Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

[ppgj]

kunal sir,

this is from your post # 229.

One more important point is this that K-5 era can deflect a single round but not the second round on the same spot, With K-5 T-90 can withstand any round but the problem is after first hit it ERA cannot protect the tank on the spot again from second round..

just to add to what you said above...

sir,

TANDEM warheads are in use now which afford multiple explosions defeating both the ERA (in the first explosion) and the main armour (in the "delayed" second explosion).

so taking a separate second shot at the same spot is not necessary. one tandem warhead in RPG 7 can kill the tank. besides K-5 is a 2nd gen ERA which can not take tandem warhead shot whereas "relikt" can which is considered 3rd gen.

question is whether Russia will give us the "Relikt"??

may be you can explain better for my benefit. here is the link -

Following the conflict in Afghanistan, new anti-personnel grenades were added. A modified version, PG-7BR (VR for the RPG-7V1) is also designed to defeat reactive armor. It uses a precursor charge to eliminate the reactive armor and a main charge to penetrate the main armor.

http://defense-update.com/products/r/rpg.htm

hence base armour is more a necessity with an ERA add on.

 

[sayareakd]

better to have two or three layer of ERA to defeat tandum warhead. this is cat and mouse game it will continue.

 

[ppgj]

Are you supportive of ppgj's assessment that we should not have gone for the 1000 T-90 contract?
You are aware I was replying to ppgj's posts which only consists of cost escalation rantings.

:emot15: ==ev++vil++

wow. great.

 

[zraver]

ppjg, I was not aware there was an issue with Russia providing 2a46m5 guns. Do you have a source please?

 

[ppgj]

ppjg, I was not aware there was an issue with Russia providing 2a46m5 guns. Do you have a source please?

yes sir. it was a major issue. i don't think it was even about 2A46M5 version. sorted out only in 2008 post agreement in 2001. here -

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/india-russia-resolve-t90-technology-transfer-issues/350906/

http://www.domainb.com/defence/general/20081022_indian_army.html

Russia yet to complete technology transfer of T-90 Bhishma tanks

22 October 2008

The Government informed Rajya Sabha members Amar Singh and Abu Asim Azmi that transfer of technology documents for indigenous production of Russian T-90 tanks (Indian Army designation Bhishma) have been received. It however clarified that other technical data relating to the manufacture of the gun barrel and armour plates were yet to be received.

Indian Army T-90Minister of state for defence, Rao Inderjit Singh, informed the members through a written reply that the matter was discussed during the meeting of the Indo-Russian working group on ship building, aviation and land systems in August, 2008 and that the Russian side had agreed to deliver the specification for the T-90 gun barrels by December 2008.

As regards the armour plates, the minister said these had been developed indigenously.

 

[p2prada]

as usual...shoot and scoot techniques.

Really. Point it out please. I was asked for actual price of the T-90 and I gave it and that was your main reason for why the T-90 should have been junked anyway. Your contention was that Arjun costs the same or less than T-90 which I said was untrue.

I still remember what source you gave to prove the T-90s we have still run on the V-84s. *rolls eyes*

speculate, claim and when asked for source - skip, sidestep and attack personally. and now you call it "spoon feeding"!!! what more is in store??

Sure. A lot more since you simply refuse to understand. You haven't given quality sources anyway.

where has he said it conclusively?? how much of it he will know compared to our MPs like kunal sir, ray sir or Ajai shukla (who is a tanker himeslf)?? he said of 2A46M2 and quoted fofanov for that.

Figure out the dates, you will get your answer.

=omg=. the "new autoloader" in T-90M was shown to Mr. Putin in only dec 2009 and exists only in prototypes. far from being operational even in Russia!!! how come we could have it with the second lot in 2007??

The 2A46M5 does not have a new autoloader. The old auto loader was modified to carry longer rounds, that's all. What Putin saw was the 2A82. A new gun with a new autoloader as mentioned by Igor.

another one!!!

Russia provides an option for AC as mentioned in Fofanov;
http://fofanov.armor.kiev.ua/Tanks/MBT/t-90.html

optional air conditioner

there is space constraints in putting AC which you are purposely skipping.

The above source should suffice. Space constraints are moot since the AC and APU are external.

everybody knows it was not "comparative trials". IA has consistently been avoiding it. it was an exercise to determine to strengths of each tank for deployment post induction. it was clarified by both army and drdo.

I am not comparing the T-90 to Arjun. What I am saying is the T-90 and Arjun trials were held in Bikaner Rajasthan in the Month of March. T-90 never faced any problems doing whatever the Arjun did in the same environment. What's so hard to not understand? Shouldn't the T-90 FCS have failed in those conditions?

besides why are they trying to put an AC if there is no problem with T-90 thermals??

AC is a good thing. The Russians gave AC options and for some reason we did not go for it.

as to the bolded part - "statement of the year."

I had already proved the T-90s gun is more powerful than the Arjuns gun by comparing sources from Fofanov as well as DRDO. Zraver came forward saying the Arjun's gun fails in the maintenance department too. That's killing enough.

for the rest, the claims were made by you and not Zraver sir. why are you bringing him into this??

Point em out and I will spoonfeed you with everything. Costs, Protection and Gun.

PS : i have no intention continue with your "speculative" debating skills.

You need to be spoonfed. Unfortunately this is will not be a debate after that.

thank you and have a good day.

You too.

ppjg, I was not aware there was an issue with Russia providing 2a46m5 guns. Do you have a source please?

