Indian Tank Ammunition Scenario

[Armand2REP]

LAHAT (Laser Homing Attack or Laser Homing Anti-Tank)

Is there any confirmation of how many were bought?

 

[Apollyon]

Kunal is CLGM an advanced version of Lahat with Greater Range, or what is it .... :shocked::shocked:

and any word about this missile ----->

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Re: Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT)

3) An improved version of the above round (Mk2, seen on the left ) rejected in favour or the IMI round.

4)
IMI designed round with imported penetrators (the fast Mk1 ammo listed on
OFB site, and this link shows the israeli ammo in closeup on last page)

5)
Meanwhile the Mk2 round is being pitched again to the army (not sure if same specs or improved ones) and the improved Arjun round (T1A with 500mm penetration ? the current round does not have any designation, link)

3. These are very old pics probably from late 90s..

4. On IMI link that is the MK2 Rod but PDF is older and deign is different, It was later improved..

5. MK-2 details are not published, But it was showed in Expo by OFB many times, Poland Weapon Industry also copied this IMI AP..

Kunal is CLGM an advanced version of Lahat with Greater Range, or what is it .... :shocked::shocked:

and any word about this missile ----->

CLGM is deigned for Man-portable ATGM..

LAHAT is used only by Tanks, IFV & Gunships..

Is there any confirmation of how many were bought?

No News on this..

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Problem with older two piece ammunition for 125mm smoothbore guns is that these older APFSDS rounds use so called ring sabot, such ring sabot as we can see is very short. So even if such ammunition is very fast (~1,700 m/s muzzle velocity), because of large stabilization fins, they also tend to very quickly lost their huge velocity, thus it is reducing their effectiveness against target at greater distance. AFAIK some newer Russian rounds do not have this problem.

What is the typical range for such lack of force for such older APFSDS..

 

[Bhadra]

Sapane , Rangeen Sapane but need effort to fructify Sapane !

 

[Kunal Biswas]

3BM-42 length..

 

[militarysta]

3BM-42 length..

Methos and I had some disuccion about DM-33 and 3BM-42:

WITU says DM 33 penetrates 470 mm at 2,000 m. BM-42 Mango should penetrated 450 mm at 2,000 m. Let's take a look at it,
The projectile of BM-42 Mango 56 cm long, DM 33 projectile is 64 cm long. -> DM 33 is more potent.
BM-42 Mango penetrator is 41 cm long, the penetrator of DM 33 is 57 cm long -> DM 33 is more potent.
The diameter of the BM-42 projectile is about 30 mm average, with the middle section being about 36 mm thick. The diameter of the DM 33 projectile is about 28 mm. -> DM 33 is more potent.
BM-42 is using a two-part penetrator in steel body, DM 33 is a monobloc round. -> DM 33 is more potent in penetrating both homogeneous and complex targets.
The muzzle velocity of BM-42 is about 50 m/s higher, but the fins and the overall diameter are larger causing more friction. The loss of velocity during flight is therefore higher on BM-42, which means that it is having about the same impact velocity somewhere at 1,000 - 2,000 m range.
This would mean that a penetrator being more than 10 cm longer and a smaller diameter will increase penetration by only 20 mm? Yes, for sure..

DM33A1 have penetrator lengt 570mm, diameter 28mm, max presure 515Mpa, rod weight (during fly) 4,6kg, and Muzzle velocity1650m/s
BM42 have about penetrator lengt 452mm, diameter 31-22mm, max presure?, rod weight (during fly) 4,85kg, and Muzzle velocity 1700m/s

So Yes, DM33A1 have 118mm longer penetrator, diameter is simillar, max presure -no idea, BM42 weight more 0,25kg, and Muzzle velocity is 50m/s bigger.
In my opinion dates are quite possible:

DM33A1 470mm (G) and ~520mm(A)
3BM42 450mm(G) and ~500mm(A)
Maybe fact that DM33 have longer penetrator is "eaten" by lower at (1/4kg) penetrator weight and smaller muzzle velocity?
And in fact in both case DM33A1 have still bigger penetration values.
Int hat:
3BM42 -P0:580 P2500:460*
DM33 -P0:600 P2500:490*
too

If this dates (taken from 10Tk.Bde) are correct then 3BM42 is lossing 120mm at 2500m and Dm33 is loosing 110mm at 2500 so maybe difrencess in Vdrop aren't so big? And it can be possible becouse Dm33 have 28mm diameter and BM42 31mm in thickest place...but have slighty bigger muzzle velocity. Again for me this dates are correct

(....)
Last but not least:
DM33A1 have penetrator diameter 28mm -during fly and in start of penetration process
3BM42 have penetrator "body" diameter 31mm -during fly but penetrator "rod" is only 22mm -and only this 22mm penetrate the target.
So in that parameter BM42 is better -of course DM33A1 is longer at 118mm, and finally have better penetration.

