Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT)

[Kunal Biswas]

They tested it point blank and from different ranges at all sides..

Probably posted in other thread..

T-90 also survived firing trials without ERA? Did it? i don't recall was the hit point blank?

 

[p2prada]

The Indian made T-90s carry the Kanchan. The 650 odd Soviet versions imported in kits does not.

I don't know which armour is the better one though.

 

[sayareakd]

Re: 2008 Arjun MCS

 

[Damian]

If the excess weight of ARJUN doesn't come form heavier armour all around, then from where does the weight comes.It is marginaly bigger than T-90 not a third bigger to have more weight.

Bigger weight comes from size of the vehicle, this is something widely known over the world.

Damian whole world knows what is the philososphy behind ARJUN. Impressed by the performance of heavier challenger tanks and shell shocked by the PATTEN fiasco in longovala, fearing that americans will supply heavier tanks to PAk,the Design philosophy of arjun was modelled on the heavier western tanks.

That's why it's design is based on the german LEOPARD.IF you say otherwise,Then I dont know what to say.Please google and check the history behind arjun development. The T-72 makers were not invited for the tech help for arjun.It is the makers of german leopard who gave design info.That's why it has RENK power pack.

Arjun design, especially in armor protection philosophy differs from NATO philosophy. As for Arjun research and development program, I am not interested in silly google, but I doubt that there is any good literature about this subject in english, because only such source can be credible.

I have seen pictures of blown up T-72 s that cannot withstand crude anti tank mines planted by the LTTE in srilanka.

One T-72 is not equal to second T-72.

I seen T-72M1's in Iraq blown in to pieces, and I seen T-72B's in Chechnya that survived multpile hits from modern anti tank weapons.

Different variants have different protection, and during soviet times, the best protected tanks they had, were never exported. For example T-72M1's for India were downgraded export model, and nothing special.

I have also seen many pictures in the net in the latest skrimishes near the russian border where T series tanks were blown up, turret apart.

Eh what?! Where the hell You seen an armed conflict near Russian border? You mean Georgia-Osetia-Abkhazia conflict? Most of these tanks were Georgian T-72AV/T-72SIM1 (T-72A is soviet equivalent to T-72M1), and very little much better armored T-72B's.

World over knowledge about tank warfare is common. And world over tanks are always heavier the better.
Tell me how many western MBTs follow this philosophy. WHy are leclarc,abrams,leopard all are in the arjun weight class?
Doon't they all know the efficient weight techniques of T series?Whether you are fortunate or unfortunate is not the issue here.

Well the funny thing is that Americans desire to reduce weight of the M1 series below 60 tons, but how they want to do that is by redesigning internal components of tank, reducing their size and weight. In the same time they want to improve vehicle protection even further by modernizing armor protection.

So no, heavier does not mean better, and pure weight is not a reason that tank is better or worser protected.

Also the russian BLACK EAGLE weighs 50plus tons compared to arjun's 55 tons. So not very dissimilr I think.Please correct me If I am wrong.The arjun's redesigned turret in Mk-II version results in a weight of 55 ton ,reduced from 58.5 tons for Mk-I.Is this correct?

You claim You have knowledge about tanks, in the same time You are using this silly name "Black Eagle" for a tank prototype that have proper designation code Object 640... "Black Eagle" is just someones fantasy.

As for Arjun Mk2, actually with all upgrades it will be definetly heavier than Mk1.

 

[ersakthivel]

Bigger weight comes from size of the vehicle, this is something widely known over the world.

It is like this.
First designers want to provide better protection for crew than a lighter tank.
So they choose bulkier and more heavy armour on turret and hull than a lighter tank.
To support this extra weight of armour, suspension become more heavier than a lighter tank.
To spread this weight lightly along the ground the tracks become heavier and broader than a lighter tank.
To move this extra weight a heavier engine is needed than a lighter tank.
SO the tank's weight increases overall , which will be natural.Isn't it?
That's why these tanks have better protection.
SO your general statement that other parts of the tank weighs more than the armour ,so the higher weight of other parts doesn't automatically lead to crew and tank protection is patently false

Arjun design, especially in armor protection philosophy differs from NATO philosophy. As for Arjun research and development program, I am not interested in silly google, but I doubt that there is any good literature about this subject in english, because only such source can be credible.

