Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT)

[sayareakd]

even in Georgia war they had T 72 upgrades from Israel, which bust open from modern anti tank weapons.

 

[notinlove]

Oh... Dear do you remember Georgia war were the T-72 were baked with just RPGs and in Iraqi NATO forces just toasted the T-72 tanks.

you might wanna read this

The RPG-29 entered service with the Soviet army in 1989.

The Israeli newspaper Haaretz stated that the RPG-29 was a major source of IDF casualties in the 2006 Lebanon War[2] although a spokesman for the Russian Foreign Ministry denied that Russia had supplied arms directly to Hezbollah.[3]

Kommersant magazine acknowledged through anonymous sources the possibility of a weapons transfer between Syria and Hezbollah during the Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon.[4]

In 2007, British officials confirmed that an RPG-29 round penetrated the frontal ERA and hull of a Challenger 2 tank during an engagement in al-Amarah, Iraq, wounding a crew member.[5]

In May 2008, The New York Times disclosed that an American M1 tank had also been heavily damaged by an RPG-29 in Iraq.[6]

RPG-29 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

An RPG 29 is a pretty destructive weapon . i would have posted a thread of chat of Israeli tank operators which stated that merkavas were blown open by top attacks from RPG's but i am not able to find the link.

How long it will take to pakistan to milk the secrets from US. Now the Pak is having the knife over the US in the Afghan Issue.

pakistan doesn't hold shit over US. for example pak is getting super cobras not vipers . pak is getting block 52 not block 60 .. in short pak is getting everything obsolete

T-72s are merely outdated whether what the upgrade it get. So atleast 400-500 Arjun will be a bumper for the IA to replace the T-72s. I am not arguing that procurement of T-90 is no wrong but Arjun as well as his brother Karna is ditched for that.

no comments.i don't wanna go into circles.

If you are not sure about the WWII, Tigers and panzers i ll explain.
Tiger is say higher version of panzer where tiger had a powerful armour than the original one which made it formidable.

so?

More... T-90 is not the one whcih he Russian forces have, it is somewhat crippled version and we people added the kanchan armour, french and israeli stuff and upgraded it.

Yes.

I one read in a israeli forum by a Israel amry men who was in the audition team for validaiton of arjun. He stated that tank is better than merkava and it is well suit for the desert operation.

Post the link if you can please , would make for a nice read

 

[p2prada]

Oh... Dear do you remember Georgia war were the T-72 were baked with just RPGs and in Iraqi NATO forces just toasted the T-72 tanks.

US vs Iraq is totally fair right. And can you tell me how many tanks did Russia actually lose in Georgia?

How long it will take to pakistan to milk the secrets from US. Now the Pak is having the knife over the US in the Afghan Issue.

Er. What secrets?

T-72s are merely outdated whether what the upgrade it get. So atleast 400-500 Arjun will be a bumper for the IA to replace the T-72s. I am not arguing that procurement of T-90 is no wrong but Arjun as well as his brother Karna is ditched for that.

The latest most modern Pakistani tanks are still inferior to the T-90M.

If you are not sure about the WWII, Tigers and panzers i ll explain.
Tiger is say higher version of panzer where tiger had a powerful armour than the original one which made it formidable.

Yes. I am aware of that. The tigers are like Arjun and Panzers are like the T-90. And the more formidable Tigers were either captured or destroyed very early by the Soviet Union compared to Panzers. The Panzers were the most successful German tanks throughout the war.

More... T-90 is not the one whcih he Russian forces have, it is somewhat crippled version and we people added the kanchan armour, french and israeli stuff and upgraded it.

The Pakistani Al-Khalid is like a peashooter against the T-90M. I doubt a single shell will go through the armour.

I read in one israeli forum by a Israel amry men who was in the audition team for validaiton of arjun. He stated that tank is better than merkava and it is well suit for the desert operation.

Enlight me if i am wrong anywhere:sporty55:

And did you see me categorically deny that? The Arjun is superior. But, the T-90 is more effective. There is a difference between superior and effective. The effective weapon always wins the war. even though Tigers were superior, the Panzers were more effective.

