Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

tejas · Post by **tejas** » 22 May 2011 08:57

Forget about trashing the current generation tin can (T-90) the geniuses in the IA want to spend money "upgrading" the fossilized generation tin can (T-72). Can there be a more criminally insane waste of money than this? This is where true civilian leadership needs to step in and do the needful. Unfortunately in India the civilian politicians don't know their a$$ from a whole in the ground when it comes to weapon systems.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 22 May 2011 09:30

chackojoseph wrote:At one level, we have developed certain skills and we need to see what is next generation and upgrade our skill. at another level, we have to exploit the developed skill and make money.

We could do it like Russians. Work on developing Arjun series and make newer platform.

The best job the DRDO can do with Arjun is call it T 100. The IA will buy it by the 100s, just like it is doing with the T 90s.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 22 May 2011 09:44

Rahul M wrote:logical fallacy. an interview in a program meant to showcase the best of the army can't be taken as proof of anything. however, it certainly does not imply the opposite.

That can be said about any interview program or for that matter any interview.

The fact remains that many officers were praise for T-90 capabilities thats there to see , unless one can turn up and say all these are doctored and stage managed. { one can say that for any thing and that then questions the integrity of IA officers which is needless and uncalled for}

the T-90 is a flawed weapon judging by what we know of its record, not because we should take the opposite of this interview as truth. this interview snippet is relatively irrelevant to that assessment.

T-90 has hardly any combat record to judge it , but the only issue with them is the free ammo in the crew compartment , from what i have read many western tank carry free ammo. you can always remove the free ammo from crew compartment at cost of reduced ammo load , it probably not worth the trade off because if the turret gets penetrated chances are the crew inside will die or suffer grave injuries , with secondary explosion from free ammo starting much after that.

any ways the IA can always upgrade to T-90AM standards and bring the T-90 to qualitatively different levels.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 22 May 2011 09:51

^^^^^Why waste more money after bad on the T-90 and the T-72 when the Arjun representing a qualitative jump in capabilities is available NOW!

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 22 May 2011 09:56

By that logic why waste money when Arjun Mk1 is available to bring it to Mk2 level becuase Mk1 is already a good tank , well to make it better in every possible way.

The rational behind T-72 upgrade is to make it better then what it can do now and perhaps the residual life of a good percentage of tanks justifies its upgrade.

There is no harm in upgrading a tank,aircraft or ship to face newer threats as long as it justifies the investment made and makes the crew fight better.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 22 May 2011 10:00

And how much would upgrading T-72s to a qualitative standard that would bring it to the Arjun GSQR cost?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 22 May 2011 10:06

Vivek K wrote:And how much would upgrading T-72s to a qualitative standard that would bring it to the Arjun GSQR cost?

The cost benefit analysis is done by the Army/MOD , they have not put up the cost benefit analysis to make a fair comment on T-72UPG versus Arjun and its unrelated as well.

Again an upgrade is not to make it equal or better then this or that tank , is just to make sure that existing T-72 tank remain contemporary and fighting fit in face of newer threats.

Thats like asking how much of Jaguar upgrade would bring it to M2K standards , its probably not worth upgrading the Jags then.

manum · Post by **manum** » 22 May 2011 10:08

yes t90 is good tank...but is it good enough to remain prominent mbt when arjun is there. Its great tank but why order more 1000 of them when there is superior tank available home made?

Austin we are asking t90s position when arjun is present. We are not questions on t90 in isolation.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 22 May 2011 10:16

Rakesh wrote:What purpose is that going to serve other than waste money?

DRDO needs to keep working on futuristic projects to ensure that next time a Tank is needed it has one ready immediately. Its a good thing to have futuristic programs. As long as it does not become a gravy train for everyone.

Anyway the FBMT is far out now. Let us first get the basics such as the 1500 Indigenous engine ready.

There are 4-6000 tanks needed, plenty of money needs to spent on both Arjun and T 90/72s. No shortage of opportunities to spend money whatsoever.

manum · Post by **manum** » 22 May 2011 10:21

and Cost of T72 upgrade is not unrelated, if it gives a feeling that arjun supply line is going hungry...and if its going hungry for any prominent reason which supersedes the Arjun advantage...then someone must tell us...

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 22 May 2011 10:26

manum wrote:yes t90 is good tank...but is it good enough to remain prominent mbt when arjun is there. Its great tank but why order more 1000 of them when there is superior tank available home made?

My original post if you look back was in the video out there the Army officers were in praise of T-90 and Arjun , I never started the debate over why one should be bought over the other or which is superior or inferior.

But then member started going tangent and coming up with various argument , contrary to the myth created that T-90 is a bad tank , that ex video clearly showed that IA officers were in high praise for its combat quality and that is what matters.

Austin we are asking t90s position when arjun is present. We are not questions on t90 in isolation.

There is no end to that argument and it has been debated till death , we can start the usual nukkad style debate and in the end all members will stick to its own point.

i would leave the number of T-90 and Arjun in the army to the professional judgement of the Army , let them decide what they think is the optimum number of the mix force composition they want of different tank in new and upgraded avatar.

We can debate why M2K needs a 40 million dollar upgrade when you can buy a new MKI for 55 million and we can have many points and counter points , lets leave that to the proffesional judgement of the airforce to decide what upgrade makes sense and how they see the force composition.

Me and you sitting in drawing room with internet knowledge and just a small window view of the huge organisational structure can not make a fair judgement on such issue of armed forces. We would end up having a biased view based on what we think is right and that really sums up the entire Arjun versus T-90 debate we had here.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 22 May 2011 12:20

tejas wrote:Forget about trashing the current generation tin can (T-90) the geniuses in the IA want to spend money "upgrading" the fossilized generation tin can (T-72)...

Tincan 2.0 is replacing the T-55 from service not Tincan 1.0. So it will be in service at least till 2030 or so(my guesstimate). Of course while you amongst others were enumerating the advantages and superiority of the Arjun over Tincan 2.0, the geniuses at IA by strangling the Arjun think that having a mostly Tincan 1.0/2.0 force is better than having Tincan 2.0/Arjun force a decade from now. That is Tincan 1.0 >> Arjun.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 22 May 2011 17:52

showed that IA officers were in high praise for its combat quality and that is what matters.

There are lots of silly statements made in such documentaries. These are meant for mango abduls.

There is one officer saying that they can destroy anything thrown against them.

meanwhile lets cloud it by bringing in M2k in thepicture

now that we have run out of tank parts to talk about

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 22 May 2011 19:39

Surya wrote:There are lots of silly statements made in such documentaries. These are meant for mango abduls.

There is one officer saying that they can destroy anything thrown against them.

I am pretty sure you wont call the statement as silly of officer saying he was flabbergasted when he saw Arjun

meanwhile lets cloud it by bringing in M2k in thepicture now that we have run out of tank parts to talk about

I was just stating that force structure is best left for the armed forces to decide , capability viz a viz expense is not something one can make a fair assessment based on forum debate.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 22 May 2011 19:42

Sanku wrote:DRDO needs to keep working on futuristic projects to ensure that next time a Tank is needed it has one ready immediately. Its a good thing to have futuristic programs. As long as it does not become a gravy train for everyone.

Anyway the FBMT is far out now. Let us first get the basics such as the 1500 Indigenous engine ready.

There are 4-6000 tanks needed, plenty of money needs to spent on both Arjun and T 90/72s. No shortage of opportunities to spend money whatsoever.

Saar, the Arjun Mk.1 is ready NOW, but the Army still wants the inferior T-90! So go figure. DRDO will develop the FMBT and the Army will crib about every single issue with that tank as well and then go buy another tank from Russia. So more money down the drain! It is amazing how stringent GSQRs only apply to desi products, but with phoren maal...the GSQR is written to suit the product. WOW! The Armoured Corps needs to get into story-telling as a side business! And the Arjun meets and/or exceeds all GSQRs set down by the Indian Armoured Corps...but they still don't want it.

An indigenous 1500 hp is NOT the basics...rather it is the entire product itself. Do we have a home-made, ready product that can be taken into battle? The answer to that is a resounding YES!

Plenty of money needs to spent only on further improving the Arjun. Spending money on T-72s and T-90s is stupid. Also, DRDO Chief Saraswat has already stated that a local engine is being developed. We got an amazing tank here...we are FOOLS not to see it.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 22 May 2011 19:46

Austin wrote:I was just stating that force structure is best left for the armed forces to decide , capability viz a viz expense is not something one can make a fair assessment based on forum debate.

Sorry Austin, but I gotta jump in here. I have no problem with the armed forces deciding force structure, however I do have a serious gripe about buying an inferior product due to the vested interests of a few and the stubbornness with the Armoured Corps in introducing a desi product.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 22 May 2011 19:54

An old video (circa 2010) but needs to be seen. Please note the jawan (who has experience on Russian tanks) who talks about the Arjun...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSsN9zaKzRA

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 22 May 2011 20:05

Rakesh wrote:Sorry Austin, but I gotta jump in here. I have no problem with the armed forces deciding force structure, however I do have a serious gripe about buying an inferior product due to the vested interests of a few and the stubbornness with the Armoured Corps in introducing a desi product.

What makes you say it is inferior , because most here say so ......if you do a fair bit of reading on T-90 on board like military photos which have many knowledgeable members ( link1 link2 ) you will find its quite a potent tank , and beyond the fact that it carries loose ammo in crew compartment it really has no downside , infact I learnt from the same forum that many western tank carry loose ammo , if it you penetrate the turret you will end up with secondary explosion but before that the crew would have been dead. If the IA still likes to do away with loose ammo they can go for T-90AM.

Desi Product or videshi product , btw do you know Arjun has 45 % imported content in many key areas , force structure is best decided by Army on the type and numbers it needs , you and me have no insight into the larger picture of Army force structure and why they think they need upgraded T-72 , T-90 , Arjun to make up its force structure and not a single tank Arjun tank based force structure is a solution to all ills facing armoured corps.

Similarly why they think their FMBT need to be under 50 T and not a 62 T Arjun Mk2 types. In the end we might just agree to disagree but it is best left to the professional who do it for a living to decide what tools they need in the larger matrix of many tools and logistics they have to deal with.

Finally you know these discussion are just an academic exercise even if we agree on a 1000 Arjun force , the Army HQ/MOD will do all the talking and buying.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 22 May 2011 20:08

Austin wrote:I am pretty sure you wont call the statement as silly of officer saying he was flabbergasted when he saw Arjun

I take a lot of these statements (in documentaries) as jingoistic statements for mango abdul

Am I going to believe the Arjun is the most fabulous weapon system on earth if an IA officer or dRDO guys says so

-Nope

Same way I chuckled at the para men claiming they are the finest in the world etc

even the balidan guys will laugh them out

but its par for the course for a program like this.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 22 May 2011 20:24

Austin wrote:What makes you say it is inferior, because most here say so.

The Arjun has bested the T-90 in every parameter out there. That is why I am stating that the T-90 is inferior. You can't beat that Austin.

Austin wrote:Desi Product or videshi product, btw do you know Arjun has 45% imported content in many key areas, force structure is best decided by Army on the type and numbers it needs , you and me have no insight into the larger picture of Army force structure and why they think they need upgraded T-72, T-90, Arjun to make up its force structure and not a single tank Arjun tank based force structure is a solution to all ills facing armoured corps. Similarly why they think their FMBT need to be under 50 T and not a 62 T Arjun Mk2 types.

LOL!

Austin Saar, can I ask you this? The T-90 has 100% foreign content. What do you prefer - 45% (which will further go down as we come out with improved variants) or 100% foreign content? Come on man, be realistic!

I say again, the Arjun is not being inducted in large numbers due to vested interests (Russian lobby being one of them) and the stubbornness with the Armoured Corps. These guys are so used to driving tin cans that a nearly 60 ton behemoth is too much for them to handle. That is like saying, I will not marry Katrina but only TunTun...because I cannot keep up with Katrina. I will marry mediocrity, because I am mediocre myself.

Austin wrote:Finally you know these discussion are just an academic exercise even if we agree on a 1000 Arjun force , the Army HQ/MOD will do all the talking and buying.

You win on that point.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 22 May 2011 20:27

also, i.e 45% by price, not by components. because foreign components are pricier than desi ones, like the MTU engines, it pushes the % up.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 22 May 2011 20:34

We are developing a local engine and we can bring it online with future variants. No one - including Unkil - can do everything on their own, the very first time. It is a learning process.

You have a PM by the way...

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 22 May 2011 21:16

Rakesh wrote:The Arjun has bested the T-90 in every parameter out there. That is why I am stating that the T-90 is inferior. You can't beat that Austin.

I really have no intention to beat on that because there is no official result of the trials , all we have is bloggers and fan boys assessment and you know that former has been proven wrong and latter will never change.

say again, the Arjun is not being inducted in large numbers due to vested interests (Russian lobby being one of them) and the stubbornness with the Armoured Corps. These guys are so used to driving tin cans that a nearly 60 ton behemoth is too much for them to handle. That is like saying, I will not marry Katrina but only TunTun...because I cannot keep up with Katrina. I will marry mediocrity, because I am mediocre myself.

Lobbies are every where there are desi and videshi lobby , desi lobby works for private interest and vedeshi lobby work for theres , I am fairly certain Russian lobby are quite strong here so are the Israel and US ones.

What you may calls as armoured corp stubbornness is what I would call as their experience , they are the best people to judge on their needs.

You win on that point.

I do not debate here becuase I want to win or loose here . I really do not any have any thing to gain or loose if 1000Arjun or 1000 T-90 gets inducted , but I really found the Arjun vs T-90 debate to be very biased to the extent that fan boys have created blogs or websites and then they use their own self opinion from their own blogs to update wiki

, ofcourse many have directly accused the army to be working for this or that lobby which is unfair becuase these people really have no experience with tanks and how the army views the big picture , its really been a toy like debate where my toy is better than yours because my toy is bigger and heavier than yours.

Mods as usual have not done their bit but its quite understandable with such nationalistic charged debate and sympathy factor to DRDO , you cant expect a fair and balanced view on the subject.

But if you read through those links I gave and look at others around you will find T-90 is fairly potent tank and that takes nothing from Arjun which is equally a potent platform and would get better.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 22 May 2011 21:28

So, the merry go round on the Arjun versus tincan-90 starts again....wonderful. And Armored Corps is being professional when it comes to Arjun versus tincan debate? Pigs have higher probability of flying....as an officer with indepth knowledge of tincans and Arjun once told me, "no one will allow even playing field between Arjun and tincan-90".

As for the ammo storage and crew-safety, Austin seems to have missed one crucial point in the whole debate. From the same link he gave:

The most funny thing is T-72B is safer ... urret[/b]. And how many rounds will the T-72B or T-90 carry in this configuration?

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 22 May 2011 21:31

Austin wrote: <SNIP> I really have no intention to beat on that because there is no official result of the trials , all we have is bloggers and fan boys assessment and you know that former has been proven wrong and latter will never change.
<SNIP>

Suffering from amnesia, are we?

You forget the statement in front of Parliamentary Standing Committee of Defence by MOD which clearly states that Arjun has the best mobility, protection and accuracy. What else are you looking for? Personal letter from Defence Minister?

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 22 May 2011 21:38

What you may calls as armoured corp stubbornness is what I would call as their experience , they are the best people to judge on their needs.

And here is a sample from the best people of the armored corp

Speaking at a recent CII seminar on the Future Main Battle Tank (FMBT), Lt General Dalip Bharadwaj, director general, Mechanised Forces said the army will not place orders for Arjun beyond the 124 already on order because it is "now looking 20 years ahead and wants a futuristic MBT".

but T 90 was ordered and continue because it is Soooooooooooooooooo futuristic. ooohhhh and I am sure he must have designed huffy and tuffy

His predecessor, Lt General (retd.) K.D.S. Shekhawat is blunter. "The DRDO does not want to own up, the Arjun is based on the German Army's Leopard-1 design which entered service in the mid-1960s. It outlived its life over a decade ago.

Today, every tank in the world, including the Leopard-2 and T-90, have sloped turrets (to reduce the impact of a hit) but the Arjun still continues with the rectangular turret."

civil words are insufficient for this specimen - I would love to drag him on TV and walk him through the tanks he mentions

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 22 May 2011 21:41

^^^That sloped turret comment is hilarious if not down-right stupid....and coming from DGMF it is a real irony.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 22 May 2011 21:48

rohitvats wrote:Suffering from amnesia, are we?

You forget the statement in front of Parliamentary Standing Committee of Defence by MOD which clearly states that Arjun has the best mobility, protection and accuracy. What else are you looking for? Personal letter from Defence Minister?

Oh really those are generically used term to describe arjun tank. Do you really have any trail reports or snippets of it from IA or MOD on how T-90 fared against arjun in the recent trials that you can point me to , at least I am not aware such reports exist in public , well I could be wrong.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 22 May 2011 21:57

rohitvats wrote:The most funny thing is T-72B is safer ... urret[/b]. And how many rounds will the T-72B or T-90 carry in this configuration?

The T-90 can carry 22 rounds in Underfloor autoloader ,the rest are just stored in the turret where its vulnerable after penetration.

The T-90AM solves it using rear turret bustle auto loader which can fire longer rods.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 22 May 2011 22:02

fire longer rods.

the other joke of this tank

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 22 May 2011 22:06

Austin wrote:
rohitvats wrote:Suffering from amnesia, are we?

You forget the statement in front of Parliamentary Standing Committee of Defence by MOD which clearly states that Arjun has the best mobility, protection and accuracy. What else are you looking for? Personal letter from Defence Minister?
Oh really those are generically used term to describe arjun tank. Do you really have any trail reports or snippets of it from IA or MOD on how T-90 fared against arjun in the recent trials that you can point me to , at least I am not aware such reports exist in public , well I could be wrong.

No general statement. These are words from submission to PSCD by MOD. Look up those reports.

They have been linked and quoted many a times on this forum.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 22 May 2011 22:11

Austin wrote:
rohitvats wrote:The most funny thing is T-72B is safer ... urret[/b]. And how many rounds will the T-72B or T-90 carry in this configuration?
The T-90 can carry 22 rounds in Underfloor autoloader ,the rest are just stored in the turret where its vulnerable after penetration.

The T-90AM solves it using rear turret bustle auto loader which can fire longer rods.

Oh! how quaint. "just stored"...as if these are popsicles carried by tank crew for their children.

There is flaw in the design of the tank and the protection level is not same as that of western tank. And T-90AM attempts to solve this flaw. As for long rods - that is another myth till we see a long rod.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 22 May 2011 22:17

now now rohit

Austin said "longer rods" not "long rods".

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 22 May 2011 22:18

so the DGMF canceled arjun because it didn't have sloped armour and went ahead and bought 1300 tincans which don't have sloped armour either ? and having sloped armour decides the generation of a tank ?

who is this, a 12 year old fanboy on tanknet ? I wonder if he will next judge tanks on how cool it looks.
it's embarrassing for the army to have a DGMF like that, how did someone like that ever go beyond the rank of a major ?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 22 May 2011 22:23

^^^ From what I have read extra ammo is on right side of autoloader on "wall" of hull, they say there is no ammo stored in turret , weak spot is by protected by side skirt and armor.

But as long as its inside the turret or hull its still not a nice place to be , the turret bustle autoloader is a better option atleast you can separate it from crew

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 22 May 2011 22:25

Rahul, funny thing is, as per the good DGMF, ERA on T-90 is the definition of sloper armor......!!!

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 22 May 2011 22:30

Austin wrote:^^^ From what I have read extra ammo is on right side of autoloader on "wall" of hull, they say there is no ammo stored in turret , weak spot is by protected by side skirt and armor.

But as long as its inside the turret or hull its still not a nice place to be , the turret bustle autoloader is a better option atleast you can separate it from crew

Why don't you read this: http://fofanov.armor.kiev.ua/Tanks/EQP/al-72.html

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 22 May 2011 22:34

rohitvats wrote:As for long rods - that is another myth till we see a long rod.

most people who have analysed pic of T-90AM believe it can carry long rod in rear turret bustle auto loader , well we will come to know when they make it public in September.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 22 May 2011 22:39

rohitvats wrote:Why don't you read this: http://fofanov.armor.kiev.ua/Tanks/EQP/al-72.html

This site is better updated as far as T-90 goes link

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 22 May 2011 23:14

any long rod discussion needs the pictures of the "long rod ' ammo of Tin can and long rod ammo for Arjun\others