Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT)

[KS]

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.

Heard of Zraver ?

He has supposedly a very good reputation.

 

[Damian]

Never heard about him, never read any of his articles in ARMOR Magazine that is official US Army Armor Corps magazine.

http://www.benning.army.mil/Armor/ArmorMagazine/content/BackIssues.html

ARMOR Magazine numbers, avaiable for civilian use are only numbers up to year 2000.

Jim Warford have much greater knowledge than this pseudo specialist that do not even know armament calliber and number of crew members in ZTZ-98G. And Warford is not such arogant and ignorant to make BS claims not even knowing design details of both compared tanks.

Not to mention that it was proved that Arjun is not any way safer than T-90 or any other T-xx series tank.

Ammunition storage is similiar to Leopard 2 with only ~15 rounds in isolated turret compartment with blow off panels.

But I suspect that even You don't have even smallest idea about any tank and it's design solution. So You belive in the first written BS that prize the best option You will support, without any reflection.

The AK uses a non return roller christie style torsion bar system.

This is the best part of this pseudo specialist speech.

First Christie suspension system was used for example in T-34, while Al Khalid use standard torsion bar suspension and it also have return rollers.

You can see behind damaged skirt section that track do not touch upper part of wheel, this means that there are return rollers.

This is credibility and knowledge of that specialist.

 

[p2prada]

Heard of Zraver ?

He has supposedly a very good reputation.

All that changed once he came to know the specs of the Arjun and the T-90 side by side. All done here in DFI in this very thread right in the beginning.

Zraver wrote that post when he believed the Arjun was equivalent to something like the M1A2 or the latest M1A2SEP in armour. Thus he used other western advantages like the greater depression for the gun and 4 man crew to assume the AK won't stand a chance.

In this very thread he calls the Arjun's gun as a dinosaur gun and that the T-90 gun is superior because facts were posted. He also assumes that the Arjun's shells are equivalent to more or less modern European shells, but he does not yet know that the Arjun actually has a shell inferior to the 3BM-42. He also does not know that the side armour on Arjun is just RHA. He believes it is composites, as already mentioned by him, "Gold" armour. Now he knows that the T-90 is modified to carry new long round shells which is equivalent to the DM-53 in length. He has also assumed the gun on the T series to be the old 2A46(70s gun on T-72) and not the latest 2A46M-5(latest gun on T-90). In this very thread, he says the 125mm shells are good because they have more bursting charge.

Notice he did not mention DFI in the list of forums he mentioned.

 

[Damian]

So these posts are from what year? For me his knowledge is very limited, especially that he does not even know the obvious visual difference of torsion bars suspension and Chriestie suspension.

 

[pmaitra]

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.

No. Regardless of whether you agree with me, they are weaknesses. There is no fact in your sentence with 'infact.' The facts are there in my table. See it again. If you must argue, you need to show me why, just like Methos had to use only one sentence to get me to agree with him, and "I told you so," is not an acceptable answer.

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.

That is your own convention of convenience that no one else is obliged to follow. Putting T-90 and Arjun in the same class is silly.

 

[pmaitra]

This is credibility and knowledge of that specialist.

Damian, putting down other people will not get you anywhere. Stand on your own feet and argue on your own merit. It is easy for you to denounce Zraver as much as it is easy for anyone to denounce you. Attack the message, not the messenger.

 

[p2prada]

So these posts are from what year? For me his knowledge is very limited, especially that he does not even know the obvious visual difference of torsion bars suspension and Chriestie suspension.

That post of Zraver's is old.

He compared Arjun's gun with the 2A46 on AK. In that case the Arjun's gun is better.

He compared western design philosophy with Chinese. So, in that case he is right.

He compared western armour design with composites with Chinese. So, again he is right.

He compared western ammo placement to that of both T-90 and AK. So, in that case he is right.

Strictly speaking he was comparing the M1A2 with AK and T-90. That coupled with lack of research in the actual components on the Chinese and Russian tanks. If you compare the post Karthic posted with what Zraver posted in DFI, his knowledge was more up to date with his more recent posts on DFI. I would say that in Zraver's post above he was actually putting the Pakistanis in their place rather than praise Arjun.

No. Regardless of whether you agree with me, they are weaknesses. There is no fact in your sentence with 'infact.' The facts are there in my table. See it again. If you must argue, you need to show me why, just like Methos had to use only one sentence to get me to agree with him, and "I told you so," is not an acceptable answer.

So, I am supposed to answer all your questions while you play the game of rhetorics. Kicking up dust and having a very very slight ground pressure advantage coupled with the fact that the Army actually stated Arjun will bog down in Pakjab are strengths? You are displaying strange logic.

That is your own convention of convenience that no one else is obliged to follow. Putting T-90 and Arjun in the same class is silly.

Please make sense. If you make a point back it up with source or logic. If you state T-90 and Arjun are of two different classes, then provide points on why they are of a different class. Don't simply state they are different and end the discussion saying you are right. Your reasoning is akin to me saying the Earth is flat and the onus is on you to prove me wrong. More importantly the thing is I have tried to do it too. I have already given all possible reasons on why both tanks are of the same class.

If you are more clear on why they are of two different classes, then it would be a lot easier to clear your misconception.

 

[p2prada]

Sure, as long as it can help put down the Arjun without giving a convincing explanation. Only you and P2P understand, not everyone else.

What he is saying is that this was discussed to death in both T-90 and Arjun threads here on DFI. Anybody who has followed this thread knows it. There are over a 200 or 300 posts where armour placement has been discussed.

 

[methos]

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.

3BM-42 Mango weighs 4.85 kg (without sabot) which is very similar to M829, M829A1, DM13, DM23, DM33 etc. The only limitation imposed by the use of two-piece ammunition in combination with most autoloaders is the length, which then again can pe partially fixed by using better autoloaders. British CHARM-3 (L27) APFSDS is about 70 cm long, German DM53 is 74-75 cm long. 3BM-42M Lekalo is 73 cm long but incompatible with some autoloaders afaik.

Heard of Zraver ?

He has supposedly a very good reputation

I don't know wether he is sometimes trolling or just badly informed. But claiming DU can penetrate more than 1 m is complete nonsense...
I read some of his posts and he often makes mistakes. First example I was capable to find with google:
He claims that the T-90 uses ceramic armour and that " [...] even Russia just got into the ceramic plategame" - in fact Russia fielded the first ceramic composite armour ever (Combination-K) on the T-64A and T-64B (early models) with ceramic balls and on late T-64B with ceramic rods/tiles. Early T-90 was known as T-72BU, which itself was based on the T-72BM (which is iirc. not an official designation). The T-72BM is an improved T-72B. Armour of all these tanks is very likely to be bulging plates armour (NERA) as used on T-72B. No ceramics were used in Soviet tanks from the 1980s, T-80U was using a polymer-filled cell armour.

On TankNet, which is the most professional forum for tanks I know, he claimed that the M829A3 can penetrate 1,000 mm RHA based on some really stupid formula for estimating weight per length and multiplying it with speed to come up with energy values - totally ignoring the diameter. A "thick" APFSDS (like M829A3 with a diameter of ~27-28 mm) was therefore easily better than thinner, shorter rounds. His weight values also were quite curios. While he can claim such stuff on other forums, on TankNet are many people having good knowledge of APFSDS, math (Lanz-Odermatt eq., Richardson eq.) who told him that he is wrong.

 

[sayareakd]

if you want to compare t90 with arjun go to defexpo and compare it, i have amitkriit as witness to this, plus we ask tank crew about this.

 

[p2prada]

What did they tell you?

 

[Damian]

3BM-42M Lekalo is 73 cm long but incompatible with some autoloaders afaik.

There is also new round with penetrator reported ~740mm long.

Seems that only autoloaders in T-90A and T-90MS are compatibile with this types of ammunition. However there is probability that 6ETs-xx series of autoloaders used in T-64, T-80 and T-84 series might be capable to handle such long rounds without modifications due to different design.

 

[p2prada]

I wonder how soon the Russian army will finish their deliveries so that the shells open up for export.

Too bad IMI has been blacklisted. They are our only other source for tank shells. I wonder if the govt is thinking of dealing with Ukraine. That would bring in a lot of flexibility in our bargaining power for the shells from Russia.

