The fact that Arjun has a rifle makes it far more accurate than any comparable smoothbore. The reason why Abrams' smoothbore works very well is because it has excellent "avionics" to help it, which India lacks. I am borrowing the term avionics from aircraft, because there is no equivalent term for tanks.
No. You simply are incapable of understanding the difference between spin-stabilized and fin-stabilized ammunition. The gun is not more accurate, when fin-stabilized ammunition is used, which is the only modern type of ammunition. So much about your "facts".
Does not matter. It's public knowledge & widely acknowledged, no matter how hard it is for some people to digest facts.
Sure, it is a widely known fact, because India does not have any access to modern T-90 armour but still random Indian forum posters know the truth...
Now, tell me what really matters, acceleration or top-speed ?
You fail to understand. You are speaking about a difference of 1 to 2 seconds and pretend it to be a major factor in combat. No, it is not.
In NATO for example the minimal distance a tank will move in combat is estimated to be 400 m (or at least was in the 1970s, which is known as "combat jump",
Kampfsprung in the German language). This is why the two MBT-70 versions, despite being fitted with two different engines (both had different acclerations) was believed to be equal. The same thing can be seen when the Leopard 2 and the M1 Abrams were joint-evaluated. It's the same difference between the Leclerc with hyperbar engine and the tropicalized Leclerc with diesel engine.
Acceleration is non-linear, which also makes generalized jugdements about the acceleration of different engines very hard.
Again, one/few islolated testimonies would not change the basic fact that Indian crew (who rode Arjun) found it way more comfortable than T-90.
I mean, come on, who would really buy the argument that a T-72 is more comfortably than a Arjun-sized tank.
What a surprise, Arjun tankers think it is better than a T-90? Every tanker will tell you that his tank is the best! Ask a group of T-90 tankers to ride in a Arjun and they will tell you the opposite. Ask a Russian tank crew to ride a M1 Abrams and they won't find it more comforable or better.
In the T-90 (like in the T-72 and the T-80) all crew members sit and have to focus on a very few items all located easily accessable from their seats. Have you ever been in a tank?
Agreed, this is the popular notion today but there are enough contrary views as well. Anyway, when Arjun was initially designed designers found it better-suited.
Yes, because the Arjun's development started in the 1974 as "Chetak" and became the "Arjun" in 1985. That the decissions which were made then might not work out as being good in the 2000s is nothing suprising.
Abrams has it today, it did not have it in Iraq. Again, public knowledge. Just do some googling.
You should do some googling. The M908 HE-OR, a specialized anti-bunker round, was introduced into service in Korea in 1997 as XM908. This round was available during Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003. Your public knowledge fails.
The 125 mm gun had HE ammunition from it's first days, the Leopard 2 has been firing pure HE ammunition first in 1994/1995, but at this time only the Swedish ones.
It does imply more powerful i.e. bigger sensors (even going by today's tech.) & more flexibility.
No, it doesn't. Have you ever seen the sights/sensors of a tank in person?
I think TrueSpirit was talking about the armour the Indian T-90s would have got as part of a possible armour ToT. That armour, whatever be it, wouldn't have been the Russian state of the art armour, but some deprecated armour which would have been inferior to Kanchan armour.
If he did talk about that, then he would have lost the context of this discussion. This is not "what would happen if"-discussion, but a discussion about the real situation. Furthermore he posted 6 minutes before your post that this is not what he meant.
