Main Battle Tanks and Armour Technology

[Dazzler]

sir, agree with you. I know arjun not best but it is better than al khalid and T80 ud in deserts and even in punjab.

in what dimension? Engine? gun? Ammo? FCS? Thermal imager/ image intensifier? gun? crew comfort? network centric capability? Your comments are too narrow and seem to reflect a lack of understanding of the issue that your are trying to raise.

 

[Dazzler]

It is design for Indian Terrain and Indian requirement for operating over desert of thar and Muddy fields of Punjab and more, That should be it ..

i am sure DRDO. Indian army never intended/ wanted a 68 ton tank for a possible Thar/ Rajhistan/ Cholistan desert. The dust is too fine to hamper engine performance, temperature soars above 52 Celsius often.

 

[Dazzler]

interesting comparison between and Alkhalid and LecLerc FCS/ Optics for commander and gunner.. (Note, both tanks do not use Savan-15 FCS but use same IIT and Thermal imagers, auto tracking algorithms and hunter killer capability).


alkhalid commander sight

alkhalid gunner's panoramic sight

LecLerc Commander and gunner sights (HL-60/80)

 

[abhi_the _gr8_maratha]

i am sure DRDO. Indian army never intended/ wanted a 68 ton tank for a possible Thar/ Rajhistan/ Cholistan desert. The dust is too fine to hamper engine performance, temperature soars above 52 Celsius often.

noob........
.
arjun is 58 ton tank

 

[abhi_the _gr8_maratha]

in what dimension? Engine? gun? Ammo? FCS? Thermal imager/ image intensifier? gun? crew comfort? network centric capability? Your comments are too narrow and seem to reflect a lack of understanding of the issue that your are trying to raise.

all question answered by me just few post back

 

[Dazzler]

all question answered by me just few post back

those were as inaccurate as it gets, by the way, Alkhalid gound pressure is less than Arjun,

 

[Dazzler]

noob........
.
arjun is 58 ton tank

Please specify which model, Mk.1 is 58 ton, Mk. 2 is a whooping 60+ ton.

 

[abhi_the _gr8_maratha]

those were as inaccurate as it gets, by the way, Alkhalid gound pressure is less than Arjun,

can you provide any link ?

 

[abhi_the _gr8_maratha]

Please specify which model, Mk.1 is 58 ton, Mk. 2 is a whooping 60+ ton.

with mine plough , does any pakis tank have mine plough?

 

[Dazzler]

with mine plough , does any pakis tank have mine plough?

alkhalid, t-80ud, al zarrar all have mine plough, standard equipment really..

al khalid testing with min plough


Al Khalid trail - YouTube

 

[abhi_the _gr8_maratha]

some of here want to repeat same post again and again .
.
arjun is 58 ton and mk2 will be 61 ton.
.
arjun can't operate in desert? Was that a joke ?
.
.
that keeps out dust, the tank
can operate in the desert. Its
cables and connections are
protected from dust and it has
a provision for deflogging the
radiator and heat exchangers.
The engine will never be shut
down even in the most critical condition
.
why arjun is heavy tank and have better armour given here ---- Arjun
.
arjun travelled 5000km in desert without a problem.
.
Asitimes: China's media ranks 10 world leading tanks
.
many of here will like to see chinese media ranking arjun over type 99 and praising around of arjun.

 

[militarysta]

T80UD is using KBA3 125mm
smoothbore gun, which is Ukrainian
version of 2A46M-1. It can fire the
same range of ammunition as other
guns of the 2A46/D-81 family.
So, the firepower is comparable with
Indian T-90S, and ammunition used in
both tanks is interchangeable.

And this is greate exmaple how non-existing knowledges you have about tanks...

1. KAB3 is Ukrainion version of the 2A46M4/5

2. Ammo.
APFSDS in India (125mm) - 3BM42 Mango. Guaranteed perforation on 2000m: 430mm RHA, achivable perforation in 2000m: 460mm RHA. IMI/Indian 125mm had 500mm RHA at 2000m -but this ammo is not existing now in IA (IMI on black list)

APFSDS in Pakistan: Naiza-1 Guaranteed on 2000m: 450mm RHA, Naiza-2 on 2000m 550mm RHA.

Repeat:
India - 3BM42: 430-460mm RHA at 2000m
Pak. Naiza-2: 550mm RHA at 2000m

This is difrence.