 

[Damian]

Well You know, Ukrainians would be happy not only selling You ammunition for 125mm guns, but also their own 125mm smoothbore guns and even 120mm smoothbore guns + maybe even T-84M Oplot and T-64BM Bulat tanks and heavy tracked vehicles based on T-64.

They need money, they have many interesting designs, they wan't to sold these designs, and after manufacturing some of them in Ukraine, maybe even to sold licence for foreing customer.

But knowing opinions of some users of this forum, this would led to an outrage.

 

[pmaitra]

So, I am supposed to answer all your questions while you play the game of rhetorics. Kicking up dust and having a very very slight ground pressure advantage coupled with the fact that the Army actually stated Arjun will bog down in Pakjab are strengths? You are displaying strange logic.

You can do whatever you want. I have not denied the good points about T-90, but you are hell bent on denying the advantages of Arjun. Now that is your problem. When presented with fact(s), you come back waving a magic wand, saying, "that is not an advantage." It would save you (and Damian), a lot of effort, if you simply at least made an effort to explain, instead of just stating 'facts' and expecting people to take your words as blind truth. The way I see it is that, while you and Damian have a lot of information to offer, you guys really lack the capability to explain. Sorry, but that is what it is.

 

[p2prada]

There was this recent report that due to blacklisting of IMI, Russia has turned out to be the only supplier for T-90 ammunition and jacked up the prices by 400%. Our defence minister traveled to Russia to fix the problem. It could be fake news, but not impossible. However I fail to see why Ukraine isn't open for export. I am sure this option can be exercised considering Ukraine's dealing with Pakistan will be nowhere compared to what India can buy from Ukraine. Perhaps Ukraine may be used as a bargaining chip to force Russia to lower prices of their old and new shells.

How good is their 120mm smoothbore as compared to Israeli or German equivalents? I guess the guns may be more or less the same, but the stabilization system will make the difference.

 

[p2prada]

You can do whatever you want. I have not denied the good points about T-90, but you are hell bent on denying the advantages of Arjun. Now that is your problem. When presented with fact(s), you come back waving a magic wand, saying, "that is not an advantage." It would save you (and Damian), a lot of effort, if you simply at least made an effort to explain, instead of just stating facts and expecting people to take your words as blind truth. The way I see it is that, while you and Damian have a lot of information to offer, you guys really lack the capability to explain. Sorry, but that is what it is.

Dude. We don't know what to explain. You are saying T-90 and Arjun are of a different class. We are saying it is not. We even gave explanations for it. We told you the class difference no longer exists. The Arjun may be heavier, but it does not mean it is more capable. Other than that the T-90 and Arjun display the same exact capabilities when it comes to tank warfare with some slight advantages for T-90.

The advantages that you stated for Arjun aren't advantages at all. They are just small differences in design. Haven't you seen videos of tanks moving in desert terrains, there is literally no difference in how much dust is kicked up by any tank. It is a question of probability, like how much dust is present on the ground, if the ground is wet or not, wind conditions etc. BSRs and aircraft pick up tanks, in a tank battle dust plays no part in giving away position with modern detection techniques like radars, TIs and night vision. Ground pressure difference is fine if both tanks weighed the same. But they don't. The T-90 is lighter by 15 tons, pretty soon it will be lighter by 20 tons.

Arjun's main advantages are when you start thinking about how the west will use it. Give NATO a T-90 they will fvuk up their war. Give them the Arjun they won't. India does not follow Soviet doctrine, and neither do we follow NATO. We have our own and the T-90 fits in perfectly like a jig saw puzzle centered around a tank. The Pakistanis rejected the Abrams in tests because even they have their own doctrine where they believe Russian design tanks fit best. Abrams failed tests and that's another matter, but any army will buy a tank based on how they fight and never because the weapon itself is better.

As for specifications, Arjun has a greater depression. This is the angle at which the gun can move up or down. It is 20 deg for pitch up and down while it is 15 deg for T-90. Arjun has hydropneumatic suspensions which increases stability and hence accuracy of the gun. BMW type comfort too. A 4 man crew reduces workload. But it does not matter much for India because we have support infrastructure moving along with the corps. A large tank would mean more upgrades can be added(not a very big difference, really, but an advantage nonetheless).

