Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

[Kunal Biswas]

How does it matter? This guy is a known think tank. His credentials are known to nearly everybody in the forum world. I gave his citation only because he may know something we don't.

If so than it would be nice if he provides the data here..

None of it matters when the pressure and muzzle velocity is greater than Arjun's gun. It may not be better than the Arjun in specifications, but it is the more powerful gun out of the 2. Numbers don't lie.

But, you were not even close. The Arjun's cal is 50.4 and not 55.

Exactly 2A46M is 6000mm barrel = 52CAL
compare to Arjun 6050mm = 50 CAL ??

Do you really think we get actual shells they use when Russia itself provides us downgraded shells? Also the DM-53 uses a weaker penetrator than the M829A3. The 10kg DU penetrator on the M829A3 at 1555m/s will pack more punch than a 8.35kg Metal penetrator at just a 100m/s higher speed.

Well for i can say we have done with Russian Ammo on our tanks but not satisfied, In past when we had centurions we did receive good ammo from western world and thats the reason why centurions have high kill rate than t-55 in Indian service during 71 war..
Besides Rheinmetall export good trusted ammo, Also i would like to add abt Israelis ammo too..

Anyway the point being I doubt we have anything as good as these shells.

For now we have sufficient punching power with DRDO shell with Arjun Rifled gun it act much better compare to present 2A46M....
Also we do have limited no of Russian/German/Israeli rounds..

The mass of the penetrators matters. If you throw a lighter mass faster does not mean greater penetration. The difference is just 100m/s but the American shells will go through more armour than the other equivalents around the world. The penetration is amplified by the radioactive elements too. DU has a higher density at the same mass compared to metals like Tungsten which makes the difference. So a 10kg DU penetrator will not be equal to a 10Kg Tungsten penetrator.

DU have slightly higher density than Tungsten but expensive than DU, Tungsten is consider safe on battlefield coz its not radioactive while DU is cheap and radioactive, Also both elements and metals are combine with other alloy therefore either its a tungsten or a DU have similar density..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tungsten_carbide
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shell_(projectile)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_energy_penetrator
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depleted_uranium

 

[sayareakd]

here is contribution from my side to your great discussion (this one from my personal collection).




Uploaded with ImageShack.us

 

[p2prada]

If so than it would be nice if he provides the data here..

Wish he would. I don't know him very well in order to invite him into our discussion. Perhaps some one who knows him can.

In the mean time you can check any of his older posts for clarification regarding the Arjun.

Well for i can say we have done with Russian Ammo on our tanks but not satisfied, In past when we had centurions we did receive good ammo from western world and thats the reason why centurions have high kill rate than t-55 in Indian service during 71 war..
Besides Rheinmetall export good trusted ammo, Also i would like to add abt Israelis ammo too..

That was over 40 years ago. Times change, it is not everyday a foreign country hands over one of their best guns with Full ToT. Also the Centurions had a more powerful gun with better rounds compared to the downgraded T-55s we received. So, it is not an accurate comparison for today's environment.

DU have slightly higher density than Tungsten but expensive than DU, Tungsten is consider safe on battlefield coz its not radioactive while DU is cheap and radioactive, Also both elements and metals are combine with other alloy therefore either its a tungsten or a DU have similar density..

DU's density is nearly 1.2-1.5 times more than Tungsten depending on how the penetrator is made. It is no small number. The M829A3 type shell is impossible for us to get from the US. There is no way we can penetrate an ERA and the composite armour, with what we have, with one hit. Check the specs on Sayar's post, the penetrator is only 6.8kgs, it is barely enough. It will probably bounce off the T-84UD's frontal armour with little damage. Is that out best T Type ammo from OFB?

The Pakistanis don't have anything against our T-types too. Even their DU based Nazia(or something) will find it hard to penetrate the T-90s and will be akin to a pea once the T-90M comes out.

 

[p2prada]

One little thing I went wrong with. I thought the Kaktus was the younger brother of Relikt. Found out the Relikt is nearly 200% more effective than the Kaktus. If we are getting the Relikt then that would make our tank really well protected. It was supposedly made to counter the M829A3.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

That was over 40 years ago. Times change, it is not everyday a foreign country hands over one of their best guns with Full ToT. Also the Centurions had a more powerful gun with better rounds compared to the downgraded T-55s we received. So, it is not an accurate comparison for today's environment.

The ammo!
The fact of yesterday still goes through today Ammo and accuracy..
I hope Krasnopol incident shouldn't happen with K-5s..

There is no way we can penetrate an ERA and the composite armour, with what we have, with one hit. Check the specs on Sayar's post, the penetrator is only 6.8kgs, it is barely enough. It will probably bounce off the T-84UD's frontal armour :emot158:with little damage. Is that out best T Type ammo from OFB?

