It would be interesting to discuss what are the indigenous systems of Arjun. Well as per my knowledge here it goes: -<P>Indian<P>Armour<BR>Chassis<BR>Gun (the stabilization system may be imported initially because India is not known to have any experience with it. If it is French then it may be electric rather than electro mechanical or hydro electric)<BR>FCS though lot of talk about need to import but I hope to see DRDO and BEL pull through (Though initially help of delft Holland was sought and PPS seem to have imported FCS, thermal and night sights. Later on the talk was to adopt the t-72 upgrade –israeli-french-polish-russian????)<BR>NBC protection BARC<BR>Suspension<BR>The production variants are supposed to have Local transmission hydrodynamic torque converter, retarder and integral system (but rumours of ZF German transmission is also around)<BR>Fire control and suppression system <BR>Smoke Grenade dischargers<BR>Ammo<BR>Turbocharger?<BR>Cooling pack<BR>Brakes?<BR>ERA<BR>GPS, <BR>Communication system?<P>Foreign<P>The design assistance KMW Germany<BR>The Gun design assistance Giat France Engine Mtu Germany<BR>Tracks Transmission in PPS seems to be imported though with ultimate intention to indigenise <BR>Laser ranger finder Barr & Stroud UK<BR>FCS, night sight, thermal sight seems to be imported though with ultimate intention to indigenize <BR>There is some reference to US components in FCS of PPS but what?<BR>7.62mm & 12.7 mm machine guns are Russian<P>Don’t knows<P>Electro optical jammers though tech absorption from Shotra System is possibility<BR>Electric Turret traverse and gun elevation system<BR>Gun Stabilization and Recoil System<BR>Is there any add on ball chain or wire mesh armor also?<P>The 15th PPS was supposedly having 60% imported content. To my mind the same will be substantially reduced in Production variants.<P>Ultimately<BR>By the time Arjun goes into production IMHO except for engine all components will be Indian <P>That is off course except for off the shelf commercial items which in any case may be foolhardy to replicate.<P>The Most Disheartening Thing Is That Presently There Is No Reference About Any Attempts To Develop An Indigenous Engine. In this regard the LCA seems much better managed.<BR>
Another interesting source of freefall speculation which I like doing is guessing the possible configuration of Arjun Mark-II. Kindly join in.<P>First of my rules is that there is very less possibility of radical redesign and we must try to work out the areas of rumored weakness of Arjun and envision the solutions.<P>So here is my take: -<P>Automatic ammo loading system (Somebody may tell us what system does UK has on Challenger which also has rifled gun) Incidentally automatic loading system is not astonishingly faster and with a well trained crew the difference is only marginal <P>APU from some Indian commercial engine like Tata Indica or Sierra or something similar<P>Indian machine guns<P>Mtu883 engine which will be lighter more powerful and more fuel efficient (or better an Indian engine)<P>Reduction in width may result automatically on adoption of the aforesaid smaller engine<P>The reduction in the weight of Armour with use of Titanium<P>Modular armor and side armour <P>Remove suicide window from turret front & give nice slopes on the turret & protection from top attack missiles<P><BR>The consequent reduction in volume due to the aforesaid including the reduction in crew to 3 due to auto loading will reduce the weight to say 56 tons which will give anything upto 15% increment in power to weight ratio.<P>Perhaps an attempt to reduce the radar cross section against SAR and MMR by smoothening the skin off various protrusions and attempt at reducing the IR signature by mixing the exhaust with cooler air before release<P>Improved ergonomics <P>Capability to fire ATGM though personally this I really do not think is essential with a powerful rifled gun as Pakis tanks even at 3500 meters may be dead meat.<P>A powerful laser dazzler and better ammo<P>Now interestingly the aforesaid list is pretty short and after start from scratch Arjun Mk I, it does not look impossible. So stand over Leo-IIA6 our Arjun Mk-2 is going to be ready to go in Production in 2006 if not earlier.<P>Now dreams aside if only some real effort is made for Indian Engine.<BR> <BR> The most disheartening thing is that presently there is no reference about any attempts to develop an indigenous engine. <BR>
