Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

[Chinmoy]

Both Arjun MK 1 and MK 2 are failures. They are damn costly, overweight, cant build all parts of them in country. We have to import parts from abroad. That's why ditch Arjun tank project. MK 2 is even more heavier and it still depends largely on imported parts.

By this logic Merkava too is a failure at 65 tons. Isn't it?

 

[Chinmoy]

I have thought of an idea of a turret less tank. The main problem of turret less tank is it cant go though wall without damaging its cannon, as it cant rotate its gun. To solve this problem we may use hydraulic recoil mechanism.

link http://nigelef.tripod.com/gunchars.htm

This system can be used. If the tank chassis is 8 meter in length, and if the barrel is 6 meter in length with 3 meter rail which is completely over chassis, like as the picture I gave, if the barrel can be pulled back(as it does during fire to absorb recoil), it means then the barrel's first 3 meter is completely within 3 meter of rail. By using this, a turret less tank can go through walls.

Any idea on how you are going to target another tank at an angle on move in a turret less tank?????

 

[Akim]

By this logic Merkava too is a failure at 65 tons. Isn't it?

How many rivers in Israel?
_____________________

 

[Chinmoy]

How many rivers in Israel?
_____________________

Do you think IA has reservations only for river and bridges?
They are not accepting it because they are worried that it would be bogged down in sand. Although Arjun had already shown its cross country prowess in that environment. All the bridges in India at least is capable of easily handling 68 tons. Can't say same for Pakistan though. Another thing which is not working in case of Arjun is its width. It can't be transported by the usual railway carrier wagons. But as far as news goes, MoD had asked to specifically build wagons of that specifics.

 

[Akim]

Do you think IA has reservations only for river and bridges?
They are not accepting it because they are worried that it would be bogged down in sand. Although Arjun had already shown its cross country prowess in that environment. All the bridges in India at least is capable of easily handling 68 tons. Can't say same for Pakistan though. Another thing which is not working in case of Arjun is its width. It can't be transported by the usual railway carrier wagons. But as far as news goes, MoD had asked to specifically build wagons of that specifics.

Do you think IA has reservations only for river and bridges?
They are not accepting it because they are worried that it would be bogged down in sand. Although Arjun had already shown its cross country prowess in that environment. All the bridges in India at least is capable of easily handling 68 tons. Can't say same for Pakistan though. Another thing which is not working in case of Arjun is its width. It can't be transported by the usual railway carrier wagons. But as far as news goes, MoD had asked to specifically build wagons of that specifics.

The river is the state of the soil. The Georgians wanted to buy Merkava, but then

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Regardless ..

Please enter a message with at least 30 characters.

===========

Georgians want everything, They intended to buy scars but ended up with civilian M4 during the war ..

How many rivers in Israel?
_____________________

The river is the state of the soil. The Georgians wanted to buy Merkava, but then

 

[Chinmoy]

The river is the state of the soil. The Georgians wanted to buy Merkava, but then

A tank which has undergone its tests in western part of India successfully is not going to face any lot in eastern part of Pakistan.

 

[India22]

Any idea on how you are going to target another tank at an angle on move in a turret less tank?????

Turret less tank STRV 103 defeated Chieftain, M60 Patton and Leopard 1. Look it up.

 

[India22]

By this logic Merkava too is a failure at 65 tons. Isn't it?

A tank alone is not defined by weight. Merkava is wholly a lot better than Arjun MK 2. I gave a quora link, look it up. Or go ask army why they want Merkava tank or T90 MS now if Arjun MK 2 was so good.

 

[Chinmoy]

A tank alone is not defined by weight. Merkava is wholly a lot better than Arjun MK 2. I gave a quora link, look it up. Or go ask army why they want Merkava tank or T90 MS now if Arjun MK 2 was so good.

Correct........... Now see what you have written for yourself.

Both Arjun MK 1 and MK 2 are failures. They are damn costly, overweight, cant build all parts of them in country. We have to import parts from abroad. That's why ditch Arjun tank project. MK 2 is even more heavier and it still depends largely on imported parts.

Arjun is a failure according to you..... Why? Costly, Overweight, Imported parts

Now overweight is not the only criteria to judged a tank as per you. So lets leave it for time being.
Costly...... Cost does come down with nos. But look at the numbers which has been ordered. 248+118. How could you expect price to come down for such less number.
Imported part.......... You have objected to the very point of it being costly. Now you have to keep it in mind that if you expect to introduce maximum indigenous parts, its cost would again sky rocket. Why? Because you would have to invest in designing sub components and it would in turn start escalating the price. The same logic of other vehicle building assembly implies here. Every high end cars are so exorbitantly priced due to number of assembly and sub assembly which are created in house for it. On the other hand, the cheap affordable makers does make use of off the shelf available part. On other hand, to establish indigenous production unit of sub assembly, again you would need numbers on your side.
Finally overweight........... Its weight is because of its armour. Now I've read here one of your post where you provided a simple solution. Decrease the armour which would result decrease in weight. But seems you have not followed the Arjun thread over here from beginning. Arjun and T-90 when tested for armour protection in test range, Arjun survived a full blown point blank shot from T-90. Whereas T-90 didn't stand a chance. Now where would you want to be in a war?

 

[Chinmoy]

Turret less tank STRV 103 defeated Chieftain, M60 Patton and Leopard 1. Look it up.

It might. I just asked a simple question to your option of a turret less tank. Just answer that.

How are you planning to take down an enemy tank while on move with a turret less design, if the enemy tank is not their in your straight LOS??

 

[Badsah]

Both Arjun MK 1 and MK 2 are failures. Partially Correct
That's why ditch Arjun tank project. MK 2 is even more heavier and it still depends largely on imported parts.

1. They are damn costly, overweight, - So which ever product is costly & Overweight can be called failure or only applies to Indian Product?
2. cant build all parts of them in country. How many we are really building in India name it those equipment's and rest scrap it since its failure by your logic.
3.We have to import parts from abroad. Same as above stated Imported Item = failure, Am I right or missing some logic?

Citation from CAG report

http://www.cag.gov.in/sites/default...e_Defence_Army_Ordnance_Factories_35_2014.pdf

Comparative field trials of MBT Arjun with T-90 tanks took place in
February/ March 2010. Till such time, the Army had been consistently
reporting quality problems in MBT Arjun; this was also reported to the
Standing Committee on Defence (2007-08). The comparative trials were on
four parameters viz. fire power, survivability, reliability and miscellaneous
issues of the tank with weightage of 40, 35, 15 and 10 respectively. As per the
trial report, MBT Arjun performed marginally better than the T-90 tank in
accuracy and consistency of firepower. However, T-90 tank performed better
in lethality and missile firing capability. The Army concluded (April 2010)
that “Arjun had performed creditably and it could be employed both for
offensive and defensive tasks with same efficacy of T-90 tank.” The Army
also recommended upgrades154 to make the Arjun tank a superior weapon
platform. We were informed (February 2014) that the Mark-II version of
MBT Arjun was under trials by the Army and that it would include the
upgrades recommended by the Army.

If yo think CAG has not done good Job please suggest other way to assess failure or success

 

[India22]

Correct........... Now see what you have written for yourself.



Arjun is a failure according to you..... Why? Costly, Overweight, Imported parts

Now overweight is not the only criteria to judged a tank as per you. So lets leave it for time being.
Costly...... Cost does come down with nos. But look at the numbers which has been ordered. 248+118. How could you expect price to come down for such less number.
Imported part.......... You have objected to the very point of it being costly. Now you have to keep it in mind that if you expect to introduce maximum indigenous parts, its cost would again sky rocket. Why? Because you would have to invest in designing sub components and it would in turn start escalating the price. The same logic of other vehicle building assembly implies here. Every high end cars are so exorbitantly priced due to number of assembly and sub assembly which are created in house for it. On the other hand, the cheap affordable makers does make use of off the shelf available part. On other hand, to establish indigenous production unit of sub assembly, again you would need numbers on your side.
Finally overweight........... Its weight is because of its armour. Now I've read here one of your post where you provided a simple solution. Decrease the armour which would result decrease in weight. But seems you have not followed the Arjun thread over here from beginning. Arjun and T-90 when tested for armour protection in test range, Arjun survived a full blown point blank shot from T-90. Whereas T-90 didn't stand a chance. Now where would you want to be in a war?

You dont get it. If Arjun tank was built along with Indian farms, it would be less costly. Why would indigenous parts make the cost increased? DRDO and other defence companies by joint effort should build. Finally dont get into armour. M1 Abrams were hit by RPG 29 although M1 Abram can tolerate point blank hit by another tank. Instead using super heavy armour, use APS and more hard metal like Steel-tungsten alloy.

 

[India22]

It might. I just asked a simple question to your option of a turret less tank. Just answer that.

How are you planning to take down an enemy tank while on move with a turret less design, if the enemy tank is not their in your straight LOS??

Simple solution. The tank will have light turret over gun, which will have an AGS and ATGM. Like M3 Lee tank

This WW2 tank has a 75mm gun as main gun, and 37mm gun as secondary armament on a rotating turret. Will talk about it later.

 

[India22]

@Chinmoy

The turret less tank I said was in view of that, now a MBT can survive 120-125mm hit by other tank, it means Chinese MBTs and Pakistani ones are going to withstand 120mm hits successfully. A tank's main objective is to destroy other tank. For this purpose I said a turret less stank. Turret less tanks can mount heavier armament. So a turret less tank armed with a 200mm light weight gun. Now armours are becoming exceedingly hard to penetrate, for this reason this tank will rely on sheer blast impact of high velocity 200mm gun. The sheer blast concussion will immobilize the opponent tank. This 200mm gun will have large part of its barrel on rail, so that in case breaking wall, the other part can be be pulled back. Over this, there will a small rotating turret, armed with an AGS with 60 rounds, and ATGM launcher. Apart from machine guns.

In WW2 Soviet tanks were generally incapable of destroying German tanks and tank destroyers, but Soviet tank destroyers and Self-propelled guns like ISU-122 and ISU-152 had no problem.

Now a lightweight 200mm gun can be made, as lightweight 155mm Howitzer M777 has been made. The loading system will be automatic.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Its more of a problem than a solution ..

Simple solution. The tank will have light turret over gun, which will have an AGS and ATGM. Like M3 Lee tank

This WW2 tank has a 75mm gun as main gun, and 37mm gun as secondary armament on a rotating turret. Will talk about it later.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

How this is going to fit into our doctrine ..

 

[India22]

Really knee jerking post? Then why army is not interested in Arjun? They ordered T 90 MS? Why 75% of Arjun is grounded?

 

[India22]

Inability of 125mm guns to penetrate enemy armour is bigger problem.

@Chinmoy

The turret less tank I said was in view of that, now a MBT can survive 120-125mm hit by other tank, it means Chinese MBTs and Pakistani ones are going to withstand 120mm hits successfully. A tank's main objective is to destroy other tank. For this purpose I said a turret less stank. Turret less tanks can mount heavier armament. So a turret less tank armed with a 200mm light weight gun. Now armours are becoming exceedingly hard to penetrate, for this reason this tank will rely on sheer blast impact of high velocity 200mm gun. The sheer blast concussion will immobilize the opponent tank. This 200mm gun will have large part of its barrel on rail, so that in case breaking wall, the other part can be be pulled back. Over this, there will a small rotating turret, armed with an AGS with 60 rounds, and ATGM launcher. Apart from machine guns.

In WW2 Soviet tanks were generally incapable of destroying German tanks and tank destroyers, but Soviet tank destroyers and Self-propelled guns like ISU-122 and ISU-152 had no problem.

Now a lightweight 200mm gun can be made, as lightweight 155mm Howitzer M777 has been made. The loading system will be automatic.

Plus the tank will have 2 wheels both in front and rear side without chain. So that they can be used in quick turn.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

We are tolerating your nonsense honestly, Anymore of such post with such claims without authenticated source will be deleted ..

Your post without source and further rant only shows your intentions of flame-baits and trolling which invites infractions only ..

Their will be no more warning .. !