Arjun Tank News Thread

recent exercise, T90, Arjun mk2, T72 present

i will not translate the news commentry, because the media mixed up which is T90 and Arjun
Not only they say Arjun as T-90 but then show T-72 as Arjun. Then they even say Arjun was made in Russia before but is now made in India


but the visuals are good

There was for obvious reasons a big fall of interest in this very thread due to the essence and core of indian tabloitism along with the PR department that has published to many bad examples of how not to propagate stuff that were coined untrue or even opposite. The entire core of "T-90 relaxed parameters" already shows the core of propaganda here like the till this very date INDO stronkkk crew that keeps on repeating disadvantages which were ironed out almost a decade ago.

The only interesting would be the thermobaric round and what effect it has on tanks and how high probability of Mission kill or (tank/crew damage) it can achieve.

Werewolf wrote: The entire core of "T-90 relaxed parameters" already shows the core of propaganda here like the till this very date INDO stronkkk crew that keeps on repeating disadvantages which were ironed out almost a decade ago.

the relaxed parameters were taken from the CAG report to the Parliament , 2015
and the CAG will not lie to the parliament.

its not as if some news paper or magzine published it


the same CAG criticized the LCA heavily, i don't see any favouritism.
and all the reprts i have cited
cite named sources within the army instead of reports citing unnamed sources

aksha wrote:

Werewolf wrote: The entire core of "T-90 relaxed parameters" already shows the core of propaganda here like the till this very date INDO stronkkk crew that keeps on repeating disadvantages which were ironed out almost a decade ago.

the relaxed parameters were taken from the CAG report to the Parliament , 2015
and the CAG will not lie to the parliament.

its not as if some news paper or magzine published it


the same CAG criticized the LCA heavily, i don't see any favouritism.
and all the reprts i have cited
cite named sources within the army instead of reports citing unnamed sources

Sure they won't lie, like they will not pre-taylor trails like IA never did before.

sepheronx wrote:

aksha wrote:

Werewolf wrote: The entire core of "T-90 relaxed parameters" already shows the core of propaganda here like the till this very date INDO stronkkk crew that keeps on repeating disadvantages which were ironed out almost a decade ago.

the relaxed parameters were taken from the CAG report to the Parliament , 2015
and the CAG will not lie to the parliament.

its not as if some news paper or magzine published it


the same CAG criticized the LCA heavily, i don't see any favouritism.
and all the reprts i have cited
cite named sources within the army instead of reports citing unnamed sources

Yeah, they lie.  Actually, when it comes to India, they tend to lie a lot.  Hence why generals are always caught with corruption charges.  Then again, half of the government of India is heavily corrupt too.

corruption is an issue in the armed forces , i agree

but has there been any case against the past for curruption
give me at least one instance and i will beleive the CAG lied


one of the jobs of the CAG is also to act as anticorruption body



now,
you say that the CAG is corrupt and hence it lied

who will pay the pay the CAG to do a hitjob against the T90 vis-a-vis the arjun??
the only answer that comes to my mind is DRDO.

but that answer is comical.
they barely have enough funds to hire enough scientists and engineers to run the labs.

besides if the DRDO had that kind of money to pay bribes the LCA would have already been in service a good five years back, the arjun would have been inducted in thousands ,not to mention a variety of other projects.

that theory doesn't make any sense


besides the DRDO has been the greatest victim of corruption

on the Arjun project itself.
why did the army want a 120mm rifled gun with manual on the arjun when they could have asked for 125 mm smooth bore like on the T90
sharing the same gun would have solved a lot of problems instantaneously,
including the ability to use already available Russian rounds and cannon launched missiles.
the army could have rectified this on the Arjun mk2 , but no they still wanted a 120 mm rifled bore gun.



another example is the siphoning of funds meant for the Kaveri engine ,
the prvious government, alotted the funds on paper while the actual funds were used for free lunch schemes to ensure that the party won the next elections.
the same was done to the navy's fuel subsidy


again why was the kaveri cancelled??
it should have been taken to its logical conclusion
whatever the time or the funds required.


as far as Arjun mk2 is concerned ,
in my view at least 500 should be inducted.
India cannot fight on imported muscle forever.

unfortunately only the Indian navy seems to understand .
they have supported indegenous programmes through thick and thin.
they have been rewarded in many cases.

Arjun is a finished project, finished like failed. Going for rifled guns only decreases firepower and increases costs for absolutley nothing worth. Already smoothbore fired rounds are barely to not possible to penetrate enemy MBT's at first and effective engagement ranges, a rifled gun will only worsen this and APFSDS,HEAT and GLATGM's will decrease its penetration power significantly at the same time wear down gun barrel.

aksha wrote:give me at least one instance and i will beleive the CAG lied

Why on earth someone here should insinuate that CAG lied ? ........How if what CAG revealed, even if in some way and rightly "defensive" of the made-in-India technological efforts, don't would had involuntarily collapsed to theirs inner foundations the ridiculous mountain of pathetic LIES that some mercenary indian media operator, selling himself to forign interests misrepresenting facts and events to influenciate Indian public opinion, had uttered in the representation of the comparative trials; lies that still today some people is still incapable to abandon after having repeated them for years


When a particular indian media operator .....with definitely too much western "friends" and love for the collection of foreign money samples, for so say .........had sustained, with the usual reference to the by now mythical "unnamed indian offiicials" present at the event that :



"India’s home-built Arjun tank has emerged a conclusive winner from its showdown with the Russian T-90."

and

"....from multiple sources who were involved in the trials that the Arjun tank has outperformed the T-90 on every crucial parameter."


several people in the knowing here and elsewhere questioned strongly this ,at best ,phantasious representation of the event in question , do you know the sort of things that happen when the data ,coming from the same trials, at the maker of one of the MBT involved paint a situation at the exact opposite.

Those are just some of mine past interventions on the subject :



https://www.russiadefence.net/t2333p255-t-90-mbt-news

https://www.russiadefence.net/t2333p555-t-90-mbt-news

https://www.russiadefence.net/t2333p570-t-90-mbt-news


What should surprise indian military enthusiasts is that Arjun MKI managed to lose ....i repeat LOSE....the comparative trials, in practically ALL the area taken into examination (even the Fire Power one !!) in spite its vectronic suit,and partially mechanical one, enjoyed more than 14 years development advantage, that its mass was maintained as low as possible (with the MKII it is now at over 67 tons with the same propulsion engine, transmissions and track wideness ) and in spite the requirements of those trials was conceived, through a playing field horribly twisted at Arjun favour and not the opposite , to not highlight the horrendous efficiency disbalance between the two MBTs at Arjun disfavour how i have clearly pointed out; disbalance that Arjun could never compensate in any way cause its unlucky western design philopsophy genetic heritage.

I seriously doubt that Arjun MKII could come at tank biathlon 2016 and even get a chance to play in the same league with a modernized T-72B3 (leaving out T-90MS/AM) in spite costing several times more ; anyone can upgrade without any problem the vectronic suit and some mechanical and armor elements to today performances but none can do the same with am outweighted ,badly designed and conceived inherent structure.

as an indian i will beleive WHAT THE CAG SAYS

favouratism to indegenous products did not stop the same CAG from strongly criticizing the LCA

you can beleive as you want


i will still take the arjun mk2 .

india cannot fight on foreign muscle forever.

aksha wrote:as an indian i will beleive WHAT THE CAG SAYS

favouratism to indegenous products did not stop the same CAG from strongly criticizing the LCA

you can beleive as you want


i will still take the arjun mk2 .

india cannot fight on foreign muscle forever.

Carrying a dead pet around and pretending it is alive will not help the defense of your country either. Arjun is a dead project even Indian authorities know that. FMBT programm is hard indication after 30 years of failure of Arjun with a design philosophy that can only be marked as a failed tank design. attempted a Leopard 2 with almost all open front of weak points, trying to safe it by using a small volumetric armor arrangement around the already weakpoints similiar to russian design but the entire tank is a failure in design, no changes in design can be made at this point.

aksha wrote:as an indian i will beleive WHAT THE CAG SAYS

Yes, then you believe that Arjun MKI have LOST the comparative trials : 75.01 for T-90S against 72.46 for Arjun MKI , to the exact contrary of what sustained for years by mercenary indian media operators.



