Arjun vs T90 MBT

[ersakthivel]

what is this? please explain

Do you even read what I wrote? Do you even once looked at the images? The "protruding fronal armour" covers far less than +/- 30° - as I wrote about +/- 17° (if you don't include the turret basket, else only ~ +/- 6°). Not more. Any shot from the frontal sector from 18 to 30° will have no problem of piercing through the thin side.



Bullshit. It increases turret width.

Did you read the post? I referred to the lesser width back side turret portion.The crew compartment is covered by the protrusion was my claim.

Again, read and understand what I wrote. Read what has been written over a dozen times here about rifled and smoothbore guns. You are clueless when it comes to technical aspects, instead you prefer some self-published articles on blogs and forums.



Hull backside top? You mean the engine comparment? If so, then you fail to understand the modern tank armour design once again.

If we superimpose the redline drawn on the horse shoe shaped redline on arjun turret ,the frontal protruding armor will provide the same angle of protection from a simple glance, If you want to explain further produce super imposed drawing of both the turrets shown in this post. It will clarify the matter.

Remember people producing so many drawings like this in this forum have openly confessed that they have never seen arjun or heard it's specs, thats why need for clarification. No need for using words like bullshit defending your tank .

And none of you know the side plate armor thickness of ARJUN an completely fail to acknowledge the basic math fact that at these 15 degrees the side turret armor will present a way higher thickness to the hitting shell.

You don't have to pretend you guys alone are the best tank engineers in the world,every one here has enough stuff to understand these things.

There are reports that there is armor plate protection behind the gunners main sight as well , post it once I get confirmation.

If smooth T-90s smooth bore is so superior to arjun why an exactly opposite result is found in trials?

If T-90s followed these modern tank design philosophies with piss poor power to weight ratio and higher ground pressure with no APU concept and poorer accuracy smooth bore guns with no separate placement for ammo it is better for arjun to steer as far as away as possible from this.

 

[Decklander]

. Pls see post #182 and the superimposed image of two turret designs.

 

[Damian]

If you do not understand a simple drawing, then sorry, it seems that someone have problems with basic percpetion capabilities.

It is simple, just meassure a 60 degrees arc from turret longitudinal axis, and then check how much of the sides are exposed to what angle. Methos and I said enough, and I will not teach you how to properly comprehend such simple things... mr "well" educated.

 

[Decklander]

If you do not understand a simple drawing, then sorry, it seems that someone have problems with basic percpetion capabilities.

It is simple, just meassure a 60 degrees arc from turret longitudinal axis, and then check how much of the sides are exposed to what angle. Methos and I said enough, and I will not teach you how to properly comprehend such simple things... mr "well" educated.

I do not have perception problem. Pls do not just go by arc. calculate the angle covered by Arjun if we use T-90 datum.

 

[Damian]

Ok perhaps this will finally help to understand. The lines show angle of 30 degrees for each side of the turret, from turret longitudinal axis. The path between lines is a danger zone, where projectiles are most likely to hit at these 30 degrees angle. As we can see, in case of T-90S it is immposible at this 30 degrees from each side to hit weak side armor. In cace of Arjun, there is a weak and exposed zone. Western tanks like M1A2 on drawing, to compensate the turret geometry that expose it's sides. Have a very thick composite armor protecting it's sides.

All these solutions have strong and weak points.

In case of Arjun the turret is big, there is a lot of space inside, and should be still relatively light while well balanced due to counterweight in form of turret bustle, yet with exposed weak side armor making tank more vurnable.

T-90S have small and light turret, well protected also, but there is not much space inside left and there can be problem with properly balancing turret that is very front heavy because of lack of any counterbalance.

M1A2 like all western tanks, have well protected turret, there is a lot of space inside, turret should also be well balanced thanks to the bustle that acts as a counterweight, but they price for this is much heavier weight.

Simple as that, I do not understand why some people are incapable to understand such simple drawing.

I do not have perception problem. Pls do not just go by arc. calculate the angle covered by Arjun if we use T-90 datum.

You have a problem, just be adult and accept the damn fact.

 

[ersakthivel]

http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/army-security-forces/arjun-tank-6612-55/

The sights are placed in early Leopard-2-manner at the turret front and not on the roof (Image), which means that at the place where the gunner's sights are located the armour is thinner (in case of the Leopard 2A4 the armour is about 1/4 thinner there). Even more problematic might the huge mantlet area be (Image) - the mantlet is thinner than the distance from turret front to gunner's sight, which means that the composite armour there is only half as thick as at the rest of the turret front. Other tanks also feature less armoured gun mantlets (actually all tanks do), but the size of the mantlets have been reduced and is very much smaller than this.

The Arjun is a rather bad designed tank. Due to the placement of the armour, which follows more or less the Soviet design doctine, while having a "long" Western-style turret the Arjun features some "gaps" at the side (Drawing, Image), where no composite armour is located, only simple steel (with a thickness probably below 10 cm) and large storage boxes.

Is he so sure there is no composite armor behind the storage boxes on the side turret?

Methos seems to be peddling same kind of views on arjun everywhere even without the basic idea of what is the thickness of the arjun side turret. Even in this thread the story is the same saying there is nothing behind those storage boxes on the side of arjun.

All based on guess work and assumptions without even having an iota of data on arjun(as usual assuming armor thickness all by himself).

 

[Damian]

Is he so sure there is no composite armor behind the storage boxes on the side turret?

Because there is not enough space for composite armor. Do you even understand the working principle of composite armor? It needs lot of space inside. Composite armors are weight efficent, but are also space inefficent.

Methos seems to be peddling same kind of views on arjun everywhere even without the basic idea of what is the thickness of the arjun side turret. Even in this thread the story is the same saying there is nothing behind those storage boxes on the side of arjun.

All based on guess work and assumptions without even having an iota of data on arjun(as usual assuming armor thickness all by himself).

It is very easy to gain knowledge where composite armor is installed, and where is not installed. Only laymans like you do not even know how to seek signs of it's installation that are well visible inside and outside.

For example weld lines. Composite armor is installed in a cavity, that have a coverplate welded on top of this cavity, so there are evident weld lines visible. Arjun do not have such weldlines visible on sides. And the internal and external photos, showing distance from hatch to the armor edge, shows there is no space for composite armor.

But why I even discuss such things with a person that have no clue about tank designing.

It is relatively easy to estimate that Arjun side turret armor is somewhere around ~70-80mm, which means that even at 30 degrees inclination, it is not efficent enough to provide protection even against most granades for RPG-7, where most common ones penetrate 400mm to 500mm of RHA, while Arjun armor at such inclination will be only between 100mm to 200mm thick. Not to mention trying to stop tank gun ammunition which is far more powerfull.

 

[Damian]

If you have proof submit it. You are blind to the fact that arujn has lower ground pressure despite so many proofs and you are questioning whether I am an adult?

So look at your silly pseudo arguments, look you know nothing about tanks, their history, research and development history and facts, how the whole school designing school in most experienced with tank use countries, evolved.

You are just another smartass who tries to design wheel again, and trying to teach that these who was doing such things for decades.

 

[Decklander]

Ok perhaps this will finally help to understand. The lines show angle of 30 degrees for each side of the turret, from turret longitudinal axis. The path between lines is a danger zone, where projectiles are most likely to hit at these 30 degrees angle. As we can see, in case of T-90S it is immposible at this 30 degrees from each side to hit weak side armor. In cace of Arjun, there is a weak and exposed zone. Western tanks like M1A2 on drawing, to compensate the turret geometry that expose it's sides. Have a very thick composite armor protecting it's sides.

All these solutions have strong and weak points.

In case of Arjun the turret is big, there is a lot of space inside, and should be still relatively light while well balanced due to counterweight in form of turret bustle, yet with exposed weak side armor making tank more vurnable.

T-90S have small and light turret, well protected also, but there is not much space inside left and there can be problem with properly balancing turret that is very front heavy because of lack of any counterbalance.

M1A2 like all western tanks, have well protected turret, there is a lot of space inside, turret should also be well balanced thanks to the bustle that acts as a counterweight, but they price for this is much heavier weight.

Simple as that, I do not understand why some people are incapable to understand such simple drawing.



You have a problem, just be adult and accept the damn fact.

You are a master of deciet? Why have you moved the point back for Arjun while I told you to use T-90 datum for Arjun? Pls keep it at the same point point as T-90 and than draw the arc for Arjun and you will know what I am saying.
T-90 has smaller turret but Arjun has longer turret and the rear part of Arjun has nothing critical in it. But it is better protected for the same angle as T-90 when you look at it from the datum of T-90.

 

[Damian]

You are a master of deciet? Why have you moved the point back for Arjun while I told you to use T-90 datum for Arjun? Pls keep it at the same point point as T-90 and than draw the arc for Arjun and you will know what I am saying.
T-90 has smaller turret but Arjun has longer turret and the rear part of Arjun has nothing critical in it. But it is better protected for the same angle as T-90 when you look at it from the datum of T-90.

You are unable to understand that angle is allways marked from the turret rear, not matters what tank is discussed?

Seriously it seems that I am discussing here with uneducated fools.

You know what, go back to countryside, maybe as a peasant you will do a career.

 

[methos]

Is he so sure there is no composite armor behind the storage boxes on the side turret?

Yes, I am so sure.

Methos seems to be peddling same kind of views on arjun everywhere even without the basic idea of what is the thickness of the arjun side turret. Even in this thread the story is the same saying there is nothing behind those storage boxes on the side of arjun.

I have an impartial view, since I am not Russian nor Indian. I am also no fan of the T-90. You however are just a fanboy/overly partiotic guy without having checked facts.

 

[ersakthivel]

No where here the thickness of turret side and the virtual higher thickness due to the angle is explained.
http://s1.directupload.net/images/120506/aa7eimsl.png

click on the above link for bigger image

My doubt is is this drawing authentic? who made it? what is the purpose as there is no official marking on it.

The drawing says that arjun inherited composite armor philosophy from russians. Any proof for it?
People with cvrde background can throw light on it. This diagram is used in many other threads also.

 

[Damian]

Nowhere because it was not the purpose of that drawing you brickhead.

Seriously, I wonder if some people were in school only for being there, or to improve their IQ, comprehending capabilities and knowledge levels.

 

[Decklander]

You are unable to understand that angle is allways marked from the turret rear, not matters what tank is discussed?

Seriously it seems that I am discussing here with uneducated fools.

You know what, go back to countryside, maybe as a peasant you will do a career.

You are a fool. Pls keep T-90 arcs whr they are and draw the arcs for Arjun from rear of turret. Dont confuse by taking back the arcs of T-90 to match Arjun Turret. have you got it now in your thick skull. You are changing the datum of T-90 turret by shifting it back to match Arjun Turret.
That is why stated that pls superimpose and not shift datums.

 

[Damian]

What? Can you talk like a human, not producing this babble?

No seriously, what you do not understand in this drawing, what is so damn problematic for your brain to comprehend?

You do not understand that both turrets have different geometry but the safe manouvering angles are allways marked from the turret rear? No seriously this is such a big problem for you?

I wonder if you would even pass a first grade of the basic school in my country if you have problems with such simple things.

 

[Decklander]

You are from Poland, right??
And you are trying to teach indians about education.
@ER Saktivel,
can you pls draw out the angles from Arjun turret and superimpose the T-90 turret on it with T-90 arcs?
These fishheads from europe need to be taught basics of geometry as they never actually understood it in history. It were Indians who taught them and they need repeat lessons now.

 

[ersakthivel]

Yes, I am so sure.

Any proof/

I have an impartial view, since I am not Russian nor Indian. I am also no fan of the T-90. You however are just a fanboy/overly partiotic guy without having checked facts.

If you submit any proof we will all know who you are?Why are you being silent on the extra virtual thickness that the shell has to pierce at these extreme angles? If you are so professional?

Any proof I wont ask a question further as you are doing the same on other forums as well.

 

[methos]

No where here the thickness of turret side and the virtual higher thickness due to the angle is explained.

click on the above link for bigger image

My doubt is is this drawing authentic? who made it?

I made it. You just could have read my post where it was included. The location of the composite armour was shown by Kunal in another image. Since photographs and claims by member of this forums support his image, I use the same location for composite armour.

The drawing says that arjun inherited composite armor philosophy from russians. Any proof for it?

No, but the armour placement is from the basic idea the same as on T-72, which was produced by India years prior the Arjun designing started.

You are a fool. Pls keep T-90 arcs whr they are and draw the arcs for Arjun from rear of turret.

You are the fool. You need to understand why the lines are from that angle and not on the front. Statistical analysis of various military encounters after WW2 has shown that the most likely place of a hit is the 60° sector from the turret centerline. This doesn't mean that only flat frontal surface is being hit, but the whole turret can be hit. Western and Eastern tanks are designed to be protected in this area, including T-64, T-72, T-80, T-84, T-90, Leclerc, Leopard 2, Challenger 1, Challenger 2, M1 Abrams, Merkava IV and others. Only very few tanks like Al-Khalid and Arjun are not built like this.
There is no fixed aimpoint/target at the turret front, the whole turret is likely of being hit in this sector.

If you submit any proof we will all know who you are?Why are you being silent on the extra virtual thickness that the shell has to pierce at these extreme angles? If you are so professional?

Your "extra virtual thickess" irrelevant. Just take a look at the works of Lanz and Odermatt... but again, you don't have a clue about what you are talking.

 

[ersakthivel]

You are from Poland, right??
And you are trying to teach indians about education.
@ER Saktivel,
can you pls draw out the angles from Arjun turret and superimpose the T-90 turret on it with T-90 arcs?
These fishheads from europe need to be taught basics of geometry as they never actually understood it in history. It were Indians who taught them and they need repeat lessons now.

First of all these two guys have to show some proof for the lack of composite armor or the thickness of side turret before making accusations.

 

[ersakthivel]

I made it. You just could have read my post where it was included. The location of the composite armour was shown by Kunal in another image. Since photographs and claims by member of this forums support his image, I use the same location for composite armour.



No, but the armour placement is from the basic idea the same as on T-72, which was produced by India years prior the Arjun designing started.



You are the fool. You need to understand why the lines are from that angle and not on the front. Statistical analysis of various military encounters after WW2 has shown that the most likely place of a hit is the 60° sector from the turret centerline. This doesn't mean that only flat frontal surface is being hit, but the whole turret can be hit. Western and Eastern tanks are designed to be protected in this area, including T-64, T-72, T-80, T-84, T-90, Leclerc, Leopard 2, Challenger 1, Challenger 2, M1 Abrams, Merkava IV and others. Only very few tanks like Al-Khalid and Arjun are not built like this.
There is no fixed aimpoint/target at the turret front, the whole turret is likely of being hit in this sector.

Any official proof is what I asked.In that thread you have assumed everything on arjun based on early model leopard well before the advent of modern higher penetration shells.I notice another member of IIR (international ranters inc) there. That's why I am asking for some thing official.

You made the drawing. You made the assumptions regarding arjuns based on old leopard model.Are you so sure CVRDE will base all their armor thickness calculations based on old leopard model which encountered much less penetrating rounds of those days. . YYou are still ignoring the extra virtual thickness that the shell has to penetrate to gain entry posted bu PMAITRA..