1) You taking something obvious as something important, only because satelaties trajectories are known does not mean anything.
Satellites dont have any trajectory, they have an orbit. There is not one satellite but dozens of US spy satellites orbiting earth they have USAF, CIA and other satellites all working independently and have very less window of dark area, to know when they are under surveillance takes some know how.
2) I do not compare equipment based on where it is made, but on it's characteristics... only "techno patriots" from some countries that only just started to develop weapon systems of certain type, think that they allready achieved level of countries and designers that have long tradition and huge experience in development... maybe some more realism eh? It is not said to be offensive, it is just realism. For example I know as my countrymen that we can develop new MBT, why not, we have scientists, industry, but general consensus among people here is that this first development will not be as good as some other countries, it will most probably be full of flaws, that will not nececary be "repairable", and completely new design will be needed. It is realistic thinking, not a wishfull thinking to be a military and technological superpower in a short time period. Critcism of own design is good, it inspires debate, seek for new routes, new design solutions.
Although some of the points you have been raising recently are legitimate your earlier tirades where very juvenile. It is only now you have begun to concentrate on the dark areas, which is actually an
welcome relief. The tank armor is up for upgrades and it will have added protection of ERA. They need to produce atleast 500 tanks to justify the project cost, If you saw the movie Pentagon Wars you will see how inferior the Bradley fighting vehicle was. This is not the case only with India. Albeit the Arjun is still a good tank, addition of ERA and better sights will make it one of the best tanks in Asia, which is good enough against China and Pakistan.
? It seems I once again hit Your weak point... oh come on, stop this silly being offended thing only because of national ambitions. Everyone knowns that Red Flag and other excercices from US perspective are done only to see what other are capable to do. This is why scenarios are staged, one side for example can't use all it's assetts, and US goal isn't to win these excercices at all, really. As I said, be more realistic, and friendly to other nations also. Not each critic is an enemy, sometimes constructive criticism is a good thing.
Patriotic chest thumping is different from simply missing the facts based, you have no facts on a lot of your assertions. You just say stuff out of your hat with some much confidence but with no proof. Such things annoy me even if it is done once.
The Americans have been on Red flag for almost a decade now, so every time they join us they are learning and fooling us and every time the IAF is dumb enough not to know what they are up to? If you know it, why do you think one of the largest and up in coming airforces wont know? It has been proved that USAF 4th gen fighters where not an match for IAFs Su-30MKI, so they bought in the Raptor F-22 against it for one on one, then they did a big chest thump on how much better they are. The USAF pilots itself admitted the IAF was as good and better in some ways in a leaked video of theirs pilots.
This is OT lets stick to the topic.
From what You provided it seems that Arjun stabilization seems to be comparable to other similiar systems. But accuracy depends on many more factors, for exampl if gun and sights are properly boresighted, if crew is properly trained, if they have proper ammo and ammo ballistic data in FCS computer etc.
So really, screwing something up intentionally or not to prove some point is easy in that case.
The Arjuns accuracy has been shown to be atleast better than T-90, so many of the armies requests like separate sights for commander will be inducted in Mark-2.
