Arjun vs T90 MBT

[Dejawolf]

It seems we are all repeating the same story again..

Some points >>

2. Arjun accuracy is better as per specs compare to present tanks in IA also much better in Night..

2. well, the arjun seems like it has a decent gun, and the night sight on russian tanks have always been abysmal.

3. Arjun have a big mantel, and its sight is placed similar as Leo2a4, And it`s sides are half Armored..

a big mantlet is not a good thing. you cannot armour a mantlet as well as you can armor the cheeks of a turret. you cannot slope it and make it as thick as the turret cheeks the germans went away from the big mantlet on the leopard 2A5 to increase armour protection, and moved the sight up to the roof in order for the front armour wedges to encompass the whole front turret.
also, a bigger mantlet means you have to add weight ballast on the cradle to balance the main gun, increasing it's weight.

4. Kanchan Armour on MK1 endured greater penetration than 500mm of RHA from IMI made round at point blank ranges ( 50-100m for 2a46m )

well, i estimated front armour protection on the Arjun in the range of ~650mm, so that's no surprise. it's not that great either.
leopard 2A4 front turret is estimated to be around 750mm RHAe vs KE, leopard 2A5 is probably close to 900mm or more,
and T-90A is 850mm.
but i suppose if the enemy only fields rounds capable of penetrating 500-600mm, 850mm is overkill.

5. It has great mobility over all terrains better snorkel ability ( reduce preparation time ) lower ground pressure than any other tanks in IA ..

And i suppose what the IA fields is comparable to the Paki army mobility wise.

5. Ammo storage design is better than other tanks in IA..

no, it is not. having the ready ammunition up in the turret unprotected and uncompartmentalized is a very bad idea.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

1. Why is big i like to keep its a Opsec, You need to review, if you already on Leo2A4 evolution package, you can always mount addons..

2. You estimate are based on Leo2a4 in 80s, Arjun Armour is constantly upgrading as per need there are some info posted by me in this thread, give a look..

3. Not necessarily, Mobility of the tank is tuned and design keep your own country`s terrain in mind..

4. Read my post again, I compared with T-series tanks in IA..

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

a big mantlet is not a good thing. you cannot armour a mantlet

well, i estimated front armour protection on the Arjun in the range of ~650mm,but i suppose if the enemy only fields rounds capable of penetrating 500-600mm, 850mm is overkill.

And i suppose what the IA fields is comparable to the Paki army mobility wise.

no, it is not. having the ready ammunition up in the turret unprotected and uncompartmentalized is a very bad idea.

 

[Dejawolf]

1. Why is big i like to keep its a Opsec, You need to review, if you already on Leo2A4 evolution package, you can always mount addons..

well it's just that leopard 2A4 is a 55 ton tank with no upgrades, Arjun is a 58 ton tank with no upgrades.

this is a 59 tonne leopard 2A5 fielded back in 1992. the front turret is nearly 1.5 meters thick. and pretty much impenetrable to any round fielded today.
compared to this, the Arjun isn't very impressive.

2. You estimate are based on Leo2a4 in 80s, Arjun Armour is constantly upgrading as per need there are some info posted by me in this thread, give a look..

well, IMO, the Arjun turret is a lost cause. better to scrap the whole design, and build a new smaller narrower turret. with compartmentalized ammunition. hull design is decent, with a good powerpack.

3. Not necessarily, Mobility of the tank is tuned and design keep your own country`s terrain..

well, i rechecked mobility figures of the MTU MB 873 and MB 838, and it seems like the 838's actually got higher peak torque than the MB 873.
MB 873 has a peak torque of 4700nm while MB 838 has a peak torque of 5000nm. so mobility wise leopard 2A4 and Arjun should be about equal.

4. Read my post again, I compared with T-series tanks in IA..

i know. and i'm comparing it to a leopard.

 

[SATISH]

well it's just that leopard 2A4 is a 55 ton tank with no upgrades, Arjun is a 58 ton tank with no upgrades.

this is a 59 tonne leopard 2A5 fielded back in 1992. the front turret is nearly 1.5 meters thick. and pretty much impenetrable to any round fielded today.
compared to this, the Arjun isn't very impressive.



well, IMO, the Arjun turret is a lost cause. better to scrap the whole design, and build a new smaller narrower turret. with compartmentalized ammunition. hull design is decent, with a good powerpack.


well, i rechecked mobility figures of the MTU MB 873 and MB 838, and it seems like the 838's actually got higher peak torque than the MB 873.
MB 873 has a peak torque of 4700nm while MB 838 has a peak torque of 5000nm. so mobility wise leopard 2A4 and Arjun should be about equal.


i know. and i'm comparing it to a leopard.

Well the only country which we are going to have a large scale tank war is Pakistan and if the world becomes flat or the Himalayas miraculously disappear along with the tibetian plateau we might see Chiinese tanks. I think Arjun is quiet capable in handling them head on in any terrain of India. We are not going to face the Abrams, Challengers or leapords anytime soon.

 

[DivineHeretic]

Well the only country which we are going to have a large scale tank war is Pakistan and if the world becomes flat or the Himalayas miraculously disappear along with the tibetian plateau we might see Chiinese tanks. I think Arjun is quiet capable in handling them head on in any terrain of India. We are not going to face the Abrams, Challengers or leapords anytime soon.

I think ladakh and sikkim could be potential zones for tank conflict with red china.do they have anything that could compare to the m1a2 or the challengers?

 

[Damian]

No, PRC do not have tanks comparable to the NATO's big 4.

 

[DivineHeretic]

Another thing, M1 is known to be transported by air(c17 of course). So could india thoretically air deploy the arjuns to ladakhs plateau and sustain ops @those altitudes?
The superior performance of mark ii should help ward off any direct thrust by hostile armored formations?

 

[Damian]

You can allways transport tanks via air. However the question is how quickly and in what quantities.

As for "superior performance", you do not know if Mk2 will definetely have superior performance against enemy tanks. Pakistani T-80UD and PRC ZTZ-99A2 should have very similiar performance to Arjun Mk1/Mk2, I think that more decisive will be training of each individual crew. India might have in training edge over Pakistan, but over PRC? I don't know and I would not underestimate foe and overestimate myself.

 

[DivineHeretic]

Well the arjun mkii falls in the 65-67 ton category,so it would be realistic thay its armor protection would be better than a 50 ton tank...
Anyways my Q actually was that can a plane deliver such a heavy tank to an airfield at a much higher altitude,as in ladakh...wont the high altitudes limit the plane payload carrying performance?

 

[SATISH]

I think ladakh and sikkim could be potential zones for tank conflict with red china.do they have anything that could compare to the m1a2 or the challengers?

Yes it is potential but it is as hard for the PRC to deploy tanks there as much as the Indian side.so whosoever comes down first is going to get slaughtered...so it is more like a stalemate...guided munitions with cluster bomblet capability artillery shells and rockets will be a major threats to tanks there....and so is mortar fire.

 

[Virendra]

I think ladakh and sikkim could be potential zones for tank conflict with red china.do they have anything that could compare to the m1a2 or the challengers?

I can see for Ladakh but are we sure that Sikkim also is a theater of Tank warfare?
I mean is the terrain going to allow it, for either sides?

 

[Damian]

Well the arjun mkii falls in the 65-67 ton category,so it would be realistic thay its armor protection would be better than a 50 ton tank...

It does not work that way. What is important is armor composition, then you can approximetaly calculate estimation for armor protection of you know TE values for materials and what material is used in armor and how the whole array looks like. But this is still rough estimation.

Anyways my Q actually was that can a plane deliver such a heavy tank to an airfield at a much higher altitude,as in ladakh...wont the high altitudes limit the plane payload carrying performance?

Well NATO send heavy equipment also tanks to Afghanistan, it is high there, so it seems to be possible.

 

[SATISH]

You can allways transport tanks via air. However the question is how quickly and in what quantities.

As for "superior performance", you do not know if Mk2 will definetely have superior performance against enemy tanks. Pakistani T-80UD and PRC ZTZ-99A2 should have very similiar performance to Arjun Mk1/Mk2, I think that more decisive will be training of each individual crew. India might have in training edge over Pakistan, but over PRC? I don't know and I would not underestimate foe and overestimate myself.

I rather prefer them by rail-road transport when it comes to India as there is only the C 17 that can actually carry tanks and we are getting only 10 now...So it is hopeless in India for air transport. Against PRC I would like to know where and how we can fight Sir. The places of engagement are very small so ATGMs will me a much more viable options. Shoot and scoot ATGMs mounted on 4x4 is much deadlier. Even if it dosent destroy the tanks it can atleast disable it. So with CHina I rather prefer to bait them, draw them and kill them instead of fighting in their area of expertise.

 

[Dejawolf]

Well the arjun mkii falls in the 65-67 ton category,so it would be realistic thay its armor protection would be better than a 50 ton tank...

No, not really. the leopard 2A4 is a 55.5 ton tank and front armour is rated at ~750mm vs KE, T-90A is a 48 ton tank, and rated at 850mm vs KE.

 

[Damian]

Against PRC I would like to know where and how we can fight Sir. The places of engagement are very small so ATGMs will me a much more viable options. Shoot and scoot ATGMs mounted on 4x4 is much deadlier. Even if it dosent destroy the tanks it can atleast disable it. So with CHina I rather prefer to bait them, draw them and kill them instead of fighting in their area of expertise.

I would be carefull with statements about disabling tanks with ATGM hits. Shaped charge based weapons are mostly very inefficent against front armor of modern tanks. And even if you get perforation, there is no certainity that shaped charge will disable vehicle or it's crew, or will hit ammunition storage that will end with ammunition cook-off.

No, not really. the leopard 2A4 is a 55.5 ton tank and front armour is rated at ~750mm vs KE, T-90A is a 48 ton tank, and rated at 850mm vs KE.

Like I said, it depends on armor composition.

Although T-90A seems to be overestimated. Neither K-5 provides such high protection, neither the front turret armor is that good.

 

[DivineHeretic]

Yes it is potential but it is as hard for the PRC to deploy tanks there as much as the Indian side.so whosoever comes down first is going to get slaughtered...so it is more like a stalemate...guided munitions with cluster bomblet capability artillery shells and rockets will be a major threats to tanks there....and so is mortar fire.

Well stalemate is what india would prefer. I doubt us going on an offensive in the ladakh region.but submunitions and cluster rounds will likely be less of a challenge as compared to artillery barrage. Guided munitions have struggled in the past in the high mountains,not to mention that due tomthe limited area,both siides would be likely too close for one side to use cas effectively

 

[DivineHeretic]

I can see for Ladakh but are we sure that Sikkim also is a theater of Tank warfare?
I mean is the terrain going to allow it, for either sides?

Well the trijunction between india,bhutan and china is a place identified by IA as a potential zone for tank warfare...sometime in 2010-11 india deployed a t72 regiment with mech infantry. But ya the region is quite small.

 

[SATISH]

I would be carefull with statements about disabling tanks with ATGM hits. Shaped charge based weapons are mostly very inefficent against front armor of modern tanks. And even if you get perforation, there is no certainity that shaped charge will disable vehicle or it's crew, or will hit ammunition storage that will end with ammunition cook-off.



Like I said, it depends on armor composition.

Although T-90A seems to be overestimated. Neither K-5 provides such high protection, neither the front turret armor is that good.

Still can slow them down considerably to take another shot....According to me Tanks work on the principle of Fire power, Mobility and Armour So the ATGMs will atleast cause considerable damage to one of those three things...

 

[Shirman]

I don't know why we Indians' want OUR 65-67 TONNE MAMMOTH ARJUN OVER BLESSED HIMALAYAS/MOUNTAIN WARFARE. FOR FIRE POWER COMMON There is something called as light tanks which r particularly designed for that need. Ok lets say T-90MS / Anders vs Paki T-80UD and ZTZ-99A2 (attacking us together in worst case senario). Even If Arjun has a 120mm Smoothbore Gun with top of the line NATO rounds. My bet will be with Light tank formation (Anders / T-90MS) coupled with Attack helos and ATGMS firing light Strike vehicles lets say Kornet-e or Spike-er/mr doing the Job. Being nationalistic for over beloved tank wont win us future wars GOOD (LIGHT AND SWIFT) FIREPOWER WILL..........:thumb:

 

[DivineHeretic]

I rather prefer them by rail-road transport when it comes to India as there is only the C 17 that can actually carry tanks and we are getting only 10 now...So it is hopeless in India for air transport. Against PRC I would like to know where and how we can fight Sir. The places of engagement are very small so ATGMs will me a much more viable options. Shoot and scoot ATGMs mounted on 4x4 is much deadlier. Even if it dosent destroy the tanks it can atleast disable it. So with CHina I rather prefer to bait them, draw them and kill them instead of fighting in their area of expertise.

Ther are no railroads or for that matter proper roads that can handle tank movement going to ladakh.so incase of unexpected hostilities,we will need to use the air route to rush assets there,with the available ground routes providing logistics support.another thing is that alongwith the c17 we still have the il76,so we could deploy significant assets to safegaurd the region if at all the planes can deliver cargo to these regions.this is somewhat the strategy that saved srinagar and much of j&k during 47-48