For repeating millionth time, Arjun is made as per the Army's GSQR which stipulated modification till 1994 and was continously tested by the Army from 1996 onwards till this day and interacted with Arjun developers for all these years. So, if Army suddenly feels that Arjun is not fitting into their doctrine, then something is wrong with Army.My reading is that the Army simply does not think that a large sized heavy tank fits into its existing warfighting doctrines..So while the Arjun is a great tank on a stand-alone basis, it does not fit into IA's "system"..(
Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
Well just depends who made that chartRahul M wrote:the caption says, "MBT Arjun, Comparison with world class tanks" guess which tannk is conspicuous by absence in that list !![]()

-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 4297
- Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
- Location: From Frontier India
- Contact:
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
somnath,
One of you point I resisted answering sometime back is the "there is no need to shove it into Army's throat." Also the continuation that "Army simply does not think that a large sized heavy tank fits into its existing warfighting doctrines."
It will be answered via official sources eventually. I will leave it to that.
One of you point I resisted answering sometime back is the "there is no need to shove it into Army's throat." Also the continuation that "Army simply does not think that a large sized heavy tank fits into its existing warfighting doctrines."
It will be answered via official sources eventually. I will leave it to that.
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
that was precisely my point. CVRDE doesn't think the T-90 is a world class tank.Austin wrote:Well just depends who made that chartRahul M wrote:the caption says, "MBT Arjun, Comparison with world class tanks" guess which tannk is conspicuous by absence in that list !![]()

