Indian Army Armored Vehicles

[Vorschlaghammer]

Eh? These are for the soon to be made obsolete Dragunov rifles, right???

Used in all T series tank coax mgs also. PKT specifically refers to the coax version of PK

 

[Vorschlaghammer]

None of that precludes them for deploying for 24-48 hour period to get a tactical advantage over the enemy!
If a unmanned tank breaks down, there's not need to rush to fix it as no human lives are at risk!

That's a bit too specialized way of thinking. For example the soviets expected to start WW3 via the fulda gap, initiating the offensive, and maintaining the momentum till the english channel. Massed armored spearheads were supposed to penetrate enemy defenses and the lead elements were even supposed to ignore and bypass enemy formations just so they could extend penetrations upto strategic depth.

To that purpose, they needed numerous afvs, focused towards assault, and designed to be expendable on a nuclear battlefield. That philosophy created the T-6x, 7x and 8x series designs, where the bulk of the armor is concentrated on a frontal 60 degree arc, lightweight, low height, minimal crew with autoloaders, and generic fire control and optics. These designs were well suited for a european theatre, under the soviet deep battle doctrine, but post 1991, these vehicles haven't proven to be well rounded designs. Iraq, Syria and Ukraine hasn't proved them to be well suited in defensive or urban combat, and advancements in modern battlefield technology has further exposed their weaknesses. The russians are fully aware of the problem, yet they can't drop it all and start with a clean slate, cause they can't afford it and they have huge inventories of these vehicles. They have no choice other than continuing to upgrade the T72 to the B3 standard, and also recently the T80 even was announced to be getting upgrades. Armata will probably enter service in small numbers, and most likely won't be a decisive factor until atleast 2030.

Compare and contrast this with the situation of IA, they have limited funding, limited political support, limited indigenous sources, and internal issues. It shouldn't surprise anyone if IA wants to make the best out of their situation and want generic and modular gear and materiel.

 

[Enquirer]

That's a bit too specialized way of thinking. For example the soviets expected to start WW3 via the fulda gap, initiating the offensive, and maintaining the momentum till the english channel. Massed armored spearheads were supposed to penetrate enemy defenses and the lead elements were even supposed to ignore and bypass enemy formations just so they could extend penetrations upto strategic depth.

To that purpose, they needed numerous afvs, focused towards assault, and designed to be expendable on a nuclear battlefield. That philosophy created the T-6x, 7x and 8x series designs, where the bulk of the armor is concentrated on a frontal 60 degree arc, lightweight, low height, minimal crew with autoloaders, and generic fire control and optics. These designs were well suited for a european theatre, under the soviet deep battle doctrine, but post 1991, these vehicles haven't proven to be well rounded designs. Iraq, Syria and Ukraine hasn't proved them to be well suited in defensive or urban combat, and advancements in modern battlefield technology has further exposed their weaknesses. The russians are fully aware of the problem, yet they can't drop it all and start with a clean slate, cause they can't afford it and they have huge inventories of these vehicles. They have no choice other than continuing to upgrade the T72 to the B3 standard, and also recently the T80 even was announced to be getting upgrades. Armata will probably enter service in small numbers, and most likely won't be a decisive factor until atleast 2030.

Compare and contrast this with the situation of IA, they have limited funding, limited political support, limited indigenous sources, and internal issues. It shouldn't surprise anyone if IA wants to make the best out of their situation and want generic and modular gear and materiel.

Again none of that is any reason for not putting 'de-inducted' tanks (when it happens) to few additional decades of work (being the tip of the spear) with a little input in making them unmanned!

 

[Vorschlaghammer]

Again none of that is any reason for not putting 'de-inducted' tanks (when it happens) to few additional decades of work (being the tip of the spear) with a little input in making them unmanned!

It may be so In an ideal world, but we live in a practical one. I don't know anything about the internal workings of IA, but taking an educated guess I do see some practical barriers

Fund crunch: The R&D work, implementation, testing all of these take time and money, which may not be readily available. If a Armored Corps commander brings the topic up at a meeting, another Infantry general might say the funding is needed for buying AKs or 716s for troops in Kashmir.

Bureaucratic inertia: The Indian government bureaucracy is famous for being exceptionally slow, IA is a subordinate to the civilian govt. and may need to wait years for a review from MoD for projects like these. Within the army brass itself there might be an aversion to being on the cutting edge of technology.

Traditional mindedness of Armed forces: All over the world armed forces are known to follow the philosophy of "if it's not broken don't fix it". Generic idioms like "the army fights the next war by preparing for the last one" are applicable everywhere. Historically this lack of reluctance of adopting and embracing new information is very prevalent, be it US ordnance with M14, or European armies with machine guns at 1914.


For whatever reason, while a fully autonomous tank might be too radical of an idea for the army, a more acceptable approach could be in designing a new turret and autoloader with the existing hull. I believe they tried that with tank-ex, but the russians objected, and the project went nowhere.

 

[Advaidhya Tiwari]

Again none of that is any reason for not putting 'de-inducted' tanks (when it happens) to few additional decades of work (being the tip of the spear) with a little input in making them unmanned!

Why do you want tanks at all if it is unmanned? What is the point of heavy armour if it does not have anyone inside to protect? Won't that be unnecessarily fuel expensive? T90 consumes 2 litre fuel per kilometer. This can be reduced by making the vehicle much lighter

Also, why not simply get the job done by UCAV since drones can see everything on the ground?

 

[Enquirer]

It may be so In an ideal world, but we live in a practical one. I don't know anything about the internal workings of IA, but taking an educated guess I do see some practical barriers

Fund crunch: The R&D work, implementation, testing all of these take time and money, which may not be readily available. If a Armored Corps commander brings the topic up at a meeting, another Infantry general might say the funding is needed for buying AKs or 716s for troops in Kashmir.

Bureaucratic inertia: The Indian government bureaucracy is famous for being exceptionally slow, IA is a subordinate to the civilian govt. and may need to wait years for a review from MoD for projects like these. Within the army brass itself there might be an aversion to being on the cutting edge of technology.

Traditional mindedness of Armed forces: All over the world armed forces are known to follow the philosophy of "if it's not broken don't fix it". Generic idioms like "the army fights the next war by preparing for the last one" are applicable everywhere. Historically this lack of reluctance of adopting and embracing new information is very prevalent, be it US ordnance with M14, or European armies with machine guns at 1914.


For whatever reason, while a fully autonomous tank might be too radical of an idea for the army, a more acceptable approach could be in designing a new turret and autoloader with the existing hull. I believe they tried that with tank-ex, but the russians objected, and the project went nowhere.

The problem on this forum (and probably in the IA circles too) is that it's impossible to appreciate a creative idea that might actually become a force multiplier (based on existing indigenous technology).....but it's easy to orgasm at some hackneyed work done by 'other' countries!

I wouldn't be suggesting this idea if the tech wasn't already developed. Muntra has proved to be effective enough for induction!

 

[Enquirer]

Why do you want tanks at all if it is unmanned? What is the point of heavy armour if it does not have anyone inside to protect? Won't that be unnecessarily fuel expensive? T90 consumes 2 litre fuel per kilometer. This can be reduced by making the vehicle much lighter

Also, why not simply get the job done by UCAV since drones can see everything on the ground?

The idea is not to build something brand new (at a huge expense) but to re-purpose an old-soon-to-be-deinducted machinery into a force multiplier.
Existing armor will protect (even) the unmanned tank from anything less than next gen ATGM!!

 

[Vorschlaghammer]

Why do you want tanks at all if it is unmanned? What is the point of heavy armour if it does not have anyone inside to protect? Won't that be unnecessarily fuel expensive? T90 consumes 2 litre fuel per kilometer. This can be reduced by making the vehicle much lighter

Also, why not simply get the job done by UCAV since drones can see everything on the ground?

I believe he's thinking of ways to recycle retired T-72s and make them combat effective again. That's not technically impossible, USAF has had QF16s for a while, Russians are developing small UGVs, Chinese are researching Full size autonomous tanks, but IA has many other things on it's plate that need attention first.

 

[Vorschlaghammer]

The problem on this forum (and probably in the IA circles too) is that it's impossible to appreciate a creative idea that might actually become a force multiplier (based on existing indigenous technology).....but it's easy to orgasm at some hackneyed work done by 'other' countries!

Well thought exercises and academic discussions are always fun and thought provoking, but we do need to look at the ground reality as well. There are absolute facts, and then there are contextual facts. I would very much want free electricity produced from a working fusion reactor, the physics is already established and well understood, but we just haven't been able to implement it in a practical and reasonable way. Concepts and ideas can't live in a vacuum if they are to be made usable, they have to be synergistic with the surroundings.

 

[Enquirer]

Well thought exercises and academic discussions are always fun and thought provoking, but we do need to look at the ground reality as well. There are absolute facts, and then there are contextual facts. I would very much want free electricity produced from a working fusion reactor, the physics is already established and well understood, but we just haven't been able to implement it in a practical and reasonable way. Concepts and ideas can't live in a vacuum if they are to be made usable, they have to be synergistic with the surroundings.

At this point I am beginning to see why I had to start every previous response beginning with the word 'again'.

Remote controlled vehicle/tank/dozer has already been proven by DRDO...comparing it to and brushing it off as fusion reactor is simply STUPID.

I rest.

 

[Vorschlaghammer]

At this point I am beginning to see why I had to start every previous response beginning with the word 'again'.

Remote controlled vehicle/tank/dozer has already been proven by DRDO...comparing it to and brushing it off as fusion reactor is simply STUPID.

I rest.

"again", possibility and feasibility are 2 different things. Try to understand the underlying point, without getting fixated on the surface metaphors. Tech demo =/= production system.

 

[Enquirer]

"again", possibility and feasibility are 2 different things. Try to understand the underlying point, without getting fixated on the surface metaphors. Tech demo =/= production system.

I can't drag you from under the rock of 'denial'....if you're so comfortable under it.

At least for the sake of the forum standards, stop lying just to stroke your own ego!
Muntra is not just a 'possibility' it has been proven as 'feasible'! That tech is already being 'exported' to other platforms!

I'll be adding you to the list of those who says stupid things and argue till death to defend it.

 

[Advaidhya Tiwari]

The idea is not to build something brand new (at a huge expense) but to re-purpose an old-soon-to-be-deinducted machinery into a force multiplier.
Existing armor will protect (even) the unmanned tank from anything less than next gen ATGM!!

I believe he's thinking of ways to recycle retired T-72s and make them combat effective again. That's not technically impossible, USAF has had QF16s for a while, Russians are developing small UGVs, Chinese are researching Full size autonomous tanks, but IA has many other things on it's plate that need attention first.

I understand the concept of reusing. But the problem is that the tan weighs so much and consumes so much fuel, the fuel expense will outweigh cost benefits of reusing. As I said, mileage of 0.5km per litre for is too low and light armoured vehicle with mileage of 2-3km per litre will reduce fuel cost by 4-6 times.

Also, T72 is not going to retire anytime soon. Recently an order for 1000 engines to upgrade T72 has been placed. This means that T72 life will be extended to at least 2040


India to Procure 1,000 Engines for T-72 Main Battle Tank Force

India’s Ministry of Defense (MoD) has approved the procurement of 1,000 new engines for the Indian Army’s T-72M1 Ajeya main battle tank (MBT) force, according to a September 26 statement.

The Defense Acquisition Council, the MoD’s principal procurement body, headed by the defense minister, has “accorded approval for procurement of 1000 engines of 1000 BHP for fitment in T-72 tanks of the Army under ‘Buy & Make’ category and at an approximate cost of over Rs 2300 crore [$313 million],” the MoD press statement notes.

The majority of engines will be produced locally by the Engine Factory Avadi (EFA), a subdivision of the Ordnance Factories Board. “The engines will enhance mobility, agility, and acceleration of T-72 tanks making them more versatile and effective in the battlefield,” the MoD adds.

The MoD did not specify the engine type to be procured, although it has apparently abandoned plans to upgrade its T-72 force with Polish-made engines. EFA is currently producing two separate homemade engines. The indigenously-produced high-power multifuel engine V-46-6, based on Russian design, has a 780 hp capacity, whereas EFA’s second locally-made high-power multifuel engine, the V92S2, boasts 1,000 hp and has been specifically designed for the T-90 MBT.

The bulk of the Indian Army’s MBT force consists of 1,800+ T-72M1 Ajeyas imported during 1982 to 1986. Around 1,500 T-72 Ajeyas are in the process of being upgraded with new engines, new fire control systems, reactive armor, fire detection and suppression systems, as well as new communication and navigation systems under the Combat Improved Ajeya program, code-named Project Rhino. Although the first phase of the program already kicked off in the 1980s, is unclear how many MBTs have been upgraded to date as it has been seriously delayed by budget shortfalls. According to one estimate, around 70 percent of Indian T-72s are currently not ready for combat.

In addition to the T-72M1, the Indian Army operates two variants of the third-generation Russian T-90 MBT — the T-90S Bhishma and T-90SM (other designations T-90AM or T-90MS). While some sources say that India is operating over 1,200 license-built T-90S Bhishma and T-90M MBTs, it unclear how many have, in fact, been delivered, and are operational. One estimate puts the number of license-built T-90S Bhishma tanks at 850-900, while the total number of T-90S and T-90SM is estimated at somewhere from 800 to 1,200 MBTs. The Indian Army is currently in the process of procuring an additional 464 T-90SM MBTs.

The Indian Army is also operating the ArjunMK-I tank, an indigenously developed MBT based on the German Leopard II MBT design, of which 124 have been delivered to the service to date. Notably, over 75 percent of Arjun MK-I MBTs remain grounded due to various technical problems and as a result of missing spare parts. To close its MBT capability gap, India’s MoD issued a global request for information (RFI) in November 2017 to develop and build 1,770 armored fighting vehicles, principally to replace the Indian Army’s T-72 MBTs in the next decade. A request for proposal (RFP), the next stage in the procurement process, however, has not been issued to date.

 

[Bhadra]

Relax, gentlemen.

We are buying technology. Nothing more, nothing less. We also, as a bonus to the technology, get 464 tanks to replace the old T72s.

What technology? The high velocity Armata gun. The Vacuum 2 round. The new ERA.

In due course, derivatives will find their way into the Arjun program.

The main problem with the Arjun program is a lack of spares and ammunition.

Spares will get sorted out. With the new orders; ammo is a problem. No one else manufactures 120 mm rifled ammo. Perhaps a swap of the 120mm rifled barrels with 125mm Russian smoothbore is on the cards?

Although there is also talk of Israeli help with the 120mm ammo. ‍

Arjun looks like a raised pillbox as compared to T-90MS low silhouette .
If your tank is made out from 80% imported item why call it indigenous ?
India is paying dollars for those parts and items.
Arjun's so called missile has disappeared even from talks. Other variety of ammunition is not even talked of. Thinking of changing the gun ? Why not change the tank.

Arjun is under the curse of Apsara (nymph) called DRDO. In old times Arjun could come out the effect of the curse in one year but this Arjuna's curse seems to never ending . It has become another INSAS....

 

[Bhadra]

I'll be adding you to the list of those who says stupid things and argue till death to defend it.

Hah ! you have a Schinders List ?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schindler%27s_List

 

[shuvo@y2k10]

Parts of arjun will be indegenized with the high volume of production once bulk order is given. Whereas the 100 % Russian junk called T-90s which has to use components designed for arjun like armour,era etc because the russian refused to give us TOT inspite of us paying them money.
Missile firing is not a requirement for the arjun mk1a version of which 124 is ordered.
Whereas it will be a requirement for arjun mk2 which is under development.

 

[Enquirer]

Hah ! you have a Schinders List ?

The inverse of Schindler's List! People on this list are beyond saving....so just ignore.
Congratulations....you're on it!

 

[Bleh]

Tanks are big heavy complex vehicles. They need maintenance. Tankers/Tankies make their vehicle their home when deployed. Doctrinally speaking, having a human loader is partially justified as an extra pair of hands to maintain the tank.

This is the only valid point against unmanned tanks...

Eh? These are for the soon to be made obsolete Dragunov rifles, right???

T-72/90 Coaxial machine-guns.

 

[Vorschlaghammer]

I can't drag you from under the rock of 'denial'....if you're so comfortable under it.

At least for the sake of the forum standards, stop lying just to stroke your own ego!
Muntra is not just a 'possibility' it has been proven as 'feasible'! That tech is already being 'exported' to other platforms!

I'll be adding you to the list of those who says stupid things and argue till death to defend it.

Dude, from where I'm standing you look like the egomaniac here, resorting to name calling without elaborating your point. If you don't have patience for a discussion, just say so in a civil manner, don't be all pretentious and holier than thou on a high horse.
Muntra is for all purposes a project in development, the vehicle roles being explored are meant for surveillance, combat engineering and nbc protected transportation. You seriously think that is the same as a offensive role undertaken by a tank ?

 

[Bleh]

Missile firing is not a requirement for the arjun mk1a version of which 124 is ordered.
Whereas it will be a requirement for arjun mk2 which is under development.

It should be... Arjun's APFSDS is sub-par & unless they can modify the new TB ammo into a taboo killer that can turn the whole metal vehicle into a pressure-cooker, a F&F CLGM is necessary.