The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

harishn
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 27
Joined: 05 Jul 2002 11:31
Location: Bombay

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby harishn » 08 Aug 2002 11:04

Any Idea about the cost of the Merkava Mk4 ? The last report i had read about the cost of T90 said that it cost aprox 5 million $ each. The above post mentions the cost as apprx 1 million $ !!! what is the real cost of T 90 ?

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

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Michael » 09 Aug 2002 05:44

Originally posted by R Nathan:
what is the real cost of T 90 ?
$2.5 million IIRC

George J

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby George J » 09 Aug 2002 05:53

I m confused now. If India bought the T-90S at $1.02M a piece. How does the REAL cost of T-90S become $2.5M? Why is $1.02M not considered a REAL price? I didnt think we were getting any concessions from the russians.

Badar
BRFite
Posts: 410
Joined: 23 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Badar » 10 Aug 2002 04:03

Hi,

Mobility is Overrated

Mike, you might be right about it in the purely tactical sense. But there is more to mobility than that.

I'll take a dog-slow tank with heavy armor and massive firepower over a T-series anyday

Would you still prefer the Merkava over the T-series if your starting line was poland or east germany and you had to race to the English channel?

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

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Michael » 10 Aug 2002 04:56

Originally posted by Badar:
Would you still prefer the Merkava over the T-series if your starting line was poland or east germany and you had to race to the English channel?
Hell yes! Better to get there slowly and in one piece, as opposed to quick and dead. :)

Like I said, war isn't a race; it's about destroying the enemy, plain and simple.

Badar
BRFite
Posts: 410
Joined: 23 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Badar » 10 Aug 2002 05:07

Hi,

Hell yes! Better to get there slowly and in one piece, as opposed to quick and dead

Mike, Spoken like a private :)

Try thinking bigger and larger :)

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16417
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby NRao » 10 Aug 2002 07:46

George J:
I m confused now. If India bought the T-90S at $1.02M a piece. How does the REAL cost of T-90S become $2.5M? Why is $1.02M not considered a REAL price? I didnt think we were getting any concessions from the russians.
$800 Million for 310 tanks, makes it approx 2.58/T-90. I would expect more than the tanks themselves to cost that much - spares, etc, etc, etc.

Redif: March 18, 2002: Russia to ship 40 T-90 tanks to India next month

Any Idea about the cost of the Merkava Mk4 ?
What it "really" costs may be difficult to acertain. For what it is worth, the US does provide $1.8 Billion per year in defence aid to Israel "above the table". Google did not come up with anything of interest.

harishn
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 27
Joined: 05 Jul 2002 11:31
Location: Bombay

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby harishn » 10 Aug 2002 14:40

Mike, Spoken like a private

Try thinking bigger and larger
I think that was a cheap dig.

As far as covering 300 KM in a couple of days is concerned, Tanks are not the best weapon of choice. I would recommend Airlifting of troops and then paradropping them, adequate Air Cover and Air lifting of BMP's with Anti tank missiles. U must remember that Tanks like any automobile is prone to mechanical faliure and Diesel is not cheap, espicially when u r talking about 500 or more Tanks. Besides do u have any idea about the fuel efficiency of a Tank? I dont suppose it can be much!! Use of Hover craft to Transport Tanks is also smart, espically since Russia has developed Air Cushion Vehicles that can lift and transport .

The Zubr is the largest landing hovercraft in the world. It is 57.4 meters long and 22.3 meters wide, has a speed of over 60 knots /110 kilometers/hour/, and overcomes obstacles up to 1.6 meters high. The hovercraft carries and puts straight on land a force of up to 500 soldiers or vehicles /3 medium tanks/. A series of trips with zubr is recommended.

I know that it says medium tanks, but maybe it can be coxed to carry a few more tons :p . Landing crafts are a good idea too.

AJames
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 43
Joined: 23 Feb 2002 12:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby AJames » 10 Aug 2002 16:21

There are two aspects to mobility. The first is the maximum speed of the tank. The second is where it is able to go (ie. restrictions imposed by bridge weight limits etc.) and how fast it can be moved over long distances (eg. by rail, land transporters, air, landing ship etc) due to it's size and weight. It is the second second aspect that is more important. Remember that an armored thrust involves not just one type of tank, but mechanized infantry, mechanized artillery and air defence artillery and supply logistics. The speed of tanks taking part in an armored thrust is usually slowed down by these other components of the modern equivalent of the German WWII panzer division, and so the difference in absolute top speed between the Merkava and T90 isn't that important.

