Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT) Mark II

ArgonPrime

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Aug 5, 2019
Messages
1,344
Likes
2,024
Country flag
Pretty sure they do:
Middle round is the BTA-2 105mm, which is 704.5mm.

Bottom round looks maybe 40-50mm longer?

Top round may look longer but if you notice the plastic bracing is actually set further forwards, so it looks like the round is shifed forwards for more propellant.
They only use two piece ammo in their MBTs as of now, so the unitary ones are inconsequential.
 

Swiftfarts

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Sep 13, 2020
Messages
605
Likes
1,029
Country flag
Pretty sure they do:
Middle round is the BTA-2 105mm, which is 704.5mm.

Bottom round looks maybe 40-50mm longer?

Top round may look longer but if you notice the plastic bracing is actually set further forwards, so it looks like the round is shifed forwards for more propellant.
You need to be more specific with these values , give there diameter or L/D ratios. what material is being used, is it a tungsten alloy or DU rod. Later will offer far greater DOP due to self sharpening effect, muzzle velocity etc.

Middle one in above pic you posted is actually older DTW.

lower one actually is DTW2 , it's written on it.
IMG_20201110_134419.jpg

fmglH2L.jpg

IMG_20201110_134504.jpg

DOP is given as 150mm/71° at 2km. That's
460mm LOS.


New 105mm BTA2 APFSDS ( improved DTW2 with longer projectile 704.5mm vs 636mm in case of older DTW2 round ).
x7uzpyuwhzp51.png

DOP is given as 220mm/66.42° at 2 km , that's 550mm at LOS.
 

Swiftfarts

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Sep 13, 2020
Messages
605
Likes
1,029
Country flag
Chinese BS should not be taken seriously along with paki. They may have a better longer 125mm APFSDS...but i do not think they have anything comparable or machining performance of even Korean APFSDS forgot Russian , German or American one. Russians will never risk giving them such high end rounds. BTA 4 APFSDS being sold with VT 4 has 600mm DOP, same as upgraded mango APFSDS.
 

Bhartiya Sainik

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2021
Messages
405
Likes
1,106
Country flag
The complete Arjun Mk. 1A with Elbit ALWCS including IR Jammer, LWS & Multi Spectral Smoke , Elbit COAPS , OFB RCWS, Pearson Engineering TWMP and APU. Note the mantlet is covered. View attachment 127226
ALWACS (Advanced Laser Warning and Countermeasure System ) has ELAWS (Enhanced Laser WArning System) + VIRCM (Vehicle mounted IRCM).
Here only the ELAWS is present, VIRCM is missing.

1640252335767.png
1640252714085.png
1640252460547.png
1640252580405.png
 

BlackViking

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2019
Messages
924
Likes
3,674
Country flag
Thank you . Very informative video. But even Alpha defense agrees that it indeed is a weak spot of arjun. There is a steel block behind it , so it's not completely useless, but still there is no reason that the sight should not be shifted upwards like in the subsequent Leopard tanks, thus increasing the safety of the main frontal armour sufficiently.

Design discarded
 

BlackViking

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2019
Messages
924
Likes
3,674
Country flag
He said the main advantage of placing the sight there was because it could be changed and maintained easily in a very short duration of time. Then red effect said that with present technology, there is no need of this and it could be placed at the top.
I know that, but considering how IA has not sought for replacement of sight's position from MK1 to MK1A, even though DRDO had previously shown a prototype with sight on top, I cannot think of any reasons except IA wanted the sight to be there.
 

Vinod DX9

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Messages
1,327
Likes
4,102
Country flag

Vinod DX9

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Messages
1,327
Likes
4,102
Country flag
None.
Arjun order would have been viable 15-years-ago right after comperative trials, instead of another batch of cramped, inaccurate, exploding deathtraps in 2007.

