Rahul M wrote: let's not forget that the "tank philosophy" of low silhouette at the cost of everything does not apply in case of 3 feet high appendages if those are from russia.
a couple of inches difference in an Indian design is OTOH, lethal.
By that definition, this would be the worst tank in the world, instead of being the best all-rounder MBT (MBT-vs-MBT but especially in urban combat), and 4 generations proven in battle against the T-xx machines.Rohit, I have said this a few times before a well, and you seem to have missed it! Its not my case that Arjun is unsuitable for CSD, just that T90 is not "crap" either...And given that the IA has already built up infra, doctrines and everything else around the T90, the latter makes for a much quicker operational deployment than Arjun..rohitvats wrote:Now comes the second part - CSD and Arjun. I've said this earlier but you seem to be stuck on this point. How will induction of Arjun hamper implementation of CSD? Is IA going to raise IBG and other CSD related formations overnight? You do realize that mobilization of IBG as per CSD and implementation of CSD are two very different things? Even if IA takes another 5 years to implement CSD, at current rate of production, some 5-6 more regiments (apart from 2 now) will be in IA service. That is more than enough time to straighten out the logistic issue. And how does the desire to amass firpower exclude the induction of Arjun but allows for T-90? Is Arjun a lesser example of "firepower on the move" than T-90?
If that is the case then why doesn't the Army come clean and say that they have a problem with Avadi? Why do they keep blaming the Arjun, when the problem is clearly not with the Tank? They also don't seem to have any problem in accepting Avadi manufactured Tin cans. They are doing a great disservice to the designers of the Arjun who have done their job. If the people at Avadi are not doing theirs then blame them.somnath wrote: ..As I have saying repeatedly, T90 is NOT dependent on Avadi..IA has the alternative of importing from Nizhny, and we have seen across T90s (as well as other platforms) that this option is exercised...Arjun on the other hand, is upto Avadi only...
Its not "just" about Avadi - but Avadi among a host of other factors...And Avadi simply "screw drivers" T90s, not too much beyond that...And if they screw up, Nizhny is always there!nachiket wrote: If that is the case then why doesn't the Army come clean and say that they have a problem with Avadi? Why do they keep blaming the Arjun, when the problem is clearly not with the Tank?
As for the T-90 being 'crap', I have never made a statement to the effect. As for Infra, IA has ample time at hand to put that in place for Arjun...by the time IA reached achieving the required mass for CSD, enough water would have flowed in the Ganga.....somnath wrote:
Rohit, I have said this a few times before a well, and you seem to have missed it! Its not my case that Arjun is unsuitable for CSD, just that T90 is not "crap" either...And given that the IA has already built up infra, doctrines and everything else around the T90, the latter makes for a much quicker operational deployment than Arjun..
I dont think CSD is still 5 years from operationalisation (at least I hope not!) - given that thr first exercises (Digvijay?or Divya Shakti?) was conducted in 2004..For all we know, the IBGs, at least some of them would have been formed and designated...that brings out to the last point on rate of induction..As I have saying repeatedly, T90 is NOT dependent on Avadi..IA has the alternative of importing from Nizhny, and we have seen across T90s (as well as other platforms) that this option is exercised...Arjun on the other hand, is upto Avadi only...
If the argument is do BOTH - T90 and Arjun, well IA will be the only army in the world to attempt deploying two radically different MBT platforms, with its attendent issues relating to logistics..that simply aint gonna work, as the yanks wuld say..
All in all, faster deployment, existing extablished doctrines, instituional laziness, Avadi - its unfortunate but a combination of factors mean that Arjun is not the "Indian" MBT..that has to be the FMBT...
Army had already said that they want a next gen tank jointly developed with russia (already selected the country to do JV ), what are the chances that T95 will fill the gaps?According to unofficial sources, the T-95 will feature better firepower, maneuverability, electronics and armor protection than Russia's latest T-90 MBT or comparable foreign models.
It will weigh about 55 tons and its speed will increase from 30-50 kph to 50-65 kph (19-31 mph to 31-40 mph).
The new tank may be equipped with a 152-mm smoothbore gun capable of firing guided missiles with a range of 6,000-7,000 meters.
In contrast to existing designs, the gun will be located in a remotely-controlled turret to improve 3-men crew survivability.
