Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Nandai
BRFite
Posts: 175
Joined: 14 Jul 2000 11:31
Location: Sweden

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Nandai » 13 Jul 2002 15:17

An IR searchlight is just a big flashlight, just that it works in the Infrared spektrum.

Nandai
BRFite
Posts: 175
Joined: 14 Jul 2000 11:31
Location: Sweden

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Nandai » 13 Jul 2002 17:40

On this picture one can easily see the IR-searchlight mounted above the maingun of this T-55.

http://www.sovietarmy.com/vehicles/t-55_icon.jpg

Rudra
BRFite
Posts: 599
Joined: 28 May 2001 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Rudra » 13 Jul 2002 17:56

I did some reading on the 'autofretagged' thing
which every tank gun is supposed to be these days.
at first my idea was it had something to with
internal polishing...but no.

the real deal is that its a way to structure the
residual stresses in the metal of the barrel to
enjoy longer and crack-free barrel life. when they
make the barrel it is made 6% smaller than the
desired diameter. then barrel is put inside a container with about 6% extra internal dimension
to leave room for expansion. the whole barrel is
now filled with solid material to an extent and
high-pressure oil is pumped in. the tube slowly
expands by 6% and is then extracted using pre-applied grease on the exterior.

the british invented this first.

I wonder how many shots a barrel lasts ? also
how much use does tank tracks take in Kms ? both
of these are supposed to be replaceable in field
in under 30 mins. even the engine is supposed to
replaced in field.

Abhaey
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 54
Joined: 02 Dec 2001 12:31
Location: Dubai/Mumbai
Contact:

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Abhaey » 13 Jul 2002 18:07

This is what it says on army-technology.com:

The T-90S has the 1A4GT integrated fire control system (IFCS) which is automatic but with manual override for the commander. The IFCS contains the gunner's 1A43 day fire control system, gunner's TO1-KO1 thermal imaging sight which has a target identification range of 1.2 km to 1.5 km and commander's PNK-S sight.
But I have seen a demonstration of the Thales heat imaging system for INDIAN T90s, and that has a range of upto about 4km. It's so sensitive that if you put your hand on your tie or on a wall and then take it away, the imager will pick up the heat on the tie or wall for a few seconds after you've removed your hand.

Based on what's reported on that website, one can assume that India has an upgraded version of the thermal imagers, amongst other systems.

P Chupunkar
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 30
Joined: 24 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby P Chupunkar » 13 Jul 2002 19:40

Originally posted by Abhaey:
It's so sensitive that if you put your hand on your tie or on a wall and then take it away, the imager will pick up the heat on the tie or wall for a few seconds after you've removed your hand.
This leads to an interesting question. Does the calibration of the imager change from environment to environment (i.e. are the settings different for plains v/s hilly regions).
If this sensor is as sensitive as is being alluded, clearly calibration has to play a major role with sensitivy dampers in some cases and enhancers in others, to adjust for false positives.
Are these instruments calibrated at one-time or are the calibration settings something which set to on the field (either on the pregorative of the commander of the tank or based on some operations manual).

vipul_karia
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 10
Joined: 31 May 2002 11:31
Location: Pittsburgh

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby vipul_karia » 15 Jul 2002 12:14

Check this on today's Indiaworld.

The Capability of these Upgraded T 72's to fire Missile's will turn them to near T 90 Standards.The report is silent though on the likely engine upgrade specs (if any).Any PA Tank with the exception of Ukranian T-8x derivatives are going to be cannon(missile fodders) for these.


http://www.indiaworld.net/index.cgi?article_id=305

1,700 Indian Army tanks to be upgraded by Russia
Moscow: Nearly 1,700 Indian Army tanks are to be upgraded by Russia. Indian Defence Minister George Fernandes had agreed to look into Russia's proposal for modernization of the 1,700 T-72 main battle tanks. The upgradation is done by the manufacturing company called Uralvagonzavod. The T-72 tanks are the workhouse of the Indian Army which once upgraded would have the capability to fire guided missiles with a range of 5 km through its bore cannon. The upgraded tanks would also have day-night guidance systems. The upgradation project would be undertaken by Uralvagonzavod and the state-controlled arms exporting agency "Rosoboronexport".

An Indian delegation has already left for the 'Russia Expo Arms -2002' a military exhibition. The delegation is led by Naresh Chand. The Indian delegation was also briefed on the salient features of the upgraded version of the T-72s. Meanwhile Russia is also shipping the T90s, which have been ordered by the Indian army in preparation for a possible war with neighbor Pakistan. India's General R S Balyan is in Russia to overlook the inspection and the shipment of the tanks. India has placed an order of 310 T-90 tanks.

India would first receive the 124 fully assembled tanks, 86 semi-knocked down stage and 100 completely dismantled. The tanks would be shipped to the heavy vehicles factory in Avadi (Tamil Nadu). The new upgraded T-72 tanks would be fitted with a 736 kW multi-fuel engine similar to that present in T-90s. India too would be start production of tank engines in the near future.

karthik.k
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 19
Joined: 05 Oct 2001 11:31
Location: India

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby karthik.k » 15 Jul 2002 15:40

Does this mean curtains for the Karna ?

Rudra
BRFite
Posts: 599
Joined: 28 May 2001 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Rudra » 15 Jul 2002 16:35

not so fast. it says "agreed to look" means he got
a presentation and even if he means to refuse one
cannot so on the face until GoI formally decide.
The Polish upgrade is still the frontrunner for
a first lot, because it has been proven in poland
and its longer history. karna is a technically
better option than keeping T72 turret and autoloader, no matter what systems one fits in there.

imo missile firing isnt what its cracked up to be.
laser guided means gunner is tied up for duration
of flight which can be long. APDS covers 2km in
1.5 secs and thats it. ERA also defeats HEAT ATGMs
handily, not so APDS.

I dont think india is going to upgrade 1500 t72s
in any case. no money.

the ideal scenario is all Karna's but one has to
make allowance for S.Delhi & Mehrauli accounts
and maybe 125 polish upgrades.

Michael
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 78
Joined: 28 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Michael » 15 Jul 2002 21:05

Originally posted by Abhaey:
This is what it says on army-technology.com:

The T-90S has the 1A4GT integrated fire control system (IFCS) which is automatic but with manual override for the commander. The IFCS contains the gunner's 1A43 day fire control system, gunner's TO1-KO1 thermal imaging sight which has a [b]target identification range of 1.2 km to 1.5 km and commander's PNK-S sight.
But I have seen a demonstration of the Thales heat imaging system for INDIAN T90s, and that has a range of upto about 4km. It's so sensitive that if you put your hand on your tie or on a wall and then take it away, the imager will pick up the heat on the tie or wall for a few seconds after you've removed your hand.

Based on what's reported on that website, one can assume that India has an upgraded version of the thermal imagers, amongst other systems.[/b]
They mean that the focus and gain on the thermal is good enough to ID the target from up to 1.5km away, which sounds about right based on my own experience with IR gunner sights. While ID'ing the target is much more difficult, it can be detected much further out. You'll see the bright blob but you can't make out enough features to get a good ID. But if you know for sure only bad guys are in your lane, light 'em up.

Anyway if the T-90 thermal can give you that good an image from 1.5km then it's equal to what we have on our tanks.

Michael
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 78
Joined: 28 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Michael » 17 Jul 2002 07:29

Nitin - in an earlier post you said Indian T-72's, while not possessing thermal sights, do at least have night vision.

You might find this report interesting:

http://www.strategypage.com/fyeo/howtomakewar/default.asp?target=HTARM.HTM

"July 14, 2002; A follow-on to the Indian acquisition of 310 T-90S main battle tanks (MBT), India decided in June to again delay it's T-72 modernization program in favor of diverting about $500 million to make priority purchases from Russia. India has already taken delivery of 124 T-90S (two batches of 40 and a third batch of 44) delivered in fully assembled form, with one Armored Regiment already fielded on the Pakistani border. The rest of the contracted T-90s will be produced at the Avadi heavy vehicles factory in Tamil Nadu, from semi-knocked-down and fully knocked-down assembly "kits" supplied by Russia.

Given the continued tension with Pakistan, the Indians decided to ignore their T-72 fleet awhile longer. One of the more critical deficiencies of the Indian T-72 fleet is the lack of Night Vision Sights. An unnamed senior Indian Ministry of Defense official also noted that over 70 percent of the Indian Army’s 2,000 T-72 tanks were simply not battle-worthy, while the delayed T-72 modernization decision has indefinitely postponed a formal bid solicitation. These bids had been previously scheduled for June. - Adam Geibel"

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16518
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby NRao » 17 Jul 2002 08:40

An unnamed senior Indian Ministry of Defense official also noted that over 70 percent of the Indian Army’s 2,000 T-72 tanks were simply not battle-worthy
70% not battle-worthy simply means that India better pack their bags.

With the Army on a high state of alert - on the border with Pakistan (that is) - and the US and US sending diplomats every few months to calm things down, the French flying their latest and greatest ACs from their latest air craft carrier - in the hope of preventing either side from preempting, I have to wonder whom are we kidding if 70% of our back-bone tanks are not battle worthy? Wonder what, then, is preventing TSP from attacking and getting at least J&K - if not Delhi itself? They should have a fairly big advantage is this is true.

Just a thought.

advitya
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 50
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby advitya » 17 Jul 2002 08:56

Not only are 70% of our tanks not battlewortyhy, but 60% of the IAF is grounded due to spares shortages. In fact in MiG-21 units availability is as low as 35%.

Umrao
BRFite
Posts: 547
Joined: 30 May 2001 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Umrao » 17 Jul 2002 08:59

so All is not quite well on the western front, thank god its atleast "All quiet on the western front. :(

Rangudu
BRFite
Posts: 1751
Joined: 03 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Rangudu » 17 Jul 2002 09:17

70% of T-72s - Good God!

This report better not be true. Adam Geibel, though is a pretty good source and a respected Military journalist. He is also a JoMO correspondent.

Vinay J
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 10
Joined: 06 May 2002 11:31
Location: USA

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Vinay J » 17 Jul 2002 09:58

I dunno why the world is out to prove that the Indian armed forces are a worn out, unusable lot!! :mad: And the use of 'unnamed defence sources' is hilarious!!

Why, Aditya, the IAF is a bunch of lotus eaters who fly only 10% of the hrs of the PAF! One PAF flying hr = 5 IAF flying hr!!

Believe what you will! In 1971, the Pakistanis had thought their Western armaments would cut through the inferior Russky stuff we had - 'Breakfast in Jodhpur, Lunch in Jaipur and Dinner in Delhi' was the slogan of the Paki strike corps!! How far did the Pattons get against inferior T-55s & Vijayantas?

Believe in yourselves and don't fall prey to every two bit writer/news

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby JCage » 17 Jul 2002 11:39

He he he he ...Mike i have seen all sorts of crap and know better than to believe it.

Adam Geibel is just quoting defensenews.Aint his fault either.

BTW,do some homework.That may prove interesting for you.Check up to see whether T72M1's were ever configured for passive NV.
Whether any indian OFB's were/are manufacturing NV eqpt.
And what.Since when.All available on the net.

Yaaaaawn.

And whats the fuss over the T90S Thermals?
Its pretty clear.The russian agava sight was ditched by us for the Thales one.
Abhaey has given the cost too.They are bloody expensive.Wonder why Thales names all its TI systems after the weaker sex?Not that i mind. :)

Also apply KISS.Does anyone here think the entire mobilisation was for sabre rattling?If so,pls change your opinion.
___________________________________

Anyway,
The independent commander's sight on the M2A3 brad(Independent TI sight for an IFV...talk about money)costs 500,000 $!
And for all bean counters...it hits the till at 7.3 million $ a pop..the M1A2 SEP is at 6 million$.

That despite the horrendous production run for the M1 series.And we wonder why the Arjun is at 4 million $.

Advitya: Not only are 70% of our tanks not battlewortyhy, but 60% of the IAF is grounded due to spares shortages. In fact in MiG-21 units availability is as low as 35%
;)

Regards,
Nitin

P Chupunkar
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 30
Joined: 24 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby P Chupunkar » 17 Jul 2002 12:34

[url=. [url=http://216.239.35.100/search?q=cache:8bP3z6jDFgUC:www.milparade.com/1998/29/060.htm+T-72M1+India+Night+Vision&hl=en&ie=UTF-8]Link]http://216.239.35.100/search?q=cache:8bP3z6jDFgUC:www.milparade.com/1998/29/060.htm+T-72M1+India+Night+Vision&hl=en&ie=UTF-8]Link[/url] claiming all T-72 M1 tanks serially manufactured were equipped with night vision[/URL]

From 1979 to 1985, the T-72A tank was in series production. The main differences from the basic model consisted in the installation of the TPDK-1 laser range finder sight, TPN-3-49 gunner’s night sight with the L-4 spotlight, solid anti-HEAT side screens, the 902B smoke grenade launching system, the 2A46 gun instead of the 2A26M2, the TVNE-4B driver’s night vision device, and the V-46-6 engine.

The T-72M export version, built around the T-72A, was manufactured and followed by the T-72M1 with additional reinforcement of the hull front and composite armor of the turret. The tanks of this series were exported to the former Warsaw Treaty countries, India, Iraq, Syria, Algeria, Kuwait, Libya, Finland and Yugoslavia
Another URL Confirming the same

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Surya » 17 Jul 2002 18:04

Nitin - And all our soldiers are stressed from J& K ops and want to go home.

Sometimes it might be better to let this crap be out there.

Harry Van
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 73
Joined: 14 Jun 2002 11:31
Location: Bangalore

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Harry Van » 17 Jul 2002 19:57

The link posted by Chupunkar has the following piece embedded inside the essay.

The Jane’s International Defense Review magazine #7, 1997 highly appraised the armor protection of T-72 tanks provided with built-in ERA by stating that T-72 tanks with heavy Contact 5 armor had become invulnerable to defeat by depleted uranium penetrators of M829 APFSDS projectiles fired from 120mm guns of U.S. M1 Abrams tanks. It should be noted that the M829 projectile is considered to be one of the most effective modern tank gun projectiles in terms of lethality;

Then how come the M1A1 Abrams got he better of the T-72 in the Gulf War ?

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby JCage » 17 Jul 2002 20:20

harry,

The T72's in ODS didnt have Kontakt5 ERA.
Also the report talks of M829A1.
The americans are now inducting the M829A3.Perhaps the best DU APFSDS ever made.M829A1 is old hat.

Anyway,Kontakt is good enough against all Paki rounds.Even their first gen DU round as and when it appears.That it reaches the capability of the A1 itself is doubtful.

Regards,
Nitin

Guest

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Guest » 17 Jul 2002 21:04

OFB has been producing night vision devices and fire-control systems at Dehradun for the T-72s and BMPs for a long time now. Other than the OFB factory DRDO also has its Instruments Research & Development Establishment (IRDE) there. IRDE has produced Thermal Imagers among other things.
All available on the net of course.

Guest

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Guest » 17 Jul 2002 21:13

Here is part of a report from CAG which gives an idea of the production capabilities of Tank NVGs in india.
http://www.cagindia.org/reports/defence/1994_book2/chapter4_p3.htm

In response to an indent placed by Director General of Ordnance Services (DGOS) in January 1988, Ordnance Factory Board (OFB) placed an Extract on Ordnance Factory, DehraDun (OFD) in February 1988, for manufacture and supply of 456 sets Periscope Armoured Vehicle Night Vision Passive (instrument). Target for manufacture of the instrument fixed by OFB for 1988-89 was 150 sets.

In a meeting held in September 1988, the Ministry stated that Vijayanta Modernisation plan had not been approved and due to financiel constraints and that 700 instruments already held by Army would be sufficient. The Army, therefore, proposed cancellation of their indent of 456 instruments. The representative of Ordnance Factories stated in that meeting that if the order for the entire quantity of 456 sets was cancelled, financial implications would be between Rs80 lakhs and RslOO lakhs and in case the order was cancelled after supply of 150 sets the amount of financial implications would be RslO lakhs.

Army in September 1989 mentioned that the Vijayanta Modernisation programme had not been approved so far. Hence orders placed on OFD for 456 sets and a firm for supply of 500 sets by the Defence Supply Wing be short closed.

In January 1994 the Ministry stated that order for 500 sets of instruments placed on the firm had been completed and indent placed on OFB for 456 instruments had been reduced to 150. Against the indent of January 1988 OFD supplied two instruments valued at Rs2.89 lakhs. Financial repercussion due to short closure of the indent, as worked out by OFD was Rs55.48 lakhs.

Thus placement of indents for an item required for modernisation programme without the approval of Government led to infruotuous expenditure of Rs55.48 lakhs by OFD.

Examination of the relevant papers in audit also revealed that the Army already holds a stock of 1200 such instruments and therefore placement of indent on Ordnance Factories for 150 instruments was not justified.

Rangudu
BRFite
Posts: 1751
Joined: 03 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Rangudu » 17 Jul 2002 21:14

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2002/20020111/main3.htm

This Jan 2002 report in The Tribune says all T-72s in IA lack Night Vision equipment.

Do our T-72s have Night Vision Gear or not? :confused:

Guest

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Guest » 17 Jul 2002 21:22

All T-72s that have been manufactured not just in India, but anywhere come with night vision and those devices have been manufatured in India for some time now. That is what I had indicated in my previous posts.
What these articles probably mean is that most T-72s lack 3rd generation night vision capability like Thermal sights.

By the way at LRDE's homepage look at the pic to the top right. The image on the monitor is produced by the Thermal Imager.
http://www.drdo.com/labs/electronics/irde/achieve.shtml

Rangudu
BRFite
Posts: 1751
Joined: 03 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Rangudu » 17 Jul 2002 21:31

Thanks ananth.

Now, as far as the upgradation goes, we know of the contract signed with a Polish firm to upgarde the FCS for 250 T-72s.

Now what is other proposed upgadation with the Russians?

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby JCage » 17 Jul 2002 22:06

Like i said.All it needs is looking around.
Gents,these are not state secrets.OFB,BEL,DRDO all have websites detailing what they manufacture.All available on the net.

Far easier and silly to cry wolf each time some DDM report comes out and think pakis are way ahead in some mythical way.

Rangudu,
DDM_is_crap.Buggers are talking of thermals as Ananth notes.And again DRDO part is wrong.
Thermals are very expensive.We simply didnt have the money.Look at the figures earlier.

THE russian thing is just a proposal.Yet.

Regards,
Nitin

Guest

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Guest » 17 Jul 2002 22:31

The IRDE website has a pic of what I think is a hand held Thermal imager; the right most one (olive green) on the Thermal Imaging Systems pic (middle of the page to the right). Other than that ther seem to be atleast 2 more thermal systems shown. Probably one of them is for Armored Vehicles?
http://www.drdo.com/labs/electronics/irde/achieve.shtml

and do look at the Thermal image on the monitor at top right

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7890
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Gerard » 18 Jul 2002 04:51

DRDO has not so far manufactured "enough Agni II in quantity."
Since when is DRDO responsible for manufacturing missiles in quantity?
Isn't this done by Bharat Dynamics and similar firms? Doesn't this require funding etc from the MoD?

Quoting the LCA CAG report from 1998 is silly. One would think in 2002, the LCA is yet to fly.

dev
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 3
Joined: 06 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: NY

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby dev » 18 Jul 2002 05:28

...a slightly silly question but with all the planned upgrades of the T-72, would they include a more hospitable environment for the crew?? I have read reports as well as posts that the temperature inside the tank can reach to a sweltering 50 to 60 degrees celcius, especially in the deserts of Rajasthan. That's just pushing the limits of the human body.

"A happy tank crew makes a deadlier tank crew"
:)

Michael
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 78
Joined: 28 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Michael » 18 Jul 2002 10:15

nitin - would you mind posting some links which verify that India's T-72's are equipped with night-vision gunner sights?

So far all I've seen are hints that some T-72's TC's (tank commanders) might carry a set of NVG's, but nothing that talks about the gunner having a night vision sight. If the gunner doesn't have night vision directly integrated into his battlesight, then he's useless at night.

But even with night vision, the gunner is still going to have a VERY hard time. It amazes me that in the US Army, we had IR sights even in our cheap TOW missile systems, not just the vehicle mounted ones but the ground-mount weapons, too. And the TOW was an old system even then. I can't believe that a weapon as expensive as a T-72 tank is expected to go into battle, in this day and age, without IR. It's crazy, especially when these tanker crews are expected to the ones attacking a dug-in enemy.

India's recent climbdown is starting to make more and more sense, as we put together the pieces of the puzzle and realize that India never had a credible offensive capability, at least not on the ground. I'm pretty sure India has the capability to dominate the air and naval equation, but it's becoming increasingly clear that the situation is not good on the ground.

Michael
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 78
Joined: 28 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Michael » 18 Jul 2002 10:52

By the way, read this very enlightening report, from Indian sources:

http://www.frontlineonnet.com/fl1912/19120130.htm

"Vajpayee, enraged by the Parliament building attack, reportedly favoured the air strikes but senior members of the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) cautioned against such action on the advice of the Army that claimed that it was unprepared to meet the retaliation by Pakistan that was bound to follow. The Army was reported to have said that it lacked adequate equipment to deal with a full-blown conflict. It claimed that its armoured columns - that would have to bear the brunt of a counter-thrust into Punjab and possibly Rajasthan's desert region - were not equipped with night-vision devices (NVDs) and hence were "blind" after dark and at the mercy of a better-equipped nocturnal enemy."

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby JCage » 18 Jul 2002 12:34

nitin - would you mind posting some links which verify that India's T-72's are equipped with night-vision gunner sights?

So far all I've seen are hints that some T-72's TC's (tank commanders) might carry a set of NVG's, but nothing that talks about the gunner having a night vision sight. If the gunner doesn't have night vision directly integrated into his battlesight, then he's useless at night.
Mike,
There is a difference between passive night vision scopes integrated with battlesights and Night vision goggles.
Do you think licence manufacture comes with just a gun,a track ,this and that?
When the tank series itself had NV integrated from its first iteration?Why do you think the IA chose the T72?
All this is integrated at AVadi with manufacture of the eqpt carried out at the OLF,dehradun.
Frontline had an illuminating article on it a few years back iirc.An advertising feature thankfully which was ghost written by the OFB itself and not the Journal.
Scans of it had been posted on BR.

The T72 series all had a passive night vision sight for the gunner.An IR searchlight could be used for engagements at longer distances.
In case you missed this read it again.Its very very enlightening.

From 1979 to 1985, the T-72A tank was in series production. The main differences from the basic model consisted in the installation of the TPDK-1 laser range finder sight, TPN-3-49 gunner’s night sight with the L-4 spotlight

Whats really funny is that you almost believed that Indian T72's dont have laser range finders and that the pakis had it.Now its night vision.

:D :eek:

Hell,if HHTI's are factored in post Kargil we've gone on a buying spree.Cared to check that up?
Thomson CSF and Elop iirc with transfer of tech to boot.
Anything like what the broke pakis have?They're still stuck to passive NV image intensifiers themselves.And with sanctions all these years i wonder what happened to their lic production efforts.