The Merkava tank is a superb design. It may have a higher profile than Arjun or the T90, but the turret armour is at an acute angle and very difficult to penetrate. The Arjun chassis is good for self propelled artillery because of it's large size and it's hydro pneumatic suspension which reduces the height and so makes it a more stable firing platform. There may be a case for using the T90 as a mobile medium tank force which can be transferred from the east to the west by train if required, and stationing heavy main battle tanks (Arjuns or Merkava) in the west, particularly Rajastan. The best scenario is to use the existing Arjun chassis for self propelled guns and bridging systems etc. model the Arjun II on the Merkava (possibly with collaboration) and use the T90 and upgraded T72s as medium tanks for mobility.

In WWII the Tiger and King Tiger were heavy tanks similar in weight to the Arjun, Abrahms or Merkava the T34 was a medium tank which though not quite up to the Tiger in terms of armor is nevertheless regarded as the best tank of WWII overall in terms of performance, armament, production cost and mobility. It is perfectly sensible to use both heavy and medium tanks and use them for different roles and theaters.

Guest

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Guest » 10 Aug 2002 22:06

Would you still prefer the Merkava over the T-series if your starting line was poland or east germany and you had to race to the English channel?
Even if an Armored force moves at 20km per day it is doing very well.
There would'nt be any occasion where the max speed comes into play.
Besides the difference in speed between Arjun and the T-series is insignificant. Just a few extra km per hour. And I believe that Arjun is in fact faster than the T series; 70kmph vs 60kmph

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

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby JCage » 10 Aug 2002 23:41

Originally posted by Sai_NT:
The MoD has cleared 124 Arjuns for series production, but military sources said that with the arrival of the Russian T-90s main battle tank, its chassis would now be "diverted" to Bhim

Why is this consistent policy of hating all that is indigenous... even before it is waiting cabinet clearing on the bhim project, now IA decides to change the design/platform!????

The Army, meanwhile, has rejected Arjun, which continues to face problems with its fire control system and gun accuracy at battle ranges and has poor operational mobility because of its weight and width. The manufacturers of its German MTU 838 Ka-510, 1,400 hp diesel engine have also raised their price, significantly adding to the MBT's overall cost of around Rs.15 crores to Rs.20 crores each. The 310 Russian T-90s tanks that India has bought and which it plans to build indigenously under licence at the Heavy Vehicles Factory at Avadi in Tamil Nadu are priced at around $1.02 million apiece

Looks like, its the IA that is bashing ARJUN and not DDM or any external force. "They" are all within the defence organization and I see a lot of value in getting commissions [legalized corruption value {LCV}] for these deals. "they" have become "inside job-ers" - kangrezized and bajpayied forces.!!! :( so what if they have raised the price.. if its good get it, till everything is indigenous!!!

And read this about imported ones, that has high LCV valued deals :

Entrenched in India, Soltam is involved in upgrading 180 130 M 46 field guns to 155/39 calibre and 155mm/45 calibre under a contract worth around $4.07 million. But according to the MoD spokesman, the retrofit is facing "quality problems". Senior artillery officers also admitted privately that Soltam's upgrade programme is not only "flawed" but "over-ambitious".

Hard to swallow words:

The Army's presentation, backed by "persuasive" senior officers, now advisers to Denel ..... "Had the scheme gone through, India would have been a tied customer and South Africa could have charged astronomical sums for the two weapon systems,"
...
And, once the Bharatiya Janata Party-led coalition assumed office in 1998, they developed stronger intelligence, security and, reportedly, even nuclear links.
...


web page
Do us all a goddamn favour and read the posts above before taking that idiot Bedi's words to be infallible esp wrt the Arjun or for that matter any IA project.You do yourself and the IA no credit by believing that cretin.

Badar
BRFite
Posts: 410
Joined: 23 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Badar » 11 Aug 2002 00:04

Hi,

I think that was a cheap dig

Nathan, It wasnt a dig and i hope it wasn't taken as one.

Mike has very well brought out the primary concern of an individual crewman - survival. As you go up the chain of command - the primary focus shifts towards timely achievement of objectives. So while the top priority for an Tanker might be safety (which might be best served by a Merkava), a theater commander has a different set of priorities that are best served by a more mobile tank (where the T-Series might be more suitable). That's my point about thinking bigger and larger.

