India's Future Main Battle Tank (FMBT)

Discussion in 'Indian Army' started by Anshu Attri, May 15, 2010.

  1. Kay

    Kay Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2014
    Messages:
    798
    Likes Received:
    862
    Location:
    Delhi
    Two man crewed tank with Armata like layout - crew in separate capsule, unmanned turret, however I want a more complex autoloader able to load ammo from a vertical carousal like Armata as well as from the back of turret like in Lecrec - that would improve ammo capacity and make all ammo in ready to fire condition - gun should be smoothbore and caliber 130 mm - 30 mm unmanned weapon station on top and two coaxial 12.7 mm guns with main gun + active and passive protection systems - there you go
    :cowboy::shoot:
     
    HariPrasad-1 and aditya10r like this.
  2. Vinod DX9

    Vinod DX9 Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    1,032
    Likes Received:
    2,785
    Tactical Frog, Kay and itsme like this.
  3. shuvo@y2k10

    [email protected] Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2010
    Messages:
    1,367
    Likes Received:
    986
    Location:
    kolkata
    A 50 ton tank cannot match the performance and armour capabilities of Arjun mk2. Now if army goes ahead with this FRCV I perceive the following situations:

    1. None of global tank design houses will do any sort of research into the requirement of Indian army when army has even failed to release GSQR.
    2. Western tank companies will pitch a modified downrated version of an existing design like Leo 2, Abrams,Challenger 2 with an autoloader.
    3. Some design houses may offer their up-armoured ICV with a 120 mm gun like CV-90 from BAE .
    4. Russian UVZ will offer a downrated version of T-14S Armata..
    5. Ukrainian design houses may offer to reserect tank projects of Soviets in 80s like Object 490, 477, 195 etc which were abandoned due to lack of funds (whose details are available in the net) with some Indian money.
    6. Sadly the only agency which is doing some actual research into FMBT that is CVRDE will be the ultimate loser.
     
    Last edited: Nov 10, 2017
  4. aditya10r

    aditya10r Mera Bharat mahan Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2016
    Messages:
    4,911
    Likes Received:
    8,140
    Location:
    patna
    L
    Like the RFI global for rifles failed this too will and ultimately army will have to accept Arjun mk2/3 or FMBT.

    Don't understand why army publishes RFI without proper specs???
     
    Pinky Chaudhary likes this.
  5. shuvo@y2k10

    [email protected] Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2010
    Messages:
    1,367
    Likes Received:
    986
    Location:
    kolkata
    CVRDE is the only agency which can come up 2 tank designs :
    1. Arjun mk 3 with 4 man crew and 60-65 ton weight and 120 mm smoothbore gun. This is the evolutionary design.
    2. FMBT with 3 man crew capsule and a 120 mm/higher caliber smoothbore gun housed in a unmanned turret and weight 50-55 ton. This is the revolutionary design.
    As a matter of fact CVRDE has decided to follow the revolutionary design and is already developing a "universal combat platform" : FMBT.JPG
    This project is in advanced stages since most of the modules are being worked on separately and CVRDE can even come up with prototypes before 2020 if army releases GSQR. Ironically even a class of vehicles can be developed on arjun mk 2 platform and it also offers modularity in terms of design (BHIM SPH, BLT 70, AARV etc).
     
  6. HariPrasad-1

    HariPrasad-1 Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2016
    Messages:
    3,611
    Likes Received:
    4,262
    Location:
    Gujarat
    We can have armata as a role model for FMBT. Its weight is almost same with unparallel strength and fire power.
     
    Kay likes this.
  7. shuvo@y2k10

    [email protected] Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2010
    Messages:
    1,367
    Likes Received:
    986
    Location:
    kolkata
    No one knows the actual weight of Armata as it is kept confidential by the Russians. Some say (wikipedia) it is close to 48 tons same as T-90. Others say it is about 55 tons or more. But one thing is certain it's hull is significantly bigger than T-72 and T-90 and has 7 wheels.
    Western MBTs with 3 man crew and autoloader like LECLERC AND K-2 have abot 55-56 ton weight and Chinese type 99 M has about 58-62 ton weight despite being 3 man crew. Hence 60-62 ton is ideal weight for a MBT.
     
