Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT)

[EzioAltaïr]

What is the amount of imported stuff in Mk II? In Mk I it was 30% imported I remember, is there any specific number for Mk II?

 

[Kunal Biswas]

What is the amount of imported stuff in Mk II? In Mk I it was 30% imported I remember, is there any specific number for Mk II?

It is said it will be 90% Indian...

 

[ersakthivel]

Damian there is no over simplification when i say that ..... I know what i said and i mean it Russian equipment does lack in quality i mean what they export vs what they use for their armies...... and soviet tanks concept has always been all about how quickly they can be produced and in numbers same goes for china. I wont say T90 with India is really inferior but its not what Russia has and also i am sure that arjun is much better than the current t90 with India and could easily cook and eat them. cheers...... and MK2 i wont say but if it is what they say they will cook and eat 2 t90 and cook and eat what the Chinese have and what the Pakistan have as well in addition. The trials conducted against the t90 was not with seasoned crew ..... hehe funny we conduct trials without seasoned crew what kind of people would do that. Had it been operated by experienced crewmen ......... You would have read a different story ..... what kind of trials was this experienced vs inexperienced crew and t90 got it ......

The problem with damian is he will say ARJUN is not upto the world standards in armour untill it is tested with latest US and NATO anti tank rounds.(But he still does not mean that the russian anti tanks round we use are inferior.
But since we are internet peasants we are always given to assume that since Russian anti tank rounds as implied by damian are inferiorand we use some of our commonsense to conclude that their armour tech is also inferior.
SInce we are under aged and not adults we make this common sense conclusions.
But according to professionals like damian it is always false.
According to him
Only the NATO and US rounds are superior.
But the heavy tank philosophy arjun followed from western tanks is also inferior,because since ARJUN is not US make,it will be inferior.)

Then he will turn stuff on it's head and argue that heavy tanks doesnot offer much better protection ,because they are poorly designed with higher weight of other components instead of armour.
Ofcourse we should never come to some conclusion ourselves with some links from google.
We may use google to come to this forumAnd we should accept what he says.
There ends the job of google.

I posted my twenty questions to him previously.
HE answered them really patiently.
He himself said that the original russian version T-72A type was superior in many ways than the export versions offered to contries like india--the version T-72M
Then I asked him is it due to the thicker armour on original soviet version T-72A?
He said he does not know.
Then I posted a googled statement saying

go to this link---http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-72
T-72M
Export "Monkey model" version, similar to T-72A but with thinner armour and downgraded weapon systems. Also built in Poland and former Czechoslovakia.

Then our DGMF guys are sitting inside the monkey version exported to us and saying arjun is not needed,because it's weight cannot be supported by it's existing infra.
Then what is the purpose of having a monkey version tank?

He is yet to say anything.
That is the problem with this experts.
We never may come up to their level.

So we may neither come to the conclusion that the heavier arjun armour is superior to T-90 since it is not yet tested on US rounds according to DAMIAN.
nor come to the conclusion that,
T-90 armour is inferior because of lesser weight. Then he will say that other parts of arjun that weighs more so there should not be a simple conclusion.
This much is my understanding with posts from DAMIAN.
SO you can have your understanding as well.
I once thought talking to professionals clears your dobts!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.
How wrong!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Damian]

The problem with damian is he will say ARJUN is not upto the world standards in armour untill it is tested with latest US and NATO anti tank rounds.(But he still does not mean that the russian anti tanks round we use are inferior.
But since we are internet peasants we are always given to assume that since Russian anti tank rounds as implied by damian and we use some of our commonsense to conclude that their armour tech is also inferior.
SInce we are under aged and not adults we make this common sense conclusions.
But according to professionals like damian it is always false.
According to him
Only the NATO and US rounds are superior.
But the heavy tank philosophy arjun followed from western tanks is also inferior,because since ARJUN is not US make,it will be inferior.)

Oh god... I really do not know what IQ You have, but it is definetly low.

1) It is widely known fact that currently the only modern, having high penetration values types of APFSDS ammunition are German DM53 and DM63, and American M829A2 and M829A3, that have penetration values above ~700-750mm at 2,000m, everything else is below.
2) Weight is not indicator of vehicle protection. Bigger weight comes from vehicles size, and mostly from it's internal mechanical components, armor itself can be heavier or lighter but it is not that allmost whole weight comes from armor.
3) You seems to not understand that there is no heavy tank concept, there is only main battle tank, weight do not matter, in USA a 40 tons tank or 60 tons tank will allways be main battle tank, because MBT replaced medium and heavy tank classes.
4) Because of logistics issues, NATO also tries to make their tanks as light as possible without sacrificing protection, this can be achieved in different ways, by reducing vehicle size, changing it's design or using new very strong but lightweight armor materials.

Then he will turn stuff on it's head and argue that heavy tanks doesnot offer much better protection ,because they are poorly designed with higher weight of other components instead of armour.
Ofcourse we should never come to some conclusion ourselves with some links from google.
We may use google to come to this forumAnd we should accept what he says.
There ends the job of google.

Oh god, are You stupid or what?

You do not understand that there are different tanks, with different types of protection? It is obvious that tank A that weights 60 tons but have more advanced armor can be better protected than tank B weighting 45 tons but with less advanced armor, but it does not mean that tank C weighting also 60 tons will have better protection than tank B. It is simple.

I posted my twenty questions to him previously.
HE answered them really patiently.
He himself said that the original russian version T-72 type was superior in many ways to export versions offered to contries like india--the version T-72
Then I asked him is it due to the thicke armour on original soviet version?
He said he doesnot know.
Then I posted a google statement saying

No You still do not understand. Can You for sake of this discussion read about history of soviet tanks?

There were several versions of T-72, the original T-72 Ural, that was also exported, then there was T-72A with upgrades, and it's downgraded export versions T-72M and T-72M1 (India purchased T-72M1), in the 1980's another version T-72B had been fielded by soviets, it have superior armor protection, better fire control system and capability to fire GLATGM + other upgrades, this tank was not exported outside soviet union. The original T-90 was developed from T-72B, in fact T-90 was T-72B "on steroids", later another upgrade of T-90, with welded turret was developed for India, T-90S, that had superior protection than T-90 used by Russian Army, in the end because cast turrets production line in Azowstal plant had been shut down, Russian Army decided to purchase new T-90 variant, T-90A that had the same welded turret like Indian T-90S.

 

[ersakthivel]

Oh god... I really do not know what IQ You have, but it is definetly low.

1) It is widely known fact that currently the only modern, having high penetration values types of APFSDS ammunition are German DM53 and DM63, and American M829A2 and M829A3, that have penetration values above ~700-750mm at 2,000m, everything else is below.

2) Weight is not indicator of vehicle protection. Bigger weight comes from vehicles size, and mostly from it's internal mechanical components, armor itself can be heavier or lighter but it is not that allmost whole weight comes from armor.

3) You seems to not understand that there is no heavy tank concept, there is only main battle tank, weight do not matter, in USA a 40 tons tank or 60 tons tank will allways be main battle tank, because MBT replaced medium and heavy tank classes.

4) Because of logistics issues, NATO also tries to make their tanks as light as possible without sacrificing protection, this can be achieved in different ways, by reducing vehicle size, changing it's design or using new very strong but lightweight armor materials.



Oh god, are You stupid or what?

You do not understand that there are different tanks, with different types of protection? It is obvious that tank A that weights 60 tons but have more advanced armor can be better protected than tank B weighting 45 tons but with less advanced armor, but it does not mean that tank C weighting also 60 tons will have better protection than tank B. It is simple.



No You still do not understand. Can You for sake of this discussion read about history of soviet tanks?

There were several versions of T-72, the original T-72 Ural, that was also exported, then there was T-72A with upgrades, and it's downgraded export versions T-72M and T-72M1 (India purchased T-72M1), in the 1980's another version T-72B had been fielded by soviets, it have superior armor protection, better fire control system and capability to fire GLATGM + other upgrades, this tank was not exported outside soviet union. The original T-90 was developed from T-72B, in fact T-90 was T-72B "on steroids", later another upgrade of T-90, with welded turret was developed for India, T-90S, that had superior protection than T-90 used by Russian Army, in the end because cast turrets production line in Azowstal plant had been shut down, Russian Army decided to purchase new T-90 variant, T-90A that had the same welded turret like Indian T-90S.

I know pretty damn well how people with high IQ dodge the truth like MESSI does in premier league footabll, all over the world.

Okay then

1.CAN T-90 withstand high penetration values types of APFSDS ammunition are German DM53 and DM63, and American M829A2 and M829A3, that have penetration values above ~700-750mm at 2,000m?

2.SO you are implying that 63 ton tanks are not about better armour protection, installation of systems like TROPHY,and blow off panels for ammo,seperate storage of AMMO ,suppporting the higher weight of heavily armoured turret and hull armour
and only about wastefully engineered bigger parts due to lack of engineering.
This extends to all bigger tanks like leopard,leclarc,abrams or arjun alone?

3.SO countries all over the world that are making the above mentioned wastefully engineered MBTs are below the tech level of T-90 which within it's lesser weight provides all the armour protection features of ABRAMS,leopard and,leclarc and ARJUN.

4.SO all countries in NATO block are trying to reduce the weight of their tanks because they have not mastered the tech level of T-90.

If you are such genious then answer my question with one word,
Whether superior protection T-72A is heavier than the T-72M wich are monkey version? If you don't know better shut up and don't reply.

5.just 50 pages back you were asking coyly what is the GSQR of ARJUN to sayarekd.

7.You are also asking kunal what ammo was used inthe trial on arjun?

SO admit you don't know a shit about "ARJUN".It's armour composite detail or strenght ,and how many mms AFDPS from 2000 meters an arjun tank can with stand and then you can you can hold your court here.

Once you run out of answers you don't have to call me an idiot.
Arjun 's design was done based upon the fears that americans may supply ABRAMS to pakistan. Not based on the fears that Ukraine may supply their T-80 to PAKISTAN.

If you don't know something in particular be polite and try to learn.

The indians were assembling T-series for eons in AVADI.It is not that they were unable to develop the tech level of T-72 armour for 60 years and producer a inferior weighty ARJUn.Do you understand?

Once ELBIT and IMI helped all the major problems were solved on ARJUn. The whole world knows it.The ISRAELI tank experts call it a dessert FERRARI and it has a n airconditioning system too.

During summer trials of T-90 a jawan fainted of heat stroke. Now you are advicing us the T-90 NBC protection can double up as aircondition. Does the armyman know about it or not? The electronics of T-90s pack up in desert heat. It's night vision is also faulty with no cure in sight.

The army admitted all this.Like any other tank both T-90 and ARJUN have their own share of problem.
That doesn't mean that design philosophy behind them becomes irrelevant.

I know the heck that MBT is main battle tank.

The russian army's strategy is different than western strategy.

World over hunter killer tanks should shoot further with much accuracy and take punishment ,arjun does all that army has acknowledged it. Go to AJAI SHUKLA's blog and read some articles before badmouthing it.

I don't demean your favourite tanks.

But it is simply astounding that your claim that all the western blck countries are grappling to reach T-90 level protection ,with T-90 level weight for the past 50 years.

If you don't want to reply, Thanks.

I know very well other than calling me idiot you don't have any answer to these questions.

People may draw their own conclusion in this regard.

 

[navkapu]

Hi Please read this below it is available at http://frontierindia.net/the-kanchan-armor just posting it just in case you have not read this thought i am sure everyone here has read it but still.......

In 1980's the Kanchan composite had a composition of ceramic, alumina, fiber glass and some other such materials mixed. The RHA tried out had two thicknesses, i.e. a 350 mm plate and a 315 m plate. However these two plates had the same weight as a 120mm RHA. Hence it is said that Kanchan armor is more volume at same weight. The anti-tank munitions have problems in penetrating denser mass.

"This is the time when the Russian Tank T-72 imported by Indian Army could not penetrate the Kanchan Armor protected Arjun Tank , with APFDS at point blank range. Subsequently, the debate took place if the Russians had supplied us with training rounds rather than the actual ammunition. As a side note, in January 2000 at Proof & Experimental Establishment (PXE), Balasore, Arjun tank armor defeated all available HESH and FSAPDS rounds including Israeli FSAPDS rounds.

Back to 1980's, after the T-72 incident, a 106 mm RCL gun was tried on the Arjun Tank. 106 RCL's were effective anti-tank weapons those days. It played havoc on enemy tanks in 1971 war. The Kanchan armor defeated that too.

Kanchan armor composition has undergone massive changes since 1980's. The volume of the RHA has been reduced to lesser mass because of better metallurgy. The composite has evolved too and it does not use the 1980's technology anymore."



106mm RCL M40

Calibre: 105mm.
Maximum Range: 1372 metres - direct fire.
Armour Penetration: At 0º it is 620mm.
..............................At 30º it is 515mm.
..............................At 60º it is 400mm.




Read more: http://frontierindia.net/the-kanchan-armor#ixzz28KUUNs5b

 

[ersakthivel]

As it stands, the Arjun composite armour approach provides protection capable of resisting a T-72 FSAPDS round at point blank range, let alone at combat ranges of 2km! The metallurgy used for the Arjun is now being used for the T-90 as the Russians refused to transfer critical tech for armour panels! So its good enough for the T-90s to use, but is not good enough for the Arjun itself!

Now some magical metallurgy has to be found to reduce the weight further?
All tanks of the Arjun class, 4 crew, frontline western MBTs, all weight in at 60T+! Looks like even they need metallurgy lessons!





Arjun MK2- completely separated and containerized ammo box, above & beyond current ammo boxes. T-90 does not even have MK-1 level.

Arjun MK2- panoramic commanders sight w/TI given as essential. T-90, with over 600 purchased/delivered, and orders for another 1000 odd given....does not even have this as standard.

Arjun MK2- vetronics for tank crew. T-90? No.

Arjun MK2 - advanced rounds for anti fortifications. T-90? No.

The joke just keeps getting bigger and bigger.



Furthermore, here is what we do know about the flawless procurement that is the T-90.

- Came without ballistic computers that could use Indian Ammo
- TOT was not given, as such armor & gun barrel metallurgy both had to be developed in India
- Critical weakness in FCS, with Thermal imager overheating in daytime (when battles are fought)
- Spares & logistics issues because the Russians asked for further TOT money & delays in overhaul of first tanks as a result
- INVAR missiles when actually tested in India, flopped.
- Engines packed up in trials, but Army said fine (same for the Arjun meant back to the workshop and more trials..)
- No AC with bizarre reasons trotted out (troops will go soft), later evaluation of Russian ACs (driver has a heatstroke), current situation, RFP/RFIs away and no credible solution in sight..



While the T-72 was acknowledged to be one of the finest Russian tank designs, the ageing tank fleet is now increasingly difficult to maintain. Its small size and cramped turret make it difficult to incorporate the latest technology — like fire control systems, night vision and electronics. Unfortunately for the Army, the T-90 has not proved to be as sterling a performer as its predecessor. A number of glitches have come to the fore and production at HVF has been slow to take off. Russia has also refused to transfer technology related to metallurgy for T-90S gun barrels and armour plates to the HVF.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

@ersakthivel

IMHO, Damian is not wrong about most things here, Kanchan can be updated as thread develops but it has not been tested against such ammo, After one does test such ammo one can improve it on practical bases, till then it is just a claim, Same goes for T-90 and other which are not tested with such ammo either, Russian ammo supplied is 80s tech, that is what Russian export at most..

 

[methos]

1.CAN T-90 withstand high penetration values types of APFSDS ammunition are German DM53 and DM63, and American M829A2 and M829A3, that have penetration values above ~700-750mm at 2,000m?

This is not know, real data is classified. Estimations generally put the T-90's armour above 700 - 750 mm, when Kontakt-5 EDZ is included; without Kontakt-5 the T-90 is often estimated to be vulnerable to this ammunition, but also somtimes to be protected against it.

2.SO you are implying that 63 ton tanks are not about better armour protection, installation of systems like TROPHY,and blow off panels for ammo,seperate storage of AMMO ,suppporting the higher weight of heavily armoured turret and hull armour
and only about wastefully engineered bigger parts due to lack of engineering.
This extends to all bigger tanks like leopard,leclarc,abrams or arjun alone?

What you need to take a look at is the size and armour volume. The T-90's turret geometry reduces the armoured volume drastically - only the front has to be armoured with thick composite armour. On Western tanks with flat turret sides however a large armour volume is required for protection; in extreme cases (the M1 with composite armour extending over the whole turret flanks) the frontal armour will be less than 50% of the total armour volume, while on the T-90 100% of the total composite armour volume are located at the front. For reaching the same level of frontal armour protection the T-90 needs significantly less weight than Western tanks.
When we compare the Arjun with the T-90 things are slightly different, because of the ridiculous turret design of the Arjun; still the T-90's turret is better shaped and has less frontal profile, which means that less weight (for the T-90's armour) will result in the same or an even higher level of protection.

Russians often argue with the weight-to-volume ratio - the small T-90 is weighing more per volume than the M1A2 and similar when compared to the Leopard 2A5.

3.SO countries all over the world that are making the above mentioned wastefully engineered MBTs are below the tech level of T-90 which within it's lesser weight provides all the armour protection features of ABRAMS,leopard and,leclarc and ARJUN

As Damian said many countries (like the U.S. and the UK) would like to have a tank weighing as much or even less than the T-90, while still maintaining a high level of protection.
Western tanks are not bad designed, they are in many aspects better than the T-90. The Arjun however is no Western tank, it does not follow the same design principles; it only looks similar to Western tanks. In the same way Chinese or Korean tanks are not following Western design principles, while also having long welded turrets and weighing more than the T-90.

4.SO all countries in NATO block are trying to reduce the weight of their tanks because they have not mastered the tech level of T-90.

No. Some NATO countries want a smaller tank, but not all. And there is no problem with mastering the "tech level of T-90", NATO has different requirements for protection. The T-90 is like the M1 or the Leopard 2 designed for Cold War scenarios; i.e. large combined arms operations against similar potent enemies. In such scenarios heavy frontal armour is required and only minor side armour. History has shown us however that the current and probably also the future conflicts in which NATO will participate are not Cold War battles, but assymetrical combat, where side armour and mine protection actually matter more than frontal armour.
The Germans once wanted to make a tank weighing slightly more than the T-90 in normal configuration, but 77 tonnes with full armour.

If you are such genious then answer my question with one word,
Whether superior protection T-72A is heavier than the T-72M wich are monkey version? If you don't know better shut up and don't reply.

The T-72A uses stronger armour protection than the T-72M - the T-72M only has a cast steel turret and only the old hull armour layout, while the T-72A had at the same time already composite armour. The T-72A's composite armour was introduced in 1978, while the T-72M1 with the same composite armour was made available for export in 1982/83, when the next Soviet tank armour was already developed.

7.You are also asking kunal what ammo was used inthe trial on arjun?

SO admit you don't know a shit about "ARJUN".It's armour composite detail or strenght ,and how many mms AFDPS from 2000 meters an arjun tank can with stand and then you can you can hold your court here.