AJames, ananth, There seems to be a bit of a confusion about what mobility is - mobility is not all about speed. There are three types of mobility - tactical, operational and strategic. Tactical mobility is dependent on top speed, power, amphibious capability/snorkelling, gradient and rough terrain negotiation etc. This is of concern to a tank, troop or regimental commander. Operational mobility is as sharply dependent on the logistic footprint and maintanability as on the above mentioned factors. Operational mobility is the one that the brigade or divisional commander is most interested in. Strategic mobility is the concern of air and sealift or rail-mobility planners. All three types of mobility are, for any given system, to a degree independent. It is possible to have a tactically extremely mobile tank which has a so-so operational mobility and a very poor strategic mobility - or any combination thereof.

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

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby P Chupunkar » 11 Aug 2002 03:10

Originally posted by nitin:
Do us all a goddamn favour and read the posts above before taking that idiot Bedi's words to be infallible esp wrt the Arjun or for that matter any IA project.You do yourself and the IA no credit by believing that cretin.
Well clearly a section of the I.A. seems to agree that Arjun does not actually cut it. If this is far from the truth as you suggest, then either of the following have to be true:
1) Assumming the journo's get information from senior serving officers, clearly the army has not done a good job updating these officers about the reality of Arjun
2) This is a left-wing (or right wing whichever your political leanings are against) conspiracy aided and abetted by foreign arms agents.

The bottom line is that so far it appears (at least in the general press) that arjun is being showed down the throat of the army and not because the army wants it. So far most of the praise about arjun i have seen seem to come from the techno folks or the army folks managing the project.
Very little praise has come from the serving senior generals or for that matter an existing corps commander who is going to use this tank.

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

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby JCage » 11 Aug 2002 12:21

Originally posted by P Chupunkar:
Originally posted by nitin:
[b]Do us all a goddamn favour and read the posts above before taking that idiot Bedi's words to be infallible esp wrt the Arjun or for that matter any IA project.You do yourself and the IA no credit by believing that cretin.
Well clearly a section of the I.A. seems to agree that Arjun does not actually cut it. If this is far from the truth as you suggest, then either of the following have to be true:
1) Assumming the journo's get information from senior serving officers, clearly the army has not done a good job updating these officers about the reality of Arjun
2) This is a left-wing (or right wing whichever your political leanings are against) conspiracy aided and abetted by foreign arms agents.

The bottom line is that so far it appears (at least in the general press) that arjun is being showed down the throat of the army and not because the army wants it. So far most of the praise about arjun i have seen seem to come from the techno folks or the army folks managing the project.
Very little praise has come from the serving senior generals or for that matter an existing corps commander who is going to use this tank.[/b]
Which goddamn section of the IA?Have you ANY NAMES apart from Gole who spoke up when the Arjun DID have defects?And even then his words were misquoted and mangled by "the week".ANY NAMES OF SERVING MEN WHOSOEVER who say " Well clearly a section of the I.A. seems to agree that Arjun does not actually cut it?" If not,then dont spout inanities and innuendoes with no facts to back up your ludicrous comments.

FWIW,i have spoken to Army men about the ARjun but have the decency to not twist and mangle their views like Bedi has done and which you support.

The problem with intellectual comments like yours "So far most of the praise about arjun i have seen seem to come from the techno folks or the army folks managing the project." is that you have little or no clue of how the Army operates.
But wish to add your two cents,come what may.

FYI,the Army people managing the project aka Project Directors were the ones OPPOSING IT when there were critical deficiencies. Gole HIMSELF was the ARJUN PROJECT DIRECTOR.Now that they have been resolved,do you expect the Army to come out and sing hosanna's?For that matter how much has the AF remarked about the MKI and its avionics fit and capabilities given the criticism thats been directed against it?And now that the MKI has arrived?Or have you ever heard the Navy speak out after the media slandered the Delhi class ,once the ship got afloat?
No clue whatsoever of how the services prefer to silently "get on with it",come what may.

And no clue AT ALL,of how all pervading the OSA (Off secrets act)is.Which is taken advantage of by unscrupulous jackasses like Bedi.Knowing fully well no Army man will risk his career by rebutting him.

Who the hell do you think Brig HM SINGH is,if not a serving Army Man and the SUCCESSOR OF GOLE as a PROJECT DIRECTOR who spoke out FOR the ARjun?Making the most cogent reply per his limitations and indicating that the MAIN bugbear FCS WAS CLEARLY RESOLVED?

