Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT)

[ersakthivel]

Both @Damian and @militarysta are uniquely qualified to comment on this topic as the Polish Army has had an extensive experience with Russian armour, their own modification and upgrades of Russian armour and also with the the Leo 2A4 tanks. Also with the close Polish -US military co-operation, their exposure to US armour would be much more than most of the people in this forum.

But they are uniquely unqualified to read any dimension from photos of ARJUN as they don't have any competence on this subject is my guess.Knowing more about armor is very different from being in some reservist force for a while. Only technically qualified guys will know it.

 

[STGN]

That's a very nice one from some one who still could not make up his mind on the crew hatch dia,

and no technical knowledge to either prove me right or wrong,

I consider it as end of the debate as I don't want to provoke you or provoked by you any further on the topic.

Keeping an open mind is a good thing when you want to get closer to the truth.

As if I need to prove you right or wrong, you will only accept your own concept.

Great!
STGN

 

[Damian]

Both @Damian and @militarysta are uniquely qualified to comment on this topic as the Polish Army has had an extensive experience with Russian armour, their own modification and upgrades of Russian armour and also with the the Leo 2A4 tanks. Also with the close Polish -US military co-operation, their exposure to US armour would be much more than most of the people in this forum.

Well, we got a lot of material to work with, Militarysta have contacts in Germany and Polish Army, I lurk around the US Military and a bit around UK, France etc. + we have some contacts in Russia and Ukraine.

As far as it comes to T-72M1 improvements, our engineers get to the conclusion that without extensive modifications, not much can be done with this tank. For example as I mentioned, on it's own DRAWA-T FCS was improvement, however FCS alone could not compensate stabilization errors caused by poor original stabilization. We also had problems with 2A46 guns, especially these made in Slovakia designated 2A46MS. It was mostly fault of lack of gun manufacturing in Poland, perhaps in future this problem will be solved, but from our experience 2A46 guns made in Russia seems to be higher quality than their clones.

As for T-72M1 protection, improving composite armor in hull front is relatively easy as our experience with CAWA-2 armor, however eplacement of old armor in the old turret is immposible due to it's design. Another lesson for India, if you would want to improve your T-72M1's in terms of protection, you could put Kanchan armor in hull front, however new turret welded from rolled armor plates would be nececary, again if India would wish to do so, you can use T-90S turrets manufacturing line.

Here is opportunity for India to make money, if T-72M1's that you use, will be withdrawn from service in future, India on it's own can design such improvement package, T-72 is still popular in some parts of world, and such improved T-72M1 could be interesting proposal for countries that could not afford more expensive tanks.

There are of course many more aspects of our experiences.

As a side note we had projects of so called "T-72 Leopardization", like PT-2001 Gepard.

Similiar concept to the Indian Tank-EX, however it ended only as a concept work of Bumar and OBRUM, as during early R&D stage of the program, conclusion was that T-72 family is obsolete, it's modernization is too expensive, and in general completely new vehicle is better idea. Besides this, we can see weak points even at the very early design stage, for example thin side turret armor on the lower project that is builded around the French made turret, T-21 it is designated I think.

 

[militarysta]

I don't think these dimensionless drawings or ratios as any sort of credible proof. They are vastly different from the ones you posted before.I think they

I have no intention of wasting my time any further as I already posted many photographic measurement to prove my points for which you people have no counter arguments.

these ratios are not needed as far as i am concerned there is no doubt about the turret width. I won't post any more on the topic.

Dear ersakthivel -it's not the point - I just post those draw, even whit this funny ruler on it for diffrent resons. You have som idea about Arjun turret dimensions yes? And you are trying to estimatous it -yes?
Dejawolf posted many times what yours estimatous are wrong.
Methos do the same.
STGN do the same.
Now I post only one avaible good* draw, taken from orginal book not from the internet, whit scale. No no matter how accurate is that draw - even on basic diamension taken from two mesurment (stupid using ruler, and mucht better using pixels and offcial DRDO Arjun width) we can see that made by You estimatous are wrong. It's all. And I don't argue, it's not the point - and what is the most important - it's nothing personal.


*in fact rather poor quality, but the best from avaible now Arjun draws

 

[ersakthivel]

@Archer

But this shows that you haven't bigger idea how was stored ammo inMerkavas Mk.I and Mk.II, and what is diffrense between this and Mk.III and Mk.IV. Your argument was invaild.


