Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

[Austin]

Ok here is some write up on Relikt ERA from its developer , since its obtained from paid site posting it in full.

RELIKT COMPLEX IS A RELIABLE PROTECTION
Valery Grogoryan Military Parade, No. 5, 2011

Valery Grogoryan - president, science director for JSC NII STALI (Research Institute of Steel), PhD (technical science), professor, RASRA academician

At present, the armor protection of even most advanced domestic tanks of type T-90 against high explosive antitank (HEAT) and armor-piercing discarding sabot (APDS) projectiles needs improvement. It follows from the expert evaluations of the most representative antitank projectiles and antitank guided missiles (ATGM) that, for example, penetration ability of the APDS of the tank guns of the ABRAMS M1 tank modifications is growing approximately according to the linear law with a factor of proportionality of about 35 mm per year. As regards the HEAT guided missiles, then alongside with the growth of the penetration ability of the warheads (WH) due to the increase in caliber, power of explosive charges and use of the precision technologies for manufacture of the warheads, a qualitative change in the principle of influence on the armor protection takes place. Specifically, we can see a transfer to the tandem warheads capable of destroying the reactive armor of the first generations, expansion of the delay time between operation of the main and auxiliary warheads, improvement of their effectiveness thanks to the scheme contrivances of different kinds, etc.

It is quite obvious that to maintain parity, we should find an adequate answer to improve for the armor protection of the domestic tanks.

The necessity of the urgent retaliatory steps to improve armor protection of the domestic tanks is also dictated by its higher role in the local conflicts where probability of use of the close combat weapons such as a handheld grenade launcher (RPG) with the HEAT grenades against the thin-armored side projections of the tank abruptly increases.

The specialists of the Research Institute were tasked to develop the appropriate armor protection complex. As a result, the RELIKT complex of the frontal armor protection was developed and entered service. Also developed were the reactive-armor special modules which were initially developed to protect the thin-armored BMP-3 infantry combat vehicles against RPG, and which well protect the side projections of the hull and turret of the tank against the widespread close combat weapons of type PG-9S.

The rear section of the hull (in the area of the engine compartment) and the turret is covered by the latticed screens to reduce by more than a half probability of an explosive jet from the shaped charge cone of the warhead of the antitank grenade launcher due to the violation of the normal operation of the warhead in case of a hit between the ribs of the screen.

Both complexes are principally new. Thus, the RELIKT complex employs a 4S23 element of reactive armor (RA) of high sensitivity and modern, more effective, propelling scheme where destructive and destabilizing influence on the ammunition striking elements (explosive jet, APDS rod) prevails relative to the thick armor plates propelled in opposite sides. In this case, the dominant contribution to the said destructive effect is made by the plate propelled in pursuit. Owing to fact that energetically a in-pursuit propelling is more advisable than an on-head propelling, the structures of such kind are more proof (in 4 to 5 times) against the APDS as compared with the KONTAKT-V RA series complex. At the same time we can see that the anti-tandem properties of such armor essentially increase, i.e. armor acquires better proofness against the most advanced tandem antitank guided missiles of type TOW-2A with a delay time of at least 400 us and with the penetration ability behind the mounted shape-charge-proof reactive armor of at least 1,000 mm.

Thus, the use of RELIKT on the domestic tanks is a meaningful step of protection of the domestic tanks against the majority advanced antitank traverse weapons designed to destroy a tank from the front.

According to the estimates of the specialists they expressed at the exhibition at Nizhni Tagil, RELIKT developed by the Research Institute of Steel is an adequate answer to the advanced antitank weapons. Today, it is one of the best armor protection complexes for the armor materiel and possibility of its installation both on the new, upgraded and being in-service tanks makes RELIKT really unique.

Protection of the tank side projections against the HEAT grenades was borrowed from the technical solutions developed for the light-weight vehicles. As applied to the protection of such light-weight vehicles, the solution of the task was drastically more difficult because of several limitations:

- it was necessary to initiate the explosives and dispersion of plates so as to prevent their destructive effects on a relatively thin principal armor;

- it was necessary to prevent transfer of detonation from the RA element initiating under the action of the explosive jet of the charge to the entire volume of their block;

- if possible, localize the area of damage by limiting it by the area of one or two modules;

- make the protective modules universal, bearing in mind simultaneous reinforcement of protection against the kinematic weapons such as bullets of up to 14.5 mm in caliber and the projectiles to the small-caliber guns.

