Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

sawant · Post by **sawant** » 22 Aug 2010 00:37

Karan M wrote:The Pakistani Army should not be seen as the heroic force fighting the evil Hindus who shell civilian homesteads and are afraid to fight the

PA but should be the ones unable to defeat an implacable enemy, parked 5-6 km in Pak territory in Kashmir, Punjab, sending the public into a frothing rage

at first, but making them then consider - that their army is not all what it claims to be

This is exactly what our Army and GOI needs to think in the direction of. I just don't understand why in this age do we play by conventional rules. And all the

talk about holding territory and using as bargaining chip - that has been an abysmal failure politically isn't it... take '65,'71 what kind of 'bargain' did we take ?

and how will it win us again in the next decade... that's like fighting the same old war with the same old tactics the Pukis are well-rehearsed with.

The only way to counter a suicidal nuclear neighbor is to use our cool smart minds. Target the sprawling GHQ real estate... surely that won't be a nuke

threshold ? Target the people who actually inflict pain on us. Why not target their infrastructure, power stations etc and make the civilians feel the pain along

with the army. This way mass casualties are avoided and a point made. Of course we will have to share the pain as well, but it will at least get the message

across that nuke or no nuke suffering will be meted out. Over the years because it is only the armies who fight on the borders, jingoism and nuke fanaticism

has sky-rocketed with the Pukis... Like WW2, once the suffering comes home, people will get the picture and PA support will go down. We simply can not

adhere to western style definitions of 'collateral damage' etc. Out here the rabid population needs to be howl as well...

All I am saying is there are acceptable ways and mechanisms to inflict pain w/o crossing the threshold. We need to think hard and find them out on the map

ArmenT · Post by **ArmenT** » 22 Aug 2010 10:22

Brando wrote:Can DCB's be destroyed through a direct air strike or missile attack enough to create a breach ?? How well do they stand up against the 2000lb'er "mud-movers" ? Indian armor can either go through it, above it or around it and strike Punjab.

Nope - problem is you can never predict which side of the ditch will be breached by an air strike. What you're looking for is a much more accurate method which guarantees better results. Old fashioned demolition with explosives to be precise. That's the reason why many militaries maintain combat engineers and sapper units. These are the chaps whose responsibility it is to do the job for India. I think the Thambis are one of the oldest units in the Indian military.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 22 Aug 2010 10:28

I recall reading in the DRDO brochure i picked up in a defence expeo in the late 90s that a DCB blaster was designed and produced by DRDO. It was a collection of Pnumatic drills through which charges were dug in the DCB and were then blown up. Creating a space for the armour to move through.

It Will be clumsy during the war time. But the option of blowing through the DCB exists with the IA.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 22 Aug 2010 13:43

Gentlemen, has anyone thought about IA using bridging equipment for crossing the water obstacles? And why do you think that IA practices water obstacle crossing in most of its annual excercises? The IG Canal in Rajasthan is main training area for this.

The defences in Punjab are centered on the Canal network which run parallel to the border - with home bank on TSP side with numerous concrete pill-boxes. Very formidable defences.

ArmenT - good that you mentioned Engineers - Assault Engineers actually. There are certain such enginerring brigades whose movement from base locations means something is seriously wrong. Also, this requirement for Engineering Eqp. also shows why it is very expensive to raise Armored Divisions - they are more than tanks onlee.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 22 Aug 2010 16:25

was reading about the wehrmacht taking about fort Eben Emael in belgium during ww2 at junction of meuse river and albert canal. what made the difference was tons of practice, r&d into hollow charges, small units with decisive levels of leadership and expert civilian glider pilots. even though the assault leader glider tow rope broke and he arrived much later after going by car back to base, the men were trained enough to complete the job without him.

dutch water defences were grabbed by parachute landings, infiltrators and sea-plane delivery.

we must never let anyone sit behind a few canals and think they are safe. do you think a WW3 soviet invasion would not have planned for the dutch water defences?

there must be a complete capability built up in ambhibious forces, heli mobile units, parachute brigades and smart weapons to destroy enmasse any
attempt to hide behind canals.

very overt capabilities need to be built up and showcased like the US does occasionally to keep the pakis constantly in a state of mild panic.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 22 Aug 2010 17:16

aditp wrote:Sample cross section of DCB design (illustrative / reference only)

http://www.fao.org/docrep/field/003/AB772E/AB772E56.gif

Now compare the dimensions with that of the tank

http://www.defencetalk.com/pictures/dat ... Sketch.jpg

Not only will the tank have extreme difficulty crossing the DCB even the approach would be very difficult

Look at 2:00 onwards

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7ISAXZj ... r_embedded

(Posted by KrishG in other thread)

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 22 Aug 2010 17:20

sawant wrote: This is exactly what our Army and GOI needs to think in the direction of. I just don't understand why in this age do we play by conventional rules. And all the

talk about holding territory and using as bargaining chip - that has been an abysmal failure politically isn't it... take '65,'71 what kind of 'bargain' did we take ?

and how will it win us again in the next decade... that's like fighting the same old war with the same old tactics the Pukis are well-rehearsed with.

The simple answer is dont give the land back. Keep it as is - eg Israel with Golan Heights and other territories they took from the Arab coalition.

The only way to counter a suicidal nuclear neighbor is to use our cool smart minds. Target the sprawling GHQ real estate... surely that won't be a nuke

threshold ? Target the people who actually inflict pain on us. Why not target their infrastructure, power stations etc and make the civilians feel the pain along

with the army. This way mass casualties are avoided and a point made. Of course we will have to share the pain as well, but it will at least get the message

across that nuke or no nuke suffering will be meted out. Over the years because it is only the armies who fight on the borders, jingoism and nuke fanaticism

has sky-rocketed with the Pukis... Like WW2, once the suffering comes home, people will get the picture and PA support will go down. We simply can not

adhere to western style definitions of 'collateral damage' etc. Out here the rabid population needs to be howl as well...

All I am saying is there are acceptable ways and mechanisms to inflict pain w/o crossing the threshold. We need to think hard and find them out on the map

Agreed.

But let me just point out that fighting terror with targeted strikes is a never ending escalory matrix. India as a country is too vast and too porous (with a very poor police/citizens ratio) to effectively insulate itself from terror attacks.

Having said that, any measure that can be explored should be.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 25 Aug 2010 19:01

85 MBT Arjun Tanks have been issued to the Indian Army

He said that “keeping in view the production capacity for MBT Arjun Tanks and strategic considerations, the Government is also exercising the option for modernising T-72 tanks instead of total replacement of these tanks on completion of their life span.”

IMO, Arjuns will replace T-72's. I have been telling you that Arjuns will have more orders. IMHO, this bolded part is a clue to that.

nits · Post by **nits** » 09 Sep 2010 11:07

Poland keen to sell tank recovery vehicles to India

As Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk flies into New Delhi tomorrow, India is said to be mulling over Poland’s offer to supply to it tank recovery vehicles. The Indo-Polish defence cooperation will figure prominently during talks between the visiting dignitary and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh here tomorrow.

A tank recovery vehicle is a type of armoured fighting vehicle used to repair battle or mine damaged as well as broken down vehicles during combat operations, or to tow them out of the danger zone for more extensive repairs.But more than defence ties, it is the prospect of a quantum jump in economic ties with Poland that excites New Delhi. Poland, a key member of the European Union (EU), is considered by India as a gateway to Europe and Central Asia

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 14 Sep 2010 19:59

Infograph: T-90 MBT

Anshul · Post by **Anshul** » 02 Oct 2010 18:48

The series of canals which run all the way from Punjab to Rajasthan are going to make all wet dreams of "Cold Start" turn into nightmares.

The BMP -2s claim to being amphibious is not exactly true....it cannot climb beyond a 15 deg incline.All this cold start blah blah is going to go for a toss when the armoured columns get into a blitzkreig like situation,the Mech Columns will simply fail to keep pace....all attributed to these series of canals.Try google earth and you will find a maze of canals which shall leave all plans to reach anywhere near islamabad to sialkot a long drawn effort.

That apart we will need to protect these sitting ducks against the Cobras and Highly mobile Baktar Shikan units.These are manportable and have an effective range 4 kms and tandem warheads.Our ERAs are toast against tandem warheads.Imagine how easy it is too cook the the BMPs and T-72 , 90s real cheap.

We need something more relaible man portable ATGMs and we need them in huge numbers....Konkurs and Milan aren't really state of the art and the Nag isn't all weather yet.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 02 Oct 2010 21:51

Anshul wrote: The series of canals which run all the way from Punjab to Rajasthan are going to make all wet dreams of "Cold Start" turn into nightmares...............<SNIP>

You also seem to have irrefutable upper hand in these matters.....

Manishw · Post by **Manishw** » 02 Oct 2010 22:21

^ I wish I had done Phd to get an irrefutable upper hand in all matters.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 02 Oct 2010 22:24

For that you need to enrol in the LMU......

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 02 Oct 2010 22:44

I wish Injun janrails knew abt this dammned series of canals which have been there for nearly 60 years. I suspect that since janrails couldn't properly istart Ops parakram, they renamed the istrategy aj cold istart. Now they bill nat be blaamed phor ops parakram like situation.

TV Host: Do you think the new strategy was success this time:
Analyst: yes, We saw is ops parakram how armee could not deploy in time. Since we have named it as cold start, it legitimizes the late reaction.

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 03 Oct 2010 00:00

rohitvats wrote:For that you need to enrol in the LMU......

Lahore Military University ?

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 03 Oct 2010 01:46

Kersi D wrote:
rohitvats wrote:For that you need to enrol in the LMU......
Lahore Military University ?

http://sites.google.com/site/brfdiction ... sary/l/lmu

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 03 Oct 2010 09:50

Hello all, I found three new videos of Arjun. Seems it has not been posted here. It seems Arjun is also being shown to Engineering students. Let's hope that young talent will join DRDO.
First one is from a thattukada (local chaiwala) taken by paanwala

These seems demonstration for college students.

Is the last one Tank-Ex?
(Edited: Yes it's Tank-Ex)

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 03 Oct 2010 10:02

Don't know, but seems to be the T 72 Chasis.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 03 Oct 2010 10:06

Anshul wrote:The series of canals which run all the way from Punjab to Rajasthan are going to make all wet dreams of "Cold Start" turn into nightmares.
SNIP............
We need something more relaible man portable ATGMs and we need them in huge numbers....Konkurs and Milan aren't really state of the art and the Nag isn't all weather yet.

While I am not very happy with the IAs armour capability. Your post is very entertaining..........

Where did you learn about the IA ATGM capability please tell....

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 03 Oct 2010 11:02

Is it possible to have Arjun turret on the T-90 chassis to make a Tank-Ex-90 Tank. This will be a real good if we upgrade all T-72's with Tank-Ex and T-90's with Tank-Ex-90. So our Armour regiments will have Arjun and its variants only. A lot of commonality.

anirban_aim · Post by **anirban_aim** » 03 Oct 2010 11:53

chackojoseph wrote:85 MBT Arjun Tanks have been issued to the Indian Army

He said that “keeping in view the production capacity for MBT Arjun Tanks and strategic considerations, the Government is also exercising the option for modernising T-72 tanks instead of total replacement of these tanks on completion of their life span.”
IMO, Arjuns will replace T-72's. I have been telling you that Arjuns will have more orders. IMHO, this bolded part is a clue to that.

Chackoji, can you please shed some light on your assertion. Pardon me, but to me your claim and the second part of the qoute (the non bolded part) sounded ominously contradictory....

Any clarity will be very welcome..

To me any further talk of extending the life of the T - 72s is scary as it might have a direct detrimental effect on the already slim chances of Arjun Mk - II

sum · Post by **sum** » 03 Oct 2010 11:57

Chackoji, can you please shed some light on your assertion. Pardon me, but to me your claim and the second part of the qoute (the non bolded part) sounded ominously contradictory....

Exactly, even i was wondering the same!!!

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 03 Oct 2010 12:22

anirban_aim wrote:Chackoji, can you please shed some light on your assertion. Pardon me, but to me your claim and the second part of the qoute (the non bolded part) sounded ominously contradictory....

Any clarity will be very welcome..

To me any further talk of extending the life of the T - 72s is scary as it might have a direct detrimental effect on the already slim chances of Arjun Mk - II

Right! How I read it is that since the production of Arjun is not going to be quick enough, hence T-72 upgrades are on the way. It appears to me that if the Arjuns (including mark 2) can be produced in a faster way, we would avoid T-72 upgrades.

But, the assertion is also based on something I have been saying that Arjuns will have more orders. If folks remember correctly, when bad news after bad news poured during the T-90 and Arjun trials (like failed in summer trials), I told you that some competent people are looking into it and Arjun will will get next order. It was mix of what I knew and gut feeling. I am using the same right now. A bit on facts on how the back end decision machinery is working and a bit of forecast.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 03 Oct 2010 12:32

uddu wrote:Is it possible to have Arjun turret on the T-90 chassis to make a Tank-Ex-90 Tank. This will be a real good if we upgrade all T-72's with Tank-Ex and T-90's with Tank-Ex-90. So our Armour regiments will have Arjun and its variants only. A lot of commonality.

IMO, T-90 is T-72 chassis.

anirban_aim · Post by **anirban_aim** » 03 Oct 2010 12:49

chackojoseph wrote:
anirban_aim wrote:Chackoji, can you please shed some light on your assertion. Pardon me, but to me your claim and the second part of the qoute (the non bolded part) sounded ominously contradictory....

Any clarity will be very welcome..

To me any further talk of extending the life of the T - 72s is scary as it might have a direct detrimental effect on the already slim chances of Arjun Mk - II
Right! How I read it is that since the production of Arjun is not going to be quick enough, hence T-72 upgrades are on the way. It appears to me that if the Arjuns (including mark 2) can be produced in a faster way, we would avoid T-72 upgrades.

But, the assertion is also based on something I have been saying that Arjuns will have more orders. If folks remember correctly, when bad news after bad news poured during the T-90 and Arjun trials (like failed in summer trials), I told you that some competent people are looking into it and Arjun will will get next order. It was mix of what I knew and gut feeling. I am using the same right now. A bit on facts on how the back end decision machinery is working and a bit of forecast.

May power be to you!!! May your words come true!!! Insha Allah!!!!

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 03 Oct 2010 13:13

Austin wrote:Infograph: T-90 MBT

In the past the US was panned for showing the J&K region as disputed..what would one say about a Russian website showing India without J&K at all ?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Oct 2010 20:56

Kartik wrote:
Austin wrote:Infograph: T-90 MBT
In the past the US was panned for showing the J&K region as disputed..what would one say about a Russian website showing India without J&K at all ?

I dont think those maps out there shows accurately the maps of India ,Saudi ,Pakistan etc but more to show the operators of T-90 and it gets small place in that big picture.

But irrespective of what it shows or not I dont think we should get too touchy on what maps of Russia,China , US talk about J&K ( not all could be intentional some may be just ignorance ) the fact remains that it remains in our control and is part of India, that is what matters

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 04 Oct 2010 01:02

That's not what you would have posted if the US had done that.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 04 Oct 2010 06:47

That aaruush2010 video is amazing. Thanks to who ever shot it and who ever posted it.

srai · Post by **srai** » 04 Oct 2010 08:18

chackojoseph wrote:
anirban_aim wrote:Chackoji, can you please shed some light on your assertion. Pardon me, but to me your claim and the second part of the qoute (the non bolded part) sounded ominously contradictory....

Any clarity will be very welcome..

To me any further talk of extending the life of the T - 72s is scary as it might have a direct detrimental effect on the already slim chances of Arjun Mk - II
Right! How I read it is that since the production of Arjun is not going to be quick enough, hence T-72 upgrades are on the way. It appears to me that if the Arjuns (including mark 2) can be produced in a faster way, we would avoid T-72 upgrades.

But, the assertion is also based on something I have been saying that Arjuns will have more orders. If folks remember correctly, when bad news after bad news poured during the T-90 and Arjun trials (like failed in summer trials), I told you that some competent people are looking into it and Arjun will will get next order. It was mix of what I knew and gut feeling. I am using the same right now. A bit on facts on how the back end decision machinery is working and a bit of forecast.

Some T-72s will have to be upgraded ... but not all 1,700.

With Arjun Mk.I (and in another 4 years Arjun Mk.II) being produced at 50-100 units/year (plus local T-90S production), there will be a transitional period where T-72s will need to soldier on while new Arjun and T-90S regiments are being raised between 2010 and 2020 timeframe. IMO, there will probably be a need to upgrade at least 600-800 T-72s as an interim measure so they can stay in service till 2020/25. These upgraded T-72s could be used in the reserve regiments after T90S and Arjun are fully inducted.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 04 Oct 2010 09:17

srai wrote:Some T-72s will have to be upgraded ... but not all 1,700.

With Arjun Mk.I (and in another 4 years Arjun Mk.II) being produced at 50-100 units/year (plus local T-90S production), there will be a transitional period where T-72s will need to soldier on while new Arjun and T-90S regiments are being raised between 2010 and 2020 timeframe. IMO, there will probably be a need to upgrade at least 600-800 T-72s as an interim measure so they can stay in service till 2020/25. These upgraded T-72s could be used in the reserve regiments after T90S and Arjun are fully inducted.

Please re read the bold line. This is exactly what I am thinking.

Then there is a quote from Distinguished Scientist W Selvamurthy (former CC LS and HR, now in admin) which he told me. He said that "once they start using the tank, they will be more confident." Actually, it looks like happening now. so far we have not seen anon officers cribbing over the bad Arjun. it could be calm before the storm or someone is seriously auditing Arjun induction from outside.

Luxtor · Post by **Luxtor** » 04 Oct 2010 09:42

Kartik wrote:
Austin wrote:Infograph: T-90 MBT
In the past the US was panned for showing the J&K region as disputed..what would one say about a Russian website showing India without J&K at all ?

Oh really?!!! Then kick the MiG-35 out of the MMRCA competition. Cancel the MTA aircraft contract. No more IL-78s for mid-air refuellers, go with A-330 tankers instead. No more T-90s. Replace all existing T-90s with Arjuns and use T-90s for target practice. Hmmm, can anybody else think of anything else that we can screw the Russians on?

We can also show on our maps Chechnya as independent country and Kuril Island as Japanese territory.

They can't get away with such callousness .....

But seriously it is surprising that they would show the map with Kashmir as not part of India and actually they're showing that entire Kashmir region as part of China. The history of India and Kashmir is well known and it actually takes an effort on the part of the Russians to draw a map as depicted in that picture instead of just showing the region with dashed boundary lines as is the normal convention when showing disputed regions.

bodhi · Post by **bodhi** » 04 Oct 2010 09:54

Luxtor wrote: In the past the US was panned for showing the J&K region as disputed..what would one say about a Russian website showing India without J&K at all ?

Oh really?!!! Then kick the MiG-35 out of the MMRCA competition. Cancel the MTA aircraft contract. No more IL-78s for mid-air refuellers, go with A-330 tankers instead. No more T-90s. Replace all existing T-90s with Arjuns and use T-90s for target practice. Hmmm, can anybody else think of anything else that we can screw the Russians on?

snip.....
[/quote]

Too much time invested to write such a long OT post!

vishnu.nv · Post by **vishnu.nv** » 04 Oct 2010 10:21

In the past the US was panned for showing the J&K region as disputed..what would one say about a Russian website showing India without J&K at all ?[/quote]

Oh really?!!! Then kick the MiG-35 out of the MMRCA competition. Cancel the MTA aircraft contract. No more IL-78s for mid-air refuellers, go with A-330 tankers instead. No more T-90s. Replace all existing T-90s with Arjuns and use T-90s for target practice. Hmmm, can anybody else think of anything else that we can screw the Russians on?

We can also show on our maps Chechnya as independent country and Kuril Island as Japanese territory.

They can't get away with such callousness .....

But seriously it is surprising that they would show the map with Kashmir as not part of India and actually they're showing that entire Kashmir region as part of China. The history of India and Kashmir is well known and it actually takes an effort on the part of the Russians to draw a map as depicted in that picture instead of just showing the region with dashed boundary lines as is the normal convention when showing disputed regions.

[/quote]

This kind of info-graphics are created by the graphic designers who may be not aware of the ground situation. The map not being a main subject of the graphics would have taken from any service like google maps or numerous atlas maps over web. Mostly because of ignorance rather than doing that intensionally. For example could GOI check the maps of every info-graphics being published by the numerous indian media houses.

There is no need to make a huge cry over this..J&K is an integral part of India [will MMS trade Kashmir for UN security seat is another issue altogether, see yesterdays newspaper for Obama's grand plans for India].

If it was coming in any russian official websites, we can mark our protest.

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 04 Oct 2010 12:06

Hey guys, you cannot blame Rianovosti always for publishing wrong images. Sometimes they get things correct. Ever seen Paki army doing exercise.
http://en.rian.ru/images/16025/59/160255919.jpg

vic · Post by **vic** » 04 Oct 2010 12:29

There is no need to make a huge cry over this..J&K is an integral part of India [will MMS trade Kashmir for UN security seat is another issue altogether, see yesterdays newspaper for Obama's grand plans for India].

I think that MMS should tell Obama that India will take the whole of J&K (including Pakistan occupied part) and let Pakistan take the security council seat. What is good for the geese should be good for pigs!

Luxtor · Post by **Luxtor** » 05 Oct 2010 00:00

u.n. security council seat isn't worth the paper it is printed on (or something to that effect, you know what I mean). There is no need for India to keep harping on it. Kashmir, the whole of it, is non negotiable as far as India is concerned.

Luxtor · Post by **Luxtor** » 05 Oct 2010 00:06

uddu wrote:Hey guys, you cannot blame Rianovosti always for publishing wrong images. Sometimes they get things correct. Ever seen Paki army doing exercise.
http://en.rian.ru/images/16025/59/160255919.jpg

I believe that's the photo of the paki NLI, SSG and their mujahideen in Kargil after IA and IAF were finished with them.
It's funny how the pakis change their species to chicken when someone shows up with bigger guns and better fighting skills.

jai · Post by **jai** » 05 Oct 2010 01:24

will MMS trade Kashmir for UN security seat is another issue altogether,

Time for MMS to rise to the occasion, thank Omama and announce that the people of India would like to take both.