Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT)

[SilentKiller]

heh. instead of measuring the arjun turret, i used the pixel measuring methods on the abrams tank.
for this tank, i know the real measures.
real turret roof width is 240cm, hull width is 366cm

off by ~2.2cm...
also keep in mind this turret is a lot more difficult to measure than the arjun turret, since it doesn't have those straight turret sides,
and in this picture there's also the issue of the skirt width being partially obscured, and difficult to pinpoint.

The picture here is bit tilted..if am not wrong.
All the dimensions given above might not be correct.

 

[Dejawolf]

The picture here is bit tilted..if am not wrong.
All the dimensions given above might not be correct.

tilt of the image means nothing, since the width of turret and hull remains proportional:

and how exactly can the dimensions be incorrect when they are correct?
i got the width of the tank from the M1A1 HA Abrams manual, and the turret roof was measured by a former US army tanker when he was still in the army. this is merely to confirms that the measuring method used on the arjun works, and is reasonably accurate, if you take care and make sure that the widths are on the correct plane.

 

[p2prada]

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.

Or even the country.

 

[p2prada]

You should have hit the ignore button a long time ago

Offered that advice months ago.

 

[ersakthivel]

Nope, sorry, I didn't disappear from this forum. You were simply added to the ignore list, on advice from mods, for repetitive misquoting, deliberate misinformation and not backing up your claims with any links, a place where you still belong. Some of us have jobs to do and come here on forums to learn, share and to stay updated on new developments, not to argue on page after page with people carrying preconcieved notions born out of lack of understanding. For whatever reasons, you have plenty of time at your hands, considering the barrage of ill structured, semi coherent, posts you unleash, and an utter disregard for opinions other than yours. Here's some advice for you, lurk more, post less and ask questions when in doubt.

Warm Regards

PS: Do not bother replying to this post, it won't be visible to me anyway.
PPS: You are still misquoting me, but nevermind.

You still have not posted the cross sectional area graph for grippen, while you were saying the same graph is the reason for tejas airframe not crossing supersonic speeds. and as for source i have given more than 50 links in tejas thread itself.

If you fancy your time too much you don't have to comment on the credibility of posts and don't waste your valuable time for giving advice to DAMIAN to ignore to me.

He is adult enough to know that.in fact his baseless criticizing posts on ARJUN in the thread I am here,In the same way one supposed know all member's stupid posts about TEJAS was the reason I posted there.

In fact I became a member of this forum 3 years ago .And for the past 2 and a half years I did not make a single post.

only when monumental stupid comments about TEJAS became a crescendo , I intervened to post some home truths.

You too need not bother to reply to this post.

See placing you on my ignore list is quite easy if you don't post old unsubstantiated claims as unresolvable problems that were made because the designers of tejas did not even know the whitcomb's rule.

In the same way some guys are arguing here designers of ARJUN don't know which stuff to place in side turret cavities.

It is too much for teenagers making unsubstantiated claims,just because one cable goes there, it does not mean all of arjun side turret is meant for cables electronics and hydraulics, while all the major western MBTs of the world have composite armor there.

 

[ersakthivel]

Thanks Dejawolf, this explains everything.

may be they wound up miles and miles of the cable into a big bundle and filled up entire space meant for armored cavity.

 

[ersakthivel]

the drawings were scaled, and dimensions were provided. where is YOUR scaled drawings? nowhere.

what is the width of the crew hatch cover according to your scaled properly dimensioned models and photo measurement?

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Funny thing is most of Interior pics posted here are all from different Prototypes not a single from operational tanks..

The Ammo storage bins in turret is one example so does commander MFD which was only single in Defexpo prototype and now 2 MFD can be seen in New Prototype..

In the same way some guys are arguing here designers of ARJUN don't know which stuff to place in side turret cavities..

 

[Dejawolf]

what is the width of the crew hatch cover according to your scaled properly dimensioned models and photo measurement?

as i've said before,
55cm for the hatch. 45-50cm for the hatch hole (there's an edge with a rubber seal on the hatch)

 

[Dejawolf]

may be they wound up miles and miles of the cable into a big bundle and filled up entire space meant for armored cavity.

must suck to be wrong.

 

[sayareakd]

Funny thing is most of Interior pics posted here are all from different Prototypes not a single from operational tanks..

The Ammo storage bins in turret is one example so does commander MFD which was only single in Defexpo prototype and now 2 MFD can be seen in New Prototype..

Sir why on earth IA want to allow general public to post pics of operational tank. Plus DRDO always bring in old arjun tank for obvious reasons.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Just like Russian did with T-90MS in India but still they were not good as DRDO..