However compared to T-90, Arjun needs a much larger logistics trail as it is a much bigger tank. This would mean extra trains for transport, extra men to train, extra maintenance and a massive new infrastructure to maintain the tank during both war and peace times. Comparatively the T-90 only uses the existing logistics trail for T-72. Major budget savings can be made. Training is more or less the same and thus there is little difference in converting a T-72 crew to the T-90. Not so with Arjun which has western training methods and tactics. So, advantage T-90 for training, logistics and maintenance.

The weapons available for Arjun aren't anywhere good. As already mentioned by Methos, Arjun's ammo is at best 80s level tech whereas the T-90s ammo currently available is ahead by a decade and newer ammo is coming out as we speak. The new ammos are upto the standards of modern NATO shells. Arjun will eventually be able to fire missiles after 2014(Lahat). Albeit Lahat is a superior missile, the T-90 had missile firing capability since the last 15 years. T-90 also has some capability against helicopters with onboard machine gun and some particular shells like HE-Frag. Arjun does not have any capability against helicopters due to the limitations of the Rifled gun. Arjun is not capable of carrying a mine plow like the T-90 can. It is being added on the Mk2 version. You can say that after 15 years, the Arjun will be able to do everything a T-90 could do since 2000. Some extra features are being added like an APS, but T-90 can have it too. So, T-90 has a massive advantage when it comes to weapons.

As for armour, the Arjun and T-90 have more or less the same armour. You can say the Russian supplied T-90s equipped with STEF will be better than the Indian made T-90 with Kanchan because STEF is a dynamic armour which acts like NERA while Kanchan is a ceramic. A dynamic armour is planned to be made for the FMBT. Arjun won't have one but will have add on NERA for Mk2 version. Other than that Arjun has design deficiencies which may not really be a big deal, but is at a disadvantage as compared to the T-90.

In the maneuverability department, there are no major differences. The only disadvantage that Arjun has is that it cannot snorkel like T-90 or pull a mine plow. T-90 is going to get a new engine soon, if not already present, unlike Arjun.

Hopefully this gives you an idea on both the tanks and you can come to your own conclusion.

 

[p2prada]

Oh, I missed another important advantage that the T-90 has. The Arjun when it was designed did not have the right parts and electronics. So, they had to be imported. Importing subsystems is bad for the tank. This is because each subsystem is designed not for Arjun but for the tanks of their own respective markets. While designing the Arjun, the space requirements increases because you don't know what is on offer outside. Perhaps a reason why the Arjun's turret is so damn big. Comparatively the T-90 has no imported parts save for the TI(and has since been replaced with a Russian system on the T-90MS). So, the entire tank is designed in such a way that there is really no space at all because the Russians know exactly what to put and where to put it.

To paraphrase what Ajai Shukla said, you won't even find a finger width of unnecessary space on the T-72, but on Arjun you can play hide and seek among the foreign subsystems. According to him, it is just a box with foreign maal inside. This was before 2005. What happened to such a vocal critic of the Arjun after 2005 is a mystery that none can fathom.

 

[Damian]

How good is their 120mm smoothbore as compared to Israeli or German equivalents? I guess the guns may be more or less the same, but the stabilization system will make the difference.

As far as I know Soviet (Russian/Ukrainian) stabilization systems in newer tanks like T-80U was not worser than NATO counterparts. AFAIK stabilization in T-64BM and T-84M is good and gives high accuracy on move, not worse than in NATO tanks. Same for Russian tanks with newer FCS of course.

As for the gun, I know it;s fully compatibile with NATO ammunition and was offered with T-84-120 Yatagan for Turkey, of course Turkey decided to wait with buying new tank, and purchased second hand Leo2's, while later buyed technology from South Korea to develop Altay... obviously Altay use only SK technology and is not based on SK K2 Black Panther tank in any way.

The Pakistanis rejected the Abrams in tests because even they have their own doctrine where they believe Russian design tanks fit best. Abrams failed tests and that's another matter,

As far as I know M1 was never tested in Pakistan. There were plans to sold tank in basic M1 variant when production started but in the end it seems that Washington changed their minds, possibly because Pakistan was not trust worthy and they could sold newest tank US Army tanks to Soviets or Chinese.