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
EDIT.Kanson wrote: For repeating millionth time, Arjun is made as per the Army's GSQR which stipulated modification till 1994 and was continously tested by the Army from 1996 onwards till this day and interacted with Arjun developers for all these years. So, if Army suddenly feels that Arjun is not fitting into their doctrine, then something is wrong with Army.
Thats why I say, the FMBT may not be a "western style" tank at all..It might remain a "light" tank of 50 ton dimensions, but it can stil use Arjun's electronics, kanchan armour, BMS, FCS yada yada...Vivek K wrote: Why will they accept the FMBT which will have the genetic prints of the Arjun - like you said a "large sized heavy tank".
Last edited by Rahul M on 25 Mar 2010 09:57, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: calling the army stupid ? not done.
Reason: calling the army stupid ? not done.
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
Chances are that since IA has ordered 1500 plus T-90 and T-72 are being upgraded we may see the T's for many decades to come.Kanson wrote:I dont see such logistics issues were raised, when T-72 was first inducted. Anway, these T series are to be retired one day. Unless there is a plan of allegiance to stick with T series and Russian tanks, i dont find that argument compulsive.
With the success of Arjun , we will see penetration of Indian tank in various Mark but gradually spread across decade
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
Maybe! But real Independece day comes when the clutches of russian imports are removed. Not only Arjun, Tank Ex needs to find a palce in Armoured corpsnishu wrote:today is independence day... yapi
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
Couldnt agree with you more...Currently all of us are simply speculating..But if one gives any credibility to the constant refrain of media reports in the recent past on what Army feels, thats what comes to mind..But yes, the "truth" in some form would be "officially" out some day!chackojoseph wrote:somnath,
One of you point I resisted answering sometime back is the "there is no need to shove it into Army's throat." Also the continuation that "Army simply does not think that a large sized heavy tank fits into its existing warfighting doctrines."
It will be answered via official sources eventually. I will leave it to that.
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
I strongly feel Indian Army s next generation tanks should be Indian.The funds for its development should be spent in India not Russia.Call it Abhimanyu or .. whatever.Indian tank technology does seem to have passed the point of being good .. and should go to excellence as one of the premier tanks out there.
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
What is the war doctrine or something like that IA got. Fight only during day time etc??? How Arjun is not suitable with say CSD? IA has made up its mind that it does not want Arjun that is all.
We hear CSD for many years. We know there is no infrastructure for the CSD even today. How many Divisions we can station near border for any quick operation.
With massive upper hand in members we still aim for obtaining clear advantage and press for it. We fear Nuclear War. In respect of Nuclear War have we seen any drill conducted in any City to see how prepared we are. No. Then what kind of preparation we are talking about?
If something good it is good and something bad it is bad. IA has specified some requirements and a weapon system was made to that specifications. Then whose fault is it if such system is not suitable. What great things have changed till resently. In fact after resent Lebonan war expiriance the need for heavy and well protected MBT increased.
That earlier argument of cost found to be false. Now this new argument has come. Even if we make a clone of T 90 locally and call it Arjun it will not be accetped by IA.
We hear CSD for many years. We know there is no infrastructure for the CSD even today. How many Divisions we can station near border for any quick operation.
With massive upper hand in members we still aim for obtaining clear advantage and press for it. We fear Nuclear War. In respect of Nuclear War have we seen any drill conducted in any City to see how prepared we are. No. Then what kind of preparation we are talking about?
If something good it is good and something bad it is bad. IA has specified some requirements and a weapon system was made to that specifications. Then whose fault is it if such system is not suitable. What great things have changed till resently. In fact after resent Lebonan war expiriance the need for heavy and well protected MBT increased.
That earlier argument of cost found to be false. Now this new argument has come. Even if we make a clone of T 90 locally and call it Arjun it will not be accetped by IA.
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
So you mean to tell me that the Army laid down the GSQRs and when the indigenous industry delivered the product which satisfies those GSQRs the Army can just change them as per their whim and refuse to accept the product? What makes you think that they won't do the same thing with the FMBT in the future? And what happens to the millions of rupees in taxpayer money that has been spent on the Arjun programme? India does not have money to waste like this.somnath wrote: We can feel depressed that the Army thinks this way, and curse its flipping on its own GSQRs, but thats the way it is...Its unfortunate, but the only way forward is to start work pronto on the FMBT..And yes, get Avadi out of the equation..
And all this might have been justified if the Arjun had been discarded for a superior tank. But no! It is being rejected inspite of being better than the tank accepted by the Army. I'm sorry but I firmly believe that if the Arjun has actually outperformed the T-90 then the MoD has to put its foot down and shove the Arjun down the Army's throat. Instead of the FMBT the army can work with the DRDO for an upgrade path for the Arjun with a new BMS, Commander's Independent Thermal Sight, maybe an Active Defense system etc.
Last edited by nachiket on 25 Mar 2010 09:41, edited 2 times in total.
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
True considering they are competing for the same piece of pie for the IA.Rahul M wrote:that was precisely my point. CVRDE doesn't think the T-90 is a world class tank.
But if you see any world Def Mag and if comparison of modern tanks are made besides the one CVRDE has put up ,T-80 and T-90 make up there.
