Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT)

[Damian]

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.

Hmmm, I have this book, why I didn't notice that paragraph?

But as it seems the reason was not failure of M1 during tests, the US just didn't liked Pakistanis nucelar program, and cease the deal. Probably in case of emergency, if invasion would be needed to prevent some crasiness.

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

No not STEF, currently we know how T-72B armor looks like, T-90 use the same or very similiar type of armor. T-90A may use something different.

You know STEF is not nececary modern, nor it is dynamic protection, rather non metallic passive composite protection.

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

Actually Burlington and it's derivatives are not BDD but a much more advanced protection.

Could be that Kanchan is based on Burlington technology, however pure Burlington technology in late 1980's were not seens as modern any more, and further development was initiated.

Burlington upgraded derivatives are known as Dorchester (UK), Heavy Armor Package (USA) both use DU alloy (however it is uncertain if Dorchester use DU alloy, it might be also Tungsten alloy) in layers and there are also similiar developments in Germany and France that use Tungsten alloy. These heavy metal layers encased in steel and other materials are supporting these more dynamic layers.

Knowing that Germans supported Indias development on Arjun, it might be possible that they transferred that earlier technology without upgraes like heavy metal alloys.

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

Interesting, so no deep water fording kit for that tank, why? Even M1 have a deep water fording kit, yet snorkels lenght and lack of hatch snorkel prevent for going fully underwater. Seems that Americans never seen that as especially nececary, even if they had experiences with such equipment, the M60 series had long snorkel tubes giving full under water drive capabilities.

 

[methos]

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.

KMDB - 120 mm KBM2 tank gun
Maximum chamber pressure is 7200 kgf/cm² - this is 706 MPa i.e. about the same as the Rh 120 L/44 and M256, but the barrel is longer (L/50). Longer Western smoothbore guns always have a slightly higher max. chamber pressure. The Swiss CTG has a maximum chambe pressure of 740 MPa (L/50), MG253 a maximum chamber pressure of 715 MPa (L/48) and the German Rh 120 L/55 has a maximum chamber pressure of 760 MPa.
The gun barrels for the Al-Khalid were made in France until pretty recently.

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.

Not necessarily, it depends on the FCS. An APFSDS through an helicopter will kill it very likely (the crew may be lucky and survive the hit, but not the engine - the fall will make the rest) - this is the way it is trained in Germany according to members of different German forums.

[...] 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.

According to Jane's they only want to buy a tank for a rather short period of time. After that it was decided to produce them locally - KMW offered Leopard 2 licence (which still would require a decision from federal security council), while the South Koreans did more transfer of technology.

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.

It was tested in Switzerland pre-1987. There was one accident because of the brakes which afaik lead to at least one casaulity.

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.

Since when can the M1 snorkel? It is some of the things that was criticized a few times by the Germans and iirc. also from the Swiss.

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

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

That was a long time ago. He got more information and knows that the T-72B armour does not include any STEF. STEF is btw. glass-reinforced plastic and not NERA.

 

[pmaitra]

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.

What explanation? I saw you run away from the HESH versus smoothbore question and Damian was struggling and turned red in rage, till Methos came and gave a cogent explanation. Yes, you guys know a lot of facts, but where's the explanation? And then you use those facts to inundate a discussion?

Just go back a few pages.

The advantages that you stated for Arjun aren't advantages at all.

No more magic wand, please.

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.

Of course, it depends on a lot of things, you mention 'wet' i.e. irrelevant. Who cares whether the ground is wet or not? Seriously? What is the probability (since you brought in that word), that it will rain in the deserts of Rajasthan? Wind condition? It does not matter, especially if a tank column is moving fast. No matter which way the wind is blowing, it can be spotted.

Dust example:

Also, You are also forgetting the sat perspective.

Finally, dust may not be an issue in Punjab, but it is a big issue in the deserts of Rajasthan.

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.

No, it does not matter which tank is heavier. Pressure is force per unit area, as simple as that, and by definition. This is high school stuff, and one doesn't need to be an expert to understand that.

A word on Punjab:
Indians flooded the Punjab plains to deter the Pakistani tanks. I think it was the 1965 conflict. Anyway, given a similar situation in future, when its flooded, it again will be an advantage for Arjun over T-90 or Pakistani tanks of similar design (don't know the exact numbers for Al-Khalid).

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.

Pakistanis did what they felt best, but then, that is not the point.

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).

Thank you.

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.

I agree. Are you suggesting that we use BMP-2 instead of the T-90?

