Arjun vs T90 MBT

[pmaitra]

I doubt that only costs are sufficent explanation. It is possible to even weld such thick plates of Titanium? Or do cast Titanium would be as good as Steel? Without ballistic tests it is hard to say.

You tell me, how did the Soviets fabricate that hull of the Alfa Class?

I know Titanium can be easily contaminated by oxygen etc., but surely, they can be worked upon in an inert environment.

I didn't know that, seriously... Stop acting like a father if you do not understand the point, and try educating others.

I do not understand your point or you do not understand the references that you present?

Remember how you termed Copper melting in a shaped charge as "nonsense," and then came up with a flame temperature of RDX that turned out to be less than the temperature of burning tobacco in a cigarette?

Remember what @Decklander had said earlier? "Do not try to teach your father . . ."

You need to stop provoking others. Did you hear that? Stop provoking others. That is your weapon every time you stand exposed, and I do not find that particularly pleasant.

I understand, it seems that you seek there things which does not exist, neither you understand what is written in that table.

What does not exist? What on earth are you talking about? Titanium does not exist? Titanium armour does not exist? Brinnell Hardness Number does not exist? Giga Pascals does not exist?

Mechanical properties are not everything, it is also question as how thick plates from specific material can be made, and if these plates can be welded. For example THS plates are more efficent than RHA, but are also difficult to manufacture as thicker ones, and more difficult to weld.

There is at least several reasons why nobody makes tanks from pure Titanium. Same goes for alluminium, for example British were experimenting with alluminium tank with Burlington armor, in the end idea was abandoned.

Mechanical properties are not everything, yes, and your point is? What exactly are you trying to say?

 

[Dejawolf]

Titanium?! Are you kidding? TE of Titanium against KE is only 0,8-0,9 which means that Titanium made armor plate 100mm thick is - 0,8-0,9 x 100 = 80-90mm RHAe, while for example Triple Hardness Steel have TE against KE 1,3 which means 1,3 x 100 = 130mm RHAe.

RHA TE is 1 against KE and CE (Shaped Charges).

So a turret made only from Titanium will be lighter, but will offer less protection. So in the end you need a composite armor that won't be that light. The only way is to go with unmanned turrets.

Titanium TE is 0.8-0.9 but it's density is only 4.5g/cc while RHA steel TE is 1.0, and has a density of 7.85g/cc. so in essence, if you double the thickness of the plates, titanium will offer more protection for the same weight. it'll be freakishly expensive though.
titanium is 11$/lb while steel is less than 0.2$/lb

example:
1x1m 40mm thick plate of titanium:
weight:90kg
RHAe: 18mm RHAe
thickness = 40
density = 4.5g/cc
volume = 40000cc
TE = 0.9

thickness*TE = 18mm RHAe
density*volume = 90kg

comparabily, 18mm of RHA steel:
density = 7.85g/cc
volume = 18000cc

density*volume = 141,3kg

so in essence you can cut vehicle wight with 36% by making it out of titanium.
however, because of the price ratio of steel/titanium, you can only make 1 vehicle of titanium for every 50 vehicles of steel.

 

[pmaitra]

@Dejawolf, thank you for the above post. I will open a thread on Titanium alone later when I get time.

 

[trackwhack]

Heh... I would wish to have money from this, but I don't, neither...

Then it must be the noble cause. But all you experts must understand that India churns out 500,000 engineers every year of which 90% have no clue what they learn in 4 years. But the other 10% are smart kids. So you should remember that distorting physics makes you look stupid.

Some of the info on composite armor, arrangement etc has been pulled straight out of their neighbors ass.

And even the 90% patzers can measure basic dimensions. You can't get through 4 semesters of engineering drawing by just reading some book.

 

[ersakthivel]

Kunal, and the result is the same, such thickness is completely unrealistic, it is immposible to reload coax, perform maintnance on it as well as performing maintnance on the main gun.

Here you have visible coax port.



Look, it is just ridiculous to claim such armor thickness, and as I said it makes coax immposible to reload, to performa maintnance on it, same goes for main gun when it comes to maintnance.

Also :

Look here, at this photo, there is no armor so close to the loader station as you claims here:

There are pictures of many prototypes built for many purposes from 1990 to 2012 ,other than armor fitment of arjun floating freely on the net,
They range from 40 ton light tank with no armor prototypes to 63 ton prototypes.What you and Dejawolf are doing is to mix all their pictures
with wrong co relation of parts and confuse your self and confuse the members.

