Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT)

[Dejawolf]

Hmm, is that an official image for you to make such calculations

it's from a book by rolf hilmes, definitely worth a read if you're interested in design of MBTs and such.

 

[ersakthivel]

@Dejawolf

Draw from Kampfpanzer heute und morgen:

DRDO width - 3864mm

red line 256px - 3864mm
190px - 2867mm (2,86m)
158px - 2384mm (2,38m)
20px - 301mm (30cm...)

More or less your mesurment is consist whit this draw

The hull width is 3864 mm.

But if you draw another red line across the turret width joining the crew hatch centers,

You can find exactly half the crew hatch cover width on the hull besides the turret side on ARJUN.

So one crew hatch cover measures 550 mm is pretty much agreed upon here.

So half crew hatch width is 275 mm.

So 3864-(2x275 mm=550 mm)=3314 mm is the width of the turret on the axis joining the centers of the crew hatch.

If partial frontal side skirts are not included in the official hull frontal width then this 3314 mm turret width is correct as per your draw.

If partial frontal side skirts are included in the official width , then you deduct 2 x 140 mm= 280 mm from the 3314 mm.

still the turret width roughly comes around to 3030 mm or so.


Considering the measurements from STGN's photo below, I have every reason to believe Kunal's words of 3200 mm as turret width at the center of the crew holes considering , since all the measurements are roughly matching.

Kunal also has posted that ARJUN turret width is 3.2 meters . This drawing seems to prove that without any need for pixel measurement.

if you have any doubts this is the photograph measurement by STGN.

So how come you arrive at 2867 mm for turret width of ARJUN?

 

[The Last Stand]

it's from a book by rolf hilmes, definitely worth a read if you're interested in design of MBTs and such.

Mr. Hilmes wrote about Arjun?

I must ask, did he ever come to India and make measurements? Because as @ersakthivel says, turret width seems to be wrong.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Not him alone, there are other two person including me who were on Arjun say the same..

@ersakthivel says, turret width seems to be wrong.

 

[Dejawolf]

So how come you arrive at 2867 mm for turret width of ARJUN?

as i've stated before countless times, and which you have ignored,
because the turret sides are angled, and the width varies from 280cm at the front, to close to 300cm at the area just behind the hatches.
and STGNs values are based on the assumption the TC's hatch is 55cm wide, plus it's measured on a low-res image.
but i believe we were talking about turret front thickness?
or is this one of your famous "let's switch subject now so i don't have to tell everyone i was wrong, and later i'll claim i wasn't wrong after all"

 

[The Last Stand]

@Dejawolf, can you recommend some books?

 

[Dejawolf]

@Dejawolf, can you recommend some books?

anything by rolf hilmes is worth a read.
also, anything by R.P hunnicutt.
also check out the leopard trilogy by michael shackleton if you like the leopard 1.
osprey books are decent enough, they give you a rudimentary understanding of how the specific tank in question works.

 

[ersakthivel]

as i've stated before countless times, and which you have ignored,
because the turret sides are angled, and the width varies from 280cm at the front, to close to 300cm at the area just behind the hatches.
and STGNs values are based on the assumption the TC's hatch is 55cm wide, plus it's measured on a low-res image.
but i believe we were talking about turret front thickness?
or is this one of your famous "let's switch subject now so i don't have to tell everyone i was wrong, and later i'll claim i wasn't wrong after all"

there is no such proof for width variation of close to 400 millimeter.

And why turret width is important to calculate front turret protection is,

1. you can not arrive at correct placement of main sight or FCS box or the width of armor wall in the turret inside view.

Without ever knowing the correct position of these elements at the true distance from center line any calculation of front turret protection is stupid.

Your whole argument behind the assertion that there is low protection behind main sight is in comparison with leo.

That is why I asked you a question, what is the distance between the crew hatch center and the turret front tip of LEO-2 As per my calculation it is just 3.5 times the crew hole dia as per photos.

So it must be less than 2 meters if we take 450 mm as crew hatch hole ida.