Take Georgia for example, the US had trained some Georgian soldiers to use the M-4. When the war actually began, the same trained soldiers dumped the M-4s and fought with AK-47s and AK-74s. The AK-47s and AK-74s were more effective compared to the superior M-4 assault rifles. They could not handle the awesome single shot and burst fire modes of the "superior" M-4.

 

[bengalraider]

As for Leopard and the other tanks. How many are operational in a single army? I am not talking about a collective of countries. If that is the case the T-72 far surpasses all of them put together. More than 25000 made, not to mention the Chinese versions that were not counted.

Not to mention the T-62 far surpasses the T-72 as well with well over 40,000made.The European nations see no significant military threat emerging anytime soon hence the total inventory of heavy armor in Europe has gone down but at the time when the cold war was at it's height the European Defence was organised around the heavy hitting HMBT formations of Germany and Britain, coupled with medium tank fleets from the rest of Europe there were significant numbers of heavy European tanks in operation by European armies at that time due to the threat perception as the threat is no longer there the downsizing of all the militaries of europe has taken place, We however still have two credible and imminent threats on our eastern and western borders,At least one of whom (read Chinese) can be expected to use the T-99 HMBT in any future Sino-Indian conflict.
Also coming back to numbers at least two of the older heavies the M60 and the British chieftain have significant numbers in service around the world with Iran estimated to operate around 700 chieftains and turkey having an inventory of around a thousand upgraded M60's

So, all are in the range of 200 or 300, less than 500. So, at the same time do you think Arjun will be a feasible project compared to 1600 T-90s and 1800 T-72s. Cold Start will fail without the T series. 1600 Arjuns cannot be inducted and maintained. It is impossible.

The Merkava has 250 on order apart from the 300 odd already part of the Israeli army .e a total of 550, also the Turkish envisage a 1000 HMBT force by 2025 with the altay, the Germans still operate close to 500 leo's. With the advent and subsequent mass proliferation of cheap ATGM's the utility of heavy armor has only increased not reduced
We need a heavy tank whether or not it is the arjun in it's current form is still a matter of discussion.

A tank is a dangerous thing. Accidents are bound to happen. What was the Commander doing with his hand in the barrel?

Anyway, the western analysts comments have been at the earliest version of the T-72. Don't see why the system could not have been bettered over the last 30 years.

Your scenario about the driver being injured is very rare. The commander is the most under threat. So, can the loader replace the commander when the time comes? Can the loader the replace the gunner? And in case the loader did replace the gunner, the commander or the driver then who is going to sit and load the gun? The driver can only be replaced by another driver and for the time being the tank is pretty much useless. All they can do is drive back home. A 3 man crew can do the same.

In this day and age of HESH nobody is safe concussions can happen anytime . In that scenario the gunner or the loader normally doubles up and does both jobs this reduces the rate of fire but keeps the tank a viable asset in a three man crew if one is lost nobody can fire removing the tank from the battle.

Fortunately our enemies are not the same as the Europeans. We don't need as many tanks as the Soviets did and the numbers required were significantly lower. However we do outnumber the Pakistani armour significantly and we have enough gunships to handle any threat. So, the current numbers will suffice.

The problem is the upgraded T-72s cannot complement the more modern Arjuns. Mixing and matching such a force is impossible. During WW2, the Tigers were in a different regiment while the Panzers had their own regiment. There was no major amount of mixing of forces involved. This is mainly due differences in logistics and doctrine.

The main armor threat for our forces come from the west where we have the 2220 tanks of the PA facing off against 3689 odd tanks from our side (i am using absolute numbers from global security actual deployed numbers will be far lesser on both sides), nowhere as large a superiority as that the soviet guards divisions alone had against the combined armored might of Europe(excluding america)which by some counts was around 15-20,000 tanks on the soviet side compared to 7-8000 on the entire western half of the continent including the 2800 odd Leo 2's the germans used to operate at that time.