    Blood+, aditya10r and Kay like this.
  8. Kay

    Kay Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2014
    Messages:
    798
    Likes Received:
    862
    Location:
    Delhi
    For Russians Armata is complemented by T-90. Remote and unmanned turrets are technologically not that mature enough that any army can fully repose their faith in it. Since the look and specification of future tank is not settled, we should hedge our bets on multiple designs reather than put all our eggs on a single basket.
     
  9. shiphone

    shiphone Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2009
    Messages:
    1,616
    Likes Received:
    1,481
    so called Type99M is ZTZ99A with a 55 ton weight...another 3-crew export tank porject VT-4: 52 tons
     
  10. R A Varun

    R A Varun Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2017
    Messages:
    67
    Likes Received:
    89
    Location:
    bengaluru
    hope it defeats arjun in terms of weight, however this design if weighs as of arjun, pakistan doesnt have much infrastructure to hold such tanks on bridges, so these will act as the second line of defence, as this time it will be the indian forces that are going to make an advance.
     
  11. R A Varun

    R A Varun Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2017
    Messages:
    67
    Likes Received:
    89
    Location:
    bengaluru
    any images of fmbt, can youplease provide me one.
     
    Bleh likes this.
  12. Bleh

    Bleh Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    98
    Likes Received:
    191
    o7L3r9A.jpg
    I found this FMBT concept in DRDO publication, page 6:
    http://publications.drdo.gov.in/ojs/index.php/dsj/article/view/12182/6087

    But the position of the hatches had me confused. In the schematics it's clearly mentioned "crewless turret", but doesn't match with the previous.
    Do the commander & gunner enter the tank from the turret, like in T-90, & sit below in the basket (which would be ingenious)?

    Any info?
     
    Sancho, Indx TechStyle, itsme and 2 others like this.
  13. sthf

    sthf Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2016
    Messages:
    1,755
    Likes Received:
    3,473
    I don't get it. Are people in DRDO doing ungodly amount of shrooms?

    First they came up with a 50 MBT design with the crew of 4 and an autoloader.

    Now they come up with a "crewless" turret with not just one but two crew hatches.

    What the fuck!!!!
     
    Armand2REP, Bleh and aditya10r like this.
  14. nongaddarliberal

    nongaddarliberal Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2016
    Messages:
    857
    Likes Received:
    2,128
    Concept is good, but I'm very sceptical about DRDOs ability to stick to the requirements and make it operational a timely manner. It took 15 years simply to get through the glitches in Arjun. And they are yet to fulfil their promise of developing an indigenous 1500 hp engine for the arjun that would replace the 1400 hp one. I wonder how they will develop a 1500 hp engine at 2/3rds the size when they cant even make a full sized one.
     
    Bleh likes this.
  15. Kunal Biswas

    Kunal Biswas Member of the Year 2011 Moderator

    Joined:
    May 26, 2010
    Messages:
    30,965
    Likes Received:
    39,375
    Location:
    BHARAT, INDIA, HINDUSTHAN
    It looks very much like stryker MGS turret ..

    [​IMG]

    =============

    If their is a requirement, They will do it ..


     
    Pinky Chaudhary, Bleh and Vinod DX9 like this.
  16. Sancho

    Sancho Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2011
    Messages:
    1,167
    Likes Received:
    718
    Sieh dir den Tweet von @SJha1618 an:
     
    Blood+ and kunal1123 like this.
  17. Blood+

    Blood+ Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    435
    Likes Received:
    166
    Dude!!Where the hell have you been, bro??!!
     
