Go Back   Team-BHP > BHP India > Commercial Vehicles


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 18th October 2009, 18:38   #31
BHPian
 
anmol2k4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Gr. Noida Aka Gurrator Naveda
Posts: 193
Thanked: 5 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by singh.amrit View Post
Too wide a tank may seem a trivial reason but it is a major issue , India , since its inception has been using Russian weaponry (majority) , and has all the transport / storage / service facilities catering to their machinery and standards .

Incorporating a new tank means - new storage areas have to be made , bigger transport vehicles are needed , different maintenance facilities are needed.. etc etc .. all this , corruption apart are reasons causing the demise of the ARJUN project. It was a good tank (as per some critics online) , but the truth being that its induction could have fueled better and more sophisticated generations of indigenous tanks in future .
Are agreeing or disagreeing with me ?

IMHO, we can adjust our logistics network to newer defense systems and while doing so we generate employment, contribute to economy, fund further advancement of indigenous defense systems and this also helps when we go out to sell our defense products which help make useful friends.

Whereas our dependence on videshi maal makes us extremely vulnerable to sanctions, at the same time we help generate employment elsewhere and negatively contribute to trade deficit. And while we can modify and update our own systems, we cannot do so with videshi maal. Look at Mirage update saga. And we also miss out own the opportunity of strengthening strategic relations through defense sales.

Whether mediocre or not, but we have to start from somewhere. But to our defense establishment, healthy bribes from videshis is their most serious concern.

Edit: Take a look at ISRO, do you think we could have reached moon if our babus would have been given opportunity to buy rockets and launch systems rather than making it on our own ? I know we cannot due to MTCR yet these restrictions have made us self reliant and today we provide the most economical space launch, remote sensing and transponder leasing services.

Last edited by anmol2k4 : 18th October 2009 at 18:48.
anmol2k4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th October 2009, 18:39   #32
Senior - BHPian
 
agspins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: MH-31
Posts: 1,571
Thanked: 305 Times
Default

Basically Al Khalid Tank is Chinese Type 90 tank which is based on or we can say very much a modified version of Soviet T-54 tank....Even more advanced Al Khalid II is under development.....
agspins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th October 2009, 18:40   #33
BHPian
 
NutsNBolts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Kochi
Posts: 796
Thanked: 20 Times
Default

Foxbat, I posted that pic not to show indigenous ships, but asked a question, can't we term Ships as military vehicles as well. You are right about Kashin. Tanker in the middle is also ex-Russia and the Corvette is indigenous one.
NutsNBolts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th October 2009, 19:31   #34
BHPian
 
anmol2k4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Gr. Noida Aka Gurrator Naveda
Posts: 193
Thanked: 5 Times
Cool Mumbai PoliceMahindra Marksman

MARKSMAN (Indigenously developed, though armor is imported)

Mahindra Marksman is India’s first armored capsule based light bullet proof vehicle to provide protection to the personnel of Defence, Para Military and Police forces against small arms fire and under belly grenade attacks. It has capability to be used in counter terrorist as well as conventional roles.

FEATURES:

Ballistic Protection

Sides: can withstand three direct hits of 7.62 X 51mm NATO Ball M80, 7.62 X 39mm Ball PS and 5.56 X 45mm Ball M 193 at a distance of 10m at 90º angle attack.

Top: can withstand three direct hits of above ammunition at a distance of 10m at 45º angle attack.

Floor: protection against two DM 51(German norm) hand grenades detonated under the vehicle simultaneously.

Additional protection: All joints and welding have overlap. The rear stowage boxes provide protection to crew when using the rear door.

Quote:
Cuppola has an machine gun mount with 270º traverse and protection. Seven crew firing ports. Outward facing configured rear seat and wide bulletproof windows allows total operational orientation of the crew sitting at the rear. Search light mounted on top of the vehicle controlled from inside the vehicle by the driver/co driver. Rear view camera and a TV screen for the driver and co driver to see the dead zone behind the vehicle. Air conditioning option available. Military/user specified stowage and fittings can be catered for.

OPERATIONAL ROLES


Counter Terrorist Operations
Patrolling in high intensity areas
Special Forces operations
Quick Reaction Teams
Mobile Check Points
Convoy protection and escort

Conventional Operations
Armed reconnaissance
Raids/road blocks in open/desert terrain
Convoy protection


SPECIFICATIONS
Weight :-
Gross Vehicle Weight : 3200Kg
Payload : 600Kg
Un-laden Weight : 2600Kg

Seating Capacity : 6 [2 (driver, co–driver) + 4(rear)]

Engine :-
Engine : 2.49 Litres, CRDE BS-3
Max Gross Power : 77 kW (105bhp)@3800rpm
Max Torque : 228 Nm@1800-2200rpm

Transmission :-
NGT 530R
Type : 5 forward, 1 Reverse
Drive : 4WD
Axle Ratio : 4.55

Steering - Power Steering

Brakes :-
Front : Disc & Calliper
Rear : Drum type

Suspension :-
Independent front suspension, Rear-
Rigid Leaf Spring alongwith shock absorber

Wheel & Tyres
Wheels: Tube Type Highway and Run flat system available as optional
Tyres : 7.50X16

Dimensions (mm) :-
Length : 4390
Width : 1863
Height : 2030 (un-laden)
Wheel Base : 2375
Ground clearance : 240

Turning circle radius : 5.8 m

Speed on Road : 100 Km/hr
Attached Thumbnails
Indigenously developed Military Vehicles.-marks.jpg  

Indigenously developed Military Vehicles.-marks10.jpg  

Indigenously developed Military Vehicles.-marks2.jpg  

Indigenously developed Military Vehicles.-marks5.jpg  

Indigenously developed Military Vehicles.-marks11.jpg  

Indigenously developed Military Vehicles.-marks7.jpg  

Indigenously developed Military Vehicles.-marks8.jpg  

Indigenously developed Military Vehicles.-marks9.jpg  

Indigenously developed Military Vehicles.-marks12.jpg  

Indigenously developed Military Vehicles.-marks14.jpg  

Indigenously developed Military Vehicles.-marks15.jpg  

Indigenously developed Military Vehicles.-marks16.jpg  

Indigenously developed Military Vehicles.-marks17.jpg  

Indigenously developed Military Vehicles.-marks18.jpg  

Indigenously developed Military Vehicles.-marks19.jpg  

Indigenously developed Military Vehicles.-marks20.jpg  

Indigenously developed Military Vehicles.-marks21.jpg  

Indigenously developed Military Vehicles.-marks22.jpg  

Indigenously developed Military Vehicles.-marks23.jpg  

Indigenously developed Military Vehicles.-marks24.jpg  

Indigenously developed Military Vehicles.-marks25.jpg  

Attached Images
  
anmol2k4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th October 2009, 20:55   #35
BHPian
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Noida
Posts: 104
Thanked: 0 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by anmol2k4 View Post
Are agreeing or disagreeing with me ?

IMHO, we can adjust our logistics network to newer defense systems and while doing so we generate employment, contribute to economy, fund further advancement of indigenous defense systems and this also helps when we go out to sell our defense products which help make useful friends.

Whereas our dependence on videshi maal makes us extremely vulnerable to sanctions, at the same time we help generate employment elsewhere and negatively contribute to trade deficit. And while we can modify and update our own systems, we cannot do so with videshi maal. Look at Mirage update saga. And we also miss out own the opportunity of strengthening strategic relations through defense sales.

Whether mediocre or not, but we have to start from somewhere. But to our defense establishment, healthy bribes from videshis is their most serious concern.

