Arjun vs T90 MBT

[Kunal Biswas]

Re: Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT) Mark II

Arjun beat T-90 in combine trails, Let it be firing or mobility ..

If that so even according to Army`s trail official data, All other BS goes down to the toilet ..

All of this appears not very accurate,

Arjun is just a few CMs(20 &10)wider and higher than T-90.So being seen from miles is a huge exaggeration.

T-90 fails to perform in the most critical indian thar desert theater due to low power from over heating engine, and sights that fail in tracking target at night , along with crew fainting heat inside.None of this is present in Arjun.

It is not bulk which dcides the use of tank in loose soil area. It is the weight in KGs per square inch , where Arjun is better than T-90 and even T-72.

Arjun is also the most accurate firing tank on the move as per army evaluation itself and it has passed ACCURT trials which tests in which a tank has to run for thousands of Kms in a short span of time and all components are testes for their stated life time and checked.

 

[ersakthivel]

Re: Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT) Mark II

true that sir.

even i had asked a t90 tank commander about arjun... answer was swift..:: i dont want to command a tank that can be seen by an enemy miles away, or i cant use it in certain sectors because its bulky, breaks down easily and cant hit its target properly...

This is one of the most basic report committed by people degrading a DRDO product.

Unless the services ask , GOI does not sanction money to start a project which it thinks will be a good one to have in future.

case in point is tejas mk-3 stealth variant.The IAF is yet to put a requirement , despite V.K. Saraswath saying repeatedly it can be done ,since a lot of concept works done on the older MCA project(new project is AMCA as per IAF demand) can be used for that.

If the IA asks CVRDE to move the sight to the top and fully cover the front turret on both sides of the main gun with ERA it will be done.

But initially the mainsight was placed near the gun and not on the top as per older LEO design which should have been prescribed by IA according to their wishes.

Without understanding this people repeatedly say the main sight area is weak and argument ran for pages here on this issue.If today the IA asks the CVRDE to shift the main sight to the turret top like latest model LEO, it will be done in no time.

DRDO is not a consumer product company like a TATA MOTORS to conduct a market survey and design a product like Nano on its own.

ARJUn's reliability is proved beyond any doubt and the IA chief himself has acknowledged in his letter and it is stated in 2009 joint parliamentary standing committee report as well.

http://frontierindia.net/arjun-mbt-weight-implications

The above link authentically proves that most of the concerns expressed on Arjun's bulk and all terrain handling ability are bogus.

Some senior Indian army officers have the opinion that the Arjun is too heavy for bridges on Indian western border and for the bridging equipment held by the Indian Army Corps of Engineers. We need to look at the Arjun MBT weight issue in a broader perspective, at the entirety of reasons and implications. It has to be analyzed based on tactical and strategic mobility of the Arjun Tank. [mpinpage]


Arjun MBT has a bigger track-print, hence, its Nominal Ground Pressure is only 0.84 kg/cm2 which compares well with other MBTs of the world . Further, with a combination of low NGP and high power / weight ratio, it has commendable going ability

. The proof being Arjun MBT crossing the Ravi at Lassian, without any engineer support, whatsoever and it has crossed numerous patches of marshy terrain which are marked 'non-tankable' in going maps of the Gurdaspur-Pathankot sector

Read more: http://frontierindia.net/arjun-mbt-weight-implications#ixzz2rZEv4cGI
Frontier India - news, Analysis, Opinion
Follow us: @frontierindia on Twitter | frontierindia on Facebook

In a THE WEEK article it was mentioned that most of the rivers on Tibet are around 120 meters wide only.So with bridging support Arjun can go there as well.

T-90 puts 0.94 Kg weight on every square inch on which it stands,

Arjun puts 0.84 Kg weight on every square inch on which it stands, lowest in the world among MBTs, with its wid track distributing the weight in more efficient manner.Most IA people don't understand this. As this is an often overlooked technical parameter of the ARJUN.

Why it is so. Because the CV

SO infact it is the bulky ARJUn that can go in areas where T-90 can't go.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

I think both T-90 and Arjun need proper ERA coverage ..

Some work by me ------ >>

MK1

T-90

 

[TrueSpirit1]

Re: Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT) Mark II

All of this appears not very accurate,

Arjun is just a few CMs(20 &10)wider and higher than T-90.So being seen from miles is a huge exaggeration.

T-90 fails to perform in the most critical indian thar desert theater due to low power from over heating engine, and sights that fail in tracking target at night , along with crew fainting heat inside.None of this is present in Arjun.

It is not bulk which dcides the use of tank in loose soil area. It is the weight in KGs per square inch , where Arjun is better than T-90 and even T-72.

Arjun is also the most accurate firing tank on the move as per army evaluation itself and it has passed ACCURT trials which tests in which a tank has to run for thousands of Kms in a short span of time and all components are testes for their stated life time and checked.

From what I know, detractors of Arjun MK1 criticize Arjun on primarily four counts:

1) Silhouette: the boxy turrent design is indeed quite outdated & a disadvantage.

2) Firepower: Army wants a smoothbore gun capable of firing the latest long-rod APFSDS rounds. Rifled-gun is history & pretty much pointless. Now, a smoothbore is as accurate as rifled one. Besides, other known shortcomings of a rifled gun like being quite maintenance intensive & more prone to wear & tear, inability to use NATO-standard rounds. However, its a surprise how Army failed to communicate to DRDO what it wants.

3) Mobility of Arjun from home-base to battlefield: Indian infrastructure not being traditionally accustomed to transporting a heavier class tank. This is real problem & cannot be brushed under carpet. Communication gaps between Army-DRDO.

4) Overall reliability is suspect (as per Army): FCS overheating, occasional failure of power packs, failure of hydro-pneumatic suspension units, shearing of top rollers and chipping of gun barrels etc. (maybe, isolated incidents during trial due to planned sabotage)

5) A general complaint: It is DRDO stamped-foreign tank due to high % of imported components.

Otherwise, Army likes Arjun's accuracy / firing on the move capability, crew comfort, armour protection, etc.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Re: Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT) Mark II

Its a reply for most of the people there ..

1 ==>

Arjun height > 2.32 metres
Arjun width > 3.864 metres

T-90 height > 2.22 meters
T-90 Width > 3.78 meters

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

T-90 has similar Box turret >

Box turret if proved obsolete, It would not been considered by other nations, Including Japan with there new tank so does German and US the logic is box turret design provide space for more ammo and electronics, So does valuable ammo bins with blow off panels, Who ever said this boxy turret is outdated does not hold knowledge about Armour ..

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

2 >

Army does not want a smooth-bore, If so there would be one in Arjun MK2, Army want Smooth-bore in FMBT, As far as i know that DRDO is making or already a longer APFSDS for MK2 ..

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

3 >

The roads infrastructure at border area cannot handle T-72 weight either, And Indian T-90S are more than 50tons due to Kanchan Armour ..

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

4 >

If that so, Will it able to beat T-90 in combine trails, Read more at this thread, Links and details are provided ..

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

5 >

It is true that Arjun` some of the parts are foreign which is 30% at most, But most importantly its design for Indian requirement and baby step towards fully self sufficient in coming wars ..

From what I know, detractors of Arjun MK1 criticize Arjun on primarily four counts:

1) Silhouette: the boxy turrent design is indeed quite outdated & a disadvantage.

2) Firepower: Army wants a smoothbore gun capable of firing the latest long-rod APFSDS rounds. Rifled-gun is history & pretty much pointless. Now, a smoothbore is as accurate as rifled one. Besides, other known shortcomings of a rifled gun like being quite maintenance intensive & more prone to wear & tear, inability to use NATO-standard rounds. However, its a surprise how Army failed to communicate to DRDO what it wants.

3) Mobility of Arjun from home-base to battlefield: Indian infrastructure not being traditionally accustomed to transporting a heavier class tank. This is real problem & cannot be brushed under carpet. Communication gaps between Army-DRDO.

4) Overall reliability is suspect (as per Army): FCS overheating, occasional failure of power packs, failure of hydro-pneumatic suspension units, shearing of top rollers and chipping of gun barrels etc. (maybe, isolated incidents during trial due to planned sabotage)

5) A general complaint: It is DRDO stamped-foreign tank due to high % of imported components.

Otherwise, Army likes Arjun's accuracy / firing on the move capability, crew comfort, armour protection, etc.

 

[sayareakd]

I think both T-90 and Arjun need proper ERA coverage ..

Some work by me ------ >>

kunal sir pre fabricated large sheets with blocks are what is needed for T90s and Arjun series tank. So that it will be easy to put on and take off. These bricks do have space in them.

 

[TrueSpirit1]

Re: Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT) Mark II

Its a reply for most of the people there ..


It is true that Arjun` some of the parts are foreign which is 30% at most, But most importantly its design for Indian requirement and baby step towards fully self sufficient in coming wars ..

I don't claim credit for any of my observations because I have no direct experience on modern MBT's & my post was made entirely on hearsay (casual conversations with friends most of whom are not from armored corps & only have some on-off experience with Arjun in wargames).

 

[sayareakd]

Re: Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT) Mark II

Russian if you are reading this, look again both are not copies...........:taunt1:
Last time T90S was beaten hands down by Arjun MK-I, if you guys want Mk-2 will beat T90SM.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

I appreciate you posted those questions, These question must be answered time to time again ..

 

[sayareakd]

Re: Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT) Mark II

From what I know, detractors of Arjun MK1 criticize Arjun on primarily four counts:

1) Silhouette: the boxy turrent design is indeed quite outdated & a disadvantage.

Tanks have max firing range of about 4 km and average about 2 kms, not much difference between T90s and Arjun. when you see both tanks at such distance. About box turret design of Arjun, it is based on hit absorbing concept, which means if fired on by anti tank weapon it is suppose to absorb the hit, slope armor is for hit avoidance, means it will deflect on impact, but this does not happen all the time. Even the ERA armor which the Russians used in Georgian war, was useless against lastest anti tank weapons.

2) Firepower: Army wants a smoothbore gun capable of firing the latest long-rod APFSDS rounds. Rifled-gun is history & pretty much pointless. Now, a smoothbore is as accurate as rifled one. Besides, other known shortcomings of a rifled gun like being quite maintenance intensive & more prone to wear & tear, inability to use NATO-standard rounds. However, its a surprise how Army failed to communicate to DRDO what it wants.

T90S and Arjun tank, Arjun tank is accurate, plus it work fine when tested continually, even British MBT use rifle gun. BTW why you want to use NATO round ? Just because they have standardised it does not mean we should do the same. BTW LAHAT is used successfully from Arjun tank gun using rubber coating.

3) Mobility of Arjun from home-base to battlefield: Indian infrastructure not being traditionally accustomed to transporting a heavier class tank. This is real problem & cannot be brushed under carpet. Communication gaps between Army-DRDO.

Lol, Indian army earlier handle heaver tank, plus with tanks all their infrastructure including tank bridges moves with it.

4) Overall reliability is suspect (as per Army): FCS overheating, occasional failure of power packs, failure of hydro-pneumatic suspension units, shearing of top rollers and chipping of gun barrels etc. (maybe, isolated incidents during trial due to planned sabotage)

These things are worse in T90S tank. Russians didnt give gun tech, fire control computer and armor tech and we paid for TOT........

Now home made T90S use Arjun tech................:taunt1: Please tell that Indian army, T90S they use which is made in India is thanks to Arjun.

5) A general complaint: It is DRDO stamped-foreign tank due to high % of imported components.

Well better to have some % foreign tank then whole foreign tank, if army give order by thousand and tank factory can break even then all the parts can be made in India, it is IA fault that we are forced to import parts as it is economically not possible to set up factory for these parts and then order never comes will end in heavy loss to investor.

Otherwise, Army likes Arjun's accuracy / firing on the move capability, crew comfort, armour protection, etc.

DGMF is more interested in ways and means to get commission and kick backs.

 

[sayareakd]

@TrueSpirit1 following tanks have box turret design.

M1A1

Type90 Japan

K2 South korea

leopard2

 

[bhramos]

can Arjun cross such mud holes,

as i heard back in 65 or 71 war, Indian Army opened a Dam gates so all Pak Tanks struck in Mud fields of Punjab... can some one remember the scene please,

thanks in advance..

 

[TrueSpirit1]

Re: Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT) Mark II

Tanks have max firing range of about 4 km and average about 2 kms, not much difference between T90s and Arjun. when you see both tanks at such distance.

Don't know. What I have been told is there is a marked difference in silhouette which is primarily due to Arjun's WWII-style non-sloping turret (quoting exact words, not mine).

About box turret design of Arjun, it is based on hit absorbing concept, which means if fired on by anti tank weapon it is suppose to absorb the hit, slope armor is for hit avoidance, means it will deflect on impact, but this does not happen all the time. Even the ERA armor which the Russians used in Georgian war, was useless against lastest anti tank weapons.

Ohk, I had not heard that. Nice to know that.

even British MBT use rifle gun.

Yeah, only the British use that. I believe, the MBT that replaces Challenger in future would have a smoothbore. That's the way forward for all MBT programs.

n BTW why you want to use NATO round ? Just because they have standardised it does not mean we should do the same.

Yes, this is not an urgent or critical matter for us. We are not US stooges & have no plans to become that.

BTW LAHAT is used successfully from Arjun tank gun using rubber coating

.

Yes, read that somewhere.

Lol, Indian army earlier handle heaver tank,

Which ones ? Centurions ? I dont know.

plus with tanks all their infrastructure including tank bridges moves with it.

IA guys talk about limitations in our rail infrastructure & Indo-Pak bridges. However, they concede that Arjun is the best bet for fording rivers & canals in Pakistan since it is based on Leopard2A4.

Btw, I know that MBT's all over the world are getting only heavier & there is no way IA can avoid that. 3-crew doctrine needs to be modified to 4-crew.

These things are worse in T90S tank.

Yeah, but due to reasons best known to IA higher ups, T-90 & not Arjun, is our MBT & would continue to be in future.

Russians didn't give gun tech, fire control computer and armor tech and we paid for TOT........

Yes, even I thought so but as per @p2prada all this was rectified long back & there are no issues now.

Now home made T90S use Arjun tech................:taunt1: Please tell that Indian army, T90S they use which is made in India is thanks to Arjun.

Well better to have some % foreign tank then whole foreign tank, if army give order by thousand and tank factory can break even then all the parts can be made in India, it is IA fault that we are forced to import parts as it is economically not possible to set up factory for these parts and then order never comes will end in heavy loss to investor.

I completely agree.

DGMF is more interested in ways and means to get commission and kick backs.

Most people would agree with you but its surprising to see IA's continued reluctance / non-commitment to induct Arjun in big numbers & decision to continue to T-90 alone as its MBT.

Are they not afraid of being indicted with corruption / bribery charges ? I mean, these days people should be little careful with the sting ops etc. Does the truth lie somewhere in between ?

 

[sayareakd]

can Arjun cross such mud holes,

as i heard back in 65 or 71 war, Indian Army opened a Dam gates so all Pak Tanks struck in Mud fields of Punjab... can some one remember the scene please,

thanks in advance..

yeah my father has told me those stories, because of the automatic gear tanks were stuck in mud and our guys have easy time shooting them.
our tanks didnt had this problem because it was manual gears, drivers just drive through mud on first gear, whereas the Pakistani tanks being auto gear tends to jump from first to second and so on thereby getting stuck in Mud.

IA learning from the above, has made DRDO to have manual gear shifts.

 

[sayareakd]

Re: Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT) Mark II

Don't know. What I have been told is there is a marked difference in silhouette which is primarily due to Arjun's WWII-style non-sloping turret (quoting exact words, not mine).

already posted that A1M1, K2 of Korea, Type 90 Japan and few others have same design

Yeah, only the British use that. I believe, the MBT that replaces Challenger in future would have a smoothbore. That's the way forward for all MBT programs.

if the gun work fine, i dont think you will have any problem. Even Israelis who didnt have their own gun initially (now they have) appreciated it.

IA guys talk about limitations in our rail infrastructure & Indo-Pak bridges. However, they concede that Arjun is the best bet for fording rivers & canals in Pakistan since it is based on Leopard2A4.

Kunal sir has already posted arjun on rail pic.

and dont expect that Pakistanis will allow T90S to pass through their bridges without destroying them.............

Btw, I know that MBT's all over the world are getting only heavier & there is no way IA can avoid that. 3-crew doctrine needs to be modified to 4-crew.

even Chinese are getting heavy MBTs as they know protection is what matters, they are not going for Al Khalids types.

Yeah, but due to reasons best known to IA higher ups, T-90 & not Arjun, is our MBT & would continue to be in future.

Less the said about DGMF better it is.

Yes, even I thought so but as per @p2prada all this was rectified long back & there are no issues now.

No issues because of what OFB learn from Arjun tank and not otherwise or that Russians help us...........

Most people would agree with you but its surprising to see IA's continued reluctance / non-commitment to induct Arjun in big numbers & decision to continue to T-90 alone as its MBT.

Pakistan has invested heavily on Anti tank and tanks and they have equal numbers of tank against us, plus their T80UD and Alkhalids can do what T90s can do, so where is the difference.

Are they not afraid of being indicted with corruption / bribery charges ? I mean, these days people should be little careful with the sting ops etc. Does the truth lie somewhere in between ?

DGMF first said that arjun is outdated, then when Arjun beat down T90s hands down, he had to bite his words, he give lollipop of FMBT and during his tenure last nail in coffin was Russian termination of FMBT.............. so finally we guys had last laugh...........

 

[Kunal Biswas]

In our country and only perhaps ours, Where National product are tagged with 20-70-90 foreign where at same time foreign tanks are with 20-50-90% with Indian components as there foreign parts are not working or not transferred ..

A tank is held formidable on three basis :

1. Armour
2. Mobility
3. Firepower

T-90 has Indian Kanchan, Gun of ARDE made 125mm which is not Russian licensed but based on 2A46M, Only the mobility is Russian so does design, T-90 made in India dont have missile firing capability as tot was not shared ..

There is lots of issues with this tank which are not talked about much, Gov does not like so does there bad fishes ..

 

[ersakthivel]

Re: Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT) Mark II

I don't claim credit for any of my observations because I have no direct experience on modern MBT's & my post was made entirely on hearsay (casual conversations with friends most of whom are not from armored corps & only have some on-off experience with Arjun in wargames).

Most of the objections you r friends have raised are from reading articles written by journos with vested interests.

Infact Arjun's rifled does better than T-90 smooth bore and it was proved in Army trials as well, both in on the move and stationary, Rifling which imparts a spin to non- APFSDS rounds help deliver the shell with much greater accuracy and momentum than smooth bore.

In Smooth bore the shell is nor given the spin , leading to tumbling effect where the shell loses height more speedily leading to lesser accuracy at longer ranges , which is a law of physics,

Also Challenger the british MBT which uses rifled gun, holds the record for longest range hit at 8 Km .

WHy tanks changed to smooth bore was with the advent of APFSDS round which should not be spun become the main shell of choice , only smooth bore can be used to fire them.

BUT DRDO solved this problem by putting slip rings around APFSDS rounds which prevents spinning of the round , so there is no problem in firing them as well making the Arjun's rifled gun more versatile with the ability to fire both the APFSDS rounds which should not be spun and Hesh which should be spun,




Also hesh rounds can only be fired from Rifled bore and IA wants to use them in battle,

And no transportation issues as well, Both T-90 and Arjun need bridging equipment support in crossing the old british era 40 ton bridges which can be crossed without bridging equipment support only by the obsolete 40 ton T-72 which is going to be phased out,

DRDO has already developed 60 ton plus sarvantra bridge layer equipment to IA standardized on Arjun's weight which is going to be used by both the T-90 and Arjun,

And the shilloute makes no difference in distances measured in Kms , may be in video games they make a difference,

Can you say the 10 Cm extra width of Arjun can make a difference in spotting , when you consider the fact the normal tank battles happen at a two KM distance as per IA's experience in indian theater?

When covered with ERA Arjun's boxy turret is going to look exactly like T-90 in both mk-2 and mk-1. So this is a false accusation at best.

 

[DivineHeretic]

Re: Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT) Mark II

Most of the objections you r friends have raised are from reading articles written by journos with vested interests.

Infact Arjun's rifled does better than T-90 smooth bore and it was proved in Army trials as well,

Also Challenger the british MBT also uses rifled gun,

And the APFSDS rounds can be fired from Arjun's rifled gun with no problem and great accuracy,

Also hesh rounds can only be fired from Rigfled bore and IA wants to use them in battle,

And no transportation issues as well, Both T-90 and Arjun need bridging equipment support in crossing the old british era 40 ton bridges which can be crossed without bridging equipment support only by the obsolete 40 ton T-72 which is going to be phased out,

DRDO has already developed 60 ton plus sarvantra bridge layer equipment to IA standardized on Arjun's weight which is going to be used by both the T-90 and Arjun,

And the shilloute makes no difference in distances measured in Kms , may be in video games they make a difference,

CAn you say the 10 Cm extra width of Arjun can make a difference in spotting , when you consider the fact the normal tank battles happen at a two KM distance as per IA's experience in indian theater?

When covered with ERA Arjun's boxy turret is going to look exactly like T-90 in both mk-2 and mk-1. So this is a false accusation at best.

Just a slight addition of information:

All road bridges and culverts being built anywhere in India must conform to the 70T-tracked classification: i.e. capacity for 70 Ton tracked vehicle. The earlier requirement was 45T-tracked, with local street level culverts being except from this requirement.

And the DRDO bridge layer also meets the 70T-tracked requirements.

 

[Neil]

Re: Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT) Mark II

All of this appears not very accurate,

Arjun is just a few CMs(20 &10)wider and higher than T-90.So being seen from miles is a huge exaggeration.

T-90 fails to perform in the most critical indian thar desert theater due to low power from over heating engine, and sights that fail in tracking target at night , along with crew fainting heat inside.None of this is present in Arjun.

It is not bulk which dcides the use of tank in loose soil area. It is the weight in KGs per square inch , where Arjun is better than T-90 and even T-72.

Arjun is also the most accurate firing tank on the move as per army evaluation itself and it has passed ACCURT trials which tests in which a tank has to run for thousands of Kms in a short span of time and all components are testes for their stated life time and checked.

well i didnt argue much with him... the moment he told me he has 30+ years of service in IA armored corps- there is a sense of respect that sets in.

And i wont blame him about his views either ... there was lot of negative perception about arjun in those days and many in Army believed that they are been forced down to accept arjun.

Defects found in Arjun tank during trial: Govt - Times Of India

 

[ersakthivel]

Re: Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT) Mark II

well i didnt argue much with him... the moment he told me he has 30+ years of service in IA armored corps- there is a sense of respect that sets in.

And i wont blame him about his views either ... there was lot of negative perception about arjun in those days and many in Army believed that they are been forced down to accept arjun.

That is the problem--The times of india, the most bogus stupid source of news about DRDO products you can ever find on the earth,

They specialize in writing rubbish.

The Israelis who evaluated it as independent authority ,after DRDO found that IA was nitpicking endlessly about the Arjun said this about Arjun,

1."it is a desert Ferrari" due to its high power to weight ratio

2. "The gun delivers the projectiles at the farthest of ranges with the highest of momentum" due to the rifling employed which stabilizes the non-APFSDS rounds in flight with spin ,avoiding tumbling effect of the smooth bore gun which leads to lower ranges ,

3. It's Hydraulic suspension was smooth and the world's first helps for better gun stabilization which results in better on the move accuracy.

All of these were proved in recent Arjun vs T-90 trials and Army quietly accepted that it was the best tank in IA, and choosing the evolved versions of Arjun as their FMBT as well..

Most of it's earlier engine heating troubles were due to the fact that the temp calibration was not done properly , which was rectified later,

And much of its bulk comes from the continuous upward revision of IA specs which repeatedly increased its weight from 40 ton category , which was the original intent to the now 60 ton version,

The reason for the weight is , it houses an extra crew member along with the canisterized ammo and higher weight higher power engine giving it a better gradient climbing performance along with full fording capability.

more here at,

http://forum.worldoftanks.eu/index.php?/topic/57799-smooth-bore-vs-rifled/