Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT)

[Damian]

I get it.

It was my mistake, I overestimated you.

No You don't, even Methos says that smoothbore guns and ammuniton are better.

You just probably use known ballistics from small arms that are not nececary proper for big calliber guns.

And hey, look further in future, coil guns and rail guns also do not use any sort of rifiling but are mean to be accurate even at very long range.

So You want to tell designers from all other countries that they are idiots and the only good solution is rifled gun? When actually all tank designing countries get rid off rifled guns?

Which will come on top if T-90 vs Al-khalid and Arjun vs Al-khalid?

T-90 have here an edge, because besides APFSDS it also have HEAT and GLATGM, while Arjun have outdated APFSDS and HESH uncapable to defeat vehicles with spaced or composite armor.

 

[pmaitra]

No You don't, even Methos says that smoothbore guns and ammuniton are better.

You just probably use known ballistics from small arms that are not nececary proper for big calliber guns.

I asked Methos, why did those German rounds outperform? A smoothbore gun outperformed another rifled gun does not mean it happened because it was smoothbore.

Correlation is not causation, and please, don't even challenge me on that, because if you do, I will inundate you with a whole bunch of mathematical formulae proving this that will further embarrass you.

 

[Mad Indian]

No You don't, even Methos says that smoothbore guns and ammuniton are better.

You just probably use known ballistics from small arms that are not nececary proper for big calliber guns.

And hey, look further in future, coil guns and rail guns also do not use any sort of rifiling but are mean to be accurate even at very long range.

So You want to tell designers from all other countries that they are idiots and the only good solution is rifled gun? When actually all tank designing countries get rid off rifled guns?



T-90 have here an edge, because besides APFSDS it also have HEAT and GLATGM, while Arjun have outdated APFSDS and HESH uncapable to defeat vehicles with spaced or composite armor.

I asked Methos, why did those German rounds outperform? A smoothbore gun outperformed another rifled gun does not mean it happened because it was smoothbore.

Correlation is not causation, and please, don't even challenge me on that, because if you do, I will inundate you with a whole bunch of mathematical formulae proving this that will further embarrass you.

Please answer my question and then Continue your fight

 

[p2prada]

This is a clear advantage for Arjun over T-90. Here's why:

T-90	Arjun
Cannot tackle low c.f.g. mulch or sand.	Can tackle low c.f.g. mulch or sand.
Will sink more into the sand and that will cause more wear and consequently frequent maintenance and replacement of wheels and tracks.	Will sink less and will have a longer life.
Tracks are more likely to come off as a result of wear.	Tracks are less likely to come off as a result of wear.
Will throw up too much dust, indicating to the enemy, "Hey, I'm coming. Keep your ATGMs ready!"	Will throw up less dust

So, superior armour, superior gun, superior shells are not enough. The T-90 is inferior because it supposedly kicks up more dust. Have you seen a formation of a 60 ton Arjun going through a desert as compare to a 46 tons tank? Do you know that our desert environment is a purely defensive environment under control of the South Western command(Arjuns) who have no control of our strike corps(T-90).

Perhaps the Arjun kicks up lesser dust, maybe. But the difference would probably be 4 or 5 cms lesser. You think that makes a difference. Of course maybe you believe the T-90 kicks up a dust wall hundreds of metres high or something. Please make more sense.

The weight alone indicates the Arjun will kick up more dust than a tank 15 tons lighter. Also, in the world of BSRs and satellites, if the enemy is still relying on dust to alert them of enemies approaching, then they are already dead.

The T-90 cannot get bogged down simply because it is 15 tons lighter. An ant has much higher ground pressure than an elephant. So, which do you think will sink first? Don't forget that the T-90 is 15 tons lighter. The Army highlights this reason as an important capability. The army believes the 60 tons Arjun will get bogged down in the fields in Pakjab(Pakistani Punjab) and was already voiced as an important reason on why they don't need the Arjun.

As for tracks you need to read up more. The T-90's tracks are good enough for the Army. Even if I give you the benefit of the doubt and accept that they come off more, they are happier that the T-90 has superior armour, superior gun and superior shells other than having the advantage of maintaining the same logistics chain as the T-72 rather than building two different logistics chain for T-72 and the Arjun.

Am I right in assuming, you believe the T-90 is of a different class than Arjun because of these awesome advantages of Arjun?

If I accept that the T-90 and Arjun are of different classes, that you so profusely support, then I am forced to say that the Arjun definitely isn't in the same class as the T-90.

 

[pmaitra]

^^

No, you are misinterpreting.

I said each has its weaknesses and strengths, remember?

 

[Damian]

I asked Methos, why did those German rounds outperform? A smoothbore gun outperformed another rifled gun does not mean it happened because it was smoothbore.

And he will definetly write this in time.

But fact is a fact, smoothbore outperformed rifled gun. You want to argue with facts?

Correlation is not causation, and please, don't even challenge me on that, because if you do, I will inundate you with a whole bunch of mathematical formulae proving this that will further embarrass you.

You will not embarrass me because I not claimed to be engineer or mathematician.

Please answer my question and then Continue your fight

Allready answered.

 

[Mad Indian]

So, superior armour, superior gun, superior shells are not enough. The T-90 is inferior because it supposedly kicks up more dust. Have you seen a formation of a 60 ton Arjun going through a desert as compare to a 46 tons tank? Do you know that our desert environment is a purely defensive environment under control of the South Western command(Arjuns) who have no control of our strike corps(T-90).

Perhaps the Arjun kicks up lesser dust, maybe. But the difference would probably be 4 or 5 cms lesser. You think that makes a difference. Of course maybe you believe the T-90 kicks up a dust wall hundreds of metres high or something. Please make more sense.

The weight alone indicates the Arjun will kick up more dust than a tank 15 tons lighter. Also, in the world of BSRs and satellites, if the enemy is still relying on dust to alert them of enemies approaching, then they are already dead.

The T-90 cannot get bogged down simply because it is 15 tons lighter. An ant has much higher ground pressure than an elephant. So, which do you think will sink first? Don't forget that the T-90 is 15 tons lighter. The Army highlights this reason as an important capability. The army believes the 60 tons Arjun will get bogged down in the fields in Pakjab(Pakistani Punjab) and was already voiced as an important reason on why they don't need the Arjun.

As for tracks you need to read up more. The T-90's tracks are good enough for the Army. Even if I give you the benefit of the doubt and accept that they come off more, they are happier that the T-90 has superior armour, superior gun and superior shells other than having the advantage of maintaining the same logistics chain as the T-72 rather than building two different logistics chain for T-72 and the Arjun.

Am I right in assuming, you believe the T-90 is of a different class than Arjun because of these awesome advantages of Arjun?

If I accept that the T-90 and Arjun are of different classes, that you so profusely support, then I am forced to say that the Arjun definitely isn't in the same class as the T-90.

Please.. Answer my question. IS any of our Tank better than the Puki ones? I want to Know ..

 

[pmaitra]

Please answer my question and then Continue your fight

Don't know man, I am not an expert in tanks and will not pretend to be one either.

I am only arguing on points that I am sure about.

Please enjoy this thread, because, it is funny.

 

[methos]

Even if fired from smoothbore, rounds are often made to spin using fins for accuracy. As I said, spinning projectile will be more accurate than non-spinning ones. (Can you give more details about the German rounds? Why did they outperform?)

The only rounds which are "really" spin-stabilized when fired from rifled guns are full-caliber shots (HE, HESH, AP) and APDS rounds. They spin at an extreme rate, iirc. with multiple rotations per second. Fin-stabilized rounds spin also, but iirc. only with a few rotations per minute. Given the typical flight time of an APFSDS (with a muzzle velocity of 1,650 m/s and a vdrop of about 60 m/s/km travelling to an enemy tank located 2,000 m far away will take less than 1 1/4 second) we can simply say "they don't spin". The exact way fin-stabilization works lies somewhere in an area of physics unknown to me.

(Can you give more details about the German rounds? Why did they outperform?)