Philip,<BR>you couldnt be more wrong.The IA isnt facing the USArmy armoured corps but the pakistanis with t80uds and alkhalids,alzarrars and the chinese with their norinco type90 variants and recently the type98.The arjun remains a viable concept and will continue to be so for a long time to come.<P><I>"Smaller crews with auto loading systems make for smaller sizes,lower profiles,more fuel carrying capacity leading to longer ranges,more ammo stowage and reduced costs."</I><P>What about combat ability?The M1 doesnt have an autoloader,neither does the leopard nor the challenger which n its 2E form is quite capable.<BR>Lower profiles can be achieved without an autoloader.if your armour is strong enough,damn the profile.In the lebanon war a merk tanker supposedly placed his tank in the way of a sagger intended for an apc,such was his confidence in the protection of his vehicle..<BR>Regarding autoloaders and low profiles,the 72 series has all that..did it help them in grozny against chechens with rpgs?<P>As is clear after hitesh's post,the factor aginst the tank is logistics...that and little else.<P>We do need the arjun,the t90 has its +points but its not perfect.<P><I>"It is decades obsolete in concept and will in 5 years time be really seen to be so."</I><P>INDEED,So are the m1,leclerc,leopard et al...why are the israeli devloping the merk mk4?They too should be concentrating on plastic tanks with railguns like the brits....<BR>Why keep "upgrading" the m1 then with the sep or the leopard ?<P>And the brits themselves are now feilding the challenger2E with a new "europowerpack" mtu engine,better fcs and many incremental improvements.<P>As regards the concepts of mobility etc with the yank induced changes...there is a lot of opposition to that as well.India doesnt have the need for aping US requirements to be "mobile" and be able to rush to any global hotspot...we have to duke it out with our enemies and win.the arjun was intended for that and that it shall.<P>regards,<BR>nitin<BR><p>[This message has been edited by nitin (edited 26-01-2001).]
Isnt Arjuns gun based on a french gun?<P>The Challenger 2 uses manual loading, and will probably continue to do so. <BR>For the Arjun mk.II I would change the rifled gun to a smoothbore gun.<P>------------------<BR>Nandai<P>Since time began,<BR>the dead alone know peace.<BR>Life is like melting snow.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Spinster:<BR><B>Aprpos ENgine, this is where the investment in civilian infrastructre would have helped the DRDO. Imagine if we had good high way system, lots of trailer trucks of the kind MAC, Volvo, Hino, Cat would be rolling and our Ashok Leyland, Telco would have by this time had experience in building big engines.<P>What about HM Terex earth moving?, BEML, what about teaming up with Skoda??<P>Skoda especially is as good as any German technology.<BR>Why not Team up with South Koreans?<BR> Dont we make already T-72 engines, cant our great HV (Avadi) GMs get their *$% moving at least now and do something?</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P><BR>i think the indian industry is moving in reverse direction. leyland intends to spinoff its engine unit in a seperate JV with a minority stake for itself and majority for iveco. tata has already spun off its engine unit as a seperate jv with cummins<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Raj Malhotra:<BR><B> <BR>Around 300-500 hp for heavy trucks and BMPs<P>Around 1000hp-1500hp for tanks<P>Around 2500hp-10000hp for marine engines<BR></B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Raj,<P>300-500 HP are already made in India (Deutz-MWM) by Ruston. These are the D & TBD 232/4 V8 & V12's. These were also used on the Rajdajni Exp End-On-Generator cars and still are where the Rajdhani is hauled by the diesel WDM2's.<P>in the 2500-10,000 HP we have Kirloskar-PIELSTICK engines being made at Nashik. in fact BR quotes: <P>"INS Kora has an indigenous component of 70%. It is powered by two [B]SEMT-Pielstick 18 PA6 V280[B] diesels... These are made by Kirloskar. <P>India is also developing a new mil;itary vechicle the, "Sarath(?)", I think. From the pictures I have seen, on BR of-course, the engine seems to be a Ruston -MWM.<P>MWM engines (german) are known for their compactness. Thse engines have almost 0% import content. Only the V12's had imported BOSCH fuel pumps (1989). Now eben these may be made in India.<P>Anyone in Pune, here with a contact in Ruston. We could get hold of the D234 technical manual. <P>However, I doubt these off the shelf civil engines can be used in the Arjun. They possibly offer a good/mature starting point for Indian design efforts.<P>Spinster:<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Dont we make already T-72 engines, cant our great HV (Avadi) GMs get their *$% moving at least now and do something?<BR><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>I think they tried turbocharging the t-72 engine a failed. We discussed this at lenghth in another thread. Sorry, no archives.<P>For mil. specially Arjun, compactness & p/w ratio would be important, in addition to operating temp. etc etc.<P>IIRC, of all indigenously made engies, the Ruston(aka Greaves)MWM's have the smallest form factor & perhaps the best p/w ratio. A good starting point.<P>Rahul<P><BR>[This message has been edited by rahulm (edited 27-01-2001).]<P>[This message has been edited by rahulm (edited 27-01-2001).]<p>[This message has been edited by rahulm (edited 27-01-2001).]