    Bleh and Sancho like this.
  18. WolfPack86

    WolfPack86 Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2015
    Messages:
    4,190
    Likes Received:
    3,543
    Is DRDO developing light future main battle tank for Indian Army and what about armour for the tank?.
     
    Bleh likes this.
  19. Bleh

    Bleh Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    98
    Likes Received:
    191
    Remember this?
    img-20170723-011330-924_orig.jpg
    The version everybody said was a rejected concept... Expecting they have favoured the Armata-like arrangement of crew.
    DSorYjAVQAAfPnI.jpeg

    Well, guess what, i found this I made on MS Paint back then & forgot to post!

    I'd converted the first design on to add a 3rd crewmember to the right side & it looked EXACTLY like the latest version they'd released later on... With the crew entering from turret-top & climbing down to the hull.
    Hull armour layout seems different though.
    img-20170723-011330-924_orig - Copy.jpg
    IMG_20180326_165722_833.jpg
     
    Rahul Singh and darshan978 like this.
  20. kunal1123

    kunal1123 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2017
    Messages:
    453
    Likes Received:
    629
    nextbigfuture.com
    US Army has focused effort to replace Abrams and Bradley with tests by 2019 and deployments by 2025
    brian wang
    3-4 minutes
    US Army has focused effort to replace Abrams and Bradley with tests by 2019 and deployments by 2025

    [​IMG]
    By late 2019, the U.S. Army could field up to three manned and unmanned combat vehicles to help determine the future of heavy army fighting vehicles.

    The US army effort appears focused and appears inspired by the Russian Armata combat vehicle platform. The Armata is a common platform for tanks, armored vehicles and manned and unmanned systems. The US system will have more lasers and advanced electronics and power generation. The US systems will have proper funding. Russia does not have the funding to buy the Armata in volume.

    Army officials have laid out the groundwork for developing the Next Generation Combat Vehicle, or NGCV. The NGCV will replace the M-1 Abrams main battle tank and M-2 Bradley infantry fighting vehicles (IFV). Both the Abrams and Bradley, while highly successful, were introduced in the late 1970s and early 1980s. The Army regularly updates both with the latest technologies, including new ammunition, anti-shaped charge reactive armor, remote-controlled weapons systems, advanced networking and communications, and ballistic shields for the crew.


    The three vehicles will then be assigned to an operational combat unit around 2021. By 2023, seven manned and 14 unmanned vehicles will repeat the schedule, hopefully winnowing the process down to both manned and unmanned systems ready for mass production.

    The U.S. Army is making it pretty clear that the manned and unmanned NGCVs will work together on the battlefield. While the manned vehicles will be larger and carry a tank gun or squad of infantry troops, the unmanned vehicle will be considerably smaller, but still carry a considerable punch. The unmanned vehicle could be used as a scouting vehicle, traveling ahead of a mixed armored task force. Once it makes contact with the enemy, the unmanned vehicles could identify their positions, attack them with direct fire, and pass their coordinates to nearby field artillery and air support. This buys the manned component time to form a plan, get into position, and launch an attack on an enemy that has had little time to prepare.

    The first generation vehicle could even be the proposed M2A5 Bradley, which includes two to five times more protection for crew and infantrymen riding inside, along with a longer hull to increase the number of mounted infantry to eight.

    What will the Army eventually end up with? NGCV will probably be a tracked, 50 to 60 ton common chassis available in both tank and infantry fighting vehicle flavors. The vehicle will have traditional passive steel, composite, and even depleted uranium armor, complemented with an active protection system to protect it from tank gun rounds, anti-tank missiles, and rocket-propelled grenades. It will be at least as mobile as the M1 Abrams, be transportable by the Air Force’s C-17 Globemaster III strategic airlifter, and generate a large amount of onboard electricity to support lasers, railguns, and possibly some sort of future cloaking device
     
    binayak95 likes this.

Share This Page