Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT)

[Austin]

That sort of statement needs to be backed up by credible evidence either some trial report from official sources that list out the problem with Shtora-1.

There is nothing earth shattering that Shtora-1 does other then jam EO and IR/Lasers by over whelming it and giving the tank split second to save itself or atleast warn them in advance to use other passive system. Its much less complicated than say a hardkill system like APS does.

 

[Dejawolf]

That sort of statement needs to be backed up by credible evidence either some trial report from official sources that list out the problem with Shtora-1.

There is nothing earth shattering that Shtora-1 does other then jam EO and IR/Lasers by over whelming it and giving the tank split second to save itself or atleast warn them in advance to use other passive system. Its much less complicated than say a hardkill system like APS does.

the problem with the Shtora suite is the dazzlers. the LRF warning sensors work fine.
Shtora only works on a single IR wavelength, while TOW 2 works on multiple IR wavelengths to counter dazzlers.

 

[Damian]

Also Instalation os Shtora-1 IR dazzlers on T-90 series, weakens vehicle protection, because ERA can't be installed behind Dazzlers. Ukrainians solved that problem with their ERA and their Shtora variant designated Varta.

 

[Austin]

the problem with the Shtora suite is the dazzlers. the LRF warning sensors work fine.
Shtora only works on a single IR wavelength, while TOW 2 works on multiple IR wavelengths to counter dazzlers.

It shouldnt matter really because it simply blanket jams the Seekers , I am sure the manufacturer of Shtora-1 known in how many wavelength TOW 2 works.

Even IR missile in AAM mode works in multiple wavelength still it can be spoofed by flares.

The Weak zone is a valid argument but I assume behind the Shtora-1 there is composite armour even though no ERA

 

[p2prada]

i thought FMBT was cancelled..
Broadsword: Army proposes to scrap Future Main Battle Tank: instead build successive models of the Arjun

Things are still not clear with regards to FMBT.

There is a chance, the Arjun Mk3 would be the FMBT.

But DRDO chief recently said the FMBT will weigh 50 tonnes. That would make it a new tank by itself. You can say this has more credibility than Ajai Shukla's report.

FMBT to focus on weight reduction of battle tanks, says DRDO chief - Indian Express

On being asked about FMBT he said, "The idea is to reduce the weight of the tank. Developed nations such as the United States of America and Israel have been working on reducing the weights of battle tanks. Heavy weights of tanks affect their maneuverability. We are therefore looking to reduce the weight of FMBT to 50 tonnes each."

Best to simply wait until GSQR is ready and snippets of it revealed.

 

[shuvo@y2k10]

designing a tank with 4 man crew and 50 ton weight would take many years and no other country has done.instead fmbt should be a evolution of arjun mk2 design with better engine,firepower and armour.also weight of the tank can be reduced by 3-5 tons in fmbt from arjun mk2(which weighs 67 tons) but a 17 ton reduction would mean a completely different design which could take many years to mature.

 

[venkat]

arkem8!!! fantastic 3D models of Arjun!!! Thank you!!! why don't you and Damien be consultants to HVF if your govtthumb and our govt rolleyespermits!!!

 

[Damian]

designing a tank with 4 man crew and 50 ton weight would take many years and no other country has done.

I do not understand this fetish to 4 men crews. All tank designs that were intended to have reduced weight with similiar or superior protection compared to 60+ tons tanks, were designs with 3 men crew and autoloaders. And there is more, USA, Germany and Soviet Union were even considering a 2 men crew tank designs.

Of course such designs would have some issues to be solved, like situational awareness, but then again it was and is possible.

Of course we can achieve weight reduction with preservation or even increase of protection, with new materials that seems to be lighter and superior in their characteristics to more conventional materials, like CNT's, ADNR's, other nanotechnology solutions as well. Also very promising are new amorphic metal alloys, still however it is not certain when such materials will be avaiable, and as far as we know, only the most scientifically and industrially developed nations have significant progress in R&D... this means USA and Germany definetely, perhaps Japan, UK, Israle and France also, but what with the rest? India is working on some of these solutions, however it is not certain for how long and how advanced is work.

So even if technology will permitt to have relatively ligthweight, 4 men crew MBT with manned turret, I doubt that evolution of tanks will go this way, as design with 3 men crew and unmanned turret, offers just more benefits, also when using these new materials.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amorphous_metal

In 2004, two groups succeeded in producing bulk amorphous steel, one at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, the other at University of Virginia. The Oak Ridge group refers to their product as "glassy steel". The product is non-magnetic at room temperature and significantly stronger than conventional steel, though a long research and development process remains before the introduction of the material into public or military use.[5][6]

This can give some new possiblities.

