Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT)

[methos]

http://www.ipcs.org/pdf_file/issue/1796701917IPCS-Special-Report-23.pdf

According to this overall comparision with all other tanks in the world the arjun weight is given as
ABRAMAS------------------69.5 TONS
LEOPARD-----------------60.79
LECLARC- ----------------54.5 TONS
t-90s BHIMSMA---------46.8
arjun-------------------------58.5

The author didn't convert short tons to metric tons.

 

[Damian]

In kg's:

M1A1SA, M1A1FEP, M1A2SEP - ~63,100kg's.
Leopard 2A5/A6 - ~60-62,500kg's.
Challenger 2 - ~62,500kg's.
Leclerc S1/S2 - ~56,500kg's, Leclerc S3/SXXI probably up to ~60,000kg's.

Weights are not 100% accurate, because even such informations are not completely avaiable for public knowledge.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

 

[Kunal Biswas]

 

[agentperry]

with what i feel is that Indian army relies heavily on railways for transporting its tank fleet. as the battle frontiers are rajasthan sector, punjab sector and himalayas, the army can afford to have a big and bulky tank in punjab sector alone or near punjab rajasthan border areas. it cant place big tank on train and move it to himalayas, so arjun's qualitative edge is of no need. moreover its solution lies in permanently placing arjun on peaks. here two problems need to be highlighte- one is technical and other is strategic.
the technical one is that its a tank made for desert conditions how can one use it effectively in himalayas? the basis of design lies in having a tank to counter PA and PLA.
here russian tank which is more versatile is the only answer.

strategic implications is that having a tank battalion near LAC will make chinese suspicious of IA designs and may think that India is preparing for war or sudden attack on china. this might lead to many unthinkable and thinkable consequences namely arming of LAC on either side, more activities by china and pakistan both to create headache for India etc.

so arjun tank stand little or no chance in himalayan warfare specially in case of indian army who relies on railways for its asset movement, been it american army they could have used heavy domestic tanks because they have gigantic transport fleet og aircraft.

in rajasthan sector tank can fully function but problem is again of weight which indian army finds a big problem( from transportation point of view).

may drdo develop a new tank which is made up of lighter composites

 

[Hari Sud]

Guys, any news on Arjun II trials this year. These must be already complete. What is army doing with its findings - looking for more defects to hammer DRDO.

It is pity that IA hates the local stuff and be perpetually under the thumbs of Russia or US for spare parts and ammunition.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

No news, probably will come out when finish with MOD speech..

 

[Patriot]

the technical one is that its a tank made for desert conditions how can one use it effectively in himalayas? the basis of design lies in having a tank to counter PA and PLA.
here russian tank which is more versatile is the only answer.

strategic implications is that having a tank battalion near LAC will make chinese suspicious of IA designs and may think that India is preparing for war or sudden attack on china. this might lead to many unthinkable and thinkable consequences namely arming of LAC on either side, more activities by china and pakistan both to create headache for India etc.

so arjun tank stand little or no chance in himalayan warfare specially in case of indian army who relies on railways for its asset movement, been it american army they could have used heavy domestic tanks because they have gigantic transport fleet og aircraft.

in rajasthan sector tank can fully function but problem is again of weight which indian army finds a big problem( from transportation point of view).

may drdo develop a new tank which is made up of lighter composites

Arjun is not meant just for desert conditions only, as it has been designed with respect to our requirement across the country . It will also be effective in Laddakh region as well as in northeast sector. Once we get the C-17, we can deploy it there in no time & same time the road & rail infra is also being strengthened.

Arjun is a tough beast can stand more hits compare to Russian tanks. At present Arjun is at the mercy of moneymaking lobby at MOD & IA.

strategic implications is that having a tank battalion near LAC will make chinese suspicious of IA designs and may think that India is preparing for war or sudden attack on china. this might lead to many unthinkable and thinkable consequences namely arming of LAC on either side, more activities by china and pakistan both to create headache for India etc.

ChiPak are already a headache for us, we should be taking our preemptive measures to prevent any adventure form other side rather being reactive.