But this distance in ARJUN is close to 2.25 meters.

So this will also impact the comparison based allegation of so called weakness behind main sight in ARJUN in comparison with LEO.

That is why you are not answering those hard question and asking piously what is turret width do with fontal protection.

Also as per your statement the crew compartment is 2.1 meters wide. storage boxes on two sides combined occupies around 500 mm. SO if we deduct this total of 2.6 meter from a turret width of 3.2 meters , a distance of 600 mm i.e close to 200 mm on each side is not there in your so called 3D model.

SO your thin side protection theory needs some explanation as well. that is why you keep on maintaing that turret is less than 2900 mm in width contrary to all possible evedidence

 

[STGN]

Considering the measurements from STGN's photo below, I have every reason to believe Kunal's words of 3200 mm as turret width at the center of the crew holes considering , since all the measurements are roughly matching.

Kunal also has posted that ARJUN turret width is 3.2 meters . This drawing seems to prove that without any need for pixel measurement.

if you have any doubts this is the photograph measurement by STGN.

So how come you arrive at 2867 mm for turret width of ARJUN?

The width of the turret is not uniform from front to rear.
Its narrow in the front then its gets wider towards the rear, about .5m behind the CL of commander hatch, then it slims down again. while taking a second look at that picture months ago, I found that the 550mm hatch width gave a hull width too wide but 540mm was closer. which equals ~3m as the widest point of the turret including storage boxes which narrows down to about ~2.8 at the front. Turret is not 3.2m wide at the commander hatch. I mean you can clearly see that the edge of the ammo cover hatch which is parallel to the centreline is less steep than the line running along the side of the storage boxes next to the commander hatch, telling you that the turret narrows going forward.
STGN

 

[Dejawolf]

there is no such proof for width variation of close to 400 millimeter.

lies. there is, and i've shown you the pictures. and it's not 400mm it's 200mm. there's several pictures where you can clearly see the stowage boxes have a sharp angle.
there's the multiple width comparison shots which shows the front of the turret is ~~280cm wide, theres that line drawing as well,
all of which you have conveniently ignored. and when i show you this evidence, you're just going to try and spin it all away and change the subject again like you usually do. because you don't want the truth. you need to keep your little dream about the arjun ubertank

And why turret width is important to calculate front turret protection is,

1. you can not arrive at correct placement of main sight or FCS box or the width of armor wall in the turret inside view.

Without ever knowing the correct position of these elements at the true distance from center line any calculation of front turret protection is stupid.

Your whole argument behind the assertion that there is low protection behind main sight is in comparison with leo.

That is why I asked you a question, what is the distance between the crew hatch center and the turret front tip of LEO-2 As per my calculation it is just 3.5 times the crew hole dia as per photos.

So it must be less than 2 meters if we take 450 mm as crew hatch hole ida.

But this distance in ARJUN is close to 2.25 meters.

yeah ha-ha good one. i answered that question, and gave you the lengths. the width of the turret has zero to do with the length of the turret. nothing.
it's just your crappy attempt at diverting the conversation. again. and again and again.

So this will also impact the comparison based allegation of so called weakness behind main sight in ARJUN in comparison with LEO.

no matter how much you try to spin it, the weakness is there. as you've said yourself, the arjun turret is lower and wider than the leo turret.
since it's lower it can't have that same armour block as the leo has, now can it... it doesn't really help that it's got an FCS console ABOVE the gunners head, unlike the leo2 where the FCS console is to the left and in front of the gunner

That is why you are not answering those hard question and asking piously what is turret width do with fontal protection.

i'm trying to keep you on subject for once, without your usual weaseling away from tough issues.