There are no issues sir, as of today. When OFB first received the contract the production was delayed for 2 years because of lack of ToT on the gun and composite armour. The Composite armour ToT was denied and became a non issue once they decided to use Kanchan inserts. But, gun was a problem.

Then in Minister level talks in Russia a new contract was signed for ToT in 2006(1 year after the induction of the 2A46M5) and the Russians delivered 100% ToT on the Gun by 2008. Production at Avadi commenced at 2008 and our first batch of fully manufactured tanks came out only in August 2009. The ToT was delayed because of Russian law which prohibited offensive weapons ToT.

As of 2009, the 2A46M5 was always available to export and according to Igor's post we may have the option of a long barrel 2A82 with a new autoloader.

It is logical we have bargained for the 2A46M5. Now that the Russians have changed their laws, we may get the 2A82 ToT if we opt for it too. It is an export product after all.

Perhaps you were talking about the 2A82 when we spoke about the 56Cal gun.

 

[ppgj]

Really. Point it out please. I was asked for actual price of the T-90 and I gave it and that was your main reason for why the T-90 should have been junked anyway. Your contention was that Arjun costs the same or less than T-90 which I said was untrue.

cost issue is still there howsoever you want to turn away from it. as for the bolded part i have substantiated while you have not.

besides sir, cost was not the only issue i dealt with. it does not take much time to go back and check. ofcourse you won't do that. so let me help you. i spoke of these too -

1. issues persisting with T-90s since induction pertaining to -

a. underpowered engine.

b. thermals/electronics frying in the desert heat.

c. APU.

d. APS.

e. AC unit (related to pont # b)

f. BMS.

2. change of engine issue.

later issues like longer rod ammunition came up.

I still remember what source you gave to prove the T-90s we have still run on the V-84s. *rolls eyes*

my sources are still there. why don't you check up?? one was from "hindubusinessonline" written by kuldip nayyar and the other was from CDM case study on induction T-90s. CDM specifically mentions V92S2 engine and not V-84 as you are trying to put it. go check for once.

Sure. A lot more since you simply refuse to understand. You haven't given quality sources anyway.

well better than "no source" unlike you.

there is nothing to "understand". you just speculate. even Nitesh, kunal sir and UchihaCG asked you to back up on your claims apart from me.

Figure out the dates, you will get your answer.

what is there to figure out. india signed TOT agreement in 2001. the unresolved issues since then pertaining to the gun/armour plates was only resolved in 2008 after protracted negotiations. this has nothing to do with 2A46M5. and since you claim prove it without speculating.

The 2A42M5 does not have a new autoloader. The old auto loader was modified to carry longer rounds, that's all. What Putin saw was the 2A82. A new gun with a new autoloader as mentioned by Igor.

modified autoloader?? are you saying it fires longer rods??? show me the proof if "yes" is the answer. if not what is the use?? it will still be firing older 2 piece ammunition. it may just give a "longer life" advantage. that's all.

on the other hand Igor speaks of 2A46M5 as an option. however it needs to be cleared - does he mean the same "additional" autoloader can be integrated with this gun too. it is an "additional" autoloader at the aft of the turret!!! this one will hold the longer rods.

summary is T-90M will have 2 autoloaders. one under the hull and the new one with the new turret to fire longer rods.

New additional autoloader, placed on the aft part of the turret and able using the new longer sub-caliber rods.

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

just go down to the "comments" section where Igor answers somebody -

Igor Djadan said...

there are two autoloaders full with 22 (hull) and 20 (aft turret) munition. No free lied munition in the hull like T-72/T-90 and Leo-2 tanks have.

Russia provides an option for AC as mentioned in Fofanov;
http://fofanov.armor.kiev.ua/Tanks/MBT/t-90.html

we are not talking of "options". we are talking whether they are there in the T-90s we have!!!

The above source should suffice. Space constraints are moot since the AC and APU are external.

how so?? external is also not easy!! you have to take into account the gun/turret movement. it needs some good engineering. even if difficult can be done IMO. but when?? as for AC, you know why?? it needs power. where will they draw it from?? from an already underpowered tank??

I am not comparing the T-90 to Arjun. What I am saying is the T-90 and Arjun trials were held in Bikaner Rajasthan in the Month of March. T-90 never faced any problems doing whatever the Arjun did in the same environment. What's so hard to not understand? Shouldn't the T-90 FCS have failed in those conditions?

well first of all march is not so hot. it is june period which takes the temperature inside the tank to about 60 degrees!! besides there is no info which was released.

from "overhearings" or an euphemism for "insider info leaked" on forums - it is said - T-90 crew changed thrice from day to night trials!!! as for ARJUN the same crew did all the trials!!!
must be due to heat where people faint!!! however this can't be substantiated.

but the issue remains. slightly older report but still relevant as nothing has changed as of now.

But army officers complained that the existing T-90S tanks faced "recurring" technical problems which were adversely impinging on the force's operational preparedness.

Senior armoured corps officers said the Catherine thermal imaging (TI) camera supplied by Thales of France that is the "heart" of the T-90S' fire control system (FCS) had "repeatedly malfunctioned" in the excessive summer heat of the western Rajasthan desert where the MBTs frequently exercise and will eventually be deployed.

Officers operating the tanks said temperatures in excess of 60 degrees Celsius inside the tank had rendered between 80-90 FCS "unserviceable" over the past four years. Attempts to rectify them had so far largely proven unsuccessful.