They were more accurate because of their fin-stabilization, velocity and trajectory. This was proven a few times during the German evaluation of the gun, the German-U.S. joint-evaluation of the Leopard 2AV and during the triliteral NATO evaluation for future tank guns. There were a variety of different tests with different settings. E.g. during the triliteral evalution the British used 110 mm APDS, the U.S 105 mm APFSDS and the Germans 120 mm APFSDS from their smoothbore gun. The Germans performed the bests in terms of firepower and also in terms of accuracy. Real details about the evaluations (like range, target size and amount of shots etc.) are not known to me.

One last thing:
Both the Arjun and the T-90 are MBTs. They Arjun might be weightwise a "heavy tank" and the T-90 a "light tank", but somewhere in the 1960s people decided to categorize weapons by their role instead of their size. Both the T-90 and the Arjun are designed to fulfill a large amount of tasks in the battlefield, to be allrounder. This makes them MBTs. They are designed following different design patterns and optimized to some extend for some roles, but are capable to do all.
Modern "light tanks" are mainly expeditionary tanks (i.e. tanks to be air-portable to fight enemies far away from their homecountry) or heavy reconnaissance vehicles. During WW2 "light tanks" were simply lighter than other tanks - the PzKw 35(t) for example was as good armed and armoured as the PzKw III during the early stages of the war, still it was seen as light tank because of the smaller size.

 

[Mad Indian]

Don't know man, I am not an expert in tanks and will not pretend to be one either.

I am only arguing on points that I am sure about.

Please enjoy this thread, because, it is funny.

Then what about the Professionals- Damian and P2P??

 

[pmaitra]

And he will definetly write this in time.

But fact is a fact, smoothbore outperformed rifled gun. You want to argue with facts?

Will never deny facts. So, if you tell me, a certain smoothbore gun outperformed a certain rifled gun, I will agree. If you say, a certain gun outperformed another rifled gun because it was smoothbore, then you are in for some interrogation. Hope you are getting my drift.

You will not embarrass me because I not claimed to be engineer or mathematician.

Well, then just state facts, and write sentences like this: "While it is true that on one occasion a smoothbore gun outperformed a rifled gun, it is not clear why the smoothbore gun outperformed the rifled gun." In other words, don't pretend to be an expert when you cannot offer an explanation.

 

[pmaitra]

Then what about the Professionals- Damian and P2P??

Read the thread and savour the beauty of what is already there. Please Sir!

 

[Damian]

T-90 in terms of mobility, firepower and protection is comparable with T-80UD. In terms of mobility and firepower comparable to Al-Khalid.
Arjun in terms of protection can be comparable to T-80UD, in terms of mobility it is comparable, in terms of firepower inferior.
Arjun is comparable in terms of mobility with Al-Khalid, comparable lub better in terms of protection, inferior in terms of firepower.

Al-Zarrar is immune to HESH, due to spaced armor (at least on turret), it's protection against Arjun APFSDS is not known. Al-Zarrar is inferior to Arjun and T-90 in terms of protection.

 

[p2prada]

So One on One, Which will win?

And Also , Which will come on top if T-90 vs Al-khalid and Arjun vs Al-khalid?

Please answer my small question, in between your fights..

Tanks always hunt in packs. The design of the T-90 and all other tanks are meant for that purpose. That's one reason why tanks don't need strong rear protection.

For the scenario you have given it is safe to say it will end in a stalemate because neither India nor Pak have good shells like what the Americans have. What I am saying is in a direct frontal hit, the tanks cannot take out each other. But things change once you start aiming for weak spots. Once weak spots come into the picture, then the Arjun has the largest number of them followed by Al Khalid. T-90 has the least number of weak spots among the three tanks.

In the front sector, the T-90 has no weak spots except for the joints between the turret and hull(difficult to reach). Al Khalid have a higher turret with less armour on top which can be aimed and shot at from the front. Arjun has a massive sight and mantle which are weakened zones.

From the side. The T-90's front armour protects the side armour. Meaning the side armour is hidden in a 30 degree angle. Al Khalid has a similar design, but the angle is lesser. I don't know the exact measurement, but I guess it is safe to say 20-25 degrees. Arjun has a flat side which is not protected by frontal armour. It is instead protected by a 80mm RHA which can be penetrated by any RPG let alone a tank.

From the rear, all three tanks are sh!t. FYI, the T-90MS has higher protection from the rear.

