Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

[p2prada]

We already know what Arjun Mk2 will be importing. Unless you have something which refutes FORCE magasine... of course you don't as usual.

FORCE magazine is not always right.

There is no reason for DRDO to be crying out for indigenous and then saying they will induct foreign stuff all over again. It only makes the Arjun look even more bad.

Also considering the article is true, IA will not be inducting it. IA will be inducting a 90% indigenous tank, not a 10% one. So, this could be a developmental prototype to showcase the production variant of the tank in 2014.

The specifications don't matter when we know what Russia lacks in technology. Auto-transmission, high grade power packs, modern engines, BMS, thermal imagers, and radios. There is a reason top Russian generals called the T-90 a "17 second modification" and a "heavily modernised T-34." It is an obsolete tank with technology Russia doesn't have to upgrade. That is why they turn to France.

T-90 is an old tank upgrade that dates back to the 90s. Yes, a lot of key components in Russian technology has not been up to the mark. However, this does not change the fact that they aren't up to it.

Fact is I see Russia coming out with new tank prototypes and not France in the last 15-20 years. So money plays a part in weapons development and we have played a major part in it when it comes to orders from Russia. That fact will never change in the foreseeable future.

AT, High grade power packs, modern engines, BMS, thermal imagers and modern radios are all new developments even in the western world. Can you tell me how many Leclercs already have APS on their tanks?

 

[Armand2REP]

FORCE magazine is not always right.

A) FORCE magasine has very high military connections
B) The prototype is already built
C) the report is too precise to be speculation
D) it talks about some contracts past tense, like ESM

There is no reason for DRDO to be crying out for indigenous and then saying they will induct foreign stuff all over again. It only makes the Arjun look even more bad.

DRDO has to meet Amy requirements or it won't be ordered regardless of DRDO crying. Those requirements are met by France and Israel.

Also considering the article is true, IA will not be inducting it. IA will be inducting a 90% indigenous tank, not a 10% one. So, this could be a developmental prototype to showcase the production variant of the tank in 2014.

According to FORCE, 124 Mk2 variants were ordered by the Army on 17 May 2010. 124 is a little much for testing. The piece also mentions that India will over time try to replace certain components with indigenous parts. It is a, fill in the blank tank that will become more indigenous over time. Pretty standard for India.

T-90 is an old tank upgrade that dates back to the 90s. Yes, a lot of key components in Russian technology has not been up to the mark. However, this does not change the fact that they aren't up to it.

T-90S is the last featured upgrade and it dates to 2001. T-90AM is the latest and it has Thales comm gear, thermals, and SESM transmission/power-packs. Russia is not up to it as sounded out by their top brass.

Fact is I see Russia coming out with new tank prototypes and not France in the last 15-20 years. So money plays a part in weapons development and we have played a major part in it when it comes to orders from Russia. That fact will never change in the foreseeable future.

France began production of Leclerc 20 years ago, and has since upgraded it many times over various batches that didn't end production until the early 2000s. It is getting an extensive MLU upgrade with the Scoprion programme yet again. The only thing new Russia has tried to make is T-95, and it failed to meet requirements never even "coming out." The project is canceled.

AT, High grade power packs, modern engines, BMS, thermal imagers and modern radios are all new developments even in the western world. Can you tell me how many Leclercs already have APS on their tanks?

Those items have been standard on Western tanks since the end of the Cold War. Leclerc uses the GALIX active protection system as well as many other European tanks.

 

[Andrei_bt]

T-95 design specifications are currently unknown, so there is no way to know how we could contribute to the project even if the design reflects what the army desires.

They are rather well known. The main design features are known for now - http://btvt.narod.ru/3/t-95.html and it is also knowbn that this project is a failure.

 

[mattster]

I really dont understand why some people on this forum still think that many of the joint development programs with Russia like Bhramos, PAK-FA, are really "joint development"

You have to be very naive to think that India is really contributing anything to the PAK-FA program besides cost-sharing. There is nothing wrong with that.
India needs the aircraft and its willing to pay for its development.....but, please dont call it joint development just because you changed a few small pieces of electronics.

