Arjun vs T90 MBT

[Decklander]

@Damian, did you notice that these storage boxes start further aft when compared with the pix on which you have been arguing? There is an addition of armour to the side protusions and after that we have these storage boxes. If you look carefully you will see the original lines of armour and also the additions made to it very clearly. Can any member show it by highlighting the additional armour behind the original side protusions.

 

[Damian]

I know about what you are talking about, this still do not look like armor, especially as I said:

Protrusions were not expanded, there is no visible welding joints between old protrusion and the box after it.

If the vehicle itself do not have base armor as fully modular there is no sence to adding modular armor later. Not to mention that hanging armor module on the old storage box attachement point have no sence, you can loose whole armor module after single hit.

What is required is to get rit of these boxes, take welders, and weld there solid armor plates to create cavity for Kanchan armor.

 

[Decklander]

I did not ever doubt the need for protection on 60* arc. But my info was always based on what is actually on the field with tank regiments while you guys have been arguing on old pix and old news. My info is real and uptodate. I don't have to search for info on this tank, I just pick up my phone and ask the officers who have operated these tanks. unfortunately and also fortunately for me, my coursemates are very senior officers in IA now. They are no more actually sitting in these tanks.

 

[Damian]

If I would have opprotunity to get close, get closer look, I would be able to better point all my concerns. As for photos, I use the most recent photos avaiable, I did not seen any other configuration of this vehicle. This is from where my doubts come.

But if you would provide a hard proof, in form of photograph, then, I be damned if I will not change my mind.

 

[Damian]

Besides this, what is worring is that Arjun is not prepared to unconventional warfare, I mean, there is no uparmor kit designed.

What should be done in such case, should be additional armor for turret sides. Hull sides should be at least over crew compartment protected by thick composite or ERA modules, and their should reach at least to the level where upper edge of the road wheels are.

Slat armor for hull and turret rear would be also good thing.

After all any conflict with Muslim states, sooner or later becomes unconventional one.

 

[pmaitra]

Now I am really interested to see what is inside those boxes. Unless we see pictures, we will never know.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Those are tool box, the design came form Centurion tanks served in IA..

Tool box are important part as it hold tank camo, tent, water, fuel, mechanical tools for repairs..

During 1971 these tool box often carry concrete slabs inside for protection..

 

[Damian]

concrete slabs inside for protection..

Concrete is not good protection. It was tested during WWII, general conclusion was, that not only it does not add protection, but also increase weight compromising vehicle mobility.

I suggest to check how much concrete is penetrated by RPG-7 PG-7L warhead.

Data provided by army recongition site.

Other new rounds were the improved 72mm PG-7S, which entered service in 1972, and the 93mm PG-7L, with much improved armor penetration, which was introduced in 1977. It could penetrate 600mm of armor, 1.1m of reinforced concrete, 1.5m of brick, and 2.5m of logs and earth.

http://www.armyrecognition.com/russ...t_specifications_information_description.html

 

[p2prada]

But the repeat recent order for another 350 odd T-90SM is full of corruption. We cud have easily paid just the TOt charge for fitting these modification on the T-90S which we are going to be produced in India under licence or we cud have just relocated T-90S regiments from western border to east and replaced them with newer Arjun regiments. But this was not done instead a repeat order for T-90 has been placed. This repeat order has been objected to by even DRDO.

What you are giving are simple suggestions combined with an accusation when the Army is currently undergoing a major change in the way it fights.

How do you know the T-90MS deal is full of corruption? IA has a massive tank force of T-90s. It was the same during T-72 production where newer models were pushed into production as and when they were available. The T-90S to a T-90MS is the same as what the air force plans to do with the MKI followed by Super MKI. It isn't a simple upgrade with ToT, which is actually an entirely different program. IAF is planning on purchasing fresh new modified MKIs from Russia, very similar to the T-90S to T-90MS modification. So, maybe the air force is corrupt too.

Also, I don't want to repeat it again, but IA won't chose the Arjun for a token number of tanks, especially when it is still under development being carried out by a company which has never delivered a tank ever.

Do you know the operational requirements of the IA in the NE for the tanks? What makes you think they will want a whole new tank when the next iterative modification of the T-90 is available? This is a classic case of nationalism over pragmatism. You don't know anything about the operational requirements of the IA under the new doctrine. So, you don't know why Arjun is the better option for the mountains here.

If you are talking about getting IA to replace their newly equipped strike force of T-90s with Arjuns and send these Arjuns over to the NE, then you are making a big fool of yourself. IA, heck even the richest nations today, won't be able to afford a second supply chain for tanks inside enemy territory. You are asking for the impossible.

Can you please come out with a more realistic explanation for why Arjuns should replace T-90s? Any army I have seen buys tanks for life, not as novelty items. In IA's case Arjuns are more of a novelty item than a system meant for war. Only meant to make nationalists and fanboys happy.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

@Damian, Slabs pitched against 75/90mm Heat rounds from M24 Chaffe Light Tank and M48/47 patton medium tank, It was a improvised solution to mask vulnerable sides..

Concrete is not good protection. It was tested during WWII, general conclusion was, that not only it does not add protection, but also increase weight compromising vehicle mobility.

I suggest to check how much concrete is penetrated by RPG-7 PG-7L warhead..

 

[Damian]

@Damian, Slabs pitched against 75/90mm Heat rounds from M24 Chaffe Light Tank and M48/47 patton medium tank, It was a improvised solution to mask vulnerable sides..

I doubt that these concrete slabs made any difference, as you can see a simple warhead for RPG-7 penetrates more than 1,000mm of reinforced concrete. Besides this, belive me, it was tested during WWII, there are photographs of StuG III and other armored vehicle with additional concrete armor, and this additional armor was useless, the only thing it change was crew morale, and unnececary high weight of vehicles that compromised their mobility.

In fact it should be completely banned, to prevent such things to happen.

For example General Patton banned in his units use of any improvised and ineffective additional protection means used on tanks, because their compromised their mobility, and done more harm than good.

 

[ersakthivel]

Are you ----in unable to understand the distance between hatch and turret side armor bulkhead inside and then comparing it to the distance of the hatch to the armor edge on the outside?

I don't know the exact thickness of the two plates (one on the outer wall of storage box and the one on the inner wall of storage box.
I am also 100 percent sure you don't know that either and making some very laughable assumptions in calculating it.
Your attempt at estimating the the thickness of two plates in total is as credible as a Fashion TV model explaining EINSTEEN's theory of relativity to all.

 

[Damian]

I don't know the exact thickness of the two plates (one on the outer wall of storage box and the one on the inner wall of storage box.

What storage box? I am talking about the turret side bulkhead, and the distance between hatch and the bulkhead inside is much greater than in Leopard 2 (or any other NATO tank with composite armor over turret sides), then any intelligent being, will compare this distance, to the distance between hatch and the side armor edge on the outside.

I am also 100 percent sure you don't know that either and making some very laughable assumptions in calculating it.

But it is very easy to messure, the thickness of turret side armor, is somewhere between ~70mm to ~100mm at best, Kunal Biswas said it is even less, around ~50mm, which might be true when we compare where turret ammo rack is placed and what width it have.

Your attempt at estimating the the thickness of two plates in total is as credible as a Fashion TV model explaining EINSTEEN's theory of relativity to all.

Oh wow, this is great argument. start to be reasonable

 

[pmaitra]

I doubt that these concrete slabs made any difference, as you can see a simple warhead for RPG-7 penetrates more than 1,000mm of reinforced concrete. Besides this, belive me, it was tested during WWII, there are photographs of StuG III and other armored vehicle with additional concrete armor, and this additional armor was useless, the only thing it change was crew morale, and unnececary high weight of vehicles that compromised their mobility.

In fact it should be completely banned, to prevent such things to happen.

For example General Patton banned in his units use of any improvised and ineffective additional protection means used on tanks, because their compromised their mobility, and done more harm than good.

Have a look at this video: UniDirectional BulletProof Glass - YouTube

Now, the question is, if concrete blocks are placed in those boxes, you'll have a thin metal wall, then concrete, then another thin metal wall, and then the thick turret wall. If a HEAT round falls on it, it might penetrate the thin outer wall and then shatter the concrete, but I doubt it will do much damage to the inner wall. Most of the heat of the HEAT round could also be dissipated into the concrete.

Again, I am saying this on the top of my head, but I would assume that was a very good piece of armour improvised at the last moment.

 

[ersakthivel]

What storage box? I am talking about the turret side bulkhead, and the distance between hatch and the bulkhead inside is much greater than in Leopard 2 (or any other NATO tank with composite armor over turret sides), then any intelligent being, will compare this distance, to the distance between hatch and the side armor edge on the outside.



But it is very easy to messure, the thickness of turret side armor, is somewhere between ~70mm to ~100mm at best, Kunal Biswas said it is even less, around ~50mm, which might be true when we compare where turret ammo rack is placed and what width it have.

Why dont you go to the MAIN BATTLE tank's armor and technology and read the whole argument again?

Oh wow, this is great argument. start to be reasonable

the same intelligent being should also take into account that arjun has 400 mm extra crew compartment space between crew hatch side turret wall bulk head and due to higher width turret than leo .

For now lets finish this argument .Only detailed drawing can clarify this matter.So lets not waste our time getting stuck on this point,as nobody can show any credible proof for this right now.We all made our points.We should leave it at that and discuss other things.

We can always come back to it once someone has some credible information regarding this.You too have said that these storage boxes can be removed and armor plates can be welded to create cavity for composite armor and it wont affect anything significantly.So there is no point in dragging it any further with out any solid proof.

 

[ersakthivel]

it may be concrete or another armor plate welded or anything else.There is no fixed idea like they will put only concrete theer.As DECKLANDER said even operation level modifications can be made to weld extra armor inside those boxes.

 

[ersakthivel]

What you are giving are simple suggestions combined with an accusation when the Army is currently undergoing a major change in the way it fights.

How do you know the T-90MS deal is full of corruption? IA has a massive tank force of T-90s. It was the same during T-72 production where newer models were pushed into production as and when they were available. The T-90S to a T-90MS is the same as what the air force plans to do with the MKI followed by Super MKI. It isn't a simple upgrade with ToT, which is actually an entirely different program. IAF is planning on purchasing fresh new modified MKIs from Russia, very similar to the T-90S to T-90MS modification. So, maybe the air force is corrupt too.

Also, I don't want to repeat it again, but IA won't chose the Arjun for a token number of tanks, especially when it is still under development being carried out by a company which has never delivered a tank ever.

Do you know the operational requirements of the IA in the NE for the tanks? What makes you think they will want a whole new tank when the next iterative modification of the T-90 is available? This is a classic case of nationalism over pragmatism. You don't know anything about the operational requirements of the IA under the new doctrine. So, you don't know why Arjun is the better option for the mountains here.

If you are talking about getting IA to replace their newly equipped strike force of T-90s with Arjuns and send these Arjuns over to the NE, then you are making a big fool of yourself. IA, heck even the richest nations today, won't be able to afford a second supply chain for tanks inside enemy territory. You are asking for the impossible.

Can you please come out with a more realistic explanation for why Arjuns should replace T-90s? Any army I have seen buys tanks for life, not as novelty items. In IA's case Arjuns are more of a novelty item than a system meant for war. Only meant to make nationalists and fanboys happy.

In IA's case Arjuns are more of a novelty item than a system meant for war. Only meant to make nationalists and fanboys happy

you can pretty much say the same thing about any other indigenous tank project producing the first production lot.It is a novelty at first all war fighting systems start life out there like the same way.
You can see the

arjun's better power to weight ratio,
arjun's lower ground pressure per square inch,
better accuracy while firing on the move ,
And better effort in mk-1 at isolating ammo compared to T-90S,
and world class standard ammo storage in mk-2,
and better net centric warfare ability as just mere novelty.

Unfortunately it wont be shared by many tank experts and young crew who have to depend on the tank for their dear life.

 

[Decklander]

I can show you storage boxes on M1A2 Abrams turret, they are also very shallow, being shallow or deep does not have anything to do with being or not being armor.

Besides this these boxes are exactly made from thin sheet metal plates, and if you will have opprotunity to take a closer look, you will see I am right.



We will see, but if this will happen, then Arjun will be in this matter on the same level as other 3rd generation MBT's.



Oh so you finally admitt that I was right?



What behind ERA? No, this is not a good idea. ERA can't be placed on such thin surfaces, because ERA explosion will destroy it, this is why Russians needed to develop completely different type of ERA for BMP and BTR vehicles. It is better to locate storage boxes on the turret rear where hit probability is minimal.



Protrusions were not expanded, there is no visible welding joints between old protrusion and the box after it.

If the vehicle itself do not have base armor as fully modular there is no sence to adding modular armor later. Not to mention that hanging armor module on the old storage box attachement point have no sence, you can loose whole armor module after single hit.

What is required is to get rit of these boxes, take welders, and weld there solid armor plates to create cavity for Kanchan armor.



The place marked in blue also should be covered by armor, not only the surface currently covered with storage boxes.

If you have a careful look, you will find that the place where your blue line starts used to be the rear of the side protrusions in earlier prototypes. After that another thick armour plate was added which ends next to the right leg of the guy standing atop the Tank. After that start the storage boxes. You will realise that this addition of armour is not limited to turret only, even the side skirts have additional protection to cover those angles.

 

[ersakthivel]

If you have a careful look, you will find that the place where your blue line starts used to be the rear of the side protrusions in earlier prototypes. After that another thick armour plate was added which ends next to the right leg of the guy standing atop the Tank. After that start the storage boxes. You will realise that this addition of armour is not limited to turret only, even the side skirts have additional protection to cover those angles.

The vertical line separating the first block (marked in blue line) from the side protrusion of the frontal armor
and
the vertical line separating the first block (marked in blue line) from the second storage box with hinges
look very different even in this picture.
And the first first block (marked in blue line) seems to have no hinges while the second storage box has two hinges clearly visible.

 

[Damian]

Have a look at this video: UniDirectional BulletProof Glass - YouTube

Now, the question is, if concrete blocks are placed in those boxes, you'll have a thin metal wall, then concrete, then another thin metal wall, and then the thick turret wall. If a HEAT round falls on it, it might penetrate the thin outer wall and then shatter the concrete, but I doubt it will do much damage to the inner wall. Most of the heat of the HEAT round could also be dissipated into the concrete.

Again, I am saying this on the top of my head, but I would assume that was a very good piece of armour improvised at the last moment.

Ok it seems I need to use a different words... concrete is a shit not protection against shaped charges, now it is understandable?

And HEAT does not mean it use heat, damn how many times it need to be explained? HEAT means High Explosive Anti Tank, not that it uses heat, or molten metal, or any other crazy theory.

Seriously the more and more I discuss with you people, it seems that the only thing that could open your eyes, would a be a damn live firing test, maybe then you would understood.