Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT) Mark II

[ersakthivel]

and? any point to this post? if you'll remember, i was the one who originally pointed out the position of the gunners seat, in this picture in order to counter your belief that the gunner sits right behind the mantlet. obviously, you were wrong about this, and now you act like this was always your position on the matter.
par for the course.

When I said behind mantlet not 100 percent behind mantlet , a large portion behind the covering plate and the gap between the mantlet and the main sight cutaway.

Btw after correcting me with huge effort why did you put it in the wrong place in your model i.e completely behind the main sight,Which is completely wrong?

the 250 Cm mark is also completely wrong based on this line drawing with dimensions, It is the hatch cover standing vertical which is at 250 cm mark as per the drawing i.e the head rest point for the Tc.

 

[Dejawolf]

I am now arguing first for the gap between cutaway for main sight and the roof top vision block,
.

oh, thanks, it's hard to tell since your subjects change so rapidly, every time i prove you wrong.
oh and correct your post:

first as per the proven fact that the armor back plate behind the main sight is flat

Where ever i claimed any LOS for main sight , I pull it out of thin air to troll people on this forum, and needlessly drag out discussions, wasting everyones time.

And you have made multiple post countering my estimates based on A+B+ C+D =2500 break up, and brutally destroyed all of my arguments.

That shows you are right on every count on these crucial 4 dimensions.

i am wrong about everything and have been for the last 300 pages. i am sorry for wasting everyones time, and i'm now going to go away.
.

 

[Dejawolf]

When I said behind mantlet not 100 percent behind mantlet , a large portion behind the covering plate and the gap between the mantlet and the main sight cutaway.

Btw after correcting me with huge effort why did you put it in the wrong place in your model i.e completely behind the main sight,Which is completely wrong?

are you talking about the gunners seat? it never was "completely behind the main sight" in the model and it is not in that image either.
and there is no correlation between the lateral position of the gunners seat, and the thickness of the armour block behind the sight.

the 250 Cm mark is also completely wrong based on this line drawing with dimensions, It is the hatch cover standing vertical which is at 250 cm mark as per the drawing i.e the head rest point for the Tc.

no, the 250cm mark is exactly where it is in the line drawing, which is one of the reasons your measurements are wrong.

 

[ersakthivel]

are you talking about the gunners seat? it never was "completely behind the main sight" in the model and it is not in that image either.
and there is no correlation between the lateral position of the gunners seat, and the thickness of the armour block behind the sight.



no, the 250cm mark is exactly where it is in the line drawing, which is one of the reasons your measurements are wrong.

See each and every feature you marked on your model is wrong.

1. width of the turret at the center point,

2. The 2500 mark from the front tip of the Arjun turret.

3. The lateral position of the gunner's seat,

4. the height of the Tc's head,

5. The height of the gunner's head.

But whenever I point them out ,

you only reply in punch dialogues , and useless three liners, So I take that as your inability to offer any coherent drawing based , photo based reply with any meaning because you don't want to admit your mistakes,

So I point out the next mistake, since there is plenty of mistakes in your model. So if it looks like I am changing the subject again and again , I just can't help it.Because there is no point in replying to stupid three liners with a teenager temper.


So you are not going to follow the instructions given by PMAITRA not to post stuff that has no relation to Arjun mk-2 here.

Why can't you post your details about Arjun Mk-1 in the relevant Arjun MBT thread?

What is the use of littering this thread with punch dialogues? and cutting and posting stuff from Arjun MBT thread?

Is it so hard for you to even follow such a simple directive?

@ersakthivel, it is true that DRDO is doing its best, yet, since we do have a non-uniform front protection, it is important to focus on that vision cutout in the front turret that seems like an Achilles Heel of the Arjun Mark II.

considering the LEO drawing posted here and the photo of Arjun in the shop floor there is no big difference in protection level of LEO and Arjun on this main sight count,

It will be clear once Dejawolf corrects all his mistakes that are pointed out here.

BTW, we have a thread for Arjun Mark II, so let's debate it in the correct thread.

@pmaitra

please ask Dejwolf to shift this discussion to Arjun MBT thread as many relevant posts regarding this debate is only in that thread.Simply cutting and pasting them here is a waste of time and worthless littering in this thread as none of it pertains to Arjun mk-2

 

[Dejawolf]

See each and every feature you marked on your model is wrong.

1. width of the turret at the center point,

2. The 2500 mark from the front tip of the Arjun turret.

3. The lateral position of the gunner's seat,

4. the height of the Tc's head,

5. The height of the gunner's head.

But whenever I point them out ,

you only reply in punch dialogues , and useless three liners, So I take that as your inability to offer any coherent drawing based , photo based reply with any meaning because you don't want to admit your mistakes,

So I point out the next mistake, since there is plenty of mistakes in your model. So if it looks like I am changing the subject again and again , I just can't help it.Because there is no point in replying to stupid three liners with a teenager temper.


So you are not going to follow the instructions given by PMAITRA not to post stuff that has no relation to Arjun mk-2 here.

Why can't you post your details about Arjun Mk-1 in the relevant Arjun MBT thread?

What is the use of littering this thread with punch dialogues? and cutting and posting stuff from Arjun MBT thread?

Is it so hard for you to even follow such a simple directive?




@pmaitra

please ask Dejwolf to shift this discussion to Arjun MBT thread as many relevant posts regarding this debate is only in that thread.Simply cutting and pasting them here is a waste of time and worthless littering in this thread as none of it pertains to Arjun mk-2

you are the one who shifted it here in the first place. as soon as i made a post here you made your 300 page replies.

