Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT)

[ersakthivel]

About this:

Then what is this?

Well the entry hole for the TC is 0.69771 units of bar holder length(512 mm , so 500 mm approx as we can get from BR line drawing) ,I suppose

In the photo above if we take the hatch width to be 550 m around,

We can get the the hatch height of 470 mm around.

So both the 0.638 unit you marked should measure about 465 mm minimum,

Thats why I always contested the LOS calculations of militarysta.

[/QUOTE]

 

[ersakthivel]

@ersakthivel, ok, I get it. It is coming as 1.007 units, so yes, you are right, the bar holder (front left) is approx. 1 unit, and the hatch is 0.697711 units.

Well the entry hole for the TC is 0.69771 units of bar holder length(512 mm , so 500 mm approx as we can get from BR line drawing) ,I suppose

But if you check it with the following measurement you will get a different result,

In the photo above if we take the hatch width to be 550 m around,

We can get the the hatch height of 470 mm around.

So both the 0.638 unit you marked should measure about 465 mm minimum,

Thats why I always contested the LOS calculations of militarysta.

I don't think the 0.6977 unit length you marked can measure round 350 mm in rel world,

Even if you set aside a few mms for the lip of the hatch cover whose height comes to around 470 mm, it should measure above 450 mm minimum.

Some perspective errors may be there but it can not account for about a third of reduction in length..

[/QUOTE]

 

[militarysta]

 

[pmaitra]

y = x(0.633444/0.697711)

I made a mistake. I will correct it.

Corrected: http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/...in-battle-tank-mbt-post785330.html#post785330

y = x(0.907889)

Let me tabulate this for different values (refer to link in quote):

x	y
450.00	408.55
500.00	453.94
550.00	499.34
600.00	544.73

(in millimetres)

 

[militarysta]

y = x(0.907889)

Let me tabulate this for different values (refer to link in quote):

x	y
450.00	408.55
500.00	453.94
550.00	499.34
600.00	544.73

(in millimetres)

Greate but crew hatch and LOS for armour after main sight are not very well marked. There is error since first draw I will try to mark on pgoto about what I think

 

[pmaitra]

Greate but crew hatch and LOS for armour after main sight are not very well marked. There is error since first draw I will try to mark on pgoto about what I think

Yes, that is why I said I am not very sure about the actual front to back width of the crew hatch hole. So I just placed different numbers and their corresponding values.

 

[Dejawolf]

Yes, that is why I said I am not very sure about the actual front to back width of the crew hatch hole. So I just placed different numbers and their corresponding values.

another image:

the height is measured inbetween the rubber seal, which corresponds to the length of the TC hatch opening,
width is total hatch width with rim. in this image, i get about 39-40cm for the TC hatch opening length.
total hatch length with rim is about 42-43cm.

 

[militarysta]

So including slopped we have for lenght relatio:

bar : x : y

1 : 0.619 : 0.661

or in theory when we included slopped bar lenght:

0.992 : 0.619 : 0.661

 

[militarysta]

And here is funny
If bal holder is 520mm long (draw) then our "x" (crew hole witdth) is 320mm (small) and our "y" is 340mm.

 

[methos]

The vision block ring is covering a part of the hatch hole. The exact plane of the arrow has to be chosen, the current arrow at the hatch hole seems to be misplaced.

 

[pmaitra]

another image:

the height is measured inbetween the rubber seal, which corresponds to the length of the TC hatch opening,
width is total hatch width with rim. in this image, i get about 39-40cm for the TC hatch opening length.
total hatch length with rim is about 42-43cm.

That is what I have been looking for. So, if I take the hatch-lid height as 400mm, I would get approx 363mm for the behind-sight armour.

 

[Dejawolf]

That is what I have been looking for. So, if I take the hatch-lid height as 400mm, I would get approx 363mm for the behind-sight armour.

correct, if the hatch is 55cm as kunal says.

 

[Saber]

any info on AMK 339, AMK 340 A, AMK 340 mk II

 

[Dejawolf]

any info on AMK 339, AMK 340 A, AMK 340 mk II

have you looked through this thread?
http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/indian-army/37860-tank-ammunitions-indian-army.html

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Information about MK1 as well as MK2 ..

Source CLAWS ..

 

[angeldude13]

Information about MK1 as well as MK2 ..

Source CLAWS ..

it's very old.i've read this before.
it was posted by xinix in some other forum.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Indeed, But source was IDRW, This is CLAWS ..

That is the reason i posted this here ..

it's very old.i've read this before.it was posted by xinix in some other forum.

 

[Dejawolf]

there's nothing surprising with the israelis bragging about the arjuns mobility. the mk.1 is a relatively lightweight tank with a very powerful engine and good suspension, and compares very favourably against the israeli merkava in this regard.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Arjun MK1 FCS Origin >>

=================
=================

Arjun`s FCS is customized as per need with help of Eblit and DRDO & Manufactured by BEL..

 

[Damian]

So Arjun Mk1 FCS is based on French SAVAN-15?