India's MBT: Arjun and its standing among Tanks

[Waylander]

I am still confused about the problem of railway transportation. What kind of railway system do you have? Is it smaller than the european one? Because there are no special wagons here for transporting tanks. We just use flat, transportation wagons like this and I think the Arjun sould fit onto one of them:

[img=http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/5655/86tn.th.jpg]

 

[brad_arsenxpt]

mk 2 is quite diffrent

Actually from what I keep on hearing. Arjun MK2 is the first production batch. It seems the Arjun that can fire the lahat ATGM is the MK2 version.

Arjun mk 2 is not only about fitting atgm there is a lot of work to be done on it.

 

[chinawhite]

I am still confused about the problem of railway transportation.

The indian army had invested in railway wagons for their fleet of T-72 and T-90 tanks. The Arjun cannot fit on one of them either because of weight or size and has been forced to buy different ones for its Arjun tanks. This means that the Arjun has to wait for its specialized wagons and cannot use the standard army wagons, which could mean they stay out of a important battle because they could only use train wagons that could be either broken or held up somewhere else.

Also flexiblity and speed is a big issue in the indian army with its Cold Start doctrime

 

[Waylander]

Than I have to say that buying wagons which could not even handle a 55 ton tank with normal size was not a really intelligent decision.
Even the T series is getting bigger and heavier and one should plan for the future.
But every army has those problems.

 

[aaaditya]

The indian army had invested in railway wagons for their fleet of T-72 and T-90 tanks. The Arjun cannot fit on one of them either because of weight or size and has been forced to buy different ones for its Arjun tanks. This means that the Arjun has to wait for its specialized wagons and cannot use the standard army wagons, which could mean they stay out of a important battle because they could only use train wagons that could be either broken or held up somewhere else.

Also flexiblity and speed is a big issue in the indian army with its Cold Start doctrime

i wonder from where you got your information,but you definitely missed the news about indian army inucting wagons specially designed for the arjun mbt,this happened 2-3 months back (i believe the wagon is known as b-flar or w-flat ,iam not exactly sure which),they also posted an image of it,it is capable of accepting a load of 65 tons (the arjun weighs 58.5 tons).

indian army also uses the indigenously designed sarvatra and kartik bridge layer tanks which are capable of accepting the arjun mbt(they have a load capability of 60+ tons).

indian navy's makar landing ship tank has been specially designed to accept the arjun mbt's(upto 20),a more advanced landing ship tank has also been developed under the lst(l) series ,the first vessel of this class ins kesari has already been commisioned into the navy(images of these are already posted in the web),the famous company mcgregor supplied the bow and the ramp equipment for it.

 

[chinawhite]

The Question was, what was the problem with railway transportation with the Arjun before it entered service. Hence my explaination

Heads up, eyes open

Than I have to say that buying wagons which could not even handle a 55 ton tank with normal size was not a really intelligent decision.

The indian army is mostly soviet in origin and for the foreseble future(in the 80s) it was going to be a fleet of T-72 tanks. The Arjun was originally intended to be smaller and lighter than it is now which didn't not yet warrant a new tank transport. It wouldn't make sense to build a oversized tank trasport when your whole fleet is of a smaller design. The indian army was not going to accommodate a tank, the tank had to accommodate the army

Also the wagons should be in the range of 50~55 tons. The Arjun is 58.5 loaded or unloaded

 

[aaaditya]

The Question was, what was the problem with railway transportation with the Arjun before it entered service. Hence my explaination

Heads up, eyes open



The indian army is mostly soviet in origin and for the foreseble future(in the 80s) it was going to be a fleet of T-72 tanks. The Arjun was originally intended to be smaller and lighter than it is now which didn't not yet warrant a new tank transport. It wouldn't make sense to build a oversized tank trasport when your whole fleet is of a smaller design. The indian army was not going to accommodate a tank, the tank had to accommodate the army

Also the wagons should be in the range of 50~55 tons. The Arjun is 58.5 loaded or unloaded

indian rail wagons can transport a load of 108-120 tons but the problem was in the width dimensions.

 

[gf0012-aust]

I am still confused about the problem of railway transportation. What kind of railway system do you have? Is it smaller than the european one? Because there are no special wagons here for transporting tanks. We just use flat, transportation wagons like this and I think the Arjun sould fit onto one of them:

[img=http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/5655/86tn.th.jpg][/img]

This doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Essentially Arjun is a reworked Leopard. That means that is within NATO transport specs. The Indian Railway system is to all intents and purposes - as a legacy british system - NATO compliant. hence the Leo/Arjun should be transportable.

somewhere the information re this is way ot of whack.

 

[Waylander]

That's exactly why I am confused. I also checked the data of the Arjun and he is not bigger than a Leopard II. It is not like we use special big wagons for it like you can see on the photo. Just normal flat transport wagons.
And a T-72 is 10cm wider than an Arjun.

 

[gf0012-aust]

That's exactly why I am confused. I also checked the data of the Arjun and he is not bigger than a Leopard II. It is not like we use special big wagons for it like you can see on the photo. Just normal flat transport wagons.
And a T-72 is 10cm wider than an Arjun.

well, I'd have to say that as far as I'm concerned the report is fundamentally a load of rubbish.

where there are issues of restrictions due to parallel passing, there is usually a siding for one train to lay over - and that would only be for a couple of hours at the most.

where there are weight restrictions on overpasses etc then thats dealt with by restricting concurrent movement - again, its not an event stopper.

I'm wondering whether there is some confusion on mixed gauged lines (??). Not all lines would be rated for military traffic - but thats not unusual either.

 

[swerve]

This doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Essentially Arjun is a reworked Leopard. That means that is within NATO transport specs. The Indian Railway system is to all intents and purposes - as a legacy british system - NATO compliant. hence the Leo/Arjun should be transportable.

somewhere the information re this is way ot of whack.

Indian railways have different track gauges from British. Used to be a few different gauges in use, but they've been re-laying track for years to try to standardise on two - something like metre gauge for minor lines, & broad (5' 6"? - something like that) for main lines. I don't know what the loading gauges are, but remember that British railways don't match the European mainland: our stock can operate over there (same track gauge), but the loading gauge is different. Continental stock would be scraping against bridges, tunnels & oncoming trains over here. Hence the need for special Channel Tunnel trains for SNCF, instead of being able to use their TGVs.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Indian railways have different track gauges from British. Used to be a few different gauges in use, but they've been re-laying track for years to try to standardise on two - something like metre gauge for minor lines, & broad (5' 6"? - something like that) for main lines. I don't know what the loading gauges are, but remember that British railways don't match the European mainland: our stock can operate over there (same track gauge), but the loading gauge is different. Continental stock would be scraping against bridges, tunnels & oncoming trains over here. Hence the need for special Channel Tunnel trains for SNCF, instead of being able to use their TGVs.

I'm aware that they have mixed gauge lines, but I was pretty sure that India only moves military heavy freight on their wide gauge (std gauge) lines.

I don;t have ready access to Janes Railways at this loc, so I'd be curious what the numbers are and against gauge type. Rolling stock is generally wide (std) gauge. Narrow gauge tended to get used for narrow passes, altitude rail and areas like mining.

AFAIK, even with disparate gauge widths, both UK and Europe meet NATO min tunnel height requirements (5.5m).

 

[aprasadi]

In india wagons are designed according to the load they carry. its not the width or shape it has, but what matters is the load it carries. In india rail tracks and wagons are designed to carry a load of 40 tons max. currently when the rail transport wanted to send double decker cargos on its wagons the problem that arrised was of how to carry load more than 40 tons. to solve this problem new dedicated rail corroider is being implemented all over india(for commercial use) which will come up in coming 2-3 years.

 

[gf0012-aust]

In india wagons are designed according to the load they carry. its not the width or shape it has, but what matters is the load it carries. In india rail tracks and wagons are designed to carry a load of 40 tons max. currently when the rail transport wanted to send double decker cargos on its wagons the problem that arrised was of how to carry load more than 40 tons. to solve this problem new dedicated rail corroider is being implemented all over india(for commercial use) which will come up in coming 2-3 years.

thx for that - but it still doesn't make sense.

eg T-72's are freighted by rail, and AFAIK they are freighted fueled up. plus they are wider than the Leo/Arjun. In real terms you are looking at a distributed load anyway, so the extra mass of the Arjun is distributed over the flat car. eg, similar to a ground pressure value.

If anything I'm even more confused now

 

[chinawhite]

Its not the rail tracks but the wagons transporting it. All articles clearly refer to three new wagons being built

 

[kams]

Its not the rail tracks but the wagons transporting it. All articles clearly refer to three new wagons being built

The wagons are already built. here is a pic of them.

Arjun Wagon

 

[Archer]

To be absolutely honest, I have no idea what they're seeing as a fit for "Cold Start". To get absolute max opportunity you need autonomy and minimal logistics imposition at each stage of the thrust. having multiple tank types makes that contradictory.

I think to some extent indias armoured doctrine is a combination of WW2 british (ie a cruiser tank and a heavy tank), soviet tactics, british armour culture and european/israeli technologies. Cold Start is pretty well much a modernised teutonic/american version of the blitzkrieg.

This is way outside of my comfort zone as such - and I'd have to defer to a real operator like Waylander for clarity.

From my perspective though, the current indian procurement cycle is very much in a position where it needs review. you cannot effectively manage a modern military with mutiple platforms that are blurred on capability.

it's not the things that necessarily go bang that determine the outcome of wars - its the logistics - and Indian logistics would be a nightmare in a high tempo trans national war. Thats the reason why the GAO/Exchequer has been overly critical. Too many procurement chefs in the kitchen - so to speak.

The problem is that you are looking at it with todays lenses at a program which was intended for a different issue altogether.

[Admin edit: Keep your discussions FOCUSED on Defence and Military issues in their TECHNICAL nature. You've been told this multiple times so please take some heed.]

The Arjun began as a replacement for the Vijayanta but the Pak evaluation of the Abrams set the cat amonsgt the pigeons in the Indian Armour camp. Hence the IA EME & the DRDO had the mandate to make an equivalent system and per Indian conditions to boot. An ambitious program- and entirely why KWM was involved in the design stage. The Arjun is basically a heavy tank killer- its armour is meant to shrug off hits (frontal is extremely impressive, lets leave it at that) have an excellent Pk FCS with state of the art suspension and stabilization. And all this at cheap third world prices.:lol3

Today, the only issue the Arjun faces is one of subcomponent reliability in extended and trying climes. Having followed the trials- you will hardly find a serving Armour officer who does not acknowledge its excellent armour and firepower plus mobility, but who also points out its high logistics costs and relative "immaturity" as a system versus the tried and tested T-72 which is soldier proof.

Thats the crux of the issue. The 124 will be produced, once they manage to stabilize the production and get the reliability upto the usual torrid levels expected, then there are always more orders to consider.

As regards cold Start- that will be the T-90S's and upgraded T-72's. They are quick to induct and comparatively easy to field, and the numbers add up.

 

[Archer]

While I don't agree with his juvenille behavior I think the Al-Khalid can give the Arjun a run for her money. India isn't exactly known for puting together the worlds best tanks. The development of the Arjun has been a rocky one to say the least. The whole program should have been scrapped from the beggining. If India bought the M1A2 they would have been much better off. Calling the man stupid isn't going to win you any brownie points in your argument

The Arjun program has been rocky because India aimed for the highest benchmark and its but a matter of time till it gets it right. Do take a walkaround Bangalore, Pune or Hyderabad and see the design and manufacturing abilities of the Indian mechanical engineering sector vis a vis what existed two decades back. If the Al Khalid is regarded as Pakistani and a great success, then by the same standards- India can call the T-72 M1 "Ajeya" a homegrown tank, another license production program.
Lastly, the Al Khalid is a deathtrap- like the old T-72s if penetrated. The same cannot be said of the Arjun given its design features.
And no, the M1A2 is not available to India. Putting it in the discussion is pointless.

 

[Archer]

bharat-rakshak.com.

And you dont need a new FCS to fire the LAHAT. Only to keep the commanders sight on the target. Its basically a anti-tank missiles which is fired from you gun instead of a lanucher. Have you seen the sights of a Laser guided missile?

It gives you a longer stick than your enemy. eg engamnet range is 2.5-6km while the nomal engament range in combat is about 2-3km which gives you a advantage.



Theres some pictures of the BMS in ****************.com . Tanks with no BMS system will rely on the trusty radio the one with BMS will have a graph of terrain and a map of where friendly tanks are and where your friends have been shot at.



I have seen and read the technical sheet for that. Its bascially a civillain grade radio system going to be issued to indian soldiers. Nothing know how just useful for the indian soldiers in Kashmir

The Arjun FCS is superb & quite modern. The issue has been with the second gen Sagem sourced thermal imager which has had heat related breakdowns.

Calling it obscolescet is pointless- the original Delft analogue FCS was replaced some six years back itself with a modern Sagem one, with an autoracker. This for the first 50 tanks. The remaining 74 are getting the brand new BEL-IRDE FCS with equivalent performance.

 

[gf0012-aust]

The problem is that you are looking at it with todays lenses at a program which was intended for a different issue altogether.

of course, but platform relevancy and success always has to be considered in a contemporary prism of analysis.

[Rubbish, pointless whinning and crying deleted

I'm not Pakistani - and a lot of the comments are coming from people who actually do armour for a living - and they're not Pakistani either. nationality has nothing to do with the discussions that we're contributing to.

As regards cold Start- that will be the T-90S's and upgraded T-72's. They are quick to induct and comparatively easy to field, and the numbers add up.

Cold Start has very little to do with an issue of absolute numbers - its a doctrine philosophy - and its a combined arms issue legacied on the Gulf War 1 event. Arjun may very well be part of that base doctrine due to geographical issues anyway.

From my readings of how this project has evolved, its fundamental flaws are due to prog management issues rather than technological limitations. The former is critical in any development prog. Get it wrong and everything suffers