Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 19 May 2010 06:13

Philip wrote:After 34 yrs. we cannnot build Arjun in any worthwhile quantity on time.What is the ood of developing any weapon system if we cannot rpioodfice it.Even ther Chinese and pakis can manage to do it ,why cannot we.The babus behind the farce should be held accountable,demoted,pensions cut or simply kicked out VRS compulsorily.

Well you should blame the IA for it's lack of vision with regard to self reliance. IAs mantra seems to be we will fight only with foreign weapons- case in point the Akash deal, the Arjun fiasco. IA has never invested in a military industrial complex to develop weapons for it. And having kicked Arjun to the point where no more than 124 were going to be bought with DGMF Bhardaj screaming at the top of his voice that Arjun is a Dabba to now hearing this fantastic complaint from Lala land about lack of production facilities is typical of Indians - confused, disorganized, chaotic, incoherent.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 19 May 2010 06:24

Two items of interest:
1) The "wish list": my humble research indicates that the list is tenable, perhaps with the exception of an engine going from 0-1500 HP in 2.5 secs (I am told by mechanical engineers that even that is possible - but, of course, at some cost). In fact some tanks already have some of those technologies - as far back as 1998!! What I suspect that "wish list" means to the Indian context is that the latest and greatest be incorporated in the "FMBT". Also, in a related item, the GSQR 2020 is supposed to have detailed the recs of a "FMBT" (and a "FICV" too!!! Surprise), but I cannot get hold of a "GSQR 2020" (yet).

2) On the "F" part, here is what I have to be the closest (and it needs more research):

TOI (2008):

The DRDO's new project 'Tank-X' too did not find favour with the Army. "Tank-X is a hybrid of T-90 and T-72, which are both contemporary technology tanks. There is no point in having technologically obsolete tanks for warfare two decades hence," the (Bharadwaj) DG (Mechanised Forces) said.

Bharadwaj also announced that the Army, along with CII, would organise a two-day international technology seminar on Future Main Battle Tank (FMBT) and Future Infantry Combat Vehicle (FICV) here on July 22 and 23 to discuss global challenges in designing, developing and producing FMBT and FICV.

To be inaugurated by Defence Minister A K Antony and Rao Inderjit Singh, Bhardwaj said the seminar would debate the kind of MBT Army needed, considering that might of the military was judged by both deterrent and offensive capabilities of Mechanised Forces and on the quality and quantity of equipment.

"Time has come to reassess our requirements. We are at the threshold of formulating qualitative requirements of FMBT and FICV. This is the future, as it takes about a decade for completing the process of designing and being ready with a prototype of FMBT and FICV. It could take another 5 to 10 years to finally induct futuristic MBTs and ICVs into the forces," he said.

The meeting would also provide defence planners, end-users, scientists and both private and public defence manufacturers a holistic view of applicability of tanks, be they heavy, medium or light, and wheeled or tracked in modern warfare.

"Considering India's expanding strategic reach and widening global standing as a military power, future armoured vehicles should be capable of performing roles during out-of-area contingencies beyond its territorial boundaries," Bharadwaj said.

The meet would also try to provide defence industry an insight into Mechanised Forces' aspirations and try to gauge their capability to meet Army's future requirements.

Apart from looking at varying global perceptions on use of armoured vehicles, the seminar would identify critical emerging technologies in the field to meet Army's requirements of FMBT and FICV.

Already, seven foreign countries have confirmed their participation in the seminar including US, Israel, Russia, Germany, UK and France.

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 19 May 2010 06:28

[quote="Nayak" What is the guarantee that the unionised twits in AVADI will not muck up [/quote]

I have always wondered whether Stalinist rapist goons at higher levels manipulate their unions and innocent workers to sabotage on behalf of their paymasters...

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 19 May 2010 06:42

Some more insight, partial as it may be (some or all of these could be duplicates, so sorry if they are):

2008 :: Catchovsky-22: The scandal that is the T-90

On 22nd and 23rd July, tank experts from across the world gathered in Delhi. The occasion was a seminar --- organised by the Indian Army’s Directorate General of Mechanised Forces (DGMF) in partnership with the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) --- aimed at advising the Indian Army on how best to go about designing its next generation of armoured vehicles: the Future Main Battle Tank (FMBT) and Future Infantry Combat Vehicle (FICV). Despite two years of labour, the army’s tank directorate, the DGMF, has failed to decide on a suitable design.

