Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT)

[ersakthivel]

that armour block was already taken into consideration when we estimated the front turret thickness on Arjun.
ershaktivel claimed the block was over 1.4 meter thick which is ludicrous.

So according to the model what is the distance between the breach sliding wedge and the frontal armor plate on the gun . on front tip of the turret ?

And according to which calculation you arrived at which dimension for ARJUN turret width?

 

[Dejawolf]

Who agreed with you ? there are armor plates before pivot plate. that was what Kunal posted and agreed, It was none of your business, I know the credibility of the measurements you post.

You still haven't answered with what calculations you arrived at the width for ARJUN turret and you never will,

Because I know damn well , that only after I posted the picture you realized that your friends were wrong quoting 2500 to 2700 mm for turret width, it was a long argument all over the ARJUN vsT-90 thread and in this thread as well.

I just tried to reason by using the size of the head as a comparison ratio and somebody jumped in with different measurements,

Then I used AJAI SHUKLA's shoes on the tank and you said a straightened shoe measures 450 mm in length.

SO I JUST DID An elementary PERSPECTIVE PROJECTION , after which you kept quiet about ARJUN turret width.

The leopard cutaway you posted also has plates in front of the pivot plate.It IS YOU WHO IS STILL REFUSING ACCEPT THAT ARE ARMOR PLATES IN FRONT OF THAT PIVOT PLATE as well.

Ershaktivel full of lies

if you have any commonsense, you should have known that the shoe worn by the man itself is about 20 cms in length,

Then how come the 18 cm measurement cover a dimension that is quarter of a shoe length that too on the very same measuring plane?

Ofcourse these questions are to be asked to rational guys, not some one like you,

If we accept your blunders called measurement the shoe must measure 72 cms in length, both the men must be himalayan bigfoots to justify your measurement,

The man's head measures 10mm(ear to ear is actually 11 mm, but lets leave out the ears and stick to the head) on scale on the screen.

Normally his head would have measured close to 200 mm in reality. Same as the scale I stated in my post no-4064.

So 1 mm on this photo roughly measures 20 mm in reality.

SO the total turret width measures 157 mm on scale on the photo.

 

[ersakthivel]

Well let others judge who is lying, and stop this shouting match and save some E waste.

 

[Twinblade]

that armour block was already taken into consideration when we estimated the front turret thickness on Arjun.
ershaktivel claimed the block was over 1.4 meter thick which is ludicrous.

If that block is 1.4 meters thick then by that proportion

 

[Dejawolf]

The man's head measures 10mm(ear to ear is actually 11 mm, but lets leave out the ears and stick to the head) on scale on the screen.

Normally his head would have measured close to 200 mm in reality. Same as the scale I stated in my post no-4064.

So 1 mm on this photo roughly measures 20 mm in reality.

SO the total turret width measures 157 mm on scale on the photo.

SO 157x20=3140 mm close to 3200 mm. SO that must settle any doubts on the Arjun turret once for all.


Why the man's head is taken as a reference because he is closer to the plane of turret and his head dimension can easily be estimated in reality.

So nothing can go wrong in this type of simple scale dimensioning of comparing a well known length on appropriate plane where the effect of perspective distortion is eliminated as much as possible.

See any member can simply take a print out and check it for himself.

lemme just beat this dead horse one more time:

in this picture i've used your erroneous measure of 20cm width for a human head to come to the wrong conclusion that turret is 3.2m wide over the front.

i used the same head measure to measure hull width, and guess what, every measure on the hull was wildly off the mark.
you didn't even take into consideration perspective distortion for turret width.. you must've been a drop-out for your engineering class.

 

[ersakthivel]

If you are a tank expert why don't you produce your diagram and models proving ARJUN's LOS armor thickness at various areas

DON'T PROVOKE ME HERE IF YOU HAVE NOTHING TECHNICAL TO ADD.

 

[ersakthivel]

lemme just beat this dead horse one more time:

in this picture i've used your erroneous measure of 20cm width for a human head to come to the wrong conclusion that turret is 3.2m wide over the front.

i used the same head measure to measure hull width, and guess what, every measure on the hull was wildly off the mark.
you didn't even take into consideration perspective distortion for turret width.. you must've been a drop-out for your engineering class.

I know you are HOW BIG A PROFESSOR OF PERSPECTIVE DRAWING FROM THE BEGINING.

It's me who taught you that with my first perspective projection.

The hull is more meters in front of the head. No fool will give it a negligible allowance and apply the heads pix ratio to the hull.

Any trained draftsman will laugh his ass of if he sees your hull calculation

Still turret at front measures around 3100mm. I see no curvature on ARJUN turret sides .

And that still makes the head wide around 200 mm, Incase you couldn't understand.


How ever much you strut your stuff, it was after the perspective projection I posted , you fumbled into any logical measure of the width.

Pmaitra is a witness to the debate and you can't fool anyone here.

You took the side view with dimension PMAITRA posted here and applied the turret width given by your friends and made the 3D model is an open secret in this forum

So untill I posted that perspective projection you had no clue for turret width.Why hide such a simple fact?