In one armoured regiment in Punjab, an alarming 30 of 40 tanks were "off-road", lamented an officer, declining to be named.

In keeping with the army's qualitative staff requirement for the T-90S MBT that stipulated a "longer range, shimmerless" sight, Peling of Belarus with its IG 46 sight entered into partnership with Thales to integrate its Catherine TI camera thereby giving the FCS a range of around three kilometres. The FCS components were "mated" by the manufacturers at the T-90S Nizhny Tagil factory in the Urals in Russia.

When problems first began to emerge in 2003 with the TI camera - priced at around Rs.20 million (4,444) per unit, a fifth of each tanks cost of Rs.117.5 million - they were replaced as the T-90S were under warranty till March 2004.

Thereafter, with the warranty having ended, the army has grudgingly conceded that it is looking to "rectify" the FCS problem, but has not yet come up with a viable solution.

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/india-to-buy-330-tanks-from-russia/24747-3-1.html

surprising isn't it?? with so many problems IA has no problems ordering more of these T-90s while rejecting Arjun!!

ummm... food for thought!!

AC is a good thing. The Russians gave AC options and for some reason we did not go for it.

ofcourse it is good. point is why they are not there??

IMO the "power requirement" is the issue. unless they get a 1200 hp engine, this issue will remain considering there is no APU too.

I had already proved the T-90s gun is more powerful than the Arjuns gun by comparing sources from Fofanov as well as DRDO. Zraver came forward saying the Arjun's gun fails in the maintenance department too. That's killing enough.

you proved nothing. Kunal sir proved Arjun has superior gun with superior unitary ammunition. rifled vs smoothbore is an old issue. both being good it is the user requirement which determines the gun. IA wanted HESH rounds for bunker busting as one of their requirement. hence rifled. every gun requires maintainence which comes into the picture when you have fired 100s of projectiles and not with evey firing. as of now there is no match for Arjun gun.

as for the Zraver bit, you have proved you don't beleive IA MPs whether it is Ajai shukla, kunal sir, ray sir or the former COAS. on the other hand you find it credible if foreigners say anything. case in point the retired lt. gen LODI of PAK ARMY.

Point em out and I will spoonfeed you with everything. Costs, Protection and Gun.

no thanks sir. i don't need your "spoon feeding". i don't want your imaginary ideas to cloud my judgement. =xD

You need to be spoonfed. Unfortunately this is will not be a debate after that.

was there one?? it was over when consistently you did not back up back up your claims.

as i said in my last post, i have no intention to debate with you.

so goodbye. take care. my last post to you!!!!

 

[zraver]

yes sir. it was a major issue. i don't think it was even about 2A46M5 version. sorted out only in 2008 post agreement in 2001. here -

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/india-russia-resolve-t90-technology-transfer-issues/350906/

http://www.domainb.com/defence/general/20081022_indian_army.html

Ok, thank you although it does not specify, the long delay seems to indicate that domestic production tanks will be using the 2A46m5. I can see little reason why Russia would impose export ToT controls on a dated soviet era gun.

 

[zraver]

you proved nothing. Kunal sir proved Arjun has superior gun with superior unitary ammunition. rifled vs smoothbore is an old issue. both being good it is the user requirement which determines the gun. IA wanted HESH rounds for bunker busting as one of their requirement. hence rifled. every gun requires maintainence which comes into the picture when you have fired 100s of projectiles and not with every firing. as of now there is no match for Arjun gun.

1. He did not prove the Arjuns gun was superior, the info provided did not look very impressive. Not at all superior in terms of raw energy to what the T-90's gun can do with modern ammunition and way behind cutting edge 120mm smooth bore ammunition. At best the Arjun's gun is adequate in that its no more under gunned that its opponents. If I was given a choice, all other things being equal- 2A46M5 w/ latest Russian ammo or India's 120mm rifled gun with its best ammo, I'd take the 125mm.

 

[ppgj]

Ok, thank you although it does not specify, the long delay seems to indicate that domestic production tanks will be using the 2A46m5. I can see little reason why Russia would impose export ToT controls on a dated soviet era gun.

possible sir. i do not discount it but i have my doubts. and these doubts are there because the issue was boiling since 2001 when 2A46M5 was not even operational. as per fofanov it was only inducted in 2005. besides why would they give their latest when that was precisely the issue!! logically i feel it may have been 2A46M2 as per you and the Deagel link.

but still it does not give the army the "advantage" of firing the "longer rods" due to it's autoloader limitation!! however it gives the guns a longer life which you rightly pointed out in one of your posts - an advantage, no doubt!!

this is dealt by fofanov too. here -

With the upgoing gun and ammo design efforts this gun managed to stay quite abreast with the armor developments in the West until the introduction of M1A1HA model of the Abrams MBT, the reliable counter to which did not materialize due to a tremendous economic and political upheaval associated with the collapse of the USSR.

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://www.russianarmor.info/

and the russians are trying to overcome it via T-90M -

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

 

[ppgj]

1. He did not prove the Arjuns gun was superior,

no problem. my response was to p2prada who said - that he proved - T-90 GUN was superior!!!

the info provided did not look very impressive. Not at all superior in terms of raw energy to what the T-90's gun can do with modern ammunition and way behind cutting edge 120mm smooth bore ammunition. At best the Arjun's gun is adequate in that its no more under gunned that its opponents. If I was given a choice, all other things being equal- 2A46M5 w/ latest Russian ammo or India's 120mm rifled gun with its best ammo, I'd take the 125mm.

three factors which in my opinion are important.

