Key capabilities such as armour, artillery, and engineers cannot be replaced (by cyber, space, or any other information-related capabilities). A tank is simply a protected artillery piece, designed for mobile combat. The proper use of tanks is in fast-moving, massed operations overwhelmingly supported by precision fires by infantry, longest range artillery, aviation and air defence. The future is about integration. Manoeuvre contact battles require communication of high-quality targetting data amongst different units. Larger uavs should be networked with helicopters, armoured vehicles and AI-enabled C2 systems. Even if some can master the tenets of fire/shoot and move, the last building block, "communicate," often remains elusive, mainly due to lack of support, user errors and overly complicated architectures. Tactical bandwidth requirements continue to outpace system capabilities, with different warfighting functions demanding alternate networks. The typical IBG will pipe several levels of data networks, tactical radio, and satellite-based tracking systems simultaneously, saturating the signals' environment. The lapses when moving forward HQs leaves ample room for shutdown and startup errors. The Indian Army should seek to condense as many of these tactical data streams and functions as possible. Indian Army, currently, still relies on 'fire-n-manoeuvre' principles, instead of 'manoeuvre fires'. China has over 6,000 tanks, with 3,500 of them being upgraded Type 59 that are based on the Russian T-54/55; while the rest being modern designs. Slovenian 38-ton M-55s is similar to the Israeli T-55 upgrade that produces the Ti67. Drones help artillery locate targets. "When an enemy can hit a tank 90 kilometers away with long-range fire, I can't move them on time to be in a position to do something that I need them to do. It's not that they're bad, it's that I can't afford to use them in my current mission." If just half of American anti-tank missiles and just one-fifth of American rockets can disable Russian armour, that adds up to 50 enemy vehicles destroyed, which is enough to gut a Russian battalion tactical group and render it combat ineffective. And this doesn't even factor in any artillery and attack helicopter support. Without tanks, an army that can't go forward can't lose the war, but it can't win the war either. One does not need the best anti-tank missiles, but rather larger numbers of cheaper yet adequate ones. Presently, the APS are not capable of defeating top-attack. At best, the APS can only defeat projectiles that are in-coming horizontally. They need to be modified to tackle top-attack munitions. You need slat cages on top of ERA panels, to protect it from multiple top-attacks. No amount of APS is worth not having an infantry screen. Before Russian forces invaded Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula back in 2014, Russia’s two active tank plants—Uralvagonzavod in Sverdlovsk Oblast and Omsktransmash in Siberia, sourced Catherine-FC thermal cameras. French sanctions on Russia barred the export of the thermal cameras. The Russians simply didn’t have enough Sosna-Us in stock to complete more than a few hundred tanks. They even created new, downgraded versions of these tanks that traded the unavailable Sosna-U for the available 1PN96MT-02. That mattered because the result, for Russian battalions on the front lines, was a bunch of tanks that couldn’t fight very well at long distances, especially at night. Russian industry launched a crash program to copy the Thales thermal camera, replacing French components with Russian ones. The resulting PNM-T sight looks like Thales Sosna-U gunner’s sight, but might not have the same quality. Russian forces manoeuvre to fire while Western forces fire to manoeuvre, is a neat encapsulation of Russian doctrine compared with the West. Russia and India train their T-90 crews more intensively because that makes more of a difference than any additional gadgets. Indian Army currently has 64 armoured regiments and 50 mechanised infantry battalions, each having 3 armoured squadrons and 3 mechanised companies. The Indian Army’s armoured/mechanised forces requirement is 97 armoured regiments and 70 mechanised infantry battalions. Thus, is short of 33 armoured regiments and 20 mechanised infantry battalions. Ideally, every mechanised squadron need 3 armoured divisions. One Armoured Brigade comprises 2 MBT Regiments & 1 BMP-2 ICV Regiment. One Mechanised Regiment comprises 2 BMP-2 Regiments & 1 MBT Regiment. Each MBT regiment has 46 tanks. India's new Integrated Battle Group (Brigade-sized) will consequently have 1 armoured regiment, 2 mechanised infantry regiments, 1 artillery battalion, one ISTR battalion (replacing the recce battalions), 1 EW Battalion, & an Army aviation regiment comprising 1 flight of medium-lift utility helicopters & LUHs for Casualty evacuation, 1 ISR helicopter, attack helicopters & Rudra helicopter gunships. Modern warfare has increased mechanisation which itself has seen rapid developments over the last few decades. One Armoured Brigade comprises 2 MBT Regiments & 1 BMP-2 ICV Regiment. One Mechanised Regiment comprises 2 BMP-2 Regiments & 1 MBT Regiment. Each Mechanised Infantry, has 51 BMP-2 ICV. Can Indian Army change the equation of three-attacker-to-defender force ratio, even without any non-organic indirect fire support? The solution has always been clear: Provide each squad (that has real-time ISR info and EW to locate & jam enemy tactical radio communications while protecting theirs by creating noise fog) with their own lethal weapons systems like "swarm" of loitering guided munitions to destroy in priority order: enemy light armoured vehicles, crew-served weapons, command and control locations, and then target groups of three or more combatants in trench line. There is currently no effective counter to adversary loitering munitions and drone swarms. US realized that EW and organic ISR are "essential on the modern battlefield." They are looking at loitering munitions, and tools that allow each squad to manage their electronic signature. "You can see video of tanks being hit by an unmanned aerial system, artillery positions being hit by an unmanned aerial system, troops being hit by an unmanned aerial system". Israel learned that drones (and Army aero scout helicopters) as spotters before any advance, firepower of infantry and artillery combined arms, were the keys to the survival of armoured vehicles. Aero scout aircrews operated in a "head out of the hatch" manner with maximum peripheral vision – something UAS operators have not replicated with their "soda-straw" view of the battlefield. Linked to ground-control stations, Shadow, Gray Eagle and other similar UAS operators lack the ability to coordinate on the spot or achieve the feel for the situation as aero scout aircrews could. In Afghanistan, the US learned the hard way that road-side mines were deadly. The optics remain the Achilles heel of all main battle tanks. Tanks are also getting too heavy, due to added protections, to move quickly to cut across enemy lines, due to all the addition protection for survivability. The heavier the cannon, the heavier its chassis, and the more powerful engine is needed. Engine's Horse-Power loses as much as 25% power due to lighter atmosphere in high-altitude, and air-cooled engines have a tendency to seize when crossing water. Only long-range artillery and aviation, which need time to deploy, will do any good against constantly moving tanks. In 2022, Russian T-90 and T-72 tanks suffered such high losses during the first months in Ukraine that Russia was eventually forced to replace them with T-62. The T-62 had a 115mm smooth-bore rather than a 125mm main gun. Since most tanks support infantry rather than fight other tanks, the elderly T-62s were an adequate replacement tank. The success of these T-62s in Ukraine led Russia to take 800 more out of storage and add further upgrades, using items that do not require any imported components. This included a more effective fire control system with improved thermal imaging. Improved EAR is also added, including more on the top of the turret to provide protection against Western top-attack missiles. The T-62 does not have an autoloader for its 115mm gun, which makes the tank less vulnerable to total destruction from any turret penetration, especially by top-attack missiles. The T-62 was the last Russian tank built without an autoloader, and that means the tank has a four-man crew. This provides more personnel to maintain the tank, which three-man crews were not always able to do adequately. Upgraded T-62s weigh 38 tons, compared to 44 tons for the T-72. Russia is trying to double envelopment attack (isolate and trap) on Ukrainian guerrilla-war-by-satellite forces. There has been no proper use of Russian "combined arms" integration. The infantry, tanks, and airpower have not been used simultaneously and cohesively to launch comprehensive attacks. It is difficult to execute in any scenario by any country. Since restructuring into "combined arms" tactical groups, the centralised resources at corps level are too meagre and lack inherent protection. The terrain has not allowed the Russian mechanised forces to conduct their manoeuver operations to flank their adversary. The snow and mud conditions, do not allow even four or six-wheel drive, vehicles to move off the roads. The Russians have also stuck to the highways and main roads — making them easy targets for the Ukrainians. Ukraine's military command & control, communications and weapon guidance systems are largely intact. Their armed forces are operating with much shorter interior lines with more coordination. The Russian armoured vehicles have been sent with an insufficient number of soldiers to protect them. Russia command posts are struggling to keep its communications secure, while Ukrainians have been getting "excellent (signals) intelligence". Russian Army EW systems and units training is inadequate to fully meet the needs of forward to support maneuver formations. Ukrainian reports suggest that Russian communications across the static forces are vulnerable to intercepts and pinpointing location. It's not totally clear exactly how, but Ukrainian artillery and MLRs have been blowing up a lot of Russian command posts routinely. Ukrainian forces also appear to be targeting anyone "standing near a bunch of antennas". Ukraine is relying less on the electromagnetic spectrum and understands this spectrum will be contested. Where Russian EW is effective is in breaking Ukrainian military communications links so that the enemy cannot distribute orders and collect situational reports, old-style methods like runners and dispatch riders came back to the fore. These were tactics anticipated on the eve of the conflict. Space Exploration Technologies Corp's (SpaceX) Starlink, a constellation of US satellites for high-speed internet, was able to resist Russian jamming of their satellite network by software update. SpaceX pointed out that it could put additional Starlink satellites into orbit faster and more cheaply than anyone else could destroy them. "Each group has its own route and determination of where each fighter in each of the assault groups should be…the leaders receive the programme of their attack, and how he and each of his fighters should move through the points. That is, you don't need to think, you need to check the movement of your group on a tablet or smartphone." The US is deploying some of its most advanced reconnaissance and intelligence from just across the border to provide Ukrainian forces imagery and signals intelligence, without revealing sensitive US spying techniques. The US has focused on providing the location and other details about the Russian military’s mobile headquarters, which relocate frequently. US intelligence support to the Ukrainians has had a decisive effect on the battlefield, confirming targets identified by the Ukrainian military and pointing it to new targets. Ukrainian guerrilla-war-by-satellite forces are contesting them from the front, flanks and in between. Ukraine has avoided big, open, battles and conflicts, and focus on targeting supply chains. The Ottawa Treaty came about after many years of unexploded mines killing innocent civilians and stories of dead or maimed children, farmers and livestock as the result of munitions never cleared. Along with Russia, China and other countries, the U.S. is not a signatory to the treaty officially known as the 1997 Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-personnel Mines and on their Destruction, commonly known as the Ottawa Treaty. However, due to these international restrictions on the use of landmines and the ageing of the U.S. stockpile, the U.S. needs a better solution to replace the Gator Landmine system, which dates to the 1980s. The problem with the landmines comes when a conflict is over and victim-triggered AP mines litter the countryside.
The very concept of "main battle tanks" was applied only to tanks beginning with T-64A, armed with 125-mm smooth-bore gun. The heavier the cannon, the heavier its chassis, and the more powerful engine is needed. Tank barrels usually must be replaced after several hundreds of shots, or risk bursting. Tanks dedicated to artillery missions will wear through their valuable gun barrels much more quickly than purpose-built howitzers. Purpose-design howitzers and field guns, however, don't need so much armour-penetrating velocity, and are built for much longer barrel lives. Marshall Joffre, wanted large quantities of troops based in a line of small, heavily defended areas from which counter-attacks could be launched against anyone advancing through the gaps. The second idea, led by Pétain, advocated a long, deep, and constant network of fortifications which would militarize a large area of the eastern border and hark back to the Hindenburg line. In 1922, André Maginot, the Minister for War, began to develop a compromise of the two model, but based largely on the Pétain model. The planned line had two purposes. It would halt an invasion long enough for the French to fully mobilize their own army, and then act as a solid base from which to repel the attack. Any battles would thus occur on the fringes of French territory, preventing internal damage and occupation. With large-scale fortifications defending the southeastern border, the bulk of the French army could gather at the northeastern end, ready to enter—and fight in—Belgium. The Ardennes Forest, a hilly and wooded area, was considered impenetrable; since during WW1 tanks failed to cross it. In the 17th century, Frederick William, the Great Elector of Brandenburg & Duke of Prussia, recognized that crammed into a tight spot in the middle of Europe and surrounded by states that vastly outweighed it in both manpower and resources, their small and impoverished state of Prussia could not win long, drawn-out wars of attrition. Instead, it had to fight wars that were short and that ended in rapid battlefield victories. Its conflicts had to be front-loaded, unleashing a storm against the enemy, pounding the enemy fast and hard, and finishing the battle as soon as possible. This solution to Prussia’s strategic problem was something the Germans called Bewegungskrieg— the war of movement. It was a way of war that stressed maneuver on the operational level. It was not simply tactical maneuverability or a faster march rate, but the rapid movement of large units: divisions, corps, and armies. Prussian commanders sought to maneuver their formations in such a way that they could strike the mass of the enemy army in an annihilating blow as rapidly as possible. French military has an intellectual tradition that stretches back at least to the 18th century. However, in 1940, France went to war having made the wrong bets about what the future would be like. The German invasion of France in 1940 knocked the French out of World War II in a month. The German invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941 destroyed over 100 Soviet divisions and advanced to the gates of Moscow in a season. A central component of German warfare was the encirclement of enemy troops with wedge-shaped armoured advances in their rear. While this way of war had served Germany well up to 1941, it had clearly come up short during Operation Barbarossa, and it would be easy to view Operation Blue as doomed from the start. In 1942, as powerful German armoured forces bypassed Stalingrad, the Russians realized that a counterstroke into the lengthy German flank would be more effective than moving forces far to the southeast to defend against German armour. This resulted in the complete encirclement and surrender of the German 6th Army, while powerful German tanks were abandoned far to the east from a lack of fuel and supplies. By 1943, the Germans lacked the resources to mount offensives. They found it easier to wait for the Russians to expose themselves with offensive thrusts, avoid their armoured spearheads, then counterattack into their exposed flanks to maul Russian rear area troops and roll up their spearheads from behind. As the Wehrmacht began the process of deploying westward, the armoured force underwent a major restructuring. Fall Gelb is also the first operation seeing the extensive use of the ad-hoc formations called Kampfgruppen. German planners were aware that against the French and British, they would face superior numbers, better armed and armoured vehicles, and stronger anti-tank defenses. Rather than face the French in their concrete defenses of the Maginot Line, the advancing armies went through Holland and Belgium. The total victory the Germans achieved was made possible by two advances – one through the low countries, the other a dramatic breakthrough around Sedan. Fortifications allowed fewer men to hold larger areas for longer, with a lower loss of life, and the French people jumped at the chance. The forts were solid buildings capable of withstanding heavy fire. The Maginot line was a dense, multi-layered system, providing what has often been described as a 'continuous line of fire' along a long front. However, most glaringly, it concentrated on the Rhineland and left France's 400-kilometer border with Belgium unfortified. In 1936, Belgium declared itself a neutral country alongside Luxembourg and the Netherlands, effectively severing its previous allegiance with France. World War II had begun with a German invasion of Poland. In 1940, the German's northern army, attacked the Netherlands, moving through and into Belgium. The Army, under the command of General von Leeb, appeared advancing through the Line, but they were simply a diversion, whose mere presence would tie down French troops and prevent their use as reinforcements. Well over a million German troops and 1,500 tanks crossed the supposedly impenetrable forest with ease, using roads and tracks. In 1940 Ouvrage Hackenberg of the Maginot Line fortifications, a part of the Fortified Sector of Boulay, was never directly attacked. Its garrison was one of the last French units to surrender after the June 1940 armistice. In 1944, under German occupation, it was in action against American forces advancing along the Maginot Line. It resisted for three days before artillery bombardment from the rear forced the Germans to evacuate. During the Occupation, the Germans occupied Hackenberg and posed a considerable obstacle to American advances in 1944 during the Lorraine Campaign. After an attack using tank destroyers failed, the Americans used a 155mm self-propelled gun against the rear of Block 8 (which held German battery of 75mm guns). The success of this attack allowed the Americans to take its west wing. Operation Cobra in 1944 broke through German lines and retook most of metropolitan France in a month. The Israeli invasion of the Sinai in 1967 triumphed in just six days. The American counteroffensive in Operation Desert Storm in 1991 evicted the Iraqis from Kuwait in 100 hours of ground fighting. The 2020 Azerbaijani offensive in Nagorno-Karabakh drove the Armenians from the Aras River Valley. In the popular imagination, World War II replaced trench stalemate with a war of maneuver. But mid- and late-war offensives against properly prepared defenses commonly produced results that looked less like blitzkrieg and more like the slow, costly, grinding advance of the Hundred Days offensives of 1918. Undermanned, overextended and shallow positions suffer heavy losses and get quickly overrun, while deep, concealed and well-prepared positions (with viable supply lines) can be attacked sucessfully only by those that advanced with very heavy fire support. In fact, it encapsulates the modern history of land warfare. Concentrated, armor-heavy attackers at the Mareth Line in 1943, Kursk in 1943, Operations Epsom, Goodwood, or Market Garden in 1944, the Siegfried Line in 1944, or the Gothic Line in 1944-45 all failed to produce quick breakthroughs and devolved into slow, methodical slogs at best. Nor did this pattern end in 1945. Iraqi armored offensives bogged down against even moderately deep Iranian defenses at Khorramshahr and Abadan in 1980-81, and Iranian offensives failed to penetrate prepared Iraqi defenses in depth at Basra in 1987. More recently, the 1999 battle of Tsorona between Ethiopia and Eritrea, the Israeli invasion of South Lebanon in 2006, and Georgia’s invasion of South Ossetia in 2008. When defenses have been deep, supported by operational reserves and well-prepared at the front, quick blitzkrieg success has been all but impossible over more than a century of changing technology. Well-trained, astutely employed attackers with numerical superiority can take ground against such defenses, but slowly and at great cost. Offensive maneuver is apparently far from dead and successful breakthrough is still possible with demanding preperation and under the right conditions.Stephen Biddle, author of Military Power Explaining Victory and Defeat in Modern (Land) Battle. https://archive.org/details/caenanvilofvicto0000mcke/page/n5/mode/2up The masterpiece of tank development in this period was a French light infantry support tank Renault FT-17, which came down from the assembly plant flow Louis Renault. Such tanks began arriving in the French army in March 1918., But only until the end of the First World War, the military received 3,177 such machines. In the tanks, "Reno" for the first time was used a tower that rotates 360 degrees, and the assembly, which later became the traditional: the separation of management — in front, fighting — in the center of the tank, and the engine — behind. Armed tank or a gun, or a machine gun, which is installed in the tower. French light tanks at the time were unusually frisky, they developed the highest speed up to 9.6 km/h Specific element of the design of the tank, "Reno" has become removable "tail", allows to overcome the ditches and trenches, and carry it loads or several Marines. Tailed tank "Reno" was so successful that later produced under licence in the United States, where Ford was called Two Man, and in Italy under the name Fiat 3000. Russian engineers had "written off" the tank T-16 "Russian Renault" late 1920s, which later was licence-made with improvements and renamed T-18 (MS-1, a light support tank). Tracked vehicle weighing about 5.5 tons, was protected by a 16-mm armour and developed a speed of 16 km / h The tank was armed with 37-mm gun Hotchkiss and 2 6.5-mm machine guns. WWII test clearly showed the high fighting properties of the T-34, which became the "grand daddy" of the modern Russian MBT. The original T-34 that the Germans encountered in 1941 had a 76mm gun. This was later replaced with a more powerful 85mm weapon. Originally, the tank was envisioned as a "machine gun destroyer", able to protect and counter the great hunger beast of war that seemly to eat men for pleasure. The tank was also useful for dislodge barbed wire that hindered the infantry's movement, allowing the machine gun to do its bloody work. It was also designed to move the war of the trenches forward with progress for ending the war. Than changed when the enemy began fielding their own tanks to counter the new threat. Currently, heavy armored (with the supporting firepower of light armoured unmanned vehicles) has become less useful fighting terrorists due to proliferation of portable missiles. Another problem is the lack of sensors to detect low-altitude (under 100 or even 25 meters) UAV making them difficult to detect much less destroy. With a concentrated fire-power, the tanks, with heavy and close air support, could breakthrough the enemy lines, followed closely by the infantry to exploit and secure the push further, all the way to enemy headquarters were communications have already been disrupted and the battle won with minimum cost. Tanks must be used as part of a subdivision and in close interaction with the infantry. A lone tank, especially one that is not moving, is an easy target for a missile. The Blitzkrieg also called upon the secrecy of missions behind enemy lines by Commando units in order to confuse the opposite side and secure strategic points such as bridges or field depots. Armies maintained large units of mechanized and armoured troops during the Cold War, beside its nuclear-deterrent aspect, as it was likely to have a prelude of huge-scale tank battles. Things changed however, mainly because of the Arab-Israeli wars. Arab armies, supplied with Soviet hardware and heavily influenced by their tactics, built up large stocks of armoured units, but failed to put them to battle, mainly because of the dominant Israeli air force superiority. Even in 1973, when Egyptian tanks moved forward out of AA missiles “umbrella” that protected them so effectively, tank superiority did nothing to prevent Sharon’s task force to infiltrate the Egyptian front, thus trapping their 3rd Army in Sinai. The 1991 Gulf War also proved that large tank units were quite ineffective against an enemy with absolute air superiority. Actually, this was already the case in WW2: during Bocage operations that followed the Normandy landings, and even though German tanks were far superior in quality and fire power to British and American tanks, the Panzers failed to complete their objectives because of the huge damages Allied ground-attack planes inflicted upon them. After the Green March, General Ahmed Dlimi started moving in FAR units, and the first military clashes with Polisario guerilla occurred as early as February 1976 (meaning just after the Spanish authority over the Western Sahara was De Facto abolished). The FAR were not ready for that sort of warfare, because of many reasons. Their embryonic structure did not allow for large scale operations Indeed the putsch attempts of 1971-1972 led to a severe purge among high-ranking (and usually quite competent) officers that left the Army with virtually no General Staff, and could not, on its own, hold a virtual battlefield. Even when concentrating on vital centres (coastal cities and the phosphate mines in Boukrâa or Guerguarat, the famous “Useful Triangle”), the FAR could not prevent the Polisario from undertaking successful raids, even in non-disputed Moroccan sectors: Tan Tan was reportedly occupied for several hours in January 1979. If anything, the Moroccan army suffered from a costly war (about $1million was daily spent on military operations), even though it was superior in manpower, equipment and training compared to the Polisario, or to the 55.000-strong Algerian Army. The war was fought on the tiny supply lines convoys followed to deliver the much needed hardware and supplies as well as on the bridgeheads both countries were seeking to defend. However, and until 1983, desert warfare was highly mobile, though not entirely of Blitzkrieg nature. The first of 6 defensive walls was built, and successive walls brought the war to a static fashion until the ceasefire in 1991. Meanwhile, the Polisario also changed their tactics following the supplies they got: the raids were more like cavalry charges, with T-55 and T-62 tanks that increased further raid ranges, but increased also dependence on oil and fuel (especially with the Algerians and Libyans). Static war, with fixed and continuous fortified positions prevented further raids, and vast minefields left a no man’s land strip in which Polisario troops could no longer threaten FAR positions. In a static war, the side with the most numerous troops and the closest to supply lines and depots wins it all, which was the case for Morocco. The impact of high speed warfare was demonstrated after September 11, 2001 when American forces used computerized data mining and analysis to speed up their OODA during counter-terrorism operations in Iraq. Thus the Sunni terrorists quickly learned that if an American raid was accompanied by intelligence specialists carrying biometric tools and comm links (to huge databases of information on known terrorists and their organizations) there would quickly be additional raids. A few new names found on one raid would spawn additional raids and within 24 hours large terrorist operations could be rolled up. Microsoft contributed by developing a thumb drive that could quickly extract useful data from a laptop while rough (but effective) machine translation of many Arabic documents could quickly provide more leads, locations and who or what to look for. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan produced even more adaptation of commercial tools and techniques and applied them to intelligence work and combat planning. Data mining and predictive analysis (computing what the enemy would do next using their past and current patterns) drives modern marketing and much else. The troops in Iraq and Afghanistan showed how it could be used to hunt down Islamic terrorists and destroy their networks. In the works are revolutionary new robotics concepts and tools. Autonomous combat robots have already been around since World War II (the wake homing torpedo, for example) and have become, without much fanfare, more common. Now these technologies are beginning to enter air and ground combat in a big way. Thus the flood of new ideas that has accompanied new weapons and tech in general continues. Sir Percy Hobart, commander of the 79th Armored Division, oversaw the development of specialized tanks that would help ensure the landings’ success. Collectively, these vehicles would come to be known as “Funnies”. The first was the Churchill AVRE (Armored Vehicle, Royal Engineer), which was built with a set of standard fixtures so it could be adapted to carry different equipment as needed. AVREs used their Petard mortars to destroy German defenses on both Juno and Sword Beaches, working in concert with other armored vehicles. The second was the Churchill Crocodile, an improved flamethrower tank.
Unlike the Olifant Mk1A, which is an upgrade from the basic Centurion Mk.5A hull, the 58 ton Olifant Mk1B is a complete rebuild and incorporates many features not previously fitted to the Centurion. It is believed that the first production batch of Olifant Mk 1B amounted to just under 50 vehicles. This upgrade programme has been completed.
The introduction of the Soviet IS-3 heavy tank forced the introduction of their own Conqueror heavy tank, armed with a 120 mm (4.7 in) gun. A single design combining the firepower of the Conqueror's 120 mm gun with the mobility and general usefulness of the Centurion would be ideal. Chieftain or Challenger was the "most formidable main battle tank in the world" with, at the time of its introduction in 1966 the most powerful main gun and most effective armour of any tank ever made. Faster than Centurion, able to maintain its speed longer than the Leopard 1 and out-gunning its contemporaries Chieftain was also the first tank to enhance its (already superior) armour with Chobham composite armour add-ons. Its export sales were primarily with Middle East customers. The Shir 1 was developed as the interim design preceeding the all-new "Shir 2" MBT combat system (which eventually became the Challenger 1 MBT). The Shir 1 had the hull of a late-model Chieftain and a new engine and powertrain used on the Challenger. The Khalid ("Sword") was essentially an intermediate hybrid of the FV4030/1 Chieftain and FV4030/3 Challenger 1. The Khalid MBT was born out of the aborted "Shir 1" ("Leo") tank built by the British to an Iranian Army requirement. The Shir II tanks being designed for Iran were fitted with Chobham armour. But the Islamic Revolution of 1979 in Iran killed the Shir 1/Shir 2 programs. The Royal Jordanian Army adopted the FV4030/2 as the Khalid MBT with deliveries beginning in 1981. The Challenger tank, which entered service with the British Army in 1983, is a revised version of the Shir II tank. There is also the Rolls-Royce engine. The British Chieftain FV4030/4 or Challenger 1 design by the former Military Vehicles and Engineering Establishment (MVEE) near Chobham in Surrey originated in an Iranian order for an improved version of the Chieftain line of tanks in service around the world. These were the Chieftain Mk5(P)- FV4030/1, FV4030/2 Shir (Lion) 1 and 4030/3 Shir 2. For a short time, the tank was named "Cheviot" before becoming "Challenger 1", a name reused from the Cruiser Mk VIII Challenger tank of the Second World War. In action, the Global Positioning System (GPS) and Thermal Observation and Gunnery System (TOGS) fitted to the Challengers proved to be decisive, allowing attacks to be made at night, in poor visibility and through smoke screens. The Challenger, in comparison with the M1A1 Abrams tank deployed by the US Army, was more fuel efficient and achieved far greater serviceability. A Challenger achieved the longest range confirmed kill of the war, destroying an Iraqi tank with a DU round fired over a distance of 5,100 metres (over 3 miles)—the longest tank-on-tank kill shot recorded. The older Russian army officers quietly agreed that T-72B3 is a better tank than the new T-90. This apparently has something to do with trying to merge T-80 elements into the T-72 design and the decline in manufacturing quality after the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991. Analysis of T-72 and T-80 tanks destroyed in the first Chechen war showed existing Russian MBTs suffer their most glaring weakness --'catastrophic ammunition ignition'—a flawed internal arrangement that sacrifices crew safety in the interest of compactness. To make matters worse, the propellant is not encased in metal, but in thin, paper-like cellulose covers. Often one tiny spark, one red-hot splinter of metal is all it takes to ignite the propellant, which is why T-72s are seen burning furiously after just one hit. These rounds are dangerously exposed to sparks and burning spall. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, U.S. and German analysts had a chance to examine Soviet-made T-72 tanks equipped with ERA (explosive reactive armor) blocks attacked to the turret and front. It was found that this ERA rendered most modern American and German tank projectiles ineffective. This led to the development of more modern Western tank ammunition, such as the M829A2 and M829A3. Russian tank designers responded with newer types of reactive and composite armor. ERA is still a popular and relatively inexpensive upgrade for exported T-72. The T-90 is one of many upgraded T-72s available on the market. India and Algeria each have more T-90s in service than Russia. The T-90AM/MS introduced the turret bustle with blow out panels to safely stow spare rounds to get back up to the 40 odd carried, although the crew have to expose themselves (or leave the battle) to get to them. While the T-90 has defenses against most ATGMS, these defenses were less effective against the American TOW wire-guided missile. The recent models of the TOW have a “top attack” warhead to defeat the ERA by detonating as it goes over the tank and penetrating the thinner armor on top, which also lacks ERA. Composite armour remains popular because it provides superior stopping power compared to the same weight of just high-quality steel plate armour. Composite armour uses different layers of metal (steel, depleted uranium and now CMF) separated by layers of ceramics to provide the most effective tank armour ever. Some Chobham designs, like the one in the American M-1 tank, used a layer of depleted (non-radioactive) uranium (the densest of dense metals) that turned resulted in armour that could stop all known anti-tank projectiles. Composite metal foam (CMF) replace some of the steel layers and provide superior protection against bullets and be much lighter. CMF was first produced to blocking various types of radiation for protecting space satellite components from higher radiation levels encountered outside the earth’s atmosphere. CMF is produced by bubbling gas through molten metal to form a lightweight metal matrix. The side and rear armour of the M-1 continued to be vulnerable to any enemy weapons. U.S M-1 had also suffered their first heavy losses in Iraq during 2014. Nearly a third of the 140 M-1 the Iraq Army had received between 2010 and 2012 have been destroyed or heavily damaged. The new T-90 tanks were promptly got to replace their US made M1 tanks, which proved vulnerable to ATGMs. That because the T-90 ATGM defenses consist of two systems. One is a “dazzler” that is connected to laser sensors on the tank. The second ATGM defense offers some protection against TOW because it consists of plates of ERA Armor which explodes when hit by the HEAT warhead used by ATGMs. Syrian crews fear the laser guided missiles so much that they would sometimes try to get behind a building when the laser sensors alerted them that an ATGM was incoming. This was often a fatal mistake because it meant the dazzler was no longer aimed at the laser beam and the ATGM hit, and the tank was destroyed. In 2003 both Germany and the U.S. believed the usefulness of heavy tanks like the M-1 and Leopard 2 were obsolete. Then came Iraq and Afghanistan where it was found that these traditional designs were still very useful, especially with the most modern technology like thermal sights and modern air-conditioning systems. The RPG-29's PG-29V HEAT tandem-charge warhead is one of the few anti-tank weapons that can penetrate the frontal hulls of Western composite-armored main battle tanks, as well as Russian T90 & T80U MBTs equipped with Kontakt-5 explosive reactive armour. It has recently seen intermittent use by irregular forces in the Middle East theater, including in combat against U.S./U.K. forces during the Iraq War, and the 2006 Lebanon War, when it was used against Israeli forces. RPGs proved useless against the M-1, except in a few cases where they hit a vulnerable component like a hydraulic line etc. RPG-29's PG-29V was designed in 1988 by the Soviet Union weapons company Bazalt and based on the RPG-7 but modified to penetrate explosive reactive armour and it entered service with the Soviet army in 1989. Terrorists are good at defending a specific area using anti-tank missiles and at using air-defenses against low flying aircrafts, helicopters and UAVs; but militants don't use UAVs for coordinating artillery units or conduct electronic warfare operations. Turkey has lost 8 German-made Leopard 2A4-TR tanks in combat since their troops entered Syria in August 2016. Also lost were about 11 older U.S. made M60T tank and several other less well protected armored vehicles because of Kornet ATGMs. The ATGM hits did not always destroy the Leopard 2A4 but they were able to disable it and cause the surviving crew to abandon the vehicle. Leopard-2A4-TR that got damaged or disabled were not recovered, which says a lot about infantry coordination and enemy pressure in the area. In the case of Syria all of the hits documented were on the right flank of the Leopard-2A4-TR leading to one of the worst situations, also some tanks were captured and utterly destroyed by ISIL or by Turkish airstrikes. While Leopard-2A4-TR is probably protected enough at the front against most threats, additional armor to the sides and some ERA could make them well protected. Better use of ground reconnaissance assets in this kind of low intensity hybrid warfare is vital, in order to determine best firing positions while protecting the tanks. Since these Leopard and M1 incidents with ATGMs occurred the United States has decided to follow the Israeli example and equip their M1s (and lighter armored vehicles) with APS (Active Protection System), initially the Israeli Trophy, as well as American, made APS systems. A complete system weighs about a ton. One of the major concerns of operational APS like the Israeli Rafael trophy is threat to friendlies caused by the Explosively Formed Penetrator (EFP) or other explosive countermeasures. The Trophy defensive system is believed to be the first of a series of so-called “active defense” systems to become operational. Such systems aim to neutralize threats before they strike the tank. In the past, tanks have relied on increasingly thick layers of armor or “reactive” technology that weakens an incoming rocket upon impact by setting off a small explosion. Trophy provides 360° coverage against anti-tank rockets, anti-tank missiles and tank HEAT (high-explosive anti-tank) rounds. Once Trophy has detected a threat, it is tracked and classified and the optimal intercept point is computed, prior to launching a countermeasure. The tiny Trophy system, lodged behind small rectangular plates on both sides of the tank, uses radar to detect the incoming projectiles and fires a small charge to intercept them. The entire process is automated, holds fire if the rocket is going to miss the tank, and causes such a small explosion that the chances of unintentionally hurting friendly soldiers through collateral damage is only 1%. Tanks are being destroyed by cheap loitering munitions. No amount of APS is worth not having an infantry screen. APS are not capable of defeating top-attack. At best, the APS can only defeat projectiles that are in-coming horizontally. They need to be modified to tackle top-attack munitions.Most of all of the basic rules about the use of armored forces were not applied by Turkish military planners probably due to political pressure to avoid losses and because the chief of the operation, the Lieutenant general Zekai Aksakallı is from SF so he is not very familiar with the usage of armored forces.
Turkey's Altay MBT is a third generation MBT designed and developed by Turkish Defense Company Otokar. Turkey used the baseline K2 Black Panther technology inputs with a re-designed Turkish turret and Aselsan’s Volkan-III modular fire control system to develop a Altay MBT which is the service with the Turkish Army South Korean K2 Black Panther tanks are considered World most expensive Main Battle Tanks which has a price tag of 8.5 million dollars. Compared to the South Korea’s new K2 Black Panther (on which Altay is based on), the Altay is reportedly longer, with an added road wheel and a slightly modified turret. The Turkish Company MKE was assigned to manufacture the 120 mm 55 caliber Main Armament by technology transfer from Hyundai Rotem of South Korea. The Turkish Company Roketsan was assigned to develop the Modular Armour Package by technology transfer also through Hyundai Rotem. South Korean Army had an initial requirement of 680 tanks but orders were confined to only 390 units after it hit production in 2013. K2 Black Panther has a top speed of 70 kilometers per hour and can accelerate from zero to 32 kph in just seven seconds. Its operational range is 450 kilometers. It features a 120mm 55 caliber smoothbore gun capable of 40 rounds, secondary armaments include a 12.7mm K6 heavy machine gun with 3,200 rounds and 7.62mm coaxial machine gun with 12,000 rounds. Altay is also similar to the US M1. Both have a 120mm gun, composite armor, and high-end electronics. The two tanks are so similar because in 2011 Turkey paid South Korea $400 million for rights to much of the technology in the new 55 ton South Korean K2 tank. This vehicle was in turn based on the 1980s K1, which deliberately emulated the M1 design in many ways and did so with the cooperation of the United States. The K1 and K2 proved to be successful designs, and the Turks already had decades of experience maintaining and upgrading American M-60 tanks (the predecessor of the M1). Turkey’s existing American M-60 tanks were heavily modernized by Israeli firms, based on the same “Sabra” modification set external link that Israel used on its own M60s. With the addition of the South Korean tech the Altay rapidly took shape. There are also numerous improvements to the K1 mechanical and electronic systems, as well as more armor (both composite and ERA). This made the K2 (and Altay) easier to use and maintain. The K2 design was attractive to the Turks because it used a number of new electronic defenses. The Turkish Army currently has about 700 old Leopard 1 and 2 tanks, 900 American M-60s (upgraded by Israel) and 1,300 American M-48s. South Korea K1-88 ROKIT (Republic of Korea Indigenous Tank), locally developed by Rotem, is based it on the U.S. M-1 design. Zulfiqar type-1 is a 2nd generation MBT based on the U.S. M60 Patton. It has a welded steel hull and turret. It has a Slovenian EFCS-3 computerized fire control system which allows the tank to 'fire-on-the-move'. The fully-stabilized 125-mm smooth-bore gun, auto-loader is based on the Iranian licensed built Russian T-72S. Its front arc is reinforced with Iranian-made composite reactive armor. 100 Zulfiqar-1 are said to have been produced. Zulfiqar type-2 was used as a test bed which has a new 1000 hp engine and turret (not taken from the T-72S) Zulfiqar type-3 hull is shaped more commonly to the US M1 Abram’s series. It is equipped with the 2A46 125 mm smooth-bore cannon with an auto-loader, a laser rangefinder and a new fire navigation system. The vehicle is equipped with day and night vision sights, an NBC system, a coaxial 7.62mm MG and a further 12.7mm MG on the commanders cupola. The was said to have entered production in 1999. Iran is a country not often associated with tank production, as it relied on purchasing exported vehicles such as the British Chieftain and US M60 series prior to the Iranian Revolution of 1979. Pakistan's Chinese-made 42.5-ton Type 96 (export is Type 85-III series design) tank Some sources claim the Type 85 tank (export version of Type 96 or earlier Type 88C) is a modification of the Type 80 which combined a Soviet T-54 chassis and improved turret with Western-styled tech which is also found in the newer Type 90 tank (PLA did not accept Type 90). Pakistan has in total 268 Type 85-IIM / Type-85AP tanks procured from China in the late 1990s. This was China's attempt to develop an indigenous equivalent to the T-72, specifically designed to satisfy requirements of the Pakistani Army. Type 85 was also the first Chinese design observed using composite armour and a system of 6 road wheels and 3 support rollers. It uses an upgraded 1,000 hp diesel engine that was introduced in 1995. In the 1970s, China's primary MBT in service was the Type 59 which began development in 1980, and a copy of the Soviet T-54 tank. Copying old tech takes the same amount of time as developing new tech. Only older T-54/55 clones, Chinese tanks, don't use an autoloader. (The first generation is a version of the Soviet T-54A and its derivatives, produced in China as the Type 59 and Type 69/79) (only 500 built). Only older T-54/55 clones, Chinese tanks, don't use an autoloader. The second-generation main battle tank started with the Type 88, which further branched into the Type 88 and Type 96. China's 52-ton 3rd gen Type 96B MBT (also derivatives called Type 88C & Type 79) is the backbone of China’s tank force. It entered service in 1997 and replaces the Type 59 on which it's based. Iran has about 200 Type 69 from China. Type 96 don't have integrated power-packs. Type 96B has Ukrainian air-cooled 900-1,200 HP powerful engine instead of Type 96A 780-1,000 HP (Croatia) as well as improved armour and electronics. The 50 ton Type 96 has 3 man crews and modern sensors and electronics. Only 400 Type 96B MBTs (rumoured 6,000) have been built, as they cannot operate at high altitudes like Tibet. China doesn't have MBTs that work in higher Tibetan areas (especially in eastern Ladakh and Aksai Chin), as China has not been able to develop water-cooled diesel engines that can generate around 800 HP for armoured vehicles. China's main battle heavy tracked armoured vehicle. The Type 96 was based on the Type 85-III design with minor modifications. It has a Chinese version of the Russian Shtora-1 infra-red/laser jamming system fitted to it. The modified variant ZTZ-96G was first revealed in 2006. The Type 96G can also be considered as a third generation tank. The engine, ventilation system and new rear-mounted exhaust system appear to have benefited from those developed for Norinco's VT-4 export MBT. The original Type 96 (entered service in 1997) & the latest Type 99 medium tank design and is based on Russian T-72. In the 1980s China obtained this tank from Romania (downgraded and not interchangeable between the Russian models) and cloned it. Less than 700 of Type 96A MBTs have been built. The Type 99 is a Chinese variant of the T-72 as it incorporates the hull, 125mm main gun, automatic loader, advanced Russian armour and active protection systems. Type 99 has a 2.5 generation thermal imaging observation and targeting system along with a 5.5km gun tube launched anti-tank guided system. AMX LeClerc (Leike Le Chariot) EPG (tranche/batch) T11 S-XXI series (with the German 1,500 hp 883 V-12 engine coupled with the Renk HSWL295 TM automatic transmission), is the lightest and fastest NATO MBT. It is also significantly smaller in size. It is built by GIAT, now Nexter of France and used by the armed forces of Abu Dhabi of the United Arab Emirates. It was the fastest and most expensive tank in the world when entering service in 1991. It replaces the aging AMX-30. In February 1980, a Memorandum of Understanding was signed with the Federal Republic of Germany involving the joint development of a MBT, called the Napoléon I in France and Kampfpanzer III in Germany. Fundamental disagreements about its desired configuration led to a failure of this cooperation in December 1982. In 1986, the project was started under the name of "Leclerc", six prototypes being built swiftly. It is fitted with FINDERS (fast information, navigation, decision and reporting system) digital coloured battlefield management system. It automatically reports to command post tank's location, quantity of ammunition and fuel left. Broadly similar system is used on the M1A2 Abrams. The engine exhaust, exiting at the rear left, is cooled to reduce the thermal signature of the tank. The new upgrades also have added hybrid climate control system and improved electronics. The visor with a SAGEM Iris system with thermal imaging, which allows acquisition of targets at a greater range. The commander’s sight is the SOIM HL70, which has optic filters and image intensifier for night vision and has the priority control over the gunner’s sight for aiming and firing, giving the tank the ‘hunter killer’ capability. It is protected with advanced modular armor system, which can be tailored to the threat. Its Euro Powerpack engine can be replaced in field conditions within 30 minutes. It's armor is a combination of steel, ceramics and Kevlar. Damaged modules are easily replaceable. Furthermore they can be easily upgraded with more advanced armor modules. Turret and hull roof was designed to withstand top-attack munitions. On top of the turret there is a 7.62 mm anti-aircraft MG in an armoured casing. The original armour system was spaced perforated steel plates inserted into the modules. On batch 10, the Leclerc retained its modules but instead inserted titanium/tungsten tiles (a basic composite armour to shatter APFSDS). It’s also believed that NERA (Non-Explosive Reactive Armour) is then placed either behind or in front of those tiles in the modules to defeat HEAT. The Leclerc is equipped with the Nexter and Lacroix Tous Artifices developed Galix combat vehicle protection system. Nexter has also developed the KBCM defensive aids suite. Evaluated by the French Army, the system warns of a laser (used by guidance systems of ATM) being pointed at the vehicle, as well as incoming missiles and is also able to jam Infra-Red. The Leclerc has an auto loader situated in the turrets bustle, which allows for a smaller crew space in the turret and a lower profile, making it a harder to hit. The commander has eight periscopes and the gunner’s sight is an HL-70 stabilised panoramic sight unit from Safran (formerly SAGEM), which has a laser rangefinder, day channel, thermal imaging and a second-generation image intensifier. The digital fire control system allows the gunner or commander to select a total of 6 targets in 30s. With all these features, it can boast a fire rate of 12 rounds per minute from its main cannon. In June 2006, Nexter unveiled the Leclerc optimised for urban operations. It is fitted with the AZUR kit, which consists of additional protection in the form of side skirts of composite material, bar armour on the rear of hull and turret to protect against rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs) and extra protection for the engine against petrol bombs.
India plan to equip 1000 of its newer T-72 tanks with Arjun tank's ERA and upgrade to 1,000 HP V92S2 engine, which already exists in T-90. India has a large inventory of Russian heavy armour. T-72m1-cia is India's light tank that has replaced the ageing T-55 tanks. India has managed to produce T-72's engine (780hp). India has created additives to quick-start the engine in cold temperature. However, India still imports T-90 engine, gearbox, power-packs, gun and stabilisation from Russia. Since Indian Army lacks 155 mm/52 calibre artillery Gun mounted on high mobility truck, so the Army also uses these T-90 tanks to work as artillery mounted on truck. The thermal sights on Indian tanks are French, but assembled by India's BEL. India only license-makes Invar ATGM and Indian tanks will be teeth-less, if it runs out of imported 125mm apfsds. India's OFB have not been able to make apfsds. Only heavy armoured (if without the immediate supporting firepower of vertical envelope and light armoured unmanned vehicles) has become less useful in these types of battlefields due to proliferation of portable missiles. Another increasingly important element is electronic warfare. Smart systems allow for both outwitting enemy defences is more valued than having numerical advantage. Indian Army has to prepare for the fact that it needs to focus more on capable command & control and to add more mobile artillery rocket firepower. In eastern Ladakh, PLA has deployed approximately 6 brigade-size Tri-Combined Arms Battalion called Group Army (mix of artillery battalion, medium-light armour and mechanised infantry sub-units at unit level), that offers more flexibility and eliminates the necessity for the tank commander to reinforce each tank regiment with motorized regiment's assets. There are 10 motorized vehicles and 9 mobile 81 mm mortars or 120 mm caliber gun vehicles, in every PLA's tri-combined arms battalion. 122 mm PCL-181 & 155 mm caliber self-propelled artillery and 370 mm MLRS & 300 mm PHL-03 MLRS, which can fire deep into the enemy’s rear, have increased the PLA commanders available firepower. The division commander then has greater flexibility in the use of his artillery resources to influence the battle. China's advantage also lies in the rear, in the broader valleys on the Tibetan plateau, with heavy-armour mechanised Infantry battalions, once the battle moves into the plains of Ladakh. China produces Ukrainian 1200hp air-cooled engine for Type-96 tank (also called Type-88) but lacks additives to quick-start the engine in cold temperature. There are 28 medium-light armoured tanks in two heavy tri-combined arms battalion of PLA. India must also not forget that the PLARF is the world leader in terms of land-based precision missiles. The difference between China and India is that PLA has high-altitudes firing ranges, training grounds, SAM sites, underground logistics warehouses, heliports and garrison barracks. China's airborne units important feature is light-armoured mechanized force. India still lacks high-altitude firing ranges and training facility, and underground logistics warehouses for Indian Army's longer-range systems and heavy mechanised units. PLA spends highest amount of money on data-driven war-gamed realistic combat training. China envisions further improving joint operations and towards application of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies. China is focused on "three attacks" to dominate the air space, which means countering stealthy aircrafts, cruise missiles, and armed helicopters. These all means stronger air-defence, but it can be neutralised by Indian AirForce. Pla's YJ-62, YJ-12B & HQ-12 are obsolete and HQ-9B is vapourware. Hence, China bought Russian S400 for air-defence. These improvements, along with anti-tank capabilities, greatly enhance area coverage and counter-battery support to subordinate divisions. Chinese airforce's key strength is in SIGINT that backs its Army. Nations that have poor Strike aircraft capability often rely heavily on land-based missiles. However, China unlike the Russians keep their latest equipment in the rear as reserves. A known limitation on Indian Army’s capabilities is shortages of imported spares from major arms supplier nations. India’s dependence on imported platform is also the root of the Indian armed forces equipment shortages. It is a regrettable fact that such last-minute panic purchases have now become standard crisis-response. Full ToT technologies will not be given to anyone in the world. Military sales has long been a US diplomatic mainstay, however, US will not give its cutting-edge tech to even its NATO allies, so forget about India. India still sees US as less reliable than Russia, Israel and France, despite US being the one who has world-class defence tech. One of the problems is also the high cost of US tech. So basically, it is a wild goose chase. India should not forget that when India’s Ballistic Missile Defence Programme conceptual stage, Americans had blocked the sale of Arrow 2 ABM. US Policymakers should understand that US needs to boost India's military as a counter to China, and that we can’t let India’s relationship with Russia get in the way by outmanoeuvring India. Even if 90% of the missile is fabricated and machined locally, the high-precision machined components (like rubber washers, ball-bearings etc etc) must be imported, without which the critical hardware becomes inoperable. It is essential that the critical sub-systems and spares of weapons systems are manufactured locally, which is not possible with foreign OEM suppliers who will never give away their intellectual property (crypto-keys). Allies also won WW2 because they were able to quickly built to resupply their forces. It is easy to build up, not so easy to either build quality or maintain what you build. Military equipment get refurbished regularly, like how you pimp your cars. Once stripped and updated, they good as new. Real military uses these tough machines till the paint comes off. In fact, only equipment that sit in sparkling conditions are with Saudis like nations. They are nothing more than hanger queens or trophies. Category B equipment is not second-hand equipment. Since both Indian and Pakistani military institutions spring from the same parent, both nations continue to employ the pedagogy they inherited from the British commonwealth model. Both nation's military institutions are army-centric in their focus and teach an outdated ground doctrine that virtually all Western students thought was more suited to World War II than a 21st century battlefield. And that is ironical, for a tri-service institution, supposedly committed to inculcating "jointmanship" in all three services. Both nation's military institutions are highly deficient in inculcating an appreciation for the roles of intelligence + combined arms OP with immediate closed air-support. Forces that can operate inside the range of China's long-range precision fires are more relevant than forces which rapidly positions outside. India's battle units must be led by large-scale fire support (tech & tactics) that is available within minutes (air-force fighters targeting integrated with Army's field artillery supporting fire) and real-time surveillance so that strike mechanised infantry and armoured units are able to survive fighting the enemy who has modern complex air-defence. Attack helicopters, when employed in numbers, produce the desired effect in blunting the land offensives by armoured and mechanised divisions. However, in high altitude, even AH64E can carry only 40% of weapons. Director General of Military Operations (DGMO) of the Indian Army can spend very little time and resources on any synchronised joint services multidimensional warfighting battle doctrines and tactics. Consequently, formations like Integrated Battle Groups (IBG) can be raised only on paper. This isn’t something that just happens. Air support must be carefully planned and briefed prior to the mission to prevent tragedy. The Air Force advocates for centralized control through a single air component, whereas the Army attaches its aviation units to the brigade or division being supported. These force must have “bake in” integration and train “like they fight, fight like they train.” The forgotten element is detailed integration. This is the culmination of simultaneous de-confliction, coordination, and synchronization of airborne resources (army attack helicopters) to support sudden ground maneuver to seek gaps (forcing the enemy with a dilemma and getting the enemy to move into a disadvantageous position). Striking at unexpected time and place, while holding the flank and denying area. M1 or M9 shoulder-fired anti-tank rocket propelled grenade launcher, commonly known as the Bazooka, was among the first generation of rocket-propelled anti-tank weapons used in infantry combat. The only threat comes from shoulder-launched MANPADS over mountainous terrain. Russia pioneered the development of anti-missile systems. The first one, the Drozd, entered active service in 1983, mainly for defense against American ATGMs. These the Russians feared a great deal, as American troops had a lot of them, and the Russians knew these missiles (like TOW) worked. Russia went on to improve their anti-missile systems but was never able to export many of them. This was largely because these systems were expensive (over $100,000 per vehicle). Saddled with a huge shortfall of critical ammunition, Indian Army has issued a request to 25 Indian companies to supply locally made ammunition (which is currently with imported) include 125 mm armour piercing (fin stabilizing discarding) Sabot; 122 MM grad rockets for Pinaka series; 40 MM grenades capable of being machine launched, 23mm High Explosive shells, 30 MM ammunition used by armoured infantry carrying vehicles; electronic fuses and bi-modular charge system. The companies are free to form their own joint ventures with the foreign vendors to source technology and know-how. India, presently, imports FSAPDS from Russia & Israel for approximately 3,500 T-90 and T-72 tanks, worth over $70 million annually. The Ministry of Defense had floated a tender for domestic private manufacturers for the supply of 125mm armor-piercing types for T-90 and T-72 tanks, 40mm multiple grenade launchers/under-barrel grenade launcher) ammo, 30mm ammunition used by armored infantry carrying vehicles, 122mm Grad rockets for Pinaka series and a bi-modular charge system. Western KE-projectiles, such as the DM63 with tungsten carbide penetrator, have a maximum penetration of 750mm RHA, and for guided weapons the maximum penetration is as high as between 1,200mm (FGM-148 Javelin) and 1,400mm (AGM-114 Hellfire). Even high-quality passive armour combined with sophisticated reactive protection technology can do little to counter this. Neither Israel Military Industries nor India’s OFB have to date succeeded in developing APFSDS rounds that travel at speeds greater than 1,660 metres/second. Only Russia and China to date have claimed that their two-piece 125mm APFSDS rounds can attain a muzzle velocity of 1,700 metres/second. India has ordered 66,000 Russian 3VBM17 APFSDS (Armour Piercing Fin Stabilized Discarding Sabot for smooth bore guns) shells for the 125mm guns on their T-90 tanks. India wanted to buy an Israeli APFSDS shell but the supplier got tied up in an Indian anti-corruption investigation so, rather than wait for that to blow over, and because the army was running low on these shells, they went for the Russian supplier. The Israeli shell would have been more reliable and penetrate over 20 percent more armour, but considering the tanks likely opponents (China and Pakistan) have, the 3VBM17 is adequate. The 25mm rod of tungsten (or depleted uranium) is surrounded by a “sabot” that falls away once the shell clears the barrel. This gives the penetrator higher velocity and penetrating power. This is the most expensive type of 120/125mm shell. The armour piercing element of discarding sabot rounds is less than half the diameter of the shell and made of very expensive, high density metal. Its smaller size enables it to hit the target at very high speeds, up to 1,900 meters (6,270 feet) a second. The Invar 3UBK-20 cartridge with 9M119M1 guided missile (Invar-M) is fired from the 125mm gun, like a shell, but operates like a guided missile. They are used by T-90 tanks. The Invar enables the tank to hit targets at twice the range of the 125mm shells. The tandem-charge warhead can penetrate up to 900mm of armour (35.4 inches), twice what the 3VBM17 can. The 17.2 kg (37.8 pound) missile is 680mm (26.7 inches) long and has pop-out fins (with a 250mm/9 inch span) that aid in guidance (laser beam riding, controlled by the tank gunner). The missile has a max range of 5,000 meters at a speed of 350 meters a second (14 seconds max flight time). In 2013 India obtained a manufacturing license to build 15,000 Russian Invar anti-tank missiles for their T-90s. India has earlier purchased 10,000 of these missiles from Russia (that were built in Russia) and with the manufacturing license the average cost will be about $2,000 per missile. Buying the missiles from Russia costs nearly $40,000 per missile, while manufacturing in India can cut that by nearly 30 percent, making the $2,000 per missile license a good deal. Invar has been around for two decades and India is buying the latest version. The 120mm gun entered service in the late 1970s and for a long time there has not been a lot of demand for a larger gun. Since the 1980s there have been several efforts to design a tank gun larger than 120/125 mm. The recoil of a 140 mm gun is pretty much the upper limit of what a tank can handle. But no one has adopted the larger weapon for their tanks, mainly because the Russian super tank (with a 152 mm gun) was supposed to appear but it never did. Although the 140 mm gun could fire an armor piercing round with twice the penetrating power of one fired from a 120 mm gun; 140 mm shell is about 50% larger than the 120 mm one; reducing the amount of ammunition carried by about a third (i.e. around 20-30 rounds). There is a growing need for a larger tank gun, mainly because new armor protection designs (composite plus reactive armor) makes it increasingly possible for new tank designs to be protected against any existing tank gun shell, at least in the front of the vehicle. For years it was believed new anti-tank shell or missile designs would overcome this, but that is assured only by hitting the thinner side or top armor. There is still a big demand for the ability to succeed on the first shot with traditional attack at the frontal armor. Speed is an issue as well, so it’s up to a tank's high-velocity gun. The Kornet-E is a Russian laser guided ATGM with a range of 5,000 meters and was sold in the 1990s to a number of Middle Eastern nations. The launcher has a thermal sight for use at night or in fog. The missile's warhead can penetrate enough modern tank armor to render the side armor of the Israeli Merkava or U.S. M1 tanks vulnerable. The system was introduced in 1994 and has been sold to Syria (who apparently passed them on to Hezbollah and Hamas). The US Army has decided to go with a radical redesign of its M1 tank that will result in a lighter 59-ton M1E3 tank with a smaller three-man crew and a smaller unmanned turret containing an auto-loaders for the 120mm main gun as well many other items not found in the 78-ton M1A2Sep4. 73.6-ton M1A2C Abram MBT previous known as M1A2 SEPv3 is the upgrade for protection against Russia's T-14 Armata and China's 3rd generation Type 99 tank. This version rectifies many of the space, weight and power issues identified during Operation Iraqi Freedom. It will also be equipped with Trophy APS. M1A2C frontal and fore side armour on the turret to survive direct APDS-FS round. M1A2 Abrams costs $4.3 million. US builds 50 tanks per month. It can host any future mature technology the Army deems operationally relevant. It will carry High Explosive Anti-Tank (HEAT) and Advanced Multi-Purpose (MPAT) 120mm ammunition round able to combine a variety of different rounds into a single tank round. Improvements focus on increasing the electrical power margin, Vehicle Health Management Systems, integrated counter-improvised explosive device protection, a new Auxiliary Power Unit, embedded training and an ammunition data link. The only facility that mass produces the family of M1 Abrams tank is the Joint Systems Manufacturing Center (JSMC) in Lima. The M1 entered service in 1980. M1A2 (baseline) production began in 1986 and entered service in 1992 (77 built for the US and more than 600 M1s upgraded to M1A2, 315 for Saudi Arabia, 218 for Kuwait). While the 2007 M1A2 retained its excellent armour protection, air conditioning and a smooth ride, it now had new computers, and their software, were redesigned to make them faster and easier to use. The M1A2 gave the tank commander an independent thermal sight and ability to, in rapid sequence, shoot at two targets without the need to acquire each one sequentially. SEP v1 upgrades added 3rd-gen depleted uranium armour components with graphite coating. By 2013 the army had upgraded 700 tanks to the M1A2 SEP standard and built another 240 new M1A2 SEP vehicles. The goal is to get at least 2,000 upgraded to M1A2SEP or higher by 2020. The heavy M-1 (A1 or A2) Abram MBT has serious problems. In spite of its alleged prowess, it is dangerous to its crew;is overly expensive; has horrible logistics; breaks too much; has bad mobility. These contribute to the M-1 having poor operational momentum. The first M1 tank was produced in 1978, the M1A1 in 1985 and the M1A2 in 1986. Its ammunition include: C785 SABOT, CA31 HEAT, and AA38 SLAP-T rounds. Even the most heavily armoured main battle tanks are significantly less well protected from hits to the side, rear or top armour—and rebels with years of combat experience have learned how to ambush imprudently deployed main battle tanks, particularly using long-range anti-tank missiles. The US lost 80 Abrams in Iraq during the 2003 invasion, out of a total of 1,135 machines deployed and had to ship 530 tanks –i.e. almost half of those deployed, off for repair in the US. According to various sources, between 30 and 47 Abrams have been lost while fighting Daesh. Safety:
Upgrades are:
SEP v4 upgrades: The Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) is centered around the integration of a high-def 3rd generation FLIR – Forward Looking Infrared imaging sensor that has an increased ability to detect enemy signatures at further ranges through various obstructions such as rain, dust or fog. Rear view sensors and laser detection systems are part of these upgrades as well. Among other things, this upgrade adds a stronger auxiliary power unit for fuel efficiency and on-board electrical systems, improved armour materials, upgraded engines and transmission and a 28-volt upgraded drive system. New electronics such as, Line Replaceable Modules including a commander’s display unit, driver’s control panel, gunner’s control panel, turret control unit and a common high-resolution display, will be upgraded. This ECP 1 effort also initiates the integration of upgraded ammunition data links and electronic warfare devices such as the Counter Remote Controlled Improvised Explosive Device – Electronic Warfare – CREW. An increased AMPs alternator is also part of this upgrade, along with Ethernet cables designed to better network vehicle sensors together. The US Army is looking at a range of domestically produced and allied international solutions from companies participating in the Army's Modular Active Protection Systems (MAPS) program. Along with Rafael's Trophy system, the Army is also looking at Artis Corporation's Iron Curtain, Israeli Military Industry's Iron Fist, and UBT/Rheinmetall's ADS system, among others. State-of-the-art SEP v3 upgrades for existing M1A1 Abrams include:
The Soviet military considered T-64 tanks as a “foundation” tank while T-72 tank was considered by as a 'mobilization' tank meant for second-tier divisions. T-64 was the first tank in the world to feature an automatic loader, enabling the crew to be cut from four to three - commander, gunner and driver. T-64A was a further development of the T-64 tank by means of fitting it with a 125mm smooth-bore gun (1969), improvement of the engine systems and running gear. T-64B was a further development of the T-64A tank by means of installing a more advanced fire control system and armament stabilizer, guided missile system, improving the protection level etc. T-64BV had all of those, plus featured an enhanced anti-radiation protection and add-on explosive reactive armor. Other advanced features included a sophisticated multi-layer protection, NBC protection system, new layout of the power pack compartment, as well as the more sophisticated automatic fire control and gun-lunched missile ability that appeared with the T-64B in 1976. Russia's T-72 MBT was intended to be deployed to certain elements of the Russian Army as a cheaper alternative to the T-64 and later the T-80 MBT. However, surprisingly it outlived both those tanks. Downgraded T-72s were exported as MBTs and modified APCs & IFVs. The T-72 were extremely lightweight, at 41 tons, and very small compared to their Western counterparts. Some of the roads and bridges in former Warsaw Pact countries were designed so that T-72s can easily use them while NATO tanks could not pass at all, or only at very low speed. Iran Karrar ("Striker" in Farsi) tank is produced with the help of Solvenian company Fotona. Its T-72S chassis carrying 125mm autoloader smoothbore gun. However, by the end of the 11th plan, all T-55 tanks with Indian Army will be replaced by T-90 (aka T-72BU) tanks. The Army's requirement for 1,780 MBTs to replace the older T-55 and T-72 tanks is going to be met through the progressive induction of 1,657 T-90S tanks and 124 of the indigenous Arjuns. T-72B2 "Slingshot" (aka T-72BM) has improved fire control system of the main cannon. Fire control system worked well while moving the laser measurements, thermal imaging cameras, controls the firing of a gun barrel, the "Pine" system, the HP 1000 equipped with APU and anti-magnetic mine (2006). Due to the tropical weather patterns in India, the Indian Army has had trouble with the systems, particularly integration with the fire control systems. The Army's case for acquiring 700 TISAS (thermal imaging stand alone systems) and 418 TIFACS (thermal fire control systems) for its T-72 fleet at a cost of around $230 million is in various stages of the procurement process. 300 Israeli TISAS were imported, followed by 3,860 image intensifier-based night-vision devices. A huge requirement persists. Out of an order of about 1,000 units of the 3-km range night vision equipment for the T-72 tanks, nearly 300 have already been delivered to the Army. The Army also requires hand held thermal imaging (HHTI) sights (with laser range finder) for infantry, armoured, air defence, artillery and engineer regiments. All air forces believe that modern war is round-the-clock effort. Operation Desert Storm clearly demonstrated the unique scope of the ability of the USAF to prosecute the war irrespective of the weather or the time of the day. The ability to operate in the hours of darkness and in bad weather provides the necessary flexibility and much higher utilization rate of available aircraft, besides keeping the enemy occupied all the time and preventing him from recuperating. In India’s case, these are also required for navigating one’s way into difficult terrain as one finds in the North East and in Ladakh. Both T-64 & T-72 tanks have different autoloaders, The T-64 has the hydrolick powered 'basket type' while the T-72 has the eletric powered 'cassette type'. Both are reliable though there were issues with the autoloaders on the T-64A, the whole gunner's losing their arms stories. Due to the ammo storage arrangement on the T-64, the autoloader itself gives around 3in more head room than a T-72, very usefull in a tank as cramped as these. Also because of this the ammo is stored lower in the hull, and thus less exposed, the basket design also allows the carosell to traverse in two directions allowing for faster selection of ammunition loading and thus a faster fireing rate, 6-9 seconds, vs. 6-14 seconds for the cassette type. The T-72 also has a falw reminiscent of the T-62 series; a small hatch at the back for the shell stubs are ejected, while this saves room it is not good in an NBC enviroment, unless however this system can be turned off. The turret crew compartment is smaller in a T-72, which for long endurance is not a good thing, it's like been stuck in the back seat of a car, hunched over for a long road trip, also the T-64 was faster than the T-72 until it had the engine upgrade in the B model. While the T-72 may have been faster on rough terrain, it was not used in Afghanistan as the suspension was prone to failure over that kind of ground. Both tanks have very cramped driver positions an can be hard to drive with the two stick steering. On the T-64 , the gun is only stabilized on 2 planes and the FCS cannot allow the tank to fire on the move (at high speed similar to now-a-days). The T-72 can fire on the move because the Gunner has the 1V528 ballistic computer. However, T-64 variants have a much higher practical rate of fire than any T-72 variant until the T-90, and T-72BM, when the latter tanks adopted the "sequence mode" present in the former. It was the T-64 which first introduced composite armour, using two layers of steel with a kind of fiberglass filler. It provided excellent protection at the time, enough to stave off 105mm L7/M68 rounds, the most common NATO tank gun at the time of their introduction. The newer upgraded "Nakidka ("Relikt" model which looks very similar to T-90) has two 1000-horsepower engines and armor Kontakt-5. The result of this creation was development of a T-72B 1 (with modern fire-control and additional armor). T-72B2 "Rogatka" upgrade has (1990) a new engine installed with 1000 horsepower (V-2) and a new fire control system. Even the T-72M/M1s (monkey models) could hold their own against L7 armed Centurions in Lebanon in 1982. It was only with the introduction of the T-72B in 1985, that the base protection of the T-72s came close to that of the T-64s, by then both had Konkat-1 ERA, which went into wide spread use in 1983. T-72B3 costs nearly twice as much as the B1, and has modern and expensive equipment like improved fire control system and 21st century communications equipment. T-72B3M is equipped with a panoramic commander sight, has increased engine power, an automatic transmission and a drive control system. Fitted with Kontakt-5 ERA, its quipped with a new fire control system, including a new Gunners thermal sight and new communication systems. The main gun has been modified to fire Refleks ATGM. Mobility has also been improved with a new 1130hp V-92S2F engine. Thus upgrade was implemented through a RESET process and is in Russian Army service. T-72S "Shilden" (1987) is the output of the T-72BV with extra armour. T-72BU (1988) was the basis of the T-72BM which was to develop a tank T-90 (1993). The Indian T-72 fleet is huge with more modern tanks also being inducted. The existing T-72s are certainly obsolete as MBTs, but their hulls are by no means junk as they can be modified to host new turrets for a variety of applications. T-72M gearbox has never been manufactured in India. The majority of T-72s await upgrades that will provide them with either full-solution thermal imaging fire control systems (TIFCS) or partial-solution thermal imaging standalone systems (TISAS) to enable them to operate at night. Till now, just 310 partial- solution TISAS had been acquired and installed on the T-72M1s, while an equal number were under acquisition. Efforts to plug the gap by upgrading India's T-72 tanks in the interim also ran into trouble. Indian-made 125mm smooth bore barrels blew up during field use, forcing the Army to seek emergency imports which haven't materialised. Imports of equipment which would have given them critical night-fighting capabilities are running years behind schedule. Some T-72s are being outfitted with all the bells and whistles - the 'gold standard' so as to speak, whereas the rest will be modernised in a more modest manner. Commencement has begun by bringing 250 tanks to the DRDO's 'Combat Improved' Ajeya standard. (The T-72M1 has been named the Ajeya in Indian service). It includes thermal imager integrated with the famous Drawa-T from PCO-Cenzin of Poland, Laser Warning System & advance fibre optic gyro-based land navigation system. IA’s nightmare scenario of blue-on-blue engagements, since the MBT designs of both China and Pakistan are derived from the T-series MBTs and will therefore be indistinguishable from those of the IA’s T-series MBTs when viewed by either a daylight TV camera or a thermal imager at nighttime. That the IA’s nightmare scenario is an undeniable fact-of-life is borne out by the IA’s requirement for a MMW identification friend-or-foe vectronics suite, which continues to be developed by the DRDO’s DEAL laboratory. Tank Ex (Karna) light tank - This program came out of Army "Combat Improved Ajay (CIA)" program for upgrading T-72. However, due to the unavailability of thermal imaging sights for its turret and lack of 1,350hp diesel engines from Russia, the program was abandoned in late 1990s. This MBT uses low-profile chassis of the T-72M1 (Ajeya) and Arjun's firepower (turret and weapon fire control system). This main battle tank uses Kanchan heavy composite armor. It is broadly similar to the British Chobham. Explosive reactive armor blocks can be added for improved protection. Vehicle is fitted with NBC protection and automatic fire suppression systems. The Tank Ex MBT is armed with a 120-mm rifled gun. This gun is loaded manually. This gun is capable of launching Israeli LAHAT anti-tank guided missiles in the same manner as ordinary projectiles. Ammunition is stored in the turret bustle, separated from the crew. Turret bustle is fitted with blow off panels. It is worth mentioning that the Tank Ex is significantly lighter than the Arjun. it also has a lower silhouette. This tank is fitted with auxiliary power unit, which powers main systems, when the engine is turned off. The 'gold standard' upgrade of the T-72 Ajeya light tank program provides for installation of a Polish SKO-1T DRAWA-T fire control systems/thermal imagers supplied by the Polish PCO/Cenzin (from Polish PT-91 Twardy ("hard","tough" or "resilient"), DRDO explosive reactive armour, a navigation system from Israel 's Tamam, German Litef or South African RDI, a locally developed laser illumination warning system, new radios manufactured by Tadiran or GES Marconi and an improved NBC protection system will be fitted. The T-72 125mm smoothbore cannons has a lower chamber pressures than those of the T-90S and this prevents the T-72’s cannon from making effective use of 125mm APFSDS rounds, i.e. the velocity of APFSDS rounds is lower than 1,600 m/s. The tank is planned to be powered by a 1,000 hp (750 kW) S-1000 engine made by the Polish firm PZL-Wola (also from Polish PT-91 Twardy ("hard","tough" or "resilient"). It is also upgraded with new fire detection and suppression systems and laser warning systems on either side of the turret. Also known as Combat Improved Ajeya. Already, 692 T-72Ms have been upgraded thus far into the T-72 ‘Combat-Improved Ajeya’ standards, while a follow-on tranche of 700 T-72M1s (whose per unit procurement cost is Rs90 million) is due to be upgraded at a cost of Rs50 million per unit Licence production of the tank was undertaken at the Heavy Vehicles Factory at Avadi, Tamil Nadu. However T-72M gearbox has never been manufactured in India. Bharat Electronics Ltd (BEL) is the biggest supplier of night vision equipment to the armed forces. In 2007 the company has signed a memoranda of understanding (MoUs) with Elbit Systems Electro Optics ELOP Ltd, for the local production and support of thermal imaging systems. The Army’s objective is to equip over 1,600 T-72 tanks that form the backbone of the country’s armored forces, with advanced night fighting capabilities. The Army’s case for acquiring 700 TISAS (thermal imaging stand alone systems) and 418 TIFACS (thermal fire control systems) for its T-72 fleet at a cost of around $230 million is in various stages of the procurement process. 300 Israeli TISAS were installed as part of several T-72 upgrade phases, followed by 3,860 image intensifier-based night-vision devices. A huge requirement persists. 310 Russian produced T-90S Main Battle Tanks were also fitted with French Catherine TI cameras. German analysts had a chance to examine Soviet made T-72 tanks equipped with Kontakt-5 ERA, and they proved impenetrable to most modern US and German tank projectiles; this sparked the development of more modern Western tank ammunition, such as the M829A2 and M829A3. Russian tank designers responded with newer types of Heavy Reactive Armour, including Relikt and Kaktus. T-72M-(1982) upgraded to T-72M1 Combat Improved Ajeya (CIA) mk2 light tank (almost identical to T-72B4 standard). It has been deployed to high altitude nothern areas like Ladakh to counter China's deployment of ZTQ-105 light tanks. These upgraded T-72M1s have also be retrofitted with 12-cylinder water-cooled V-46TK 1,000hp diesel engines (taken from existing T-90S). The first 175 tanks were produced with kits supplied by Russia. This was followed by progressive local manufacture. The eventual aim was to produce as much of the tank as possible in India with the target being 97%. It is understood that this target was not achieved. Production of the T-72M1 in India was running at about 70 vehicles a year with final vehicles being delivered in March 1994. In Indian Army service the T-72M1 is known as the Ajeya and by 1995 the Indian Army had around 1,100 vehicles in service. Other sources have indicated that the total Indian T-72M1 MBT fleet could be as low as 800 or even as high as 1,980 vehicles. The original Russian engine in T-72 tanks had performed well in all climatic conditions. Operation Rhino plan aimed at re-equipping 1,500 T-72M1 tanks. Indian Army wants 34 Regiments of T-72CIA. In 2002, India purchased 250 Polish SKO-1T DRAWA-T digital tank fire-control systems for 250 T-72M1s that were upgraded to T-72CIA standard. Subsequently, another 692 T-72M1s were upgraded to T-72CIA standards thus by being retrofitted with ELBIT Systems-supplied Thermal Imaging Stand Alone Systems (TISAS) and Thermal Imaging Fire Control Systems (TIFCS) at a cost of around Rs 1,150 crore (US$250 million). Another 300 T-72M1s will be upgraded next. T-72A upgrade program was started in 1999-2000 and it ended in 2009. They upgraded most of the armour of T-72's tank engine propulsion system and additional armour to protect the rubber tracks. Even the T-72M/M1s (monkey models) could hold their own against L7 armed Centurions in Lebanon in 1982. It was only with the introduction of the T-72B in 1985, that the base protection of the T-72s came close to that of the T-64s, by then both had Konkat-1 ERA, which went into wide spread use in 1983. 46 ton T-72B3M (T-72B4 standard) by Uralvagonzavod, part of the Rostec State Corporation, is a tank built to fight battles after nuclear exchange. It is equipped with a panoramic commander sight and has increased engine power from a new 1,130hp V-92S2F to replace its original 780hp diesel engine. The new engine is coupled with a new automatic transmission system and improved drivetrain control system, which should improve the T-72’s mobility. The driver will also receive a new rear-view camera display to improve his situational awareness. It will also be fitted with a new communication systems. T-72B3 is equipped with a rear view camera and a display complex for the driver. The upgraded tank will get a new 2A46M-5 125-mm smoothbore, the same weapon the T-90A has, along with a new sighting system called the Sosna-U, which will be paired with the new 1A40-4 fire control system with an automatic target tracking which can significantly reduce the time for training gunner-operators, without reducing the effectiveness of firing. The tank will also receive a new ballistics computer to help increase its accuracy. The main gun has been modified to fire Refleks ATGM. Perhaps more significantly, the T-72B3M will receive an independent PK PAN sight for the tank commander, which has its own thermal imaging system. It will also replaces the older Kontakt-5 ERA package with the new Relikt explosive reactive armor (ERA). Relikt ERA is believed to provide at least 50 percent more protection than the current Kontakt-5 ERA. 150 Russian T-72B are being upgraded to T-72B3M, which would offer performance comparable to the much more modern T-90MS Tagil, but for a fraction of the price (17 million rubles per tank). Thus, upgrade was implemented through a RESET process. Currently, the Russian Army has 65% tanks in its service are T-72B3. The T-72B3 costs nearly twice as much as the T-72B1, and has modern and expensive equipment like an improved fire control system and 21st century communications equipment. While the T-72B3 is nearly as expensive as the T-90, it was preferred by the troops and quietly agreed that it was a better tank than the T-90MS Tagil. Not too complex, not too outdated. This apparently has something to do with the design of the T-72BU (trying to merge T-80 elements into the T-72 design) and the decline in manufacturing quality in Russian the defense industry after the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991. Especially telling was how T-90s began to be put in reserve as soon as enough T-72B3s became available. T-72S "Shilden" (1987) is the output of the T-72BV with extra armour. It was the T-64 which first introduced composite armour, using two layers of steel with a kind of fiberglass filler. It provided excellent protection at the time, enough to stave off 105mm L7/M68 rounds, the most common NATO tank gun at the time of their introduction. The newer upgraded "Nakidka ("Relikt" model, which looks very similar to T-90) has two 1000-horsepower engines and armor Kontakt-5. The result of this creation was development of a T-72B 1 (with modern fire-control and additional armor). T-72B2 "Rogatka" upgrade has (1990) a new engine installed with 1000 horsepower (V-2) and a new fire control system. T-72BU (1988) was the basis of the T-72BM which was to develop a tank T-90 (1993). In 2003 both Germany and the U.S. believed the usefulness of heavy tanks like the M-1 and Leopard 2 were obsolete. Then came Iraq and Afghanistan where it was found that these traditional designs were still very useful, especially with the most modern technology like thermal sights and modern air-conditioning systems. In 2017 Germany began upgrading its Leopard 2s to the 2A7V standard, using the experience of Canadian, Danish and Turkish Leopard 2s in Afghan and Syrian combat. In 2016 the Leopard got its latest upgrade; the A7V. This added a few features to the A7+ including a 20 KW auxiliary power supply so the stationary tank could continue to operate all its electronics when the main engine was shut down. The other addition was the ability to easily add additional armor modules. Leopard-2-AV (Austere Version): Currently, Germany only has 225 number of Leopard-2 in service. The 55 ton Leopard 2A6 was introduced in 2006, is still the most commonly used model. In 2009 Germany began upgrading its few active duty Leopard tanks from the 2A6 to the A7+ standard. Additionally, 104 Leopard 2A4 tanks (that were retired in the 1990s) have been reactivated and refurbishing to Leopard 2A7V standard. In many respects the Germans were just trying to stay competitive with the M1 upgrades. That would include more armor on the sides and rear, more external cameras, more effective ammunition for the 120mm gun, a remote control machine-gun station on top of the turret, better fire control and combat control computers and displays, more powerful auxiliary power unit and better air conditioning, and numerous other minor improvements to mobility (engine, track laying system, wheels and related gear), sound proofing and the thermal sights. This would increase the weight of the tank to nearly 70 tons. The 44 ton Leopard I entered service in the late 1960s, it was the first post-World War II German tank design. Although a contemporary of the American M-60A3, the German tank was considered superior. The German Leopard 2 appeared in 1979 and was an immediate export hit, especially to replace the aging 1960s U.S. designed M-60 tanks. Turkey has lost 8 German-made 55 ton Leopard 2A4 tanks in combat since their troops entered the Syria in August 2016. These were the first combat losses for the Leopard 2. The Leopard-2 has space for only for 15 ammo in the turret's bustle storage rack with sliding blast doors and blowout panel in the turret roof. 27 rounds are stored in a special blast out magazines for the charges in the crew compartment in the hull, left of the driver's station (because there is no space for sliding blast doors there). The 3rd gen Arjun-I is partially based on the German Leopard II main battle tank. India decided on a hybrid tank design, i.e. the hull & turret design from Germany’s recommendations, & the armament/fire-control system suggestion from the UK. It was designed with assistance of Krauss Maffei, who had also previously helped design the earlier Leopard-2 MBT. Like the Leopard 2 majority of the ammo is stored in a special blast out magazines for the charges in the crew compartment in the hull (because there is no space for blast doors or blowout panels). There was the decision to produce an indigenous Indian tank was made in 1972, shortly after the Indian Army used T-72 during Indo-Pakistani War of 1971. T-72M deficiencies like poor crew safety (when direct hit) and poor firepower & fire-control sytem was because T-72 was meant to be cheap and the main battle tank for Soviet army were 38-ton T-64 light tank and 46-ton T-80 heavy tank. The 105mm APFSDS rounds fired by Israeli Merkava tanks in Lebanon with 105mm rifled-bore guns routinely pierced the Syrian T-72M front armour and went straight through the tank's engine compartment. LTTE guerrillas exploded improvised explosive devices underneath two T-72M during the battle for Jaffna, which penetrated the tank's floor armour and detonated the stored ammo and blew off the turret. On April 19, 1985, Gen. A.S. Vaidya, then Chief of the Army Staff, gave the name Arjun to the prototype tank, which was fitted with a powerful (impressive 35:1 horsepower-to-weight ratio) but extremely fuel inefficient German-made MTU MB 838 Ka-501 1,400-horsepower turbocharged water-cooled diesel engine, complemented with an Indian supercharger. The requirement was for a tank small enough to be strategically mobile, capable of being shuttled on internal lines (roads and railroads) to vital sectors along the long border with Pakistan. However, the main drawback of the Arjun Mk.1A is the turret-mounted RCWS since it restricts the 360-degree view of the commander’s panoramic sight due to which it isn't optimum for rapidly advancing into hostile territory. India's tanks are not designed to operate in extended tank duels or cover ground; they main purpose is to rapidly punch holes and dismantle fixed defensive lines in India-Pakistan desert. Arjun Mk-1 tank per unit cost around is $7.8 million even with a limited production run of only 124 or 126 units. The actual product had lots of shortcomings, revealed in testing, the Indian Army was forced to buy 124 ot 126 Arjun tanks, which is enough to equip 2 armored regiments, in order to keep state tank production facilities open. The tank has 90 technical issues, with its laser-warning receiver, targeting & thermal sights, power-pack, transmission system & auxiliary power unit; which is why, 75% of the 124 tanks have become non-operational. One of the significant issues was that the thin slat-armour package on the tank's rear section, the left-side section and the area around the primary gunner sight, was found inadequate against APFSDS attack. Another problem of Arjun mk1 is absence of ammunition blast proof doors or blow out panels that release the energy of ammunition cook off. Therefore Indian Army demanded the latest standard features, Explosive Reactive Armour (ERA) on the front and the turret roof, for more protection. The Kanchan modular composite armour similar to British Chobham armour from which it was developed. This armour is able to defeat APFSDS, HESH and HEAT rounds. This added protection came at the cost of HP-to-weight ratio — ballooning the weight of the tank from 40-ton to 62-ton; thus decreasing tactical and operational mobility. The tank's weight also means it cannot be used in Punjab and the northern deserts of India in India’s “Cold Start” offensive strategy against Pakistan. Today, the Indian Army has no more appetite for more armour. The Indian Army for its part is adamant it wants no part of the Arjun Mk-2 until prototypes perform successfully during field trials, and would much rather buy latest Russian tank. India currently is totally depended on only Russian-supplied T-90s MBTs. India’s military industrial base was such that any new tank development would have faced a long time. The tank took so long to develop that technologies not even invented when Arjun was first proposed had to be added to the tank. GPS navigation, laser warning receivers, non-explosive-reactive armor and other innovations were merely research papers in 1974, but by the early 2000s were must-have inventions that added to the tank’s complexity, weight and cost. The tank was trapped for decades in a development death spiral. The Arjun’s development period was so long that major design decisions became completely obsolete. Initially, there was a lot of as well component failures however, those defects were patiently and steadily eliminated while working through the development phase. Numerous hardships contributed to the fact that the first prototype was completed only in 1984 and several prototypes were created in 1988. The 105mm gun, perfectly adequate in the 1970s when stacked up against the NATO-standard 105mm L7 gun (the M68 in U.S. Army service), and the 115-millimeter gun of the Soviet T-62 tank, were obsolete by the early 1990s. It has just 300 mm penetration at 2 kms. However, it is enough for all Pakistani armour. This lead to the development of Arjun Mk 1 tank, with a 120mm rifled barrel gun, advanced composite armour, and advanced fire control and thermal sights. The gun, capable of firing High Explosive, Armor-Piercing Discarding Sabot rounds, High Explosive Anti-Tank rounds and High Explosive, Squash Head rounds. Arjun shares the same turret layout as the Leopard-2 tank. The fire control system has been developed by Elbit Systems in Israel. Originally, more than 50% of components of the tank were imported, but this percentage has gradually diminished as various parts have been replaced by indigenous designed systems. Yet the tracked vehicle still requires foreign hardware to function and those supplied have dried up. Israel's 65-ton Barak (or Merkava-4 meaning Chariot in Hebrew) costs over $5 million each. Merkava 4 has improved armour, a redesigned turret, improved suspension, a powerful 1,500HP engine and a top speed of 65 kms/hr. A new feature of the tank is that the fitted modular special armour covers the turret. Its armour design is tailored to local threats, mostly IEDs and ATGMS, and is not geared to fight other tanks. While the ATGM warhead often penetrated, ATGMs were much less effective in the 1982 and 2006 since the Merkava was designed to take this kind of hit and survive. In addition to fire extinguisher systems, the ammo and fuel are stored in such a way that secondary explosions are rare. By 2021 360 Merkava 4s were built. Currently, 220 of 550 Merkava 4s are in storage, while only 160 of 730 63.5-ton Merkava 3s are in use, the rest in storage. Although the Merkava was introduced in 1979, until 2006 Merkavas had only been used in peacekeeping and counter-terror operations with the Palestinians. Hezbollah would often use a missile at the vehicle commander when he was standing out of the turret hatch to get a better look at what's going on. In 2011 Trophy APS defeated incoming missiles and rockets in combat for the first time. In 2017, Iron Vision commander helmet was introduced. Iron Vision meant a tank could largely dispense with tanks’ traditional dependence on the tank commander spending a lot of time with his head sticking out of the turret to get a better view of the situation. Israel and the surrounding area are either desert or rolling hills, which form ideal tank country. Israel is the smallest nation in the world to design and build its own tanks. During and after the 1967 War, Britain and France refused to supply certain categories of modern weapons to Israel. Alarmed, the Israeli government established a native defence industry so that state security would not be compromised by the political whims of outsiders. High priority was given to the development of a Main Battle Tank (MBT). The general design borrows the tracks from the British Centurion tank, which had seen extensive use during the Yom Kippur war. Following the model of contemporary self-propelled howitzers, the turret assembly is located nearer the rear than in most main battle tanks. With the engine in front, this layout gives additional protection against a frontal attack, especially for the personnel in the main hull, like the driver. It also creates more space in the rear of the tank that allows increased storage capacity, as well as a rear entrance to the main crew compartment, allowing easy access under enemy fire. This allows the tank to be used as a platform for medical disembarkation, a forward command and control station, and an armoured personnel carrier. The rear entrance's clamshell-style doors provide overhead protection when off- and on-loading cargo and personnel. Usually six infantrymen are carried, providing Merkava with its own infantry support. This is especially useful in built-up areas. The model has a new fire-control system, the El-Op Knight Mark 4. Removable modular armour, from the Merkava Mark IIID, is used on all sides, including the top and a V-shaped belly armour pack for the underside. This modular system is designed to allow for damaged tanks to be rapidly repaired and returned to the field. Tank rounds are stored in individual fire-proof canisters, which reduce the chance of cook-offs in a fire inside the tank. The turret is "dry"; no active rounds are stored in it. The Merkava was designed with fully armoured, self-sealing fuel tanks; fireproof containers that provide one hour minimum protection for all ammunition; and a heavily armoured crew compartment. All crewmembers are required to wear protective asbestos clothing, and the tanks are equipped with an extremely fast-reacting fire suppression system. Some features, such as hull shaping, exterior non-reflective paints, and shielding for engine heat plumes mixing with air particles to confuse enemy thermal imagers, were carried over from the IAI Lavi program of the Israeli Air Force to make the tank harder to spot by heat sensors and radar. The Merkava 4 has a new all-electric turret, a much larger 12.7 mm machine gun for anti-vehicle operations. The Mark IV includes the larger 120mm main gun of the previous versions but can fire a wider variety of ammunition, including HEAT and sabot rounds like the APFSDS kinetic energy penetrator, using an electrical semi-automatic revolving magazine for 10 rounds. Merkava 4 carries 48 rounds of 120mm shells and uses a 10-round electric powered drum for quick loading. The Trophy defensive system is believed to be the first of a series of so-called “active defense” systems to become operational. Such systems aim to neutralize threats before they strike the tank. In the past, tanks have relied on increasingly thick layers of armour or “reactive” technology that weakens an incoming rocket upon impact by setting off a small explosion. Trophy provides 360° coverage against anti-tank rockets, anti-tank missiles and tank HEAT (high-explosive anti-tank) rounds. Once Trophy has detected a threat, it is tracked and classified and the optimal intercept point is computed, prior to launching a countermeasure. The tiny Trophy system, lodged behind small rectangular plates on both sides of the tank, uses radar to detect the incoming projectiles and fires a small charge to intercept them. The entire process is automated, holds fire if the rocket is going to miss the tank, and causes such a small explosion that the chances of unintentionally hurting friendly soldiers through collateral damage is only 1%. Automatic fire detection and suppression has been installed. Sensors include radar with four antennas placed around the vehicle. The system development was completed in April 2007 and the IDF has approved production for fitting on new Merkava tanks. The underside of the hull has been fitted with additional armour protection against mines. The redesign of the hull around the installation of the new power pack has provided improved frontal armour protection and improvement to the driver's field of view. For improved reverse driving, the driver uses a camera. Merkava IV tank crewman was killed when a tank ran over an improvised explosive device (IED). This tank had additional V-shaped underside armour, limiting casualties to just one of the seven personnel (four crewmen and three infantrymen) on-board. The latest version Merkava Mark IV, most tank crews agree that, in spite of the losses sustained and some major flaws in tactical conduct, the tank proved its mettle in its first high-saturation combat. High-tech missile have penetrated the tank's armour, but caused no injuries among its crew. Tactics had also been modified to focus on asymmetric or guerrilla war threats, in addition to the conventional war scenarios that the Merkava had primarily been designed to combat. By October 2010, the IDF had begun to equip the first Merkava IVs with the Trophy active protection system, to improve the tanks' protection against advanced anti-tank missiles which use tandem-charge HEAT warheads. Added protection systems included an Elbit laser-warning system and IMI in-built smoke-screen grenades. Covenanter A13 Mk III low-profile tanks in 1942. As weight reduction measure, aluminum wheels and welded hull was at first envisioned, however, it was reverted back to steel and riveted hull on a steel frame which actually made the tank slow and heavy. An unusual feature born from a rushed design that doomed the Covenanter was that there was no room for radiator at the back of the tank with the engine and had to be relocated at the front on the tank which gave rise to heating and stalling issues in Western Desert conditions. Due to engine overheating and fighting compartment ventilation problems, all production vehicles were used exclusively for training in the British Isles. Army says there are bridges where heavier MBT might find it difficult (to move). This is the reason why we have developed the other bridge and made our tank go over it again and again when displayed at DefExpo. We are trying to tell the army that even if we may not be able to use it as it is everywhere, there definitely can be places where it can be used. It understandable why the Army now felt the earlier 67 ton Arjun Mk.1A tank design did not meet its requirements for the future. Its basic features were conceived for a different era. A lighter tank still retains its character when adding extra armour and more powerful engine but a heavy tank design will go wary if its remade into a lighter tank. The Rajasthan canal was conceived in 1947 but work on it could start only in 1957 after the Indus waters treaty was signed. In 1983 an year before the first prototype of the Arjun was made, Stage I of the canal reached North of Bikaner. The deserts where tanks could have unrestrained mobility started becoming restricted. A latticework of canals snaked all over especially parallel to the border and are planned to go upto Gadra Road in Barmer district. An area which was classic tank country has gradually changed into a populated area with restricted employability especially for heavy tanks. Given its excessive weight and width, the Arjun can't be used in Punjab and northern deserts for armoured thrusts under the "Pro-Active" or "Cold Start" war strategy. Arjun Mk.1A Indian Army has plans to induct two regiments with Arjun Mk.1A version which will have the feature of firing anti-tank missiles. 67.5-ton Arjun Mk.1A version has been ordered. 18 of 118 Arjun Mk.1A will be delivered by 2022. Drdo has upgraded 14 features including automatic fire control system for guided shells and day-and-night stabilised sights, integrated with automatic target tracker. The main gun, fire control system and engine are imported. A weight-reduction of 8 tonnes of the Arjun Mk.1A tanks have been successfully achieved by Drdo’s CVRDE with the help of the MoD’s DGQA and the IA’s Corps of Electronics & Mechanical Engineers (EME). Some sources claim that weight of this main battle tank was reduced from 59 to about 55 tones comparing with it's predecessor in order to improve operational and logistic mobility. High-Nitrogen Steel (HNS) production technology has been mastered by the DRDO’s DMRL and has been transferred to Jindal Stainless Steel Ltd (in Hisar). The baseline hull of the Arjun Mk.1A will no longer be built with imported low-carbon, Ni-Cr-Mo rolled homogeneous armor (RHA) steel, but with lighter High-Nitrogen Steel (HNS) which will reduce Arjun Mk.1A weight from 67.5 ton to 62 ton. In addition, the powerpack will include a 1,500hp Cummins diesel engine. Consequently, the Arjun Mk.1A ’s power-to-weight ratio will increase from 18hp/tonne to 25hp/tonne. Additionally, the Nexter Systems autoloader option (also used on the LeClerc MBT) has also been dropped in order to minimise weight. Under another weight-reduction exercise, the Sundaram Industries built steel-wheels for Arjun MBT, will be made of aluminium-wheels and ventilators for the Arjun Mk.A1 (also for the upgraded T-72CIA tanks) and be built by the Alicon Group. Also 2D paper blueprints tend to leave tiny gaps between the different components of an assembly that were filled with shims, leading to increased weight. But by 3D CAM blueprints, those tiny gaps can be entirely eliminated during the manufacturing process. The biggest issue with the previous 65.5 ton design was that it was 4 to 5 tonnes heavier than the Arjun MK-1; hence there was too little horsepower due to the upgrades such as - too much heavy Explosive Reactive Armour Mk-II, added improved night vision capability based on un-cooled thermal imaging, added advanced air-defence guns - that had made the tank overweight. There are many problems with its excessive weight, such as limited cross country mobility, limiting areas where it can be deployed. Also it is difficult to transport this tank to the front line. Locally developed Fitting Explosive Reactive Armour (ERA) Mark II plates on the tank has boosted crew protection, but also had increases the weight by one and a half tonnes. An equivalent increase comes from added mine ploughs, which churn up the ground ahead of the tank, uprooting explosive mines that would otherwise blow up the tank. The trade-off, though, is in maximum speed. The DRDO rebuts this logic, as do the tank units that actually operate the Arjun. “The Arjun’s heavier weight is distributed over a larger area because of its larger tracks. Its “nominal ground pressure” is lower than the Russian tanks. So the Arjun can actually move more easily in Punjab,” says S Sundaresh, the DRDO’s Chief Controller of R&D for armoured vehicles. This is validated by history, says Lieutenant General (Retired) RM Vohra, who won a Mahavir Chakra in the 1971 war while commanding 4 HORSE, a tank regiment equipped with Centurion tanks. He says the 42-tonne Pakistani Patton M-48 tanks got mired in the soft soil of Asal Uttar, in Punjab, while the 51-tonne Centurion moved around that battlefield easily. For years the army criticised the original Arjun Mk.1 tank was criticized as being too heavy as too heavy for India’s road and rail infrastructure; but wanted modifications that will make the Arjun heavier. Indian Army which frequently complains that Arjun MK-2 which weight close to 65 tonnes is Heavy and creates problems moving around in riverine terrain of Punjab and J&K has demanded 50 tonnes Future Main Battle Tank (FMBT) from DRDO which is 15 tonnes lighter than Arjun MK-2 and 5 tonnes Lighter than Armata which has put DRDO in a spot. Chennai-based Combat Vehicle Research and Development Establishment has designed the Mark II version of MBT at its facility here. CVRDE co-ordinated with Armament Research and Development Establishment, Pune, High Energy Materials Research Laboratory, Pune, Instruments Research & Development Establishment, Dehradun, Centre for Fire, Explosive and Environment Safety, Delhi and Defence Metallurgical Research Laboratory, Hyderabad for designing Mark-II. It sports more than 93 improvements over the older version and with around 60% locally manufactured components so as to be less depended on foreign imports. Another crucial improvement in the Mark II is the tank commander’s French-made manual thermal imaging (TI) night sight, which replaces the day-only sight of the earlier Arjun. Now the Arjun can operate at night in “hunter-killer” mode --- the commander as hunter; and the gunner as killer. The commander scans the battlefield through his new TI sight; targets that he spots are electronically allocated to the gunner to destroy, while he returns to hunting for more targets. The tank's navigator must constantly view a monitor or view-finder to locate targets. The new tank also has improved communication systems and new navigation system. It will feature indigenous high accuracy fibre optic gyros developed by DRDO's RCI and feature fire control systems developed for the Arjun Mk-2 (also will be used on Indian T-90s). A tank is cost effective with economies of scale. "the Army keeps on changing its technical requirements. If it ordered around 500 Arjuns, it would stabilize production lines. This, in turn, will allow regular upgrades and set the stage for developing the (55 tonne) FMBT," said a scientist. The Indian-made T-90s cost about $3 million each. India has already bought 700 Russian made T-90 tanks, at a cost of $3.5 million each. The Arjun 2 is expected to cost over $5 million each. The high price is due to a lot of high tech. This includes an active defense system to defeat anti-tank missiles, a much more powerful engine, lots of electronics and a hermetically sealed crew department to provide protection against chemical weapons and radiation. All this stuff is tricky to develop. A decision to indigenously develop a new anti-tank missile to be fitted onto the MK-II will, in all likelihood, delay the induction of the upgraded platform. It still needs to clear 2 more phases of user trials. It seems to have more secure ammo storage in blow-out panel containers on the rear of the turret bustle but it also seems the primary gunner sight of Arjun Mk-1 did not previously have adequate armor. Hence, to be placed in strategic locations in both the hull and turret will be the DRDO-developed ‘Kanchan’ ceramics-based composite laminate armour tiles as well as DRDO’s High Energy Materials Research Laboratory (HEMRL) developed and indigenously-built explosive reactive armour (ERA) Mk-II tiles, for enhanced protection against large caliber kinetic energy ammunition on the front and sides of the hull and turret sections. It seems that the new ERA is based on the Russian Kontakt-5 technology, developed in the 1980s and used on the T-90 and some other Soviet/Russian tanks. The new Explosive Reactive Armour panels have been developed using advanced Armour materials and new designs do not increase weight compared to older Kanchan Armour. Armour is made of composite panels sandwiched between rolled homogeneous Armour (RHA), which can defeat APFDS or HEAT rounds. Armour modules counter APFSDS and HEAT rounds, as well as RPG rounds. DMRL first started working on Kanchan Armour in the late 80’s and over years due to advancement of metallurgy and technology many improvements have been made leading to major composition and construction changes from original design. Sub-systems developed by DRDO for the Arjun Mk-1A program are also expected to be featured in the T-90S including CVRDE's ERA Mk-II. The decision was taken to stick to the existing 1,400hp powerpack since its industrial eco-system already exists in India. The Arjun Mk.1A is fitted with a new unspecified turbocharged diesel engine, which replaces the previous German MTU MB 838 Ka-501 diesel unit, developing 1 400 hp. It is speculated that the new engine is the Cummins QSK-38 turbocharged diesel unit, developing about 1 500 hp. It should be coupled with a French transmission. The Arjun Mark II does just 60 kmph, compared with the 70 kmph top speed of the Arjun Mark I. But the army has accepted this trade-off. “Tanks need agility and acceleration in battle, not sustained high speed. And the advantages of ERA and a mine plough are enormous,” says a tank officer. CVRDE chief, Dr P Sivakumar, an award-winning transmission specialist, is jubilant. “Earlier the army was criticising my Arjun [for weighing too much]. But, after seeing its cross-country performance, even compared with a lighter 40-tonne tank like the T-90, they realise that the Arjun moves like a Ferrari. Even at 65-66 tonnes, it will beat any MBT in the desert”. Arjun Mark 1A has missile-firing capability against long-range targets, has an enhanced Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) with a capacity of 8.5 KW (against Mark I's 4.5 KW), mine plough to weed out mines, Automatic Target Tracking, Advanced Land Navigation System, digital control harness, advanced commander panoramic sight with night vision, higher penetration ammunition, ammunition containerisation, Laser Warning and Countermeasure System (ALWCS) i.e. sensors suite to detect and warn lasers fired by an enemy tank, infra-red jammer and an aerosol smoke grenade system among other features. Laser beam that incoming missiles ride, will giving the tank 10-15 seconds of reaction time. Within milliseconds, the system automatically launches smoke grenades, creating a smokescreen around one’s own tank that leaves the missile operator without a target to aim at. The purpose of ALWCS is to enhance survivability of armoured vehicles against anti-tank guided missiles. Fire control system of the new tank should have a hit probability over 90%, when firing on the move. This new main battle tank is armed with a fully stabilized 120-mm rifled gun, which is loaded manually. A rifled gun of such calibre is used only on the British Challenger 2 MBT. This gun is more accurate at long range comparing with smooth-bore guns. It is claimed that during trials this new Indian tank out-gunned both the T-72M and T-90. It will have a better anti-aircraft gun barrel (to shoot down helicopters) with an Equivalent Firing Charge (strength of the barrel to sustain firing) of 500 rounds against the T 72's 250 rounds. Secondary armament consists of coaxial 7.62-mm machine gun and a roof-mounted remotely controlled weapon station, armed with a 12.7-mm heavy machine gun. In 2010, in comparative trials between the Arjun and the T-90, not only did the Arjun hold its own, it was actually better in some respects than the Russian tank. In exercises lasting 96 hours, the Arjun and the T-90 faced off on 20 key operational parameters. Key among them were mobility, loading the tank with ammunition, tactical manoeuvres and the most significant of all, firing at the Army's Mahajan ranges in Rajasthan. T-90S and MBT Arjun tanks are of different class. Both the tanks have their own special features. In MBT Arjun, we have more power to weight ratio, hydro-pneumatic suspension for better ride comfort and a stable platform to fire on the move, better quality class of Gun Control System and Fire Control System etc. The T-90MS, a new, upgraded version of the T-90S that India bought in 2001, is regarded as well suited for the extreme cold of Ladakh, Sikkim and Arunachal Pradesh, where the two new armoured brigades will operate. The Arjun, in contrast, is designed to withstand the heat of the Indian plains, where the T-90S has repeatedly malfunctioned in high temperatures. Missile firing capability of Arjun was demonstrated. T-90S tank has missile firing capability and lower silhouette. It is claimed that Arjun Mk.1A is fitted with advanced laser warning and countermeasures system which confuse enemy sensors and active protection system. Arjun, will be fitted with an Indian-made automatic video tracker for locking onto targets until they are destroyed. The current trials of the Mark II will include firing of the Israeli LAHAT missile, which has a range of 4-5 miles. Israeli LAHAT missiles were proof-fired from the Arjun in 2004, but the sighting and control systems are now being integrated into the gunner’s sight by its vendors, OIP Sensor Systems (Belgium) and SAGEM (France). The Arjun's 120mm rifled main turret gun can fire the Israeli-made laser-homing anti-tank guided missile LAHAT, first in service in Israel in 1992 and was designed primarily for the Merkava tanks. 118 Arjun Mk.1A have been ordered. The Arjun Mk.1A has some design similarities with the German Leopard 2A5 main battle tank. Major improvements on Arjun MBT Mk.1A
“We also now have an ammunition containerisation system. At the beginning of this year, US forces in Iraq reported a new version of the passive infrared trigger, nicknamed the Black Cat. It looked exactly like a regular passive infrared sensor, but the motion detector was altered to be triggered instead by radio frequencies. Shielded to prevent it from being set off by household radios and with reduced reception range, the new device is one of the most devious yet. Designed to detect the passing bubble of a coalition jamming system’s powerful radio field, the Black Cat has brought Jieddo full circle: It is an IED that will detonate only when it detects an IED countermeasure. After their radio-control bombs were smothered by jammers, the Taliban turned not only to “command wire” — physical connections between trigger and bomb — but also 20 to US military personnel in Iraq and Afghanistan. At the beginning of this year, US forces in Iraq reported a new version of the passive infrared trigger, nicknamed the Black Cat. It looked exactly like a regular passive infrared sensor, but the motion detector was altered to be triggered instead by radio frequencies. Shielded to prevent it from being set off by household radios and with reduced reception range, the new device is one of the most devious yet. Designed to detect the passing bubble of a coalition jamming system’s powerful radio field, the Black Cat has brought Jieddo full circle: It is an IED that will detonate only when it detects an IED countermeasure. After their radio-control bombs were smothered by jammers, the Taliban turned not only to “command wire” — physical connections between trigger and bomb — but also to the even more reliable “command pull,” a simple switch attached to mono-filament fishing line or even a piece of string. With these, at least, the trigger-man must remain nearby for the attack and is therefore relatively easy to catch or kill. But almost all of the devices encountered during 2009 by Jieddo’s Afghan operation, Task Force Paladin, were simpler still and harder to locate: large bombs triggered by pressure plates buried in the middle of dirt roads. These rudimentary mines can sit for days or even months waiting for a victim. They’re often made from whatever is at hand in a rural environment, like the bicycle seat springs or two carpentry saw blades tensioned into a bow — anything that lets two contact surfaces meet to complete a circuit. More recently, the pressure plates have been built with less and less metal. One type of device uses only two strips of aluminum tape; another, single strands of wire and contacts made from fragments of the graphite core from a C-cell battery. As a result, the metal detectors used by US route-clearance teams are becoming ineffective. And since the stocks of military ordnance left over from the Soviet war have been depleted, three-quarters of Afghan IEDs have been made not with pilfered artillery rounds but with more common agricultural ingredients like ammonium nitrate fertilizer. Packed into 5-gallon plastic containers and buried in a dirt road, these charges are utterly invisible to metal detectors. Task Force Paladin is using ground-penetrating radar to find them, but that works only from right on top of a bomb, increasing the risk of setting it off. And many chemical sniffers deployed in Iraq detect only the molecules produced by decaying TNT — not ammonium nitrate. Scientists have been working for four years on a means of detecting home-made explosives at a distance; a solution has so far eluded them. Perhaps inevitably, some of the best means of beating the Afghan bombers have proved to be the simplest: Many vehicles are now protected by front-mounted rollers that trigger mines ahead of a convoy. If in doubt, troops are trained to simply get out and look for clues like disturbed ground or a pile of trash that wasn't there the day before. “Even today, with all the technology,” says Jarkowsky, “the best detector of an IED is the human eye.” Crafting an armour philosophy is not an intellectual feat. Three bright armoured corps colonels could do it in a week, given inputs on India’s border geography; war termination objectives; likely adversaries; the army’s manpower profile and India’s industrial capabilities. Instead the T-90 tank, designed and built for freezing Russia, is now being air-conditioned so that its electronics can survive the Indian summers. As per some sources: the Kanchan armored Arjun Mk. II managed to defeat a 125 mm APFSDS from the T-72 point blank in the 1980 s (however, a point to note is that no range is mentioned in any of the sources). In comparison, most modern APFSDS rounds can penetrate between 700 and 900 mm of armor at 2 km. The T-84 Oplot MBT is now in service with Ukraine and Pakistan (including a new all-welded turret and other improvements to give them enhanced T-84 configuration). Locally produced T-64 by Ukraine has had performance problems and did not benefit much from upgrades to T-64BV even with "dynamic" protections. Ukraine is now producing its first indigenous tank, the T-84. The T-84 is based on Ukraine's T-80UD, but it has a number of additional advanced features which distinguish it from the T-80UD. T-80 BVM (improved "Elite" T-64 in terms of components and in appearance looks similar to the T-72 and is the same size as the T-72 and T-90) but this tank easily distinguishable features compared with the standard T-72 are the attachment of side skirts and 12 turret-mounted grenade launchers with 7 on the left side and 5 on the right side. T-80 BVM uses a newly-built 2A46M-4 gun. T-80 was supposed to be the successor to the T-72. Due to high operational costs these Russian tanks are being kept in reserve. The T-80 was the first production tank in the world to be equipped with a gas turbine GTD-1250TF engine. This gave the tank a high power-to-weight ratio and made it one of the most mobile main battle tanks in the world, and consequently it was referred to as the "flying tank". However, it has dismal range. Ukraine also operates 167 gas turbine powered T-80 tanks. T-80's logistical demands on the battlefield were a severe hindrance to the effectiveness of the type. Ukraine also operates 167 gas turbine powered T-80 tanks. In subsequent variants of the T-80, the gas turbine has been replaced with a diesel engine, to lower maintenance costs. Between 1976 and the present the T-80 has undergone a number of modifications that included the T-80, T-80B, T-80U ("U" corresponds to "Y" in the cyrillic alphabet, meaning improved), and the T-80UD ("D" meaning diesel engine). T-80UM2 "Chiorny Oriol" (Black Eagle) is the most advanced version of Ukraine's T-80U MBT. It is believed that China had ordered 200 T-80Us in late 1993. Ukraine sold 320 units to Pakistan for $650 million and these were delivered between 1997 and 1999. T-80U MBT is a 46 ton vehicle with a 125mm smoothbore gun (and 45 rounds of ammo) that fires discarding sabot, HE, HEAT and 9M119 laser guided missiles (max range 5,000 meters). Max rate of fire for the main gun is 8 rounds a minute using an autoloader. The autoloader means only a three man crew is needed. The Sosna-U and Relikt ERA gives the T-80 a second life by turning it into a 21st century combat vehicle. It also had high-end composite armour. The addition of ERA (Explosive Reactive Armor) is about the same as the T-90AM. The T-80UD is fitted with an advanced fire control system, and either the gunner or commander can lay and fire the main armament at stationary and moving targets while the tank is stationary or moving with a high first round hit probability. The T-80U already has some advanced features, like a reduced heat design, to help hide it from heat seeking sensors. To reduce the thermal signature of the tank on the battlefield, the T-80UD power pack compartment top deck is fitted with special heat insulation. The T-80UD can disguise itself on the battlefield by laying a smoke/aerosol screen. Mounted on either side of the turret is a bank of four electrically operated smoke grenade launchers. The T-80UD can lay its own smoke screen by injecting diesel fuel in the engine exhaust (i.e. by using the so-called engine smoke emitter). There is also an auxiliary power unit for running the combat systems when the tank is stopped, and a modular design that makes maintenance easier. The engine is a 1250 horsepower gas turbine and internal fuel will carry the vehicle 335 kilometers at 40 kilometers an hour cross country. The use of a turbine over a tradtional diesel engine left the tank with decent power, but with dismal range. Top road speed is 70 kilometers an hour. The gunner has a thermal night sight. Like older Russian tanks, the interior is cramped. Upgrading a T-80U to the performance level of the T-90AM costs less than a million dollars per tank. "Weapon quality is important. If you're facing a T-90, you'll need three tanks to deal with it - or luck," said Ukrainian Lieutenant and tank commander Oleksander Romanchuk.
Russia's T-90M "Proryv" (means "Breakthrough"), the latest avatar with new 125A 2A82-1M 125 mm cannon (similar to the highly sophisticated Armata tank) is 46.5 ton (to 52 ton), slightly heavier than T-90MS "Tagil" built by Yekaterinburg-based Uralvagonzavod JSC factory located in Nizhny Tagil (hybrid tank with a T-72 hull and T-80 turret) and 3.5 tons compared to T-90A "Vladimir" (T-90's and the "M" stands for Modernised). T-90MS, it has a lower profile, a higher top speed, a longer operational range. The T-90M includes the uprated V-92S2F diesel engine rated at 1,300 hp developed by the Chelyabinsk Tractor Plant. The upgraded tank features a steering wheel type turn drive and an automatic gearbox which allow improving its controllability. It will also get improved suspension. The hydraulic actuator will be replaced by a new electromechanical arms stabilization system, which consumes less tank battery. For the money that Uralvagonzavod (UVZ) requires to build the T-90A, you can buy three Leopard 2A6. Compared to Western tanks, modern Russian tanks have an automatic loader (instead of a fourth crewmember), which makes the tanks lighter and more mobile. The main armament is the 125mm 2A82-1M cannon (same as that of the T-14 Armata MBT). The cannon is capable of firing dynamic cross-bar ammunition (APFSDS), fragmented detonation (HEF), concave explosive (HEAT) and 9M119 Refleks anti-tank guided missiles. T-90MS tank is equipped with the improved Kalina hunter-killer digital fire control system (FCS) that also has an automatic target-tracker and a redesigned turret features a new upgraded 120mm gun. Its redesigned turret features an upgraded 120mm high-accuracy smooth bore gun as well as a remotely controlled 7.62mm light machine gun. It will be able to tackle low flying anti-armour helicopter. Thanks to the new turret, spare ammunition is placed outside the vehicle compartment. Thus, the tank has the possibility of resisting, in case the autoloader is destroyed. Instead of trying to "beat the US" latest M1A2 Abrams by poorly copying its extremely high costing "100% solution," Russia decided to go for an 80% solution at less than 50% of the price. The turret provides protection against all existing munitions thanks to the layout, differentiated armour. Other notable improvements to T-90M from the original T-90 design includes integration of soft-and hard-kill active protection system (APS), which is similar to the Afghanit active protection system installed on the T-14; and a new communication and command suite and digital communications systems also similar to the T-14 which improve situational awareness and network-centric warfare capabilities. It has new Relikt explosive reactive armored tiles (ERA) which improves protection to defeat kinetic threats capable of penetrating 1,300mm and shaped-charge threats penetrating up to 1,350mm of rolled homogenous steel (RHS). The level of protection of the T-90M has been improved against even the most modern versions of SABOT ammo based depleted uranium. Since 2014, the Syrian Army has lost only one T-90 to an American TOW missile due to poor crew training. The losses in Syria show that any tank—whether T-90, M-1 or Leopard 2—is vulnerable on a battlefield in which long-range ATGMs have proliferated. Active protection systems and missile warning systems are vital to mitigate that danger—but so are careful tactical employment, competently trained crews, and improved cooperation with infantry to minimize exposure to long-range attacks, ward off ambushes, and provide extra eyes on possible threats. Chinese have over 6,000 tanks, with 2,500 of them modern designs. The rest of them are based on the Russian T-54/55 license as the Type 59. By mid-2020, the total mechanised force of the PLA against the Indian Army was about 4 light tank regiments and 2 Light rapid-action motorised infantry regiments, with heavy-armour reinforcements in its rear. Currently, the light tank regiments have gone down from 4 to 3, while the light highly-mobile infantry regiments have gone up from 2 to 3. Also, the mechanised force has been transformed into Tri-Combined Divisions (Direct-Fire, Air-defence, Support & Engineer), while the sub-units are being transformed into from motorised to medium mechanised Infantry brigades. 58 to 64-ton ZTZ-99A / WZ123 (Type 98G / Type 99A) "The Dazzler" a superior T-72 variant, has very costly high-tech electronics and is 25% heavier than the T-72B3. One of the tank's designers has stated that the T-99A has not reached desired reliability levels. Currently, it is the most advanced Chinese main battle tank and no longer 54-ton. It entered service in 2001, but had a major upgrade in 2011. Most Chinese tanks use an autoloader. Only the older T-54/55 clones don't. China's Type 99G is powered by the powerful engine, developing 1,500 hp, and is based on a German MTU 871 Ka-501 engine. The engine is mated to an automatic gearbox. This MBT has a deep fording capability. Auxiliary fuel tanks can be fitted externally for extended range. It is fitted with a 125mm 50 caliber smooth-bore gun with autoloader. Ammunitions include armour piercing fin stabilised discarding sabot rounds (APFSDS), high explosive anti-tank rounds (HEAT), and high explosive fragmentation (HE-FRAG) projectiles. China has also reportedly manufactured Russian A-11 laser guided anti-tank missile (ATGM) to be fired by the 125 mm gun. In addition, the Chinese experimental depleted uranium (DU) rounds which it may be available to the Type 98. Fire accuracy is attained by the laser range-finder, wind sensor, ballistic computer, and thermal barrel sleeve. Dual axis stabilisation ensures effective firing on the move. The commander is has six periscopes and a stabilised panoramic sight. Both the commander and gunner have roof-mounted stabilised sights fitted with day/thermal channels, a laser range-finder and an auto tracker facility. The commander has a display showing the gunner's thermal sight, enabling the commander to fire the main gun. The Type 99 is also fitted with a computerised onboard information processing system, which can collect information from vehicle GPS navigation, observation systems and sensors, process it in the computer and display it on the commander's display, giving the ability of real-time command and beyond-vision-range target engaging. Secondary weapons include a 7.62 mm coaxial machine gun and a 12.7 mm air defence machine gun mounted on the commander's cupola. Each side of the turret has a 76 mm Type 84 five-barrel smoke grenade launchers. The turret and hull are of all-welded steel armour construction. A layer of composite armour has been added to the front arc. The armour package is of modular design, enabling damaged sections to be replaced or upgrades installed throughout service life. Explosive reactive armour (ERA) can be fitted if required. The ERA known as FY series, in FY-IV variant is most likely based on Soviet 4S22 Kontakt-5 ERA The Type 99 features an JD-3 integrated laser range-finder/warning/self-defence device. Unlike contemporary Russian active tank self-defence systems, the Chinese system uses an experimental high-powered laser to attack the enemy weapon's optics and gunner. It can also engage attack helicopters and the laser device could also be used for communications between tanks. The system includes what appears to be a laser warning receiver. China's 3rd gen 52 ton VT4 / MBT-3000 (Type-90) is an upgrade of VT-1A / MBT-2000 (called Type 90-II M which was developed for export since it was not accepted by PLA). Most Chinese tanks use an autoloader. Only the older T-54/55 clones don't. It uses 900hp from Croatia (with plans to upgrade it to 1,300hp in the future if and when it's developed). VT4 / MBT-3000 MBT has a ZPT98 series gun and has been touted as hosting a digital vectronics suite, carries 38 rounds of 125 mm ammunition (including 22 in an armoured autoloader carousel) with a loading speed of eight rounds per minute, with a maximum missile range of 5000 m. The MBT’s gunner and commander are provided with second-generation cooled thermal imagers, while the driver uses an uncooled thermal imager. The 1,300hp power-pack uses a water-cooled turbocharged electronically-controlled diesel engine. In 2014, it added a Remote Weapons Station on the roof fitted with a 12.7 mm MG, replacing the 12.7 mm MG mounted on the commander's cupola. The vehicle also has a 7.62mm coaxial MG. The frontal turret armour appears to match (wedge shape, inspection hatch on the top of each) that of the module armour used on the upgraded Type 96 and Type 99 MBTs. It contains a modern composite armour (as used on the hull front) with Explosive reactive Armour built into it. ERA bricks are also mounted across the front of the hull. It also has an internal fire suppression system and electrical gun stabilization system. It also has an active protection system that links laser threat warning sensors in to the smoke grenade launchers, designated the GL5. The crew have full NBC protection. In the years to come, once can safely expect Pakistan's Haider MBT to be an exact replica of the MBT-3000. Haider tank appears to had been envisaged to work in parallel with the Al-Khalid-II. VT-1A also known as MBT-2000 MBT (is an export version of Type 90-I) is built under license by Pakistan as the Al-Khalid tank (costing 10% more than the MBT-2000) and entered service first in 2001 with the Pakistani Army. Most Chinese tanks use an autoloader. The Al Khalid tank uses a Ukrainian 1,200 hp 6TD liquid-cooled diesel engine and has superior power-to-weight ratio of 24.5 hp/ton than Indian Army's T-series tanks. However, Pakistani is having trouble finding a suitable engine that could handle the Indian-Pakistani border desert & riverine conditions. Pakistan has started development of Al Khalid-Improved (I) tank, which basically is replaying its engine with the newer Ukrainian 6TD-2 engine. Pakistan is also developing Al-Khalid-II tank, which will incorporate a newly redesigned turret and will be powered by a 1,500 hp 6TD-4 engine. Turkey's Aselsan is offering its onboard electronics suite consisting of fire control, electro-optical, and communications systems for use on the al-Khalid II MBT. Pakistan Army began operationalizing its BMS network with its armoured corps since 2004. Japan's 44-ton or 48-ton Type 10 MBT prototype In 2001, the Japan approved research projects for the development of a new battle tank with advanced command and control capabilities. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries is the main contractor of the TK-X. Development of components began in 1990s, and as of 2008 production was expected to start in 2010-2011. A prototype of the '3.5-generation' tank was revealed in 2008. The Type 10 TK-X (MBT-X) project aims to build a new main battle tank to replace the existing Type 74 MBTS. This new lightweight MBT weighs significantly less than other modern battle tanks. It is 10 tons lighter than the current Japanese Type 90 main battle tank. The 40-ton tank was designed to be lightweight in order to comply with Japanese road laws. This tank will be deployed to the narrower and more mountainous regions of the country. The Type 10 has sloped turret armor similar to the Leopard 2A5, as well as a side profile similar to the Leclerc. Without additional armor plating, the vehicle weighs about 40 tons, while weighing about 48 tons with all of the add-on armor. Laws banning heavy vehicles meant that the Type 90 could not operate outside Hokkaido, except at certain training facilities. The most remarkable characteristic of the Type 10 tank lies in its C4I function (command, control, communications, computers, and intelligence). This can be incorporated into the GSDF network to enable sharing of information among tanks, as well as connected to the infantry’s outdoor computer network “Regiment Command Control System” to facilitate integrated military operations with the infantry troops. A day & night 360° sight is also mounted on the turret, which can be integrated with the "new Basic Regimental Command & Control System". Compared to the Type 90, the Commander's Panoramic Sight has been moved to the right and is located at a higher position, giving the commander a wide field of view. The use of modular components, thereby significantly improving the side armor in comparison to the Type 90. The vehicle's armor can be reconfigured depending on the needs. The vehicle is armed with the 120-mm L44 smoothbore cannon, built by Japan Steel Works, Ltd. This company also license-produces the Rheinmetall 120-mm / L44 gun for the Type 90 MBT. There is an option for L55 or a new barrel 50 caliber in length. The TK-X main battle tank fires a newly developed armor-piercing ammunition. It is compatible with all standard 120-mm NATO ammunition. Secondary armament consists of coaxially mounted 7.62-mm machine gun and a roof mounted remotely controlled 12.7-mm machine gun. It uses an autoloader, with a crew of three (Commander and gunner in the turret, driver in the hull). It uses Continuously Variable Transmission, and is equipped with active hydropneumatic suspension, which allows it to adjust its stance. The tank can "sit", "stand", "kneel" or to "lean" in any direction. This feature gives a number of advantages. Russia's new 'Armata' T-99 or the new "long-term series of standardized platforms of heavy battlefield". Military action in Chechnya demonstrated that the Soviet tanks, while perfect for mass armies, are not as good in local conflicts. Due to the layout of the T-72/90 the tank's crew is not separated from the ammunition and in case of detonation has no chance for escape. All this was taken into consideration when designing a new machine. The new tank designated T-99 will be less radical and somewhat smaller, lighter, simpler and cheaper than the ambitious ‘Object 195’ or T-95 which was a failure, it will weigh less, therefore, become more agile and will be more affordable, compared to its more ambitious predecessors. It is believed that the tank will be armed with 125 mm smooth-bore gun of high power. It's a tool and put a new version of the T-90AM. "A number of platforms" capable: it's a tank, an armoured recovery vehicle, a heavy infantry fighting vehicles and heavy armoured assault. It can also be developed and tank support combat vehicle (BMPT). The Russian industry is also developing the Boomerang family of 8×8 wheeled armoured vehicles, which will gradually replace the current BTR-90. Additionally, the Kurganets-25 tracked armoured vehicle provides a high degree of commonality with the new Armata tank. The Kurganets-25 will evolve into various models, gradually replacing BMP and BMD and MT-LB and other types of tracked armoured platforms. Kurganmashzavod T-14 Armata “universal combat platform” MBT flaw has been the developing a new Chaika diesel engine and transmission in mass due to high cost. There is only scanty information on the performance-enhanced new APFSDS projectiles, type BPS-1. An unmanned version of the T-14 Armata is planned and is currently in development. The T-14 should therefore be seen as a wake-up call for NATO (Rheinmetall already wants to retrofit the Leopard 2 with a newly developed 130mm smoothbore L/51 gun). In 2019, it was announced that the tank would now be equipped with a more powerful A-85-3 engine, which had a power output of 1,500 hp. Interestingly, this figure probably refers to a peak power output that can only be used in wartime and at the expense of an extremely short service life of just 2,000 operating hours. The T-14 is the first Russian tank to have the engine and transmission integrated into one module. There is also an auxiliary engine that provides power to all systems when the engine is shut down. It also ensures that the engine starts smoothly at low temperatures. T-14 is considerably larger but only just under 15% heavier compared to the T-90SM and still lighter than the Leopard 2A7. The first prototypes of this vehicle began testing in 2013 and the Armata platform is currently being used for the T-14 tank prototypes. Compared to Western tanks modern Russian tanks have an automatic loader (instead of a fourth crewmember), which makes the tanks lighter and more mobile. A snorkel is carried at the rear of the turret, which can be used to make the T-14 capable of deep wading. A true fire-and-forget missile with a built-in seeker would go a long way towards correcting that deficiency, and allow the tank to destroy targets at extreme range. Russia’s new T-14 Armata Russian tank costs $3.7 million. The placement of ammunition in the middle of the tank alongside the crew, rather than a separate stowage compartment as in the M1, has long been a vulnerability of Russian tank designs. "With the T-14, they have at last adopted a layout that emphasises crew protection oversize. According to a report in the Rossiyskaya Gazeta, the tank’s crew members are no longer distributed between the turret and the hull, but have all been placed in a cage armoured ‘capsule’ in the hull. The ammunition is stored in its own separate compartment, away from the crew. This compartment is armoured as well, and located to minimise the probability of a hit. It may also be equipped with blow-off panels to vent the explosion away from the crew and powertrain, thus preventing an ammunition deflagration from immobilising the vehicle. The turret—historically housing the gunner and commander’s stations—is now unmanned and remotely operated from within the hull. There are two advantages to this arrangement. Firstly, a tank hull, by virtue of its location, is always less exposed to enemy fire than the turret, especially when fighting from defilade. This reduces the probability of a hit to the crew compartment. The upshot is that the crew is well-placed to survive the destruction of the turret or the ammunition—known as a ‘mission kill’—and make it back to base in one piece. Secondly, in older tanks, the designers had to armour the hull (to protect the driver) as well as the turret (to protect the commander and gunner). So the quantity of armour that could be applied had to be carefully rationed between the turret and the hull. Any designed increase in armour at one location in one often came at the expense of the other. The T-14, with the entire crew placed in one dedicated armour compartment, eliminates this dilemma rather nicely. The bulk of the armour is now concentrated in around the crew, in the hull. On the whole, this results in protection levels far greater than those possible on rival tanks. The Afghanit APS on Armata is supposed to be able to intercept incoming projectiles with velocities of up to 1700 m/s, so the designers obviously had defense against sabot in mind. In addition, there are several sensor systems (thermal, vid cams and AESA radar) and an automatic defense system for protection against missiles and weapons like RPGs (shaped charge rockets). It remains to be seen whether this armour compartment will be dispensed with in the later production version of the T-14. Firepower is another area where the current generation of Russian tanks is lacking. This, too, is a direct outcome of the decision to use an automatic gun-loading mechanism in place of a manual loader. The constraints imposed by the lack of space and the configuration of the autoloader make it impossible for the tanks to use heavy, one-piece ammunition rounds. Instead, a different type of round consisting of two separate pieces, the propellant charge and projectile, is employed. The 3MB42 round that Russian tanks currently field is quickly becoming obsolete against newer composite armour technologies. It was reported in 2007 that it failed to penetrate the Arjun tank's Kanchan armour in tests carried out by the Indian Army. The automated 125 mm gun lower mount can hold 32 tank shells (separated ammunition) and missiles in a turret, and the T-14 can carry 45 in total. 125mm main tank gun was the most powerful in the world when it made its debut on the T-64 tank, and the basic design remains competitive. Therefore, it is not surprising that the T-14’s designers decided to equip it with a heavily modernised version of the same gun, with a higher muzzle velocity and reportedly greater accuracy. Due to the high muzzle energy of 15 megajoul, the service life of the barrel is probably limited to 200-280 rounds with long-rod penetrators. Some version may have the 152 mm Type 2A83 gun as a heavy assault vehicle. The fire control system, linked to the main computer, consists of, among other things, an electro-optical telescopic sight with infrared camera and laser range finder at the front of the turret, an electro-optical commander’s periscope with infrared camera and laser range finder on top of the turret roof, an analog TV telescopic sight for emergency firing, 6 cameras for all-round surveillance and 2 AESA radars for the APS Afganit and ERA Malachit protection systems and for target reconnaissance. The softkill component uses two rotating/swiveling launcher units of 12 launcher cups each on the left and right in the front area of the roof and two fixed upward-pointing launcher units of 12 launcher cups each recessed in the rear area of the T-14’s turret roof, which are used for self-misting with a multispectral fog. This can also be used to counter modern third- or fourth-generation anti-tank guided weapons with top-attack capability. There is also a RWS (remote weapons station) for a 30 mm auto-cannon and another for a 12.7 mm machine-gun (which can also be used for air defense) on the turret roof with infrared camera and laser range finder. The heavy machine gun operated remotely from within the crew compartment. The weapon fixes a critical vulnerability that MBTs face on the modern battlefield, a vulnerability the Russians discovered at great cost in Chechnya. During the First Chechen War, Russian tank columns routinely came under fire from rebels sited on building rooftops and armed with handheld anti-tank rockets. The tanks’ inability to shoot back at the attackers resulted in heavy losses on the Russian side. All machines of the "Armata" family are equipped with a communication system without the use of radio — information is transmitted via IR-channel. They are also coated with reflective GALS-technology. Newer equipment also makes Armata more expensive and due to limited production capability and ongoing technology development it is likely to stay like that for the next few years till Russia can mass produce them or find few export customers for the new tank. The 55 ton T-14 is mostly about publicity because the Russian leadership saw the T-14 as essential for national pride, and it seems like one of those innovative designs that never entered service. Even if unit numbers remain low, the T-14 could be viewed as an evolved technology demonstrator that offers several new interlocking innovations that can be integrated into existing platforms such as the T-72 or T-90 in the future, in addition to the T-14. The government encouraged work on the T-14 because it was a prestige item that proved Russia was still a major defense developer and manufacturer. For Russia a new tank is not seen as important item while new ICBMs and nuclear submarines. If the Indian experience is anything to go by, Russian corporations, hungry for exports, are often known to make tall claims, but they aren't always backed up by field performance. The engineering is pretty good, though." In 2015, mass production of ceramic armour, communication engines and electronic systems for the heavy platform started. Visibility is normally dependent on the cameras installed outside the tank and the reliability of the power supply and electronics that keep those cameras operational. For now, a pilot test-batch of 20 tanks is being produced. Troops operating these would be able to identify shortcomings, which can be eliminated before bulk purchases begin. Hyundai Rotem K3 MBT55-ton K3 tank uses an autoloader (or Rheinmetall's 130mm smoothbore L/51 gun) and has a 3-man crew inside an armoured capsule under the turret. Its design is similar to the T-14 MBT and PL-01 light tank. It has an anti-tank mine detection system and built-in anti-jamming capabilities. There is also a smaller auxiliary power generator to enable the main engine to be shut down, while there is still sufficient power to keep all the electronics and air-conditioning operating. AI-enabled automatic target recognition can draw upon advanced algorithms to make instant distinctions and identify threat details with high confidence in milliseconds. Previously, the soldiers who quickly and correctly identified the best targets through rapid visual identification were often chosen to be a "gunner" in a tank. Carmel Concept for future armoured vehicles is a “revolutionary program” for future armoured corps to reduce the number of soldiers inside armoured vehicles from the usual four to two and while increasing mission performance using AI and autonomous capability and multi-sensor fusion of a variety of sensors. The challenge on the future battlefield is to be able to easily operate with point and click on a screen using Xbox-style controllers and also autonomous tech to detect and identify threats. In addition, the kinds of anti-tank weapons being developed have made operating in urban environments difficult for armour. Imagine one tank being targeted by a Kornet missile, while a second and third vehicle with a better view can use guns or missiles to take out the Kornet team. The only part of the program that will definitely be incorporated is IronVision Helmet-mounted Display (as well as more than forty cameras around the vehicle) developed by Elbit System. Karan - Indian Army Future Concept (now Future Ready Combat Vehicles) as required by 2020, when T-72s, which entered service in 1979, start retiring. Indian Army (IA) has put into the deep-freezer futuristic projects like the FRCV and FICV, and is now focussed entirely on upgrading its existing fleets of main battle tanks (MBT) and infantry combat vehicles (IFV) in addition to buying more T-90 Bhishma & Arjun-2 tanks. This under 50 ton tracked fighting vehicles needs to be developed on a modular concept as part of a family of combat vehicles (such as a light tank variant), with a high degree of flexibility in a manner that, it can operate across the varying requirements of different terrain configurations such as developed / semi-desert/desert terrain and in high altitude areas across the entire spectrum of conflict. (One of the chief disadvantages of the gas-guzzling Abrams is its heavy dependence on vulnerable supply lines.) 2012: Army has not finalised FMBT specifications. India's 55-ton Future Main Battle Tank (FMBT) project has been merged into the Future Ready Combat Vehicle (FRCV) which is to replace the ageing T-72 battle tank (also reducing the priority for tracked combat vehicles & personnel carriers). The Army also has asked CVRDE to refrain from talking about the programme. While the estimated development cost of Rs 5,000 crore might seem large, the investment would pay itself back many times over. An order for 1000 FMBT’s would be worth Rs 50,000 crore (Rs 50 crore per piece) over 2 to 3 decades. RFI also stresses on the development of a family of following variants are planned to be developed on the FRCV platform:
“India has never designed engines; engine technology has always been imported. But we will develop the FMBT engine as a national project. Our approach is not engine-specific; we are looking at developing the complete range of technologies needed for building engines. Not only design… but also manufacturing, testing, evaluation,”. Sivakumar says that German companies MTU and Renk, which supply engines and transmissions for the Arjun tank, refused to provide consultancy, realising that building Indian capability would end their market here. DRDO is now evaluating consultancy proposals from Ricardo of Britain and AVL of Austria. Sivakumar says that a tank remains static for at least 40 per cent of the time in battle, during which time its engine idles. “This means that 40 per cent of the time, you wastefully run a 1,500 Hp engine, guzzling diesel and giving away the tank’s position, while you need very little power for running electricals like the radios and gun control equipment or for moving the tank slowly. So, we are evolving a hybrid technology concept in which the tank will have two engines: a 500 Hp engine for low power mode and another 1,000 Hp engine that kicks in when high power is required, e.g. for manoeuvring in battle,” The development of the 120 mm smooth bore main gun will also provide its own challenges, in terms of design and weight. Keeping in mind the Israeli involvement in the Arjun programme, it is very likely that Israeli companies will play a vital role in the development of the FMBT. CVRDE has gained considerable experience in tank design and development with the Arjun and Arjun MK-2 upgrade. Designing a 50 tonne tank, with the features demanded by the Army, will be an extremely difficult task.
Deep Attacks by Themselves Are Ineffective. Russian forces manoeuvre to fire while Western forces fire to manoeuvre, is a neat encapsulation of Russian doctrine compared with the West. Central to maneuver theory is the proposition that rapid attacks against isolated points of weakness can disorient the enemy, causing the fragmentation and systemic breakdown of the ability to resist or counterattack. This assumption appears inapplicable to addressing sophisticated A2/AD challenges. The decentralized command and control system required by maneuver theory would be unable to cope with the scale and interconnectedness of an advanced A2/AD network. You win a war, with the capability you build, during the war.
1 Comment
Maurizio Lacava
19/1/2016 10:47:20 pm
Congratulation for you documents.The futures battlefiel could change the MTB radically and the actual production is quite ineffective as weaponery and to much costly.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |