Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

[cobra commando]

Merkava driving fail !

 

[pmaitra]

Re: Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT) Mark II

Is that from your work experience or you read or heard about this somewhere ..

I agree with @karn here. I studied torsion (or torque) and solved problems in engineering mechanics in college. Lengthening the torsion bars is certainly one solution or part of the solution.

 

[jouni]

T-95 with 152mm gun revealed. Enjoy.

A tested formula

 

[sorcerer]

Germany, France to Develop New Battle Tank to Catch Up With Russia’s Armata
Germany and France are now preparing to jointly develop a new main battle tank, the Leopard 3, to replace its ageing Leopard 2 military vehicle by around 2030, which would be able to compete with Russia's next-generation Armata tank, recently showcased at the Victory Day parade commemorating the end of World War Two in Moscow.


The German Defense Ministry has announced its plans for the "Leo 3" (as it's likely to be nicknamed in Germany) to replace its main battle tank, the Leopard 2.

The main reason for the modernization is believed to be the Leopard 2 service life, which is set to expire by 2030.



The German media, however, suggest that the real reason is the recently-presented analysis by Germany’s Federal Intelligence Service (BND) on Russia’s reinforced combat strength and its recently showcased T-14 Armata tanks, which were presented during the country's Victory Parade in Moscow on May 9.
A column of Armata tanks, equipped with 125mm cannons, rolled through Moscow's historic Red Square on May 9 as Russian President Vladimir Putin and a number of foreign heads of state, including Chinese leader Xi Jinping, watched on.

The BND analysis suggests that even though the combat vehicles unveiled at the parade are still somewhat pre-production models, when completed, it will be a tank with the highest levels of armaments.


According to Deutsche Welle, the manufacturer of the current Leopard 2, Krauss-Maffei Wegmann, is scheduled to fuse with the French firm Nexter Systems over the course of this year.

This has prompted the German media to report that the new Franco-German firm, with more than 6,000 staff and a combined turnover of around 2 billion euros ($2.2 billion), could be a strong candidate to win the contract to develop a new battle tank for the German Bundeswehr.

Just before the Victory Day Parade in Moscow, the US bimonthly magazine The National Interest reported on why America should really fear Russia's Armata T-14 tank.


The magazine suggested that Russia actually might be able to deliver in the field the tank of greater speed, maneuverability, firepower and survivability vis-à-vis anything being produced for Western armies.

The Armata is a Russian prototype of a heavy tracked vehicle platform that will be used in the construction of a next-generation main battle tank and a range of other combat vehicles.

The tank's main armaments include a 7.62mm remote-control machine gun and a 125mm smoothbore cannon. The tank is operated by a crew of three, which are housed in an armored capsule in the front.

The military vehicle is also equipped with active counter-mine defense and a suit of circular-view high resolution cameras. It can fire rounds while in motion and travels at a speed of up to 50 miles (80.47 km) per hour.




Read more: http://sputniknews.com/europe/20150523/1022481431.html#ixzz3ayvyqxEv

 

[blueblood]

^^^^^^ Next MBT-70 in the making?

 

[apple]

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/europe/20150523/1022481431.html#ixzz3ayvyqxEv

And the source... Sputnik news :-/

The West doesn't really do tanks anymore, there's no competition with Russia.

 

[Dazzler]

it is too early to boast on what the T-14 Armata brings to the table. Not much is known apart of the few highlighted capabilities while the machine is yet to be tested by her primary user. Too early to predict how good Armata would fare against adversaries.

 

[Dazzler]

Nothing lost. Better long-barreled gun as the "Armata".

At least the chassis is same in both, not sure about turret though. The current one displayed uses a 125mm 2A82 55 cal gun right?

 

[Dazzler]

in the mean time, t-80UD's equipped by Catherine thermal imagers, integrated by Thales licensed industrial partner from pakistan.

Same thermal imager already operational along with Sagem matis thermal imager on Alkhalid series since 2004..

list of mbts equipped with Catherine thermal imagers in pakistan army so far..

• T-80 UD (125mm)

• T-85 (125mm)

• Alkhalid (125mm)

• AlZarrar (125mm)

• T- 69 (105mm)

• T-59 (105mm)

 

[STGN]

I was looking at that 60mm back plate claim for the Leo2A0-4 and I can't make it fit with the evidence provided this is just at quick mock up and its not 100% accurate but you can clearly see that the points you use to measure distance from are quit a bit away from each other and because of the angling of the frontal array the distance measured are quit a apples to oranges measurement and can't be used to make that conclusion rather its seems to be the contrary only a thin back plate.

Please correct me if I am wrong

 

[cobra commando]

Saudi Abrams hit by ATGM.

 

[Hari Sud]

Saudi Abrams hit by ATGM.

First time I have seen an Abrams tank cooked like this. Are you sure it was Abrams?

 

[pmaitra]

First time I have seen an Abrams tank cooked like this. Are you sure it was Abrams?

That video is not very clear.

Here is a video of Saudi tanks rolling into Yemen.


And here is a video where some of the targets are slightly clearer.

Many tanks are French LeClerc tanks.

 

[Akim]

First time I have seen an Abrams tank cooked like this. Are you sure it was Abrams?

Invulnerable tanks does not happen. Yes, it's Abrams.

 

[Akim]

That video is not very clear.

Here is a video of Saudi tanks rolling into Yemen.

In Saudi Arabia there is no Leclerc and BMP-3!

 

[SafedSagar]

In Saudi Arabia there is no Leclerc and BMP-3!

This article says they have bought Leclercs

http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/08/04...-of-saudi-led-coalitions-ground-war-in-yemen/

 

[Akim]

This article says they have bought Leclercs

http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/08/04...-of-saudi-led-coalitions-ground-war-in-yemen/

The arrival of UAE tanks in Yemen represents a significant escalation in the military campaign against the Houthise]

This UAE, no SA
.......................................................

 

[pmaitra]

In Saudi Arabia there is no Leclerc and BMP-3!

Please read the thread. Both Saudi and Emirati forces have invaded Yemen. I did not say those LeClers are Saudi LeClercs. All I said is that many of these tanks are LeClercs referring to the videos.

How did I know some of these are LeClercs? Well, some of them don't look like Abrams, and I have been reading up on the Yemen crisis. You should too.

 

[ersakthivel]

Re: Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT) Mark II

Everytime I read 20:1 or 5:1 or 1500:30000XXXX kill ratio for WW2 I have a drink .
People talking about "kill ratios" forget that what was counted as a loss was different for different armies .
For the USSR/USA armies if a tank was disabled (not able to fight for whatever reason =loss) . But Germans counted their losses in terms of if tank irrecoverable only then is it aloss.
For example if a tank is knocked out and is sitting on the field it is not lost until the germans have to retreat from the area . This has the curious effect of losses appearing on records weeks after a battle.
The 30000xxxx whatever soviet losses comes from kirosheevs book . The author took all t 34s manufactured vs all t34 remaining at the end of the war . He forgets to count t 34s rebuilt given to allies or transfered to NKVD .
On top of this kill ratios of tanks is meaningless only 14% of tanks are killed by other tanks .
If your anology is Arjun/Leo2 = tiger t90=t34 I would take t90 anyday .
The tiger was an enormous strain on resources which could have been useful elsewhere and had little value other than propaganda .
Then think of tiger 2 where the nazis continued with the insanity . The first time the tiger 2s saw action the soviets mistook them for panthers acted appropriately and destroyed them . Later while checking the abandoned/destroyed "king tigers" the soviets realised that it was a new tank .
Then there is heavy tank destroyer ferdinand that catches fire while driving up a slope .

All that was offtopic:
My gripe with the arjun is
It has a classic layout with a human loader . This is an old setup (in terms of ammo storage) that the americans and germans came up with in the late 70s.Where the shells are kept right at the front next to the driver . HE shells can weigh upto 22 Kgs prolonged shooting will fatigue the loader . It only has 17 shells in the read rack . Abrams and T 90 have more . With larger guns possible the move to an autoloader is essential.
As much as you talk about "ground pressure" the weight has its consequences . The weight is not evenly distributed on the whole track there is weight concentrated under the wheels. With a heavy tank you need special tracks or they will wearout and break fast (Germany provides the tracks for all NATO tanks and for the Arjun) .The L&T tracks were not satisfactory now tracks will be imported from Diehl.
Despite higher power to weight ration the heavier vehicle will always be slower off the mark due to inertia ( A quality of Abrams highly praised by US soldiers in the Iraq war where the gas turbine , engines gave their tanks high acceleration from a stand still one of the reasons they do not want to switch to diesels despite its higher fuel consumption).

If you look at the K2 and type 10 these represent the direction of modern armour (3 man crew , active suspension , less than 55 tons) . Soon we will see armata also with similar design philosophy .
It is time for the army to stop with its doctrinal paralysis and clarify the need for the FMBT and FICV. Buying 4000+ arjun or t 90 and making them the mainstay of the fleet for the next 30 years is the worst decision .

1.Do you yhave any proof for your claim that the weight is not equally distributed. I know perfectly well that this claim of your is baseless.

Why?
because the 60 ton Arjun crossed the punjab riverine (Ravi river at lassian)areas (with no engineering support) which are marked non tankable by indian army which had 40 ton T-72!!

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

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

if the weight distrinbution is so unequal Arjun should have been bogged down at lassian like T-72s and T-90s which are lesser weight.

This proves you have no grasp of the technical stuff you are writing about!!!

2. Do you have any reliable proof that the auto loader of leclrec and type-99,which has many tank rounds in their hold which are sitting duck candidates for ammo cook off are space age design ?

Answer -you have no proof and once again writing about stuff on which you have no knowledge. You pressume that bigger ammo bustle has solved the auto loader unreliability !!!!, which is a totally meaningless claim.

In man loading ammo, all rounds are safe in compartmentalized ammo storage , which has no chance of ammo cook off, no auto loader has such a fool proof arrangement.

3. Already MRF established a track making factory for arjuns in india and due to lower orders it was closed down. So it is not as ifindian doesnt have tech for making satisfactory tech!!!

4. Dont look at the total hp of engine. look at the ratio of tonnage to engine Hp and you will see the larger tanks have no acceleration problems at all. And look at gradient climbing specs to know that the power to weight ratio with bigger engines place larger tanks at no significant disadvantage.

It is like claiming that because of higher weight Porsche Cayenne has slower acceleration than maruthi suzuki 800.

 

[ersakthivel]

Re: Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT) Mark II


1.I was arguing for an autoloaderwith a 3 man crew in the FMBT . Putting an autoloader in a tank not meant to house it would be a sub optimal solution.
And that is the thinking in DRDO as well . GO to the 22 minute mark
The first arjun was an improved vijayanta just like the army wanted the design got updated twice but the layout remained roughly the same.Back in 1972 the army had not yet seen an autoloader it is not surprising the direction arjun took.
2.Sorry I what I meant to say is that you are wrong . There are heavy american and german designs that sank into mud despite having on paper low ground force .
Or you know we could increase the track width on the t 90 just a little bit and end this stupid comparison .
3.Meh .. I was thinking of different types of engines and their transmission and was totally wrong . As in turbine engines develop power faster.

FRCV is a perfect stupid way and is just a figleaf for procuring armata in future and stalling funding for DRDo's new FMBT program citing the FRCV tender..

No cutting edge tank maker in the world will design a tank for just fees and hand over all crucial tech to IA , which will float another tender to select a different manufacturer to produce it.

because if they transfer those right s to IA, they will lose all their exports right and vest all rights to IA, which is something no tank maker will do.

because french simply refused to part with even non core tech for 20 billion rafale deal with the coming era of stealth fighter, Then which tank maker will part with all IP rights of a cutting edge 40 ton futuristic tank design?

And IA is totally incompetent to lead this tender because it has not given any specific specs to evaluate all the designs. They neither specified weight , armor protection level, crew men etc, ect.Everything is vague and subject to spurious interpretation..

If IA was so sure of procuring its FRCV in this novel method, why it did not adopt the method for its failed MICW tender, bullet proof vest tender, LUH tender and spike tender?

Answer-they know perfectly well that the FRCV "compete for design with no advance info on specs , transfer IP right to IA for job work fees , with production by another tank maker" is a perfectly unworkable in real world.

They know they cant get spike, MICW,bullet proof vests and LUH in time if they use FRCV route.

Then why are they doing it on FRCV.

Simple just stall the budget sanction for DRDO's FMBT by citing the FRCV tender, whale away a decade on foreign tours and commission seeking endeavors, and if they have no winner in hand(they surely wont, if we go by the much simpler bullet proof, LUH, MICW tender fiascos!!!) cite the urgent fall in tank numbers and ask for immediate import of thousands of Armata from pliable future government.

they are just fooling manohar parrikar by giving the ruse of "make in india" campaign of Modi govt.

Simple-question which host government abroad ,will allow its FMBT design winner to transfer the rights of newer gun, armor tech, ammo tech, FCS tech , engine , transmission tech to IA.

Answer-None will, if IA can get a company from mars there is a possibility of securing those rights!!!

let me see how long they can manage to fool the new govt with this FRCV tender fraud.