(...)

3BM42 penetrator weight more (0,25kg) then DM33A1 -and we are talking about penetrator during fly...
3Bm42 have bigger (50m/s) muzzle velocity
During fly DM33A1 have 28mm diameter(penetrator), and Bm42 have 31mm max (penetrator) - propably Vdrop is simillar, but during penetration proces Dm33A1 have this 28mm still but in BM42 in penetration proces take ony dual "rod" of the penetrator whit diameter 22mm -so smaller then DM33A1.
Only one BIG advantage DM33A1 is 118mm longer penetrator, so with bigger rod(penetrator) diameter (disadvantage), and smaller penetrator weight (disadvantage) it can perforate more then 3BM42.

BTW: dual penetrator in BM42 is caused by penetratoin multi layers target capabilities.

I did some more detailed measurements of the scale drawings on Kotsch's and Fofanov's pages. For the image on Fofanov's page the tungsten penetrator is about 25-26 mm (not including the blurred pixels) and about 28 mm when I include them. On Kotsch's page the scale drawing leads to an diameter of approximately 22 mm.
I googled and tried to found a real BM-42 and ended up with one which has a pretty unlucky angle, but it seems to lie between 22 and 25 mm, depending on how exactly is meassured. So the penetrator diameter seems to be less than the overall diameter of DM 33.

Still we should not forget that the diameter of BM-42 is in fact about 31-32 mm on the thinnest non-tip part. For an penetrator diameter of 22-26 mm some 30 to 50 % of the surface area are covered with steel. There a lot of energy will be lost, up to 25% of total, if a simple apporach by dividing densities and multiplying with percentages of surface area is correct.

Taking a look at images from the DM 33 round (like this with a lot of zoom or the images in the AMAP brochures) it seems quite possible that 28 mm refer to the thickest point of the projectile (the tip is thicker) and not to the average penetrator diameter. I don't want to speculate much more about this, but it may be somewhere about 24-26 mm average. Another point speaking against a diameter of 28 mm is the weight. 57 x 2.8 cm x 17.5 (density of typical 1980s WHA) => 6.1 kg!

To repeat myself again: The main reason for loss of velocity ("vdrop") is not the diameter of the sub-projectile containing the penetrator, but the size of the fins. DM 33 has fins with a diameter of about ~90 mm, while the fins of BM-42 are ~125 mm in diameter. The sub-projectile containing the penetrator has an ideal ballistic/aerodynamic shape, the fins not. Even though: a 28 mm diameter has a surface are of ~615 mm², while a 32 mm diameter has a surface area of ~804 mm². If the vdrop would only based on the diameter of the projectile body, then DM 33 would have a 23% lower vdrop.

BM-42 weighs less than DM 33 penetrator btw.

(....)

I doubt that it is possible not to loose any energy. Kinetic energy is (following the old, conventional definition) 1/2 mass * velocity². A 2.8 kg penetrator (see below where this mass comes from) will therefore have a muzzle energy of about ~4 MJ, will the whole round (4.85 kg) will have a muzzle energy of about ~7 MJ. With sabot this figure rises to ~10 MJ. So there is plenty of energy stored inside the steel part and I doubt that the melting of the steel will increase the speed of the tungsten (physically impossible I would say).
Interessting is:
Area for 22 mm (pentrator): ~380 mm²
Area for 32 mm (penetrator + steel jacket): ~ 804 mm²
By dividing the area through the muzzle energy we can see that the penetrator only aspects shows better behavior:
~4000 kj / 380 mm² -> 10.5 kj per mm²
~7000 kj / 804 mm² -> 8.7 kj per mm²

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Tender for T-90S Tank Ammunition

Global Tender for India's T-90 Tank Ammunition


The Indian Army is entering the global market for the purchase of unspecified number of ammunition worth $550 million for the Russian made T-90 tanks it operates. The ammunition being used by the Indian Army for the T-90 tanks was contracted along with the purchase of T-90 tanks in 2000.

While the Indian made ammunition for the T-90 tank has been rejected by the Indian Army due to technical faults, the price of the Russian made ammunition has been increased 300 per cent by the Russians.

The Indian Army has now decided to hunt in the international market for a variety of ammunition for the T-90 tanks, including the standard 330 grade ammunition and two other varieties for the T-90 tanks.

The tender is expected to be floated in December and is likely to be sent to

Dhiel defence of Germany,

IWI of Israel,

Rosoboronoexport of Russia,

BAE of United Kingdom,

Bumar of Poland and

Ukrainexport of Ukraine.

There were technical problems with the Indian made ammunition for the 125 mm gun of the T-90 tanks especially relating to packing and the rate of the fire. As such the Indian made ammunition has not been used for years, and is lying unused. The Indian Army has rejected the Indian made ammunition and has been using the Russian made ammunition only contracted along with the first contract of the Tank. The Russians want 300 per cent increase in price of the ammunition for extra supplies.

The purchase of the ammunition for the T-90 tanks is likely to be done on Urgent basis which would mean that the winners would be selected in the shortest possible time.

Global Tender for India's T-90 Tank Ammunition



Originally Posted by wild goose.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Re: Tender for T-90S Tank Ammunition

They ban every one and asking wrong people for RFI..

Its like MOD crippled Army and pushing it for a run on one leg..

Bumar of Poland and

Ukrainexport of Ukraine.

Only sources now..

 

[Dixit13]

Re: Tender for T-90S Tank Ammunition

"""While the Indian made ammunition for the T-90 tank has been rejected by the Indian Army due to technical faults, the price of the Russian made ammunition has been increased 300 per cent by the Russians."""""

Yup technical faults,..... because we are da fckin ones wt average IQ of -120 (in negatives), so that bureaucrats and army procurement officer can make money.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Re: Tender for T-90S Tank Ammunition

Poland is offering :

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

Ukraine is offering :

 

[Akim]

Re: Tender for T-90S Tank Ammunition

There are Israel rounds, they anymore like your military.

Ordnance Factory Board

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Re: Tender for T-90S Tank Ammunition

They are based on IMI rounds or Cloned..

 

[Akim]

Re: Tender for T-90S Tank Ammunition

I understand when it is difficult to do more powerful projectile, but vice versa -this simple work. Why India must export alien, when is it a to do a less powerful round for old guns?

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Re: Tender for T-90S Tank Ammunition

I cant say much, But on darker side it can be related with Corruption which is common in defense deals in India..

Strangely the ammo which are discarded due to faulty charge bags, the perpetrator / Rods were also ordered to be destroyed, Latter some of these found there way into terrorist hands..

 

[Damian]

Re: Tender for T-90S Tank Ammunition

Destroying penetrators is stupidity, especially if they are not faulty. They could had been reused.

 

[sayareakd]

Re: Tender for T-90S Tank Ammunition

what is not said in this tender is that fire control computer for T90 will reject any foreign ammo, so first computer programme should be hacked so that ammo from other makers could be fired from the gun.

This was the main problem when Indian and Isreali ammo was used, its computer never recognised the ammo. Sadly we paid top $$$$ for TOT and Russians has withheld this source code for fire control from us, noq they are charging 300 % for same export grade ammo (which ia inferior to ammo used by Russian army).
Break the source code and Russains will offer same ammo for 75%.

 

[Sridhar]

Re: Tender for T-90S Tank Ammunition

@Sayare , Do you mean calibration of Fire Control Computer for Non Russian ammo ?

 

[sayareakd]

Re: Tender for T-90S Tank Ammunition

@Sayare , Do you mean calibration of Fire Control Computer for Non Russian ammo ?

yes...........................................

 

[p2prada]

Re: Tender for T-90S Tank Ammunition

what is not said in this tender is that fire control computer for T90 will reject any foreign ammo, so first computer programme should be hacked so that ammo from other makers could be fired from the gun.

This was the main problem when Indian and Isreali ammo was used, its computer never recognised the ammo. Sadly we paid top $$$$ for TOT and Russians has withheld this source code for fire control from us, noq they are charging 300 % for same export grade ammo (which ia inferior to ammo used by Russian army).
Break the source code and Russains will offer same ammo for 75%.

I don't think that is true. Instead you can say source code ToT was delayed rather than denied. Indian ammo was destroyed in 2006 after tests. Wouldn't have happened had we not had access to the source codes. Remember I told Russia modified laws only in 2005 for gun barrel ToT.

If you note, even the article claims the Indian ammo was made for T-90 tanks.

The Russian army does not use anything better than Mango. We don't know if Lekalo is in mass production let alone in service.

The only better ammo we had was the Israeli Mk1 and now the company has been blacklisted. Now we can't buy the MK2 either.

As for the cost increase, well every time we have gone for a single vendor situation we have been ripped off. Israelis are the biggest rip offs followed by the French. The very reason why the govt has openly said they don't want to get into single vendor ToTs.