The present T90s with Indian army are equipped with 1000hp engines..
That was not true. Everything written by manufacture or indian fanboys is not be true. Find the below-
T-90 tanks from Russia -- Another strange deal?
Kuldip Nayar
TO WRITE anything about the T-90 is like flogging a dead horse. Right from its inception the deal has generated more controversy than any other Defence contract. Several questions remain unanswered, such as the replacement of the aging Vijayanta tanks.
Pakistan's acquisition of T-84 from Ukraine has made India's modernisation of its fleet of tanks all the more necessary. Thus, the Government's decision to acquire the T-90s from Russia is welcome. But the deal, for some reason, has, it is felt, been str uck without proper field trials in India. One cannot make out what compelled New Delhi to do so. Some T-90 tanks were flown in from Russia and tried but found wanting. I shall come to that later but more baffling is the appointment of a one-man committee , headed by Lt Gen S. S. Mehta. The Deputy Chief of Army Staff was made solely responsible for selecting the tanks and giving his assessment report on field trials. Now he has been appointed chairman.
Despite 90-odd meetings between Moscow and New Delhi, the deal continued to stay at relatively lower level. It never went to the top echelons of the government, where the disputes that arose could have been sorted out. It is evident that there is more to it than meets the eye. Perhaps, some technical issues have been overlooked to serve vested interests. Accusing fingers are pointed at some politicians as well. This charge cannot easily be brushed aside as the tanks are vital to the country's defence an d security.
The Russians have claimed that the T-90 engine generates 1,000 horse power (HP), which fits the requirements of the Indian Army. During field trials in India, it was found that the engine was getting overheated and the tanks lacked the power to negotiate the desert terrain.
The technical people, especially from the EME and DGQA, were surprised to find the horse power rating of the engine not conforming to the specifications. The Russians, it is said, tried to mislead the trial team, persisting with their claim that the engi ne was generating 1,000 HP.
When the technicians tested the engine more than once it was found to generate only 840 HP. The Russians, however, assured the trial team that the engine brought for trials would not be the one fitted on to the tanks meant for India. Instead, they would put in the engine with 1,000 HP. This was just a verbal assurance.
On this mere undertaking, India finalised the contract. When the technicians protested against such a procedure they were apparently informed that before the despatch of the engine, the technical team could visit Russia and do a pre-despatch inspection a t the factory to satisfy themselves.
In other words, the Russians would mount the 1,000 HP engine on the tanks meant for India. If the engine does not produce 1,000 HP, and if there is a doubt about its performance, why should India go for such contracts? The Army would like to test the tan ks in Indian conditions, and it has strict norms for that.
Traditionally, demonstration of equipment is done only in the selling country. But the field trial takes place in the buying country. This means the final trial of the tanks or its components should have been done in India. New Delhi should not have acce pted the assurances by Moscow because the contract has serious financial ramifications.
Never before has such a deal been struck. A case in point is the signing of the fire control system contract SUV-72 and SUV-55 with Yugoslavia in 1987. After the contract was signed and the advance paid, the political situation in Yugoslavia deteriorated so much that the contract had to be abandoned.
This meant the loss of the advance paid. When this example is applied to the T-90 tanks, it means that the advance has been paid to Moscow on the understanding that the engine would generate 1,000 HP -- that too, after the trials in the country of origin .
What happens if the pre-despatch inspection fails? In any case, the true test of engine capability will be known only after it is mounted on a tank and tested in Indian conditions. It is, therefore, the Government's responsibility to avoid being lured in to a contract that is not foolproof. Equally, it would be more prudent to have the 1,000 HP tank trials in India in summer, before the contract is implemented.
The story about spares for the T-72 tanks is no less dubious. This battle-tank has been with us for 20 years. But the countries from which we acquire spares for them do not produce the tank.
Then there is the case of transfer of technology. All the drawings are lying in New Delhi, with the Russian text untranslated. The Government depends on some vague part numbers, which keep changing. It does not get anything it really requires. The excheq uer is put to great loss. Allegedly, wrong or spurious parts are supplied, and paid for at an inflated price.
There are charges that we are upgrading our 130mm guns to 150mm, and giving the order to Solton. The ordnance factory in Kanpur has developed prototypes that have been tested at Balasore. Why is the contract not given to the Kanpur factory? Are all these factories going to be converted into another NTC, where we pay the wages, maintain the establishment at great cost and get no work done? That, I think, is another area affecting our security because, if we have a war lasting 15-20 days or more, and if w e do not get the spares, how are we going to fight?
Looking back, it seems that most of our Defence deals have question marks against them. Either there are compromises on specifications or wrong purchases have been made. The T-90 tank deal evokes such fears.
http://www.hinduonnet.com/businessline/2001/02/02/stories/040255ku.htm
I have heard it several occassions in Bharta Raksak, even somebody has pasted the test result conducted earier aroun 2000, forget