@ p2prada
Seems u know abt Armour data of T-84 pls share...
And also Our rounds are far-far better than Russian rounds..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/125_mm_smoothbore_ammunition

The Pakistanis don't have anything against our T-types too. Even their DU based Nazia(or something) will find it hard to penetrate the T-90s and will be akin to a pea once the T-90M comes out.

Indeed!
But untill Indian T-90M comes out, we cannot make out details abt its firepower..

 

[p2prada]

The ammo!
The fact of yesterday still goes through today Ammo and accuracy..
I hope Krasnopol incident shouldn't happen with K-5s..

Even the Germans messed up the American contract for ERA. Sh*t happens! We have to be worried about it only if it is consistent.

Seems u know abt Armour data of T-84 pls share...

Composite + Russian K-5. Similar to T-90 S. I should have said T-80UD and not T-84.

Best of luck trying to get through that armour without better shells.

And also Our rounds are far-far better than Russian rounds..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/125_mm...n let alone the T-90S, as validated by tests.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Even the Germans messed up the American contract for ERA. Sh*t happens! We have to be worried about it only if it is consistent.

Well yes things go wrong, and soilders pay the price but i am more concernt abt my people!
And i worry more abt their safety than regular supply of K5..

Composite + Russian K-5. Similar to T-90 S. I should have said T-80UD and not T-84.
Best of luck trying to get through that armour without better shells.

Even so the T-80 is considered second after T-90S..
6.8 KG rod at 1650m/s compare to 3.7KG at 1700m/s.......
thanks!!

Hardly true. Too many things go into making a round and the Russians have more experience. Also, in the link, the best Russian shell specifications are unknown. Not a good way for a comparison. It still does not mean the projectile will go through the Composite+ERA. Heck our T-72 shells don't even go through Arjun's composite armour let alone ERA. Even the Israelis don't have anything that can go through the Arjun let alone the T-90S, as validated by tests.

Provide a better link..
Russian weakness is their auto-loader which is vulnerable to enemy fire also limits the size of the rod hence reducing the penetration..
Whereas Arjun don't have such limitations, Arjun is indeed heavily armored compare to T-90S/M, and is the best MBT in Indian Army..

 

[ppgj]

One little thing I went wrong with. I thought the Kaktus was the younger brother of Relikt. Found out the Relikt is nearly 200% more effective than the Kaktus. If we are getting the Relikt then that would make our tank really well protected. It was supposedly made to counter the M829A3.

=omg=. what an anti climax!!!

after singing paens and praises for the "KAKTUS" most of the pages in this thread and calling Arjun - a pea shooter, joe vegetable product etc..(compared to this super duper T-90M) and going personal against people (including me) for countering it!!!

good going.

i posted Igor's article (btw it is not the only one!!) T-90M will have a new turret and a new autoloader for "unitary" longer rods - you rubbished that too calling as it as the blogger's personal view!!! and asserted the difference is only Kaktus ERA from T-90S!!! all without a single back up.

......

it would be great if you can you post a "comparative" analysis of these 3 ERAs - Kontact-5, Relikt and Kaktus???

one more thing. you have been talking of the gun on our T-90S as being 2A46M-5. i have not seen a single source which says so. every source just says 2A46M!! except this -

http://www.deagel.com/Main-Battle-Tanks/T-90S_a000369001.aspx

which says it is 2A46M-2.

i would be glad to be corrected!!!

 

[p2prada]

Well yes things go wrong, and soilders pay the price but i am more concernt abt my people!
And i worry more abt their safety than regular supply of K5..

Your intentions aside. Things always don't work the way you want to. When you gave the example of the LM2500, I gave you a similar example about the ERA mistake the premier country in engineering did.

Like I said sh*t happens. The biggest examples of goof ups are the frequent space shuttle explosions and plane crashes that happen everywhere in the world. Nothing is perfect.

If the Russians messed up, they may have rectified it by now or maybe recalled the order.

Even so the T-80 is considered second after T-90S..
6.8 KG rod at 1650m/s compare to 3.7KG at 1700m/s.......
thanks!!

What specifications are these? Which shell has a 6.8kg rod and which 3.7kg?
The problem is the latest Russian shell specs are still not out.

The T-80s are indeed weaker than the T-90s. T-90s are a more modern development and has a better composite armour. But ERA is more or less the same.

Whereas Arjun don't have such limitations,

Agreed.

Arjun is indeed heavily armored compare to T-90S/M, and is the best MBT in Indian Army..

It is a common misconception that the western MBTs are better protected externally than the Russian T Types. The reason why western MBTs are heavier is because of the extra armour protection for ammunition storage. Other than that the external armour specs are mostly the same for both types. If you want to add an ammo storage area in your tanks, then that increases the size of the tank and also the weight. Other than that the protection factor remains the same.

The T-90s turret is 15-16 tons in weight while the Arjun turret is 20 tons which makes it grossly heavy. Overweight does not mean better protected.

Also the cause of death is interesting to note among protected tanks and T Types. In T-Types, if the turret is hit, the crew die instantly. In western tanks, if the tank is hit and the internal components catch fire, the crew normally burn to death rather than instant death.

Back to the point. There is very little difference between the T-90's and the Arjun's composite armour protection. They are more or less the same in protection. The difference is the ERA. It is a god like armour. Heck, I am betting even the Americans are dying to get their hands on the Kaktus or the Relikt. It would be cool to see the M1Abrams with Kaktus ERA. Without ERA or even NERA your tank is toast.

after singing paens and praises for the "KAKTUS" most of the pages in this thread and calling Arjun - a pea shooter, joe vegetable product etc..(compared to this super duper T-90M) and going personal against people (including me) for countering it!!!

Can you get some examples of me going personal except for Armand's idiotic assessment of RC-400s radars? You were the one who questioned my sources, then you are the one who is making a personal attack now? I have answered all your questions already.

The Kaktus is indeed super duper.

I posted Igor's article (btw it is not the only one!!) T-90M will have a new turret and a new autoloader for "unitary" longer rods - you rubbished that too calling as it as the blogger's personal view!!! and asserted the difference is only Kaktus ERA from T-90S!!! all without a single back up.

HuH! The T-90M we will be getting has an ERA upgrade along with Kanchan armour. If we get a new gun too, then that's good anyway. I told you it is a bloggers post. How will he know the designation of the tank when it is only on paper? You have seen the PAKFA flying, can you tell me its designation?

it would be great if you can you post a "comparative" analysis of these 3 ERAs - Kontact-5, Relikt and Kaktus???

They are classified. Bet the Americans want it too. They only have K-5 specifics.

one more thing. you have been talking of the gun on our T-90S as being 2A46M-5. i have not seen a single source which says so. every source just says 2A46M!! except this -

http://www.deagel.com/Main-Battle-Tanks/T-90S_a000369001.aspx

which says it is 2A46M-2.

i would be glad to be corrected!!!

Don't have sources for it. The Indian military establishment is excessively secretive about product designations. My IAF source is not even ready to say we have the R-77(X) in our inventory. They don't go beyond the name of the product, designation is classified.

The articles during the time of the contract mentioned the latest guns will be fitted on the T-90s. There was talk about changing the stabilization of the T-90s main gun to modern standards. The only stabilization upgrade on the T-90 was the 2A46M-5. There is no difference between the M-4 and M-5 except for new stabilization and increased accuracy.

The 2A46M is the best operational Russian gun.

It could be possible the first 350 tanks may have had older guns. But deagel is not a reasonably credible source. I had already proven that with Deagel's article on the RC-400. Igor is more credible.

 

[p2prada]

Perhaps Igor was talking about the T-90ME and we may be getting this version;

The export version of modernized T-90M tank was demonstrated for Russian PM Putin today in 'UVZ plant (N-Tagil). The tank has a new, bigger turrets,
- 'Relict' ERA on the turret (but not on the hull),
- a new panoramic commander sight with 360 degree vision,
- new commander hatch with better accessability
- different placement of the air conditioner
- new tracks
- stronger rolls and some improvement in the chassis
- possibly 1200 hp engine

http://igorrgroup.blogspot.com/2009/12/t-90me.html

Check link for pics.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Your intentions aside. Things always don't work the way you want to. When you gave the example of the LM2500, I gave you a similar example about the ERA mistake the premier country in engineering did.

My Dear,
Army works on tested and graded weapons which is not always granted by Russians, Our INDIAN Grunts are not for weapon tests also if weapons are faulty it will seriously effect all T-90s on field, Also in Indian Army those systems which prove faulty we don't use for permanent as for LM2500 is a gas turbine and i never mentioned abt it!!

What specifications are these? Which shell has a 6.8kg rod and which 3.7kg?
The problem is the latest Russian shell specs are still not out.

Whatever the specs are if the rods length is not increased it wont be heavy as ours..
Btw, If u have a better link pls share..

The T-80s are indeed weaker than the T-90s. T-90s are a more modern development and has a better composite armour. But ERA is more or less the same.

K-5 is on only on Russian MBT,
K-5 look alike Ukrainian copy should not be confused with K5..
K-5 is internal structure is very differnet form T-80UD era
Also it is very possible AK may use the same..

It is a common misconception that the western MBTs are better protected externally than the Russian T Types. The reason why western MBTs are heavier is because of the extra armour protection for ammunition storage. Other than that the external armour specs are mostly the same for both types. If you want to add an ammo storage area in your tanks, then that increases the size of the tank and also the weight. Other than that the protection factor remains the same.

If you ask me abt any western tank ( Most of them) i can provide you with Armour data and then you can compare them to T-90..
T-90S is seriously behind western tank in terms of Armour..

The T-90s turret is 15-16 tons in weight while the Arjun turret is 20 tons which makes it grossly heavy. Overweight does not mean better protected.

Yes it is, look at the data i give you abt the turret of both tanks at page no 10..

Also the cause of death is interesting to note among protected tanks and T Types. In T-Types, if the turret is hit, the crew die instantly. In western tanks, if the tank is hit and the internal components catch fire, the crew normally burn to death rather than instant death.

Do you presenting this as a joke?
No comments..

Back to the point. There is very little difference between the T-90's and the Arjun's composite armour protection. They are more or less the same in protection. The difference is the ERA. It is a god like armour. Heck, I am betting even the Americans are dying to get their hands on the Kaktus or the Relikt. It would be cool to see the M1Abrams with Kaktus ERA. Without ERA or even NERA your tank is toast.

Go back at page no 10..

HuH! The T-90M we will be getting has an ERA upgrade along with Kanchan armour. If we get a new gun too, then that's good anyway. I told you it is a bloggers post. How will he know the designation of the tank when it is only on paper? You have seen the PAKFA flying, can you tell me its designation?

We just receive TOT of the gun 2A46M-2, It wont be economically good to change the entire production line..

 

[p2prada]

My Dear,
Army works on tested and graded weapons which is not always granted by Russians, Our INDIAN Grunts are not for weapon tests also if weapons are faulty it will seriously effect all T-90s on field, Also in Indian Army those systems which prove faulty we don't use for permanent as for LM2500 is a gas turbine and i never mentioned abt it!!

Army needs to test all the weapons anyway. It is not like any military in the world gets perfect systems. That's why I gave the German goof up example.

Also, my bad about the LM2500. Don't know how that came up here. It was supposed to be in a different place.

Whatever the specs are if the rods length is not increased it wont be heavy as ours..
Btw, If u have a better link pls share..

A DRDO shell or Russian shell has to have the same specifications if the gun it is being fired from is the same. You say the T-72/T-90 has autoloader limitations. But for some reason you say the shells DRDO makes are superior because they magically cross over the limitations. ???

The shell specifications Sayar came up with was for the T-72 or maybe even the T-90 because it said 125mm APFSDS.

Russian shell specs are not known and that's the problem about coming to any meaningful conclusion.

K-5 is on only on Russian MBT,
K-5 look alike Ukrainian copy should not be confused with K5..
K-5 is internal structure is very differnet form T-80UD era
Also it is very possible AK may use the same..

K-5 is a Soviet invention as you rightly pointed out in the 3rd sentence. The Ukranians have decent battle tank capabilities unless you are suggesting the Ukranians have not done anything with their own weapons systems over the last 20 years.

If you ask me abt any western tank ( Most of them) i can provide you with Armour data and then you can compare them to T-90..
T-90S is seriously behind western tank in terms of Armour..

I would love to have them. We can discuss it after you provide it.

Yes it is, look at the data i give you abt the turret of both tanks at page no 10..

Sir. Do you still have the link, I tried looking and couldn't find the right link.

We just receive TOT of the gun 2A46M-2, It wont be economically good to change the entire production line..

We are doing that with our Aircraft Carrier, our Nuclear submarine, our aircraft. So, why shouldn't our tank be any different. Even Arjun Mk2 will be entirely different from Mk1.

Had Arjun been successful in 2000, then things would have been different. Now with Pakistan inducting good tanks, we will need better tanks too. We need T-90M and Arjun Mk2. Both are already being planned too.

 

[ppgj]

Can you get some examples of me going personal except for Armand's idiotic assessment of RC-400s radars?

ok. in your post # 168 you said this -

That will be pretty much till the end of your retirement age. So, you can stick around and cry about it all your life or focus on the strengths of the T-90 and see where it can win the war for us.

This has been a waste of time.

Thanks.

you called me - a "kid" too, a couple of times. you can check all your posts to me.

You were the one who questioned my sources,

did you post any sources??? that is news to me. infact i have been requesting for them on many of your claims. all you did was sidestepping it or skipping it!!

infact somebody else also asked you to substantiate on your claims.

then you are the one who is making a personal attack now?

did i?? i only pointed out the ones on me and others - made by you.

I have answered all your questions already.

i have been asking like many others to "substantiate" your claims with credible sources on many issues. you have not done that.

The Kaktus is indeed super duper.

no surprises considering your own post # 361.

HuH! The T-90M we will be getting has an ERA upgrade along with Kanchan armour.

i repeat our TOT was for T-90S and not T-90M and the TOT agreement was signed in 2001.

kanchan armour only proves 2 things.

1. DRDO armour is good.

2. Russia in no SU. they can screw their best friend when it comes to sensitive technology.

besides what is the point of the armour and ERA when the "basic issues" are still hanging fire with T-90S even now - which are far more important. 11 years is not late i guess!!! russian no???

If we get a new gun too, then that's good anyway.

but you have been saying we already have 2A46M-5!!!

I told you it is a bloggers post. How will he know the designation of the tank when it is only on paper? You have seen the PAKFA flying, can you tell me its designation?

you missed the point - which i have pointed out already - long back infact. he was quoting another site, the link also i have provided.

let me repeat again -

http://igorrgroup.blogspot.com/2010/01/90-new-specs.html#more

in the above article, he quotes this -

http://otvaga2004.narod.ru/xlopotov_8/t90m.htm

which forms the basis for Igor's article.

there are pictures too.

They are classified. Bet the Americans want it too. They only have K-5 specifics.

so how do you know so much about them when they are "classified??" you have been speaking very authoritatively on many things including painting KAKTUS as some silver bullet - till you came to know that it was not - as per your post # 361??

Don't have sources for it. The Indian military establishment is excessively secretive about product designations.

i can understand if it "basic armour". what is the problem with the gun designation??

My IAF source is not even ready to say we have the R-77(X) in our inventory. They don't go beyond the name of the product, designation is classified.

it is no secret. we use russian weapons mostly which has started changing only recently.

heck we are so open about even ASTRA!! we get so much details on it's testing etc.. what is big in R-77 that one needs to be secretive about!! BVR is common now.

The articles during the time of the contract mentioned the latest guns will be fitted on the T-90s. There was talk about changing the stabilization of the T-90s main gun to modern standards. The only stabilization upgrade on the T-90 was the 2A46M-5. There is no difference between the M-4 and M-5 except for new stabilization and increased accuracy.

can you post those articles???

besides 2A46M-5 was only inducted in 2005!!! here -

http://fofanov.armor.kiev.ua/Tanks/ARM/2a46.html

and our TOT agreement was signed in 2001 for T-90S.

considering the Russians were playing hard on TOT on the "latest" tech, why would they give us?? and even now that gun is the latest!!!

The 2A46M is the best operational Russian gun.

they won't give us the version 5. as to how good they are, Kunal sir has posted extensively.

It could be possible the first 350 tanks may have had older guns. But deagel is not a reasonably credible source.

so why don't you give us the "credible" source and back up??

I had already proven that with Deagel's article on the RC-400.

you were wrong on that too.

check post # 310. Armand proved it is 2.1 kw for even RC 400 and not 400w as you were saying. he also said mirage 2000s have RDY 3 radar and not RC 400 as you were saying.

Igor is more credible.

you did not agree when i posted his links on T-90M!!!

Perhaps Igor was talking about the T-90ME and we may be getting this version;

The export version of modernized T-90M tank was demonstrated for Russian PM Putin today in 'UVZ plant (N-Tagil). The tank has a new, bigger turrets,
- 'Relict' ERA on the turret (but not on the hull),
- a new panoramic commander sight with 360 degree vision,
- new commander hatch with better accessability
- different placement of the air conditioner
- new tracks
- stronger rolls and some improvement in the chassis
- possibly 1200 hp engine

http://igorrgroup.blogspot.com/2009/12/t-90me.html

Check link for pics.

your link is slightly older than this -

http://igorrgroup.blogspot.com/2010/01/90-new-specs.html#more

it is evident the above link is follow on to the older one you posted above.

besides even Fofanov talks about the "obsoleteness" of the ammunition on the gun -

Currently the ammunition for 2A46M gun still corresponds to the level of threat that existed 15 years ago, and there are certain technical hurdles, primarily the autoloader dimensions, that prevent simple solutions to the problem.

Solutions do exist. These include a complex of deep modernization measures utilising an increased-power 125mm 2A82 gun, new ammunition with 740mm battle parts, and redesigned autoloader to accomodate those. There is also the project of radical increase in main gun caliber to 152mm (2A83?). Given the current geopolitical climate and Russian defence spending priorities, any efforts in this direction are unlikely to materialize in nearest years.

http://fofanov.armor.kiev.ua/Tanks/ARM/2a46.html

so it is evident why Russians would want to change the autoloader, turret etc..on T-90 particularly when T-95 vanished!!! afterall they have to earn by export!!!

reason why Igor's article quoting other Russian sites.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

A DRDO shell or Russian shell has to have the same specifications if the gun it is being fired from is the same. You say the T-72/T-90 has autoloader limitations. But for some reason you say the shells DRDO makes are superior because they magically cross over the limitations. ???

The shell specifications Sayar came up with was for the T-72 or maybe even the T-90 because it said 125mm APFSDS.

Well, see the weight of Indian tungsten rod and compare to Russian Rods..
It also include 120mm..

K-5 is a Soviet invention as you rightly pointed out in the 3rd sentence. The Ukranians have decent battle tank capabilities unless you are suggesting the Ukranians have not done anything with their own weapons systems over the last 20 years.

Good as Russians, In ERA tech?

I would love to have them. We can discuss it after you provide it.

For that you need to ask!

Sir. Do you still have the link, I tried looking and couldn't find the right link.

You will get T-90 data on FAS.org
The Arjun data is a old data since 2000 in INTRANET ( Army net )..

We are doing that with our Aircraft Carrier, our Nuclear submarine, our aircraft. So, why shouldn't our tank be any different. Even Arjun Mk2 will be entirely different from Mk1.
Had Arjun been successful in 2000, then things would have been different. Now with Pakistan inducting good tanks, we will need better tanks too. We need T-90M and Arjun Mk2. Both are already being planned too.

From where did u get that info?
How many HVF we have?
PA tanks= Good?? ( Excluding T-80UD )
T-90M is limited also Arjun MK-2 for now also in next +10 years..

 

[p2prada]

Well, see the weight of Indian tungsten rod and compare to Russian Rods..
It also include 120mm..

The specifications you gave me are old shells. Ones made in the 80s and some early 90s. The newest ones are classified.

Good as Russians, In ERA tech?

You can't say they are hopeless anyway. The Ukranians have inherited the most after the Russians after the fall of the Soviet Union. They are pretty good because the technology had matured under the Soviets. You can't say the same for Kaktus and Relikt though.

For that you need to ask!

I did, when I said I would love to have them.

You will get T-90 data on FAS.org
The Arjun data is a old data since 2000 in INTRANET ( Army net )..

I don't get your point. Are you referring to the weight of the turrets or weight of the tank?

From where did u get that info?

New gun, NERA or ERA, BMS, APS(laser based), will have modifications to the chassis, new engine, maybe some structural modifications. It will turn the Mk1 into a new tank. I did not mean new tank literally though.

How many HVF we have?

We have 1. What's it got to do with anything?

PA tanks= Good?? ( Excluding T-80UD )

Yes. Pretty good. T-80UD and AK.

T-90M is limited also Arjun MK-2 for now also in next +10 years..

There will be a lot of T-90Ms, definitely more than 248. Also I don't mind Mk2 inductions after the phase out of the T-72s. Right now the army has better things to spend on. They will not make changes to doctrine based on some 200 odd tanks.

 

[p2prada]

ok. in your post # 168 you said this -
you called me - a "kid" too, a couple of times. you can check all your posts to me.

Yeah! You were not discussing, you were whining.

Kunal sir and I were never discussing about the T-90s induction. Neither of has have no problem with it. I identified the problem of sanctions and failed tests to bring out why the T-90 was chosen too and even he agreed with that. Nevertheless, You have still been consistently saying the T-90 inductions should not have happened and that the Arjun was a better tank over flimsy details. I am sure you still are.

The T-90s are here to stay. The T-90s and Arjun will be spearhead any attack on our enemies. And any major Arjun inductions will happen once the product is more mature, namely the Mk2. That's all there is to it. If you still want to whine about costs and AC then be my guest it will not get you anywhere.

did you post any sources??? that is news to me. infact i have been requesting for them on many of your claims. all you did was sidestepping it or skipping it!!

I have been asking like many others to "substantiate" your claims with credible sources on many issues. you have not done that.

I speak to people. So, I have no sources which I can show on a computer screen.

no surprises considering your own post # 361.

See. Now you understand why I called you a kid. It isn't a personal attack. For you it is all Black and White. If I say something is good, you automatically take it as the other thing is bad. That's not how things work.

i repeat our TOT was for T-90S and not T-90M and the TOT agreement was signed in 2001.

There is not going to be as many changes as you think they are. Any electronic upgrade will be from our own house. We will not get Armour ToT. Pretty much the biggest change in the T-90M.

kanchan armour only proves 2 things.

1. DRDO armour is good.

Yes. I have never disagreed.

2. Russia in no SU. they can screw their best friend when it comes to sensitive technology.

Both have screwed us over. There was no internet during the Soviets and no twisted media, so we don't know much about it.

besides what is the point of the armour and ERA when the "basic issues" are still hanging fire with T-90S even now - which are far more important. 11 years is not late i guess!!! russian no???

This is what I have been saying. It is only your opinion. During the comparative trials, did you see any reports of T-90s failing in the desert?????? It happened in Bikaner, Rajasthan in the month of March.

but you have been saying we already have 2A46M-5!!!

Zraver said we have this gun already. I don't know where that post is though, I read it a long time ago.

you missed the point - which i have pointed out already - long back infact. he was quoting another site, the link also i have provided.

let me repeat again -

http://igorrgroup.blogspot.com/2010/01/90-new-specs.html#more

in the above article, he quotes this -

http://otvaga2004.narod.ru/xlopotov_8/t90m.htm

which forms the basis for Igor's article.

there are pictures too.

No. The point is we will not be getting everything mentioned in Igor's post. FCS, Radio, Nav systems, new this, new that etc. This is a Russian upgraded system. It in no way implies we will be getting the same version.

so how do you know so much about them when they are "classified??" you have been speaking very authoritatively on many things including painting KAKTUS as some silver bullet - till you came to know that it was not - as per your post # 361??

That's why words called "analysis" exists and there are certain people called "Analysts." A lot of these analysts have been studying armour development and try and get as much information as possible from anybody they can. Then they piece the information together and figure out what's what and what's not. Such people don't rely on a computer screen for information.

Now some of these analysts are on forums. They have a get together and they talk about it. The best part is people who are not analysts can learn from these analysts and understand the current scenario. Now, when these analysts have a high regard for something you don't need a source from some random journo to prove that the product is good.

Everybody in the tank world know the capabilities of the Kaktus and Relikt. Nobody is blind towards its capability.

i can understand if it "basic armour". what is the problem with the gun designation??

It is an age old problem. It is like saying Windows Operating System. They will tell you they work on Windows, but they will not tell you if it is a 98, Vista or XP.

it is no secret. we use russian weapons mostly which has started changing only recently.

Yes. It is common and some of it is released by the highest echelons of the military society. Whatever information spokesmen and other officials give to the media is fine because the media is particularly called for it. But, if you ask some one personally about operational technology, they will not give out names.

can you post those articles???

Impossible to look for it. It is nearly 4 years old and was a passing statement. Still the ToT happened in 2008, as given below.

besides 2A46M-5 was only inducted in 2005!!! here -

http://fofanov.armor.kiev.ua/Tanks/ARM/2a46.html

and our TOT agreement was signed in 2001 for T-90S.

considering the Russians were playing hard on TOT on the "latest" tech, why would they give us?? and even now that gun is the latest!!!

The Contract was signed in 2000-01 with ToT for other parts, the ToT agreement for gun was signed in 2006 and we got it only in 2008. They had to change their laws for it.

http://www.yourshipbuildingnews.com/news_item.php?newsID=13723

Russia to deliver T-90 gun barrel technology to India
Friday, Oct 24, 2008

With negotiation for transfer of technology for indigenous production of T-90 main battle tank (MBT) at an advanced stage, India on Wednesday said Russia will deliver the technical know-how for gun barrels for the tanks by this year-end.

The Russian side agreed to deliver the specification of T-90 gun barrels by December 2008, Minister of State for Defence Production Rao Inderjit Singh told the Rajya Sabha in a written reply to question on the indigenous production of 1,000 T-90s from members.

Admitting that the non-delivery of T-90 MBT gun barrel specification was one of the major obstacles faced by India in indigenous production of 1,000 of these tanks, Singh said the issue of transfer of technology (ToT) was discussed between the two sides during the Indo-Russian Working Group on ship building, aviation and land system in August this year.

The minister said the ToT documents for most of the parts were already with India and some technical data regarding armour plates along with gun barrel manufacturing was awaited.

He said India had already developed armoured plates indigenously and the DRDO has come up with the 'Kanchan' explosive reactive armoured(LOL. Media screw up) plates for tanks.

they won't give us the version 5. as to how good they are, Kunal sir has posted extensively.

Huh! Why not. They are ready to give us 2A82 gun too.

so why don't you give us the "credible" source and back up??

That's why look out for analysts posts.

you were wrong on that too.

check post # 310. Armand proved it is 2.1 kw for even RC 400 and not 400w as you were saying. he also said mirage 2000s have RDY 3 radar and not RC 400 as you were saying.

The RC-400 and RDY-3 are one and the same. The RC-400 is the export name for RDY-3 with reduced SAR capability. Also, Armand proved a 2.1KW power for a radar specification that does not exist. Which radar on Earth needs 2.1KW for a 400W transmission? LOL

I disproved his assumption in the post after that with the right math involved too. Why else do you think I did not buy his Deagel link which said the Peak consumption is 4KW? It was in print. But I know it is wrong. At 4KW the radar is working at 10% efficiency. That spec makes it the worst radar on the planet.

It is called Analysis.

you did not agree when i posted his links on T-90M!!!

I said he is more credible and not god. Like I said you see the world as black and white.

your link is slightly older than this -

http://igorrgroup.blogspot.com/2010/...pecs.html#more

it is evident the above link is follow on to the older one you posted above.