India does not have access to any modern ammunition. The Russian ammo used with the T-72s and T-90s is from 1985/86, while the Arjun's current ammunition is not better than Cold War ammo. In best case the tests were made using Isreali supplied tungsten APFSDS, which do not exceed the performance of the Soviet DU ammunition from 1991.

Once you run out of answers you don't have to call me an idiot.
Arjun 's design was done based upon the fears that americans may supply ABRAMS to pakistan. Not based on the fears that Ukraine may supply their T-80 to PAKISTAN.

The development of the Arjun (even though with different name back then), started prior the M1A1 was available.

As it stands, the Arjun composite armour approach provides protection capable of resisting a T-72 FSAPDS round at point blank range, let alone at combat ranges of 2km! The metallurgy used for the Arjun is now being used for the T-90 as the Russians refused to transfer critical tech for armour panels! So its good enough for the T-90s to use, but is not good enough for the Arjun itself!

The "metallurgy" doesn't matter much. The fact that the Arjun survived hits from T-72's APFSDS doesn't matter much... because your informations are not detailed. Which type of APFSDS? The oldest 125 mm APFSDS cannot penetrate 300 mm RHA at 2,000 m!
As you said, the Russians didn't send you "critical tech for armour panels", that's the reason why the T-90 is now assembled with "[t]he metallurgy used for the Arjun".

Now some magical metallurgy has to be found to reduce the weight further?
All tanks of the Arjun class, 4 crew, frontline western MBTs, all weight in at 60T+! Looks like even they need metallurgy lessons!

You are appearently missunderstanding the semantic of "metallurgy".

Arjun MK2- completely separated and containerized ammo box, above & beyond current ammo boxes. T-90 does not even have MK-1 level.

Arjun MK2- panoramic commanders sight w/TI given as essential. T-90, with over 600 purchased/delivered, and orders for another 1000 odd given....does not even have this as standard.

Arjun MK2- vetronics for tank crew. T-90? No.

Arjun MK2 - advanced rounds for anti fortifications. T-90? No.

The Arjun Mk. 2 has nothing of this, because it currently hasn't been fielded. The T-90 does have a thermal sight for the commander which can be moved independently from the turret, the currently fielded Arjun models are not known of having safe ammunition storage and the Arjun has currently no "advanced rounds". If you compare the T-90 with something that only has been projected, then you also could compare the Arjun with advanced Soviet/Russian prototypes like the Molot (FST-2), T-95 or Armata.

The RHA tried out had two thicknesses, i.e. a 350 mm plate and a 315 m plate. However these two plates had the same weight as a 120mm RHA.

The sentence is ----ed up... the RHA had two thickness (315 and 350 mm), but weighed as much as 120 mm RHA... nice paradoxon.

 

[Damian]

Thank You Methos for answering, I do not have time for this right now.

But as we can see here, is the problem here are definetly people without a knowledge about tanks, expecting simplified answers good for their simplified understanding of the world.

 

[Damian]

The problem with armor protection is a very difficult issue to be solved. On the one hand we have Russian tank designing school that focus on possibly the most compact vehicle design, that will be light but offer good armor protection. Still from ergonomics point of view, as well modernization and vehicle life cycle point of view this is not the best idea.

On the other hand we have attempts in USA, probably Germany, and several other countries to develop new armor materials that will be light anough, but also strong enough so vehicle weight could be reduced without sacrificing armor protection, vehicle ergonomics, and crew survivability.

Of course there are other attempts to reduce weight. For example currently Americans are starting R&D program for M1 Abrams modernization, one of the goals for ECP1 phase is to redesign or design completely new internal components, that will be smaller, lighter and more efficent, besides this of course, US Army wants another improvement in armor protection, details are unknown but as we can see, there is what Methos said, that at least some NATO countries would want a lighter vehicle, yet at least as survivable as currently used ones, and if possible even more survivable.

