No. See back in this thread, I'd looked into that... But Arjun Mark1/A's biggest problem is its already increasingly massive turret.
Where were you trying to go with this again?? Arjun's turret is bigger and wider compared to most contemporary tanks sans Merkava MkIV and the turret of the Abrams is actually more compact compared to the monstrosity that is the Arjun turret?? I mean seriously, if this is the caliber of our so-called IITians, then God help us (and this statement is coming from an ardent anti-theist)!!
To stack 2 more layers of ammo in the bustle, roof will have to be raised by 1.5 ft & it will cross 70t.
First of all, I said, copy the design, that doesn't mean we can not or should not scale it up or down as per our specific needs!!
Second of all, Arjun MkII weighs about 60 mts without the add on heavy ERA tiles and the mine plow, so unless you are under this rather erroneous impression that somehow the Abrams turret is 10 tons heavier than the one on Arjun, then I don't really see any merit in this statement of yours.
Thirdly, we can make the turret taller and still keep the weight almost the same by shaving off its width and length, thereby making it more compact and as a result, less surface to cover with armor and thus reduced weight. Oh and I don't think having a taller turret would be such a bad thing for India since we have to cater for the northern front against the Chicoms and a taller turret would be advantageous in that theater.
And finally, I don't think the increasing weight of AFVs is such big of a problem, at least not to the extent it's made out to be in India. I mean just look at the ongoing trend in AFV design all over the world!! Be it the west or the east, every nation's AFV designs are getting heavier and heavier in their each successive trenches, and this holds true for every nation bar none!! And frankly speaking, there is no way around it, and unless some sort of radical new breakthrough is achieved in material sciences, then this trend will continue in the foreseeable future and I don't see how we can circumvent this when nations that are far more superior couldn't achieve the same.
Type-90's mechanism would pave the path for it to become a 2-crew turret & possibly cut internal volume at crew compartment at bit gunner & loader sides (due to less need for movement).
Also in Arjun's turret autoloader would carry 24 rounds.
View attachment 59584
So what?? You can do all the above with the Abrams turret design as well. And when we take overall armor protection into account, the Abrams turret just blows the Type 90 out of the water.
You need to understand one basic thing - Nations design their tanks as per what they believe will serve their needs the best. And that's why the T-34 was the best tank for the challenges faced by the SU same way as the M4 medium was the best suited for US needs!!
Similarly, the Type 90 was made strictly to cater to the Japanese needs. They are an island nation and therefore, being able to transport their vehicles to and from different islands becomes a huge concern for them and it shows in the design of the tank. They do not anticipate nor intend on engaging in pitched land battles but rather their aim is to keep an invader from being able to establish a bridgehead, which makes it their top priority to be able to reinforce possible invasion sites with at the earliest. And therefore, the type 90 has great mobility and firepower but compromises on its armor protection to a certain extent.
We, on the other hand, face completely different challenges and types of adversaries and different terrain along the possible area of operations. So, in my humble opinion, it'd be foolish to blatantly copy the Type 90 design or any design for that matter.
Why I mentioned Abrams is because it's the best overall tank design anywhere in the world, it's great in defense as well as in offense, a truly universal tank by every standard.
I could use some "desi" mates there.