Though I have never seen Arjun make it up there , surprisingly some South Korean tanks have been put up there , so its just the question of ones perspective and awareness
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
somnathji,somnath wrote: And sir, for the fifteenth time (!), Army goofed up in GSQR-management, they were stupid (maybe being reactive to reports of M1 induction by Pakis)..It does not take us very much forward than that..
as a tax-paying member of the citizenry, I would be extremely and intolerably furious at the army for that. What has been the amount of money and resources spent on developing the Arjun. After eons and drdo says 'alrighty then. your tank is ready sir' and the army says oops. we thought we wanted 'chilli chicken but now i think i'l go on a diet. bliss to give me curd rice', can you imagine the reaction? That is exactly what is happening here. And it is not even that the drdo was in some remote location and the army didn't know what the drdo was upto till they were presented with the final product like the lord in puri! Heck, they had umpteen looks at the tank at every step of the way. Why then did they enforce weight and size restrictions earlier? If they did, why did the DRDO not change it?
This "Oh we actually thought we'd fight the abrams but are going to fight al-khalid or the chinese tanks. we don't need no supa dupa tank now" is simply irresponsible. period!
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
Tank Ex uses the T-72 chasis and is consequently inferior to the Arjun. It was just a compromise tank created because everyone was shouting that the Arjun was too big. If the Arjun is accepted we can safely discard the Tank Ex. It offers nothing extra that the Arjun doesn't.Kanson wrote:Maybe! But real Independece day comes when the clutches of russian imports are removed. Not only Arjun, Tank Ex needs to find a palce in Armoured corpsnishu wrote:today is independence day... yapi
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 6046
- Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
- Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
Hold your horses folks. The Natashas aint gonna take this lying down.. Expect redoubled efforts and more Natashas winging their way over. I expect the final report to be couched in fine language saying that though the Arjun performed well, blah blah, we have already standardized on the T-90 and there is no case to order more.
Putting my evil Yindoo Chankian Strategee mind on, I would guess that the problem for the Army is this. They went and bought the T-90 (as a rush emergency purchase) and then doubled on that bet by ordering lots more. They know that it is not upto scratch in it's current form, it needs the Shtora and Active defences and other ding dongs from the Russians to make it even remotely relevant in the coming decades and to do that kind of thing, you need to have a couple of thousand tanks so that you can order that additionalding dongs and have the scale economies to amortize the cost , so that on a per unit basis, it comes looking reasonable. To do the Shtora/Arena Ding dong on a couple of hundred tanks would be like spending some $1 to $2b on those systems alone. Now if you stretch it over 3000 tanks, it doesnt look too bad.
Now the problem is that the Arjun is now a serious contender. The Army now either has to come out and say that the Arjun is not better than the T-90, or if they say, it is better, they have to give very serious and cogent answers on why they will buy T90s and upgrade T72s instead of ordering Arjuns.
In either case, the army is in a tight spot. Come out and say that the Arjun isn't better , but if the recent tests prove otherwise and the results leak out, the yellow matter will hit the fan in parliament , and AK and Kangress get raked over the coals. Admit it if the Arjun is better and give a bah/humbug we know best.. damned civilisans..harrumph , wishy washy no good answer, the Army will get over the coals in parliament. Point is that this matter is no more a "internal army" matter. Questions will be asked for sure from multiple quarters. It is much easier to reject a non performing/ inadequate platform, but it will be incredibly hard to reject a credible performing product, which was developed specifically to your OWN GSQR.
Putting my evil Yindoo Chankian Strategee mind on, I would guess that the problem for the Army is this. They went and bought the T-90 (as a rush emergency purchase) and then doubled on that bet by ordering lots more. They know that it is not upto scratch in it's current form, it needs the Shtora and Active defences and other ding dongs from the Russians to make it even remotely relevant in the coming decades and to do that kind of thing, you need to have a couple of thousand tanks so that you can order that additionalding dongs and have the scale economies to amortize the cost , so that on a per unit basis, it comes looking reasonable. To do the Shtora/Arena Ding dong on a couple of hundred tanks would be like spending some $1 to $2b on those systems alone. Now if you stretch it over 3000 tanks, it doesnt look too bad.
Now the problem is that the Arjun is now a serious contender. The Army now either has to come out and say that the Arjun is not better than the T-90, or if they say, it is better, they have to give very serious and cogent answers on why they will buy T90s and upgrade T72s instead of ordering Arjuns.
In either case, the army is in a tight spot. Come out and say that the Arjun isn't better , but if the recent tests prove otherwise and the results leak out, the yellow matter will hit the fan in parliament , and AK and Kangress get raked over the coals. Admit it if the Arjun is better and give a bah/humbug we know best.. damned civilisans..harrumph , wishy washy no good answer, the Army will get over the coals in parliament. Point is that this matter is no more a "internal army" matter. Questions will be asked for sure from multiple quarters. It is much easier to reject a non performing/ inadequate platform, but it will be incredibly hard to reject a credible performing product, which was developed specifically to your OWN GSQR.
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
whatever we know of next gen tank ideas from russia, all are moving towards western style tanks, with high levels of protection and larger 7 wheels based systems. roping in the israelis for their input, all point out that FMBT will most certainly be more western than russian. unless of course, pet theories dictate otherwise.somnath wrote:Thats why I say, the FMBT may not be a "western style" tank at all..It might remain a "light" tank of 50 ton dimensions, but it can stil use Arjun's electronics, kanchan armour, BMS, FCS yada yada...

