Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

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.
Post Reply
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6587
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by Manish_P »

Jay wrote: 12 Feb 2025 21:50
Rakesh wrote: 12 Feb 2025 21:11
10. Certain quarters in the Indian establishment believe that the deal might be dead in the water as the new regime has a hard line stance on “Make in America” and might cancel off shoring of manufacturing facilities.
I really hope this happens. Armed forces never ending love for foreign deals and take the easy route should be ended and if Trump admin does it for us, more power to that admin then.
Or it means that the Trump admin wants us to buy fully assembled (in USA) units. And also pay for the transportation charges to get them delivered to india. :mrgreen:
Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1814
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by Khalsa »

Thanks for that , I did not realise they had asked for surplus engines.
Jay
BRFite
Posts: 913
Joined: 24 Feb 2005 18:24
Location: Gods Country
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by Jay »

Manish_P wrote: 13 Feb 2025 10:54
Or it means that the Trump admin wants us to buy fully assembled (in USA) units. And also pay for the transportation charges to get them delivered to india. :mrgreen:
I thought they are not even assembled in US, but Canada of all places. General Dynamics Land Systems-Canada (GDLS-C) produces Stryker vehicles for the US Army in London, Ontario.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20967
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by Rakesh »

https://x.com/VinodDX9/status/1889328575012131326 ---> So here are some known specifications of the DATRAN 1500 tank engine-

• Type: 12 cylinder, 4 stroke, V-90, twin turbo, CRDI
• Fuel: Diesel
• Swept Volume: 25 litres
• Cooling: has after-cooler
• Output: 1,500 Hp
• Peak Torque: 4780 Nm @ 1560 rpm
• Temperature Limit: -40°C to +55°C
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6587
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by Manish_P »

Jay wrote: 13 Feb 2025 22:20
Manish_P wrote: 13 Feb 2025 10:54
Or it means that the Trump admin wants us to buy fully assembled (in USA) units. And also pay for the transportation charges to get them delivered to india. :mrgreen:
I thought they are not even assembled in US, but Canada of all places. General Dynamics Land Systems-Canada (GDLS-C) produces Stryker vehicles for the US Army in London, Ontario.
Even better then sir. Trump has threatened to put import duty on Canadian automobiles hasn't he? He can charge duty to Canada to get the Stykers in the US, then charge India for their purchase and transportation. MAGA is Mehenga
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20967
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by Rakesh »

Army Chief celebrating/promoting the Stryker deal. So much for the myth that the Govt is pushing Stryker down the Army's throat!

VIDEO: https://x.com/AjayshreeSamby3/status/18 ... 8623908022 ---> Now it's more or less clear that the Army is buying Strykers and Javelin along with it. But why the hell have they nominated #BEML as the production partner, when their only rona thona was the incompetence of PSU.

https://x.com/AdithyaKM_/status/1891059733240430656 ---> 10 year plan for cooperation is all good & joint production can help the Army & even promote self-reliance and exports. But anyone saying so about Stryker while there are *better* Indian equivalents in WhAP (which also bagged a major export order) is lying.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20967
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by Rakesh »

VIDEO: https://x.com/wartrophy_414/status/1892240487416991791 ---> COAS when asked about Stryker & stuff, to be honest it's depressing that COAS of the country thinks we can have foreign collaboration to get the technology in a faster timeline as he says. Does the COAS not realize WHAP is already a system of just the kind he described? And is already getting exported.