Don't be funny, it's really clearly visible on Arjun prototype photo:

indeed 3-4mm thick tube give a lot of protection...and whit uncover bottom round parts. Thos ammo rack was so bad that it was removed in later Arjun prototypes:

and this is mucht better.


Sure, no blow-out plates, not isolated bunker for ammo in turret, just tubes/conteiners for rounds. But for you its super-duper safe solution becouse beloved DRDO use it and Arjun have this solution. It's your problem not mine, propably you even havent idea how big is residual penetration for APFSDS and HEAT after armour (behind armour effect).



I really like your theory about super-duper Thar deser when all other tanks are crap but only beloved Arjun developed by DRDO is brillant. And for your story about MTU/Renk -I don't know if its true or not, that what I know – MB833 whit renk in Euro-powerpack went to Emirates in Lelcerc and in their deser there wasn't bigger problems. But of course only Indian desert is so bad, it's so uniqe that euro-powerpack or other MTU+Renk faild there when in Amirates desert circa ~400 Leclerc whit MB833 + renk haven't problem. The same about Chile desert – 116 old leo-2A4 whit serial MB873 and HSW and again – no biggest problem. But I know, I know -only India have sucht therrible deser and weather conditions that only Arjun can ceal with this. And all other tanks – even used in deser conditions haven't chanse there. Only Arjun. oh seriously?


Leopard-2 was developed for ABC warfare so where is your point? All european Leo-2 users where trained to fight on ABC battelfield so what the point?


Yes. Both israeli removed turrets: RCWS-30 and UTD faild during polish trials – both turrets where unable to work in minus 18 degree frozen. So both where rejected from trade for circa ~500-700 turrets system.
BTW; Leopard-2 (and M1) was tested in really hard evirnoment on servral continents so again – you theory about super-duper Thar deser is slighty funny.


It's not from Janes -I just know and have detail about Leopard-2 FCS unable to find in interent press or others, so for me talk about "žtest" whole FCS in India in 1980's is bullshit. India can have test whit germany about EMES-13 or other solution for export like TAM-FCS and other tanks but not in case IIIgen MBT FCS (Leopard-2) not in 1980s. You just wrote fairy tails.


it was obvious, but you are trying to fetch by talking how to poor gemans have problem whit FCS in this super-uniqe Indian condition and brave DRDO engeners help them and save program. And in your opinion it's argument that Leopard-2 can't be decribe as better then Arjun. When for me it's obious that those traials (even if their are real not in your fantasy) can't be conected whit Leopard-2 FCS. And definetly not in 1980s.


And this storry is the same stupid like M829A2 tests on T-90S or other funny stories living their own life in the interenet. There is no single evidence about M1 tests in Pakistan.



And it's again shown that you haven't idea what looks Leo-2 and XM-1 tests in 1970s. And layter. In fact both tnaks where tested much more seriously then even Arjun was. On few continents in very diffrent conditions, during hundret thousands miles, etc. Leopard-2 was tested in Norway, Canada, USA (including deserts), of cource Germany, north africa (engines in Marrocco and others) and is sevral other points. The same M1. But no...only special developed Arjun by the most brainly DRDO engineers in those super-duper Thar deser evirnoments is able to fight. Rest tanks -even if their where tested in oher deserts, mouintaints, jungles, almoust on north pole -they are crap, becouse only India have this one uniqe deser, and those uniqe DRDO engineers. It shoud be obvious!
Nice story


In Leo-2 manuals there is simple answer about weather conditions. And tank was tested from -40 to +50 in sevral diffrent climates and countries -including deserts, mouintaints, jungles, north climate, and others. But again we have funny uniqe Indian desert theory.


It's not my foult -it harsh truth about indian Arjun program.


And what is so uniqe in those conditions? It's ridiculous and it's again shown that You have no idea how tank traials during developed program looks in M1 and Leo-2 cases.


Don't put into one sak Leo-2 M1 and T-90 (in fact T-72). In fact in most aspect about quality and ability to use in heavy conditions Leo-2 and M1 are far better then T-72 clones. And it was proof many times...
BTW: Leopard-2 have no problem in Afganistan and Chile, and Singapour, but it will be not argument becouse those uniqe indian desert...


Again – those tanks where tested in sevreal conditions on sevral continents whit propably mucht more difficult conditions then Arjun was. Yours funny "žuniqe Indian conditions theory" is based on lack knowledges how teste cames (and where) in leo-2 and M1 cases.



Is indian industry able to build artilery radars? Like this:
http://www.bumar.com/elektronika/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/LIWIEC.pdf
No? Upsss...

Is indian industry able to build whole radar family? Like this:
Systemy radiolokacyjne | Bumar Elektronika
Partial definetly yes. Based mostly on foregin components...

Is indian industry able to developed this:
http://banqan.republika.pl/devices/devices_trc20.html

Or maybe Indian industry is abale to made radar on simmilar level to this?
http://banqan.republika.pl/devices/devices_trd1222.html
http://banqan.republika.pl/devices/devices_mmsr.htm
http://banqan.republika.pl/devices/devices_n12.htm

BTW -as I remember IA bought from Poland older ones radar based on this:
http://banqan.republika.pl/devices/devices_trs15.html

But about what we are talking – Indian industry is unable to devleoped and deliverd in to army even good future rifle and INSAS Rifle, program look like now.


Of course not. But you made misteke when you assume that only Indian operational conditions are the whors and in other countries they are not so difficult conditions like in India. It's mistake, M1 and leo-2 where tested in other conditions but definetly very difficult too.


So it's not suprise that poor trening crews can boild even V46/ B84MS or V92S2 engine. When crew is poor trening and thery is lack of any bigger users's technical culture then indeed MTU and Renk can fail, or suspension can't hold MTBF time. But you shoud write it first, and not telling how to western equipment is wrong and Indian desert (and environments) uniqe. If IA nees primitive weapons then stay whit Ak-47 clones, T-72 clones, others. It's trening and users's technical culture problem not equipment.


Yes dude I have many resons to be proud for my life and sucess, and I done many good thinks in my life,so? In what way is conected whit topic? If you think Im teeneager -sorry unfortunatly Im not. I have my own house, familiy, good work, and making PHDs. Im happy men without any frustration and racism. What is funny in work Im working whit very advanced indian make systems and they are quite good for bisnes customers as low-cost options. And again – in what way it's conected whit topic?

See no on here disputes your familiarity with LEO-2 , by reading many books on it. By the same token you can graciously admit that you don't know anything about ARJUN other than seeing a few photographs about it. Many times Damian has said that there is no credible books on ARJUN. definitely there is no way you can know anything about ARJUN, because just now it's problems having been sorted out and it is getting ready for large scale induction with MK-2 and further FMBT evolution.

See ARJUN was made as per IA's GSQR which changed 3 times.This was the main reason for the delay.it is a running program for many decades. It is quite naive to keep on saying disparaging things about it when it is in developmental stage.

You arte posting many photos of stuff developed in POLAND with high tech and offered to INDIA,

Since you claim to know so much about tank, there is no difficulty for you to admit that systems like ballistic missiles, nuclear submarines and fighter jets and nuclear weapons are many times more complex than a modern MBT.ISRO recently completed 100 space launches and sent a moon probe.

When there is expertise in the country to meet out these monumental complex challenges , there is no way you can say the technical challenges can not be met in ARJUN by DRDO.That too after extensive help from foreign experts.

That is why I find your claims of so called "weakness in 60 deg frontal arc" quite juvenile . Do you think that engineers at DRDO won't even know that?

when it was specifically mentioned in the documentary posted here by KUNAL "that ARJUN has protection in frontal 60 deg arc ",It is simply more stupid to argue that it is not, and just a marketing talk by DRDO.Do you think the Indian ARMY, ISRAELI experts and CVRDE all put together missed out on this aspect that is known to you guys only?

LOOK BEFORE YOU LEAP is my advice to you guys , when you talk about stuff you don't know.

first things first about TANKS is FCS accuracy , heat hardened rugged electronics, armor, all the systems like changing to smooth bore from rifle and developing more penetration capable ammo and compartmentalization of ammo are no monumental challenges.
ARJUn has just now got complete acceptance on the first 3 parameters from Indian ARMY. Further evolution like weight reduction, will now start. And to keep the rifled gun or changing it to smooth bore is IA's call, not DRDO's.if the army is satisfied with rifled DRDO will keep it, if it want's to go for smooth bore DRDO will do it.

Here this tank is developed as per IA norms , not on some fantasy dreaming by DRDO.

