Which is the World's Best Tank??

Which tank is the world's best??


  • Total voters
    53
Status
Not open for further replies.

root_slack

New Member
Its funny when u compare tanks that have proven their worth in battle to tanks that have not even seen a war. Let arun or al-khalid battle against top tanks like abraham or t-90 in real wars then u can say that they r top MBT's , u r making a joke here saying that they r the best when they havent even seen a real battle, duh :rolleyes::eek:hwell

i vote for abrahams:)

regards
jayakrishnan
 

Sparapet

New Member
I am curious to see how the T-95 (when its finished) and/or the T-80UM2 "Black Eagle" will fare against the M1A2s, especially when the developement of the 152mm smoothbore/ATGM main gun is complete.

Technology aside, the number one qualifer that can rate a tank is its crew, and the US has the best training all around. The crews that havent seen combat learn from those that have, they fire live rounds (around a 100/year) and spend a lot of time in simulators and wargames.
 

aaaditya

New Member
hey guys iam posting this article from bharat rakshak it confirms my opinion that arjun may not be the best tank in the world but it definitely is not the worst tank in the world(it is comparable to any modern heavy tank),it has its share of problems but they are not due to its design but due to the fickle minded nature of the indian army top brass and the corrupt nature of the politicians ,this battle tyank can be the mainstay of the indian army only if it has an indigenous engine,this article also gives certain interesting snippets on the merkava main battle tank.

Quote:The Indian Army and the Arjun Experiment

Lt. Gen. (Retd.) Niranjan S. Malik

April 8, 2005

During WW II India was a base for repair, overhaul and other major military works for the entire south east Asian operations as well as the China and Indian Ocean operations. Considerable amount of industrialisation had perforce taken place. It was but natural that from there we should have taken off and built up our indigenous defence industry. This somehow did not happen. The approach was to acquire equipment from abroad if it was cheaper. This was the background of the Indian defence industry and it has continued despite the fact that we have built up a colossal organisation of defence research. Despite our attempts to be self reliant on various issues there are a number of problems. The MBT Arjun project offers several lessons.

First and.foremost, the problem comes between the user and the DRDO. The problem basically is the GSQR. The GSQR never gets finalised. Changing GSQRs slow down the whole process and the datelines are not kept and expenditure keeps going up. That has been one of the major reasons for the delay in the Arjun tank. At the same time, if you look at the user's perspective, if we don't keep up with the latest technology, then we will get an equipment which is likely to be outdated by the time production starts. This is a problem area which needs to be resolved. The other area is coordination which is becoming a major problem between the user, the DRDO and the manufacturing agency, which is going to produce the equipment. In the case of MBT Arjun, it is the Heavy Vehicles Factory (HVF) at Avadi which is responsible for the delay. HVF takes it as a second baby and not as its main job. The HVF is working on the T-90s, T-72 overhaul and also on the Arjun. It is doubtful whether it will be able to make 120 Arjuns within the given time period. Although the first 15 tanks were supposedfly 'Made in HVF Avadi', they were really put together by workers and engineers who had come from the CVRDE.

The procedures for indigenisation are very tedious. The problems are of two kinds. The first is the non-availablity of expertise and technical knowledge within the country. For example, the tracks for the Arjuns were being imported and I wanted this to be made within the country. I was told that it could be made in Ludhiana. We paid an advance and gave the agency our requirements for the track. After two years, that agency said that it could not make the tracks as per our requirements. We had been to every factory, including BHEL in Ranchi which had no other work at that time, but no one could do the job.

The other type of problem is that private firms that really can do import substitution are not rewarded. This was clear in the case of rubberising the road wheels. To rubberise the Arjun, the tanks used to be ferried across to Germany by air, rubberised there and then brought back. This was colosally expensive. We requested MRF who agreed to do this. They/put up a special factory for that purpose and did it. The numbers required at that time were very meagre. Sometimes it used to be' 100 and sometimes it would be only 50.