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dg_amarnath:<BR><B>Saurabh<BR>What if we add that "Kanchan" armour to T-90.<BR>We did it to some older tanks in IA isnt it?<BR>It mixes Russian And Indian.So no imported no Indigenous.</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Whoops,<BR>Sorry I missed this post the last two times I scanned the topic. <P>To answer your question:<BR>No it can't 'cause it's meant for a much bigger tank. It's also not fitted on any older tanks.<BR>The T-72 upgrade similarity with Arjun lies in engine and communication and also probably with FCS<P>------------------<BR>Adios<BR>Saurabh
according to what i have gathered the germans have denied us the Leopard 2 engine from the begining. <BR>The Leclerc engine seems to be a better bet - all the mosre since the French are trying to increase their share in the sales to indian armed forces. There was a problem with Arjun engine heating up in desert trials but since i don't hear this argument from the army anymore maybe they have overcome this problem. But leclercs have been tried in Qatar and did not have any problem in the 45ºC. so maybe thats not a bad option and that engine is 1500hp according to what i've heard. (please point out any mistakes in the above paragraph). <BR>The army was also complaining about the hydro-pneumatic suspension and thats the reason DRDO came out with a torsion-bar prototype. So which suspension wil be used in the production version. Also which suspension will be used if the army goes ahead with the mating of th T6 turret to the arjun. Or is it that we dont hear about it anymore because this issue solved.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by darshand:<BR><B>according to what i have gathered the germans have denied us the Leopard 2 engine from the begining. <BR>The Leclerc engine seems to be a better bet - all the mosre since the French are trying to increase their share in the sales to indian armed forces. There was a problem with Arjun engine heating up in desert trials but since i don't hear this argument from the army anymore maybe they have overcome this problem. But leclercs have been tried in Qatar and did not have any problem in the 45ºC. so maybe thats not a bad option and that engine is 1500hp according to what i've heard. (please point out any mistakes in the above paragraph). <BR>The army was also complaining about the hydro-pneumatic suspension and thats the reason DRDO came out with a torsion-bar prototype. So which suspension wil be used in the production version. Also which suspension will be used if the army goes ahead with the mating of th T6 turret to the arjun. Or is it that we dont hear about it anymore because this issue solved. </B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>le had a hyperbar engine which i understand was a disaster. consequently the exports to q has mtu 1500hp 883 engines.<P>i think gas suspensions will be used.<P>incidently, rahul the bmel site refers to the fact that it has set up manufactering capacity for 10-1000 hp engines. is something cooking? does somebody know more?<P>also does somebody know anything about tatra-kolos trucks which seem to be extensively used in forces.<P>
Raj, Giat havent sold any Leclercs to Qatar, they have been tried, but no contract have been signed, the Leclerc have only been exported to Abu Dhabi which have ordered 436 tanks, but there seems to be some problem in the recent tanks being delivered.<P>For info on Tatra trucks, go to <A HREF="http://www.tatra.cz" TARGET=_blank>http://www.tatra.cz</A> <P>------------------<BR>Nandai<P>Since time began,<BR>the dead alone know peace.<BR>Life is like melting snow.
