Indian Army News and Discussion

[Rish]

A question: Is any known mountain division which has integral IFV/tank support? The usual way to secure armored support in wartime is to attach a heavy formation to them, especially when they have to fight on easier terrain, which makes things harder for such light units. Just curious.

Firn

there are a couple of armored divisions dedicated to the NE but I can't say for sure how they're structured for combat. if i find ssomething i'll let you know.

 

[Firn]

India might be one of the nations where a "pure" moutain division makes most sense. Still I never understood why armor and mountains should be mutually exclusive. It should be a matter of scale, quantitiy and good sense.

A formation of gun/mortar AFVs would be rather neat to have, as well as a decent IFV with the same carriage to support it. Should work rather well in some terrain, especially when the other side has not brought tanks with them.


Firn

 

[Feanor]

If the IA likes their Tunguskas, the Pantsyr-1S would be a good choice. I'm sure negotiations can be made to put it on a tracked chassis (it may already be on one for the Russian Army).

However for howitzers, I'm not sure armor is a major support. If you're worried about counter-battery fire you need radars to detect it, and you need to train move and shoot tactics.

 

[kintarooe]

If the IA likes their Tunguskas, the Pantsyr-1S would be a good choice. I'm sure negotiations can be made to put it on a tracked chassis (it may already be on one for the Russian Army).

However for howitzers, I'm not sure armor is a major support. If you're worried about counter-battery fire you need radars to detect it, and you need to train move and shoot tactics.

Yes, you're 100% right.

 

[OPSSG]

The FMS notification for India's request to acquire 145 M777 155mm Light-Weight Towed Howitzers has appeared. Please note that the order includes the Selex LINAPS (Laser INertial Artillery Pointing System) which is in service with the British Army's 105mm L118 and also in use by the Canadian Army's M777. This order is not for the M777A2. [h/t to ArtyEngineer and pirate]

Vietnam War historical tidbit on heli-mobile artillery support

Two batteries of 105mm howitzers at LZ Falcon (Alpha and Charlie Batteries of the 1–21 Field Artillery Battalion), in support of then LTC Harold Moore's 1-7 Calvary troopers at LZ X-ray (made famous by the movie staring Mel Gibson) during the Battle of Ia Drang Valley that started on 14 Nov 1965 fired more than 4,000 high-explosive rounds by the end of the day. Some estimates suggest that the Americans on LZ X-Ray were out numbered 10 to 1 but they were able to hold on thanks to artillery and air support. On 0900 hours on the 2nd day, the Americans established a second firebase at LZ Columbus, 5 kilometers northeast of X-Ray; this added two batteries of howitzers to the steel curtain protecting Moore’s battalion. In total and for 53 straight hours, the artillery men at LZ Falcon managed to fire more than 18,000 rounds in defense of LZ X-Ray. In the Battle of the Ia Drang Valley, artillery proved to be the difference between life and death for LTC Hal Moore’s 1-7 Calvary troopers and all 4 batteries provided a ring of fire round the perimeter. But logistics support was the enabling force behind the firepower, providing the edge necessary to earn victory in the face of imminent defeat. See link on the logistics involved, in particular the role of the forward support element of the American Division Support Command (DISCOM).

 

[Firn]

The FMS notification for India's request to acquire 145 M777 155mm Light-Weight Towed Howitzers has appeared. Please note that the order includes the Selex LINAPS (Laser INertial Artillery Pointing System) which is in service with the British Army's 105mm L118 and also in use by the Canadian Army's M777. This order is not for the M777A2. [h/t to ArtyEngineer and pirate]

It seems to be a pretty sensible choice for the mountain divisions guarding the long frontier. Less (weight) can be more (capability).

The success story of the heli-mobile artillery shows IMHO also just how much helicopter support is needed to keep the howitzer howling at such an astonishing rate. Firepower was often seen by the US forces in Vietnam as the answer to all problems, which created of course a new set of them.