 

[ersakthivel]

This is not know, real data is classified. Estimations generally put the T-90's armour above 700 - 750 mm, when Kontakt-5 EDZ is included; without Kontakt-5 the T-90 is often estimated to be vulnerable to this ammunition, but also somtimes to be protected against it.



What you need to take a look at is the size and armour volume. The T-90's turret geometry reduces the armoured volume drastically - only the front has to be armoured with thick composite armour. On Western tanks with flat turret sides however a large armour volume is required for protection; in extreme cases (the M1 with composite armour extending over the whole turret flanks) the frontal armour will be less than 50% of the total armour volume, while on the T-90 100% of the total composite armour volume are located at the front. For reaching the same level of frontal armour protection the T-90 needs significantly less weight than Western tanks.
When we compare the Arjun with the T-90 things are slightly different, because of the ridiculous turret design of the Arjun; still the T-90's turret is better shaped and has less frontal profile, which means that less weight (for the T-90's armour) will result in the same or an even higher level of protection.

Russians often argue with the weight-to-volume ratio - the small T-90 is weighing more per volume than the M1A2 and similar when compared to the Leopard 2A5.



As Damian said many countries (like the U.S. and the UK) would like to have a tank weighing as much or even less than the T-90, while still maintaining a high level of protection.
Western tanks are not bad designed, they are in many aspects better than the T-90. The Arjun however is no Western tank, it does not follow the same design principles; it only looks similar to Western tanks. In the same way Chinese or Korean tanks are not following Western design principles, while also having long welded turrets and weighing more than the T-90.



No. Some NATO countries want a smaller tank, but not all. And there is no problem with mastering the "tech level of T-90", NATO has different requirements for protection. The T-90 is like the M1 or the Leopard 2 designed for Cold War scenarios; i.e. large combined arms operations against similar potent enemies. In such scenarios heavy frontal armour is required and only minor side armour. History has shown us however that the current and probably also the future conflicts in which NATO will participate are not Cold War battles, but assymetrical combat, where side armour and mine protection actually matter more than frontal armour.
The Germans once wanted to make a tank weighing slightly more than the T-90 in normal configuration, but 77 tonnes with full armour.



The T-72A uses stronger armour protection than the T-72M - the T-72M only has a cast steel turret and only the old hull armour layout, while the T-72A had at the same time already composite armour. The T-72A's composite armour was introduced in 1978, while the T-72M1 with the same composite armour was made available for export in 1982/83, when the next Soviet tank armour was already developed.



India does not have access to any modern ammunition. The Russian ammo used with the T-72s and T-90s is from 1985/86, while the Arjun's current ammunition is not better than Cold War ammo. In best case the tests were made using Isreali supplied tungsten APFSDS, which do not exceed the performance of the Soviet DU ammunition from 1991.



The development of the Arjun (even though with different name back then), started prior the M1A1 was available.



The "metallurgy" doesn't matter much. The fact that the Arjun survived hits from T-72's APFSDS doesn't matter much... because your informations are not detailed. Which type of APFSDS? The oldest 125 mm APFSDS cannot penetrate 300 mm RHA at 2,000 m!
As you said, the Russians didn't send you "critical tech for armour panels", that's the reason why the T-90 is now assembled with "[t]he metallurgy used for the Arjun".



You are appearently missunderstanding the semantic of "metallurgy".



The Arjun Mk. 2 has nothing of this, because it currently hasn't been fielded. The T-90 does have a thermal sight for the commander which can be moved independently from the turret, the currently fielded Arjun models are not known of having safe ammunition storage and the Arjun has currently no "advanced rounds". If you compare the T-90 with something that only has been projected, then you also could compare the Arjun with advanced Soviet/Russian prototypes like the Molot (FST-2), T-95 or Armata.



The sentence is ----ed up... the RHA had two thickness (315 and 350 mm), but weighed as much as 120 mm RHA... nice paradoxon.

Thanks methos.since arjun has the suspension and engine and tracks to support the 60 +ton weight improvements in armour technology and turret redesign can be done on it without affecting much of it's design and weight parameters to be taken on par with western tanks. Atleast the scope exists as it has the volume and weight supporting potential of the modern western tank with further refinements.

Kunal said that other than this russian and israeli rounds something was tested on it after further refinements of armour. But it is not yet publicised and it is a private detail among the officials concerned. So no up to date strength of KANCHAN armour seems to be out in the open from official circles.



there are reports that this turret redesign is done and it's weight is reduced by 4 tons according to statements by V.K.Saraswat. But there is nothing reliable on it.However it's FCS troubles are fixed and it is accurate it seems.

What's your thoughts on that?
We will also have to wait for the safe ammunation storage and blow off panel thing when actual prototypes emerge

1.However this same ammunation storage and blow off panels are there in T-90 or not? please answer.

2.What will be the prudent options for FMBT? should we go for an entirely new design within 50+ ton specs?

3.Will it be possible to give same level of protection of the western latest leopard and abrams and their advanced tech within the 50+ ton limit set by indian army?

4.Since western countries haven't mastered it how come the indian army expect's CVRDE to deliver it?

5.Is army's expectation realistic?
or iterate arjun design as suggested by Israelis?

 

[ersakthivel]

@ersakthivel

IMHO, Damian is not wrong about most things here, Kanchan can be updated as thread develops but it has not been tested against such ammo, After one does test such ammo one can improve it on practical bases, till then it is just a claim, Same goes for T-90 and other which are not tested with such ammo either, Russian ammo supplied is 80s tech, that is what Russian export at most..

kunal
V'K.saraswat says the turret of arjun mk_II is re engineered to reduce 3.5 ton weight.
But you are saying mk-II exactly weighs 67 tons.

SO will it be possible that the tank that is currently undergoing evaluation is a Mk-I ARJUN serving as test bed for the technologies to be implemented on ARJUN MK-II ?
That's why it is yet to implement safe separate chamber of ammunition?
or
V.K. Saraswath's statement is misquoted in the media?
will the safe separate ammunition chamber be implemented on Mk-II?

 

[sayareakd]

problem is that we have Arjun MK-I, its upgrade as Arjun MK-IA and not as Arjun MK-II as we all say.

Arjun MK-II lets hope is different project.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

In this sense you can be right, But till now from web what we know that Arjun MK2 is MK1 with modifications..

I would be happy if what you mentioned is right..

kunal
V'K.saraswat says the turret of arjun mk_II is re engineered to reduce 3.5 ton weight.
But you are saying mk-II exactly weighs 67 tons.

SO will it be possible that the tank that is currently undergoing evaluation is a Mk-I ARJUN serving as test bed for the technologies to be implemented on ARJUN MK-II ?That's why it is yet to implement safe separate chamber of ammunition?
or
V.K. Saraswath's statement is misquoted in the media?
will the safe separate ammunition chamber be implemented on Mk-II?

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Some Corrections to methos above :

1. Regarding Armour Module, ArjunMK1 and T-90S use different Armour Concepts, When you measure the thickness of both its a useless effort as both works differently and structural wise not the same..

2. Regarding Tot of Armour which was resolved but Kanchan was chosen coz it was cost effective and in the specs implemented for T-90S gives more or less same protection..

3. Check this thread so does other blogs where my work is show on advance Panoramic Sight for Arjun MK2, Safe ammo storage is mentioned in MK2 should have noted before commenting so..

4. What kind of Advance round projected ? There many under-projected and already developed..

5. You dont understand the knowledge of metallurgy to this extend that is why your comment is ****** ..

 

[ersakthivel]

unless there is an official press release specifying the exact weight of arjun MK-II with exact weight specs ,we may not know the exact weight it seems.

 

[bhramos]

 

[p2prada]

It seems the discussion is between facts and hopes.

 

[sayareakd]

It seems the discussion is between facts and hopes.

yeah i too find the same thing with peoples posts.