Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

[p2prada]

T-90A induction was after the induction of T-90S..

No. T-90A was ready for induction in 1999. T-90S came after the T-90A was ready.

Who needs their TOT!
We made a better gun based on their offer of inferior 2A46M, Indian 2A46M is better than 2A46M-5 ( Compare the specifications )
Besides the Indian 2A46M in production right now for next 1000 INDIAN t-90Ms..
Btw, they can keep their TOT to them..

We need the ToT. It is very important. We did not hold out on production for a year for no other reason. The quality of the Russian gun is superior to the Soviet versions. We may have tried making our own version as a safety measure in 2006. But we still need the Russian autoloader. Further, if we are to make the Russian gun with our own raw materials we still need ToT.

Next batch is with ERA, and previous one will be updated, BMS was started 2002 completed and operational by 2006,

ERA is just an add on. It has to be ready first though.

Than why is the T0T Of 2A46M?
They keep on giving us 2A46M for T-90S, and they wanted to us to have Inferior 2A46M on T-90M..
It is obvious that if requested DRDO can inspect the tanks of IA latest T-90S, they would never have us the tech, therfore the present T-90S in Army are using 2A46M..

The designation is not clear in the OFB article. They are offering their best guns for export, we will get it with ToT. So, I am not overly worried about it. This confirmation has to come from our side, hopefully in some expo or the other.

as to the USA's FCS programme, i have already given a link in the previous post. it stands cancelled. it was direct from the horse's mouth!!! robert gates, defence secretary of the US Govt.

Some points to be noted in the said article;

He plans to re-launch the new vehicle program by 2011:

The FCS will be restarted with a different name.

Gates said both Army Chief Gen. George Casey and Army Secretary Peter Geren disagreed with his decision to cancel the FCS vehicles.

So, is a politician right or the Army Chief and Army Secretary? Does a politician know the ground reality or does this stink of usual red tape politics?

He criticized the Army leadership for sticking with the original FCS vehicle design which was intended to field a lightweight family of armored vehicles that could be rapidly flown to global hot spots. That was before insurgents in Iraq demonstrated the lethality of crudely constructed roadside bombs that shredded lightly armored vehicles. The proliferation of inexpensive anti-armor missiles of increased precision is also a troubling development.

If the enemy was better equipped, say Russia, China or even Pakistan. They would have seen M1s littered on the side streets too. Right now lightly armoured vehicles are being destroyed by mines and not by ATGMs or artillery. Because they don't have any. Comparing the Iraq scenario to say Russia or China is typical political hindsight.

And that's why the program has been renewed under a different name.

As they began working on the infantry fighting vehicle and looking at the lessons learned, in Iraq and Afghanistan, they began adding armor to the infantry fighting vehicle. And all of a sudden, it was looking like 34 tons, 36 tons, 38 tons on a 30-ton chassis. That seems to me to be a problem.

The 40Ton FCS tank isn't an IFV. It holds a crew of 2(max) and a 120mm gun. It is a MBT and was set to replace the M1 before the great purge. Now, if the same systems will come back online will be hard to speculate on. Even if a new tank comes into the picture, they will only try doing the same thing the Russians are doing. Low profile and smaller, better protected tanks.

Best assumptions can be made only if the Russians release more information on the T-95. It is said the T-95 will have an even smaller profile than the T-90 and the crew will be enclosed in armour below the hull line which is a big deal.

From Prasun:

Now, have the Russians already achieved such network connectivity with even their latest T-90M MBTs and Mi-28NE/Ka-50 attack helicopters? Does the T-90S/T-90M have enough internal volume for housing battlespace management systems and control consoles for an active protection system? (the Arjun Mk1 definitely does!)

So, for some reason, the Russians can have AC and their own BMS on their T-90s. But we cannot. *rolls eyes*

Shtora is APS too. Wonder how you missed that?

The T-90 is ahead of the Arjun in all parameters in development.

The T-90M exists today, while the Arjun Mk2 is only on the drawing board.
The T-90M has shown everything that needs to make a Arjun MK2.

You fail to understand that technology is added progressively and not all at once. If the Su-30MKI can get a new radar and uprated engines along with composites, so can the T-90 move up in scale. The base Arjun itself took 10 years to perfect that other tanks are still better than it. In 2000 Arjun had problems, so T-90 was inducted. Now that Arjun is ready, out comes T-90M further pushing its outdatedness. Once the Arjun Mk2 is ready, who knows what else is in store to curtail it.

From 2000 to 2010, DRDO has only been trying to fix the same tank as a T-90S over and over again so the army accepts it. The Arjun has nothing to do with T-90 except for being late. Had the Arjun been at its 100% in 2000 as it was supposed to, it would have been more meaningful.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

We need the ToT. It is very important. We did not hold out on production for a year for no other reason. The quality of the Russian gun is superior to the Soviet versions. We may have tried making our own version as a safety measure in 2006. if we are to make the Russian gun with our own raw materials we still need ToT.

The quality of the Russian gun is inferior to our version of 2A46M which is in production line right now in HVF, We made a clone of Arjun Gun, with certain difference of 2A46M, Note again the specification given in the article..

ERA is just an add on. It has to be ready first though.

ERA is just an add-on, Arjun Armour ratings are good enough and better than T-90S Armour rating..

The designation is not clear in the OFB article. They are offering their best guns for export, we will get it with ToT. So, I am not overly worried about it. This confirmation has to come from our side, hopefully in some expo or the other.

No need, the Designation is Cristal clear 2A46M..
They did gave as the T0T for T-90M ( latest ) with 2A46M?

From 2000 to 2010, DRDO has only been trying to fix the same tank as a T-90S over and over again so the army accepts it. The Arjun has nothing to do with T-90 except for being late. Had the Arjun been at its 100% in 2000 as it was supposed to, it would have been more meaningful.

Meaningful?
Is this that the present Arjun is more capable than in various parameter than T-90s and T-90M will be modified to have the same capability as ARJUN MK-1..

 

[ppgj]

well unlike india, politicians in the US including the president are most often technocrats and most often have served in one of the armed wings. it does not take much time to "google" and find out.

here is an account on MR. Robert gates -

http://www.defense.gov/bios/biographydetail.aspx?biographyid=115

he served as the director of CIA and USAF!!!

.......

FCS programme as i said is not for replacing the heavy tanks even if they "restart" the programme later. they will be mostly used for urban environment like in Baghdad etc...already IIRC Strykers are being put to use in Iraq as "mobility" is a prime factor along with "situational awareness". besides it is much more cheaper maintainence and costwise. moreover the "threat perception" for continuing abrahms has vaned. to equate it to mean they will "replace" abrahms would be a joke. besides the programme is cancelled as of now.

.......

the idea of "quoting" prasun was to show how people distinguish between "bloggers" as it suits them. =xD

well as to "curtailing" of Arjun - you don't need any "performance/superior parameters"!!! our DGMF has already proven it. they are fine with obsoleteness and unending issues wrt T-90S. iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii

god bless them and others who support that.

AMEN.

 

[p2prada]

The quality of the Russian gun is inferior to our version of 2A46M which is in production line right now in HVF, We made a clone of Arjun Gun, with certain difference of 2A46M, Note again the specification given in the article..

There is no clone of the Arjun gun on the T types. You are making things up. The 2A46 is for the T-72s we are upgrading. It is the 125mm 2A46 Maple. It is not the gun going into the T-90.

The specification is 125mm smoothbore which is different from 120mm Riflebore.

By the way, can you quote where you are extrapolating from?

ERA is just an add-on, Arjun Armour ratings are good enough and better than T-90S Armour rating..

It is speculation as long as you can back it up.

No need, the Designation is Cristal clear 2A46M..
They did gave as the T0T for T-90M ( latest ) with 2A46M?

More speculation since the 2A46M-5 as well as the 2A82 are both available for export. News articles don't confer with what you say. Also, you claim to have sat in the T-90, did they not give you the gun specifics or any contacts who know it?

Meaningful?
Is this that the present Arjun is more capable than in various parameter than T-90s and T-90M will be modified to have the same capability as ARJUN MK-1..

The 2A46M-2 still holds more pressure and fires a bigger slug compared to the Arjun. The 2A46M5 does the same with more accuracy. Either of these guns are more powerful than the Arjun's gun. Add ERA, the armour is stronger as well. So, the only things better on the Arjun are accuracy on the move and mobility (which may equalize once we get the 1200 HP engine).

The Arjun's gun may be able to fire even bigger slugs but we don't have the so called bigger slug.

APU, BMS, APS are add ons which can be installed after the tank is built. We already know what APS will go into the T-90 too.

 

[p2prada]

well unlike india, politicians in the US including the president are most often technocrats and most often have served in one of the armed wings. it does not take much time to "google" and find out.

here is an account on MR. Robert gates -

http://www.defense.gov/bios/biographydetail.aspx?biographyid=115

he served as the director of CIA and USAF!!!

The Army Chief disagrees with him.

[sarcasm] Of course the only reason being the Army chief is corrupt and being bribed by the big corporations. Also the "Army" Chief knows nothing about warfare and has to learn it from a USAF personnel who was the director of CIA.[/sarcasm]

Similar to how the DGMF is wrong and the media is right here.

Robert Gates' main area of expertise is Intelligence and not Army. The purging to the FCS has a lot to do with Obama's hopeless policies and the recession cuts and less to do with technology. But, of course they cannot say it can they.

After all the hoopla the program will still go on.

FCS programme as i said is not for replacing the heavy tanks even if they "restart" the programme later. they will be mostly used for urban environment like in Baghdad etc...already IIRC Strykers are being put to use in Iraq as "mobility" is a prime factor along with "situational awareness". besides it is much more cheaper maintainence and costwise. moreover the "threat perception" for continuing abrahms has vaned. to equate it to mean they will "replace" abrahms would be a joke. besides the programme is cancelled as of now.

The FCS is a very wide program. It is mainly to be able to do something in a week that will take the Abrams a month or more. The FCS program has nothing to do with COIN operations. It is meant for dropping tanks and soldiers behind enemy lines and opening a new front at the heart of the enemy's area of operations. It is meant for major conventional operations and not for COIN that is going on in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is not a $100Billion program for nothing.

the idea of "quoting" prasun was to show how people distinguish between "bloggers" as it suits them. =xD

That's the main point and that's why I don't give sources from random journalists like Kuldeep Nayyar or retired servicemen who served 5 or even 10 years ago. I only focus on what serving people have to say to the media and they don't give away information. Forum debate on Military is purely extrapolation when it comes to the future inductions. Manufacturer claims are what runs forum debates along with old retired personnel. The Armed Forces are not allowed to have a press conference every time they do something. Most of the times even journalists are not sure about the credibility of the information they receive.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

There is no clone of the Arjun gun on the T types. You are making things up. The 2A46 is for the T-72s we are upgrading. It is the 125mm 2A46 Maple. It is not the gun going into the T-90.

By the way, can you quote where you are extrapolating from?

Also, you claim to have sat in the T-90, did they not give you the gun specifics or any contacts who know it?

The 2A46M-2 still holds more pressure and fires a bigger slug compared to the Arjun. The 2A46M5 does the same with more accuracy. Either of these guns are more powerful than the Arjun's gun. Add ERA, the armour is stronger as well. So, the only things better on the Arjun are accuracy on the move and mobility (which may equalize once we get the 1200 HP engine).

Making up!?..
This is the article provided by you to me..

Indigenisation of 125mm t-90 ordnance
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.

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.

http://ofbindia.gov.in/units/index.p...e=my_3&lang=en

Officers and soldiers of Indian Armored Regts know T-72 & T-90 use the same gun..

 

[p2prada]

Making up!?..
This is the article provided by you to me..

Yes. You are wrongly interpreting the article.

Officers and soldiers of Indian Armored Regts know T-72 & T-90 use the same gun..

So, you are saying the T-72s 125 mm gun and the T-90s gun are the same. *shakes head*

The T-72 we have use the 2A46 and now the 2A46 Maple. The T-90s use 2A46M2. They are not the same gun. 2A46M2 and 2A46M5 are the same guns.

So, you have degraded our T-90s from the 2A46M5 to 2A46M2 to 2A46M to 2A46. Next, will it be the pea shooter? Somewhere there fits the Arjun's gun, 125mm smoothbore clone for our T-90s.
Perhaps Indian Army are being lead by headless chickens. *shakes head again*

Also, note that 2A46 Maple is our name and not Russian name. Meaning 2A46 Maple is not 2A46M. If that is what you are confused about.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Perhaps Indian Army are being lead by headless chickens. *shakes head again*

Care to elaborate..

.............................

 

[p2prada]

Care to elaborate..

.............................

You reduced the T-90s gun from 2A46M5 being offered for export to the indigenous 2A46 Maple that goes into the T-72.

This is called regression and thus the headless chicken comment. I don't see the point of the army going for weaker and weaker guns every year even if better guns are offered, as you claim. Not logical from any POV.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

You reduced the T-90s gun from 2A46M5 being offered for export to the indigenous 2A46 Maple that goes into the T-72.

This is called regression and thus the headless chicken comment. I don't see the point of the army going for weaker and weaker guns every year even if better guns are offered, as you claim. Not logical from any POV.

ARE U BLIND OR HAVE EYE DEFECTS OR SOME HEAD LESS CHICKEN????????
READ THE ARTICLE!!!
Indian T-72M1 are using (125mm SB T-72 barrel )
That is because u didn't read the article and calling us "HEAD LESS SH*T"
Why would i decrease the effectiveness of t-90s??
Its the Article which says 2A46M which u cant swallow !!!!!

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Indian T-72 barrel is Maple and based on 2a46..
Indian T-90M barrel is also Maple and based on 2A46M and have same characteristics of Arjun`s 120mm Gun..

Which include max chamber pressure of 8000bars and auto-auto-frettage barrel..

Meaning of maple ((MATERIAL ADDED AUTOFRETTAGE PROCESS LEADING TO ELASTIC RELEASE)


According to article INDIAN Barrels have better chamber pressure than Russian counterparts, Now its abt 2a46 or 2a46m...

MAX camber pressure
2A46= 5000bars
Indian 2A46= 6700bars

2A46M= 6500bars
Indian 2A46M= 8000bars

 

[p2prada]

You don't have to get personal. I called the army headless chickens based on your post and not you. It was sarcasm if you don't get it.

You should have been there when people were calling the Army generals corrupt and sold to the Russians.

Officers and soldiers of Indian Armored Regts know T-72 & T-90 use the same gun..

You are the one who made this post. So, tell me are the 2A46 and 2A46M the same guns?

The penultimate reason for the discussion is just that too. People believe the Arjun is superior and that the T-90 was chosen because the army is corrupt which we know is a misnomer.

This brings us to the most important question, Why was the T-90 chosen? Do you have any answers?

 

[p2prada]

Which include max chamber pressure of 8000bars and auto-auto-frettage barrel..

The article says nothing of the sort.

According to article INDIAN Barrels have better chamber pressure than Russian counterparts, Now its abt 2a46 or 2a46m...

You mean Soviet.

MAX camber pressure
2A46= 5000bars
Indian 2A46= 6700bars

You are thoroughly confused about the terms. The safe pressure for 2A46 Soviet made gun is 6700 bars while the Indian made MAPLE series is 8000 bars. There is no 5000bars in the article, but it is the proof pressure.

2A46M= 6500bars
Indian 2A46M= 8000bars

Similarly, the safe pressure is unknown as we have not seen it in any article or manufacturers website and which I calculated to be greater than 8000bars. But proof pressure is 6500bars. Nothing in the article says 8000 bars for the 2A46M.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

You don't have to get personal. I called the army headless chickens based on your post and not you. It was sarcasm if you don't get it.

Do know anyone close who is serving in Army as a officer..
tell him the same BS you told me..

You are the one who made this post. So, tell me are the 2A46 and 2A46M the same guns?

If i consider both gun same i would have said it before in page 9..
The tank crew i know of T-90 said me so, as they were told by their superiors..

The penultimate reason for the discussion is just that too. People believe the Arjun is superior and that the T-90 was chosen because the army is corrupt which we know is a misnomer.
This brings us to the most important question, Why was the T-90 chosen? Do you have any answers?

When i said this??
Check from 9 to 44 if u find a single post contain that T-90s is a bad choice..
I change my tone since u gave me the article which shocked me abt Russian reality..
Also u will find the post mentioning why we got the T-90S, And surprisingly, you will also found that it was a reply to you..

The article says nothing of the sort.

Cant u see 800MPA?
Its the same for Arjun`s 120mm at MAX chamber Pressure..
Article gave us the same 800mpa for Indian 2A46M at MAX..

You are thoroughly confused about the terms. The safe pressure for 2A46 Soviet made gun is 6700 bars:emot154: while the Indian made MAPLE series is 8000 bars. There is no 5000bars in the article, but it is the proof pressure.

AND YOU FORGET TO

REST OF THE PART!

Indian T-72 barrel is Maple and based on 2a46..
Indian T-90M barrel is also Maple and based on 2A46M and have same characteristics of Arjun`s 120mm Gun..

MAX camber pressure
2A46= 5000bars
Indian 2A46= 6700bars
2A46M= 6500bars
Indian 2A46M= 8000bars

VASILIYS ARTICLE SAYS RUSSIAN 2A46= 5000BARS MAX

............6700BAR ( 670MPA) for Indian 2a46 not Russian 2A46!! ( ARTICLE )

READ THE Vasiliy Fofanov's Modern Russian Armor Page!!!!!!!!!!!
IT CLEARLY MENTIONED MAX CHAMBER PRESSURE!!!!

For all soviet, Russian guns..
http://fofanov.armor.kiev.ua/

 

[ppgj]

US FCS programme -

sarcasm and nitpicking apart, the programme is cancelled. period. if it is restarted whenever, may be we can have a separate thread and debate it.

as to they will replace "abrahms" when the programme is restarted(??) is a fantastic joke. may be Zraver sir can throw more light on this.

however the "analogy" of our DGMF and the media is hilarious. it is as fantastic as people calling the former COAS gen. shankar roy chowdhary - a politician (no brainers as implied wrongly) - as if he had a "memory loss" the moment he became a member of parliament and suddenly lost his knowledge, experience and capabilities as a soldier and lost his ability to think!!! here is his brief biography -

General Shankar Roy Chowdhury, PVSM, ADC
(22 Nov 1994 to 30 Sep 1997)

1. General S Roy Chowdhury, PVSM, ADC was born on 6th September 1937 at Calcutta and was educated at Calcutta and Mussorie. He joined the Joint Services Wing, Dehradun in 1953 and was commissioned into 20 Lancers on 9th June 1957. He participated in the Indo-Pak conflict in 1965 and 1971 including operations for the liberation of Bangladesh.

2. He commanded an Independent Armoured Brigade from December 1980 to July 1983 and Armoured Division from May 1988 to May 1990. He subsequently commanded Corps in Jammu and Kashmir in 1991-92.

