Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Yogi_G · Post by **Yogi_G** » 08 Apr 2013 09:32

I am wondering if it would be appropriate to call the new power pack for Arjun as "indigenous", IIRC wasn't it Crompton who is building the new engine? Mahindra clearly has a good hold on diesel engines, the engine size has to be scaled, redundancy has to be put in and the number of cylinders increased?

nelson · Post by **nelson** » 08 Apr 2013 10:03

T-90 MS Winter Demonstration.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qz12jap6Z-g

Should suit the requirement of IA to operate in plains of Gurudongmar.

amit · Post by **amit** » 08 Apr 2013 11:35

nelson wrote:T-90 MS Winter Demonstration.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qz12jap6Z-g

Should suit the requirement of IA to operate in plains of Gurudongmar.

Nelson,

That's a sleekly produced marketing video of the latest export version of the same T90. I fail to see why we need this particular version of T90 for operations near Gurudongmar Lake? Why can't the current T90s that India has contracted for do the job with suitable modifications? I mean what's so jee whiz with the MS (apart from sleeking marketing)?

I find it hard to believe that the current T90S - a tank which has been designed to operate in Russian winters (surely?) - cannot operate in Sikkim during winter and we need to import, yet again. Like Anujan said, at this rate we'll always find excuses to import and local industry will never develop.

Take the 390 odd tanks that the Army feels it needs in the North East from the current T90 stock - involve the Russian for upgrade to this MS standard if need be. And fill up the numbers with more Arjun tanks for the plains of Pakistan. I think that's the common sense way to do it if one has India's interests in mind.

All the talk about the terrain not being suitable for Arjun in Punjab is hogwash. If bridges are a problem, is it a big problem to surmount? And any one who thinks the Pakistanis would keep their bridges intact for Indian armour to stroll across in a situation where they are retreating (towards Lahore) is living in La, la land.

At the end of the day one must never forget Arjun is 100 per cent Indian and for it to get better - and spawn world class successor - it needs to be supported to the hilt. All this talk about Avadi not being able to produce 240 odd Arjuns but apparently not having any problems producing 1000 T90s is motivated propaganda.

Please don't fall for the shill! (The last part is not meant for you but is a general comment)

nelson · Post by **nelson** » 08 Apr 2013 11:55

With an emphatic statement that what i am saying as highly probable reason for Arjuns not being deployed in Punjab as hogwash, i can add little except following. As per existing procedure, the file for procuring new tanks to equip the two Armoured brigades in Ladakh and NE, will go/would have gone through the desk of DRDO Chief Dr Saraswat, before being taken up by Def Min or CCS. He is suitably positioned to answer the apprehensions.

BTW, as per this report it would be 236 tanks and not 390.

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2012/20121105/main5.htm

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 08 Apr 2013 12:10

India Reverses Gear, Puts Arjun Tank Back in Production

Is this news credible??

If yes, the what does it say about the Arjun.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 08 Apr 2013 12:14

nelson wrote:BTW, as per this report it would be 236 tanks and not 390.

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2012/20121105/main5.htm

That news says 236 T-90MS has already been ordered , is it from existing 1600 T-90S or an over an above order ?

amit · Post by **amit** » 08 Apr 2013 12:15

nelson wrote:With an emphatic statement that what i am saying as highly probable reason for Arjuns not being deployed in Punjab as hogwash, i can add little except following. As per existing procedure, the file for procuring new tanks to equip the two Armoured brigades in Ladakh and NE, will go/would have gone through the desk of DRDO Chief Dr Saraswat, before being taken up by Def Min or CCS. He is suitably positioned to answer the apprehensions.

BTW, as per this report it would be 236 tanks and not 390.

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2012/20121105/main5.htm

Nelson,

Apologies if that hogwash comment came through as being directed at you. It was a general comment and this point about Arjuns being unsuitable for the plains of Punjab (despite having a lower ground pressure than the T90s) have been doing the rounds for many years. I personally think - and I'm yet to see evidence to the contrary (but would love to see it and modify my views) - that the only reason that has been cited for this alleged inability in the Punjab have been bridges.

While I'm willing to accept that many bridges would need to be strengthen, broaden, whatever, it's hardly an insurmountable or costly solution. And if this point is used as an excuse to import more tanks then the whole scenario look suspicious.

JMT

amit · Post by **amit** » 08 Apr 2013 12:26

nelson wrote:http://www.tribuneindia.com/2012/20121105/main5.htm

OK I got the numbers wrong but it's still an import and as Austin says, it's unclear if it's a new order or a new order.

However, the report has a few interesting nuggets:

The key change will be a modern targeting system with an automatic target tracker. The gunner inside the tank has to “lock-on” a target. Once that is done, onboard computers keep a track of the target in a 360° radius. Fire can be directed at the target as and when. At present, the gunner has a tough time keeping track of the moving target while the tank is in motion.

The new version of the tank will also have a “correction input device”. This will assess all prevailing factors such as distance of target, height and temperature of the barrel and correct the line and trajectory of fire on its own.

The third incorporation will be a new muzzle reference system. At present, the front muzzle on the barrel of the tank needs to be aligned afresh each time the barrel position is lowered. The latest version of the T-90 will have a system by which the tank barrel will re-align itself to its earlier-programmed reference point, sources explained.

The new tanks will also have an improved thermal imager that will give sharper pictures at nighttime from a distance of 3-4 km. The new thermal imager will pick up variations in temperatures of an advancing vehicle or human being and help the tank-commander better understand the looming threat. Existing thermal imagers do not detect variations in temperature.

These are nice upgrades. However, you would notice that none of these are particularly relevant to whether the tank is fielded in the cold of the North East or the heat of the Punjab plains. However, if these new add ons are cited as being reason to import even more from Russia, then that raises questions.

This is what Shukla has to say in Business Standard:

Authoritative MoD sources tell Business Standard that the plan, which has been cleared by the MoD, involves raising six new armoured regiments, equipped with 348 tanks (58 tanks per regiment, including reserves). In addition, three mechanized infantry battalions will be raised, amounting to about 180 BMP-IIs.

According to MoD sources, the army has demanded the purchase of additional T-90 tanks for these six armoured regiments. India has already bought 657 T-90S tanks from Russia and obtained a licence to build another 1000. Now, in addition to these purchases, the army wants the latest version of this tank, called the T-90MS.

There have been reports saying that the Army wants a 3,000 odd tank force. Going by the numbers provided in Shukla's article 2000 of them would be T90s and about 700 odd refurbished T-72s. If these numbers are accurate then that leaves how many for Arjuns? 248?

That means, according to information we have today, the Army has no intention whatsoever of ordering more Arjuns even after the MK2 goes into production.For the Army, it appears, the Arjun is still a "dabba" - or should I say a Mercedes-class "dabba"?

In a previous post you said that Arjuns would form the spearhead strike forces on the Rajasthan front. Do you think 248 is an adequate number for that?

More importantly, the MK1 has been shown to be superior to the T90s. And MK2 would be a whole new ball game vis a vis the T90s. Yet the Army - it appears - is determined to follow a course that would marginalise and destroy a worldclass desi tank which has been developed after many trials and tribulations and according to exact GSQR specifications of the Army.

Do you think this right?

PS: I think Anujan made the most prescient comment of all. Forty years down the line we'd still be importing Russian tanks and we would still have a section of posters justifying the import. Sigh!

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 08 Apr 2013 12:40

The most improtant question that needs to be answered by the Powers that be.

What is it about the T 90 that makes the IA stick to it? To the exclusion of all else.

nelson · Post by **nelson** » 08 Apr 2013 12:46

I can not say with say any certainty that 236 T-90 MS is a new order. It may part of the 1000 T-90 contract that India signed with Russia in 2001/02.

http://pib.nic.in/archieve/lreleng/lyr2 ... 00225.html

Only that the Army may have placed indent now, for these 236 to be of T-90 MS version, possible. I also think its 59 x 4 = 236, and not 58 x6 = 348 as Col Shukla has written.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 08 Apr 2013 12:52

Anujan wrote:The reason I wondered is because sometimes people tend to delude themselves when it benefits them. It is in human nature to convince oneself that all parties benefit -- even when the situation is completely one sided. I mean honestly speaking, do you not see self contradiction in your own arguments?

Anujan bhai -- you must learn, casting aspersions on others when one lacks data and logic is not a good idea. Two can play this game.

Let me once again, set some records straight

1. You blame Avadi for Arjun QC issues, but Apparently 1000 T90s are going to be manufactured by them defect free.

Again bad reading on your part. I have maintained two things
1) It is easier for Avadi to use a established manufacturing line given by others rather than set up their own. Manufacturing engineering is a major issue. This has been discussed before.