If you bring in the T-90 vs the Pak T-80, then the T-80 has even lesser weak spots than the T-90. But the difference is not too big for the advantage to be used effectively. Meaning the armour on the hull is better spread out near the turret ring, unlike the T-90. It's other advantages are the same as the T-90.

 

[Damian]

Will never deny facts. So, if you tell me, a certain smoothbore gun outperformed a certain rifled gun, I will agree. If you say, a certain gun outperformed
another rifled gun because it was smoothbore, then you are in for some interrogation. Hope you are getting my drift.

Methos allready answered. Rhinemetall smoothbore outperformed British Rifled guns, and You not sell me story that Indians all of the sudden designed superior rifled gun in terms of accuracy...

French smoothbore in Greece also outperformed British rifled gun.

Well, then just state facts, and write sentences like this: "While it is true that on one occasion a smoothbore gun outperformed a rifled gun, it is not clear why the smoothbore gun outperformed the rifled gun." In other words, don't pretend to be an expert when you are not.

Never pretended to be an expert on that subject. This is Yoy that don't accept facts and starts holly war to defend DRDO toy.

 

[methos]

T-90 in terms of mobility, firepower and protection is comparable with T-80UD. In terms of mobility and firepower comparable to Al-Khalid.
Arjun in terms of protection can be comparable to T-80UD, in terms of mobility it is comparable, in terms of firepower inferior.
Arjun is comparable in terms of mobility with Al-Khalid, comparable lub better in terms of protection, inferior in terms of firepower.

Al-Zarrar is immune to HESH, due to spaced armor (at least on turret), it's protection against Arjun APFSDS is not known. Al-Zarrar is inferior to Arjun and T-90 in terms of protection.

That's pretty much it. Still the Pakistani made 125 mm APFSDS (they still might get some others from China, Ukraine or Russia) are on 3BM-42 level. The new Mk.2 APFSDS should be better. Still Pakistan has the Naiza DU APFSDS shown during some expos, which should be on a rather comparable level in terms of armour penetration.
HESH can't kill enemy tanks with a big probabilty, but it should be capable of blinding them to some extend. ----- up the enemie's sights and nothing can happen to you. HESH should not be used against enemy heavy armour, against medium armoured vehicles/infantry/bunkers it should be usefull. Arjun APFSDS is like posted some posts above worse than the current 125 mm rounds operated by Pakistan and India, but should be better than the only APFSDS used by the UK during Cold War.

In the front sector, the T-90 has no weak spots except for the joints between the turret and hull(difficult to reach). Al Khalid have a higher turret with less armour on top which can be aimed and shot at from the front. Arjun has a massive sight and mantle which are weakened zones.

T-90 has also a weaker mantlet and unlucky driver position. The drivers sight's are located within the armour volume, which means that this is also a weaker point. That whole thing is not very big, depending on the exact layout of the sights between 22 and 50 cm x width of driver place.

 

[p2prada]

^^

No, you are misinterpreting.

I said each has its weaknesses and strengths, remember?

My intention was to let you know that the weakness of the T-90 as you stated are infact not weaknesses, rather they are not anything.

You are yet to explain why the T-90 and Arjun are of different classes. Weight is no longer a class difference.

Gun, armour, mobility and weapons bring differences in class for tanks, not weight.

 

[p2prada]

Both the Arjun and the T-90 are MBTs. They Arjun might be weightwise a "heavy tank" and the T-90 a "light tank", but somewhere in the 1960s people decided to categorize weapons by their role instead of their size.

Exactly. In India, the tanks are categorized into a MBT or any other tank by the role it performs. The T-90 is part of the strike corps. Each strike corp can have 300-500 tanks. There are 3 strike corps and 5 defensive corps facing Pakistan. The remaining T-90s and older tanks are distributed between the defensive corps.

So, the main role of the MBT in India is to kill the enemy in enemy territory. Hence the T-90 is the MBT. Arjun is currently part of one of the defensive corps. Even they have some offensive roles, but it is rather limited.

 

[KS]

Views on Arjun by an ex-US Army tank commander.

I assume you meant rifled not riveted.

