FICV - Discussions

[Spectre]

Some of you may be aware that there is a 11 Billion USD contract for FICV program in india. One of the local companies TATA Motors has tied up with General Dynamics Land Systems for this. AFAIK GCV of General Dynamics was cancelled. Can anyone shed light if it would be able to meet the program requirements of FICV? if not what would be other good candidates

Artist's impression of the GCV Infantry Fighting Vehicle

The major requirements from IA are -
a. The FICV needs to be compact, tracked and amphibious, and no heavier than 18-20 tonnes, so that it can be air-portable and transportable by other means, onto combat zones.
b Protection from 14.5 mm calibre weapons
c. Crew of three with capacity to carry upto 7 additional soldiers with combat loads
d. Strike power of a 45 tonne Main Battle Tank (MBT) including a rapid fire cannon, a 7.62 mm machine gun, grenade launcher and an anti-tank missile to ranges beyond four kms.

Detailed parameters as below

http://www.*********************.com/forums/attachments/upload_2016-4-22_0-34-18-png.3157/

 

[Spectre]

@MilSpec @PARIKRAMA @Abingdonboy @Zebra

 

[Abingdonboy]

Some of you may be aware that there is a 11 Billion USD contract for FICV program in india. One of the local companies TATA Motors has tied up with General Dynamics Land Systems for this. AFAIK GCV of General Dynamics was cancelled. Can anyone shed light if it would be able to meet the program requirements of FICV? if not what would be other good candidates

Artist's impression of the GCV Infantry Fighting Vehicle

The major requirements from IA are -
a. The FICV needs to be compact, tracked and amphibious, and no heavier than 18-20 tonnes, so that it can be air-portable and transportable by other means, onto combat zones.
b Protection from 14.5 mm calibre weapons
c. Crew of three with capacity to carry upto 7 additional soldiers with combat loads
d. Strike power of a 45 tonne Main Battle Tank (MBT) including a rapid fire cannon, a 7.62 mm machine gun, grenade launcher and an anti-tank missile to ranges beyond four kms.

Detailed parameters as below

http://www.*********************.com/forums/attachments/upload_2016-4-22_0-34-18-png.3157/

TATA's FICV:

@PARIKRAMA had a great document from EY that outlined the FICV's selection process/criteria in detail.

There will be 4-5 other private consortiums (L&T, BAE, SAMSUNG defence etc) with OFB (seemingly) assured of being a finalist.

 

[Spectre]

TATA's FICV:

@PARIKRAMA had a great document from EY that outlined the FICV's selection process/criteria in detail.

There will be 4-5 other private consortiums (L&T, BAE, SAMSUNG defence etc) with OFB (seemingly) assured of being a finalist.

Has Tata released the specifications/targeted specification for it's candidate? I couldn't find any via simple google search

 

[Abingdonboy]

Has Tata released the specifications/targeted specification for it's candidate? I couldn't find any via simple google search

Very early days and TATA have not given any spec out yet (why would they?).


I think it is interesting to look at the AJAX (yes intended for a very different role) considering the GD connection:

 

[Spectre]

Very early days and TATA have not given any spec out yet (why would they?).


I think it is interesting to look at the AJAX (yes intended for a very different role) considering the GD connection:

I like it and there is a huge scope for customization into various other roles. some of it subsystems like sensor and communication suits would come in handy in other areas if Tata is able to acquire tech.

It is not unusual to release technical specs pre bid. This creates buzz

 

[Abingdonboy]

I like it and there is a huge scope for customization into various other roles. some of it subsystems like sensor and communication suits would come in handy in other areas if Tata is able to acquire tech.

As per the FICV rules there have to be at least 6 different variants (ambulance, C&C, engineering, NBC recon etc).

It is not unusual to release technical specs pre bid. This creates buzz

True but maybe TATA are waiting for the others to show their hand, to date TATA is the only entity to have presented their offer in any form.

 

[Spectre]

As per the FICV rules there have to be at least 6 different variants (ambulance, C&C, engineering, NBC recon etc).


True but maybe TATA are waiting for the others to show their hand, to date TATA is the only entity to have presented their offer in any form.

I dont know why there is not more urgency on this. By now every one should have finalized the partners and prepared the preliminary design.

 

[Abingdonboy]

I dont know why there is not more urgency on this. By now every one should have finalized the partners and prepared the preliminary design.

The partnerships have to have been fixed by now, the MoD/IA is going to downselect consortiums/designs by the end of 2016.

 

[Spectre]

The partnerships have to have been fixed by now, the MoD/IA is going to downselect consortiums/designs by the end of 2016.

Anyway let's check in here periodically with any news here.

 

[Water Car Engineer]

Interested to see what LnT will show.

 

[MKC]

Tata Motors has JV with Bharat Forge & GDLS, also other firms are competing so don't be sure about Tata Motors will build this as it is almost equal to other firms, like Tata Power SED, L&T, Ashok Leyland.
Mahindra Group, Punj Lloyd Ltd, Anil Ambani’s Reliance Group and Ordnance Factory Board are some of the other bidders for the project.
So we can't be so sure about Tata Motors design it's just a proposal.

 

[Omega007]

The 18-20 ton weight limit would be a serious handicap which might come back to bite them in their bloody arses at the worst possible time!!Sometimes i wonder,do the IA top brass,responsible for laying down these requirements even qualified enough to do so,do they have any worthwhile technical knowledge necessary for the job??Heck,do they even follow the trends across the world??I mean just look at other armies all over the world - every single one of them is increasingly moving towards heavier armored vehicle designs because they have realized that, in order to cater for the increased proliferation of ever advancing anti armor weapons,they would need to employ more advanced armor on their vehicles,and one can't do that without increasing the overall weight!!
Take for example the German Puma ICV!!Even in their most basic form,they weigh more than 30 tons and with its full asortment of add on AMAP armor modules,the weight increases to a hopping 44 tons!!Heck,even the much older Marder ICV (first inducted way back in the early 70s) weighed more than 28 tons!!
Or you can take the example of the Turkish Tulpar ICV,which again weighs over more than 30 tons at its basic form.
The older version of the M2 Bradley ICVs weighed about 27-28 tons and with its former being able to resist 25mm armor piercing rounds but that was deemed utterly inadequate and now the latest avatars are far too heavier as well.
And then there is the example of the Israeli Namer APC which weighs a fucking 60 tons when equipped with all of its add on armor modules and it's not even an ICV!!
So why did these nations,with long experiences in designing and manufacturing armored vehicles are increasingly moving towards heavier vehicles??It can not be that one fine morning they just woke up and said to themselves something like "let's build them heavy this time around" and bam!!No,of course not,obviously they had put rigorous thinking and meticulous planning into it before cementing the design features of their respective vehicles.
All the folks in the army had to do was to follow the crowed,just get into the bandwagon,it was that simple and they blew it!!They are again pinning their hopes on relatively thinly armored ICVs,which for all practical intents and purposes,would be nothing more than some glorified (albeit highly overpriced) BMP IIs...................and that too,when they are at odds with two of the most powerful and well equipped armies in the whole fucking world!!It's beyond saddening to an absurd level to even put it politely!!

One more thing I find weird is their decision to go for completely separate designs for different armored vehicles - I mean they have got the MBT program running,there is the FICV,the Kestral the whole shebang!!Why are they doing this when the whole world,including the Russians,whom our Army always seems to be so eager to follow around, is moving towards Universal Combat Platforms,that a host of different armored vehicles like MBTs,APCs,ICVs,ARVs etc all sharing the same basic hull design,there by greatly simplifying spare requirements and reducing both manufacturing and operational cost by a good margin.I think the folks at the CVRDE even had come up with such a proposal and presented it to the Army,they even proposed to get them on-board from the very start to the finish,so that the users can insert their inputs whenever and wherever they fit right from the conceptual design stage.But as always,the all knowing DGMF shot it down promptly.Guess,there was just no money to make in that.

 

[Abingdonboy]

The 18-20 ton weight limit would be a serious handicap which might come back to bite them in their bloody arses at the worst possible time!!Sometimes i wonder,do the IA top brass,responsible for laying down these requirements even qualified enough to do so,do they have any worthwhile technical knowledge necessary for the job??Heck,do they even follow the trends across the world??I mean just look at other armies all over the world - every single one of them is increasingly moving towards heavier armored vehicle designs because they have realized that, in order to cater for the increased proliferation of ever advancing anti armor weapons,they would need to employ more advanced armor on their vehicles,and one can't do that without increasing the overall weight!!
Take for example the German Puma ICV!!Even in their most basic form,they weigh more than 30 tons and with its full asortment of add on AMAP armor modules,the weight increases to a hopping 44 tons!!Heck,even the much older Marder ICV (first inducted way back in the early 70s) weighed more than 28 tons!!
Or you can take the example of the Turkish Tulpar ICV,which again weighs over more than 30 tons at its basic form.
The older version of the M2 Bradley ICVs weighed about 27-28 tons and with its former being able to resist 25mm armor piercing rounds but that was deemed utterly inadequate and now the latest avatars are far too heavier as well.
And then there is the example of the Israeli Namer APC which weighs a fucking 60 tons when equipped with all of its add on armor modules and it's not even an ICV!!
So why did these nations,with long experiences in designing and manufacturing armored vehicles are increasingly moving towards heavier vehicles??It can not be that one fine morning they just woke up and said to themselves something like "let's build them heavy this time around" and bam!!No,of course not,obviously they had put rigorous thinking and meticulous planning before cementing the design features of their respective vehicles.
All the folks in the army had to do was to follow the crowed,just get board on the bandwagon,it was that simple and they blew it!!They are again pinning their hope on relatively thinly armored ICVs,which for all practical intents and purposes,would be nothing more than some glorified (and highly overpriced) BMP IIs...................and that too,when they are facing two of the most powerful and well equipped opposing armies!!It's beyond saddening to an absurd level to even put it politely!!

I agree, it's the same issue with the Arjun- the IA are asking for the world but still expecting weight to be the same of the Russian junk they are replacing.


It is reflective of the IA's regressive mindset and the fact that this current generation of officers haven't fought a conventional war at any point in their career. Look at the world leaders who are on the cutting edge- they have all got very recent experience of mechanised warfare.

 

[Omega007]

I agree, it's the same issue with the Arjun- the IA are asking for the world but still expecting weight to be the same of the Russian junk they are replacing.

Well,I wouldn't say that the T90s are complete junks,especially since the Indian made ones are equipped with the same armor modules as is Arjusn. Besides,Arjun is still not a completely finished products even in its MkII format,the turret needs a good amount of modifications to do away with its weak spots.But still,Army should have worked with CVRDE to clear any glitches (most of which have been rectified by now) in the Arjun MkI and shouldn't have gone for the license production of T 90S.But you know,then there wouldn't have been any money to fill their pockets nor pretty little Ruskie chicks to................you know what I mean.

It is reflective of the IA's regressive mindset

Not just regressive but some of them are just way too rigid and inflexible and thick in their heads with extremely bloated egos but worse still,corrupt to their very cores,if the late good Brigadier is to be believed.

and the fact that this current generation of officers haven't fought a conventional war at any point in their career. Look at the world leaders who are on the cutting edge- they have all got very recent experience of mechanised warfare.

So true,so true.But hey,even the Turks haven't been involved in much of conventional warfare yet they understood the need of the hour without much hassle!!You know how - they just followed the crowed!!It's not always a bad thing to do,you know??
And besides,you do not need to indulge into mechanised warfare to find out about your needs,you need to know who you might be facing in a potential conflict and what shit the other side has got and then you can plan your design accordingly,especially since extensive ballistic test data is already available in the open domain!!It's really that simple these days,one doesn't need a degree in metallurgy or material sciences for that,it's the age of free education (internet!!) after all.
And at the last,I would want to finish this comment with a few questions - what experience do the 'keyboard warriors' like I and you have got,yet we can very well understand what's going on and what was needed to be done instead??Which leads me to next question,that,if we can get this,then why can't they??Is it just ignorance or something else.something far worse??You see where I'm getting at with this??