2) Despite having been given a established manufacturing line. Avadi does a poor job -- that is where direct russian imports have been saving the day.

You may not like it but that is a fact.

So yes, the Avadi issue and its impact on T 90 is fully discussed. I can not help it, if you are late to the game.

2. You blame India MIC for not scaling up, and therefor want more foreign maal, therefore assuring that they wont scale up.
3. You allege that Avadi cannot supply Arjun in numbers, but somehow think they would be able to supply T90 in numbers.

Incorrect reading once again. Indian MIC is not scaling up because it is not doing the right things. It is impossible to want it to scale up when the basics are flawed.

The large imports are unfortunate desperate attempts to meet the requirements because the MIC does not scale up and not the reason.

Cause and effect.

4. If they dont supply T90 in numbers, you want an alternative, which is to buy more T90 from Russia so it is okay if they dont supply it in numbers. Which will assure that they dont supply T90 in numbers.

Avadi does what it wants to do, Avadi did not meet the T 72 overhaul targets even when no tanks were being purchased for 30 years.

The cause is Avadi, the effect is buying from outside, not the other way around. That is just poor excuse.

5. You dont want any Arjuns inducted unless *all* supposed problems are sorted out. And then claim that it is completely okay for Russians to Squeeze our testimonials because there are no tanks.

Again incorrect reading. I want Arjuns to be inducted, problems not withstanding. This is what is also being done.

I only do not want a 10000000000000000000 tank order when LSPs themselves are not ready. Which is something that IA is doing right. Not willing to accept a large order untill the first order is proven.

These are actually some of the arguments of yours that make any sense to me, and that is after I have sifted through disinformation, shifting goal posts, wrong facts, slight misinformation --

No actually all those are in your posts, I have shown above how you have either not read, or are not aware of the basics.

For example, despite being thrashed out in the forum like a 1000 times, you talk about "problems uncovered during AUCRT". AUCRT was not acceptance trials, and merely trials done to assess spares requirements during the lifetime of the tank. Then why are orders held hostage to fixing issues "uncovered" during AUCRT?

Because there is nothing merely about discovering a spare requirement during the lifetime of a tank. In fact AUCRT also discovers the meaningful life time of a tank.

You can not have a system which is not reliable. Which is the R in AUCRT

It is amazing that you can call reliability tests as mere? Astonishing.

Again this example shows, while you accuse others of disinformation, it is YOU who is wrong.

Now you need to do some soul searching buddy.

Why do you believe in these untruths?

nelson · Post by **nelson** » 08 Apr 2013 12:55

@amit

Arjun 124 + 124, would be suitable for deployment in Rajasthan as in the article carrying Dr Saraswat's interview linked earlier. <deleted later>

http://pib.nic.in/newsite/erelease.aspx?relid=64467

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XII_Corps_%28India%29

amit · Post by **amit** » 08 Apr 2013 12:56

nelson wrote:I can not say with say any certainty that 236 T-90 MS is a new order. It may part of the 1000 T-90 contract that India signed with Russia in 2001/02.

http://pib.nic.in/archieve/lreleng/lyr2 ... 00225.html

Only that the Army may have placed indent now, for these 236 to be of T-90 MS version, possible. I also think its 59 x 4 = 236, and not 58 x6 = 348 as Col Shukla has written.

Unlikely to be part of the 2001/2 order as the MS version did not exist then. And Shukla states quiet clearly that it's a new order and I've read other reports saying the same.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 08 Apr 2013 12:56

Karan M wrote:
Anujan wrote:In the interests of full disclosure -- do you materially benefit from T90 orders? Not that it is a bad thing, but just curious for my own edification.
If he did, that would at least be logical. No, this entire T-90 is good rooskie maal, Arjun big flaws stuff is just one big ego-maalish exercise, on the lines of i cannot be wrong because i say so (http://i.somethingawful.com/u/maxnmona/hmm.jpg).

More passing off or personal frustations on others.

Still no data.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 08 Apr 2013 12:59

Karan M wrote:
This is clear. Mk1 production was to run till 2011-12. The Mk II production was to proceed from that time frame. Links already posted.
Your "this is clear" won't do. We are clearly not blessed with your clarity of thought. Please provide verifiable data from accredited journalists or credible sources that MK2 production is underway and orders have been placed.

There were two parts, to it. This is clear, and links already posted.