About BEML 10-1000 HP engines. No I don't know but some one in Bangalore/Mysore could find out. Are these aKOMATSU engines. BEML has a licence manufacture deal with them for earthmoving equipment.<P>Rahul
As I was trying to find out more about the engine manufacturing facility set up by BMEL, I came across pretty disappointing information. It seems BMEL was initially purchasing the engines from Kirloskar but based on alleged complainants from the consumers it decided to set up its own engine division. Also it was intended that engines would be supplied for military use. (I think it means & includes for BMPs and T-72 as BMEL manufactures components for these AFVs). It tied up with Komasatu, Japan to provide technology. The plant only reached capacity utilization of 25% at maximum. The consumers found the engines extremely costly. Certain engines intended for military use were not of proper size. (Perhaps means were not compact enough to be used in AFVs.) Komasatu did not review the JV agreement after 1998.<P> Presently BMEL is looking for a MNC to spin off its engine division.<P>A disappointing tale. Instead of grooming an established and reputed Pvt manufacturer the only thing achieved was typical babudom inspired stu*idi*y. This story is repeat of Maruti. Initially the pvt manufacturers were not allowed to develop by controlling the input, output and technology. Then the buffoon set up Maruti as Govt controlled company at extraordinary favourable terms. Then the babudom practically gave it away to Suzuki. Till date Maruti does not make gearboxes in India. Compare this with Indica. Definitely not the best Car in the segment but a right car at a reasonable price and in the teeth of the toughest competition.<P><BR>Now there are attempts to set up another JV for 1000-1500hp engines.(?) The babudom fails to realise that it is difficult to be an economical manufacturer of a limited range engines. The number of engines required for AFVs per annum will be in range of 100-500 only. It would be preferable to set a manufacturing base for a range of engines of a common family used for variety of civilian and military purposes. Only thing it needs is ten minutes of commonsense policy planning. Mtu whose engines are practically controlling the AFV market is less than a billion $ turnover company which is not a big size anymore even by Indian standards. For limited turnover/number commodities like AFV engines lower volumes in India will be offset by Low labour costs.<P>Incidentally BMEL has also set up manufacturing facility for TATRA vehicles. I wonder which engines are used therein. TATRA or Komatsu? Indigenization of around 50% has been achieved. And if I remember correctly TATRA has set up another competing subsidiary in India –Tatra Udyog limited. Funny! <P>The best plan would be now to set up three way JV. BMEL, MNC and a pvt Indian company and leverage the facilities of BMEL for making the whole range of engines. 10-1000hp, 1000-1500hp, 2500-10000hp. Pvt help is required for bringing commonsense to the babudom if nothing else. If a suitable MNC is not forthcoming then the initial development effort should be reignited. Foreign consultation and help can be sought for numerous sub components and it would be easily available. Diesel engines are not exactly rocket science but babudom has made a mess of it. Just imagine if we read that there are 100 small or big manufactures of jet engines in India but ADA is buying GE without even trying it at home.<P><BR>Now with facilities set up only thing it needs is a realistic time frame. As drdo is always in artificial hurry it rejects Indian development efforts. Production of Arjun was to begin in 1990 therefore there was hurry to abandon Indian efforts for a established foreign supplier. If a realistic time frame of 2002 was adopted then the Indian engines would have been ready. <P>Also Indian forces have to give up obsession with the best. Many times reasonable is good enough. They have no problem with T-90 with power to weight ratio of 17hp/ton but want something like 27 for Arjun which is 50% increment. In addition Russian engines are noisy, have difficulties with hot weather, big heat signature, maintaince oriented, short lived etc. High time IA realizes that it is not fighting in European front and investment in indigenous tech is what will make India a super power not by buying costly crumbs from abroad. <BR>
To complete the record regarding BMEL engine division, I would like to post some more facts: -<P>1. As per last data in public domain the capacity utilization has been 15% only that is around 400 engines.<BR>2. The engine division was to be set up to manufacture both Komatsu engines and Tatra engines. It is beyond my understanding as to why BMEL had to adopt two family lines of engines with completely different heritages.<BR>3. The Tatra engine line was abandoned as imports were much cheaper. Now, Tatra manufactured by BMEL uses imported TATRA engines. Incidentally why did Kamatsu line of engines were not used when BMEL expected to supply the same to other manufactures( while they themselves failed to adapt the engines in its own lines) is beyond my understanding. Even though initially it was thought that engines will be used for BMEL, other automotive manufacturers, generators, compressors, military and related lines, obviously the results belied the expectations completely.