Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT) Mark II

[TrueSpirit]

The turret from the sides seems to be well protected with curves but the front seems flat... why this? Any direct impact in the flat front would mean damage.

Yes, flat front is something that IA dislikes the most & refers to it as a vintage design. I am sure, FMBT program would address this major design flaw.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Arjun have a thick Armour at front consist of Kanchan Armour, Over it is Heavy ERA which is curved..

Flat / Curved Armour at frontal arc were an part of concern before composite Armour came into play, In today it matter most how good one`s composite Armour is..

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

Same can be observed on T-90S, Indian T-90S use Arjun`s Kanchan composite Armour..

T-90 turret unmounted without era and gun and others

 

[rock127]

Yes, flat front is something that IA dislikes the most & refers to it as a vintage design. I am sure, FMBT program would address this major design flaw.

Actually the curves needs to be in 1 direction ie upwards so that it' doesn't hit the tank anywhere but here the curve is on both sides so if the shell hits the lower curve it might hit the turret base badly.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Debated quite often before not anymore, but for you simple layman language would do..

1. Military tanks use different transmission / gear and very different engine compare to you home car or Suv..

2. Military tanks are design for battlefield requirement not for commuting and racing purposes, these are for fighting purpose..

As Western design engine are transmission are very good and Arjun share similar design its preform-ace is better than most eastern tanks..

More experts can help you also : @Damian, @ersakthivel, @Keshav Murali, @militarysta

Yes it is acceleration speed is often more important then top speed but I wonder what might be the acceleration speed for a vehicle topping at 58 kmph , How much, is still a debate.

 

[rock127]

Debated quite often before not anymore, but for you simple layman language would do..

1. Military tanks use different transmission / gear and very different engine compare to you home car or Suv..

2. Military tanks are design for battlefield requirement not for commuting and racing purposes, these are for fighting purpose..

As Western design engine are transmission are very good and Arjun share similar design its preform-ace is better than most eastern tanks..

More experts can help you also : @Damian, @ersakthivel, @Keshav Murali, @militarysta

Ok so why we are going for heavier tanks when tanks are going lighter? For example US and Paki tanks are lighter.

Also we need lighter tanks for China.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

US is going for both ways heavy to against heavy resistance as well as light for quick deployment, Same as we do ( Heavy Armour over thar, Lighter Armour over mountains ) ..

Almost all Western tanks are getting up-Armour kit and getting more heavy based on there experience over astan and other conflicts..

Ok so why we are going for heavier tanks when tanks are going lighter? For example US and Paki tanks are lighter.

Also we need lighter tanks for China.

 

[Damian]

Well when it comes to movement speed. You can't really go with max speed and expect that stabilization of turret and main gun will keep up. This is why max seed when moving forward it is possible to fire on the move is around 45 to 50 kph. In difficult terrain the max speed is around 30 to 40 kph, and in such terrain to efficently fire on the move, you would reather want to move slower.

What is even more important than maximum speed is acceleration of vehicle, so it can more quickly change positions.

IMHO te most promising transmission right now is CVT type, that permitts to have the same speed forward and reverse, only tank currently using CVT transmission is Japanese Type 10.

 

[sayareakd]

Pakistan is at max 400 km deep from our border. so if PA wont challenge us within few hours we can cross and go to Afghanistan.
Ofcourse in war it will be heavily defended, with anti tank crew, anti tank mines, tanks and other means to halt tanks. So speed is ok for Arjun MK-II.

if on first day we go 100 kms inside Pakistan with all the Independent Battle groups on an average it will be good progress, as it mean that we have gone inside 1/4 of Pakistan.

 

[The Last Stand]

Debated quite often before not anymore, but for you simple layman language would do..

1. Military tanks use different transmission / gear and very different engine compare to you home car or Suv..

2. Military tanks are design for battlefield requirement not for commuting and racing purposes, these are for fighting purpose..

As Western design engine are transmission are very good and Arjun share similar design its preform-ace is better than most eastern tanks..

@Payeng,

I am not much of a modern tank expert. WW2 tanks and I will answer with no hesitation.

1. Absolutely true. Tank engines are designed for torque. They are very large, have large fuel chamber and fuel consumption is extreme. Running gear is designed with 50 times more weight in mind.

2. Yes. So the engines are made nuclear radiation proof (usually) and given shielding from electromagnetic waves which may affect it. Tanks are rugged.