Who do you think was in charge of productionising the T1APFSDS in 1999,if not a SERVING ARMY MAN?Or were they all out for a lark in the park?

What the heck are http://www.mod.nic.in BUT THE OFFICIAL INDIAN SOURCES.
They -the ANNUAL ,ARMY ,DRDO etc reports-are as OFFICIAL AS AND MORE RELIABLE THAN CAG.
What do you think the PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE IS?Which officially clarified the Capability of the ARJUN FCS and its THermal imager for the first time?

Get it into your head .
ALL OF them say that Arjun is in production.
And MENTION CONTINUOUS TRIALS and relevant successes.If you dont agree,then your personal opinions dont count for squat.

Corps commanders.What a friggin joke.How many Corps commanders have spoken about the Centurion,pray tell me?Or the T72?
And you expect them to satisfy your urge for soundbites before the Arjun regiments are fully inducted in the Corps.And pray tell me what does the PROJECT DIRECTOR DO to get reports on the tank success,if not TAKE REPORTS FROM THE ARMY OPERATORS IN TRIALS?

Technical persons. :D

Regards,
Nitin

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

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby P Chupunkar » 11 Aug 2002 13:08

Pray tell me what engine are they going to use when the production order commences?

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

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Harry Van » 11 Aug 2002 14:51

The best thing is the DRDO start making tanks and SPGs for foreign clients.Or independantly as research projects.After all the purpose of the PSU is to create infrastructure without looking for immediate profits.

Now on its own the DRDO has come up with Karan.Without reference to GSQR.Its now teh world wide trend to mix and match weaposn from various quarters.Russians offer western electronics to the customers of its tanks and helos.Mi-17 comes with a western cockpit.Like wise SA wants Mig-29's engines for its F-16 offered by USA and teh latter has approved it.USA's Atlas rockets use Russian cryo engines for its first stage.Australia may go in for the Su-27 but wishes for GE engines and Russians have said OK.

Why not the DRDO get into this business of hybrid weapons and earn itself some money.After all at least the specs of foreign manufacturers are not going to be as self contradictory as the GSQR.

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

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby JCage » 11 Aug 2002 15:52

Originally posted by P Chupunkar:
Pray tell me what engine are they going to use when the production order commences?
Pray look for yourself.As usual,seeking the easy and glib way out.
If you werent so busy sharing your valuable thoughts,you'd have realised that Production HAS commenced.Do your own friggin research.
And oh yes,NO NAMES OF ANY SERVING ARMY MEN for your "well clearly a section of the IA feels that the Arjun actually doesnt cut it".Shameless to the very end.But thats pro forma for you isnt it?
Say some crap and then scamper when asked for PROOF.

Regards,
Nitin

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

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby P Chupunkar » 11 Aug 2002 16:15

FYI i never did fancy that bloke (rahul bedi). But what i did think that his journalistic integrity would force him to verify with his sources and yes i assumed that he does have some access to serving officers in the Armed Forces.
Nor do i have any vested interests in running down the armed forces/DRDO but when it comes to the truth it must be told.
As far as the arjun is concerned the first time the production order was granted by Narasimha roa's govt. (way back in mid to late 90s). Finally another production order was approved in the year 2000. Now here we are in Year 2002 and still the production has not even commenced. This i feel justifies my skepticism for this particular project.
As far as i know there are still question marks regarding the availability of the german engine hence my query as to which engine is going to be used when production of this tank actually commences.
So as far as my take on this whole thing is concerned. I will only believe that the production has commenced once a tank actually rolls out and this event is actually publicized. Now the question whether they will publicize it or not is a different question. If i had any input i would gladly recommend that this event be put on the front pages as it is a source of national pride that an indigenous designed tank is finally being produced (much like the pride behind the LCA project and others).

Peeyoosh
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 79
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: hong kong

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Peeyoosh » 11 Aug 2002 16:16

Nitin

Any idea on the status of the Bhim?

Peeyoosh

harishn
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 27
Joined: 05 Jul 2002 11:31
Location: Bombay

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby harishn » 11 Aug 2002 17:28

Nitin, I like u'r style :lol: .

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

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby JCage » 11 Aug 2002 22:50

Nor do i have any vested interests in running down the armed forces/DRDO but when it comes to the truth it must be told.
As far as the arjun is concerned the first time the production order was granted by Narasimha roa's govt. (way back in mid to late 90s). Finally another production order was approved in the year 2000. Now here we are in Year 2002 and still the production has not even commenced. This i feel justifies my skepticism for this particular project.