One can not defend if one is scared & unprepared.

 

[Damian]

Arjun is a tough beast can stand more hits compare to Russian tanks.

Oh really, and when IA performed comparision trails with ballistic tests as well as tests with ammunition deflagration + tests with safe manouvering angles in mind?

Never, or no such thing known to the public... so Your statement is nothing more than pure speculation

 

[Patriot]

Oh really, and when IA performed comparision trails with ballistic tests as well as tests with ammunition deflagration + tests with safe manouvering angles in mind?

Never, or no such thing known to the public... so Your statement is nothing more than pure speculation and wet dream good for fanboys and laymans.

Not IA has done but DRDO has done with some munitions and it's specifications are enough to suggest it's toughness.

 

[Damian]

Not IA has done but DRDO has done with some munitions and it's specifications are enough to suggest it's toughness.

Oh really? So please enlighten me at what distance what type of armor with what structure was tested against what types of ammunition (please give me designation codes of these ammunition) with what characteristics.

 

[agentperry]

oh really? So please enlighten me at what distance what type of armor with what structure was tested against what types of ammunition (please give me designation codes of these ammunition) with what characteristics.

google it...

 

[ersakthivel]

Oh really? So please enlighten me at what distance what type of armor with what structure was tested against what types of ammunition (please give me designation codes of these ammunition) with what characteristics.

kunal biswas already enlightened eveyone regarding the effectiveness of kanchan armour , so don't keep on harping that arjun doesnot have better armour and it's weight is due to poorly design. Ifyou have any source for your argument please post.

You have already admitted that you don't know anything in particular about kanchan armour,so how come you doubt it again and again.

 

[Damian]

Well You are not good partners for discussion because You do not understand either the question, nor how armor tests are performed and how they can be interpreted.

So I will explain:

Ammunition types used - Kunal agreed with me in some of previous discussions that armor was tested only against ammunition avaiable for India, this means ammunition with penetration values of the 1980's technology level.

Kanchan internal design is not known, we do not know if this is passive type of composite armor or reactive type of composite armor.

Range of firing trails are not known.

Angle of hit is not known.

Angle of armor module provided for the tests is not known.


This means that neither claims that Kanchan is superior to any other type of armor are credible, and claims that Kanchan can provide protection against modern ammunition are simply lies.

You are not understanding these problems..

do not understand that weight of the vehicle do not mainly depends on pure armor weight, because modern armors are relatively light compared to their thickness (volume) and to the homogeneus armor of the same thickness, neither You understand that weight also depends on vehicle size, this also means the internal volume that need to be covered by armor.

Untill advanced lightweight and extremely hard (yet flexible not brittle) carbon based nanomaterials (fullerene's and ADNR's) will not be used as armor materials, it won't be possible to design a tank as big as Arjun, with the weight similiar to tanks like T-90S.

Simply because if more internal volume needs to be covered by armor, it means a more weight due to currently used materials.

Also the problem is that currently only front of the hull and turret, and in some tanks also turret sides are protected by composite armor. While with advanced nanomaterials it will be possible to add such protection also to other surfaces of the vehicle without significant increase in weight and also perhaps size.

There are of course many more issues that needs to be solved, for example reduction of size and weight of the vehicle internal components.

For example powerpack, Diesel engine in a tank like Arjun, weights approx 3 tons, while in Russia, Ukraine and countries like Germany and USA, they were attempts and some were successfull to induct compact, lightweight yet providing at least 1,500HP engines.

Even currently Americans are working within the ECP1 phase for the M1 series upgrade to redesign or design a completely new internal architecture, so all internal components will be redesigned or designed as a new in a more compact and lightweight form, so weight of these components can be reduced, and armor protection of vehicle improved without significant increase in weight, and if possible even decrease in weight.

 

[p2prada]

Kanchan may have both armour types. This is speculation at best but I have heard about two Kanchan models, one passive and the other reactive.

The thing is we don't even know the actual program name of the armour. It is just like Chobam/Burlington. Here, it is Kanchan/?. It is only called Modular Composite Armour.

There are zero books on Arjun. So, that's another big problem when it comes to information. Maybe once the program ends we may see more information.

 

[Damian]

Good point. Something could had been revealed if we could know the origins of Kanchan, if it was inspired by foreing design, perhaps some cooperation with other country (UK for example? or USSR/Russian Federation?), there are so many unknowns, neither known facts about ammunition avaiable for India are supporting advertisement that is done to this armor by some people.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Back in 2000 :

3BM-15 is in service in Indian army back in 2000 and still used in training..

-------------------
-------------------

CL 3254 and as the MK-1..

neither known facts about ammunition avaiable for India are supporting advertisement that is done to this armor by some people.

Ammunition types used - Kunal agreed with me in some of previous discussions that armor was tested only against ammunition avaiable for India, this means ammunition with penetration values of the 1980's technology level.

Range of firing trails are not known.

What could be the point blank range for 125mm gun ? for a 155mm i know its 1.5km for a small arm its few inches..

So, can it be from 200-500ms ? probably..

This means that neither claims that Kanchan is superior to any other type of armor are credible, and claims that Kanchan can provide protection against modern ammunition are simply lies.

Most Armour in the world are not tested against latest developing ammo, T-90S was tested against BM-42 ? or latest Russian Ammo its not publish so one can assume again that its not also full prove against latest US and German ammo..

This goes against most - most other tanks, we only assume, regarding Arjun at least officially we have idea on range, About the and ammo used took little time and the layout of Kanchan gives us a hint it is a frontal test..

From range i can also say, the penetration is not just 500mm of RHA coz the shot is taken from much closer range from which i can conclude that the penetration level is higher than just 500mm of RHA..

The HEAT round of 106mm RCL is 620 mm of RHA, these test were conducted more than a decade ago..

----------------
----------------

 

[Damian]

What could be the point blank range for 125mm gun ? for a 155mm i know its 1.5km for a small arm its few inches..

So, can it be from 200-500ms ? probably..

Point blank range will be from 500m to 100m and below, but it can't be too close so the test gun won't be damaged.

However as You provided, the ammunition used was not modern, so the results are not very impressive, I seen similiar tests done in Russia on T-90A turret without ERA, I also seen some footage from German tests, and from American tests but without any descriptions so, nothing can be said about them.

Most Armour in the world are not tested against latest developing ammo, T-90S was tested against BM-42 ? or latest Russian Ammo its not publish so one can assume again that its not also full prove against latest US and German ammo..

Not everywhere, tests are performed with avaiable ammunition, so while Germans and Americans definetly tests their armor against their ammunition, which is currently the best out there, other countries sometimes needs to perform tests with obsolete ammunition. And this is normal, the problem starts when someone starts to claims about superiority of one armor type, that was not tested against most modern ammunition. It is even dagerous because it puts too much confidence in troops, they perhaps will take too much risks, and when something bad will happen, You know how public, general staff, politicians could react, in the end someone might say that this is a fault of designers, and something might end wrong.

This is because designers, the engineers designing this stuff mostly are not talking big things, this is what PR guys are doing, but PR guys and later fanboys might say too much, and as I said above, many bad things might happen.

This goes against most - most other tanks, we only assume, regarding Arjun at least officially we have idea on range, About the and ammo used took little time and the layout of Kanchan gives us a hint it is a frontal test..

Yes it gives us idea about protection against older or obsolete types of ammunition.

From range i can also say, the penetration is not just 500mm of RHA coz the shot is taken from much closer range from which i can conclude that the penetration level is higher than just 500mm of RHA..

Not exactly, I heard that APFSDS penetration levels are preaty steady, of course from the closer range penetration will be a bit bigger, but the question how much? Ahhh this is tricky thing to guess without a tests.

The HEAT round of 106mm RCL is 620 mm of RHA, these test were conducted more than a decade ago..

It is not something really special. The UK/US Burlington in the second half of 1970's and beggining of 1980's was estimated to provide protection against HEAT at the level of approx ~700mm to ~900mm RHAe.

As for protection against HESH, even very simple spaced armor provide protection against such ammunition, due to it's working mechanism it is very easy to defeat it.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

However as You provided, the ammunition used was not modern, so the results are not very impressive, I seen similiar tests done in Russia on T-90A turret without ERA, I also seen some footage from German tests, and from American tests but without any descriptions so, nothing can be said about them.

Not everywhere, tests are performed with available ammunition, so while Germans and Americans definitely tests their armor against their ammunition, which is currently the best out there..

Its was a test more than a decade ago cannot be related with today`s or recent rounds in western countries like US and Germany so does in Russia..

Regarding Indian test i gave you Round designation used 12 years ago, But same from your comment there were no description or official mention of Round used over other tanks from other country and nothing can be said about them..

Its an assumption that they might used each other rounds for there Armour test, In that sense India also can use latest Russian and IMI rounds against Kanchan ?
But we know that we dont have proof to support our claims, So its is now an assumption until there is an official or solid evidence we find..

Not exactly, I heard that APFSDS penetration levels are preaty steady, of course from the closer range penetration will be a bit bigger, but the question how much? Ahhh this is tricky thing to guess without a tests.

Few pages back Methos provided me some info, But as on ground i know how Bullets behave, from that knowledge i know that that penetration at closer range is more fatal than longer ranges, the drop of energy with range is fractional but that small amount of that energy make big difference, for example a 5.56mm SS109 FMJ round can pass through a solid steel plate of 1cm thick plate from 10ms but cannot does the same at 200m range, the drop of energy is not very much though but that small energy is decisive at closer range..

Yes it gives us idea about protection against older or obsolete types of ammunition.It is not something really special. The UK/US Burlington in the second half of 1970's and beggining of 1980's was estimated to provide protection against HEAT at the level of approx ~700mm to ~900mm RHAe.As for protection against HESH, even very simple spaced armor provide protection against such ammunition, due to it's working mechanism it is very easy to defeat it.

During that era this was a good achievement, It evolve with time and latest threads since then, We can assume India purchased latest from others but there is no proof to claim so, till then these are assumptions and cannot be taken as fact..

Kanchan is good enough for regional threads Afaik..

 

[militarysta]

Few pages back Methos provided me some info, But as on ground i know how Bullets behave, from that knowledge i know that that penetration at closer range is more fatal than longer ranges,.

As I remember You asked how mucht bigger will be penetration at almoust 0m distance in modern APFSDS rounds.
Those data are taken from official polsih 10TkBde (Leopad-2A4) data about amunition in Poland, Germany & USA, and enemy (ex Soviet). It's using during trening material so I suppose it was prepared using OPSPEC sources and others.
Data:
3BM42 -P0:580 P2500:460
DM33 -P0:600 P2500:490
M829A1 -P0:700 P2500:560

3BM42M -P0:630 P2500:510
DM53(L44) -P0:670 P2500:560
M829A2 -P0:770 P2500:660
PRONIT -P0:560 P2500:460

P0 - penetration at 0m
P2500 - penetration at 2500m
Important -those data are using RHA. It's not the same as capability to overcome modern multi layers armour. Example - older monolit rods in APFSDS are better in RHA perforation thema (M829A1/A2,DM33, DM43) but whorse in overcome modern ERA, multilayer armour, etc. And more modern rounds (DM53) have ower possibilities to overcome RHA target, but have very good capabilities to overcome multilayer target protcted by ERA.
So for example - M829A2 have at 2500m 660mm perforation and DM53 for L-44 have "only" 560mm RHA perforation. But in real word against real tank with ERA and multilayer armour DM53 will be have bigger perforation then M829A2. So please remeber that RHA "scale" can't be taken as factor "how good is modern APFSDS" becouse todays modern APFSDS have lower RHA perforation values then in and of 1990s.

And Indian CL round is close to polish Pronit:
PRONIT -P0:560 P2500:460
So, yes for very close range Ajrun (and T-90S as I understand) windstand about 550-560mm RHA APFSDS perfoation. It NATO circa about 1984-1986 level.