<BR>4. Forget Tatra they could not even adopt the engine for the rest of their product line and only 45% of their product line used their engines. The civilian market for Tatra vehicles was not explored. Consequently Tatra itself set up a subsidiary to exploit this market called Tatra Udyog limited.<BR>5. Engine price was more than 700% beyond projection. Projection was for 1996 and engines rolled out in 1999.Engines were so costly that their own machinery using such products was becoming uncompetitive by being overpriced.<BR>6. Import content was around 86%. (I personally think the only thing they did was to unpack and paint their names over it.)<BR>7. The project was to be completed in 1996, it was completed in 1999 and it seems Kamatsu terminated the JV in 1998.<BR>8. To rub salt into the wounds the customers preferred to buy the Kirloskar Cummins engines that BMEL sought to replace. <BR>9. Now off course BMEL wants to spin off the engine division to MNC<BR>10. Around 65 crores was spent to set up the engine manufacturing line for the project that was sanctioned in 1988.<BR>11. It seems repeatedly Army /forces failed to place orders on BMEL and preferred to import inspite of BMEL setting up facility on the basis of express promises. The reason ostensibly is that imports are cheaper (though it is worth considering that army does not Pay Custom Duties.)<BR>12. It seems that army wanted to repower Vijanta tanks with the same engine that can be used for T-72. So the thinking was reasonable that is to develop the same family of engine that will be used in Vijanta, T-72 and possible could have been used in T-90 also & variants in Arjun. I think it is pretty obvious that the plan remained on paper.<BR>13. Ultimately Vijanta, T-72, Indian manufactured T-90 and Arjun and variants will require around something like 4000-5000 engines in next 10-15 years. Are we going to continue imports? Considering that 12 years endeavour has not provided any results.<BR>14. It seems babudom it is not even importing technology, it is trying to import an assembly line or fabrication plant. Any person with even few day working in the industry would know that importing the manufacturing plant works in mass produced generic product like fertilizers, petrochemicals, heavy water or even shells, fuzes, explosives etc but for complicated limited edition machinery like high power engines required in multiple variants there is no short cut and if you want to indigenize then you have to do the design yourself. (Though almost all the technology can be obtained through consultants, retired employees, independent R&D labs and patent offices.) For instance the landing gear of LCA was copied line by line (as per some BR members) from Mirage 2000 and HUD was made after drawing information from public domain documents. Why is this spirit missing in case of engines? Is it because it seems so easy that it is not worthwhile to spent time and energy over it? Well then this thinking has been proved wrong.<BR>15. I wonder whether BMEL can learn anything from Indica, Bajaj or Nirma or its going the thumsup/lakeme way? <BR>16. Lastly I again want to add that army should either give up its obsession with the best or take it to the logical conclusion by using Pajeros instead of Maruti jeeps.<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by shailesh.garg:<BR><B>Raj: You are absolutely right. However common-sense is in short-supply in India.<P>The best thing would be if AFV engines are made by Tatas or Ashok Leyland. BEML is not the right place for making engines.<P></B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P><BR>Shailesh involving TATA or Leyland may be a good idea but as I pointed out in my earlier posts that they have themselves spun off/are in process, their heavy engine divisions to JVs controlled by MNC’c<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by shailesh.garg:<BR><B>Raj: You are absolutely right. However common-sense is in short-supply in India.<P>The best thing would be if AFV engines are made by Tatas or Ashok Leyland. BEML is not the right place for making engines.<P></B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P><BR>Shailesh involving TATA or Leyland is a good idea but as I pointed out in my earlier posts that they have themselves spun off/are in process, their heavy engine divisions to JVs controlled by MNC’c<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by shailesh.garg:<BR><B>Bofors makes 155mm ammunition in Pakistan. Does that impact Pakistan's security.<BR></B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Have you got any source to back this claim of yours?<P>------------------<BR>Nandai<P>Since time began,<BR>the dead alone know peace.<BR>Life is like melting snow.
rahul you have brought in interesting fact or possibility that sarath use Greaves-ruston-MWM engines.<P>sarath is indian name for BMP-1 & 2 being manufacterd in India.<P>Greaves has a website but the same is not opening due to some defect with the server perhaps<P>Do you have more information on this aspect?
Did MTU deliver any engines at all for the Arjun, to be used for prototypes and such? If that is the case, couldnt the engine be reverse-engineered and then manufactured in India, sure it wouldnt be all that legal, and the germans might get p*ss*d, but atleast the Arjun will have a good engine.<P>------------------<BR>Nandai<P>Since time began,<BR>the dead alone know peace.<BR>Life is like melting snow.<p>[This message has been edited by Nandai (edited 04-02-2001).]