Also, the MRF was not sure about when the next order would come. So, they stopped this factory. I spoke to an official at the MRF who said that he was prepared to work even at a loss, which it was while working on the Arjuns. But the contract for T-72, T-55 and Vijayanta had been awarded to some other company. When I checked with the Defence Ministry, I found out that the contract for rubberisation for the rest of equipment was given, I was told it was given to the firm which gave the lower tender. MRF stated that they cannot keep the assembly lines waiting and pending forever. There are other examples. The Kirloskars were doing the hydroneumatic systems for us. The last order was for 14 tanks. After that there was no order for seven years. For the company, the investment in specialised production lines is a dead waste and they need to be subsidised. One has to ensure that the assembly lines are kept alive, the technology, and skilled labour are kept alive for defence purposes. I am told now that they are restarting this process at the Kirloskar plant, which did a fabulously good job.

Then there is the problem of diversified equipment in the army. For instance, it is claimed that 67 per cent of the parts of the T-72 and T-90 are common. I asked the HVF as to why they are importing everything if 67 per cent things are common between the two tanks. I was told that it was not possible due to the transfer of technology agreement. The question is if the transfer of technology has already taken place with regard to the T-72 then why were we not able to build the T-90 with the least amount of imported technology. One expects that if you got something once into the country, then we should not be going back again and again for the same thing. There are many private companies that could be involved in the Arjun production, including the Tatas, Mahindras, Ashok Ley land etc. who are quite capable of taking on some of these jobs. The best part is that we have within the country PSUs such as the BHEL which is also capable of building tanks. Two tanks were built by BHEL Bhopal.

As far as the Arjun is concerned, five have been produced and handed over to the users for trials. Arjun has been worked and thought out for a long period. It is one of the finest pieces of equipment. The Arjun's mobility with its 1400 horsepower engine is very good. The engine however is an old equipment. This powerpack is no longer used in Europe. We got the 1400 horsepower since the 1500 HP engine was only for NATO allies. However, it is a big powerpack and the one they produced later is smaller for which the tank would have to be redesigned and the cost would be astronomical. They said they had stopped manufacturing these engines and if we wanted them they would restart the whole thing for us. This has been done. It has been restarted. The problem lies with placing orders both with the manufacturing agency and the Ministry of Defence. When we know that we need 124 Arjuns tanks as well as Bhim tanks which will carry the same engine, but we do not place orders well in time. I have been told that the orders never went beyond 30-40 atone time.

The question is how long will we continue to import tanks. Today we have the T-90s and we are going to start producing it. But somewhere we have to.stop. After T-90 are we going to import either the T-100, the T-200 orthe T-300. When Israel first produced the Merkava MBT, Ariel Sharon was the DG CV. He walked up to the team and asked them what was the problem. After the team explained the problems, he said that this particular tank would be called Mark I and that they would produce it despite all the problems. The Mark I would be given to the troops and work would start on the Mark II, which would be better than this one. That is how the Israelis did it. Somewhere we have to start producing. Somewhere we need to have the capacity within ourselves to be able to do that and then improve that equipment. Presently this is just not happening.

The engine itself has really no problem but the problem is with regard to the size of the order. The Arjun's 120mm gun with the FSAPDS and Hash ammunition, is excellent. The integrated fire control system had a lot of problems. We had got it from the Dutch but it had an American component in it. Suddenly we were throttled as the Americans said that the Dutch could not supply this to us. After some time, we were able to get France to redesign the entire fire control system. Now we have an excellent fire control system. Tactically, Arjun is a fine weapons system though it looks big and very heavy. Its tactical silhoutte is very low. The T-72 and the Arjun in a hull down position are not very different. In a hull down position, the tank gives you the same silhoutte as any other small tank. Also, its speed provides security in the battlefield. Its firepower is tremendous. Particularly on the move, its firepower is very accurate and good. Some people say that the Arjun is not strategically feasible due to its size and weight. Fortunately, the Arjun has been running all over the railway system of India and has been running all over the western deserts on tank transporters and without tank transporters both.