Smoothbore canons have exactyl that a smooth bore. They can achieve somewhat higher velocities than a rifled gun, but are less accurate. Rifled gun have rifling on the inside of the barrel called the bore. This rifling imparts a spin to the round as it is pushed down the bore by the expanding exhaust gasses of the propellant. This spin makes the weapon more accurate. The longest tank on tank kill was achieved by the British using a rifled L11A5 120mm gun. The longest tank vs target hit of all time was General Tal of the IDF's hit on a Syrian bulldozer at something like 6km using a rifled L7/M68 105mm gun.

Rifled guns general have a shorter barrel life and are harder to clean. Thus with modern computerized fire-control systems making up almost all of the difference in accuracy, the smoothbore cannon seems to be the way to go forward with conventional gun technology.

Yup, the Indian's haven't spent the last 8-9 years fixing the deficencies discovered in 88-89. The T-90 is junk compared to the Arjun with inferior armor and survivability, inferior mobility and fire on the move envelope, an inferior power pack and power to weight ratio, increased gorund pressure, reduced crew effectiveness and increased combat fatigue, inferior battle management systems, inferior electronics, no room for major moderinisation etc.

As for the fire control issue specifically, the Israelies have been involved for a number of years now and they are world class fire control designers so betting Pakistan's future on an article written years ago is fool hardy.

Guns,

125mm Guns will not perform at the same levle as 120mm guns. The 2A46 pattern autoloading 125mm smoothbore sues 2 piece ammuntion that both reduces the penetrators overall weight by more than 25% and it's overall leangth by aboutthe same amount. maximum penetration for a 125mm is about 600mm RHAe (russian claims) and evne this si suspect becyuase thier way thier asign RHA values is artifically high (see the claimed performance of the RPG-29 vs the T-90 and the RPG-29's failure to penetrate the merkava from the front. The numbers do not match up)

meanwhile western pattern 120mmAPFSDS like the DM-63 (non-DU) can bust 800mm RHAe with ease.

The world record for direct fire is held by a 120mm rifled canon fitted to a Challanger 1 at over 5km.

A comparison will show that the 125mm fires a lighter projectile at the same speeds as the 120mm's heavier round beucase the 2 peice ammo system also reduces the amount of propellant.

Cross country speed,

The AK uses a non return roller christie style torsion bar system. The Arjun uses a pnuematic system. The ride in the arjun will be signifigantly easier on the crew and the smoother the ride the wider the speed range in which the FCS will work. The AK will be lucky to achieve 25kmph fire on the move across rough terrain, and the Arjun can expect 40kmph or better.

crew comfort,

the cramped vibrating interior of the AK along with threemen having to do four mens worth of work will leave AK crews fatigued far sooner than the Arjuns roomier more comfratable ride. This was not a problem for the USSR who would use echelon tactics so crews were not overworked. Since pakistan and india have near equal numbers of tanks both sides T series and T type tanks will seriously degrade crew performace, but the InA's Arjun fleet will remain fresh for far longer periods.

Protection,

The AK has no side protection vs infantry fired anti-tank weapons, and it's composite armor is poorly shaped and leaves large gaps that are more easily exploited. Also the newest Chinese ATGM rounds are still 2 generations behind the west and Russia and thier performance as a way to tes tthe composites is doubtful. The Arjun's "gold" cermaic armor is considered world class and no 125mm round or any HEAT round has yet proven the ability to penetrate such armors from the front.

All the merkavs lost were side hits so as long as the InA guards the Arjuns flanks it is all but unstoppable from the front. There is not a single weapon currently in the PA inventory I would trust to take out an Arjun( Unless of course the PA gets the javelin anti-tank missile with pop up attack.)

the Arjun also has bustlerack storage with blow out panels, while the AK uses the very dangeorus and explosive casset style system ie flying frying pans of Gulf War 1 fame.

I have already been over this subject so often on so many different forums its not even funny, check the landwarfare thread on this very forum, Sinodefence forum, PDF, WAB and BRF. The AK is a medium tank built around a 40 year old hull and gun with a few new bells and whistles thrown on. As t series tanks go it is probalby an equal partner with the T-80/90 type tanks, but cannot be favorably comapred to an MBT which has a better gun, signifigantly better protection, and a more rested crew.

If Pakistan wants an asnwer for the Arjun, get the ZTZ-98G (120mm 4 man crew version of the ZTZ-98)

 

[Damian]

The longest tank on tank kill was achieved by the British using a rifled L11A5 120mm gun. The longest tank vs target hit of all time was General Tal of the IDF's hit on a Syrian bulldozer at something like 6km using a rifled L7/M68 105mm gun.

Nobody of course say how many rounds were fired before target was hit. Firing classic munitions at ranges bigger than 4,000m is waste of ammunition and should not be done... never. Not to mention that this was not even performed by ordinary crews, but by General and Colonel... Ordinary crew would be slapped in face by officers for wasting ammunition.

Guns,

125mm Guns will not perform at the same levle as 120mm guns. The 2A46 pattern autoloading 125mm smoothbore sues 2 piece ammuntion that both reduces the penetrators overall weight by more than 25% and it's overall leangth by aboutthe same amount. maximum penetration for a 125mm is about 600mm RHAe (russian claims) and evne this si suspect becyuase thier way thier asign RHA values is artifically high (see the claimed performance of the RPG-29 vs the T-90 and the RPG-29's failure to penetrate the merkava from the front. The numbers do not match up)

meanwhile western pattern 120mmAPFSDS like the DM-63 (non-DU) can bust 800mm RHAe with ease.

The world record for direct fire is held by a 120mm rifled canon fitted to a Challanger 1 at over 5km.

A comparison will show that the 125mm fires a lighter projectile at the same speeds as the 120mm's heavier round beucase the 2 peice ammo system also reduces the amount of propellant.

Cross country speed,

The AK uses a non return roller christie style torsion bar system. The Arjun uses a pnuematic system. The ride in the arjun will be signifigantly easier on the crew and the smoother the ride the wider the speed range in which the FCS will work. The AK will be lucky to achieve 25kmph fire on the move across rough terrain, and the Arjun can expect 40kmph or better.

crew comfort,

the cramped vibrating interior of the AK along with threemen having to do four mens worth of work will leave AK crews fatigued far sooner than the Arjuns roomier more comfratable ride. This was not a problem for the USSR who would use echelon tactics so crews were not overworked. Since pakistan and india have near equal numbers of tanks both sides T series and T type tanks will seriously degrade crew performace, but the InA's Arjun fleet will remain fresh for far longer periods.

Protection,

The AK has no side protection vs infantry fired anti-tank weapons, and it's composite armor is poorly shaped and leaves large gaps that are more easily exploited. Also the newest Chinese ATGM rounds are still 2 generations behind the west and Russia and thier performance as a way to tes tthe composites is doubtful. The Arjun's "gold" cermaic armor is considered world class and no 125mm round or any HEAT round has yet proven the ability to penetrate such armors from the front.

All the merkavs lost were side hits so as long as the InA guards the Arjuns flanks it is all but unstoppable from the front. There is not a single weapon currently in the PA inventory I would trust to take out an Arjun( Unless of course the PA gets the javelin anti-tank missile with pop up attack.)

the Arjun also has bustlerack storage with blow out panels, while the AK uses the very dangeorus and explosive casset style system ie flying frying pans of Gulf War 1 fame.

I have already been over this subject so often on so many different forums its not even funny, check the landwarfare thread on this very forum, Sinodefence forum, PDF, WAB and BRF. The AK is a medium tank built around a 40 year old hull and gun with a few new bells and whistles thrown on. As t series tanks go it is probalby an equal partner with the T-80/90 type tanks, but cannot be favorably comapred to an MBT which has a better gun, signifigantly better protection, and a more rested crew.

If Pakistan wants an asnwer for the Arjun, get the ZTZ-98G (120mm 4 man crew version of the ZTZ-98)

If this is made by some officer then he is weakly informed... ZTZ-98G is armed with 125mm gun, have 3 crew members and is pre mass production version of ZTZ-99.

Besides this problems with autoloaders and projectile lenght were solved by Russians, now new APFSDS ammunition have ~740mm long penetrator, it is within NATO standards.

Rest is pure bollocks, Jim Warford would be terrified if he would see such specialist from US Army claiming such revelations... and Jim Warford is well known and respected US Army officer analizing non US designs. You talk with him on TankNet.