All in all I think that the Indian alpine or better himalayan units gain a lot of capability with this purchase. Now the infantry needs the ability to quickly and accurately call in that amazing firepower.


Firn

 

[swerve]

It looks as if India is moving back to buying British, albeit licence-built in the USA.

 

[OPSSG]

It seems to be a pretty sensible choice for the mountain divisions guarding the long frontier. Less (weight) can be more (capability).

The success story of the heli-mobile artillery shows IMHO also just how much helicopter support is needed to keep the howitzer howling at such an astonishing rate. Firepower was often seen by the US forces in Vietnam as the answer to all problems, which created of course a new set of them.

All in all I think that the Indian alpine or better himalayan units gain a lot of capability with this purchase. Now the infantry needs the ability to quickly and accurately call in that amazing firepower.


Firn

As usual, Planeman's done an amazing open source job on artillery deployments on both sides - Bluffer’s Guide: Indo-Pakistan Border. I think increasingly the use of UAVs for artillery spotting and weapons locating radars will affect the outcome of any artillery duel. However, these two artillery force multipliers are not the only determining factors as the respective air forces will need to protect their own forces from the other's air force.

Have a read. It's certainly some food for thought.

 

[funtz]

Piercing the army's armour of deception
Ajai Shukla / New Delhi February 4, 2010, 0:31 IST
by Ajai Shukla
Business Standard, 4th Feb, 2010

On August 24 last year, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) dressed up failure as achievement when — almost nine years after India bought the T-90 tank from Russia — the first 10 built-in-India T-90s were ceremonially rolled out of the Heavy Vehicles Factory (HVF) near Chennai.

No reasons were given for that delay. Nor did the Ministry of Defence (MoD) reveal the T-90’s ballooning cost, now a whopping Rs 17.5 crore. On November 30, 2006, the MoD told the Lok Sabha that the T-90 tank cost Rs 12 crore apiece. Parliament does not yet know about the 50 per cent rise in cost.

The story of the T-90 has been coloured by deception and obfuscation from even before the tank was procured. Business Standard has pieced together, from internal documents and multiple interviews with MoD sources, an account of how the Indian Army has saddled itself with an underperforming, yet overpriced, version of the Russian T-90.

The deception stemmed from the army’s determination to push through the T-90 contract despite vocal opposition from sections of Parliament. Former Prime Minister H D Deve Gowda argued — allegedly because a close associate had a commercial interest in continuing with T-72 production — that fitting the T-72 with modern fire control systems and night vision devices would be cheaper than buying the T-90. Deve Gowda correctly pointed out that even Russia’s army had spurned the T-90.

To bypass his opposition, the MoD and the army reached an understanding with Rosvoorouzhenie, Russia’s arms export agency. The T-90 would be priced only marginally higher than the T-72 by removing key T-90 systems; India would procure those through supplementary contracts after the T-90 entered service. Excluded from India’s T-90s was the Shtora active protection system, which protects the T-90 from incoming enemy missiles. This was done knowing well that Pakistan’s anti-tank defences are based heavily on missiles.

Other important systems were also pared. The MoD opted to buy reduced numbers of the INVAR missile, which the T-90 fires. Maintenance vehicles, which are vital to keep the T-90s running, were not included in the contract. All this allowed the government to declare before Parliament that the Russian T-90s cost just Rs 11 crore, while the assembled-in-India T-90s were Rs 12 crore apiece.

The MoD did not mention that these prices would rise when the supplementary contracts were negotiated. Nor did it reveal that India’s pared-down T-90s barely matched the performance of the Pakistan Army’s recently acquired T-80 UD tank, which India had cited as the threat that demanded the T-90.

Worse was to follow when the initial batch of 310 T-90s entered service (124 bought off-the-shelf and 186 as knocked-down kits). It quickly became evident — and that too during Operation Parakram, with India poised for battle against Pakistan — that the T-90s were not battleworthy. The T-90’s thermal imaging (TI) sights, through which the tank aims its 125mm gun, proved unable to function in Indian summer temperatures. And, the INVAR missiles assembled in India simply didn’t work. Since nobody knew why, they were sent back to Russia.

Even more alarmingly, the army discovered that the T-90 sighting systems could not fire Indian tank ammunition, which was falling short of the targets. So, even as a panicked MoD appealed to the DRDO and other research institutions to re-orient the T-90’s fire control computer for firing Indian ammunition, Russian ammunition was bought.

With Russia playing hardball, none of the supplementary contracts have yet gone through. The TI sights remain a problem. The army has decided to fit each T-90 with an Environment Control System, to cool the delicate electronics with a stream of chilled air. None of the world’s current tanks, other than France’s LeClerc, has such a system. The American Abrams and the British Challenger tanks fought in the Iraq desert without air-conditioning. India’s Arjun tank, too, has “hardened” electronics that function perfectly even in the Rajasthan summer.

Nor has the MoD managed to procure the Shtora anti-missile system. The Directorate General of Mechanised Forces now plans to equip India’s eventual 1,657-tank T-90 fleet with the advanced ARENA active protection system, for which it has budgeted Rs 2,500 crore in the Army Acquisition Plan for 2009-11.

The greatest concern arose when Russia held back on its contractual obligation to transfer the technology needed to build 1,000 T-90s in India. But, instead of pressuring Russia, the MoD rewarded it in 2007 with a contract for 347 more T-90s. In an astonishing Catch-22, the MoD argued that the new purchase was needed because indigenous production had not begun.

Next month, when the T-90 is measured against the Arjun in comparative trials, the T-90s’ drawbacks will not be evident. But, as officers who have operated the T-90 admit, these could be crucial handicaps in battle.

“It is for these reasons that I have consistently argued for supporting the Indian Arjun tank,” says General Shankar Roy Chowdhury, former army chief and himself a tankman. “Another country can hold India hostage in many ways. We need to place an order for several hundred Arjun tanks so that economies of scale can kick in and we can bring down the price even further.”

If the Arjun performs strongly in next month’s comparative trials around Suratgarh and Pokhran, that order could be in the offing.

FRAUD ON THE NATION?

* Key operational systems were kept out to bring the price down
* Parliament wasn’t told about this, nor of the plan for supplementary contracts
* The performance on the ground showed that the T-90 was an appalling mistake
* This has set in train even more costly cover-ups
* All this, while the indigenous Arjun is free of many of these minuses

Piercing the army's armour of deception

Brilliant journalism if all of this is accurate, and a shocking situation, my father decided to delay his annual vacation, i decided to delay a car purchase and god knows the sacrifices so many people make every day to save money, and the authorities spend our money like its a joke, no one in India questions defence expenditure as they know its vital, but hell they should at-least be transparent about it.

Deceiving the authority people put incharge of running their affairs, if this comes to light and is somehow linked to corruption charges would do unrepairable damage.

 

[Firn]

As usual, Planeman's done an amazing open source job on artillery deployments on both sides - Bluffer’s Guide: Indo-Pakistan Border. I think increasingly the use of UAVs for artillery spotting and weapons locating radars will affect the outcome of any artillery duel. However, these two artillery force multipliers are not the only determining factors as the respective air forces will need to protect their own forces from the other's air force.

Have a read. It's certainly some food for thought.

An interesting view on this interesting topic. I will probably write a more in-depth comment of his guide later on.

Some quick thoughts (limited on regions A and B, so basically the alpine arc of the front):

a) The artillery sites are out there in the open, with very limited cover and little chance to move. I would not like to serve anywhere near them. Often constructed to cover a lot of real estate, quite some seem to me to be perfect counter-battery fodder.

The need to destroy the enemy firepower was not taken seriously when WWI broke loose. But very soon it became a key element of the war, involving most impressive efforts. In the Dolomites many artillery positions were dug deeply into the mountains , to survive the heavy enemy poundings.

b) Both sides have a rather limited amount of fire-finders. They could and perhaps should be highest on the lists of priority targets. Suitable Drones or AEW aircraft should be able to pinpoint their locations ( I have written somewhere about this possibility). The technology is certainly there.

c) Shoot and scoot is of course limited due to the few and narrow roads. Still it should greatly enhance the survivability of the artillery units. In this case Pakistan holds the clear advantage. A rather light modern SPH can do the quick and accurate shooting as well as the rapid scooting pretty well.

d) Modern UAV and well trained and equipped small forward observation teams could be key elements of any conflict. With so many huge advantages to the defending forces, accurate and powerful fire support as well as the destruction of the enemy firepower is the key for any overt offensive action.

e) Given the vast territory and the difficulty to supply large amounts of men and material, quality will perhaps be more important than sheer quantity. Especially dangerous and very very difficulty will it be to support the bases and obvious positions. In WWI the barracks were very soon pushed under glaciers, into the mountains and to the sides of very steep reverse slopes and under overhanging walls. The supply routes run upwards using as much of those natural and artificial advantages as possible.

f) Guided ammunition will be also hugely important. First due to the already mentioned and huge challenges of the supply chain. Secondly the topography will make the employment of conventional ammunition from many positions against many targets impossible. Thirdly especially guided rockets like the GMLRS could accurately engage the enemy from huge distances out of positions which can not be tracked by fire-finders nor be engaged by unguided artillery rockets or rounds.

g) Of course it is a fight of two systems against each other. The airforces and the GBADs will also play a very important part in every conflict.


I have still a lot to say, but this must suffice as a quick reaction.

Firn

 

[OPSSG]

[Mod Edit: Housekeeping - Post and reply transferred from the M16 vs AK-47 thread as it is more relevant here.]

Thanks. Both the articles were of help.

Indian Army does not use the AK 47 as a issued item of weapon.

There is a whole lot of it (AK series) otherwise and which are used. They are what we have got out of terrorists captured or killed and then put to good use.

We use INSAS rifles.

Carbines continue to be the good old sten machine carbine.

The INSAS and AKs do equally well as the carbine.

The INSAS Carbine designed by the DRDO has still not been accepted.

Thanks for that clarification. Much appreciated.

Off-topic: Earlier, I was watching the interview with Brigadier General (retired) Patrick Choy (who is now working for ST Kinetics or STK) on the Indian carbine market and could not make sense on some what he said until you explained.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZmZVEbErIA]8ak Interview with ST Kinetics[/ame]
In May last year, Ajai Shukla wrote an article on India’s central police organisations (CPOs) request for the Indian home ministry to equip them with carbines, which is why ST Kinetics has an opportunity to sell carbines (including the SAR-21 MMS) in India (click here for the May 2009 article). In his comments on his blog, he notes:

"All you supporters and proponents of the Zitara, let me clarify that I am not qualified to come to any conclusions about whether a weapon is a success or a failure... The Zitara was pronounced unsuitable for procurement for the Indian Central Police Organisations by a board of officers, including officers from the NSG, that conducted detailed firing trials. Their trials report was forwarded to the MHA on 10th October 2006.
...
As far as the MHA is concerned, a set of specifications have been laid down and if a carbine doesn't meet them, the Trial Team has no choice but to reject it... Anonymous, the specifications laid down by MHA don't include multiple ammunition use. So the Zitara gets no brownie points for that."​

From your comments, I see that there is a small window of opportunity for STK. For the avoidance of doubt, STK makes a 3 kg lightweight carbine or LWC (click here for info on the LWC) but that's different from the 3.5 kg SAR-21 MMS referred to in Ajai Shukla's article (click here for the old SAR-21 brochure). The SAR-21 is now a product family and there's even a newly developed SAR-21A which has ambidextrous controls, a 3.2 kg unloaded weight, with a Picatinny rail and a higher ROF of 600 to 900 RPM (see post #64 for more info on the SAR-21A and post #17 for SAR-21 pixs & reviews).

 

[OPSSG]

I am sure the retired Brigadier of ST Kinetics (who would have interacted with the powers that be) would be better versed than me.

Sir, IMO, a former insider's perspective in invaluable and can provide insight to the current process and also its potential limitations.

To me, BG(Rtd) Choy is now an arms salesman and he has a vested interest in presenting his point of view in a manner that is most advantageous to his present employer.

Our indigenous defence development agencies have not produced equipment to the required standard (except for the Navy) and even when they have done so, they have been so inordinately delayed that the equipment has become outdated. Patriotism and nationalism would demand that we acquire such indigenous military equipment, but then such a huge tradeoff vis a vis lives but then……

...The wish list for modernisation is huge and every item is urgently necessary. .

Agreed. According to some sources, India is now the 2nd largest buyer of weapons in the world with US$30.8b spent (from 2001 to 2008) and the US is the world's largest arms exporter (click here for info-graphics).

There is a blog of a defence correspondent Shiv Aroor stating that the Indian Army has rejected the Arjun Tank. He quotes undisclosed sources for his opinion. In so far as Shukla, an ex Armured Corps officer, was dead against the Arjun Tank has now has had a change of heart and was rooting for it. What made him change his opinion is not known!
....

I don’t go by what these blogs state. Ajai Shukla was against the Arjun tank and now he is the greatest votary for it. The rationale for a change in heart is not known. He is a retired Colonel of the Armoured Corps (Tank) unit. Just today, I saw a post which another chap, who is supposed to be a defence journalist (not ex military) who has stated in his blog that the Arjun tank has been rejected by the Indian Army. He bases his comment on an undisclosed source!

Yes, Ajai Shukla's changed his position for reasons that are not clear to me too. If the decision to buy the T-90 (click here for the T-90 thread) was a good decision then, it should remain a good decision. I'm still awaiting for the story to unfold as more dirty laundry is washed (see article posted by funtz above). One of the issues seem to be that DRDO does not work well with the Indian Army. Both parties seem to have competing interests (maybe someone else who follows closely can explain). IMHO, the issue is how to move forward given the implied suggestion from some reports that the Arjun tank (click here for the Arjun Tank thread) has matured as a product and may be ready for the prime time. In this case, I'm just watching things unfold.

He has written a few articles on the issue. Have you seen his attempt to clarify his position here?

At this point, I would like to say that my country has also made procurement mistakes before and this has been admitted (at the risk of the displeasure of my fellow Singaporeans). A case in point was our purchase of the V-200 and discovered that they could not keep up with our AMX-13s. That is why when the Terrex was introduced, there was a Q&A released to the media. BTW, the V200 is still in service but not in it's original intended role and a number are used by the air force field defence squadrons and to mount anti-aircraft missiles. I've actually been in these vehicles and know their limitations. I'm not saying the India made a mistake, rather, I cite this example where it may be necessary for someone in the Indian MoD to explain.

However, the Indian Govt is keener on social empowerment and infrastructure improvement since the population requires attention, especially the poor lot (and we have a huge population Below the Poverty Line) and if infrastructure is improved then the economy and industry will get a boost.

Yes, on the surface a good idea that has been adopted as a strategy by four of the original six founding members of ASEAN. However, every dollar taken out of the defence budget for Indonesia, Philippines, Malaysia and Thailand have not and did not go into development but were diverted elsewhere. Out of courtesy to fellow forum members from these countries, I have not opted to give specific examples.

Brunei and Singapore are the only two of the original six ASEAN countries that are committed to their defence spending levels. While defence sending in these two countries does change with economic circumstance, the commitment to spend has not wavered. This might have to do with the fact that both are small, rich and a little insecure.

Sir, Singapore is using our defence industry as another engine for economic growth. Our trick is that we don't try to do everything and focus on only select areas/niches where we can compete. The government as a shareholder requires Singapore Technologies to compete and that has been the direction thus far.

Fyi, Ananda, an Indonesian member of our forum has an interest in discussing 'Developing Local Defence Industries'.

That being the background, while it might be fine to import, it should be a limited amount to meet the threat and instead there should be collaboration with foreign companies on Indian terms with transfer of technology.

Yes, I can understand what you are saying.

I think what the retired Brigadier of ST Kinetics is making sense. However, was the company blacklisted on grounds that they bribed the Ordnance Factory Board Chairman?

Yes, ST Kinetics (STK) was blacklisted, which resulted in India going via the FMS route for the acquisition of 140 M777 ultra-light howitzers from BAE. There is also a Telegraph India report that explains how the blacklist rules have been eased.

In the above 8ak interview, STK is behaving as if they are not blacklisted for the various carbine Indian competitions and also for the competition to supply 400 155mm 52-calibre towed howitzers off-the-shelf and for the licensed production of another 1,100 of the same. The iFH-2000 due in India for this 52-calibre towed howitzer competition was damaged in transit. Consequently, the trials in India will start a bit later. However, I note that CBI itself has not clarified that STK's status has changed.

Gaius Ho, spokesman for ST Kinetics has issued a statement that was reported here and he said:

"We are perturbed by the change of events and feel strongly that we have not been fairly treated as a legitimate bidder who is committed to helping the Indian MoD with its modernization efforts."​

I've previously posted my thoughts in this thread, here and would be glad for corrections, if necessary. Further, I understand that former OFB Chairman, Sudipta Ghosh, was granted bail in July 2009 after the CBI failed to file a charge sheet against him (click here for link).

India is a huge market for military equipment; not only for the defence forces, but also for the paramilitary forces. Special Forces requirement is different from what the Army requires and the NSG requirement is also unique. The paramilitary has its own requirement. Actually, what is required is a light weight and compact weapon that is a cross between a Carbine and a Rifle. The material technology has gone ahead and maybe it is possible.

The weapon that can look taking on targets beyond the line of sight and at 90 degrees would have great potential to fight terrorists, Naxalites and protect the VIPs (politicians (sic!))

Yes, some of the technology in the SAR-21 have been developed because of our future solider program, called ACMS (click here for another DT thread on the topic). With ACMS, each section commander is issued with a SAR-21 MMS rifle with a night-vision camera is attached. The front stock of the rifle is adapted into a joystick-like controller, so that with the aid of a monocular display the soldier can see and fire around an obstacle (link here). The monocular enables the ACMS user to revive input from more sources than the video on his SAR-21 and these inputs would include the Surveillance Ball, the 40mm Camera Round (that can be fired by another member of the section) and so on. These developments are often the result of the tripartite relationship between the army, DSTA and ST Kinetics. The focus is often not invention for invention sake (for that we have DSO), rather it is using technology to enhance tactically relevant capabilities.

Another subsidiary of Singapore Technology is also in the security business. They are actively selling their services in the Middle East and they have won a few multi-million dollar contracts but not all have been announced due to customer confidentiality requirements.

 

[kay_man]

ITS TRUE, ITS TRUE, and FINALLY BEEN PROVEN

Arjun tank outruns, outguns Russian T-90


by Ajai Shukla
Business Standard, 25th Mar 2010


India’s home-built Arjun tank has emerged a conclusive winner from its showdown with the Russian T-90. A week of comparative trials, conducted by the army at the Mahajan Ranges, near Bikaner in Rajasthan, has ended; the results are still officially secret. But Business Standard has learned from multiple sources who were involved in the trials that the Arjun tank has outperformed the T-90 on every crucial parameter.


The trial pitted one squadron (14 tanks) of Arjuns against an equal number of T-90s. Each squadron was given three tactical tasks; each involved driving across 50 kilometers of desert terrain and then shooting at a set of targets. Each tank had to fire at least ten rounds, stationary and on the move, with each hit being carefully logged. In total, each tank drove 150 kilometres and fired between 30-50 rounds. The trials also checked the tanks’ ability to drive through a water channel 5-6 feet deep.


The Arjun tanks, the observers all agreed, performed superbly. Whether driving cross-country over rugged sand-dunes; detecting, observing and quickly engaging targets; or accurately hitting targets, both stationery and moving, with pinpoint gunnery; the Arjun demonstrated a clear superiority over the vaunted T-90.


“The Arjun could have performed even better, had it been operated by experienced crewmen”, says an officer who has worked on the Arjun. “As the army’s tank regiments gather experience on the Arjun, they will learn to exploit its capabilities.”

 

[dragonfire]

Arjun tank outruns, outguns Russian T-90


by Ajai Shukla
Business Standard, 25th Mar 2010


India’s home-built Arjun tank has emerged a conclusive winner from its showdown with the Russian T-90. A week of comparative trials, conducted by the army at the Mahajan Ranges, near Bikaner in Rajasthan, has ended; the results are still officially secret. But Business Standard has learned from multiple sources who were involved in the trials that the Arjun tank has outperformed the T-90 on every crucial parameter.


The trial pitted one squadron (14 tanks) of Arjuns against an equal number of T-90s. Each squadron was given three tactical tasks; each involved driving across 50 kilometers of desert terrain and then shooting at a set of targets. Each tank had to fire at least ten rounds, stationary and on the move, with each hit being carefully logged. In total, each tank drove 150 kilometres and fired between 30-50 rounds. The trials also checked the tanks’ ability to drive through a water channel 5-6 feet deep.


The Arjun tanks, the observers all agreed, performed superbly. Whether driving cross-country over rugged sand-dunes; detecting, observing and quickly engaging targets; or accurately hitting targets, both stationery and moving, with pinpoint gunnery; the Arjun demonstrated a clear superiority over the vaunted T-90.


“The Arjun could have performed even better, had it been operated by experienced crewmen”, says an officer who has worked on the Arjun. “As the army’s tank regiments gather experience on the Arjun, they will learn to exploit its capabilities.”

The question is if it is" too little too late" wrt further orders for the Arjun MBT. I had kinda had a personal intuition that the Arjun would wind up outperforming the T-90, mainly because surprisingly at the time the Indian Army had changed its stand from Arjun is not contemporary to the Arjun is a modern tank but the IA is looking at a futuristic design for further requirements.

But you never know.... the Arjun might manage to get more orders with this outperforming of T-90 in a comparitive trial

 

[dragonfire]

News Update

Singaporean Army hold military exercise in India

NEW DELHI (PTI): Facing a space-crunch in their own country, Singaporean armoured forces are taking part in a month-long training exercise at Indian Army's Babina field-firing range in Uttar Pradesh.

Around 550 personnel of the Singaporean Army along with their armoured personnel carriers, Bronco all-terrain tracked vehicles, Spike anti-tank guided missiles and other latest equipment are participating in the exercise which started on March 1, army officials said on Wednesday.

"The month long training exercise will culminate in a bilateral joint exercise
codenamed 'Bold Kurukshetra' involving the Indian mechanised forces," they added

http://www.brahmand.com/news/Singaporean-Army-hold-military-exercise-in-India/3465/1/10.html - Full Story

The Bronco's are coming to town, i wonder if the highly impressionable IA is going to show interest in the platform. After the American Stryker contingent this looks like another composite bilateral training excercise using armoured elements in India

The article goes on to comment on Singapore F-16's have been used for training sessions for the Indian Millitary - any ideas OPSSG

 

[aaaditya]

News Update



The Bronco's are coming to town, i wonder if the highly impressionable IA is going to show interest in the platform. After the American Stryker contingent this looks like another composite bilateral training excercise using armoured elements in India

The article goes on to comment on Singapore F-16's have been used for training sessions for the Indian Millitary - any ideas OPSSG

india seems to be more interested in the us stryker and considering the new warmth in the indo-us relations ,there seems to be a better chance of india acquiring the strykers .

 

[OPSSG]

The Bronco's are coming to town, i wonder if the highly impressionable IA is going to show interest in the platform. After the American Stryker contingent this looks like another composite bilateral training excercise using armoured elements in India

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zeo9jghCm4s"]YouTube- Steel and Dust - 46 SAR Exercises in India[/nomedia]

Yup, I agree wth aaaditya and I don't think India's interested in our Broncos (a niche product for specific roles, though there are many variants).

From 1 to 27 Mar 2010, soldiers from the 46th SAR and 27th Armoured Brigade of the Indian Army participated in this year's exercise. IMO, the SAF came away from Ex Bold Kurukshetra impressed with India's armour corp (click to see story). BTW, Singapore has a long history of sending officers to India for training and as a small country/army we have much to learn from Indian officers. So I think we are the ones who are impressionable.

Fyi, the Stryker is used by the US for motorised infantry and Singapore is very grateful that the US allowed us to send some of our guys to train with them in Aug 2007 (to learn their concept of ops). One of the key things the SAF needs from that type of infantry carrier is the ability to swim (not just ford waterways). The Stryker does not meet our requirements (including the ability to swim), hence we developed our own Terrex. Below, old Terrex video that provides an overview:

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrSrMCiT9hQ"]YouTube- Terrex AV81 Infantry Fighting Vehicle[/nomedia]

There are newer videos which focus on the dual remote weapon system (40mm AGL and 7.62mm machine gun) and sniper/weapon detection system installed but do not have the basic info that is contained in the first video. BTW, there are at least 7 variants in the Terrex:

(i) troop carrier,
(ii) command post,
(iii) pioneer (or armoured engineer) vehicle,
(iv) armoured ambulance,
(v) ATGM,
(vi) STORM (strike observer mission), and
(vii) RSTA (recce, surveillance, target acquisition).

If you are interested in more info, click here for another DT thread with more Terrex pixs and graphics. Below is a newer video of the Terrex at it's public intro:

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejbuOLCJ_J4"]YouTube- Army Open House - Terrex: The Wild Wheeled Wonder[/nomedia]

The Stryker is an excellent vehicle that meets the needs the US Army but we have our own specific needs.

 

[Chino]

BTW, Singapore has a long history of sending officers to India for training and as a small country/army we have much to learn from Indian officers.

To add to that, some of our first tanks - AMX13 - were ex-Indian Army. And there are many ethnic Indian in the Singapore government and military officer corps, which makes these exchanges easier.

 

[Chino]

I had kinda had a personal intuition that the Arjun would wind up outperforming the T-90,

Not surprising.

I never followed the development of the Arjun closely, but from what I did read, it appears to me that a lot of the initial problems stem from poor QC during manufacture, and not because the tank was poorly-designed.

 

[shag]

Light Combat Helicopter Makes first flight : Unconfirmed sources

In what appears to be a major achievement for HAL and the Indian military aviation sector ,the country’s first indigenously developed attack helicopter, the Light Combat Helicopter (LCH) has made its maiden test flight. According to unconfirmed sources the LCH serial number “ZP 4601″ took to skies today.
LCH will form the backbone of the Indian Air Force and Indian Army which are currently operating some 80 Soviet Era Mi-24’s and Mi-35’s. Both the Russian attack helicopters are getting old and obsolete and with Pakistani Air Force upgrading their American Cobra Attack helicopter their is serious gap in capabilities which LCH is supposed to fill.
LCH was undergoing extensive ground trails since February 4 and many were expecting it to take to skies in that month itself. The program was delayed for more than a year because of weight issues but its seems like most problems are solved now. The current prototype being tested is a non-weaponized version meant to test only the basic structure of the helicopter. Next two prototypes are expected to be weaponized. LCH will need many more hours of testing before it receives its final operation certificate. Both the Army and the Air Force have heavily invested in the project with 189 on order. LCH is expected to enter service by 2015.

Good news I guess
The first flight was first expected in december thats a delay of 4 months. Hope the weight issue is resolved.