Any evolution from ARJUN MK_1 to mk-2 qand FMBt won't be difficult as DRDO has already mastered the armor, FCs, gun and heat hardened rugged electronics.
Now weight reduction and turret re design and ammo compartmentalization is just engineering excercise not R& D ventures.

 

[Damian]

That is why I find your claims of so called "weakness in 60 deg frontal arc" quite juvenile . Do you think that engineers at DRDO won't even know that?

It is obvious that DRDO engineers know this, somehow turret is not designed to provide such protection, at least against more modern ammunition, as I said perhaps the reason was weight efficency of armor, it is especially visible when we compare dimensions of Arjun, armor placement, overall vehicle weight and compare it to other modern MBT's, it is just logical.

 

[militarysta]

Both @Damian and @militarysta are uniquely qualified to comment on this topic as the Polish Army has had an extensive experience with Russian armour, their own modification and upgrades of Russian armour and also with the the Leo 2A4 tanks. Also with the close Polish -US military co-operation, their exposure to US armour would be much more than most of the people in this forum.

Thanks for defending our here
Some peopels here propably think that I and Damian don't like India, indian industry, Arjun, Indian Army, etc. Sorry - we have nothing against them all. Im here, just whit my point of viev, and some real expiriences whit tanks and im expressing my personal opinions about some Arjun program problems or visible features. When IMHO somthing is strange or can be dangerous in Arjun -im just posted about that. Propably Archer is buthurt in his national pride - it's not my problem, but is important to notice that when I wrote that avaible now Arjun ammo or 125mm ammo (in India) is obsolate then im not attacks / goin India, Inia industry etc. Im just notice that IA have some serious problem. Im trying to discuss at some substantive level. I wll not discuss on way "we have nukes and Poland not" becouse it's extremly stupid. I can give some facts, data about Leopard-2, 120 and 125mm ammo avaible mostly in Europe, some data about T-72 and T-64 family. We can discuss about that. And this is not problem for me. Im really like posting here becouse this forum is good, and Im really far far for judge whole indian industry. I even have personnaly very good expiriences whit some hi-tech indian made solution -so I know what India industry can made (for example brillant low-cost ultrasounds systems -they are really good, and mucht better then South Kore, Chinnese, or even Italian ones). But when I see some DRDO works - for example Arjun ammo, or some Arjun features -and they are on not even typical word level why I shoudn't post this? Only to by kind? Constructive criticism is always good think, but please guys - do not confuse this with rasism, arrogance or teach. It's not the point, and it never will be.
Amen.

 

[ersakthivel]

Dear ersakthivel -it's not the point - I just post those draw, even whit this funny ruler on it for diffrent resons. You have som idea about Arjun turret dimensions yes? And you are trying to estimatous it -yes?
Dejawolf posted many times what yours estimatous are wrong.
Methos do the same.
STGN do the same.
Now I post only one avaible good* draw, taken from orginal book not from the internet, whit scale. No no matter how accurate is that draw - even on basic diamension taken from two mesurment (stupid using ruler, and mucht better using pixels and offcial DRDO Arjun width) we can see that made by You estimatous are wrong. It's all. And I don't argue, it's not the point - and what is the most important - it's nothing personal.


*in fact rather poor quality, but the best from avaible now Arjun draws

SeeDEJAWOLF and STGN won't post any more on it, and you need not rake it again and again.It is a closed subject as far as i am concerned.

If you have any views on measurement on photos please post, if you don't then just leave it.no one here needs your opinion about DEJA WOLF and STGN photo measurement, or my views about their photo measurement. They can conduct a debate with me on this regard on a separate thread.

Already this photo measurement has gone on in 60 pages of ARJUN vs T-90 and 20 pages on this thread, what is new in it for us to revisit it?

All other guys are complaining about it. SO it is time to stop this on this thread and go to a separate thread .

The reason I posted those photo measurements was to establish that ARJUn has protection on turret sides, not to indulge in foul language argument with posters.

 

[militarysta]

The reason I posted those photo measurements was to establish that ARJUn has protection on turret sides, not to indulge in foul language argument with posters.

