India's Future Main Battle Tank, NGMBT

[Blademaster]

Wonder if the drdo aps works against arty. Arty is the biggest foe of tanks in this Ukraine russia war.

Drones have overtaken Arty role in defeating tanks.

 

[Super falcon]

DRDO is working on new defensive system against liotering munitions for tanks and there will be a dedicated anti tank missile killer system based on light weight trophy system on tanks and supporting system for additional support for tank colums

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Abrams MBT was upgraded with Trophy APS but still now Abrams-X TD has come up with crewless turret 3-crew concept similar to T-14 Armata.
Our DRDO, CVRDE, etc need to expedite their FMBT program & catch up fast with technology demonstrators like Abrams-X, MGCS-EMBT, Leopard-2 ATD, K2-PL, etc which show MMW radar for APS & variety of optical sensors for see-through-armor day/night capability, LWR, MAWS, aiding APS.

The MGCS-EMBT TD has similar sensor suite

High resolution cameras & some sensors have become economical. For sustaining losses to gun fire, etc, every few feet on tank will be covered with day/night optical sensors with advanced S/w & partially controlledby AI/ML to detect anything moving or stationary & classify it just like a human does. Action on a foe vehicle or troop will be just a click on button or touch on screen or voice command.
All types of frontline vehicles prone to attack will be requiring these features. And the backline vehicles at base, inland, reserve, are also prone to deep strike, will require require some integrated defense not just by SAMs, VShoRADS but also a hybrid Area-APS.

 

[Super falcon]

Leopards and T 14 are front runners

 

[Corvus Splendens]

 

[Marliii]

 

[Bleh]

No updates on NGMT in a while huh?

Remember when I made a concept Arjun Mark3 by punching FMBT turret on Arjun Mark1A hull?.. If any CVRDE loser is reading this, you could have rolled out this one by now. It's 2023 already.

 

[Blood+]

No updates on NGMT in a while huh?
View attachment 204470
Remember when I made a concept Arjun Mark3 by punching FMBT turret on Arjun Mark1A hull?.. If any CVRDE loser is reading this, you could have rolled out this one by now. It's 2023 already.

Good luck with that one. And the design of the hull front should be changed to something more in line with that of the Leclerc.

 

[Bleh]

Good luck with that one. And the design of the hull front should be changed to something more in line with that of the Leclerc.

Both seen to prioritise the upper glacis, Arjun concentrates it more at centre-of-silhoutte (& would easily accommodate LOS thickness increase)... IMO that fuel-tank space behind it & wet ammo-stowage would be more critical to crew-survivability.

 

[Bleh]

View attachment 22278
I found this FMBT concept in DRDO publication, page 6:
http://publications.drdo.gov.in/ojs/index.php/dsj/article/view/12182/6087

But the position of the hatches had me confused. In the schematics it's clearly mentioned "crewless turret", but doesn't match with the previous.
Do the commander & gunner enter the tank from the turret, like in T-90, & sit below in the basket (which would be ingenious)?

Any info?

Alright children, I've got a treat for you.

Source: https://publications.drdo.gov.in/ojs/index.php/dsj/issue/view/582
That journal couldn't be downloaded for me to harvest the cover-page photo, so I took SS & enhanced the tank.

Same version of NG-MBT as in the above quote...

 

[Blood+]

Alright children, I've got a treat for you.

Source: https://publications.drdo.gov.in/ojs/index.php/dsj/issue/view/582
That journal couldn't be downloaded for me to harvest the cover-page photo, so I took SS & enhanced the tank.

Same version of NG-MBT as in the above quote...View attachment 204932

Although it seems promising, at least on paper, their track record with ground vehicles does not inspire much confidence.

 

[Blood+]

View attachment 204478View attachment 204479

Both seen to prioritise the upper glacis, Arjun concentrates it more at centre-of-silhoutte (& would easily accommodate LOS thickness increase)... IMO that fuel-tank space behind it & wet ammo-stowage would be more critical to crew-survivability.

Honestly, the practice of stowing ammo in the hull should be dispensed with completely (unless they go for a carousel type design like that of the T-14).

 

[Bleh]

Honestly, the practice of stowing ammo in the hull should be dispensed with completely (unless they go for a carousel type design like that of the T-14).

Much easier to switch to non-flammable charge like C4 explosive. Switching to electrical pulse detonated rounds will solve everything easier.

Either that, or have to go Merkava way.
Turns out Mark4 had a ready-rack & rest of the shells in hull are behind a blast door, with their rear entrance acting like blow-off in case of an unlikely hit (the rack 3 holds 2 ATGMs)

 

[Blood+]

Much easier to switch to non-flammable charge like C4 explosive. Switching to electrical pulse detonated rounds will solve everything easier.

Either that, or have to go Merkava way.
Turns out Mark4 had a ready-rack & rest of the shells in hull are behind a blast door, with their rear entrance acting like blow-off in case of an unlikely hit (the rack 3 holds 2 ATGMs)
View attachment 205079

I don't believe C4 can be used as propellant charge material as it's a type of high explosive, but there are less energetic propellant charges available now. So yeah, what you propose does have its merits. But where's the need for that when you can simply go with an unmanned turret??

 

[Bleh]

I don't believe C4 can be used as propellant charge material as it's a type of high explosive, but there are less energetic propellant charges available now. So yeah, what you propose does have its merits. But where's the need for that when you can simply go with an unmanned turret??

Unmanned turrets have been tried & discarded too many times.. T-14 is also stumbling. Plus blow-off panel cook is preferable to whole turret being cooked.

Actually that FMBT unmanned turrets where's your simple climbing down & sitting below like the driver with all the equipment & 25-round autoloader upstairs is best IMO... Wet-stowage itself is good to douse podt-penetration fires (ie, if the non-flammable option is undoable)

 

[Blood+]

Unmanned turrets have been tried & discarded too many times.. T-14 is also stumbling. Plus blow-off panel cook is preferable to whole turret being cooked.

T-14 is stumbling due to budgetary issues more than anything else. And there is no need to mount a carousel autoloader when you could always go for a bustle mounted one.

Actually that FMBT unmanned turrets where's your simple climbing down & sitting below like the driver with all the equipment & 25-round autoloader upstairs is best IMO... Wet-stowage itself is good to douse podt-penetration fires (ie, if the non-flammable option is undoable)

Wet stowage doesn't work, at least not in the way you think it does.

It was found in after-war inspections and tests that the wet stowage system actually did not work as intended (dampening any exposed propellant and theoretically preventing or slowing its ignition), and that it was actually the relocation of basically all the main gun ammunition to the very floor of the tank (away from its center of gravity), where it was less likely to be hit regardless, that caused the reduction in fire risk. The pre-Korean War revisions of the technical manuals for the M4A3 Sherman (by this time the only model in widespread U.S. service) and the M24 Chaffee ordered that the liquid containers be drained of any fluid and that containers that had deteriorated severely enough be removed and the spaces plugged with appropriately sized wooden blocks.
It didn't work all those years ago and sure as hell won't work now that modern propellants have greatly faster burn rates.

Source: I read all that in a book, the name of which escapes me at the moment; yeah, memory's never been my strong suit.

 

[itsme]

Alright children, I've got a treat for you.

Source: https://publications.drdo.gov.in/ojs/index.php/dsj/issue/view/582
That journal couldn't be downloaded for me to harvest the cover-page photo, so I took SS & enhanced the tank.

Same version of NG-MBT as in the above quote...View attachment 204932

Seems to match the first concept in this below image and also another image of this concept, which I am not able to find.


https://defenceforumindia.com/attachments/ewtgbetxgamaots-jpeg.46539/

 

[Bleh]

T-14 is stumbling due to budgetary issues more than anything else. And there is no need to mount a carousel autoloader when you could always go for a bustle mounted one.

Bustle autoloader can hold upto max 36 ready-rounds (Abrams concept autoloader), ours will be 18-24 probably. That's the issue, we gotta store some more somewhere. (Interesting read in wet-stowage tho, didn't know)

Seems to match the first concept in this below image and also another image of this concept, which I am not able to find.


https://defenceforumindia.com/attachments/ewtgbetxgamaots-jpeg.46539/

Yes the 1st concept actually matches this one (except the glacis armour shape has changed).

The 2nd one (named revolutionary design) is possibly a concept they moved on to, where crew seats before the turret like T-14. New turret with no crew hatches...

 

[Blood+]

Bustle autoloader can hold upto max 36 ready-rounds (Abrams concept autoloader), ours will be 18-24 probably. That's the issue, we gotta store some more somewhere.

Hmmm.... can't they just build a wider turret??

(Interesting read in wet-stowage tho, didn't know)

Yeah, I'll try to remember the name of that book.

 

[Bleh]

Hmmm.... can't they just build a wider turret??

I dunno... Type 10 has only 14, K2 has 16, Type 90 had 20 & Leclerc has 24. So the capacity maybe be just width dependant