Truth.......bollocks.Nice choice of words to say that you KNEW SQUAT and SHOT OFF YOUR MOUTH *shamelessly*.If you cared to find out the reasons for the Arjun's retrials circa 96 and the ARmy insistence on the JAP,etc the information is available.Of course,nor would you know that components of the Arjun FCS and the thermal imager were American and sanctioned ,would you?Nor that the FCS standards were raised by the Army!

And who the hell told you that production hasnt commenced?Your fertile imagination at work again!Have you even bothered to SEARCH for the DRDO,ARMY reports at http://www.mod.nic.in ? Or is it "Assumptions" aka "i'm lazy but i've two cents to add" again?

The ARMY RAISED THE STANDARDS AND DRDO met them.

Have you even bothered to READ THE JOINT ACTION PLAN which was formulated in 1996?
Which CLEARLY STATED that the Arjun would be accepted ONCE IT MET ALL ARMY CRITERIA.I wont even bother to restate the criteria.For those who are interested ,its in the Arjun to be or not to be thread started by Raj M.

Whats funny nay ridiculous is that you dont even understand what the term "indent for production" means.The GoI placed an indent in 2000.That means tooling and preparation for the same would commence at OFB in 2000.Contracts for LSP will be negotiated with suppliers with the GOI order sufficing as OFFICIAL.
All this clearly noted by OFB.
George Fernandes even went to the extent of confirming the "last remaining" issue ie Armor trials pending which the indent would be valid.
These were carried out in Feb 2000.DRDO notes that ongoing trials of tech were to be incorporated in production?Pray tell us what can one infer from the above?Knowing that FCS issue was resolved?

As far as i know there are still question marks regarding the availability of the german engine hence my query as to which engine is going to be used when production of this tank actually commences

Well,you sure know a heckuva lot,i'll say that fer sure.More than the poor Parliamentary Accounts Committee.A bunch of unknown dorks with no connections.Who forget to mention any problems with german engines!That too in April 2000- much after Pokhran.They even contemplate licensed manufacture.Chee chee,the ignoramuses!

Yikes.Neither do they state that Renk has reneged on their deal(and lost out on much dollahs).Or that Diehl has run off with a huge load of tracks.
Ooooh.Bhim must be stalled then!As it uses the Arjun chassis and drivetrain.The BEML director is a LIAR.
PChupunkar knows best.

BTW,DRDO is continuing with the Nishant...which has an ALvis 801R engine from....errr...germany.

Heh.All that Germany did was cancel the HDW follow on deal.Nothing else,nothing more.Everything else is hunky dory.WIth a few price increases for extra mustard on their sauerkrauts.

So as far as my take on this whole thing is concerned. I will only believe that the production has commenced once a tank actually rolls out and this event is actually publicized

Then kindly keep your valuable "take" where it belongs and do intimate the PAC,DRDO,Army that you know far more than they ever did.And that you believe the "truth shall be known". :D .....now its Rahul Bedi alone who faces the firing squad.Slippery move that.
Har de har.

And we are yet to hear about your facts vis a vis how the sneaky ARmy logically scuppered the T72 upgrade to kill the ARjun!

Y'see the truth deserves to be known. :D

Regards,
Nitin

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

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby JCage » 11 Aug 2002 23:09

Originally posted by peeyoosh chadda:
Nitin

Any idea on the status of the Bhim?

Peeyoosh
Peeyoosh,
The Bhim was cleared for induction in 2000 itself.
The DRDO report for 2000 says "The state of the Art 155mm self propelled gun obtained by integrating a derivative of the Arjun chassis with the T-6 turret has been recommended for induction by the trial team".

The trial team being army.
The only objection to Bhim has been cost.Apart from logistics.

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/MONITOR/ISSUE2-3/rupak.html

At US$ 2.4 million a piece, the Denel T-6 turret alone costs more than a complete FH-77AD system. The turret’s cost is attributable in part to modifications made in repose to Indian requirements. It differs from the existing G-6 turret in being fully autonomous. The turret has been re-designed to provide storage for both projectiles and charges, in addition to the power pack.
The Arjun chassis is also expensive.

What gives credence that the Bhim is finally underway,is not only a slew of media reports alluding the same but the recent-a week or so back iirc- interview by the director of BEML stating that the organisation has been selected by the Govt to be responsible for the chassis of the Army's self propelled gun project.

Net,it appears that the Bhim is finally on its way.Mace and all. :)

Regards,
Nitin

Guest

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Guest » 12 Aug 2002 02:28

I am seriously contemplating wiping out any Rahul Bedi post from now on. The man has ulterior motives and all we are doing is helping his task. It only gives the likes of Nitin and I high blood pressure.

subra

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

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Michael » 12 Aug 2002 03:39

Originally posted by Badar:
Mike, Spoken like a private :)

Try thinking bigger and larger :)
That's staff sergeant to you. :)

Anyway, I guess it's clear that my real-world experiences are not as valid or enlightening as your theoretical knowledge.

Roop
BRFite
Posts: 257
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Roop » 12 Aug 2002 03:41

I am seriously contemplating wiping out any Rahul Bedi post from now on. The man has ulterior motives and all we are doing is helping his task.
LNS: I encourage you to do exactly that. And then follow it up with a similar policy re. Tehelka posts. This forum is (or ought to be) under no obligation to spread lies, disinformation and propaganda. People who want such are free to visit the relevant websites directly and get their daily fill of "India is sh!t, Indian Army is sh!t, IAF is sh!t, IN is sh!t, LCA is a dud, Arjun is a dud" headlines for themselves.

It only gives the likes of Nitin and I high blood pressure.
I never said so before (shame on me! :)

Ashutosh
BRFite
Posts: 150
Joined: 04 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Ashutosh » 12 Aug 2002 03:57

Just found a link to one of the earliest prototypes of Arjun:
http://www.jed.simonides.org/tanks/alpha/arjun_series/prototype/arjunproto_001.jpg
Might be appropriate for the Images Gallery, dunno about the copyright.

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3097
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby fanne » 12 Aug 2002 04:20

Subra,
IMHO, deleting Rahul Bedi article is a bad idea. I know this SOB has an agenda, but he is the only few reporters who write about Indian arms/army and is widely read. Most of the reader are not experts, the only place where his view can be logically challenged is BR. IMHO, this is one battle we must fight and win, ignoring it (or him) will only make us weak.

rgds,
fanne

Muns
BRFite
Posts: 294
Joined: 02 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Muns » 12 Aug 2002 05:18

A Nitin post a day keeps the Arjun naysayers at bay!

Ive been trying to do some reading on some reports i keep reading around about why a 120mm rifled gun on the Arjun/Challenger 2 might be more "Lethal" than a 120mm/125mm smoothbore gun.

All ive been able to come up with is that rifled guns are more accurate....with the challenger holding the record destroying a tank at over 5kms in the gulf.
Any more about this? thanks

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

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby P Chupunkar » 12 Aug 2002 06:04

Army raised the standards and the DRDO met them ? Really till 1997-8 we were hearing about how the army lowered the bars so that DRDO could meet them. Now suddenly the army raises the standards again and DRDO is able to meet them; that too after running into a sanctions block by the americans.
Please enlighten us. You are going against all media reports emnating from india which indicate that the requirements were watered down for the DRD0 to meet them.
Also kindly explain to us why the army did not want more Arjun's to be produced and why did DRDO come up with its own requirements for Tank-ex (not another project initiated by the Army itself).

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

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby advitya » 12 Aug 2002 06:12

Originally posted by Praneet_N:

All ive been able to come up with is that rifled guns are more accurate....with the challenger holding the record destroying a tank at over 5kms in the gulf.
Any more about this? thanks
Rifled guns can fire HESH rounds that offer greater ranges. Also the auto-loader and associated equipment for the 125mm smoothbore restricts the size and type of ammo that can be carried. A munnually loaded gun offers quicker reaction time and much higher rates or fire..along with greater accuracy because you can keep your gun on target while loading.

Guest

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Guest » 12 Aug 2002 07:01

fanne

His articles can exist as a link in a news thread - but posting and discussing the same drivel in seperate threads is meaningless.

I recently talked to a army officer who was besides himself with rage at the mention of Rahul Bedi. He told me the bugger goes to Delhi, sits for a drink with some third rate bureaucrat/defence official and then goes out and writes this crap in various magazines/newspapers repeatedly.

Subra

Guest

Re: The state of the armor - Indian and Pak tanks

Postby Guest » 12 Aug 2002 07:04

Nitin - don't bother replying - Enough info exists in the archives - this thread is being closed


Return to “Military Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests