As i have mentioned before we already operating three different type of logistic supports for three different tanks, namely T-55/72/90 this also include BMPs, In coming days we will get-rid of T-55 and 72, besides Arjun logistics are no different from T-90s on ground, Also we can maintain the logistic easily as we are doing now..
Besides T-72 don't even share the same engine oil with T-90..
Engine oil is obviously different cause of different engines. But there are so many parts that share the same logistics. I am talking about the small parts, nuts, bolts, springs, cogs, brackets, bearings et al. The Arjuns would be different and the logistics supply for a different type of tanks will be huge.
Also, buying additional transports and paying additional transport costs to the railways will cost too.
You can't bring the T-55 into the picture because they are our reserves. More importantly, they are being phased out as we speak. By 2015 there will be no T-55s, Only T-72s and T-90s. So, T-55 does not come into the picture at all.
Earlier logistics supply included T-72s and T-55s, the future supply chain will include T-72s and T-90.
I doubt the army will think about opening up a third chain for a tank that's too few in number.
No body forced actually, Its media who liked to shout unnecessarily, IA agreed that Arjun is good and will be induced and media reported Arjun is forced into service..
Not true. IA never agreed to induct the first batch of 124 tanks. It was the MoD who pressurized the Army into buying it. I am still wondering where the army will use 200 tanks out of the 248 to be purchased. 6 regiments is interesting. It will only end up supporting the T-90 or will end up being used for training.
No army except IA is buying a token number of tanks to keep the critics happy.
further their were few problems in Tank back in 2000 and Army itself mentioned that it will be rectified with DRDO cooperation and here our Home media call our own project FAIL, Its the media language what people talk mostly and mostly it is very wrong..
Sir, I am not talking about media at all. They can shout all they want. Army does not operate under the aegis of the media. Heck if they are not bothered about the media storm about the NE Army Act, why will the army bother about some random ex service journalists over procurements.
We all know the Arjun failed the trials in the 2000 period. Had the Arjun cleared all trials, given a definitive plan of action for its future upgrade and logistics, the army would have gone with the Arjun. But nothing came. The Arjun couldn't move a few hundred kilometres without needing an engine replacement and couldn't shoot to hit at 100 metres.
The Arjun's problems was not created by the media. The problems were there and rectified only in 2005(except engine).
Their is no upgraded Kanchan after 2002, The same module in Arjun will be implement on T-90S/M, Still compare to Arjun it will have less thickness coz of its deign and hence less protection....
The application of Kanchan is done to reduce the cost of T-90S/M for mass production within the country..
Sir, the kanchan has undergone multiple modifications since it was developed. Some in the composition, some in the manufacturing process and some in the assembly. Tank armour is ever evolving. New designs and modifications of the Kanchan are coming out every 2 or 3 years. This is a part of the tank development. Out of many variants one is chosen by the army. Unfortunately we will never know how many and which one was chosen.
It highly possible coz of K-5 size which is way big than normal ERA tiles, It is obvious that opponent tanks will hit the same place twice, The chances of hitting that place increase within 1500-1000m for T-80UDs..
It is nearly impossible. The tank guns accuracy is greater than the dimensions of the ERA tile. Hitting the same spot again is a matter of luck.
Dont count T-72s or 55s also the first 300 T-90s..
T-55s will not exist pretty soon, half way before the production of the T-90 ends.
Why would Russia uprate an engine design they view as obsolete? Popovkin said it was obsolete and now he has been promoted to deputy defence minister. Medvedev is traveling across Europe and the US securing defence technology. There will be no uprated engine based on old designs, they want Western engines.
Uprating an engine is basic. Even people on streets uprate existing engines to boost power. We can do it ourselves too.
They may go for German engines in the future, maybe reverse engineer them. But the T-90s we have will need some kind of upgrades anyway.
Yet the Leclerc can travel 500km, it must not be a heavy MBT.
Leclerc has bigger fuel tanks. The fuel consumption is nearly one and a half times that of the T-90. It is not an advantage.
Yet Indian T-90s lack APUs while the Arjun has one, go figure.
Huh! T-90 has a superior FCS, has a superior armour rating against all projectiles, has a decent gas mileage, cheaper on production and operation. You are comparing all that to the APU?
Tanks need APUs, it is that simple. It is not 1941 when tanks didn't have electronics.
Tanks need to be cheaper too. APU isn't a huge advantage, especially in the world of battlefield surveillance radars and CAS.
Next Russia is going to buy engine and gun from Germany. Strange that they choose armor, I think russia is still strong in armor technology. Cancellation of T95, shows Russia's disadvantage technological poistion vs western. I will be not surprise if future Russian MBT will be around 60 Tons, Leo type but with an outoloader and 3 crew
That's what they were looking at with the T-95.
Anyway the Russians are going for equivalent in western markets because they are not able to financially develop it on their own. They have lost a lot of their best minds to the west as well as to bigger design houses like Sukhoi.
They don't have the finances or the manpower to do the smaller things like light armoured vehicles, transport aircraft, new cargo helicopters etc. So, they will obviously look to the west for fulfilment. This will take some years to achieve.
But, their biggest projects are going well, like tank design, PAKFA, aircraft carriers etc.
It is not that they can't do it. It is just that it is cheaper to get a German contract than a Russian who will take a longer time to setup the infrastructure that has been lost.
Why we are going for JVs and why they are going for JVs are 2 different reasons.