Even in the area (fire power) where its much more up-to-date vectronic suit should have given to it a wide advantage over its opponent, even discounting the advantage of T-90S in missile firing capability (that is already operational since day one, tested and included in its cost.....a very low cost), the difference would have amounted instead to a bit more than a single point , 25.77 to 24.50, in Arjun favour , if you put the exact same tank crew, before, in a T-90S and ,after, in a modernized one, T-90MS with "Kalina" (...... for not name something much, much more advanced in work for new unified heavy brigade family   ), in the same trials the final results would have been crushingly lopsided in T-90MS favour .


What Indian tax-payers should ask to CAG is to publish the results (that someone know....   ) in the other area of the trial ,so that public opinion could become aware if in those comparative trials Arjun would have gained the upper hand even in only ONE of them  


Even more Indian taxpayers should pretend from CAG to point out why Indian MoD do not order a SERIOUS comparative trials, taking into account all truly cardinal characteristics of the two weapon platforms in a possible large scale war scenario ,instead of one like that in 2010 clearly conceived to allow the Arjun, and its enormous baggage of inherent western design-related disadvantages, to lose of only few points.

This is what is call an even playing field :


https://www.russiadefence.net/t2333p570-t-90-mbt-news


1) Force the platoon of Arjun to come to the testing range using the same, identical  number (and occupy the same, identical space aboard) of Indian strategic mobilization assets - aircraft, train, ship, tractor trailers etc… -required to the 14 T-90S , so to render evident the simply crushing strategic mobilization speed overmatch and the crucial sector force density in the event of a war, between T-90S and Arjun.

2) Provide the 14 Arjun’s platoon with the same ,identical Indian Army human resources  -42 tankers and not 33% more as required by the Arjun ,cause its  western genetic pool heritage-  required to the T-90S platoon , with also the same identical furniture for them (food, coverage, energy generators, clothes etc….) and with the related carrying vehicles. The results will be very interesting……

3) Measure the exact distance covered by the 14 Arjun platoon with the same identical amount of fuel provided to the T-90S, at the same conditions.  Moreover Indian Army should also provide the two groups with the same ,identical number of fuel resupply  vehicles for the entire duration of the trials so to simulate repeated fuel resupply in time of war and measure the total distance covered by the two groups. I manage already now to figure the faces….


4) Provide the two groups with equal number of repair vehicles with fixed number ,volume and weight of spare parts (at example replacement for damaged armor blocks , ERA tiles, transmission, engines, axis, tracks ,rollers, tires etc… within a prefixed volume and weight limit) so to simulate logistical needs in response to battle and environmental damages  for conflicts of different duration. The result would be very, very interesting.

5) Measure the weight , fuel/oil requirement and strategic lift requirements for all the auxiliary engineering vehicles  ( recovering vehicles, bridging vehicles, amphibious fording etc) supporting the operation of the two MBT’s groups of different weight .  

6) Let both group to transverse different roads , canals bridges ,and enemy over-ditch passages  representative of both national and potential enemy ones and take account of how many of them sustain their weight ( with good peace of the comically abused nominal ground pressure argument).

7) Last  but not least : produce three-dimensional targets with the exact 3D size of the two tanks and conduct the fire at the shooting range allowing those targets to move ,exactly as in the reality, changing continuously and in a totally arbitrary way their speed and direction long different land morphology . That would allow also to simulate the different  capability to change more and more faster those variables by part of the two tanks in reason of the different torque potential available ,the different inertial mass and the maximum solicitation limit for the suspensions) and video-record the entire fire session. At the end of it measure with precision the number and placement of any hit and, from the video recording, the distance and direction of any miss. The cold results of a similar realistic test would cause majority of easily gullible “tin-can yelling” zombies  to fall in complete depression, even more because would become immediately evident  the dramatic effects that similar huge difference in target area would have in the exchange ratio between peer opponent employing MBT constructed around the two different philosophy.



Try to read post 268

https://www.russiadefence.net/t2333p255-t-90-mbt-news



Arjun is an important project for India, not for its inherent military value, but for the technological experience in developing a domestic MBT; under this point of view the selection of a western-like design, obviously much less efficient, but much more simple and less problematic ,having less volumetric constrictions , was a good choice.


That, of course, do not cancel the hard reality that any serious general or military scientist know......is sufficient to see the technical requirement and limits that Indian MoD has put for the FMBT  

In short time India will order more modified T 90 and in future armata, my take

India Successfully Tests Next-Gen Arjun Battle Tank’s Strike Capabilities

The Indian Army looks set to be going ahead with the indigenously developed Arjun MK 2 Main Battle Tank going by the successful trials being reported in by defense scientists.

New Delhi (Sputnik) — Sources told Sputnik that defense scientists of the Defence Research and Development Organization (DRDO) saw the successful test of an anti-tank weapon with a strike range of five kilometers at a testing facility in Orissa state. Scientists test-fired high explosive anti-tank weapon from Arjun MK 2 in salvo mode against a decommissioned tank. Sources said the test was successful and it had the desirable impact on the target.

DRDO scientists have been developing the Arjun MK 2 Main Battle Tank since 2012. Arjun MK 2 is said to be a substantially improved and more capable version of the Arjun MK 1, 118 of which are now in delivery. But the Army has a problem with the weight of the tank: it weighs approximately 68 tons with scientists trying to lighten the load. Sources said scientists will use indigenously developed lighter high nitrogen steel in the baseline hull of the tank. They will also use all-aluminium road-wheels instead of all-steel road wheels and ventilators to reduce the weight.

Defense sources told Sputnik that the Indian Army wanted Arjun MK 2 to weigh 50-55 tons but the DRDO has conveyed its inability to bring it down to that level. The Army is said to have objected to the tank's 68 ton weight, saying it was too heavy and limited the area where it can be deployed.

In February this year, Bharat Electronics had unveiled a remote controlled weapon station (RCWS) for 12.7 mm gun of MBT Arjun Mk II battle tank at Aero India 2017 in Bengaluru. This enabled 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. The RCWS is armed with the 12.7 mm Russian NSVT heavy machine gun. Other weapons like 7.62 mm MG can also be fitted with it.

https://sputniknews.com/military/201704071052396493-india-test-tank-arjun/

Carrying a dead pet around and pretending it is alive will not help the defense of your country either. Arjun is a dead project even Indian authorities know that. FMBT programm is hard indication after 30 years of failure of Arjun with a design philosophy that can only be marked as a failed tank design. attempted a Leopard 2 with almost all open front of weak points, trying to safe it by using a small volumetric armor arrangement around the already weakpoints similiar to russian design but the entire tank is a failure in design, no changes in design can be made at this point.

Your right and wrong. The Arjun is dead project thats alive. Its got no long term future other than small orders, which cost a lot given its twice the price of T-90. But so is the T-90 no? T-14 had arrived, so the T-90 is pretty much outgunned right? So ordering more T-90s regardless of the domestication from Avadi is pointless at this point. All they can do is upgrade the T-72s and T-90s with moderns FCS, APS and gimmicks to give it a decent serviceability and crew comfort. Should India get into the T-14? I don't think so. Given that India already has the machines to produce T-90s, they could easily license T-14 but that'll put them back in a hole again. Should they continue with Arjun and build up on it like Israelis? Thats a good idea no? Russians built up on the T series and stuck with T-72 upgrades for a long time. So what can Avadi do? They can build a completely new tank after Arjun MK2 with better suspension, bigger gun, lower weight etc... They can do a lot of things. They can produce a tank 10-20 tons heavier than T-90 its a possibility no? The industry is there. Whats required is a firm commitment from the Army. Because judging by IA demands they want a 50 ton tank, with light tank as well. Meaning they are replacing T-90 weight class and low weight class of t-72s. Not targeting the Arjun class at all! If the Chinese can have a heavy tank, Type 99AGZXABC a medium tank, Type 96, light tanks why can't India? If the T-90 was such a great design with now flaws, why is it using a French sights? Why even improve on it drastically like the T-14?
I'm not stepping on T-90 or T-14 or Russia. Just pointing out the BS. India knows its flaws. The operate too many T-90s not to know its flaws in desert conditions. lets see what India does.

The Arjun is dead project thats alive. Its got no long term future other than small orders, which cost a lot given its twice the price of T-90. But so is the T-90 no?

The only reason to have two tanks in service is that one is more capable but too expensive to be a standard tank so you have a less capable but cheaper tank as your numbers tank to make up numbers... you don't need super tanks everywhere and with APS and ERA most modern tanks are pretty tough to crack.

The problem for India is that the Arjun was supposed to be the expensive but capable tank... yet in many ways it is not.

In this situation... if it was me... and I admit right now that I am biased of course, I would say... OK we tried with the Arjun but at the end of the day it is never going to be an indigenous vehicle... there is no shame in that of course... most western tanks have 120mm smoothbores developed by west Germany, and have armours largely based on british designs... the Abrams has british armour, a german gun, and a belgian coaxial machine gun... and likely most of the electronics probably came from Japan or Taiwan... or China.

The point is that you have new tanks that are good enough... a T-90MS is a good tank... India does not need a better tank than that so trying to spend more money developing one, or licence producing some Indianised models is a total waste of time and money.

I would buy a licence to locally produce the T-90MS and get together with Russian companies to develop new ERA and new APS systems to make it even better. India will be paying for it but will also be producing it so no one can cut them off via sanction etc.

Also development of new more potent ammo would be valuable skills for India too.

T-14 had arrived, so the T-90 is pretty much outgunned right?

The T-14 is a better tank, but they use the same gun at the moment.

Perhaps India could break new ground and build a long range tank that has a 152mm tank gun in a fixed roof structure intended for long range engagements of enemy vehicles in open terrain. Limited gun traverse would not be that big a deal, but being able to open fire at enemy tanks at extended ranges would be valuable against the enemies they face...

If the T-90 was such a great design with now flaws, why is it using a French sights? Why even improve on it drastically like the T-14?

The main focus of the T-14 is protection of the crew. Another focus is standarisation.

There wont be a T-14 tank to replace the T-90, and a Kurganets IFV to replace the BMP-3 and a Boomerang APC to replace the BTR-82A in a mixed force of armatas, kurganets, and boomerangs.

There will be a tank armata and a tank kurganets and a tank boomerang... with the same turret and the same sensors and equipment... but different engines and different transmissions and different wheels/tracks.

An armata tank will operate with armata ifvs and armata apcs and armata command vehicles and armata air defence vehicles and armata engineer vehicles etc.

There will be armata divisions with only armata based vehicles, and it will be the same for the Kurganets and boomerang.

Armata divisions are a specialist unit intended for very specific roles and missions, where their armour is important.

In places like flat open plains with no roads the Kurganets divisions might be more suited, where their light weight and better mobility could be more valuable than heavier armour.

To go for armata... and that assumes it is for sale any time soon, you are replacing your entire fleet of vehicles and it would be very very very expensive to go for an all Armata fleet... these are heavy tank weight tank price vehicles... most of the Russian army will be lighter more mobile wheeled and tracked vehicles like Kurganets and Boomerang... and Typhoon for very light forces.

There is nothing wrong with the T-90MS... used sensibly it is perfectly able to hold its own against the best western armour... none of which India is likely to face in the next 10-20 years.

India should formulate exactly what it wants first and create realistic goals... designing a pure Indian made tank is bullshit... Russia only has all Russian tanks after decades of replacing Ukrainian and other components and buying French thermal sight designs and then adapting them to their own needs.

There are very few makers of tanks on this planet and most of them have spent a fortune developing each component and decades getting it right... and all have their flaws still.

The only reason to have two tanks in service is that one is more capable but too expensive to be a standard tank so you have a less capable but cheaper tank as your numbers tank to make up numbers... you don't need super tanks everywhere and with APS and ERA most modern tanks are pretty tough to crack.

The problem for India is that the Arjun was supposed to be the expensive but capable tank... yet in many ways it is not.

In this situation... if it was me... and I admit right now that I am biased of course, I would say... OK we tried with the Arjun but at the end of the day it is never going to be an indigenous vehicle... there is no shame in that of course... most western tanks have 120mm smoothbores developed by west Germany, and have armours largely based on british designs... the Abrams has british armour, a german gun, and a belgian coaxial machine gun... and likely most of the electronics probably came from Japan or Taiwan... or China.

The point is that you have new tanks that are good enough... a T-90MS is a good tank... India does not need a better tank than that so trying to spend more money developing one, or licence producing some Indianised models is a total waste of time and money.

I would buy a licence to locally produce the T-90MS and get together with Russian companies to develop new ERA and new APS systems to make it even better. India will be paying for it but will also be producing it so no one can cut them off via sanction etc.

Also development of new more potent ammo would be valuable skills for India too.

Thats what i've been saying. But heres the thing. If IA wants a tank, there is a need for 3 types of tanks. light medium and heavy. Not a single tank. Depending on the situation, you can move light tanks fast. Medium tanks can hold the ground and attack. Heavy tanks can go further, and hold the ground in LIC especially when the ammunition is protected. But heres the problem. Tanks don't need to better than other tanks! they just need to survive against infantry weapons (ATGM), IEDs, artillery and airforce. Does India need tanks to stop pakistans invincible Alkhalid tanks? No, India just needs to keep its superiority in the air against Pakistan. Does India needs tanks against China? Not really given, the infrastructure and mountain situation in Tibet. Bangladesh? Too many rivers. Use of tanks is limited. The only way India would use tanks against Pakistan is in cold start doctrine which might end being a nuclear environment. The other would be if India wants to invade a weak state. India will keep the Arjun, until eventually the technology is cheaper and domestic.

The T-14 is a better tank, but they use the same gun at the moment.

Perhaps India could break new ground and build a long range tank that has a 152mm tank gun in a fixed roof structure intended for long range engagements of enemy vehicles in open terrain. Limited gun traverse would not be that big a deal, but being able to open fire at enemy tanks at extended ranges would be valuable against the enemies they face...

Yes, its survivability is better but its not a going to win wars against NATO. No tank can survive long if the air is not friendly.

The main focus of the T-14 is protection of the crew. Another focus is standarisation.

There wont be a T-14 tank to replace the T-90, and a Kurganets IFV to replace the BMP-3 and a Boomerang APC to replace the BTR-82A in a mixed force of armatas, kurganets, and boomerangs.

There will be a tank armata and a tank kurganets and a tank boomerang... with the same turret and the same sensors and equipment... but different engines and different transmissions and different wheels/tracks.

An armata tank will operate with armata ifvs and armata apcs and armata command vehicles and armata air defence vehicles and armata engineer vehicles etc.

There will be armata divisions with only armata based vehicles, and it will be the same for the Kurganets and boomerang.

Armata divisions are a specialist unit intended for very specific roles and missions, where their armour is important.

In places like flat open plains with no roads the Kurganets divisions might be more suited, where their light weight and better mobility could be more valuable than heavier armour.

To go for armata... and that assumes it is for sale any time soon, you are replacing your entire fleet of vehicles and it would be very very very expensive to go for an all Armata fleet... these are heavy tank weight tank price vehicles... most of the Russian army will be lighter more mobile wheeled and tracked vehicles like Kurganets and Boomerang... and Typhoon for very light forces.

There is nothing wrong with the T-90MS... used sensibly it is perfectly able to hold its own against the best western armour... none of which India is likely to face in the next 10-20 years.

India should formulate exactly what it wants first and create realistic goals... designing a pure Indian made tank is bullshit... Russia only has all Russian tanks after decades of replacing Ukrainian and other components and buying French thermal sight designs and then adapting them to their own needs.

There are very few makers of tanks on this planet and most of them have spent a fortune developing each component and decades getting it right... and all have their flaws still.

What i'm hearing is basically new gen logistics and economics.

If IA wants a tank, there is a need for 3 types of tanks. light medium and heavy. Not a single tank.

Might I suggest that really a better option would be a MBT and a light gun platform.

Heavy tanks are overrated and with modern armour and NERA and APS systems actually hauling around heavy metal and composite armour wastes fuel and makes everything slower and heavier.

A good MBT... something like T-90MS for export should be plenty of tank for most roles. Sometimes however you need a lighter platform that can go places a T-90 can't and in that case you take an IFV based vehicle and put a long recoil full power tank gun on it and use it for fire support.

Another option for the lighter vehicle is to put a high velocity 57mm gun on it and also ATGMs of a new generation like ATAKA or Krisantema or Kornet-EM... these don't trail wires as they are laser beam riding or command guided, so the launching platform can continue to move during the weapons flight to the target... also because they don't drag wires they are supersonic which means less time to track the target.

In comparison a TOW missile launch from a Bradley means remaining stationary for about 30 seconds to max range of about 3.5km... not a good idea if the target is a T-72 firing back APFSDS rounds at 1.6km/s.

Tanks don't need to better than other tanks! they just need to survive against infantry weapons (ATGM), IEDs, artillery and airforce.

Depends who you talk to... most in the west see MBTs as vehicles that take on enemy tanks that also can provide direct fire fire support for infantry attacks.

For the Russians they see the tank as a vehicle that supports infantry operations... including fighting off enemy tank attacks.

If you think tanks don't need to be better than enemy tanks then take heavy tanks off the list... they are expensive to make... difficult to move around effectively and while they are well armoured there is no such thing as an invincible tank...

The other would be if India wants to invade a weak state. India will keep the Arjun, until eventually the technology is cheaper and domestic.

Mountains and waterways are not ideal for Arjun either... would it not therefore be better to just quietly drop the Arjun and just mass produce the T-90MS which has quite a bit in common with the existing fleet of T-72s.... use the T-90MS when the best quality is needed and T-72s to support them... maximise parts commonality so there is no real logistical problem in using both vehicles... as armour technology improves and APS systems improve you might eventually develop an amphibious tank for wet areas that is light enough to operate in mountains too...

Yes, its survivability is better but its not a going to win wars against NATO. No tank can survive long if the air is not friendly.

Air power didn't last long over the Ukraine and I would suggest that even against NATO that the much vaunted NATO air power would not last that long either... it tried to operate above 10,000m in Kosovo and many targets were misidentified because of that... against Russia.... well the US and Israel wont even fly over Syrian airspace with their F-35s and F-22s because they fear the S-300VM and the S-400... let alone all the other modge podge of systems there... imagine the airspace over a battlefield with Russian Army systems...

What i'm hearing is basically new gen logistics and economics.

Pretty much... there might be 500 to 1,000 armata tanks in total, but for every tank there will be 20 other vehicle types within the division so they are going to need quite a few platforms.

Rather more Kurganets tanks because they are lighter and cheaper... and likely lots of Boomerang because of their lightness and high mobility and low operating costs without tracks.

The logistics tail of each division will be minimised because parts will be interchangable between vehicles... wheels, tracks, engines, transmissions, etc, while guns and weapons and sensors and electronics will also be unified into suites like the avionics on an aircraft.

India: Reliance Infra to deliver parts of Arjun Mark II MBT prototypes ahead of schedule

https://www.armyrecognition.com/september_2018_global_defense_security_army_news_industry/india_reliance_infra_to_deliver_parts_of_arjun_mark_ii_mbt_prototypes_ahead_of_schedule.html

In my opinion, Arjun mk2 could be just a cashgrab for private partners or even DRDO.
The T90 is a excellent platform, is produced locally, is battle proven, russian has no problem with upgradation, then why reinvent the wheel. Just upgrade the hell out of it, and how hard can it be.

Arjun is no doubt the fail, but it isn't that big a faliure, that it's useless. It just can't perform at par with t90, just like how kaveri didn't perform at expected parameters, but it wasn't dead.

Its like "I have got a 70 ton of manure, it doesn't smell that bad.".

Anyways, era of tank warfare is coming to an end. Tank is useful for invasion against weaker defender with ak and rpgs. Not against relatively fortified countries like pakistan where tank would be outgunned by 5:1 with ATGMs from every direction.

No tank can survive a salvo of a dozen modern atgms. Similarly in mountains, atgms would be harrrasing the agressor trying to push into enemy territories.

Isos wrote: Military technology is also one of the only ways to get a high tech industry and a heavy industry that create a lot of jobs.

How? Companies are rather unwilling to invest solely into military technology because there is just one buyer - the government.

In my opinion, Arjun mk2 could be just a cashgrab for private partners or even DRDO.

People certainly will be making money, but the idea was supposed to be indigenous design and indigenous production, and in that sense I think it is a failure because it is made of so many foreign parts it might as well be a locally assembled foreign tank just like the T90 is.

I understand the principle an reasoning, but I also think they should be rather more sensible about what needs to be domestically made and what licence made.

It makes little sense to invest the money to develop and design brand new tanks just for India because at most you will be making 1-1,500 of them which is simply not enough to justify all the costs involved.

In comparison if they made Indian versions of the engine and transmission and other components and then used them on small boats and trucks and buses and other things domestically then it might start to make sense.

IMHO making their own tank is not as useful as joint development and local production of more potent ammo for their tanks...

For SAMs don't design your own just produce the missiles locally and make them in enormous numbers.

Anyways, era of tank warfare is coming to an end.

The era of the tank has been coming to an end for the last 40 years.... the land mine, the anti tank missile, the helicopter with anti tank missiles, the drone.

The tank has evolved and developed and the current best substitute for a tank is an armoured vehicle on tracks with a big powerful engine for mobility and a big powerful gun with lots of ammo under very heavy armour with ERA and APS and all sorts of stuff to protect it... you know.... a tank.

Tank is useful for invasion against weaker defender with ak and rpgs. Not against relatively fortified countries like pakistan where tank would be outgunned by 5:1 with ATGMs from every direction.

There are a range of systems that will stop an anti tank missile, and new airburst ammo designed to engage drones will just make running around with an ATGM more dangerous too.

To hold ground you need troops. To move those troops around the battlefield you need BMPs and BTRs, and to protect those BMPs and BTRs from enemy heavy armoured vehicles you need tanks that provide and receive support from the troop transporters and artillery etc etc.

New high fire power vehicles that provide convoy support like the Terminator might increase in use, but the tank is not dead... not by a long shot.

No tank can survive a salvo of a dozen modern atgms.

With systems like SHTORA and ARENA you actually can... and it depends how that tank is deployed and where...

Similarly in mountains, atgms would be harrrasing the agressor trying to push into enemy territories.

Tanks can carry missiles too, but shells from a gun often carry more HE power over a much greater range in direct fire use.

The T-72 can fire a HE Frag round to about 11km range...

India tried that with transfert of technology in its contracts but it failed because no one gives them actually the technology, only the right to make the assembly which isn't really helping their industry.

I think they need to be smarter with what they want to make... I thought making a super tank and using cheap T-72s was a bad idea.... the T-72 is already a good cheap tank, but their problem is that the domestic tank they make is not better than the T-90 the Russians sell them but it is more expensive.

I would have thought the Tegas was a good idea but they are trying to make it into a 5th gen light fighter when what they really should be developing is a real modern MiG-21 replacement that is affordable and able to be made and used in enormous numbers with good basic capabilities... not amazing, but solid and reliable and useful.

Instead their expectations seem too high so of course it fails...

I personally think the best cheap light fighter you could have would be to take a medium fighter and simplify it down to the basics with decent but not amazing features that is not too expensive to operate.... sort of like the MiG-29M/2.

Make it in large numbers to keep the price down... it is a modern capable aircraft that is not expensive to operate and maintain and you could make in numbers so you have lots of them and they are available.

Over time it can be upgraded with better stuff developed for the Mig-35 when that stuff becomes affordable and available.

Isos wrote: India tried that with transfert of technology in its contracts but it failed because no one gives them actually the technology, only the right to make the assembly which isn't really helping their industry.

I was referring to the West. Third world countries like India do not have the talent to develop a defense, aerospace industry. Nor do they have the capital required to sustain Research & Development in the defense sector.

Here in the U.S for small-to-medium companies in the mid- and lower-tiers of the sector, it generates something of a crisis of commercial confidence when it comes to investing heavily in developing precisely the kinds of technologies that the Pentagon needs for the future.

China, OTOH  is developing and acquiring key defense technologies through licit and illicit means. These include investment in private industries, talent recruitment programs, directing academic and research collaboration to military gain, forced technology transfer, intelligence gathering, and outright theft.

The ages of space, stealth, and precision strike had already arrived by 2000; progress has surely continued since then, yet it has been progress mostly of degree rather than of kind. And tasks that were difficult at the turn of the century, even for very advanced militaries, remain generally very hard today, including missile defense, most dimensions of anti-submarine warfare, and most aspects of infantry combat.

GarryB wrote:There are a range of systems that will stop an anti tank missile

Beam riding ATGMs like Kornet cannot be stopped. APS are not designed to intercept these beam riding missiles.