@p2prada
Indeginization of hardware is always subject to change. The more the tank is orders the more likely that more equipment can be sourced from local supplier
The change has to come about fast. Any changes the USAF expects from Boeing is done in record time. But DRDO takes for ever.
This is primarily because we have a near first world military and a third world industry.
Level of indeginisation has not stopped the Army or IAF from showing interest in LCH.
Of course not. LCH equivalents are not easily available or affordable in the international market. We need this for anything like Cold Start or Network Warfare.
We all talk about the Indian private sector , having a bigger role in defense. That's all about building and sourcing the various parts like the threads , electronics etc.
They neither have the experience nor the funds to invest in a big way. So, I am not overly worried about any of their roles. TATA and L&T are involved in a big way. Probably 30 or 40 years down the line they may become our Boeing and Raytheon.
But don't you think that given more orders and the time frame of those orders the levels of indigenous items will also rise , to at least well above 50%. As more supplier get roped in.
It has more to do with time and funds. Nothing to do with user interest. IA is not interested in the Arjun and they are not funding the development. But GOI is and DRDO is getting funds to develop the Arjun further. This is all that matters.
Normally in first world nations, once the user has lost interest the industry stops research on the product due to lack of a potential market. So, the board of directors cites lack of user interest for stopping research which is a genuine reason. But in DRDO lack of user interest does not mean the product development stops. Product development continues even if the industry is 100% sure the product is not taken in by the user. So, funds continue to pour in and development continues. Also, since DRDO is a state enterprise, any red lines in sales is discarded because it is the tax payers money that is involved. The situation is the opposite in the first world countries since R&D is done by private industries which look at profit and loss.
This is one of the points i was trying to make , by manufacturing and putting the Arjun in serivce , the Manufacturing and supply chain can be established by the time the FMBT roles around.
If you have 2 cars and you are the only one who drives both then one car becomes a waste of time. They will simply rust away as what is happening with the F-14s in the US. US can afford it but India cannot.
We aren't buying tanks to drive them around. They will be used to wage wars. Doctrines are created and manpower is expended creating the doctrines. It takes years. It is not beneficial to create a whole new doctrine for a new tank when air power significantly dwarfs tank warfare.
Air power has changed so dramatically that its power is unimaginable.
Back in 1971 in the battle of Longewala, 4 Hawker Hunters destroyed over 130 tanks and vehicles in a matter of hours. In 1991, the Highway of Death incident ended with nearly 10000 dead and 2000 vehicles destroyed in Kuwait.
All this was with older generation radars that could not detect much on the ground. Now with the advent of AESA and related technologies, the modern definition of tank warfare has completely changed. Heavy tanks are sitting ducks.
If a Predator drone can kill 6 sleeping men in a shack by firing a hellfire through a window then a tank is as good as dead. The future is small tanks like the T types with stealth incorporated in them along with a high degree of automation to reduce crew members following the principle of hit avoidance. Air transportable is an important criteria.
By not making the Arjun , even now in as many small numbers as we do , we will undoubtedly run into Manufacturing roadblocks for the FMBT in the future.
As explained, Arjun project has failed but not cancelled. It will form the foundation to a new generation tank.
May need a bit more from you then that.
What info are using to say that the T type is more reliable than the Arjun.
T types are very reliable. When the gulf war started the Americans were really wary of the T-72. Even after the war the Americans are still wary of the T-72s. The T-90s are much more dangerous. The primary reason is the lower profile of the tank making it difficult to detect.
Even now the IA is more comfortable with a smaller, easily deployable tank compared to the Arjun type tanks. Offer the army Leo2s and they will still reject it for the T-types. The future is small tanks anyway. So, why waste time with a bigger heavier tank?
I mean truth be told , the t-90's have to be fitted with AC's to run in the desert.
While the Arjun can do without.
That's only for the Catherine FCS. Give the Arjun a third gen FCS system and even that will need a AC. Most western MBTs now come equipped with ACs. The ones who don't have them are the ones who can't afford them as of now. It is a standard fit now a days.
I think there is bias in your statement regarding the T series reliability.
The T-types have seen combat and are a proven platform after years of service in IA as well as the rest of the world.
Arjun has not even been in service long enough to make that determination.
Sure you have another point right here.
But stating superior reliability to the t series seems to be unsubstantial.
T-types are older and proven. Arjun is a new tank type and hence unproven. At the same time the USAF will rely more on the F-15 rather than the F-22 simply because the F-15 is proven. When a commander sends out a squadron, he knows what the F-15 is capable of and what it is not. This gives him a decisive edge in plotting out a course of action. But the F-22, though superior, is an unreliable platform. The commander has no idea how it will perform a mission and that jeopardizes the mission at hand.
The Arjun is superior or not is established using war exercises and comparative trials which takes years. So, until then the T-90s are more reliable.
But you are getting away from the point , 124 MKII's require a lot of logistics set up, troops and maintenance. It's a waste if all their going to be is testbeds .
A certain number is required to test every doctrine. At a squad level as well as a division level. So, 124 tanks, or more specifically 85 tanks is for tests.
We kinda already order 372 Arjuns so we already have that scenario.
If you are opposed to that scenario so much we could always get rid of the T-90, lol .
By the time OFB completes delivery it will be 2020 and that is by being highly optimistic . At the same time 1600 T-90s will be in operational service.
But i don't get why you have to give the impression that Arjun is not combat vehicle . Inducting 300+ vehicles for tests and such. I mean they are stationed in Rajastan right next to the border , not somewhere in South India , away from the front.
It does not matter. The army will get the full order only by 2020 , maybe more. Heck if we start making Arjuns today we can only get 500 by 2020. 124 Arjun Mk2 will take more than just 2020. 5 years of development and trials of Mk2 followed by manufacturing will take a decade at best.
Planting them in Rajasthan is a given. IA does not conduct offensive operations in Rajasthan. Only area denial and defensive operations. With a superior IAF, even that is not required. Heck the Pakistanis tried and failed already with dire consequences at Longewala.
Why can't you just admit that the tank works , it is operational and it is in serivce.
85 tanks. :happy_2:
I guess what i am asking is has'nt the Arjun already proved itself. It can hold its own than any tank across the border with the except of the Type-99.
Na. Arjun will probably kick Type-99s azz too. But the T-90 will do a bit more of the azz kicking.
Why do you insist on calling it a token test vehicle , despite good showing at the trials.
A white elephant can look pretty but in the long run you really want the grunt.
