Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

niran · Post by **niran** » 25 Mar 2010 12:11

speaking of Tank EX, why there is no new Picture here?
i got this from a puki site

ASPuar · Post by **ASPuar** » 25 Mar 2010 12:16

Just saw Ajai Shukla's report...

If correct, I think that we will be seeing more Arjuns in our army soonish. The fact of there being no bridges to carry the tank.. well, planning should have been made for such eqpt by both the Army and the DRDO. I hope that we will see induction of that bridging eqpt in the army soon, through development of a cost effective and rapidly inductible and deployable system.

As I had said earlier, if the Arjun is better, nothing would make me happier than seeing our army equipped with it, instead of foreign maal.

I still dont like the way the faceoff has happened between Defence R&D, and the DGMF, but I do feel that the DGMF should not have chosen to oppose the Arjun if the Arjun was indeed a superior product. In doing so, they have set themselves up for a problem.

If A Shuklas report is correct, many of the Senior army generals (including one Army commander) witnessed the trials, and were positively impressed by the performance of the tank. If so, it will become difficult for pro- T-series tanks officers to justify non induction of the Arjun even within the army, if brass of such high level has been convinced of the power of the Arjun.

Lets see what happens. The project might still be killed off, but I really dont think it should be. I dont buy the argument that T-series are "good enough" for Indian conditions. If the Arjun is actually superior, then that is akin to saying that 1970s Lada is good enough for India, so we shouldnt have the Honda Civic!

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 25 Mar 2010 12:22

singhaji, not of the same level, but we do have a variety of versions of the BMP. the 81 mm mortar carrier version with 108 rounds for example.

ASP, the arjun BLT.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 25 Mar 2010 13:33

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

If the question is rhetorical then the equally rhetorical answer is NO

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 25 Mar 2010 13:35

an article on the south korean k2 tank. http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/aw/dti0 ... startid=20

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 25 Mar 2010 13:45

Bah - its crappy - look at the boxy turret

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 25 Mar 2010 14:05

Surya wrote:Bah - its crappy - look at the boxy turret

Does not phit into the "tank philosophy of Indian Army"...

sathyaC · Post by **sathyaC** » 25 Mar 2010 14:09

EDIT.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 25 Mar 2010 14:10

rohitvats wrote:
Surya wrote:Bah - its crappy - look at the boxy turret
Does not phit into the "tank philosophy of Indian Army"...

"...(on indefinite loan from mother russia)"

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 25 Mar 2010 14:11

Sanku wrote: 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.

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.

Sorry to burst the bubble, but there is nothing in the open material so far to warrant above conclusion...and you intend to cut TSPA into two with grand total of Four Arjun Regiments? And while we're at it, the two of existing regiments are in different formations in different sector...and if we are lucky, 140(I) may have all the 3 Regiments as Arjun...so, with one (I) Armored Brigade, we'd reach RYK?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 25 Mar 2010 14:16

Sanku wrote: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.

Yes try to do that and 50 odd Nuclear bomb will make 30 Indian city disappear out of our map , its a different question that Pakistan too will disappear for good , but that hardly matters.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 25 Mar 2010 14:19

Rahul M wrote: may be we are witnessing the formation of the core of an IBG ? as D roy says ?

hope really springs eternal......

.....

with one regiment of 140(I) with Arjun, may the other two in due course also will be Arjun equipped....but God and IA only know what form an IBG will take...but assuming, all the armored brigades of IBG are equipped with 3 Armored Regiments and all are Arjun equipped..we'd be taking about 8*3*62 tanks---1,488 tanks+more.....(more dreaming......

)

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 25 Mar 2010 14:22

Oii, cant you guys let the bubble stay for a page at least?

But seriously, yes, I think Arjun would be ideal for shock and awe type of operation, with ability to function WELL in NBC environment. Also we will have to cut Pakistan some day, and I think IA has that goal in mind since Brass tacks (though currently the first focus may be Cold start)

Finally, yes, of course what I am saying is impractical in terms of the current number of Arjun's but I think there is a good chance more may be ordered and become the mainstay of the IBGs etc.

Come on guys, all jingos have their dreams, cant I dream for one sec too?

jagga · Post by **jagga** » 25 Mar 2010 16:20

Jai Arjun!

Jishnu - the undefeatable !

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 25 Mar 2010 19:00

X post From the Indian Army: News & Discussion thread

shukla wrote:After Ajai Shukla now Shiv Aroor reports on Arjun trials...and like Ajai Shukla, cites "reliable sources"..