Also as per your statement the crew compartment is 2.1 meters wide. storage boxes on two sides combined occupies around 500 mm. SO if we deduct this total of 2.6 meter from a turret width of 3.2 meters , a distance of 600 mm i.e close to 200 mm on each side is not there in your so called 3D model.

it's because it doesn't mix with all the other evidence, like the large gap at the loaders hatch, the tiny space between TC periscope and turret outer wall (it needs an extension down through the turret roof so it can be connected) the large gaps along the sides of the turret not present on the leopard 2A4..
besides, 200mm is not enough to stop an RPG, and definitely not enough to stop a main gun tank round. you need at least 400mm or so to stop a 93mm RPG-7 warhead, and close to 600mm to stop an RPG-29. having thinner sides would be the smarter choice since you won't burden your tank with unneccesary weight that doesn't really protect you anyways.
2100... yeah, you got partially back to your senses after you claimed the turret interior was less than 2 meters wide.
anyways, 2.15m is at the front, 2.25m is at the rear, stowage box thickness is ~280mm on my model,
280*2 = 560mm
297-560 = 2410mm
2410-2250 = 160mm
160/2 = 80mm. or more than enough to stop 30mm rounds from a BMP-2.
the south koreans did it on their hypermodern K2 black panther, why not the indians...
anyways, weren't we discussing front turret thickness? i don't see how any of this has anything to do with the front turret thickness.

SO your thin side protection theory needs some explanation as well. that is why you keep on maintaing that turret is less than 2900 mm in width contrary to all possible evedidence

if you read my post 5058 you'd know i support a maximum turret width of up to 297cm, so you're pretty much fighting a straw man here.
the real issue is that over TC and gunners area turret width is about 286-290cm. and at the front, as per a shit-ton of measurements from pictures show, about 280cm.

 

[militarysta]

Considering the measurements from STGN's photo below, I have every reason to believe Kunal's words of 3200 mm as turret width at the center of the crew holes considering , since all the measurements are roughly matching.

Kunal also has posted that ARJUN turret width is 3.2 meters . This drawing seems to prove that without any need for pixel measurement.

if you have any doubts this is the photograph measurement by STGN.

So how come you arrive at 2867 mm for turret width of ARJUN?

I have doubts if you just one time think about what you are writing in Arjun thema... There is no inconsist in values 2867 or circa 3000mm for turet width becouse Arjun have this shape of the turret:

Compare the blue A lines, and red C and E line.
Red E line is obvious longer then C line -couse arjun turret shape.
And hipotetical line marked on turret front will be shorther then C and E line.
Just try to image this and understand - Arjun turret front is less width then turret center. And it's quite big difrence (circa 20cm)

 

[militarysta]

there is no such proof for width variation of close to 400 millimeter.

300mm? Yes, it is:

And why turret width is important to calculate front turret protection is,

No, it's not - you can mesure turret front armour without turret width. All what is needed is ONE sure real dimension and knowledges when armour start (frontplate) and when it's ending (beckplate). Turret width have nothing to do here.

1. you can not arrive at correct placement of main sight or FCS box or the width of armor wall in the turret inside view.

Without ever knowing the correct position of these elements at the true distance from center line any calculation of front turret protection is stupid.

Again - turret width have nothin to do whit those above. All is visible on interior photos on films - whit one greate indicator - turret roof vision block. And it's really possible to mesure armour width after main sight doghouse cose it's clearly visible when is ending and starting those sight "doghouse"

Your whole argument behind the assertion that there is low protection behind main sight is in comparison with leo.

Becouse it's true and obvious. I masuret spacial armour block after EMES-15 main sight in Leo-2 - thickenss is 650mm LOS
In Arjun on all avaible mesurments it's circa 300-350mm so half less. And it's fact, and turret width have nothing to do whit this.
As I sai - try to forced whit this:

On the last picture is clearly visible how big and how placed is main sight "doghouse" in Arjun -so it's possible to marked lines when armour blokc after "doghouse" is starting.
And on those photos:



Is clearly visible that end of the armour (backplate) is ending BEFORE turret vision block (those before ornage slopped FCS).
So it's only ONE dimension to mesure it. It's simple to do this.

Arjun special armour after main sight have only circa 300-350mm LOS. And it's big weak point.