We have a good tank but we still have massive problems. What the solution is one really cannot say. Dr. Santhanam would remember, a paper had been prepared many years ago which laid down how we should go about manufacturing major defence equipment. Arjun was one of the things in that paper. The paper started with an Advisory Committee at the highest level and then having four elements to it: the user, DRDO, manufacturer and the financing agency. All these were to be placed under one person to work as a single body to ensure the job is done. Presently there is no coordination of any nature on whatever is happening between them. It only happens when the Chief holds a meeting and asks about the progress on the Arjun. The users need to think ahead and have to somehow or the other facilitate the production of equipment even if it is not the very best.

At the same time, the user also asks the question that if China, having used the Russian equipment, has produced the T-59 which is a copy of the T-54, produced the T-62 which is a copy of PT-76 and produced all these MiGs under different names, what is our problem? The Chinese defence industry has gone so far ahead of us. We continue to rely on transfer of technology.

Another point that comes in is export and joint ventures of various nature. Export of defence equipment has been taboo. Perhaps if we had encouraged it at some point of time, other industries may have come up, which could have independently developed certain systems and exported them. At one point of time, the South Africans were very keen to tie up with us on Arjun and wanted to work together. They wanted only about 200 tanks which they said we could produce for them. That sort of a thing could also be done. However, it did not happen. Assembly line is another issue. Once it is started, it has to be kept going otherwise you will lose whatever money is put into it.

:coffee :coffee :coffee
 

kilo_4que

New Member
I have a very interesting article i have read. The article goes as follows:

Indian Army Faces Tank Shortage
By VIVEK RAGHUVANSHI,

The Indian Army is losing its aging tanks faster than new and modernized ones are ready for service, according to service sources here.

The Army expects to lose 50 percent of its fleet in the next three to four years. The government in April decided to scrap all 800 of the service’s Vijayanta tanks. They will be stripped of guns, communication and surveillance equipment and auctioned off later this year, a Defence Ministry official said.

Developed for India by the British company Vickers, now part of BAE SYSTEMS, the Vijayanta has been in service since 1966.

Army sources say that by 2008, an additional approximately 1,000 of the Army’s more than 3,000 tanks will be ready to be junked.

An Army official said the service’s 500 T-55 tanks are due to be scrapped in that period, and about 400 T-72s will be nonfunctional in another two or three years, leaving the Army with a serious tank shortfall in that time frame.

At the same time, the Army continues to await full induction of its Arjun main battle tank 30 years after the state-owned Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) began developing it, and the program to modernize its T-72 tanks is not yet in full swing. Around 500 of India’s T-72 tanks are slated to be fully modernized by 2014.

“With the depleting tank strength, there would be an attempt by DRDO to procure another tank project for its laboratories,†said defense analyst Sament Harish, a retired Indian Army captain. “Such a move would be a blunder … India should buy advanced tanks from overseas markets at an urgent pace, along with undertaking the upgrading of the T-72 tanks.â€

The Army’s fleet today includes the Russian-made T-55, T-72 and T-90, the Vijayanta and the Arjun, which still is used only for training.

The Army official said only 180 of about 1,600 T-72 tanks have been upgraded, around 125 T-55s are functional and the Arjun still is too cumbersome for combat.

Arjun’s Troubles

The Army is not happy with the homegrown Arjun. The first five were delivered by the Avadi Heavy Vehicles Factory, Chennai, last year as part of a 124-tank order.

Originally slated for first delivery in 1990, with mass production planned to begin in 1997, the 124 Arjuns now are expected to be inducted for Army service by 2012.

DRDO began developing the tank in 1974 and delivered the first prototype in 1984. But problems — including the tank’s weight, its overheating engine and the level of armor protection — delayed the program.

The 58.5-ton Arjun, longer and much heavier than the Russian T-90 tanks the government is buying as an interim solution to the Arjun’s delays, has poor operational mobility, the Army official said.

India in 2001 signed a deal with Russia’s Uralvagonzavod State Enterprise to procure 310 T-90s. So far, about 180 partially assembled tanks have been delivered and the remaining 130 will be built under license at Indian facilities.

The Army official said India urgently needs to accelerate T-72 modernization to a rate of around 50 each year.

The Defence Ministry official noted the government already is upgrading around 300 T-72s with a new 125 gun, a more powerful engine, mounted land navigation systems, nuclear, biological and chemical protection equipment, laser warning systems, thermal imaging systems, night-vision devices and frequency-hopping radios.

Source: Defensenews subcribers area only


This id say is very shocking provided that we have been given the agenda of the lucrative indian prospects within land forces. On a personal level i was thinking more on the lines of the indian army solidifying its air force and now concentrating more on building its land forces to give an overall military might.

Some thing to ponder over
 

aaaditya

New Member
i think indian army should now at least concentrate on tank x(t-72 chasis with arjun turret and gun and maybe a1200hp engine.) currently i think it has 1000hp engine drdo is now looking at a higher powered engine for it.it will give this tank a lot of capabilities(commonality with t-72 as t-72 chasis is readily available a world class gun derived from arjun,it will be cheaper than maybe acquiring arjun or a foreign tank and at the same time will utilise capabilities of cvrde,this battle tank will also hav the ability to fire the lahat anti tank missile)
some modification though i think are necessary,efforts should be made to add some elements of arjun's composite armour(it may increase the weight considerably say in the range of 52 tons),to fit the israeli trophy active self defence system . it may not be the world's best tank but will definitely be more than enough for any regional threat(like the al-khalid or the t-80u).:coffee
 

kilo_4que

New Member
some valid points aditya but i think u are looking at the wrong end of the spectrum in order to solve the indian armies woe and misseries with regards to battle tanks. Rather than talking about hi performance engines and rapid fire turrets, you need to be thinking about mobility and how to improve it. Engine dont improve mobility but weight does. You need to concentrate on making the tanks lighter but robust in the same process, this is why the al khalid uve mentioned is such an asset to the pakistanis. Its quick, (if i recall correctly, the quickest tank made, but dont quote me on that as i am unsure), robust and deadly in attack. What more can one ask for. I feel that the indians have a huge task in front of them if they want to be made comparable with the like of al khalid. Maybe the other pakistani Al zarrar is something u need to target.

The reason i have not much faith in indias abilities to come up with a top end tank is due to the 30 years quoted, which is the number of years it actually took to make the Arjun. So it becomes rather ironic that a project that took so long to complete even that with problems is going to have a sibling created in next to nothing time but devastating enough to compete with the al khalid and t-80
 

aaaditya

New Member
mobility is not everything kilo (arjun is supposed to have good mobility),anyhow engine and transmission play an important role in mobility of a tank along with suspension(arjun is said to have excellent suspension system).if we go by your argument tanks like abrahms and leopard would be inferior to al khalid in terms of mobility being heavier than ak but they are not bad tanks are they?can ak match abrahms or any western tank in terms of armour protection or survivability.mobility will ensure a tank to move between battle zones quickly but it does not ensure survivability particularly if tank launched atm's are used.by the way what is ak's max speed whereas arjun's is 72 kms/hr.anyway dont take it as a comparison betwean arjun and ak but as a comparison a light tank and a heavy tank .:coffee
 

kilo_4que

New Member
weight loss and engine powers are more vital individually amongst particular tanks. With the al khalid, it is its mobility that makes it so good. With the Arjun it lacks due to mobility so the equation is pretty simple.