Sir why on earth IA want to allow general public to post pics of operational tank. Plus DRDO always bring in old arjun tank for obvious reasons.

 

[shuvo@y2k10]

drdo always bring arjun's of mid 90's for showing in a exibition and this is true for all defence products(since these kind of exibition are for general masses to give them a sense of pride and these people are in general not military gurus).the arjun's operational in 75th and 43rd armour division are significantly different on inside than these prototypes shown.also i would like to point out since arjun's turret width is 3.2m which is about 30-40cm bigger than any western mbt the side armour provides comparable projectiles from contemporary tank projectiles since it has reportedly withstood point blank range hits from t-72,t90 main gun and modern russian and israeli apfsds, heat projectiles from milan,rpg projectiles.i wonder what would happen if a nag is launched against arjun since nag is one of the best anti tank weapons in our inventory and has a deadly 10-12 kg tandem warhead.

 

[STGN]

drdo always bring arjun's of mid 90's for showing in a exibition and this is true for all defence products(since these kind of exibition are for general masses to give them a sense of pride and these people are in general not military gurus).the arjun's operational in 75th and 43rd armour division are significantly different on inside than these prototypes shown.also i would like to point out since arjun's turret width is 3.2m which is about 30-40cm bigger than any western mbt the side armour provides comparable projectiles from contemporary tank projectiles since it has reportedly withstood point blank range hits from t-72,t90 main gun and modern russian and israeli apfsds, heat projectiles from milan,rpg projectiles.i wonder what would happen if a nag is launched against arjun since nag is one of the best anti tank weapons in our inventory and has a deadly 10-12 kg tandem warhead.

So how do you know that?
STGN

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Rare chance of survival without APS..

It will surely crippled the tank..

f a nag is launched against arjun since nag is one of the best anti tank weapons in our inventory and has a deadly 10-12 kg tandem warhead.

 

[shuvo@y2k10]

well it is obvious that drdo bring old models of arjun's in these exibition.for example the pictures of arjun in the exibition show that it has very thin side armour.but if you look carefully in the discovery channel video of arjun mbt(last 5 mins) you will clearly see enhanced side armour and I have even seen an aps on top of the tank(in mission army episode of armoured corps).these are arjun of 75th and 43rd armoured regiment doing practice in thar desert.

 

[shuvo@y2k10]

if you go to page 90 of this thread and see the pics of arjun turret side provided by kunal biswas you will find enhanced side protection as seen in the discovery chaneel video

 

[Damian]

well it is obvious that drdo bring old models of arjun's in these exibition.for example the pictures of arjun in the exibition show that it has very thin side armour.but if you look carefully in the discovery channel video of arjun mbt(last 5 mins) you will clearly see enhanced side armour and I have even seen an aps on top of the tank(in mission army episode of armoured corps).these are arjun of 75th and 43rd armoured regiment doing practice in thar desert.

You confused side armor with storage boxes. Side turret armor thickness over crew compartment and bustle did not changed, it is still homogeneus below 100mm thick RHA plates.

 

[kshkumsin]

You confused side armor with storage boxes. Side turret armor thickness over crew compartment and bustle did not changed, it is still homogeneus below 100mm thick RHA plates.

can u all stop on this discussion it has been going for months

 

[Dejawolf]

drdo always bring arjun's of mid 90's for showing in a exibition and this is true for all defence products(since these kind of exibition are for general masses to give them a sense of pride and these people are in general not military gurus).the arjun's operational in 75th and 43rd armour division are significantly different on inside than these prototypes shown.

do you have a point?

also i would like to point out since arjun's turret width is 3.2m which is about 30-40cm bigger than any western mbt the side armour provides comparable projectiles from contemporary tank projectiles since it has reportedly withstood point blank range hits from t-72,t90 main gun and modern russian and israeli apfsds, heat projectiles from milan,rpg projectiles.

nonsense:

front turret as you said, withstands the best rounds from T-90. additionally it might be able to withstand M829A1(silver bullet) at point blank range,
which makes the front turret armour equal to the M1A1(HA) and leopard 2A4,
side turret however, is clearly less than 55cm thick. you claim it's 60cm thick or more...
the side turret armour is at most proof against BMP-2 30mm at most on the rear half, and proof against RPG-7 on front half.

i wonder what would happen if a nag is launched against arjun since nag is one of the best anti tank weapons in our inventory and has a deadly 10-12 kg tandem warhead.

Nag is top-attack, so it will circumvent the front/side armour protection and blow the arjun to bits.