During WW2 the Germans initially started out with light tanks supported by air power mainly the PzIII and the PzIV , at the time most of Europe operated little or no comparable armor and victory came comparable easily, much of the Whermacht armor victories can instead be attribute to the excellent CAS provided by the stukas of the Luftwaffe and as long as the Luftwaffe controlled the skies no significant threat to German armor could be garnered; all that changed one fateful day in the midst of operation barbarossa a T-34 came charging into the German ranks and took out a panzer or two, this was anew adversary far more armored and better armed than anything the Germans had faced in Europe so far, also the luftwaffe had fast begun to lose air superiortiy to the new genration of soviet, british and american aircraft , hence the entry of the tigers and the panthers, the main reason these regiments operated alone was to reduce friendly losses no one wanted a regiment of mixed Tigers and Pz III's to take on a regiment of shermans and come out with the shermans having annihilated all the PzIII's.

The reality is simple. DRDO scientists who have Masters and Doctorates cannot think in line with their lesser educated military counterparts. Their education is in totally different fields. The scientist makes things while the military guy uses those things. Any scientist, journalist or layman will know that the Arjun is a superior tank. But, any military oriented guy will know that it will not serve. This is all because of Doctrine. The military guy knows what he needs. He does not need a scientist, journalist or a layman to tell him what he should do.

The problem is people watch some movies and read some books and believe they know better and that they have the right to criticize. A guy who has served 40 years in the army obviously does not know sh*t about warfare.:dozey:

Most of the problems is because of journalists. They take simple news, complicate it and cleverly twist it to fit their own agenda. Take a look at Ajai Shukla's blog. Supposedly the FCS is flawed. :dozey: And lack of ammunition is also a flaw.:stinker: Overhauling an engine is a bigger flaw.:icon_salut:
His blog would have got a lot of hits from fanboys.:2guns:

This i will not disagree with the media does exaggerate and the army generals probably do know best but how much of them are really thinking without being under the spell of a natasha is the question.

 

[notinlove]

The Pakistani Al-Khalid is like a peashooter against the T-90M. I doubt a single shell will go through the armour.

i wouldn't bet my life on that ...pakistanis do use DU shells albeit locally made....and according to some reports AK is a fine tank ...better than T-90 .. i don't think so ....but it isn't all that bad.

 

[bengalraider]

Yes. I am aware of that. The tigers are like Arjun and Panzers are like the T-90. And the more formidable Tigers were either captured or destroyed very early by the Soviet Union compared to Panzers. The Panzers were the most successful German tanks throughout the war.

Actually the most successful German units in the later stages of the war(after the Luftwaffe lost air-superiority?) were forces that had heavy armor not the medium/light panzers

The 502nd Heavy Tank Battalion was a German World War II independent armoured battalion (German: Abteilung) equipped with heavy tanks. The battalion was the first unit to receive and field the Tiger I or Panzerkampfwagen VI Ausf. E heavy tank. It fought on the Eastern front, and was one of the most successful German heavy tank battalions, destroying 1,400 tanks and 2,000 guns.

502nd Heavy Tank Battalion (Germany: Facts, Discussion Forum, and Encyclopedia Article)

After the Luftwaffe could no longer afford to provide CAS in tank to tank battles the Tiger and panther were the most effective tanks the Germans ever had

According to US Army Ground Forces statistics, destruction of a single Panther tank was achieved after destruction of an average of 5 M4 Shermans or some 9 T-34s. The Panther tank remained a major German tank until the end of the war. Later versions of the Panzer IV with long 75 mm KwK 40 L/48 guns were slightly cheaper to produce and more reliable and so it remained in production alongside the Panther tank. However the main reason for the prolonged Panzer IV production was that the re-organization of the German tank industry to manufacture Panthers rather than Panzer IVs would have resulted in such a temporary decrease in overall tank production that it would have been unbearable for Germany when the tide of war had already turned.

Heavy Tanks Of Ww2

And did you see me categorically deny that? The Arjun is superior. But, the T-90 is more effective. There is a difference between superior and effective. The effective weapon always wins the war. even though Tigers were superior, the Panzers were more effective.