Define your "CREDIBILE SOURCE".Show one source that says ARJUN is not modelled on the western tank philosophy of LEOPARD.And I will accept.I'm sure you will never find one even if you google for ever.

Some people become nervous about google ,once they cannot depend on google to substantiate their statements. I find it often in the forum.Are you willing to tell the forum members every google link is a lie? Then what about kunal's statement in the above post? Please get over google phobia.

One T-72 is not equal to second T-72.

I seen T-72M1's in Iraq blown in to pieces, and I seen T-72B's in Chechnya that survived multpile hits from modern anti tank weapons.

Different variants have different protection, and during soviet times, the best protected tanks they had, were never exported. For example T-72M1's for India were downgraded export model, and nothing special.

SO are you saying that russians keep their best tanks with themselves and exporting downgraded models for India??????
Is that also case with T-90s?????? Then nations like INDIA should breakfree from the scam called Russian weapons and build their own tanks like arjun if they want good armour as per your suggestion!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Eh what?! Where the hell You seen an armed conflict near Russian border? You mean Georgia-Osetia-Abkhazia conflict? Most of these tanks were Georgian T-72AV/T-72SIM1 (T-72A is soviet equivalent to T-72M1), and very little much better armored T-72B's.

So you are saying every single Indian T-72 is substandard???????????????????????????
And we don't have T-72 B type in india. ANd this T72 Bs can withstand hits from ARJUn and ABrams perhaps????
How big is the armour improvement in T-72 Bs?please quote as I don't know.I am really shocked that all indian T-72s are no upto the T-72 B mark.

How much heavier the T-72 B's armour?Does the T-72 M weigh more than T-72 due to excessive armour protection? Are the quality of armour in T-72 Bs are better that they provide better protection with same weight.I am looking forward to your reply.

Well the funny thing is that Americans desire to reduce weight of the M1 series below 60 tons, but how they want to do that is by redesigning internal components of tank, reducing their size and weight. In the same time they want to improve vehicle protection even further by modernizing armor protection.

Ofcourse it is natural.That's the philosophy of western tank.Reduce the weight of all other supporting components and
add more armour equal to the weight saved , so as to offer better crew protection.It is a genuine desire of every heavy tank designer. What is so funny about it? It is your mistake that you are misunderstanding their effort to do the above is aimed at reducing the weight of the tank.

So no, heavier does not mean better, and pure weight is not a reason that tank is better or worser protected.

It is like this.
First designers want to provide lighter armour to get a lighter tank.
So they choose lighter and more lesser armour on turret and hull than a heavier tank .
To support this lighter weight of armour , suspension become more lighter than a heavier tank .
To spread this lesser weight lightly along the ground the tracks become lighter and narrower than a heavier tank .
To move this lesser weight a lighter engine is needed than a heavier tank .
SO the tank's weight decrease overall , which will be natural.Isn't it?
That's why these lighter tanks have lesser protection.
SO your general statement that that lighter tank can provide for better crew protection and the heavier tank'sweight comes only because of the other parts which are heavy flies in the face of designing logic.

As I explained in the first few sentences of my post ONLY HEAVIER TANKS which support heavier armour alone can offer crew protection. Never the other way around.So lighter tanks are much better protected than heavier tank generally? or in specific cases?

You claim You have knowledge about tanks, in the same time You are using this silly name "Black Eagle" for a tank prototype that have proper designation code Object 640... "Black Eagle" is just someones fantasy.

SO nothing in the name of balck eagle ever buit or proposed? then what is this?
Black Eagle (tank) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As for Arjun Mk2, actually with all upgrades it will be definetly heavier than Mk1.

I will post some source to disprove this ,and many websites are particularly saying than redesigned turret has resulted in weight reduced from 58.5 ton to 55 tons.

 

[ersakthivel]

Jane's - Impenetrable Russian Tank Armour Stand Up to Examination

Jane's International Defence Review 7/2007, pg. 15:

"IMPENETRABLE RUSSIAN TANK ARMOUR STANDS UP TO EXAMINATION"

By Richard M. Ogorkiewicz

Claims by NATO testers in the 1990s that the armour of Soviet Cold War tanks was "effectively impenetrable" have been supported by comments made following similar tests in the US.

Speaking at a conference on "The Future of Armoured Warfare" in London on the 30th May, IDR's Pentagon correspondent Leland Ness explained that US Army tests involving firing trials on 25 T-72A1 and 12 T-72B1 tanks (each fitted with Kontakt-5 explosive reactive armour [ERA]) had confirmed NATO tests done on other former Soviet tanks left behind in Germany after the end of the Cold War. The tests showed that the ERA and composite Armour of the T-72s was incredibly resilient to 1980s NATO anti-tank weapons.

In contrast to the original, or 'light', type of ERA which is effective only against shaped charge jets, the 'heavy' Kontakt-5 ERA is also effective against the long-rod penetrators of APFSDS tank gun projectiles, anti-tank missiles, and anti-armour rotary cannons. Explosive reactive armour was valued by the Soviet Union and its now-independent component states since the 1970s, and almost every tank in the eastern-European military inventory today has either been manufactured to use ERA or had ERA tiles added to it, including even the T-55 and T-62 tanks built forty to fifty years ago, but still used today by reserve units.

"During the tests we used only the weapons which existed with NATO armies during the last decade of the Cold War to determine how effective such weapons would have been against these examples of modern Soviet tank design. Our results were completely unexpected. When fitted to the T-72A1 and B1 the 'heavy' ERA made them immune to the DU (Depleted Uranium) penetrators of the M829A1 APFSDS (used by the 120 mm guns of the Cold War era US M1 Abrams tanks), which are among the most formidable of current tank gun projectiles. We also tested the 30mm GAU-8 Avenger (the gun of the A-10 Thunderbolt II Strike Plane), the 30mm M320 (the gun of the AH-64 Apache Attack Helicopter) and a range of standard NATO Anti Tank Guided Missiles – all with the same result of no penetration or effective destruction of the test vehicles. The combined protection of the standard armour and the ERA gives the Tanks a level of protection equal to our own. The myth of Soviet inferiority in this sector of arms production that has been perpetuated by the failure of downgraded T-72 export tanks in the Gulf Wars has, finally, been laid to rest. The results of these tests show that if a NATO/Warsaw Pact confrontation had erupted in Europe, the Soviets would have had parity (or perhaps even superiority) in armour" – U.S. Army Spokesperson at the show.

Newer KE penetrators have been designed since the Cold War to defeat the Kontakt-5 (although Kontakt-5 has been improved as well). As a response the Russian Army has produced a new type of ERA, "Relikt", which is claimed to be two to three times as effective as Kontakt-5 and completely impenetrable against modern Western warheads.

Despite the collapse of the USSR, the Russian Tank industry has managed to maintain itself and its expertise in armour production, resulting in modern designs (such as the T-90, the T-95 and mysterious Black Eagle) to replace the, surprisingly, still effective Soviet era tanks. These tests will do much to discount the argument of the "Lion of Babylon" (the ineffective Iraqi version of the T-72M) and export quality tanks being compared to the more sophisticated and upgraded versions which existed in the Soviet military's best Tank formations and continue to be developed in a resurgent Russian military industrial complex."

ofcourse there is proof for your claim that original T-72 non export versions are better than the export versions offered to INDIA.
Then holly shit...Why are we paying so much for ineffective RUSSIAN ARMOUR?


But there is a statement in the same forum which says
simply don't like the "impenetrable armour" talks, cause not a single tank is impenetrable, even if their protection can affect seriously the course of a battle, kontakt5 has still never been applied to the lower chassis, which is a pretty nice target area.
Let's not forget too that most successful modern attacks by ATR's and ATGM are done in a concentrative manner, several launchers on one target, and this is the key, once the ERA like system is used of, the kill becomes easier.


It seems to support the view that they are not impenetrable ,after all.

 

[Damian]

It is like this.
First designers want to provide better protection for crew than a lighter tank.
So they choose bulkier and more heavy armour on turret and hull than a lighter tank.
To support this extra weight of armour, suspension become more heavier than a lighter tank.
To spread this weight lightly along the ground the tracks become heavier and broader than a lighter tank.
To move this extra weight a heavier engine is needed than a lighter tank.
SO the tank's weight increases overall , which will be natural.Isn't it?
That's why these tanks have better protection.
SO your general statement that other parts of the tank weighs more than the armour ,so the higher weight of other parts doesn't automatically lead to crew and tank protection is patently false

No, You still do not understand, pure armor weight does not matter, what matters is size of the internal vehicle volume that need to be armored. The more space inside, the more armor is needed, the heavier vehicle is, it is a simple fact known from the beggining of the AFV's designing.