 

[hest]

the problem with the Shtora suite is the dazzlers. the LRF warning sensors work fine.
Shtora only works on a single IR wavelength, while TOW 2 works on multiple IR wavelengths to counter dazzlers.

It is statement made with total lack of understanding.

There is no single (whatever you mean) generator of wavelenght. System modulators vary spectral range corresponding with all these ATGM, there is no defeat with such guidance method, they are effectively outdated.

 

[Tronic]

Wait a minut is it you or ersakthivel who has that degree?? or what am facing two mechanical drawing engineres who are either incompetent or purposfully misunderstanding the subject at hand.

I'm both, a mechanical design technologist, and now in final year undergrad mechanical engineering. I have got no clue how you chaps are pulling these numbers from photoshop. No mechanical engineer in the world comes up with a scale by measuring the pixels of a picture! Just sounds like a very bad practice, and a disaster waiting to happen. I'm even more appalled that an engineering CAD school would teach something as absurd as this! If you try doing this on a real job, you'd be shown the door sooner than you could blink.

 

[Dejawolf]

I'm both, a mechanical design technologist, and now in final year undergrad mechanical engineering. I have got no clue how you chaps are pulling these numbers from photoshop. No mechanical engineer in the world comes up with a scale by measuring the pixels of a picture! Just sounds like a very bad practice, and a disaster waiting to happen. I'm even more appalled that an engineering CAD school would teach something as absurd as this! If you try doing this on a real job, you'd be shown the door sooner than you could blink.

different tools for different purposes. we're trying to estimate lengths, not design cars for serial production.
the method isn't rocket science, you take a known length, say the width of the arjun tank, draw a line between the extremes of those 2 points, rotate the line until it's horizontal(or vertical),
measure the length of the line in pixels, then do a unit conversion from pixels to cm. then you take another length, and multiply or divide by the pixel conversion number,
to arrive at an estimate.
So if you have a known length that is 18cm, and that length on the image is 360 pixels, you do:
18/360 = 0.05.
then to find a similar length, you find another length on the same plane and multiply with 0.05.
accuracy of the measures is dependent on the number of pixels in the image, and the amount of perspective distortion present on the measured plane.

 

[Dejawolf]

It is statement made with total lack of understanding.

There is no single (whatever you mean) generator of wavelenght. System modulators vary spectral range corresponding with all these ATGM, there is no defeat with such guidance method, they are effectively outdated.

well, it's nearly a year since i talked with him so i didn't remember the details. i sent him an email and this is what he said:

Shtora creates a fake hotspot, which makes the SACLOS launcher think the new hotspot is the missile and then gives wrong flight path correction commands to the missile, making it miss. This works with older SACLOS ATGMs that use for example a flare in the missile's rear.

Now, the new ATGMs like TOW have the light that the SACLOS launcher tracks, changing frequency in a set pattern. This way the launcher knows to track the actual missile and is not fooled by the single-frequency fake hotspot created by the Shtora.

 

[ashicjose]

Check this news ....this lady facing charges that she supplied low grade steel for our MBT ARJUN.

Tendering irregularities: Subi Mally turns up before CBI

Tendering irregularities: Subi Mally turns up before CBI

Kochi, Jan 22 (IANS): Mumbai-based Subi Mally, an alleged intermediary between suppliers and ordnance factories, presented herself Tuesday morning to the CBI, which is probing irregularities in the tendering process for procurement of goods.

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) unit here has already booked two senior officials of a Kerala state public sector undertaking here.

The CBI officers last week met Mally in Mumbai and asked her to report before them here.

M. Shanavas, managing director and Valsan, a senior manager of Steel and Industrial Forgings Ltd. (SIFL) are the officials who have already been questioned and listed as accused by the CBI.

The first information report filed (FIR) by the CBI here mentions that certain people tried to manipulate the SIFL supply to the ordnance factory at Madek near Hyderabad and also to another defence establishment in Chennai.

 

[ersakthivel]

different tools for different purposes. we're trying to estimate lengths, not design cars for serial production.
the method isn't rocket science, you take a known length, say the width of the arjun tank, draw a line between the extremes of those 2 points, rotate the line until it's horizontal(or vertical),
measure the length of the line in pixels, then do a unit conversion from pixels to cm. then you take another length, and multiply or divide by the pixel conversion number,
to arrive at an estimate.
So if you have a known length that is 18cm, and that length on the image is 360 pixels, you do:
18/360 = 0.05.
then to find a similar length, you find another length on the same plane and multiply with 0.05.
accuracy of the measures is dependent on the number of pixels in the image, and the amount of perspective distortion present on the measured plane.

