Arjun Finally Cancelled, Really Cancelled
-
Arjun Finally Cancelled, Really Cancelled
October 7, 2006: India has decided to relegate its Indian designed and built tank, the Arjun, to training duties, and will not put these tanks into mass production. Thus ends a three decade effort to create an Indian designed and built tank. The 35 Arjuns already built are too large (heavy and wide) for existing tank transporters. The Arjun is also considered too unreliable for combat. But for training purposes, they are adequate, so it's not a complete waste.
The government was reluctant to give up on the Arjun, as so many politicians had praised the project as a military and nationalistic success. But every time a prototype was put to the test, the results were disappointing. As has so often happened with other weapons projects, the Arjun is having problems with its electronics. In the last round of tests, it was the fire control system. But Arjun has also had problems with its engine, and that fact that its size and weight prevents it from being used with current tank transporters. The Defense Ministry could not bring itself to admit defeat, so all attempts to just cancel Arjun failed. Until now.
Six years ago, the situation became critical, because the army needed a new generation of tanks and the Arjun wasn't ready. So the army ordered 310 T-90 tanks from Russia, mainly to check them out. This was the beginning of the end for Arjun, that was supposed to be the successor to the Russian T-72, currently the first line Indian tank. The Defense Ministry still insisted that Arjun production would go forward. But the government engineers could not make Arjun work. There were also problems with using manufacturing technology, imported from Russia, to build components for Indian made T-72s, to build similar components for Arjun. About two thirds of the components in the Arjun and T-72 were interchangeable. But the technology transfer agreements with Russia only allowed India to manufacture these components for T-72s, not another tank design. The lawyers screwed up on this one, and Indian manufacturers were not able to design and build replacement parts that India could afford. The Arjun was going to cost more than imported T-90s.
Four years ago, desperate Ministry of Defense officials made plans to mount the turrets from the Arjuns on T-72 chassis, overcoming many of the construction problems. The Arjun chassis would then be used for a new Bhim self-propelled 155mm howitzers, with the South African Denel T-6 turret. The T-72 with the Arjun turret would be called Tank EX. The Denel turret proved to be too expensive, and too many components in the Arjun turret were still having problems, so this scheme was abandoned as well. At that point, the army began to refurbish some of its 1,700 T-72s, equipping 200 of them with additional armor (ERA), a new engine and upgraded electronics. The army began to look on the T-90 as its next generation tank, but it took four years for the Defense Ministry, and politicians, to admit that Arjun would not work.
Many of the problems with Arjun had to do with nothing more than government ineptitude. The Ministry of Defense was more interested in putting out press releases, about how India was becoming self-sufficient in tanks, than in attending to the technical details needed to make this happen. The Ministry of Defense crowd has done this sort of thing many times. Moreover, if it isn't incompetence screwing things up, then it's corruption. Cleaning up the Ministry of Defense, and all the politicians that get involved with it, is, so far, a problem without a solution.
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htarm/articles/20061007.aspx -
Now now, where is Munnabhai?
-
You mean one of our forumites?Originally posted by laurence82:Now now, where is Munnabhai? -
The INSAS rifle, is it reliable or is it as unreliable as the Nepalis claimed?
-
The T-90
-
Pakistan AL-Khalid
Pakistan T-85
-
Didn't there used to be some kid in this forum that kept espousing how good the Arjun was?
Another victim of propaganda. :-) -
-
can transform into robots?Originally posted by insouciant:Didn't there used to be some kid in this forum that kept espousing how good the Arjun was?
Another victim of propaganda. :-) -
I know one forumer call 'Arjun' say this tank is damm good! He will defnintely rebuke us and say Arjun relegate to training duties and not mass produced doesn't mean it is not successful!
BUT I TELLIN U EVERY INDIAN NATIONALIST,THIS TANK IS RUBBISH!
Btw,any more reliable link besides strategypage? -
-
Next India flop to come! LCA... Hahaha...
Lousy Crap Aircraft.. -
Moca, why is the Al-Kahlid the Pakistani tank shown here. Is it also a failure like the Arjun? Are Pakistan cancelling the Al-Khalids. Is T-85 the Type 85 of the Chinese military or is it a new Pakistani tank?
-
I post the Indian new purchase - T-90.Originally posted by Bhagat:Moca, why is the Al-Kahlid the Pakistani tank shown here. Is it also a failure like the Arjun? Are Pakistan cancelling the Al-Khalids. Is T-85 the Type 85 of the Chinese military or is it a new Pakistani tank?
Then I post the Pakistani Al-Khalid tank as a comparison.
You have a problem with that? -
Cost over-run: almost 20 times. Delay: 16 yrs, and counting. Army says too heavy, too hot, Russian T-90s better; even Minister admits tracks will be replaced by imported ones; DRDO says we will build new one
http://www.indianexpress.com/story/16589._.html
New Delhi, November 13: The Arjun tank has no future. It still cannot fire straight. The T-90, a far superior tank, can kill the Arjun. We would not cross any border with these tanks.
Strong words, from Brigadier D K Babbar, the Army’s pointsman for the Main Battle Tank (MBT) Arjun project at the Mechanised Forces directorate until he retired last year from the 94th Armoured Brigade. Babbar, who spoke to The Indian Express, has reason to be disillusioned. So has Army chief General J J Singh who was more diplomatic last month: “We will see where we can use it to get optimum use.”
ItÂ’s not going to be easy.
Over 30 years after Project Arjun was sanctioned by Indira GandhiÂ’s Cabinet to make a home-grown battle tank that would address the armoured deficit identified during the 1971 war, the Army is now faced with a troubling prospect: inducting a lumbering, misfiring, vintage design tank like the Arjun, and that, too, in large numbers.
This, after DRDO over-shot Arjun’s project deadline by 16 years — from 1984 to 1995, finally closing the project only in 2000 — and the cost over-run is almost 20 times the original estimate. This is the highest percentage over-run for any DRDO project.
With five pre-production tanks forced upon the ArmyÂ’s 43rd Armoured Regiment in 2004 and 23 tanks to be handed over shortly, MBT Arjun is about to be pushed into full-rate production outside Chennai, with the Army bound by its commitment to buy 124 for two regiments, all of which are to be delivered by 2008.
Still having 58 per cent of its content imported - including its engine, the integrated gunner’s main sight and tracks— the Arjun tank was put through confirmatory trials in the Mahajan ranges in July but the Army wasn’t holding its breath.
Consider these: At a mammoth 58.5 tons, Arjun is a full weight class over the Russian T-90 and nowhere near as agile.
• In May, the Defence Ministry publicized the Army chief’s inauguration of a product called Bogie Flat Arjun Tank (BFAT) built by Bharat Earth Movers in Bangalore. What it didn’t say: these were specially built rail wagons wide enough and reinforced to carry the massive 3.85-m-wide Arjun. For, the tank will crack the existing freight wagons.
• According to the Army’s latest trials, the decade-old problem of overheating persists. Two of the tank’s main subsystems, the fire control system (FCS) and integrated gunner’s main sight, which includes a thermal imager and laser range-finder, are rendered erratic and useless by the Arjun’s abnormally high peak internal temperature, which moves well beyond 55 degrees Celsius. This is in testimony to the Parliamentary committee.
• Following failed trials in summer 1997, which were criticized in a 1998 CAG report for a series of malfunctions, transmission failures and overheating, and an exodus of scientists from DRDO the same year, the tank’s production cost shot up steeply. Its unit price in 1997 was Rs 10.8 crore. It’s official unit price now: Rs 16.8 crore.
Former chief Gen Shankar Roy Choudhary had promised his service quick inductions, only to be faced with yet another extension by DRDO. In the same period, the Sino-Pak Al-Khalid tank was productionised and had begun inductions. When contacted, Roy Choudhary said: “I was a strong proponent of the Arjun tank but its performance was disappointing.”
• On October 12, Minister of State for Defence Production Rao Inderjit Singh told The Indian Express that it was decided — after the recent trials — that the production-series tanks will be stripped of their indigenous tracks and will have imported ones. So will the first few tanks that roll out of the Heavy Vehicles Factory outside Chennai. In other words, after three decades of research, Main Battle Tank Arjun cannot stand on its own “indigenous” feet.
• The project, according to testimony provided in January by the Defence Ministry to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence, has produced virtually nothing. DRDO admitted to the same committee in June that it would be able to develop an indigenous engine, gunner’s main sight and tracks only if the Army places an order beyond 124 tanks. However, the Army has no such plans, making it uneconomical and non-feasible to reduce import content.
“License production of the above items may be feasible with enhanced order quantity for Arjun tanks and may result in reduction in import contents,” admits DRDO. It is, therefore, no surprise that the Army will progressively begin inducting between 800-1000 T-90 Bhishma tanks, which will be built under license from Russia, from 2008, making the letter ‘M’ in Arjun’s prefix not just superfluous but bogus. Why?
“It is important for the Army to maintain combat superiority over its adversaries. There have been delays and slippages in the MBT Arjun project,” Army Headquarters said in written replies to The Indian Express. Five months ago, the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence said, “The Committee also desires that accountability for delay in production of the Arjun Tank may be fixed.” But the Arjun, which has cost the exchequer Rs 305.6 crore so far (representing one of the largest ever cost-overruns in percentage terms), has the influential DRDO high command unfalteringly behind it. DRDO chief Manthiram Natarajan, chief architect of the Arjun programme and a 2002 Padma Shri, has been associated with the programme since its birth in 1974 and became Programme Director in 1987. When contacted, he said, “Defence scientists are conscious that there have been time over-runs on some of the projects. But even today, it is much more cost efficient than tanks of same calibre being produced elsewhere.”
But DRDO is undeterred. With the ArmyÂ’s armour perspective plan drawing out 60 regiments by 2020, DRDO told the Parliamentary panel that itÂ’s now developing what it calls Tank-X, a hybrid consisting of an Arjun gun turret mounted on a T-72 chassis. Two tanks have been prepared, and DRDO has said it will shortly offer them to the Army for an evaluation. No guesses for why the Army isnÂ’t terribly excited.
Stupid tank...full of nationalistic and Indians never start things from basic steps and not within its capabilities! It's failure is never in doubt! 58% of its component are imported, LOL!!! -
Lets just hope that we ourselves will never make such mistakes.
-
Did India have any experience with upgrading or building tracked AFV before Arjun?
-
After so many years, DRDO gets an A for effort. Results well it depends on the aim. They wanted to build an indigenous content tank. But they faced quite a long list of difficulties, not helped by the extreme range of temperatures in the field.
IMHO, they should have design the whole thing based on imported content and slowly change over to local products if and when ready. -
It is possible that India tried to build the Arjun without any outside help at the development stage. In theory that is commendable but in reality it is like re-inventing the wheel. As with their INSAS rifle, if I'm not wrong they also did that wholly on their own, right? Except they borrowed heavily from the AK and other weapons in design.
Singapore has always adopted a much more pragmatic approach with many of our "indigenous" weapons. The Ultimax was designed by an American called Sullivan or something. The SAR-80 was a design of the British arms manufacturer called Sterling.
This happened before they attempted the SAR-21. And even then, it is widely rumoured to be a joint effort with the Israelis.
I wonder how much of our weaponry are built with outside help...
For example, how much of our Bronco, Bionix and Primus are indigenous and how much of it imported? I think our first 155 the FH 88 was built with Israeli help, right?
The Primus chassis kinda look like an M113, so I am wondering if we just borrowed the technology from the US?
Also, ST Engineering had been refurbishing and upgrading AMX-13, M113 and possibly Centurions for decades before attempting to build anything like the Bionix or Primus. -
Didnt they say the Primus chasis is wholly a M109 Paladin one?Originally posted by moca:The Primus chassis kinda look like an M113, so I am wondering if we just borrowed the technology from the US?
Also, ST Engineering had been refurbishing and upgrading AMX-13, M113 and possibly Centurions for decades before attempting to build anything like the Bionix or Primus.
-
Originally posted by moca
Its not possible to use the M113 chasis because it is too light.
The Primus chassis kinda look like an M113, so I am wondering if we just borrowed the technology from the US? -
Agree, I think more like using M109 as a model....... but design from ground up.Originally posted by tankee1981:Its not possible to use the M113 chasis because it is too light. -
I believe the Primus and Bionix use US Detroit engines which is all imported..Originally posted by moca:For example, how much of our Bronco, Bionix and Primus are indigenous and how much of it imported? I think our first 155 the FH 88 was built with Israeli help, right?
The Primus chassis kinda look like an M113, so I am wondering if we just borrowed the technology from the US? -
Yeah...Originally posted by zenden9:I believe the Primus and Bionix use US Detroit engines which is all imported..
Well, I'm sure this is a sane thing to do as designing a reliable engine would take too much trial and errror. And for the comparatively small numbers that we'll end up using, just not economical.
What about the IDF Merkava? Do you know if they use indigenously designed engine or US ones? -
Originally posted by Wikipedia:
A familiar strategy eh. A sound and proven one at that.
Japan continued in its efforts to build up a strong national naval industry. Following a strategy of "Copy, improve, innovate", foreign ships of various designs were usually analysed in depth, their specifications often improved on, and then were purchased in pairs so as to organize comparative testing and improvements. Over the years, the importation of whole classes of ships was progressively substituted by local assembly, and then complete local production, starting with the smallest ships, such as torpedo boats and cruisers in the 1880s, to finish with whole battleships in the early 1900s. The last major purchase was in 1913 when the battlecruiser Kong; was purchased from the Vickers shipyard. By 1918, there was no aspect of shipbuilding technology where Japanese capabilities fell significantly below world standards. By 1920, the Imperial Japanese Navy was the world's third largest navy, and was a leader in many aspects of naval development:
