Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    T-90 MBT: News

    Share

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Mike E on Sat Sep 20, 2014 5:35 pm

    higurashihougi wrote:
    GarryB wrote:
    BTW The Abrams and Challenger and Leclerc don't have hard kill APS systems... the T-90s systems were developed but not deemed necessary.

    As far as I know, T-90AM has hardkill APS. But India's T-90MS seems not have it.

    Forgive me if I am wrong.

    Mike E wrote:and even defeated by RPG's one *multiple* occasions.

    Actually in an ambush there are a number of tank's weak points we can exploit, but then many people have named the RPG as God of Firepower (火神) for several good reasons...

    It doesn't not even though it could probably be configured with it...

    RPG's are "that powerful", typically it would take two or three shots to disable a MBT.

    NationalRus
    Senior Lieutenant
    Senior Lieutenant

    Posts : 637
    Points : 650
    Join date : 2010-04-11

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  NationalRus on Sat Sep 20, 2014 5:55 pm

    RPG's are "that powerful", typically it would take two or three shots to disable a MBT.

    RPG, liek the RPG-7 is not a weapon and not "powerful" its a briliant lunching mechanism, a timeless design like the AK, take a 1957 AKM, put a rail for optics on it, put a muzzle break on it for less recoil and more stability and you have a 21 century weapon, same with RPG, all depends on the warhead you use, more modern ones i will come, and we might see it in 2050 lunching guided missiles

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Mike E on Sat Sep 20, 2014 5:57 pm

    NationalRus wrote:
    RPG's are "that powerful", typically it would take two or three shots to disable a MBT.

    RPG, liek the RPG-7 is not a weapon and not "powerful" its a briliant lunching mechanism, a timeless design like the AK, take a 1957 AKM, put a rail for optics on it, put a muzzle break on it for less recoil and more stability and you have a 21 century weapon, same with RPG, all depends on the warhead you use, more modern ones i will come, and we might see it in 2050 lunching guided missiles
    They do have a great and useful design, but I was simply implying that they aren't "that powerful" and they still show flaws in Chobham.

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9443
    Points : 9935
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  George1 on Thu Nov 27, 2014 4:51 pm

    I love this sound..


    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9443
    Points : 9935
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  George1 on Sat Nov 29, 2014 2:47 am

    I have a question. Russian tank troops wear the standard Russian ground forces green beret or black beret??

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5391
    Points : 5640
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Werewolf on Sat Nov 29, 2014 11:47 am

    George1 wrote:I have a question. Russian tank troops wear the standard Russian ground forces green beret or black beret??

    Black barret.

    Here russian tank crew from the Tank biathlon recieving golden tank trophey.


    Mindstorm
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 737
    Points : 920
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Mindstorm on Fri Dec 26, 2014 3:07 pm

    It is good moment to return on a very old question more times touched in the past in this same thread : Arjun and T-90S and the outcome of the 2010 comparative trials allegedly resulting, in the totally unsubstantiated report, but strangely promptly publicized and highlighted in western media and forums, of a certain Indian ex Col....... , in a clear "victory" by part of Arjun


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

    This is what i had said instead on the same subject about two years ago (post 33 and 38 of this same thread )

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t2333p30-t-90-news

    Mindstorm wrote:Our dear ex Col. Ajai Shukla who return the the attack of the hated T-90S (and of the "inept and corrupt" Indian Army's Gotha) with its ,at best ,imaginative thesis Laughing


    We are still all anxiously hanging on ,since more than two years and half, the names of any Indian Army's official confirming a single word of its reconstruction of the comparative trial of Arjun and T-90S of Febraury 2010.



    Mindstorm wrote:Returning to our Ajai Shukla , Austin has someone ever ,up to this point, asked to it to provide a single OFFICIAL declaration or OFFICIAL chronicle of the facts related to the 2010 "comparative trials" by part of DRDO (who should have ANY reason , getANY benefit and suffer NO drawbacks in revealing OFFICIALLY that its product had shown in the comparative trials far better performances in respect to T-90S) and  confirming ITS VERSION Cool ?

    Do you know ,it is very ,very strange that the primary source providing this version of the facts is....JUST IT ,while any OFFICIAL source say simply that Arjun had (.....probably for the first time in its entire development's history) successfully passed all the trials.


    Now a first official document -Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India on Army, Ordnance Factories and Defence Public Sector Undertakings - seem to push the first light on the real results of the up-mentioned trials.

    http://www.saiindia.gov.in/english/home/Our_Products/Audit_Report/Government_Wise/union_audit/recent_reports/union_compliance/2014/Defence/Report_35/Report_35.html

    From Chapter VIII ,8.3.2.8 Testing and issue of MBT Arjun, pag. 164/165

    Comparative field trials of MBT Arjun with T-90 tanks took place in February/ March 2010.
    Till such time, the Army had been consistently reporting quality problems in MBT Arjun; this was also reported to the Standing Committee on Defence (2007-08). The comparative trials were on four parameters viz. fire power, survivability, reliability and miscellaneous issues of the tank with weightage of 40, 35, 15 and 10 respectively.
    As per the trial report, MBT Arjun performed marginally better than the T-90 tank in accuracy and consistency of firepower. However, T-90 tank performed better in lethality and missile firing capability. The Army concluded (April 2010) that “Arjun had performed creditably and it could be employed both for offensive and defensive tasks with same efficacy of T-90 tank.”

    The Army also recommended upgrades 154 to make the Arjun tank a superior weapon platform. We were informed (February 2014) that the Mark-II version of MBT Arjun was under trials by the Army and that it would include the upgrades recommended by the Army.
    We found that the MBT Arjun and T-90 tank were not exactly comparable in missile firing ability; the higher score of T-90 tank was mainly due to missile firing ability which was not in the design of MBT Arjun.
    Barring missile firing ability, the scores of MBT Arjun and T-90 tank would be 25.77 and 24.50 respectively in firepower. In the overall comparative score, T-90 tank scored 75.01, marginally higher than MBT Arjun which scored 72.46, mainly because of higher score on missile firing ability of T-90 tank.

    Therefore exactly as suspected was the T-90S at coming out on the top at the end of the comparative trials - 75.01 vs 72.46 -. and the unique good news from those trials fro the Arjun was, as i had foreseen , that Indian Army had for the first time found finally the domestic Arjun MBT worth of operational employment.    

    Even more important is to highlight that even removing totally the missile firing capability (that is already integrated and PAID FOR in what Indian Army get from the price of each of its T-90S ) Arjun MBT ,with its naturally much more up-to-date vectronic suit, would have achieved only a mere 1.27 points edge ,in the firepower score, over the most older FCS equiped T-90S.

     

    I find, at this point, simply PATHETICS the attempts ,in particular in some "suspect" forums, to still warp the spin of those cold numbers COMPLETELY DEBUNKING the version of the facts about the 2010 comparative trials ,  previously sold by some mercenary public media operator ,pointing on some minor differences in requirements (majority of which are anyhow vastly overcome also by today Indian T-90S) for Arjun in reason of the fact that the several development slippage in the program has trapped Arjun MBT  still in 2014 in the development phase  (now with MKII version) and this reality force the Indian Army to change cyclically the requirements to maintain the product more or less in line with worldwide requirements for its class at the time  .

    Immeasurably more severe and increased changes in the technical requirements  (for mobility, fire control ,reliability  and logistic performances)  has been put by MoD for only partial modernization of old tank fleet  (such as for the T-72B3 program).  


    Fact is that a '90 years MBT, such as T-90S ,enjoying by its same basis design concepts, simply crushing advantages in respect to any MBT designed on the opposite philosophy as explained in mine post 40 and 206 of this thread

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t2333p195-t-90-news

    had completed the comparative trials with Arjun in February 2010 COMING OUT ON THE TOP ,to the EXACT CONTRARY of what claimed in all those years by some well paid "spin doctor" present in the Indian public media and the following herd of easily guillable people deceived by its unsubstantiated claims.

    higurashihougi
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2130
    Points : 2245
    Join date : 2014-08-13
    Location : A small and cutie S-shaped land.

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  higurashihougi on Fri Dec 26, 2014 3:25 pm

    @Mindstorm: even though the Arjun managed to defeat T-90 in this competition, I believe we can say, Arjun is less successful than T-90.

    Arjun is 59 tonnes. T-90 is 47 tonnes. Arjun is 9,1 mil USD, while T-90 is 2.5-4.5 mil USD.

    Arjun is much heavier and much more expensive than T-90, but it is still more or less the same in quality.

    And T-90 has autoloader while Arjun still jerks off with manual loader.

    T-90 wins.

    Mindstorm
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 737
    Points : 920
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Mindstorm on Fri Dec 26, 2014 4:41 pm


    higurashihougi wrote:even though the Arjun managed to defeat T-90 in this competition, I believe we can say, Arjun is less successful than T-90.

    Interesting........say to me what part of 75.01 to 72.46 points result in favour of T-90S over Arjun is not clear to you ?

    It is simple : the alleged "victory" of Arjun over T-90S in the comparative trials was a simple, pure complete LIE .



    collegeboy16
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1207
    Points : 1234
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 20
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  collegeboy16 on Fri Dec 26, 2014 4:54 pm

    its always possible to tailor a competition to suit the inferior product. anyway what is insane is that arjun costs twice as much as the upper price range T-90, that kind of price is understandable for armata MBT but for an inferior leo 2 expy, no way Mad .

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5391
    Points : 5640
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Werewolf on Fri Dec 26, 2014 5:05 pm

    collegeboy16 wrote:its always possible to tailor a competition to suit the inferior product. anyway what is insane is that arjun costs twice as much as the upper price range T-90, that kind of price is understandable for armata MBT but for an inferior leo 2 expy, no way  Mad  .

    Well they need to compensate 30 years of development and pay everything off.

    collegeboy16
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1207
    Points : 1234
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 20
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  collegeboy16 on Fri Dec 26, 2014 5:15 pm

    Werewolf wrote:
    Well they need to compensate 30 years of development and pay everything off.
    and that is the even more irritating part- why should ordinary indian taxpayer shoulder fckups, its not like there wasnt a viable alternative at the time- hell they couldve just gone for a license of a western tank and it wouldve costed a lot less and be done before 30 years - like more than 50% of the tank is foreign made anyway.

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5391
    Points : 5640
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Werewolf on Fri Dec 26, 2014 5:28 pm

    collegeboy16 wrote:
    Werewolf wrote:
    Well they need to compensate 30 years of development and pay everything off.
    and that is the even more irritating part- why should ordinary indian taxpayer shoulder fckups, its not like there wasnt a viable alternative at the time- hell they couldve just gone for a license of a western tank and it wouldve costed a lot less and be done before 30 years - like more than 50% of the tank is foreign made anyway.

    Well, like the current western dictatorship politics which is driven by US shows, is that is indeed better to develope and procure own arms of all vital parts of a functioning MIC and military to proclaim military independence. The other option was actually if they somehow could make a deal for full Transfer of Technology for Leopard 2 tanks and produce them entirely independend of Germany in India then they should (if they could) go that path, but that is unlikely today, if such an opportunity existed than it was during the 90's and early-mid 00's.

    collegeboy16
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1207
    Points : 1234
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 20
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  collegeboy16 on Fri Dec 26, 2014 5:45 pm

    Werewolf wrote:
    Well, like the current western dictatorship politics which is driven by US shows, is that is indeed better to develope and procure own arms of all vital parts of a functioning MIC and military to proclaim military independence. The other option was actually if they somehow could make a deal for full Transfer of Technology for Leopard 2 tanks and produce them entirely independend of Germany in India then they should (if they could) go that path, but that is unlikely today, if such an opportunity existed than it was during the 90's and early-mid 00's.
    military independence is nice and all, but you have to have a military that can adequately do its job first. This thing missed the ultimate deadline- a real hot war ffs.

    magnumcromagnon
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4468
    Points : 4659
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Fri Dec 26, 2014 8:10 pm

    Mindstorm wrote:
    higurashihougi wrote:even though the Arjun managed to defeat T-90 in this competition, I believe we can say, Arjun is less successful than T-90.

    Interesting........say to me what part of 75.01 to 72.46 points result in favour of T-90S over Arjun is not clear to you ?

    It is simple : the alleged "victory" of Arjun over T-90S in the comparative trials was a simple, pure complete LIE .



    Interesting. We now have definitive evidence that Russian export versions of GLATGM's are better than their Israeli export equivalent, which should also translate with their domestic versions of the same system. I really hope no one tries to claim that Israeli GLATGM have 8 km range... lol1 lol1 lol1

    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5630
    Points : 6283
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Viktor on Fri Dec 26, 2014 8:13 pm

    As always when he appeares Very Happy

    My vote Mindstorm!

    Kyo
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 514
    Points : 563
    Join date : 2014-11-03
    Age : 67
    Location : Brasilia

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Kyo on Fri Dec 26, 2014 8:32 pm

    Well done, Mindstorm! Welcome back.

    collegeboy16
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1207
    Points : 1234
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 20
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  collegeboy16 on Fri Dec 26, 2014 10:15 pm

    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    Interesting. We now have definitive evidence that Russian export versions of GLATGM's are better than their Israeli export equivalent, which should also translate with their domestic versions of the same system. I really hope no one tries to claim that Israeli GLATGM have 8 km range... lol1 lol1 lol1
    against any modern tank LAHAT wont be effective as effective as reflex/reflex-m - the laser designator will trip the LWS and out pops the smoke. even if you only lase it for the last few seconds its still enough time for the smoke to pop(only takes barely a second) and obscure the tank. it will hit if the target is static but if it is moving the chance to hit is greatly reduced. then there is the problem that the enemy now knows exactly where you are (you just told him via laser) and has a round waiting for you as he emerges from the smoke cloud.

    magnumcromagnon
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4468
    Points : 4659
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Fri Dec 26, 2014 10:49 pm

    collegeboy16 wrote:
    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    Interesting. We now have definitive evidence that Russian export versions of GLATGM's are better than their Israeli export equivalent, which should also translate with their domestic versions of the same system. I really hope no one tries to claim that Israeli GLATGM have 8 km range... lol1 lol1 lol1
    against any modern tank LAHAT wont be effective as effective as reflex/reflex-m - the laser designator will trip the LWS and out pops the smoke. even if you only lase it for the last few seconds its still enough time for the smoke to pop(only takes barely a second) and obscure the tank. it will hit if the target is static but if it is moving the chance to hit is greatly reduced. then there is the problem that the enemy now knows exactly where you are (you just told him via laser) and has a round waiting for you as he emerges from the smoke cloud.

    Shtora also has the two "red eyes" as laser dazzlers, that may even prevent the LAHAT GLATGM from acquiring a target, meanwhile like you said the laser will alert to were the opfor's armor's location, where the laser beam riding (virtually impossible to jam) Reflex/-m GLATGM can fire back at a Merkava and it's manual loading apparatus.

    collegeboy16
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1207
    Points : 1234
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 20
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  collegeboy16 on Sat Dec 27, 2014 3:11 am

    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    Shtora also has the two "red eyes" as laser dazzlers, that may even prevent the LAHAT GLATGM from acquiring a target, meanwhile like you said the laser will alert to were the opfor's armor's location, where the laser beam riding (virtually impossible to jam) Reflex/-m GLATGM can fire back at a Merkava and it's manual loading apparatus.
    afaik the red eyes are for blinding SACLOS that use IR flare, but those are being phased out with more secure guidance systems so the red eyes are cut.
    the rumoured AESA radar on the tank could be used as jammer for radar guided missiles tho, add DIRCM and you have a mighty soft shield.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  GarryB on Sat Dec 27, 2014 10:24 am

    The new GLATGMs being developed for Armata will likely also be available to India soon enough, making the advantage even more sigificant.

    I would suspect the T-90MS would have done rather better... perhaps instead of wasting time trying to build indigenous tanks they should just look at licence production of the T-90MS for the moment and then work together with Russia to develop a new MBT tailored to Indias needs with domestic production of all components based on further experience... the future tank development can be based in the companies licence producing the T-90MS tanks so they get a bit of production experience and can then use that as a base to further develop new technologies for the next gen Indian tank.

    I personally would go for something like a T-90MS Burlak design with a 31 round auto loader in the turret bustle plus 22 round underfloor autoloader.

    The turret bustle autoloader would be more vulnerable to enemy fire but could be designed so that it can be jettisonned in action... ie if it is hit and catches fire and can't be saved turn turret 90 degrees to one side or the other and push a button and eject it to the side of the tank and drive away with 22 rounds in the under floor autoloader.

    Having the bustle able to be ditched like that would be beneficial as you could load them by crane like a rifle magazine so reloading will be quicker and easier and longer penetrators can be used if required.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Mindstorm
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 737
    Points : 920
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Mindstorm on Tue Dec 30, 2014 11:17 pm

    I want to return one more time on the subject of the result of the comparative trials, because it appear that the blind impudence of some fanatic has truly no limit.


    What i find amusing and pathetic at the same time, is how the herd of ignorant and easily gullible people that had in all those years blindly believed to the laughable version of the Arjun that had “smashed to shred” and "totally outclassed" in any cardinal parameter the T-90S in 2010 trials and that, on this imaginative version,  had constructed immense paper castles now ,with closed eyes and ears, still attempt to "play on the offensive" on the subject.......guided by some desperate but well paid spin doctor.......pointing on few statements referred to annex XIX and a question posed by the CAG on the possible “weight” that those requirement could had had.

    Those eight instances of different requirements between Arjun and T-90S  (some of which simply trivial by any extent and representing less than the MINIMUM for a MBT the development of which will, at best,  be completed  16 years  after T-90S ) has been put in the endless course of Arjun’s development phase and are in NOT WAY related to February 2010 trials.
    The 2010 trials has been obviously conducted in the same place ,fording the same river , shooting at the same targets  etc…etc…
    A simple statement on the subject by part of Indian Army would be sufficient, at this point, to utterly disintegrate theirs last frail hanging point.

    Someone must truly get an iron face to have even only have the courage to speak about “level playing field” in a comparative trial between a MBT like T-90S and one  like Arjun constructed (for development risk mitigation reasons) on western MBT philosophy.
    In facts  actually Indian Army is forced to prepare a similar “playing field” for the trial immensely unbalanced in favor of Arjun (or ,for any extent, any other western-like “heavy” MBT design) only in order to allow a competition to happen  !!!!

    If Indian Army would truly intend to free itself and ridicule, one time for all, that herd of easily gullible persons with theirs chiefs of few well-paid and attentively guided detractors , it should simply repeat the same comparative 2010 trials ( anyhow ended  75.01 to 72.46 in favor of T-90S ,to the exact contrary of what claimed by a dishonest mercenary spin doctor, and that in spite of a naturally older FCS and vectronic suit ) and :

    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 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.            


    If Indian Army would at this point act cruelly could ask the DRDO to produce those 14 Arjun for the same Indian tax payer money and in the same time of 14 T-90S ,even accounting for the projected decrease of the cost and time amount for procurement order equal to that of T-90S.    

    Is important to notice that to the contrary to the effect of FCS , Sensor suit ,Engine output, defensive suit  etc..etc…  ,that can be easily fitted and implemented in the two MBTs and in models  even more advanced and up-to-date (is sufficient to see the modernized T-90S –T-90MS “Tagil” to easily realize that) similar crushing constitutive advantages are embedded in the design and cannot be implemented or compensated for in any way by a tank constructed around  a western design.

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5391
    Points : 5640
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Werewolf on Fri Jan 02, 2015 3:30 am

    I wanted to ask about the feature that the side ERA on the hull front can be extended. I assume to have better protective capability, to predetonate incoming ATGM's, RPG's and HEAT tank rounds before they actually can reach the hull, for threats to the tank that are to an angle to the tank that the enemy can see the side of the tank. Is this system automated or does this system adjust the Angle of ERA Tiles to the threat via Gunners sight/commanders sight to always have the highest possible coverage of side armor and not open gaps for enemy?

    collegeboy16
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1207
    Points : 1234
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 20
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  collegeboy16 on Fri Jan 02, 2015 10:22 am

    Werewolf wrote:I wanted to ask about the feature that the side ERA on the hull front can be extended. I assume to have better protective capability, to predetonate incoming ATGM's, RPG's and HEAT tank rounds before they actually can reach the hull, for threats to the tank that are to an angle to the tank that the enemy can see the side of the tank. Is this system automated or does this system adjust the Angle of ERA Tiles to the threat via Gunners sight/commanders sight to always have the highest possible coverage of side armor and not open gaps for enemy?
    what you are describing seems very complex- and they'll probably reserve those for the armata. and afaik relik, which is the best ERA on any T-90 variant, is not remote detonated, and the Relikt lite on the hull which i assume is what you are talking about should'nt be any different.

    But for armata it would be very possible, the rounds would now occupy the entirety of the middle hull so it has to be protected very well esp for situations that expose the tank to much closer threats like in urban combat where precision hits aren't very uncommon. however while possible i think
    a predetonating ERA tile would be redundant against HEAT based weapons(western HEAT based weapons that is, since they are generally weak as p!ss- see peasant single charge copper(rpg-7 more like) m830 vs triple charged and possibly DU/W 3BK29M) with an effective APS in place, and of more use against APFSDSs and EFPs.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  GarryB on Fri Jan 02, 2015 10:31 am

    AFAIK it was only ever used on early T-72s and also from memory didn't include ERA, so these were just sheets of metal with rubberised material in support that could be angled forward in combat to act as stand off armour from frontal fire aimed at the sides of the tank.

    Never really saw it on later tanks so I suspect ERA works better.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Sponsored content

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 9:09 pm


      Current date/time is Thu Dec 08, 2016 9:09 pm