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
Since the Army is going to upgrade hundreds of its T-72s which were completely obsolete yesterday, we come to the shocking conclusion that the Army is not only favoring the T-90 over the Arjun but it is actually favoring the T-72 over the Arjun.
Since the T-72s are being upgraded they are obviously not going to be replaced by T-90s. So why not replace them with the Arjun? Why does the Army seem hell bent on committing soosai by sending T-72s against the vastly superior Al-Khalid and Type 99 when a homegrown and affordable alternative is available?


Since the T-72s are being upgraded they are obviously not going to be replaced by T-90s. So why not replace them with the Arjun? Why does the Army seem hell bent on committing soosai by sending T-72s against the vastly superior Al-Khalid and Type 99 when a homegrown and affordable alternative is available?


Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
only because those are the best russian bloc has to offer, not because they actually belong to the top group.Austin wrote:True considering they are competing for the same piece of pie for the IA.Rahul M wrote:that was precisely my point. CVRDE doesn't think the T-90 is a world class tank.
But if you see any world Def Mag and if comparison of modern tanks are made besides the one CVRDE has put up ,T-80 and T-90 make up there.
that's because the home country's army didn't accept it. people are bound to think 'there must be some problem with it'. other than that, it's right up there with the top 5-6.Though I have never seen Arjun make it up there
surprising ? hardly ! IMHO k2 black panther is currently the most futuristic of all MBTs at the moment and might well dictate how the FMBT looks like. there is at least one ex COAS who is *very* impressed with it., surprisingly some South Korean tanks have been put up there , so its just the question of ones perspective and awareness

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
Not entirely true it has its own qualities and weakness , i personally do not think T-90 Bishma is a bad tank as many here make out to be , its just got a very tough competitor in Arjun.Rahul M wrote: only because those are the best russian bloc has to offer, not because they actually belong to the top group.
I read recently that Saudi too are planning to buy 150 odd T-90's , but thats a far cry from the 1500 plus that IA is purchasing , I was quite stunned and surprised looking at that figure , I do not know of any major big defence procurement that has those numbers.
True , what can be marketed is what will be advertised.If DRDO manages to export Arjun after its current success and greater acceptance in IA then it should promote it.that's because the home country's army didn't accept it. people are bound to think 'there must be some problem with it'. other than that, it's right up there with the top 5-6.
Well CVRDE does not think sosurprising ? hardly ! IMHO k2 black panther is currently the most futuristic of all MBTs at the moment and might well dictate how the FMBT looks like. there is at least one ex COAS who is *very* impressed with it.

-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 4728
- Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
- Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
I am coming around to accepting the bolded part reluctantly. For whatever reason, the IA thinks that the T-90 with its fault and all is better suited for it. Maybe there is too much of an inertia to design new doctrines around the tank, or maybe the eastern tank philosophy is so entrenched all the way to the top that they just don't think we need Arjun. Looking at the comments of an Armored corps officer that Chandrabhan had quoted, and the reluctance of the army, it looks like the eastern tank lobby has won.somnath wrote: My reading is that the Army simply does not think that a large sized heavy tank fits into its existing warfighting doctrines..So while the Arjun is a great tank on a stand-alone basis, it does not fit into IA's "system"..(Which would also translate into the fact that none of the Western tanks - M1 included, would)..
However, it is more open than ever before to an indigeneous effort, and therefore the capabilities of the Arjun can be utilised for the next project...I had posted some time back that India's FMBT can well be a "light" tank of 50 ton dimensions..
We can feel depressed that the Army thinks this way, and curse its flipping on its own GSQRs, but thats the way it is...Its unfortunate, but the only way forward is to start work pronto on the FMBT..And yes, get Avadi out of the equation..
At the most, the army may order another two regiments of 124 tanks, and that will be end of Arjun as we know it.
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
Rahul M wrote:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_zUe7sq7m3h0/S ... 200036.JPG
Right: A comparative chart, snapped by me at the CVRDE, Chennai, comparing the performance of the Arjun with the world's major Main Battle Tanks (MBTs)
the caption says, "MBT Arjun, Comparison with world class tanks" guess which tannk is conspicuous by absence in that list !![]()
Rahul. The chart is absolutely correct. "IT" is not a world class tank. OR is it world crass tank. Ooops mai spaleng mestuke !!!
K
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
Time has come for T-72 to get it's 72 

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
I have heard the "eastern tank doctrine" and "eastern philosophy" reasons being given for rejection of Arjun so many times. What exactly is the so-called "eastern philosophy" and why does the T-90 fit into it and the Arjun doesn't? (in the Indian Army's context of course)maybe the eastern tank philosophy is so entrenched all the way to the top that they just don't think we need Arjun.
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
your last point is answered by your second one.Austin wrote:Not entirely true it has its own qualities and weakness , i personally do not think T-90 Bishma is a bad tank as many here make out to be , its just got a very tough competitor in Arjun.Rahul M wrote: only because those are the best russian bloc has to offer, not because they actually belong to the top group.
I read recently that Saudi too are planning to buy 150 odd T-90's , but thats a far cry from the 1500 plus that IA is purchasing , I was quite stunned and surprised looking at that figure , I do not know of any major big defence procurement that has those numbers.
True , what can be marketed is what will be advertised.If DRDO manages to export Arjun after its current success and greater acceptance in IA then it should promote it.that's because the home country's army didn't accept it. people are bound to think 'there must be some problem with it'. other than that, it's right up there with the top 5-6.
Well CVRDE does not think sosurprising ? hardly ! IMHO k2 black panther is currently the most futuristic of all MBTs at the moment and might well dictate how the FMBT looks like. there is at least one ex COAS who is *very* impressed with it.

Kersi D wrote:Rahul. The chart is absolutely correct. "IT" is not a world class tank. OR is it world crass tank. Ooops mai spaleng mestuke !!!
K


unfortunately blind loyalty does not necessarily equate to being right. the army has a serious problem with procurement and guiding tech development, burying head in the sand and claiming "they know best, they are the armeee" is doing more harm to the army itself. the blind supporters are not going to go to war in those tanks, current and future gen armoured forces soldiers will.Vivek K wrote:Friends, please applaud the loyalty .......
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
putnanja, my bad..the formation is infact 140(I) Armored Brigade based in Jaisalmer. I've edited my earlier post....apoloies for the confusion.putnanja wrote:Where is the 140 Armored Brigade based at?rohitvats wrote:
--The Brigade in Jaisalmer should be 340(I) Mechanized Brigade and not 140 Armored Brigade....
--The 62 tanks/regiment will also help to understand the reserve tanks over the 45 operational ones in each armored regiment...but the question remains-who holds these tanks?
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
rohit, aren't there 3 armd regiments in an indep Armd Bde ? which will be the 3rd one ?
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
Sirji, that is what I'm not able to understand given the current level of open information. Now, if you plan to induct a tank in limited numbers, ideally, you'd bunch them together to manage the logistics bit. For example, the workshop fellows will be trained on one system, storage of spares, the BLT etc.Rahul M wrote:rohit, aren't there 3 armd regiments in an indep Armd Bde ? which will be the 3rd one ?
Now, there are two regiments with Arjun - 43rd and 75th Armored. 43rd is with 24 RAPID(Bikaner-the armored briade is in Suratgargh) while 75th is going to 140(I) Armored Brigade in Jaisalmer. So, at present, both the regiments are with different formations. Unless, ofcourse, IA equips the entire 140(I) and 24 RAPID with Arjuns..then we are taking about 2+1 more Arjun Regiments...

or, the 43rd is headed to 140(I)+75th and they might add one more.....sigh!!!
Last edited by rohitvats on 25 Mar 2010 10:57, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
Why doesn't drdo tie up with a russi company to rechristen Arjun as 'Арджун'
import some knocked down arjun kits from russia then assemble them here. This is sure to find favour!! (kits to be exported to russia first before being imported back. This is being done with sugar, then y not arjun)
This post is destined for the trash can
import some knocked down arjun kits from russia then assemble them here. This is sure to find favour!! (kits to be exported to russia first before being imported back. This is being done with sugar, then y not arjun)
This post is destined for the trash can
Last edited by AdityaM on 25 Mar 2010 11:23, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
Hmm; it would be nice to get a formal report now, it appears to be the right time to deliver the next dose of the soap.
Rahul M; you are right loyalty does not make you right, either to the Army or the DRDO.

Rahul M; you are right loyalty does not make you right, either to the Army or the DRDO.

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
Sanku wrote:Rahul M; you are right loyalty does not make you right, either to the Army or the DRDO.

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
This is indeed a great day for all of our BRF members.
Even though we have debated over Arjun for years now, all of us are connected by Dhaaga of Deshbhakti.
So those who opposed Arjun must be now really happy and satisfied for they were wrong and OUR product is better than imported one. And Arjun supporters like me are happy as we supported the better product.
RayC saar OUR Arjun is not "substandard", I hope you won't mind now joining us, Arjun jingos
We can expect a good number of Arjuns on fields now.
Cheers!!!
Even though we have debated over Arjun for years now, all of us are connected by Dhaaga of Deshbhakti.
So those who opposed Arjun must be now really happy and satisfied for they were wrong and OUR product is better than imported one. And Arjun supporters like me are happy as we supported the better product.
RayC saar OUR Arjun is not "substandard", I hope you won't mind now joining us, Arjun jingos

We can expect a good number of Arjuns on fields now.
Cheers!!!
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
Ah, but then that is true for us too right? I was just remarking on this statementRahul M wrote:Sanku wrote:Rahul M; you are right loyalty does not make you right, either to the Army or the DRDO.my loyalty is to my country, nothing more nothing less.
Personally I found the comment by Vivek K odious, one liners sitting in judgment of others is a little galling, particular from some one whose major contribution to the forum is one liners on how the unfair Army is bashing up poor DRDO, normally I ignore such wisdom, but I dont like it when a gold class poster like you (nothing to do with your mod status btw) feeds this.Rahul M wrote:Vivek K wrote:
Friends, please applaud the loyalty .......
unfortunately blind loyalty does not necessarily equate to being right. the army has a serious problem with procurement and guiding tech development,
The procurement system in the forces is a shambles, is the worst kept secret. This has absolutely nothing to do with the forces themselves and this ignoring this fact is not going to help us either.
When the T 90 was brought -- it was the first new MBT after 25 years with barely any incremental development on T 72 -- do you really think IA was ok with this?
The fact remains, our procurement has always be short sighted, haphazard, and blighted by the Babudom. We always do the minimum possible to defend our borders, and have a really narrow definition of use of Military force. This is a systematic issue. Blaming IA for it is not going to change anything.
It may surprise you that the although there is much angst on BRF about the treatment to Arjun, a casual discussion with any of the powers that be in MoD (those who actually make decisions) would elicit a response -- huh a problem with Tank and its induction? What ever about, we have a program and whats the issue?
Please realize, the world view which drives the forces equipment level and how they react, are not driven by the forces themselves. And once a direction is given, the IA merely marches along that.
In any event, if the Arjun is actually ready, as per anecdotal evidence so far, I am sure IA would send up appropriate reports, what happens then is for MoD to decide.
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
may be we are witnessing the formation of the core of an IBG ? as D roy says ?rohitvats wrote:Sirji, that is what I'm not able to understand given the current level of open information. Now, if you plan to induct a tank in limited numbers, ideally, you'd bunch them together to manage the logistics bit. For example, the workshop fellows will be trained on one system, storage of spares, the BLT etc.Rahul M wrote:rohit, aren't there 3 armd regiments in an indep Armd Bde ? which will be the 3rd one ?
Now, there are two regiments with Arjun - 43rd and 75th Armored. 43rd is with 24 RAPID(Bikaner-the armored briade is in Suratgargh) while 75th is going to 140(I) Armored Brigade in Jaisalmer. So, at present, both the regiments are with different formations. Unless, ofcourse, IA equips the entire 140(I) and 24 RAPID with Arjuns..then we are taking about 2+1 more Arjun Regiments...(oh! well....I can dream, can't I?)
or, the 43rd is headed to 140(I)+75th and they might add one more.....sigh!!!

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
sigh !The procurement system in the forces is a shambles, is the worst kept secret. This has absolutely nothing to do with the forces themselves.....

clearly, we are talking at cross purposes. there is no end in sight to this argument. better to shelf it for now ?
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
Hey we still have T 55s; if you are complaining you should complaining about that.nachiket wrote: Since the T-72s are being upgraded they are obviously not going to be replaced by T-90s. So why not replace them with the Arjun? Why does the Army seem hell bent on committing soosai by sending T-72s against the vastly superior Al-Khalid and Type 99 when a homegrown and affordable alternative is available?![]()
To answer you question -- for the same reason as Mig 21s were updated to Bison instead of scrapping the whole lot and buying new planes to replace it.
You can find details here
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/LAND-FORC ... Rhino.html
and here
0) Threat perception, yes Pakistan has Al Khalid, but how many? Some 220 at best? Most of its other tanks are far more obsolete T series which the T 72 is more than a match for, and that was the reason IA did not procure any more tanks till T 80s came on the scene.
1) Cost -- the overhaul cost of T 72 is only 5 cr, compared to the 20 cr a Arjun would cost.
2) The T 72s are here, junking them (which would happen if they were replaced) while they still had life left which could be used goes against the grain of Indian forces equipment use philosophy, which squeezes the very last drop out of the beasts till the literally fall apart.

3) The upgraded T 72 will be nearly as good as a T 90 (thus one of Rahul Ms crib, why not upgrade T 72s only, but that is a different answer, basically to quickly get brand new tanks with a higher edge)
4) The T 72 upgrade program feeds the local industry, it is a local program, thus the other reasons of comparison with Arjun is some what mitigated.
5) The rate -- even if we have a super ideal scenario -- the current line of Arjun's can produce at best 30-50 tanks, this is insufficient for upgrading the tank forces. In parallel the existing T 72 lines can handle the upgrade, which new lines for Arjun's are built (if more are ordered)
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
Surely, I do however reserve the right of interjection in future please.Rahul M wrote:sigh !The procurement system in the forces is a shambles, is the worst kept secret. This has absolutely nothing to do with the forces themselves.....![]()
clearly, we are talking at cross purposes. there is no end in sight to this argument. better to shelf it for now ?

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
Indeed, pretty clearly the IA is trying to use the Arjun as a system for shock and awe and to cut Pakistan in two if need be, along the RYK axis.Rahul M wrote:may be we are witnessing the formation of the core of an IBG ? as D roy says ?rohitvats wrote:"Rahul M">>rohit, aren't there 3 armd regiments in an indep Armd Bde ? which will be the 3rd one ?
Unless, ofcourse, IA equips the entire 140(I) and 24 RAPID with Arjuns..then we are taking about 2+1 more Arjun Regiments...(oh! well....I can dream, can't I?)!
This would explain everything, the focus on desert performance etc etc, and will also dove tail well with current capability of Avadi in number of tanks.
This does appear to the most acceptable outcome.
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
mercy ! please !Surely, I do however reserve the right of interjection in future please.

re : T-72 upgrade : can it get better than this ?

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
Whether tank is admitted in Army in large number or not it is a success now and will pave the way for future indigenization of the weapon systems.
Arjun fan club
Jai Hind
Arjun fan club
Jai Hind
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
I have always been a big fan of very large caliber mortars and low-power howitzers designed to fire fat projectiles intended against houses and bunkers for 'clearing the way'
in built up areas (most of target areas in P are full of villages).
maybe a part of the old T72 holding can be converted to this role? the IDF seems to have
modded patton and sherman tanks into a zoo of roles.
gotta love the Russian vocation of endlessly coming up with new modes of artillery
to pound the living c**p out of anyone. its their thing, they do this well.
http://www.military-today.com/artillery ... na_svk.htm
Armament: 1 x 120 mm gun V= 560 m/sec; range 8,8- 12.8 km
rate of fire: 10; ammo=30; vert: -4 to +80 degr; horiz.: +-30
something like this on a wheeled Stallion or Tatra 4x4 chassis would be imo a
good tool in the mountains , and permit >> 30 rounds with the turret in back being
more spacious or feeding off protected boxes behind it. firing would 99% be
mortar mode so POV, low elevation and 360' rotation like a tank isnt that key.
OFB had indeed demoed a manual 105mm IFG bolted to back of a tatra, so not a
cheap turret and feeding mechanism to go with it.
variant1 - 105mm, 25km range, conventional artillery
variant2 - 120mm, 10km range with mortars/mines, terror artillery and direct support.
in built up areas (most of target areas in P are full of villages).
maybe a part of the old T72 holding can be converted to this role? the IDF seems to have
modded patton and sherman tanks into a zoo of roles.
gotta love the Russian vocation of endlessly coming up with new modes of artillery
to pound the living c**p out of anyone. its their thing, they do this well.

http://www.military-today.com/artillery ... na_svk.htm
Armament: 1 x 120 mm gun V= 560 m/sec; range 8,8- 12.8 km
rate of fire: 10; ammo=30; vert: -4 to +80 degr; horiz.: +-30
something like this on a wheeled Stallion or Tatra 4x4 chassis would be imo a
good tool in the mountains , and permit >> 30 rounds with the turret in back being
more spacious or feeding off protected boxes behind it. firing would 99% be
mortar mode so POV, low elevation and 360' rotation like a tank isnt that key.
OFB had indeed demoed a manual 105mm IFG bolted to back of a tatra, so not a
cheap turret and feeding mechanism to go with it.
variant1 - 105mm, 25km range, conventional artillery
variant2 - 120mm, 10km range with mortars/mines, terror artillery and direct support.