 

[ersakthivel]

The driver's head is well behind the start of the slanting frontal hull plate edge .

It is stupid to assume that measurements in pixels on the start of the slanting plane edge will have the same scale to the measurement of driver'e head in pixels.

That too without taking into effect the angle of the observer, it shows one's lack of depth in any kind of drawings and measurement let alone perspective drawing.

 

[Dejawolf]

I know you are HOW BIG A PROFESSOR OF PERSPECTIVE DRAWING FROM THE BEGINING.

It's me who taught you that with my first perspective projection.

The hull is more meters in front of the head. No fool will give it a negligible allowance and apply the heads pix ratio to the hull.

Any trained draftsman will laugh his ass of if he sees your hull calculation

Still turret at front measures around 3100mm. I see no curvature on ARJUN turret sides .

And that still makes the head wide around 200 mm, Incase you couldn't understand.


How ever much you strut your stuff, it was after the perspective projection I posted , you fumbled into any logical measure of the width.

Pmaitra is a witness to the debate and you can't fool anyone here.

You took the side view with dimension PMAITRA posted here and applied the turret width given by your friends and made the 3D model is an open secret in this forum

So untill I posted that perspective projection you had no clue for turret width.Why hide such a simple fact?

i'm not trying to fool anyone, i'm exposing you for the fraud and liar that you are.

 

[Dejawolf]

The driver's head is well behind the start of the slanting frontal hull plate edge .

It is stupid to assume that measurements in pixels on the start of the slanting plane edge will have the same scale to the measurement of driver'e head in pixels.

That too without taking into effect the angle of the observer, it shows one's lack of depth in any kind of drawings and measurement let alone perspective drawing.

it is more to assume that the turret will have the same scale as the head, in that picture, and yet thats how you measured it, not bothering to take perspective into account. Don't act like you're teaching me anything,

 

[ersakthivel]

it is more stupid to assume that the turret will have the same scale as the head, in that picture, and yet thats how you measured it, not bothering to take perspective into account. Don't act like you're teaching me anything, you're the one who ----ed up.

OK then use your perspective drawing skills , and calculate the head width of the driver,

I do need some entertainment.

You yourself have given the ratio as 0.97(the difference between the head plane and hull plane.)

So you yourself have determined that if the head measures 200 mm across, the hull should measure 4520 mm across.

Now take the reverse if the hull measures 3850 mm in front ,

then use the ratio in the reserve and arrive at the head width of the driver.


If we follow your ratios the width of the driver's head should be around 150mm.

Is that fair?

if you don't understand anything about perspective drawing, please don't advertise it.

In perspective classes a problem will be give saying a stick Z mm long whose one end is at x mm height from the ground and it is titled at y angle from the observer gives a measurement of A mm in the side view.

In the above problem some values will be given and some won't be.

We have to draw it , it project it and find it. it is not as straight forward as say give 0.97 ratio and fix the length.

 

[ersakthivel]

it is more to assume that the turret will have the same scale as the head, in that picture, and yet thats how you measured it, not bothering to take perspective into account. Don't act like you're teaching me anything,

My assumption was ,

Even though the head and turret are at different planes ,

Relative to the observer , the distance between the planes is minimal.

And I was making the bare minimum possible estimate just at a glance , not maximum.

But in your calculations , relative to the observer the difference between the Head plane and hull front edge plane is very large.

So probability of errors is high as the relative distance of planes increase.

 

[Dejawolf]

OK then use your perspective drawing skills , and calculate the head width of the driver,

I do need some entertainment.

You yourself have given the ratio as 0.97(the difference between the head plane and hull plane.)

So you yourself have determined that if the head measures 200 mm across, the hull should measure 4520 mm across.

Now take the reverse if the hull measures 3850 mm in front ,

then use the ratio in the reserve and arrive at the head width of the driver.


If we follow your ratios the width of the driver's head should be around 150mm.

Is that fair?

yes. as damian said, average human head is between 140-160mm wide. according to a united states survey

 

[ersakthivel]

By the same toke the four and a half head distance between the back of the Tc's head and the yellow box above the gunner must measure no more than 900 mm.

Because the same wiki link you posted says that the from side breadth of the head is just 200 mm for men.

Then 2500mm(distance of the Tc's seat back from turret)-(700mm(main sight cutaway)+900 mm(4and a half head width))=900mm.

So there is 900 mm space for the composite armor behind the Main sight. CONFIRMED.

And 1600 mm in all other places at the front.

With side storage boxes getting converted into composite armor blocks in ARJUN mk-2,

the IA has nothing to complain about I think.

Many thanks for the help.

That was what I have been saying all along.And You have been denying all along.

Now I really accept you as an expert.

 

[ersakthivel]

BTW, this is the proof for ARJUn's turret width of 3100 mm posted by not me but STGN.

The width of the turret : vertical hatch cover is 1 : 5.6

The hatch cover is 550 mm.

So 550 mm x 5.6=3100 mm.

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/indian-army/9558-arjun-main-battle-tank-mbt-299.html

And in post no-4473 you accepted it as well.

So what is the fuss,

What I have been saying from the beginning is correct.