This is where you analyse information. Igor gave a report about a new T-90ME meant for export. Then he posted a bit more detailed info on the T-90M. The T-90ME and T-90M are different designations where one is meant for export while one is a Russian upgrade. There is no credible source saying India will be ordering the same tank.

besides even Fofanov talks about the "obsoleteness" of the ammunition on the gun -

so it is evident why Russians would want to change the autoloader, turret etc..on T-90 particularly when T-95 vanished!!! afterall they have to earn by export!!!

Upgrades are a part and parcel of modernization. Even the Americans know their weapons are already becoming obsolete because of the Kaktus and Relikt ERAs. The ERA is one of the reasons why the M1A3 program exists and includes a bigger gun.

reason why Igor's article quoting other Russian sites.

To which I have already stated my points regarding his blog.

 

[zraver]

Zraver said we have this gun already. I don't know where that post is though, I read it a long time ago.

All T-90's except perhaps the very earliest have the 2A46M5. Although not much different from the gun used on the original T-64 and T-72 tanks it is made to much better tolerances, has a longer barrel life round over round (same round in an earlier 2A46 gun) and can handle increased pressures. This is because quality control went up after the collapse of the USSR. The biggest difference between the earlier T-90S sold to India and the T-90 as it relates to firepower is the improved auto-loader which can fire a round that is more truly a long rod penetrator. It is likely that Russia would sell or license India the 3BM42M penetrator.

BTW, the Ukraine's Nozh (Knife) heavy ERA is probably as good as anything Russia can make. It is after all based on Soviet era Kontak-5 HERA.

 

[ppgj]

All T-90's except perhaps the very earliest have the 2A46M5. Although not much different from the gun used on the original T-64 and T-72 tanks it is made to much better tolerances, has a longer barrel life round over round (same round in an earlier 2A46 gun) and can handle increased pressures. This is because quality control went up after the collapse of the USSR.

i agree with you sir on tolerance, longer life of the latest gun 2A46M5. the question is does indian T-90S have this gun?? all sources only say 2A46M and only one source says it is version 2. also the fact that version 5 was inducted in 2005 while our TOT agreement was signed in 2001.

The biggest difference between the earlier T-90S sold to India and the T-90 as it relates to firepower is the improved auto-loader which can fire a round that is more truly a long rod penetrator.

exactly the point sir. infact, inferred from Fofanov's article on russian ammunition on 2A46M guns and the natural result - the new autoloader in T-90M - per various russian sources including that of Igor's blog.

but some people here think that the "only" difference between T-90M and T-90S is the "KAKTUS" ERA. can you clarify that sir?

It is likely that Russia would sell or license India the 3BM42M penetrator.

i guess this is the new unitary longer rod. but that would mean massive changes to indian T-90S relating to the turret and the autoloader meaning lots of money and lots of time. and in view of Arjun proving itself, i doubt if that will happen.

BTW, the Ukraine's Nozh (Knife) heavy ERA is probably as good as anything Russia can make. It is after all based on Soviet era Kontak-5 HERA.

agree sir.

 

[p2prada]

@Zraver

Sir what do you think about Arjun's gun and its one piece ammo system?
I believe the one piece system is superior to the two piece system on the T types but the ammo OFB makes is inferior to its Russian counterparts.

Is the Arjun's gun superior to the T-90's latest if you forgo shell dimensions?

Also does the rifle bore allow major advantages over smoothbore with the exception of firing HESH?

Also, Kunal Biswas said we may get the Relikt instead of the Kaktus for our T-90Ms, maybe a gun upgrade to 2A82 by Igor.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

All T-90's except perhaps the very earliest have the 2A46M5. Although not much different from the gun used on the original T-64 and T-72 tanks it is made to much better tolerances, has a longer barrel life round over round (same round in an earlier 2A46 gun) and can handle increased pressures.

As i know we are in use of 52cal ( 6000mm barrel length ) 2A46M in our T-90S, is it 2A46M-2?
If you provide me the length of 2A46M-5 it would be helpful..
Regarding pressure is it 6500 bar according to http://fofanov.armor.kiev.ua/
Or 5000bars according to http://warfare.ru/?linkid=2382&catid=314

This is because quality control went up after the collapse of the USSR. The biggest difference between the earlier T-90S sold to India and the T-90 as it relates to firepower is the improved auto-loader which can fire a round that is more truly a long rod penetrator. It is likely that Russia would sell or license India the 3BM42M penetrator.

3BM42M
Entered service in 1994 Utilising an improved penetrator and a new Sabot. Reported to be tungsten alloy.
* Country of origin: Russia
* Round length: 730 mm L
* Projectile weight: 4600-5000g projectile
* Muzzle velocity: 1750 m/s
http://www.russianarmor.info/Tanks/ARM/apfsds/ammo.html

are these true specifications on net?