Define your "CREDIBILE SOURCE".Show one source that says ARJUN is not modelled on the western tank philosophy of LEOPARD.And I will accept.I'm sure you will never find one even if you google for ever.

Some people become nervous about google ,once they cannot depend on google to substantiate their statements. I find it often in the forum.Are you willing to tell the forum members every google link is a lie? Then what about kunal's statement in the above post? Please get over google phobia.

Google is not credible source. Listen I do not know how well educated You are, but if for You, google is credible source then sorry, for me You are nothing more than poor educated peasant. On university my teachers said me clearly, the only credible source can be book with proper bibliography, or document, other sources can't be seen as credible untill You will confront it with credible source.

As for Arjun not being modelled in western tank philosophy, this are my and not only main conclusions after analizing vehicle design and armor placement. Only because it is similiar to Leopard 2, does not mean it is same or as good as Leopard 2 or any other western tank.

SO are you saying that russians keep their best tanks with themselves and exporting downgraded models for India??????
Is that also case with T-90s?????? Then nations like INDIA should breakfree from the scam called Russian weapons and build their own tanks like arjun if they want good armour as per your suggestion!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Not Russians, are You even familiar with history of Russia? When T-72's were exported back then, there was a Soviet Union, now there is different state Russian Federation that have different economic system, and different policy, actually Indian T-90S with welded turret is somewhat better armored than Russian T-90A.

So you are saying every single Indian T-72 is substandard???????????????????????????
And we don't have T-72 B type in india. ANd this T72 Bs can withstand hits from ARJUn and ABrams perhaps????
How big is the armour improvement in T-72 Bs?please quote as I don't know.I am really shocked that all indian T-72s are no upto the T-72 B mark.

How much heavier the T-72 B's armour?Does the T-72 M weigh more than T-72 due to excessive armour protection? Are the quality of armour in T-72 Bs are better that they provide better protection with same weight.I am looking forward to your reply.

Yes, Indian T-72M1 are within soviet standards inferior tank to T-72B, because T-72M1 was designed as inferior, downgraded export tank.

As for T-72B protection, it can withstand some types of ammunition, some other not, Arjun do not fire modern APFSDS ammunition, so I am preaty sure that T-72B is immune to Arjun ammunition, Americans use better ammunition tough.

As for the weight, I don't remember how much increase in weight had T-72B over previous models.

Ofcourse it is natural.That's the philosophy of western tank.Reduce the weight of all other supporting components and
add more armour equal to the weight saved , so as to offer better crew protection.It is a genuine desire of every heavy tank designer. What is so funny about it? It is your mistake that you are misunderstanding their effort to do the above is aimed at reducing the weight of the tank.

You see, funny it is because Russians and Ukrainian do the same, reduce size and weight of internal components to make vehicle lighter and improve protection. Newest T-90MS weight is 48 tons, the Ukrainian T-84M Oplot is even heavier, 51 tons.

It is like this.
First designers want to provide lighter armour to get a lighter tank.
So they choose lighter and more lesser armour on turret and hull than a heavier tank .
To support this lighter weight of armour , suspension become more lighter than a heavier tank .
To spread this lesser weight lightly along the ground the tracks become lighter and narrower than a heavier tank .
To move this lesser weight a lighter engine is needed than a heavier tank .
SO the tank's weight decrease overall , which will be natural.Isn't it?
That's why these lighter tanks have lesser protection.
SO your general statement that that lighter tank can provide for better crew protection and the heavier tank'sweight comes only because of the other parts which are heavy flies in the face of designing logic.

As I explained in the first few sentences of my post ONLY HEAVIER TANKS which support heavier armour alone can offer crew protection. Never the other way around.So lighter tanks are much better protected than heavier tank generally? or in specific cases?

It depends on design. You are still thinking in WWII category, not in modern.

SO nothing in the name of balck eagle ever buit or proposed?

As I said, "Black Eagle" is just someones fancy creation to the prototype tank with official GABTU designation code Object 640.

I will post some source to disprove this ,and many websites are particularly saying than redesigned turret has resulted in weight reduced from 58.5 ton to 55 tons.

As far as I seen from official Indian sources, the weight of tank will increase not decrease.

 

[p2prada]

As far as I seen from official Indian sources, the weight of tank will increase not decrease.

Livefist: India's Arjun Mk.2 Tank Revealed

There is an interview with the CVRDE Director Sivakumar, the company which designed the Arjun.

The Arjun Mk-2 will see the tank weight increase from 62 to 67 tonnes, as a result of specific requirements from the user — which include additions such as the track width, mine plough and Explosive Reactive Armour (ERA) on the glacis plate, as well as the front of the turret. These two requirements alone will add three tonnes to the weight of the Arjun Mk-1. Along with other additions, the Mk-2 is expected to top out at 67 tonnes.

Looking at the interview, current Mk1 weight is 62 tons and Mk2 will be 67 tons.

 

[ersakthivel]

No, You still do not understand, pure armor weight does not matter, what matters is size of the internal vehicle volume that need to be armored. The more space inside, the more armor is needed, the heavier vehicle is, it is a simple fact known from the beggining of the AFV's designing.

The size of the internal volume incraeses only for the compartmentalisation of ammunitions which is an added safety feature with blow out panels.No one will add superfluous weight and volume to tanks in their right minds.

Google is not credible source. Listen I do not know how well educated You are, but if for You, google is credible source then sorry, for me You are nothing more than poor educated peasant. On university my teachers said me clearly, the only credible source can be book with proper bibliography, or document, other sources can't be seen as credible untill You will confront it with credible source.

All I asked you is to provide one credible source that says ARJUN is not modelled on LEOPARD.It may be google may not be google.Because you are saying things exactly opposite of all availabe literature on ARJUN.Then why is RENK suspension on it?

As for Arjun not being modelled in western tank philosophy, this are my and not only main conclusions after analizing vehicle design and armor placement. Only because it is similiar to Leopard 2, does not mean it is same or as good as Leopard 2 or any other western tank.

Well that's subjective.Israelis call ARJUN DESSERT FERRARI and you are calling them not as good as any western tanks.Purely subjective.They are puzzled at the "GRAND FUTURE MBT-55 tons" SCHEME OF INDIAN ARMY.One senior israeli tank expert said that tank designs are iterative and arjun must be fine tuned to FMBT status. Not another new design.Ofcourse there may be room for improvement.But are you sure it's armour is substandard than western tanks?

Not Russians, are You even familiar with history of Russia? When T-72's were exported back then, there was a Soviet Union, now there is different state Russian Federation that have different economic system, and different policy, actually Indian T-90S with welded turret is somewhat better armored than Russian T-90A.

My surprise was regarding the T-72s indian army is still madly in love with junk level crew protection and resisting arjun as overweight

Yes, Indian T-72M1 are within soviet standards inferior tank to T-72B, because T-72M1 was designed as inferior, downgraded export tank.

As for T-72B protection, it can withstand some types of ammunition, some other not, Arjun do not fire modern APFSDS ammunition, so I am preaty sure that T-72B is immune to Arjun ammunition, Americans use better ammunition tough.

Please dont give pretty sure judgements so soon.I have seen much in LCA tejas thread.you are pretty sure that ," Arjun do not fire modern APFSDS ammunition"

As for the weight, I don't remember how much increase in weight had T-72B over previous models.

SO without weight increase they cannot give more protection.Please note you are starting to contradict yourself.You are saying through out your previous posts that heavier tanks doesn't neccassarily mean more protection.SO how come this statement ?

You see, funny it is because Russians and Ukrainian do the same, reduce size and weight of internal components to make vehicle lighter and improve protection. Newest T-90MS weight is 48 tons, the Ukrainian T-84M Oplot is even heavier, 51 tons.



It depends on design. You are still thinking in WWII category, not in modern

designers of M1A1 ABRAMS are also stuck in WW-II times like me ,perhaps

.



As I said, "Black Eagle" is just someones fancy creation to the prototype tank with official GABTU designation code Object 640.



As far as I seen from official Indian sources, the weight of tank will increase not decrease.

Just quote one source that arjun MK-II weighs more,then we will analyze how official it is?whether it is with mine ploughs and extra ERA armour plus or just plain Mk_II whose weight that increased.because when comparision indian media always uses to compare the short ton weight of arjun (including all add ons)to normal tonnage of T-90 without any add ons .Most of them are ............well, I don't want to comment and spoli the nice atmosphere here. There are statements all over the net even in wiki saying that redesigned turret has resulted in weight reduction from 58.5 to 55 ton on mk-II.Are they all false?


Also please clarify whether T-72B is heavier than T-72M1? If not then how come they offer better protection than T-72M1?

Also

 

[Damian]

The size of the internal volume incraeses only for the compartmentalisation of ammunitions which is an added safety feature with blow out panels.No one will add superfluous weight and volume to tanks in their right minds.

Not really, You know that western tanks are not very spacious inside compared to Arjun?

All I asked you is to provide one credible source that says ARJUN is not modelled on LEOPARD.It may be google may not be google.Because you are saying things exactly opposite of all availabe literature on ARJUN.Then why is RENK suspension on it?

I can also say that the most credible source here is tank design itself. RENK suspension? Haha You mean transmission ;P, Merkava Mk4 also use RENK transmission, does it make it modelled after Leopard 2?

Well that's subjective.Israelis call ARJUN DESSERT FERRARI and you are calling them not as good as any western tanks.Purely subjective.They are puzzled at the "GRAND FUTURE mbT" SCEME OF INDIAN ARMY.One senior israeli tank expert said that tank designs are iterative and arjun must be fine tuned to FMBT status. Not another new design.Ofcourse there may be room for improvement.But are you sure it's armour is substandard than western tanks?

Of course I'am sure that Arjun armor is not as effective as NATO tanks armor, there is difference of decades of research and development work as well as practical experiences. USA and UK started work on composite armors in WWII, actually the first tank ever tested was M4A3 Sherman with addon modular HCR2 composite armor. So this makes difference.

My surprise was regarding the T-72s indian army is still madly in love with junk level crew protection and resisting arjun as overweight

Indian Army have T-90S, which is better than T-72M1.

Please dont give pretty sure judgements so soon.I have seen much in LCA tejas thread.

You mean about Arjun APFSDS ammunition? It is not assumption, it is a fact, the shorter is penetrator the worse is penetration level, I seen Arjun APFSDS ammunition penetrator, it is early 1980's standard in lenght and diameter.

SO without weight increase they cannot give more protection.Please note you are starting to contradict yourself.You are saying through out your previous posts that heavier tanks doesn't neccassarily mean more protection.SO how come this statement ?

No, You do not understand that composite armor works differently than homogeneus armor. It can provide better protection with less weight. Great example here is T-64 that with weight of 38 tons only in 1960's had better protection that heavy tank of that period with weight of more than 50 tons. Think about this.

designers of M1A1 ABRAMS are also stuck in WW-II times like me ,perhaps

No they didn't, M1 is just bigger tank, this is why such weight increase, besides this there were armor upgrades from 1980 to 2012, next armor upgrade is currently under development.

Just quote one source that arjun MK-II weighs more,then we will analyze how official it is?whether it is with mine plouhs and extra ERA armour plus or just plain Mk_II whose weight that increased. There are statements all over the net even in wiki saying that redesigned turret has resulted in weight reduction from 58.5 to 55 ton on mk-II.Are they all false?

it seems they are false. May I ask You, how old are You? No offence but Your chaotic writing style makes it difficult to read and answer.

 

[ersakthivel]

Not really, You know that western tanks are not very spacious inside compared to Arjun?

If western tanks are not as spacious as arjun,then it contradicts your previous statement "that space increase inside the tank leads to weight increase".Because all western tanks are in the same weight class of arjun.

I can also say that the most credible source here is tank design itself. RENK suspension? Haha You mean transmission ;P, Merkava Mk4 also use RENK transmission, does it make it modelled after Leopard 2?



Of course I'am sure that Arjun armor is not as effective as NATO tanks armor, there is difference of decades of research and development work as well as practical experiences. USA and UK started work on composite armors in WWII, actually the first tank ever tested was M4A3 Sherman with addon modular HCR2 composite armor. So this makes difference.

you can go to the link that kunal posted and check it for yourself.I'm sure you have never seen ARJUN's armour's charecteristics. subjective statement once again.

Indian Army have T-90S, which is better than T-72M1.



You mean about Arjun APFSDS ammunition? It is not assumption, it is a fact, the shorter is penetrator the worse is penetration level, I seen Arjun APFSDS ammunition penetrator, it is early 1980's standard in lenght and diameter.