As many of these experts told me, on condition of anonymity, the DGMF’s problems lie in its decision to start designing an MBT all over again. Instead of building on two decades of experience gained while designing the indigenous Arjun tank, perhaps by framing the requirements for an advanced version of the Arjun, the army is going back to the start line.

Experts at the seminar --- including Israeli tank legend, Maj Gen Yossi Ben-Hanan, who designed that country’s successful Merkava tank --- pointed out that tank design is evolutionary, each design building upon the previous one.

On 23rd July, Maj Gen Yossi Ben-Hanan warned the audience, “A decision taken today to build an Indian tank will yield an MBT only 15 years hence.”

vina · Post by **vina** » 19 May 2010 07:58

NRao wrote:Two items of interest:
1) The "wish list": my humble research indicates that the list is tenable, perhaps with the exception of an engine going from 0-1500 HP in 2.5 secs (I am told by mechanical engineers that even that is possible - but, of course, at some cost). In fact some tanks already have some of those technologies - as far back as 1998!!

I already commented on that. There are much better ways of doing that than that "Hyperbar" brochuritis they have peddled. In this day and age , that is not a biggie. Of course we will end up with Sanku Maharaj like logic. "100% of tanks with "Hyperbar" went with well - Hyperbar.. So we should go that way or it is obsolete"-- Harrumph.

The DRDO's new project 'Tank-X' too did not find favour with the Army. "Tank-X is a hybrid of T-90 and T-72, which are both contemporary technology tanks. There is no point in having technologically obsolete tanks for warfare two decades hence," the (Bharadwaj) DG (Mechanised Forces) said.

Bharadwaj also announced that the Army, along with CII, would organise a two-day international technology seminar on Future Main Battle Tank (FMBT) and Future Infantry Combat Vehicle (FICV) here on July 22 and 23 to discuss global challenges in designing, developing and producing FMBT and FICV.

"Considering India's expanding strategic reach and widening global standing as a military power, future armoured vehicles should be capable of performing roles during out-of-area contingencies beyond its territorial boundaries," Bharadwaj said.

By all accounts, the DGMF office has been staffed by a succession of basic nincompoops who couldn't engineer a pin if their life depended on it. They were basically into a pissing content, heated running battle with the DRDO based on massive ego clashes and bad blood going back for over a decade. "bah" .. Damn civilians, what will they know about tanks (I think Ajay Shukla in version 1 of his avatar, picked up that Arjun is a dabba garbage from those places and got his Musharraf handed back to him in BR) and finally to "prove" that they could do better, they set out designing their "own" FMBT, but guess what, for folks with zero engineering and product development experience and whose only skill engineering wise is brochure reading and tinkering as repairmen in the army workshops, that was a wild goose chase all the same.

Thank goodness, those blowhards have either retired /have been eased out and institutionally and the Army hierarchy has started making crucial decisions with it's brains (well, no one accused the army of being intelligent anyways) rather than testosterone driven emotions (as is it's wont and usual way of doing things).

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 19 May 2010 09:06

Rahul M wrote:
Philip wrote:Yes,a new label,Arjun MK-2!
what is that supposed to mean ?

are you really surprised to read that coming from Philip ? his negativity towards anything indigenous should be quite well known to you by now..notice how he writes that "even after 34 years... " in another of his posts on the Arjun..as if manufacturing units start setting up assembly lines the moment some person utters the sentence "lets build an MBT"

..the problem is the shocking lack of knowledge of production, engineering and its associated issues which lead to biased opinions which lead to such rubbish statements.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 19 May 2010 09:41

vina wrote: By all accounts, the DGMF office has been staffed by a succession of basic nincompoops who couldn't engineer a pin if their life depended on it. They were basically into a pissing content, heated running battle with the DRDO based on massive ego clashes and bad blood going back for over a decade. "bah" .. Damn civilians, what will they know about tanks (I think Ajay Shukla in version 1 of his avatar, picked up that Arjun is a dabba garbage from those places and got his Musharraf handed back to him in BR) and finally to "prove" that they could do better, they set out designing their "own" FMBT, but guess what, for folks with zero engineering and product development experience and whose only skill engineering wise is brochure reading and tinkering as repairmen in the army workshops, that was a wild goose chase all the same.

