Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

[Akim]

Akim interesting vehicles, are these for Ukrainian Army from stocks?

Ukraine has a very large number of MBTs T-80U. In the early 21st century, alteration of the stern, with a diesel engine is very costly - almost as modernization of the T-64B, to the level BM Bulat. Then adopted a rearmament program, which it proposes to modernize more than 300 tanks to the level BM Bulat and alteration of the T-80 is no longer relevant, because in Ukraine there had to be a unified base of the tank on the chassis of the T-64. However, in 10 years they have altered little over a hundred. Now heard proposals for the army procurement party BM Oplot and get a unified tank on the chassis of the T-80 is priority. Therefore, Lviv engineers, its proposal for the of the tank, where instead of the GTE will stand "Pakistan engine-transmission compartment (ETC) ". How much will it cost, I don't know.

 

[Twinblade]

ATGM's effectiveness against modern tanks is hardly spectacular, in fact it is relatively low compared to their advertisements.

Again, a very pedantic view of the issue at hand. Name one tank designed ground up to handle top attack ATGM. Also, what percentage of tanks carry active protection system capable of defeating top attack ATGM ? miniscule.

Also remember that all these ATGM's you mentioned have relatively short range, which means that their carriers or operators are well within range of MBT's main armament.

Nag have a range of what? 4000m at best? Any Pakistani or Chinese tank have gun launched ATGM with a range of 5000m. Basic infantry carried Javelin or Spike have a range of about 2000m. US is working on new Javelin variant with range increased to 4000m.

4Km in LOBL mode, 7 in LOAL mode. Nag-II plans to increase it even further.

So modern tanks can fire their ammunition even further than most ATGM's have a effective range.

For example M1A2SEPv2, as the ones on pictires above, have thermal sights with maximum 50x zoom, and new fire control system that gives it capability to accurately fire conventional (non guided) rounds up to 5000m, and there was ATGM tested on that tank, XM1111 MRM-CE, fired from it's main gun with a maximum range of 12,000m.

So good luck with trying to efficently engage modern tanks that are properly commanded and their crews are properly trained.

Good luck trying to hit a non line of sight target at 7 Km with conventional rounds. Wait, did I say non-LOS, oh wait, I totally did. You see, NAMICA in it's final version is supposed to incorporate mast mounted thermal sight (that can be raised to a height of 6 meters). Tanks can go hull down behind a hill, but they still have to be in LOS to target using conventional weaponry. Not NAMICA, it can hide behind buildings, forests, hills, fire missiles from a range of 7km, guide them till the seeker locks on and move. Since the targeting and missile, both are passive, tanks will not know what hit them till it actually hits them. Also, the missile is smokeless, so no trails to follow the attack back to the source.

What more, NAMICA is based on BMP-2, which makes it amphibious and air transportable. NAMICA brings the kind of asymmetry to armoured warfare that missile carriers of yesteryear's, which carried SACLOS and Laser guided missiles, could not.

Also, XM111 was more a tank round than a missile, the KE round was doomed to fail because the energy at those ranges would be laughably low. The CE round, again, too would have faced issues maneuvering into top attack profile at those ranges, given the very flat launch trajectory of a tank gun. I am yet to read about the possibility of top attack profile in XM111 which logic says would have been very difficult at those ranges by an unpowered projective to achieve, if not impossible, if one completely disregards the size of warhead that is left in the round after the seeker and control tail. Without top attack tandem warhead, XM111-CE would have been a glorified tank launched mortar.

 

[militarysta]

How is typical fire range on Pakistani - Indian border?

 

[Dazzler]

How is typical fire range on Pakistani - Indian border?

1200m to 2200m, depending on terrain.

 

[militarysta]

1200m to 2200m, depending on terrain.

So in the other wold:

beeing exiced about GLATGM is pointles!
on 1.2-2.2km only sabot there is no reson to using GLATG on sucht small distance, when 120 and 125mm are more accuracy and faster and...more dedly.

So whole discuion is pointles...

Btw: if sucht range is typical (1200-2200m) then discusion shoud go in to direction:
-what pritection have Pak. and Indian tanks vs APFSDS
- what APFSDS have Indian and Pak tanks?

Simple.

 

[Dazzler]

So in the other wold:

beeing exiced about GLATGM is pointles!
on 1.2-2.2km only sabot there is no reson to using GLATG on sucht small distance, when 120 and 125mm are more accuracy and faster and...more dedly.

So whole discuion is pointles...

Btw: if sucht range is typical (1200-2200m) then discusion shoud go in to direction:
-what pritection have Pak. and Indian tanks vs APFSDS
- what APFSDS have Indian and Pak tanks?

Simple.

i posted a comparison pic in tank ammunition thread, even tagged u there but u never responded. A bit offtopic but here it is..

BM-42 vs a pakistani indigenous round (either POF 125mm of ARDE 125)

 

[militarysta]

i posted a comparison pic in tank ammunition thread, even tagged u there but u never responded. A bit offtopic but here it is..

BM-42 vs a pakistani indigenous round (either POF 125mm of ARDE 125)

I didn't repost it becouse those picture where previous in internet as slovakia munition...


Anyway

125mm APFSDS ammo avaible in Pakistan is far better then 3BM42 in India, or Arjun 120mm ammo.

 

[abhi_the _gr8_maratha]

but tanks of india far better than pakis tanks

 

[cobra commando]

Merkava Mark 4 will be sold in a foreign army

 

[militarysta]

but tanks of india far better than pakis tanks

In what aspect better?
Can you explain me that?

Pakistani T-80UD is definetly not worse then newest T-90S Bisma for IA, in some aspects as mobility its just far beter in other aspects like avaible ammo or armour proection it seems to be slighty better.
EDIT: in ammo case Naiza-2 is far better then 3BM42 in IA...

Al. Chalid -1 have same flaws but in fact it's quite modern and vel developed tannt - IMHO mucht better then Arjun.

BTW: Im not holding Pakistani or Indian side in this "holly war". I even like peoples from India, and I have meet some indians studens in Poland when I was a student too. Nice and smart guys, so this what im write is not depend on like or dislike India or Indian citizens.
Im trying to write about this whit pure technical or known facts aspects.
And soory for harsh truth but pakistani T-80UD are not worse (in some aspects like mobility even far better) then T-90S Bishma and pakistani Al. Chalid-1 is far far better tank then T-72M1 Aleya, IMHO Arjun Mk.1, and it's on one level whit T-90S, exept mobility -couse this is again mucht better in Al. Chalid 1 then in T-90S...

As I said - I have nothing against India or peoples form India or Indian culture, but wake up couse pak tanks are mucht better now.

 

[abhi_the _gr8_maratha]

this is why I think you don't have any knowledge in tanks. Nor the names nor the technologies , you know nothing
.
chalid , aley al chalid(khalid?) better than arjun

 

[Kunal Biswas]

We know that very well, You hold only your side of comfort ..

BTW: Im not holding Pakistani or Indian side in this "holly war". .

 

[abhi_the _gr8_maratha]

T80UD is using KBA3 125mm
smoothbore gun, which is Ukrainian
version of 2A46M-1. It can fire the
same range of ammunition as other
guns of the 2A46/D-81 family.
So, the firepower is comparable with
Indian T-90S, and ammunition used in
both tanks is interchangeable.

 

[abhi_the _gr8_maratha]

July 28, 2005, Defence
Minister Pranab Mukherjee
informed Parliament, "The
Arjun tank is superior to (the)
T-90 tank due to its high
power to weight ratio,
superior fire on the move
capability during day and
night and excellent ride
comfort. MBT Arjun has gone
through all the tests and it is
meeting the (requirements)
of the Army."
.
.
so now stop noob post about inferiority of fire power of arjun

 

[abhi_the _gr8_maratha]

Arjun VS Al Khalid
Maximum Speed: 40 km/h VS
(lets assume) 40 KMPH (off
Road Speed)
Maximum Range: Un-
refuelled range 450 km VS
400 KM
Power to Weight Ratio: 23.93
hp/ton VS 26 hp/ton
Combat Weight: 58.5 tonnes
VS 45.5 tons
Crew : 4 VS 3
Ground Pressure: 0.84 kg/cm2
vs (not Avaliable but ite
higher than Arjun, Pakistanis
tried bringing it down bu
rubber pads, but it still
remains higher. Thats why no
pakistani sites mention this.
AK is more likely to sink in
sand than Arjun)
(please note that ground
pressure of T-90 is 0.87 kg/sq
cm and T80-UD is 0.93 kg/
cm2. Even if Arjun is heavier,
the ground pressure is lesser
than lighter tanks)
Gradient: 77º vs 60 % / 40 %
Trench Crossing: 2.43 m vs 2.7
m
Now tell me in terms of these
characteristics, which tank
will survive desert better? Al-
Khalid had advantage in just
power to weight area and
trench crossing, but this
difference in just 3 HP and 3
m. Obviously Arjun is better
in Desert survival.
Additional advantage for
Arjun is its suspension. "It has
a hydro-gas suspension,
which is akin to the landing of
an aircraft. You get more
pressure than when an
Airbus lands
It has special filter system
that keeps out dust, the tank
can operate in the desert. Its
cables and connections are
protected from dust and it has
a provision for deflogging the
radiator and heat exchangers.
The engine will never be shut
down even in the most critical
conditions. This addresses the
heat transfer phenomenon.
The tank, without air-
conditioning, can dissipate
heat." Arjun's design is
modular, including that of the
weapon system, turret and
the power pack. "You can
change the power pack in the
field in 45 minutes.
Elsewhere, it takes 14 hours,"
Except for some filters Al
Khalid dosen't have any of
the features.

 

[abhi_the _gr8_maratha]

Please note the hydro
suspension :-
As for armour, Arjun's
electronics could be inferior
to new western tanks but not
armour. Though India
recieved Israeli help for some
electronics.
When the Army wanted us to
design a tank comparable
with those in the United
States, Germany and France,
we took it up as a challenge.
We had little experience
then... Arjun encompasses
the most beautiful
technologies including the
best in armour." Dr.
Arunachalam called the
Arjun a "fantastic" machine,
describing it as a complex
engineering system with
moving parts. He said: "We
have come a long way. We
have arrived. It has not been
easy. I am proud to be
associated with this. Its
armour is unbeatable. A tank
is determined by its mobility,
fire-power and protection.
Arjun is unbeatable in all the
three."
Arjun's armour, called
Kanchan, is indigenously
designed and produced. It is
made of composite steel,
titanium and ceramic
embedded together.
. "It has a hydro-gas
suspension, which is akin to
the landing of an aircraft. You
get more pressure than when
an Airbus lands," Dr.
Natarajan said. The hydro-gas
suspension provides excellent
riding comfort to the crew,
and has been designed taking
into account the diverse
terrain on which the tank will
have to traverse. Its mobility
is marked by fast acceleration
and deceleration and it has an
excellent braking system. Its
rifled 120-mm gun, together
with the super velocity fin
stabilised armour piercing
discarding sabot (FSAPDS)
ammunition, can pierce the
armour of enemy tanks. Its
secondary weapons are a
7.62-mm machine gun and a
12.7-mm anti-aircraft gun.
The tank's superior fire-
power is based on a
computer-controlled system,
by which it can engage
targets accurately and
quickly. It can engage targets
on the move and its first hit
probability is high. A thermal
imaging system enables it to
see targets even in pitch
darkness.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

@abhi_the _gr8_maratha, I think its been discussed lot of times comparing these two tanks, Arjun is indeed a superior design and there little to doubt, but it does not mean Arjun is most formidable, Every tank has its design scarifies es and that should be it ..

 

[hitesh]

Alkhalid 1,200 horsepower , Weight 46 t

Arjun Mk2 1 ,400 hp , Weight 68 t

Alkhalid has better power to weight ratio but Arjun has better protection compared to pak's tank .

Paks T80UD has slightly better ammo placement compared to T90S but that has been taken care of in T90MS.

What i would wish improvement in Arjun Mk2 is
1)weight reduction Without sacrificing protection level (At least create a balance ).
2)Reduce the week spots on the armor i.e the the week spot between the main gun tube and turret , main sight placement .
3)Proper placement of commander sight & HMG mount to reduce the blind spot .
4)Either keep same main gun on both T90 & Arjun for the sake of logistics & ease of ammo integration or change the current 120 rifled one to 120 mm smooth bore.
5)Create a PR video done form a professional marketing agency

 

[abhi_the _gr8_maratha]

@abhi_the _gr8_maratha, I think its been discussed lot of times comparing these two tanks, Arjun is indeed a superior design and there little to doubt, but it does not mean Arjun is most formidable, Every tank has its design scarifies es and that should be it ..

sir, agree with you. I know arjun not best but it is better than al khalid and T80 ud in deserts and even in punjab.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

It is design for Indian Terrain and Indian requirement for operating over desert of thar and Muddy fields of Punjab and more, That should be it ..

sir, agree with you. I know arjun not best but it is better than al khalid and T80 ud in deserts and even in punjab.