Arjun News & Discussions

[s6demon]

yes this peace of Junk has started moving. Moving really well indeed, hope u dont have any problem with that, have u?? but if you call a tank comparable to T-90, I wonder what do u call a tank which is not even comparable to T-72, Yes Al-khalid Indeed. A moving $hit?

sheez, I was just asking. chill!!!


one last question though. how often do you need to change the mule pulling this thing?

 

[LCA Tejas]

sheez, I was just asking. chill!!!


one last question though. how often do you need to change the mule pulling this thing?

answering your question is always my pleasure.... A a troll has to be dealt with a troll, a question has to be dealt with an answer, I am perfect in both the ways, did what suited the situation.... If you felt it so hard, same did we feel....

 

[flaming arrow]

sheez, I was just asking. chill!!!


one last question though. how often do you need to change the mule pulling this thing?

NOW HOW CAN WE DO THAT??? PULLING A TANK BY MULE IS SOMETHING MAY BE UR ARMY IS GOOD AT,HOW CAN WE COPY THIS GREAT TECH??? WE RUN IT ON ENGINES I KNOW WE ARE LIGHT YEARS BEHIND COMPARED TO THE PAKISTANI TECH

 

[s6demon]

NOW HOW CAN WE DO THAT??? PULLING A TANK BY MULE IS SOMETHING MAY BE UR ARMY IS GOOD AT,HOW CAN WE COPY THIS GREAT TECH??? WE RUN IT ON ENGINES I KNOW WE ARE LIGHT YEARS BEHIND COMPARED TO THE PAKISTANI TECH

I am not saying that India cant make anything good or anything of that sort.


I am just asking, wont the mule get in the way of the main gun??

 

[yuvabharat]

I am not saying that India cant make anything good or anything of that sort.


I am just asking, wont the mule get in the way of the main gun??

nope not like ur tanks

 

[thebrownguy]

I am not saying that India cant make anything good or anything of that sort.


I am just asking, wont the mule get in the way of the main gun??

It does, so we put the engines. No wonder all the delays. We do not have genius Engineers like you guys. The mule in way of the gun is a small issue, you guys have managed to get it done using tall creatures like camels along with mules !!! Pakistani tech no doubt is great!!!

 

[flaming arrow]

I am not saying that India cant make anything good or anything of that sort.


I am just asking, wont the mule get in the way of the main gun??

GUN???? arre yaar it has no gun are you not aware of the poor yindian mettalurgy,we cannot produce one..atleast not till the time we get our hands on the PAKISTANI MADE INDIGENOUS TANK NAMED AL KHALID

 

[thebrownguy]

GUN???? arre yaar it has no gun are you not aware of the poor yindian mettalurgy,we cannot produce one..atleast not till the time we get our hands on the PAKISTANI MADE INDIGENOUS TANK NAMED AL KHALID

Man all that technology imagine. How much "Camel Power " BCP , drives it?

 

[Hang em High]

I am not saying that India cant make anything good or anything of that sort.


I am just asking, wont the mule get in the way of the main gun??

I am no big engineer ... but wouldn't it be prudent to use two mules, that can pull the thing from left and right side

 

[thebrownguy]

I am no big engineer ... but wouldn't it be prudent to use two mules, that can pull the thing from left and right side

So the secret of AL Khalid is leaked!!!

 

[sancho]

sancho ji indigenous euipment increases as a tank is evolved around the year,arjun in its current avatar employs the finest videshi maal on it,iam talking about the best isreali elecronic equipment,When Arjun mk2 enter the arena it will have more indian euipment on it beacuse of the learning experience with the imported gadgets...

Imo, there can't be much we could have learned from, because simply integrating foreign parts without any co-development in it, won't make us better. Also cost can be reduced by numbers of units beeing made, but 124 (especially in terms of tanks) is a poor number and I blame IA for it!

Be in at Arjun, or LCA, it would have been wise to induct numbers first and upgrade/improve them later, instead of insisting on the MK 2 version of both developments from the start.

My point is, how can we get real experience with the tank, or improve it if only such a small number is operational? Imo, only during operational service, you will find out weakpoints and can improve, or fix them with the next upgrade. But complaining about problems from the start and delaying the whole development and production to get the MK2 version, won't help the forces, nor our industry!
I am not blaming the IA alone, our industry tend to delays and also overestimate their capabilities as we saw in LCA development too, but in other countries it's not going like this.

The German Leopard 2 tank is one of the best tanks in the world, but even they evolved the tank through the years and didn't wait for the improved version.

First Leopard 2 tank:

Actual Leopard 2A6:

And the next upgrade is already under development, Leopard 2A7:

The first order of Leopard 2 tanks was for 380 tanks, the second of improved 2A1 versions was even 750 tanks!


The Saab Gripen was developed nearly at the same time like LCA, of course they didn't have problems with a financial crisis and sanctions, but they was so smart to develop only those parts alone, that they could develop alone and went with JVs for the rest. We instead wanted to do everything on our own and now, when many things went wrong we search for partners to help us. EADS for weight reduction, Elta for MMR, Snecma for Kaveri engine and we still search for partners to make LCA carrier capable and for an AESA development.
The Gripen in the meantime developed from an interceptor in the A/B versions, over a 4. gen multi role fighter in C/D, to the 4.5 gen Gripen NG version now.
So if we had gone with Israel for a radar co-development (MMR and AESA later) and with France, or Russia for engine (both reliable partners for us) from the start, couldn't we had LCA MK1 years ago?
And why doesn't IAF start inducting LCA MK1 before? It wasn't underpowered at all:

LCA MK1 - around 6,4t at that time and 85kN with GE 404 - 20IN
Gripen C/D - around 6,8t and 80kN with early version of GE 404
JF 17 B1 - around 6,4t and 83kN with RD 93

Maybe Arjun MK1 lacks behind in some fields of IA expectations and maybe the T90s are better in some areas and more cost-effective, but we still had gone with Arjun in higher numbers to have a common base to improve from.
Same for LCA, maybe it was not as good as expected from IAF at the start and maybe it was only useful as an interceptor, but we could have replaced some Mig 21 yet and could improve it later to MK2 standard too.

Both was possible, both would have been better way to go, but now both is way too delayed and everybody is already thinking about NG projects like MCA, or futuristic tanks, but you can't move on before these developments are done and they are inducted in numbers!

 

[saurabh]

Imo, there can't be much we could have learned from, because simply integrating foreign parts without any co-development in it, won't make us better. Also cost can be reduced by numbers of units beeing made, but 124 (especially in terms of tanks) is a poor number and I blame IA for it!

Be in at Arjun, or LCA, it would have been wise to induct numbers first and upgrade/improve them later, instead of insisting on the MK 2 version of both developments from the start.

My point is, how can we get real experience with the tank, or improve it if only such a small number is operational? Imo, only during operational service, you will find out weakpoints and can improve, or fix them with the next upgrade. But complaining about problems from the start and delaying the whole development and production to get the MK2 version, won't help the forces, nor our industry!
I am not blaming the IA alone, our industry tend to delays and also overestimate their capabilities as we saw in LCA development too, but in other countries it's not going like this.

The German Leopard 2 tank is one of the best tanks in the world, but even they evolved the tank through the years and didn't wait for the improved version.

First Leopard 2 tank:

Actual Leopard 2A6:

And the next upgrade is already under development, Leopard 2A7:

The first order of Leopard 2 tanks was for 380 tanks, the second of improved 2A1 versions was even 750 tanks!


The Saab Gripen was developed nearly at the same time like LCA, of course they didn't have problems with a financial crisis and sanctions, but they was so smart to develop only those parts alone, that they could develop alone and went with JVs for the rest. We instead wanted to do everything on our own and now, when many things went wrong we search for partners to help us. EADS for weight reduction, Elta for MMR, Snecma for Kaveri engine and we still search for partners to make LCA carrier capable and for an AESA development.
The Gripen in the meantime developed from an interceptor in the A/B versions, over a 4. gen multi role fighter in C/D, to the 4.5 gen Gripen NG version now.
So if we had gone with Israel for a radar co-development (MMR and AESA later) and with France, or Russia for engine (both reliable partners for us) from the start, couldn't we had LCA MK1 years ago?
And why doesn't IAF start inducting LCA MK1 before? It wasn't underpowered at all:

LCA MK1 - around 6,4t at that time and 85kN with GE 404 - 20IN
Gripen C/D - around 6,8t and 80kN with early version of GE 404
JF 17 B1 - around 6,4t and 83kN with RD 93

Maybe Arjun MK1 lacks behind in some fields of IA expectations and maybe the T90s are better in some areas and more cost-effective, but we still had gone with Arjun in higher numbers to have a common base to improve from.
Same for LCA, maybe it was not as good as expected from IAF at the start and maybe it was only useful as an interceptor, but we could have replaced some Mig 21 yet and could improve it later to MK2 standard too.

Both was possible, both would have been better way to go, but now both is way too delayed and everybody is already thinking about NG projects like MCA, or futuristic tanks, but you can't move on before these developments are done and they are inducted in numbers!

Compare the threat perception by Germans and Sweden with India. They don't need the best they can get, we do. How many countries do you think would have agreed on JVs till 2000, with our weak economy. We had a nuke test in 70's and then 98. If it was not for our booming economy, how many JVs do you expect we would be having?

And are you sure we didn't tried for any help? Cause AFAIK we did, but 98 ruined all those efforts.

 

[sancho]

Compare the threat perception by Germans and Sweden with India. They don't need the best they can get, we do. How many countries do you think would have agreed on JVs till 2000, with our weak economy. We had a nuke test in 70's and then 98. If it was not for our booming economy, how many JVs do you expect we would be having?

And are you sure we didn't tried for any help? Cause AFAIK we did, but 98 ruined all those efforts.

Mate the Leopard 2 tank was developed in the 70s during cold war, when half of Europe was more that afraid of the 10 000s Russian tanks. So they had to be ready and capable from the beginning too!

Also would LCA MK1 wouldn't be able to do the job it was meant for?
The GE 404 - 20IN engine is integrated, R73 short range missiles was testfired as well as dumb bombs. It was reported that the MMR was ok for A2A modes and that A2G modes was integrated from the Israeli 2032 radar later. As I pointed out in the last post, the T/W ratio was ok too, so the main duty of the LCA, interception, it was ready!
Why the delays in induction then, why not upgrade radar and more A2G capabilities (that are limited at LCA anyway) later and develop an improved version with lessons learned during operational service, like everybody else does too?
I mentiond the Saab Gripen earlier, but every country exept us is doing it that way. EF tranche 1 was had only A2A capabilities and in T2 some multi role was added, same for the French Rafale in F1 and F2 standard. The early US F16 A/B, that PAF uses too, had also only A2A capabilities and was improved during service in later batches. We instead are testing LCA for years only and just 1, maybe 2 squads of the MK1 will be ordered, but in the meantime the MK2 will be developed. What if we find out other weak points after the first MK1 squad is inducted, is there still time for changes of the MK 2 upgrade?

It is simply not a logic way to go imo and we can say similar about Arjun development too.

Btw, I said we should have gone with co-developments from the start of the LCA development, way before sanctions and AFAIK neither Russia, France, nor Israel posed sanction on us or?

 

[saurabh]

Mate the Leopard 2 tank was developed in the 70s during cold war, when half of Europe was more that afraid of the 10 000s Russian tanks. So they had to be ready and capable from the beginning too!

Oh yeah, I forgot that!
But you also forgot Germans were experienced tank makers. Leopard 1 was one of the best. While Arjun was just a first attempt. So if German believed that they can evolve L2 afterwards while Indian army placed doubts, nothing wrong with that.

Also would LCA MK1 wouldn't be able to do the job it was meant for?
The GE 404 - 20IN engine is integrated, R73 short range missiles was testfired as well as dumb bombs. It was reported that the MMR was ok for A2A modes and that A2G modes was integrated from the Israeli 2032 radar later. As I pointed out in the last post, the T/W ratio was ok too, so the main duty of the LCA, interception, it was ready!
Why the delays in induction then, why not upgrade radar and more A2G capabilities (that are limited at LCA anyway) later and develop an improved version with lessons learned during operational service, like everybody else does too?
I mentiond the Saab Gripen earlier, but every country exept us is doing it that way. EF tranche 1 was had only A2A capabilities and in T2 some multi role was added, same for the French Rafale in F1 and F2 standard. The early US F16 A/B, that PAF uses too, had also only A2A capabilities and was improved during service in later batches. We instead are testing LCA for years only and just 1, maybe 2 squads of the MK1 will be ordered, but in the meantime the MK2 will be developed. What if we find out other weak points after the first MK1 squad is inducted, is there still time for changes of the MK 2 upgrade?

I can only make a guess. PAF had no other (better) choice, while USAF doesn't needs multirole FAC, it has plenty for specialized role. European countries already have pretty good planes. They also have extra money to induct a limited capacity plane, or may they inducted due to some other reasons, dont know abou their policy.

About tejas, its indigenous radar was not up to the mark. And DRDO was insistent that they can make it. So it wasn't worth inducting till foreign components like radar, ew suite etc were purchased. After the purchase, IAF has agreed on the induction.

It is simply not a logic way to go imo and we can say similar about Arjun development too.

About Arjun, its problems are highly debatable, so cant say anything.

Btw, I said we should have gone with co-developments from the start of the LCA development, way before sanctions and AFAIK neither Russia, France, nor Israel posed sanction on us or?

Because till a few years back, DRDO/HAL were confident that they can do it all, on their own. It hit them pretty late, that they are inexperienced, and could take external help. This was all the problem for not inducting LCA. Cannot blame them for this though.

 

[pop_alsa]

Problem is not with capabilities of DRDO. They have done better than what anyone else can do, with a penny budget and shitty third-world salaries.

Problem is with systemic corruption(both Armed Forces+MoD) to scuttle domestic defense projects and arrogant media who support imports lobby.

For example, just look at Indian AWACS project. Now when all sensors and RADAR is ready for integration(after 10 years of hard work) onto Brazilian Embraer aircraft, suddenly IAF jumped in and said - "we don't want Embraer. we changed our mind now. Please choose a new aircraft."

So, very smartly IAF and MoD has once again delayed one more DRDO project and soon they will kill it.

I mean what the hell? Let DRDO test home-made AWACS RADAR out on Embraer, in air. Then you can change aircraft later. Why delay it more?

By the way, those who accuse DRDO of lagging in AWACS programme are not aware that DRDO's first test of AWACS RADAR happened 10 years back which met a crash due to issues with aircraft.

And, because of not enough budget DRDO didn't have any backup aircraft & RADAR to continue the programme. This is how much our babus are serious about domestic R&D.