But on now visible photos it haven't - we have circa 60mm RHA turret sides and some storage boxes. According to the measurements (my and other users), even when we replace those storage boxes by armour modules we have circa ~60mm RHA + ~240mm thick cavity (to replace those boxes). Whole will be equal to circa 300mm LOS - so on typical western turret sides protection. But now Arjun haven't sucht armour on turret sides. Maybe in nex Arjun model it will be changed.
And now on now existed Arjun tanks protection for frotal 60 degree is not very good in turret side case.And when we conected it whit uniqe Arjun ammo storage in turret in some conteiner (not very well armoured in fact -it's visible on photos...) propably without blow-out plates, then it's really disturbing. Propably it will be changed in newest Arjun.

It's all.

 

[ersakthivel]

Thanks for defending our here
Some peopels here propably think that I and Damian don't like India, indian industry, Arjun, Indian Army, etc. Sorry - we have nothing against them all. Im here, just whit my point of viev, and some real expiriences whit tanks and im expressing my personal opinions about some Arjun program problems or visible features. When IMHO somthing is strange or can be dangerous in Arjun -im just posted about that. Propably Archer is buthurt in his national pride - it's not my problem, but is important to notice that when I wrote that avaible now Arjun ammo or 125mm ammo (in India) is obsolate then im not attacks / goin India, Inia industry etc. Im just notice that IA have some serious problem. Im trying to discuss at some substantive level. I wll not discuss on way "we have nukes and Poland not" becouse it's extremly stupid. I can give some facts, data about Leopard-2, 120 and 125mm ammo avaible mostly in Europe, some data about T-72 and T-64 family. We can discuss about that. And this is not problem for me. Im really like posting here becouse this forum is good, and Im really far far for judge whole indian industry. I even have personnaly very good expiriences whit some hi-tech indian made solution -so I know what India industry can made (for example brillant low-cost ultrasounds systems -they are really good, and mucht better then South Kore, Chinnese, or even Italian ones). But when I see some DRDO works - for example Arjun ammo, or some Arjun features -and they are on not even typical word level why I shoudn't post this? Only to by kind? Constructive criticism is always good think, but please guys - do not confuse this with rasism, arrogance or teach. It's not the point, and it never will be.
Amen.

this silly harping on ARJUn ammo is pure dumb ass,

it has been posted here 1000 times that ammo development can go on only after a substantial number of ARJUns are inducted, not with just 100 tanks. Who will spend mid night oil for developing ammo with a huge R& D effort for just 100 tanks?

Oh my God , what is the need for this tear jerker? after using gutter language from the inception of this thread?

All I said was open a thread for photo measurement ,

Post photos, show your measurement skills,

No goose shit dimension less, scale less drawing ,

Got it?

 

[militarysta]

it has been posted here 1000 times that ammo development can go on only after a substantial number of ARJUns are inducted, not with just 100 tanks. Who will spend mid night oil for developing ammo with a huge R& D effort for just 100 tanks?

How many T-72 and T-90 tanks have IA? Mucht more then one thousand.
And stillthe best avaible APFSDS is 3BM42 from circa 1986. Ammo problem in India is not only about 120mm rifted Arjun gun and ammo. It's more serious problem, hopefully it will be solved.

 

[ersakthivel]

But on now visible photos it haven't - we have circa 60mm RHA turret sides and some storage boxes. According to the measurements (my and other users), even when we replace those storage boxes by armour modules we have circa ~60mm RHA + ~240mm thick cavity (to replace those boxes). Whole will be equal to circa 300mm LOS - so on typical western turret sides protection. But now Arjun haven't sucht armour on turret sides. Maybe in nex Arjun model it will be changed.
And now on now existed Arjun tanks protection for frotal 60 degree is not very good in turret side case.And when we conected it whit uniqe Arjun ammo storage in turret in some conteiner (not very well armoured in fact -it's visible on photos...) propably without blow-out plates, then it's really disturbing. Propably it will be changed in newest Arjun.

It's all.

The shadow of the turret falls on the hull at the third blue line from the top.

it is the place where turret's side wall projection on the hull would fall.

The blue rectangle drawn on the TC's crew hatch cover represent s the true length of the hatch cover .

This rectangle is projected in the correct plane on the hull ,

found out by the downwards projection of the line joining the two hatch covers on the turret top,
to the top of the hull.

This is the perspective drawing as far as I know,

Width over track is 3540 mm.


About half of the crew hatch is enclosed between the red line an the blue line. The red line indicates the track width border of 3540 mm

That is about 0.50x550 mm=220 mm
3540-(220x2=440 mm)= 3140 mm is the width of the ARJUN turret.