Space for Los behind main sight --900 mm(some 10 percent measurement errors are possible)

Other places space for LOS-- well above 1400 mm.


How much of it is taken is anybody's guess, but there is space for it.

And the turret width is 3100 mm.

The why you have been disputing this in your 100s of post?

So you have 3100 mm width at the center for the turret width.

SO what I posted was always correct it seems.

So this topic should be finished here.

 

[ersakthivel]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/61/HeadAnthropometry.JPG

And the above link is for famous head measurement values posted by Dejawolf.

 

[ersakthivel]

LOL, in your xxxxx xxxxx xxxxxx.
I've said this 3 times already, and i'm saying it again,
you're measuring from the wrong spot.
and by measuring from the head, you're not taking into consideration perspective at all. i've already shown you the massive perspective distortion in the above image,
by comparing the close vision block to the far one.
this is apparently a very difficult concept for you to get your head around.

in this image i've put in measurement for vision blocks, which i used, and used the correct external measurement spot, and also taken head lengths, with
the CORRECT measurement spot on the front armour, along with the CORRECT 2500mm spot from where you're actually measuring from, which is far behind the TC's seat.

Just look at the length of the Tc's hand in this picture, If he straightens his hands he can touch the yellow box above the eye piece into which gunner is looking, So no more than 900 mm as far as me is concerned.

You conveniently left out the Tc's nose out side the measuring unit , this kind of forgetful convenience is not new for you.

You can fix the 2500 mm point anywhere you wish, but the pictures in the post no-4834 makes it clear it starts on Tc's seat back.

You never claimed once till this post that you have used this picture for 3d model.

As far as I remeber this film was released after you posted model here, because Kunal was the first one to post pictures from the film well after you posted your 3D models,

All along you claimed that the distance between the Tc's seat back and the yellow box

in the picture in 4834 was 1400 mm through out your posts.

Now since you trapped yourself by giving head measurements you are jumping to another picture, starting your markings where ever you wish,
,
So now you want to me to believe You used this blue mangoe film for you 3D model,

You can measure your xxxx xxxxx anywhere,

You can fix the Tc's seat back anywhere, because you don't have the slightest amount of worrying about your credibility,

You will never be able to give any proof for the question from where you got the turret width for your 3D model.

You accused STGN of using falsified shit for posting the picture which proved the width to be 3100 mm.

SO you can find someone else to play this game. Not me.

Mod: Be mindful of tha language, both of you

 

[ersakthivel]

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/indian-army/44522-arjun-vs-t90-mbt-66.html
post no-978,
Inthis post you accepted the Tc's seat back lying at 2500 mm,

And 4837

And you continuously claimed till today that the distance between the Tc's seat back and the yellow box above the gunner is 1400 mm.

And at that point the blue mango film was not released and you never used it for your model.The only picture we discussed was the Tank commander sittin with radio in his hand, You continuously claimed that the distance between his seat back and the yellow dial above the gunner to be about 1400 mm.

Now as per the head you supplied it comes to around 900 mm only.

Now you are switching on to another picture by stretching the distance as you wish,

Look, you even gave a calculation .

I reproduce that post word for word below.

There is no need for your 3 d drawings once PMAITRA has posted the drawing above.


Because
1.the distance from the frontal turret to crew seat is 2500 mm.
ersakthivel ↑

well, to the back of the cupola ring yes, correct. 2500mm.
Deja wolf

2.the cut away for sight is about 500 mm
ersakthivel ↑

ncorrect, it's 750mm
Dejawolf

3.the distance between the crew members seat to armor mounting on the front is about 600 mm
ersakthivel ↑incorrect it's ~1400mm. you cannot fit 2 people within 60cm of space.
Deia wolf

SO 2500-(500+600)=1300 mm
ersakthivel ↑

2500-(500+600) = 1400mm but i digress

correct formula:
2500-(1400+750) = 350
Dejawolf.

Now you are refuting all this

Now if we factor in your old argument in the older post 978 with the new measurement scheme you present here,

We add your old claim of 1400 mm to extra 800 mm you marked with the big measuring red line,

2500 - [2200 mm distance between the Tc and inner armor wall + 700 mm for main sight cut away]

The answer is -300 mm. How do you make a tank like that?

First understand besides length and width photographs have something else called depth,

you are wantonly bringing forward and backward whatever object that lie at different depths in the photograph,
to suit the measuring needs of your moment.Not very scientific.

Tomorrow you will discard the picture in this post and post another picture and claim that you made your 3D model based on that picture.
Then can we argue for another 100 pages?o

 

[Dejawolf]

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/indian-army/44522-arjun-vs-t90-mbt-66.html
post no-978,
Inthis post you accepted the Tc's seat back lying at 2500 mm,

is "seat back" and "cupola ring" synonymous to you? because it sure as hell is not to me.

 

[ersakthivel]

is "seat back" and "cupola ring" synonymous to you? because it sure as hell is not to me.

If they are meters apart, Why did you accept it's distance of 2500 mm for the calculation and gave your answer?

In the first hundred posts you made after you put your 3D model you never used this blue mango picture, Am I right or wrong?

Then whatever you were saying till today was wrong?