MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Anshuman.Kumar
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 37
Joined: 08 Sep 2016 20:16

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Anshuman.Kumar » 02 Mar 2018 22:27

Mk1 was 58 tons ..add a plough to it..becomes 60 tons. usable .use 4-5 of them with say 40 MK2 without the ploughs in each regiment..which frees them if needless weight n helps meet the new army demand of I believe 65 tonnes weight..ur earlier mk1 become usable too..everybody is happy ..a mk1 with a plough will still be better than wt most BRFites call tin cans

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1575
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby srin » 02 Mar 2018 22:32

What is the APS for Arjun mk2 ? Are we developing our own?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50763
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby ramana » 02 Mar 2018 22:52

I don't think the Arjun Mk1 can carry the mine plough.

Vivek K
BRFite
Posts: 1877
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Vivek K » 02 Mar 2018 22:59

Anshuman.Kumar wrote:Mk1 was 58 tons ..add a plough to it..becomes 60 tons. usable .use 4-5 of them with say 40 MK2 without the ploughs in each regiment..which frees them if needless weight n helps meet the new army demand of I believe 65 tonnes weight..ur earlier mk1 become usable too..everybody is happy ..a mk1 with a plough will still be better than wt most BRFites call tin cans

Any day Arjun Mk-1 is better than the tin cans. But soon reality of the geopolitical situation will set in with IA Brass. From the 70s to perhaps the breakup of the FSU, Indian interests and FSU interests had commonalities. Since the break up of the SU, and the re-alignments in the world order, those commonalities are fewer. Roos has found friends in Pakistan and is often on the same side as Cheen. So for India to be paying billions to help roosi ecanamee will not make sense for too long.

And so, IA will, like the IAF soon realize that buying M1A1s instead of tin cans is very expensive. That will lead to a revival of the Arjun program in the FMBT avatar. DRDO should drop MK2 and work on FMBT and learn from the past mistakes. Enlisting a pvt firm for lobbying and business development would help tremendously. What did they say in Sholay - Jab ghora ghaas khaata hai ........ or some such.

Avik
BRFite
Posts: 190
Joined: 06 Oct 2009 00:16

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Avik » 03 Mar 2018 02:32

The Arjuns are deployed in the desert rather than Punjab and south J&K. In the desert the armour advance will be in full abreast formation rather than deep echelon formation like in Punjab and Chicken Neck. Advancing in deep echelon formation across Cholistan doesn't make sense since the desert is 'relatively' open . Hence, the need for multiple mine clearance tanks instead of just 4-5-8 tanks, which is ok with narrow zones of advance, but not for wider penetration.

Also, remember the armr bdes that have been assigned Arjuns only have 1 sqn of engrs. That is not sufficient to support three armr regiments advancing in parallel. Hence, the need for tank trawls on tanks

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4087
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby srai » 03 Mar 2018 03:04

ramana wrote:Zynda, or anyone do we know what are the 73 improvements that Army suggested and DRDO agreed to incorporate?

Does every tank have to have that mine plough? Do they want bull dozer or a tank?
Does T-90 come with the mine plough on every tank?

Have they manufactured the local design engine?

I think Nirmala Sitaraman has to tackle the Arjun issue on priority basis.


Here you go. It was 19 major and 74 minor improvement.

Upcoming modifications on the Arjun Mark II
Folks,

I know, like every married person, that “major” and “minor” are relative terms. But here is the list of 19 major modifications that the Arjun Mark II will feature. The list was finalized after extensive user opinion canvassing and feedback from the DGQA, DGEME, OFB, other DRDO labs.

