India's MBT: Arjun and its standing among Tanks

[kingkobra]

It's a political problem now. Not technical.

what do u mean?i dont unstand can u explain ?R u saying that Arjun tank is good but politician dont want that tank that's why they dont want to collabrate with Isreal?
Because after that Arjun will be same as Abraham,Lepord,Marakava and India will not buy foreign stuff and corrupt Indian politician and tank selling lobby will stop getting money?

 

[dabrownguy]

Compare the Arjun to T-90. The Arjun easily out classes it in every field. But since the InA already uses T-72's they would have to undergo a majour change to accomdate the Arjun! The Arjun is heavier, requires more training and mantinance.

 

[aaaditya]

I dont unstand why india is not colobrating with Isreal to slove problems with Arjun and why dont use same engine as Fcs and other system as Isreali Marakava tank.if just it is heavy wait so it is useless that does not make sense if u think like that then all tank like Abraham,Lepord etc... have much weight then arjun.

the main problem with arjun is its engine.the engine is german made and produces 1400 bhp thrust(arjun requires 1500bhp).i think india should collaborate with france to develop the suralmo hyperbar engine for the arjun(1500-1800 bhp),these engines power the leclerc.indian army's prefernce for foreign gedgetry can be seen from the fact that they replaced the bel fcs with a french one which performed miserably.

 

[gf0012-aust]

the main problem with arjun is its engine.

I don't think so. The main problem has been project management. A lack of proper sign off and change control processes.

The engines power to weight, ground pressure stats are very good. The engines are actually some of the best in the world.

the engine is german made and produces 1400 bhp thrust(arjun requires 1500bhp).

Refer to above

i think india should collaborate with france to develop the suralmo hyperbar engine for the arjun(1500-1800 bhp),these engines power the leclerc.

and the Leclerc engine was beset with problems in the only export customer (who also did extensive desert trials)

indian army's prefernce for foreign gedgetry can be seen from the fact that they replaced the bel fcs with a french one which performed miserably.

Well, there is nothing wrong with being prepared to shop offshore if you need efficiencies that can't yet be achieved locally. eg the Dhruv is originally a 1980's MBB design. You can see one hanging from the rafters in the Sindheim Museum in Germany. Modern engines and electronics still make it a useful design. Ditto with Arjun. From a number of angles you'd swear it was a late Leopard 1 (the turrets are almost identical to later Leo 1's).

My view has always been that Arjuns faults lay primarily with the project management process - and as such that effected proper sign off throughout the tech development.

 

[kingkobra]

.

Yes u r right 100% and its because of Indian jingos who dont want Arjun in IA becauseArjun will put full stop on buying tanks from foreing country.

The engines power to weight, ground pressure stats are very good. The engines are actually some of the best in the world.

I said to colobrate with Isreal because Isreali Marakava is the best proven tank in the high temprature deserts.Marakava have engine,engine cooling system and Fcs system which r proven in high temprature deserts and to fix Arjun problems we need desert proven system not the engine and Fcs which r failed in high temprature desert. I know that marakava -4 use American engine which have 1500hp and proven in desert.That's wat Arjun needs for better mobility.India must go for engine ,Fcs and other system as like marakava-4 because those all system r proven in high temprature deserts.And Arjun's previous engine,Fcs and other system r failed in high temprature.So India must go for proven systems as like Marakava-4 here it they r
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merkava

 

[aaaditya]

.

Yes u r right 100% and its because of Indian jingos who dont want Arjun in IA becauseArjun will put full stop on buying tanks from foreing country.

The engines power to weight, ground pressure stats are very good. The engines are actually some of the best in the world.

I said to colobrate with Isreal because Isreali Marakava is the best proven tank in the high temprature deserts.Marakava have engine,engine cooling system and Fcs system which r proven in high temprature deserts and to fix Arjun problems we need desert proven system not the engine and Fcs which r failed in high temprature desert. I know that marakava -4 use American engine which have 1500hp and proven in desert.That's wat Arjun needs for better mobility.India must go for engine ,Fcs and other system as like marakava-4 because those all system r proven in high temprature deserts.And Arjun's previous engine,Fcs and other system r failed in high temprature.So India must go for proven systems as like Marakava-4 here it they r
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merkava

merkava is one battle tank definitely not suited for india as it weighs 65tons ,the bridge laying tanks currently available with indian army(kartick and sarvatra)are capable of handling battle tanks weighing upto 60 tons.