Thank goodness, those blowhards have either retired /have been eased out and institutionally and the Army hierarchy has started making crucial decisions with it's brains (well, no one accused the army of being intelligent anyways) rather than testosterone driven emotions (as is it's wont and usual way of doing things).

I have said this before. If you want to take the seat of bada Saab, then you have to think and act like Baada Saabs thought and action. The tradition passes on.

Somewhere, one army man cheats and brings his brain to work (normally, the first thing the army recruit is told to keep his brains at home). so, he breaks the tradition after he becomes Bada Saab.

"Considering India's expanding strategic reach and widening global standing as a military power, future armoured vehicles should be capable of performing roles during out-of-area contingencies beyond its territorial boundaries," Bharadwaj said.

He means that Armour will actually fight in Pakistan or china?

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 19 May 2010 09:54

The DRDO's new project 'Tank-X' too did not find favour with the Army. "Tank-X is a hybrid of T-90 and T-72, which are both contemporary technology tanks. There is no point in having technologically obsolete tanks for warfare two decades hence," the (Bharadwaj) DG (Mechanised Forces) said.

what an unbelievable liar !!

first, tank-ex is based on the arjun and T-72.
secondly it was projected as an upgrade path for the T-72, not as a new tank.
this person is an absolute disgrace, having him in a responsible post hurt the army like nothing else. he should have been kicked out of the army long before he could do much harm.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 May 2010 10:29

Finally after all the tiring trials between Bishma and Arjun , Exclusive pictures of both tanks in peace time location.

T-90 and Arjun

rajsunder · Post by **rajsunder** » 19 May 2010 10:38

Austin wrote:Finally after all the tiring trials between Bishma and Arjun , Exclusive pictures of both tanks in peace time location.

T-90 and Arjun

Austin delete your post before some mod does it for you.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 May 2010 10:46

Rahul M wrote: secondly it was projected as an upgrade path for the T-72, not as a new tank.

With a 4 man crew in T-72 chasis , new turret and a MG of different caliber wouldnt Tank Ex type upgrade will be too radical to be called an upgrade for existing T-72 , They could call that a new medium tank in T class and sell it in Intl market if they added few more incremental bells and whistles.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 May 2010 10:49

rajsunder wrote:Austin delete your post before some mod does it for you.

Why sir , did we loose our sense of humor in all this serious discussion , I find that pics funny and sums up the mood

VijayV · Post by **VijayV** » 19 May 2010 10:50

Austin wrote:
Finally after all the tiring trials between Bishma and Arjun , Exclusive pictures of both tanks in peace time location.

And Al-khalid is lying in front of them.

sathyaC · Post by **sathyaC** » 19 May 2010 11:27

If things go like this we need to start sack Bhardwaj&Co campaign

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 19 May 2010 11:43

Austin wrote:Finally after all the tiring trials between Bishma and Arjun , Exclusive pictures of both tanks in peace time location.

T-90 and Arjun

wrong ID, both are T-90.

pralay · Post by **pralay** » 19 May 2010 11:57

Arjun MK2 updates may include

most likely:
1. automatic target tracking( may be just need to upgrade current one)
2. defensive aids - ERA / NERA
3. defensive aids - APS
4. defensive aids - Mobile Camo (this is ready i remember i read somewhere about it )
5. laser warning System
6. tank simulator systems
7. remote operation via on tele-link(I am not sure if its possible with arjun as it has manual loader)
8. IR Jammer
9. Upgraded Fire Control System( Network centric, with Identification Friend Or Foe)
10. Stealth Paints
11. New 1500BHP engine
12. independent commander’s panoramic sight

less likely changes:
1. Active suspension system (terrain hugging, I am not sure if it needs total redesign and is feasible on arjun or not )

some very less likely changes
1. gun barrel update to 52 caliber from current 44 caliber(sengupta article)
2. The redesign of the hull and turret sections(sengupta article) but very unlikely, please don't ask me why is it needed.

references
DRDO release about Arjun upgrade, May 2009
Shiv's Article about FMBT
Article by prasun sengupta

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 19 May 2010 11:59

the mobile camo has been successfully tested as confirmed by MOD report.

arnab · Post by **arnab** » 19 May 2010 12:00

Rahul M wrote:
Austin wrote:Finally after all the tiring trials between Bishma and Arjun , Exclusive pictures of both tanks in peace time location.