Operational tank details are known only to the personnel involved.SO dejaa wolf's calculation are quite wrong, and all I did was to point out the mistakes in his calculation method.That's all.That doesnot mean my calcuation of 680 mm space for armor is correct.
Because I dont have any access to operational arjun tank inside pics.All the pics posted with hapazard wirings and guages are prototypes,older and newer.

Even in the illustration presented by dejawolf which you have included the crew member is wrongly placed to support his wrong claims.

 

[ersakthivel]

This is impossible -any single photo of right turret space shown that.
Proof:

As You can see it's impossible situation (this mark by You.)
On photos we can clearly see that in more then 2 "hath" width there is no front backplate. So Your draw is wrong. I marked on that photos area when on interior photos there is no backplate.

In fact my firs draw is more or less correct:

Only question is - after main sight there is 450 or 500mm cavity. Rest is clealy visible on photos.

besides pixels there is something called scales and the effect of angle from which the photo was taken also has an effect on your measurements.

 

[ersakthivel]

Arjun have decently designed hull, nobody questions that, the problem is that turret, redesign the turret, and problem will disappear.

As for shortcomings in design, there are acceptable and unacceptable shortcomings, Arjun turret design is unacceptable... at least would not be both in NATO or todays Russia and many other countries.



Well this is a trade off, in the end unmanned turret will be nececity, and in the end all tanks will be designed that way.



Titanium?! Are you kidding? TE of Titanium against KE is only 0,8-0,9 which means that Titanium made armor plate 100mm thick is - 0,8-0,9 x 100 = 80-90mm RHAe, while for example Triple Hardness Steel have TE against KE 1,3 which means 1,3 x 100 = 130mm RHAe.

RHA TE is 1 against KE and CE (Shaped Charges).

So a turret made only from Titanium will be lighter, but will offer less protection. So in the end you need a composite armor that won't be that light. The only way is to go with unmanned turrets.

They never said it's protection is inferior.Infact one gentleman directly compared it abrams ,leo,leclerc.Do you think they don't know the shortcommings?

You should view the interview of three armored fleet generals posted on you tube and the link posted by DAREDEVIL.They all clearly say ARJUN is one of the best in the world.You are confusing yourself and confusing others by resorting to wrong drawings and arriving at a wrong conclusion b y piecing together dimensions from various discarded prototypes.

they clearly said you just cannot compare arjun and T-90 They are different class of tank,
who said that armored fleet generals.
You are saying there is only one type of MBT in the world and we can comprare all of them .
But three retired armored corp generals differ from you.

 

[ersakthivel]

You cannot determine the hardness of all materials with the same tests, thus there are multiple different hardness scales. Some types of determining the hardness are largely redundant and only used because of different country using different systems (the Vickers Hardness Scale for example is mainly used by British/some former Commonwealth countries, Rockwell seems to be mainly used by Americans). Some units can easily converted to another, others are hardly convertable.

Simply google "hardness conversion" or something like that to compare the values.



Because of costs. Titanium is much better when it comes to protection per weight and nearly as good as RHA (depending on the alloy). Some Titanium alloys weigh only 40% of the RHA required for the equivalent protection... this means you can (even though armour might get slightly thicker) replace the 15 tonnes heavy Chieftain turret with a 6 tonnes turret made out of high quality Titanium.

What are the multiple different hardness scale and multiple different units of measurements used?
Any authoritative link?Whatever be the scales and unitd they are all convertable to each other using a factor.

 

[ersakthivel]

Titanium TE is 0.8-0.9 but it's density is only 4.5g/cc while RHA steel TE is 1.0, and has a density of 7.85g/cc. so in essence, if you double the thickness of the plates, titanium will offer more protection for the same weight. it'll be freakishly expensive though.
titanium is 11$/lb while steel is less than 0.2$/lb

example:
1x1m 40mm thick plate of titanium:
weight:90kg
RHAe: 18mm RHAe
thickness = 40
density = 4.5g/cc
volume = 40000cc
TE = 0.9

thickness*TE = 18mm RHAe
density*volume = 90kg

comparabily, 18mm of RHA steel:
density = 7.85g/cc
volume = 18000cc

density*volume = 141,3kg

so in essence you can cut vehicle wight with 36% by making it out of titanium.
however, because of the price ratio of steel/titanium, you can only make 1 vehicle of titanium for every 50 vehicles of steel.

What is the percentage of material cost in the total tank cost.I think most of the money paid for the tank goes for the tech level and FCS and engine.Raw material cost and machinig cost must be a very low factor of the total cost unless it is a rare earth materisl or preciuos metalSO we cannot automatically apply a multiplication factor based on the cost difference.Even less so considering titanium is neede only in places that require heavier armor protection for lesser weight, not in all places.

 

[Damian]

There are pictures of many prototypes built for many purposes from 1990 to 2012 ,other than armor fitment of arjun floating freely on the net,
They range from 40 ton light tank with no armor prototypes to 63 ton prototypes.What you and Dejawolf are doing is to mix all their pictures
with wrong co relation of parts and confuse your self and confuse the members.

Operational tank details are known only to the personnel involved.SO dejaa wolf's calculation are quite wrong, and all I did was to point out the mistakes in his calculation method.That's all.That doesnot mean my calcuation of 680 mm space for armor is correct.
Because I dont have any access to operational arjun tank inside pics.All the pics posted with hapazard wirings and guages are prototypes,older and newer.

Even in the illustration presented by dejawolf which you have included the crew member is wrongly placed to support his wrong claims.

So give the goddamn proof... oh wait, you do not have a proof, only lies.

They never said it's protection is inferior.Infact one gentleman directly compared it abrams ,leo,leclerc.Do you think they don't know the shortcommings?

You should view the interview of three armored fleet generals posted on you tube and the link posted by DAREDEVIL.They all clearly say ARJUN is one of the best in the world.You are confusing yourself and confusing others by resorting to wrong drawings and arriving at a wrong conclusion b y piecing together dimensions from various discarded prototypes.

they clearly said you just cannot compare arjun and T-90 They are different class of tank,
who said that armored fleet generals.
You are saying there is only one type of MBT in the world and we can comprare all of them .
But three retired armored corp generals differ from you.

In my country there were officers claiming that T-72M1 is superior to Leoprad 2, or that 9M14 can penetrate front armor of any tank. One thing is chit chat to improve morale of lower rank soldiers and society, and the other thing is truth. I am 100% sure that Arjun would not pass any ballistic tests in NATO countries neither in former Soviet Union.

Why? Because during tests not only armor model, but also whole complete vehicle is tested, as far as we know, only armor models were presented from tests, not even a single photo or evidence that complete tank was hit from every side, that it was blown up etc.etc.etc.

 

[Dejawolf]

.Even less so considering titanium is neede only in places that require heavier armor protection for lesser weight, not in all places.

trying to make drama again? we were discussing the feasibility of making a vehicle entirely out of titanium.

 

[Dejawolf]

interesting picture showing locations of various interior components of Arjun:

seems like there's a protective fuel tank in the front hull of the arjun, in front of driver and ammunition.

 

[Dejawolf]

There are pictures of many prototypes built for many purposes from 1990 to 2012 ,other than armor fitment of arjun floating freely on the net,

well, lets collect a few then:

 

[Shaitan]

I like your graphics.
@Dejawolf

 

[ersakthivel]

well, lets collect a few then:

If the last picture is ARJUN MK_2,Then what is the tank being discussed in the links below?
http://trishul-trident.blogspot.in/2011/04/arjun-mk2-mbt-emerges.html

The Arjun Mk2 will incorporate a total of 93 upgrades, including 13 major improvements. Rollout of the first prototype will take place by this June, and by 2013

The CVRDE, with IMI's help, has also redesigned the Arjun Mk1's turret to incorporate modular sloped armour fittings, and has developed a slat-armour package to protect the MBT against anti-tank rocket-propelled grenade (RPG) attacks. It functions by placing a rigid barrier around the vehicle, which causes the shaped-charge warhead to explode at a relatively safe distance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arjun_(tank)

As part of improving the Arjun to the Mark-II variant, DRDO is continuing to .... a director in charge of trial and evaluation, said that the last year's user field trial .... DRDO chief V.K. Saraswat, also the scientific adviser to the defence minister, told HT ... is helping to augment Arjun Mk II's mobility, redesign its turret and hull and

http://www.defencenow.com/news/748/...s-undergoes-trials-in-rajasthan-for-army.html

In an earlier statement, DRDO chief VK Saraswat had indicated that the new variant (Arjun Mk-II) is likely to achieve 90% indigenous component. The Arjun tank hull and turret has been modified to achieve the target weight of about 55 tons from 59-64 tons. Israeli firm Elbit is helping to enhance its firepower and battlefield survivability and IMI is helping to augment Arjun Mk II's mobility, redesign its turret and hull and improve its production-line processes.

The photograph of the last tank is modified arjun MK-1 test bed validating some improvements for MK_2.

It is not the actaul MK-2.So please don't jump in with some wrong drawings and armor estimate like you did for the mk-1 with discarded light TANK-ex prototype.

This is the problem I highlighted again and again with you guys.You are just being too economical with the truth.

Don't jump to conclusions that suit your convenience with no regard to truth.

 

[militarysta]

besides pixels there is something called scales and the effect of angle from which the photo was taken also has an effect on your measurements.

Without any doubt I have mucht bigger expirience then You Even when we take into account the angle at which the picture was taken then it change nothing - there is no backplate in 2.18 "diameter of the hatch" or even visible on interior photo. In fact backplate on loaders side is in place where I pointed. And LOS after main sight is 450mm or 500mm in best case. You can argue agains whole world, bud Dejawolf have right, and I have right. Arjun protection whit that turret have serious gaps: almoust non protected turrets sides and erea behin main sight.
And LOS value given by me are pretty close to the reality - you can't rescale any photos and even find backate on interior picutre, so please don't argue whit persons who are doing this mesurments quite offen. Dejawolf made it as PRO, Damian and I made it in more as a hobby, but im doing this for more then 5 yers. And most of my own mesurment are guite correct vide Leo-2, Merkava Mk.IV, CR2, M1A2, T-90A, T-72B, etc.

 

[Dejawolf]

The photograph of the last tank is modified arjun MK-1 test bed validating some improvements for MK_2.

It is not the actaul MK-2.So please don't jump in with some wrong drawings and armor estimate like you did for the mk-1 with discarded light TANK-ex prototype.

This is the problem I highlighted again and again with you guys.You are just being too economical with the truth.

Don't jump to conclusions that suit your convenience with no regard to truth.

i'd ask you the same thing,i'm not the one who downgraded my armour estimates by as much as 1000mm on the arjun front turret....
Arjun Mk.II revealed
Livefist: India's Arjun Mk.2 Tank Revealed

 

[Dejawolf]

oh and as for this picture:

it's the roof of an israeli namer apc.

 

[pmaitra]

I like your graphics.
@Dejawolf

+1

Me too. Very good work by @Dejawolf.

 

[ersakthivel]

Without any doubt I have mucht bigger expirience then You Even when we take into account the angle at which the picture was taken then it change nothing - there is no backplate in 2.18 "diameter of the hatch" or even visible on interior photo. In fact backplate on loaders side is in place where I pointed. And LOS after main sight is 450mm or 500mm in best case. You can argue agains whole world, bud Dejawolf have right, and I have right. Arjun protection whit that turret have serious gaps: almoust non protected turrets sides and erea behin main sight.
And LOS value given by me are pretty close to the reality - you can't rescale any photos and even find backate on interior picutre, so please don't argue whit persons who are doing this mesurments quite offen. Dejawolf made it as PRO, Damian and I made it in more as a hobby, but im doing this for more then 5 yers. And most of my own mesurment are guite correct vide Leo-2, Merkava Mk.IV, CR2, M1A2, T-90A, T-72B, etc.

Even when we take into account the angle at which the picture was taken then it change nothing

the above statement shows the worth of your 5 year experience or rather the lack of it.no one can arrive at any conclusion without knowing the exact angles, which the photographer himself has no knowledge.he would have just stood there and clicked the snap.

This 5 year experience of posting at various threads won't change the basic reality of engineering drawing.The LOS you are talking is the LOS of a partially blind man without knowing the exact angles.

See in engineering drawing there are two types of drawing
one----- Production drawing------------drawings with three images elevation, front view,plan view each on a plane at 90 degree angles to each other and each with the same scale.

These are the basic drawings marked with dimension detail to give accurate ideas about the dimension and co relation between of different parts.
for even more complex parts various cutaway diagrams at various angles are given.

Two------perspective drawings-------They are exactly like photographs taken from any angle of convenience.There is no way you can get the actual dimensions without knowing the exact angle at which these are taken.

If you want to get accurate dimensions ,then these photos of the same object should be taken from three planes that are 90 degree apart from each other.

that's why even my calculation effort which arrived at 680 mm space for armor is also inaccurate as pointed out by kunal.because the turret top and the man sitting inside the tank are taken at different places at different unknown angles (no one is certain that both are of the same model at all!!!!!!!!!!!!)

My effort was to try to expose the wrong assumptions of DEJA WOLF and nothing more.

So this absurd pixel black magic should stop.If you have any doubts please ask a third year mechanical engineering student about it.
So you just can't measure the dimensions and come to any conclusion from them, and teah pathetic geometry lessons to tank designers.So please stop before real professionals start laughing at this.