Delay in induction of the new Arjun tanks averted
Induction of the new Arjun Tanks which was being delayed by Indian Army successfully passed all tests. Indian Army delayed the induction of the 9 Arjun Tanks by giving reason that Arjun Tank should have medium fording capability. Defence research and Development Organisation pointed out that Arjun Tank already has the capability of medium fording and could remain in medium waters for more than 20 minutes against just 3 minutes of T-72 kind of tanks. The Arjun Tank Radiator is capable of using water as a cooling agent when medium fording, where as, the T-72 radiator is shut off during medium fording resulting in rise in engine temperature. Even without modifications Arjun Tanks collects only 5-10 liters of water inside in those 15 and more minutes which is of no consequence. Barring some minor instances Indian Army never had to medium ford in both western and eastern borders in 1971. The modifications are more of time consuming mechanical in nature. Indian Army wanted complete ceiling which DRDO promised in future makes.
However, the visit of the defense minister to the Combat Vehicle Research and Development Establishment (CVRDE) and the Heavy Vehicles Factory (HVF) at Avadi, changed all that. But the Arjun Tank comparative trials which was due in July has been pushed to September and this will again effect the production schedule. This time the production delay is not any more attributed to DRDO.
12 Responses to “Delay in induction of the new Arjun tanks averted”
By vinay_s on Jul 4, 2007 | Reply
what more does army want now ?? make it a submarine ??
By vivek_k on Jul 4, 2007 | Reply
Vinay, good comment. It seems that the army wants to make sure the Arjun can take out the Augusta submarines. Soon you will hear a complaint that Arjun cannot outrun the JF-17 and fire Brahmos. The army loves its T-series tin cans. To make sure that we have superiority over Pakis, all they need is a “T-number” greater than 80. So we chose the T-90 even though that is an obsolete, non-upgradeable design. The army likes the T-series deathtraps that were shown to evaporate in the Gulf wars. India has a population of a billion. So what if we sacrifice the lives of some tank crews just to make sure that the ego of a few Generals biased against the Arjun and the DRDO is satisfied.
Democracy indeed.!!
By mukunda on Jul 5, 2007 | Reply
IN can as well as buy Arjuns instead of scorpenes. I was amazed at what depth these IA chaps in armoured corps can plumb to.
By Prasad on Jul 5, 2007 | Reply
Does no one here know the difference between deep fording and a submarine! God help us!
Fording capability is a crucial requirement for any tank, especially when the projected Area of Ops is criss-crossed by canals & rivers, which may have to be crossed. Especially when the enemy has blown up the bridges, fording becomes a very important capability.
There are 3 types of fording, and tanks can navigate different water depths for each type:
1. Unprepared: The tank does not need to stop and can navigate through the water easily. This is about 1.5 m in most tanks, and depends upon the height of the intakes, which prevents water from entering the engines. (This can be seen in Ajai Shukla’s NDTV video).
2. Prepared/medium fording: When the water level is too deep, there is no way to go without flooding the engine through the hull intakes. In such cases, the driver closes the lower intakes, engages the upper intakes alone, overpressures the engine, to prevent flooding, and changes gears, and goes ahead. This sort of capability is about 2.0-2.2 m.
3. Deep/Snorkel FOrding: When the water level is much higher than even the turret top, there is no other way bt to go in for snokelling.. a snorkel is engaged, which entends from the turret, and helps provide air to the engines & the crew compartment. The other conditions are similar to medium fording. Power for the overpressure is usually engaged through the APU, since any engine problem will most likely create a pressure loss and flood the tank.
This capability is about 4-5 m. However, deep snorkelling is not a trivial matter, and is avoided as much a can be. Its a dangerous operation, and requires elaborate recon by engineers and a lot of time to set up the tanks. Not only that, tanks swivel wildly under water, which makes navigation difficult. Plus, theres always the risk of sinking into soft mud, or hitting an obstacle.
Snorkels are usually a wide ring around the turret hatch, which doubles as an escape hatch for crew. Russian tanks use a thinner straw-type snorkel, and crew are given breathers to escape (which is very dangerous, and has resulted in a few accidents).
Overall, snorkel fording is rare, and is not so important for the desert conditions. However, such a capability is important, and any tank cannot afford not to have it.
if you are not informed enough, I suggest you read up at [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle_snorkel[/url].
By vivek_k on Jul 5, 2007 | Reply
Prasad - please re-read the above posts and the article. The Arjun already exceed the capabilities of the T-series death traps!! (So why were they bought when they could not fulfill the spec?) We certainly did not (duh!) imply that the army was asking for a submarine. That was said sarcastically because the Arjun already exceed GSQR but the army is looking for excuses to reject the Arjun - i.e. the Arjun cannot launch the Brahmos!!
By Prasad on Jul 6, 2007 | Reply
No Vivek. I have read the article. Sure, the Arjun exceeds the T-90 capabilities. However, if the GQSR specified medium and snorkel fording capability, which all tanks usually have (including the T-90 ‘deathtraps’), it is important that the Arjun have it, irrespective of its performance in other areas, and the Army would probably be well within its rights to ask for a demonstration of this capability, which has been done. What object to is your contentions that the Army is pushing DRDO for the moon, and looking for a reason to halt the Arjun. While this may be true, it doesnt detract from the fact that fording is a vital capability that all tanks have.
Second, I think its obvious that you would know the difference between the Arjun and a sub. However, your point that the army is asking for new capabilities is wrong, especially since the posters before you seem to think that fording capability is not needed.
By vivek_k on Jul 6, 2007 | Reply
Prasad, since the Arjun meets with medium and snorkel fording capabilities, I do not think the DRDO would be worried. The Arjun is DESIGNED FOR INDIAN BATTLEFIELD conditions, unlike the T-90 dabba designed for EUROPEAN BATTLEFIELD CONDITIONS.
Since the Arjun meets with or exceeds GSQR, why is the army then delaying its induction? When the Arjun passed the tests in the last exercise (June 2007), why more trials are required? Why the promised Arjun vs T-90 trial not conducted and report publicised? Why is the trial date pushed to Spetember from July? Does the army need more time to think up a defficiency? We are discussing fording capabilities now and previously it was the logistics and capability to traverse the desert sands. All along it was being said that since the Arjun was heavier than the T-90, it could fight on the western front. The critics did not realise that the GROUND PRESSURE of the Arjun is actually lower than that of the T-90 and therefore it can go more places than T-90 can. What about the T-90’s problems like - TI problems, engine overheating issue, non-ability of initial supplies to fire the missile? Did the supplier help out there? The Arjun can already fire the LAHAT missiles.
The Arjun is a heavy tank. There is no way it can be light like the T-90. You cannot specify one and get the other. The army needs to support local industry especially if there is a product that is superior to imported products.
By Prasad on Jul 6, 2007 | Reply
I have no beef with what you’re saying…. its been repeated here and elsewhere ad nauseam. I too wonder why the Army is trying as hard as it can to delay the Trials, and I’m happy that one more of their so called objections has been busted by DRDO which has shown the fording capability.
But you are confusing issues…. we’re talking about the fording capability only. Plz dont try to convert this into an Arjun vs T-90 or overall Arjun specs debate. Better to stick to the point. I was just stating the importance of having fording capability, which some responses were trashing and probably insinuating as useless, which it certainly isn’t.
By ajit on Jul 7, 2007 | Reply
hi (to prasad and vivek)
army alwase ask drdo for one project when drdo complit it , army make some change on that and ask for the newer one.
i have a question why army not thik for feature one , and place the idea as per.
samething happen in case of nag and akash missile, they ask for a range(4km for agni and … for akash) when drdo reach that mark ,these people demand for higher.
this will leade difference between the two group and hamper the nation only.
army alwase interested to get his product from outside ,
why this thing are happen in india only.
china say our technology is best……
usa say we are the best
why shouldn’t we .
By vivek_k on Jul 10, 2007 | Reply
Ajit, DRDO is also partly to blame though the major blame is with the army. DRDO like a naive job-applicant said - “yes we can do it” to everything the army asked, and the army asked for the sun. DRDO did not realize what it was accepting (In my opinion) the time required for the tasks. And as the threat scenario in the vicinity changed (US promising M1A1 to Pak then later backing off and Pak buying T-80), so did the GSQRs. What this shows is the IA has a flawed procurement process as the army looks for threat specific solutions. It shows the army does not have a vision for its capabilities and role in the future but is haphazardly buying whatever it can justify.
The Arjun is one of the finest tanks around and perhaps the finest in Asia (if not the world). Yet the army does not want to buy it. Again the army’s threat perception and doctrines may have been adjusted around the T-90/T-72. So the army will not accept fine weapons like the Arjun till such time that it develops a future vision for its capabilities and roles.
If there are to be only 124 Arjuns produced, then we should shut down the assembly line now. There is no point in procuring 124 Arjuns for an army that uses thousands of tanks. Even from the manufacturing point of view, a production run of 124 tanks will be inefficient.
By Mayuri on Jul 11, 2007 | Reply
I have a correction here to make.
“Some elements” in Indian Army do not want the tank. These some elements do have bifurcations. One set of these people are used to light tank. Another set of people are obviously peddling the Import lobby objectives. Another set is fence sitters who have been coerced by the above mentioned two types.
There is a pro Arjun Tank lobby too.
The problem occurs when such diverse opinion exists. hence the Arjun tank is being pushed towards deployments and temperoraly being blocked by the elements.
Please do not pass a blanket statement that “Army does not want it.”
By vivek_k on Jul 11, 2007 | Reply
No kidding, Mayuri!! Going by the refusal to accept even the 5 production tanks, it would seem otherwise.
It is the procurement system (or mafia) that is to blame and not the army itself. Have you ever tried to peddle products to Indian companies. The purchase officers play hard to get and come up with all kinds of objections till grease is applied.
The Army probably has some elements that like the Arjun, but their number is seemingly very limited and incapable of affecting decision making. In the end we all hope that the Arjun wins out for it is a Tank that our army should use.