No, You do not understand that composite armor works differently than homogeneus armor. It can provide better protection with less weight. Great example here is T-64 that with weight of 38 tons only in 1960's had better protection that heavy tank of that period with weight of more than 50 tons. Think about this.

go to this link---http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-72
T-72M
Export "Monkey model" version, similar to T-72A but with thinner armour and downgraded weapon systems. Also built in Poland and former Czechoslovakia.


Now your lie that lighter tanks provide equal protection than heavier tanks is nailed.

Thanks.
whether it is composite or homogenous more weight of the armour leads to more protection.that's my point.

No they didn't, M1 is just bigger tank, this is why such weight increase, besides this there were armor upgrades from 1980 to 2012, next armor upgrade is currently under development.



it seems they are false. May I ask You, how old are You? No offence but Your chaotic writing style makes it difficult to read and answer.

Well argue the points. It seems from your replies that you pretty much understand what I said. Now you have started passing subjective judgements without any source.

 

[p2prada]

it seems they are false. May I ask You, how old are You? No offence but Your chaotic writing style makes it difficult to read and answer.

He has comprehension issues and the reader does not know what he is talking about most of the times. You are the 4th guy who has come to this conclusion, and he has had discussions with 4 guys since he joined, including you.

Just ignore him. All those who started a discussion with him are ignoring him.

 

[ersakthivel]

He has comprehension issues and the reader does not know what he is talking about most of the times. You are the 4th guy who has come to this conclusion, and he has had discussions with 4 guys since he joined, including you.

Just ignore him. All those who started a discussion with him are ignoring him.

every one knows your comprehension level. Just read the previous post where I nailed DAMIAN's lie.You seem to be a wee bit too late.

BTW i miss your expertise on LCA very much.You are not posting much nowadays. Plese read the full conversation between me and damian.You have intervened at the most inapporpriate time as usual.

Not enough time for you to save your friend DAMIAN from my poor comprehension,perhaps.

 

[Damian]

If western tanks are not as spacious as arjun,then it contradicts your previous statement "that space increase inside the tank leads to weight increase".Because all western tanks are in the same weight class of arjun.

It does not contradicts any of my statements, Western tanks are less spacious inside than Arjun, but more spacious than Soviet tanks. Simple.

you can go to the link that kunal posted and check it for yourself.I'm sure you have never seen ARJUN's armour's charecteristics. subjective statement once again.

And? Contrary to You I actually seen composite armors photographs of different tanks, some still classified, as well as I read some documents and other materials about them, and no, these were not silly Wikipedia od google.

T-72M
Export "Monkey model" version, similar to T-72A but with thinner armour and downgraded weapon systems. Also built in Poland and former Czechoslovakia.
Now your lie that lighter tanks provide equal protection than heavier tanks is nailed.

Thanks.
whether it is composite or homogenous more weight of the armour leads to more protection.that's my point.

Where did I lied? As I said, world is not simple, there are no simple explanations. T-64 weighting 38 tons provided better protection than for example M103 weighting more than 50 tons, while in the same time T-64 will provide less protection than M1A2SEP v2 weighting 63,1 tons. Simple as that, there is weight, internal volume, overall vehicle size and also how advanced armor itself is.

Well argue the points. It seems from your replies that you pretty much understand what I said. Now you have started passing subjective judgements without any source.

When did the last time You used any source.

every one knows your comprehension level. Just read the previous post where I nailed DAMIAN's lie.You seem to be a wee bit too late.

No lie here, only You can't understand how complex is subject of armored vehicles protection. Designing aircraft is easier than designing proper protection that will not exceed vehicle size and weight limits and in the same time will provide efficent protection.

Good example of Your lack understanding here is for example Arjun armor tests.

It is said that armor was tested by firing projectiles point blank range, ok cool, but anyone ever asked what projectiles were fired?

No of course no, this is how manipulation works, say something that lesser minds will take as important information, and do not say the most important one.

Indian Army generally do not use modern APFSDS ammunition, not modern in the NATO standards. Neither for T-72M1, neither for T-90S, neither for Arjun.

 

[ersakthivel]

It does not contradicts any of my statements, Western tanks are less spacious inside than Arjun, but more spacious than Soviet tanks. Simple.



And?