 

[ersakthivel]

The width of the turret is not uniform from front to rear.
Its narrow in the front then its gets wider towards the rear, about .5m behind the CL of commander hatch, then it slims down again. while taking a second look at that picture months ago, I found that the 550mm hatch width gave a hull width too wide but 540mm was closer. which equals ~3m as the widest point of the turret including storage boxes which narrows down to about ~2.8 at the front. Turret is not 3.2m wide at the commander hatch. I mean you can clearly see that the edge of the ammo cover hatch which is parallel to the centreline is less steep than the line running along the side of the storage boxes next to the commander hatch, telling you that the turret narrows going forward.
STGN

Did you include partial frontal side skirts in your total hull width calculation based on hatch cover width of 540mm?

Are the partial frontal side skirts included in the official hull width of 3864mm?

 

[ersakthivel]

lies. there is, and i've shown you the pictures. and it's not 400mm it's 200mm. there's several pictures where you can clearly see the stowage boxes have a sharp angle.
there's the multiple width comparison shots which shows the front of the turret is ~~280cm wide, theres that line drawing as well,
all of which you have conveniently ignored. and when i show you this evidence, you're just going to try and spin it all away and change the subject again like you usually do. because you don't want the truth. you need to keep your little dream about the arjun ubertank



yeah ha-ha good one. i answered that question, and gave you the lengths. the width of the turret has zero to do with the length of the turret. nothing.
it's just your crappy attempt at diverting the conversation. again. and again and again.



no matter how much you try to spin it, the weakness is there. as you've said yourself, the arjun turret is lower and wider than the leo turret.
since it's lower it can't have that same armour block as the leo has, now can it... it doesn't really help that it's got an FCS console ABOVE the gunners head, unlike the leo2 where the FCS console is to the left and in front of the gunner



i'm trying to keep you on subject for once, without your usual weaseling away from tough issues.


it's because it doesn't mix with all the other evidence, like the large gap at the loaders hatch, the tiny space between TC periscope and turret outer wall (it needs an extension down through the turret roof so it can be connected) the large gaps along the sides of the turret not present on the leopard 2A4..
besides, 200mm is not enough to stop an RPG, and definitely not enough to stop a main gun tank round. you need at least 400mm or so to stop a 93mm RPG-7 warhead, and close to 600mm to stop an RPG-29. having thinner sides would be the smarter choice since you won't burden your tank with unneccesary weight that doesn't really protect you anyways.
2100... yeah, you got partially back to your senses after you claimed the turret interior was less than 2 meters wide.
anyways, 2.15m is at the front, 2.25m is at the rear, stowage box thickness is ~280mm on my model,
280*2 = 560mm
297-560 = 2410mm
2410-2250 = 160mm
160/2 = 80mm. or more than enough to stop 30mm rounds from a BMP-2.
the south koreans did it on their hypermodern K2 black panther, why not the indians...
anyways, weren't we discussing front turret thickness? i don't see how any of this has anything to do with the front turret thickness.



if you read my post 5058 you'd know i support a maximum turret width of up to 297cm, so you're pretty much fighting a straw man here.
the real issue is that over TC and gunners area turret width is about 286-290cm. and at the front, as per a shit-ton of measurements from pictures show, about 280cm.

Show me the proof , How did you arrive at the turret width of 2800 mm or 2900 mm or any measurement ?

Any official proof?

Without knowing the turret width you can not place the position of the main sight on the turret.

The height of the roof vision block is close to the bottom level of the vision blocks over Tc's head.

The bottom edge of the vision blocks over Tc's head is close to 200 mm below the inner turret roof level.

how can the roof top vision block over the gunners main sight vision block visible at the same height as that of the vision blocks over Tc's head(at a height of lower than 200 mm below the inner turret roof) ?

if the arrangement of the roof top vision block is like that of your following model below., considering the angle of the photo, there is no way the roof top vision block over gunner's main sight block can be covered in this photo?

Now who is lying ?

I asked you a simple question.\What is the turret length distance between the crew hole center and front gun mantlet plate of LEO?
According to my estimates from photo . this distance seems to be 3.5 times the crew hole dia. That is 3.5X 450 mm(my estimate of crew hole dia in LEO-2)=1625 mm.

but in the line drawing provided by PAMITRA the same distance is close to 2250 mm.

How long are you going to keep quiet, that this large difference of close to 600 mm has no role in the estimation of the frontal turret protection behind the main sight?

Now who is dodging?

i posted the photo above and asked where is the bumpy , folds on the inner turret wall of ARJUN in your so called 3d models. You are still keeping quiet?

now who is diverting?

 

[militarysta]

Without knowing the turret width you can not place the position of the main sight on the turret.

LOL
Turret width is not conecting whit placmen of the main sight!
It's bullshit.
And placement main sight is clearly visible on photos (doghouse or in other worlds - main sight window block whit optics). And it's possible to put main sight and armour block after it becouse on dozens photos is clearly visible how is placed "doghouse" and when is ending gunner sight vision block inside turret. And it's cearly visible where is placed turret roof vision block (periscope) above gunner sight vision block.
Turret width have nothing to do whit this problem. Those are two complelty separated and not connected issues!

 

[militarysta]

Show me the proof , How did you arrive at the turret width of 2800 mm or 2900 mm or any measurement ?

Any official proof?

Don't be funny - they are dozens posiilities - for example using gun caliber (120mm), using and rescale official DRDO Arjun hull width, using one "oficial" draw whit lenght Arjun -I had use them here:

They are many options.

 

[ersakthivel]

LOL
Turret width is not conecting whit placmen of the main sight!
It's bullshit.
And placement main sight is clearly visible on photos (doghouse or in other worlds - main sight window block whit optics). And it's possible to put main sight and armour block after it becouse on dozens photos is clearly visible how is placed "doghouse" and when is ending gunner sight vision block inside turret. And it's cearly visible where is placed turret roof vision block (periscope) above gunner sight vision block.
Turret width have nothing to do whit this problem. Those are two complelty separated and not connected issues!

I don't need you to teach what is bull shit?

you can stop replying to my posts , in case you don't have any correct measurements.

you are yet to answer many contentious questions I raised.

I asked you a simple question.\What is the turret length distance between the crew hole center and front gun mantlet plate of LEO?

but in the line drawing provided by PAMITRA the same distance is close to 2250 mm.

How long are you going to keep quiet about that this large difference of close to 600 mm has no role in the estimation of the frontal turret protection behind the main sight?

According to my estimates from photo . this distance seems to be 3.5 times the crew hole dia. That is 3.5X 450 mm(my estimate of crew hole dia in LEO-2)=1625 mm.

 

[ersakthivel]

Don't be funny - they are dozens posiilities - for example using gun caliber (120mm), using and rescale official DRDO Arjun hull width, using one "oficial" draw whit lenght Arjun -I had use them here:

They are many options.

turret width is never marked on any official DRDO drawing, if it is there post it.

i asked for any official proof of turret width?

 

[militarysta]

The height of the roof vision block is close to the bottom level of the vision blocks over Tc's head.

The bottom edge of the vision blocks over Tc's head is close to 200 mm below the inner turret roof level.

how can the roof top vision block over the gunners main sight vision block visible at the same height as that of the vision blocks over Tc's head(at a height of lower than 200 mm below the inner turret roof) ?

if the arrangement of the roof top vision block is like that of your following model below., considering the angle of the photo, there is no way the roof top vision block over gunner's main sight block can be covered in this photo?

And value 200mm is taking from where? From space?
And of course you don't consider the fact that there is slight slopped turret roof, and there is comander coupola ABOVE the turret roof level and that periscope have (visible on photos) rather small hight.
BTW: place on this draw those vision block above gunner sight vision block and use brain:
http://www.defencetalk.com/pictures/data/3497/Arjun MBT Sketch.jpg
thinking is not painfull

 

[militarysta]

turret width is never marked on any official DRDO drawing, if it is there post it.

i asked for any official proof of turret width?

but there is offcial HULL width and known that value you can rescale it. It's simple