Sorry, that was rhetorical, but you do get my point, I hope.

Bigger tank, so more support needed, but bigger tank also offers its advantages, that you yourself have listed.

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.

Yes, but upgrading the gun isn't a big issue.

Moreover, I am still waiting for an explanation why a certain smoothbore gun outperformed a rifled gun. Notice, I am not denying that the smoothbore did a better job, I am asking why. In other words, did it outperform because of smoothbore or was it something else?

Frankly, I don't know, but unless anyone gives a good explanation, nobody knows.

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.

Shall we call it slight difference? T-90 with STEF might be good (I am saying that because I don't know about this development), but STEF in T-80 has a significant proportion of cast metal, which does not make it any superior to Arjun's Kanchan armour, if you compare the properties of ceramic and cast metal. Sure, T-90 might be better, but then it's probably different from T-80.

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.

Will give that to the T-90. India has dedicated tanks (older T series) for that purpose. Arjun needn't do that. Also, mine-plough is usually in the front - I haven't heard of mine plough being pulled (you probably didn't mean that).

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

Thanks for mentioning the advantages of Arjun as well, rather reluctantly. Still doesn't convince me that T-90 is superior to Arjun in all respects, unless, I started denying the advantages Arjun has. Thank you for taking the time though.

 

[Damian]

Since when can the M1 snorkel? It is some of the things that was criticized a few times by the Germans and iirc. also from the Swiss.

Seems that it was not added in basic M1, but in M1A1. Howerver snorkels are mostly used by USMC during beach assaults, Army do not use them often, even during training and these snorkels are preatty short + there is no hatch snorkel, so fording depth is limited, however making snorkels longer and add snorkel on loader or TC hatch should be preatty easy and cheap adaptation.

I have some photos of M1A1 with snorkels.

And here movie:


As I said, adding longer snorkels and snorkel for one of turret hatch should not be a big problem.

French Leclerc have similiar snorkels:

 

[Ray]

But it is still not fit for the IA!

 

[p2prada]

But as it seems the reason was not failure of M1 during tests, the US just didn't liked Pakistanis nucelar program, and cease the deal. Probably in case of emergency, if invasion would be needed to prevent some crasiness.

According to the Pakistanis, the engines repeatedly failed in the heat.

No not STEF, currently we know how T-72B armor looks like, T-90 use the same or very similiar type of armor. T-90A may use something different.

You know STEF is not nececary modern, nor it is dynamic protection, rather non metallic passive composite protection.

Interesting. So, Fofanov did not update his website.

Actually Burlington and it's derivatives are not BDD but a much more advanced protection.

Yes. You mentioned that early on.

Could be that Kanchan is based on Burlington technology, however pure Burlington technology in late 1980's were not seens as modern any more, and further development was initiated.

Burlington upgraded derivatives are known as Dorchester (UK), Heavy Armor Package (USA) both use DU alloy (however it is uncertain if Dorchester use DU alloy, it might be also Tungsten alloy) in layers and there are also similiar developments in Germany and France that use Tungsten alloy. These heavy metal layers encased in steel and other materials are supporting these more dynamic layers.

Knowing that Germans supported Indias development on Arjun, it might be possible that they transferred that earlier technology without upgraes like heavy metal alloys.

Too speculative isn't it.

Interesting, so no deep water fording kit for that tank, why? Even M1 have a deep water fording kit, yet snorkels lenght and lack of hatch snorkel prevent for going fully underwater. Seems that Americans never seen that as especially nececary, even if they had experiences with such equipment, the M60 series had long snorkel tubes giving full under water drive capabilities.

Nobody bothered about it I guess.

KMDB - 120 mm KBM2 tank gun
Maximum chamber pressure is 7200 kgf/cm² - this is 706 MPa i.e. about the same as the Rh 120 L/44 and M256, but the barrel is longer (L/50). Longer Western smoothbore guns always have a slightly higher max. chamber pressure. The Swiss CTG has a maximum chambe pressure of 740 MPa (L/50), MG253 a maximum chamber pressure of 715 MPa (L/48) and the German Rh 120 L/55 has a maximum chamber pressure of 760 MPa.
The gun barrels for the Al-Khalid were made in France until pretty recently.

Excellent. I did not know that.

Not necessarily, it depends on the FCS. An APFSDS through an helicopter will kill it very likely (the crew may be lucky and survive the hit, but not the engine - the fall will make the rest) - this is the way it is trained in Germany according to members of different German forums.

