Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 06 Oct 2015 12:52

Good video clips of Foss of Janes' on the LeClerc and Korean MBT here.
http://tankandafvnews.com/2015/03/17/ch ... clerc-mbt/
IDEX 2015: Christopher Foss talks about the Nexter Leclerc Main Battle Tank
Christopher F Foss, Editor, IHS Jane’s Land Warfare Platforms and filmed by Patrick Allen, IHS Jane's correspondent
17 March 2015

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 06 Oct 2015 13:46

Philip wrote:I have quoted from a v.recent report posted by another member.

It would be nice if you can repost it. I have no problem admitting a mistake.

jayasimha · Post by **jayasimha** » 07 Oct 2015 19:28

^^^^

I dont know why, this came to my mind

http://www.las-vegas-shows-reviews.com/ ... beginning/

..
lets wait for suitable ________ and let the discussion proceed.

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 07 Oct 2015 20:12

Arjun costs includes the cost of production line. While T-90 cost not only excludes the cost of production line but also many components which are standard on Arjun.

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 07 Oct 2015 21:51

After the DM bit the bullet on the LCA, the next tiger to tame is the army on the pnding decision order T90s for the Chinese border. There are counter arguements which say Army can order Arjun for the western border and the T90s there can be moved to DBO. Will have to see how this comes out

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 07 Oct 2015 21:56

Gyan wrote:Arjun costs includes the cost of production line. While T-90 cost not only excludes the cost of production line but also many components which are standard on Arjun.

Like the base armour, ERA and main gun.

And air conditioning without which, its been burning through TI sights valued at $500K a pop.

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 07 Oct 2015 22:41

Paul wrote:After the DM bit the bullet on the LCA, the next tiger to tame is the army on the pnding decision order T90s for the Chinese border. There are counter arguements which say Army can order Arjun for the western border and the T90s there can be moved to DBO. Will have to see how this comes out

Absolutely no new T90 orders anymore. Enough "import" even if the T90 we make ends up being half indian.

srai · Post by **srai** » 08 Oct 2015 03:23

Viv S wrote:
Gyan wrote:Arjun costs includes the cost of production line. While T-90 cost not only excludes the cost of production line but also many components which are standard on Arjun.
Like the base armour, ERA and main gun. And air conditioning without which, its been burning through TI sights valued at $500K a pop.

We see it time and again the same old story. Russian equipments come with artificially low acquisition prices only to be followed by huge hidden costs of making them actually functional/serviceable. There are those who tend to selectively only remember the initial low prices.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 08 Oct 2015 06:13

It is one thing for a poster on BR to have amnesia and something else for a few 100 Indians to go through the same motions and fall asleep at night.

Amazing!!!

srin · Post by **srin** » 08 Oct 2015 14:51

Philip wrote:Srai's post in the arty td.
The MoD has cleared 124 Arjuns for series production, but military sources said that with the arrival of the Russian T-90s main battle tank, its chassis would now be "diverted" to Bhim. The Army wants to acquire around 100 to 120 SP 155mm weapon systems in completed condition or as kits and build indigenously the remaining 400 to 450 in order to arm around 30 mechanised infantry regiments. These systems are meant to counter some 150 American M109A2 SP guns with the Pakistan Army.

The Army, meanwhile, has rejected Arjun, which continues to face problems with its fire control system and gun accuracy at battle ranges and has poor operational mobility because of its weight and width. The manufacturers of its German MTU 838 Ka-510, 1,400 hp diesel engine have also raised their price, significantly adding to the MBT's overall cost of around Rs.15 crores to Rs.20 crores each. The 310 Russian T-90s tanks that India has bought and which it plans to build indigenously under licence at the Heavy Vehicles Factory at Avadi in Tamil Nadu are priced at around $1.02 million apiece.
If this report/costs are even approx. accurate,one could buy two-3 T-90s for just one Arjun. $1.02M works out to about 6.5 cr. Along with one crew member less,its capital,operating and manpower costs would be much higher than a T-90. That may be a key reason why the IA is reluctant on Arjun,as the IA plans to possess about 4500 MBTs by 2020.

1996 called. They are offering Sukhoi-30s at Rs5100 crore for 40 aircraft(only 130 crores per aircraft). The LCA is far more expensive at 200 crores in 2015. Let's get rid of LCA and buy more Sukhois.

srai · Post by **srai** » 08 Oct 2015 15:04

^^^
Philip ... that article was written by Rahul Bedi, whose reputation as a DDM is well known. In any case, it's an old article written around 2002. Much have come to pass since then.

