there are many reasons for calling T-90
obsolete.
1. soviet doctrine emphasising "quantity" over "quality" as an advantage in terms of production and numbers fielded. they never thought of "futuristic" requirements - IOW, lack of vision.
2. they thought a "low profile" of the tank will be an advantage. while this may have been true in 70s and 80s it is no more valid now. the technologies which have evolved post 80s have made "size" redundant in a way IMO. the sensors and electronics which go into MBTs make the point moot where even AFVs are detected and targeted well at a distance!!!
OTOH the "space constraints" due to it's "low profile" has rendered it's CRAMPED INTERIORS not suitable for heavy upgrades to fight modern wars.
why putting an AC unit/BMS/APU becomes a headache and needs a great amount of reengineering without compromising on the performance - is, due to this factor called "low profile" design.
this "obsoleteness" becomes even more pronounced in indian climate where AC is a must!!!
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2008/20080521/nation.htm#5
unlike in europe (where the absence of AC is not important) which is where it was designed to operate.
3. another drawback of the "T" class tanks was the "caroussal" type autoloaders which sit directly under the turret and on top of the ammo dump!!! it is like the crew sitting on the "ticking time bomb" - due to an enemy hit or even an internal fire!!!!
besides the limitations of autoloader design parameters - to fire obsolete ammunition in modern combat renders them pretty useless. this point is made by fofanov too -
With the upgoing gun and ammo design efforts this gun managed to stay quite abreast with the armor developments in the West until the introduction of M1A1HA model of the Abrams MBT, the reliable counter to which did not materialize due to a tremendous economic and political upheaval associated with the collapse of the USSR.
Currently the ammunition for 2A46M gun still corresponds to the level of threat that existed 15 years ago, and there are certain technical hurdles, primarily the autoloader dimensions, that prevent simple solutions to the problem.
Solutions do exist. These include a complex of deep modernization measures utilising an increased-power 125mm 2A82 gun, new ammunition with 740mm battle parts, and redesigned autoloader to accomodate those. There is also the project of radical increase in main gun caliber to 152mm (2A83?). Given the current geopolitical climate and Russian defence spending priorities, any efforts in this direction are unlikely to materialize in nearest years.
http://www.russianarmor.info/Tanks/ARM/2a46.html
he
empahsises on a
new autoloader to fire modern ammunition AKA longer and unitary rods.
russians have
realised this and they know very well - to retain whatever market they have - the way forward is in "mitigating" the short comings to the extent possible. result - the new
T-90M as reported by Igor which not only sports a new bigger turret but an "additional" autoloader to fire longer, unitary rods - as proven by fofanov - quoted above.
link -
http://igorrgroup.blogspot.com/2010/01/90-new-specs.html#more
will this solve "all" the problems?? well
NO atleast not for india though it improves over T-90S.
the issue of the "caroussal autoloader" that exists in T-90s is a problem
not only wrt to it's inability to fire longer rods but many others!!! let's see how fofanov looks at it.
The
disadvantages of carousel-based autoloaders of the Soviet tanks are fairly evident:
* The ammunition is placed inside the fighting compartment and by the very nature of the design can neither be satisfactorily protected nor equipped with efficient blast venting measures. The autoloader is also susceptible to accidental damage by the crew.
* The round follows a fairly complex path during loading, which reduces the loading speed and increases the risk of malfunction, especially if a round or autoloader are noncompliant due to damage or misalignment.
* Placement of autoloader under the turret ring prevents decreasing the height of the tank and lowering crew placement.
* The carousel autoloader layout puts serious limitations on the dimensions of the rounds that can be accomodated. The capacity of the autoloader is also limited due to an inefficient storage of cylindrical ammo.
* Replenishing the autoloader is a slow and hard task, due both to its location and the weight and fragility of the modern rounds.
but unfortunately these issues can not be "surmounted" easily. it will mean "massive" changes to accommodate the deficiencies particularly due to the "cramped space" available!!!!
not that Russian designers did not realise this. they initiated
"BLACK EAGLE" based on T-80U which was a "stretched" versions with 7 wheels "similar" to the western type tanks and indian ARJUN TANK, weighing similar. this was planned with "BUSTLE MOUNTED" autoloader, the advantages of which fofanov summarises -
To address these issues,
a new bustle-mounted autoloader/magazine has been developed. It has the following highlights:
* The autoloader module is mounted outside the fighting compartment, and is at all times isolated from it. This both protects the interior in case of the ammunition fire, and increases autoloader reliability.
* In the event of the ammunition fire blowout panels allow to control it and prevent it from damaging the interior of the tank.
* The loading cycle consists of a single ramming movement without the need for any complex trajectory.
* The autoloader has a simple and rugged design and allows to store substantial amount of ammunition due to efficient placement. Adapting the autoloader for different artillery systems is straightforward.
* The autoloader realizes the "rifle clip" concept - the entire depleted autoloader module is meant to be replaced by a new one by means of the dedicated transloader vehicle, facilitating extremely fast replenishment of ammunition and allowing to quickly address the autoloader malfunction. There is also provision for replenishing it one round at a time by the crew should the need arise.
The autoloader is described in the Russian patent RU 2195617 C1
Autoloader Schematics
Operation
Following the activation of the electric drive 32, the chain 39 starts rotating in one of the directions depending on the proximity of the next round of a given type; the chain rotates until the cassette with the selected round is in the low-central position, above the loading trough. The round is then released into the trough, and is rammed by the chain rammer through the port in the front autoloader wall, the hatch in the rear turret wall, along the loading guide and into the gun. The rammer then retracts and the gun is ready to fire.
Specifications:
Capacity 30 rounds of 125mm ammunition
Cycle time 3-4 sec
http://fofanov.armor.kiev.ua/Tanks/EQP/al-640.html
unfortunately this seems to have been dropped due the fact that T-80 production happens in Ukraine!!!
however Russians are "mitigating" to some extent, as i said earlier, with T-90M which will have 2 autoloaders!!! one in the hull and the new one at the "AFT" of the new bigger turret.
now to replicate this T-90M for india means loads of money and loads of time!!!
even if Russia was willing,
will the Indian Army be interested when they have accused DRDO of delay and cost overruns?? they seem to be "content" with T-90S with all the issues which are dogging since induction -
http://ibnlive.in.com/news/india-to-buy-330-tanks-from-russia/24747-3-1.html
while "rejecting" Arjun with all these issues enumerated above being
absent!!! Arjun has been designed specifically for the indian climate and is FUTURISTIC with its basic design being very robust and future friendly - IOW, a great vision.
all it needed was IA to "actively" involve themselves in it's development process
inspite of frequent GSQR changes. this is particularly imporatant when IA has no problems with
"delays" wrt ARTILLERY/ADS among others!!! they missed out and hence India - a great opportunity - to rid India from the clutches of foreign OEMs, an example being T-90 TOT itself -
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...rt-in-T-90S-tank-deal/articleshow/2786546.cms
was it necessary or needed to import an "obsolete tank" with many "unresolved" issues even today??? i guess not.
Kunal Sir, Ajai Shukla (a tanker himself who commanded a T-72 regiment), Ray sir, a former COAS gen. Shankar Roy Chowdhary and most important of all
43rd regiment of IA are all happy with Arjun but some how the present DGMF thinks otherwise!!!
Zraver says "overall" Arjun is a better tank and good for the future though he does not like the gun on it.
a point to be noted here is Zraver thinks of 2A46M5 version and unfortunately that is not the gun on our T-90S.
just some random thoughts!!!
:happy_2:
