Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT)

[methos]

The Round OFB produce has 650mm penetration..

620 mm RHA penetration according to OFB's website. But I don't think that they used this, when they were still testing 3BM-9 APFSDS ammunition. Even if they used the OFB-manufactured recoilless rifle, it is the same as with 3BM-9: It would be a wonder if this old ammunition could penetrate any modern tank. 620 - 650 mm RHA penetration is nothing compared to other, much older, shaped charge ammunition. The HOT missile entered service in 1977 (!) and had an armour penetration of 800 mm RHA. 3BM-9 is weaker than currently existing 100 mm & 105 mm APFSDS!
People here see tests against outdated weapon systems which are far below the international standard as proof that the Arjun is as good protected as other modern tanks, but completely ignore that the same weapons wouldn't manage to destroy a mid-1980s T-72.

 

[The Last Stand]

And where is so mirracle here?

3BM9 achivable perforation - 290mm RHA P(0) circa 340mm
3BM42 achivable perforation - 520mm RHA P(0) circa 550mm
CL Mk2 achivable perforation - 540mm RHA (per analoge to PRONIT) P(0)570mm
106mm RCL - circa ~680-720mm RHA (HEAT)

This all is circa middle 1980s level (Leo-2A4 from circa 1986), of course Arjun Kanchan armour can be better but those test prooofs only that Kanchan in Arjun can hold half of the 1980s. level - if better ammo will be tested then we can sey that Kanchan can windstand more, but those ammo proofs only that what I'd wrote here -half of 1980s.

3BM9, CL3254 and 106 mm M40 were 80's tests. Kanchan survived more than 15 hits without slightest damage.

3BM42, Israeli MK-1 (500 mm) , MK-2 prototype (550 mm) and 106 mm M40 (again - modern ammunition with penetration of 650 - 750 mm) were tested against pre-production Arjun prototype in 1997. Armour was impenetrable again even after 20 direct hits. That isn't good for you?
@militarysta @Damian @methos, Please comment on the Arjun keeping in mind our potential adversaries - the Type 85-II, 90-II, and 96. All three are incapable of penetrating more than 600 mm. Type 99 may be capable of 700+ (Chinese propaganda states 950 - absurd unless Chinese have found new element). @militarysta - please remember that the armour was improved after the 1997 tests.

Also Kanchan has been in development for longer than German, French and Italian composites and has been tested to the same level. It is of lower quality than Dorchester but better than Burlington.

 

[The Last Stand]

620 mm RHA penetration according to OFB's website. But I don't think that they used this, when they were still testing 3BM-9 APFSDS ammunition. Even if they used the OFB-manufactured recoilless rifle, it is the same as with 3BM-9: It would be a wonder if this old ammunition could penetrate any modern tank. 620 - 650 mm RHA penetration is nothing compared to other, much older, shaped charge ammunition. The HOT missile entered service in 1977 (!) and had an armour penetration of 800 mm RHA. 3BM-9 is weaker than currently existing 100 mm & 105 mm APFSDS!
People here see tests against outdated weapon systems which are far below the international standard as proof that the Arjun is as good protected as other modern tanks, but completely ignore that the same weapons wouldn't manage to destroy a mid-1980s T-72.

We on DFI aren't trying to say that Arjun is comparable to the Western tanks. We are just trying to say that it is better than any tank our closest neighbours are fielding (China, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka)

 

[Kunal Biswas]

What Miracle news you are expecting from here anyways ??

And where is so mirracle here?

10 year old test is best what is available to public domain, Rest is a Official Secret..

And why not we proud about our system ? Any reason we should not be ..

People here see tests against outdated weapon systems which are far below the international standard as proof that the Arjun is as good protected as other modern tanks, but completely ignore that the same weapons wouldn't manage to destroy a mid-1980s T-72.

 

[methos]

3BM9, CL3254 and 106 mm M40 were 80's tests. Kanchan survived more than 15 hits without slightest damage.

That's not true. CL 3254 didn't even exist back then.

3BM42, Israeli MK-1 (500 mm) , MK-2 prototype (550 mm) and 106 mm M40 (again - modern ammunition with penetration of 650 - 750 mm) were tested against pre-production Arjun prototype in 1997. Armour was impenetrable again even after 20 direct hits. That isn't good for you?

You might not know this, but stating the number of hits is pretty much useless, because the damage made by modern ammunition is only limited to a very small area. But no, that is not good for me. That's what a mid-1980s tank would expect on battlefield (M829 from 1984 - 540 mm RHA penetration, 3BM-32 Vant from 1985 - 560 mm penetration, HOT from 1977 - 800 mm RHA penetration).

Please comment on the Arjun keeping in mind our potential adversaries - the Type 85-II, 90-II, and 96. All three are incapable of penetrating more than 600 mm.

And currently all three of them are capable of penetrating more armour than the current Indian 120 mm APFSDS.

Also Kanchan has been in development for longer than German, French and Italian composites and has been tested to the same level. It is of lower quality than Dorchester but better than Burlington.

Any source for your claims? I don't think so.

We on DFI aren't trying to say that Arjun is comparable to the Western tanks. We are just trying to say that it is better than any tank our closest neighbours are fielding (China, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka)

You might be saying that it is better than your neighbours' tanks, but many people here are using the same "test results" to claim it is as good as modern Western MBTs.
I also don't think that it is necessarily better than these tanks - the current Arjun has numerous flaws which have been mentioned dozen times here. Arjun Mk. 2 might fix some of them. But currently the Arjun doesn't have any greater post-penetration survivability than a T-72 (because the ammunition is not isolated from the crew compartment), the Arjun does not have any ammunition capable of defeating modern ERA (like the Kontakt-5 used on T-80UD or the Chinese ERA) and the Arjun does have huge weakspots (like the incredibly large mantlet and the gunner's sight placement.

 

[The Last Stand]

Any source for your claims? I don't think so.

Sigh. Every man on DFI knows that Kanchan has been in development from 1980. Also most of the rounds were fired by a stationary T-72 (3BM-42) from 100 metres.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Some where from those days only..

Read more: http://frontierindia.net/the-kanchan-armor#ixzz2RMANsc9H
Frontier India - news, Analysis, Opinion
Follow us: @frontierindia on Twitter | frontierindia on Facebook

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

Your research is poor regarding the matter..

That's not true. CL 3254 didn't even exist back then..

 

[methos]

@Kunal Biswas

You notice that I quoted his claims about the 1980s test. Cl 3254's development was finished in 1996.

Sigh. Every man on DFI knows that Kanchan has been in development from 1980.

Burlington has been in development since the 1960s. So what? The Arjun has been in development since 4 decades, still that doesn't mean that Arjun is better than other tanks with a shorter development span (like for example the M1 Abrams or the T-90MS). You claim that it is definetly better than Burlington, but all threats mentioned can also be defeated by a Burlington armoured tank (in the end you even claim yourself that the Challenger 1 and the Arjun should have a similar level of protection).
You also claim random stuff about French, German and Italian composite armour,, but e.g. Germany did have access to British composite armour development (i.e. Burlington) and had been working on their own solution from the1960s on too.

Also most of the rounds were fired by a stationary T-72 (3BM-42) from 100 metres.

So at first it was 3BM-9, now it is 3BM-42? Seems legit. But again, 3BM-42 does not penetrate any significant amount of armour; according to values provided from militarysta, 3BM-42 penetrates 580 mm RHA certified at point blank range. At the same time, second-rate export ammunition (like KEW-A2) can penetrate 660 mm RHA at 2,000 m.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Test were conducted in 2000, Yes in that sense you correct i take my word back..

According to article, Kanchan was test against HEAT round in 80s..

@Kunal Biswas
You notice that I quoted his claims about the 1980s test. Cl 3254's development was finished in 1996..

 

[methos]

So I guess you are refering to the Frontier India article. What does it mention:

- Kanchan managed to defeat a 125 mm APFSDS from the T-72 point blank in the 1980s. According to Zaloga however, export of Soviet APFSDS ammunition was limited to 3BM-9, 3BM-12, 3BM-15 and 3BM-17 (penetration at 2,000 m ranges from 290 mm to 340 mm RHA).
- Kanchan managed to defeat a 106 mm HEAT round from a recoilless rifle in the 1980s (so penetration is probably less than 500 mm RHA)

These threats also could have been stopped by T-72A from 1978.

- In/prior 2000 Kanchan managed to defeat multiple 125 mm APFSDS (including Isreali made ammunition) and HESH rounds. But here no range is given.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

OFB Heat Round designation was same as it used to be in 80s, 620mm ..

The Range is between 100-50ms according to one of the Mmber there, I know it is a very old test and famous..

- Kanchan managed to defeat a 106 mm HEAT round from a recoilless rifle in the 1980s (so penetration is probably less than 500 mm RHA)

- In/prior 2000 Kanchan managed to defeat multiple 125 mm APFSDS (including Isreali made ammunition) and HESH rounds. But here no range is given.

 

[Dejawolf]

3BM9, CL3254 and 106 mm M40 were 80's tests. Kanchan survived more than 15 hits without slightest damage.

3BM42, Israeli MK-1 (500 mm) , MK-2 prototype (550 mm) and 106 mm M40 (again - modern ammunition with penetration of 650 - 750 mm) were tested against pre-production Arjun prototype in 1997. Armour was impenetrable again even after 20 direct hits. That isn't good for you?
@militarysta @Damian @methos, Please comment on the Arjun keeping in mind our potential adversaries - the Type 85-II, 90-II, and 96. All three are incapable of penetrating more than 600 mm. Type 99 may be capable of 700+ (Chinese propaganda states 950 - absurd unless Chinese have found new element). @militarysta - please remember that the armour was improved after the 1997 tests.

Also Kanchan has been in development for longer than German, French and Italian composites and has been tested to the same level. It is of lower quality than Dorchester but better than Burlington.

most western composite armour is designed to resist multiple hits. it's why the Ceramics are arranged in a honeycomb shape bolted between steel plates.

as for Arjun front turret estimates:

~735mm on loaders side, ~650mm on gun mantlet, ~620-910mm on gunners side, and a weakspot around the Gunners sight with ~360mm
arjun mk.2 add ~250mm KE and 500mm HEAT in the areas protected by ERA modules.

 

[The Last Stand]

I used Kunal's words about CL 3254 (or whatever it is).

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Blast from the Past >>

Arjun MK-1 Cutway

==========================>>

Commander And Gunner

Loader

The Interior : Driver

=============================>>

Electronic Panoramic Sight

 

[Austin]

No one from Army or DRDO ever went on record and said Kanchan was tested against x type of APFSDS and y type of HEAT round and nor there are any patients filed which states what type of armour Kanchan is and what is the penetration value for it.

Most bloggers and website are merely speculating about Kanchans capability.

We can just assume that IA is quite well aware of Kanchans capability and a weak armour was never a complain from IA right from inception .....what ever be the capability of Kanchan its a secret and a well protected one that is.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

One of my mate there confirmed me about such test years ago..

Reports were accurate..

No one from Army or DRDO ever went on record and said Kanchan was tested against x type of APFSDS and y type of HEAT round and nor there are any patients filed,Most bloggers and website are merely speculating about Kanchans capability..

 

[Austin]

I am sure they would have done such test that goes without saying every development organisation and armed forces do such test on Armour and try to gauge its strength and weakness ....i am not disputing that.

What i am disputing is what kind of ammo that was used what kind of penetration did it achieve how much did Kanchan managed to withstand and what are the end result of such test .,......that would be only privy to Army and DRDO and they would never revel such data .......so best is to not to speculate as one speculation leads to another.

Army never disputed Kanchan armour in Arjun saga , so Army is quite satisified with what it can do,

 

[Kunal Biswas]

अर्जुन टेंक - ARJUN TANK , भारतीय सेना , INDIAN ARMY

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Continue Discussion here :

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/indian-army/5240-indian-army-armored-vehicles-43.html

 

[shuvo@y2k10]

if the army can airlift an arjun regiment at dbo the chinese tents will vanish.a similar masterstroke was played by gen cariappa during 1947-48 war when tanks were deployed against paki intruders at 12000ft and turned the tide of the war in our favour.