But as far as I know in any credible and serious source there is mention of M1 tested in Pakistan. In fact in whole 1980's it was not tested in any country interested to buy it but was not in NATO. I know about tests in 1980's in UK, and world wide tests for foreing customers were done in 1990's in Sweden, Greece, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

As for armour, the Arjun and T-90 have more or less the same armour. You can say the Russian supplied T-90s equipped with STEF will be better than the Indian made T-90 with Kanchan because STEF is a dynamic armour which acts like NERA while Kanchan is a ceramic. A dynamic armour is planned to be made for the FMBT. Arjun won't have one but will have add on NERA for Mk2 version. Other than that Arjun has design deficiencies which may not really be a big deal, but is at a disadvantage as compared to the T-90.

T-90 do not use STEF, oh come on. Object 188 (old T-90) used same armor as T-72B, Object 188A1/A2 also known as T-90A woth new welded turret might use more modern armor. As for Kanchan we don't know much about it, however cloes ties to Germany during development might hint us the right direction of Kanchan armor ancestor in... Great Britian and R&D program for development of composite armor, widely known under codename "Burlington".

The only disadvantage that Arjun has is that it cannot snorkel like T-90

Actually Arjun can use snorker and drive under water. Just like any other modern MBT with snorkels mounted. Depth of driving under water is determined only by snorkels lenght.

 

[p2prada]

As far as I know Soviet (Russian/Ukrainian) stabilization systems in newer tanks like T-80U was not worser than NATO counterparts. AFAIK stabilization in T-64BM and T-84M is good and gives high accuracy on move, not worse than in NATO tanks. Same for Russian tanks with newer FCS of course.

Not bad. That on the Arjun or even a ToT for the gun would do a great deal to increase Arjun's lethality.

As far as I know M1 was never tested in Pakistan. There were plans to sold tank in basic M1 variant when production started but in the end it seems that Washington changed their minds, possibly because Pakistan was not trust worthy and they could sold newest tank US Army tanks to Soviets or Chinese.

But as far as I know in any credible and serious source there is mention of M1 tested in Pakistan. In fact in whole 1980's it was not tested in any country interested to buy it but was not in NATO. I know about tests in 1980's in UK, and world wide tests for foreing customers were done in 1990's in Sweden, Greece, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

No Damian. The M1s were tested and evaluated in Pakistan extensively. This was in 1985-88 where Pak was an ally of US against the Soviet Union. Pak played a pivotal role against SU in Afghanistan. It was also a major issue and was discussed in our Parliament. The Arjun's GSQR changed to a 60 ton tank with a 120mm gun from a 40 ton tank with a 105mm gun solely because of this reason.

M1 Abrams Main Battle Tank, 1982-92 - Steven J. Zaloga, Peter Sarson - Google Books

This book by Steven Zaloga points out that the Pakistanis tested the tank. Page 12 last paragraph. It also says Saudi Arabia tested the Abrams in 1983. Egypt took deliveries in 1991, so that would mean tests happened in the 80s.

The reason we know the M1 was tested in Pakistan is because one of the great dictators in Pakistan Zia ul Haq died in a plane crash while he was going home after watching the Abrams trials. Newspapers reported that.

T-90 do not use STEF, oh come on. Object 188 (old T-90) used same armor as T-72B, Object 188A1/A2 also known as T-90A woth new welded turret might use more modern armor.

T-72B(M)/T-90 Armor Estimate

Fofanov says there is STEF. Again he also mentions this could be Steve Zalogas opinion.

As for Kanchan we don't know much about it, however cloes ties to Germany during development might hint us the right direction of Kanchan armor ancestor in... Great Britian and R&D program for development of composite armor, widely known under codename "Burlington".

Agreed. Some sources say it could be a BDD type. If it is then that is a good thing.

Actually Arjun can use snorker and drive under water. Just like any other modern MBT with snorkels mounted. Depth of driving under water is determined only by snorkels lenght.

No Damian. There is no Snorkel kit for Arjun. It can only wade at turret height.