Edit: Take a look at ISRO, do you think we could have reached moon if our babus would have been given opportunity to buy rockets and launch systems rather than making it on our own ? I know we cannot due to MTCR yet these restrictions have made us self reliant and today we provide the most economical space launch, remote sensing and transponder leasing services.
Disagreeing on the part that being too wide was the only reason for its rejection , that matter apart , I read somewhere that one Battalion of Arjun has been approved and induction is in progress .
singh.amrit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th October 2009, 22:13   #36
R_R
BHPian
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Gurgaon
Posts: 121
Thanked: 26 Times
Default

The Arjun is hardly indigenous: its engine and key components such as the fire control system are imported.

OT: I do think that we need to indigenise, but we also need to be practical and pragmatic, focussing on stuff that we cannot get for love or money (such as long-range missile, for example) rather than tanks and assault rifles etc. for which there are many, many willing sellers.
R_R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th October 2009, 22:25   #37
BHPian
 
rajathv8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 233
Thanked: 207 Times
Default

the marksman has aircon vents and rims from a scorpio???
rajathv8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th October 2009, 01:28   #38
BHPian
 
anmol2k4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Gr. Noida Aka Gurrator Naveda
Posts: 193
Thanked: 5 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by R_R View Post
The Arjun is hardly indigenous: its engine and key components such as the fire control system are imported.
Just like Chinese Type 99 and Pakistani Al-Khalid, Chinese have German engine whereas Pakistanis have used Ukrainian engine.

And yes all these tanks areIndigenous, for example we can sell Arjuna and Chinese and Pakistanis can sell their T-99 and Al Khalid to prospective buyers but in case of Bhishma we cannot.

Quote:
Originally Posted by R_R View Post
OT: I do think that we need to indigenise, but we also need to be practical and pragmatic, focussing on stuff that we cannot get for love or money (such as long-range missile, for example) rather than tanks and assault rifles etc. for which there are many, many willing sellers.
You do know that buying Arjuna would mean we are Investing in Indian economy and Indian Military-industrial complex, that would generate employment and and we won't be vulnerable to sanctions. Whereas buying Russian tanks would mean we would also be investing in Russian Military-industrial complex and generating employment in Russia.

Still Army is buying Russian tanks in thousands and ordering only hundreds of Arjuna(Not even allowing CVRDE to break even on the project) This is when our own product is ready after many years of development.

And BTW, due to large defense purchases we have a huge trade deficit which means we are already living beyond our means.

Still you think it is pragmatic to buy Tanks from outside. .

And what does long range missiles have anything to do with Tanks purchase ?
anmol2k4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th October 2009, 07:33   #39
BHPian
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 158
Thanked: 68 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by anmol2k4 View Post

Still Army is buying Russian tanks in thousands and ordering only hundreds of Arjuna(Not even allowing CVRDE to break even on the project) This is when our own product is ready after many years of development.

And BTW, due to large defense purchases we have a huge trade deficit which means we are already living beyond our means.

Still you think it is pragmatic to buy Tanks from outside. .
@anmol2k4: Firstly, i am proud of Arjun MBT that India could make a tank which can be compared to US Abrams MBT. However i do not agree with you statements above.

Take the balanced view on Army's objections: the first and foremost of Army's objection is Weight (not just width). T90S tanks battle weight is 46 tons. Whereas MBT Arjun's battle weight is 58tons. Army pointed out that many of the bridges in the boarder regions cannot hold weight beyond 50tons. Now imagine if a tank platoon is asked to respond quickly to an escalating situation in war and we have many old bridges to cross in the path, Arjun would be a bummer in that scenario as it cannot cross on those old bridges.

I agree that there is multiple levels of mudslinging happening from both sides(DRDO and Army). Some Army officers who are responsible for qualifying the armament have shown multiple deficiencies and used that as an excuse to buy T90 as stop gap. Besides T90 has best self defense and firecontrol mechanisms than Arjun.

On the other hand DRDO is trying to push the same product without much changes. So Arjun is embroiled in a turf war between these two organizations.

Well look at the brighter side, have you ever heard of Tank-Ex from DRDO? They started mating lighter tank chasis with Bofors Howitzer guns and started producing much lighter tank. MBT Arjun is a first tank developed by India. We should use the key learnings and technology deveoped during this project to comeup with newer solutions.

Cheers!
-Vaspro

Last edited by vaspro : 26th October 2009 at 07:37.
vaspro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th October 2009, 10:09   #40
Senior - BHPian
 
shankar.balan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: BLR
Posts: 8,027
Thanked: 5,326 Times
Default

the beige marksman clearly looks like it is built on the Scorpio platform.
see the alloy wheels used in the side profile pics and of course the entire interiors - dashboard facia, air vents, steering wheel, instrument panel/ console etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by anmol2k4 View Post
MARKSMAN (Indigenously developed, though armor is imported)

Mahindra Marksman is India’s first armored capsule based light bullet proof vehicle to provide protection to the personnel of Defence, Para Military and Police forces against small arms fire and under belly grenade attacks. It has capability to be used in counter terrorist as well as conventional roles.
Note from Team BHP Support
Please don't quote a large post.
It causes inconvenience to dial up and mobile users
Thanks,

Last edited by bblost : 26th October 2009 at 16:58. Reason: Explained in post.
shankar.balan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th October 2009, 16:51   #41
BHPian
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 139
Thanked: 10 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Parm View Post
dude you seriously need to read newspapers!

DRDO has been trying to put together a tank for last 30 years and you gave all the credit to T-90!

come on dude show some respect to DRDO!
actually it is in the newspaper that i remember reading about that. i take immense pride in the work and research done by DRDO.
thats the reason the line read 'if 'm not wrong...'. nothing about not showing respect to DRDO.

@others: thanks for clearing the confusion for me
somspaple is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th October 2009, 19:16   #42
BHPian
 
neel385's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Kharagpur
Posts: 530
Thanked: 401 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Parm View Post
come on dude show some respect to DRDO!
From what I have imbibed, respect needs to be commanded, NOT demanded. Lets find a good reason for respecting the work done by DRDO. Has any of their projects fructified in time? Have any of their projects met the ultimate user requirements-the Armed forces. Yes, there are a few Radars, the Indira and Rajendras which are showing promise, but other than that,there are very few successful projects that DRDO can boast of. On the other hand, the Armed Forces have had to pay a very heavy price for DRDO's incompetence! The most torrid example was of and Air Force pilot loosing his life when field trials of a bomb fuse was being carried out. The fuse malfunctioned and the bomb exploded immediately on leaving the aircraft causing the aircraft to explode in mid-air.

Quote:
Originally Posted by anmol2k4 View Post
Sadly, our own corrupt babudom and the army deal brokers have refused to purchase Arjuna in adequate quantities, even though the DRDO( makers of the tank) is challenging Army to hold trials between Arjun and the Russian tank which is favorite of Army but Army has been delaying those trials.

Reason for all this: Arjuna is too wide.

Tell me who will buy Indian product if our own defense forces will refuse to buy it. It is sad fact, our defense forces and the babudom are more than happy to contribute to the trade defect.

The only way out of this mess is the privative the production and marketing of Indigenously developed defense products, and leave R&D to the various labs. Because Indian private sector is as good as anyone else in bribing the babudom and the brokers.


Quote:
Originally Posted by singh.amrit View Post
Too wide a tank may seem a trivial reason but it is a major issue , India , since its inception has been using Russian weaponry (majority) , and has all the transport / storage / service facilities catering to their machinery and standards .

Incorporating a new tank means - new storage areas have to be made , bigger transport vehicles are needed , different maintenance facilities are needed.. etc etc .. all this , corruption apart are reasons causing the demise of the ARJUN project. It was a good tank (as per some critics online) , but the truth being that its induction could have fueled better and more sophisticated generations of indigenous tanks in future .
The defense forces have a lot to look at at besides the trade deficit. We are talking about the defense of a nation here which should be beyond the trade deficit.
Any equipment that hinders mission accomplishment cannot be accepted! And the Arjun is a case in point! The QRs laid down by the Army specified a certain max weight. The Arjun well exceeds that. This severly restricts the mobility of the tank. In an eventuality that a Armoured formation needs to be quickly re-deployed, it is done by rail. Due to its weight, the Arjun cannot be moved by rail-a very severe limitation! Besides this vital reason, the initial Arjun had severe engine reliability issues, which have been sorted out to a certain extent which is the reason why the Army has finally accepted it.
neel385 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th October 2009, 20:47   #43
BHPian
 
anmol2k4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Gr. Noida Aka Gurrator Naveda
Posts: 193
Thanked: 5 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vaspro View Post
Take the balanced view on Army's objections: the first and foremost of Army's objection is Weight (not just width). T90S tanks battle weight is 46 tons. Whereas MBT Arjun's battle weight is 58tons. Army pointed out that many of the bridges in the boarder regions cannot hold weight beyond 50tons. Now imagine if a tank platoon is asked to respond quickly to an escalating situation in war and we have many old bridges to cross in the path, Arjun would be a bummer in that scenario as it cannot cross on those old bridges.
And that is the exactly the attitude that I dislike about Army-Babu complex, rather than upgrading the infrastructure like China is doing we are using such silly excuse to destroy years of work. I don't think any engineer would be motivated to work upon and improve the Tanks in future due to such attitude. And I am sure you understand that Arjun won't be the only tank in the inventory.

For same reason we will shut down a project which to decades to fruition, and yes this is exactly what would happen as army is not even interested to order in a quantity that would allow the project to break even.

And correct me if I am wrong (I am no defense expert), aren't we supposed to use Arjun against the Al-Khalid of Pakistan in Indo-Pak border (mostly plain) region. And can Bhishma me operated in the Indo-China Himalayan range ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by vaspro View Post
I agree that there is multiple levels of mudslinging happening from both sides(DRDO and Army). Some Army officers who are responsible for qualifying the armament have shown multiple deficiencies and used that as an excuse to buy T90 as stop gap.

On the other hand DRDO is trying to push the same product without much changes. So Arjun is embroiled in a turf war between these two organizations.

Then Army shouldn't be delaying the comparative trial, and why did Army chief said that he is satisfied with it ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by vaspro View Post
Well look at the brighter side, have you ever heard of Tank-Ex from DRDO? They started mating lighter tank chasis with Bofors Howitzer guns and started producing much lighter tank.

If that is the bright side then we should be in Dark, as (just like Arjun) it have been rejected by the Army. And trust me if the proposal had Russians involved then the Babu-Army complex would have approved it instantaneously.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vaspro View Post
MBT Arjun is a first tank developed by India. We should use the key learnings and technology deveoped during this project to comeup with newer solutions.
Army have not even allowed the project to break even so what makes you think DRDO would consider taking such a huge risk again ?,and do you think the engineers who worked upon it for decades would be motivated to do that ? Do you expect any young engineer would want to go through what people working on Arjun went through ?

Last edited by anmol2k4 : 26th October 2009 at 20:51.
anmol2k4 is offline   (1) Thanks Reply With Quote
Old 26th October 2009, 21:44   #44
BHPian
 
anmol2k4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Gr. Noida Aka Gurrator Naveda
Posts: 193
Thanked: 5 Times
Unhappy

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
From what I have imbibed, respect needs to be commanded, NOT demanded. Lets find a good reason for respecting the work done by DRDO. Has any of their projects fructified in time? Have any of their projects met the ultimate user requirements-the Armed forces. Yes, there are a few Radars, the Indira and Rajendras which are showing promise, but other than that,there are very few successful projects that DRDO can boast of. On the other hand, the Armed Forces have had to pay a very heavy price for DRDO's incompetence! The most torrid example was of and Air Force pilot loosing his life when field trials of a bomb fuse was being carried out. The fuse malfunctioned and the bomb exploded immediately on leaving the aircraft causing the aircraft to explode in mid-air.
If you are using that freak (but sad and unfortunate) accident to label DRDO as incompetent and for justifying Army's refusal to purchase and support indigenous defense products, then it is even bigger reason for Defense forces to purchase indigenous products, as they have lost far more personnel due to malfunctioning Russian arms and aircrafts.


Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
The defense forces have a lot to look at at besides the trade deficit. We are talking about the defense of a nation here which should be beyond the trade deficit.
I disagree, as it is not at all wise to go beyond our means. Let me give you a very appropriate example; as you may know China have upgraded their infrastructure around Indo-China border and especially around Arunachal Pradesh and that have given them an edge over us and goosebumps to Defense strategists in India. And when Indian government tried to do same they found that due to current trade defecit they don't have the money so they went to ADB to borrow money for development. And China vetoed against the loan proposal. And that is why we should be very concerned about our trade deficit, even though defense and security angle.


Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
Any equipment that hinders mission accomplishment cannot be accepted! And the Arjun is a case in point! The QRs laid down by the Army specified a certain max weight. The Arjun well exceeds that. This severly restricts the mobility of the tank. In an eventuality that a Armoured formation needs to be quickly re-deployed, it is done by rail. Due to its weight, the Arjun cannot be moved by rail-a very severe limitation! Besides this vital reason, the initial Arjun had severe engine reliability issues, which have been sorted out to a certain extent which is the reason why the Army has finally accepted it.
As i have replied to Vaspro, it won't be the only tank in inventory, I am one of those people who believe that war isn't fought every day and war between India and China will be on the direction of leadership of respective nations. And that being the case they would be less concerned about details and more about numbers.

And you may also know that Chinese arms are considered of very poor quality especially compared to Russian arms, that is according to reports from the Russian people doing consultancy. And you know very well what is the record of Russians arms in India when it comes down to their quality and reliability.

As far as Pakistan is concerned where Army calls the shots, our border region with them where tanks would be deployed is mostly plains. So its weight won't be an issue.

Again, I am of belief that we won't have to use these things, wars would mostly involve missiles. And these things will be used simply to scare people and if we have to deal with China then we have to act just like them. That means we have to prop up a friendly nation against it. And selling Arjun like they did with Al-Khalid will be of great help.

All in all, we have to play psychological game and for that we should use Indigenous product which will cost us nothing.


Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
From what I have imbibed, respect needs to be commanded, NOT demanded. Lets find a good reason for respecting the work done by DRDO. Has any of their projects fructified in time?
I am sorry but you should expect that when their work is mostly overlooked, intentionally delayed with feature creeps and rejected. Imported arms are opted our own and even the projects of national importance is flushed down the toilet after decades of work and billions spent.

Look at ISRO for example there was no alternative and see how far they have come, and when scientists are not very different what would you attribute their success to ?

I think it is because they didn't have Babu-Army complex which could reject their product.

If only DRDO could bribe..............

And yes respect needs to be commanded.
anmol2k4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th October 2009, 22:57   #45
BHPian
 
neel385's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Kharagpur
Posts: 530
Thanked: 401 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by anmol2k4 View Post
If you are using that freak (but sad and unfortunate) accident to label DRDO as incompetent and for justifying Army's refusal to purchase and support indigenous defense products, then it is even bigger reason for Defense forces to purchase indigenous products, as they have lost far more personnel due to malfunctioning Russian arms and aircrafts.
Freak you say my friend? Let us see....when the IAF wanted to float a global tender to replace the MiG 21 fleet in 1981, the DRDO said that they will provide the replacement-the LCA. That project is 11+ years late today and as a result of which the IAF is facing it's worst shortage of aircraft to date. Also, by the time the LCA is inducted (expected in 2011) the technology of the LCA will be outdated. As it is, the LCA today runs on an American engine and is stated to be fitted with a Israili radar.Reason- DRDO failed miserably in it's efforts to indigenously develop both (till date). So much for an "indigenous" aircraft.
The Army required a MBRL to augment it's firepower in 1983. The Smerch was its first choice both due to availability and costs as well as trials. DRDO piped in and said that they could do better!So the Pinaka idea was born. Against a project completion date of 1992, the Pinaka system was fielded for trials in 1999. It was finally inducted in the Army without all the QRs being met in 1999.
The list can go on...INSAS, EW systems , fuses for weapons, they have tried it all and succeeded in far too few.


Quote:
Originally Posted by anmol2k4 View Post
I disagree, as it is not at all wise to go beyond our means. Let me give you a very appropriate example; as you may know China have upgraded their infrastructure around Indo-China border and especially around Arunachal Pradesh and that have given them an edge over us and goosebumps to Defense strategists in India. And when Indian government tried to do same they found that due to current trade defecit they don't have the money so they went to ADB to borrow money for development. And China vetoed against the loan proposal. And that is why we should be very concerned about our trade deficit, even though defense and security angle.
It is simply a case of national priority! The Chinese have made a conscious decision to augment their military position w.r.t. India because of which, they have aggressively pushed for infrastructure development in TAR. The so called "edge" is debatable given the altitude of the region,but, nevertheless, if India was seriously contemplating the infrastructure issues, it could have done the same in Arunachal, Sikkim and Himachal. The very fact that China vetoed the loan in ADB is an indicator that China is trying to ensure that it has a strategic advantage in the region. But the point to note is that India needs to find money to ensure these projects go through, and, at the same time ensure that the armed forces do not loose their edge-which can only be ensured that they get the required hardware in time and of the required quality. Waiting for DRDO to someday deliver the promised goods is not helping at all in this respect! The falling aircraft numbers and submarine numbers are all a stark reminder of this fact!


Quote:
Originally Posted by anmol2k4 View Post
As far as Pakistan is concerned where Army calls the shots, our border region with them where tanks would be deployed is mostly plains. So its weight won't be an issue.
Our Strike formations are not always sitting across the border. Their peacetime locations are far from their op-time deployment sites. In case of a contingency, the formations are supposed to move in the fastest possible time to the op-locations. And the fastest possible means to transport the MBTs in by rail. Because of the weight and size of the Arjun, it is not presently rail transportable-a serious limitation, which is why the Army is not too keen about it and the government has cleared the purchase and licensed production of the T-90.

Quote:
Originally Posted by anmol2k4 View Post
Again, I am of belief that we won't have to use these things, wars would mostly involve missiles. And these things will be used simply to scare people and if we have to deal with China then we have to act just like them. That means we have to prop up a friendly nation against it. And selling Arjun like they did with Al-Khalid will be of great help.
The gulf war is still on as is the war in Afghanistan.How big is the role of missiles? Wars are finally fought and won on the ground. Take a look-conventional forces will continue to take a major role in all perceivable future wars. And for the land forces, the MBT will continue to be their most prized and important possession.

Quote:
Originally Posted by anmol2k4 View Post
All in all, we have to play psychological game and for that we should use Indigenous product which will cost us nothing.
The defence of a nation is not a game. It is a serious proposition with devastating results for the looser. So can we really wait and take a chance? And secondly, even your costing "nothing" indigenous projects are expensive. For the LCA the sanctioned amount initially for Phase I was Rs.2188 crores, and for Phase II was Rs. 2,340 crores. These figures have been significantly overshot. To put it in perspective, a Mirage 2000 was bought for 200Cr each. and the LCA will not be as capable as the Mirage 2000.
neel385 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pre-War Military Vehicles in India harit Vintage Cars & Classics in India 67 16th December 2017 13:10
Government to launch indigenously developed electric vehicle platforms Rajeevraj The Indian Car Scene 11 15th November 2015 17:05
Military Registration Problem xtreme power Shifting gears 15 2nd October 2013 15:43
Military Green not allowed for private vehicles? satyamenon Modifications & Accessories 64 26th August 2013 16:47
WorldWar Jeep/Truck/Military Vehicles Manuals Twinn 4x4 Technical 4 19th April 2012 11:37


All times are GMT +5.5. The time now is 14:48.

Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Team-BHP.com
Proudly powered by E2E Networks