The arguement is not trying to prove that mobility is the biggest asset to a tank but mobility is vastly important amongst particular tanks since the Arjun is no devastating blow to any military opposition. Im sorry im coming along with a neutral view but this is a fare fact that the Arjun lacks vastly, and the main area of concern is definately the 30 years it took to make. How does the indian army justify that and yet they are proposing such wonderful ideas for another tank as you say which is highly unlikely to result as conveyed
 

kilo_4que

New Member
nothing makes me think sir, its the sheer facts plus common sense given the speed against weight. Furthermore, the arjun possesses many problems even after 30 years of develpment, i vastly question indias abilities to build tanks
 

Alektas

New Member
The best can depend on the needs and the specific criteria of a user country. For Israel the best is the Merkava4 since it is customized to their specific needs. For USA M1A2 is the best and so on.
If I had to select a single "silver bullet" tank for all purposes and terrains:

1. Leclerc (with bugs corrected)
2. Leopard2
3. Merkava4
4. M1
5. Challenger2
6. T90
 

Lost

New Member
If Al khalid is a Pakistani copy of China's type 90, how could it be better than type 98? I know al khalid is refited with a 1200 hp engine but everything else pretty much stays the same i think, and type 98 is just a newer and better tank.
I voted for Leopard 2 because I think fuel efficiency and 3 man crew+auto loader can make a big difference in a war.
 

EnigmaNZ

New Member
I have a feeling the best tank will be the tank fielded by the country with the most posters represented here, due to national pride.
Hmm, the Abramns has wonderful ceramic/depleted uranium armour, but a thirsty engine, the Mekara has the ability of carrying a squad along for the ride, plus that co-axial 60 mm breech loading mortar for urban warfare, the others I know little about.
Best tank depends on what you want it for, the best in urban warfare, desert, mud and jungle, for lightning advances, or a indistructble mobile bunker. Define your role, make a list of values you consider essential, then compare each tank to those values, the one that most meets the requirements is your best tank., and probably at the bottom of the list for the country down the road.
:argue
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
EnigmaNZ said:
I have a feeling the best tank will be the tank fielded by the country with the most posters represented here, due to national pride.
there is more than a scintilla of truth in that little observation.. ;)
 

knightrider4

Active Member
I like to think in reasonably simple terms. So if your an infantryman who may be under the pump so to speak just about any 60 ton behemoth would be more than welcome.;)
 

Lost

New Member
Some of my friends thinks tanks are becoming obsolete, I don't believe them, comment on this comment plz.
 

AlexSWE

New Member
gf0012-aust said:
My Top XX list: (and this is for use by Australia as there is no point in having a generic top "10", lists have to be relevant to the host nation, its warfighting doctrine and its likely theatre of operations)

1.a Leopard 2 A6
1.b Stridsvagn 122 (Swiss Leopard II A5)
2. M1A2 SEPD
3. Leopard 2 A5
4.a MIA2 Turbine
4.b MIA2 Diesel Europack
5. Leopard 2 A4
6. M1A1
7. Challenger 2 (Dorchester)
8. Challenger 2 (Chobham ser 2)
9. Challenger 1
10 Japanese T90. Italian Ariete
11 Leclerc
Correction, STRV 122 is not Swiss, its Swedish and is of Leopard 2A6EX standard but without the L55 gun and the new powerpack, besides that is pretty much identical to Leopard 2A6EX (demonstrator tank or latest make)

The STRV 122 is the most advanced Leopard 2 in service, and is one of the most expensive Leos in service aswell. It weigh in at around 69 tons (62,5 metric tons) and the new mine protected STRV 122B is said to weigh around 75 (68 metric tons).

The reason why the L55 hasn't been chosen on the STRV 122 yet is becuase of the stabilasation problems that is present with the loger heavyer gun (or atleast was a problem). As that is fixed, the STRV 122 might (has been considered) to implement the new L55 gun. And might also upgrade to the new powerpack.

/Alex
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top