Cars or tanks doesn't matter the principles of perspective drawing applies to all objects,you cannot bring forward an object deep in the picture to the front of the picture and say that it occupies the same space in both the places, like you did to justify your turret width by placing the hatch 2 meters in front on the hull.

there are enough mechanical engineers in india to know how to arrive at right dimensions without resorting to dimensionless 3d models and pixel measurement on perspective distortion,

They can do it by projection of planes to appropriate position for comparing a known length and proportionate unknown length in a proper manner.

 

[Dejawolf]

Cars or tanks doesn't matter the principles of perspective drawing applies to all objects,you cannot bring forward an object deep in the picture to the front of the picture and say that it occupies the same space in both the places, like you did to justify your turret width by placing the hatch 2 meters in front on the hull.

there are enough mechanical engineers in india to know how to arrive at right dimensions without resorting to dimensionless 3d models and pixel measurement on perspective distortion,

They can do it by projection of planes to appropriate position for comparing a known length and proportionate unknown length in a proper manner.

read my post again until you understand it, before you make another reply.

 

[hest]

well, it's nearly a year since i talked with him so i didn't remember the details. i sent him an email and this is what he said:

Shtora creates a fake hotspot, which makes the SACLOS launcher think the new hotspot is the missile and then gives wrong flight path correction commands to the missile, making it miss. This works with older SACLOS ATGMs that use for example a flare in the missile's rear.

Now, the new ATGMs like TOW have the light that the SACLOS launcher tracks, changing frequency in a set pattern. This way the launcher knows to track the actual missile and is not fooled by the single-frequency fake hotspot created by the Shtora.

It is conceptual error, this is not the working method.

These missiles have a beacon, excited xenon gas which irradiates in known IR spectrum. Emission is not contionous but interrupted with a certain frequency, which the sensor recognises, calculates position and sends correction signals. This was highly vulnerable because knowing those parameters it was countered by simple systems. Newer TOW-2 beacon and sensor are set for a randomly changed frequency which is an improvement but against complex systems as Shtora it is useless, because when missile approaches target, it reaches one point when radiation incidence on sensor of APS projector is of equal and higher intensity than that of missile beacon, so it is not possible to recognise it independently of it's frequency (Shtora is 1 Kilowatt of power), so it does not receive correction and misses.

All missiles with this guidance, wire guided, radio guided (Tow-2(A,B), Bill-2, etc) are outdated, which is nothing new and that is the reason why they are being replaced, or should.

 

[Bhadra]

I really do not know why thread runs..

King is dead, long live the king.....

 

[Austin]

it reaches one point when radiation incidence on sensor of APS projector is of equal and higher intensity than that of missile beacon, so it is not possible to recognise it independently of it's frequency (Shtora is 1 Kilowatt of power), so it does not receive correction and misses.

Thats what i said it blanket jams using high power the beam or any source that guides the missile to the target , as soon as it reaches closer to Shtora its blinded and the guidance beams becomes useless.

The only way to defeat such system is to guide the missile at the place where Shtora is not effective like from Side or Back or use MMW guidance

 

[STGN]

I'm both, a mechanical design technologist, and now in final year undergrad mechanical engineering. I have got no clue how you chaps are pulling these numbers from photoshop. No mechanical engineer in the world comes up with a scale by measuring the pixels of a picture! Just sounds like a very bad practice, and a disaster waiting to happen. I'm even more appalled that an engineering CAD school would teach something as absurd as this! If you try doing this on a real job, you'd be shown the door sooner than you could blink.

Now that I see ersakthivel liked you post. I have to ask what you really mean here. Because you liked my original post, and the part you quoted doesn't deal with any estimation I made, it deals with skj and ersakhivel. Did you mean to say that because skj and ersakhivel claim to be engineers they should know better or is it a general complaint to all measurements done on photos?
STGN

 

[STGN]

It is conceptual error, this is not the working method.

These missiles have a beacon, excited xenon gas which irradiates in known IR spectrum. Emission is not contionous but interrupted with a certain frequency, which the sensor recognises, calculates position and sends correction signals. This was highly vulnerable because knowing those parameters it was countered by simple systems. Newer TOW-2 beacon and sensor are set for a randomly changed frequency which is an improvement but against complex systems as Shtora it is useless, because when missile approaches target, it reaches one point when radiation incidence on sensor of APS projector is of equal and higher intensity than that of missile beacon, so it is not possible to recognise it independently of it's frequency (Shtora is 1 Kilowatt of power), so it does not receive correction and misses.

All missiles with this guidance, wire guided, radio guided (Tow-2(A,B), Bill-2, etc) are outdated, which is nothing new and that is the reason why they are being replaced, or should.

Is it known whether anybody has actually tested TOW2 against Shtora or equivalent system to see if this blinding hypothesis is right or if TOW sensor is able to still recognise beacon?
I have also read about tactic that you would aim near target until last possible time and then switch to the target you intended to hit. Would Shtora Still be effective against that?
STGN