Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT)

[ersakthivel]

more propaganda. it doesn't matter how accurate your gyro is able to measure the gun angle. with a bigger mantlet you'll need to increase the size and power of the elevation motor and traverse motor, as well as the brakes of those systems. otherwise the heavier mantlet will cause the gun will not be able to stabilize as quickly. and any weight added to the front of the mantlet will have to be added on the back of the gun, to counter-balance it's movement.
best alternative is to make use of a system similar to that of the leopard 2A5, then no counterbalancing will have to be done, no elevation motors will have to be upgraded, etc.

I don't think that Arjun has fired thousands of rounds proving the gun stabilization and FCS as a propaganda,

And despite the higher weight mantlet it is the most accurate gun in IA with accuracy at longer range

and on the move firing.
as per MOD report is also not a propaganda,

size power and brake capabilities of elevation motor are not set in stone for all kind of guns regardless of the mantlet size and weight .

the aim is to suit them according to the needs and weight of the gun stabilization. Not cut the mantlet to suit the capability of elevation motor and brakes..

In future when bigger caliber and bore guns are introduced all these elevation motors and brakes will have to be upgraded in all tanks. So tech keeps evolving according to needs.

What is a constant is your propensity to call anything that won't suit your need to criticize Arjun as a false propaganda.

And your ability to believe that all the gun elevation motor tech and brake tech is always frozen in the world,

at the need level of leopard 2A5 mantlet size and armor level and no one will go beyond that even if there is a need for that .

DRDO is a very old hand at these techs and stabilizing various combat platforms for years.

 

[Damian]

I remember the problems which USA and Germany faced with a longer gun installation. Longer gun had different balance and was heavier than the older gun, so it affected stabilization system.

Of course these problems were eventually solved, but you can see how increased weight can be pain in the ass, and gun do not have as big weight as gun mantled armored mask.

 

[Dejawolf]

I would say avoid cheap shots by using Cheap words..

it is the most accurate description of Ershaktivels way of argumentation. he arbitrarily creates insurmountable standards, and then ignores them himself, for the chief purpose of dragging on arguments and pissing people off. it is the most childish and inane rhetorics you can possibly use, and one of the many reasons i cannot stand him.

 

[ersakthivel]

more propaganda. it doesn't matter how accurate your gyro is able to measure the gun angle. with a bigger mantlet you'll need to increase the size and power of the elevation motor and traverse motor, as well as the brakes of those systems. otherwise the heavier mantlet will cause the gun will not be able to stabilize as quickly. and any weight added to the front of the mantlet will have to be added on the back of the gun, to counter-balance it's movement.
best alternative is to make use of a system similar to that of the leopard 2A5, then no counterbalancing will have to be done, no elevation motors will have to be upgraded, etc.

WELL thats what I said must have been done on Arjun to get higher accuracy , ---------" with a bigger mantlet you'll need to increase the size and power of the elevation motor and traverse motor, as well as the brakes of those systems" , so lt becomes propaganda if I say and truth if you say,

it is the most accurate description of Ershaktivels way of argumentation. he arbitrarily creates insurmountable standards, and then ignores them himself, for the chief purpose of dragging on arguments and pissing people off. it is the most childish and inane rhetorics you can possibly use, and one of the many reasons i cannot stand him.

Let us all know what is your easy gold standard for starters which you use to write pretty much whatever you want,

And your through professional arguments that does not piss off people,

Using Wiki head measurement when it suits you and not accepting it when it does not suit you,

like refusing to ,mark four continuous dimensions A, B, C , D on the Arjun turret,so that your bluff will be called, is I suppose your reason for not standing me ,

I don't value your critique very much is something , You know very well. So pls avoid your rave reviews,

stop making personal comments and I won't reply to you,

Ir is not a rule here that every one has to accept your or my p o v,

we make our p o v known and move on,

Thanks,

 

[ersakthivel]

I remember the problems which USA and Germany faced with a longer gun installation. Longer gun had different balance and was heavier than the older gun, so it affected stabilization system.

Of course these problems were eventually solved, but you can see how increased weight can be pain in the ass, and gun do not have as big weight as gun mantled armored mask.

gun bore , chamber pressure,caliber and total weight will always increase in the future ,

not going to decrease so eventually this space age technical problem of bit higher weight will be solved.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Then i suggest to use the ignore option, I wont tolerate such language from anyone here ..

i cannot stand him.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

There is no solution for it, Weight will increase ..

but you can see how increased weight can be pain in the ass, and gun do not have as big weight as gun mantled armored mask.

 

[militarysta]

Interestingly, all these flaws were discussed at this thread before 2012 expo ..

