Arjun vs T90 MBT

[Damian]

Re: Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

First a fool like you must understand that NAG is a top attack missile and can never get through the armor behind the main sight of ARJUN.

First thing idiot, you need to learn how to read, because it seems nobody teached you that, did you even been in a school during your life?

I said we will do a static test, we will not lanch a missile, we will place it on a frame and detonate it, simple as that, because this is how most tests are done.

And you know why I choose Nag? Simply because I know, that a stupid troll like you, will say that anyother kind of weapon, especially non Indian made, is inferior.

But ok, Nag is not ok? Let's use 9M133 or TOW-2A. These are not top-attack, but have high enough penetration levels.

So do you agree to be a test subject? Do you have enough confidence in your beliefes to risk your life?

As a side note, Nag being top attack or direct attack missile do not have anything to subject, it is irrelevant, what is important it is penetration capabilities of it's warhead, which means if it can penetrate x mm of armor, it can also penetrate frontal armor if it is within the capabilities of warhead. Simple as that, but it seems it still beyond your comprehension capabilities.

Why don't you sit in a BM oplat and let the arjun fire a parabolic round through the main sight?

First it is BM "Oplot", second, why a parabolic trajectory? What do you want to prove here? That roof armor will not protect against such hit?

But it is obvious, and nobody claims otherwise, it is you that claims, that a front armor weak zone will provide adequate protection. Which complete nonsence for any educated being with high enough intelect.

what is the thickness of the roof plate in BM oplat?

70-80mm at high inclination with dynamic protection mounted on it.

Will you survive?

Hit in roof, probably not, but we are not discussing here turret roof protection, we are discussing a frontal protection, it's weak zones, and their impact on vehicle and crew survivability... which I fought should be understandable even for such primitive like you, well I was over optimistic.

 

[ersakthivel]

Re: Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

First thing idiot, you need to learn how to read, because it seems nobody teached you that, did you even been in a school during your life?

I said we will do a static test, we will not lanch a missile, we will place it on a frame and detonate it, simple as that, because this is how most tests are done.

And you know why I choose Nag? Simply because I know, that a stupid troll like you, will say that anyother kind of weapon, especially non Indian made, is inferior.

But ok, Nag is not ok? Let's use 9M133 or TOW-2A. These are not top-attack, but have high enough penetration levels.

So do you agree to be a test subject? Do you have enough confidence in your beliefes to risk your life?



First it is BM "Oplot", second, why a parabolic trajectory? What do you want to prove here? That roof armor will not protect against such hit?

But it is obvious, and nobody claims otherwise, it is you that claims, that a front armor weak zone will provide adequate protection. Which complete nonsence for any educated being with high enough intelect.



70-80mm at high inclination with dynamic protection mounted on it.



Hit in roof, probably not, but we are not discussing here turret roof protection, we are discussing a frontal protection, it's weak zones, and their impact on vehicle and crew survivability... which I fought should be understandable even for such primitive like you, well I was over optimistic.

Why don't to volunteer to sit in a BM oplat in a static test with NAG exploding on the mantlet plate or through the gun barrel?

There are enough weak spots in all tanks besides the 10 cm x 20 cm bottom potion of the main sight in ARJUN mk-1 , which still has close to 600 mm LOS protection even in mk-1 version was my argument which never gets through your composite armored skull.

So carping on this one aspect which is so difficult to target to the exclusion of all other easily targetable items like the gun and the mantlet plate is simply stupid trolling.

long turret tanks like ARJUN have enough spare space to add extra armor block behind the sights in MLUs . But the roof top main sight tanks have a higher chances of going blind by fragmentation or armor piercing bullet hit from three directions which is not the case in ARJUN.

Show me proof for penetration of any missile on composite armor like kanchan whose strength is not known to any one. Least of all a troll like you. OR STFU.

 

[Damian]

Re: Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

But wait a moment, this is not a subject of this discussion. We do not need penetration proof. This is why we want to perform a test.

You made a very clear statement that there is no weak zone behind Arjun's main sight. Ok, but you must proove that yeah? You know why you need to prove that? Because it contradicts any logic and avaiable photos shows there is no significant armor behind main sight.

So I made a proposition for you. You will be a test subject. We will perform a ballistic test by use of any type of ATGM, we will place it on a frame in front of Arjun's main sight, you will sit in a gunner station on a penetration path.

If shaped charge jet, will not kill you, then you are right, if it will kill you, we are right and there is significant weak zone there.

This is a fair deal, and you seems to have a fanatical confidence in you statement that there is no weak zone there. So what you are afraid so much? Afterall you consider us, guys from Europe, as inferior to you, per your beliefes we do not have any knowledge, and this test should be a complete failure to us, and you will emerge from a turret hatch like a god looking on us, poor bastards defeated!

Damn how I love to defeat people like you with sarcasm.

 

[ersakthivel]

Re: Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

But wait a moment, this is not a subject of this discussion. We do not need penetration proof. This is why we want to perform a test.

You made a very clear statement that there is no weak zone behind Arjun's main sight. Ok, but you must proove that yeah? You know why you need to prove that? Because it contradicts any logic and avaiable photos shows there is no significant armor behind main sight.

So I made a proposition for you. You will be a test subject. We will perform a ballistic test by use of any type of ATGM, we will place it on a frame in front of Arjun's main sight, you will sit in a gunner station on a penetration path.

If shaped charge jet, will not kill you, then you are right, if it will kill you, we are right and there is significant weak zone there.

This is a fair deal, and you seems to have a fanatical confidence in you statement that there is no weak zone there. So what you are afraid so much? Afterall you consider us, guys from Europe, as inferior to you, per your beliefes we do not have any knowledge, and this test should be a complete failure to us, and you will emerge from a turret hatch like a god looking on us, poor bastards defeated!

Damn how I love to defeat people like you with sarcasm.

The moment you are ready to sit in an OPLAT for a staic test of NAG at the mantlet plate or though the gun barrel, I too am ready.

Because a maniac like you also needs to prove ,

that the so called weakness behind the main sight in ARJUN which is so difficult to target ,

than the much easily targetable gun mantlet plate which sits smack in the center in other tanks like OPLAT

makes the ARJUN inferior in the battlefield as you kept on crapping in thread after thread.

because you too have the fanatical confidence that this is the only area in ARJUN that has more probability of going to be hit by other tank than the chances of mantlet plates in other tanks with roof top main sight placements.

That was the view I was arguing against,which could not be understood by a stuffed self like you.

Shaped charged jet won't kill any one sitting in OPLAT behind the weak spot like mantlet plate perhaps.

you can look for another retard like yourself to defeat with sarcasm.Not me.Mind it.

Your stuffed superior self in the decrepit part of europe did not even have the numbers to do math if it is not for Indians.


Mind it.

 

[Damian]

Re: Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

The moment you are ready to sit in an OPLAT for a staic test of NAG at the mantlet plate or though the gun barrel, I too am ready.

Because a maniac like you also needs to prove ,

that the so called weakness behind the main sight in ARJUN which is so difficult to target ,

than the much easily targetable gun mantlet plate which sits smack in the center in other tanks like OPLAT

makes the ARJUN inferior in the battlefield as you kept on crapping in thread after thread.

Shaped charged jet won't kill any one sitting in OPLAT behind the weak spot like mantlet plate perhaps.

you can look for another retard like yourself to defeat with sarcasm.Not me.Mind it.

And again, you seems to have problems with understanding what you read.

You said, that there is no weak zone behind Arjun main sight, this is the point, you said so, you are confident in your words.

Then You can provie it by participating in such test.

Now, do you keep up, or it is too difficult for you?

Ok so, you claim that I should sit in BM "Oplot" for a similiar test, but there is a significant different, I did not claimed that gun mantle is not a weak zone, because I am perfectly aware it is a weak zone in all modern tanks.

So I do not have anything to proove here, because I did not claimed that gun mantle will provide sufficent protection, it will not.


You see the difference, or should I accept you are just incapable to communicate with your own species or to use your brain properly?

Then who is retared here? Me or you? Maybe ask yourself if you are really healthy on your mind. Especially that you have even problems with properly writing weapon systems designation codes and their names... you know that properly writing is not "ARJUN" but Arjun with small letters behind "A", and not "OPLAT" but "Oplot" which from Ukrainian to English translates to Hold or Bulwark.

 

[ersakthivel]

Re: Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

And again, you seems to have problems with understanding what you read.

You said, that there is no weak zone behind Arjun main sight, this is the point, you said so, you are confident in your words.

Then You can provie it by participating in such test.

Now, do you keep up, or it is too difficult for you?

Ok so, you claim that I should sit in BM "Oplot" for a similiar test, but there is a significant different, I did not claimed that gun mantle is not a weak zone, because I am perfectly aware it is a weak zone in all modern tanks.

So I do not have anything to proove here, because I did not claimed that gun mantle will provide sufficent protection, it will not.


You see the difference, or should I accept you are just incapable to communicate with your own species or to use your brain properly?

Then who is retared here? Me or you? Maybe ask yourself if you are really healthy on your mind.

you feign lack of understanding about any inconvenient point that you can not rebut. And it is not the first time i am seeing it in you.

in you this trait is dishonesty not lack of comprehension in myself.

What I said was the targetting of the main sight on ARJUN by other tanks is a foolhardy enterprise,

and by the time the enemy tries to do that ,

ARJUN also has the same odds of hitting through many other weak spots on roof top main sight tanks like OPLAT , like mantlet plate .

just get it through to your funny head. Reread the post.

Since your stuffed self greeted with sarcasm that the hitting of a suit case size target from 2 kms by ARJUN is not something you can believe,

Why should I believe your foolhardy venture of some other tank hitting through the 10 cm x 20 cm rectangle from 2 kms

while having their weak spots like mantlet plate safe from ARJUn's shot?

And I know very well that measurement on photographs and you are as distant as north pole and south pole .

So you can stuff the claim that so and so LOS behind main sight in ARJUN up your ---.

And btw who is ghost writing these posts for you?I know that you can not post four sentences with out five spelling mistakes even to save your life. Am I magnifying it like the small typos in my post you dean at oxford cringe at?

 

[Damian]

Re: Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

you feign lack of understanding about any inconvenient point that you can not rebut. And it is not the first time i am seeing it in you.

You are funny you know. You are not making any inconvieniant point, you are just writing BS.

in you this trait is dishonesty not lack of comprehension in myself.

Uhhhh, I am such a dishonest bastard, who do not respect little ersakthivel...

What I said was the targetting of the main sight on ARJUN by other tanks is a foolhardy enterprise,

But who says anything about targetting a main sight? In a normal engagement range, in most tanks optics, targets are just blobs, you aim at their center mass, and shoot, then we have dispersion, sometimes you will hit a well protected spot, sometimes a weak zone. The point is to reduce weak zone by eliminating them or reducing their size.

In case of Arjun we have both a main sight weak zone and huge gun mantle which is also a weak zone, which increase chances to hit one of them.

and by the time the enemy tries to do that ,

ARJUN also has the same odds of hitting through many other weak spots on roof top main sight tanks like OPLAT , like mantlet plate .

Of course, but the BM "Oplot" weak zone is much smaller. Can you get it through your funny head?

 

[ersakthivel]

Re: Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

You are funny you know. You are not making any inconvieniant point, you are just writing BS.



Uhhhh, I am such a dishonest bastard, who do not respect little ersakthivel...



But who says anything about targetting a main sight? In a normal engagement range, in most tanks optics, targets are just blobs, you aim at their center mass, and shoot, then we have dispersion, sometimes you will hit a well protected spot, sometimes a weak zone. The point is to reduce weak zone by eliminating them or reducing their size.

In case of Arjun we have both a main sight weak zone and huge gun mantle which is also a weak zone, which increase chances to hit one of them.



Of course, but the BM "Oplot" weak zone is much smaller. Can you get it through your funny head?

post the los thickness of OPLAT and ARJUN mantlet plate and you will know why your statement is not true.

the pivot of the gun mantlet plate is so deep in ARJUN main gun cutaway in factory floor ,

and you have seen the photos, and Kunal did explain it many times. And this discussion already ran for pages.

So don't feign ignorance.

 

[The Last Stand]

Re: Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

@ersakthivel, even main sight in turret front goes useless when a 9mm round hits it. It isn't protected from the front.

His point stands.

 

[ersakthivel]

Re: Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

@ersakthivel, even main sight in turret front goes useless when a 9mm round hits it. It isn't protected from the front.

His point stands.

But for that the gunner has to stand in front of the tank in line with the gun. because the sight is located deep in the cutaway not even angular shots are possible. So it has more safety margin .

But in some other tanks the roof top main sight with no meaningful armor protection on three sides is ,

far more easily targeted from all four sides was my claim.

 

[The Last Stand]

Re: Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

But for that the gunner has to stand in front of the tank in line with the gun. because the sight is located deep in the cutaway not even angular shots are possible. So it has more safety margin .

But in some other tanks the roof top main sight with no meaningful armor protection on three sides is ,

far more easily targeted from all four sides was my claim.

Indeed. I see your view. But still, there is the unresolved LOS thickness matter. Let's wait till next year.

BTW From when to when will the Def Expo 2014 be held?

---------------

401!

 

[Damian]

Re: Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

All tanks that have main sight on the turret roof, have this sight protected by well armored cover plate, popularly known in tankers slang (at least english speaking) as "doghouse", this "doghouse" provides protection against small arms, shrapnels, projectile fragments etc.

It can be damaged only by armor piercing ammunition of medium calliber automatic cannons, tank guns, RPG's or ATGM's or by direct hit of high calliber HE ammunition.

So "argument" that such sights do not have potection is invalid, and based on complete lack of knowledge.

As for gun mantle protection, it does not matter if it is gun mantle of BM "Oplot", Arjun, M1, Leopard 2 or Merkava Mk4, it is allways weak zone, which is immposible to eliminate in a tank design with manned turret. We can only reduce it's size to minimize chance of hitting it.

 

[The Last Stand]

Re: Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

@Damian, you mentioned Chieftain and Challenger 1 had no mantlet. How could the gun traverse without movement of turret? And would there be any stabilization?

Wouldn't the gun be exposed? And what about co-axial armament.

Confused.

 

[Austin]

Indian T-90 Upgrade ( pg 23 , 28,29 )

July 2013

 

[ersakthivel]

Re: Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

I'am not talking about sloping armor. You still do not understand safe manouvering angles principle.



You confuse width with thickness. The thicker the better yes, but width must be as small as possible.

For example let's take two gun mantle masks. Both have same thickness and weight but one is narrower, this means that narrower one have grater density of armor and with the same weight provides better protection as well still being weak zone, is much smaller and difficult to hit.



Germans were never that great in tank designing as they like to claim. For example Americans were able to crate medium tank, the M26 weighting 40 tons + with the same frontal protection as PzKpfw VI Ausf. H1/E Tiger, but American tank was smaller, more mobile, more reliable and simpler. Same goes for Soviets they created heavy tanks that were smaller, better armored, heavy armed, more mobile, reliable and simpler.

Germans during WWII tended to crate overcomplicated, in many way primitive, oversized and overweighted tanks. Their first really good tank was Leopard 2 yet still with many not very wise design solution.

You should take a closer look to KWS II upgrade program, where Leopard 2 turret was a bit redesigned, the main sight was raised and the old sight "window" was closed by welding there steel block. Still yet this leaves main sight vurnable to frontal hits because ~200mm steel block definetly will not stop a projectile and will be able to damage main sight making use of FCS difficult or even impossible at all.



As I said, Arjun protection and especially turret design in this regard was done with complete ignorance about experience of other nations that are more experienced in tank designing.

Ok let's take it that way, try to find an Arjun drawing or photo from above, then draw a 60-65 degree frontal arc, the arc "tip" should be then placed behind turret. So both sides of turret will be exposed within 30-35 degrees from turret longitudinal axis. Ok then look how much side turret surfaces not protected by composite armor will be exposed to incoming fire from within vehicle frontal arc. This is principle of safe manouvering angles, and this is why vehicles turret need to provide good protection there.

This is achieved in two ways, or by placing there thick composite armor, or by playing with turret geometry and trying to "hide" turret side armor behind front armor within that frontal arc of 60-65 degrees.



In this video it is not seen, but AFAIK US Army soldiers says that it can fire to the sides during movement. It is because M68A2 105mm gun is a modified variant of M68A1 with lower recoil.

Hmmm I wonder if M1128 could be armed with low recoil 120mm gun like XM360, that was also designed for vehicles within weight class of 20 tons, however tracked.



I think US Army is not specially concerned, they have still huge stockplies of 105mm ammunition and need to use it, while M1 tanks use 120mm smoothbore with ammunition using semi combustible casings so they seems to not be worried.



I would be carefull here You know. Burlington development also lead to use of polymers and other non metallic materials as well as reactive elements. And statements that Burlington offered less protection against KE threats might be very far from reality. Americans during tests reported that protection of XM1 and Leopard 2AV was comparable to being in favor of M1, same for British that said the same thing about M1A1 and Leopard 2A4.

You remeber the PDF with article of Pawel Przezdziecki? He made extensive research about Burlington development and it seems that indeed Burlington technology was transferred to Germany and later it was promoted to NATO countries (which ones, it is not know).

I think the main problem with Burlington armor is that there was not single Burlington armor but many different variants, from simple ones to more complex designs. And we don't even know which variant was used where and by whom.

The early Leopard 2 armor might be as well one of Burlington armor variants with different materials and structure design.

Stop posting such wholly incorrect views about Arjun.

You have never seen the tank. And you know nothing about Kanchan armor or side protection or Los behind main sight.

In Arjun Mbt thread in this forum most of your wrong claims based on ignorance has already been proved wrong.

Just accept that you don't know anything about arjun , which is clear to every one in this forum. Don't make wrong claims without even seeing the tank.

 

[ersakthivel]

Re: Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

How do You know that in reality it was better than T-90? If I would be You I would be more carefull with beliving in official statements, especially that the whole tests and Arjun vs T-90 is a political shit hole.



Arjun Mk2, or at least that graphic showing it do not have ERA over this weakened turret side, take a closer look, in place of old storage box there is a new type storage box, and ERA cassettes are placed over currently existing composite armor cavieties.

IMHO if tank have semi modular turret armor, then I would just weld in that place additional steel plates to create composite armor cavity and then place there composite inserts.

So they don't even know to design a proper storage box because it was the first time!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

crazy.

In Arjun mk-2 the ERA tiles cover the place where the first storage box was there in the very old prototypes.

Since you have said that the ERA tiles are placed on turret only where composite armor cavity is there , you should know that the first storage box was replaced by armor long time back and it has no frontal 60 deg arc weakness as claimed by you.

 

[ersakthivel]

Re: Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

Before induction.



It never did. While Russians claimed the T-90 was superior to the Arjun. DRDO never claimed the same. There is not a single news article which claims the Arjun is better than the T-90.

Army bought the T-90 after Arjun trials were complete in 1998-99.



Is this question for me? Anyway we will see the tank in June.

Now there is an MOD report that was submitted to parliamentary standing committee in 2009 that ARJUN is the best tank in Indian army in terms of fire power, mobility, protection ,accuracy.

And trials also proved that Arjun was second to none in IA. And future FMBT is going to be a further development of ARJUN.

 

[Dejawolf]

Re: Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

Now there is an MOD report that was submitted to parliamentary standing committee in 2009 that ARJUN is the best tank in Indian army in terms of fire power, mobility, protection ,accuracy.

And trials also proved that Arjun was second to none in IA. And future FMBT is going to be a further development of ARJUN.

then they lied. T-90 has better firepower than the arjun.

 

[farhan_9909]

Re: Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

then they lied. T-90 has better firepower than the arjun.

how?
Arjun gun calibre is higher than t90
Because of manual loading can also load a even long rod penetrator
has a superior fire control system Because as per Indians claim arjun can accurately fire at a briefcase Size target from 4km

 

[The Last Stand]

Re: Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

how?
Arjun gun calibre is higher than t90
Because of manual loading can also load a even long rod penetrator
has a superior fire control system Because as per Indians claim arjun can accurately fire at a briefcase Size target from 4km

Current ammunition is very poor. And the gun is very bad - much inferior to 2A46M-2 and later 2A46. Not to mention that India's T-90S later orders and T-90MS have their design based on new build T-90A and T-90AM of Russian Army, and T-90MS has confirmed much longer autoloader.

And we never claimed that it can accurately fire at a briefcase sized target from 4 km. (If somebody did, quote me the post) Arjun's gun has same accuracy as Rh 120, i.e. 0.21 milliradians dispersion at 1 km.

Rather, it was your compatriots jumping up and down at the other forum's Al-Khalid thread after the "tests" at Saudi Arabia where the Al-Khalid hit "moving targets" with "100% results" at "4 km"



You are trying to put words in our mouth and failing miserably.