Again the panzers were only more effective as long as adequate air power was still there; without the Luftwaffe strafing the hell out of the enemy the Panzer was easy prey to any Sherman or a T-34.In toto as per wiki the heavy tank deatchments of the Whermacht heer succeeded in destroying around 9850 OPFOR tanks while only sustaining 1715 casualties themselves a kill ratio of 5.75 per tank
German heavy tank battalion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[gb009]

The army GSQR was not for a heavy tank. Arjun is a heavy tank not because the army wanted it so but because the DRDO could not make it any lighter. Is this the case with other heavy tanks in the world. i.e. they are heavy not because the end user wanted a heavy tank but because the manufacturer could not make a lighter tank. If yes then I guess Arjun can be called a heavy tank.
Lot of people have been pointing that the fact that Arjun is an HMBT is an advantage and that the future requirement is for HMBTs etc... Question: had DRDO been able make a tank that fit the GSQR and so was lighter would you have sighted its lower weight as a disadvantage? I am sure those opposing Arjun for its weight would not switch their stance.
By the way why is arjun so heavy? The kanchan armor alone could not account for all that weight.
Another thing I don't understand is why is the army against inducting Arjun tanks : Lets say the current plan is for 1600 T90 and 124 Arjun tanks. Now if the army was to induct 376 more arjun tanks (and correspondingly only 1224 T90) would it cause such a big problem as far as army's doctrine is considered? For example if we have a war with Pak, I assume all the tanks with IA will not make a dash for the pak border in one go. There would be a second line of attack/defence (if the ones in front get destroyed) may be even a 3rd & 4th. These tanks(3rd/4th line) need not be available right away.. I guess it would be enough if they take longer to arrive (as some people have stated that moving Arjun around would take more time)... So why not have T90 in front and Arjun slightly behind as a 2nd/3rd/4th line? I am not someone in the military so everything mentioned above is just my guess, if its just rubbish then ignore it ....

 

[bengalraider]

@ gboo9

I fear the DRDO may be hiding something , i believe the arjun may have a layer of DU armor like that on the Abrams, this is a controversial armor due to the risk of the crew getting irradiated even though no known armor can match it in terms of protection provided. Du armor is 2.5 times more dense than steel plate and increases weight while retaining size. The DRDO may not be admitting it due to security concerns same along with the army i.e The armor may be a secret.

A snippet on DU armor
The DU armor on the M1A1 tanks proved effective in protecting tank crews from enemy fire, although the tank crews were continually irradiated by their own armor and DU rounds for the months many of them lived with their tanks. For example, a tank driver receives a radiation dose of 0.13 mrem/hr to his head from overhead DU armor.20 After just 32 continuous days, or 64 twelve-hour days, the amount of radiation a tank driver receives to his head will exceed the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's annual standard for public whole-body exposure to man-made sources of radiation.21 Unfortunately, U.S. tank crews were not monitored for radiation exposure during the Persian Gulf War.

During the ground war, only seven M1A1's were hit by rounds fired from the Iraqi's T-72 tanks, with none being seriously damaged. The Army reported that the Iraqi armed forces "destroyed no Abrams tanks during the Persian Gulf War."22 Nine Abrams tanks were destroyed during the war: seven due to friendly fire and two were intentionally destroyed to prevent capture after they became disabled.23 One incident in particular demonstrates the effectiveness of armor-piercing rounds and tank armor made of depleted uranium. As allied forces pushed into southern Iraq at the start of the ground war, an M1A1 tank became stuck in the mud.

The unit (part of the 24th Infantry Division) had gone on, leaving this tank to wait for a recovery vehicle. Three T-72's appeared and attacked. The first fired from under 1,000 meters, scoring a hit with a shaped-charge (high explosive) round on the M1A1's frontal armor. The hit did no damage. The M1A1 fired a 120mm armor-piercing (DU) round that penetrated the T-72 turret, causing an explosion that blew the turret into the air. The second T-72 fired another shaped-charge round, hit the frontal armor, and did no damage. The T-72 turned to run, and took a 120mm round in the engine compartment (which) blew the engine into the air. The last T-72 fired a solid shot (sabot) round from 400 meters. This left a groove in the M1A1's frontal armor and bounced off. The T-72 then backed up behind a sand berm and was completely concealed from view. The M1A1 depressed its gun and put a (DU) sabot round through the berm, into the T-72, causing an explosion.24

Collateral Damage: How U.S. Troops Were Exposed to DU

 

[p2prada]

Not to mention the T-62 far surpasses the T-72 as well with well over 40,000made.

T-62 is a 40 ton tank with a 115mm gun. The same as GSQR 326 Arjun. Only the T-90 is operational and surpasses the T-72.

The European nations see no significant military threat emerging anytime soon hence the total inventory of heavy armor in Europe has gone down but at the time when the cold war was at it's height the European Defence was organised around the heavy hitting HMBT formations of Germany and Britain, coupled with medium tank fleets from the rest of Europe there were significant numbers of heavy European tanks in operation by European armies at that time due to the threat perception as the threat is no longer there the downsizing of all the militaries of europe has taken place, We however still have two credible and imminent threats on our eastern and western borders,At least one of whom (read Chinese) can be expected to use the T-99 HMBT in any future Sino-Indian conflict.

Just proves that the HMBT is too expensive to maintain. The T-90 is not.

Also coming back to numbers at least two of the older heavies the M60 and the British chieftain have significant numbers in service around the world with Iran estimated to operate around 700 chieftains and turkey having an inventory of around a thousand upgraded M60's

M-60 Patton is lighter than the T-90. It is just one ton lighter. So, it is not a HMBT.

[qute]The Merkava has 250 on order apart from the 300 odd already part of the Israeli army .e a total of 550, also the Turkish envisage a 1000 HMBT force by 2025 with the altay, the Germans still operate close to 500 leo's. With the advent and subsequent mass proliferation of cheap ATGM's the utility of heavy armor has only increased not reduced[/quote]

300, 400, 500, 1000...No. We need 4000 tanks for our doctrine.

We need a heavy tank whether or not it is the arjun in it's current form is still a matter of discussion.

Not financially viable unless Pak suddenly decides to get Abrams or Type-99s.

In this day and age of HESH nobody is safe concussions can happen anytime . In that scenario the gunner or the loader normally doubles up and does both jobs this reduces the rate of fire but keeps the tank a viable asset in a three man crew if one is lost nobody can fire removing the tank from the battle.

The drivers compartment is separated from the gunner or the loader. The loader sits very close to the back of the tank while the driver sits right in front of the Arjun. If the driver needs to become the loader, he needs to get out of the front of the tank, enter the tank again from the top to get to the loaders position. It is impossible. There is no space at all in the tank for this to happen internally.

The main armor threat for our forces come from the west where we have the 2220 tanks of the PA facing off against 3689 odd tanks from our side (i am using absolute numbers from global security actual deployed numbers will be far lesser on both sides), nowhere as large a superiority as that the soviet guards divisions alone had against the combined armored might of Europe(excluding america)which by some counts was around 15-20,000 tanks on the soviet side compared to 7-8000 on the entire western half of the continent including the 2800 odd Leo 2's the germans used to operate at that time.

You forgot to mention the enemy tanks on the western border will be inferior to the T-90. The Soviets created their doctrine for a superior force while we have a similar one for an inferior force.

During WW2 the Germans initially started out with light tanks supported by air power mainly the PzIII and the PzIV , at the time most of Europe operated little or no comparable armor and victory came comparable easily, much of the Whermacht armor victories can instead be attribute to the excellent CAS provided by the stukas of the Luftwaffe and as long as the Luftwaffe controlled the skies no significant threat to German armor could be garnered; all that changed one fateful day in the midst of operation barbarossa a T-34 came charging into the German ranks and took out a panzer or two, this was anew adversary far more armored and better armed than anything the Germans had faced in Europe so far, also the luftwaffe had fast begun to lose air superiortiy to the new genration of soviet, british and american aircraft , hence the entry of the tigers and the panthers, the main reason these regiments operated alone was to reduce friendly losses no one wanted a regiment of mixed Tigers and Pz III's to take on a regiment of shermans and come out with the shermans having annihilated all the PzIII's.