Where did I lied? As I said, world is not simple, there are no simple explanations. T-64 weighting 38 tons provided better protection than for example M103 weighting more than 50 tons, while in the same time T-64 will provide less protection than M1A2SEP v2 weighting 63,1 tons. Simple as that, there is weight, internal volume, overall vehicle size and also how advanced armor itself is.



When did the last time You used any source.



No lie here, only You can't understand how complex is subject of armored vehicles protection. Designing aircraft is easier than designing proper protection that will not exceed vehicle size and weight limits and in the same time will provide efficent protection.

T-72M
Export "Monkey model" version, similar to T-72A but with thinner armour and downgraded weapon systems. Also built in Poland and former Czechoslovakia.

what is the meaning of this .You have said through out your post that T-72 M offers much protection than T-72 A.Now this statement says that it is only due to the fact that the T-72 m's heavier armour this is happening. Now how can you say ARJUN with bulker armour can't have more protection than lighter armour of T-90s?
Since both are composites, if we apply the same analogy of T-72 M and T-72 A ,then ARjun should have a higher crew protection levels .Is it not?

that proves my posts as right.Isn't it? Because your statement has been corraborated by JANES defence weekly also.

 

[ersakthivel]

It does not contradicts any of my statements, Western tanks are less spacious inside than Arjun, but more spacious than Soviet tanks. Simple.



And? Contrary to You I actually seen composite armors photographs of different tanks, some still classified, as well as I read some documents and other materials about them, and no, these were not silly Wikipedia od google.



Where did I lied? As I said, world is not simple, there are no simple explanations. T-64 weighting 38 tons provided better protection than for example M103 weighting more than 50 tons, while in the same time T-64 will provide less protection than M1A2SEP v2 weighting 63,1 tons. Simple as that, there is weight, internal volume, overall vehicle size and also how advanced armor itself is.



When did the last time You used any source.



No lie here, only You can't understand how complex is subject of armored vehicles protection. Designing aircraft is easier than designing proper protection that will not exceed vehicle size and weight limits and in the same time will provide efficent protection.

Good example of Your lack understanding here is for example Arjun armor tests.

It is said that armor was tested by firing projectiles point blank range, ok cool, but anyone ever asked what projectiles were fired?

No of course no, this is how manipulation works, say something that lesser minds will take as important information, and do not say the most important one.

Indian Army generally do not use modern APFSDS ammunition, not modern in the NATO standards. Neither for T-72M1, neither for T-90S, neither for Arjun.

They have access to all modern ammunitions through their tie ups with israelis. The Israelis are heavily involved in finessing the arjun. SO by the same token if arjun uses NATO standard APFSDS it can get through other lighter armours.Is it right.Nothing prevents arjun from having ammunition like this in future.

SO you can argue forever. But heavier armour has higher protection and heavy tanks are heavy since they support heavier armour.It is always true. Whoever may be the expert here.

i don't want to drag it any further.thanks

 

[Damian]

You still do not understand, weight per se is not indicator of protection. And composite armor, well there are many different composite armors, one are better, one worser.

I will ask again, how old are You, because I doubt I'am discussing with adult person.

And please, purchase some good books about tanks written by such authors like Jentz, Hunnicutt, Zaloga, Griffin and many more. Maybe then You will understand.

 

[ersakthivel]

You still do not understand, weight per se is not indicator of protection. And composite armor, well there are many different composite armors, one are better, one worser.

I will ask again, how old are You, because I doubt I'am discussing with adult person.

And please, purchase some good books about tanks written by such authors like Jentz, Hunnicutt, Zaloga, Griffin and many more. Maybe then You will understand.

Tell me which good book that teaches me heavier tanks dont offer higher protection than lighter tanks ,when the armour material used are of same quality. I will immediately buy it.When you have completely understood each and every one my questions and answered them in a co herent way ,what is my age got to do with it?

why is it all experts hate google. When all scholorly articles are published in PDF format so that anyone can access?

 

[Damian]

But who says that quality of armor is the same?

I said it earlier, M1A2SEP v2 might have better armor than T-90S, but this does not mean Arjun have also better armor than both, not matters the weight. Do You understand that there is not single composite armor standard?

 

[ersakthivel]

Arjun Mk.2 Main Battle Tank | Military-Today.com
link which says it is modelled on LEOPARD.
which also says that the weight is reduced to 55 tons.I don't whether this is with or without ERA and other add ons. I will clarify and post it later if it is correct.