Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT)

[ice berg]

China already did that . The export version of z96. It is called Al Khalid. Doubt they will sell ztz99 any time soon. The new ztz 99 A2 or B is just been introduced.

 

[Damian]

I am just asking you to be fair in your judgement not to be partial. Your angle of incidence on Arjun is completely different compared to what you have drawn for ztz-90. That is not any graphical mistake but a complete technical blunder.

As I said, it is difficult to make the same angle marked, especially without any tools. I admit, the first drawing is wrong.

Also why do you draw the armor of the M1A1 right over the crew hatch? How can their be armor there? Look at the pic the hatch has no armor running besides it, just like the Arjun the armor wall is way inside the hatch.

There is armor there, look at the photos, armor ends just right next to commander and loaders hatch:

You see commander hatch? See where armor ends, just to the edge, yes, this armor is really that thick GK.

 

[Godless-Kafir]

I don't think you understood the images. If you look from the top, T-90s turret geometry is indeed different. Arjun's turret geo is like a rectangle while ZTZ-99's geo is somewhere in between. Meaning the area which is not covered by composites are hidden by the frontal armour, however a small part of it in the middle is still exposed within safe maneuvering angles. Suffice to say the probability of Arjun conking it is higher than ZTZ-99 in a shot outside of the safe maneuvering angles.

Angles are deceptive to the human brain but in reality the angle of incidence is the same.

This is like the time you said the Gripens engine is designed in sweden while it was only an re-branded GE-404 engine. How confident you sounded even while you where completely WRONG. Where do you get this confidence to blabber wrongly? I guess this is just youthful foolishness.

 

[Godless-Kafir]

As I said, it is difficult to make the same angle marked, especially without any tools. I admit, the first drawing is wrong.



There is armor there, look at the photos, armor ends just right next to commander and loaders hatch:

You see commander hatch? See where armor ends, just to the edge, yes, this armor is really that thick GK.

Damian, that is a slope dude. The armor does not run through the wall of the hatch, the armor is away from the hatch hole and also it is not solid but a slope.

 

[p2prada]

@GK

Some top views of Chinese tanks, so you understand what I am talking about.

 

[Damian]

Damian, that is a slope dude. The armor does not run through the wall of the hatch, the armor is away from the hatch hole and also it is not solid but a slope.

And? Yes it is sloped, but the thickness of armor is same as I marked it on drawing. Because composite armor cavity allways have the same size as is the size of occupied by composite armor insert space inside cavity.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Type-96/99, MBT-2000 have exposed turret roof which inclined towards frontal armour hence a huge weak spot, Where as Arjun as well as T-90S don't have such issues..

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Operational means running or proved itself in operations ?
What is the meaning.. even Vijayant is more operational ? what does that prove ??

In that sense none of Indian Army tanks are combat proven except T-72M1 & T-55..

 

[Damian]

Type-96/99, MBT-2000 have exposed turret roof which inclined towards frontal armour hence a huge weak spot, Where as Arjun as well as T-90S don't have such issues..

Yes, that is truth.

GK I hope that this graphic might help You understand the issue of M1A1/M1A2 Abrams side turret armor and it's inclination.

 

[Drsomnath999]

@ Damian

ARJUN mark2 is stated to have TROPHY active protective system .Do u think TROPHY (APS) is going to be effective.???

 

[p2prada]

A closer image of the armour placing. It is not perfect, but it does not look like the turret box is a rectangle. Meaning the RHA tapers towards the back as compared to the rectangular outline which should be some sort of support structure or may function like slat armour.

 

[Damian]

@ Damian

ARJUN mark2 is stated to have TROPHY active protective system .Do u think TROPHY (APS) is going to be effective.???

Trophy will be effective against RPG's, ATGM's and to some degree against HEAT, HE or HESH ammunition fired from tank guns and similiar weapons, like HEAT from recoilles rifles and guns.

However such APS like Trophy will not be effective against APFSDS ammunition in my opinion, due to working mechanism of Trophy executive elements.

 

[Godless-Kafir]

Yes, that is truth.

GK I hope that this graphic might help You understand the issue of M1A1/M1A2 Abrams side turret armor and it's inclination.