,though from bottom of my heart i wish to see Arjun Replacing atleast T-72 tins, and make place side by side to T-90 in IA.such things are not made public ,specially not for a tiny population of curious spectators, and RTI may not work as well ...sunilpatel wrote:still there is no OFFICIAL reports from even DRDO that Arjun is superior.... i am smelling something
No chance...There would be no scenario where the IA would want to set up an infrastructure for two disparate MBTs for the next 30 years...the real (and only) hope for Arjun was for it to become the "next" MBT for IA, replacing the T72s gradually..then it would have made sense...Philip wrote:Had Arjun been perfected earlier,say 3 years ago,I am sure that we would now have ordered about 4-500 at least
the T-series are basically the same family of tanks, Arjun is very very different...As I said before, the only and real chance for Arjun would have been as the replacement tank for the next 30 years, replacing all T72s...Dont think it was available in time for the Army to take that call, or as I think, maybe the Army had already decided that a tank of Arjun's class doesnt suit its requirements!Also, if we can have a mix of T90/T-72/T-55 and planned FMBT, why should the argument of logistics be held against Arjun
What are the chances of this one making its way into the Indian Army somewhere in the future?? I am not betting against it..Russia's new main battle tank (MBT), the T-95, could be exhibited for the first time at an arms show in the Urals Region this summer, the developer and future manufacturer of the tank has said. The development of the new tank dubbed "Item 195" began at the Uralvagonzavod design bureau in the early 1990s. Russia will become the first country in the world to have the 5th-generartion MBT if the military commissions the vehicle.
"The work on the project has been conducted for many years. If the government gives us a 'green light' we will exhibit the tank at the [Russian Expo Arms 2010] arms show in Nizhny Tagil this summer," general director of the Uralvagonzavod plant Oleg Siyenko told RIA Novosti in an exclusive interview. "I cannot disclose the characteristics of the tank, but I can assure you that we have met all the requirements put forward by the military," he said.
According to unofficial sources, the T-95 will feature better firepower, maneuverability, electronics and armor protection than Russia's latest T-90 MBT or comparable foreign models. It will weigh about 55 tons and its speed will increase from 30-50 kph to 50-65 kph (19-31 mph to 31-40 mph). The new tank may be equipped with a 152-mm smoothbore gun capable of firing guided missiles with a range of 6,000-7,000 meters. In contrast to existing designs, the gun will be located in a remotely-controlled turret to improve 3-men crew survivability.
Meanwhile, the T-90 MBT, developed in the 1990s on the basis of the T-72B tank, will be the backbone of the armored units until 2025, according to the Russian military.
Even the newest of tanks like the K2, Type-10 etc are considered 3.5 generation. How did Natasha directly jump to 5th generation tanks ? Must be their plasma stealth!Russia's new main battle tank (MBT), the T-95, could be exhibited for the first time at an arms show in the Urals Region this summer, the developer and future manufacturer of the tank has said. The development of the new tank dubbed "Item 195" began at the Uralvagonzavod design bureau in the early 1990s. Russia will become the first country in the world to have the 5th-generartion MBT if the military commissions the vehicle.
It's late arrival comes at a stage when the IA is planning for its next armoured combatant,a Russian version of which is supposed to have futuristic featues and a much heavier gun 152mm as against the 125 main gun of the T-series so far.The 3-man crew is also preferable than a 4-man crew with one crew member less for every tank in service.With our shoirtfall in officers in the thousands,ine udnerstands why the IA feel Arjun is not for the future.
it was purely Army Affair. DRDO will comment only after receiving the report from the Army.sunilpatel wrote:still there is no OFFICIAL reports from even DRDO that Arjun is superior.... i am smelling something
And what makes you believe that Arjun was not ready 3 years earlier? Remember, IA did the AUCRT in 2007-2008? And as for the 'magnanimity' of the trade-off....the trade-off is having better and superior tank....Had Arjun been perfected earlier,say 3 years ago,I am sure that we would now have ordered about 4-500 at least.After its latest tests,where it has come through with flying colours,the IA will have to see how a trade-off can be made by ordering extra Arjuns instead of upgrading all early model T-72s.
What has the planning for FMBT got to do with induction of Arjun? Is T-90 by any yard of imagination a stepping stone for FMBT? If anything, T-90 is 180 degree opposite to the existing tank design 'philosophy' of Russia...It's late arrival comes at a stage when the IA is planning for its next armoured combatant,a Russian version of which is supposed to have futuristic features and a much heavier gun 152mm as against the 125 main gun of the T-series so far.
Dude, how ingenious can you get in pushing the Russian ware? What has the 4-man crew got to do with officer shortage in IA? Or are you telling me that IA details Officers as the loader on Arjun? Is is very hard to think before you post your biased views? Is it difficult to understand that the number of officers authorized for Arjun and T-90 Regiments will be same?The 3-man crew is also preferable than a 4-man crew with one crew member less for every tank in service.With our shortfall in officers in the thousands,one understands why the IA feel Arjun is not for the future.
You do realize that Russian input or no input, the optoelectronic on FMBT will have to be western? And what basis are you taking about the inability of DRDO to come up with new MBT? First, the IA does not allow for iterative development of Arjun and then you cast aspersions on the the ability to come up with new product....For example there are several items in Arjun itself that are not indigenous.The engine,thermal sights,etc.So coming up all alone with a credible FMBT design ,developed in to to within a dedicated time frame is going to be a tall order for the DRDO/HVF.The onus is know on the IA though as it must make crucial decisions about its present and future force structura reg. the armoured corps
So, now Indian Army will fund the development of T-95 and serve as the "captive" customer for the uber-tank? And at the expense of domestic Mil-Ind complex? And of course, more screw-driver "co-development"........Austin wrote:As per latest issue of Military Technology ( Issue 2,2010 ) , the T-95 has been shown to Indian Official ( the only foreign nation to see T-95 ) and a proposal is on the table to co-develop T-95 as India FMBT ( and Russia ).
They have mentioned that considering India (Avadi ) has already lic manufactured the T-72 and now T-90S Bishma moving to T-95 will easier and less of industrial challenge.
Honestly, somnath, I've loosing patience with you; this in spite of explaining in as detail as possible about the CSD, present and planned structure, PA disposition...you've manufactured a complete scenario with multiple 'ifs and buts' to support your argument....About Cold Start, my take is that formations have already been earmarked for some of the objectives..Even if IBGs may not have been formally set up, armoured brigades within existing formations (strike corps or otherwise) would have been designated and advance elements positioned accordingly...After all, at least three division level exercises (Divya Astra, Divya Shakti and Digvijay) have been held to test CSD concepts...Who knows, maybe a brigade or two of the Strike Corps too may have been designated...The chances of a conflict that allows full mobilization of three strike corps are close to zero now - the world would simply not allow it...Therefore, the distinctions between Strike and Holding Corps too are more cosmetic than real..In such a scenario, the focus of the Army would be to fill in the numbers as quickly as they can, and in true military conservative style, not have to do too much on equipment training, doctrines etc..T90 fits th bill there, while Arjun doesnt..Even the most vociferous supporters of the tank wont vouch for 1000 Arjuns in the next 5-7 years...And 2500 in 10...
Not available for IA to take the call with respect to replacement of T-72? Last I checked, IA still has ~2,400 T-72...of which IA will upgrade ~1,000 odd..what happens to void created when these will be replaced and to other vanilla T-72? And what about the T-55 in IA inventory? Even the current planned numbers of T-90 will not be sufficient for filling the numbers....the T-series are basically the same family of tanks, Arjun is very very different...As I said before, the only and real chance for Arjun would have been as the replacement tank for the next 30 years, replacing all T72s...Dont think it was available in time for the Army to take that call, or as I think, maybe the Army had already decided that a tank of Arjun's class doesn't suit its requirements!
--And what about the fact that it completely sidelines the domestic Mi-Ind complex and homegrown product and caps development of domestic knowledge base?Austin wrote:^^^ If co-development has greater acceptance in defense force and can minimize the risk in development of new system and reduce cost then there is nothing wrong in opting for it.
DependsIf it is consensus with the leader having option to override and make their own choice for the greater good, then we may see some movement. It takes a lot of courage and leadership to do the right thing.
Rohit/RahulRahul M wrote:austin, what co-development is there ? T-95 is nearly completed, to russian army's requirements no less, what co-development or specifications by IA will be there other than superficial MKI'sing ?
The report says Arjun performed well , but how did the T-90 Bishma performed , did it meet all parameters and objective , did it fail in meeting some objectives where as Arjun met all , do we have any report on how T-90 performed ?Nikhil T wrote:More mainstream media coverage of the Arjun in the trials.
Arjun tank wins the battle for supremacy
i have had a sparrow telling me this morning T90s got around 34% shot on target while on move during the afternoon sessionAustin wrote:The report says Arjun performed well , but how did the T-90 Bishma performed , did it meet all parameters and objective , did it fail in meeting some objectives where as Arjun met all , do we have any report on how T-90 performed ?Nikhil T wrote:More mainstream media coverage of the Arjun in the trials.
Arjun tank wins the battle for supremacy
i have had a sparrow telling me this morning T90s got around 34% shot on target while on move during the afternoon sessionniran wrote:The report says Arjun performed well , but how did the T-90 Bishma performed , did it meet all parameters and objective , did it fail in meeting some objectives where as Arjun met all , do we have any report on how T-90 performed ?
that's valid pov.Rahul M wrote:problems with this scenario :
> production will be complete by 2013, 1st qtr of 2014 at most.
> mk2 will most likely be ready by 2013.
> 5 regiments of tank-ex will give us a total of 1600 T-90 + 700 CIA + 300 tank-ex + 300 arjun mk1 = 2900 non-obsolete tanks, our requirement is of minimum 4000.
> development of Mk2 for a miniscule 2 regiment order doesn't make economic sense, when our sanctioned strength is 63 regiments, give or take a couple and we are buying 26 regiments of T-90 alone.
> Mk2 production (if for 2 regiments) will be completed in 2 years, ideally less and again it will not make economic sense immediately start upgrading almost brand new mk1's which are 3-4 years old. it's also unlikely to take as long as 2020.
I am equally disappointed by the stand taken by many BR'ites specially the veterans on Army decision to procure Bishma to the extent raising doubts over IA integrity.Vivek K wrote:Austin your stand on the Arjun is very disappointing.
