Indian Army Armored Vehicles

[tharun]

Unfortunately, Abhya project was ended as TD, It should have been in service by now ..

The R&D knowledge we gained from Abhya project was applied & we have tata kestrel ..

I hope the kestrel won`t ended up as a TD as well ..

What is the armor level on abhay ifv?

 

[Neeraj Mathur]

Few snaps i took during def-expo 2014, One of the first few prototype of TATA kestrel ..

kunal bahi
any idea what weapon station we will have on this APC
i dont think BMP turret is final

 

[tharun]

@Kunal Biswas Bro i found this on internet....your comments please

 

[Vinod DX9]

Ukrainian company LLC UKRAINIAN ARMOR is developing the new 120 mm mobile mortar system based on Varta armoured multi-purpose vehicle.

Why don't we make one such. Thus systems can decrease time of quick deployment

 

[Kunal Biswas]

We operate BMP mortar carrier which design as per need ..

 

[sthf]

We operate BMP mortar carrier which design as per need ..

Man portable 81 mm mortar on a 13 ton platform is hardly something to be proud of.

Especially at a time when countries are putting 120 mm on ever lighter, more mobile and cheaper vehicles.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

If one mounts a 160mm mortar on a 4x4 and proud on doing so has no value in real world, Before you look others, first understand why your country decided to mount a lighter mortar on a heavier tracked vehicle under what context when others are doing the opposite under what factors ..

Army choice of mounting 81mm on BMP has logic and practical in real world ..

BMP mortar carrier is attached with mech forces and vehicle is able to keep up with mech forces in all terrains compare to any-other vehicle in the inventory. The vehicle retains its ability to swim.

CMT can be seen crossing the canal in a amphibious drill

81mm mortar has same shrapnel dispersion of a 120mm mortar, Its logical to put it instead of a heavier 120mm besides that more rounds can be carried compare to 120mm mortar in the vehicle.

The system role emphasis more on laying smoke screens, illumination rounds for night fighting purposes and target marking at longer ranges for Armour, Arty and aviation, Than solely supporting infantry via suppressive fire-power.

Man portable 81 mm mortar on a 13 ton platform is hardly something to be proud of.

Especially at a time when countries are putting 120 mm on ever lighter, more mobile and cheaper vehicles.

 

[bhramos]

T-90 Bishma in Thar Desert...

 

[Kunal Biswas]

MK2 at some exhibition at HVF ..

 

[sthf]

@Kunal Biswas You just contradicted yourself. If the purpose of CMT is not just fire support then 120mm is a much better option, bigger HE, more powerful smoke & illumination round and longer range.

Regular infantry has limitations on what it can carry hence 81 mm. No such compulsion for mech. infantry.

But I will agree on the qualities of BMP-2 as platform.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

I am not contradicted myself but you had mixed up contexts, CMT is a part of Mech inf in Indian context ..

If you advocate for 120mm for regular infantry, 120mm is already used by some Infantry units ..

Now, If you want to talk about self propelled 120mm in regular infantry units, I can put more reason why not to ..

@Kunal Biswas You just contradicted yourself. If the purpose of CMT is not just fire support then 120mm is a much better option, bigger HE, more powerful smoke & illumination round and longer range.

Regular infantry has limitations on what it can carry hence 81 mm. No such compulsion for mech. infantry.

But I will agree on the qualities of BMP-2 as platform.

 

[sthf]

@Kunal Biswas I think you did. As I said, weight implications dictated that regular /light infantry use man portable 81mm platoons in their battalions. These handicaps do not apply to mech. infantry.

Most countries that use self propelled mortars in conjunction with mech infantry use 120mm. There are umpteen examples of that.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Regarding that matter i have already stated the reasons ..

Most countries that use self propelled mortars in conjunction with mech infantry use 120mm. There are umpteen examples of that.

 

[sthf]

Regarding that matter i have already stated the reasons ..

Conjecture possibly yes but reasons not so much.

I would have agreed to said reasons if the nature of Indian mechanized warfare was dramatically different from that of other countries which IMO it is not. Unlike other units which are uniquely Indian like mountain or jungle units, mechanized infantry is still following the basic principles laid out by General Sundarji.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Their is nothing incomplete here, Their are thing different here though and if you go on dissecting my post you can get more facts out of it ..

 

[Vinod DX9]

Indian Centurions , were they equipped with 20 pdr or L7?
More precisely,
Mk 3-20 pdr
Mk 7-L7

This should be for British. But what about ours?

And did we had just Mk 3 and 7 or just 7 or anyother versions of the tank?

 

[Kunal Biswas]

No centurion in Indian Army had L7 but 20 ponder B barrel ( 84mm ? ) ..

 

[Vinod DX9]

No centurion in Indian Army had L7 but 20 ponder B barrel ( 84mm ? ) ..

Isn't it L7? It is not looking like 20 Pounder

 

[sbm]

It is the 20pdr. The L7 is slightly different.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

20 pounder had 2 versions,

• Model A without a fume extractor.
• Model B with a fume extractor.

Indian centurian through out its service life had 20 pounder B barrel, 83.4mm ..

The L7 105 mm tank gun was developed from the 20 pounder. In 1954, the original version of the 105 mm was made by re-boring the tube of a 20 pounder barrel

Only Vijanata tanks had 105 L7 guns during War, Some Photo reference :

Centurian MK7 during 1971 war, Note the barrel thickness and a metal strip over fume extractor, This is a 20 pounder B model.

Vijayanta tank in 1971 war, Note the barrel thickness and design of fume extractor which is slightly bulged out upwards or sometime downwards and missing the metal strip on its fume extractor. This gun is 105mm L7

View attachment 15251
Isn't it L7? It is not looking like 20 Pounder