All tweets below are in response to the video above...

https://x.com/cvkrishnan/status/1892253882644090933 ---> For too long we’ve romanticizes “soldiers’ general” far more compared to Cerebral thinking generals to our own detriment. Too many infantry officers at the top. Less knowledge and time to think about about mechanization, industrial capacity, ecosystems, future capability building!

https://x.com/EkNashwar/status/1892339132313035095 ---> Transfer Of Officers (TOO) may be more practical in IA than ToT. Discouraging display of institutional blindness towards technical independence and excellence. Institutional apartheid towards Indigenous platforms. No platform becomes proven until inducted.

https://x.com/AdithyaKM_/status/1892281811054842206 ---> ToT, ToT, ToT. That's all our senior defence officials seem to know. Or atleast say in public every other day. Not sure if they believe in it.

https://x.com/OpinionGalaxy20/status/18 ... 9072069796 ---> Total illiterate about the technology. Technology evolves with the number of iterations. Even a 200 line data structure requires at least 10 iterations to get it crisp and accurate, but these buffoons need foreign "proven" maal.

https://x.com/AdithyaKM_/status/1892279131707994168 ---> So COAS himself can't spell out a convincing case for Stryker, uses buzzwords: "integrated", "visualization", "firepower", FCS. All these are chassis agnostic & available in India. WhAP is a proper IFV and modular (a buzzword he missed). Note: Army had ordered only IPMV* variant, an APC*.

*IMPV: Infantry Protected Mobility Vehicle

*APC: Armoured Personnel Carrier


https://x.com/PrasadSatya10/status/1892465614444204437 ---> Ha Ha. He is rationalizing the acquisition of a non amphibious foreign platform, while an IDDM platform that cleared IA's user trials after spending taxpayer's money for development to fulfill its own service requirements is awaiting orders.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20967
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by Rakesh »

https://x.com/fishy_bong/status/1892554613351743991 ---> Look what I found. I always knew the import negative list was more or less a fraud list.

"Wheeled Armored Fighting Vehicle" is prohibited from import. Add to this where is a tender for comparative trials for all possible vehicle available in the market? So what actually is the Stryker? It is wheeled, it's a fighting vehicle and my hunch is that these guys will play around with the definition of armour to get this import done without falling into legal battle. It's a scam through and through. @INCIndia make good use of your existence take this issue up. Open to correct the interpretation of the document if mistakes on my side.

Link to List: https://static.pib.gov.in/WriteReadData ... %20MOD.pdf

Image
srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5866
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by srai »

^^^
Who is this negative list for :twisted:
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6587
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by Manish_P »

srai wrote: 21 Feb 2025 15:23 ^^^
Who is this negative list for :twisted:
For the Imports lobby and the Dalaals

It means - "All items in this list will be procured directly via Government to Government channels"
Nikhil_Naya
BRFite
Posts: 108
Joined: 06 Nov 2018 16:44

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by Nikhil_Naya »

For all the noise - I feel that Strykers in some form WILL be coming. They will probably be for the western sector only and limited to 100-150 number ( 2-3 armoured regiments worth) Whereas for high altitude, mountain terrains we will have the Tata/ Mahindra wheeled platforms.
All I can say is that there is some resistance from within the forces as well for this new machine.
ernest
BRFite
Posts: 402
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 15:35

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by ernest »

Nikhil_Naya wrote: 22 Feb 2025 12:04 All I can say is that there is some resistance from within the forces as well for this new machine.
I have heard the same. All of this, and the fact that Stryker is not amphibious (a requirement from the army), gives me hope that it will not be ordered. Maybe a JV to manufacture for export. We are better off buying other US stuff that we really need, and do not have domestic capabilities like P8I, Chinook, Cargo aircraft, and so on.
SRajesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2574
Joined: 04 Aug 2019 22:03

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by SRajesh »

So much for Atmanirbhar!!
We are going to be still doing screwdrivergiri and c all it Atmanirbhar!! :roll:
Folks what do we call this type of Atmanirbhar???
We need a catchy phrase or some English Pundit can suggest something like Oxymoron!!