1. Missile firing capability
2. Commander’s TI panoramic sight Mk II
3. Driver’s uncooled thermal imaging night sight
4. Additional ammunition (don’t ask… won’t tell!)
5. Enhanced ammunition penetrator
6. Effective alternative to muzzle reference sight (MRS)
7. Resin-based CCC
8. Ten-round containerised bin
9. Explosive reactive armour panels
10. Infra-red/Thermal imaging resistant paint
11. Air defence weapon remote firing
12. ALWCS (advanced laser warning and countermeasure system)
13. Roof mounted driver’s seat
14. ATT in GMS (gunner’s main sight)
15. Advanced land navigation system
16. New final drive with increased reduction ratio
17. Advanced running gear system
18. New track system
19. Mine plough

In addition, there are 74 “minor” improvements (adding up to 93 improvements in all) that are not really that minor. For example:

1. An improved sprocket wheel that modifies the manufacturing process from rolled homogenous armour (which required gas cutting and machining) to a forged sprocket which is 50% the cost, 50% easier to build and gives a longer life.

2. Another minor modification is the incorporation of stainless steel fuel tanks. The painting required for the insides of the earlier mild steel tanks was creating residue that clogged the fuel lines and filters. But stainless steel requires no painting.

3. Internal electrical wiring has been comprehensively re-laid, incorporating the dozens of modifications that have been incrementally carried out over the years. The wiring has now been laid systematically, making it easier to track and repair.

4. The radio harness has been modified, and internal communications are now digital. That makes it easier to integrate audio alarms and provides an SMS facility between the crew (how ‘bout sum chai?). It is totally noise free… now the crew can communicate easily.

5. Another improvement is the incorporation of a new compact Auxillary Power Unit (APU), which provides 8 KW of electrical power (uprated from the existing 4.5 KW APU). This requirement is based on fresh load budgeting calculations, allowing the tank to operate in “silent mode” with the additional electronics… also keeping a cushion for future electronic enhancements.

Of these 93 modifications, 45 have already been tested during trials in summer 2011… having been incorporated on one "improved Arjun Mk I" tank. A second tank is being cut open to put in three major modifications, including the commander’s panoramic sight Mk II.

I could bore you all at some length with this kind of stuff, but will let you chew on this for now…

ArjunPandit
BRFite
Posts: 1470
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby ArjunPandit » 03 Mar 2018 03:22

ramana wrote:I think Nirmala Sitaraman has to tackle the Arjun issue on priority basis.

Sir, IMHO, this govt is dousing fires from one to another, all thanks to AKA's clean mundu. Tanks are not in as much shortage in IA as artillery, Guns, BPJ and sqdn shortage for IAF or AC or what not for IN.
As much as I would like at least 2000 Arjuns, I think its number is pretty late in the list. DRDO if it has budget should carry on so that the learnings of it are not lost like marut.

Besides, all said and done Army chief will carry more heft than IAF or IAN and in the end he sits in a better situation than his other counterparts. The only thing I think we can look into is, progressive replacement of T72 that will be retiring with Mk1/2

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50763
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby ramana » 03 Mar 2018 04:25

srai wrote:
ramana wrote:Zynda, or anyone do we know what are the 73 improvements that Army suggested and DRDO agreed to incorporate?

Does every tank have to have that mine plough? Do they want bull dozer or a tank?
Does T-90 come with the mine plough on every tank?

Have they manufactured the local design engine?

I think Nirmala Sitaraman has to tackle the Arjun issue on priority basis.


Here you go. It was 19 major and 74 minor improvement.

Upcoming modifications on the Arjun Mark II
Folks,

I know, like every married person, that “major” and “minor” are relative terms. But here is the list of 19 major modifications that the Arjun Mark II will feature. The list was finalized after extensive user opinion canvassing and feedback from the DGQA, DGEME, OFB, other DRDO labs.

1. Missile firing capability
2. Commander’s TI panoramic sight Mk II
3. Driver’s uncooled thermal imaging night sight
4. Additional ammunition (don’t ask… won’t tell!)
5. Enhanced ammunition penetrator
6. Effective alternative to muzzle reference sight (MRS)
7. Resin-based CCC
8. Ten-round containerised bin
9. Explosive reactive armour panels
10. Infra-red/Thermal imaging resistant paint
11. Air defence weapon remote firing
12. ALWCS (advanced laser warning and countermeasure system)
13. Roof mounted driver’s seat :?:
14. ATT in GMS (gunner’s main sight)
15. Advanced land navigation system
16. New final drive with increased reduction ratio
17. Advanced running gear system
18. New track system
19. Mine plough

In addition, there are 74 “minor” improvements (adding up to 93 improvements in all) that are not really that minor. For example:

1. An improved sprocket wheel that modifies the manufacturing process from rolled homogenous armour (which required gas cutting and machining) to a forged sprocket which is 50% the cost, 50% easier to build and gives a longer life.

2. Another minor modification is the incorporation of stainless steel fuel tanks. The painting required for the insides of the earlier mild steel tanks was creating residue that clogged the fuel lines and filters. But stainless steel requires no painting.

3. Internal electrical wiring has been comprehensively re-laid, incorporating the dozens of modifications that have been incrementally carried out over the years. The wiring has now been laid systematically, making it easier to track and repair.

4. The radio harness has been modified, and internal communications are now digital. That makes it easier to integrate audio alarms and provides an SMS facility between the crew (how ‘bout sum chai?). It is totally noise free… now the crew can communicate easily.

5. Another improvement is the incorporation of a new compact Auxillary Power Unit (APU), which provides 8 KW of electrical power (uprated from the existing 4.5 KW APU). This requirement is based on fresh load budgeting calculations, allowing the tank to operate in “silent mode” with the additional electronics… also keeping a cushion for future electronic enhancements.

Of these 93 modifications, 45 have already been tested during trials in summer 2011… having been incorporated on one "improved Arjun Mk I" tank. A second tank is being cut open to put in three major modifications, including the commander’s panoramic sight Mk II.

I could bore you all at some length with this kind of stuff, but will let you chew on this for now…


I highlighted the ones I thing will lead to weight gain.
Of the highlighted items the ERA should be the most heavy.
We know the mine plow is 1.5 t to 2 tonnes.

Rest are really updating the items to current capability.
So 68.6- 1.5= 67 tonnes vs 65 tonnes goal.

Does IA want that reduction to come from ERA?

I don't think so.
What's Item 13?
Is it because of hot weather operation or due to the mine clearing plow?

This roof mounted seat makes it an earth mover.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4087
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby srai » 03 Mar 2018 04:45

^^^
Number 8 would also add weight.
8. Ten-round containerised bin

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50763
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby ramana » 03 Mar 2018 05:12

Isn't it a packaging issue?
I would imagine containerizing is good thing for logistics.

Wonder what was the baseline?

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2668
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby kit » 03 Mar 2018 05:28

Out of curiosity .. why does all the Arjuns need mine ploughs ? .. wouldnt be enough to task some variants with this feature ?

vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1599
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby vasu raya » 03 Mar 2018 06:30

srin wrote:What is the APS for Arjun mk2 ? Are we developing our own?


if there is one, testing them by placing them in protection duty of posts on LoC might be possible.

Srutayus
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 67
Joined: 29 Aug 2016 05:53

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Srutayus » 03 Mar 2018 07:14

Out of curiosity .. why does all the Arjuns need mine ploughs ? .. wouldnt be enough to task some variants with this feature ?


From an operational perspective...a very valid question.
No MBT is evaluated for its primary weight after strapping on a mine plough.

But if you are predisposed to reject it, these absurd conditions help you to do so.

Akshay Kapoor
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1627
Joined: 03 May 2011 11:15

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Akshay Kapoor » 04 Mar 2018 02:13

ramana wrote:
Akshay Kapoor wrote:No every tank does not need a mine plough but some do. In a regt of 45 tanks I think 4-5 are enough.

Large scale mine sweeping will be given by Armd and assault ENGR regts of the Armd Div (remember there is 1 ENGR regt in every Div). So there will be a troop of that regt with each armd regt. I think the problem is because there are no Armd/Assault Engr Regts equipped with arjun mine plows. Two solutions - equip some tanks with a mine plow or look at raising 1 sqdn of a new Amrd / Assault ENGR Regt to support the Arjun Brigade. We do have a precedence of a bde level force - the para brigade. Start with a Arjun bde and then raise one more if that works well.



I think the idea of a special mine clearing squadron per Division would be an effective thing and attach to the ENGR regt.

Squadron is 15 tanks? If so that would be 45 tanks for 3 armored divisions.

Need to break the log jam just like it was done with the Tejas Mk2.

Can some one dig up the changes between Arjun Mk1 and Mk2? and the weight contributions due to the changes?


No, not a Armoured Engr Sqdn per Div but per bde ie for the Arjun Brigade. For the Div you need 3 sqdns ie a full regt. But yes thats a good solution. The sqdn will also need a Combat Engr tractor. Mine clearing is quite important because our 71 and 65 Armd offensives were stuck because of deep Pak minefields (they used civilian labour ie expendable to lay mines). Infantry (and ENGRs were used to clear lanes but because we didnt want to take tank casualties offensives were not pressed). OT and I will discuss on tactics thread.

For the purpose of this thread mine plough has not been asked for every tank.

Avik
BRFite
Posts: 190
Joined: 06 Oct 2009 00:16

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Avik » 04 Mar 2018 04:21

Akshay sir..

reposting....

The Arjuns are deployed in the desert rather than Punjab and south J&K. In the desert the armour advance will be in line abreast formation rather than deep echelon formation like in Punjab and Chicken Neck. Advancing in deep echelon formation across Cholistan doesn't make sense since the desert is 'relatively' open . Hence, the need for multiple mine clearance tanks instead of just 4-5-8 tanks, which is ok with narrow zones of advance, but not for wider penetration.

Also, remember the armr bdes that have been assigned Arjuns only have 1 sqn of engrs. That is not sufficient to support three armr regiments advancing in parallel. Hence, the need for tank trawls on tanks

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4087
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby srai » 04 Mar 2018 06:26

MoD’s “Power” required here too to push 1000 Arjun’s through :twisted:

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36076
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby SaiK » 04 Mar 2018 07:46

We have to campaign like we did for Mk2 on soc media. Just waiting for Mk2 confirmations and a deep lungi dance

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19640
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Philip » 04 Mar 2018 09:29

M2K is awaited eagerly.NS.however HAL's production must improve.A firang fighter to make up numbers replacing the SEF, which we're enjoying as the neo-MRCA td., is being pursued.

From yesterday's v.heartening results for the BJP, the return of the NDA to power come 2019 is v.much on the cards.Karnataka is on a knife edge and the fragmented oppn. will be up the spout if they cannot cobble together some alliance that inspres confidence in the electorate.Thus far the IOU ( Iindex of Oppn. unity) is v.low.

The BJP can therefore take huge leaps of faith with the MK-2 but provided that a v.clear roadmap is presented with swift achievable development , testing/trials and series production.Otherwise the MK-2 will lose its relevance due to the obsolescence factor when stealth birds are found more frequently in the sky.In fact, increasing the LCA MK-2's stealth into a stealth or semi-stealth fighter could be a masterstroke .There is a lot of redesigning of it reqd. to fit the bill.Time to make max use of the opportunity..

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1350
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Khalsa » 04 Mar 2018 15:13

SaiK wrote:We have to campaign like we did for Mk2 on soc media. Just waiting for Mk2 confirmations and a deep lungi dance

aye sir

however there are some subtle differences between that Mk2 and MkII

Tejas Mk2 is not built and the IAF wants to influence some of things it can.
Arjun MkII has been built and the army loves the 70+ improvements but the good old weigh sticking point has gone from bad to worse.

otherwise you have me as a first recruit to undertake path of any campaign that be launched.
I am all for Arjun MkII