3. He is a graduate of Defence Services Staff College and held several staff and instructional appointments, including that of Director General Combat Vehicle dealing with the Indian Main Battle Tank 'Arjun'.

4. The General Officer was awarded Param Vishisht Seva Medal (PVSM) for distinguished service and valuable contribution. He took over as General Officer Commanding - in - Chief, Army Training Command (ARTRAC) in August 1992, and was the Chief of Army Staff from 22nd Nov 94 to 30th Sep 97.

5. Post retirement the General has taken to active politics. As a member of the Rajya Sabha he has highlighted and taken up Defence related issues with great passion and vigour in the Parliament.

http://indianarmy.nic.in/Site/FormT....aspx?MnId=EH8a4Q03ASE=&ParentID=oYjJbpqKulY=

it is better if people are more respectful when commenting on "distinguished" soldiers like sir. chowdhary just because it does not suit their pov's.

this becomes even more laughable when retired pak lt. gen Lodi is found "credible" and beleived!!!! iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii

besides being "politician" is not some shame. there have been some great people in the parliament who have made a big difference to india. what is lost on people is also a fact that distinguished people from different walks of life are "nominated" to the upper house as members of parliament.

 

[p2prada]

Do know anyone close who is serving in Army as a officer..
tell him the same BS you told me..

If he understands Sarcasm he will get it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarcasm

If i consider both gun same i would have said it before in page 9..
The tank crew i know of T-90 said me so, as they were told by their superiors..

So, they don't have the same gun.

When i said this??

You did not say it. Other people said it.

Check from 9 to 44 if u find a single post contain that T-90s is a bad choice..

By saying Arjun should have been picked. You automatically mean the T-90S was a bad choice.
We need both tanks. The T-90 right now and the Arjun 5 years later when many of our tanks need replacement including the old T-72s. If it is 5 year later, then better to wait for the Arjun Mk2 instead of inducting the mk1.

Note that all the Arjuns being inducted are sent to Rajasthan. They are not part of the strike corps.

I change my tone since u gave me the article which shocked me abt Russian reality..
Also u will find the post mentioning why we got the T-90S, And surprisingly, you will also found that it was a reply to you..

That's Soviet reality. Not Russian. The Russians have improved over quality and the new guns are better. The 2A46 we improved upon is from the Soviet lineage. Also, what OFB did was not a big deal. They increased quality which increased the safe pressure and that increased the EFC. It is not Rocket Science.

The 2A46M-2 to 5 should be able to handle much higher pressures than the 800MPa mentioned.

Cant u see 800MPA?
Its the same for Arjun`s 120mm at MAX chamber Pressure..
Article gave us the same 800mpa for Indian 2A46M at MAX..

Yeah! But you are extrapolating on the 2A46M. There is nothing in the article which says the 2A46M has a pressure of 8000bars, you just made it up.

The article only talks about the 2A46 Maple's increased EFC. The only thing it says about the 2A46M is that it was sent to PEE Balasore for tests.

............6700BAR ( 670MPA) for Indian 2a46 not Russian 2A46!!

Please Google Proof Test, Working Pressure, Bursting Pressure and Proof Pressure.

Maximum Chamber pressure is not what you think it is.

 

[ppgj]

here is an account of how T-90S were inducted with trials in Russia!!!

point # 30 onwards here in the 3rd standing committee report (MOD) under the heading T-90 Tanks -

http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q...DTMPg5&sig=AHIEtbT1lAoDwQR1SYC9NvWU2DNsUsFqjA

and how the AUCRT of 3 T-90S (in india) went when 1 engine broke and all had "smoke genarating sys pipes" broken -

http://cdm.ap.nic.in/casestudies/casevol362/Induction of tank T90s.pdf

point # 6, page 23.

 

[p2prada]

US FCS programme -

sarcasm and nitpicking apart, the programme is cancelled. period. if it is restarted whenever, may be we can have a separate thread and debate it.

Of course. However it is coming all right.

as to they will replace "abrahms" when the programme is restarted(??) is a fantastic joke. may be Zraver sir can throw more light on this.

An M1A3 is in development, it will be similar to what the Arjun Mk2 will be, hopefully. APS and NERA will be the primary additions on the M1A3 along with a more powerful gun. Pretty good right. The FCS will be ready for induction realistically in the 2020 to 2023 period, 4-7 years after the supposed first prototype. Something has to run the show until then. That's why the T-90s were inducted here. The Army has specifically stated the need for a FMBT as its next induction. Arjun in the present form in not a FMBT.

The FCS is very diverse. Like I said it is a $100Billion program. Comparatively the Arjun tank alone is a $150Million development and program costs of ~$1Billion for 248 tanks including development.

however the "analogy" of our DGMF and the media is hilarious. it is as fantastic as people calling the former COAS gen. shankar roy chowdhary - a politician (no brainers as implied wrongly) - as if he had a "memory loss" the moment he became a member of parliament and suddenly lost his knowledge, experience and capabilities as a soldier and lost his ability to think!!! here is his brief biography -

it is better if people are more respectful when commenting on "distinguished" soldiers like sir. chowdhary just because it does not suit their pov's.

I never doubted his credentials and stop trying to put words into my mouth.

However, by saying this you mean to say our current, working DGMF and COAS are wrong simply because a retired COAS's POV differs. Look at the reality here. The people who are in the decision making process and are privy to every kind of detail available have chosen a tank which you don't like. So, are you suggesting the current working DGMF and COAS are somehow wrong and that only a retired COAS is right? Now whose views better represent the ground reality. Retired or Current?

Look realistically, he retired well before the Arjun was proven to be useless in 1998-2000 period. When he was COAS, the army was hoping the Arjun will turn out to be a good tank.

Also, look at his comments. He only said we must support indeginization by supporting Arjun's induction. I do agree with it and so are the DGMF and Army Chief, but now is not the time. There are better things to spend on.

this becomes even more laughable when retired pak lt. gen Lodi is found "credible" and beleived!!!! iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii

Let's see you try to shoot down his views about the Arjun. But of course you can't and you will give a lame reason for it. Everybody knows the Arjun was garbage in the 2000 tests. Simply because he pointed it out, the issue becomes laughable.

 

[p2prada]

here is an account of how T-90S were inducted with trials in Russia!!!

point # 30 onwards here in the 3rd standing committee report (MOD) under the heading T-90 Tanks -

http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q...DTMPg5&sig=AHIEtbT1lAoDwQR1SYC9NvWU2DNsUsFqjA

and how the AUCRT of 3 T-90S (in india) went when 1 engine broke and all had "smoke genarating sys pipes" broken -

http://cdm.ap.nic.in/casestudies/casevol362/Induction of tank T90s.pdf

point # 6, page 23.

Why was the T-90 chosen over the Arjun?

 

[ppgj]

putting words into the mouth?? people can go back and check their posts. summarily rejecting an "informed" COAS just like that and in a way disrespecting his POV (which comes with 1st hand experience and being part of the Arjun programme) for being a member of parliament only shows hollowness of thought.

as to Arjun was garbage in 2000 - i just posted links - in post # 454. it is better if people go thro' them.

inducting T-90S based on "trials" in Russia (cold conditions) in hot weather indian tropical climate is a "blunder" which has already cost us dearly!!! the saga continues with "issues" i have already highlighted and i am yet to get answers!!!!

and how the indian AUCRT of 3 T-90S went is also in the same post # 454.

pray tell how worse than garbage T-90S was. mmmmmmmmmmmm

and there is nothing to point from Pak lt. gen lodi's article. it is a typical pak propaganda and worse thing is people finding it as "credible". ==gudddjjj==