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 08 Oct 2015 15:46

^Oh please, like he doesn't know that.

srin · Post by **srin** » 08 Oct 2015 16:12

Of course, he did. Let's look at the fallacies in the logic, shall we ?
a) Assuming that exchange rate is the same between 2002 and 2015
b) Assuming that DDM cost analysis is correct
c) Assuming that T-90 price includes everything - nope, we had to import missiles, ammo and thermal sights on top of it
d) Assuming that there is no such thing called time value of money
e) Comparing the price to an Arjun that hadn't even entered production.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 13 Oct 2015 16:30

General Dynamics Land Systems displays M1A2 SEPV3 most advanced digital main battle tank

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 18 Oct 2015 18:59

Overdrive magazine reviews the Kestrel.
http://overdrive.in/features/the-tata-k ... l-carrier/

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 26 Oct 2015 14:04

http://www.benning.army.mil/armor/armor ... 995web.pdf

there is a nice writeup on the fight by the kuwaiti 35th 'shaheed' brigade on the night of the iraqi invasion in 1990. despite a few hours warning, and partial loading of ammo and supplies in the night they were able to cause heavy casualties to the medina and hammurabi divs before withdrawing across the KSA border the next afternoon after hours of heavy fighting.

the were the only one of the 4 kuwaiti brigades to deploy in time for a fight.

its well worth a read .... shows how large scale war even at brigade level is like a chess game - positions, sensors, comms, ammo, trained crews, reliable eqpt, resupplies down to water all contribute to the overall game.

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 27 Oct 2015 06:31

Anyone heard any chaiwalla info on NaMiCa? Three years since the platform was last tested.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 27 Oct 2015 11:32

looks like DOA to me because IA does not want TSP/PLA style specialized AT units with heavy TOW/Kornet class ATGMs.
they seem comfortable with tens of thousands of konkurs and Milan2T that BDL is producing.
we also have some limited number of Kornets somewhere - not sure who uses it.

Nag will live on as Helina in the LCH which is nearing IOC.

for bunker busting they seem ok with unloading 125mm rounds from tanks downrange

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 27 Oct 2015 16:41

^^ NaMiCa to me seems indispensable in Tibetan plateau, with good line of sight, ability to be airlifted by Il-76 and C-17 and ability to take down enemy armour beyond their strike capabilities.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 27 Oct 2015 16:47

IA top brass is still to execute its tibet pivot and consider the PLA its primary problem. when that happens things will move.

bharat karnad has recommended dismantling 2 of the 3 strike corps and standing them up with right tools as MSCs. in a atmosphere of limited funding, makes sense to me.

srai · Post by **srai** » 27 Oct 2015 16:56

^^^

NAMICA won't get inducted if the IA keeps changing goalpost. The NAG missile has been ready for 5 years now and NAMICA, as originally designed, could have been inducted some 3 years ago. The initial order is for a measly 13 NAMICAs and 400-odd NAGs. New design changes could have continued as Mk.1A/2 iteration path following those initial production/inductions, but the IA seems to want to either keep waiting for a "perfect" system or is using another delay tactic. The total requirement, at one point, was stated as 200 NAMICAs and some 8000 NAGs.

Picklu · Post by **Picklu** » 27 Oct 2015 20:09

I believe the thinking in MOD is that armour and anti armour - both are relatively lower priority right now with adequate no of T-90 is present to hold the fort for time being at least. Hence despite the chaiwala info from Niranulla, Arjun did not go anywhere and LCA is being prioritized.

I think MOD is prioritizing based on financial situation. Rafale was a massive outflow about to happen and NaMo-Parikkar combo gave LCA the highest focus to save us from that without compromising squadron numbers. There is no such impending order for tank import right now.

LRSAM, MRSAM are done deal so I think the next focus would be on upgraded Akash to protect the SRSAM flank from import lobby. Already Insas update has been given higher priority and import lobby thwarted.

srai · Post by **srai** » 28 Oct 2015 07:39

Picklu wrote:...
There is no such impending order for tank import right now.
...

Didn't the IA want to order the latest variant of T-90 for the mountain armor brigades? Some 300 units or something like that from what I remember.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 28 Oct 2015 09:18

cancelled I think, along with most of MSC due to funds crunch. it was preceded by the idea of importing 300 polish anders light tanks.

Picklu · Post by **Picklu** » 28 Oct 2015 23:13

Also, any t-90 import is a repeat order as we already have license for 1000 more.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 28 Oct 2015 23:22

JTull wrote:http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/defence-ministry-to-clear-military-deals-worth-rs-5000-cr/articleshow/49561226.cms

...
Parrikar, who is set to leave for Russia on Friday, is also likely to discuss the possible acquisition of two new Kilo class submarines for the Indian Navy that is battling with a depleted underwater fleet. India currently operates nine Kilo submarines under the Sindhughosh class and had lost one to a major explosion at the Mumbai harbour in 2013.

The two submarines are being offered as a quick option to fill gaps as St Petersburg already has a line of advanced Kilo class submarines under production for the Russian Navy as well as a Vietnamese order.

...

The government is set to clear two major military purchases from Russia days before Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar's visit to Moscow, including a comprehensive upgrade of India's Ilyushin transport aircraft fleet and the acquisition of 150 new armoured fighting vehicles

BharadwajV · Post by **BharadwajV** » 28 Oct 2015 23:47

NRao wrote: The government is set to clear two major military purchases from Russia days before Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar's visit to Moscow, including a comprehensive upgrade of India's Ilyushin transport aircraft fleet and the acquisition of 150 new armoured fighting vehicles

From 2013:
http://indianarmy.nic.in/writereaddata/ ... 131109.pdf

In a written response to the Lok Sabha, Antony said the estimated Rs8bn ($0.14bn) project involved armament upgrade of BMP-2/2K infantry fighting vehicle (IFV) to BMP-2M standard, and acquisition of a new powerpack for the IFV.

http://www.army-technology.com/news/new ... icle-fleet

So the new order must be for the BMP-2M!

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 29 Oct 2015 00:19

Its almost as if IA has its own definition of BMP-2M and is asking about for it?!?
http://indianarmy.nic.in/writereaddata/ ... 131109.pdf

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 29 Oct 2015 00:22

Looks like IA looked at BMP-2M, said nice concept and now wants equivalents?
http://www.defproac.com/?p=1730

Matches news here
http://defencenews.in/article/Indian-Ar ... ed-FICV-29

Russians are gonna be pissed, lol.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 29 Oct 2015 08:16

This 150 more IFV is to be manufactured by OFB and one report which I read said the model is BMP-2/2K.

That 150 number is in a sweet spot to account for 2 x mechanized infantry regiments. Hope another infantry division is being converted into RAPID configuration.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 29 Oct 2015 08:24

what is position on the domestic upg to BMP2 that OFB had proposed in collab with Tula? it was supposed to put new armour and thermal sights on the BMP2.

rkhanna · Post by **rkhanna** » 29 Oct 2015 13:10

Wiki tells me that Russia offered the BMP-3 to India with ToT if we killed our own program. I remember reading somewhere that the BMP-3 was indeed trialed in India and Failed GQSR.

Anybody know what were the failure points? To my mango eyes the BMP-3M looks like an impressive beast.

pragnya · Post by **pragnya** » 29 Oct 2015 14:15

is this inducted? seems BMP with an artillery gun.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVRaqWft ... e=youtu.be

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 29 Oct 2015 14:37

the BMP3 might be ok as a light raiding tank. but its layout is the worst of any IFV in modern era. even IA could not find a way to pass it I suppose.
--

The vehicle has an unconventional layout. The engine is in the back of the vehicle to the right (unlike most other IFVs, which have the engine located forward in the hull). As a result, the driver is seated forward in the hull (in the center) together with two infantrymen (one on each side of the driver). The vehicle has a double bottom and the engine is located under the floor of the vehicle (troops enter/leave the vehicle over the engine).[14] The remaining five infantrymen are seated aft of the two man turret

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 29 Oct 2015 14:43

http://www.oxygino.com/site/wp-content/ ... 5-um-8.jpg
http://www.oxygino.com/site/wp-content/ ... -um-13.jpg

its a death trap for the 5 troops cramped around the back of turret if something blocks their crawling tunnel exits.
the engine below the floor means none can sit in that space, they have to crawl out of the back

the two in the front cannot dismount under fire at all through their hatches.

its the 'camel' of the IFV world - a horse designed by commitee

if you just want a lightly protected heavily armed amphibious raiding tank with a 3-man crew it is probably ok

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 29 Oct 2015 14:49

^^ There is a new BMP-3 variant called Dragoon which per Janes report Saudi and Iraq wants to buy
they have added a new 57 mm Gun and moved Engine on front

http://www.janes.com/article/54972/iraq ... p-3-orders

A new version of the BMP-3 is being developed called the Dragoon that rectifies the vehicle's most glaring flaw by moving the engine to the front, thereby freeing up more space for the infantry in the rear. The Dragoon also has the new AU-220M weapon station with a 57 mm gun.

Picture of BMP-3 Dragoon 57 mm gun

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 29 Oct 2015 21:02

Putin had personally lobbied for the BMP 3 some years ago but did not go through

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 29 Oct 2015 21:16

Paul wrote:Putin had personally lobbied for the BMP 3 some years ago but did not go through

He had a condition on it though. He wanted India to stop designing her own.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 29 Oct 2015 21:34

Karan M wrote:Its almost as if IA has its own definition of BMP-2M and is asking about for it?!?
http://indianarmy.nic.in/writereaddata/ ... 131109.pdf

E mail ID. we dte@yahoo.com

:groan:

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 30 Oct 2015 12:48

What happened to our desi IFVs? Is it the cheaper option to build more upgraded BMP-2s? Probably something that the OFB can handle without too much stress. It appears that buying/building/upgrading "more of the same" is gradually gaining ground in the MOD as MP gets to grips with the modernisation/acquisition problems and decisions. This route is the most cost-effective to keep numbers and capability happy.

The decision in the media that all 27 IL-76/78s are to be upgraded to serve for another 20 years,with new engines,avionics,etc., is very wise.The IL-76 aircraft and its AWACS/tanker derivatives have served the IAF superbly.Even new IL-476/90s cone in at very low cost.The BMP decision will avoid the need for more imports. One would like to know though what missiles are planned for it.