Rahul I did some cyberspace research and could not turn up anything about greaves-mwm-ruston engines being used for sarath. In fact GOI has established an engine factory at Avadi to manufacture engines for ICV/BMP/sarath and for tanks-T-72.<P>So to make a conclusion the following are the important indigenous manufacturers of heavy diesel automotive engines:-<P>10-300hp kirloskar <P>300-360hp Avadi (Russian) (Drdo sit mentions uprating of engine to 360hp by turbocharging)<BR>750-840hp? Avadi ( I suppose T-90 technology transfer will take it to 1000 hp with new tech input)<P>Excluding the smaller names, screwdriver technology and mnc controlled production bases.<BR>Consequently I have excluded Tata Cummins, Cummins India, caterpillar India, simpsons, Leyland, bmel, tatra, Volvo, benz. Wartsila is mostly for DGs above 1mw. DLW site does not work. Bhel is in different league.<P>(?=guesswork)<P>For marine engines we have:-<P>10-2000hp? Greaves-ruston-mwm (German-UK? inputs - Italy? inputs) (though these engines are pretty heavy but greaves uses it as their USP)<P>1500-3500hp? GRSE Mtu 396 (German)<BR>4000-5000hp? GRSE mtu 538<BR>2500-7700hp Kirloskar pielstick (French)<P>GRSE sit claims to manufacture but may be assembly only<BR>Kirloskar pielstick is an assembly<P>Gas turbine<P>Bhopal-Bhel-no info-(HELP wanted to determine the peerage!!)<BR>LM 2500-GE assembled by HAL <P>For turboprops<BR>I was wrong reportedly HAL is working to indigenise the engines of Nishant.(Hansa also?)<P>Lastly it seems that the options for engines available to drdo is very limited. The western world is turning en masse to mtu 883 1500hp. For instance challenger, le, leo, diesel version of Abrams for export etc. the Europeans engines are supposed to heavy almost 2kg/hp but durable. On the other hand Russians claim 1kg/hp but do not have anything to offer in 1000-1500 hp range and engines have shorter life by around 3-4 times ?)<P>I could not locate the weight specifications of mtu-883 even on mtu site but the opinion seems to be unanimous that it is a revolutionary compact design for hot climate.<P>Also it seems that the original mtu 838 1400 hp imported in 1983 ( or about) for Arjun has been phased out. It seems mtu may be offering mtu 873-1500hp to India now, which is also listed on BR site as power pack of <BR>Arjun.<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Nandai:<BR><B>Did MTU deliver any engines at all for the Arjun, to be used for prototypes and such? If that is the case, couldnt the engine be back-engineered and then manufactured in India, sure it wouldnt be all that legal, and the germans might get p*ss*d, but atleast the Arjun will have a good engine.<P></B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P><BR>42 power packs were imported (engine + transmission)<BR>GRSE claims to manufacture some models of MTU<P>Read the aforesaid CAG report very instructive<BR>
A suggestion,<BR>Indian government should produce light tanks fitted with ATM like the nag instead on trying to produce MBT. In the gulf war the bradleys were very effective and destroyed more tanks than M1A1. Also a MBT will not be well suited for moutainous terrains and bridges. Pakistani tanks are mostly old and are very vunerable to ATM and so are Chinese ones. Also u don't have worry about the engine problem. Even the U.S army is planning to produce about 1200 light tanks starting in 2002 i guess.
But what does the US army plan to use their light tanks for, to fight real MBTs, I dont think so, they are probably going to be used for low intensity conflicts, and as support units to light forces until the heavier units arrive, with the heavy M1A2s. <BR>I think light tanks is out of the question, they are way to vulnerable when they come up against real MBTs. Any old tank would make mincemeat out of any Bradley class tankdestroyers if it would get the chance to open up at it. The ATGMs of today, and most of tmw are too slow, most travel below the speed of sound, and most need the gunner to keep his sight on the enemy till his missile hits its target, so while the ATGM is travelling towards its target at say 300m/s the crew of the target discovers the vehicle which fired the missile and opens up at it with machine guns and the maingun firing projectiles at speeds up to 1800m/s, which do you think will hit its target first.<BR>But John, you do have a point, the IA could probably do with some sort of fire support vehicle that could be used in areas where they arent very likely in encountering heavy opposition.<P>------------------<BR>Nandai<P>Since time began,<BR>the dead alone know peace.<BR>Life is like melting snow.