The whole complex of the tasks listed above was solved in no small measure due to the development and acceptance for operational service of the RA element (index 4S24) with twice as little amount of explosive as indexes 4S20 and 4S22. This drastically increased, without reducing the effectiveness of the jet suppression, the design survivability when attacked by fire and practically eliminated flammability both of the RA elements themselves and of the modules on the whole that was a problem with the previous RA elements of type 4S20.

It should also be specially underlined that when mastering this complex, a very complicated task was solved to delay a leading portion of jet that by virtue of a certain inertial dispersion of the RA plates (especially when propelled in pursuit) had time to "slip" having at the same time a rather high penetration ability of at least one caliber of the warhead for a relatively thin principal armor.

It should be also noted that RELIKT allows installation on the tank of a stealth complex against precision weapons. The main component of this complex is a set of the NAKIDKA anti-radar multi-spectral composite material widely tested and well-proved.

Even a simple visual inspection of the vehicles shows that percentage of the so-called weak zones was essentially reduced.

If we take into account that all the represented protection complexes were only a part of the amazing work on deep upgrade of the T-90 tank that has been performed by the Uralvagonzavod practically for all aspects related to the improvement of the vehicle combat effectiveness, then we may draw a conclusion that both our army and the foreign partners in the event they buy such vehicle will obtain one of the world's best tanks capable of standing up to the today's threats.

However, the potential of growth both of protection and of the other combat properties of the vehicle have many latent reserves.

[Sanku]

Considering they are continuing with Rifled Gun for Mk2 they probably see merit in continuing with Rifled Gun , probably good enough for most task and for long range anti-tank shots beyond effective range of APFSDS they can use the missile now that they have that option for Mk2

Austin saab, even during the heydays of Arjun bashing, I don't remember its gun ever being disparaged in the media. No one even thought of cooking up a story about it (a la torsion bar). So if it ain't broke , don't fix it, no matter how much certain posters here are pained by us not following in Russian footsteps.

Apparently the makers of Leo and Abhrams did not get your note that they were getting swayed by Russikophile posters on BRF.



-------------

No need to do this you know.

[pralay]

wow,
whole "(tin?)Can Lovers Association" is active after long time:d
Fellow Indians shall expect a lot of BS about Arjun

[Kersi D]

we need matter/anti- matter Engine powered tank with Warp 9 speed and inter galactic range with Phazer Gun which can shoot 0.9 light years distance with possible up gradation option to TransWarp drive. I do not know.

You mean you don't know that our Rodina is already developing such a tank ?

Yes It is the T 1637373. It is undergoing secret trials on the Xczwyqphg plateau. (It is on Mars if you ignorant Indians do not know).

K

PS It is meant only for the IA, meaning only IA will buy it.

[Philip]

Gentlemen,as promised from my archives,the piece written 25 years ago about the helicopter coming of age and the advantages of attack helos-airborne cavalry compared to tanks.I am giving you the gist of the article from a British publication.

1986:
In fact,it came of age during the Vietnam War,best exempliified in the film,Apocalypse Now,starring Brando.During Israel's Lebanon War in 1982,Israeli forces destroyed 48 tanks for each helo lost.Each Syrian helo in turn,destroyed 15 Israeli tanks! "The biggest fright Israeli tank commanders have ever had",said a British expert,"they just could not see the enemy".Well,that was until the last Lebanon excursion when the Hiz using tandem warhead RPGs (which Austin has very knidly posted for us a Russian expert's remarks about armour proetction challenges,which some naughty boys jave been making fun of,tch,tch!) tokk out scores of Israeli tanks which were not supported by ground troops.

Paul Beaver,editor of Defence Helicopter World,writing at the time,said that one helo was worth 20 tanks.Another well known analyst Richard Simpkin,mainatained that the Russians "rate a combat force of 84 helos (requiring a total of 2000 men) as the equivlent of a tank diivision of 10,000 men and 500 vehicles! The Q asked, why then was the disparity so large between tanks and helos? The answer was that the land forces were dominated by cavalrynmen with "as much affection for the tank as their predecessors for their horses"!

"The trouble with Cinderella is that we have to find a Prince Charming",lamented one helo man,"some regard it as an expensive toy".
That viewpoint may have faded much over the last 25 years,but the statement about "cavalrymen" and their love for the tank has not.Recent conflicts have shown the virtues of the attack helo and the IA is on a huge acquisition plan for the Army Air Corps and rightly so.
"An Apache may cost 4 times that of a Leopard 2 and later models will be more expensive,but if it can destroy 20 tanks ,it is stoill an economic proposition".

"The helicopter's firepower will eventually force tanks to be so heavily armoured that they will become little more than barely mobile pillboxes"!

Gentlemen,The Russian expert's detailed analysis of the challenge facing tanks in combating modern projectiles and anti-tank missiles is bearing out this prophecy made 25 years ago.While the death-knell of the tank is a long way away,one still needs to hold ground by grunts,supported by tanks,the RMA in airborne attack capability of the "flying tank",the attack helo,is hastening its vulnerability.In fact,the attack helo is the evolution of the tank...with wings!

2011:
Mission statement.

"The Indian Army wants to enlarge its Aviation Corps and take control of all tactical air assets for use in the battlefield...the Army wants control not only over helicopters but also over fixed-wing aircraft that it has proposed to buy".

(Some sources say that the IA not only wants about 200 light helos Kamovs/Fennecs,the two doz. attack helos,widely believd to be the Apache,the armed Dhruvs,rolling orders for even more MI-17-Vs,LCHs,and heavy lift helos MI-26s/Chinooks.but apart from thesehelos,the IA is also believed to want upto 20+ MTAs fro its sole use for logistic duties.One may also see a future requirement for COIN /light GA strike aircraft like Tucanos,etc.

PS:Where does this leave the future of the FMBT/Arjun Mk-3 then? Tank development will go on (perhaps turretless,smaller, lighter,faster,3-man crewed tanks with heavier calibre guns that fire missiles too) ,but one is surely going to see more "metal" in the air,and we haven't even started talking about composites and long endurance,ultra-long,even upto a month+, UCAVs - unseen fire from the heavens raining down upon the "miserable men in the metal machines",of the kind that have painfully struck our dear friends across he border again and again!

[Surya]

negi

there have been discussions on limitations of ammo etc before. Rohit has more knowledge on that aspect.

The soviets went on from 100 mm to the 115 mm to the 125 mm.

105 mm gunned Centurions still tore them new holes. Once you see the insides of these Tin cans you will never want your men in such tanks facing adversaries armed with the opposing tanks.

Its lucky our western idiots do not have anything better

As Singha mentioned somewhere after the T55 the gap opened up.

Yeah CIA books might have hyped up the super duper T 72 ( I still have an old Soviet Military power which indicates the lighter, faster and better gunned T 72 ) but in reality it was not the case.

So no rant - there was a time and place I plumped for Russian equipment and maybe if something changes. But in armor seen way too many mangled Tin cans at close range to believe they are close equals.

[rohitvats]

The fact that russians have short-comings in terms of APFSDS is evident from the fact that they are trying to incorporate bustle mounted autoloaded and ammunition. That will allow them to use unitary rounds. As long as that traditional auto-loader is there, the APFSDS cannot go beyond a particular figure. And look at the irony - people talk about the merits of Russian ERA against western APFSDS rounds but miss the fact that if superior american/western rounds have problems (and afaik, americans/germans have newer versions), how will the russian APFSDS round behave against these very ERA equipped chinese or TSPA tanks!!!

[negi]

there have been discussions on limitations of ammo etc before. Rohit has more knowledge on that aspect.

The soviets went on from 100 mm to the 115 mm to the 125 mm.

105 mm gunned Centurions still tore them new holes. Once you see the insides of these Tin cans you will never want your men in such tanks facing adversaries armed with the opposing tanks.

Its lucky our western idiots do not have anything better

Boss you made a blanket statement to start with on Ru going with larger calibre SB guns; the point about limitation on ammo is again one of those arguments on the lines of putting horse before the cart. When the T-64 and T-72 designs were conceived they could accommodate the longest possible sabot rounds in use in those times, it's only in 80s when NATO standardized on the Rhienmetall's L44 and it's GD produced version with Abrams(it was earlier using a version of L7 gun) the long rod penetrators restored the balance of power in NATO's favour, the ammo limitations due to carousel type loader and such stuff only became an issue later (when Unkil introduced the M829 round) and are only relevant to the discussion around T-90 and other T-72 layout based designs. Today NATO sticks to the 120mm cal and Ru to 125mm mostly due to the logistics and not because one caliber is better than the other.

Whether a L7 can penetrate the T-72 armor or not has no bearing on this discussion, Ru MBT design philosophy like many of it's other weapon programs was based on the old adage i.e. "quantity has a quality of it's own" and when one would look at the USSR's map and it's terrain one would realize that it made sense.

As Singha mentioned somewhere after the T55 the gap opened up.

Well platform vs platform comparison wise the gap only opened after the M1 Abrams and Leo2 production lines opened up which was late 70s i.e. T-72s and T-64s had already been produced in significant numbers.

So no rant - there was a time and place I plumped for Russian equipment and maybe if something changes. But in armor seen way too many mangled Tin cans at close range to believe they are close equals.

Well after the WW-II when was it that the west fought someone even half as well armed as itself ? Ironically even in the WW-II it was the losses in bad lands of erstwhile SU which changed the course of war in Europe. Yes the tin cans are a no match against a contemporary western MBT but then latter were not around when tin cans were originally designed and produced so the comparison is misplaced in first place, it is like comparing a Mig-21 bison to F-22 .

[nachiket]

Austin saab, even during the heydays of Arjun bashing, I don't remember its gun ever being disparaged in the media. No one even thought of cooking up a story about it (a la torsion bar). So if it ain't broke , don't fix it, no matter how much certain posters here are pained by us not following in Russian footsteps.

Its not about bashing or supporting Arjun gun , my response to Sanku is more on pros and cons of each gun , If i say HESH round is not good for Smooth Bore it does not mean I am bashing Smooth Bore guns or smooth bore is poor choice.

Never said you were bashing. I was only trying to make the point that perhaps the Arjun designers never thought about making changes to the gun simply because the current one has no performance shortcomings.

[Surya]

err long before you get to M1 and Leopards , upgunned Centurions made hash of T 62s.

Yeah the tin cans were produced with qty in mind but whther that provides quality is doubtful.

It defintely did not help the Syrians ( am sure next you will bring training etc.)

[Singha]

I think the Chieftain was a pretty good prospect vs soviet tanks of its era too. a noble beast...son of centurion and father of challenger. kind of samudragupta of tanks.

the israelis seem to have used even modified sherman's and such to beat up arab tanks...i think they had centurions also...

we won our tank battles using AMX and Centurion tanks and there have been no tank battles thereafter. hopefully the t-series wont crap out on mass scale if subjected to wartime rough use. more worried about the t90 than t72 because the t72 saw extensive use in europe large scale exercises apart from saddam's army t90 has no track record other than rus army.

[SaiK]

Just wondering if Ajai Shukla's article is Shikandish enough for Bishma. I am sure there is lot of time ahead.. but I am beginning to think that way.

[Sanku]

Just wondering if Ajai Shukla's article is Shikandish enough for Bishma. I am sure there is lot of time ahead.. but I am beginning to think that way.

You are forgetting

1) This Bhisma is in Indian army

2) Ajai may be Shikhandi all right, but thats not Arjun thats behind him, look closer.

[Sanku]

It defintely did not help the Syrians ( am sure next you will bring training etc.)

Of course, because if performance of Arab armies is taken as a indicator then, Gnat is a better plane than Saber.

[SaiK]

sanku.. he does not look like karn at all. he has all tell tale signs of arjun. but then they both have common turret.

btw, please note the naming context: it is not IA vs ?, but within IA.

[Surya]

might be insulting to the syrians

their army was pretty competent. even the Israelis acknowledge it.