The above armor marking is wrong i think.

If you see the armor begins near the small hole for the sight.

So the armor is not marked correctly in that picture, it only shows the front armor and DOES not represent the side armor. The side armor as seen from inside is drawn below.

 

[Drsomnath999]

Trophy will be effective against RPG's, ATGM's and to some degree against HEAT, HE or HESH ammunition fired from tank guns and similiar weapons, like HEAT from recoilles rifles and guns.

However such APS like Trophy will not be effective against APFSDS ammunition in my opinion, due to working mechanism of Trophy executive elements.

but russian say that they have develop a RPG to overcome the Trophy system

Back in 2008 the media reported about the new military hardware samples, taken into service, in particular, the RPG-30 RPG-32 "Hashim" development "Basalt." RPG-30, according to V.Korenkova, "is designed to overcome these security systems tanks. All the world's active protection systems, the same ideology. This radar, and at some distance, near or far, with the destruction of combat units, with shrapnel and high explosive flow field. These systems have common drawbacks. First of all, it is the duty cycle, ie the interval of the system response to the threat. RPG-30 can easily overcome such a defense system. "

As noted V.Korenkov, "there are many ways to overcome such protection, which reduces the feasibility of a very complex system of protection. In particular, it easily overcomes the RPG-30, with the same warhead as the RPG-27. Next to the main rocket launch a provocateur , which allows you to "pick up" the system of protection and is in the range of porosity and the second missile hit the target. This is in principle sufficient to overcome the Israeli system. "

In addition, according to V.Korenkova, "in order to overcome such systems there is a special ammunition for the RPG-30, when with one hand while flying two missiles. RPG-32 has a single rocket. To the RPG-32 was supposed to create a whole set of cartridges, which are including deciding to these problems. But the power of the RPG-32 is such that one of the options for implementing - undermine a sufficiently large distance from the tank - still lead to his defeat. This is a very powerful weapon. so-called focal length, but it is several meter allows you to save the power of the warhead at undermining both the armor, and at a sufficient distance from it in the zone of active protection. very ideology of modern systems based on information processing, shot counter and the counter flow of fragments, it is very easy to overcome now that enough to shoot even from old RPG is almost "simultaneously" by two shots. "

Google Translate

 

[Damian]

The above armor marking is wrong i think.

If you see the armor begins near the small hole for the sight.

So the armor is not marked correctly in that picture, it only shows the front armor and DOES not represent the side armor. The side armor as seen from inside is drawn below.

No GK, You are once again making mistake. Look at the photo of real tank:

It shows clearly that Your interpretation of photos and drawings is wrong.

GK wait a moment I need to make photos to show You why You are wrong. More detailed ones will definetly help.

 

[Godless-Kafir]

No, it's just imperfection of drawing. It is actually easier to make a proper inclination mark when turret itself have angled sides, than in case of a western type turret. You know, I'm not a graphic artist, my capabilities in this manner are limited. For mistakes I can only apologize. However in general view it won't change much, I can do another one if You wish with more properly aligned lines, ok?

One more drawing to compare something.

This is the right estimation of armor.

[/IMG]

 

[Damian]

Now it makes clear to You GK how thick is side turret armor on M1 series? This is how it looks in reality, I do not know how better explain this to You.

 

[Damian]

This is the right estimation of armor.

[/IMG]

No GK it is not right estimation of armor thickness, it's Your pure fantasy, based on lack of knowledge about this subject and wrong interpretation of photos. How many times I need to explain this to You? Please at least one single time accept that someone knows more than You...

You making completely wrong assumption probably basing on CITV port opening, that is not aligned as same as it's upper collar seen from the outside.

 

[Godless-Kafir]

@Damian that is what i was saying, the armor on your BLUE blot line was wrong. The armor begins at the sight but you drew over it.

 

[Damian]

@Damian that is what i was saying, the armor on your BLUE blot line was wrong. The armor begins at the sight but you drew over it.

No, are You blind? Can't You even properly interpret what You see? You completely messed up everything... Christ now to explain You something that simple I will need to use tons of photos and made correct drawings...