Since the other thread on the T-90 has been closed,I'm using this to make a few points.I still think that we are going down the wrong track with large ,heavy tanks for the future,as Arjun typifies.Members please take a look at the current R&D going in in all the major nations.Heavy,large tanks will be dinosaurs in coming decades.Arjun's flaws have been too well catalogued for everyone to see.Production of Arjun merely keeps our PSUs wiht work,at great expense to the taxpayer.<P>The other point whioch I repeat,and I have no antipathy at the other two services,is why can't the IAF and Army also design its weapon systems as successfully as the navy.We have just had the third Dekhi class DDGH and another Kora missile corvette commissioned.These are definitley "indigenous" designs despite the fact that mano of their components are of foreign origin,but they have been used innovatively by the IN in the designs,particularly the heavy missile firepower for ships of their size.They have a unique mix of Indian and foreign technology,successfully integrated.In fact the observations of the russians has been great admiration in the way with which the various differing technologies and equipment has been integrated by the IN.<P>Now examine the other twos services and their history of weapon system design and production.Most of it has been licenced production,that never took advantage of total technology transfer-despite the huge size of the deals.this has resulted in us never being able to catch up with world developmenst,always at a later date going in for expensive acquisitions.I have yet to get a satisfactory reply why the "cinderella of the services" as it is officially acknowledged (and only now getting the required support from the present govt),the Indian Navy can and has done great service to the country by its indigenous designs which have entered service over the last few decades,while the other two services have failed in this respect.As have repeated ,we still haven't produced a successful armoured vehicle,large calibre artillery or SP gun-still looking for imports,basic jet trainer after the Kiran,advacnced jet trainer or fighter,even though we have been producing under licence three MIG variants and Jaguars.The Ajeet was an interesting development of the Gnat which could've been taken forward as the basis for an AJT but was killed.<P>Today the Arjun and the LCA represent the hard and costly learning curve that we have had to pay for years of neglect of indigenous designs being favoured by the services and babudom.Thes weapon systems will be to some extent obsolete by the time they are fully indcuted.Therefore,the need is for new design concepts and their prototypes to be immediately produced using the technologies developed so that in a decades time we may have weapon systems that are contemporary and contain a greater indigenous content than the Arjun and LCA at present.Just for tank buffs,new naval guns being developed will have ranges for rocket projectiles of extreme accuracy of over 150kms.These guns will be of similar size as present tank guns.Imagine this technology used on tanks.
Philip if you are trying to say that India should field a lighter tank or manufacture one then there cannot be any quarrel with your basic proposition. In fact India fields AFVs/vehicles right across the range<P>1. around 1 ton-Jongas mounted with TOW and 106mm recoilless guns.<P>2. around 10 tons –trucks which are mine protected (not really relevant here), brdm<P>3. around 20 tons –ICV armed with 73mm guns, 105mm self propelled gun, BMP mounted Nags<P>4. around 40 tons-ajeya T-72 I think most of us forget that India has almost completely indigenised T-72 by setting up huge manufacturing facilities of around 200 tanks per year by spending over1000 crores in 1982-1992. India manufactures the main armament, turret, hull, ammunition, engine, mechanical optics, electric optics, and other assemblies. T-72 is one of the best tanks of its category and India already makes it. After incorporating the technology of advanced t-72 alias t-90 and the T-72 upgrade project it will be the best of its category. (I think you have missed this.)<P>5. around 60 tons-arjun which India is working on. Most of the manufacturing facility relating to machining a heavy tank is already in existence. The electronics developed can be fitted in any tank. The input from Arjun will help us in ajeya also. Also India will perhaps be the only country which will field/manufacture both light and heavy categories of tanks.<P>Making 124 arjun in around 7 years is a turnover of 300 crores approx which is dwarfed by the fact that we already have a capacity to build 200 t-72 and 500 bmp which would be valued at something like 1500-2500 crores.<P>Regarding your argument of navy it can be countered by pointing out that they are badly welded steel tubs that have imported engines, imported gears, imported guns, imported anti ship missiles, imported anti aircraft missiles, most of the radars are imported, imported helos, imported landing system and the indigenous content is the over inflated cost plus labour bill.<P>On the hand this argument is fallacious because they are huge amount of work done apart from these components like sonars, communication devices, command modules, electronic suites, torpedoes and drdo is working on anti aircraft missiles, anti ship missiles, alh etc. The same is true for Arjun. The things that are imported are powerpack, gcs and fcs. The gcs is intended to license produced till indigenous system is ready. After this, the next step would be develop indigenous designs of fcs and powerpack. <P>Arjun continues to be relevant because it is still time before we see little plastic tanks with rail guns and two men crew.<BR>
