Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

[Karan M]

Also, there were still design deficiencies in Arjun until the Mk2 improvements were ordered. The Mk 1 commander has only a panoramic day sight and it was not interfaced with the FCS to hand over targets to the gunner for hunter killer capability. It is only Mk 2 that commander will get a day & night sight interfaced with FCS to hand over targets to gunner. T-90 had day & night hunter killer capabilities in its FCS from the start, and it was improved with Thales TI replacing the original Belarussian TI. ARDE should have thought of it when other contemporary tanks had the feature.

Incorrect. The Arjun's CPS - Commanders Panoramic Day sight comes with hunter killer functionality. The commander can detect, and lock onto a target for the gunner to engage. The MK'2s improvement on the MK1 in this respect is that the CPS will have a thermal channel & the FCS will come with autotracking. Given the original partner is working with IRDE on this, it will be a comprehensive upgrade & not just a plug & play channel. Usual practise is to separate the IR bands for different imagers. More later..
T-90 does not have day & night HK capabilities in the sight from the start. H&K yes, same as on the Arjun, but no TI, a passive channel is offered via light amplification but its Gen2 and thoroughly obsolete, not to mention of limited use at best in night time. So no separate TI and the commander takes a feed from the Thales FC on a monitor. The original Russian TI sight was the Agava - performance was thoroughly subpar. In today's times, the other option offered by the Russians, active IR illumination, was rejected. The T-90 now has a new PS developed by IRDE in trials. It integrates a IRDE developed TI, into the form factor of the PNK-4S. Anything else won't fit, and thats a substantial problem for the T-90, limiting its upgrade potential.

[Austin]

Look if you see the way T-90 has many flaws etc etc then I dont have much to argue there , I just disagree with you.

My point is T-90 is an excellent tank and the views of IA officers are proof of their testimony and I believe them.

You can believe its a bad design , too many flaws , ready to explode and I am fine with that since you are entitled to believe.

BTW the T-90M is not the welded turret , the T-90S like initial T-90A came with cast turret and then moved over to welded turret , they call it later model of T-90A which would be latter model of T-90S.

The M model is connected with AM model used interchangeably , although Russian sources claim the M was the one proposed to Algeria.

I never said Ajai was being paid to write that stuff , paid is not bribe is that is what you understood , it is just that he had some interesting views on T-90 later Arjun and now MMRCA.

[Karan M]

Look if you see the way T-90 has many flaws etc etc then I dont have much to argue there , I just disagree with you.

Feel free to disagree, but the evidence speaks for itself, especially when it comes to the specific points I mentioned regarding
- Lack of passive crew protection
- Subpar ergonomics
- Limited upgrade potential without significant redesign
- Lack of access to Russian TOT/in depth design data/source codes

My point is T-90 is an excellent tank

..which is unfortunately not backed by any evidence. Excellence is too strong a term to be used so charitably.

and the views of IA officers are proof of their testimony and I believe them.

Guys like Ajai Shukla being presumably from the Burmese army and not Indian, for you to not believe them.

You can believe its a bad design , too many flaws , ready to explode and I am fine with that since you are entitled to believe.

Its not a question of belief but of evidence. If evidence to the contrary existed, I would be glad. Per se, nothing against Russia. But when being gypped, no reason to be happy either.

BTW the T-90M is not the welded turret , the T-90S like initial T-90A came with cast turret and then moved over to welded turret , they call it later model of T-90A which would be latter model of T-90S.

Russian sources referred to the T-90S with welded turret as T-90 M, and also T-90 Vladimir. Others note T-90 A. I really wouldn't bother too much about designations, beyond a point as for all purposes, welded turret apart, there is no difference between a T-90S1 or T-90S2. Apart from the fact the IA was willing to even accept the cast turret tank with limited protection...

The M model is connected with AM model used interchangeably , although Russian sources claim the M was the one proposed to Algeria.

Thats fine..

I never said Ajai was being paid to write that stuff , paid is not bribe is that is what you understood , it is just that he had some interesting views on T-90 later Arjun and now MMRCA.

Man, "interesting views" and then "paid journo"...the way you have been hammering on these points, what else is one to believe. Fact remains that he is an ex T series tanker who has brought out evidence regarding the trials and the farce that is the T-90 acquisition. Everything that he has said including the lack of Shtora, FCS performance etc can be corraborated from other sources if one is so inclined. You haven't & you choose not to believe him because his statements slam the T-90 justifiably, but if you were to find out, what then? Think of what the evidence says, versus belief..and using terms like "excellent" so loosely.

The Abrams is an excellent tank family, combat proven with state of the art technology insertions and very well thought out balanced design. The Merkava is an excellent tank family with overwhelming emphasis on crew protection but very powerful firepower. The T-90?

#1 in firepower? No. Rounds are limited by autoloader design.
#1 in protection? No. Bad internal design, turret armor is not fully modular, only ERA can be replaced.
#1 in mobility? No. Outrun by other older designs, let alone the newer ones. Suspension no great shakes either. Tank vibrates like crazy.
#1 in sensors? No. Electronics are outdated, new systems have to be designed around older form factors,
#1 in ergonomics? No. Horrid internal layout, cramped, no AC, will be miserable to operate in buttoned down conditions.
#1 in upgrade potential? No space to do much, if at all..

If this is excellent..
Mediocre is more like it. For an army with no other choices, "affordable" is what I would call it, provided it worked!!

About the only advantage it has over the Arjun is that it has a remotely operated MG. Even that's due on the MK2 per memory. Good work that'll do against other tanks.

[Austin]

^^ OK

[tsarkar]

The Arjun's CPS - Commanders Panoramic Day sight comes with hunter killer functionality. The commander can detect, and lock onto a target for the gunner to engage.

Proof Karan, provide Proof. If Shangri-la exists, it must be on the map

Here is proof that the capability doesnt exist -

From BEL, the manufacturer http://www.bel-india.com/index.aspx?q=&sectionid=315 describing the entire fire control system. No where is the Commander's sight mentioned, or the ability of the commander to hand over targets via FCS to gunner.

If BEL FCS indeed had this feature, they would have described it in glowing words, like they are describing the FCS and ALNS. The only reason there is no description is because there is no commander hunter killer capability.

FWIW, the commander doesnt have a night sight. He has only panoramic day sight.

T-90 has 1A45T Irtysh integrated fire control system with 1A42 automated fire control system, 1A43 daytime aiming and information complex, 2E42-4 elevation and traverse stabilization for 2A46M-2 cannon, PT-800 transducer and RChN-3/3 regulator guiding laser guided missiles to range 5 km (day) FSAPDS/T HEAT & HE-FRAG to range 2.5 km (day) 1.2 km (night using TO1-KO1E TI) increased to 3 km (night using Peleng ESSA with Catherine-FC TI).

Commander has TKN-4S commander's sight having day unity vision channel, day channel with 8x magnification & night channel with magnification 5.4x with vertical stabilization, power supply, gun positioning sensor having manual override for commander to locate, identify, track, range, engage and destroy moving targets while in motion.

So Karan, provide proof that Arjun has hunter killer capabilities. Otherwise its delusional thinking like Tejas Mk 1 has internal EW systems to account for increased weight when DRDO itself says all Tejas Mk 1 has is only RWR triggering CMDS.

[pragnya]

well why do you wanna do what you did to bofors?
(built the factory, paid for ToT and closed it)

The decision to go for T-90 was done in 2000-01 not now? we have paid for it and we will get it.

sir the order for additional 1000 T-90s was made in 2007. the initial order was for 310 pieces. yes we have paid but what for?? the issues still need sorting out. unless the new 1000 tanks have/would have the issues rectified there is no point going for them. or are we going to induct fresh ones with the same set of problems and keep issuing different RFI/RFPs for the FCS, TI, AC, Commander's sight etc...and spend more money/time on them and keep them in ovehaul depots??

Arjun production is getting on line, Mk2 is in pipeline, what will you gain by stopping T-90 production?

by stopping now atleast we save more cost we will have to spend on them without even knowing whether they could be sorted out - like it has been happening so far. invest the money more on partly upgrading the later T-72s and more Arjuns till FMBT arrives.

i would think national security is more important than some loss or respecting of agreements made. all the more important when the russian MOD/army itself is saying T-90 is beyond upgrades/costly and refusing them.

................

Because nothing has been done to address the really fundamental issues.

Our tank manufacturing and to an extent design infrastructure has no real investment and effort put in.

and whenever efforts have been made and results obtained, they have been simply stonewalled.

There has been some improvement in 2009-10 time frame by St Antony to make things better in terms of DRDO reorganization plan, however OFBs are untouched.

Expect same whine to continue for next 20 years at least

things cannot change summarily. whenever favourable changes have occured there has been shortshrifting of it which also needs to be taken care. no country as big as india with so much potential, manpower, scientific knowhow and economic surge should be dependant on 'only' imports particularly regards military. all stake holders need to introspect and take decisions on what is good for our interests and not somebody else's.

................

T 90S is not now, its last order was in 2006 time frame, TWO years before Arjun passed the AUCRT.

Also T 90S can come from Russia providing some relief from Avadi related issues.

it is not 2006 sir. 2007 order.

and what relief are T-90s supplied from Russia are going to bring 'if' they come with the same issues as we are witnessing even now?? if 'only numbers' is the advantage you are speaking of - it also means we will spending more money and time on the things i wrote in the first part. is that desirable??

Also GoI plan since 2000 has been 50:50 mix of T 90 and Arjun/Indian family of tanks. This was a long term plan still being worked on. Nothing has changed.

pipedream is how it looks to me today - going by the past history.

[d_berwal]

well why do you wanna do what you did to bofors?
(built the factory, paid for ToT and closed it)

The decision to go for T-90 was done in 2000-01 not now? we have paid for it and we will get it.

sir the order for additional 1000 T-90s was made in 2007. the initial order was for 310 pieces. yes we have paid but what for?? the issues still need sorting out. unless the new 1000 tanks have/would have the issues rectified there is no point going for them. or are we going to induct fresh ones with the same set of problems and keep issuing different RFI/RFPs for the FCS, TI, AC, Commander's sight etc...and spend more money/time on them and keep them in ovehaul depots??

Arjun production is getting on line, Mk2 is in pipeline, what will you gain by stopping T-90 production?

by stopping now atleast we save more cost we will have to spend on them without even knowing whether they could be sorted out - like it has been happening so far. invest the money more on partly upgrading the later T-72s and more Arjuns till FMBT arrives.

i would think national security is more important than some loss or respecting of agreements made. all the more important when the russian MOD/army itself is saying T-90 is beyond upgrades/costly and refusing them.

The decision to go for T-90 was made in 2000-01 with first order materializing. Now the rest of them were done in subsequent years, that's not important at all, it took time to negotiate ToT modifications etc....

Now the RFI you are referring to are delinked and separate and are for information and planning purpose only, most probably they are for the purpose of creating a mid-life upgrade for T-90 family in IA servcie. T-90 is already 10yrs old in IA now. In next 4-5 yrs they will require an upgrade and RFI serve that purpose only.

By stopping T-90 production we dont gain any thing but create a national security disaster and wastage of money.
- you save $$$ that only in terms of cost of future numbers to be produced
- Losses in terms of:
---- Money paid for ToT
---- Money invested in localization of components
---- Idle production line and cost of converting T-72 production line to T-90

Savings cannot be used elsewhere as:
- T-72 modernization is a long story and no clear road-map still
- Arjun is funded totally differently and ramping up Arjun production is not linked to available or saved money. MoD and Finance Ministry can find enough funds if they are serious. (saving money in at one place does not mean it is available to be used elsewhere)

The Russian Army/ MOD argument is just politics nothing else... my opinion

[putnanja]

One of the basic issues that rankles everyone is that even though the T90 didn't perform that well, it was selected. Even assuming that the paki T80 buys prompted it, the decision to purchase 1500 more in batches, while ordering just 248 of Arjun and then saying depending on how Mk-II goes, we will order more, just doesn't make sense.

[Karan M]

Proof Karan, provide Proof. If Shangri-la exists, it must be on the map

Here is proof that the capability doesnt exist -

From BEL, the manufacturer http://www.bel-india.com/index.aspx?q=&sectionid=315 describing the entire fire control system. No where is the Commander's sight mentioned, or the ability of the commander to hand over targets via FCS to gunner

Tsarkar, the only thing more interesting than your ignorance is the amount of confidence you exude when absolutely unaware of even the most basic of details. Proof it seems when you don't even know whats on the tank to begin with and confidently point me to a googled link! If you had the faintest idea about the Arjun, you would have thought twice or even thrice before even posting this link and then going overboard with sarcasm to boot!

If BEL FCS indeed had this feature, they would have described it in glowing words, like they are describing the FCS and ALNS. The only reason there is no description is because there is no commander hunter killer capability.

For your information, the BEL IGMS is not on the tank. It was a development system intended for Batches 2 & 3 of MK1 if the Arjun was series produced in number, based on Army orders! Nor is it the BEL IGMS. It is the IRDE IGMS, for which BEL is the development partner and it is on a trials tank! The current production FCS is the Delft/Sagem-DRDO one, with the GPS/TI provided by Sagem working with Delft, integrated with the DRDO-TATA ballistic computer & German meteo sensors! The CPS integrated with this FCS which DOES have HK capability is from IRDE, and the new one is again being developed with a partner. Not only do you not know even this much, you come back with obnoxious comments about Shangri La when corrected. And no, you will not find this information on google either, mores the pity!

FWIW, the commander doesnt have a night sight. He has only panoramic day sight

.
And who said different.

T-90 has 1A45T Irtysh integrated fire control system with 1A42 automated fire control system, 1A43 daytime aiming and information complex, 2E42-4 elevation and traverse stabilization for 2A46M-2 cannon, PT-800 transducer and RChN-3/3 regulator guiding laser guided missiles to range 5 km (day) FSAPDS/T HEAT & HE-FRAG to range 2.5 km (day) 1.2 km (night using TO1-KO1E TI) increased to 3 km (night using Peleng ESSA with Catherine-FC TI).

Commander has TKN-4S commander's sight having day unity vision channel, day channel with 8x magnification & night channel with magnification 5.4x with vertical stabilization, power supply, gun positioning sensor having manual override for commander to locate, identify, track, range, engage and destroy moving targets while in motion.

So? What else did I say...

T-90 does not have day & night HK capabilities in the sight from the start.

H&K yes, same as on the Arjun, but no TI, a passive channel is offered via light amplification but its Gen2 and thoroughly obsolete, not to mention of limited use at best in night time. So no separate TI and the commander takes a feed from the Thales FC on a monitor.

Given the context, its pretty clear what I am referring to. The T-90 PNK-4S does NOT have an integrated thermal channel for proper day and night capabilities. The Gen2 night channel (The modernized PNK-4SR system features an image converter tube (ICT) of 2+ generation and a universal (passive) mode of operation.) is bloody rubbish, given todays requirements.
http://militaryforces.ru/weapon-3-60-375.html

So Karan, provide proof that Arjun has hunter killer capabilities. Otherwise its delusional thinking like Tejas Mk 1 has internal EW systems to account for increased weight when DRDO itself says all Tejas Mk 1 has is only RWR triggering CMDS.

Actually the only one delusional is you, and having to deal with your silly attitude is more than enough. There was a time when we actually had the likes of B Harry on this forum, who would go to great lengths to find out information and share it. Now we have you. Weren't you the one also talking about how the Tejas would not even require an EW suite as it was not even in the ASR and similar rubbish. When informed there were indeed plans to fit an EW suite on the LCA, your response was typical - an obnoxious denial saying the IAF would never require one & similar attacks. Then the claim that it works only in the one band, and only in the forward direction. Do note the fwd & rear antennae and the high/low band capability. And nor is this the most capable EW suite in development either. About the only thing that you have to clutch at is that its still being contemplated for whether to fit it on the MK1 & 2, and so far instead of having any actual information about the topic bar some brochures posted by others from Aero India, all you have to show for your attitude are statements like delusional.

Here, knock yourself out.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ZwHf70wl1x8/T ... 1+LCA+.jpg

tsarkar, compare your behavior to that of putnanja when he asked a query. Judging the kind of person you are, from your online persona, I doubt you have it in you to even respond civilly.

[Pratyush]

^^^

AS long at the IA insists on having 1900~ T 90s. The Arjun will never be build in numbers. The reason is simple. HFV lacks both the industraial and human resources to build both in large numbers. In addition to this the suppliers for both are the same. If one is working for the the T 90, they may not have the spare industrial/ HR capacity to work for the Arjun.

So the nearly perfect Arjun gets shafted in favour of a dead end design.

PS; If any one has seen the Mission army and compared the T 72/90 firing the main guns with the Arjun. Please re watch the videos You will see the T 72/90 rock like a rocking chair every time the main gun fired. Compare that with the rock solid Arjun when it fired the Main gun.

But to the fan boys of T 90 that makes no difference.

[Karan M]

^^^

AS long at the IA insists on having 1900~ T 90s. The Arjun will never be build in numbers. The reason is simple. HFV lacks both the industraial and human resources to build both in large numbers. In addition to this the suppliers for both are the same. If one is working for the the T 90, they may not have the spare industrial/ HR capacity to work for the Arjun.
.

Heh, the DRDO/CVRDE and private partners have to throw economic rationale to the winds when developing items for the Arjun. Significant capacity has been built up but true indigenization (by value) can only be done when orders are placed accordingly - this is something lost on the Army powers that be. Current import value (of overall cost) stands at around 52-55%, all thanks to the GMS (which actually refers to the entire FCS), the tracks, the powerpack (MTU engine & RENK transmission) and a few other components.
IGMS apart, there are several other systems on the Arjun that simply don't make sense to supplant with local items because of limited production numbers. Another example is the engine, the Germans offered India licensed production of the 1400 hp engine, but with limited numbers produced, it simply didn't make sense to transfer the production here. Same goes for the transmission. There are several programs underway for indigenizing everything from the GMS to the transmission, but who the heck would want to have 3-4 different batches of just 40 odd tanks each in a 248 tank run, each with different subsystems. It simply makes no logistical sense. If we had ordered some 2000 odd Arjun's, then we could have standardized on 2-3 tranches with slightly differing subsystems. About the only saving grace is that stuff developed for the Arjun is being leveraged for other programs, including IFVs.

[Sanku]

One of the basic issues that rankles everyone is that even though the T90 didn't perform that well, it was selected.

Incorrect, it passed all the trials that were made only then purchased. There is no credence to "it did not perform well" it performed perfectly well, and has been performing perfectly well since.

That is not to say that there are were issues in the process, the few issues were worked on and sorted out. That is how it is and has been all systems, including Su 30 MKI.

Even assuming that the paki T80 buys prompted it, the decision to purchase 1500 more in batches, while ordering just 248 of Arjun and then saying depending on how Mk-II goes, we will order more, just doesn't make sense.

It absolutely does, considering that for external purchase a bulk order makes sense for a number of reasons including bargaining power, enabling ToT etc.

For Arjun, there is no reason to order in chunk. What extra benifiet we get by ordering Arjun in one shot vs staggered purchases? Setting up of additional lines? Lowering of costs of external items on Arjun?

Sure but let Avadi first sort out issues with its first line before getting ambitious. You care about second order issues ONLY after the first order issues are sorted out.

Exactly same situation with MRCA vs LCA.

[Sanku]

^^^

AS long at the IA insists on having 1900~ T 90s. The Arjun will never be build in numbers. The reason is simple. HFV lacks both the industraial and human resources to build both in large numbers. In addition to this the suppliers for both are the same. If one is working for the the T 90, they may not have the spare industrial/ HR capacity to work for the Arjun.
.

Simply Incorrect. There are distinct lines and completely distinct supplier base. They have been given resources for 50 tanks a year line for Arjun and 50-100 tanks a year lines for T 90.

[Pratyush]

Karan,

You have said it better then I could have said it. I just dont understand what is the IA thinking WRT Armour. Here they have Tank that is capable of taking on the best in the business. But they continue to insist on a tank that was obsolete the day it was conceived.

To the T 90 fanboys on the forum, What was the amount of money that was spend on its development, What was the time that was taken to develop it. While you are at it, Please compare the major Tank projects over the last 40 years and put it as a summary. That will tell you what were the parameters and why it took so long to develop the vehicle.

You may come back that the USSR design approach was different. Please also note that they had ~50000 tanks at one time. The priority was not the quality of the Individual tank and I will agree with you. That a lot of poor tanks will beat a few good design tanks.

But the Tank fleet of the IA is not so huge. It has to concentrate on pure quality, Arjun gives it that quality. But the IA wants the T 90 onlee. The Dal is kali.

[Sanku]

.....

Karan M, not being able to back up your statements with third party verification is not a virtue.

[Sanku]

You may come back that the USSR design approach was different. Please also note that they had ~50000 tanks at one time.

Another incorrect data point.

Also petulance is not substitute for facts.

[Pratyush]

SNIP........

Simply Incorrect. There are distinct lines and completely distinct supplier base. They have been given resources for 50 tanks a year line for Arjun and 50-100 tanks a year lines for T 90.

Really,

Do you mean to tell me that India has so many defense sub suppliers that HVF can engage 2 separate suppliers for similar sub components of both tanks. Or will they subcontract it to the same supplier. Ie & eg The main gun will be supplied by different suppliers. The FCS, if produced in India will have different suppliers for both Arjun and the T 90. The Armour forge for the the two will be same company or two different suppliers.

Edited latter for clarity

[Pratyush]

You may come back that the USSR design approach was different. Please also note that they had ~50000 tanks at one time.

Another incorrect data point.

Also petulance is not substitute for facts.

1) Why don't you tell us what is the correct data point. Oh I forgot, you said that my data point was in correct. So it must be.

2) Dear Sir,

I end where your begin when it comes to petulance Dept.

[Sanku]

Really,

Do you mean to tell me

I mean to tell you that you have pulled a statement from thin air. The two tanks have different lines, with different components with dedicated lines.

Have you ever heard that Su 30 MKI orders take away from LCA?

that India has so many defense sub suppliers that HVF can engage 2 separate suppliers for similar sub components of both tanks.

What similar sub components? Can you tell me what are the similar sub components on the two tanks? Who are their sub contractors? What is their capacity limitation?

Or will they subcontract it to the same supplier. Ie & eg The main gun will be supplied by different suppliers.

Which "sub-contractor" does the gun come from do you know? Do they use the same lines jigs and fixtures to make the guns? What are their capacities?

(BTW I know, some of this information is also available if you google if you want)

The FCS, if produced in India will be different for both Arjun and the T 90. The Armour forge for the the two will be same company or two different suppliers.

Again answer the same questions as above, once you do, you will realize how your statement is completely wrong.

[Sanku]

You may come back that the USSR design approach was different. Please also note that they had ~50000 tanks at one time.

1) Why don't you tell us what is the correct data point. Oh I forgot, you said that my data point was in correct. So it must be.

.

I will not because it is normally expected the person making the claim to do so. Kindly show how and when SU had 50,000 tanks.

[Rahul M]

pratyush ji, why bother ? some people will try to convince you that day is actually night, if you try to pin them on the definition of day and night they will weasel out and claim night is also a 'kind of' day because it gets suns rays via the moon on some days, hence "night and day are both same". meanwhile they will insinuate that everyone who calls night night is actually colourblind and there is no proof they are not colourblind. etc etc, you get the drift.

the bottomline is, Indian army has ordered 1300 tanks of a type which by their own admission was untested when they ordered it and then repeatedly failed the minimum standards. (there are reports written by EME officers in charge of T-90 maintenance at college of defence management that are available on the net)
of the other type, which has been extensively tested over a decade and which has comprehensively beaten the other tank has only 124 orders to show for it, that too after much goading by the govt. and the officer in charge i.e the DGMF periodically threatens that 'there will be no more arjun orders'. not to mention the malicious and blatantly false whisper campaign (and a sabotage attempt) that accompanied the arjun during its development.
that says everything that needs to be said.
the fanboys don't really matter.

[svinayak]

Heh, the DRDO/CVRDE and private partners have to throw economic rationale to the winds when developing items for the Arjun. Significant capacity has been built up but true indigenization (by value) can only be done when orders are placed accordingly - this is something lost on the Army powers that be. Current import value (of overall cost) stands at around 52-55%, all thanks to the GMS (which actually refers to the entire FCS), the tracks, the powerpack (MTU engine & RENK transmission) and a few other components.
IGMS apart, there are several other systems on the Arjun that simply don't make sense to supplant with local items because of limited production numbers. Another example is the engine, the Germans offered India licensed production of the 1400 hp engine, but with limited numbers produced, it simply didn't make sense to transfer the production here. Same goes for the transmission. There are several programs underway for indigenizing everything from the GMS to the transmission, but who the heck would want to have 3-4 different batches of just 40 odd tanks each in a 248 tank run, each with different subsystems. It simply makes no logistical sense. If we had ordered some 2000 odd Arjun's, then we could have standardized on 2-3 tranches with slightly differing subsystems. About the only saving grace is that stuff developed for the Arjun is being leveraged for other programs, including IFVs.

That is why big countries subsidies these small batch runs so that R&D and new innovation in defence is built inside the country. India can create a small fund to enable these critical tech in small numbers to be developed since it will lead to transfer of this tech to other viable defense programs.
Tech matrix cannot have any gap in the eco system

[Pratyush]

pratyush ji,

SNIP.....

the fanboys don't really matter.

Rahul ji,

Point well taken.

[Sanku]

pratyush ji, why bother ?

Rahul M, this is not expected of you, dont support junior members in their incorrect points. And lets be specific.

the bottomline is, Indian army has ordered 1300 tanks of a type which by their own admission was untested

Are you saying there were no tests in 1998 in Punjab and Thar?, Are you saying that Indian army did not use it before the follow on order?

when they ordered it and then repeatedly failed the minimum standards. (there are reports written by EME officers in charge of T-90 maintenance at college of defence management that are available on the net)

Actually I dont think they are available on net any more, my book mark at least does not work. Can you point me to them again? As far as I see, the above statement you have made is not borne out by that report. But I will be happy to point that from the very report if you can share the link again.

of the other type, which has been extensively tested over a decade and which has comprehensively beaten the other tank

Yes it had to be tested for a decade because it would not pass the tests. It only passed them in 2008.

the fanboys don't really matter.

that is correct, IA does.

[Sanku]

pratyush ji,

SNIP.....

the fanboys don't really matter.

Rahul ji,

Point well taken.

I am still waiting for substantiation of some of the statements made and no Rahul Ms agreement is not enough.

[Karan M]

.....

Karan M, not being able to back up your statements with third party verification is not a virtue.

Did you even bother to read my reply to SaiK before sharing this bit of exceptional wisdom?

Posting it again, so you can see it again.

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/LAND-FORC ... iment.html

The integrated fire control system had a lot of problems. We had got it from the Dutch, but it had an American component in it. Suddenly we were throttled as the Americans said that the Dutch could not supply this to us. After some time, we were able to get France to redesign the entire fire control system. Now we have an excellent fire control system.

More non google information required? The component he is referring to is the thermal imager. The US had issues with our Dutch partners, because they had at one time exported some components to China, and also because of the 1998 tests. The original FCS was not as sophisticated as the current one either. Want yet more confirmation, in case Niranjan Malik is not upto your lofty standards of third party verification? Here, try an ex OFB board member, a man keenly aware of the Arjun program.

http://www.thehindubusinessline.in/2002 ... 040800.htm

The first 124 MBT Arjuns will have the most sophisticated and clearly superior SAGEM Fire Control Systems with thermal imager and on board computer.

For your & your buddy's kind information, the exact details of the current FCS are exactly as I have posted above. Its even more current than the weblinks above. Mores the pity, that you will not find any nice weblink for your reading pleasure which goes to as much effort as I did to determine what is what.

Also, the Arjun's local IGMS plan has not progressed because it makes little sense to put different FCS piecemeal on limited production runs of the tank, with only 200 odd orders. The only saving grace is that a derivative was developed for the Abhay TD, and at least that might end up finding itself on the series IFV produced by private industry.

Next what, more on how the CPS has HK capability? Which button the commander has to push? What will you do if the information is not on google?

Oh wonderful internet world. Real information from the world outside seems to have no validity whatsoever.

And when one does share hard won information, derived from one's own interest, one has to face obnoxious comments. Why should one even bother sharing information?

[Sanku]

Oh wonderful internet world. Real information from the world outside seems to have no validity whatsoever.

In that case perhaps you should restrict both your attitude and information to real world. Here we need and ask for back up accredition.

As such I appreciate your attempts to back up what you said with links, even if they are from 2002 talking about prospective plans. It would be much better if you could have backed it up by more recent reports.

And I would request you to get used to it, people are regularly asked for back up on BRF and no they do not throw a hissy fit when asked.

[Karan M]

That is why big countries subsidies these small batch runs so that R&D and new innovation in defence is built inside the country. India can create a small fund to enable these critical tech in small numbers to be developed since it will lead to transfer of this tech to other viable defense programs.
Tech matrix cannot have any gap in the eco system

Agreed. The thing is a lot of SMEs are involved in these programs and the endless trials and dripfeed orders really ruins their patience and fiscal capabilities. Even the larger partners run out patience:

The procedures for indigenisation are very tedious. The problems are of two kinds. The first is the non-availability of expertise and technical knowledge within the country. For example, the tracks for the Arjuns were being imported and I wanted this to be made within the country. I was told that it could be made in Ludhiana. We paid an advance and gave the agency our requirements for the track. After two years, that agency said that it could not make the tracks as per our requirements. We had been to every factory, including BHEL in Ranchi which had no other work at that time, but no one could do the job. The other type of problem is that private firms that really can do import substitution are not rewarded. This was clear in the case of rubberising the road wheels. To rubberise the Arjun, the tanks used to be ferried across to Germany by air, rubberised there and then brought back. This was colossally expensive. We requested MRF (Madras Rubber Factory) who agreed to do this. They put up a special factory for that purpose and did it. The numbers required at that time were very meagre. Sometimes it used to be 100 and sometimes it would be only 50. Also, MRF was not sure about when the next order would come. So, they stopped this factory.

I spoke to an official at MRF who said that he was prepared to work even at a loss, which it was while working on the Arjuns. But the contract for T-72, T-55 and Vijayanta had been awarded to some other company. When I checked with the Defence Ministry, I found out that the contract for rubberisation for the rest of equipment was indeed given to another organisation. I was told it was given to the firm which gave the lower tender. MRF stated that they cannot keep the assembly lines waiting and pending forever. There are other examples as well. The Kirloskars were doing the hydroneumatic systems for us. The last order was for 14 tanks. After that there was no order for seven years. For the company, the investment in specialised production lines is a dead waste and they need to be subsidised. One has to ensure that the assembly lines, the technology and the skilled labour are kept alive for defence requirements. I am told now that they are restarting this process at the Kirloskar plant, which did a fabulously good job.

The first point is very similar to whats happened in the past with several T-72 spares, without design data. We just have to reinvent the wheel there, lacking the detailed process and design knowledge.

[Sanku]

^^^ The problems reported above are endemic to MoD, and span the entire spectrum of Tanks, as well as every other product.

This is not restricted merely to Arjun, and that is the core issue. Of poor infrastructure for Indian mil complex and lack of of money spent for the same.

[Karan M]

In that case perhaps you should restrict both your attitude and information to real world. Here we need and ask for back up accredition.

And who are you to advise anybody anything? A <snip> who spends all his time fighting on multiple topics, getting banned, and then redoing the whole shindig, is now posturing about attitude? Seriously, your attitude would be laughable, only if it werent so ludicrous...if only you could see yourself as others see you as...
Can you even spell accreditation btw? If you make an attempt to sound impressive, it helps to spell properly.

As such I appreciate your attempts to back up what you said with links, even if they are from 2002 talking about prospective plans. It would be much better if you could have backed it up by more recent reports.

ROTFL.. Prospective plans it seems, LOL! Niranjan Malik is talking about the actual state of affairs in 2006 itself, when the current Arjun's FCS was proven and even that does not sit well with you because it contradicts your oh-so-smart attempt to score one up. Your attempts are as obvious as they are juvenile. Whom do you think you are fooling with that tough guy act?

Rahul M said it right ...there really is NO hope for you lot. And you have the gall to call yourself a senior member versus Pratyush?

And I would request you to get used to it, people are regularly asked for back up on BRF and no they do not throw a hissy fit when asked.

Ha ha, judging by your behaviour on multiple threads & your tendency to go crying & snitching whenever anybody says anything that does not match your worldview, you are one to talk about "hissy fits"...

[Rahul M]

sanku ji, you are harping on semantics, red army did have a massive # of tanks, whether it was 50012 or 49987 is irrelevant. (just FYI it was quite a bit more than 50k, if you count active reserves then even more) in any case, that number is not important, the point is.

let me make this clear, there has been a lot of dishonest argument tactics employed in this thread that would have attracted board warnings in any other thread on BR. it didn't happen only because I usually do not moderate threads that I actively participate in.
even now I can see some quite questionable statements, half-truths, repeating same discredited arguments again and again etc. this has to stop. period.

and for the moment, kindly do not badger other members.

[Karan M]

^^^ The problems reported above are endemic to MoD, and span the entire spectrum of Tanks, as well as every other product.
.

Back it up oh-Sanku-ji, with links for each and every tank - entire spectrum of tanks as you said, and every other product. Only latest links accepted. Should at least make you work for a change on google! Your words are worthless without third party verification, which is not a virtue.
Should be dang easy no? Everythings on the net. Go on, show us. Every other product and entire spectrum of tanks. And also, do share with us your analysis of spending on the Indian MIC with exact details of each subsystem. Again, only latest weblinks. Third party verification, y'see.

[Rakesh]

KaranM: Please follow Rahul's directions.

[Sanku]

sanku ji, you are harping on semantics, red army did have a massive # of tanks, whether it was 50012 or 49987 is irrelevant.

Yes those difference would be irrelevant. However my understanding is not the above. Red Army usually had 10 K main tanks, the massive reserves were for nuclear war, and even those were not beyond 22 K max as far as I know.

I am not quibbling, I fundamentally disagree with "red tanks were inferior and made up by numbers" argument. Red Army had both good tanks as well as in great numbers.

=========

Also I would request that please have the dishonest discussion shut down by another moderator in case you worry about conflict of interest. Thanks.

[Karan M]

Rakesh,

sure. But there is a situation where we have guys throwing around terms like delusional, etc without the slightest of compunction & deliberately provoking a response. And others, who rarely if ever provide any source for their claims, quickly jump in with one liners about third party verification etc, being senior members etc.

[Rakesh]

KaranM: All Rakshaks will not agree on everything

Sanku: Please follow RahulM's directions. No more.

[svinayak]

That is why big countries subsidies these small batch runs so that R&D and new innovation in defence is built inside the country. India can create a small fund to enable these critical tech in small numbers to be developed since it will lead to transfer of this tech to other viable defense programs.
Tech matrix cannot have any gap in the eco system

Agreed. The thing is a lot of SMEs are involved in these programs and the endless trials and dripfeed orders really ruins their patience and fiscal capabilities. Even the larger partners run out patience:

Defense building and capability needs patience and there is no short cuts.

[Karan M]

KaranM: All Rakshaks will not agree on everything

Agreed, life would be boring otherwise but a lot to be said about countering arguments without getting personal, ie remarks about delusional and what not..
Anyways, yours & rahuls point taken.

Defense building and capability needs patience and there is no short cuts.

Patience is in short supply in India. Latest is that INSAS will be replaced by some imported thingmajig to be built at the same factories that had a tough time building INSAS..oh well..

[sudeepj]

I am an Armor newbie, so let me post three questions and see if the answers resolve some of the heated issues being discussed.

1. What was the size of a Vijayanta Tank regiment as opposed to a later T72 tank regiment? If this number differed, why did it differ?

2. Many western tanks have their rounds 'unprotected' in the hull, without blowoff panels. Are these rounds all concentrated in one location or sprinkled all over the T72 tank (like the Arjun fellows claim)?

If they are sprinkled all over vs all in one location, is it more likely or less likely that an armor penetration will cause a 72 round to cook off?

3. Does the T90S (the version that India has) store its rounds differently than the T72?

[Karan M]

Sudeep, we are all armor newbies, the actual experts are at Ahmednagar and CVRDE. I'd rather somebody with a good grasp & memory of ORBATS answers query.

1. I remember all sorts of sizes for the brick size, perhaps rohitvats can help you here. The standard used to be around 50 tanks, but then numbers as high as 60-70 have also been quoted, but not likely today, when the regiment should be 40 odd tanks. Try Orbat.com, they have a good TOE list.

For 2, it depends. The Leopard 2 has all its ammunition in one area of the hull, unlike the Arjun though, these rounds are in thin walled canisters. I didn't see any closed hatches either. The Leclerc, if my memory serves me correct is similar. The Ariete should be likewise, but then its probably not a good example as its not considered amongst the premier western tanks anyhow. The Merkava - perhaps eastern not western here, stores its rounds in individual fireproof canisters in the first few iterations, then in 4 round magazines in the last, with around 8-10 rounds in a semiautomatic, armored autoloader in the turret in the MK 4 version. Most of its rounds are stored towards the rear of the tank, near the hatchway. The Merkava is unique in that its engine is in the front, so even that technically acts as armor. The Challenger has unique two piece rounds for its rifled tank gun. It has relatively small sized FSAPDS sabots, which are loaded with bagged propellant charges. These charges, which are a fire/saftey hazard are stored in armored bins in the turret.
So to answer your question, logically, yes. If rounds are all over the turret and drivers compartment, then its much more likely to be hit if a round penetrates. Problem (like I said previously) is that rounds nowadays are made of cellulose compounds for the exterior shell. They are not brass rounds which are harder to set fire to (the fragment has to go through the exterior brass casing).

For 3, the T-90 is the T-72 BM, same dimensions & India's T-90s, welded turret apart, are plain jane T-90s, no substantial increase in internal volume over the T-72BM. Unless they have access to Harry Potters expanding house tech, I doubt they can do anything fancy for the ammo. For the "modernized" versions of the T-90, they were planning Merkava style containers, but that will require turret redesign & more internal volume

OT: I seriously admire the armour corps people. Its all very well to look dashing in black as on the videos, but they are really tough, imagine being inside a cramped surrounding at 55 degrees centigrade plus (the plus is a problem, the Catherine FC can ostensibly operate upto 55 deg centigrade) with the hatches down. This is part of the reason I wish the Army finally starts taking better care of its people and the ergonomics of the equipment they choose for them. In 2001-2, they had to import ice vests on emergency basis because crews were finding it hard to function inside these furnaces. Such ad hoc stuff really galls me..

All this talk of NBC means they will have to operate with hatches down in desert conditions.