T-90 and Arjun
wrong ID, both are T-90.

Actually they are T-72s, when you put lipstick on them - they become T-90s

pralay · Post by **pralay** » 19 May 2010 12:09

Generation 2.0: Arjun Mk-2

Path for the development of the Second generation of Arjun Mk-2 has been cleared recently by the Ministry of Defence and funding allocated , while the Army has ordered more 124 Arjun Mk-1 to keep the production line in Avadi busy till the Arjun Mk-2 will start rolling out from 2013-14 onwards . DRDO rather than starting all over again the Arjun MK-2 will have the same design of Arjun MK-1, but major changes are planned for the new generation variant of Arjun Tank to keep up with the new technological changes which are been incorporated in the MBT’s world over .

Arjun MK-2 will have Battle Field Management System (BFMS) which will enable the tank to get feed from UAV‘s and Helicopters, which then enable the Arjun mk-2 tank crew much aware of their surroundings and better understanding of the battle zone, this will lead to improvement in coordinating with other Friendly tanks in the zone and also avoid Friendly kills, it will also give information regarding enemy tank movement along with their troops and help navigate terrain in the battle zone.

Self-diagnostic system (SDS) will also be added to Arjun Mk-2 which is like a health monitoring system. it will not only tell the tank crew if it is having any problem but also point out the trouble area , it is also important when Tank has taken multiple hits from different position and from different ammunition after a self-diagnose Tank crew will know exact damage inflicted on the Tank .

Arjun Mk-2 will get a new efficient 1500bhp engine which has been in development by DRDO in India its self, they are reports that a Indian Private industry is also working with DRDO on the engine development, currently Arjun MK-1 is powered by German supplied 1400bhp engine which is quite old in design and technical parameters but still a powerful and respected engine in the world.

NERA (non-explosive reactive armor) will be added to Arjun Mk-2 this will give the tank additional protection against anti-tank munitions, unlike ERA, NERA will enable tank to take multiple hits anti-tank munitions, but also increase the weight of Arjun MK-2 to 60 tons from its current weight (Arjun MK-1) of 58 tons.

It is much likely that Arjun Mk-2 will also spot Air-conditioning system for the crew, which will be powered from an APU which will draw its power from the Main engine of the Tank; this will enable the tank crew to operate in higher temperature of desert heat without any discomfort to the tank crew, Arjun MK-1 already has hardened electronics that function perfectly even in the Rajasthan summer without requiring any Air-conditioning system.

More changes will take place in Arjun Mk-2, above mentioned are mostly likely changes which will take place in the new variant.

http://idrw.org/?p=1718

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 19 May 2010 12:14

>> It is much likely that Arjun Mk-2 will also spot Air-conditioning system for the crew, which will be powered from an APU which will draw its power from the Main engine of the Tank

oh dear, you wish that a dedicated defence news outlet would at least get the basics right.

if that's what the APU does, why not get rid of the middleman and let the AC gets its power directly from the engine without the APU getting its 'cut'.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 May 2010 13:10

Ajai Shuka report on Mk2 seems more reliable and from horses mouth , IDRW seems to have its own view on what Mk2 should be like.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 19 May 2010 13:18

it sounds like what that phony israeli guy(what was his name again ?) scammed about on arjun couple of years back.

Pankaj C · Post by **Pankaj C** » 19 May 2010 13:20

To all the tank experts out here, out of curiosity can someone speculate on

1. What is the likelihood of introducing a sloping turret on Arjun
2. If it happens at all, what should be a reasonable timeframe be to get it on Arjun?

As was pointed out earlier on this thread, instead on straight away jumping on the FMBT bandwagon, it will be prudent to first let Arjun evolve through various tranches and gain the requisite experience in production as well. This is going to help the FMBT more than anything else as most of the technologies will be an extension of the one's already on the last tranche of Arjun.

Most other countries have gone down this path and it has paid off rather well.

pralay · Post by **pralay** » 19 May 2010 13:33

Pankaj C wrote:To all the tank experts out here, out of curiosity can someone speculate on

1. What is the likelihood of introducing a sloping turret on Arjun
2. If it happens at all, what should be a reasonable timeframe be to get it on Arjun?

sloped turret may require redesign of the the turret, but adding those > shaped secondary armor plates(as on t-90) around the turret is relatively easy.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 May 2010 13:36

Found this Nice Video of T-90 testing during year 2000 tank trials for Malaysian MBT , T-90 looks more at home in the jungle.

Part-1

Part-2

symontk · Post by **symontk** » 19 May 2010 13:46

is it possible to use Arjun against Naxals? Will it stand the 50kg IED? Our experience in Srilanka was not good, but we didnt use T-72 but some light tanks / APC's only

Do anyone know?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 May 2010 13:52

Using tanks for COIN operation has no value specially if the terrain is hilly , It makes more sense to use something like HAL Lancer which has proven itself in Ops Sarpvinash.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 19 May 2010 14:17

pankaj, there is a quite detailed discussion on sloped turret in the very last page, would you mind reading at least the last few pages of a thread before asking questions ? no one likes to type the same thing again and again, at least not on every page.

symon, there are many psychological reason why tanks shouldn't be used in COIN. for tactical ones, why tanks ? what would you use that 120mm gun against ?
also, tanks aren't mine resistant to the level specialised MPV's are, they are also much cheaper and have a much better usability in this context, where the primary need is to carry soldiers.

Austin wrote:Found this Nice Video of T-90 testing during year 2000 tank trials for Malaysian MBT , T-90 looks more at home in the jungle.

no wonder, the uncivilized brute !

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 19 May 2010 14:20

Pankaj C wrote:To all the tank experts out here, out of curiosity can someone speculate on

1. What is the likelihood of introducing a sloping turret on Arjun
2. If it happens at all, what should be a reasonable timeframe be to get it on Arjun?

<SNIP>

While me no expert, there is a discussion in this regards in the Mil-Tech Archive section - where exactly this question was raised. The answer given was that Kanchan Armor is extremely difficult to machine and hence, there might be certain issues with sloped turret (weight penalty?). Please read the discussion for more details.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 May 2010 16:54

Rahul M wrote:no wonder, the uncivilized brute !

What I realised looking at that video was that size and compactness matters , the visual stealth of T-90 is quite apparent as it moves through the jungle during the test run , even though T-90 does not use any kind of cammo exclusively to manage its visual signature.

This is something I did not realise when I watched all those desert rolling and demo videos of T-90 , I hope they do not move towards a western type heavy tanks with large footprint , if T-95 is indeed 55 T then it would be disappointing.

Talk of prediction our man did much before then Ajai Shulka , this is what he mentioned way back in Jan 2009 link

Presently, as things stand, Indian Army HQ is adhering to a modified MBT force structure, whose original version, as proposed in 2006, had called for a fleet of 3,780 MBTs, comprising 1,302 T-90s 2,356 T-72s and 124 Arjun Mk1s. The modified structure now calls for 2,473 higher-end MBTs, including 1,409 T-90s, 248 Arjuns, and 692 T-72M1 Combat Improved Ajeyas. The Army’s gameplan is to have 21 regiments of T-90s and 34 regiments of upgraded T-72M1s and six regiments of Arjuns by 2020

Aab Sanku jee kya kahenge , Sun rises in the West

Some times I just wonder if all this trial agere wagera is just a exercise to hoodwink the public and give legitimacy to a decision which has already been taken by GOI/IA at the highest level long time back.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 19 May 2010 17:05

Austin Sir, I am not saying anything for a while, will try and say focus my speech elsewhere.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 19 May 2010 18:31

Austin ji,

I suspect that the decision has been made (in mid 2000s) as to the number and distribution of tanks would be in 2020. The key (as per my simple research) is 2020 and NOT the number of whichever tank. For most read-between-the-line article seem to indicate that the "FMBT" (whatever that is) should be a different beast that is not in the calculus that we are exposed to so far.

On sloping turrets - the thinking seems to be for not placing a human in a turret. We have to realize that technologies are moving at a great speed. The 2005 thinking is already outdated.

That said, there is nothing wrong with the whatever the "Mark-2" is, for, it will most likely be upgrading, incorporating, and the like. It should be a (far?) better beast than the previous ones, but I suspect it will not be good enough for "Future". You see the "Future" is beyond a simple GSQR - for it will actually depend on how far the political branch wants to reach out and I suspect this political branch does not have much of a clue.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 19 May 2010 19:03

Austin wrote:Finally after all the tiring trials between Bishma and Arjun , Exclusive pictures of both tanks in peace time location.

T-90 and Arjun

A little correction:
http://img704.imageshack.us/img704/6728/correctpics.jpg

Anabhaya · Post by **Anabhaya** » 19 May 2010 19:05

The 'future' has been reserved for whatever the Russians come up in the coming years.

vic · Post by **vic** » 19 May 2010 19:12

I think if the idea is to change the engine of Arjun mark2 and upgrade it slightly then it would be easy and achievable. But if you want to convert it into FMBT (using US type FCS brochure) then it would be killing it.

Just for your info, if mtu 838 powerpack is replaced by mtu 893 or equivalent then it would save 6m^3 space i.e. 6000 litres of volume. Which can mean massive decrease in size and consequent weight or increase in protection. Lets see what mark 2 entails.

akash_k · Post by **akash_k** » 19 May 2010 19:43

Manish_Sharma wrote:
Austin wrote:Finally after all the tiring trials between Bishma and Arjun , Exclusive pictures of both tanks in peace time location.

T-90 and Arjun
A little correction:
http://img704.imageshack.us/img704/6728/correctpics.jpg

Thats more like it

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 19 May 2010 19:44

a more compact engine would open space for another fuel tank which would improve the arjun unrefuelled range to match the russian tanks and
get rid of the drop tank it carries in the back. this is a present weakness of arjun as that drop tank is unprotected and can catch fire if hit by artillery fragments or unexpected small arms fire - hopefully it can atleast be remotely dropped from inside the turret in a quick emergency.
a small additional hull magazine could also be added there below the bustle area - Leo2a4 had one hull mag near the driver. additional equipment for BMS/cooling/etc could be stashed away without overcrowding the current turret. a locker for additional couple thousand HMG rounds is useful if a remote weapons station is added atop the commanders position. even extra food and water cupboard, NBC suits etc need storage space.

but most critical new features are BMS and commanders independent thermal sight from "the network is the sum of all parts" pov.

pralay · Post by **pralay** » 19 May 2010 19:51

Austin wrote:
Presently, as things stand, Indian Army HQ is adhering to a modified MBT force structure, whose original version, as proposed in 2006, had called for a fleet of 3,780 MBTs, comprising 1,302 T-90s 2,356 T-72s and 124 Arjun Mk1s. The modified structure now calls for 2,473 higher-end MBTs, including 1,409 T-90s, 248 Arjuns, and 692 T-72M1 Combat Improved Ajeyas. The Army’s gameplan is to have 21 regiments of T-90s and 34 regiments of upgraded T-72M1s and six regiments of Arjuns by 2020

Austin sar 248 will be unlikely figure for 2020 as it will force the production line to be idle for at least 6 years.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 19 May 2010 20:25

The Arjun turret is like a penthouse!!!!!

On leaning on Russia - per Austin their effort has been killed!!! Russia did offer to codev, like the Brahmos, as late as 2-3 years ago (T-95 was supposed to be inducted this year if it had not been killed).

More l8r.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 May 2010 20:27

I think it will not be easy to change the engine of Arjun without it going through some rigorous trials and delaying the whole process and its really not worth it.

Amongst all that I have read on Mk2 , Ajai shukla to me looks more reliable in that Mk2 is not a radical new tank over Mk1 but an incremental but effective upgrade over Mk1 , although it would be anybodys guess how long will DRDO take to come up with a production ready prototype of Mk2 and how much time Avadi will take to get things right from their end.

Thankfully the T-90 line is not an hostage to Avadi whims and wishes , The T-90M as mentioned in Igor and Senguptas blog is akin to Mk2 for T-90.

The FMBT IMHO is another MMRCA in making all hype no substance , I am certain 10 years from now we will be discussing what constitutes FMBT and no further that we are right now in this debate.