3. Sometimes Eastern engines are as good as Western engines. Look at 6TD series. Remarkable engines by Ukraine. Comparable to MTU and could be better. Arjun MK1 uses older MTU (80's engine not latest) but new 1500 hp engine has been developed by DRDO. Renk transmission is very reliable and German transmission has been world class from WW2 era.

Actually as Damian mentions everyday, engines are limited to their stated power. Remove the governor and you get a monster that accelerates 1.3x to 1.4x times faster. But engine might get damaged.

Edit: Biswas sir is too kind

 

[The Last Stand]

Ok so why we are going for heavier tanks when tanks are going lighter? For example US and Paki tanks are lighter.

Also we need lighter tanks for China.

Tanks are going lighter. Definitely. But only in unmanned turret era i.e. 20 years in the future. For manned turrets, weight can only remain same or go up since more and more armour is needed even though composites improve. US tanks are surely heavier than their counterparts.

Lighter tanks, yes. We need lighter tanks for mountains and Eastern Front. Why are we going for Polish Anders-based light tank?

For normal terrain, tanks will get heavier till we get unmanned turrets.

 

[Payeng]

@Payeng,

I am not much of a modern tank expert. WW2 tanks and I will answer with no hesitation.

1. Absolutely true. Tank engines are designed for torque. They are very large, have large fuel chamber and fuel consumption is extreme. Running gear is designed with 50 times more weight in mind.

2. Yes. So the engines are made nuclear radiation proof (usually) and given shielding from electromagnetic waves which may affect it. Tanks are rugged.

3. Sometimes Eastern engines are as good as Western engines. Look at 6TD series. Remarkable engines by Ukraine. Comparable to MTU and could be better. Arjun MK1 uses older MTU (80's engine not latest) but new 1500 hp engine has been developed by DRDO. Renk transmission is very reliable and German transmission has been world class from WW2 era.

Actually as Damian mentions everyday, engines are limited to their stated power. Remove the governor and you get a monster that accelerates 1.3x to 1.4x times faster. But engine might get damaged.

Cool, but a so called layman's question, how do some one increase the bhp of a given engine at the gear box

the final drive has been enhanced by increasing the reduction ratio from 4.4 to 5.3
However, despite the increased weight, the Arjun Mk1A's acceleration is better than the Arjun Mk1, while fuel efficiency and the power-to-weight ratio of 23.9hp/tonne remain the same.
TRISHUL: Orders Placed For Arjun Mk1A MBT's Vectronics Suite

Does military jingo technology permits the peak power output of an engine in HP to be enhanced at the gear box :shocked: (without any modification at the engine level)?

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Turbo Charged 1400hp engine :cool2:

 

[The Last Stand]

1.Cool, but a so called layman's question, how do some one increase the bhp of a given engine at the gear box

2.Does military jingo technology permits the peak power output of an engine in HP to be enhanced at the gear box :shocked: (without any modification at the engine level)?

1. Don't know. Not an engine expert.

2. Not aware of it.

But remember this, the monster the Arjun claims to have is a 1400 BHP engine which has an actual output of maybe 1850 HP. It is limited to 1400 so that engine lasts longer. Simple modification in garage - maybe 1 hour will enable Arjun to move faster.

In M1 Abrams, an emergency mode can be used to automatically disable the governing equipment for extra acceleration. AGT1500's actual output is 2000 HP :shocked: according to Damian.

 

[Payeng]

1. Don't know. Not an engine expert.

2. Not aware of it.

But remember this, the monster the Arjun claims to have is a 1400 BHP engine which has an actual output of maybe 1850 HP. It is limited to 1400 so that engine lasts longer. Simple modification in garage - maybe 1 hour will enable Arjun to move faster.

In M1 Abrams, an emergency mode can be used to automatically disable the governing equipment for extra acceleration. AGT1500's actual output is 2000 HP :shocked: according to Damian.

I believe, No you cannot increase engine bhp of an engine through any modification with the gear box onlee, military or non military.

 

[Yusuf]

Pakistan is at max 400 km deep from our border. so if PA wont challenge us within few hours we can cross and go to Afghanistan.
Ofcourse in war it will be heavily defended, with anti tank crew, anti tank mines, tanks and other means to halt tanks. So speed is ok for Arjun MK-II.

if on first day we go 100 kms inside Pakistan with all the Independent Battle groups on an average it will be good progress, as it mean that we have gone inside 1/4 of Pakistan.

No way we are getting 100kms inside Pak. Two reasons,
1) Supply line may not be able to keep up/cut off by enemy.
2) Nuclear response from Pak. We will maintain shallow ingress.

 

[Damian]

I believe, No you cannot increase engine bhp of an engine through any modification with the gear box onlee, military or non military.

It depends on engine. For example maximum power of some engines like AGT-1500 is 2,000HP, AVCR-1360 and also probably MB873 Ka501 is 1,800HP, however all these engines were governed to 1,500HP so it is safer to use them and to reduce wear and tear.

 

[sayareakd]

No way we are getting 100kms inside Pak. Two reasons,
1) Supply line may not be able to keep up/cut off by enemy.
2) Nuclear response from Pak. We will maintain shallow ingress.

Then what cold start really mean ? if you cant punish Pakistan without cutting them off. 8 IBG not going into towns but going into Pakistan is good idea, just get inside and take defensive positions and start taking out any counter attack.

We do have calculated their limit, that is why cold start.

 

[Decklander]

No way we are getting 100kms inside Pak. Two reasons,
1) Supply line may not be able to keep up/cut off by enemy.
2) Nuclear response from Pak. We will maintain shallow ingress.

The days of classic battles thru use of strike corps are over. Now we are into CSD which is about shallow thrusts and pincer moves to encircle PA in small areas called killing zones wherein any nuke strike will bring anhilation of PA only. The aim is to strike in depth with an aim to stop ARN & ARS of PA from reaching the area to support the besieged PA troops who have been forward deployed in offensive defense manner. This exposes them to encirclement. Pakistan lacks depth to defend and fall back to be able to fight a long battle of attrition. They also do not have resources to fight for over ten days. We need to occupy just so much territory within Pak which brings all their bridges on Indus within our arty range.

 

[AVERAGE INDIAN]

lets go with merkava tank development to get an insight developmental stages
Date of service:

Merkava I -- 1979

Merkava II -- 1983

-Merkava III -- 1987

Merkava IV --2004

Country: Israel

Type: Main Battle Tank

Dimensions: Length, 7.5 m (22.4 ft); width, 3.7 m (12.2 ft); height, 2.75 m (9 ft)

Combat weight:

Merkava I -- 60 tonns

Merkava II -- 63 tonnes

Merkava III -- 65 tonnes (140,000 lb)

Merkava IV --- Classified according to wiki 65 tonns

Engine:

Merkava I -- Teledyne Continental V-12 diesel 900 hp

Merkava II -- Teledyne Continental V-12 diesel 1,200 hp

Merkava III -- Unknown, believed to be 1,400 to 1,500 hp

Merkava IV -- Unknown

Armament:

Merkava I -- One 105 mm M68, rifled

Merkava II -- One 105 mm M68, rifled

Merkava III -- One 120 mm smoothbore MG251 smoothbore tank gun

Merkava IV -- One 120 mm smoothbore MG253 smoothbore tank gun

All Models -- Three 7.62 mm NATO machine guns;

one 60 mm mortar

Crew: 4

Speed: 46 km/h (28.6 mph)

Range: 400 km (249 mi)

Obstacle/grade performance: 0.95 m (3.1 ft)

Combining the best features of American, British, French, and captured Soviet tanks, all of which have been used extensively by Israel in the past, the Merkava is the product of real battlefield experience. The 1967 War, which spurred the development of the Merkava as part of a native Israeli defense industry, demonstrated the extreme importance of armor protection to such an extent that the Merkava's design emphasizes tank survivability, armament, and speed in that order.

conclusion most of the western tanks gave importance to primarily to tank survivability, armament, then comes speed in that order. there are no signs of decrease in weight even Abrams, Lepord etal

 

[Kunal Biswas]

The cold start with mass precision strikes and lightning mobility against selected tactical objectives, The ground forces are meant to dug in but air-campaing does not stops..

Nuclear / Conventional the doctrine apply to all..

The days of classic battles thru use of strike corps are over. Now we are into CSD which is about shallow thrusts and pincer moves to encircle PA in small areas called killing zones wherein any nuke strike will bring anhilation of PA only. .