Will
BRFite
Posts: 615
Joined: 28 Apr 2011 11:27

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Will » 04 Mar 2018 20:37

Vivek K wrote:
Anshuman.Kumar wrote:Mk1 was 58 tons ..add a plough to it..becomes 60 tons. usable .use 4-5 of them with say 40 MK2 without the ploughs in each regiment..which frees them if needless weight n helps meet the new army demand of I believe 65 tonnes weight..ur earlier mk1 become usable too..everybody is happy ..a mk1 with a plough will still be better than wt most BRFites call tin cans

Any day Arjun Mk-1 is better than the tin cans. But soon reality of the geopolitical situation will set in with IA Brass. From the 70s to perhaps the breakup of the FSU, Indian interests and FSU interests had commonalities. Since the break up of the SU, and the re-alignments in the world order, those commonalities are fewer. Roos has found friends in Pakistan and is often on the same side as Cheen. So for India to be paying billions to help roosi ecanamee will not make sense for too long.

And so, IA will, like the IAF soon realize that buying M1A1s instead of tin cans is very expensive. That will lead to a revival of the Arjun program in the FMBT avatar. DRDO should drop MK2 and work on FMBT and learn from the past mistakes. Enlisting a pvt firm for lobbying and business development would help tremendously. What did they say in Sholay - Jab ghora ghaas khaata hai ........ or some such.


Am waiting for the defence minister to do a Tejas on the Arjun and put paid to anymore tin cans for the IA from mother Russia. I don’t see why we have to bankroll someone else’s MIC when the said country is turning towards supporting our enemies. With Russia, do business as equals and go the joint development route for cutting edge tech. We supported their MIC during their worst days. What did they do? Armed the Chinese and now are on the verge of arming the Paki’s. The old adage that there are no permanent friends or enemies in geopolitics holds true. Every country does what’s in ones interests and they should. But when someone turns to arming our enemies and supporting them in global forums, they should not expect us to be a captive market for their junk. Realitionships should not be based just on purchase of defense hardware. There are other avenues of boosting trade but so far Russia dosent seem to be too interested in that.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36076
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby SaiK » 04 Mar 2018 21:47

khalsa ji, I have started the campaign. my first tweet to @nsitaraman ji is sent. I'm sure she will see it or I will do some telepathic mantra (I know exactly what she loves to hear :)). Arjun MkII it is!

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19640
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Philip » 04 Mar 2018 23:28

Continuing winning elections by the BJP will make it less likely.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2668
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby kit » 05 Mar 2018 00:34

srai wrote:MoD’s “Power” required here too to push 1000 Arjun’s through :twisted:


rather plough through IA opposition :mrgreen:

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1350
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Khalsa » 05 Mar 2018 01:56

--DELETED by Self.
Last edited by Khalsa on 05 Mar 2018 01:59, edited 1 time in total.

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1350
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Khalsa » 05 Mar 2018 01:59

SaiK wrote:khalsa ji, I have started the campaign. my first tweet to @nsitaraman ji is sent. I'm sure she will see it or I will do some telepathic mantra (I know exactly what she loves to hear :)). Arjun MkII it is!


I am joining you sir.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50763
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby ramana » 05 Mar 2018 06:52

I think Arjun can have a role in strengthening up the RAPIDs pivot divisions.

These have dual role of holding and strike as needed.

IA has armoured divisions,.
Infantry are two types
Pivot
Strike

Vivek K
BRFite
Posts: 1877
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Vivek K » 05 Mar 2018 10:39

All T-72s should be replaced with Arjun MK1s and 2s.

Kersi
BRFite
Posts: 149
Joined: 31 May 2017 12:25

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Kersi » 05 Mar 2018 12:27

srai wrote:
ramana wrote:Zynda, or anyone do we know what are the 73 improvements that Army suggested and DRDO agreed to incorporate?

Does every tank have to have that mine plough? Do they want bull dozer or a tank?
Does T-90 come with the mine plough on every tank?

Have they manufactured the local design engine?

I think Nirmala Sitaraman has to tackle the Arjun issue on priority basis.


Here you go. It was 19 major and 74 minor improvement.

Upcoming modifications on the Arjun Mark II
Folks,

I know, like every married person, that “major” and “minor” are relative terms. But here is the list of 19 major modifications that the Arjun Mark II will feature. The list was finalized after extensive user opinion canvassing and feedback from the DGQA, DGEME, OFB, other DRDO labs.

1. Missile firing capability
2. Commander’s TI panoramic sight Mk II
3. Driver’s uncooled thermal imaging night sight
4. Additional ammunition (don’t ask… won’t tell!)
5. Enhanced ammunition penetrator
6. Effective alternative to muzzle reference sight (MRS)
7. Resin-based CCC
8. Ten-round containerised bin
9. Explosive reactive armour panels
10. Infra-red/Thermal imaging resistant paint
11. Air defence weapon remote firing
12. ALWCS (advanced laser warning and countermeasure system)
13. Roof mounted driver’s seat
14. ATT in GMS (gunner’s main sight)
15. Advanced land navigation system
16. New final drive with increased reduction ratio
17. Advanced running gear system
18. New track system
19. Mine plough

In addition, there are 74 “minor” improvements (adding up to 93 improvements in all) that are not really that minor. For example:

1. An improved sprocket wheel that modifies the manufacturing process from rolled homogenous armour (which required gas cutting and machining) to a forged sprocket which is 50% the cost, 50% easier to build and gives a longer life.

2. Another minor modification is the incorporation of stainless steel fuel tanks. The painting required for the insides of the earlier mild steel tanks was creating residue that clogged the fuel lines and filters. But stainless steel requires no painting.

3. Internal electrical wiring has been comprehensively re-laid, incorporating the dozens of modifications that have been incrementally carried out over the years. The wiring has now been laid systematically, making it easier to track and repair.

4. The radio harness has been modified, and internal communications are now digital. That makes it easier to integrate audio alarms and provides an SMS facility between the crew (how ‘bout sum chai?). It is totally noise free… now the crew can communicate easily.

5. Another improvement is the incorporation of a new compact Auxillary Power Unit (APU), which provides 8 KW of electrical power (uprated from the existing 4.5 KW APU). This requirement is based on fresh load budgeting calculations, allowing the tank to operate in “silent mode” with the additional electronics… also keeping a cushion for future electronic enhancements.

Of these 93 modifications, 45 have already been tested during trials in summer 2011… having been incorporated on one "improved Arjun Mk I" tank. A second tank is being cut open to put in three major modifications, including the commander’s panoramic sight Mk II.

I could bore you all at some length with this kind of stuff, but will let you chew on this for now…



Does the T 90 have these features ? i have my doubts. So IA happily gets more T 90 without these "special" features whereas the Arjun has to prove its over and over again

Akshay Kapoor
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1627
Joined: 03 May 2011 11:15

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Akshay Kapoor » 05 Mar 2018 17:34

Avik wrote:Akshay sir..

reposting....

The Arjuns are deployed in the desert rather than Punjab and south J&K. In the desert the armour advance will be in line abreast formation rather than deep echelon formation like in Punjab and Chicken Neck. Advancing in deep echelon formation across Cholistan doesn't make sense since the desert is 'relatively' open . Hence, the need for multiple mine clearance tanks instead of just 4-5-8 tanks, which is ok with narrow zones of advance, but not for wider penetration.

Also, remember the armr bdes that have been assigned Arjuns only have 1 sqn of engrs. That is not sufficient to support three armr regiments advancing in parallel. Hence, the need for tank trawls on tanks


Hmm. Good point. I hadn't visualised that abreast advance in deserts.I should have thought of that. But you have made a strategic error in posting - you seem to know about armour tactics and terrain differences so I will request your presence on the tactics thread.

I am also thinking of a concept operations re the 2 front war thread - in my self styled role as theatre commander west. Would love to have your inputs there as well.

Akshay Kapoor
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1627
Joined: 03 May 2011 11:15

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Akshay Kapoor » 05 Mar 2018 17:47

ramana wrote:I think Arjun can have a role in strengthening up the RAPIDs pivot divisions.

These have dual role of holding and strike as needed.

IA has armoured divisions,.
Infantry are two types
Pivot
Strike


No, that's not quite correct.

We have 2 types of Corps - PIvot and Strike.

Strike Corps have an Armoured Div which is the nucleus around which the corp is formed. There are two more divs. Typically infantry or mountain Div or a Rapid.

There are 5 kinds of Divs - Infantry , Mountain , Rapid , Armoured and Arty.

Rapid div has two inf bdes and one mechanised bde.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6988
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Indranil » 05 Mar 2018 23:05

It is painful to see the hoops that IA is making Arjun jump through. As part of the weight reduction effort, CVRDE has floated a tender to build the wheels and rims out of composites. Is there any parallel to this in any tank in the world?

Currently, each wheel + rim weighs 63 + 15 kgs. If they succeed in this endeavour, then each composite wheel + rim will weigh < 45+5 kgs. Saving 28 kgs per wheel, they would be able to shed about 390 kgs off the tank.

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1589
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby nam » 05 Mar 2018 23:41

I think the rim and some of the supporting components are been made out of composites. The wheel itself may be of aluminium. The prototypes are already there.

The T-72 steel wheels have been replaced with aluminium. Along with weight savings, it has tremendously increased the T72 top speed.

In a way this is good. All these lessons can be applied on FMBT. Lot of internals could potentially be replaced with lighter composites and aluminium.

Vivek K
BRFite
Posts: 1877
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Vivek K » 05 Mar 2018 23:42

Indranil wrote:It is painful to see the hoops that IA is making Arjun jump through. As part of the weight reduction effort, CVRDE has floated a tender to build the wheels and rims out of composites. Is there any parallel to this in any tank in the world?

Currently, each wheel + rim weighs 63 + 15 kgs. If they succeed in this endeavour, then each composite wheel + rim will weigh < 45+5 kgs. Saving 28 kgs per wheel, they would be able to shed about 390 kgs off the tank.

You know what comes after that right = 100,000 km of testing to make one of the rims break and then call the composite tech a failure.

Kersi has a point. We need to have BRFites look at the list of improvements required of the Arjun and see how many of those capabilities are available in the tincan.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6988
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Indranil » 06 Mar 2018 00:09

nam wrote:I think the rim and some of the supporting components are been made out of composites. The wheel itself may be of aluminium. The prototypes are already there.

The T-72 steel wheels have been replaced with aluminium. Along with weight savings, it has tremendously increased the T72 top speed.

In a way this is good. All these lessons can be applied on FMBT. Lot of internals could potentially be replaced with lighter composites and aluminium.

I agree it will be helpful for FMBT. But how long will we keep using them as technology demonstrators only?
Vivek K wrote:Kersi has a point. We need to have BRFites look at the list of improvements required of the Arjun and see how many of those capabilities are available in the tincan.

I don't see the point of a witch-hunt. We MUST realize as civilians that morale of the force is a BIG thing. They can't do the thankless job of risking life and limb every day with a broken morale. Broken machines are okay, broken men are not.

IMHO holding up injustice is useful for them to see. Also it sends a message to the bad apples that they are being watched. But, calling our own forces names does not serve any purpose. We should not forget the difference. I know you and Kersi are patriots and will give it some thought.

Vidur
BRFite
Posts: 131
Joined: 20 Aug 2017 18:57

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Vidur » 06 Mar 2018 00:16

I don’t like to comment on specific equipment but I am constrained to say that there must be more introspection before making wild insinuations. Arjun while an adequate tank does need weight reduction in MK2 and it is the development agency’s responsibility to do so. In general DRDO has been given a lot of support and decades of patience. It’s probably the most cosseted govt body.And it has finally started getting some good results across many programs. These are being fully supported by the govt and the users.