Ah! You need that lucky hit.

That was a long time ago. He got more information and knows that the T-72B armour does not include any STEF. STEF is btw. glass-reinforced plastic and not NERA.

Someone needs to tell him to update it. That is one of the best sources for western tanks and doe snot need to carry wrong info.

Thanks for the info Damian and Methos.

 

[Damian]

According to the Pakistanis, the engines repeatedly failed in the heat.

IMHO BS, M1's engine was tested both in arctic and desert conditions before tank was fielded. Also no problems were reported by US forces during ODS in 1990/1991 and OIF in 2003 to 2011 period. Nor Egyptians, Saudis, Kuwaitis and Iraqis are complaining for engines overheating. Besides this Gas Turbine is designed to work in extremely hight temperatures, and is not even specially cooled (it use only air that goes through airfilters in to engine combustion chamber, only transmission have dedicated cooling system).

 

[Godless-Kafir]

IMHO BS, M1's engine was tested both in arctic and desert conditions before tank was fielded. Also no problems were reported by US forces during ODS in 1990/1991 and OIF in 2003 to 2011 period. Nor Egyptians, Saudis, Kuwaitis and Iraqis are complaining for engines overheating. Besides this Gas Turbine is designed to work in extremely hight temperatures, and is not even specially cooled (it use only air that goes through airfilters in to engine combustion chamber, only transmission have dedicated cooling system).

Your completely wrong, the turbine blades sucked in dust and had major issues in Iraq desert sands. The iraq desert is diffrent as in it has powdery sand and not grains like we see in the beach. The blades where damaged and the engines failed.

 

[p2prada]

What explanation? I saw you run away from the HESH versus smoothbore question and Damian was struggling and turned red in rage, till Methos came and gave a cogent explanation. Yes, you guys know a lot of facts, but where's the explanation? And then you use those facts to inundate a discussion?

Just go back a few pages.

Actually I did. But there are many answers to one question. We never know what is the reader expecting. An excellent reason on why essay type answers should be banned from technical courses. My teachers used to say the same.

We are sorry that we don't come up to your standards of explanation.

Of course, it depends on a lot of things, you mention 'wet' i.e. irrelevant. Who cares whether the ground is wet or not? Seriously? What is the probability (since you brought in that word), that it will rain in the deserts of Rajasthan? Wind condition? It does not matter, especially if a tank column is moving fast. No matter which way the wind is blowing, it can be spotted.

Dust example:

This does not matter anymore.

Also, You are also forgetting the sat perspective.

Your point being? Are you saying Arjun does not kick up dust. Then you haven't seen the Arjun. You are actually the first guy saying Arjun does not kick up more dust than other tanks. Even a one ton jaguar kicks up dust in the desert. Haven't you seen movies?

No, it does not matter which tank is heavier. Pressure is force per unit area, as simple as that, and by definition. This is high school stuff, and one doesn't need to be an expert to understand that.

Weight matters. You are not looking at it in a complex way, you are being simplistic. If a bridge can hold 10 tons, you cannot run a truck weighing 20 tons over it even if the pressure per unit area is less than a one ton car's.

A word on Punjab:
Indians flooded the Punjab plains to deter the Pakistani tanks. I think it was the 1965 conflict. Anyway, given a similar situation in future, when its flooded, it again will be an advantage for Arjun over T-90 or Pakistani tanks of similar design (don't know the exact numbers for Al-Khalid).

Tiger tank had lesser ground pressure than Panzers, it did not stop it from getting bogged down.

I agree. Are you suggesting that we use BMP-2 instead of the T-90?

Sorry, that was rhetorical, but you do get my point, I hope.

There are certain cases where tanks are useless. So, a BMP-2 is a better option there. That's because a BMP-2 complements the T-90. The Arjun can never complement another Arjun in roles.

Bigger tank, so more support needed, but bigger tank also offers its advantages, that you yourself have listed.

The advantage that the bigger tank offers is nothing compared to what the T-90 offers to IA. That was my whole point. The reason I posted the advantage of Arjun is to let you know that the points I made were the actual advantages. Kicking up less dust and slightly lesser ground pressure aren't advantages.

Yes, but upgrading the gun isn't a big issue.

Moreover, I am still waiting for an explanation why a certain smoothbore gun outperformed a rifled gun. Notice, I am not denying that the smoothbore did a better job, I am asking why. In other words, did it outperform because of smoothbore or was it something else?

Frankly, I don't know, but unless anyone gives a good explanation, nobody knows.

There are two big reasons why Rifled guns are deemed necessary by people who support rifled guns, namely Indians and the British who like to see Arjun and Challenger the way they are today. The reasons are Rifling provides high accuracy and allows the use of HESH. These are actually the only two reasons. Rifling's disadvantages are that they are difficult to maintain, difficult to manufacture and have a short life. In this thread, Damian and I are saying that HESH is useless in today's world. I think you got our point regarding this. And Damian already pointed out that Smoothbores outperformed the Rifled gun when it came to accuracy. So, the point was accuracy can be achieved by other means like stabilization and modern FCS instead of rifling. So, by cutting down on a Rifled barrel and going for smoothbore, we automatically get a gun which is easy to manufacture, easy to maintain, have longer life and can use ammunition which has greater advantages than HESH, like HE, HEF, HEOR etc.

Hence the need for a rifled gun and the ammunition called HESH is no longer necessary. Thus Arjun's gun system is obsolete.

The reason Rifled gun came up in the discussion relating to HESH is because Arjun has the rifled gun and only a rifled gun can fire HESH.

Shall we call it slight difference? T-90 with STEF might be good (I am saying that because I don't know about this development), but STEF in T-80 has a significant proportion of cast metal, which does not make it any superior to Arjun's Kanchan armour, if you compare the properties of ceramic and cast metal. Sure, T-90 might be better, but then it's probably different from T-80.

I was wrong regarding STEF. Damian and Methos pointed it out.

There is no cast metal in our T-90 versions. We have welded turrets.

Will give that to the T-90. India has dedicated tanks (older T series) for that purpose. Arjun needn't do that. Also, mine-plough is usually in the front - I haven't heard of mine plough being pulled (you probably didn't mean that).

Yeah. I meant what you said. Pulled, pushed, who cares as long as the point gets across. I did not know what word to use there. Big posts need fast typing speeds and sometimes you lose out to grammar in the process. There is a very bad habit in our science culture in India. We don't care about grammar and correct sentence structure as long as the key points are put across.

Anyway you can't use old tanks for that. When you are charging into the enemy's vanguard, you can't wait for some old tank to show up and clear obstacles. You need your MBT to do everything. That's why it is called MBT.

Thanks for mentioning the advantages of Arjun as well, rather reluctantly. Still doesn't convince me that T-90 is superior to Arjun in all respects, unless, I started denying the advantages Arjun has. Thank you for taking the time though.

Both tanks are in the same class. It is just that the T-90 is more mature. So, when push comes to shove, the Army can rely on it's past performance as a good tank. Arjun, we cannot say the same. Considering Arjun keeps croping up with new problems and that DRDO takes years to fix those problems, we can't take such major risks.

We are a third world nation, with a third world industry, building a first world army.

 

[p2prada]

But it is still not fit for the IA!

Unfortunately pride blinds ones ability to reason.

 

[pmaitra]

@Ray Sir,

Compared to Arjun, T-90 is indeed unfit for the deserts of Rajasthan, and this reason can always get one branded as blind to reason - still, it doesn't change the reality.

The Russians are also coming up with a tank support vehicle (I think there is a thread on that), because, they have seen how vulnerable their tanks were in Chechnya. T-90, being a close relative of the T-72 (being subtle here), needs them to overcome the deficiencies, and in urban combat, Arjun will surely have an advantage.

T-90 is also at the end of it's life-cycle while Arjun still has a lot of room for improvement.

The most important reason why IA got T-90 was because DRDO couldn't deliver on time, as simple as that, and not because it is inferior to T-90. that is not even true.

 

[Damian]

Your completely wrong, the turbine blades sucked in dust and had major issues in Iraq desert sands. The iraq desert is diffrent as in it has powdery sand and not grains like we see in the beach. The blades where damaged and the engines failed.

I'am not wrong. It seems You not understand the nautre of problem. Engine itself is reliable in dusty conditions, if maintained properly and if air filters are cleaned from time to time.

If crew ---- up this and this is not fault of an engine, and if You think that Diesel is more reliable read about British Challenger 2 tanks and problems with their engines in desert. When Americans were using M1's without any modifications without any big problems, Brits needed to add special dust skirts to their tanks so dust would be keep far from air filters that were not protecting engine to jam caused by dust.

The Russians are also coming up with a tank support vehicle (I think there is a thread on that), because, they have seen how vulnerable their tanks were in Chechnya.

God, how many times I will need to explain why 1st Chechenya war was a failure and 2nd Chechenya war was incredible success for Russian tanks?

T-72 and T-90 tanks have highest survivability in case of armor perforation from all Soviet designed tanks if:

Additional ammunition will be not taken and ammunition will be stored only in autoloader. In 1st Chechenya War this additional ammunition was cause of losses in case of T-72 tanks.

T-64, T-80 and T-84 tanks have different type of autoloader that is more exposed and vurnable, so no matters if You have additional ammunition stored in crew compartment or not, effect will be same. Dead crew.

In 2nd Chechenya War T-72B tanks survived multiple RPG and ATGM's hits.

(T-72 and T-90 series autoloader)

(T-64, T-80 and T-84 series autoloader)

Arjun will surely have an advantage.

No it will not. Side hull is made from RHA only, max 80mm thick, protected by thin non ballistic skirt. No advantage here against T-90. Side turret protection in Arjun is also only max 80mm thick RHA plate, similiar to T-90, so no advantage over here.

Arjun is tank with western design and Soviet style armor placement on tank, without any composite armor over turret sides, making crew vurnable to any side hits within or beyond safe manouvering angles.



It was explained many times, side turret in Arjun is only partially protected by composite armor, most of turret side is protected by thin RHA armor.

In case of T-90, situation is similiar however, front armor covers weakly protected side armor up to 30-35 degrees.



Neither tank have advantage here in case of assymetric conflict, T-90 have advantage over Arjun is tank vs tank combat where it's weak side armor will be covered by front armor if turret faced towards enemy.

T-90 is also at the end of it's life-cycle while Arjun still has a lot of room for improvement.

How the hell T-90 is in the end of life cycle when T-90MS just recently was presented? And T-90MS is far more deep modernization than Arjun Mk2 compated to Mk1.

Another BS from someone that even do not have proper knowledge about tanks design or their history.

 

[p2prada]

@Ray Sir,

Compared to Arjun, T-90 is indeed unfit for the deserts of Rajasthan, and this reason can always get one branded as blind to reason - still, it doesn't change the reality.

False. In the Saudi Arabia trials. During validation all competing tanks had to change engines at least twice while T-90 came to the exercise with the one engine it already had on and finished the endurance trials with just that engine.

The T-90 is brilliant in deserts. It is just our media who are making up stories.

Don't forget the brigadier was in active service when Arjun and T-90 were being validated in India.

Edit: Arjun is very special in deserts. In a 1000Km march the Arjun had to change engines 4 times. In 2005, the electronics melted and the gun failed to fire. It leaks fluids even today.

Latest news from Ajai Shukla: http://ajaishukla.blogspot.in/2012/03/drdo-wants-say-in-procurements-says.html

There is a serious concern within the DRDO after the Arjun tank, which outperformed the Russian T-90 tank in army trials last year, disappointed the frontline combat units for whom it was bulk-produced by the Heavy Vehicles Factory, Avadi (HVF). The apparent reason: poor manufacture and ineffective quality control.

Funny right? Everything is perfect when DRDO is in control but all goes haywire when Army takes control. HVF which has been making tanks for decades is suddenly slapped with quality control issues when they are making T-90s side by side. DRDO/ADA blamed HAL for LCA's delays too. Somehow HAL and HVF aren't capable at all while DRDO is the champion of justice.

T-90 is also at the end of it's life-cycle while Arjun still has a lot of room for improvement.

Not even close to the truth.

 

[pmaitra]

False. In the Saudi Arabia trials. During validation all competing tanks had to change engines at least twice while T-90 came to the exercise with the one engine it already had on and finished the endurance trials with just that engine.

The T-90 is brilliant in deserts. It is just our media who are making up stories.

Oh, so now it is media making up stories, when it shows T-90 is bad light, isn't it?

T-90 is excellent for the kind of combat Russia expects to see. No, it does not beat the Arjun in the deserts of Rajashtan.

Don't forget the brigadier was in active service when Arjun and T-90 were being validated in India.

There is dochotomy in the army as well. So that is a non-sequitur.

Edit: Arjun is very special in deserts. In a 1000Km march the Arjun had to change engines 4 times. In 2005, the electronics melted and the gun failed to fire. It leaks fluids even today.

Latest news from Ajai Shukla: Broadsword: DRDO wants say in procurements: Says indigenous weapon programmes should not be scuttled by substandard production

Hmm, how about I use your excuse and say the media made up stories?

