Indian Army wants futuristic vehicle for its Armoured corps

[Mad Indian]

Their is nothing call medium, Heavy tanks, Just Main battle tank ..

I am still waiting for answers from both of you ..

I answered already. I have a friend who works there.

And this is a silly argument. I suppose you won't criticise anything you hear in news without having been involved in it first hand?

 

[Rowdy]

The battlefield has changed drastically from 1965 and 1945 (if anyone wants to bring up ww2).
Tanks in development today are varied drastically . We have designs from the koreans , japanese to now the russians . Even the germans cannot figure out what the leopard 3 will look like . The army just wants to know what is the industry capable of .. Designing a tank is a large endeavor and anyone interested has to make many tieups so that they can specify what can go into their design . Didn't you see how indian companies ran around to tie up with foreign ones for the artillery and submarine procurements ?

Yes it has changed... why has DGMF not kept pace.... whose responsibility is it to keep abreast with latest developments in the industry? Hypersonics and lasers are the next step. What if tomorrow China fields laser based DEWs...will we be caught napping?
As I said this RFI smells of incompetence or malice... or both

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Your point is well understood, But in our system we wanted further improvement on a completed product ..

The agency/bureau whose designs are selected will require to continue to work on the project through the prototype and the Limited Series Production (LSP) stages. For this, a separate contract will be drawn. The agency/bureaus participating in this competition will mandatory have to give an undertaking to this effect while applying for the competition

 

[karn]

Yes it has changed... why has DGMF not kept pace.... whose responsibility is it to keep abreast with latest developments in the industry? Hypersonics and lasers are the next step. What if tomorrow China fields laser based DEWs...will we be caught napping?
As I said this RFI smells of incompetence or malice... or both

I have said so before , this is just information gathering . Based on the responses, a detailed study will be conducted to identify the possible performance parameters & possible military-industrial partnerships.

 

[Mad Indian]

What is the best optimum weight for a two engine fighter plane?.

So how exactly will the IAF give the exact wegith requirents of a two engine fighter it wants a design of? Do you get his question now?

See how absurd this question is?
That question itself is not important ... the question is does the IA have an idea of what weight they want in a tank? The RFI says otherwise..

It's not a silly question. His point was you can not specify a weight without actually knowing if it is possible for designers to do it in that weight- and so they gave a broad defn of medium weight. For instance

I will nevertheless indulge this question just for posterity. The T90 has a power to weight ratio of 22hp/ton @ 49.2 tons.... can the IA decide it wants a lighter tank...does it reflect in the RFI? My understanding is that if you go for a lighter tank , you will lose out on power due to smaller engine. There is no one optimum weight for a tank. e.g. The M1A clocks 21.4hp/ton @ 72 tonnes ... obviously this is heavy ... so what does army want ... lighter or heavier than T90....
what specific power(hp/ton) will produce enough acceleration? What kind of mobility do they need. For this you need to answer the question of how our tanks fit in our battle doctrine. which is what I meant by tank philosophy.

Dude, karn has already answered this question of yours.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

I am specific abt my questions and the answers from others, you just stated you have no experience abt DRDO first hand but i do in both things i asked you ..

Its distasteful, You don`t have any idea abt Army either, I suggest you to hold your words with have nothing to back on ..

If you like to listen to media then their are plenty of articles which are their in Arjun`s thread and replies to learn from, These topics which are played here been debated to death ..

If you cannot see or want to listen but move on with your own slogans, Then you are trolling ..

I answered already. I have a friend who works there.

And this is a silly argument. I suppose you won't criticise anything you hear in news without having been involved in it first hand?

 

[karn]

Your point is well understood, But in our system we wanted further improvement on a completed product ..

Then that comes under a separate contract . If they run away it is their money to lose . The reason we do not modify russian equipment as most of the time it is specified in the contract we cannot do so without their approval if we do any modification they are not responsible for after sales service (which is also in the contract) . In this case the defence ministry solely holds the intellectual property of the design ... so anyone can make modifications as they will.

 

[Mad Indian]

I am specific abt my questions and the answers from others, you just stated you have no experience abt DRDO first hand but i do in both things i asked you ..

Its distasteful, You don`t have any idea abt Army either, I suggest you to hold your words with have nothing to back on ..

If you like to listen to media then their are plenty of articles which are their in Arjun`s thread and replies to learn from, These topics which are played here been debated to death ..


If you cannot see or want to listen but move on with your own slogans, Then you are trolling ..

Ok. I will bite.what experience do you have on these issues? What is your qualification?

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Born and Bread in Army and still there, That should be enough ..

What is your qualification?

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Bhardra, I am not going to delete your post this time, When does Medium & Heavy tank came into picture when their is not such category ever existed in IA only MBT, Unless someone is making for an excuse for Imports ..

Arjun is design by IA, Even you admitted it which nothing short of surprise, If IA put specification for adding more Armour then IA know its going to be Heavy then if Arjun is heavy is only because Army wanted it ..

Do not push your view and abuse others to pass your argument ..

Do not be cahtak ch***ya to shift goal post..
you have been harping on specifications and now you come to philosophy..
The Philosophy is Medium tanks.. Can't you see it specified.. it is a philosophy of rejection of heavy tanks as DODOs would like to be accepted.. for their own good...

Do you know any thing related to employment of Medium Tanks ?? Do not shift burden of your poor understanding to some one else..

 

[Kharavela]

If you are good at spotting BS you should start with DRDO fanboys claims of army being against indigenous systems. It just falls flat on evidence. Army had no problem accepting indigenous goods of DRDO when they were actually upto the mark- like how almost all electronic warfare items in IAF and IN are indigenous because they were superior /at par with what was offered to them in the foreign market.

Rather than applauding army for what they are doing to us, we are discrediting them and their opinions which is pretty sick and insulting to our boys IMO . what we should probably be doing is screening drdo for eating our tax money and playing fast and loose with strategic projects. And many lca fanboys here were claiming the same BS on LCA too. Where is it now? Seriously, talk with someone who is a relative working in DRDO and you will know what a crappy org they are.

I know DRDO is a typical govt organisation through my friend who works as an engineer there.

I would rather trust my army which is out there in the borders keeping me safe than trust self serving govt agents in a govt job like DRDO who have mistakes in their projects success or failure

If the same logic is applied on Army, you will be astonished to know how corrupt & selfish it's employees (officers as well as jawans) are. Do you know the corruption level of BSF ? (My younger brother, an employee of Tata Info-Tech, was deployed in Army HQ)

In each & every department or organisation, whether it is government or non-government, every one is busy looting or cheating in his/her own way. I have myself seen both sides of coin i.e. cheating by scientists & looting by uniformed people.

Hence, I suggest not to have prejudiced opinion by just believing one side of story.

 

[Kharavela]

@Rowdy

The entire design philosophy has to be based on " Medium Tank" requirement - Weight of 45 tons or less.

Sir, does the RFI clearly mentions required weight of the future tank to be less than 45 tons ??
If not, how do you conclude it to be less than 45 tons ?? Are there any IA classification specifying MBTs of 45 tons or less as Medium Category tanks ??

 

[Kharavela]

And I think only here in India we will see producers (DRDO ) abusing customers(armed forces) and the public siding with producers rather than with consumers.

Hello, neither the consumer pays from their own salaries, nor the producer takes the profit home. It is taxpayers money, on which both enjoy.
So stop this consumer / producer drama once & for all. Both are guilty for the imported maal.

 

[pmaitra]

Here is an example of the utter incompetence of those that prepared the RFI:

The FRCV should be in the `Medium Tank’ category whose physical dimensions should facilitate transportability over existing terrain, in-service military bridges and major civilian infrastructure (including bridges) in the border areas (on either side of the Western border).

(Link already provided in this thread, so read the thread.)

This tells me, the DGMF has no clue what the bridges can accommodate, in terms of weight, axle load, and pressure; forget about across the border, not even inside India. This also tells me that the DGMF has no clue as to the max allowed length and width of India Railway wagons, and their loading gauge, while this information is available with the Ministry of Railways, and also in the open forum, such as, IRFCA.

 

[DivineHeretic]

DRDO has already provided a platform as Arjun which is 60 tons (Mark II being 68 ton)- That is heavy platform. The Medium platform comes to play in that existing reality. It is abundantly clear that Army does not want that kind of a platform.

So far your arguments about MBT is considered Armies around the world adopt one particular platform of weight class and specifications for majority of their armour vehicles based on their philosophy of employment, doctrine , terrain and other conditions. Do not be surprised if Stryker becomes an MBT for US forces in near future.

For IA, Arjun is not an MBT but T-90 / T-72 is. Arjun still is the side show.

Now the Arjun landed up being 68 tons - whether is the mistake of Army or DRDO is not the relevant question. The relevant question is what the Army wants as a futuristic platform.

Army has issued an initial RFI. Respond to that and answer their questions rather than teaching Army how to write an RFI. Their questionnaire reveals that they are looking up for ideas on" design based on a medium platform."

Look at the "Shyapa" Brigade here. They see foreign mal even in dreams without realising and telling others that everything they make is nothing but foreign mal - for example Arjun itself.

The RFI requires among other characteristics, two specific requirements:

1. Very high Survivability
2. Medium Weight.

They might appear to be mutually exclusive, and very reasonable, but given the current level of material sciences and Engineering limitations, they are mutually contradictory.

If the IA wants very high survivability, they will have to sacrifice on mobility, and compromise on weight. That is what the Russians, the biggest proponent of Medium weight MBTs have done with their Armata Platform. The Americans with the GCV reached 84 tons, before being cancelled(?). Actually, The Americans estimated that they'd need 200 ton MBTs to cater to complete protection against the modern threat environment.

If they on the other hand want medium weight, they have to be willing to sacrifice protection.

What you have at the end of the day is an RFI that's again more fancy than fiction, which implies that there will be enormous difference between the RFI and the RFP, or worse, repeated changes to the GSQR as the designing progresses and the RFP requirements are found to be unfeasible.

 

[pmaitra]

And you are going to compare army with DRDO now? And since when did DRDO risk its life like army does daily. This analogy is insulting to the armed forces.

How many of these people who prepared this RFI actually fought in a real battle? I am willing to assume that an average DRDO scientist is more at risk of being assassinated by foreign spies than these people who prepared this RFI.

The Army has a lot of staff. Many don't see combat.

And one more thing. I used to commute from Borivali to Churchgate. I have seen plenty of people run over by trains after they fell off while trying to get to work. These are all tax paying citizens of India, who lost their lives, just like those guarding the border.

No matter how much you attempt to make your point using cheap pseudo-patriotic and rhetorical sloganeering, you cannot change the specific gravity of Iron, or the energy density of a fuel. Science does not care about life and death. Science is science.

I really want DRDO to simply rebuff this joke of an RFI.

 

[power_monger]

DRDO has already provided a platform as Arjun which is 60 tons (Mark II being 68 ton)- That is heavy platform. The Medium platform comes to play in that existing reality. It is abundantly clear that Army does not want that kind of a platform.

Weight of MBT and platform are two different things. You can make a SUV and a hatchback using same platform in cars. That has nothing to do with weight. Ex: Brio,Amaze,City all have same platform. Which means similar modular construction,shared parts and similar design philosophy.

So saying Arjun platform is heavy and all is incorrect.You can stilll get a light weight tank using same arjun platform.But will it satisfy RFI requirements will be the golden question.

 

[power_monger]

Army has more engineers than DRDO but not with fake degrees and mere BSc and diploma holders posing as Scientists.

Nonsense. BSc is Bachelor of science which deals with Pure Science related areas. Now what is wrong if DRDO has scientist from BSc. What else you expected? PHd holders in journalism..

 

[karn]

The RFI requires among other characteristics, two specific requirements:

1. Very high Survivability
2. Medium Weight.

They might appear to be mutually exclusive, and very reasonable, but given the current level of material sciences and Engineering limitations, they are mutually contradictory.

If the IA wants very high survivability, they will have to sacrifice on mobility, and compromise on weight. That is what the Russians, the biggest proponent of Medium weight MBTs have done with their Armata Platform. The Americans with the GCV reached 84 tons, before being cancelled(?). Actually, The Americans estimated that they'd need 200 ton MBTs to cater to complete protection against the modern threat environment.

If they on the other hand want medium weight, they have to be willing to sacrifice protection.

What you have at the end of the day is an RFI that's again more fancy than fiction, which implies that there will be enormous difference between the RFI and the RFP, or worse, repeated changes to the GSQR as the designing progresses and the RFP requirements are found to be unfeasible.

The entire point off this entire medium weight high survivability condition is so that it is known that there is maximum survivability at the minimum weight .So that there i no absurd revision in the weight to 70 + tons.There already exist MBTs withing 55 ton weight . There is nothing fancy about this tender , Its a tank that is meant to enter service in 2030 , why should the army set a low bar ?

 

[pmaitra]

These are radical views which you are entailed to but with these views you should not moderate.

You can change specific gravity of iron by mixing other things with it - even VIII class student knows that.

You cannot change the specific gravity of iron. You can reduce the percentage of iron in an alloy and increase the percentage of some other metal that is lighter than iron, thereby reducing the specific gravity of that alloy, but the specific gravity of iron remains unchanged.

And when you do that, you end up making the alloy light, and weaker. There are exceptions. You can make a tank using Titanium and not sacrifice on the strength, but it will be prohibitively expensive.

The American scientists wanted to make their tanks (variant of Abrams) stronger, and they added Uranium as part of the alloy. That made the tank heavier, not lighter.

You cannot have the cake and eat it too.

• Want more protection? Gotta sacrifice on weight.
• Want a lighter tank? Gotta sacrifice on protection.

And if you are so confident about things that a class VII student should know, perhaps you should write to the DGMF with your recommendations in numbers (not vague terms and expletives that you have a propensity of using) and let us see a revised RFI with a semblance of objectivity.

Here, I can give you a very light tank. Want to induct it?