this money" http://www.izvestia.ru/armia2/article3152771/ (use translator)

Actually he has questioned the quality of Russian Armour in toto. The debate is there if you scan the previous pages.

This time the apologists came up and questioned and tried to explain why the Russian man said so.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 18 May 2011 09:58

chackojoseph wrote:Simple, FMBT requirement is not been announced. I know some idea exists, it has to be officially communicated. Untill then it is as good as not there.

It is nothing but some hot-air at present. It seems the DGMFs cannot find his ar*e with their two hands even if they tried.

The only silver lining is that Arjun has proved so good that no amount of shenanigans are going to prevent the induction of the tank in larger numbers. The requirement for additional modern MBTs is staring the IA in the face and if nothing, pure demand factor is going to ensure that the tank is inducted in numbers.

The only good thing to have emerged from DGMF office in recent times is the involvement of private sector in development of future AFV to replace the BMP-1/2 and using the US concept of getting multiple companies to come up with their concept and design.

srai · Post by **srai** » 18 May 2011 10:20

rohitvats wrote:
chackojoseph wrote:Simple, FMBT requirement is not been announced. I know some idea exists, it has to be officially communicated. Untill then it is as good as not there.
It is nothing but some hot-air at present. It seems the DGMFs cannot find his ar*e with their two hands even if they tried.

The only silver lining is that Arjun has proved so good that no amount of shenanigans are going to prevent the induction of the tank in larger numbers. The requirement for additional modern MBTs is staring the IA in the face and if nothing, pure demand factor is going to ensure that the tank is inducted in numbers.

The only good thing to have emerged from DGMF office in recent times is the involvement of private sector in development of future AFV to replace the BMP-1/2 and using the US concept of getting multiple companies to come up with their concept and design.

Given that the IA has not even come up with a formal specifications yet, how can the DRDO be able to R&D a FMBT by 2020? I think we are going to see similar "delays" in the program and DRDO being blamed for it.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 18 May 2011 10:34

Senior DRDO scientist have mentioned on record that they are working on FMBT and that they have received inputs from the Army for a 40 T class FMBT , so it would be flawed to says DGMF is not working on it unless DRDO made derived those specs from thin air.

I have yet to see any GSQR on Arjun formally put up by IA or DRDO , to expect something similar for FMBT or keep it in public record is too much to expect.

Here is a recent article on FMBT by TSS http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article866925.ece

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 18 May 2011 11:16

srai wrote:
rohitvats wrote: It is nothing but some hot-air at present. It seems the DGMFs cannot find his ar*e with their two hands even if they tried.

The only silver lining is that Arjun has proved so good that no amount of shenanigans are going to prevent the induction of the tank in larger numbers. The requirement for additional modern MBTs is staring the IA in the face and if nothing, pure demand factor is going to ensure that the tank is inducted in numbers.

The only good thing to have emerged from DGMF office in recent times is the involvement of private sector in development of future AFV to replace the BMP-1/2 and using the US concept of getting multiple companies to come up with their concept and design.
Given that the IA has not even come up with a formal specifications yet, how can the DRDO be able to R&D a FMBT by 2020? I think we are going to see similar "delays" in the program and DRDO being blamed for it.

DRDO has certain budgets to get ready for projects. If you see my 155mm DRDO article, it shows the process of getting into a project. DRDO has to do ground work. They work on technologies etc. Another example is AMCA.

DRDO is making a 155 mm and FMBT claim are factually wrong.

Added later...

rohitvats assertion that DGMF cant find his ----------- etc is right. DRDO is not getting ready for 40 or 50 ton project. They are doing some research in "anticipation" of the project.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 18 May 2011 11:31

Austin wrote:Senior DRDO scientist have mentioned on record that they are working on FMBT and that they have received inputs from the Army for a 40 T class FMBT , so it would be flawed to says DGMF is not working on it unless DRDO made derived those specs from thin air.

'Working on it' can mean anything. They could be working on composite armor for example, which while crucial to the FMBT, would also be a part of future Arjun and APC variants.The same goes for a 1500HP engine. Basic research goes on and will contribute to everything.

I have yet to see any GSQR on Arjun formally put up by IA or DRDO , to expect something similar for FMBT or keep it in public record is too much to expect.

Not the particulars of the GSQR itself, but the news of it being given to the DRDO would eventually leak out.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 18 May 2011 11:47

Well DRDO is not a private agency that develops project on its own and then presents to the Army as one of the many participant for FMBT , they work on requirement laid out by the army and something the IA must have conveyed to DRDO on its future requirenment for FMBT

To quote directly from TSS

“For engine development, we have formed a national team comprising members from the academia, the user, industry and the DRDO. We have also gone in for an international consultant,” said S. Sundaresh, Chief Controller (Armaments and Combat Engineering), DRDO. The first prototype of the indigenous engine would be ready in four to five years.

The DRDO is launching a project to develop the transmission for the tank; the indigenous engine and transmission will together be called Bharat Power Pack and it will meet the FMBT's mobility requirements.

“We are confident that we will be ready with the FMBT prototype in five to seven years,” Mr. Sundaresh said. “We are trying to involve all the stakeholders — the user [the Army], quality control personnel and the production agency — in this project and the industry will be our partner. We will go for a modular design so that we can always upgrade the tank when new technology comes in.”

The FMBT will weigh only 50 tonnes compared to Arjun-Mark II's 62 tonnes. The DRDO is simultaneously working on Arjun-Mark II. The volume occupied by the electronics package in the FMBT will be less. The FMBT's engine will be two-thirds the size of Arjun-Mark I's, but will generate 1,500 HP compared to Arjun-Mark I's 1,400 HP.

So to say FMBT is being developed in vacuum is flawed , considering the broad effort industry and Army participation that is being knitted for this big project , its certainly an army laid out FMBT requirenment , and like any GSQR we would never see such things in public.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 18 May 2011 11:54

So as per this report the PSQR has been worked out and they are right now working on GSQR , any ways there are direct quote from VKS on FMBT so that should settle any doubt

http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2010/08/ ... 00000.html

DRDO chief and Scientific Advisor to the Defence Minister, Dr VK Saraswat, revealed, “While the Future Infantry Combat Vehicle (FICV) has been handed over to the private industry, the DRDO will develop the FMBT. We need about 7-8 years from the time the project is formally sanctioned. The army and the DRDO have already identified the major features of the FMBT, which are quite different from the Arjun. While the Arjun is a 60-tonne tank, the FMBT will be lighter… about 50 tonnes. It will be a highly mobile tank.”