BTW,quoting some DDM report doesnt make your assumptions true.BTW,there are no ethics at all in this DDM "business".None at all. I can quote the accurate and honest reporters on my fingertips.People make up "data" all the time.
Hard for you to believe?Shocking?
Welcome to the real world.Yes,they do lie.
Sometimes for a purpose and sometimes for the sheer friggin' heck of it.Deadline to meet."Unnamed sources said"..the most common "victims" are the IA and the IAF.IN seems to have missed its fair share.

OTOH,common sense appears to be in short supply and panic in ample supply with all this "ooooooh we dont have this" faithfully carried by our media experts.

Balls.

Armor wise we have a parity ,in fact superiority to pakistan if you factor in the huge stocks of ATGM's available with their integrated sights.Let alone IFV's with ATGM's scabbed on.BMP's.

Tank to tank,their T80's gave a slight technological advantage which is being neutralised by our T90's.And the 124 Arjuns should be enough for their AlKhalids.The "massively successful" one of which they ordered all of 300 or so.

Reading the defensenews report itself is a ROTFLMAO attack.
The whole 70 percent crap started two years back with Brian Cloughley quoting it again and again.It was then picked up by Fetter of defaerospace etc and then spread around.If a canard gets repeated a dozen times,it doesnt make it the truth.And i say "canard".That ba*stard Cloughley has even been in contact with ISSI to make them publish "revised" estimates of Indian armor.Till date they havent acquiesced.

Do you guys seriously believe that the IA mobilised or even bothered to with their tank fleet out of action?If so,then your naivete is shocking.Do you think a mobilisation is possible with decrepit eqpt?

Do you think the CCS would have even ordered or given the go ahead for mobilisation ?

This is all the same stuff on the lines of the previous hogwash which our media is famous for.

The temporary de escalation had nothing to do with military capabilities but_was_purely_political.And temporary if need be.

Even a portion of the T55's and Vijayanta's fleets were upgraded with passive NV aided sight.Read up on Sanjay's article in BRM if you wish.

Umrao ,
Whats next?
An article by Josy Joseph?He and Iype are probably married to each other.

Regards,
Nitin

Vinay J
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 10
Joined: 06 May 2002 11:31
Location: USA

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Vinay J » 18 Jul 2002 18:27

The de-escalation is due to pressure from the US- and that too brutal economic pressure(travel adviseries, loss of IT edge etc.)

The US needs Pak and so pressured India to back down.

It is amazing to see the enormity of disinformation spread about the Indian armed forces.

Rudra
BRFite
Posts: 599
Joined: 28 May 2001 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Rudra » 18 Jul 2002 19:03

the polish upgrade deal is not approved. it has been
put back to conserve funds for T90 purchases.

in any case, its better that one uniform Karna
upgrade be applied to all T72s they want to keep.

in the darker days of arjun pgm, when the FCS
issues were not resolved, there was talk of using
the Drawa FCS for arjun too...but that seems not be
necessary now.

Guest

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Guest » 18 Jul 2002 19:51

The word brutal is just about right. THe US squeezed our tail and we could not do much about it.

subra

ragupta
BRFite
Posts: 347
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby ragupta » 18 Jul 2002 19:55

Originally posted by VinayJ:
The de-escalation is due to pressure from the US- and that too brutal economic pressure(travel adviseries, loss of IT edge etc.)

The US needs Pak and so pressured India to back down.

It is amazing to see the enormity of disinformation spread about the Indian armed forces.
India has reached the limit to which US can put pressure or want to put pressure on TSP.

Now it is solely up to India, to deal with this TSP menace from whatever position it has reached after all this pressure tactics.

Going forward most effort must be directed towards covert operation to weaken and destroy TSP from within. Keep them engaged at the Border to keep their military occupied and deplete their resources.

Why don't we open up other fronts suitable to us to break up their resources. I don't understand.