And personally i was concern about flaws specially

2. FCS location.

Its quite satisfying to know from the mouth of the engg from Arjun Program, The following answers =======>>


2. He said Yes, there is no composite Armour behind FCS but metallurgy of plates are thicker composition and harder..

If it's true, I suppose that You understand what this mean,,,

 

[ersakthivel]

If it's true, I suppose that You understand what this mean,,,

LOS comes somewhere between 700 to 800 mm behind the main sight assuming same metallurgy across the turret front.

If we factor in his statement that metallurgy is beefed up to improve LOS behind main sight ,

And if this metallurgy adds another ten or twenty percent then the practical LOS comes to around 1000 mm behind the main sight almost the same average across the front turret LOS ,

So what is there to worry about?

 

[Dejawolf]

LOS comes somewhere between 700 to 800 mm behind the main sight assuming same metallurgy across the turret front.

If we factor in his statement that metallurgy is beefed up to improve LOS behind main sight ,

And if this metallurgy adds another ten or twenty percent then the practical LOS comes to around 1000 mm behind the main sight almost the same average across the front turret LOS ,

So what is there to worry about?

LOS thickness is somewhere around 350mm, and with a solid block of hardened steel, protection ends up at around 437mm.

 

[ersakthivel]

LOS thickness is somewhere around 350mm, and with a solid block of hardened steel, protection ends up at around 437mm.

False.

Because using the leo turret design as a bench mark to measure Arjun turret will give only wrong measurement.

Since the turret itself is longer at front and extra steel block is specifically provided to up armor the area behind the main sight,

Saying the protection offered is just 437 mm is baseless , and it was proved beyond doubt in debate till death marathon in previous 30 pages.Simply no point in dragging it again, when you could not give any counter measurement to back your 380 mm LOS behind main sight claim.

Now I don't know on which basis you have discovered this, ground breaking new fact----"solid block of hardened steel, protection ends up at around 437mm"

Some one said 300 mm, then you said 380 mm and now you are saying ,"with a a block of hardened steel it ends up at 437 mm", as if it was measured on the tape across the cross sectional plane.

When I said there was a solid block behind the sight to compensate for the cutaway for sight it was vehemently contested for 100 pages by various posters, Now surprise, surprise, this solid armor block jumps suddenly into this MBT thread, anyway I welcome it's arrival on this thread a it puts to rest many dubious measurements repeatedly arriving at less than 350 mm LOS behind the main sight.

Photo based evidence tells other wise,

With the same extra solid block behind it, even in simple LOS it is about 700 to 800 mm,



As said by the design engineer if better metallurgy is at play , then it would be better than 800 mm according to the strength of the different higher strength plate.

If same high strength metallurgy is used on the big gun mantlet plate , the weak mantlet argument also goes out of the window,

because the assembly line photos have already indicated that the pivot plate of the gun is around 500 mm depth from the gun front covering plate on the gun. So if better metallurgy is used on this place then the protection for mantlet area too will be far higher than the 500 mm LOS that was seen on the assembly line photo.

Logic demands if such special metallurgy and extra armor block was used behind weak behind the main sight part , to bring it's protection level at par with the GSQR needs, then the same better metallurgy must have been used on gen mantlet plate as well,

 

[Dejawolf]

Saying the protection offered is just 437 mm is baseless , and it was proved beyond doubt in debate till death marathon in previous 30 pages.Simply no point in dragging it again, when you could not give any counter measurement to back your 380 mm LOS behind main sight claim.

going by your standards, saying the protection level is 700-800mm is just as, if not more baseless.

 

[ersakthivel]

going by your standards, saying the protection level is 700-800mm is just as, if not more baseless.

I have no interest in dragging it any further,

you keep quiet for 10 pages when I rip apart your wrong conclusion of 380 mm based on a wrong 3D model ,
and

now you are suddenly discovering some added armor block to nudge it 480 mm LOS.

As your 350 mm, 380 mm were proved as wrong in the past, your 470 mm LOS is also baseless and will be proved wrong once you post your evidence supporting it, I am sure.

So go ahead and post the evidence for 470 mm LOS with added protection from added armor block,

I will make sure that in future you will nudge it a little further to the real LOS value after 10 or 20 pages!!!!!!!!!

On this video:
Inside Out - Arjun Main Battle Tank - Discovery Channel's Documentary On DRDO on Vimeo

from 6:00 is clearly visble when is gunner siting:

Arjun gunner is siting direct as I marked (by red dottd lines) on photo above.

In fornt of Arjun gunner face is vision block, then is circa 300-350mm thick armour and after that is placed space for main sight mehanism (not window block -it's only 40% of sight hight!) and front armour cavity.
This is what not perotected is tank commander front - cause there is no thick armour after main sight "window" -only circa 300-350mm armour. This place is obvious very weak point, while in Leo-2A4 place before Tc face is protected by 2x more thick armour - 650mm special armour cavity.