There needs to be a correction factor for taking the same length turret width line which is situated at a depth of the close to 1.5 meter from hull plane . If we apply that the hull width is only going to increase, not decrease.

Because the fixed length rectangle on the hatch cover will measure less length if we bring it in front by 1.5 meters on the hull plane,

Since my opponents here will not accept it as they don't have any idea about Perspective distortion, I haven't included it here.

Even if you take a worst case scenario of 3000 mm turret width, giving a very large margin of 140 mm for inaccuracies

1500mm is the distance between outer most side wall of arjun side turret and the turret center line,
1200 mm is the distance between the two crew hatch centers,
1200/2= 600 mm is the distance of Tc' seat edge from the turret center line,
So 1500 mm-600 mm=900 mm is the space available besides the crew hatch center and the outer most side wall of ARJUN turret,

The composite armor cavity in the photo above confirms that.

 

[ersakthivel]

See these are your trolling ways you talk about crew hatch hole and 400mm, then suddenly you where actually talking about the side of the turret. I have shown you wrong so many times, because you are a troll its like "whack a mole" if I show you wrong in one place you suddenly forget all about it and pop your head up someplace else saying "uh oh disprove this" you can't be proven wrong by any acceptable standard because you are a troll and simply will never agree no matter what. Funny thing is that you are now trying to act smart saying "uh oh I was just playing you all" when what you have actually been doing is disproving your estimates because no matter the numbers you get 3.2 as the result. You just assume numbers that fit with your preconception of what the turret should be.
And now argument from authority we should just believe Kunal, just because. And this is only to delay, till you can cook up your next batch of wacky numbers.
STGN

Read this post in combination with my above post-4236.


see the post no-1143 below. That is conclusive as far as I know.

You posted 500 mm as a hatch width,

I have taken a far larger number of 550 mm as hatch width, even though going by your 500 mm will give 100 mm more width for ARJUN turret , I did not take the option please note.Because it is posted in this forum that ARJUN hatch width is between 53 to 57 cm.

The above is the drawing DEJAWOLF posted in response.

And you accepted it is my conclusion , Otherwise you can please point out the errors.

If we take hatch width as 550 mm and apply it in the following photo results will more or less be the same.

In fact it will give a much bigger width on this photo.

For me this is conclusive and , a member of the armed forces KUNAL BISWAS has already posted in ARJUN MBT thread in his debate with STGN that ARJUN turret measures more than 3 plus meters, So my guess is it is more than 3 meters.

So it is a fact that ARJUN has composite armor all around as explicitly mentioned by military recognition web site, and confirmed by many generals that it is the best protected tank in IA comparable to ABRAMS, LECLERC and LEO in the link to interview of 3 generals on NDTV posted by DAREDEVIL on this thread,

One of them commanded ARJUN regiment and other two were also very high ranking armored core officers,

[IMG]http://imageshack.us/a/img585/2162/arjunwieowy.png[/IMG]

The ratio of the white metal gap between the crew hatch edge to crew hatch width is 0.25 in the photo below.

So 0.25x550 mm=140 mm

Also the photo below confirms that there is only 140 mm gap from the edge of the crew hatch to the side turret armor cavity.

Rest is armor only.

You yourself has said that there is 1200 mm gap between the two crew hatch centers,

Adding another 550 mm for edge to edge crew hatch distance will give 1750 mm
Adding this additional 2x140 mm=280 mm gives 2030 mm as inner turret width of ARJUN .

So 3140-2030=1000 mm/2 =500 mm is the gap available for armor cavity between the turret inner wall and outer wall.

----------------------------------------------------------------

 

[ersakthivel]

No. Measure it again, but try to be more accurate.
The ratio is 0.725 to 1.
0.725 x 3,840 mm = 2,784 mm.

The drawing is btw. taken from a book which gives the scale.




Really, are you trying to play full crazy? The photograph of the drawing is rescaled; you cannot simply take a screen measure and multiply the result with 72. For doing this you need to buy the book from which it is taken or hope that someone scans it who also gives the scale (pixel-to-cm ratio).

Read my above two posts no-4236 and 4237 and point out any mistake in dimensions. No need to use any head measurement

 

[ersakthivel]

I don't even want to comment these bollocks of yours. Keep in mind that whole world is laughing from people like you, as I shown your posts to other people.