We can be at loggerheads with US on TSP, like Nuke in the past.

Harry Van
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 73
Joined: 14 Jun 2002 11:31
Location: Bangalore

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Harry Van » 18 Jul 2002 21:24

Next they will say Indian tank commanders are blind.

How can a tank not have night vison scopes ?Do you mean to say the Russians when they manufactured T-72 did not put NVD's.Then how will Russia defend herself ?

Iraqi T-72s had NVDs.They did'nt have thermals and suffered because of that.All Indian tanks/aircraft from Russia invariably are superior to their counterparts back home.T-72s must have NVDs.DO you think they would ahve mobilised without that ???

Vinay J
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 10
Joined: 06 May 2002 11:31
Location: USA

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Vinay J » 18 Jul 2002 21:39

Harry:

If you would believe some of the reports spread about India then you would conclude:

The Indian armed forces is manned by a bunch of fools who have no battle worthy weapons. The defence budget is pocketed by the politicians and Generals. So IN ships are rustbuckets that don't leave port; IAF fighters are not airworthy so pilots don't fly their aircraft but keep them parked on the runway to scare PAF; IA armor is obsolete and is not battleworthy, Indian missiles have a 10 mile range so useless!! :mad: :mad:

Boy oh boy! The point is this, armies gear up as per threat perception. Our two prime enemies in the region are China and Pakistan (TSP)!! We are not fighting US , please remember that. We have a competent intelligence outfit and know the preparation of the enemy. And our weapons acquisitions are prepared to ward off any threat to the nation.

We have won all wars against Pak! The last time in 1971, Nixon was forced to send his fleet to prevent India from breaking up Pakistan into 4 pieces. We still broke it into two!! :rotfl:

We will win again when we fight. Just like we did in Kargil.

The US had better realize that this is a war based on principles. You cannot win if you use double standards in the war.

Michael
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 78
Joined: 28 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Michael » 19 Jul 2002 03:18

Originally posted by harryvandeusan:
The problem with the West is they cannot reconcile India in better position with Pakistan becasue of the martial races theory.They are shocked when something violates it , like near parity of Indian and Pakistani armour , they must run it down to conform to their theory.According to them the tolerant hinduism absorbed Islam.We have been putting up a better fight to them than teh christians of Europe and they wont accept the facts as if hindus fought islam then they are not hindus they are no longer spiritual.We consume more Non-Vegetarian than many western countries and perhaps more beef than many western countries.
:eek: :confused: ????????

nitin - good rebuttals on the night vision issue. I think you've pretty well established that the reports about T-72's lacking night vision are misleading. After looking at some of your sources I think it's probably safe to say the IA T-72's do indeed have night vision in the gunner's sight. I hope it's better than the atrocious Russian night vision gear I've used. The Russian NVG's I tried out back when I was in the army were completely useless w/o the IR spotlight. Hopefully the T-72's do not have such rudimentary night vision.

Getting solid info is a much bigger problem on this forum than it should be. The truth is out there and it's not even classified. We just don't have any former Indian tankers here to talk about it. It's a shame that the only former or current military folks I've seen on BR have been myself and couple of other non-Indians. One thing I like about US military forums is there are always tons of former servicemen floating about. BR would be a hell of a lot more useful if we actually had some real Indian soldiers, sailors, and airmen taking part.

Our discussions would probably be a hell of a lot shorter since the facts would get cleared up without us having to go through a bunch of detective work to find out even the most mundane details.

Shirish
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 53
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31
Location: India

Re: Arjun – To be or not to be (?)

Postby Shirish » 19 Jul 2002 04:24

BR would be a hell of a lot more useful if we actually had some real Indian soldiers, sailors, and airmen taking part.
ha ha ha ha ha aah :rotfl:
Mike, India does not have unlimited resources to play the card of 'overwhelming force' that the US is so fortunate to posess. Hence, we use ambiguity. Besides, you didn't like what they had to say.


Return to “Mil-Tech Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests