gogbot
New Member
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2009
- Messages
- 937
- Likes
- 120
Unfortunately , that fact has forced me to ask a great deal many questions.As of 25 Aug, 2010 04:35:11 PM, IA is the proud owner of only 85 Arjun Tanks after 26 years of development and trials.
ROFL. That should answer all your questions.
DRDO , MOD and the Indian army have a lot to answer for.
DRDO and MOD for all the usual suspects , delays , lack of planning and cost-overruns.
But Remember it was the Army that had changed the GSQR 3 times over the course of development.
It prompted at least 3 known re-designs.
http://frontierindia.net/history-of-arjun-tank-development
#1
#2The first General Staff Qualitative Requirement (GSQR) was issued in August 1972 as QR No. 326 for the design and development of MBT. The QR 326 was not exhaustive and with regard to specifications but featured only skeleton specifications.
The design and development of MBT based on GSQR No. 326 was taken up by the Combat Vehicle Research and Development Establishment (CVRDE). The initial outlay of Rs. 15.50 Crore was sanctioned vide the Government of India (GOI) letter dated 02 May, 1974. Project Development Certification (PDC) of the project was 10 years from the date of sanction.
#3In April 1978, the Indian Army called DRDO for a meeting for mutual discussions. The aim was to change the GSQR No. 326. A series of meetings between DRDO and Indian Army, chaired by VCOAS resulted in change in GSQR. The new GSQR bearing the number 431 was issued in August 1982.
The changes in the GSQR No. 431 were
a)Increase in width and weight
b)110/115mm gun was to be replaced with a 120mm gun.
c)Improved Sighting and Fire Control system.
Essentially it meant creation of entirely new design and systems. A sum of Rs. 56.55 Crores was obtained mainly to cater to cater to GSQR changes and price escalation due to inflation/ rise in import costs.
That would put the design of the tank as of 1987.There had been significant enhancement in the battle tank technologies world wide and there was a possibility of these tanks being introduced in the Indian Sub Continent. This prompted Indian Army to change its GSQR and in November 1985, third GSQR No. 467 was issued. The changes in GSQR were:
a)More lethal gun of 120mm caliber.
b)Requirement of Fin Stabilized Armour Piercing Discarding Sabot (FSAPDS)
c)Development of Semi Combustible Cartridge cases and high energy propellant.
d)Integrated Fire Control System based on sight stabilized system with periscopic gunner sight.
e)Thermal Imaging system for gunner's main sight for night fighting capabilities.
f)Provision of "Kanchan Armour" for enhanced immunity.
In addition following conditions were in the new GSQR:
"¢Manufacture of 23 Pre production Series (PPS) Tanks to enable full scale troop trials and after that smooth transfer technology (TOT) to a production agency.
"¢Setting of Armoured Fighting Vehicle (AFV) evaluation center and augmentation of infrastructure facilities.
"¢Realistic assessment of technical and user trial.
"¢Import of engines for prototypes and PPS.
The revised financial implication because of the new GSQR was Rs. 280.80 Crores which was issued in 1987. The GSQR escalated the cost of materials, stores and the import cost spiraled due to weakening Rupee.
Around the same time the LCA was first designed.
ROFL at that why not.
its funny is it not, every time they try to make the tank they have to start over
more or less.
I am sure DRDO made its own mistakes , but no one gave them a simple job to begin with but nor was it made any easier on them with the changing requirements.
I am just happy that the Arjun actually got to arrive.
If we did not get the T-90 in 2000 , i would like to ask the question would the GSQR have changed again as well.
Except there are two difference , the Air force has fighters far superior to the LCA-Mk1.LCA and Arjun have faced similar problems. Both forces have rejected Mk1. Both forces have asked for a MK2. Both forces have not committed to the project completely. Both forces have mooted for a new gen platform MCA and FMBT.
And is Importing fighters with the same requirements as the LCA-MK2.
Why does the IAF get of crtiq free, they are inducting a horde of planes superior the LCA and the LCA MKII , And are already working towards comparable aircraft like the AMCA , in the FGFA. When they say the LCA is not ready we need only take a look at their fleet to find an answer.
How does the T-90 or the T-72 stack against the Arjun.
Not only is the superiority of the current fleet in question ,
But so are the tanks we will be inducting , over the next 10 years 1000 t-90 will be produced. and a greater number of T-72's upgraded.
Do any of them even meet the GSRQ requirements of the Arjun or even Surpass them.
And the other Difference the Army rejected the MkI capped it and wanted to shelve the entire project, the Air force asked for the MK-II.
In conclusion the end result of IAF decision may slow indigenous efforts,
But going for the MMRCA not only strengthened but only increased IAF's capabilities.The same capabilities they want in the MKII.
Contrast this with the Army's decision to cap the orders and look for a new tank
That would be inducted many years from now. While we just sit on the Arjun with no Upgrades or development requested.
If the Arjun performed poorly at the trials no questions would have been asked and we would have moved onto the new tank.
But that's not what happened , Why was Arjun almost scarped despite it performing at comparable standards to the current inventory of tanks.
In 2008, the Indian Army announced plans to acquire an entirely new main battle tank unrelated to the Arjun, to be inducted after 2020.The Indian Army has held an "international seminar on future MBTs", during which the parameters and requirements of this future MBT were identified. As a result, Russia has offered to team with India on developing this future tank. According to Jane's, the Indian Army had confirmed that the Arjun's production will be capped at 124 units.
Compare and examine the two decisions.The IAF decision though is not the end of the road for the Rs. 6,000-crore LCA programme. It will consider acquiring 125 more Tejas when an improved — Mark 2 (Mk2) — variant is developed. As indicated by an IAF committee in 2004, any further order will be subject to the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA), the designer and developer of the LCA programme, showing "firm visibility that the aircraft will meet the ASR."
Recently, the IAF even made a few suggestions on improvements in Tejas Mk2, including a more powerful engine, optimisation of the aerodynamic qualities and weight of the aircraft and "dropping and replacing" certain parts to take care of obsolescence.
IF Arjun is past its expiry date what does that make the T-90 and T-72.Never questioned the success of the trials. Questioned only the time line. Why claim for great taste when its past the expiry date.
Straight from the horses mouth a
http://pib.nic.in/newsite/AdvSearch.aspx
Development of Arjun Tank(7/28/2005)
Lok Sabha
Some of the salient capabilities of Arjun tank are superior armour defeating capability, day and night operation, remarkable mobility, excellent ride comfort, high degree of immunity and fire 'on the move' capability.
The Arjun tank is superior to T-90 tank due to its high power to weight ratio, superior fire on the move capability during day and night and excellent ride comfort. MBT Arjun has gone through all the tests and it is meeting the General Staff Qualitative Requirement of the Army.
The first batch of five Arjun tanks, out of production lot will be going, for comparative trials with T-90 tanks. During preparatory tests before comparative trials certain systems have not met the acceptance criteria. These units are being rectified. Ruggedisation has been introduced to withstand peak abnormal temperature.
This information was given by the Defence Minister Shri Pranab Mukherjee in a written reply to Shri Ajoy Chakraborty and Shri Naveen Jindal in Lok Sabha today.
Release Id :10623
Why ?And you really think the army will actually use it for major combat operations. It is a token gesture. Arjun will be relegated to duties within our borders.
Why the token gestures , why not use the tank for its full capability.
Even in a few numbers.
At the very least its better than the T-72.
Even if they have it in few numbers why must it be treated like it is the most ineffective tank in the force.
Answer me that one question, why can't Arjun at least replace the T-72 or even older tanks that we keep in reserve.
Despite meeting the GSRQ , despite the Trials with the T-90.
Why does the Army choose to use Antiquated older models over the Arjun still.
968 T72M1 have been upgraded by the Heavy vehicles factory (HVF), While requests for proposal for upgrading approximately 1000 other T-72's have been sent to various firms in Israel, Russia, Poland and France.
Most could use replacement, Why can't the Arjun find a place in the Army if all those tanks are still in service.Up to 200 additional T-55s are kept in storage. T-55s were to be phased out in favour of T-90. Some T-55s may be converted into Tarmour AFV's
How is it you can tell me happily that the order of the Arjuns is just a token gesture. When we might actually need the Arjun to replace some of the odler models.
The FMBT is years away , and the Army is not looking at any foreign tank in the intern.
In the mean time we have the Arjun , if in fact its performance at the trials is not of debate.
It would be logical to assume that the Arjun is in fact reliable and comparable to that of the T-90.
Yet why do continue to operate older tanks in this 2010+ battlefield. Citing an expiry that does not seem to apply to the current stock and inventory.
Inducting a tank of comparable capabilities.A tank that has remained static over the last 10 years and will be static for the next 10.
All the while we have a dynamic tank , moving towards MKII. Who's eventual technologies will evolve into the FMBT ,
If as you say.the FMBT is thereal deal
You must also accept that fact that as it is being developed over the course of the next 10 to 15 years the corresponding technologies can be dynamically added to the Arjun series over that same period of time. If anything that process would result in a far superior tank.
And what would those Criticisms be ?All criticisms have been relegated to board rooms and meetings. Nothing more is being releases to mainstream media. IA has taken its cue from the IAF.
Praise it to an extent that the public is happy and still not induct it.
Does it not meet the requirements.
Can it not perform on par with the T-90.
where they hell are the criticisms regarding the T-90 or the t-72.
You don't need a 124 tanks as a test bed.It is a test bed for modern technologies like the APS and certifying technologies like engine, transmission, electronics and tracks.
That's a useless argument when we still have tanks like the T-72 sitting around.Arjun is well past its expiry date for development time. Normally any other armed forces would have asked to cancel the project and start afresh a new tank development in early 2000 itself. DRDO did not relent and the army went ahead with T-90.
If Arjun is past expiry what does that make the T-72.
And it not as if the T-90 is a ultra modern tank.
Its old by the same standards.
And is also inferior to the Arjun in certain regards.
If you want to tell me the Arjun is old and expired , we should scarp the t-90 and t-72 as well.
Since you bought it up.Don't compare with the Israeli Merkava because it is like comparing Apples and the Milky Way. The Merkava was indeed ahead of its time and had a lot of promise which came from technology that was 35 years ahead of what today's Arjun is.
Just because we did not make something as good.
Does not change their underlying concept wrong.
They went for incremental upgrades and improvement.
The results are clear for all to see.
Tell me one reason why incremental improvement would not have worked for the Arjun.
Arjun could have well of evolved into the FMBT.
Rather they are now forced to make a leap and try to produce the FMBT.
The Arjun was designed to the the Army's GSQR , ask the army why it did not ask for something different . Or if the Merkava is so ahead of its time why isn't the Army Inducting it for the 2010+ battlefield. Let me guess weight issues.
I would prefer almost anything over the t-72 frankly.
As i said earlier the current GSQR that the Arjun is based of is from 1987 when the Army issues.If the year was 1980 I would have whole heartedly supported Arjun. Heck even 2000 was fine. But not 2010+. The battlefield has become way too advanced for a super sized Brontosaurus.
This makes the Arjun a 90's design tank. This was what the Army asked for.
Now it is 2010 , and you are right we can make a better tank now or we can even import one. But FMBT is at least 12 years away(optimisic) and no tanks is bieng imported to meet the 2010+ battlefield.
What we have is the T-72
The T-90 a tank no different than the Arjun as far as capabilities are concerned.
Some would make the Argument that the Arjun could do better.
So in this 2010+ battlefield.
We have the T-72 a tank that's hardly fit for service at if your point is to be accurate.
The T-90 no better equipped than the Arjun. But we are inducting 1000 of over the next 10 years.
All this while we are sitting on top of the Arjun. Either unable or unwilling to take advantage of it.
In the Mean while, T-72 and Arjun , Why is T-72 in service despite the fact that Arjun is comparable to T-90.
Whatever you may tell me, the super sized Brontosaurus mkII will be the closest thing we will have to a 2010+ tank till the FMBT rolls out some 10-15 years.
I Await you reply p2prada