India inks $248 million deal with Russia for T-72 tank engines
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/ind ... 788413.cms
07 March 2025
ernest
BRFite
Posts: 402
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 15:35

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by ernest »

ernest wrote: 09 Feb 2025 22:44 I've heard from a panwallah, who heard it from his doodhwallah, that Stryker did not perform well in Indian conditions. Let's see if there is a report similar to T-90 vs Arjun CAG comparison.
My panwallah's doodhwallah was right, it seems.

https://defencefrontliner.com/stryker-i ... ry-import/
Army isn't very interested in Stryker or Javelin
- "During testing, the Stryker attempted to climb a slope but rolled back halfway, leading to laughter among personnel"
- Stryker failed to meet typical trench crossing reqmnt
- No serious fording trials
https://x.com/AdithyaKM_/status/1897863153385418961

Image
Image


https://x.com/Firezstarter1/status/1897955303276032069
Credits- Firezstarter, Adithya Krishna Menon and FrontlinerUV
ernest
BRFite
Posts: 402
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 15:35

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by ernest »

^ add amphibious requirement to it, and the Stryker is a flop across all requirements. If we end up importing this instead of a vastly superior domestic platform, then say goodbye to Indian MIC. No scope for mounting Indian weapon systems like NAG+derivatives, Loitering Munitions, etc as well.
wig
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2281
Joined: 09 Feb 2009 16:58

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by wig »

https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/i ... 2025-03-08

India signs $248 million deal with Russia to upgrade T-72 tank engines with 1000 HP engines. the current engine generates 780 HP
extracts
The Ministry of Defence on Friday signed a USD248 million contract with Russian defence firm Rosoboronexport (RoE) to procure 1,000-horsepower (HP) engines for T-72 battle tanks in fully-assembled, completely knocked-down, and semi-knocked-down conditions.

The deal includes the Transfer of Technology (ToT) from the Russian defence manufacturer to Chennai-based Armoured Vehicles Nigam Limited (Heavy Vehicle Factory), for integration and subsequent licenced production of engines under ToT to boost the 'Make in India' initiative in the defence sector, offficials said.
srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5866
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by srai »

^^^
T-72s should be retired and put in reserves … we are in the year 2025 :twisted:
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6587
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by Manish_P »

Additional horse power is always welcome

In this case was it required specifically because of addition in armor / protection systems leading to increase in weight?
Nikhil_Naya
BRFite
Posts: 108
Joined: 06 Nov 2018 16:44

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by Nikhil_Naya »

FWIW - the T72's will still add a lot of 'stick' to what is the spear tip of T90S and Arjun. It makes sense to have these machines - with uprated/ upgraded engines that enable them to take on additional weight (ERA, Active protection) Making them more of a T90 Minus and add to the bulk of the armour.
Also knowing the long acquisition timelines of the forces, this 'engine' upgrade will also mean extensive overhauling of the tanks by default, adding life to these machines.
Tanaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4905
Joined: 21 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by Tanaji »

My query is where are we going to use these? The Punjab border is already bristling with DCBs and tank traps of assorted types on both sides. Bean down static firing is now dangerous due to the profusion of cheap UAV swarms or FPV ones. The Ukraine experience shows that the T series is highly vulnerable to top attacks that required cope cages….

So where is this fleet to be used? The cynic in me notes who the contract is with and wonders…
srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5866
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by srai »

^^^
Why not buy new tanks?

Arjun MBT orders stuck at 124 Mk1 and 116 Mk2.

Go to battle with 1980s T-72xyz or 2024 Arjun MBT?
Nikhil_Naya
BRFite
Posts: 108
Joined: 06 Nov 2018 16:44

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by Nikhil_Naya »

srai wrote: 10 Mar 2025 15:30 ^^^
Why not buy new tanks?

Arjun MBT orders stuck at 124 Mk1 and 116 Mk2.

Go to battle with 1980s T-72xyz or 2024 Arjun MBT?
Where is the money the army will say...Where is the Mars Testing report. Anyways, now everything is waiting for the Next Generation Armoured Vehicle. We are putting things in place for that (engine is ready, chassis is under testing, new material, being designed for drone warfare, etc). By the time my kid is old enough to put this post, we shall probably have this inducted. Don't worry.
Tanaji wrote: 10 Mar 2025 12:58 My query is where are we going to use these? The Punjab border is already bristling with DCBs and tank traps of assorted types on both sides. Bean down static firing is now dangerous due to the profusion of cheap UAV swarms or FPV ones. The Ukraine experience shows that the T series is highly vulnerable to top attacks that required cope cages….

So where is this fleet to be used? The cynic in me notes who the contract is with and wonders…
I have a feeling that this will be deployed to a different zone, esp with the eastern borders heating up. Also, T72s are still light enough to be airlifted and deployed you know where as 'heavy tanks' to complement the Zorawar.
ernest
BRFite
Posts: 402
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 15:35

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by ernest »

I hope we are extending Muntra-T technologies to T-72. UGVs are going to become common in the battlefield in the next decade. We can use these unmanned tanks for extra firepower in a lot of places and roles. We can even airlift them once into somewhat remote places and leave them deployed and controlled remotely round the clock, with minimal support crew visits. Very useful for our Himalayan borders

But for manned, we should be going hard on Arjun and follow up desi tank orders.
A Deshmukh
BRFite
Posts: 687
Joined: 05 Dec 2008 14:24

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by A Deshmukh »

srai wrote: 10 Mar 2025 15:30 Arjun MBT orders stuck at 124 Mk1 and 116 Mk2.
or 2024 Arjun MBT?
Sir, Arjun tank was designed around the German engine 30 years back.
by the time it took for the army to order these tanks, the German engine has stopped production. :(
Now we need a new engine.
new Indian engine DATRAN is under testing.
until a new version with the new engine is fully tested, we can forget about new orders. :eek:
sanjayc
BRFite
Posts: 1325
Joined: 22 Aug 2016 21:40

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by sanjayc »

^^^ Hope the world doesn't run out of oil by the time some orders get placed by the Army
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6587
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by Manish_P »

Elon Musk will have electric powered Cyber Tank ready by then...

Or Nitin Gadkari, pushed by the sugar barons, might get the military to have ethanol powered engines
mody
BRFite
Posts: 1439
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by mody »

wig wrote: 09 Mar 2025 11:20 https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/i ... 2025-03-08

India signs $248 million deal with Russia to upgrade T-72 tank engines with 1000 HP engines. the current engine generates 780 HP
extracts
The Ministry of Defence on Friday signed a USD248 million contract with Russian defence firm Rosoboronexport (RoE) to procure 1,000-horsepower (HP) engines for T-72 battle tanks in fully-assembled, completely knocked-down, and semi-knocked-down conditions.

The deal includes the Transfer of Technology (ToT) from the Russian defence manufacturer to Chennai-based Armoured Vehicles Nigam Limited (Heavy Vehicle Factory), for integration and subsequent licenced production of engines under ToT to boost the 'Make in India' initiative in the defence sector, offficials said.
This deal makes no sense. Avadi can already produce both the T-72 and T-90 tank engines completely inhouse from scratch. The T-72 engine is 780HP and the T-90 engine is 1,000HP. They can simply use the T-90 engine in the T-72 tanks and be done with it. Why pay Russia $248 million for screwdrivergiri!!!!

So much for defense planning in India. There was initially a plan to develop a Datran 1,000HP engine as well along with the 1,500HP engine. This along with the industry developing a 600HP engine for use in IFVs. Tata/Mahindra developed 600HP engine for use with Whap. The development of 1,000HP engine was dropped, as uses were thought to be limited.
When the requirement for light tanks came up, they figured that a 1,000HP engine would be required and again they ran to MTU for the German 1,000HP engine. Germany as usual delayed the approval for selling the engine to India and DRDO/L&T ended up using a Cummins 750HP engine for the Zorawar light tank.

Now they figure that 1,000HP engines are also required to upgrade the T-72 tanks. The existing T-90 engine, which can be manufactured completely inhouse is not being used and we are paying Russia for perhaps the same engine, maybe with a different nomenclature and maybe a few mods.

MoD and IA are truly a circus in India.
srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5866
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by srai »

^^^
Was this a “real” priority???

USD 248 million!!!
S_Madhukar
BRFite
Posts: 851
Joined: 27 Mar 2019 18:15

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by S_Madhukar »

Are they going to get more cleaner or efficient engines as well? These are quite smoky easily visible in snow and sand. No wonder Namo has to say this is not era of war, we are Vishwamitra, he must know our preparations, with every deployment seems like we realise the need to upgrade with phoren maal … at least we are not shopping for the Armatas yet!
What’s next ? Turtle tank armour anyone? Battle tested too :((
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20967
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by Rakesh »

https://x.com/connect_rishav/status/1900807999654162448 ---> Different variants of @tataadvanced Wheeled Armoured Platform (WhAP). From APV to Light Tank, a very good wheeled solution that is economical and indigenous.

Image
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34774
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by chetak »



A Sharma ji, you are obviously not aware of what the naxals can and usually do


They use local explosives, usually ammonium nitrate, and at times plastique, in mind bogglingly humongous quantities (such huge IEDs are usually buried weeks or months in advance at various locations under forest roads, awaiting instructions to spring the trap) to take out armoured vehicles or "mine proofed" platforms. This is their usual modus operandi.


even the latest M1 abrams tank will not survive the intensity of such a massive blast. The shock alone will be more than enough to neutralize all the occupants of such a vehicle, leaving no survivors


These guys usually get a regular supply of arms and explosives from offshore enemy sources
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6587
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by Manish_P »

^ while what you say is quite true, Chetak sir, what having better equipment means is that it forces the naxals to use more and more stuff.. increasing the costs and risks of being tracked and detected.

They are forced to reduce targets and try and hit only the high value ones.

It's an economical attrition war as well..
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34774
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by chetak »

Manish_P wrote: 22 Mar 2025 08:00 ^ while what you say is quite true, Chetak sir, what having better equipment means is that it forces the naxals to use more and more stuff.. increasing the costs and risks of being tracked and detected.

They are forced to reduce targets and try and hit only the high value ones.

It's an economical attrition war as well..



Manish ji,


Ammonium nitrate (AN) is a widely used chemical compound with several important applications. Ammonium nitrate (NH₄NO₃) is also a widely used nitrogen fertilizer and as a fertilizer, it helps feed billions.

It is also the main component in many types of mining explosives, where it is mixed with fuel oil and detonated by an explosive charge.

The naxals use threats and blackmail to get "forest contractors and others profiteers like them" to supply it to them. They never pay.

Anyone who refuses to supply AN or informs the police, gets slaughtered openly and in full public view.

Economics doesn't concern them
Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6587
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by Manish_P »

chetak wrote: 22 Mar 2025 12:56 ...
The naxals use threats and blackmail to get "forest contractors and others profiteers like them" to supply it to them. They never pay.

Anyone who refuses to supply AN or informs the police, gets slaughtered openly and in full public view.

Economics doesn't concern them
Agree on the cheap explosives and extortion for finance, Chetak sir.

The anti-naxal war is being fought on many fronts.

The state has overwhelming firepower and economic heft and it is slowly and steadily using it.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34774
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by chetak »

Manish_P wrote: 22 Mar 2025 16:19
chetak wrote: 22 Mar 2025 12:56 ...
The naxals use threats and blackmail to get "forest contractors and others profiteers like them" to supply it to them. They never pay.

Anyone who refuses to supply AN or informs the police, gets slaughtered openly and in full public view.

Economics doesn't concern them
Agree on the cheap explosives and extortion for finance, Chetak sir.

The anti-naxal war is being fought on many fronts.

The state has overwhelming firepower and economic heft and it is slowly and steadily using it.

the biggest problem Manish ji, is that they have FFNGO funded naxals sitting in "civil society", government and private (foreign funded) universities, state legislatures, and in the national parliament, compromised govt servants, specially among the babooze, not to forget the leftist presstitutes, media, both print and electronic, and traitorous media owners who get paid huge bucks by entities like soros, USAID, amnesty, green peace and other cancerous networks who, in turn pay hefty kickbacks to these babooze guys to look the other way.