 

[ersakthivel]

you are the one who shifted it here in the first place. as soon as i made a post here you made your 300 page replies.

this thread is only 13 pages before we shifted here, Any way we can shift to Arjun MBt thread and not post here any more,

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Information about MK1 as well as MK2 ..

Source CLAWS ..

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Cannon Launched guided missile.

Posted By @Twinblade

 

[Twinblade]

^^ Still a work in progress in this picture. Doesn't seem to have radar and has some armour modules still missing, but we can see some sort of mounting plate for the radar and the RCWS installed.

 

[sayareakd]

^^ Still a work in progress in this picture. Doesn't seem to have radar and has some armour modules still missing, but wee can see some sort of mounting plate for the radar and the RCWS installed.

yeah if you compare it with computer generated models. That structure, what ever it is on the left side (if you are facing MK-2) is their.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

You can see the Radar is on far left side ( From picture prospective ) ..

^^ Still a work in progress in this picture. Doesn't seem to have radar and has some armour modules still missing, but we can see some sort of mounting plate for the radar and the RCWS installed.

 

[arnabmit]

As per AEROSUN MEDIA it is the Arjun MK-II P-1 Prototype

^^ Still a work in progress in this picture. Doesn't seem to have radar and has some armour modules still missing, but we can see some sort of mounting plate for the radar and the RCWS installed.

 

[Twinblade]

You can see the Radar is on far left side ( From picture prospective ) ..

It looks more like the base plate for installation rather than the actual instrument.

 

[jmj_overlord]

when the final prototype is produced , will it be with full armor? if so then won't it exceed the current weight?

 

[sayareakd]

when the final prototype is produced , will it be with full armor? if so then won't it exceed the current weight?

It is already full armor for front and both sides. MK-I is mean to be for tank to tank battle. I think Arjun tank has more room for PSO (Peace Support Operations) for urban combat, where in more protection can be added for all round full protection against anti armor crew in urban combat.

 

[sayareakd]

found this pic

 

[Kunal Biswas]

You may be correct ..

It looks more like the base plate for installation rather than the actual instrument.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

OFB made RCWS

Nice thing, Its also manual ..

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

He is mistaken BFSR for IR jammer ..

found this pic

 

[sayareakd]

You may be correct ..

Sir plate shown in Arjun MK-2 is fine, this is same type as shown in the computer generated pic.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

One of the Interesting features of MK2 >>

Russia and India. Despite the differences in geography, culture and other aspects of these countries have in common the common problems of construction of modern armed forces. That in Russia, in India, is now the place to be opposition political groups and clans. As applied to the case military modernization, this translates into a hard military conflict - representatives of the Ministry of Defence and the Army Command in particular, representatives of the military-industrial complex. Similarly, as we now have in Russia, India, military lobby in favor of military equipment imported armaments. Industrialists, in turn, are talking about support for "domestic" manufacturer, to lobby for the development of national industry and economy.The report "Ukraine steals Russian tanks" we have already mentioned that in order to explore the possibilities to upgrade T-90S tanks, the Indian side has sent to Ukraine to Plant im.Malysheva KMDB and one of the tanks of this type, for a comprehensive modernization. But Russian officials probably will not see this as a problem, but according to this do not take any response. But one look at the appearance, demonstrated a model of modernization, as it becomes clear that the Ukrainian company offers direct competitor Russian version of modernization of the T-90C, known as T-90ms "Tagil".

Another strong competitor T-90ms in India, is the national development - the project "Arjun" Mk.2. On this machine we just mentioned . However, it is worth to recall it again. The reason for this are the new details emerged about the configuration of the machine.World experience shows armor upgrade priority - FCS modernization, equipping tanks with more modern sighting systems with the thermal and the possibility of the panoramic view. So much for the tank "Arjun" Now Mk.2 prototypes piloted MSA with panoramic sight COAPS from Israeli firm Elbit Systems (ELOP).

Setting sights on COAPS tank "Arjun" Mk.2 manufactured by Elbit together with the Indian company Bangalore-based Serial Innovations. According to the promotional materials distributed, COAPS has several features that are absent in other OMS tanks. The sight is a modular, open architecture platform, stabilized in two planes. This allows you to easily and cost-effectively add to it or modify the design, reduces maintenance and repair. Allows you to easily install a thermal imaging camera range 3-5mkm or 8-12mkm (target detection range of 5 km), the camcorder with the ability to scale color image format HDTV (target detection range of 5 km), the laser range finder (distance of 10 km). Stabilization of an independent two-plane. Provides a 360 deg. in the horizontal plane and from -20 to +60 deg. in the vertical. The sight has a ballistic protection from bullets and shrapnel. Provides integration into military carrier system, the work in the "search-destruction."

It is not difficult to see panoramic sight COAPS compares favorably to the Russian and Belarusian counterparts smaller in size, with the odd then it may be easier to assemble modernized, but more so on the newly developed machines. Serious benefits are enhanced viewing angle in the vertical plane (such as our "Hawkeye" only from -15 to +45 deg.), And, of course, open architecture. It may be noted and disadvantages.

First of all, this is clearly insufficient combat and operational viability. Ballistic protection rotten. In dusty conditions the air, not to mention the effects of combat, there are structural prerequisites to ensure that sight can jam with the movements in the vertical plane. Oh and do not know how to show the thermal camera in low thermal contrast.

However, panoramic sight COAPS - this is a serious competitive bid. We can say the Russian tank designers are challenged. Not so terrible it's integration to the modernized "Arjun", will be hurt and angry if this sight the Indian side chooses to upgrade its T-72 and T-90.

Source : Gur Khan attacks!: Панорамный прицел для "Арджуна"
Source : Панорамный прицел для "Арджуна" » Военное обозрение

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

Like to left this note, This was my work picked up by foreign blogs..