The entry of the Tigers and Panthers had nothing to do with losing air superiority. The Panzers were used in large numbers while only some 1000 odd Tigers were made, too few to have made a difference against some 80000 T-34s. Panthers were arguably good tanks. But, it was the 25 ton Panzers that stole the show. The Soviets simply out numbered the Germans by a HUGE margin for the Tigers to have done anything. Also, making changes in the doctrine during war is far easier than doing it during peace time.

This i will not disagree with the media does exaggerate and the army generals probably do know best but how much of them are really thinking without being under the spell of a natasha is the question.

Think about it. If the Generals were indeed looking for kickbacks, they could have launched a global tender for MBTs and pitched the Arjun with it. Abrams, Challengers, Leclercs, Merkava etc etc. All would have competed, the Generals would have had better access to money and the Russians would have come running to us with more ToT.

No mate. The generals merely bought more T-90s to replace an ageing fleet of tanks. That's all. Our doctrine is more important. The generals earn more money through other ways than kickbacks. Kickbacks are meant for middlemen and politicians.

Spell of Natasha is something that the media made up again. We just like using it a lot.

 

[Agantrope]

OK Now Ajaishukla dropped a new bomb on Arjun vs T-90

http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2010/01/coming-up-on-popular-demand-broadsword.html

 

[neo29]

OK Now Ajaishukla dropped a new bomb on Arjun vs T-90

http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2010/01/coming-up-on-popular-demand-broadsword.html

We are having trials in feb- march, these will be practical trials than just statistics on paper. Better to depend on those results than paper results.

 

[Dark_Prince]

I have heard Israelis are actively involved with engine and other electronic rectifications, and they are very satisfied with the Armour and Maneuverability of Arjun Tank? Does anyone has more details about it outsmarting Merkava in many ways?

 

[pankaj nema]

The trials in March are for finding out the ''core strengths '' of both T 90 and Arjun .In future IA might even have
mixed armored regiments maybe 10 arjuns and 35 T90 in one regiment.

Since IA is always short on resources it makes the best use of its resources I read that T 55 and vijayantas were not scrapped but were given to the Infantry divisions [after training them ] The army has also to be ready for counter attacks by the pakistani strike corps Maybe the trials would prove that Arjun is most suitable for which role attack or defence

 

[RPK]

http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/russia\s-t-90-vs-india\s-arjun/384353/


Russia's T-90 vs India's Arjun


Next month, India’s homegrown Arjun tank will take on the new Russian T-90 in a long-awaited comparative trial.


The outcome could decide whether the Indian Army will ride Indian tanks into future battles or continue its reliance upon a heavily criticised fleet of Russian T-72 tanks, which even the army chief admits is 80 per cent blind at night, when most tank battles occur.

The army’s Bikaner-headquartered 24 Infantry Division will conduct the month-long trials in the desert expanses around Bikaner, Suratgarh and Pokhran. A squadron (14 tanks) of the Arjun will be pitted against a T-90 squadron. Both will be evaluated by day and by night, comparing their abilities to speed through rugged, sand-dune-infested terrain; to fire accurately even while moving; their abilities to operate for long periods over long distances; and the fatigue they impose on their crews.

The declared aim of the comparative trial, surprisingly, is not to identify the better tank. The army claims the T-90 is not on trial; instead, the strengths and weaknesses of the Arjun are being evaluated, to help the army decide what operational role the Arjun could play, and which sector of the border it could effectively operate in.

But the Defence R&D Organisation (DRDO) — which has developed the Arjun tank at the Central Vehicles R&D Establishment (CVRDE) at Chennai — insists that if the Arjun performs well against the vaunted T-90, the army will be forced to order the Indian tank in larger numbers. Arjuns could start replacing the T-72, while the T-90 remains in service for another three decades.

So far, the army has only ordered 124 Arjuns for its 4,000-tank fleet. An incensed DRDO has long demanded comparative trials against the T-72, and the newer T-90, to prove the Arjun’s quality. Trials were scheduled, and then postponed, because of a shortage of Arjun ammunition. With the ammunition now available the army, significantly, has withdrawn the T-72 from the trials.

