LWCS is similar to Soft kill ( or passive countermeasure) measures of an APS. If you read again, LWCS includes laser warning system, Infra Red jammers and aerosol grenade smokes, and will help reduce the signatures of the tank in the battle field and help it improve its survivability. All above mentioned components do form a part of APS if not all. Take the example of Shtora APS - it also has laser warning system, infrared jammer and aerosol grenade smokes. So, LWCS is kind of passive APS if not active APS.LWCS is not an APS lol. and moreover does your LWCS come for free ?? as my argument is about cost.
The SAAB page says the LEDS-150 can stop RPG-7 type RPGs which are obsolete weapons now. What abt RPG-29???http://www.saabgroup.com/en/Products...oductId=1448
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Fi...tection_System
Btw india has bought the first one ie LEDS 150
It will weigh about 55 tons and its speed will increase from 30-50 kph to 50-65 kph (19-31 mph to 31-40 mph).
T-90 can be fitted with the Kanchan Armour and the kaktus (not sure) ERA. NIL, bulls eyes. Russian economy prevents them from buying the T-90 as few weeks back we saw 100s of working T-80 abandoned in the russian forests.http://www.russianarmor.info/Tanks/TRIALS/19991020.html
see the results for yourself and decide which is better protected T-80 or T-90.. and that was back in 1999 .. our T-90 contain the kanchan and also next generation ERA .. they are certainly better.... and i agree they lack the apu..that is one thing that should be rectified.
russia's dint buy t-90 cos their economy dint allow them to
The question I would ask is that how good is the Kanchan ERA suite is as compared to the Kontakt-5 ERA used by the Russians on their T-80s and T-90s ? Over that Russia will use the newer Kaktus ERA for its T-95 MBT (not confirmed) as well as uses it on the T-90M also. Ukraine also uses the Kontakt-5 on its T-80s. India will get the latest T-90M with Kaktus ERA. Also the comparative protection trails of T-80 and T-90 were done with both tanks fitted the Kontakt-5 ERA with showed that the T-90 had a good survivability against both ATGMs and APFSDS munitions. Only the RPG-29 could penetrate the ERA armour, 3 out of 5 times. But then , the kind of weapon the RPG-29 is, no modern MBT in the world can withstand multiple hits with this weapon !! As long as the Kanchan equipped T-90 or Arjun undergo a similar type of comparative protection trails, it can't be determined how good it is and which tank is more suitable for this ERA suite.T-90 can be fitted with the Kanchan Armour and the kaktus (not sure) ERA.
The IA can never ask for the T-95 after the comments it made on the Arjun.I am waiting for IA's response on the T-95 that to be unveiled.
http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20100326/158314386.html
And my questions will be
If arjun cant be deployed on the punjab plains, how come this candy moves there.
Bridges are problem for arjun, then this piece will fly if there is no bridge
Transportation, If arjun cant be, then how come this beast.
Watch this space for more...
Also
It does have slopped armour you just have to look at it from a proper angle.i don't understand one thing about arjun is that why does it have a straight armour instead of a sloped one?
the sloped armour design provides better protection by DEFLECTING incomming projectlies rather than absorb the impact almost all the best tanks in the world has sloped armour like markeva IV, abrams
IA said it interested in the T-95 when the prototype rolled out for the tests. Will get the source soon later.The IA can never ask for the T-95 after the comments it made on the Arjun.
It is unjustifiable for it to demand another heavy tank after the years of unnecessary comments it made, If it wants to induct the T-95 it needs to induct the Arjun in Numbers and then say weight is not an issue
okay i see it now thanx manIt does have slopped armour you just have to look at it from a proper angle.
The slope is more horizontal than Vertical.
If it is true, then it shows IA's duplicity towards Arjun. How can IA will justify a 55 Ton ( the tank required to be heavy as the gun will be either135 mm or 152 mm as per wiki) T95 will fit in IA's war doctrine but 58 Ton Arjun will not. But who knows IA may keep maximum weight for their FMBT at 55 Ton.IA said it interested in the T-95 when the prototype rolled out for the tests. Will get the source soon later.
Its about 50 percent of a soft kill APS .... not even a complete soft kill APS , whereas we are talking about APS with both soft and hard kil capacities ... LWCS is not even in the league :|lLWCS is similar to Soft kill ( or passive countermeasure) measures of an APS. If you read again, LWCS includes laser warning system, Infra Red jammers and aerosol grenade smokes, and will help reduce the signatures of the tank in the battle field and help it improve its survivability. All above mentioned components do form a part of APS if not all. Take the example of Shtora APS - it also has laser warning system, infrared jammer and aerosol grenade smokes. So, LWCS is kind of passive APS if not active APS.
fit whatever you please .. but just don't quote the price of T-90 as 18 crore then.LWCS doesn't come for free, so does LEDS-150 APS on T-90. If we can buy LEDS-150 for T-90 why can't we do the same for Arjun??.
It destroys the weapon 5m away from the tank .. so be it the RPG-7 or the RPG-29 .. it wouldn't cause any difference .. just a louder bang that's all.The SAAB page says the LEDS-150 can stop RPG-7 type RPGs which are obsolete weapons now. What abt RPG-29???
i am not going to dispute that. you may be right but this still applies for a tank firing on another tank direct LOS. but LAHAT can have an LOS designated by another tank at a different place closer to the enemy tank or even by air by a heli or a UAV. that the range is 8km is proven and accepted is a fact.I correct myself the range would be around 5 km and not 6 as previously stated . i took the height of arjun as 3.32 instead of 2.32 now considering the formula for distance that can be seen is sqrt(13h) putting the height as 2.32 gives the range as 5.49 km .. now you can safely assume that the targeting system and range finder would be placed atleast slightly below that top height of 2.32 km and you can get the range as just about 5 km
ok.This i agree to .. but one thing that bugs me is ...
even direct hits will have a problem against the kanchan armour. i doubt the shrapnels will prove so deadly considering they have to pierce thro' a complete layer of the armour!!in case of being penetrated , and then the shrapnel or whatever reaching past the cabin and into the ammo dump .. what are the chances of survival of the crew anyways ??? is this just a western propaganda to imply that their tanks are better ??
what mudslinging?? we are just debating.This is an honest question and please don't drag me into the mud over this ....
quoting your lines from Ajai's blog -can you backup your claim? that the cost of T-90 includes the cost of support vehicles?
From Mr. Shukla's revered blog
so if you are considering the price as 18 crore then it contains the support vehicles .. if you are taking it as 11 crore then that's fine. mind you he also calculates the price of invar missiles in those 18 crores .
read on the same. unit cost of T-90 is 17.5 crore and not with support vehicles you are saying.The MoD opted to buy reduced numbers of the INVAR missile, which the T-90 fires. Maintenance vehicles, which are vital to keep the T-90s running, were not included in the contract. All this allowed the government to declare before Parliament that the Russian T-90s cost just Rs 11 crore,
i have read Fofanov's page long back. though from it, T-90 seems to be better than T-80 but still not great against RPG 29. Pakistan will have already corrected for that and the fact that both their T-80's and AL-KHALIDS have 1200/1250 hp engines and APU's will make them better than our T-90.i would not want to wait that long
here are some links
http://fofanov.armor.kiev.ua/Tanks/EQP/era.html
here is a very interesting discussion between me and kuku ..
http://www.defenceforum.in/forum/showthread.php?7-Arjun-News-and-Discussions/page49
the manufacturer claims 8 km max range including attack platform as helo...and the longest it has ever hit is 7 km .. that too when launched from a cobra helo.... i dont know why i should believe anything else.i am not going to dispute that. you may be right but this still applies for a tank firing on another tank direct LOS. but LAHAT can have an LOS designated by another tank at a different place closer to the enemy tank or even by air by a heli or a UAV. that the range is 8km is proven and accepted is a fact.
the design flaw is there.....but is it really a design flaw? if the shrapnel is going through the crew cabin and then reaching the ammo dump .. i doubt it will spare the crew members in any case .even direct hits will have a problem against the kanchan armour. i doubt the shrapnels will prove so deadly considering they have to pierce thro' a complete layer of the armour!!
however i am not saying that Arjun gives 100% protection against all threats. no tank gives that. the point i am making is by design T-90 is inferior. Arjun/Merkava/Abrahms are by design superior. ammo dump being separate is an important factor.
Can somebody anybody .. anywhere in the world .. gimme a shred of evidence that the cost has ballooned to 17.5 crore without taking the APS, and support vehicles into account?..as per my comprehension Mr. shukla is calculating the cost by taking into account the cost of APS , support vehicles , even the missiles and then stating it as 17.5 crores.quoting your lines from Ajai's blog -
read on the same. unit cost of T-90 is 17.5 crore and not with support vehicles you are saying.
at best, Arjuns with APS may cost as much but the economics of scale will kick in for Arjuns when bigger orders come and this will bring down the cost further.
That was back in 1999 .. the russians have jumped 2 whole generations in ERA since then namely the kaktus and relikt..and nobody makes better ERA than the russians..moreover the armour beneath the era is also vastly superior in the T-90 when compared to T-80.. so i sincerely believe that the T-90 beats T-80 in terms of protection hands down.our thermals are better than theirs...guns are similar .. an APU alone will not guarantee their superiority.i have read Fofanov's page long back. though from it, T-90 seems to be better than T-80 but still not great against RPG 29. Pakistan will have already corrected for that and the fact that both their T-80's and AL-KHALIDS have 1200/1250 hp engines and APU's will make them better than our T-90.
Slop armour... lol. You do know what the slope is for? Projectiles that contact have to travel greater distance for penetration while using less material keeping weight down. It certainly isn't revolutionary, it has been used since the first Ironclad barges. But it is effective.Japanies Type 90 MBT
for those who argue for slop armour.
Leopard 2A6 does indeed have sloped armour.Sloped armour is the tech of WWII. I hope this unconventional design will set a new bar. I hope Leopard is also not sloped armour.
Leopard 2A6 does indeed have sloped armour.
[/QUOT
The turret is highly sloped only on front side.It is also same for Challnger2. What will happen if the hit is on left, right or rear side? The tank will blow up like a T series tank ?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Challenger_II.jpg