- Joined
- Jul 12, 2014
- Messages
- 32,121
- Likes
- 149,003
If total projected T-90 strength is 1300 then how come DAC approved 1500 mine ploughs last year.
Indian Army Armored Vehicles
- Thread starter Antimony
- Start date
If total projected T-90 strength is 1300 then how come DAC approved 1500 mine ploughs last year.
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2012
- Messages
- 6,017
- Likes
- 3,364
we have a plans to use these kinda mini missiles from our Pulsar 150 and Yamaha FZ ..
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2012
- Messages
- 6,017
- Likes
- 3,364
200 will be put in stocks and spares
- Joined
- May 26, 2010
- Messages
- 31,122
- Likes
- 41,042
This order is nothing new, It just money allocation of remaining T-90 Bhishma which were meant to be manufacture under HVF, Their is no increase in numbers, The only difference is these new tanks will get Arjun`s component and other Indian firms as posted here before ..
These tanks have no what so ever relation with Russian T-90MS.
These tanks have no what so ever relation with Russian T-90MS.
Abhishek Shrivastava
Regular Member
- Joined
- May 22, 2014
- Messages
- 110
- Likes
- 41
What is new in T90MS.
&
How it is better than Arjun Mk-II
.......................................
&
How it is better than Arjun Mk-II
.......................................
republic_roi97
Senior Member
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2016
- Messages
- 1,960
- Likes
- 2,700
T-90MS is new modernised (M) version of the export tank T-90S, with a 1130HP engine, a PNM Sosna-U gunner view, a 7.62 mm turret UDP T05BV-1 RWS, GLONASS, inertial navigation systems, new explosive reactive armour (ERA) and steering wheel. A new removable turret bustle is included, which provides storage for eight additional rounds. T-90MS is ready for serial production.
T-90 basically is lighter, hence more portable than the Arjun, hence that happens to be a big factor towards choosing it. Other than that, we know that there were reports that Arjun outperformed T-90, not sure how it does against T-90MS though.
republic_roi97
Senior Member
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2016
- Messages
- 1,960
- Likes
- 2,700
Here is an awesome pic, courtesy Wikipedia:-
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/...I_being_developed_by_DRDO_at_Defexpo_2016.jpg
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/...I_being_developed_by_DRDO_at_Defexpo_2016.jpg
republic_roi97
Senior Member
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2016
- Messages
- 1,960
- Likes
- 2,700
By the way that happens to be our home grown Arjun MK2, too sad about it.^^^^^
rishivashista13
Regular Member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2016
- Messages
- 721
- Likes
- 655
Please confirm .....
Are we buying T90S or T90 MS from Russia ?
Different reports saying different things .
Confused [emoji29] [emoji29]
Sent from my Micromax Q380 using Tapatalk
Are we buying T90S or T90 MS from Russia ?
Different reports saying different things .
Confused [emoji29] [emoji29]
Sent from my Micromax Q380 using Tapatalk
rishivashista13
Regular Member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2016
- Messages
- 721
- Likes
- 655
It is saying that we are buying T90 MS tagil .
http://defence-blog.com/army/india-...hase-of-russian-t-90ms-main-battle-tanks.html
Sent from my Micromax Q380 using Tapatalk
http://defence-blog.com/army/india-...hase-of-russian-t-90ms-main-battle-tanks.html
Sent from my Micromax Q380 using Tapatalk
Marquez
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2016
- Messages
- 1
- Likes
- 0
Last reported Arjun Mk II weighs 68 tonnes in August 2016 , and bridges are able to carry upto 60 tonnes only. Note these are road bridges which cannot be changed.
read full here http://www.businessinsider.in/Arjun-MBT-MK-I-Overweight/articleshow/53542486.cms
read full here http://www.businessinsider.in/Arjun-MBT-MK-I-Overweight/articleshow/53542486.cms
mine ploughs get damaged and destoryed far more frequently then any other part of the tanks.
Prashant12
Senior Member
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2014
- Messages
- 3,027
- Likes
- 15,002
DRDO's Armed Ambulance Tracked Vehicle Made in Sangareddy
Justanobserver
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2016
- Messages
- 1
- Likes
- 0
Why is everyone struggling with terminology on the Arjun Mk2/ after reading bits and pieces from wikipedia ? After reading several pages of Why? questions , its really simple to figure out most answers if you understand who we are collaborating with to figure out why we are doing what we are doing.
1) Why do we have a 120 mm (rifled gun on Arjun mk2 ) and 120 mm smooth bore proposed on the FMBT, when the rest of the army is standardized on the 125 mm? The answer is simple, we are collaborating with the Israelis who use 120 mm on their merkava's . So we try to replicate the same gun with its fire control systems and make sure the elbit fire control system which is on the Merkava , comes with the same gun to our indigenously designed tank , and works as effectively as the Israeli tank gun works. The proposed shift from the rifled bore to smooth bore is the old argument of rifled vs smooth bore . A rifled bore gives greater accuracy ( Arjun can hit a suitcase at 2 km is claimed) but the dynamics of spinning a round brings down it kinetic energy and sacrifices range . So one has to take a call between accuracy and shorter range or longer range with a bit of loss of accuracy, which today can be compensated with computer generated calculations on a fire control system . In addition to this , as we collaborate with Israel on more advanced tank rounds , we have to have to replicate the barrel to which their rounds have been designed . If we keep chasing the logic of why we should standardize the rounds with the rest of the Indian army , ( which is immensely the most logical path to go down ) DRDO will be stuck with having to make a new main gun and fire control system on their own on par with the developed countries. A technology we have not completely mastered , hence the collaboration and hence the mismatch with an army stuck with soviet systems and a DRDO going to Israel. DRDO did do a ' modified chemistry barrel' , but we had to match
the system with the Israelis
2) Lets go with the stuff Ajai Shukla posted , as most are referring to it
- Missile firing capability ; The missile is lahat , so the gun has to match the missile i.e 120 mm
- Commanders Thermal Imaging sight MK 2 . Which is good , but for the rest of the crew he does not mention if
we have 4 side facing high intensity cameras for the driver and crew , who will have to depend on the
The commanders continuous guidance. Driving a tank is not easy if you have to listen to someone all the
time
- Drivers uncooled Thermal imaging night sight ; Not a good idea to have it uncooled . We had a problem
with the Russian tanks where the intense heat of Rajasthan made the sights melt and swim . Looks like
we have not learnt from this experience . We have an indian company making cooled sights , so beats me
as to why have not asked them to make one here as well?
We make bad NVG in India, which are still second generation from BEL , while the world has moved on. It
was reported somewhere the range is only 300 to 400 meters at night to see the terrain. We could do
better
- Additional ammunition ( dont ask) : Just look up Israeli rounds and our own rounds developed by ARDE and
HEMRL . Ajai Shukla need not sound so hush hush.
- Enhanced ammunition penetrator : Ditto , look up ARDE and HEMRL
- Resin based CCC: Now one has to be careful here . CCC based ammunition is easy to handle , but under high
heat , in a metal tank , like in mid summer Rajasthan , they get deformed and will not fit into the barrel . The
critical element then becomes the Resin . Have we mastered this technology ? Honestly , i dont know . If we
did kudos to DRDO. Above 45 to 50 degrees , you do get a bit of deformation
- Ten Round containerized bin : With blow out panels , Good for safety of the crew and survivability of the tank
- Explosive reactive armour plates : The ERA plates we developed were a replacement to the Kontakt-5
ERA from Russia . Russians were not sharing the tech with us , so we developed our own. In Tests ,
both ERA system took direct hits from MILAN anti-tank guided missile and against 125 mm FSAPDS
ammunition at PXE, Balasore and did equally which was witnessed by Indian army officials. Kudos to DRDO.
The question now is :
is Kontakt is outdated ? Based on Russian combat experience , they now have Relikt , supposed to be
twice as good. Can the Indian developed ERA match Relikt . I have not come across any data
- Infra-red/Thermal imaging resistant paint: I was also told some work was done on masking emissions as well
- Air defence weapon remote firing : Building a tank with NBC capabilities for survival against tactical nukes
without this ability, is senseless. This was a basic must have capability. You cant open the cupola after a Tac
Nuclear strike to operate your machine gun.
- ALWCS (advanced laser warning and countermeasure system): I think thanks here to the Israelis. If we have
what the Merkava 4 has , we are up to current generation
- Roof mounted driver’s seat: So as not to rattle the driver when we hit mines
- ATT in GMS (gunner’s main sight); Auto target tracking , This system should have come when Gyro stablized
gun sights came into being. The gunners cupola is small , many a times he cant see where the gun is pointing
if he swings the tank around and the gun has locked on to a target. One bit of technology in the tank just caught
up with another, and its good
It also knocks off background clutter once you painted a target.
- Advanced land navigation system: Nice to have
- Effective alternative to muzzle reference sight (MRS); Its hard to understand why Ajai Shukla is so vague
on well known developments . The next generation to the Muzzle reference system (MRS) is the dynamic
muzzle reference system(DMRS . The old muzzle reference system had to be done manually, It took time as
the gunhad to be brought into position ( preferably when standing) . This was hard during operations. In the heat
of battle if your gun flexed , you would have been inaccurate . This helps you continuously help you measure
muzzle to trunnion angle even as you are moving. or at will . There is very less time involved to lets say
zero your gun
- New final drive with increased reduction ratio : same engine, more torque due to better gearing for better cross
country abilities
- New Track system : Reduces the weight per square inch on the road , of the tank. Its now lower than the T 90
Theoretically it should go through desert sands and swamps , better than a T 90.........but this does not
take into account over all weight of 68 tons fully loaded . In my opinion, while it may be heavy, the Merkava 4
too weighs 65 tons . If Israel can use it effectively so can the indian army
The issue ( In my opinion) could have been reliability in operations of all the above mentioned systems.
On paper things look good . How reliably does all these things put together work under extended , stress testing. Do things break down quickly? Do your bearings wear out quickly?
Remember a XUV 500 has all the feature list of a BMW X 5 and perhaps more . But if you were given both free and asked to choose one , which would you? That is where the reliable engineering and the solidity and finish, detailing
and integration of everything put together matters. While we have come a long way with DRDO . Maybe the FMBT will solve those problems as well .
Yes the Army is put off by DRDO , because they have arm twisted the Army to buy stuff by putting pressure through ministries . Knowing that they can , has made them complacent at times , on deadlines, cost , and not listening closely . Maybe the Army too has changed its mind often on specs . The question then is, if you take 20 years to develop a system, the world has moved on, You cant hold up a 20 year old piece of paper and say, This is what you wanted long back I have it now. Now buy it.
The Army has therefore floated a Global RFP for its future tank and asked DRDO to compete openly with everyone . Fair enough. Why should the Army molly coddle a Govt body which is heavily funded , by putting the lives of its soldiers and its mandate to protect the nation . While there are more subtle valid arguments in the details, This is the sum and substance of the over all argument. May the best man win , and may our forces get its best . They deserve it to do their duty to their fullest of our expectations of them
1) Why do we have a 120 mm (rifled gun on Arjun mk2 ) and 120 mm smooth bore proposed on the FMBT, when the rest of the army is standardized on the 125 mm? The answer is simple, we are collaborating with the Israelis who use 120 mm on their merkava's . So we try to replicate the same gun with its fire control systems and make sure the elbit fire control system which is on the Merkava , comes with the same gun to our indigenously designed tank , and works as effectively as the Israeli tank gun works. The proposed shift from the rifled bore to smooth bore is the old argument of rifled vs smooth bore . A rifled bore gives greater accuracy ( Arjun can hit a suitcase at 2 km is claimed) but the dynamics of spinning a round brings down it kinetic energy and sacrifices range . So one has to take a call between accuracy and shorter range or longer range with a bit of loss of accuracy, which today can be compensated with computer generated calculations on a fire control system . In addition to this , as we collaborate with Israel on more advanced tank rounds , we have to have to replicate the barrel to which their rounds have been designed . If we keep chasing the logic of why we should standardize the rounds with the rest of the Indian army , ( which is immensely the most logical path to go down ) DRDO will be stuck with having to make a new main gun and fire control system on their own on par with the developed countries. A technology we have not completely mastered , hence the collaboration and hence the mismatch with an army stuck with soviet systems and a DRDO going to Israel. DRDO did do a ' modified chemistry barrel' , but we had to match
the system with the Israelis
2) Lets go with the stuff Ajai Shukla posted , as most are referring to it
- Missile firing capability ; The missile is lahat , so the gun has to match the missile i.e 120 mm
- Commanders Thermal Imaging sight MK 2 . Which is good , but for the rest of the crew he does not mention if
we have 4 side facing high intensity cameras for the driver and crew , who will have to depend on the
The commanders continuous guidance. Driving a tank is not easy if you have to listen to someone all the
time
- Drivers uncooled Thermal imaging night sight ; Not a good idea to have it uncooled . We had a problem
with the Russian tanks where the intense heat of Rajasthan made the sights melt and swim . Looks like
we have not learnt from this experience . We have an indian company making cooled sights , so beats me
as to why have not asked them to make one here as well?
We make bad NVG in India, which are still second generation from BEL , while the world has moved on. It
was reported somewhere the range is only 300 to 400 meters at night to see the terrain. We could do
better
- Additional ammunition ( dont ask) : Just look up Israeli rounds and our own rounds developed by ARDE and
HEMRL . Ajai Shukla need not sound so hush hush.
- Enhanced ammunition penetrator : Ditto , look up ARDE and HEMRL
- Resin based CCC: Now one has to be careful here . CCC based ammunition is easy to handle , but under high
heat , in a metal tank , like in mid summer Rajasthan , they get deformed and will not fit into the barrel . The
critical element then becomes the Resin . Have we mastered this technology ? Honestly , i dont know . If we
did kudos to DRDO. Above 45 to 50 degrees , you do get a bit of deformation
- Ten Round containerized bin : With blow out panels , Good for safety of the crew and survivability of the tank
- Explosive reactive armour plates : The ERA plates we developed were a replacement to the Kontakt-5
ERA from Russia . Russians were not sharing the tech with us , so we developed our own. In Tests ,
both ERA system took direct hits from MILAN anti-tank guided missile and against 125 mm FSAPDS
ammunition at PXE, Balasore and did equally which was witnessed by Indian army officials. Kudos to DRDO.
The question now is :
is Kontakt is outdated ? Based on Russian combat experience , they now have Relikt , supposed to be
twice as good. Can the Indian developed ERA match Relikt . I have not come across any data
- Infra-red/Thermal imaging resistant paint: I was also told some work was done on masking emissions as well
- Air defence weapon remote firing : Building a tank with NBC capabilities for survival against tactical nukes
without this ability, is senseless. This was a basic must have capability. You cant open the cupola after a Tac
Nuclear strike to operate your machine gun.
- ALWCS (advanced laser warning and countermeasure system): I think thanks here to the Israelis. If we have
what the Merkava 4 has , we are up to current generation
- Roof mounted driver’s seat: So as not to rattle the driver when we hit mines
- ATT in GMS (gunner’s main sight); Auto target tracking , This system should have come when Gyro stablized
gun sights came into being. The gunners cupola is small , many a times he cant see where the gun is pointing
if he swings the tank around and the gun has locked on to a target. One bit of technology in the tank just caught
up with another, and its good
It also knocks off background clutter once you painted a target.
- Advanced land navigation system: Nice to have
- Effective alternative to muzzle reference sight (MRS); Its hard to understand why Ajai Shukla is so vague
on well known developments . The next generation to the Muzzle reference system (MRS) is the dynamic
muzzle reference system(DMRS . The old muzzle reference system had to be done manually, It took time as
the gunhad to be brought into position ( preferably when standing) . This was hard during operations. In the heat
of battle if your gun flexed , you would have been inaccurate . This helps you continuously help you measure
muzzle to trunnion angle even as you are moving. or at will . There is very less time involved to lets say
zero your gun
- New final drive with increased reduction ratio : same engine, more torque due to better gearing for better cross
country abilities
- New Track system : Reduces the weight per square inch on the road , of the tank. Its now lower than the T 90
Theoretically it should go through desert sands and swamps , better than a T 90.........but this does not
take into account over all weight of 68 tons fully loaded . In my opinion, while it may be heavy, the Merkava 4
too weighs 65 tons . If Israel can use it effectively so can the indian army
The issue ( In my opinion) could have been reliability in operations of all the above mentioned systems.
On paper things look good . How reliably does all these things put together work under extended , stress testing. Do things break down quickly? Do your bearings wear out quickly?
Remember a XUV 500 has all the feature list of a BMW X 5 and perhaps more . But if you were given both free and asked to choose one , which would you? That is where the reliable engineering and the solidity and finish, detailing
and integration of everything put together matters. While we have come a long way with DRDO . Maybe the FMBT will solve those problems as well .
Yes the Army is put off by DRDO , because they have arm twisted the Army to buy stuff by putting pressure through ministries . Knowing that they can , has made them complacent at times , on deadlines, cost , and not listening closely . Maybe the Army too has changed its mind often on specs . The question then is, if you take 20 years to develop a system, the world has moved on, You cant hold up a 20 year old piece of paper and say, This is what you wanted long back I have it now. Now buy it.
The Army has therefore floated a Global RFP for its future tank and asked DRDO to compete openly with everyone . Fair enough. Why should the Army molly coddle a Govt body which is heavily funded , by putting the lives of its soldiers and its mandate to protect the nation . While there are more subtle valid arguments in the details, This is the sum and substance of the over all argument. May the best man win , and may our forces get its best . They deserve it to do their duty to their fullest of our expectations of them
- Joined
- May 26, 2010
- Messages
- 31,122
- Likes
- 41,042
Don`t copy paste someone post without properly reading it ..
The fact we need to understand, in case of war with China Mountain divisions and artillery will play pivotal role. US will not accept Indian armour offensive into Pakistan. Pakistan also has nuclear deterrent. Further in case of future war with Pakistan we have to capture PoK and put an end to this for once and all. We dont have to advance from Rajasthan and Punjab. Given this scenario India should concentrate more artillery, MLRS and mountain divisions. India needs 20 Mountain divisions, 10 Jungle divisions, 10 Desert divisions, 10 normal divisions. To counter Pakistani armour threat a fleet of 3500 T 90 and MILAN 2T operators in large number are enough.
republic_roi97
Senior Member
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2016
- Messages
- 1,960
- Likes
- 2,700
There was one mounted on arjun chassis.