 

[militarysta]

Arjun VS Al Khalid
Maximum Speed: 40 km/h VS
(lets assume) 40 KMPH (off
Road Speed)

BS no.1

Al Chalid (or Khalid in english)
have maximum speed forward 70km/h
aceleration 0-32km/h 7-9s (How about Arjun here?!)
reverse speed is 34km/h

terrain speed is depend on terrains and between 45 and 55km/h

Maximum Range: Un-
refuelled range 450 km VS
400 KM

Al Chalid-1 have max rang on INTERIOR fuel equal to 400km, whit standard aditional barrels it's 550km

Power to Weight Ratio: 23.93
hp/ton VS 26 hp/ton
Combat Weight: 58.5 tonnes
VS 45.5 tons

Al Chalid have 6TD-2 engine whit 1200HP on 2600torque and weight is between 46 and 48t. So ratio is
25-26HP/ton

Ground Pressure: 0.84 kg/cm2
vs (not Avaliable but ite
higher than Arjun, Pakistanis
tried bringing it down bu
rubber pads, but it still
remains higher. Thats why no
pakistani sites mention this.
AK is more likely to sink in
sand than Arjun)
(please note that ground
pressure of T-90 is 0.87 kg/sq
cm and T80-UD is 0.93 kg/
cm2. Even if Arjun is heavier,
the ground pressure is lesser
than lighter tanks)

Al Chalid-1 ground preassure in 48t version is 0,9kg/cm2 so the difrence is marginall.

Gradient: 77º vs 60 % / 40 %

yep true

Trench Crossing: 2.43 m vs 2.7
m

Yes, 2,7m for Al Chalid-1, and wall 0,85m, flooded without preapering to 1,8m and whit preapering up to 5m

Arjun's design is
modular, including that of the
weapon system, turret and
the power pack. "You can
change the power pack in the
field in 45 minutes.
Elsewhere, it takes 14 hours,"
Except for some filters Al
Khalid dosen't have any of
the features.

Next tottal nonsense.
Al-Chalid-1 have ukrainian power-pack (the same as in T-80UD) able to replace on battelfield in 30minutes. + APU



All dates are given by Al Chalid monography:
Pakistański czołg Al-Chalid
printed here:
Wydawnictwo Magnum-X[]=176&Itemid=25

and yes, I have this monography

 

[abhi_the _gr8_maratha]

the biggest BS, can you just shut up if you can't read post clearly . I said off road , you noob. 72 km/hr is on road
.
and this is cunning , give link in english , polish language not alloweded here . Anyway , I have already posted how arjun is better
.
hydro suspension gives crew comfort and better accuracy. Better armour.
.
the ammo that is used by pakis will hardly do any damage to kanchan armour

 

[Damian]

give link in english , polish language not alloweded here .

You can use translator, there is nothing difficult in this.

But I know what you did there. You will ignore any reliable and proffesional source that provides informations that are different than what you believe in.

Anyway , I have already posted how arjun is better

No, you did not. What you produce here is nothing more than a babble talk of a teenager at best that is nothing more than a disgusting fanboy without any proper knowledge based on real experience and proffesional literature.

 

[Dazzler]

And this is greate exmaple how non-existing knowledges you have about tanks...

1. KAB3 is Ukrainion version of the 2A46M4/5

2. Ammo.
APFSDS in India (125mm) - 3BM42 Mango. Guaranteed perforation on 2000m: 430mm RHA, achivable perforation in 2000m: 460mm RHA. IMI/Indian 125mm had 500mm RHA at 2000m -but this ammo is not existing now in IA (IMI on black list)

APFSDS in Pakistan: Naiza-1 Guaranteed on 2000m: 450mm RHA, Naiza-2 on 2000m 550mm RHA.

Repeat:
India - 3BM42: 430-460mm RHA at 2000m
Pak. Naiza-2: 550mm RHA at 2000m

This is difrence.

A little correction here, Naiza 1 has guaranteed penetration of 560mm RHA at 2000m, Naiza 2 is not well known but is rumoured to cross 650 mm at 2000 but this is not confirmed. During my tour to ARDE few years ago, i saw many goodies there but cant say further.



Naiza-1 DU apfsds round 125mm

http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/pakistani-ndc-125mm-apfsds-round

http://sweetneha.wordpress.com/2010...ade-compatible-with-pakistani-t-80ud-tanks-2/

 

[Dazzler]

.
hydro suspension gives crew comfort and better accuracy. Better armour.
.
the ammo that is used by pakis will hardly do any damage to kanchan armour

this is where you are very wrong, here is why:

1. Hydro-gas suspension a.k.a. hydropneumatic suspension is expensive, comfortable but very complex and maintenance heavy. In half the cost, Russia, Ukraine, Poland (PT-91 series), Yugoslavia, China and pakistan achieved the same smooth ride with a combo of Torsion bars+hydraulic dampers and rubber bushed tracks.

2. No one on earth knows how good the Arjun and AK armour is except those who are working and testing them, but the battlefield test will prove one's superiority over another. Considering the evidence provided on this forum, Kanchan seems similar to Polish CAWA-2 composite amror Thanks to Damian, Militarysta, Kunal Biswas and Methos for insight. AK's composite armour remains a mystery to this day. I saw it back in 2000s so do know its good, but how good? No Idea.

Regarding the ammo, this is the biggest handicap IA is facing for a while now. They have no suitable penetrator to kill the adversary. I am being as general as can be.

 

[Damian]

1. Hydro-gas suspension a.k.a. hydropneumatic suspension is expensive, comfortable but very complex and maintenance heavy. In half the cost, Russia, Ukraine, Poland (PT-91 series), Yugoslavia, China and pakistan achieved the same smooth ride with a combo of Torsion bars+hydraulic dampers and rubber bushed tracks.

Problems with hydrogas suspension systems were solved long time ago. For example French Leclerc, british Challenger 1 & 2, Japanese Type 90 and Type 10, and also South Korean K1/K1A1/K1A2 and K2 tanks uses it and it seems there are no problems with it.

Turkish Altay will also use hydrogas suspension system, and also GDLS designed their M1 tank hull to be capable to use different suspension types, hydrogas suspension system was tested for M1 in the past, there is ready for production such suspension system for M1, and GDLS talks with US Armed Forces about replacing torsion bars suspension system with this new hydrogas suspension system.

Hydrogas suspension system have other, more important advantages over torsion bars than smoother ride. Hydrogas suspension system is lighter, it's actually easier in maintnance and repairs as each unit is individual module installed to hull via screws, so if it is damaged it can be quickly replaced or it can be blown off completely but without any internal damage making repairs difficult. Torsion bars on contrary, if they are damaged, the torsion bar itself might bend or even break in to pieces, which makes repairs a nightmare, I know this from actuall tank crew member who was in combat and had experience with reparis down to such suspension after a mine blast bended torsion bars.

Also if one torsion bar is damaged, weight of vehicle is distributed differently, and if crew waits too long with repairs, other torsion bars will break eventually as well.

DRDO made actually a good decision to use hydrogas suspension system, as it have more advantages in general as a design, to torsion bars or other suspension systems.

Israelis also use interesting suspension system that is in form of completely externally mounted module, each unit is such separate module, that is bolted to the hull sides and can be easy replaced for maintnance or repairs.

It's only drawback is weight, much larger than torsion bars or hydrogas suspension systems.

 

[Dazzler]

Problems with hydrogas suspension systems were solved long time ago. For example French Leclerc, british Challenger 1 & 2, Japanese Type 90 and Type 10, and also South Korean K1/K1A1/K1A2 and K2 tanks uses it and it seems there are no problems with it.

Turkish Altay will also use hydrogas suspension system, and also GDLS designed their M1 tank hull to be capable to use different suspension types, hydrogas suspension system was tested for M1 in the past, there is ready for production such suspension system for M1, and GDLS talks with US Armed Forces about replacing torsion bars suspension system with this new hydrogas suspension system.

Hydrogas suspension system have other, more important advantages over torsion bars than smoother ride. Hydrogas suspension system is lighter, it's actually easier in maintnance and repairs as each unit is individual module installed to hull via screws, so if it is damaged it can be quickly replaced or it can be blown off completely but without any internal damage making repairs difficult. Torsion bars on contrary, if they are damaged, the torsion bar itself might bend or even break in to pieces, which makes repairs a nightmare, I know this from actuall tank crew member who was in combat and had experience with reparis down to such suspension after a mine blast bended torsion bars.

Also if one torsion bar is damaged, weight of vehicle is distributed differently, and if crew waits too long with repairs, other torsion bars will break eventually as well.

DRDO made actually a good decision to use hydrogas suspension system, as it have more advantages in general as a design, to torsion bars or other suspension systems.

Israelis also use interesting suspension system that is in form of completely externally mounted module, each unit is such separate module, that is bolted to the hull sides and can be easy replaced for maintnance or repairs.

It's only drawback is weight, much larger than torsion bars or hydrogas suspension systems.

Not to refute anything you mentioned about hydrogas suspension but hydrogas suspension was tested on two AK prototypes with unsatisfactory results. Too heavy and complex hence difficult to maintain, otherwise, both suspensions have their advantages and disadvantages. Both are used by various mbts. Leo-2 also use torsion bar suspension

 

[Dazzler]

@hitesh

Alkhalid has better power to weight ratio but Arjun has better protection compared to pak's tank

.

unless you know alkhalid's composite and ERA components and exact thickness, this is not true


this is old but still good.. whats of note is the fired shell could not penetrate the first layer, modern AK uses more advanced armour. Can you show me a similar pic where Arjun's armour is being tested?

Paks T80UD has slightly better ammo placement compared to T90S but that has been taken care of in T90MS.

Nope, ammo in MS is placed exactly where it was in the T-90S i.e.. in the carousel and the hull, armour bins.

What i would wish improvement in Arjun Mk2 is

1)weight reduction Without sacrificing protection level (At least create a balance ).

if achieved, it would be good

2)Reduce the week spots on the armor i.e the the week spot between the main gun tube and turret , main sight placement .

quite needed, it has many

3)Proper placement of commander sight & HMG mount to reduce the blind spot .

true

4)Either keep same main gun on both T90 & Arjun for the sake of logistics & ease of ammo integration or change the current 120 rifled one to 120 mm smooth bore.

no harm in keeping a high pressure rifled gun, all that is needed is a lethal, high penetrating apfsds round that could bust 700+ composite armour, otherwise, go for smooth bore and buy apfsds rounds off the shelf

5)Create a PR video done form a professional marketing agency

Always required