The babooze stall, misdirect, interfere and obstruct the efforts of the govt with a HM like AS. In spite of all this, AS has succeeded where most others have failed.

The freedom fighting party is their staunchest supporter, as well as, their biggest beneficiary because of the missionary influences and colonial control mechanisms ingrained in the ecosystem.

The palghar sadhu killings are yet to be investigated satisfactorily though every one knows exactly who all were actively involved because photos and videos were circulating after the dastardly killings. Remember that naxal scum, "father" stan swamy ....... he was portrayed in the presstitute media as angel gabriel and moses rolled into one. Like wise, binayak sen, alleged "paediatrician, and public health specialist" who was convicted of sedition on christmas eve 2010 and sentenced to life in jail. He was granted bail on 15 April 2011 by the supreme court of India which gave no reason for the order

This is a decades old problem being funded right from the beginning (since independence) by the 3Ms, mullis, missionaries and marxists. It has strong cross border connections and support in terms of funds from the goras, cheenis and the jihadis, supply chains are well established for weapons, intelligence inputs and sophisticated comm devices, including cover fire from all the entities mentioned above
ernest
BRFite
Posts: 402
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 15:35

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by ernest »

Chetak ji is right on the amount of explosives used. I remember reports from early 2000s, where they'd use upwards of 50kg, often 100s of kg of ANFO based sticks. These were obtained from mining contractors, and are not that expensive. Where I beg to differ is the extent of their planting capabilities. The ubiquity of phones and Indian state's economic power have made such long planned IEDs difficult by making it more attractive to provide tip offs by informants. There is often a sizeable reward for recovering such IEDs before they go off, and we see fewer attacks with them over time. Add to it better digitized record keeping of mining explosives, which I guess (i cannot say for sure) has made them difficult to obtain.

Another aspect is that most of these mining sticks have a (maybe deliberate) use by date of <12 months. The emulsion is not stable indefinitely, maybe for safety. This also means that Naxals are under the pressure of using those explosives quickly, and cannot depend on IEDs laid beyond a time limit. This is different from the time when RDX and TNT was easily available from the ISI supported network of Jihadis a decade ago.
srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5866
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by srai »

wig wrote: 09 Mar 2025 11:20 https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/i ... 2025-03-08

India signs $248 million deal with Russia to upgrade T-72 tank engines with 1000 HP engines. the current engine generates 780 HP
extracts
The Ministry of Defence on Friday signed a USD248 million contract with Russian defence firm Rosoboronexport (RoE) to procure 1,000-horsepower (HP) engines for T-72 battle tanks in fully-assembled, completely knocked-down, and semi-knocked-down conditions.

The deal includes the Transfer of Technology (ToT) from the Russian defence manufacturer to Chennai-based Armoured Vehicles Nigam Limited (Heavy Vehicle Factory), for integration and subsequent licenced production of engines under ToT to boost the 'Make in India' initiative in the defence sector, offficials said.
Couldn’t the IA have used T-90 1000 HP engines for T-72 when the T-90s upgraded to 1350 HP engine? Seems quite wasteful spending.

DAC clears indigenous purchases worth over Rs 54,000 crore, including T-90 tank engines, Varunastra torpedoes and AEWS systems


AoN was accorded to the Indian Army for procurement of 1350 HP engines to replace the present 1000 HP engines. This will enhance the battlefield mobility of these tanks especially in high-altitude area by increasing the power to weight ratio.
Avik
BRFite
Posts: 228
Joined: 06 Oct 2009 00:16

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by Avik »

^^^^^^^^^^^
'Coz the T 90 engines have been in use for close to 20 years

And ..higher HP engines usually have different transmission systems...
srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5866
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles: News & Discussion

Post by srai »

^^^
Not all are 20 year old :twisted:

New T-90s are still rolling out from HVF as we speak …
Post Reply