Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread - Jan 12, 2012

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 09 Jun 2013 00:27

while crying about Arjuns and APCs etc

the irony of things is that the IA had never a good thing to say about INSAS

but the maoists and assorted vermin seem to have no problems using them to devastating effect
SLRs and INSAS seem to be handy

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 09 Jun 2013 05:16

Singha wrote:the global tender includes buying 60,668 armor piercing rounds, 91,004 high-explosive rounds for the 25-40mm cannon, 886,436 rounds of the 7.62 coaxial machine gun and 84,100 rounds for the 25mm-40mm anti-grenade launcher.

what a criminal waste of money.

what exactly are the numerous ordnance factories in India producing?

7.62 ammo is a very basic thing any country should be able to produce.

member_26622 · Post by **member_26622** » 09 Jun 2013 12:29

886,436 rounds of the 7.62 coaxial machine gun firing at 500~1000 round per min (example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M240_machine_gun) will give you 30 ~ 60 hours firing time total.

For 100 APC, it will be 3~6 minutes firing time per APC

That will not get you from one end of Janpath to the other end, forget going to war with pakistan or China with these babies.

By god, are we that stupid ? I want to measure the IQ of everyone who nodded at this proposal.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 09 Jun 2013 16:28

many of these imported things are destined to be "force in being" for parades than real warfighting.

nelson · Post by **nelson** » 09 Jun 2013 18:41

Holding of stocks and indent for purchase of ammunition for any weapon in service is not calculated based on the firing rate of the weapon, even when there is a distant correlation. A weapon introduced in service, like the secondary armament of APC in question will have an ammunition scale laid down for it.

First line - on weapon and unit reserve, with fighting troops.
Second line - with formation and immediately behind the fighting forces.
GS stock and reserve - based on war wastage rate, estimated for different conflict types.
Training scale - laid down at annual rates.

Typical first line holding for secondary armament in APC/tank is about 2000 rounds. Also, when a new weapon is introduced it would make sense to order initial tranche of ammunition from the manufacturer of weapon, to lessen teething problems.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 09 Jun 2013 21:20

nik wrote:886,436 rounds of the 7.62 coaxial machine gun firing at 500~1000 round per min (example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M240_machine_gun) will give you 30 ~ 60 hours firing time total.

For 100 APC, it will be 3~6 minutes firing time per APC

That will not get you from one end of Janpath to the other end, forget going to war with pakistan or China with these babies.

By god, are we that stupid ? I want to measure the IQ of everyone who nodded at this proposal.

The only one showing his stupidity here is you...I would really like to take your IQ test.

Is that how you think Services do calculations for their ammunition holding? And do you think IA will not order further ammunition beyond the initial order? Stop attacking the keyboard in an effort to show how concerned you're about the nation and making fool of yourself. And wasting people's time.

member_26622 · Post by **member_26622** » 10 Jun 2013 03:46

rohitvats wrote: Is that how you think Services do calculations for their ammunition holding? And do you think IA will not order further ammunition beyond the initial order? Stop attacking the keyboard in an effort to show how concerned you're about the nation and making fool of yourself. And wasting people's time.

If my comments are hitting hard then better here than during an actual war. You would be well served re-directing your energy to the import lobby.

member_26965 · Post by **member_26965** » 10 Jun 2013 06:58

http://articles.economictimes.indiatime ... army-chief

Gen VK Singh complained about ammo shortage. Kargil war showed the lack of ammo and imports from Russia "on a daily basis."

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 10 Jun 2013 09:57

nik wrote:
rohitvats wrote: Is that how you think Services do calculations for their ammunition holding? And do you think IA will not order further ammunition beyond the initial order? Stop attacking the keyboard in an effort to show how concerned you're about the nation and making fool of yourself. And wasting people's time.
If my comments are hitting hard then better here than during an actual war. You would be well served re-directing your energy to the import lobby.

Get down that high horse of yours...your comment was plain stupid. Simple. Don't try and hide your ignorance behind high sounding flatulence. If you're that interested in understanding the issue behind domestic production and import lobby, do some basic research and then comment. Making inane one line arguments does not help anyone.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 10 Jun 2013 10:09

I am yet to find after 10 yrs on the hunt if we make all 155mm shells and charges locally or not.

even if the 155mm deal has been in limbo we still have around 400 guns and OFB is in home stretch of the local 45-cal model so these pieces will be heavily used in any conflict.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 10 Jun 2013 10:30

I think we have a deal with Denel of SA to develop 155 mm cal rounds some where at a new factory in Bihar which was signed during GF time as DM , The rounds includes Base Bleed ammo for extra range.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 10 Jun 2013 10:38

that never worked on the ground ^ Denel was blacklisted.
post 1998 tests the US also pulled out of building such a plant in India.

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 10 Jun 2013 10:58

Get down that high horse of yours...your comment was plain stupid. Simple. Don't try and hide your ignorance behind high sounding flatulence. If you're that interested in understanding the issue behind domestic production and import lobby, do some basic research and then comment. Making inane one line arguments does not help anyone.

Could you tell us what the reason is for importing 7.62mm ammo.

Why are the local ordinance factories unable to produce this most basic ammo?

Something is terribly wrong with the way things are being managed. Either its corrupt or incompetent I fear.

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 10 Jun 2013 13:03

nik wrote:886,436 rounds of the 7.62 coaxial machine gun firing at 500~1000 round per min (example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M240_machine_gun) will give you 30 ~ 60 hours firing time total.

For 100 APC, it will be 3~6 minutes firing time per APC

That will not get you from one end of Janpath to the other end, forget going to war with pakistan or China with these babies.

By god, are we that stupid ? I want to measure the IQ of everyone who nodded at this proposal.

Please check following points:
1) How many rounds an APC carries with it in battle
2) Theoretical rate of fire vs actual rate of fire
3) How many rounds an average soldier carries with him and compare it with the theoretical firing rate of the gun he carries.

Just to make it easier for you, lets say your APC can fire 800 rounds per minute and a Rambo guy fires it continuously for 15 minutes.( While you are at it, check barrel fatigue) 12000 rounds and at ~20 g weight of 7.62m x 51 mm (conservative), do you have that much space in your vehicle or load carrying capacity ?

I'll love to join your

then

Snehashis · Post by **Snehashis** » 10 Jun 2013 13:06

Singha and Austin, OFB is manufacturing the Denel's Assagai family ammunition at Badmal. Nalanda was for BMCS.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 10 Jun 2013 14:59

^^^

I have a simple question, what is so unique about this APC, that the role cannot be played by the BMP 2. In addition to this, if we need to import the Co- axial ammo for this APC. Then what does it say about the co-axial ammo for the existing fleet of the BMP as well as the T series. IIRC, they both use the PKT .

Leave aside the PKT, what about the ammo used for the MMG of the Indian Army. That uses NATO 7.62 MM.

If we need to import this ammo for the proposed APC. Then what is the state of the war reserves for the other 2 types of 7.62 machine guns currently being used by the Indian Army.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 10 Jun 2013 16:23

jamwal wrote:
nik wrote:886,436 rounds of the 7.62 coaxial machine gun firing at 500~1000 round per min (example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M240_machine_gun) will give you 30 ~ 60 hours firing time total.

For 100 APC, it will be 3~6 minutes firing time per APC

That will not get you from one end of Janpath to the other end, forget going to war with pakistan or China with these babies.

By god, are we that stupid ? I want to measure the IQ of everyone who nodded at this proposal.
Please check following points:
1) How many rounds an APC carries with it in battle
2) Theoretical rate of fire vs actual rate of fire
3) How many rounds an average soldier carries with him and compare it with the theoretical firing rate of the gun he carries.

Just to make it easier for you, lets say your APC can fire 800 rounds per minute and a Rambo guy fires it continuously for 15 minutes.( While you are at it, check barrel fatigue) 12000 rounds and at ~20 g weight of 7.62m x 51 mm (conservative), do you have that much space in your vehicle or load carrying capacity ?

I'll love to join your then

Wiki says BMP-2 carries 2000+ rounds of 7.62mm. The same figure contemporary tanks range from 3000 to as much as 8000. No Rambo-giri involved. So the this order will cover 2-4 full refills.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 10 Jun 2013 17:03

in "raider/antifaithfool" config, the abrams is claimed to carry some 10,000rds of HMG ammo and similarly the bradley extra loads of 25mm cannon shells in the vacated troop compartment.

one thing is guaranteed about war - ammo usage will be N times that of planned.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 10 Jun 2013 17:08

That still does not answere the basic question regarding the IA's holding of the 7.62 MM. Both the NAtO / Easter type. That they have to order ammunition along with the dammed APC.

Nor is the question answered, what makes this APC so unique that the job cant be done by the BMP2. If it is all about a futuristic APC. Then it will kill the FICV program.

Or are we going to have a repeat of the T90 vs the Arjun situation WRT, the APC as well.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 10 Jun 2013 19:43

was this not to do with special vehicles to be used in high altitude areas? either that or i subliminimally absorbed one of singha's wish list postings!

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 10 Jun 2013 20:20

How many wire-guided-HEAT shells can Prithvi shroud handle?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 10 Jun 2013 21:39

Came across a picture of what appears Indian T-72 being unloaded from Il-76

T-72/IL-76

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 10 Jun 2013 21:58

^^^ That is a very old one. It picture was discussed in detail during the C-17 thread about 1-2 years back.

It is not easy to fit a T-72 into the IL-76. It needs hours.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 11 Jun 2013 11:36

^^ How many hours exactly to load one tank into IL-76 ? Do we have any thing from IA on this ?

From the picture there is enough space between tank and the aircraft body , though picture might not tell the whole story.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 11 Jun 2013 11:44

there was an article by Gp Cpt Bewoor on BR that mentions how tense it got for both T-72 driver and Il-76 crew to get the T-72 to fit inside.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 11 Jun 2013 12:02

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Histo ... ewoor.html

after a lot of training they got it down to 30 mins. and had to violate some rules for leh and jaffna ops.

in contrast the T90 or Arjun should be able to just drive into a C17 or AN124 with no rule violations.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 11 Jun 2013 13:03

Austin wrote:^^ How many hours exactly to load one tank into IL-76 ? Do we have any thing from IA on this ?

From the picture there is enough space between tank and the aircraft body , though picture might not tell the whole story.

As Kartik has pointed out, there is an article by the gentleman who actually undertook the airlifting part. In fact, the picture is from his article on the subject. Also, did you notice that T-72 is w/o side skirts? Any guess why?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 11 Jun 2013 13:16

the same rules apply to IL476 also. fuselage has not increased in diameter.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 11 Jun 2013 13:31

Considering IA has been operating T-72 for decades now and air lifting tanks perhaps more than a dozen time on IL-76 ,they would have refined the loading and unloading operation even if it takes 30 m or may be less or more.
Ofcourse bigger the aircraft the better but even that would take tens of minutes to load and fly.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 11 Jun 2013 14:54

Austin, what part of his article made you think that one can get better at getting the T-72 into the Il-76 without damaging and grounding the Il-76? This was clearly an aircraft that just about barely managed to load and carry a T-72. As he mentions in the article

The max wt of cargo in the IL-76 is 43 tons, so with a T-72 inside, the IL-76 cannot carry even an empty condensed milk tin

and

The reason for this cardiac-thorax link is that, there is less than a foot of space between the steel tracks of the T-72 and the cargo compartment skin. And, right behind the aircraft skin run the hot air ducts for pressurising and heating the ac. If the tank moves sideways by more than a foot, the steel tracks break the duct.

No wonder it took over 3 hours at times to load one T-72, and another 3 hours to off load it. We were learning, along with the tank crew.

maybe they got better, but reduce it to 30 min from 3 hours? Not without changing the aircraft from an Il-76 to an An-124 or C-17.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 11 Jun 2013 15:03

the C17 with 76t payload is cavernous enough to carry 1 arjun or 1 t90 easily but unfortunately not 2 , though it has the length. it can also cart around any of the Akash SAM, Pinaka, shourya or brahmos TELs - weight and volume should be ok. different mobile radars and EW trailers which can fold would be fine.

if we need to efficiently move 2 tanks around by air in winter or to where no roads exist, the AN124 is the only game in town but that also implies the receiving airbase must support AN124 sized planes.

member_26965 · Post by **member_26965** » 11 Jun 2013 17:08

Modular tank will be easy to airlift in parts and then assemble. Here all marks for Arjun.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 11 Jun 2013 17:43

The 30 mins part I picked from Singha post , the article mentions of trying to load and unload in 30 mins. With C-17 that should not be a problem.

wig · Post by **wig** » 14 Jun 2013 15:09

Ammunition bursts in T-72 tanks barrels cause concern for Army

India's T-72 tanks are facing problems with its ammunition as it sometimes bursts in the barrel and 200 such cases have been reported making the Army wonder whether its troops will be "afraid" to fire even after seeing the enemy.

"It (the T-72 ammunition) used to burst in the barrel. If it bursts in the barrel, then the firer is afraid to fire his own gun, which is not a correct thing. If he is afraid to fire his own gun, then even if he sees the enemy he will not fire," the Army has told a Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence.

The Army informed the Government and the Parliamentary Committee that over a period of time, there have been 200 such accidents involving the ammunition and "it brings down the confidence of the firer, especially, with regard to tank ammunition."

In terms of the numbers, the T-72 tanks are the backbone of the Indian armoured fleet and have undergone several upgrades since their induction to be able to fight effectively in the battlefield.

The Army is also "concerned" over the ammunition used by its artillery called Krashnapov, which has been imported from Russia, and has failed to hit targets in high altitude ranges such as Kargil.

"They were supposed to meet certain height and temperature requirement, and they said that it is not meant for such high altitude areas. Now, this ammunition has been shifted in the plain areas because it was not working there satisfactorily," it said.

The Army said several meetings have been held with the vendors to resolve the issue but progress in this direction has been relatively slow.

Last year, former Army Chief Gen V K Singh had written a letter to the Prime Minister explaining to him the shortages of tank ammunition being faced by the force.

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/338 ... tanks.html

member_26965 · Post by **member_26965** » 14 Jun 2013 15:29

Old issue once again made new by India's largest convenience news store - the PTI (not my words). It is 2007 issue

Indian Army T-72 Tanks barrels bursts

http://frontierindia.net/indian-army-t- ... els-bursts

habal · Post by **habal** » 14 Jun 2013 15:51

which anti-tank missile is this ?
it seems wire-guided

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 15 Jun 2013 16:18

Came across this video of Russian Arms Expo , Pretty much involves most equipment that IA operates and some demo of others

http://youtu.be/B49NJdnmXgA

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 15 Jun 2013 16:31

wig wrote:Ammunition bursts in T-72 tanks barrels cause concern for Army

India's T-72 tanks are facing problems with its ammunition as it sometimes bursts in the barrel and 200 such cases have been reported making the Army wonder whether its troops will be "afraid" to fire even after seeing the enemy.

"It (the T-72 ammunition) used to burst in the barrel. If it bursts in the barrel, then the firer is afraid to fire his own gun, which is not a correct thing. If he is afraid to fire his own gun, then even if he sees the enemy he will not fire," the Army has told a Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence.

The Army informed the Government and the Parliamentary Committee that over a period of time, there have been 200 such accidents involving the ammunition and "it brings down the confidence of the firer, especially, with regard to tank ammunition."

In terms of the numbers, the T-72 tanks are the backbone of the Indian armoured fleet and have undergone several upgrades since their induction to be able to fight effectively in the battlefield.

The Army is also "concerned" over the ammunition used by its artillery called Krashnapov, which has been imported from Russia, and has failed to hit targets in high altitude ranges such as Kargil.

"They were supposed to meet certain height and temperature requirement, and they said that it is not meant for such high altitude areas. Now, this ammunition has been shifted in the plain areas because it was not working there satisfactorily," it said.

The Army said several meetings have been held with the vendors to resolve the issue but progress in this direction has been relatively slow.

Last year, former Army Chief Gen V K Singh had written a letter to the Prime Minister explaining to him the shortages of tank ammunition being faced by the force.
http://www.deccanherald.com/content/338 ... tanks.html

So we throw away all the T 72s, AND BUY T 9XYZ IMMEDITELY

RKumar · Post by **RKumar** » 15 Jun 2013 18:48

ranji wrote:Old issue once again made new by India's largest convenience news store - the PTI (not my words). It is 2007 issue

Indian Army T-72 Tanks barrels bursts

http://frontierindia.net/indian-army-t- ... els-bursts

Could it be that this issue still not fixed along with Krashnapov ammunition? or will it be too expensive and wastage of taxpayers money to fix these?

member_26965 · Post by **member_26965** » 15 Jun 2013 18:54

its Krasnopol 155mm laser-guided shells. There was a news item long before that they were fixed.