Right now I'd rather have the available FMBT turret mounted on TankEx hull (with hydropneumatic suspension & rubbered tracks & aluminium alloy wheels), to make a TankEx2... That way we have logistical commonality with present fleet, while also meeting their 4-crew 50-ton fantasy. View attachment 64239
Russia isn't allowing to use T-72/90 hull without buying from them.
 

Bhartiya Sainik

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2021
Messages
405
Likes
1,106
Country flag
View attachment 132685
I think he’s referring to this.
I have already shown the size & sector coverage of IRCM required.
So it cannot be IRCM as it is too narrow, only 1, faces only forward & fixed. ATGM can come from any direction & gunner could be engaged with a target in opposite direction. So the "red eyes" IR jammers on T-90 for example are not really a good implementation being fixed forward forcing to rotate entire turret.
The "box" was present in some older model like in following pic:
1642587050535.png


But other model like following doesn't have it
1642587198996.png


The latest model has covered that space with >> wedge shaped armor but there is a big hole retained. I'm guessing it could be a backup sight.
1642587658021.png
 

Vinod DX9

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Messages
1,327
Likes
4,102
Country flag
I have already shown the size & sector coverage of IRCM required.
So it cannot be IRCM as it is too narrow, only 1, faces only forward & fixed. ATGM can come from any direction & gunner could be engaged with a target in opposite direction. So the "red eyes" IR jammers on T-90 for example are not really a good implementation being fixed forward forcing to rotate entire turret.
The "box" was present in some older model like in following pic:
View attachment 132705

But other model like following doesn't have it
View attachment 132706

The latest model has covered that space with >> wedge shaped armor but there is a big hole retained. I'm guessing it could be a backup sight.
View attachment 132707
It might be or not. The first Mk. 1A handed over to army definitely doesn't have any such box
20220119_200107.jpg

But this is possibly not the final product. The right side of the turret houses either an IR counter measure or guidance for CLGM. Instead of front it's actually fitted to top of the turret. Still I'm doubtful of the latter as COAPS itself can guide it.
20220119_200343.jpg

If this be the guidance , then the gunner can fire a missile and then independently fire another anti-tank round while commander can independently go in hunter-killer mode!
By the way, this is third such model. Another such scaled model would showcase something attached in the front instead of top, exactly the same position the box can be seen .
I still believe there could be some modifications yet, otherwise clean ERA mounted version as here we can see.
20220119_201113.jpg
 

Bhartiya Sainik

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2021
Messages
405
Likes
1,106
Country flag
It might be or not. The first Mk. 1A handed over to army definitely doesn't have any such boxView attachment 132732

But this is possibly not the final product. The right side of the turret houses either an IR counter measure or guidance for CLGM. Instead of front it's actually fitted to top of the turret. Still I'm doubtful of the latter as COAPS itself can guide it. View attachment 132733
If this be the guidance , then the gunner can fire a missile and then independently fire another anti-tank round while commander can independently go in hunter-killer mode!
By the way, this is third such model. Another such scaled model would showcase something attached in the front instead of top, exactly the same position the box can be seen .
I still believe there could be some modifications yet, otherwise clean ERA mounted version as here we can see. View attachment 132734
1642605390504.png
This thing clearly looks fixed facing forward & cannot rotate independently & now the 3rd set of sensors after gunners & commander's sight.
It cannot or rather should not be IRCM due to reasons i mentioned earlier.
The "box" if there, is not visible bcoz bcoz it is behind the wedge armor. The box can be a power source &/or processing electronics to support this "thing".
I think it could be for CLGM launch guidance like all ATGM require CLU (Command Launch Unit):
1642606701907.png


However,
1) this is highly exposed when the gunner's sight is protected
2) there is unnecessary redundancy in LRF (Laser Range Finder) & IR sights when both the missile & shell are launched from cannon. The same set of sights can be used for both shell & missile.
In latest models of Russian & Western tanks the commander's sight will also function like gunner's sight if later fails or is lost. No extra sensor is needed to launch IR or laser guided CLGM.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

Articles

Top