Funny right? Everything is perfect when DRDO is in control but all goes haywire when Army takes control. HVF which has been making tanks for decades is suddenly slapped with quality control issues when they are making T-90s side by side. DRDO/ADA blamed HAL for LCA's delays too. Somehow HAL and HVF aren't capable at all while DRDO is the champion of justice.



Not even close to the truth.

You have to say that to those who are biased in favour of DRDO. Your bias against DRDO is quite obvious. So if you are arguing with someone with a DRDO bias, it will be an even match. I am not interested.

 

[pmaitra]

Actually I did. But there are many answers to one question. We never know what is the reader expecting. An excellent reason on why essay type answers should be banned from technical courses. My teachers used to say the same.

There is only one answer to my question, and Methos gave the right answer.

We are sorry that we don't come up to your standards of explanation.

Don't be sorry. Just answer to the point.

Since yesterday, this HESH-vs-smoothbore discussion got me guessing that either you and Damian didn't know how a HESH functions or you guys were deliberately not answering.

This does not matter anymore.

Perhaps not, but then, explain why.

Your point being? Are you saying Arjun does not kick up dust. Then you haven't seen the Arjun. You are actually the first guy saying Arjun does not kick up more dust than other tanks. Even a one ton jaguar kicks up dust in the desert. Haven't you seen movies?

I'm too lazy to go back and read what I had written, but I don't recall saying Arjun doesn't kick up dust. I'm sure it will as well, but that depends upon (1) speed and (2) how much the tracks sink into the sand. T-90 will surely kick up more dust.

Weight matters. You are not looking at it in a complex way, you are being simplistic. If a bridge can hold 10 tons, you cannot run a truck weighing 20 tons over it even if the pressure per unit area is less than a one ton car's.

Yes, that is a valid point when it comes to bridges.

Tiger tank had lesser ground pressure than Panzers, it did not stop it from getting bogged down.

Again, you are factually correct, but that doesn't change the reality that T-90 has more ground pressure than Arjun, and if the plains of Punjab are flooded again, Arjuns will outrun the T-90s and T-90s will get stuck first.

There are certain cases where tanks are useless. So, a BMP-2 is a better option there. That's because a BMP-2 complements the T-90. The Arjun can never complement another Arjun in roles.

True, and as I said, T-90 and Arjun complement each other.

The advantage that the bigger tank offers is nothing compared to what the T-90 offers to IA. That was my whole point. The reason I posted the advantage of Arjun is to let you know that the points I made were the actual advantages. Kicking up less dust and slightly lesser ground pressure aren't advantages.

That's fine by me if you think ground pressure does not matter. No point haggling on this. I have already provided a chart why ground pressure matters.

There are two big reasons why Rifled guns are deemed necessary by people who support rifled guns, namely Indians and the British who like to see Arjun and Challenger the way they are today. The reasons are Rifling provides high accuracy and allows the use of HESH.

No, rifling provides one and only one advantage, and that is spinning the projectile. You can even spin a projectile using fins and thus shoot it from a smoothbore.

"Rifling allows use of HESH" is total BS. You have no idea what you are talking about, even after so many pages of discussion.

Think of HESH as a flat-bread that explodes. A spinning projectile helps spread out the plastic explosives on the surface, but even if it were not spinning, you would still have a flat-bread on impact, but the spin of the projectile will simply assist this. Do you get this or not?

These are actually the only two reasons. Rifling's disadvantages are that they are difficult to maintain, difficult to manufacture and have a short life. In this thread, Damian and I are saying that HESH is useless in today's world. I think you got our point regarding this. And Damian already pointed out that Smoothbores outperformed the Rifled gun when it came to accuracy. So, the point was accuracy can be achieved by other means like stabilization and modern FCS instead of rifling. So, by cutting down on a Rifled barrel and going for smoothbore, we automatically get a gun which is easy to manufacture, easy to maintain, have longer life and can use ammunition which has greater advantages than HESH, like HE, HEF, HEOR etc.

I have never countered any of the things you have mentioned here and again, I highlight, this is the problem with you and Damian. You guys bring in a lot of information that are totally unrelated and just because they are correct, you think you are making a point. Stand corrected, you are not making any point, because I have not countered any of these things you have mentioned here. I hope I am making sense.

Hence the need for a rifled gun and the ammunition called HESH is no longer necessary. Thus Arjun's gun system is obsolete.

I have not countered that point either, have I?

The reason Rifled gun came up in the discussion relating to HESH is because Arjun has the rifled gun and only a rifled gun can fire HESH.