Becouse in Arjun there is no roof vision block in the middle of the armor block, but there is vision block behind the armor block behind main sight. And it's huge serious weak gap.

If it's true, I suppose that You understand what this mean,,,

Militarysta,

You have been explaining to me hundreds and hundreds of times that there is no extra armor block behind main sight in Arjun turret and promised me hundreds and hundred of times that the LOS behind the main sight for Arjun is below 350 mm,

Now, Surprisingly ,Your frien Dejawolf whose job you so admire has found some "NEW ADDED ARMOR BLOCK to take the LOS behind main sight value to 480 mm"

Any interesting thoughts?

Incidentally the above quote of your in which you discovered that the LOS behind the main sight to be cicra 350 mm was liked by Dejawolf,

But now he is talking about extra armor block and 470 mm LOS behind main sight,

Sigh,,,,,,,,,,

Now you have to educate him hundreds and hundreds of time from the start to make him learn that LOS behind main sight is Cicra-350 mm, hard tutoring session ahead for Dejawolf and all the DFItes perhaps,

Interesting... and in the same time terryfing to ride inside a vehicle with such ammunition.

DAMIAN Sir,

What do you think about it,

 

[militarysta]

LOS comes somewhere between 700 to 800 mm behind the main sight assuming same metallurgy across the turret front.

If we factor in his statement that metallurgy is beefed up to improve LOS behind main sight ,

And if this metallurgy adds another ten or twenty percent then the practical LOS comes to around 1000 mm behind the main sight almost the same average across the front turret LOS ,

So what is there to worry about?

Im affraid You are unable to do two simple things:

1) understand that Arjun Mk.I LOS after main sight is circa 300-350mm max.
2) read really simple text whit understanding what is written there. Kunal wrote very significant think:

He said Yes, there is no composite Armour behind FCS but metallurgy of plates are thicker composition and harder..

Now ask yourself why there is no composite Armour behind FCS. Answer is simple - LOS after main sight is so small (thin) that there was no point to put there multilayer armour - becouse LOS is small nececcery was to put there something what shoud achive as big as it's possible protection in relation to thickness and mass. So SHS or HHS or RHA plates. And it's really logical - LOS after main sight is smaller (in Arjun Mk.I) then gun mantled mask LOS, etc.

So in other way - Kunal had wrote very importand thnk about lack of the composite Armour behind FCS in Arjun Mk.1 - this fact give us conclusion that LOS there just must be really small (in othar way mass of pure SHS, HHS, or RHA protection will be to big).

 

[militarysta]

Militarysta,

You have been explaining to me hundreds and hundreds of times that there is no extra armor block behind main sight in Arjun turret and promised me hundreds and hundred of times that the LOS behind the main sight for Arjun is below 350 mm,

Now, Surprisingly ,Your frien Dejawolf whose job you so admire has found some "NEW ADDED ARMOR BLOCK to take the LOS behind main sight value to 480 mm"

Any interesting thoughts?

Yes, you definetly shoud read cearfully what other users are writing here.

Dejawolf had wrote:

LOS thickness is somewhere around 350mm, and with a solid block of hardened steel, protection ends up at around 437mm.

For you I coloured two part of Dejawolf post. First is about LOS thickness second is about protection. You just dont understand this.

What more - Dejawolf have right. If LOS have circa 350mm then when we put in this "box" (circa 350mm thick) not simple steel (or RHA) but HHS or THS or SHS steel then protection will be bigger then psyhical thickenss between 1.3 to 1.8 as I remember. This solution will be consist whit this what Kunal wrote:

metallurgy of plates are thicker composition and harder..

Simple again - small LOS, so Arjun developers put there HHS or THS or SHS steel what multiple protection there.
So conclusion Dejawolf about circa ~437mm protection is correct and consist whit known fact about HHS or THS steel.

 

[ersakthivel]

Im affraid You are unable to do two simple things:

1) understand that Arjun Mk.I LOS after main sight is circa 300-350mm max.
2) read really simple text whit understanding what is written there. Kunal wrote very significant think:

Now ask yourself why there is no composite Armour behind FCS. Answer is simple - LOS after main sight is so small (thin) that there was no point to put there multilayer armour - becouse LOS is small nececcery was to put there something what shoud achive as big as it's possible protection in relation to thickness and mass. So SHS or HHS or RHA plates. And it's really logical - LOS after main sight is smaller (in Arjun Mk.I) then gun mantled mask LOS, etc.