In which country do you have director of R&D agency as part of the vetoing body for defence purchases - Defence Acquaition Council. It’s like having the person taking the exam also sitting in invigilator board. But it is done to show commitment to indegenisation. But they need to be accountable too. They need to reduce weight and post that testing is an integral part of the process to check if that has happened. They cannot have a blank cheque. Personally I believe Army has been quite patient on this project.

Vidur
BRFite
Posts: 131
Joined: 20 Aug 2017 18:57

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Vidur » 06 Mar 2018 00:22

I would urge all members of this forum to be a bit realistic and even handed in their comments. There is a strong desire for indegnistaion here and that is good. Perhaps because you are mostly all Engineers ? But do try to understand operational issues. The Tactics&Military Craft thread is a very useful resource. You would all do well to visit that and understand the issues. Winning in war is the raison d etere of the equipment. And weight is a very important part of that.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6988
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Indranil » 06 Mar 2018 00:41

I agree with all your assertions and I hope we all heed your urge. I will try to moderate on similar lines.

At the same time, the engineer in me does revolt a little. How can I give you every capability you want of a Arjun at the weight of a T-90. You ask for better armour, better mobility, better firepower, better crew conditions, better accuracy, better fordability, all-day all-fighting capability with two sets of panaromic view generation to enable hunting while firing. You mandated a four man crew at the beginning. But, you are not ready for weight gain. Forget non-performing DRDO, is there anybody in the world who has built a tank with Arjun's specifications which is lighter than Arjun? If not, something has to give, no sir?

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2205
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Cybaru » 06 Mar 2018 01:37

Tweet that last post bro! We all need to start tweeting. Change discourse on the net where it matters.

ManuJ
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 271
Joined: 20 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: USA

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby ManuJ » 06 Mar 2018 04:08

Indranil wrote:is there anybody in the world who has built a tank with Arjun's specifications which is lighter than Arjun?

Needs to be highlighted and asked again and again, whenever someone brings up the question of Arjun's weight 'problem'.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15742
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: MBT Arjun - News and Discussions

Postby Karan M » 06 Mar 2018 04:20

Vidur wrote:I would urge all members of this forum to be a bit realistic and even handed in their comments. There is a strong desire for indegnistaion here and that is good. Perhaps because you are mostly all Engineers ? But do try to understand operational issues. The Tactics&Military Craft thread is a very useful resource. You would all do well to visit that and understand the issues. Winning in war is the raison d etere of the equipment. And weight is a very important part of that.


Dear sir, can you please explain what kind of tactics and operational advantages the T-90 brings to the table? Lets be even handed as you correctly point out, lets see:
Radiator problems
TI Sight does not work
Needs an APU
Main ammo is obsolete vis a vis Western rounds (no great advantage over Arjun) leading to import of expensive, slow ATGMs
TOT was a farce, leading to Arjun tech for armor and gun barrel
Unlike Arjun ammo storage cannot even be modified for safe storage and has to be stored outside the tank in the latest variant
Sights and gun stabilization is behind Arjuns

Yes, winning in war is the be-all and end-all. But do ask yourself, is buying imported lemons just so you could claim that expenditure on infrastructure was saved, the panacea for winning in war?

And second, indigenization is because of a strong "Desire?" Surely sir, you must understand the huge strategic necessity to indigenize!! What happens to any of our imported toys if they stop working and merely field modifications implies we voided warranty and hence prevents us from doing anything but continually importing.

In 1965, we stopped fighting because we incorrectly assessed we ran out of (imported) ammunition.
And today, piecemeal orders for local equipment mean indigenization is never truly achieved and instead "warwinning" equipment is imported which hardly ever works.

A simple and cursory survey of most of our imports over the past decade or so, shows so many showpiece items actually being unused because of contractual fights after the equipment proved to be unsuited for the rugged use our soldiers require of it.

In short, indigenization is not a desire, but has to be an absolute strategic necessity.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: brar_w, Google [Bot], Vinod Ji and 34 guests