• Saturday, September 21, 2019

Arjun-II MBT development l Updates & discussion.

Discussion in 'Indian Defence Forum' started by Horus, Dec 23, 2013.

  1. Kailash Rava

    Kailash Rava FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    121
    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2017
    Ratings:
    +0 / 103 / -1
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    have to disagree with many of the answers above. The Arjun MKI & II are both very disappointing vehicles, with significantly reduced capabilities compared to other modern third and fourth generation MBTs.

    Let´s start with mobility:

    The Arjun MkI is powered by a GermanMTU MB 838 Ka-501 diesel engine. This engine is a modernized version of the MTU MB 838 CaM 500 multi-fuel engine that was first fitted to the Leopard 1 MBT in 1965. Thanks to various upgrades, and the addition of a supercharger, the Ka-501 can reach 1400 hp while the CaM 500 can only reach 800 hp.

    So fans of the Arjun MBT (and its manufacturer) would have you believe that this tank has excellent mobility thanks to a hp/weight ratio of 23,5 (slightly below average for a modern MBT but still within acceptable norms).

    However, raw engine power is only one of the factors that determines a tank´s mobility. The problem is that because of its outdated design, the Ka-501 engine is big, heavy, extremely fuel inefficient (a pitiful 200km range on good terrain while other MBTs can easily reach 500 km) and has very poor performance in terms of rpm and torque. These problems are worsened by the vehicles heavy weight (58 tons for the MkI and 68 for the MkII, the heaviest MBT in the world), meaning that the Arjun struggles to crest even a slight hill.

    [​IMG]
    Big, heavy, and terrible fuel efficiency...

    The current version of the MkII still uses the same outdated, crappy engine, although there are plans to upgrade to a modern American Cummins engine coupled with a French suspension. So far, these plans have yet to materialize.

    Protection:

    On paper, the Arjun´s armor is supposedly quite good. On paper.

    The manufacturer of the Arjun MBT claims that its "Kanchan heavy composite armor" is on par to the British Chobham armor from which it was developed. The Arjun MkI&II can also use locally manufactured ERA blocks, said to equal the performance of Russian Kontact-5 ERA from which they were developed as well.

    So theoretically, the Arjun´s armor uses excellent materials. The problem here is the design of the armor itself.

    The arjun´s gun shield is significantly thinner than other modern MBTs. In addition, the primary gunner sight does not have a extra armor module.

    [​IMG]
    Notice how the left side of the turret is completely bereft of any composite armor (those white layers on the other side of the turret front). The gunner sits behind 250mm of spaced steel armor, and that´s it. Any modern APFSDS round will cut through that like it´s butter and vaporize the gunner.

    [​IMG]
    Notice the huge weak spot created by the primary gunner sight.

    So the turret front is terrible. But the turret sides are even worse.

    [​IMG]
    Notice how the vaunted "Kanchan heavy composite armor" (the white layers of armor) leave 2/3rds of the turret sides exposed. The turret sides of the Arjun I&II are literally paper thin. Worse, contrary to what the manufacturer claims there are no blowout panels on the Arjun MBT, nor is it equipped with a separate ammunition compartment.

    [​IMG]
    Where is that separate ammo compartment you´ve been talking about?

    This means that virtually round penetrating the turret will ignite the tank´s ammunition and vaporize it in a big fireball.

    Moving on...

    Firepower:

    If you thought the Arjun was a bad tank before, you haven´seen anything yet.

    The Arjun MKI&II both use the same gun: a 120/55 mm rifled gun inspired by the British L30 rifled tank gun used by the British Challenger 2. Proponents of the tanks will tell you that because the gun is rifled, it is more accurate than the smoothbore guns used on the Abrams or the T-90.

    That´s bullshit, to put it simple.

    A rifled gun applies a spinning motion to the round it fires, meaning those rounds will be more stable when travelling through the air and more accurate over range. However, modern ammunition doesn´t need a rifled barrel to be accurate and stable, since they are equipped with little fins at the end of their penetrator, that apply a spinning motion to the round as it travels through the air. Put simply, modern ammunition spins itself, and doesn´t need a rifled gun to be accurate.

    [​IMG]
    Notice the little fins at the end of the round.

    Therefore, the claims that the manufacturer makes about the gun´s accuracy are very doubtful at best. It is claimed that the Arjun has a First Hit Probability (FHP) of 90%, even on the move, thanks to an excellent stabilizing system and Fire Control System (FCS). Comparative trials were conducted between the Arjun MkII and the T-90, where it was claimed that the Arjun MkII outperformed the T-90.

    However, Indian Army Generals have since come out to say that those trials were rigged by corrupt defense officials, and that the accuracy of the Arjun MBT is vastly overestimated.

    But the worst of all is the penetrating power of the Arjun´s main gun. At 2km, a round fired by the Arjun can only penetrate 300mm of Rolled Homogenous Armour (RHA).

    [​IMG]
    This is pitifully bad. At 2km, this tank won´t even be able to penetrate the side armor of most modern MBTs.

    As a comparison, most modern APFSDS rounds can penetrate between 700 and 900 mm of armor at 2 km. That´s 3x the penetration of the Arjun.

    The poor penetrating power of the Arjun is attributed to poor materials used for the penetrators, a low-pressure firing chamber and a short penetrator length.

    Soooo, if we recap:

    The mobility of the Arjun is terrible. Its armor is virtually non-existent with huge weak spots all around the turret, and its gun is horrendously inadequate by modern standards.

    There is a reason why even the Indian Army refuses to use the bloody thing. Only 100-200 Arjuns have been ordered to placate the government and DRDO (the Arjun manufacturer), while the Army relies on 1250 T-90 and 2500 T-72 MBTs.

    Linkhttps://www.quora.com/How-does-the-Arjun-MBT-compare-with-other-battle-tanks-in-the-world

    This is a answer by a quora guy
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
  2. DESERT FIGHTER

    DESERT FIGHTER ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    43,596
    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2010
    Ratings:
    +108 / 80,601 / -22
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan


    That's what we've been sayin .. But hey your people high on jingoistic .... won't accept the reality.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  3. Dazzler

    Dazzler PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Messages:
    7,609
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2008
    Ratings:
    +17 / 16,270 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United States
    The answer sums up a lot about why Arjun is a flawed product. Fortunately, the IA understands the situation and is making contingency arrangements.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  4. SDS1

    SDS1 BANNED

    Messages:
    660
    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2016
    Ratings:
    +0 / 469 / -26
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    Well.. The author has giving short coming , but when you see the shortcoming of other tanks Especially, you will find IA buying worse tank.

    Its all about Pro-Russian lobby working in IA
     
  5. Dazzler

    Dazzler PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Messages:
    7,609
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2008
    Ratings:
    +17 / 16,270 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United States
    No one in their right mind would deny that. But, singling out the IA would be unfair as such practices are a norm worldwide. However, if Arjun was a quality product with few shortcomings, refusing to induct it in numbers would have been be difficult for the IA.

    That is not the case.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  6. SDS1

    SDS1 BANNED

    Messages:
    660
    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2016
    Ratings:
    +0 / 469 / -26
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    Wrong.... Assumption ....

    Author has no Technical knowledge at all,
    A) Higher the Power / lower the fuel Efficiency. Arjun is powered by 1400 BHP while T-90 is powered by 840 BHP.

    1) If Arjun run @ 67 KM / hr , then the Arjun range is 483 KM. The offroading is around 200km
    2) While using Trubo , Arjun Can increase the speed to 72 KM .
    3) British Challenger has 550 KM ranger out of 1200 HP engine with speed @ 59KM/Hr , and 250km in off roading
    4) Merveka :- Range 500 km @ 64 KM/Hr with 1400 HP engine


    If you compared with world tank , you will have quality of range and speed.


    Every Tanks has its weak point , The area you mentioned is too small and not as deep as it is shown , moreover , In battle the arjun sight has more chances of survival then any bulge popping out which can be destroyed making gunner sight useless.

    This is already taken care of using APS

    So its a small trade off , After installing Plates , that risk is also taken care of . BTW block is very Think


    Turret block.JPG


    Turret.JPG




    Ammo on T-90 is littered on the tank floor waiting to cook off even from any seep through fire resulting from simple anti tank mine explosion.

    but in Arjun it is stored in separate canisters behind the loader, so there is no chance of it happening.
    Direct hit on Amo chamber of Arjun mk1 is only possible from the top attack missile.
    because no round is going to pierce itsfrontal and sideways composite cum ERA armor and hit it on ammo chamber

    In mk2 even that possibility is taken care of by providing blow out panels that direct the explosive energy outside the crew compartment preventing ammo cook offinside the tank.

    how test was rigged on the moving target.

    tank.JPG

    Another Crap
    The mentioned tank round is, APFSDS (kinetic energy penetrator) , care to check T-90 APFSDS rounds. T72 tank round failed to make any dent on Arjun at point blank range.


    In January 2016, new tank ammunition called Penetration-Cum Blast (PCB) and Thermobaric (TB) ammunition, two specially designed rounds for the Arjun Tank, were tested.
     
    Last edited: Feb 4, 2017
    • Thanks Thanks x 10
  7. ptldM3

    ptldM3 SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    5,586
    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2009
    Ratings:
    +21 / 8,733 / -2
    Country:
    Russian Federation
    Location:
    Jordan

    I think a think tank needs to behave a bit more professional then this. Lets discuss facts and not get too emotional or nationalistic.






    Choose your arguments more wisely. It is in the size class as most western tanks, and even smaller in some dimensions. This may even come as a shocker but it has a lower profile then the Al-Khalid.









    I would, and without turning this into Arjun vs Al-Khalid, I would take this tank over the Al-Khalid every day of the week. Its armor protection is in a league of its own. 51 tons vs 75...is this even a question?







    The Arjun has 14 suspension arms, most tanks have 12-10, this means its weight is distributed between 14 suspension arms. Even the heavier Arjun II has 5.35 tons per arm, a Challenger 2 with add on armor is 6.89 tons per arm, a Type 10 is 5.29 tons per arm. You are clearly being overly bias and just hating at this point.


    Where is the suspension falling apart?

    IMG_2966.JPG





    IMG_2977.JPG


    This is not fair, again you're bias, check out the Al-Khalid, both hatches are obscured by the panoramic sight and gunners sight.














    Having tunned my engine for track racing i have to call you out on BS.

    With the highlighted part...what is your point? If you remove a turbocharger or supercharger on any engine the performance will plummet. Even if the original engine is old once a turbocharger or supercharger is introduced the engine is fundamentally different, HP, Torque, fuel consumption, everything. For one you will need a ECM or engine management system, larger injectors and usually upgraded internals such as valve springs, upgraded pistons due to high compression, ect.

    Even the computer management system (which can be custom tuned) alters fuel delivery, (lean or rich), valve timing, and overall HP and Torque.

    As for the Arjun's performance, it is adequate. Protection was the first priority, mobility is second.









    Every tank has weak points, period. The gunners sight is overall small and will require a near head on shot to penetrate the tank. The sight is located deep inside the turret and is further shielded with the ERA armor around the sides, so again, small target which will require almost a head on shot to penetrate.

    Many other tanks have the gunner's sight inside the turret.









    This is nonsense, again the frontal armor is one of the thickest in the world, nothing in Pakistan's or China's tank arsenal comes close to its protection. As for the side armor, take a look at the side armor of a Turkish leopard in Syria. All tanks have thin side turrets, at least the Arjun has less thin side armor then the Leopard.


    Leopard side armor:


    IMG_2980.JPG






    No blow out panels? really?



    IMG_2976.JPG







    Yet the rifled 120mm British gun is combat proven and has some of the longest kills in tank warfare, so i don't get your point. The end result is accuracy, range and penetration. Rifled and smoothbore guns ultimately achieve the same or similar results. No one thing determines accuracy, its a combination of things. Looking at just the gun itself without factoring in the ballistic computer or munitions is narrow sited.







    That graphic has been around since dinosaurs roamed earth. Indian FSAPDS have a 500+ mm penetration figures. In early 2016 India was testing new tank rounds. New Indian FSAPDS's should exceed well beyond 600+ mm.








    It actually has a very long track base which gives it a low ground pressure that is even better then much lighter tanks, so your mobility claims, just like many other of your claims are out of touch with reality. Low ground pressure means it will have excellent mobility and perform well in mud or sand. Where it will struggle is probably steep inclines due to its weight.

    @Water Car Engineer @Abingdonboy @Storm Force @Skull and Bones
     
    Last edited: Feb 4, 2017
    • Thanks Thanks x 20
  8. Dazzler

    Dazzler PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Messages:
    7,609
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2008
    Ratings:
    +17 / 16,270 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United States
    Ah it's you again, long time no see, this time defending Arjun. That's nice.

    I request you to open a thread on flaws and strengths of Arjun mbt. Let's take the discussion there shall we?

    Waiting for your response.
     
  9. GORKHALI

    GORKHALI SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    3,689
    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2010
    Ratings:
    +0 / 5,194 / -9
    The thing is every tank has flaws but as you claim to be tank specialist ,your claims including many been busted not just in PDF but also in *** and you shamelessly ask every other day ,lets make a thread.
    Al Khalid vs Arjun .I remember those threads
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 8
  10. ptldM3

    ptldM3 SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    5,586
    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2009
    Ratings:
    +21 / 8,733 / -2
    Country:
    Russian Federation
    Location:
    Jordan

    Why would I open a new thread about the Arjun when we are in the Arjun thread? Besides that the mods would probably move it back here or lock the thread.

    You made a number of claims, I beautifuly countered those claims, now I'm waiting for none bias rebuttal with facts not emotions.
     
    Last edited: Feb 5, 2017
    • Thanks Thanks x 9
  11. Dazzler

    Dazzler PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Messages:
    7,609
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2008
    Ratings:
    +17 / 16,270 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United States
    Read again, I asked you to open a comparison thread, while this thread pertains to any new developments on Arjun.
    Hope you got that bit. We are drifting offtopic here you know.
     
  12. ptldM3

    ptldM3 SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    5,586
    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2009
    Ratings:
    +21 / 8,733 / -2
    Country:
    Russian Federation
    Location:
    Jordan

    I'm not here to compare anything, I just provide counter arguments of other people comparing the Arjun. You are the one that made many claims so either counter those claims or just concede you can't.



    And why all the sudden now you want to keep this thread strictly "new developments on Arjun" when you called the tank "a peice of trash" and in general have not contributed anything positive to the thread.

    You want to open a new thread about how the Arjun is "trash" and prove how its suspension "falls apart" then feel free but remember you made those claims.
     
    Last edited: Feb 5, 2017
    • Thanks Thanks x 10
  13. GORKHALI

    GORKHALI SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    3,689
    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2010
    Ratings:
    +0 / 5,194 / -9
    Point is - He knows Arjun tank better than those developed it.So shut up mate....
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 3
  14. Dazzler

    Dazzler PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Messages:
    7,609
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2008
    Ratings:
    +17 / 16,270 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United States
    Those who made it know how incapable it is. So do your army.

    That's what I've been saying. let's pile our arguments and counter arguments in a dedicated thread. Why ruin an information pool ? Gather some courage mate, it will be fun.
     
  15. Hindustani78

    Hindustani78 BANNED

    Messages:
    39,562
    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2014
    Ratings:
    +5 / 12,603 / -7
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    http://indianexpress.com/article/in...stem-for-mbt-arjun-mk-ii-battle-tank-4524457/
    By: PTI | Bengaluru | Published:February 14, 2017 5:38 pm
    [​IMG]
    Main battle tank Arjun MK-II, the first indigenously designed and developed tank, also referred to as ‘Desert Ferrari’ for its excellent mobility, was also on display. The weaponry put on display by the Indian Army included T-90 tank ‘Bheeshma’, multi-launcher rocket system Smerch, Brahmos weapon system and transportable satellite terminals. Army tanks at the Republic Day Parade. (IE Photo: Prem Nath Pandey)


    Defence PSU Bharat Electronics Ltd (BEL) on Tuesday unveiled a new Weapon Control system for 12.7 mm Gun of MBT Arjun Mk II battle tank, at Aero India 2017 air show. Remote Controlled Weapon Station (RCWS)/Air Defence Weapon Station (ADWS) is an improvised version of the manually operated air defence gun, the Bengaluru-based Navratna PSU said.

    It enables the soldier to aim and fire at aerial targets from the safe interiors of the battle tank, BEL said in a release, noting that, presently, the 12.7 mm guns of all tanks are manually operated.

    RCWS integrated on MBT Mk II has successfully completed tank integration and firing trials in September 2015. RCWS has also been developed for use in Armed Repair and Recovery Vehicle (ARRV), it said.

    It can also be mounted on hovercraft/fast moving boats for the Coast Guard, the release added.

    The features of RCWS include, Remote Firing option, Automatic Cocking, DSP Based Brushless Drive Technology, 2 Axis Self-stabilised platform, Day Camera and Night Vision, Automated FCS and Ballistics corrections and Automatic Target Tracking.

    [​IMG]

    BEL unveiled a new Weapon Control system — Remote Controlled Weapon Station (RCWS) / Air Defence Weapon Station (ADWS) for 12.7 mm Gun of MBT Arjun Mk II battle tank, at Aero India 2017 in Bengaluru on February 14, 2017.

    The RCWS is an improvised version of the manually operated air defence gun. It enables the soldier to aim and fire at aerial targets from the safe interiors of the battle tank. Presently, the 12.7 mm guns of all tanks are manually operated. RCWS integrated on MBT Mk II has successfully completed tank integration and firing trials in September 2015. RCWS has also been developed for use in Armed Repair and Recovery Vehicle (ARRV). It can also be mounted on hovercraft / fast moving boats for the Coast Guard.

    The features of RCWS include: Remote Firing option; Automatic Cocking; DSP Based Brushless Drive Technology; 2 Axis Self-stabilised platform; Day Camera & Night Vision; Automated FCS & Ballistics corrections; and Automatic Target Tracking.

    Salient Features
    The RCWS for MBT ARJUN Mk II is intended to lay and stabilise the NSVT 12.7 mm machine gun along with the optical sensors in traverse and elevation mounted on the MBT turret. The system allows the operator to control the gun and sight from the operating console and joy stick from inside the turret. The optical sensors include a day camera, Thermal Imager and a Laser Range Finder integrated on a single housing. The system allows automatic target tracking for air and ground targets and performs necessary ballistic computations to feed the ballistic offsets to the gun / sight. The system has a provision for the operator to do automatic loading and firing of the gun.

    The system can operate on power mode without stabilisation or in stabilised mode where the gun along with the optical sensors is stabilised. The system can position the turret with an angular travel of 360 deg and elevate the gun in 60 to -5 degree elevation. The sight has a freedom of +/- 17 degree in azimuth and in elevation it can move from -5 to +60 degree. It operates from the 28V DC power source available on the tank. The RCWS meets all environmental specifications and EMI specifications as per MIL STD 461 F.

    [​IMG]

    The GMS is the key sub-system of the Integrated Fire Control System, used in MBT ARJUN Tank to engage ground targets. GMS is an integrated Day cum Night sight,Consisting of Day sight, Thermal Imager & Laser Range finder. The GMS system is coupled to a Fire Control Computer (FCC) and a Gun Control System (GCS) thus enabling the tank and the gunner to engage ground targets, irrespective of it being stationary or moving, by day as well as night with the tank itself either being stationaryor on the move.

    FEATURES
    GMS performs the following functions

    • Surveillance
      The day channel enables the gunner to engage the line of sight on the desired targets during day & the thermal imager performs the same function during day or night.
    • Display
      The micro monitor in the Gunner's Control and Display and the mini monitor in the Commander's Control Station enable the display of video signal from the thermal imager and inlay of system information such as Bore sighting parameters, Wear counters, Calibration parameters and reticule.
    Calibration Parameters
    • Bore sighting
      The system has necessary controls for performing bore sighting alignment of LOS with the Gun at 1100 m
    • Muzzle Reference System
      This function allows for the automatic measurement of angular difference between LOS and LOF to compensate for misalignment of the gun with respect to the GMS. Gun barrel misalignment / bending is mostly caused by temperature effects of the sun or during firing
    • Drift Compensation
      The automatic drift procedure is performed in GMS slaved mode and stab mode compensates for the complete drift present due to the gyro's, the earth's rotation and electrical variations in system, in particular the control handles Has a powerful BITE facility which is able to detect most of failures and displays the failed functions in the monitors. Besides1 the failure detection, the BITE performs safety actions, in order to preserve the system integrity incase of a major failure.