And the only thing the Israelis worry about is the Egyptian M1s

[negi]

Surya you are now shifting goal posts by bringing yom kippur war and such in this discussion , btw while you are at it the British developed the L7 gun (again higher caliber than the one on T-55/62) specifically to counter the threat posed by T-55 and 62 series so it's not like Ru was alone in the bigger caliber war hence your comment "I have never believed in Russian higher caliber tank guns which were desperate attempts to compensate for other problems" has little fact/data to back it. The need to up gun the tanks came from the fact that NATO was coming with more heavily protected tanks Chieftain being the one which prompted the Ru to come up with the 125mm SB gun.

[kvraghavaiah]

almost 40 years since the Arjun project was started.
Today; the engine, transmission,track,main infrared imaging equipment, fire control system and the design consultation ..are foreign. What technically critical part is indigenous?
The INSAS rifle also is being replaced now.
We do not have just a field howitzer or a good rifle gun of our own today.
We do not have a single real cruise missile. (barhmos is practically not useful for strategic purposes as its range is only 300km and that too 95%russian technology)
No meaningful indegenous aircraft at all.
shame on us. The directors and chiefs of DRDO over boast with full of lies after every copied missile success.

All because of lack of wisdom in Indians, who do not know whom to vote and what to think about.

[SaiK]

^^40:
-because it takes 72 to change attitude of people.

[ramana]

Philip, Always remember its the ground elements that will occupy and hold the ground. So helis are good to enable this and tanks to hold it.

Also I recall some 1976 NATO exercise where the MBB105 took out (simulated) US tanks in under five minutes. So it was understood that helis armed with ATMs were the assault breakers.

[Anujan]

Completely agree with kvraghavaiah.

The US with all its cruise missiles and nuclear submarines is planning to introduce the M1128, which is a British gun mounted on a Canadian chassis. This is to replace the Abrams (in some contexts) which has a german gun! So more foreign import to replace something with less foreign imports. Shame on the USA. They should collectively hang their heads.

Dont even get me started with the British and their JSF purchase, Australia and their Aircraft purchase, every defence item ever made by China and the "Oh we are engineers" Germans and their collaboration to make the typhoon. And those shameless Russians buying the Mistral ship! A superpower which cant even make an Amphibious ship! Not that the french are any better either. Their tankers are made by Airbus with critical components manufactured in Germany! A and swedes. Claiming Grippen is a local make -- while critical components like the engines imported from the USA.

The defence scientists of the whole world should hang their heads in shame for the lies they have given out.

[Philip]

Ramanna,I did write,"one still needs to hold ground by grunts,supported by tanks" and also referred to Israeli losses in Lebanon against the HIz,because they sent in their tanks without groud troops in support and were picked of like rabbits by the Hiz. The force multiplying effect of attack helos has beenw ell understood by the IA in parti=uclar and one is thrilled to see the IA's very ambitious for the Army Aviation Corps,where it will have a huge inventory of utility,armed Dhruvs,light attack,attack and heavy helos ,as well as their own MTAs for logistic duties.Wat is missing are a few squadrons of tuboprop battlfield and COIN aircraft like Tucanos.Armies are discovering their value which was seen in full bloom Vietnam.

A similar evolution has to take plavce with the tank,otherwise it will end up as becoming as said in the above post," a heavily armoured mobile pillbox"! The tank has to get samller,turretless for lower profilem,new composite armour, reduced weight,increased speed and range,with a 3-man crew,auto-loader,with a larger main gun that can also fire missiles,anti-air missiles too for combating attack helos and GA aircraft,NCW commns.,aviation style displays,etc.Apart from such new MBTs of around 40-45T,the IA will also need a light scout tank,withb a large gun,capable of being airlifted and serving in the Himalayas,plus the tropics too ,which can be used in amphibious operations too.

[Austin]

Never said you were bashing. I was only trying to make the point that perhaps the Arjun designers never thought about making changes to the gun simply because the current one has no performance shortcomings.

Exactly , the IA might have found that HESH is more useful for most targets Arjun will come across including fortified bunkers , BMP type light skin vehical ,truck etc that can be taken care by raw 20 kg explosive at sufficiently long ranges with better accuracy using rifled gun , you add specialised explosive like CL-20 then you get more bang for the buck.

For specialised target they have APFSDS and now missile like Lahat that they dont see the need for HEAT for long range engagements , so why change when it works well .....and with Mk2 i read they would improve the gun.

[Austin]

And look at the irony - people talk about the merits of Russian ERA against western APFSDS rounds but miss the fact that if superior american/western rounds have problems (and afaik, americans/germans have newer versions), how will the russian APFSDS round behave against these very ERA equipped chinese or TSPA tanks!!!

Superior as the Western APFSDS are for say certain RHA penetration figures , a long sabot is not necessarily a better sabot when you are dealing with armour composition.

There is a lot of assumption that one makes when designing a Sabot and when it has to deal with the kind of armour it faces be it ERA or Multilayer composite armour , you might keep on increasing the length to get better penetration and eventually the current US A3/A4 has reached to nearly 1 m , you might well guess after 30 more years of armour development we might well end with a sabot of 2 m or so if the trend is to linerly increase the sabot length.

So a good Sabot is one which has a optimium L/D ratio for a specific armour + era combination not necessarily longer or not not necessarily shorter. Since armour compostion between US , Germany , UK ,Russia , Israel,India might be different to achieve the same strength but using different layers , a sabot might show variable penetrating figures for different armour it faces , might work great for some may not so well for others.

So Western rounds might show great penetration figures of equivalent RHA , the slightly shorter Israel , Russian ,Indian sabot might work equally well for some kind of armour and might end up showing equivalent result.

Unless you have extensively tested a sabot with the armour you are most likely to face and then refine your sabot for a optimum LD Composition etc ,you end up making lot of assumption while designing your sabot.

So there are no gurantees that a Russian Sabot or the israel one we use may not work well or will work very well when facing a Chinese , Ukranian tank ...... a lot of factors will come into play not just a good sabot design.

[Austin]

Part II: Army’s delayed orders halts T-90 tank

[Austin]

It says HVF has to build a total of 700 more tanks that it is suppose to , So considering the order was for 1650 Tanks and 700 more needs to be built , do we have 900 odd tanks in service including direct imports , CKD and the 150 that we built so far ?

[Austin]

T-90s & Arjun MBTs At Ex Sudarshan Shakti

what is the fork like thing we see on the front chasis of T-90 ?

Do we see T-55 in action too in one of the picture ?

[Avik]

^^^^^

Mine Plough

[pragnya]

Part II: Army’s delayed orders halts T-90 tank

by any chance, is the delay (cap hopefully!!! ) related to Arjun "coming through" in the eyes of the IA with the changes incorporated as per its requirement and the subsequent validation trials and the coming summer trials with more changes incorparated??

if true that would be a game changer of sorts at multiple levels imo.

[Kailash]

^^^
IMHO, they are just being as slow as usual. Thought payment only goes in batches to Russia, the contract is already finalized, which i guess would include breaches/penalties etc.

Moreover, if Arjun production has to step up, we would have heard lot about components being imported. Orders should have been placed way back. If T90 itself is late, Arjun will be even more late !!

[Austin]

New Type 10 MBT from Japan at 50 T its looks good.

http://globalmilitaryreview.blogspot.co ... -self.html

[Singha]

to me it looks like a fairly small tank (note the 5 road wheels) of t90 size (50t) thats got the stealth treatment, good looking optics and the merkava style turret wedgy style cues.

its not in the class of the heavies but perhaps suited to japan's needs.

60t challenger/arjun/leo2 seems to be the minimum bar using current tech to qualify as a stand-up fight heavy with the merk and abrams belonging in the super-heavy category.

the Leclerc is somewhere in between...

[Austin]

A Medium or Heavy Tanks does not mean it has lower protection level , it simply means it has lower internal volume , protection level is dependent on Volume to Armour Ratio and not the question of its heavy as Abrams or light as Type 10 or T-90.

Both types have their advantage and their disadvantage but moving ahead the Type 10 of 50 T tank looks optimum when you look at strategic or tactical mobility other cascading factors that would end up depending on the choices you make , I think a 50 T tank is a good trade off when you have made sufficient advancement on areas like Active protection and Passive advancement in armour like NERA or even some modern ERA.

Ofcourse it would also mean going back to the drawing board and it can be a PITA when you have something thats known to work well for you , so you end up thinking why change when it works. Only few countries are working on new MBT most prefer upgrading what they have.

