Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

GeorgeM · Post by **GeorgeM** » 29 May 2011 08:41

Cummins 1500 HP engine.
It sounded very inviting to reply since I work for company that is a direct competitor of cummins world wide engine business.

Basic engine - A 1500 HP is well with in the range of engines Cummins make. In today's engine business, given same engine displacement (cc) the difference b/w an engine on a school bus, garbage collection truck, mud moving machine or a tank is primarily in the ECM software. One might select a cam or piston or injector from your collection to tweak performance.

Validation - I don't think its going to be 5 years. It is more
like 6 months to a year. Also there will tremendous amount data already available from Mk1. Even a brand new engine won't take 5 years. So no dhoti colouring. The wide range of engine applications in today's world would make tweaking an engine for tank just another job. You should see how a 'simple' harvesting machine works in some CIS nations ( Kazakhstan ?) They drive it one way full torque in a straight line for 3-4 days, becoz that is the size of some of the farms there. Add to it the poor fuel quality, higher altitude, dust from harvesting and high ambient summer temp. It is one tough engine to tweak, and no less than a tank engine.

Cummins India - been around for a long time. One of the heavy engg MNCs that has done a great job in developing a robust local supplier base. This has helped them to keep cost down and give their competition a run for their money

Indigenosity and Cummins- well I wouldn't be surprised if some of these companies have Asia as their WHQ in 10-15 years. Did any of you notice the dollar going below the bottom support line recently ? Oh heck that's when they announced Bin Laden's killing and burial at sea

now things are back to 'normal'

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 29 May 2011 09:11

The only reason why I could think of they would go for new Engine for Arjun with higher HP is that would in some way offset the higher weight of Mk2 and they have big plans to mass produce Arjun , that would justify the risk , cost and effort associated with the new engine , it should augur well for the Arjun project and would give breathing space for the FMBT to come online.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 29 May 2011 09:29

also mtu would get a slap.they must have been adked but refused tech share for cummins to get their foot in

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 29 May 2011 09:30

we should hook into caterpillar too for other projs.usefuk looking portfolio

pragnya · Post by **pragnya** » 29 May 2011 10:59

Even if that were to be true and we move to cummins engine , Wouldt that be like Lic Manufacturing of Cummins Engine in India by its Indian subsidiary rather than direct import , to make it cheaper to procure hence it not an indigenous engine but a lic manufucture cummins engine

you are right that technology and IP would be held by Cummins unless we paid them heavily to make it a india specific development and share the IP (like UAE did for the block60 falcon) . CVRDE surely cannot develop a 1500hp world class tank engine from nowhere in a few yrs and hope it will work and integrate with Arjun....at best they can handle the integration and testing side of making it work with the Arjun and the punishing trials process.

does not seem so if one looks at what dr. sundaresh says. they are doing it indigenously 'with a foreign consultant' - possibly Cummins, though not clear.

“For engine development, we have formed a national team comprising members from the academia, the user, industry and the DRDO. We have also gone in for an international consultant,” said S. Sundaresh, Chief Controller (Armaments and Combat Engineering), DRDO.

http://www.hindu.com/2010/11/05/stories ... 981500.htm

it would be an indigenous effort. so no IP rights for the foreign company here though they may be paid hefty fees for sure.

this means they may work in similar fashion like the EADS worked/working on the LCA or how NAL had consultation for the 'composites'. no IP rights or any doubt about the indigenousness in both the cases.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 29 May 2011 11:55

That hindu article is talking about FMBT engine and not Arjun Mk2 engine , most of the recent article in Frontline etc does not really talk of any new engine so its a bit of mystery

pragnya · Post by **pragnya** » 29 May 2011 12:16

Austin wrote:That hindu article is talking about FMBT engine and not Arjun Mk2 engine , most of the recent article in Frontline etc does not really talk of any new engine so its a bit of mystery

i was not speaking of the 1500HP drdo engine wrt any specific tank. just highlighting the 'consultancy' part of it.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 29 May 2011 17:50

on the kanchan composite trail for arjun-mk2, how does it support lower weight say if it has to cover for NBC warfare. Any q-metal like in M1s I could think, but dunno what they have? some stealthy new radiation blocker composite?

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 29 May 2011 18:33

One shouldn't read too much into the Cummins engine statement from S. Sundaresh especially wrt the Arjun. The Mk2 will see no engine change, though they should consider switching to the MTU 'Euro Pack' and mate it to an appropriate gearbox.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 29 May 2011 19:06

yeah, google chacha reports many forums discussing cummins India, got the order for 1500hp. But that is hardly any deshi product since it is outright masa imported. What is the point in naming it bharat pack!?

---
http://defense-update.com/products/t/tusk.htm
BTW, any such slat armored Urban version for Arjun that can spray thousands of high projectiles per second?

sivab · Post by **sivab** » 29 May 2011 19:18

Austin wrote: Even if that were to be true and we move to cummins engine , Wouldt that be like Lic Manufacturing of Cummins Engine in India by its Indian subsidiary rather than direct import , to make it cheaper to procure hence it not an indigenous engine but a lic manufucture cummins engine

In addition to what Sidharth wrote, DRDO issued a tender in 2007 for engine development for Arjun. In that tender Cummins India was listed as a development partner. So they have had ample time to do whatever was needed by 2009.

Drishyaman · Post by **Drishyaman** » 29 May 2011 19:19

If there is going to be no change in engine in Arjun MK-II from MK-I, then how is MK-II going to be 90 % indigenous ?
Is the news of MK-II going to be 90% indigenous, just DDM?

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 30 May 2011 13:17

Gurneesh wrote:An old article...
http://frontierindia.net/arjun-tank-pro ... -30-months
The lead time for production of next batch is 30 months.
The delay in production is unavoidable due to delay in ordering
the production can restart in mid 2013

Chako's article quoted above talks about Arjun's production line being idle till 2013, Hindu article quoted above says

In phase I, 45 tanks will roll out with 56 upgrades, including the missile firing capability and the commander's panoramic sight with night vision.

In phase II, the remaining 79 tanks, with all the 93 improvements, will come off the assembly line. “By 2013-14, the first batch of around 30 tanks will go out,” Dr. Sivakumar said.

meaning, by 2013-14, first batch of 30 tanks would be rolled out, how can they achieve this if the line is idle till then???
Paging CJ!!!

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 30 May 2011 16:49

^^^^The new pdn run will beging by June 2013. The current pdn is at its fag end.

I am just documenting this

Comparative trials between MBT Arjun and T-90 Tanks

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 30 May 2011 17:49

chackojoseph wrote:^^^^The new pdn run will beging by June 2013. The current pdn is at its fag end.

I am just documenting this

Comparative trials between MBT Arjun and T-90 Tanks

Please spell check your posts as well as Frontier India Articles.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 30 May 2011 19:39

cheenum wrote:Please spell check your posts as well as Frontier India Articles.

don't ask for moon. I will give you a counter offer : report it on my email when you find it in FI. I will correct it.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 30 May 2011 19:48

chackojoseph wrote:
cheenum wrote:Please spell check your posts as well as Frontier India Articles.
don't ask for moon. I will give you a counter offer : report it on my email when you find it in FI. I will correct it.

put a comment in FI (with my own spelling mistake). the word "Comparative" was misspelt as "omparative"...

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 30 May 2011 19:57

Saw that. Thanks a lot. You have a mail.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 30 May 2011 20:49

chackojoseph wrote: Saw that. Thanks a lot. You have a mail.

Chacko, i can proof read your articles. I live in Khan land so i can do the needful when you are in bed and revert back to you.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 30 May 2011 21:15

Folks,

I have something on AFV engine developments in India. I will post it this week or ASAP. Its amazing. It includes 1500 HP for MBT's too.

Marten,

frontierindia at gmail dot com. cheenum, you know already.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 30 May 2011 21:26

Actually, chacko if you want you can start a proof reading thread in GDF, besides spell check, there may be certain semantics and strategic aspects before it may go public. JMT. Of course, nothing stopping admin brigade to demolish with their rifled 120mm turrets.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 31 May 2011 08:26

SaiK,

The mistakes arise when I am not concentrating. For example, when I am on road or in between meetings or absolutely loaded with work. Some are passed by the authors. For example, if its a press release. Combine it with the stated examples. check the coast guard thread. it was pure copy and paste from the release.

When I am at ease, it dosen't come up. The business of news is such that you have to be the first or even 5th. Anything below that is useless.

Anyway, as a punishment, I will post the AFV engines part today (without mistakes).

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 31 May 2011 09:25

DRDO works on National Mission for developing AFV engines

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 31 May 2011 15:06

^^^

The best part of the report is the upgrading efforts of the T 72 Engines. From my read (I counld have made a mistke in comprehending what is written) the existing Engine has been upgraded by the DRDO to make 1000 hps.

If this effort is sucessful then the T72 upgrade will take a whole new dimension by reducing costs and R&D efforts to see if a brand new engine will fit or not.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 31 May 2011 15:26

Yes, existing engine has been upgraded.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 31 May 2011 18:12

have we started upg the T-72's with that engine ? if so, that's bad news, it means token # of arjuns for the future and a complete waste of resources on a tank that is obsolete now and will stay so after the upg. I hope better sense prevails and they stop wasting money on upgrading that thing.

a much better use would be to retain the 700-800 T-72's are upg to CIA standard (I don't think engine upg was part of that ?) and start converting the rest to miscellaneous support uses like AD gun carrier and others, something like the tunguska and BMPT. the weight and power of those vehicles are very close to that of a T-72 chasis. the mobility and protection of such vehicles which can match tank forces on the move would serve our armoured formations well.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 31 May 2011 18:16

^^^Rahul M, I think upgradation of engine was part of CIA program.

That aside, using the hulls of T-72 to create Israel style APC would be great increment to our deficit in mechanized infantry asset.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 31 May 2011 18:29

Rahul M wrote:have we started upg the T-72's with that engine ? if so, that's bad news, it means token # of arjuns for the future and a complete waste of resources on a tank that is obsolete now and will stay so after the upg. I hope better sense prevails and they stop wasting money on upgrading that thing.

a much better use would be to retain the 700-800 T-72's are upg to CIA standard (I don't think engine upg was part of that ?) and start converting the rest to miscellaneous support uses like AD gun carrier and others, something like the tunguska and BMPT. the weight and power of those vehicles are very close to that of a T-72 chasis. the mobility and protection of such vehicles which can match tank forces on the move would serve our armoured formations well.

Hint: Tank Ex

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 31 May 2011 18:37

not only APC, consider the fact that we have only ~150 SP AA guns for our 4000 strong tank fleet and ~2000 strong BMP fleet !!! none at all for most of the indep bde's !
and these numbers are only going to go up, esp. the IFV's.
we would need 100's of chassis for akash, nag and the future LLQRM. all russian systems of this type uses vehicles of the GM family. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GM_chassis
we do not make any vehicle of this type. however, the T-72 chasis is very similar in terms of weight and power. both families are powered by engines rated at around 800hp, the GM family weighs about 25 t while the T-72 chassis at 30+ t but that comes with better protection, so the extra weight is an acceptable trade-off. what better way to use the T-72's ?

>> Hint: Tank Ex

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 31 May 2011 18:40

Grrr.... You are a lot smarter than that.

Hypothetically, a 1000 hp can help make a Tank ex. Arjun Turret + T-72 chasis. If you modify the turret (downgrade), uses T-72 chasis and add 100 hp engine, it could be a good combination.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 31 May 2011 18:43

understand that boss, but I am not sure that would happen either.
anyway, can you confirm that T-72's with the 1000 hp engine are already in IA service ? as part of CIA package ?

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 31 May 2011 18:47

The prototypes are.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 31 May 2011 20:57

Chacko / Rahul,

What makes you think the IA will agree to the upgraded T72 injuns.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 31 May 2011 21:31

because that will allow them to keep their beloved t-72 and block the evil arjun.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 31 May 2011 21:34

Why will they not use the T 90 injun on the T 72 and drive up the cost of the T 72 upgrade.

Prey tell................

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 31 May 2011 21:57

Perhaps Arjun start focusing on regiment oriented-ness.. GoI could go ahead and sanction few Arjun regiments, with new orbat and doctrine. The user has the rights to keep upgrading though.

Start with a minimum requirement of 5 regiments with 35 tanks each., and keep incrementing regiments by 5.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 31 May 2011 23:08

Picklu wrote:
Yup, i remember that autocar article where it even described HK. There is a very slight outside possibility that it is not included in Mk1 (like LAHAT firing capability) but given the date of that article, I believe we can safely assume that is not the case.

No slight outside possibility whatsoever that its not on the Arjun. The HK capability has been constantly demonstrated on the Arjun MK1 for over a decade now

However, the CITV advantage on T-90 still remains as per my understanding. Every technical spec on Arjun mentions CPS as Commander's Panoramic Day Sight. At night the commander is totally dependent on Gunners TI. I believe the output from the Gunner's TI is forwarded to commander's viewer.
On the otherhand, T-90 has a Gunner's TI plus CITV. Now the The CITV contains only a 2nd gen image intensifier and not 3rd gen thermal but still the bottomline is that at night(or may be in low light), the T-90 commander and gunner can look at 2 different objects/target whereas Arjun can not.
But then again, given the heat situation inside T-90, the commander most likely will increase the number of scar's in his forehead (due to banging his head in frustration) and the gunner will be able view upto the top of driver's head during nighttime

The T-90 does not have a CITV. It means Commanders Integrated Thermal Viewer. Note the second last word, it basically means a Thermal Imager. The CPS (Commanders Panoramic Sight) on the T-90S does not contain a thermal imager. It contains an image intensifier, which needs ambient light to intensify, and nor is it of the latest (and reasonably effective 3G) but a 2G+. It is very limited in operational conditions. A thermal imager instead, picks up infrared radiation from an object and can even work in pitch black conditions. Hence, the Army is seeking to replace it with a proper Thermal Imager.

The IRDE is basically fitting a locally designed thermal imager to the T-90 PNK-4S sight and its being evaluated in trials.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 31 May 2011 23:24

Karan M wrote: ...the FCS deal was struck with Delft Sensor systems....Delft was the name of the actual FCS partner for Arjun. Its actual FCS division was not from the Netherlands but Belgium. The unit was procured by ELOP of Israel. The holding company was based out of Netherlands.

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-106864054.html
http://www.oip.be/history.asp

... Delft asked Sagem to help out before its acquisition to make the FCS all European and the contract continues. The combine supplies the entire GPS - Gunners Primary Sight! Its tied to an Indian FC.....OIP remains the primary contractor and responsible for the integration.

http://hindu.com/fline/fl2805/stories/2 ... 510000.htm

‘Desert Ferrari' and more
Volume 28 - Issue 05 :: Feb. 26-Mar. 11, 2011

Arjun Mark I has imported content ..............and the gunner's main sight, which is from Belgium

The FCS will be license manufactured in India if need be & its India's choice to make on choosing the most advanced version as will come with the MK2. Will assist standardization. BEL-IRDE IGMS derivatives will be used for upgrades, IFV programs.

As regards Mk2.

http://www.hindu.com/2010/11/05/stories ... 981500.htm

The Arjun-Mk II tank will have a number of upgrades compared with Arjun-Mk I. Missiles can be fired from the former to destroy long-range targets and bring down attack helicopters. The tank's commander will have a panoramic sight with night vision.

The fourth upgrade is that Arjun Mk-II will have an automatic target tracking system which will add to the accuracy when firing on a moving target.

P. Sivakumar, CVRDE Director, said Arjun-Mk-II would have a total of 93 upgrades, including the advanced air defence gun system for firing at attack helicopters. The Army had placed an indent for production of 124 Arjun-Mk II tanks.

In phase I, 45 tanks will roll out with 56 upgrades, including the missile firing capability and the commander's panoramic sight with night vision.

In phase II, the remaining 79 tanks, with all the 93 improvements, will come off the assembly line. “By 2013-14, the first batch of around 30 tanks will go out,” Dr. Sivakumar said.

So, basically, integrating a new laser target designator for the LAHAT, a CITV, and ATS (Automated Target Tracking) for the FCS and integrating an AAD into the FCS (apart from the coaxial gun currently on the tank)

It will make an already potent system, even better.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 01 Jun 2011 07:24

Pratyush wrote:Why will they not use the T 90 injun on the T 72 and drive up the cost of the T 72 upgrade.

Prey tell................

This is avery Valid question. However, even the T-90 engines are not suited for Indian conditions : as per CVRDE. As per CVRDE, none of the ank engines are efficient including the MTU and T-90 engine. DRDO has worked with metals developed by Midhani and it has learnt techniques from its 1500 hp program and MTU program. So they logically applied it to T-72 engine.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 01 Jun 2011 07:56

http://www.newmantools.com/vortex.htm
may be something like this can work for cooling engines