See what Methos says. Anyway, I get your point.

I was wrong regarding STEF. Damian and Methos pointed it out.

Thanks bud!

There is no cast metal in our T-90 versions. We have welded turrets.

Got it. that's what I thought, but Indian T-90s don't have STEF either (I am guessing here).

Yeah. I meant what you said. Pulled, pushed, who cares as long as the point gets across. I did not know what word to use there. Big posts need fast typing speeds and sometimes you lose out to grammar in the process. There is a very bad habit in our science culture in India. We don't care about grammar and correct sentence structure as long as the key points are put across.

That's fine. I thought you knew about ploughs.

Anyway you can't use old tanks for that. When you are charging into the enemy's vanguard, you can't wait for some old tank to show up and clear obstacles. You need your MBT to do everything. That's why it is called MBT.

No, they are not going to show up, but I will post a picture later on exercises to prove my point.

Ok, I found it. No, minesweepers don't just 'show up' and you are using rhetoric to mislead.

Are these T-55 minesweepers? The last one is a BMP I know.

Both tanks are in the same class. It is just that the T-90 is more mature. So, when push comes to shove, the Army can rely on it's past performance as a good tank. Arjun, we cannot say the same. Considering Arjun keeps croping up with new problems and that DRDO takes years to fix those problems, we can't take such major risks.

They are not the same class by weight, but since you don't want that classification, even by role, they are different. Sure, if you call both of them MBT, they pehaps become the 'same class' (I don't buy that and that wasn't what I meant anyways).

Problems have also cropped up with T-90.

We are a third world nation, with a third world industry, building a first world army.

True.

 

[methos]

We are a third world nation, with a third world industry, building a first world army.

First world airforce maybe, second world army. See: Second World - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
T-55s, T-72s, T-90s and BMP-2s are second world equipment.

 

[p2prada]

Oh, so now it is media making up stories, when it shows T-90 is bad light, isn't it?

T-90 is excellent for the kind of combat Russia expects to see. No, it does not beat the Arjun in the deserts of Rajashtan.

Says who? The only reason the T-90 was criticized was for failure of TI which was rectified in 2006. But there were reports until 2010 that TI still kept failing which was false information.

Arjun isn't some special tank

There is dochotomy in the army as well. So that is a non-sequitur.

Of course. His experience as a Brigadier is non-sequitur as well. Generals have rejected the Arjun, the ones who matter anyway.

Hmm, how about I use your excuse and say the media made up stories?

Then give reasons as to why the Arjun is better in the desert?

You have to say that to those who are biased in favour of DRDO. Your bias against DRDO is quite obvious. So if you are arguing with someone with a DRDO bias, it will be an even match. I am not interested.

Haha! You actually think you are not biased.

 

[Tolaha]

Edit: Arjun is very special in deserts. In a 1000Km march the Arjun had to change engines 4 times. In 2005, the electronics melted and the gun failed to fire. It leaks fluids even today.

Latest news from Ajai Shukla: Broadsword: DRDO wants say in procurements: Says indigenous weapon programmes should not be scuttled by substandard production

There is a serious concern within the DRDO after the Arjun tank, which outperformed the Russian T-90 tank in army trials last year, disappointed the frontline combat units for whom it was bulk-produced by the Heavy Vehicles Factory, Avadi (HVF). The apparent reason: poor manufacture and ineffective quality control.

Funny right? Everything is perfect when DRDO is in control but all goes haywire when Army takes control. HVF which has been making tanks for decades is suddenly slapped with quality control issues when they are making T-90s side by side. DRDO/ADA blamed HAL for LCA's delays too. Somehow HAL and HVF aren't capable at all while DRDO is the champion of justice.



Not even close to the truth.

If Arjun is worse than T-90 as you say, then how did Arjun beat the T-90 convincingly? Are you saying the Army fudged the trials!?

 

[p2prada]

There is only one answer to my question, and Methos gave the right answer.

I am glad he did.

Since yesterday, this HESH-vs-smoothbore discussion got me guessing that either you and Damian didn't know how a HESH functions or you guys were deliberately not answering.

Thing is if you don't understand what we are talking about then you won't find the answers you are looking for. You came here into the discussion with a closed mindset. You came here thinking the Arjun is better than T-90 and that's why you don't realize that you are already biased.

Perhaps not, but then, explain why.

Dust not magic. Dust is dust, this is not WW2. TI can pick up tanks from 8Km away. BSR can pick up tanks from 20Km. Aircraft can pick up tanks from 50Km-100Km away. Dust you can possibly see from 500m to 2Km away and they could be horses or camels running or a sand storm. Heck TI can pick up tanks through sand storms and you are thinking about WW2 tactics.

Welcome to the 21st century.

I'm too lazy to go back and read what I had written, but I don't recall saying Arjun doesn't kick up dust. I'm sure it will as well, but that depends upon (1) speed and (2) how much the tracks sink into the sand. T-90 will surely kick up more dust.

ROFL. I give up. Be satisfied with your awesome advantage.

Again, you are factually correct, but that doesn't change the reality that T-90 has more ground pressure than Arjun, and if the plains of Punjab are flooded again, Arjuns will outrun the T-90s and T-90s will get stuck first.

46 tons vs 60 tons and you believe T-90 will get bogged down. I can't explain anything anymore. You can keep this along with your dust.

True, and as I said, T-90 and Arjun complement each other.

Wow. I have been telling the exact opposite. Please explain why Arjun complements the T-90. Heck even one point will do.

That's fine by me if you think ground pressure does not matter. No point haggling on this. I have already provided a chart why ground pressure matters.

What chart? Again you are comparing a 46 ton tank to a 60 ton tank. Army's own reason indicates Arjun is the tank that will bog down first. Ground pressure matters not when the tank is 15 tons heavier.

No, rifling provides one and only one advantage, and that is spinning the projectile. You can even spin a projectile using fins and thus shoot it from a smoothbore.

"Rifling allows use of HESH" is total BS. You have no idea what you are talking about, even after so many pages of discussion.

Think of HESH as a flat-bread that explodes. A spinning projectile helps spread out the plastic explosives on the surface, but even if it were not spinning, you would still have a flat-bread on impact, but the spin of the projectile will simply assist this. Do you get this or not?

Simply genius.

I have never countered any of the things you have mentioned here and again, I highlight, this is the problem with you and Damian. You guys bring in a lot of information that are totally unrelated and just because they are correct, you think you are making a point. Stand corrected, you are not making any point, because I have not countered any of these things you have mentioned here. I hope I am making sense.

You bring in nonsense points and ask us to prove you wrong. It can't be done. We are explaining how things need to be explained so you can come to conclusions yourself. For eg: you are perfectly right with your concept of what rifling means, but you are talking about the function while we are talking about advantages and disadvantages and the reason why the disadvantages outweigh the advantages. If we start talking about the function of every anjar panjar on the tank then our families will bury us at our keyboards.

You have not come here with an open mind. You still think Rifling is better because it adds spin. But what we are saying is the spinning effect of projectiles is not necessary anymore because there are better shells available and more effective without having to spin them.

No, they are not going to show up, but I will post a picture later on exercises to prove my point.

Ok, I found it. No, minesweepers don't just 'show up' and you are using rhetoric to mislead.

Please try to understand facts. I can show a bunch of Shermans doing the same and say M1s can wait while the Shermans will clear minefields. Just because a bunch of tanks have rollers, ploughs or sweepers does not mean they suddenly become frontline tanks. All tanks need minesweeping capability because you never know where a minefield pops up.

Notice in the picture they are all T-55s. There are no T-72s or T-90s at the back waiting for the T-55 to clear the field. In regiments with T-90s you will find some with rollers, in regiments with T-72s you will find some with rollers, in regiments with T-55s you will find some with rollers. But in all the regimens with Arjuns you won't find any equipped with rollers because the transmission cannot handle the load. One little minefield and the entire corps will stop dead.

They are not the same class by weight, but since you don't want that classification, even by role, they are different. Sure, if you call both of them MBT, they pehaps become the 'same class' (I don't buy that and that wasn't what I meant anyways).

Problems have also cropped up with T-90.

Then don't believe anything we say. Like I said, you don't recognize the fact that the T-90 is a better tank. It can't be helped no matter who says what. Keep believing Arjun and T-90 are in a different class. Keep believing dust plays such an important role. Keep believing anything you want. No one can change your mind if you keep it that way.

The problems with T-90s get fixed real quick, unlike Arjun. Heck 20 years to get it to this stage while the T-90's problems were sorted out a long time ago.

 

[Damian]

If Arjun is worse than T-90 as you say, then how did Arjun beat the T-90 convincingly? Are you saying the Army fudged the trials!?

Knowing about coruption problems in India, and fact that whole case is political, I would not be surprised if these trails were staged.