[Kersi D]

Only few countries are working on new MBT most prefer upgrading what they have.

Can you name them ?

K

[Austin]

Can you name them ?

K

New ones are US Abram M1A3 , Russia Universal Combat Platform Armata ,Japan Type 10

Upgrade almost all have upgrades to existing MBT , US M1A2SEP/Urban Kit , Germany Leo A7 , UK Chalyl 2 Upgrade , India Arjun Mk2 , Russia T-90MS, Chinese have their own stuff, Ukraine Opalt-M

[Nikhil T]

President Pratibha Patil scripts history, rides T-90 main battle tank

BARMER: After taking off in the frontline Sukhoi-30 MKI, President Pratibha Patil on Monday once again donned military fatigues to ride a T-90 main battle tank, becoming the first head of state to do so.

Dressed in black overalls worn by the personnel of the tank regiments, the 76-year-old President entered the exercise 'Sudarshan Shakti' here riding in the main battle tank with Army Chief General V K Singh.

Defence minister A K Antony also arrived in a tank to witness the massive exercise and was accompanied by Southern Army Commander Lt Gen A K Singh.

This is her second ride in a military vehicle as she flew the Sukhoi-30MKI fighter aircraft at the Lohegaon air base in Pune in 2009.

The President along with the defence minister will review the ongoing exercise in the deserts of Rajasthan involving over 50,000 troops, 300 tanks and 250 artillery guns.

The exercise also involves operation by aircraft such as Su-30 MKI, Jaguars, Mig-27 and Mig-21 AWACS and helicopters.

It will also put to test the newly-inducted communication and battlefield surveillance radars by integrating them with all the war fighting assets of the Army and the IAF.

The exercise will help the Southern Command to validate its war-fighting concepts while working towards 'capability- based approach' relying on a series of transformational initiatives, concepts, organisational structures and absorption of new age technologies.

What a shame MoD didn't arrange for her to do a tank drive in an Arjun!

[Singha]

the south korean k2 black panther is also a new tank thats enter mass production stage
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K2_Black_Panther

the m1a3 seems to be a combination of their urban warfare TUSK upgrade, new ammo types incl a copperhead type self-guided projectile and obviously new netcentric electronics and their associated beefed up internal power generators.

[Austin]

Interesting the K-2 won the first export order beating French Leclerc and German Leo ! The tank most certainly is good.

Given a political will and money Soko can develop many top end products.

[Singha]

in the last 50 years would it be fair to say the only major tank vs tank engagements have been:
1. Israel vs egypt/syria - shermans, pattons, M60, captured t-series vs t-series winner: israel
2. India -vs- Pak - centurions / vijayanta / T55 -vs - pattons winner: india
3. Iraq -vs- Iran - t-series -vs- t-series winner: no clear winner
4. usa+uk -vs- iraq - challenger/abrams -vs t-series winner: chally/abrams

to me it seems the merkava and the leopard of any mark have no combat track record against enemy tanks.
the merkava has some exp fighting ATGM teams, infantry ...
leopard has none of that either, except taking potshots at insurgent militias in bosnia maybe
leclerc has none either

the canikon EOS-1d handsome good looks soko and japan tanks have no track record. their users have not fought armour battles in 50 yrs.

we won our last tank battles using centurions. our t-series have not seen action since 1971 - whether against armour or infantry.

to me it seems khan is a good student and war a good teacher. they would have derived the max learning from their field use and worked to improve things. also they have the funds and political cover to fix it.
UK is a good student but lacks the funds and political backing. their chally2 is end of line and is being much reduced in numbers.

germany and france are probably trying to incorporate whatever they can from shared field reports and industrial espionage but khan will withhold some details for its favourite pet the abrams for sure.

israel now faces no real tank threat so the merkava seems more tuned to intimidation, anti insurgent fighting and force protection than a combined arms march on alexandria or damascus.

[Singha]

given the above, it seems we must cut our own cloth and keep developing and procuring the arjun to suit our context....esp in the realm of battlefield networking which is undergoing great change.

Rus has no real interest to fix the t90 and is using it as a cash cow to fund their future MBT program.