Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

[p2prada]

^^If we had every thing to make the Tank with all the ToT, why did we assemble CKD and SKD kits instead of building them from scratch?

If we go by Ajai Shukla's rhetoric of having built only 150 T-90 tanks over 10 years then we have built only 1 MKI over 15 years. Do you see where I am going?

As of today we have over 150MKIs flying in the sky and over 800 T-90s in regiments. So, you figure.

 

[sayareakd]

P2P how come all the issues with T90S is solved after induction and Arjun tank before induction ???

i am sure parameters of trials is same for Both T90S and Arjun tank, right ?????????????????????????? (after all soldiers life is dependent on it and countries national security is at stake).

or those who have done trials have overlooks these issues which come up at later stage ??? if this is true, it is quite serious.

 

[Param]

If we go by Ajai Shukla's rhetoric of having built only 150 T-90 tanks over 10 years then we have built only 1 MKI over 15 years. Do you see where I am going?

Yup, only 1 MKI completely built from scratch in our country.

As of today we have over 150MKIs flying in the sky and over 800 T-90s in regiments. So, you figure

.
But the entire time line of acquiring and applying ToT was better with regards to MKI in comparison to T90.

 

[p2prada]

P2P how come all the issues with T90S is solved after induction and Arjun tank before induction ???

i am sure parameters of trials is same for Both T90S and Arjun tank, right ??????????????????????????

or those who have done trials have overlooks these issues which come up at later stage ??? if this is true, it is quite serious.

No. There are vast differences between what is identified as teething troubles and design flaws. What the Arjun had was design flaws, like transmission and engine troubles and some others which were called flaws but not identified by the media.

If Arjun's electronics burnt up in some conditions or if the Su-30 MKIs tyres had issues like it did immediately after induction, then those are teething problems which can be rectified. These can be rectified during production.

The trial parameters for all tanks are the same.

The early T-90 guns which were manufactured by OFB were design flaws and IA had rejected them. Once ToT came in 2008, OFB could deliver satisfactory guns and hence delivered the first batch of indigenous tanks only in August, 2009 instead of supposedly a 2007 date.

Both T-90 and Arjun will continue giving troubles until some time has passed producing the tank. There were plenty of exercises in the Thar desert with the T-90s, and we had never heard of any new of failure of tanks there.

 

[Damian]

Param

I just want the army to dump future T90 and order more Arjuns.Atleast Arjun looks like tank. If the Generals want a light tank maybe they should buy something like this

Typical thinking of person that have completely 0 knowledge on tanks, their design features, history of R&D, their service and different design schools and concepts standing behind them.

T-90 is MBT - Main Battle Tank just like Arjun, not a light tank, the weight was never indicator of armor protection.

The recently researched documents about composite armors development and recently seen armor elements on several different modern MBT's suggest to us that both NATO and Soviet Union (Russia, Ukraine) developed not passive composite armor but dynamic composite armors with reactive elements, currently we even belive that old Burlington composite armor had reactive elements in it's layers.

As far as Kanchan armor is described it seems that it do not use dynamic elements in it's design, instead there are ceramic layers between RHA plates, nowhere is mentioned anything that can be NERA or NxRA.

This give us a hint that Kanchan maybe was developed basing on NATO desinformation spread in all publications about ceramic layers encased in RHA or similiar.

So T-90S with it's composite armor that use internal non energetic reactive elements and external dynamic protection in form of explosive reactive elements + the overall armor placement, turret geometry etc. etc. etc. Can be comparably or even superior protected with smaller weight compared to Arjun Mk1.

I recommend You to read some books about tanks before You write another such silly statement.

 

[p2prada]

But the entire time line of acquiring and applying ToT was better with regards to MKI in comparison to T90.

The MKI ToT transfer took more than a decade to happen as compared to T-90. The T-90 ToT required amending some laws which allows transfer of technology. Just like there is a group in the Russian govt which wants better relations with India there is a similar group which opposes major transfer of technology. Putin has been good for India. It suffices to say the transfer that Russia or Israel does, US will never do.

The MKI ToT was signed in Jan, 2001, after we signed a contract for 140 MKIs to be produced in HAL over the 50 already ordered. Russia OKed the transfer in October, 2000. ToT was transferred over a period of 9 years after that. Complete T-90 ToT took only 3 or 4 years in the same respect.

Compared to the 2001 date for MKI's serial production, a 1000 tank deal was signed between Army and OFB only in July, 2006, so you could say the actual contract between India and Russia was signed a year before 2006. Even if you take 2004-05(when first SKD and CKD T-90s were delivered from Avadi) to 2008 (when full gun ToT as provided) we can say the time line was less than half that of the MKI.

We have to be extremely foolish to expect armour ToT anyway.

Heck they are ready to give us their best operational Nuke subs for lease, MKI and T-90 pales in comparison. They would have sold us the Akula had it not been for US pressure and the stupid treaties they signed.

The MKI ToT came much later than T-90 and considering there are 150 home made tanks compared to 1 MKI, we can say the application of T-90 ToT was better. Of course the MKI is a much more complex piece of technology and cannot actually be compared unit for unit.

What people say about Russia and the ground realities in relations between the two nations are at two extremes. The best weapons in our inventory is Russian and will continue to do so for another 30 years, until we make our own. What people say about failure of T-72s in Gulf War is also quite prejudiced and don't tell the entire story.

 

[p2prada]

@Damian

I would actually rate the Ukrainian T-80UD at a higher level than the T-90A. What do you think?

It has lesser weak spots on the hull, more ammo in the carousel, carries more electronics(at least from known configurations). There may not be major differences between the KBA-3 and 2A46M-2 either. Considering it is Ukraine, they may have exported better shells than the 3BM42 and the Israeli Mk1 shells to Pakistan.

EDIT: From what I know the Pakistanis preferred the T-80 over the Abrams.

 

[Damian]

T-80UD, maybe Ob.478BE indeed is a bit better than T-90A, but overall T-84M Oplot-M (Ob.478DU10) is definetly better in some places.

As for Pakistanis, they could preffer T-80UD than export "Monkey" variant of M1A1 with downgraded armor protection and weaker ammunition, also such deal would give US control over their tank arsenal (or some part of it), just think about it, Pakistan is doing something against the will of US, and Washington just cut supplies, after some months of use (and Muslims are not good in equipment maintnance) and the whole fleet would be unoperational.

So from Pakistanis point of view, deal with Ukraine was much better choice.

 

[p2prada]

T-80UD, maybe Ob.478BE indeed is a bit better than T-90A, but overall T-84M Oplot-M (Ob.478DU10) is definetly better in some places.

As for Pakistanis, they could preffer T-80UD than export "Monkey" variant of M1A1 with downgraded armor protection and weaker ammunition, also such deal would give US control over their tank arsenal (or some part of it), just think about it, Pakistan is doing something against the will of US, and Washington just cut supplies, after some months of use (and Muslims are not good in equipment maintnance) and the whole fleet would be unoperational.

So from Pakistanis point of view, deal with Ukraine was much better choice.

Yeah. Political considerations are more important for Pakistan. From what I know the Americans were actually desperate to sell to Pakistan as the first export customer because of cost issues. They were lucky they scored Egypt in the debacle after Pakistan.

 

[Damian]

Dunno if Americans were really that desperate, it would just end that US Armed Forces would have less M1's or procurement would be slower, so I doubt in any rumors about US desperation.

 

[p2prada]

Dunno if Americans were really that desperate, it would just end that US Armed Forces would have less M1's or procurement would be slower, so I doubt in any rumors about US desperation.

The SU end was imminent. We are talking about 1988-89 period. There would have been cuts in defence spending had it not been for Egypt's 1000 tank order. The export orders made the tank cheaper. From what I know this is what provided funding for development and induction of M1A2.

No different from what we see today with the F-35. Even though they have orders for 2500 F-35's they still want more export orders to make the development price tag look lucrative to Congress. We know what happened to the F-22.

So, all in all, yeah. They were not crying for export orders, but they did not want caps on the numbers already ordered for the Abrams or even slowing production. They don't want that to happen to the F-35 either. The F-22 has already gone that way.

 

[nitesh]

@Nitesh.

Shukla is using information from early 2000s as his source. It is very well known that OFB has gun ToT and that OFB has managed to install Kanchan plates into the armour.

Nope, he mentions clearly, in the blog that the ToT has not been provided, can you please provide any idea from where you got your info, that will be helpful

Technology transfer, supply of assemblies hit Russian stonewall

Then HVF officials discovered that Russia had withheld key T-90S technologies without valid reason. This included technology for crucial components like the tank's main gun and a key section of the turret armour. When New Delhi demanded those technologies, Moscow blandly responded that they were secret. To this day, Russia has not transferred full technology for building the T-90S in India.

The MoD has not responded to emailed questions about this issue. But when Business Standard asked MSN Rao, General Manager of HVF Avadi, how the T-90S was being built without these technologies, he confirmed: "We developed the tank gun indigenously in Central Ordnance Depot, Kanpur, and the turret armour component in CVRDE (Combat Vehicles R&D Establishment), Avadi. This is still a sticking point between India and Russia."

It is also very well known that nothing on the T-90 can be sanctioned, even the Catherines. It is very well known that the Arjun's engines are imported and that the tracks are manufactured under license by L&T. And both can be sanctioned.

How do you know it? I never came across such info

 

[p2prada]

Nope, he mentions clearly, in the blog that the ToT has not been provided, can you please provide any idea from where you got your info, that will be helpful

Technology transfer, supply of assemblies hit Russian stonewall

Oh! Gee! Oh! Gee! Oh! Gee! I have posted this before and I am posting it again.

This is from PIB.
Press Information Bureau English Releases

The Russian side had signed a contract for transfer by 2008.

I had posted 2 articles from the Hindu which claimed the same at 4 different times in both tank threads. It even carried direct quotes from OFB. If you have the patience to look for them then please go right ahead.

How do you know it? I never came across such info

You have to be clear in what you want. From 15th Aug, 1947 to 29th Nov, 2011 Soviet Union and then Russia has never sanctioned India while Europe has sanctioned India at least 5 different times along with creating treaties which directly affect us like the NPT and MTCR.

 

[Austin]

Austin, he has came with name and designation of sources, so you can't just flatly label it as hatred. And the problems he has mentioned are known issues, like the thermal imager equipment not working.

It is unfair to label him as hater.

You have to look at all his work on T-90 and not just this one , he has a history.

TI sights are no more a problem , I think i even saw a recent statement from Army on this. Ofcourse Tehelka will recycle it after 2 years and will show how bad the TI problem is , some times i really wonder who are these people working for when Arjun used to get a bad name in press ( most of times unjustified ) we used to blame the phoren lobby , indian army and what not ..... now with the string of malcious article against T-90 who are we suppose to blame now ?

You have to just look at MOD press statement of past decade ( its all on their website ) when ever there was a problem MOD has acknowledge it and praised the Arjun and T-90 when ever it deserved.

BTW forget the T-90 or Arjun , his ability to look at JSF development program and analyse it based on facts presented by Lockheed Congress Reports Pentagon reports , open source information and present a well balance write up is simply beyond him , all he keep harping is Lockheed told me so and I know what they told me are all facts and my own analysis on JSF proves the same.

Alll he has to do at the least is to look at website of AW&ST , you would find many reliable information on JSF development both its pluses and challenges.

A good reporter would present facts from all sides and let its reader decide based on it but Shukla just present his final analysis and depending on if he hates it or likes it its outcome is already know.

Expect him to come with more facts on T-90

 

[p2prada]

BTW forget the T-90 or Arjun , his ability to look at JSF development program and analyse it based on facts presented by Lockheed Congress Reports Pentagon reports , open source information and present a well balance write up is simply beyond him , all he keep harping is Lockheed told me so and I know what they told me are all facts and my own analysis on JSF proves the same.

He believes the F-35 costs $65million and even Lockheed Officials have said this price does not include engine and that this cost will be reached after the 3k odd F-35s are manufactured.

Expect him to come with more facts on T-90

If you did not know he once quoted Prasun Sen Gupta in one of his articles on the T-90. You may remember his articles on all the blown up T-72s.

Some one mail him the Abrams videos from Iraq, the ones posted by the Jihadis.

 

[Damian]

Some one mail him the Abrams videos from Iraq, the ones posted by the Jihadis.

In such conditions any tank without proper up-armor kit for side and belly would end like many of thouse M1's.

 

[Drsomnath999]

well india should also concentrate on ARJUN mark 2 development as it can be more benefical for india in the long run ,with isreali help we can really make it a killer platform.

 

[p2prada]

In such conditions any tank without proper up-armor kit for side and belly would end like many of thouse M1's.

Damian. This guy Shukla tried to prove the T-72s are lemons by posting photos of destroyed tanks during the Chechen wars. Then he tried discrediting the T-90 saying they were just modified T-72s which will only end up all black and sooty in a battlefield and that's why we must buy Arjuns.

If you are looking for the equivalent of Carlo Kopp for T-90s then you are looking at Shukla. At least Kopp is more convincing.

 

[Damian]

Then it means that this guy should better read something about history of development of Soviet and post Soviet tanks... he definetly have no idea about differences between T-72 (Object 172M) and T-72B (Object 184) and the differences between T-90 (Object 188 ) and T-90A (Object 188A1/A2).

 

[p2prada]

Then it means that this guy should better read something about history of development of Soviet and post Soviet tanks... he definetly have no idea about differences between T-72 (Object 172M) and T-72B (Object 184) and the differences between T-90 (Object 188 ) and T-90A (Object 188A1/A2).

That's why it is simply better to send videos of Abrams. You can't teach stubborn people without visual aids.