Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT)

[Dejawolf]

i did not reduce an hatch size,

I made a mistake in the post , I got 375 mm not 275 mm.

oh my mistake, i forgot your are a digital cripple working on windows NT and cannot use paint.exe to measure accurately with pixels.

393mm is stgn's value using incorrect hatch width of 50cm. and unlike you he admits he made a mistake.
with correct hatch width of 55cm, the value becomes 450mm.
correcting the position of the measuring spots we get a value of 500mm, which is the correct value.

ALL of these values are below your estimate of 3.2m.

 

[STGN]

Heres something you can measure on ersakthivel: Ruler galore.
STGN

 

[STGN]

Okay base on the drawing I have had to revise my height drawing. It seems the Arjun suspension has been heightened since the drawing was made so its actually 10cm taler than the official 2.32m number.
Heres revised height measurement with 65cm wheels.

STGN

 

[Dejawolf]

Okay base on the drawing I have had to revise my height drawing. It seems the Arjun suspension has been heightened since the drawing was made so its actually 10cm taler than the official 2.32m number.
Heres revised height measurement with 65cm wheels.

STGN

not sure how you come to these numbers.
given a 65cm roadwheel:

roadwheel is 101px tall.
measure from top blue line to the bottom where the track meets the ground is 370px:
60/101 = 0.594059
0.594059*370px = 219cm

measuring further up to the TC's hatch: you get about 231cm, which is close to the official 232cm.

 

[STGN]

not sure how you come to these numbers.
given a 65cm roadwheel:

roadwheel is 101px tall.
measure from top blue line to the bottom where the track meets the ground is 370px:
60/101 = 0.594059
0.594059*370px = 219cm

I use 99pix for roadwheel.
65/99 =0.6565657
0.6565657*369px = 242cm

Why do you use 60 instead of 65?

STGN

 

[Dejawolf]

I use 99pix for roadwheel.
65/99 =0.6565657
0.6565657*369px = 242cm

Why do you use 60 instead of 65?

STGN

brainfart. yeah with 65cm you do get 242cm. hmm..
i'd say it's likely the tank in the picture is not combat-loaded. causing it to ride high on the suspension, while official height is for combat loaded tank.

 

[STGN]

brainfart. yeah with 65cm you do get 242cm. hmm..
i'd say it's likely the tank in the picture is not combat-loaded. causing it to ride high on the suspension, while official height is for combat loaded tank.

Its possible on the drawing the arms are at 38o in exhibition side shot hot they are at ~47o. And in the MK2 side shot they seem about 38o too.
STGN

 

[ersakthivel]

Heres something you can measure on ersakthivel: Ruler galore.
STGN

only fools measure dimensions on sketches that are not production drawings,

and whose primary aim is to show the schematic arrangements of sub assemblies,

without even knowing whether it was an old 40 ton prototype or 50 ton tech demo vehicle or actual 60 ton production vehicle.

While super geniuses like you are unable to measure proper dimensions even on actual photographs of production models.

 

[ersakthivel]

Again that picture was not meant to be accurate it was merely meant to show you wrong which it does.
STGN

how wrong am I?

 

[ersakthivel]

oh my mistake, i forgot your are a digital cripple working on windows NT and cannot use paint.exe to measure accurately with pixels.

393mm is stgn's value using incorrect hatch width of 50cm. and unlike you he admits he made a mistake.
with correct hatch width of 55cm, the value becomes 450mm.
correcting the position of the measuring spots we get a value of 500mm, which is the correct value.

ALL of these values are below your estimate of 3.2m.

I used the correct width of 550 mm for hatch for calculation, so it does not matter what width you or STGN used for that purpose.

The ratio of the ---- space on the ARJUN hull besides the turret side padlock covered with lock (27 mm on scale )/ hatch cover width (38 mm on scale ) is 0.7

0.7x550 mm=385 mm.on one side.

2x385 mm=770 mm on both sides,

frontal hull width(partial frontal side skirts included is my assumption) is 3860 mm.

Turret width =3860 mm-770 mm=3100 mm i.e 3.1 meters.

There are no errors here,Once again I am not commenting on his pixel measurement techniques ,

it is the simple ratio of spaces anybody can measure on any size of their computer screen or printouts.


It is final and agreed upon by STGN as well, now he is saying it is inaccurate is none of my business.

Which is further corroborated by the picture above.

the red line is where the tracks are leaving aside the side skirts,

the red line cuts the hatch into two i.e 550 mm/2=275 mm.

For both sides 275mm x2=550mm,

width over track is 3540 mm-550mm=3 meters.

The ratio of far hatch width/ the near ( blue rectangle placed ) hatch width is=0.85. this is due to perspective.

This is due to perspective distortion of distances, because the near hatch appears visually bigger compared to far hatch due to distance from the observer,

In the same way the rectangle placed on the hull should measure 0.85 times the actual dimension measured when it is placed on on the near hatch cover.

In the same way we should reduce the 275 mm length cut by the red line using 0.85 as factor .So it comes to 233 mm,

233mm x2=460 mm,

3540 mm-460 mm=3100 mm,

Again the same,

So since both measurements tally I have no doubt regarding this measuring technique, whatever you may post to counter this.