1. Arjun can fire longer rods including western ones unlike T-90 which has to live with shorter two piece rounds due to autoloader limitations.

2. Rifled allows a greater accuracy and longer range.

3. Indian army requirement for HESH rounds in bunker, concrete bursting role which the smoothbore can't.

also -

Firing performance of Arjun MBT is superior to T-90S in terms of accuracy (both static and dynamic situations) due to gun ammunition combination and high order of weapon stabilization coupled with auto collimated MRS. Auto collimated MRS compensates for the barrel bend. Firing performance of Arjun MBT and T-90S is same in terms of defeat capability and rate of firing. Two axis stabilized commander's panoramic sight integrated with gunners main sight provides "hunter killer" capability both in static as dynamic mode (moving to moving mode). Higher order of stabilization accuracy enables accurate fire on the move at a moving target while maintaining the stipulated fire rate. The commander of Arjun MBT can engage targets in case of emergency, capable of firing at various slopes and tilt angles. First round hits probability has been demonstrated for MBT Arjun on a 1 mil target and greater than 60% hit percentage when firing from a moving Arjun tank to a moving target, both at 25 km/h.

LAHAT (semi automatic homing) Missile firing from Arjun MBT has been already demonstrated using a stand alone Laser Target Designator (LTD). This designator can be integrated into Gunner's Main Sight (GMS). T-90S can fire Laser bean riding missile..

Arjun MBT armament system including gun barrel has been proved to be robust and reliable No case of barrel burst was reported even after firing 10000 rounds. The Arjun MBT prototypes and pre production tanks fired more than 100 rounds from the same barrel in a day. Life of barrel of Arjun MBT is twice that of T-90S, estimate equivalent in Effective Full Charge (EFC) of 500.

http://frontierindia.net/dissimilar-combat-arjun-mbt-vs-t-90s-specs

i beleive like many Arjun gun is superior. this was proved in the last trials this year to determine the roles of each for later deployment.

http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2010/03/arjun-tank-outruns-outguns-russian-t-90.html

post these trials 124 more Arjuns was ordered.

the above article is by Ajai shukla who was a colonel and a tank man in IA. he is a defence journo now.

anyway i respect your view even if they differ.

 

[zraver]

three factors which in my opinion are important.

1. Arjun can fire longer rods including western ones unlike T-90 which has to live with shorter two piece rounds due to autoloader limitations.

Improved auto-loader adresses this issue.

2. Rifled allows a greater accuracy and longer range.

It does not improve range, which is a function of energy. In fact given round sof the same weight, the Russian round at 1750m/s will fly farther than the 120mm round at 1650 m/s. it might improve effective range, which is why rifled guns used to dominate. But modern fire control eliminates that advantage. The T-90's accuracy problems seem to be a function of its poorly integrated hybrid FCS. Put the Arjun up against an Abrams, Leopard or Challenger and see how well the accuracy claims stick up.

3. Indian army requirement for HESH rounds in bunker, concrete bursting role which the smoothbore can't.

You can make a wide variety of HE type ammunition for the 125mm if needed. If really needed, then a 125mm round either HE, HESH, or APHE would be superior to a 120mm round. Bigger diameter equals a bigger bursting charge. The sole reason the gun was originally intended to use HESH was an anti-armor role because the gun is descended from the British 120mm L11A5.

i beleive like many Arjun gun is superior. this was proved in the last trials this year to determine the roles of each for later deployment.

You are of course free to believe what you want. But as a function of energy or explosive filler the 120mm used on the Arjun has not demonstrated it vs the T-90M.

post these trials 124 more Arjuns was ordered.

That is a logical fallacy. If number ordered was a function of effectiveness then the T-90 wins. The numbered ordered is a complex process of give and take between the parties involved and hopefully something useful come out the other side.

anyway i respect your view even if they differ.

Likewise

That beign said, I feel overall the Arjun is a better tank with a better future. I just am not a big fan of its gun and a few other things.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

1. He did not prove the Arjuns gun was superior, the info provided did not look very impressive. Not at all superior in terms of raw energy to what the T-90's gun can do with modern ammunition and way behind cutting edge 120mm smooth bore ammunition. At best the Arjun's gun is adequate in that its no more under gunned that its opponents. If I was given a choice, all other things being equal- 2A46M5 w/ latest Russian ammo or India's 120mm rifled gun with its best ammo, I'd take the 125mm.

Arjun gun is indeed good compare present Russian 125MM 2a46m2 and little less than 2a46m5 in terms of chamber pressure..

Barrel is 6050mm
Chamber pressure is 612bars

DRDO Ammunition ( my bad in previous posts ) 4.8kg rod at 1650m/s..

Ok, thank you although it does not specify, the long delay seems to indicate that domestic production tanks will be using the 2A46m5. I can see little reason why Russia would impose export ToT controls on a dated soviet era gun.

If so than its good for us..

It does not improve range, which is a function of energy. In fact given round sof the same weight, the Russian round at 1750m/s will fly farther than the 120mm round at 1650 m/s. it might improve effective range, which is why rifled guns used to dominate. But modern fire control eliminates that advantage. The T-90's accuracy problems seem to be a function of its poorly integrated hybrid FCS. Put the Arjun up against an Abrams, Leopard or Challenger and see how well the accuracy claims stick up.

T-90s/T-72 & Arjun all are using DRDO rounds, though we did order foreign origin rounds for both T-90 & ArjunMK-1..
Arjun may be equipped with DM-43/56/63 with modified sabot, And as most people saying within the force that T-90 also have Russian Rounds which were purchased with the tank but their is no word abt serial production..

Both tanks are well equipped with modern rounds, Also Arjun have a edge in first round hit while running at 40km/h..
T-90 do have the ability but as far as i know its not that accurate as Arjun..

 

[p2prada]

cost issue is still there howsoever you want to turn away from it. as for the bolded part i have substantiated while you have not.

Yes I have.

Anyway, here again;
http://pib.nic.in/release/rel_print_page.asp?relid=22583
While the T-90 tanks were procured directly from Russia at the cost of Rs. 11 crore in 2001, the issue price of indigenous tanks for the current year is Rs. 12 crore.

Further increase of costs has been only for the French Thermals which has costed Rs 2 Crores which makes the T-90 cost approx Rs 14-15 Crores. But this is only my opinion because the T-90s we have gotten from the Russians till date have been with the Catherine thermals equipped and paid for which means the T-90s have not costed us more than mentioned in the link above.

Also, this,
http://www.pib.nic.in/release/release.asp?relid=20171
In so far a T-90 tank is concerned, there had been no escalation in the cost. T-90 tanks have been procured at the cost initially contracted for.

This is dated August 2006, which may have been the time during which the second batch of tanks were inducted in November, 2006. IN a 5 year duration the cost for the T-90 has remained the same even with a new gun included because we had already paid for everything necessary. These tanks were equipped with Catherines when delivered.


Current unit cost of Arjun without new generation sights and Thermal Imager, weaker gun, lack of second tier protection(ERA or NERA), lack of APS, lack of AC and lack of BMS(if you check BEL website, there is no mention of Arjun's BMS being ready for combat use) is Rs 17.2 Crores. Well above the T-90s costs which has a 3rd generation Thermal Imager.

As for AC;
Abrams, Leopard, Leclerc, Challenger 2 have ACs. Al Khalid II is also to get an AC.

a. underpowered engine.

http://www.ofbindia.gov.in/units/index.php?unit=efa&page=products&lang=en
1) V92S2 High Power Diesel Engines â€" 1000 HP
     Fitted in T-90 Battle Tank

Also, this

http://www.ofbindia.gov.in/products/data/armoured/add_11.htm

The only T-90 engine listed in OFB.

b. thermals/electronics frying in the desert heat.

I already told you. Give me proof saying the T-90s failed in March 2010 during the Comparative trials? It happened at Bikaner, Rajasthan during Summer. Summer in Rajasthan is constantly hot and the test went on for quite some time.

c. APU.

http://www.pib.nic.in/release/release.asp?relid=57977
APU+A/C Unit for T-90

We have the right electronics already. We just need the APU installed and it is not big deal. For eg: An APU is simply a car engine attached to the back of the tank. A diesel car engine can be bought for Rs 3 Lakh and lesser and integration may cost ~Rs7 Lakhs. So, a total cost of Rs 10 lakh which will reduce as production continues. It ain't much.

e. AC unit (related to pont # b)

As mentioned above and my earlier point about most MBTs already equipped with ACs.

d. APS.
f. BMS.

They don't exist on Arjun either. T-90 will be getting the Swedish LEDS while Arjun does not yet have an equivalent. Noting that the T-90 is already protected by the Composite armour as well as ERA. It will be a better protected tank.

2. change of engine issue.

Moot point considering the V92S2 can be pushed to 5000Km. Engine change time is longer than the Arjun. But it is not a tactical disadvantage.

later issues like longer rod ammunition came up.

The Arjun does not have a powerful indigenous shell. The one OFB came up with has similar specifications as Russian shells. The Russians shells are heavier too. The OFB shells penetrator is at 6.8Kg while there are many Russians equivalents with 7Kg+ penetrators. Since the Muzzle velocity of the Russian guns are higher and the pressure exerted is more, the KE is more and the impact on the target is greater than compared to the Arjun fired gun.

my sources are still there. why don't you check up?? one was from "hindubusinessonline" written by kuldip nayyar and the other was from CDM case study on induction T-90s. CDM specifically mentions V92S2 engine and not V-84 as you are trying to put it. go check for once.

Kuldip Nayyar; Who is he? It does matter anyway since the T-90s are equipped with a 1000HP engine as I have given the appropriate link for. A new 1200 HP V-99 engine is available for export as mentioned by Igor.

If you are talking about loss of power due to heat, it happens on all engines. The worst one happens on the Arjun's MTU because it is not tropicalized. Just because the engine is rated at 1400HP does not mean it will give 1400HP constantly. It is just like how jet engines operate differently at different air pressures. Diesel Engines are limited by heat. The army allows a 10-15% reduction in power for different conditions.

well better than "no source" unlike you.

Any more sources that you need???

All my sources are from OFB and PIB. Better than all your sources since they are all directly from the Govt.

there is nothing to "understand". you just speculate. even Nitesh, kunal sir and UchihaCG asked you to back up on your claims apart from me.

I have not disappointed any of them. I have given all my sources to Nitesh and Kunal. Nitesh asked about Chamber pressure and I gave it. Kunal asked for the same which has been given. Uchiha was only general about it. I don't generally spoonfeed. This is the highest amount of spoonfeeding I have ever done for some one else.

what is there to figure out. india signed TOT agreement in 2001. the unresolved issues since then pertaining to the gun/armour plates was only resolved in 2008 after protracted negotiations. this has nothing to do with 2A46M5. and since you claim prove it without speculating.

We got our first batch of T-90s in 2002-03 period with older guns. Then we contracted a new batch of T-90s in 2006 after failed Arjun tests in 2005. This was exactly the time when the 2A46M5 was ready for induction.

So, we sent the new gun for life cycle tests which is the usual case for any new gun at PXE Balasore in 2006.

http://ofbindia.gov.in/units/index.php?unit=ofc&page=my_3&lang=en
1 No. indigenous T-90 barrel is under assembly with OEM breech mechanism. It is proposed to subject this barrel to life cycle test (250 rounds) for ascertaining the suitability of indigenous steel. The article 2A46M will be offered for life cycle test at PXE Balasore by end of July 2006. Further 2 Nos of T-90 ordnance will be produced with GOST specification steel during 2006-07.

modified autoloader?? are you saying it fires longer rods??? show me the proof if "yes" is the answer. if not what is the use?? it will still be firing older 2 piece ammunition. it may just give a "longer life" advantage. that's all.

Zraver already told the autoloader is modified and as mentioned above it was tested in Balasore in 2006, a year after the M5 gun was ready and at the same time we got the M5.

on the other hand Igor speaks of 2A46M5 as an option. however it needs to be cleared - does he mean the same "additional" autoloader can be integrated with this gun too. it is an "additional" autoloader at the aft of the turret!!! this one will hold the longer rods. summary is T-90M will have 2 autoloaders. one under the hull and the new one with the new turret to fire longer rods.

Gun barrel and autoloader are different. The breech mechanism must be suited to the dimensions of the long rod shell and the breech mechanism is a part of the autoloader. So, the guns could be the same while the autoloaders could be different.

The additional autoloader seems like speculation. We will have to wait for more concrete information unless Igor has seen it himself.

Nevertheless, for some reason the T-90 suddenly has enough space for 2 autoloaders. Whatever happened to "NO Space" in the T-90 for anything except a mouse.

how so?? external is also not easy!! you have to take into account the gun/turret movement. it needs some good engineering. even if difficult can be done IMO. but when?? as for AC, you know why?? it needs power. where will they draw it from?? from an already underpowered tank??

The T-90 has an option for AC, as given in the Fofanov link. So, I don't see any problem. The T-80s already have APU, so I don't see any problem with a DRDO APU on our tank.

AC power is supplied by the APU and not the engine.

from "overhearings" or an euphemism for "insider info leaked" on forums - it is said - T-90 crew changed thrice from day to night trials!!! as for ARJUN the same crew did all the trials!!!
must be due to heat where people faint!!! however this can't be substantiated.

The heat in Arjun and in T-90 is not any different. I would like a source from your "inside" people. Even forum links will do if the people posting have the right credentials.

but the issue remains. slightly older report but still relevant as nothing has changed as of now.

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/india-to-buy-330-tanks-from-russia/24747-3-1.html

2006 is not 2010.

surprising isn't it?? with so many problems IA has no problems ordering more of these T-90s while rejecting Arjun!!

Arjuns problems were rectified only after 2008.

Check this Defence Ministry statement report in the Parliament;

Check Page 7.

http://pib.nic.in/archieve/others/2007/may07/2007051634.pdf

Coloumn 1(Recommendation) says:

The deficiency in the Arjun Tank have been rectified and required modifications have been incorporated. The Committee would like to be apprised of the performance of Arjun Tanks on the basis of accelerated User Trial to be done in this regard.

Coloumn 2(Action taken) says:

However, Army could not proceed with the evaluation due to problems with certain electronic components in the Arjun tank. After rectification of these defects by DRDO, Army has conducted Validation Trials with the aim of assessing the technical performance of the five tanks handed over to the
Army, in June 2006. Though the performance of these tanks was found to be satisfactory, many issues still need to be resolved. The areas of major concern are the Laser Range Finder of the Gunner Main Sight, which is still to be upgraded, replacement of defective piston rods of Hydro-Pneumatic Suspension Unit and the high fuel consumption of the tank as was evident during the Validation Trials in June 2006.

The reason given was accepted by the Govt. As of 2007, the Arjun was still not ready for induction because of malfunctioning components. Also, note that the Gunners sight is yet to be upgraded along with the engine which supposedly guzzles fuel. Then came the failure of the engine during Winter trials.

IMO the "power requirement" is the issue. unless they get a 1200 hp engine, this issue will remain considering there is no APU too.

The AC will be powered by the APU and anyway out of 1000KW the tank's powerplant generates, sacrificing 5-10KW for AC is not a big deal if the engine is used to power it.

you proved nothing. Kunal sir proved Arjun has superior gun with superior unitary ammunition.

The 2A46M2 to 5 have a better caliber rating the the chamber pressure is much higher. The muzzle velocities reached is even higher than the Arjun's rated muzzle veocity. I have given Fofanov and DRDO as sources. Check back.

as for the Zraver bit, you have proved you don't beleive IA MPs whether it is Ajai shukla, kunal sir, ray sir or the former COAS. on the other hand you find it credible if foreigners say anything. case in point the retired lt. gen LODI of PAK ARMY.

I proved Kunal sir wrong about the gun ratings. Ajai Shukla wrote an article that does not highlight Arjun's main problems and instead focusses on T-90s smaller problems that don't exist. I can also accuse him of spreading lies about the T-90s self protection capabilities by referring to older T-72s in Georgia which is far from the truth. The T-90 has better protection than the Arjun.

I have never discussed with Ray sir about tanks. So, you can't judge me on that.

The former COAS is a politician now. See the point. Being MP means towing party line and appeasing the public.

Foreigners are more realistic. They know that our technology is still deficient and needs more work before the Arjun can be truly called a modern tank. They are not being nationalistic or egoistic just because we are doing 8-9% on the economic front.

no thanks sir. i don't need your "spoon feeding". i don't want your imaginary ideas to cloud my judgement. =xD

It is a bitter pill. Swallow it or forever hold your silence.

was there one?? it was over when consistently you did not back up back up your claims.

as i said in my last post, i have no intention to debate with you.

so goodbye. take care. my last post to you!!!!

I am glad we are done with it. Bye.

 

[wild goose]

Before reading this heated debate about T-90 vs Arjun by you gentlemen, I was happy that which ever tank is better IA is having both. So no worries.

But after reading this thread for the past couple of weeks, it seems whatever tanks we have all have troubles.

Now I am really trying to say 'All is well' to myself.

Hope everything will be rectified sooner than later.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

I proved Kunal sir wrong about the gun ratings.

http://ofbindia.gov.in/units/index.p...e=my_3&lang=en
1 No. indigenous T-90 barrel is under assembly with OEM breech mechanism. It is proposed to subject this barrel to life cycle test (250 rounds) for ascertaining the suitability of indigenous steel. The article 2A46M will be offered for life cycle test at PXE Balasore by end of July 2006. Further 2 Nos of T-90 ordnance will be produced with GOST specification steel during 2006-07.

But also i should mention this that according to Arjun`s gun, it produce 8000bars to archive a proof pressure of 6120bars ( The gun barrel has been partially autofrettaged )..
And it is good that you gave me the link abt Indian 2A46M gun which have higher rating than 2A46M5 Indian MAPLE 125mm archive the same 8000bars by autofrettaged barrel ( proof pressure is not given )which must be same as Arjun..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autofrettage

125MM MAPLE Barrel ((MATERIAL ADDED AUTOFRETTAGE PROCESS LEADING TO ELASTIC RELEASE)
This barrel is offered as alternative to 125mm SB T-72 barrel. Combining the benefits of auto-frettaged and shrink fit designs, it offers various advantages over OEM T-72 barrel.
These include higher maximum safe pressure (800 MPA as compared to 670 MPA in
T-72 barrel), higher fatigue life of barrel (1700 EFC as compared to 250 EFC for T-72 barrel).
It is planned to manufacture and supply 2 Nos. of these barrels by Sept 2006 for trial and evaluation.
STATUS :
2 barrels successfully proven and issued to imi israel for fsapds propellant development. 2 more barrels are expected to be ready by sept 2006 for user trial at ACCC&S Ahmednagar.

The new Indian barrel based on 2A46M but have drastic difference in performance..
It is very similar with Arjun 120mm rifled cannon in terms of chamber pressure by Autofrettage technique..
Both INDIAN gun produce 8000bars to archive a proof pressure of 612bars, where Russian gave 6500bars produce but no proof pressure..
Also the Russian didn't gave as the TOT of 2A46M2 or 5 But Inferior 2A46M according to Gov article..

If Mr Zraver discuses this proof pressure concept it will be more clear..

They don't exist on Arjun either. T-90 will be getting the Swedish LEDS while Arjun does not yet have an equivalent, It will be a better protected tank.

The time when T-90s will be equipped with APS the same time operational Arjun will be equipped with the same APS..
If DRDO manufacture the Indigenous APS than we may see it in next batch of Arjun, If not then Swedish APS..

 

[ppgj]

Improved auto-loader adresses this issue.

that is the point sir. the improved auto loader is not there in indian T-90S. this is only a recent development and exists in some T-90s - as prototypes - in Russia and which are named T-90M and was shown to Mr. Putin only in dec 2009. these T-90Ms have 2 autoloaders and a new turret besides 1200 hp engine and relikt ERA among others. i gave a link earlier.

if Russia is willing and even if IA opted for it - still, it will mean great amount of time and additional cost when the existing T-90S already costs equal to or more than Arjun presently.

It does not improve range, which is a function of energy. In fact given round sof the same weight, the Russian round at 1750m/s will fly farther than the 120mm round at 1650 m/s. it might improve effective range, which is why rifled guns used to dominate. But modern fire control eliminates that advantage. The T-90's accuracy problems seem to be a function of its poorly integrated hybrid FCS.

well sir i agree with your point. Arjun gets its longer range due to its barrel length being longer vis-a-vis T-90S.

but as to the bolded part - it is not the same!!! Arjun's ammunition (APFSDS) are unitary longer rods and have a higher mass compared to the 2 piece shorter rounds of T-90S. now the momentum if one calculates (momentum = mass X velocity) is higher for Arjun. hence greater penetration too. also i gave a table in my last post. take a look at the FRHP which is 90% at 2000m for 2.3mx2.3m target for Arjun compared 85% at 1600m for 3mx3m target for T-90!! besides the auto tracker on the Arjun with better stabilisation gives it a good "on the move" hit chance which is "lacking" in T-90S.

Put the Arjun up against an Abrams, Leopard or Challenger and see how well the accuracy claims stick up.

sir we are talking Arjun versus indian T-90S.

You can make a wide variety of HE type ammunition for the 125mm if needed. If really needed, then a 125mm round either HE, HESH, or APHE would be superior to a 120mm round. Bigger diameter equals a bigger bursting charge.

sir 120mm firing HESH was IA requirement.

The sole reason the gun was originally intended to use HESH was an anti-armor role because the gun is descended from the British 120mm L11A5.

agree but with improvements in armour that advantage is lost besides IA wants it for fortified bunker/concrete bursting role and not for anti armour role.

You are of course free to believe what you want. But as a function of energy or explosive filler the 120mm used on the Arjun has not demonstrated it vs the T-90M.

sir, we are talking about indian T-90S and not the russian T-90M.

That is a logical fallacy. If number ordered was a function of effectiveness then the T-90 wins. The numbered ordered is a complex process of give and take between the parties involved and hopefully something useful come out the other side.

well T-90 already has 1657 unit order inspite of many issues which is dogging them since induction in 2000. if you can go thro' this whole thread, i have enumerated those issues.

Likewise

That beign said, I feel overall the Arjun is a better tank with a better future. I just am not a big fan of its gun and a few other things.

respect your opinion sir. good that overall you see Arjun as a better tank. thank you.

 

[ppgj]

i don't know how many times people need to be told.

the cost of T-90 as per various links are all valid. the point being deliberately missed is the T-90S cost does not include the cost of various "normal systems" that are supposed to be there in an MBT. this was the whole point in Ajai Shukla coming up with his investigative article where he very succintly showed how T-90S cost was deliberately "kept down" by "not including" these systems like APS/APU etc..(to get a "cost advantage" against Arjun) which were supposed to be acquired by "supplementary" agreements at a later stage!!!! and these facts were kept away from even the parliament!!!

http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2010/02/t-90-tank-piercing-armys-armour-of.html

now when you add up cost of CATHERINE THERMALS/APS/APU/AC/BMS/KANCHAN ARMOUR etc...will the cost still remain 10 crore as said at one point, 14-15 crore being said now???

a note on BREECH MECHANISM -

this term refers to "removal of cartridge" after a shell has been fired so that breech remains open for the next round to be fired. this has nothing to do with autoloader as people are implying here and extra polating it to mean a new improved autoloader.

a video -

 

[p2prada]

But also i should mention this that according to Arjun`s gun, it produce 8000bars to archive a proof pressure of 6120bars ( The gun barrel has been partially autofrettaged )..
And it is good that you gave me the link abt Indian 2A46M gun which have higher rating than 2A46M5 Indian MAPLE 125mm archive the same 8000bars by autofrettaged barrel ( proof pressure is not given )which must be same as Arjun..

Proof test is a factory test where the gun is subjected to the highest pressure possible until it bursts. The Arjun's gun bursts at pressures of 8000bars while the optimum proof pressure is 6120 bars. The T-90s is significantly much higher at 6500 Bars. The gun can still fire at higher pressure, just that it will decrease the life of the barrel.

Noting the standard muzzle velocities achieved and the Arjun's gun being a lower calibre gun compared to the T-90 it is obvious the Arjun's gun is not as powerful.

Both INDIAN gun produce 8000bars to archive a proof pressure of 612bars, where Russian gave 6500bars produce but no proof pressure..

The Indian guns were subjected to 8000 bars, they don't give 8000 bars pressure.

The time when T-90s will be equipped with APS the same time operational Arjun will be equipped with the same APS..

There are indications we have ordered APS for 987 T-90s and not for Arjun as of now. It is definitely possible the future Arjun APS will be the same as what's on the T-90. This includes other aspects like Navigation, Communication and BMS which will be Indian or an Indo-Israeli mix.

If DRDO manufacture the Indigenous APS than we may see it in next batch of Arjun, If not then Swedish APS..

I doubt we have the capability to make a hard kill APS as of now. What we have are untested soft kill capability which is still not finished development. AESA will be required.

By the way I checked the first page of this thread and the thread starter's article seems interesting;

http://trishulgroup.blogspot.com/2009/01/indias-born-again-t-90m-mbt.html

Some interesting points:

in February 2001, India bought its first batch of 310 T-90S MBTs worth US$795 million

We all know that.

on October 26, 2006, for another 330 T-90M MBTs that were to be built with locally-sourced raw materials.

The OFB link suggested the Balasore gun testing was done for indigenous steel which matches the time line mentioned in the article. Notice the T-90 designation. It is T-90M.

The third contract, worth $1.23 billion, was inked in December 2007 for 347 upgraded T-90Ms, the bulk of which will be licence-assembled by HVF.

Followed by more T-90Ms in 2007. The second and third contract was for the T-90M. It is logical since the Urals Arms Expo was where the pictures were taken from in 2009.

Also, this;

The T-90M's final round of user-trials were successfully concluded last year[2008] and it has now been cleared for series-production.

Hope it makes sense.

Also, this;

and most importantly, has a 52-cal 2A46M-5 Rapira smoothbore main gun barrel that also comes fitted with a muzzle reference system.

And a picture of the T-90M, ERA is covered though.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_44d3OT-xI3U/SYCqmd9gULI/AAAAAAAAAmg/awQPB68-HL4/s1600-h/T-90M+MBT.jpg

 

[p2prada]

This is a new AC they have developed for the T-90 which can be carried internally.

http://igorrgroup.blogspot.com/2010/01/new-tank-conditioner.html

Check the video.