“The army knows that the T-72 would have performed very poorly in trials against the Arjun”, complains a senior DRDO officer. “Despite that, the army continues to sink money into its 2400 outdated T-72s. Any comparative trial with the T-72 would make it clear that the Arjun should replace the T-72.”

But there is also concern about the subjectivity of trials involving an entire squadron in tactical manoeuvres. Major General HM Singh (retired), the father of the Arjun, says, “It is impossible to measure the tactical performance of 14 tanks. There are too many variables, including the skill of the tank crews and coloured perceptions of the judges. A comparative trial should be a scientific comparison of each tanks’ physical performance in identical situations.”

The Ministry of Defence (MoD) has not responded to an emailed questionnaire from Business Standard on the comparative trials and the condition of the T-72 tank fleet.

Meanwhile, the Arjun is ready for production in larger numbers, with a production line at the Heavy Vehicles Factory (HVF) near Chennai established at a cost of Rs 50 crores. Capable of producing 20 Arjuns annually, it has already equipped India’s first Arjun unit, 43 Armoured Regiment. Now, a second unit, 75 Armoured Regiment, is being converted to the Arjun.

But that is as far as the army is prepared to accept the Arjun. According to the army’s long-term plan, which Business Standard has accessed, no more Arjuns are planned. Instead, the army will field equal numbers of T-90s and T-72s for the next 15 years, spending thousands of crores on extending the life of the T-72.

But these trials, despite the reservations about their relevance, are the moment of truth for the Indian tank. A strong performance by the Arjun will force the army to redo its maths. Conspicuous failure, on the other hand, could cap the programme at just 124 tanks

 

[Daredevil]

The declared aim of the comparative trial, surprisingly, is not to identify the better tank. The army claims the T-90 is not on trial; instead, the strengths and weaknesses of the Arjun are being evaluated, to help the army decide what operational role the Arjun could play, and which sector of the border it could effectively operate in.

This statement nails the motive of Army towards Arjun that they don't want any more of Arjuns. I hope the trials will be done and judges in an unbiased manner.

 

[ppgj]

This statement nails the motive of Army towards Arjun that they don't want any more of Arjuns. I hope the trials will be done and judges in an unbiased manner.

dd you are right. but i don't see that happening. even impartial international auditors say it is world class but the army for mysterious reasons does not accept it. going by its sabotage of previous trials which has delayed induction, i am sure this will also go the past way. sad indeed that our own army does this to a superior indigenous tank.

 

[bengalraider]

The business standard article above painst an interesting picture it seems that the IA now wants to retain it's old T-72 inventory at the expense of the arjun as well.Other than logistics ther can be no conceivable reason for the IA to want to retain the T-72 as wars in chechnya , Iraq and even the recent conflict in georgia have shown the T-72 is especially vulnerable to RPG's and man-portable ATGM's . While we could retain a sizeable inventory of Bhisma's and Vladimir's as the core of fast strike groups i do not see why the ARjun cannot replace the T-72 as the core of the defensive formations in india.The T-72 is a 70's design built for a cold war battle that never came; while i do not doubt the supremacy of this design in it's time now with the advent of modern RPG's and Atgm's it's design has been rendered largely obsolete. we should look at an inventory of T-90's and Arjuns supplemented by a reserve force of T-72's .

 

[notinlove]

How possible is it that the army is waiting for the t-95?that can be one reason why they did not include t-72 in the trials. they might be thinking of replacing it with the t-95 instead of the arjun

 

[Singh]

It appears Army is in no mood to relent. Arjun will sadly not be inducted in large numbers in the InA.

 

[sayareakd]

Indian army (DGMF) is great, they come up with all the excuses for non induction of Arjun tank, finally when the comparative trials are called, it is not comparative trials but trials of tank tactical manoeuvres that too with 14 tanks from each side.

Wont it be cheaper if one Arjun, one T 90S and one T 72 would have taken part, all tanks doing the same task.....

It appears that even before the start of trials this contest has rigged, oh almost forget that trails should have taken place in Jun heat of Rajsasthan........but IA want Feb, to give advantage to T 90 tank.......

Tax payers money is being paid to the Arms dealers and commission agents