 

[ersakthivel]

oh i'm sorry, is there something wrong with the official engineering drawings for the arjun now?
i did nothing else but scale the official engineering drawings to the official width of the tank, and then measure the thickness of the side plate.

Do you know the difference between sketches showing scematic arrangement of sub assemblies and actual scaled engineering drawing?

Even official engineering drawing of something as basic as screw jack has dimensions marked on them,

And a name plate detailing the scale , date , who did the drawing on them,

I hope you have done engineering drawing in your bachelors.

 

[ersakthivel]

 

[Dejawolf]

Do you know the difference between sketches showing scematic arrangement of sub assemblies and actual scaled engineering drawing?

Even official engineering drawing of something as basic as screw jack has dimensions marked on them,

And a name plate detailing the scale , date , who did the drawing on them,

I hope you have done engineering drawing in your bachelors.

well, you've been wrong countless times before, i'll just assume you're wrong about this as well.

 

[ersakthivel]

well, you've been wrong countless times before, i'll just assume you're wrong about this as well.

Countless times!!!!! Read my post no-4353 and point out the mistake.

Why don't apply your hatch width of 550 mm on the following photo and find out the turret width?

For me the length of turret top at the base of the crew hatch/crew hatch on the picture comes to around 6.

the turret top is almost flat and with very minimum perspective distortion,

More than 550 mm (equal to the width of hatch cover ) is plainly visible even to lay man besides the crew hatch edge and turret edge,

So even if you leave aside the 100 mm as elbow space besides crew on the crew hole it still leaves more than 450 mm as space for side armor cavity on turret ,Any dispute on it is simply hilarious.

So 6x550 mm=3300 mm is the width of the turret is the basic idea ,

you can proceed from here And derive your dream turret width of below 2.9 for all of us to see.

 

[Dejawolf]

i thought you said the turret was 3200mm.

 

[ersakthivel]

i thought you said the turret was 3200mm.

what is your turret width for ARJUN? My estimate is it is near 3.1 meters based on correct ratio calculations proved in 2 different types of photos, using two different measuring techniques.

Don't show your teenage temper here, post if you have anything to prove or scoot ,

 

[Dejawolf]

what is your turret width for ARJUN? My estimate is it is near 3.1 meters based on correct ratio calculations proved in 2 different types of photos, using two different measuring techniques.

no your estimate is 3.2m because that's the assumption kunal biswas made.

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/indian-army/44522-arjun-vs-t90-mbt-45.html#post646023
http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/indian-army/44522-arjun-vs-t90-mbt-44.html

as i've said for the past 2 months, 2.86m.

 

[ersakthivel]

no your estimate is 3.2m because that's the assumption kunal biswas made.

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/indian-army/44522-arjun-vs-t90-mbt-45.html#post646023
http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/indian-army/44522-arjun-vs-t90-mbt-44.html

as i've said for the past 2 months, 2.86m.

Storage boxes were converted to armor eons ago,

only rip van winkle dummy tank specialists here still harking back to the days of discarded Tank-Ex models,

and trying to fool every one here.

our estimates aside the photos tell it is near 3.1 meters that is what matters.

Anyway it is good that you are cured of pixel measurement disease.

If not make your revolutionary pixel measurement on the photo in 4357 with hatch width as 550 mm and prove it to be 2.86 meters,

your dummy tank specialist friends are eagerly waiting it seems,

Do you ever remember anything about your previous measurement which you made on this photo?

Now what is your position?

 

[ersakthivel]

Looking at the Drawing it seem its for old prototype.like this:

with the thick mud guard in the front.
It also has 65cm diameter wheels.
STGN

By reducing the size of the crew hatch hole on the hull , you tried to mislead the forum once, remember?

if not read my post no-1346 in ARJUN vs T-90 thread.

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/indian-army/44522-arjun-vs-t90-mbt-90.html

this is fraud. the crew hatch down is reduced in scale, pathetic attempt.

If you put the original crew hole besides the frontal turret armor block you won't fit more than 2/3 rd of it.

Now you are getting trapped , if crew hole is 400 mm only as per your post ,you are proving yourself wrong.

And if you put the original sized crew hole on the hull besides the turret near frontal armor block, you can only fit 2/3rd of it

SO you are once again proving my estimate that there is no more than 300 mm space besides the turret on the hull.

o it bolsters my estimate of 3200 mm turret width.So whatever deception you try here you are going to get trapped both ways,
whether the crew hole is 550 mm or 400 mm does not matter.

Why are you doing this?

this is what I posted and you haven't responded to it till now,

So all you guys know how wrong you are trying to prove one baseless allegation made by damian ,

that there is no side turret armor cavity on ARJUN turret, why this monumental attempt of tilting at the windmills?

 

[Dejawolf]

By reducing the size of the crew hatch hole on the hull , you tried to mislead the forum once, remember?

the only liar here is you:

also:

so don't accuse me of misleading anyone here.