"Arjun In Present Form Can Never Be Our MBT, 2 More Regiments Possible"

I had a candid chat with an Army officer who was part of one of the trial teams, and I have to admit he's the first Army tankman I've spoken to so far who's admitted that the Army is as much to blame for the Arjun's "situation" (his word) as DRDO.

"The Arjun performed all its objectives to the full satisfaction of the trial team. I should point out that there was little doubt in our minds at this stage that any major issues would crop up in the platform. The Arjun has reached a level of maturity after several trial rounds, so we were quite confident that we would not encounter any developmental or serious technological issues."

"In its current form and configuration, I think the Army has already made it very clear that the Arjun cannot be the mainstay of the armoured corps. There are several reasons for this, including some intangibles which everyone is aware of, but to be fair to the Army, there is logic to the argument that the Arjun belongs to a certain design and configuration philosophy that the Army does not want in its future tank. These trials have given deep perspective into where the Arjun fits in our battle order."

"Although it is not definite at this stage, and may change in the course of the days ahead, several key decision-makers in the Army have in-principle agreed to the suggestion that the Arjun in its present form can occupy four tank regiments. But there is resistance to this idea from the field. The just concluded trials could support the possibility of a total of four Arjun regiments focused on desert operations."

"The Army should share the blame also for not expediting its requirements for a future main battle tank (FMBT). There have been internal studies for years, but to this day, there is no definite picture of what our FMBT should have, look like or be capable of. So when the people at DRDO blame us for indecision and mid-stream QR changes, they do seem to have a case. As they did with Arjun."

"The Army is quite clear. We need to close one chapter and begin another. Call it Mark-2, call it something else. But things need to move forward. It is unhealthy how things have progressed, though I can say in the last three years there appears to be a much greater empathy between the Army and DRDO about how to take things forward. Let's hope it continues."

"Admittedly, the trials may not go a long way in resurrecting Arjun as some quarters have been led to believe, but it has been a healthy exercise and the Army is in a strong position now to use the Arjun to the best of its abilities. The tank has been given its due."

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 25 Mar 2010 19:06

"In its current form and configuration, I think the Army has already made it very clear that the Arjun cannot be the mainstay of the armoured corps. There are several reasons for this, including some intangibles which everyone is aware of, but to be fair to the Army, there is logic to the argument that the Arjun belongs to a certain design and configuration philosophy that the Army does not want in its future tank. These trials have given deep perspective into where the Arjun fits in our battle order."

Q.: So, what is the new configuration.
Army: Mark 2 or FMBT, what ever you would like to call it.
Q.: Have you decided what is the new configuration
Army: We have not yet been able to make our mind.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 25 Mar 2010 19:32

C'mon gurulog help me out here.

Reposting:

Q1. How long do you reckon it would take the DRDO to come up with the Arjun MkII? Is 2015 too optimistic a figure? The Arjun's production line could run for two and half years with a second 124 tank order. All subsequent deliveries being the MkII.

Q2. What would the MkII comprise? Obviously you'd have a newer 1500hp engine, perhaps an improved armour composition... would adding wedge-shaped add-on armor à la Leopard 2A5 be feasible?

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 25 Mar 2010 20:24

viv, this article by chacko is a good place to start.

http://frontierindia.net/arjun-mk2-the-futuristic-mbt

in short :
> BMS : battle management system that gives it truly hunter killer ability, allowing a group of arjuns to share information with each other and receive the same from UAVs and other such nodes. tanks modified for commanders will be even more networked, they will be able to 'talk' to multiple groups at the same time and with the higher command authorities. this is a truly revolutionary system.
current arjun has an encrypted frequency hopping radio (combat net radio) based BMS (T-90 has none) which allows literally talking to one another.

Mk2's BMS will allow tank commanders

The BFMS will give the geographical location of the terrain, location of our own troops, location of enemy targets, illuminate targets, help navigation, display the health of tanks, status of ammunition holding in the tank, fuel stock etc.

IOW, a complete picture of the battle field.

> the accuracy of the fire control system will be improved (it already is consistently above 90% probability of kill). features like the auto-tracker(see chacko's article) will make the job even easier for the crew.

> defensive aids systems,

Combat Vehicles Research and Development Establishment
(CVRDE), Avadi, has taken up Development of Defensive
Aids System for Armoured Fighting Vehicles (AFVs) to enhance the
survivability of the tanks against antitank guided missile threats and to
reduce the probability of detection by the target acquisition systems.
Under this project, two major systems viz., Advanced Laser Warning
and Countermeasure System (ALWCS) {this is more or less similar in function to the shtora of the T-90 which was advertised but never featured on our T-90's. expect better performance than the shtora though. I would expect that T-90's will also be retrofitted by this arjun system } and Mobile Camouflage System
(MCS) are being developed.

http://www.drdo.com/pub/nl/2009/March-09.pdf

this is from march 2009, the MCS has been successfully tested since. it's likely that some of this will be part of the arjun Mk1 itself.

> the LAHAT missile will be fully integrated in the FCS. combined with the BMS this gives a phenomenal punch to the arjun, for the missile can be fired by one tank while it is designated by another, completely confusing the enemy ! this is the kind of potential arjun MBT has that requires more experienced crews to exploit, as ajai shukla's article says.

> chacko's article says :

An 81mm Anti-laser and Anti-thermal Screening Smoke Grenade is also going to be featured.

correct me if I'm wrong, but I think this is already part of the arjun.

> paging chacko : will Mk2 have all electrical turret as against the electro-hydraulic one of Mk1 ?

> different ERA have been developed for the arjun but was considered unnecessary by the kanchan armour's superlative performance. they were used for the T-72 upgrade instead (CIA) and in the future will probably be used to upgrade T-90. already kanchan derived armour is being used for the abhay ICV program.

____________________
I'm sure I've missed at least 3-4 more points.

I'm not 100% sure but the tentative date was 2013 IIRC.

added later :

Q1. How long do you reckon it would take the DRDO to come up with the Arjun MkII? Is 2015 too optimistic a figure?
{as I said, 2013 was the date IIRC when all of these would be featured on arjun. since there isn't any major structural change, there is no reason why the systems that complete development earlier than 2013 won't be part of the production arjuns. IOW, it can well be an incremental journey of incrementally improved arjun in versions Mk1.0 to Mk1.1 to Mk1.2 to Mk2.0 rather than a jump straight from Mk1 to Mk2 with Mk1 produced in the interim. always better to produce Mk1.1 rather than the plain Mk1.0 right ? }
The Arjun's production line could run for two and half years with a second 124 tank order. All subsequent deliveries being the MkII. {the arjun's production line has almost completed the 124 order. if it has to run continously, the order has to come now.}

Q2. What would the MkII comprise? Obviously you'd have a newer 1500hp engine, {I'm not sure that's a pressing need, the 1400 hp is good enough for the moment. may be in Mk3} perhaps an improved armour composition... would adding wedge-shaped add-on armor à la Leopard 2A5 be feasible?
{and why do we need wedge shaped armuor please ?}

Vivs · Post by **Vivs** » 25 Mar 2010 20:29

This is great news! Kudos to the Arjun team for developing a remarkable product!!

If the Arjun is so much better than the T-Series, shouldn't we then build appropriate logistics to support our best product? Can't the Arjun BLT handle the weight? The thinking here seems to be existing logistics ----> tank design ------> fighting doctrine....when maybe it should be the other way!?

symontk · Post by **symontk** » 25 Mar 2010 20:32

Why cant DRDO export Arjun after the current Army order? Even 124 from the Army is a good order to start exports for Arjun. There would several countries that would interested like Vietnam, Venzuela

Meanwhile DRDO can concentrate on Mark2

, Army on FMBT

No fighting please

Fidel Guevara · Post by **Fidel Guevara** » 25 Mar 2010 21:59

Slightly OT. If there are so many pros and cons of the Arjun, perhaps the IA can induct a small order of Leopard 2 MBT's, and study in detail what makes this tank tick, and incorporate the best features into the Arjun.

Germany may not sell the 2A6 version, but the 2A4 has been widely exported, to non-NATO countries such as Chile, Finland, Singapore, Sweden, Switzerland.

As I understand it, the major differences between the 2A4 and the 2A6 are the additional spaced armour, a new gun, and a few other additions which the IA/DRDO can probably do on their own. The basic tank is the same, so wouldn't this provide a good standard of comparison.

BTW, I love this video of the Leopard 2A6...very martial !

Also, this one, with a Leopard in a head-to-head mobility test against a Humvee. Unfortunately in German voiceover, but the video is self-explanatory.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 25 Mar 2010 22:12

Ajai Shukla responds to some of the comments on his Arjun trials article

Anonymous 07:57:

The officers and jawans of 43 Armoured Regiment like the Arjun. They have always said that the Arjun would blow away the T-90 in trials or in war.

It is 140 Armoured Brigade, as the article states.

Joydeep Ghosh:

We already have the Sarvatra bridge, which can take a load of 70 tonnes. The latest T-72 Bridge Layer Tank has also been designed for the Arjun.

Rail and road wagons have already been designed and produced for the Arjun

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 25 Mar 2010 22:57

Rahul M wrote:
http://frontierindia.net/arjun-mk2-the-futuristic-mbt

> paging chacko : will Mk2 have all electrical turret as against the electro-hydraulic one of Mk1 ?

The article was good for its time then. The smoke grenades were not integrated. The electrical turret and other things, give me some time. I can tell what is going to be different after the results are out.

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 25 Mar 2010 22:59

Came across this NewsX video regarding the LCA and Arjun. Found Kapoors comments quite funny especially in light of the recent blow to the t-90.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6OH3dZivOw

msdogra · Post by **msdogra** » 25 Mar 2010 23:05

Sanku wrote: Hey we still have T 55s; if you are complaining you should complaining about that.

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)

This is excellent analysis but the sad part is that if we want a world class Next Generation tank, then we have to keep the Arjun production lines going.

Wickberg · Post by **Wickberg** » 25 Mar 2010 23:07

Fidel Guevara wrote:Slightly OT. If there are so many pros and cons of the Arjun, perhaps the IA can induct a small order of Leopard 2 MBT's, and study in detail what makes this tank tick, and incorporate the best features into the Arjun.

Germany may not sell the 2A6 version, but the 2A4 has been widely exported, to non-NATO countries such as Chile, Finland, Singapore, Sweden, Switzerland.

As I understand it, the major differences between the 2A4 and the 2A6 are the additional spaced armour, a new gun, and a few other additions which the IA/DRDO can probably do on their own. The basic tank is the same, so wouldn't this provide a good standard of comparison.

Actually Sweden bought 2A4 and 2A5 (which is virtually a 2A6). And I don´t see any reason why Germany would´nt sell the 2A6 to India. When it comes to the older 2A4 ones, how many are there left in the stocks in European countries?

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 25 Mar 2010 23:35

Rahul M wrote:viv, this article by chacko is a good place to start.

http://frontierindia.net/arjun-mk2-the-futuristic-mbt

Cheers. That's was an illuminating read.

Q2. What would the MkII comprise? Obviously you'd have a newer 1500hp engine, {I'm not sure that's a pressing need, the 1400 hp is good enough for the moment. may be in Mk3} perhaps an improved armour composition... would adding wedge-shaped add-on armor à la Leopard 2A5 be feasible?
{and why do we need wedge shaped armuor please ?}

Hmm.. I believe the DRDO issued a RFI for co-development of a 1500hp engine. Which would make it a likely addition to the MkII.

The Leopard 2A5/6 employs them to degrade APFSDS penetration and defeat hollow charges. From (admitted unreliable) sources on internet, its performance against KE is believed to be 50% higher and almost twice as good against chemical warheads vis-a-vis the A4 variant. I mention it because the Arjun looks like the spitting image of the Leopard 2A4 and it wasn't unreasonable to assume that its future variants would follow a similar development. While the Arjun's composite armor derives no benefit from sloped surface, the performance of add-on ERA should increase substantially if employed on a wedge of spaced armour.

And finally, this may well be tosh... but I believe the tank would end up looking radically different and the DRDO should find it easier to market it as the FMBT.

Ankit Desai · Post by **Ankit Desai** » 26 Mar 2010 00:24

A comparative chart, snapped by Ajai Shukla at the CVRDE, Chennai, comparing the performance of the Arjun with the world's major Main Battle Tanks (MBTs)

Courtesy Ajai Shukla's Blog http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/

Ankit

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 26 Mar 2010 00:24

rohitvats wrote: Does not phit into the "tank philosophy of Indian Army"...

As Lt. Gen (retd.) VK Kapoor would say "Whichever angle you hit it, it will be hit and get penetrated."

nevermind the probability of it locating you and hitting you first is higher, but hey it doesn't fit into the IA's tank philosophy..

haven't heard more BS than what that retd.Lt Gen VK Kapoor was spouting on that Vishal Thapar report..with a ground pressure lower than the T-90 and T-72 and with medium fording capability the Arjun would do just as well as the T-series tanks in Punjab.

and its really retarded to say that because there aren't bridges available for the Arjun now, it cannot be bought. Those tank-laying bridges can be built, bought in numbers and the money stays within India. Its really dismaying to see such a sloth like attitude in the IA, continuously hiding behind one excuse or another..

Fidel Guevara · Post by **Fidel Guevara** » 26 Mar 2010 00:37

Ankit Desai wrote:A comparative chart, snapped by Ajai Shukla at the CVRDE, Chennai, comparing the performance of the Arjun with the world's major Main Battle Tanks (MBTs)

Courtesy Ajai Shukla's Blog http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/

Ankit

The chart is wrong wrt Leopard's weight - it is not 55 tons, it should be 62 tons.

If you Google "Leopard 2 weight" the very first link says 55 tons, and all the serious tank sites say 62 tons. Hopefully CVRDE does not take military design advice from Google!

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 26 Mar 2010 00:42

So a better option is to acquire the Arjuns and base them at the border maybe in IBGs or holding corps to eliminate transportation on Ind Rail cars etc?

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 26 Mar 2010 00:57

niran wrote: Company "A" needed a new design window grill to prevent
thieves entering, so it got company "B" to design and manufacture
the window grill.

after R&D and testing and what not, company "B" have the finished
product, but company "A" rejects the product citing the reasons
that the grill does not fit the window, but company "B" asks
"it was you(company "A") who gave us the requirement and
measurements, and how can the grill be incompatible?

IA issued the GSQRs (is it GQRS) according to its need, Arjun is
the result of those, no? then how can IA rejects Arjun on the
ground of too heavy, too airy, too large,..........., like it or not
IA ordered it, so they have use it, in a normal world(not ideal world)
these excuses by IA would have resulted in a Court case all IA alla affsaraan
getting their........ i will leave it at that.

the problem is the Company A does something only when neighbour Abdul does something. If neighbour Abdul is happy with a donkey cart, Company A is happy with a mule cart. Give him a three-wheeler or small truck and he'll say its too big, drinks too much petrol/kerosene whatever, requires paved roads, requires maintenance, requires driving licence, insurance ityaadi ityaadi. all the other benefits don't percolate into Company A's simple mind. either that or a mule-breeder really keeps Company A's top rung happy with fringe benefits just so Company A continues to buy mules.

problem was that Company A thought that Abdul was getting nice ornate firangi windows and gave Company B the specifications to build grills for what Company A thought was a window as heavy, as ornate and as wide as the firangi windows of Abdul. Then Abdul didn't get any firangi windows and Company A lost interest in larger, more ornate windows and decided that the old style creaking windows were good enough..Company B went ahead and made the grills for the earlier windows having dejaain almost as good as firangi maal that also happened to cost about the same as re-fitting Company A's existing grills.

Now Company A says Company B took too long to make the grill. Its a classic case of institutional lethargy and backward mindedness.

Raveen · Post by **Raveen** » 26 Mar 2010 01:15

Kartik wrote:
niran wrote: Company "A" needed a new design window grill to prevent
thieves entering, so it got company "B" to design and manufacture
the window grill.

after R&D and testing and what not, company "B" have the finished
product, but company "A" rejects the product citing the reasons
that the grill does not fit the window, but company "B" asks
"it was you(company "A") who gave us the requirement and
measurements, and how can the grill be incompatible?

IA issued the GSQRs (is it GQRS) according to its need, Arjun is
the result of those, no? then how can IA rejects Arjun on the
ground of too heavy, too airy, too large,..........., like it or not
IA ordered it, so they have use it, in a normal world(not ideal world)
these excuses by IA would have resulted in a Court case all IA alla affsaraan
getting their........ i will leave it at that.
the problem is the Company A does something only when neighbour Abdul does something. If neighbour Abdul is happy with a donkey cart, Company A is happy with a mule cart. Give him a three-wheeler or small truck and he'll say its too big, drinks too much petrol/kerosene whatever, requires paved roads, requires maintenance, requires driving licence, insurance ityaadi ityaadi. all the other benefits don't percolate into Company A's simple mind. either that or a mule-breeder really keeps Company A's top rung happy with fringe benefits just so Company A continues to buy mules.

problem was that Company A thought that Abdul was getting nice ornate firangi windows and gave Company B the specifications to build grills for what Company A thought was a window as heavy, as ornate and as wide as the firangi windows of Abdul. Then Abdul didn't get any firangi windows and Company A lost interest in larger, more ornate windows and decided that the old style creaking windows were good enough..Company B went ahead and made the grills for the earlier windows having dejaain almost as good as firangi maal that also happened to cost about the same as re-fitting Company A's existing grills.

Now Company A says Company B took too long to make the grill. Its a classic case of institutional lethargy and backward mindedness.

So the IA is Borat and we all know his famous neighbour.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 26 Mar 2010 01:28

ramana wrote:So a better option is to acquire the Arjuns and base them at the border maybe in IBGs or holding corps to eliminate transportation on Ind Rail cars etc?

ramana, it is too early and premature to even talk about IBG; but as far as the Arjun and holding corps are concerned, they can be placed in the Independent Armored Brigade of these corps. For example, 140(I) Armored Bde of the 12 Corps. That itself will create requirement for 12-15 Regiments (including the present two regiments) - ~750-1,000 tanks..........

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 26 Mar 2010 01:35

Fidel,

The chart is not wrong.

They are referring to the Leopard 2A4, combat weight 55.15 tons exactly as in the chart. http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/mindef ... specs.html

If you would have looked more, you would have found it. 2A4 model is somewhat visually similar to Arjun as well.

Mobility ratios for later models suffer as the Leopard tank added more weight but kept a 1500 hp engine. So it makes more sense to take the Leopard 2A4 as a comparison.

Wickberg · Post by **Wickberg** » 26 Mar 2010 03:17

Mrinal wrote:Fidel,

The chart is not wrong.

They are referring to the Leopard 2A4, combat weight 55.15 tons exactly as in the chart. http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/mindef ... specs.html

If you would have looked more, you would have found it. 2A4 model is somewhat visually similar to Arjun as well.

Mobility ratios for later models suffer as the Leopard tank added more weight but kept a 1500 hp engine. So it makes more sense to take the Leopard 2A4 as a comparison.

I don´t get it. What´s the point of that chart? Comparing a Arjun from 2010 to a 30 year old German tank?

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 26 Mar 2010 03:26

Some gentlemen held that Arjun was copy of Leopard2A4. That simple chart shows there are differences between the two tanks with Arjun having edge in some areas. Another point is that Arjun is compared versus a tank whose mobility was better than those of later variants, which added armour but did not uprate the engine, hence its mobility parameters are decent.

Once they have Arjun MK2, which will also field some similar systems as on newest variants of the Leopard (with increase in weight as well), it makes sense to compare to newer variants. However, most of the changes will be internal, iterative and are not really suited for chart type display.

V_Raman · Post by **V_Raman** » 26 Mar 2010 05:55

is it possible to adapt kaveri for arjun as a gas turbine engine? abrams has a gas turbine engine.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 26 Mar 2010 06:53

V_Raman wrote:is it possible to adapt kaveri for arjun as a gas turbine engine? abrams has a gas turbine engine.

why ? is there an advantage to using a gas turbine engine that outweighs the disadvantages of
a) being a fuel guzzler
b) tactical disadvantages (infantry can't walk behind the tank due to heat generated)
c) maintenance and cost headaches in operating what is essentially a jet engine as against simpler diesel engines
d) problems associated with operating gas turbines in desert environments. (turbine blades have to be changed frequently as they are very quickly worn out by sand ingestion)

we might also ask why no other tank in the world has a gas turbine engine. IA itself decided long back, in early 90's that is doesn't want one. the arjun with SDRE diesel engine also has same/similar speed characteristics as the uber-TFTA abrams.

or should we have one just because the americans have one ? the abrams also has a torsion-bar suspension, should we then chuck away arjun's hydro-pneumatic suspension and put in a torsion-bar suspension in stead ?
incidentally, post GW-1 one IA general had such an idea that because the americans use it it must be better. he forced DRDO to make a torsion-bar arjun, which was (obviously) found to be much inferior to the regular hydro-pneumatic one and the concept was dropped like a hot potato.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 26 Mar 2010 07:45

Viv S wrote:C'mon gurulog help me out here.

Reposting:

Q1. How long do you reckon it would take the DRDO to come up with the Arjun MkII? Is 2015 too optimistic a figure? The Arjun's production line could run for two and half years with a second 124 tank order. All subsequent deliveries being the MkII.

Q2. What would the MkII comprise? Obviously you'd have a newer 1500hp engine, perhaps an improved armour composition... would adding wedge-shaped add-on armor à la Leopard 2A5 be feasible?

They might call this also as Mark 2.

A new 20 year tank development program “Future Main Battle Tank” (FMBT) is in the concept stage. FMBT is a turret less tank with weight class of 40 tonnes. The project will be a public – private enterprise.