So in other way - Kunal had wrote very importand thnk about lack of the composite Armour behind FCS in Arjun Mk.1 - this fact give us conclusion that LOS there just must be really small (in othar way mass of pure SHS, HHS, or RHA protection will be to big).

Ohhhhhhh, Reallyyyyyyyyyy,

So instead of the composite block they have put an additional armor block which gived an LOS of 700 to 800 mm and with Kunal's post alluding extra strength metallurgy it's real LOS in normal condition must be close to 900 mm.

if people cannot put composite armor in 350 mm thick place,

pray, how do they put composite armor on the sides of turret which are lower than the 350 mm thickness?

The question I asked you was ,
you were maintaining all along that LOS behind main sight was 350 mm below,

And you were certifying Dejawolf's each and every faulty 3D model through which he was trying to prove your 350 mm theory,

Now suddenly he discovers an extra added armor block and raises it to 470 mm,

That is what I am asking you, Not your advice regarding which thickness is the minimum for putting composite armors,

if I want to know the answer for that I will know where to go,

By the way don't use words like MK_1 etc, only version of Arjun in service is MK_1 and it is in this MK_1 your 3D model maker is discovering a new armored block(which was plain for every one to see from the first place !!!!1) after 300 pages,

Whether there is composite armor there are not LOS is between 700 to 800 mm was already proven here beyond doubt and with Kunal's post alluding extra strength metallurgy it's real LOS in normal condition must be close to 900 mm.

So all your claims of weakness behind main sight is laid to rest once for all.

 

[ersakthivel]

Yes, you definetly shoud read cearfully what other users are writing here.

Dejawolf had wrote:

For you I coloured two part of Dejawolf post. First is about LOS thickness second is about protection. You just dont understand this.

What more - Dejawolf have right. If LOS have circa 350mm then when we put in this "box" (circa 350mm thick) not simple steel (or RHA) but HHS or THS or SHS steel then protection will be bigger then psyhical thickenss between 1.3 to 1.8 as I remember. This solution will be consist whit this what Kunal wrote:

Simple again - small LOS, so Arjun developers put there HHS or THS or SHS steel what multiple protection there.
So conclusion Dejawolf about circa ~437mm protection is correct and consist whit known fact about HHS or THS steel.

Very very simple,
because to compensate for the cutaway in turret front,

arjun designers added an extra armor block as well and used better metallurgy steel as well,

 

[militarysta]

And you were certifying Dejawolf's each and every faulty 3D model through which he was trying to prove your 350 mm theory,

Now suddenly he discovers an extra added armor block and raises it to 470 mm,

Show me Dejawolf post when he claim that LOS is 470mm Just show me this post. You just dont understand what he had wrote about protection.
Simple fact HHS or THS steel is not 1 but 1.3 or 1.8
10mm RHA plate is still 10mm RHA plate
10mm HHS plate act like 18mm RHA plate
understand? Yes? sure?
So next:
If Arjun have small LOS there (circa 350mm) then Arjun developers to achive strong enought protection (or any protection) put there not composite armour (in Burlinghton style or Kanhan) but few HHS or THS or SHS plates what give not 350mm RHA protection (when we put in 350mm LOS 350mm thick RHA we will have sucht protection) but bigger protection - few HHS SHS or THS plates will give not equal to LOS but bigger protection.

You just dont understand dejawolf post

 

[militarysta]

Very very simple,
because to compensate for the cutaway in turret front,

arjun designers added an extra armor block as well and used better metallurgy steel as well,

It's not the "extra" but the only one armour block after FCS (main sight) in Arjun Mk.I.

 

[ersakthivel]

Show me Dejawolf post when he claim that LOS is 470mm Just show me this post. You just dont understand what he had wrote about protection.
Simple fact HHS or THS steel is not 1 but 1.3 or 1.8
10mm RHA plate is still 10mm RHA plate
10mm HHS plate act like 18mm RHA plate
understand? Yes? sure?
So next:
If Arjun have small LOS there (circa 350mm) then Arjun developers to achive strong enought protection (or any protection) put there not composite armour (in Burlinghton style or Kanhan) but few HHS or THS or SHS plates what give not 350mm RHA protection (when we put in 350mm LOS 350mm thick RHA we will have sucht protection) but bigger protection - few HHS SHS or THS plates will give not equal to LOS but bigger protection.

You just dont understand dejawolf post

I need not understand any dejawolf work,

In fact I corrected his faulty works to reflect the true picture like above,

for which he has no answers, So I assume he accepted it.

It's not the "extra" but the only one armour block after FCS (main sight) in Arjun Mk.I.

So the distance between the yellow and green line is 800 mm.

And that is the thickness of the only one armour block after FCS (main sight) in Arjun Mk.I