Point taken about the T-72.That is why I said that smaller tanks with three man crews with auto loaders (though the T-72 one is notorious for being unreliable) is preferabe for lots of reasons.Smaller crew,smaller size,less weight,faster speed,longer range etc.The T-90 in any case is supposed to be a souped up T-72 and belongs to the same family and is not really a new concept.<P>Regarding the welding quality of Indian warships,if you have been on INS Delhi,built by Maz Docks, you will not complain about any welding flaws believe me.The Koras being built at Garden Reach reflect the poor capabilities of that particular yard.But take a look at the INs building plans.Impressive by any standards.The new indigenously designed and to be built in India projects that will take off in the immediate future, are a new carrier design of 32,000t,a new class of stealth frigates ,a new sub project (P-75)-read the thread on this ,improved corvettes,OPVs and missile craft and hopefully the improved class of Delhi destroyers.Barring the Talwar class,being bought to make up for lack of orders of warships in Indian yards in the past, and the Kilo class of subs,75 % of Indian warships and subs will be built in India.For decades the IN has planned that the IN will eventually be a builders navy,with home designs and warships and subs.Once the new missiles under development by the DRDO have been perfected,even some of the major missile sytems will replace Rusian ones.<P>Perhaps the HAL helicopter design bureau has had better results than ther bureaus.The ALH is a great design and will be built in large numbers,notwithstanding its foreign engine.The Lancer derivative of the Cheetah is another sucess.The fastest developments are taking place in aircraft technology and their related avionics,radar and weapon systems.We somehow set off on the wrong foot as far as the LCA project is concerned and have a ten year delay in its development and production,thanks to changing requirements making the project more complex and difficult to achieve.Similar attitudes dogged the Arjun.I again say that new concepts must be pursued even as the present version enters limited production.
hey I jus found out that MAV the U.S variant of Light Tanks is also designed to kill T-72 battle tanks specifically I wonder why?<P>In gulf war the Iraqi tanks had no idea whether the bradley was near and that was in open dessert.<P>By the way does the army plan to Ka-50 or 52?
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Nandai:<BR><B>Does the IA use TOWs?<BR></B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>No. Just,<P>• Milan 2<BR>• AT-3 Sagger (being phased out)<BR>• AT-4 Spigot<BR>• AT-5 Spandrel<BR>• SS-11-B1 (used against bunkers)<BR>• Harpon (used against bunkers)<P>Add Nag somewhere in the future.
Here's the actual article, interesting read. I don't remember hearing this about the Merkava in any of the public news outlets.<BR> <A HREF="http://www.freeman.org/m_online/sep00/winston.htm" TARGET=_blank>http://www.freeman.org/m_online/sep00/winston.htm</A>
Div, I remember hearing about that too, I think it was because the americans doesnt wanna pay for the Merkavas anymore, as they dont contain that much american goddies, but I think Clinton was still in charge when that news came out, now with Bush in office I think the israelis will get the money they want, so that they can keep making Merkavas.<P>------------------<BR>Nandai<P>Since time began,<BR>the dead alone know peace.<BR>Life is like melting snow.
John, the MAV, if you are reffering to the new LAV-III that are going to be used by the US army, where one of the types will feature a 105mm high pressure gun in a unmanned turret, those vehicles are <B>NOT</B> intended to take out tanks, but are to be used as infantry support. Although they can kill a tank with that gun, since it is the same gun as on the M1. Any tank threat is suppose to be dealt with using ATGMs(new TOWs) fired by the special TOW vehicle.<P>------------------<BR>Nandai<P>Since time began,<BR>the dead alone know peace.<BR>Life is like melting snow.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Raj Malhotra:<BR><B>incidently does somebody know about the upgrade programme of T-72. it is supposedly going on at a slow rate. which systems from which country?</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Check out this article on DefExpo99 from Milparade. There is some info on the T-72 upgrade scattered around in various pages. Off hand, I remember Israel, Poland and maybe the Chezch Republic being involved.<BR> <A HREF="http://www.geocities.com/milpics/defexpo99/" TARGET=_blank>http://www.geocities.com/milpics/defexpo99/</A>
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests