I think what we are seeing now is exactly how it was supposed to happen.Singha wrote:yes methinks a dose of reality has crept into high places.
A good Tungsten round is so much harder to engineer and precision manufacture it , there are no easy answer when it comes to designing a good APFSDS lets say Slender and Longer versus Thicker and Shorter Sabot , the former is good in penetrating multilayer composite armour while no so effective at dealing with Heavy Metal ERA , the latter is good at defeating ERA but not that good in dealing with multilayer composite armour , in the end it boils down to optimium size L:D ratio , design , engineering ,velocity and composition of APFSDS round. The easier option is to build long and longer APFSDS round because in the end after defeating the ERA you still have to deal with and defeat composite armour.Singha wrote:I read somewhere tungsten can actually penetrate better than DU if the velocity goes beyond some high number like 1800 m/s which is currently not the case because thats the muzzle velocity and 2km out , it will be slower....maybe 1400-1500m/s range due to air resistance.
in future if better guns and charges are used maybe this fascination with DU will go from khan as well...always the litterbug
Surya I have seen the Force article by Mr Prasun Sengupta , He is more of the school of thought that Arjun should be further evolved instead of working on new lighter 50 T FMBT.Surya wrote:Oh reallyI am so sad and shocked. How could they?? All the experience from Huffy and Tuffy - now what will those scientists do??
must be the non availability of a 145 mm gun
or maybe they found out they could not find 4.2 inch Indians in sufficient numbers to fit in the turretless wonder they had on design
With changing trends in guerilla warfare tactics used by insurgent groups it is necessary for the troops to contain a threat with multi-role armoured vehicles. For troops deployed in counter-insurgency and security operations in the Northern and North-Eastern commands, bullet and splinter-proof vehicles have become the need of the day. Keeping this in view, for the first time Corps of EME of the Indian Army has developed two bullet-proof vehicles that are also equipped with latest communication system, night vision devices and wide range of fire power.
Both Hunky and Tuffy are ergonomically designed air-conditioned vehicles to accommodate six and four-member crew respectively. While Hunky, the medium bullet-proof vehicle, has a protection against small arms, splinters and IEDs, Tuffy, the lighter version, has a Swedish bullet-proof shield against fire from a distance of 10 metres. Both of the vehicles have splinter-proof glasses in the windows and windscreens and have sliding firing ports for firing of personal weapons. A variety of weapons ranging from LMGs, MMGs and missiles can be fitted on a mount which has a 360 degree traverse on both the vehicles. Hunky, developed by 505 Army Base Workshop, Delhi Cantonment, can store provisions in sliding racks that operate with feather touch. The concept can surely give an added edge to the troops in tough terrain as versatility and comfort has been a key area of emphasis in developing these vehicles.
I doubt we will ever go back to the Russian after the T-90 deal and after maturing of Arjun platform. Regarding caliber of MG , the NATO standard caliber after 120 mm was suppose to be 140 mm and they have tested on on leo platform ..Russian caliber after 125 mm was to be 152 mm and that was the T-95 , both cold war era monster never went beyond that both project was abandoned.Surya wrote:there is one which was a red herring thrown up by the characters like the former DGMF who wanted some sort of future Russian colloboration. that had all sort of failed russian wet dreams like 145 mm gun ( a fav of philip saar)
They should stick with what works rather then spending money in new development , so Arjun can be a model for future FMBT and can be evolved further , atleast thats their best bet for a low risk high returns FMBT project.its a good idea to use the Arjun and work out lighter \ heavier derivatives of it with technologies that have matured.
Thank You Sir. Initially I too was under such impression. But going through this interview gave me a different message. It says not only on the front, but top and sides will have ERA protection. That is I say, like CIA T-72, a complete array. And it weighs just 1.5 tonnes as that of ERA package for CIA T-72.koti wrote:It is true sir. However, it is the weight of the total array, Arjun might not use the entire array.Kanson wrote: Thanks, let me check. What is the ERA package weight in T-90S? Not sure, but remember that it is around 3 ton, is it true?
Each K-5 brick weighs around 10.5 Kgs.
Can some gent answer this simple question : How can we visually identify between Kaktus, Relikt or kontakt ERA blocks?Another upgrade will see the introduction of an explosive reactive armour panel which will comprise explosives in metallic brick form. These bricks will be mounted not only on the front slope of Arjun-Mk-II tank, but all round it as well.
When the enemy ammunition hits these bricks, they will explode and retard the energy of the projectile, which then cannot penetrate the tank's armour.
“The penalty for using these bricks is that they will add 1.5 tonnes to the tank's weight. But we can prevent top attack and side attack. We can add to the tank's protection from missiles and rocket-propelled grenades,” the DRDO Chief Controller said.
P. Sivakumar, CVRDE Director, said Arjun-Mk-II would have a total of 93 upgrades, including the advanced air defence gun system for firing at attack helicopters. The Army had placed an indent for production of 124 Arjun-Mk II tanks.
In phase I, 45 tanks will roll out with 56 upgrades, including the missile firing capability and the commander's panoramic sight with night vision.
In phase II, the remaining 79 tanks, with all the 93 improvements, will come off the assembly line. “By 2013-14, the first batch of around 30 tanks will go out,” Dr. Sivakumar said.
According to Mr. Sundaresh, these 124 Arjun-Mk II tanks would cost Rs.5,000 crores.
Simple Answer , Can you find it for us ?Kanson wrote:Can some gent answer this simple question : How can we visually identify between Kaktus, Relikt or kontakt ERA blocks?
because -Narayana Rao wrote:So why there is a need to FMBT or whatever our Army wants in near future? Do the IA foreseen that we have to fight Amirikhan in near future? or is there some super duper Lizard hot S**t under development unknown to me? To my knowledge there is no major Tank development going on in West or east. Nothing of a game changing coming up in near future from anywhere. So why this idea of IA about development of FMBT other than stall Arjun production and maturity of Arjun variants. By now Army must of learned a lot bitter lessons with T90 drama which they themselves enacted to stall order of Arjun. Correct me if I am wrong in this assesment of mine.
More importantly, they don't like/trust tanks too much. The Chinese love their Engineers and Artillery. Most senior officers made their careers learning how to trap-and-kill Soviet tanks (it was a very serious tank threat, while it lasted). The recent Sino-Pak defensive exercises are somewhat worrying for this very reason, because London to a Brick they are teaching the Paks the same old tricks and arming them quite cost-effectively (ATGMs, 122mm and A100 artillery).Singha wrote:the chinese like to parade their later "type-N" , produce one token regiment and then move to "type-N+1" ... they are not facing any serious tank threat.
ParGha, any recco on books on PLA warfighting philosophy...past and present?Thanks.ParGha wrote:More importantly, they don't like/trust tanks too much. The Chinese love their Engineers and Artillery. Most senior officers made their careers learning how to trap-and-kill Soviet tanks (it was a very serious tank threat, while it lasted). The recent Sino-Pak defensive exercises are somewhat worrying for this very reason, because London to a Brick they are teaching the Paks the same old tricks and arming them quite cost-effectively (ATGMs, 122mm and A100 artillery).Singha wrote:the chinese like to parade their later "type-N" , produce one token regiment and then move to "type-N+1" ... they are not facing any serious tank threat.
so, that would be $4.8M for just these three components. wow! if you go by $8M per Arjun 2. Of course, I can not verify that.60% of the cost of the Arjun goes on imported components. Practically all of that goes on just three components --- the power pack; the gunner's main sight (GMS); and the gun control equipment (GCE).
Moscow is puzzled over Indian media rumors claiming that Russia refuses to fulfill a decade-old contract on licensed production of T-90S main battle tanks in India, a Russian defense industry source said.
“The Russian side is timely and completely fulfilling all agreements with India on the licensed production of T-90 tanks, including the delivery of all necessary components and the transfer of technical documentation,” the source said on Tuesday.
India’s Business Standard said on November 28 that the licensed production of T-90 tanks was “hamstrung by Moscow’s obstruction in transferring technology and the Russian-built assemblies needed even for the India-built tanks.”
“It is difficult to say why these allegations have emerged,” the Russian source said, adding that all controversial issues on the arms contracts with India are promptly resolved by the Russian-Indian intergovernmental commission on military-technical cooperation.
Russian diplomatic sources in India believe that the media rumors reflect the attempts by the Indian side to shift the responsibility for its own inability to manage the production of sophisticated military equipment.
India ordered 310 T-90s in 2001 following delays in the manufacturing of the indigenous Arjun main battle tank and Pakistan's decision to purchase the T-80 from Ukraine. A contract was also signed for the licensed production of another 1,000 T-90s.
Initial disagreements with Russia over transfer of technology were resolved at the end of 2008, according to official statements on both sides.
Russian diplomatic sources in India believe that the media rumors reflect the attempts by the Indian side to shift the responsibility for its own inability to manage the production of sophisticated military equipment.
Wow....quite some arrogance even in a diplomatic note!Russian diplomatic sources in India believe that the media rumors reflect the attempts by the Indian side to shift the responsibility for its own inability to manage the production of sophisticated military equipment.
At the same time the article does not mention why it took till 2008 to clarify issues regarding TOT when the discussions started in decade ago??? I am sure that if we allow them Russians would throw the blame of the fiasco of Vikramaditya on Indian navy and declare themselves as 400% pious people.Austin wrote:Russia denies allegations over Indian T-90 tank contract
Moscow is puzzled over Indian media rumors claiming that Russia refuses to fulfill a decade-old contract on licensed production of T-90S main battle tanks in India, a Russian defense industry source said.
“The Russian side is timely and completely fulfilling all agreements with India on the licensed production of T-90 tanks, including the delivery of all necessary components and the transfer of technical documentation,” the source said on Tuesday.
India’s Business Standard said on November 28 that the licensed production of T-90 tanks was “hamstrung by Moscow’s obstruction in transferring technology and the Russian-built assemblies needed even for the India-built tanks.”
“It is difficult to say why these allegations have emerged,” the Russian source said, adding that all controversial issues on the arms contracts with India are promptly resolved by the Russian-Indian intergovernmental commission on military-technical cooperation.
Russian diplomatic sources in India believe that the media rumors reflect the attempts by the Indian side to shift the responsibility for its own inability to manage the production of sophisticated military equipment.
India ordered 310 T-90s in 2001 following delays in the manufacturing of the indigenous Arjun main battle tank and Pakistan's decision to purchase the T-80 from Ukraine. A contract was also signed for the licensed production of another 1,000 T-90s.
Initial disagreements with Russia over transfer of technology were resolved at the end of 2008, according to official statements on both sides.
Also smooth bores are easier to maintain as there is no wearing out of rifling.ArmenT wrote: As a bonus, the Russians discovered that smoothbores produce higher velocities than rifled cannons, so they simply used this feature to their advantage.
While that may be so, how is that comment relevant here, considering that the US of A has no dog in this fight? Shooting the messenger, are we?Sanku wrote:Col Shukla is the new best friend of US of A.
Plain and simple, nothing more nothing less.
Rifled Gun are quite good for certain kind of weapons like HESH round for long range shots ~ 4 km or so it give much better accuracy and with 20 kg of raw explosive in HESH rounds its good enough to destroy most common non-heavy armoured target and its a much cheaper option bang per buck , else for smooth bore you end up using expensive intelligent fuses to achieve the same goal.Sanku wrote:Once FSABOTs were the main AT weapons, rifling became strict liability than a advantage as far as tanks were concerned.
Austin saab, even during the heydays of Arjun bashing, I don't remember its gun ever being disparaged in the media. No one even thought of cooking up a story about it (a la torsion bar). So if it ain't broke , don't fix it, no matter how much certain posters here are pained by us not following in Russian footsteps.Austin wrote:
Considering they are continuing with Rifled Gun for Mk2 they probably see merit in continuing with Rifled Gun , probably good enough for most task and for long range anti-tank shots beyond effective range of APFSDS they can use the missile now that they have that option for Mk2
Its not about bashing or supporting Arjun gun , my response to Sanku is more on pros and cons of each gun , If i say HESH round is not good for Smooth Bore it does not mean I am bashing Smooth Bore guns or smooth bore is poor choice.nachiket wrote:Austin saab, even during the heydays of Arjun bashing, I don't remember its gun ever being disparaged in the media. No one even thought of cooking up a story about it (a la torsion bar). So if it ain't broke , don't fix it, no matter how much certain posters here are pained by us not following in Russian footsteps.
No, not shooting the messenger. Merely reminding whose messenger the messenger is.nachiket wrote:While that may be so, how is that comment relevant here, considering that the US of A has no dog in this fight? Shooting the messenger, are we?Sanku wrote:Col Shukla is the new best friend of US of A.
Plain and simple, nothing more nothing less.