Likewise..the Bhramos - what did India do. The engine, the guidance electronics, the radar/seekers are all russian. Indians may have tweaked the firmware or software but that is really not joint development - is it ??

Its nothing more than wholesale technology transfer for a price.
There is really very little "joint" about it.

I dont see why India just cant call these deals for what they are - who really believes that these are joint development projects ??
What is wrong in admitting that India is just buying the technology ?

 

[pmaitra]

Likewise..the Bhramos - what did India do. The engine, the guidance electronics, the radar/seekers are all russian. Indians may have tweaked the firmware or software but that is really not joint development - is it ??

India built the Guidance System. Development of a single guidance system itself can churn out hundreds of tier-1 scientific journal publications, tens of doctorates and a few patents. I beg to differ with you. BrahMos is indeed a joint project. Just because you cannot see software or logic (and 'why India just cant call these deals for what they are' [sic.]), does not mean it doesn't exist or does not play a major part.

Here is an old research publication, a part of which I had implemented in parallel:
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=112783

I would recommend the readers to get a fair idea about guidance systems before dismissing India's contributions, specifically of the types as in BrahMos, as mere financial contribution.

 

[Armand2REP]

Brahmos = P800 Oniks/Yakhont ... the funny thing is Russia has exported this missile to three countries, four counting India, and Brahmos has none.

India developed "target discriminating" algorithms... WoW

 

[pmaitra]

Brahmos = P800 Oniks/Yakhont ... the funny thing is Russia has exported this missile to three countries, four counting India, and Brahmos has none.

India developed "target discriminating" algorithms... WoW

Your post not only reeks of ignorance, but also shows that you are trolling around. May I know your qualifications that you are commenting on 'guidance systems'?

Forget BrahMos, you may start by explaining to me the guidance, targeting and target tracking system of the SCALP EG. I'd like to know how much you actually know about guidance systems.

BTW, did you read that research paper (post #541)? If you did, what and how much of it did you understand?

 

[Armand2REP]

I am not going to dignify the rest of your trolling statements with attention, but I do know how SCALP EG works. It is INS/GPS midcourse using periodic updates from the NAVSTAR P-Y channel to correct errors in INS. It's trajectory is hi-lo-hi cruising at altitude for needed range and drops low when entering the threat zone. A passive radar altimetre is used to keep 100m altitude or whatever else is programmed. Attack patterns can be pre-entered. When entering terminal phase, SCALP pops up several hundred metres and gets a thermal picture of the target. It cross checks its intel library of images taken from either space or airbourne assets and corrects its trajectory for pin-point accuracy. The algorithms the seeker uses are pretty simple, it matches the picture up to several ones in the library, and overlays all the geometric shapes in it until it matches. If you don't have pre-intel loaded, she can fly off the INS/GPS and be only 10m off.

BTW, your research paper is subscription only.

 

[pmaitra]

I am not going to dignify the rest of your trolling statements with attention, but I do know how SCALP EG works. It is INS/GPS midcourse using periodic updates from the NAVSTAR P-Y channel to correct errors in INS. It's trajectory is hi-lo-hi cruising at altitude for needed range and drops low when entering the threat zone. A passive radar altimetre is used to keep 100m altitude or whatever else is programmed. Attack patterns can be pre-entered. When entering terminal phase, SCALP pops up several hundred metres and gets a thermal picture of the target. It cross checks its intel library of images taken from either space or airbourne assets and corrects its trajectory for pin-point accuracy. The algorithms the seeker uses are pretty simple, it matches the picture up to several ones in the library, and overlays all the geometric shapes in it until it matches. If you don't have pre-intel loaded, she can fly off the INS/GPS and be only 10m off.

That's all? What about the math that goes into all that? Any ideas? You simply explained what it does, but you have no idea how it does whatever it does. I don't claim to know how, but I am pretty sure I can produce a list of possible approaches.

BTW, your research paper is subscription only.

I suspected you had no academic background to comment on 'guidance systems', but now you simply proved it. Yes, it is IEEE, and it is not meant for all and sundry. Pardon me if that sounds condescending.

Edit: You can pay a small fee and download that research paper.

 

[shuvo@y2k10]

well how many supersonic cruise missile of the caliber of bhramos have been built by the french?

 

[p2prada]

A) FORCE magasine has very high military connections
B) The prototype is already built
C) the report is too precise to be speculation
D) it talks about some contracts past tense, like ESM

The writer who wrote the piece can be doubted. They could be throwing tall claims just to increase circulation. Something that all media houses frequently do.

DRDO has to meet Amy requirements or it won't be ordered regardless of DRDO crying. Those requirements are met by France and Israel.

A hyperbar engine isn't part of the Arjun project. The Army's main requirement is indigenous product, no western kits except Israeli kits are acceptable. Even those Israeli kits have to be replaced with Indian after some time.

According to FORCE, 124 Mk2 variants were ordered by the Army on 17 May 2010. 124 is a little much for testing. The piece also mentions that India will over time try to replace certain components with indigenous parts. It is a, fill in the blank tank that will become more indigenous over time. Pretty standard for India.

124 tanks = 3 regiments. It is standard number required for testing and also for stabilization in production.

T-90S is the last featured upgrade and it dates to 2001. T-90AM is the latest and it has Thales comm gear, thermals, and SESM transmission/power-packs. Russia is not up to it as sounded out by their top brass.

Interesting. However we are yet to see the Indian version. We no longer use foreign comm gear. As for transmission pack and even engine, we will know pretty soon.

France began production of Leclerc 20 years ago, and has since upgraded it many times over various batches that didn't end production until the early 2000s. It is getting an extensive MLU upgrade with the Scoprion programme yet again. The only thing new Russia has tried to make is T-95, and it failed to meet requirements never even "coming out." The project is canceled.

Both Black Eagle and T-95 have been canceled primarily because of shortage of funds. The Black Eagle makers Omsk even filed for bankruptcy. Russian Army actually lost interest in the T-95 because everybody started talking about newer tanks with stealth, automation and stuff.

However Ural will continue investing in 1500 and 1800HP engines as they have mentioned before.

Those items have been standard on Western tanks since the end of the Cold War. Leclerc uses the GALIX active protection system as well as many other European tanks.

There is no country in the world with the actual "APS" that we are talking about except for Israel and Russia. GALIX is just a Shtora system. Only Israel have the Trophy since 2010 while the Russians have had active APS since the 80s, at least in the prototype form. The buggers are broke and have been broke since the 90s. Even today they are not particularly rich enough to continue supporting their large military. So any kind of funding from the outside is welcomed by them in any form.

 

[p2prada]

I really dont understand why some people on this forum still think that many of the joint development programs with Russia like Bhramos, PAK-FA, are really "joint development"

You have to be very naive to think that India is really contributing anything to the PAK-FA program besides cost-sharing. There is nothing wrong with that.
India needs the aircraft and its willing to pay for its development.....but, please dont call it joint development just because you changed a few small pieces of electronics.

Likewise..the Bhramos - what did India do. The engine, the guidance electronics, the radar/seekers are all russian. Indians may have tweaked the firmware or software but that is really not joint development - is it ??

Its nothing more than wholesale technology transfer for a price.
There is really very little "joint" about it.

I dont see why India just cant call these deals for what they are - who really believes that these are joint development projects ??
What is wrong in admitting that India is just buying the technology ?

The biggest difference between the J-10 and the F-16 Block 52 is the software. Your machine is only as good as the software. This is a written rule followed by everybody all over the world.

The hardware on the Brahmos is similar to the Sunburn missile in China. However the missile is a generation ahead mainly because of the software.

The propulsion, airframe and seeker are Russian. The guidance, navigation and software is very much Indian.

The MRSAM being made in Israel is less of a JV and more of what you said. So, no one is talking about it.

As for PAKFA, time will tell on what we have provided. 25% of development share is a big deal for a project of that scale. Even UK does not have such a big share in the F-35 and whatever they have is considered quite significant.

 

[Andrei_bt]

Both Black Eagle and T-95 have been canceled primarily because of shortage of funds. The Black Eagle makers Omsk even filed for bankruptcy. Russian Army actually lost interest in the T-95 because everybody started talking about newer tanks with stealth, automation and stuff.

Black Eagle makers are OAO KBTM, they realized "Burlak" project fir russian army basing on the "Black eagle" design.

 

[mattster]

India built the Guidance System. Development of a single guidance system itself can churn out hundreds of tier-1 scientific journal publications, tens of doctorates and a few patents. I beg to differ with you. BrahMos is indeed a joint project. Just because you cannot see software or logic (and 'why India just cant call these deals for what they are' [sic.]), does not mean it doesn't exist or does not play a major part.

Here is an old research publication, a part of which I had implemented in parallel:
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=112783

I would recommend the readers to get a fair idea about guidance systems before dismissing India's contributions, specifically of the types as in BrahMos, as mere financial contribution.

You can sit down and debate how big a role software and firmware play in a particular system till the cows come home.
But it really depends on the system.

For a cruise missile - I would have to say that the biggest challenges are the propulsion system and then the guidance electronics. If India actually developed any of the guidance hardware - gyros, radars, sensors, etc., then you may have a stronger claim to joint development.

That's not to say that the software and firmware is trivial. I am sure its very challenging as well. But I dont think its enough to be called "joint development".

 

[Oracle]

You can sit down and debate how big a role software and firmware play in a particular system till the cows come home.
But it really depends on the system.

For a cruise missile - I would have to say that the biggest challenges are the propulsion system and then the guidance electronics. If India actually developed any of the guidance hardware - gyros, radars, sensors, etc., then you may have a stronger claim to joint development.

That's not to say that the software and firmware is trivial. I am sure its very challenging as well. But I dont think its enough to be called "joint development".

I would request you to please get a country flag first, so that I know who I'm talking to? Or are you ashamed of representing your Country in here?

I'll answer your posts in the appropriate way.

 

[civfanatic]

You can sit down and debate how big a role software and firmware play in a particular system till the cows come home.
But it really depends on the system.

For a cruise missile - I would have to say that the biggest challenges are the propulsion system and then the guidance electronics. If India actually developed any of the guidance hardware - gyros, radars, sensors, etc., then you may have a stronger claim to joint development.

That's not to say that the software and firmware is trivial. I am sure its very challenging as well. But I dont think its enough to be called "joint development".

Do you ever have anything useful to say, instead of whining your ass off about how much India sucks and how far India is lagging behind?

Other members have already given the proper response with sources, and all you do is dismiss them and whine some more. Have you applied for US citzenship yet?

 

[Rahul92]

Well i see most of them have problem regarding joint developments with Russia and they want India to join with some European countries for better technology But you guys Hardly know that Russia is the only substitute to USA for decades so count Russian Technology

 

[p2prada]

For a cruise missile - I would have to say that the biggest challenges are the propulsion system and then the guidance electronics. If India actually developed any of the guidance hardware - gyros, radars, sensors, etc., then you may have a stronger claim to joint development.

That's not to say that the software and firmware is trivial. I am sure its very challenging as well. But I dont think its enough to be called "joint development".

The Ring Laser Gyro is indigenous. So is all the software. It is a generation ahead mainly because of the software changes we made. Also, the integration is our own along with modifications on the seeker.

Armand already made fun of our targeting software which is far superior to anything France has ever made on a cruise missile.

We don't know how far the TERCOM system has also improved in the Army variants. If our missile can maneuver in the Himalayas at those speeds and still drop down on the target accurately, then it is already world class.

Black Eagle makers are OAO KBTM, they realized "Burlak" project fir russian army basing on the "Black eagle" design.

Yeah. I am hoping even we are involved in the Burlak project. But I guess we are yet to know what's next.

 

[Andrei_bt]

Yeah. I am hoping even we are involved in the Burlak project. But I guess we are yet to know what's next.

1-st, who are "we"?
Both existing.
"Burlak" is project from Omsk (OAO KBTM). They now own the factory which they bought after it bankruptcy
. 2-nd – the so called "t-95" photos and design of which I had posted, it is failed project with uncertain future.

 

[Armand2REP]

well how many supersonic cruise missile of the caliber of bhramos have been built by the french?

100 ASMP have been produced... of which are obsolete. 100 ASMP-A are in production and are twice as capable.