 

[gf0012-aust]

merkava is one battle tank definitely not suited for india as it weighs 65tons ,the bridge laying tanks currently available with indian army(kartick and sarvatra)are capable of handling battle tanks weighing upto 60 tons.

The issue is not so much one of weight - it is it's ground pressure rating that is more important..

 

[aaaditya]

well the indian authorities seem to be giving a lot of importance to the weight and dimensions of arjun.if the ground preasure was to be the criteria,then arjun would not have been facing any problem,but according to the indian army arjun in its current configuration cannot be carried on the railway carriages as it is too wide,exceeds the acceptable limits p0rescribed by the indian railways by several inches.also it exceeds the railway's weiht regulations and hence the army may have to pay a surcharge of it besides the transportation costs.

 

[gf0012-aust]

well the indian authorities seem to be giving a lot of importance to the weight and dimensions of arjun.if the ground preasure was to be the criteria,then arjun would not have been facing any problem,but according to the indian army arjun in its current configuration cannot be carried on the railway carriages as it is too wide,exceeds the acceptable limits p0rescribed by the indian railways by several inches.also it exceeds the railway's weiht regulations and hence the army may have to pay a surcharge of it besides the transportation costs.

and all of the above goes back to my persistent comment that the Arjun has failed due to a stellar display of incompetence at the initial project creation/development/management level.

the reason why its stabilising now is that after all the prev construction and development crisis, the project is now going through the std project recovery cycle.

its a classic example of bad project management. the platform is and has always been recoverable if it met client requirements.

The issue of weight against notional areas of deployment and operation (bridges, layers, freight) parameters is really basic stuff.

Someone should be kicked all the way across the Thar for that.

 

[aaaditya]

and all of the above goes back to my persistent comment that the Arjun has failed due to a stellar display of incompetence at the initial project creation/development/management level.

the reason why its stabilising now is that after all the prev construction and development crisis, the project is now going through the std project recovery cycle.

its a classic example of bad project management. the platform is and has always been recoverable if it met client requirements.

The issue of weight against notional areas of deployment and operation (bridges, layers, freight) parameters is really basic stuff.

Someone should be kicked all the way across the Thar for that.

agree with you on that ,by the way do you think the project can still be salvaged if it is handed over to a private company(there are several world class private companies in india capable of taking over the project ) like the larsen and toubro,with the engine being jointly developed in collaboration with a foreign country?

 

[gf0012-aust]

agree with you on that ,by the way do you think the project can still be salvaged if it is handed over to a private company(there are several world class private companies in india capable of taking over the project ) like the larsen and toubro,with the engine being jointly developed in collaboration with a foreign country?

If the design meets the fundamental requirements, and those requirements are still relevant and valid - then yes it's worth salvaging. If the relevancy is not there- then you are throwing good money after bad.

you don't need a private company to come in and fix it - you need proper project management, with proper change control procedures, proper sign off and proper timelines that are rigidly adhered to. its an issue of process that can still be managed properly by govt. you don't need a private company necessarily to do that.

 

[ArjunMK1]

you don't need a private company to come in and fix it - you need proper project management, with proper change control procedures, proper sign off and proper timelines that are rigidly adhered to. its an issue of process that can still be managed properly by govt. you don't need a private company necessarily to do that.

Very true , but such professionalish can't be expected from a third world country !!! Any way Arjun project is going ahead and surely abt 100 will be produced .

There is a new concept in Indian army of providing tanks to infantry battellions !! :gun They will do the job of hold and fight and also will debunk an armour assault . Some of older Vijayanta tanks have been issued in this task. I think initial delivery of Arjuns will be to this this infantry battelion rather than armoured corps. Arjun having heavior armour and excellent 120 mm rifled gun is an excellent defensive tank !!!
Thats why India is going for both T 90(in large nos , for assault) and Arjun( smaller nos. only for defence ) . :bazooka

 

[Defcon 6]

Why doesn't India just keep the tanks it has. The Arjun is an inferior design, even the Mk. 2

They should just buy The M1A2 Abrams MBT and get with the big boys. Egypt already has.

 

[KGB]

India wants to develop its own defence industry. They're working on building their own nuclear sub among other things. The next few decades will see its neighbor china emerge as a superpower, while their traditional military provider russia both seems to be getting left behind and is getting chummy with china.

 

[aaaditya]

Why doesn't India just keep the tanks it has. The Arjun is an inferior design, even the Mk. 2

They should just buy The M1A2 Abrams MBT and get with the big boys. Egypt already has.

defcon m1a2 abrahms does not meet indian army requirements,the main reason why indian army rejected arjun was because of its heavy weight (58.5 tons) ,so how will they accept abrahms which weighs 65+tons?
also india has blt's capable of handling upto 60-65 tons(just sufficient for arjun) but not capable of handling the abrahms ,so india will have to develop this infrastructure all over again,also i dont think the abrahms can fire a missile ,while the arjun can fire the israeli lahat missile (range of 7 kms).so abrahms would be a far worser choice than the arjun.

 

[Defcon 6]

defcon m1a2 abrahms does not meet indian army requirements,the main reason why indian army rejected arjun was because of its heavy weight (58.5 tons) ,so how will they accept abrahms which weighs 65+tons?
also india has blt's capable of handling upto 60-65 tons(just sufficient for arjun) but not capable of handling the abrahms ,so india will have to develop this infrastructure all over again,also i dont think the abrahms can fire a missile ,while the arjun can fire the israeli lahat missile (range of 7 kms).so abrahms would be a far worser choice than the arjun.

The M1A2 Abrmas is 69.50 tons. However it is also fast and mobile. Capable of firing while moving with great accuracy and has been battle proven. The M1A2 can sustain quite a great amount of damage and continue operating. Not only that, but the M1A2 has some highly advanced targeting systems.

I understand why India wants to develop this tank, but I don't understand why they don't just get chummy with the U.S. The U.S isn't all that fond of China so it makes a good ally. It's going to cost a lot of money to develop this Arjun Mk. 2, when the first one has already failed. It makes more sense to purchase two hundred Abrams MBT's with the money it would take to develop a prototype Arjun.

Also, the Abrams isn't too heavy for roads and infrastructure. It has a ground pressure of about 15 psi so thats not all that bad for a 50+ ton tank.

If I was India, I would want to increase the defense capability, even if that meant importing foreign hardware.

 

[Whiskyjack]

I know that the M1A1 that the Australians are getting is only 54 tons, but are being Digitised. This may me acceptable than a 70ton tank and give Indian industry more experiance in the systems for MTBs

 

[Defcon 6]

Some people are going to disagree with this, but the bigger heavier tank always wins. As far as I know the Aussie tanks aren't going to use depleted uranium armor. hence a significant reduction in combat tonnage.

A near 70 ton tank can take on any smaller tank anytime.

 

[Pathfinder-X]

Some people are going to disagree with this, but the bigger heavier tank always wins. As far as I know the Aussie tanks aren't going to use depleted uranium armor. hence a significant reduction in combat tonnage.

A near 70 ton tank can take on any smaller tank anytime.

Several important factors come into play. Optics, fire control system, material composition of armor, muzzle velocity of the main gun. Sheer weight isn't going to cut it.

 

[aaaditya]

The M1A2 Abrmas is 69.50 tons. However it is also fast and mobile. Capable of firing while moving with great accuracy and has been battle proven. The M1A2 can sustain quite a great amount of damage and continue operating. Not only that, but the M1A2 has some highly advanced targeting systems.

I understand why India wants to develop this tank, but I don't understand why they don't just get chummy with the U.S. The U.S isn't all that fond of China so it makes a good ally. It's going to cost a lot of money to develop this Arjun Mk. 2, when the first one has already failed. It makes more sense to purchase two hundred Abrams MBT's with the money it would take to develop a prototype Arjun.

Also, the Abrams isn't too heavy for roads and infrastructure. It has a ground pressure of about 15 psi so thats not all that bad for a 50+ ton tank.

If I was India, I would want to increase the defense capability, even if that meant importing foreign hardware.

arjun has all those capabilities which you have mentioned,the problem is indian army is satisfied with its russian tanks and like to stick with whats worked for them.
india is already too chummy with usa without having to actually radically modify a vital element of its army and army doctrine.
id rather india acquire the arjun(arjun -2 would not be that expensive,because except for the engine ,most of the critical components have been developed and already proven as a part of the arjun system,and the work is going on the few remaining ones),though i believe india will most likely go with the tank-x(arjun turrent and ergonomics on the t-72-t90 chasis,these tanks are being reengined this year with a more powerfull engine and will again resume testing next year,they retain arjun's 120mm rifled gun and the ability to fire missiles.).
my next best option for a heavy battle tank would be a joint development with russia or a german tank based on the leapord design(since arjun has provided a base for acceptance of german infrastructure) and finally a french solution based on the leclerc(i would trust france more than usa).