Not to mention that neither you read with understanding my post, neither you are actually arguing with me but with your own fantasy. Perhaps in future, when you finally learn how to properly read in english, write in english and using quote option, then perhaps we will be able to discuss, for now however your post is nothing more than a babble.

read my posts no-4236 and 4237 and point out your views.

 

[ersakthivel]

I don't even want to comment these bollocks of yours. Keep in mind that whole world is laughing from people like you, as I shown your posts to other people.

Not to mention that neither you read with understanding my post, neither you are actually arguing with me but with your own fantasy. Perhaps in future, when you finally learn how to properly read in english, write in english and using quote option, then perhaps we will be able to discuss, for now however your post is nothing more than a babble.

Read posts -4236 and 4237 and reply.

 

[Damian]

I replied so many times that there is no nececity tom reply this all over again, you don't unerstand simple answers? Then this is your problem.

 

[ersakthivel]

I replied so many times that there is no nececity tom reply this all over again, you don't unerstand simple answers? Then this is your problem.

Since you are a pro you are expected to know something like engineering drawing, without which how do you become tank professional?

SO please post some measurements on photos and to prove ARJUN has only 50 mm armor on sides. Or point out any errors in my above post no-4236 and 4237.

I never remember you ever replying with any measurement on photos? IF so please point out the post no.

Also explain what is behind the inner curving side wall of the turret behind the TC in the picture, What is it's cross sectional size?

Since there is no corresponding curvature on ARJUN turret out side , it must be the cavity for composite armor, SO it goes against your view of just 50 mm RHA thickness at the side turret for ARJUN.

What is enclosed there.

 

[Damian]

Since you are a pro you are expected to know something like engineering drawing, without which how do you become tank professional?

SO please post some measurements on photos and to prove ARJUN has only 50 mm armor on sides. Or point out any errors in my above post no-4236 and 4237.

I never remember you ever replying with any measurement on photos? IF so please point out the post no.

Perhaps because I agree with STGN and Dejawolf, I do not need to replicate their work because I agree with them, do you understand humans language and what word "agree" means?

Also explain what is behind the inner curving side wall of the turret behind the TC in the picture, What is it's cross sectional size?

Since there is no corresponding curvature on ARJUN turret out side , it must be the cavity for composite armor, SO it goes against your view of just 50 mm RHA thickness at the side turret for ARJUN.

What is enclosed there.

Composite armor is not enclosed there, vehicle electric, electronic and mechanical components might be. If you considers that there is composite armor there then... skończ waść, wstydu oszczędź as we say in my country.

Composite armor is placed outside crew compartment, thus comparing the interior space and the exterior we can determine where composite armor is placed. There are of course other signs of composite armor being present or absent that are visible outside.

Seriously, stop being a troll and start using your brain... if you have any.

 

[ersakthivel]

Perhaps because I agree with STGN and Dejawolf, I do not need to replicate their work because I agree with them, do you understand humans language and what word "agree" means?

Composite armor is not enclosed there, vehicle electric, electronic and mechanical components might be. If you considers that there is composite armor there then... skończ waść, wstydu oszczędź as we say in my country.

Composite armor is placed outside crew compartment, thus comparing the interior space and the exterior we can determine where composite armor is placed. There are of course other signs of composite armor being present or absent that are visible outside.

Seriously, stop being a troll and start using your brain... if you have any.

So you don't know any thing about engineering drawing or dimensioning is clear to me now.

SO leave it aside,

What space age electricals, mechanicals and ELECRONICS are located in that cavity behind the TC? When in all other tanks only composite armor is placed in cavities between outer wall and inner wall,

Which bud head will locate electricals mechanicals and and critical electronics in an area that has just 50 mm armor thickness according to your space age physics , and subject them to constant vibration from and shell hits,

That too through out the length of the side turret!!!!!

and to be hit at constantly in a war?As you already posted some gibberish like there is too much volume and wasted space in ARJUN ,

SO why should not they place electricals in these huge spaces which are much safer from penetration,

and instead place them on a place which will be constantly bombarded in war the turret side?


SO in LEO and ABRAMS they will place composite armor in cavities , but when it comes to ARJUn it is going to be electricals,that are going to be placed in the most vulnerable part of the tank.

A nice engineering design principle indeed.

In our country we call this sort of explanation CHUTPAZ!!