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.
you beleive russians on their claims easily while you raise doubts about the israelis about their claims when i have already given a link which says it has been tested and approved in india.
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 .
and by the highlighted logic .. T-90 has 2 complete layers of armour .. and one of them is said to be the same kanchan armour ;)
kanchan armour!! means they have to come back to DRDO for protection!! good.
ERA is designed to act
outwardly to the incoming threats. hence most of the shrapnels post hit will fly away from the tank and to the sides. even if some do make it, they would have reduced KE to really make a difference.
the bigger danger ERA presents is to the tank support team. they have to keep a lot more distance away from the tanks.
A further complication to the use of ERA is the inherent danger to anybody near the tank when a plate detonates (disregarding that a HEAT warhead explosion would already present a great danger to anybody near the tank). Although ERA plates are intended only to bulge following detonation, the combined energy of the ERA explosive, coupled with the kinetic or explosive energy of the projectile, will frequently cause explosive fragmentation of the plate. The explosion of an ERA plate creates a significant amount of shrapnel, and bystanders are in grave danger of serious or fatal injury. As a result, infantry needs to operate some distance from vehicles protected by ERA in combined arms operations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactive_armour
the future belongs to NERA, which drdo has already developed and is working fine. the link for which i have already given many times.
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.
you claimed categorically that the T-90 tank cost includes the support vehicles cost and you quoted Ajai shukla in support of it. now you say it is your comprehension!!
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 ..
right. but what makes you think pakistan's T-80 still only sports kontakt?? they would also have moved on from there considering they operate in
"india specific" way??
even their protection becomes a case when they are hit!! our T-90's are way underpowered so we should be talking mobility and maneuorability before we talk of hitting T-80's.
an APU alone will not guarantee their superiority.
when did i say APU alone means superiority. what it does is allowing the tank to operate in silent mode which, besides saving fuel, reduces thermal signature - which is a
big factor, whether you beleive it or not.
