Indian Army Armored Vehicles

[Dejawolf]

you are short of height but not much. So you see your measurements are not that perfect.

they don't have to be perfect, only within a specific range. original Claim of kunal biswas and ershaktivel was 350cm turret width, our claim about 282-295cm.

if we missed by 5cm or so, that's fine. we'd have to miss by 60cm in order for Ershaktivel and Kunal to be correct.

 

[ersakthivel]

they don't have to be perfect, only within a specific range. original Claim of kunal biswas and ershaktivel was 350cm turret width, our claim about 282-295cm.

if we missed by 5cm or so, that's fine. we'd have to miss by 60cm in order for Ershaktivel and Kunal to be correct.

It comes to anywhere around 3050 -3150 mm in reality .

our original claim was 3.2 meters. Not 3.5 meter as you wrongly insist here.

Any way who are all the guys included in the words ,"OUR's claim & We missed it". It will be quite interesting to know that.

You have said that distance between tc's seat and vision block is 800 mm once ,

and changed it to 1400 mm the moment it did not suit your theory of LOS behind main sight as 350 mm.

Now using the pic above and pic below why don't you give your estimate for LOS behind main sight.

Mine is 2400 mm between the frontal turret and hatch(i.e tc's seat)

We can deduct 450 mm for the hatch cover cutaway.

So 2400 mm- 450 mm= 1950 mm.

The distance between the Tc's seat back and the vision block which is held up by red lines is 800 mm to 900 mm at the most.

You have agreed to it once. My idea is his belly is 1 foot across, i.e 300 mm. There is a gap of around 3 times his belly width between his seat back and vision block . So at the most 900 mm.

So the LOS behind main sight is 1950 mm-900 mm=1050 mm.

post your estimates.No need to worry about vanishing point here.

 

[Dejawolf]

Now using the pic above and pic below why don't you give your estimate for LOS behind main sight.

because i've done this 4-5 times already, and i'm sick and tired of it.
i've said the diameter of the TC's cupola is 800mm, and i did not "change" it to suit my needs, you simply failed to catch the fact that a man sits in front of the TC called the gunner the first time i put up my estimate, and he needs an additional ~660mm of space.

 

[ersakthivel]

because i've done this 4-5 times already, and i'm sick and tired of it.
i've said the diameter of the TC's cupola is 800mm, and i did not "change" it to suit my needs, you simply failed to catch the fact that a man sits in front of the TC called the gunner the first time i put up my estimate, and he needs an additional ~660mm of space.

AFAIK You never used the word Tc's cupola is 800 mm in any of our conversation.If you have done that please quote the post number. Don't try to fudge the issue, you accepted this distance to be 800 mm in your post.

But in this photo the gunner is absent , So why do you worry about him? If the gunners is present in his seat the distance between the gunner and vision block will be proportionally less than what is available in the photo.

 

[ersakthivel]

because i've done this 4-5 times already, and i'm sick and tired of it.
i've said the diameter of the TC's cupola is 800mm, and i did not "change" it to suit my needs, you simply failed to catch the fact that a man sits in front of the TC called the gunner the first time i put up my estimate, and he needs an additional ~660mm of space.

Well you are so eager in proving yourself right that you cant see the obvious

if his calculation of one side is wrong then it is obvious that other side is also wrong since it has to be complete tank and not just one side.

he has not even take into consideration green length of tank gun.

This is LEO 2A5 gun mantel, Some idea about assembly..

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

The space between both masks are more than what show here..

The image is above. Now what is the width of the vision block? And what is the distance between the Tc's seat and the yellow panel tied with red lines?

Considering the hand of the Tc which holds the radio has the same width as the white display in front of him (from his wrist to knuckles, which is about 100) and the distance between the Tc's seat and yellow panel tied with red lines, is about 7 times this 100 mm=700 mm . Add a large 200 mm for error . So it comes no more than 900 mm , which you agreed to as 800 mm .

The gunner sits left of the Tc and not directly behind the main sight if you consider the yellow roundings done by sayre.So we can resstrict this discussion to Tc's seat and the yellow panel tied with red lines.

well i am not very good at paint drawing, but this might show what i was saying

yeah kunal sir is right this is what i was talking about. You have calculated the wrong space, as it obvious from the pic of the gun.

I dont know how it is mounted but

I underestimate Mantel protection, In my view assemably is not different from Leo2`s, Perhaps Slabs size are also larger ?



As long as Vehicles are without Addons & Space Armour, they can be killed with HESH..

Thinking that most Armoured vehicles in this region are not with such addons specially APC& IFV and they cannot be either..




Thrice the normal mechanic fuse..



For an explosive charge of 5kg ( RDX ) 20 meters is enough to cause internal bleeding just with shock waves..

So I was not the only one saying your drawings are wrong perhaps,,,,,,,,In fact there are many guys.

 

[ersakthivel]

The sight placement are too big
The side Armour looks thin..
The gunner periscope is too close to sight placement
The gunner periscope outlet is not straight like sub periscope
The masks distance is not properly fixed inside rather
The ammo containers are too long..


The best one can say its a rough diagram how things look inside and there are errors, Not professional work enough for studies..

700mm



i'm basing it on the line drawing of the arjun.


i don't see why, but this is the seating arrangement:

and for what it's worth, leopard 2A4

Then what was discussed in the post number-931 in the following page,

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/indian-army/44522-arjun-vs-t90-mbt-63.html

 

[ersakthivel]

700mm



i'm basing it on the line drawing of the arjun.


i don't see why, but this is the seating arrangement:

and for what it's worth, leopard 2A4

Then what was discussed in the post number-931 in the following page,

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/indian-army/44522-arjun-vs-t90-mbt-63.html

And finally you are admittin that your model was just a rough sketch and nothing accurate about it in post no-938 in the following link,

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/indian-army/44522-arjun-vs-t90-mbt-63.html.

well, of COURSE it's a rough diagram, but it should be accurate to within 10cm or so.
the leopard diagram on the other hand is accurate to within 1cm.
I went inside it myself with measuring tape to get the accurate dimensions.
if you want go ahead and take measures of the real Arjun, and post them here.

if you have taken the line drawing given in the army recognition website accurately , there is no way for you to make so many mistakes.

well, to the back of the cupola ring yes, correct. 2500mm.


incorrect, it's 750mm

incorrect it's ~1400mm. you cannot fit 2 people within 60cm of space.

2500-(500+600) = 1400mm but i digress

correct formula:
2500-(1400+750) = 350

Cutaway for main sight 750 mm?? The cutaway for main sight seems equal to crew hole dia, Then are you implying that crew hole dia is 750 mm? The 1400 mm is also over estimate by a long stretch of imagination!!!!. So all your assumptions on which your 3D model is based are patently wrong.

So it is obvious that you are wrong by more than half a meter if you look at it any way. Am I right?

Can any of the guys who used to say that ARJUN has just 350 mm LOS thickness behind main sight all along explain this?

@militarysta ,@methos ,@Damian who supported your 3D model explain this?

 

[Dejawolf]

Then what was discussed in the post number-931 in the following page,

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/indian-army/44522-arjun-vs-t90-mbt-63.html

And finally you are admittin that your model was just a rough sketch and nothing accurate about it in post no-938 in the following link,

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/indian-army/44522-arjun-vs-t90-mbt-63.html.

yes, i didn't add all of the small details like i usually do, didn't make a texture, the TC hatch and loaders cupola only have the right size, but not the right shape, hatch hinges and such are missing etc.
all i did was make the walls match the line drawings as closely as i could, and then scale the model according to the official figures.

if you have taken the line drawing given in the army recognition website accurately , there is no way for you to make so many mistakes.



Cutaway for main sight 750 mm?? The cutaway for main sight seems equal to crew hole dia, Then are you implying that crew hole dia is 750 mm? The 1400 mm is also over estimate by a long stretch of imagination!!!!. So all your assumptions on which your 3D model is based are patently wrong.

yes 750mm, if you measure from close to the gun to the back wall of the gunners sight, although it's 700mm in my model. 430mm if you measure from the outer side.
so as you can see it adds up.

 

[Dejawolf]

AFAIK You never used the word Tc's cupola is 800 mm in any of our conversation.If you have done that please quote the post number. Don't try to fudge the issue, you accepted this distance to be 800 mm in your post.

But in this photo the gunner is absent , So why do you worry about him? If the gunners is present in his seat the distance between the gunner and vision block will be proportionally less than what is available in the photo.

post #957 "cupola periscope assembly" i list them as 700mm. that's from front periscope to back periscope. if you take the lower metal "ring" into account, that's 800mm.

 

[ersakthivel]

yes, i didn't add all of the small details like i usually do, didn't make a texture, the TC hatch and loaders cupola only have the right size, but not the right shape, hatch hinges and such are missing etc.
all i did was make the walls match the line drawings as closely as i could, and then scale the model according to the official figures.



yes 750mm, if you measure from close to the gun to the back wall of the gunners sight, although it's 700mm in my model. 430mm if you measure from the outer side.
so as you can see it adds up.

As per the photo above the RATIO for the total length of the hull / cutaway for the main sight comes to 12 on the tank which stands at the right hand side of the man wearing black t shirt .

The total hull length I measured includes FITTINGS for fuel drums as well.

So 12x 750 mm=9000 mm.

That means the hull should have a length of about 9 meters.Which is wrong as per the following dimensional line drawing.

Because the total length of the ARJUN TANK hull is only 8.5 meters.

Any way it is not a big difference if we correct your main sight cutaway length as per this calculation it comes to around 700 mm

So 2500 mm-700 mm cutaway leaves 1800 mm space between the crew hatch and the cutaway for main sight.

Then as per the above image you have put six red lines from the head of the Tc to the red strings on the yellow box.How much does each red line section measures?

 

[Dejawolf]

Then as per the above image you have put six red lines from the head of the Tc to the red strings on the yellow box.How much does each red line section measures?

about 18-20cm. also, the vision block measured is the commanders 3 o' clock vision block, so you need subtract 39cm, since it's approximately at the center of the hatch. and there's a small wedge between the sight cutout and gunshield about 50mm long, according to the drawing.

 

[ersakthivel]

about 18-20cm. also, the vision block measured is the commanders 3 o' clock vision block, so you need subtract 39cm, since it's approximately at the center of the hatch. and there's a small wedge between the sight cutout and gunshield about 50mm long, according to the drawing.

The distance between the seat of the Tc and redline like sripes holding the yellow box is 4.5 times the head size of the man sitting in the photo.

Back of the head should be taken as the end point of 2500 mm space because that's where the center of the seat lies.If we take back of the seat there will be errors as the seat is swiveled towards the photographer at an angle.


If you give 250 mm as the width of his head,

The 4.5 x 250 mm,it comes to 1125 mm.

SO 2500 mm- (700 mm+1125 mm) = 675 mm is the LOS thickness space available for composite armor behind the maim sight.

On other places the LOS thickness for ARJUN is 675 mm+700 mm(the main sight cutaway gap) = 1375 mm. SO you won't be having any problems with that, I suppose.

If the main sight is moved to tank top and replaced with composite armor plates then overall frontal LOS thickness for armor is 1375 mm, which is what once posted here.

SO ARJUN compares well with modern tanks in frontal protection.

 

[ersakthivel]

The reason you are getting all the mistake in LOS thickness calculations in the front is because of the mistakes in the proportion of the gun dimensions in your modelling, which was pointed out by other members as well.

 

[ersakthivel]

It depicts the position of the gunner and the TC .If the TC stretches his hand he can easily touch the red stripes holding the yellow box. SO there is no way fro more than a 1000 mm space to be present there.

well, to the back of the cupola ring yes, correct. 2500mm.


incorrect, it's 750mm

incorrect it's ~1400mm. you cannot fit 2 people within 60cm of space.

2500-(500+600) = 1400mm but i digress

correct formula:
2500-(1400+750) = 350

@Dejawolf

So your above mentioned estimates are actually wrong.

SO 2500 mm- (700 mm+1125 mm) = 675 mm is the LOS thickness space available for composite armor behind the maim sight.

On other places the LOS thickness for ARJUN is 675 mm+700 mm(the main sight cutaway gap) = 1375 mm. SO you won't be having any problems with that, I suppose.

If the main sight is moved to tank top and replaced with composite armor plates then overall frontal LOS thickness for armor is 1375 mm, which is what once posted here.

SO ARJUN compares well with modern tanks in frontal protection.

No more than 1200 mm space , as there is no need to fit the gunner i the same sitting position as Tc

because the gunner sits a bit left of the Tc and well below the Tc's seat level, so not that much space is required.You can also see the main sight is to the right side of the gunner.Not in front of the gunner.

 

[ersakthivel]

No, the formula is 2500-(700+50+(5*200)+390) = 360.
you conveniently forgot to subtract the distance between the back of the cupola and the vision blocks, and the small ledge on the front turret. and for some reason you used head widths instead of vision block widths.

The crew hatch cover and the Tc's seat lie on the same point as per the picture above which is marked as 2500 mm from the gun front mantel plate (from 4 meters to 6.5 meters on the scale )in the line drawing below.

When the head of the Tc whose dimensions can be checked by anyone is easily available on the picture , why are you taking pains to deny it.

How do you suppose the Tc just cannot touch the red stripes just by extending his hands.So the distance is surely around 1000mm, not 1400mm as you posted.

where the back of the cupola is irrelevant here.Estimates are taken from what every one can see in the picture.What was wrong was all your assumptions on the gun sketch and gunner placement in your 3D models based on which you did the calculations.

 

[Dejawolf]

The crew hatch cover and the Tc's seat lie on the same point as per the picture above which is marked as 2500 mm from the gun front mantel plate
.

yeah well 2500mm you're not measuring from the crew hatch, you're measuring from the back of the cupola ring to the front of the turret.
measuring from the crew hatch opening, you have ~2150-2200mm.

 

[ersakthivel]

yeah well 2500mm you're not measuring from the crew hatch, you're measuring from the back of the cupola ring to the front of the turret.
measuring from the crew hatch opening, you have ~2150-2200mm.

[
As per the above pic from the back of the Tc's seat which is right below the vertical crew hatch cover over the Tc's seat is 2500 mm from the front gun mantel of the ARJUN tank. There is no need to include cupola ring to the front of turret measurement here.

 

[militarysta]

Of course here is some error, but what is obvious:

1) Thickest Arjun turret width is less then 3m - it's (whit some error range) between 2,82 -2,95m
2) on crews hatches hight turret width is between 2,32 -2,44m
3) after main sight there is 350-370mm space for armour ant not more.
4) front left side loss is guite big -it's bigger then 800mm but smaller then 900mm LOS. Smth between those values.

 

[ersakthivel]

Of course here is some error, but what is obvious:

1) Thickest Arjun turret width is less then 3m - it's (whit some error range) between 2,82 -2,95m
2) on crews hatches hight turret width is between 2,32 -2,44m
3) after main sight there is 350-370mm space for armour ant not more.
4) front left side loss is guite big -it's bigger then 800mm but smaller then 900mm LOS. Smth between those values.

All the above LoS thickness is based on wrong models.

You can read the post no-4720 and 4721 in the following link for clarification.

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/indian-army/9558-arjun-main-battle-tank-mbt-315.html

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Arjun & Bhishma Blazing ....