You want to not read and accept real world data which goes against your pet fantasy. So sorry but cant spoon feed.

Go back and read the links posted. Am not wasting time on your trolling. When you cant be bothered to read the basics.

This is true for all the smart alec questions that you have been trying

"116 != 124, so you are wrong that same numbers are ordered"

Yeah, yeah. You are more interested in trying these silly games rather than meaningful content.

amit · Post by **amit** » 08 Apr 2013 13:01

nelson wrote:@amit

Arjun 124 + 124, would be suitable for deployment in Rajasthan as in the article carrying Dr Saraswat's interview linked earlier. It implies Arjun would be in Desert Corps which consists of two regiments in the armoured brigade and two regiments integral to the infantry divisions.

http://pib.nic.in/newsite/erelease.aspx?relid=64467

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XII_Corps_%28India%29

Maybe you're right. But then the bigger issue remains. As things stand today 248 (however, remember that the entire order for 124 MK2 hasn't yet been placed) is the sum total production run of Arjun, a worldclass product developed after a lot of sweat and tears.

And this only happens in India. A local product which is demonstratively better than the foreign analogue is abandon in favour of the very said analogue.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 08 Apr 2013 13:02

nelson wrote:@amit

Arjun 124 + 124, would be suitable for deployment in Rajasthan as in the article carrying Dr Saraswat's interview linked earlier. <deleted later>

http://pib.nic.in/newsite/erelease.aspx?relid=64467

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XII_Corps_%28India%29

Nelson Allow me please

The Indian Army is placing an order for 124 Arjun Tanks Mark – II in addition to the equal number of Mark – I ordered earlier. Tank T-90, Tank T-72, and Arjun tanks are all main battle tanks of the Indian Army.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 08 Apr 2013 13:04

amit wrote:
Maybe you're right. But then the bigger issue remains. As things stand today 248 (however, remember that the entire order for 124 MK2 hasn't yet been placed) is the sum total production run of Arjun, a worldclass product developed after a lot of sweat and tears.

What sheer nonsense is this, AFTER IMMEDIATE PROOF that 124 tank order has been placed. The person comes and says

he entire order for 124 MK2 hasn't yet been placed

This is Shukla level "aam means imli" stuff.

No wonder the thread is a mess. Fantasies are freely passed of as data, this when the real data is posted again, again and again.

amit · Post by **amit** » 08 Apr 2013 13:05

Sanku wrote:
nelson wrote:@amit

Arjun 124 + 124, would be suitable for deployment in Rajasthan as in the article carrying Dr Saraswat's interview linked earlier. <deleted later>

http://pib.nic.in/newsite/erelease.aspx?relid=64467

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XII_Corps_%28India%29
Nelson Allow me please
The Indian Army is placing an order for 124 Arjun Tanks Mark – II in addition to the equal number of Mark – I ordered earlier. Tank T-90, Tank T-72, and Arjun tanks are all main battle tanks of the Indian Army.

This is the quality of your data points. That's a PIB release from Aug 9, 2010 and it says is placing. Since it's three years on - circa 2013 - the order must have been placed!

There all data supplied. Eat crow folks!

amit · Post by **amit** » 08 Apr 2013 13:06

Sanku wrote: What sheer nonsense is this, AFTER IMMEDIATE PROOF that 124 tank order has been placed. The person comes and says

he entire order for 124 MK2 hasn't yet been placed
This is Shukla level "aam means imli" stuff.

No wonder the thread is a mess. Fantasies are freely passed of as data, this when the real data is posted again, again and again.

As I said before. You'd have to pay top dollar for such (virtual) stand up comedy in the real world. Here we get it for free.

Please carry on with your mindless trolling. It's dull day and I'm bored.

PS: Jokes aside, this "data point" actually goes against you other "data point" that the Army will order 1,500 Arjuns. I do hope you realise your various "data points" are twisting your chaiddis into a Gordian knot.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 08 Apr 2013 13:08

Pratyush wrote:India Reverses Gear, Puts Arjun Tank Back in Production

Is this news credible??

If yes, the what does it say about the Arjun.

Yes this news is credible. In a nut shell, this says
1) Arjun finally matured in terms of reliability by 2008
2) Once the basic issues of Arjun were fixed -- IA went forth with step II, viz to include the components missing from Mk I but in Arjun spec (LAHAT etc) + critical improvements like ERA.
3) The above was accepted by DRDO and the plan for the same is under progress.

Arjun's future depends on quality and timeliness of step 3 above.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 08 Apr 2013 13:09

nelson wrote:I can not say with say any certainty that 236 T-90 MS is a new order. It may part of the 1000 T-90 contract that India signed with Russia in 2001/02.

http://pib.nic.in/archieve/lreleng/lyr2 ... 00225.html

Only that the Army may have placed indent now, for these 236 to be of T-90 MS version, possible. I also think its 59 x 4 = 236, and not 58 x6 = 348 as Col Shukla has written.

There are two separate issues here with respect to the number of T-90 in IA service (and the variations thereof)

1. First - IA placed order for 1,657 T-90 tanks based on PRESENT level of ORBAT and required equipment level. So, these 236 T-90 MS can well be part of 1,657 TANKS ordered earlier...however, as this is an improvement over the base version, this will be require additional money to be forked out to the Russians.

2. Second - the Ajai Shukla report talks about requirement for equipping TWO NEW (I) Armored Bdes which have been sanctioned recently. The equipment required for these formations will be over and above the one budgeted earlier. This means, Indian Army will have to raise additional Armored Regimens and induct tanks to equip these Regiments. This will require 6 x 58 new tanks in the IA inventory. Now, as the article by AS states, IA has asked for more T-90 tanks. This will take the total number of planned T-90 tanks in IA service ~2,000 specimens.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 08 Apr 2013 13:10

amit wrote:
Sanku wrote: What sheer nonsense is this, AFTER IMMEDIATE PROOF that 124 tank order has been placed. The person comes and says

amit >> the entire order for 124 MK2 hasn't yet been placed

This is Shukla level "aam means imli" stuff.

No wonder the thread is a mess. Fantasies are freely passed of as data, this when the real data is posted again, again and again.

As I said before. You'd have to pay top dollar for such (virtual) stand up comedy in the real world. Here we get it for free.

Please carry on with your mindless trolling. It's dull day and I'm bored.

Again the same story.

Get your blatant untruth exposed -- attack those exposing your blatant untruths.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 08 Apr 2013 13:12

Pratyush wrote:What is it about the T 90 that makes the IA stick to it? To the exclusion of all else.

I am not guru on Tanks like the big guns here but my 2 cent on this issue after observing IA views on Arjun and the interview by VKS etc.

Its not the tank that makes IA stick to T's series , any tank might have its own pro and con as stand alone machine or when viewed from the larger aspect of tank battle and T's has it own cons and pros well documented.

But the key issue seems to be the entire logistics of IA runs round a 40T tank when viewed from POV of its entire fleet deployment of tank , 40T means here between 40-49 T.

IA has been operating T-72 since early 80's and since 3 decade that it has operated the 40T tanks its logistics and transportation via road, bridges ,air transport in rare cases revolves around it , it could be pure co-incidence or mearly an effect of IA getting T-72 because that was best available to it in the 80's when all the 3 major armed forces went through a major modernisation period inducting many new weapon system from East and West.

Put it simply it would be easy and cheaper for IA to tell DRDO to build a 40 T tank i.e FMBT which according to VKS statement wont exceed 50 T ( ie 40-50T ) then to change the entire logistics for a 50 or 60 T tank , ofcourse PA tanks and logistics operating in similar constrains does not help.

I remember a discussion I read some time back on Tanknet a German guy that even though the German Leo was heavier but entering into warsaw pac nation using NATO tank was a logistics issue because the entire bridges was built around a 40 T tank at best plus minus few tons and it was not possible for NATO to push across Warsaw to the extent they wanted due to logistics limitations.

The fact that IA think upgrading T-72 in big number is still worth while besides procuring T-90 instead of saying lets junk T-72 and T-55 and procure more Arjun makes be believe IA is operating on its logistics limitation not that it would be financial feseable to buy those numbers of tanks.

amit · Post by **amit** » 08 Apr 2013 13:12

Sanku wrote:
Pratyush wrote:India Reverses Gear, Puts Arjun Tank Back in Production

Is this news credible??

If yes, the what does it say about the Arjun.
Yes this news is credible. In a nut shell, this says
1) Arjun finally matured in terms of reliability by 2008
2) Once the basic issues of Arjun were fixed -- IA went forth with step II, viz to include the components missing from Mk I but in Arjun spec (LAHAT etc) + critical improvements like ERA.
3) The above was accepted by DRDO and the plan for the same is under progress.

Arjun's future depends on quality and timeliness of step 3 above.

Aha good Sanku Bhai, so that link which Pratysuh posted passes your "Shukla amm means imli" test.

So I suppose you also agree to this para in the article:

The Army’s plan still calls for 1,657 T-90S “Bhishma” tanks at about 12 crore (INR 120 million, about $2.78 million) each if prices remain stable. About 1,000 of those are slated to be built in India by Avadi Heavy Industries, the same firm that builds the Arjuns. They will be joined by just 248 Arjuns at about 16.8 crore (INR 168 million, about $3.92 million) each, as well as 692 older T-72 tanks upgraded to the T-72M1 “Ajeya” standard . This overall plan changes the force structure proposed in 2006, from 3,780 tanks (1,302 T-90s and 2,480 T-72s) to 2,597 higher-end tanks.

So I ask you again from where did you pull out that "data point" of the Army buying 1,500 Arjuns? It must be from a very dark place where the sun never shines.

nelson · Post by **nelson** » 08 Apr 2013 13:13

@amit and @rohitvats

The T-90 MS may be a new order, i do not deny that. However, i would like to make a distinction between a 'contract to produce' and 'order to buy'.

The original contract around 2001 for indigenous manufacture of 1000 T-90, over and above the 310, (124 imported and 186 built from CKD as per contract of 1997) is a contract between MoD Dept of Production and Russian production/ export agency. That in itself does not mean the production versions would be finalised at the time contract, since a lot of time lapses between this contract (2001) and actual production after receiving the indent from Army(2013/14). Army may well have indented for latest versions as part of the original 1000.

amit · Post by **amit** » 08 Apr 2013 13:17

Austin wrote:
Pratyush wrote:What is it about the T 90 that makes the IA stick to it? To the exclusion of all else.
I am not guru on Tanks like the big guns here but my 2 cent on this issue after observing IA views on Arjun and the interview by VKS etc.

Its not the tank that makes IA stick to T's series , any tank might have its own pro and con as stand alone machine or when viewed from the larger aspect of tank battle and T's has it own cons and pros well documented.

But the key issue seems to be the entire logistics of IA runs round a 40T tank when viewed from POV of its entire fleet deployment of tank , 40T means here between 40-49 T.

IA has been operating T-72 since early 80's and since 3 decade that it has operated the 40T tanks its logistics and transportation via road, bridges ,air transport in rare cases revolves around it , it could be pure co-incidence or mearly an effect of IA getting T-72 because that was best available to it in the 80's when all the 3 major armed forces went through a major modernisation period inducting many new weapon system from East and West.

Put it simply it would be easy and cheaper for IA to tell DRDO to build a 40 T tank i.e FMBT which according to VKS statement wont exceed 50 T ( ie 40-50T ) then to change the entire logistics for a 50 or 60 T tank , ofcourse PA tanks and logistics operating in similar constrains does not help.

I remember a discussion I read some time back on Tanknet a German guy that even though the German Leo was heavier but entering into warsaw pac nation using NATO tank was a logistics issue because the entire bridges was built around a 40 T tank at best plus minus few tons and it was not possible for NATO to push across Warsaw to the extent they wanted due to logistics limitations.

The fact that IA think upgrading T-72 in big number is still worth while besides procuring T-90 instead of saying lets junk T-72 and T-55 and procure more Arjun makes be believe IA is operating on its logistics limitation not that it would be financial feseable to buy those numbers of tanks.

Austin,

That's a fair enough comment and you may be right.

However IMO two things stand our jarringly. First of all Arjun GSQR was changed twice and that resulted in the MK1's weight. And in its specification of MK2 actually increased the weight. So if the Army prefers 40 ton class tanks due to its logistics chain then why the heck did it first order a heavy tank and then - as part of improvements - increase the weight even more?

IMO something doesn't sound right here.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 08 Apr 2013 13:17

amit wrote: So I ask you again from where did you pull out that "data point" of the Army buying 1,500 Arjuns? It must be from a very dark place where the sun never shines.

So after being caught on your "the entire 124 tank order has not been placed yet" immediately following a statement of "124 tank order has been placed)

You try and change the topic from passing off data with more foul mouthed stuff?

amit wrote:So I ask you again from where did you pull out that "data point" of the Army buying 1,500 Arjuns? It must be from a very dark place where the sun never shines.

Pulling out data from places where sun does not shine is your core competency old boy. I have always mentioned where the data was from. Multiple times now.

However since it is not a fantasy data, it wont meet your expectations.

If truly intrested go back and read. If not, I could not care less.

amit · Post by **amit** » 08 Apr 2013 13:19

Sanku wrote:Get your blatant untruth exposed -- attack those exposing your blatant untruths.

Dear me Sanku bhai do you feel attacked or threatened when someone praises your sense of humour and comedy?

My, my! Humour is such a precious commodity in this day and age. Please don't lose it and actually become serious. It would be such a loss.

amit · Post by **amit** » 08 Apr 2013 13:21

Sanku wrote:So after being caught on your "the entire 124 tank order has not been placed yet" immediately following a statement of "124 tank order has been placed)

Ha, ha, ha.

You can't really make this up.

The above in response to my post:

amit wrote:This is the quality of your data points. That's a PIB release from Aug 9, 2010 and it says is placing. Since it's three years on - circa 2013 - the order must have been placed!

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 08 Apr 2013 13:25

Pratyush wrote:The most important question that needs to be answered by the Powers that be.

What is it about the T 90 that makes the IA stick to it? To the exclusion of all else.

Organizational Inertia. Period.

And let me share an example from General SR Chowdhary's (ex-COAS) autobiography (Officially at Peace):

He very clearly states that a generation of armored corps officers had been trained and served on T-72 imported from then USSR. Even before the induction of Arjun in the IA, there was a strong murmur in the IA against requirement of a tank based on western philosophy. General Chowdhury was himself a Cavalry Officer and considered Arjun to be a great tank. And he was of the firm opinion that enough water has flowed under the bridge as far as earlier development issues of the tank are concerned and IA needs to move on. It was his idea to induct the tanks in 43rd Armored Regiment so that a feedback mechanism between end-user and DRDO could be established.

He also talks about how user confidence in the machine increased once they started using it.

amit · Post by **amit** » 08 Apr 2013 13:26

+ 1

Thanks for that piece of info Rohit.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 08 Apr 2013 13:30

rohitvats wrote:
Pratyush wrote:The most important question that needs to be answered by the Powers that be.

What is it about the T 90 that makes the IA stick to it? To the exclusion of all else.
Organizational Inertia. Period.
....................

He also talks about how user confidence in the machine increased once they started using it.

I can agree with this. However it is not the only cause.

For one, the example of Gen SR Chowdhary is now about 15 years+ old. While those reasons might have predominated then, and it stands to reason they would continue, we do not know how much they play a role today when the situation is quite different, and IA and the services are far more open to western models of war.

As of right now, just the fact that IA is behind in its armor program, and the whether the issues of Arjun schedules being plagued with delays is addressed is still open, IA as I see it, hardly has a choice.

pralay · Post by **pralay** » 08 Apr 2013 13:45

Austin wrote:But the key issue seems to be the entire logistics of IA runs round a 40T tank when viewed from POV of its entire fleet deployment of tank , 40T means here between 40-49 T.

IA has been operating T-72 since early 80's and since 3 decade that it has operated the 40T tanks its logistics and transportation via road, bridges ,air transport in rare cases revolves around it , it could be pure co-incidence or mearly an effect of IA getting T-72 because that was best available to it in the 80's when all the 3 major armed forces went through a major modernisation period inducting many new weapon system from East and West.

You are implying that the IA think-tank(TopBrass) who formed GSQRs for Arjun are idiots. They asked for a tank that they are incapable to operate.. and worse ... it took them 30 years to realize that.

Austin wrote:Put it simply it would be easy and cheaper for IA to tell DRDO to build a 40 T tank i.e FMBT which according to VKS statement wont exceed 50 T ( ie 40-50T ) then to change the entire logistics for a 50 or 60 T tank , ofcourse PA tanks and logistics operating in similar constrains does not help.

Oh, Is it really that easy? and cheaper? the Army top-brass don't even know what they want in FMBT. They are clueless about future warfare and have no vision. So they could not make GSQR for FMBT in two years.

Austin wrote:I remember a discussion I read some time back on Tanknet a German guy that even though the German Leo was heavier but entering into warsaw pac nation using NATO tank was a logistics issue because the entire bridges was built around a 40 T tank at best plus minus few tons and it was not possible for NATO to push across Warsaw to the extent they wanted due to logistics limitations.

did Germany Scrap Leo and buy some foreign 40ton T-X tank to solve that problem?(Besides your Bridge-capacity logic is bashed out so many times.)

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 08 Apr 2013 14:12

sameer_shelavale wrote:You are implying that the IA think-tank(TopBrass) who formed GSQRs for Arjun are idiots. They asked for a tank that they are incapable to operate.. and worse ... it took them 30 years to realize that.

No but what happened was it got restricted to certain theater of operation as confirmed by IA and DRDO.

Austin wrote:Oh, Is it really that easy? and cheaper? the Army top-brass don't even know what they want in FMBT. They are clueless about future warfare and have no vision. So they could not make GSQR for FMBT in two years.

Atleast what we know for sure from DRDO chief statement that FMBT wont exceed 50T. Compared to 58T for Mk1 and 62-65 for Mk2

Austin wrote:did Germany Scrap Leo and buy some foreign 40ton T-X tank to solve that problem?(Besides your Bridge-capacity logic is bashed out so many times.)

No what i was trying to say was the Germans or lets says NATO could not rely on using the existing logistic bridges etc to cross over to Warsaw nation but had to rely on their own logistics , but for Warsaw it was possible to use existing logsitics on their own and other side.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 08 Apr 2013 14:19

amit wrote: Austin,

That's a fair enough comment and you may be right.

However IMO two things stand our jarringly. First of all Arjun GSQR was changed twice and that resulted in the MK1's weight. And in its specification of MK2 actually increased the weight. So if the Army prefers 40 ton class tanks due to its logistics chain then why the heck did it first order a heavy tank and then - as part of improvements - increase the weight even more?

IMO something doesn't sound right here.

That comment looks rational and well thought out only in retrospect. When all else has failed.

If tomorrow PA was to acquire the latest version of Abrams from USA, IA will do a back-flip and ask for a heavy tank.

And you're right about IA then screwing up with GSQR if logistics and bridges were the main sticking point. And why do people forget that the first choice of IA for new MBT was Leopard 1 and not T-72? What would have IA done then with the bridges as Leopard 1 became obsolete?

If the IA has fvcked up with respect to sending DRDO on a wild goose chase and wasting tax-payer's money then let them be the man they claim to be and own up. But please don't find imaginary faults with Arjun and impede national development in this critical domain.

alexis · Post by **alexis** » 08 Apr 2013 14:25

edited

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 08 Apr 2013 14:43

rohitvats wrote:If tomorrow PA was to acquire the latest version of Abrams from USA, IA will do a back-flip and ask for a heavy tank.

And you're right about IA then screwing up with GSQR if logistics and bridges were the main sticking point. And why do people forget that the first choice of IA for new MBT was Leopard 1 and not T-72? What would have IA done then with the bridges as Leopard 1 became obsolete?

Rohit Guru , In retrospect a lot could have happened , Not sure what could have been IA decision if PA went for Abrams perhaps they would have bought T-80 or perhaps some Western Tank Leo 1 as you say , the only problem with Western Equipment was they expected us to pay in Forex USD which was a big pain then , IIRC India did not have forex reserves worth more than $1-2 billion and it was used wisely.

The Soviet on the other hand used to give equipment in long term credit with very low interst rates and even accepted barter , so it was easy for Indian Defence Forces to buy large equipment since financially it was very attractive. and very few purchase were made of Western system.

Looking back had IAF went of 150 lic Built Mirages as it was agreed we woulnt have this long running MMRCA saga which has no end in sight but instead they went for Mig-29 and stopped at 40 out right buys.

Not sure what we would have done had PAF purchased E-3 and later trunkated to E-2D ....may be we would have gone for Soviet A-50 AWACS .......I remember as a kid I used to hear lot of noises on DD and news paper of immenent AWACS purchase by PAF.

No one ever knew we would have had financial crunch of 90's were virtually nothing significant across the board was purchased but selective purchase was done and that almost extended till mid 2000.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 08 Apr 2013 15:41

Reading the discussion above one thing comes out clearly. The Arjun is unacceptable because it answers the GSQR set forth by the IA. Whereas, the T90 while not meeting any GSQR that we know off, is fully acceptable to the IA.

Have I summed up the position of the IA in this matter. Or I am completely missing the point. Which may be.......

symontk · Post by **symontk** » 08 Apr 2013 16:11

There you have doodh ka doodh, paani ka paani

End of the story, discussion & Arjun