Yes India has major issue`s with the fire control systems due to overheating, they are scrambling to come up with a AC unit that will fit with the sight and within the turret. It will be interesting to see what they come up with, I wonder if a good overpressure system would help them out.well despite its problems the indian army seems to be keen on acquiring more t-90's .they have recently placed an order for 330 additional t-90's.
i believe the indian army force structure will comprise the t-90's as a replacement for the t-72's ,the tank-x as a replacement for the t-55 nad the arjun as a replacement for the vaijayanta's .
here check out this link:
http://www.ibnlive.com/news/india-to-buy-330-tanks-from-russia/24747-3-1.html
Delivery of T-90S kits from Russia, Jane's adds, would "speed up" the fielding of new MBTs as assembly using Indian-made components is more time consuming.
But army officers complained that the existing T-90S tanks faced "recurring" technical problems which were adversely impinging on the force's operational preparedness.
Senior armoured corps officers said the Catherine thermal imaging (TI) camera supplied by Thales of France that is the "heart" of the T-90S' fire control system (FCS) had "repeatedly malfunctioned" in the excessive summer heat of the western Rajasthan desert where the MBTs frequently exercise and will eventually be deployed.
Officers operating the tanks said temperatures in excess of 60 degrees Celsius inside the tank had rendered between 80-90 FCS "unserviceable" over the past four years. Attempts to rectify them had so far largely proven unsuccessful.
In one armoured regiment in Punjab, an alarming 30 of 40 tanks were "off-road", lamented an officer, declining to be named.
In keeping with the army's qualitative staff requirement for the T-90S MBT that stipulated a "longer range, shimmerless" sight, Peling of Belarus with its IG 46 sight entered into partnership with Thales to integrate its Catherine TI camera thereby giving the FCS a range of around three kilometres. The FCS components were "mated" by the manufacturers at the T-90S Nizhny Tagil factory in the Urals in Russia.
When problems first began to emerge in 2003 with the TI camera - priced at around Rs.20 million ($444,444) per unit, a fifth of each tanks cost of Rs.117.5 million - they were replaced as the T-90S were under warranty till March 2004.
Thereafter, with the warranty having ended, the army has grudgingly conceded that it is looking to "rectify" the FCS problem, but has not yet come up with a viable solution.
Army chief Gen J.J. Singh recently declared that the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) was considering proposals to "partially" air-condition the T-90S to overcome the overheating problem. But he did not elaborate as to how a cooling plant could be successfully engineered into the tank without undertaking major structural changes.
The T-90S licensed production that was to commence at HVF in 2006 has also been "considerably" deferred, armament industry officials said.
This was due partly to engineering problems encountered in locally assembling the MBTs, but principally because of integrating the Catherine TI camera with the 1G 46 sight.
The first locally assembled T-90S tanks began rolling out of the HVF in January 2004, but within a short period they too faced FCS problems in hot temperatures.
Ammunition for the T-90S is also posing a major problem.
Initially, the T-90S fired Russian-made AMK-338 and AMK-339 rounds, but these were soon exhausted in training and presently the tanks are without any ammunition as their 125 mm smoothbore guns have not yet been configured to fire the locally manufactured AMK-340 rounds.
Production of the MBT's 9M119 Refleks (NATO designation AT-11 Sniper) missiles by the state-owned Bharat Dynamics at Hyderabad in southern India that was scheduled to begin earlier this year is also behind schedule as several test firings have been unsuccessful. Russian technicians have been called in to assist.
Alongside, armoured corps officers said the T-90S had been "overexposed" in exercises "to suit the individual whims of senior commanders" anxious to show off the new tank and were already in need of major overhauls.
Each tank has a maximum life of 650 cycles on the onboard rev-counter with static running equalling one rev per hour while travelling 17.5 km equalled one rev. But, in less than four years, most of the T-90S tanks had completed 600 revs.
Army officers also bemoaned the shortage of T 90 simulators of which there were only five at present, in order to extend the MBT's operational longevity.
"Given the army's over emphasis on low intensity conflict the long term armour induction policy and related modernisation programmes have slipped badly," said Brig Arun Sahgal, a former armoured corps officer now with the United Services Institute. This bodes ill for its overall fighting capability, he added.
The army aims on eventually equipping its 58 armoured regiments with T-90S tanks and upgraded Ajeya T 72Mis fitted with full and partial solution FCS, explosive reactive armour, land navigation systems, frequency hopping radio sets and advanced nuclear, biological and chemical equipment to keep them in service till 2015 -20.
T-90 in Comparison to Western Armour
- Status
Yes India has major issue`s with the fire control systems due to overheating, they are scrambling to come up with a AC unit that will fit with the sight and within the turret. It will be interesting to see what they come up with, I wonder if a good overpressure system would help them out.
the problem is with the french catherine sight ,india is currently working on partially aircondintionising the t-90's based on the technology developed by the private company melcon systems for the arjun main battle tank.
That should help them out quite a bit to eliminate the electronics from shorting out, Ironically we had the same issue on the M60A3 TTS sight which came from Viva La France, we were able to reconfigure the ventilation for it partly due to the size of the turret on a M60 series tank.
The real numbers on a M829A2 are closer to around 1780 for initial velocity and around 1712 at 1000 meters and will give you around 760 mm penetration at 2000 meters. I cannot give you the numbers of the M829A3 but will state that it is one mean tank round, it will not have a issue taking out a T-80 or T-90 with either Kontakt -5 Kaktus armor applications out to 2000 meters. As far as barrel erosion goes, we are getting more than 380 M829A2 rounds thru it, with the new manufacturing process and powder used for the M829A3 we will get even more, we have also added something special to our manufacturing process of the M256 to help out on barrel erosion and so far we are getting good results.
Actually the manafacturer claimed initial velocity for the M829A3 is 1555 m/s, and 1675 for the A2. They capabilities are far fot taking taking out a T-72B or T-90 with modern ERA (Relikt). Not sayng about Kaktus, as it is more advanced.
The real numbers on a M829A2 are closer to around 1780 for initial velocity and around 1712 at 1000 meters and will give you around 760 mm penetration at 2000 meters. I cannot give you the numbers of the M829A3 but will state that it is one mean tank round, it will not have a issue taking out a T-80 or T-90 with either Kontakt -5 Kaktus armor applications out to 2000 meters. As far as barrel erosion goes, we are getting more than 380 M829A2 rounds thru it, with the new manufacturing process and powder used for the M829A3 we will get even more, we have also added something special to our manufacturing process of the M256 to help out on barrel erosion and so far we are getting good results.
The recent tests also mantioned that the M829A2 can not penetrate the T-90-s new welded turret from minimal distance even eithout ERA.
hey guys according to a janes article posted in a defence forum,the second batch of 330 t-90s tanks being acquired by the indian army would be equipped with the russian shtora1 self defence system and an electro-optical self defence system capable of deflecting guided rounds,these will then be retrofitted on the remaining tanks.
unfortunately i cannot provide a link for that article since i do not have subscription to janes.
unfortunately i cannot provide a link for that article since i do not have subscription to janes.
The M829A2 round was designed to deal with these armor packages, the M829A3 is designed for the future tank projects like T-95 Black eagle.
Do not get centered on what the manufacturer is claiming. All ammunition that Russia and the U.S are designing are based on 2000 meter tank kill shots.
This is due in large part because of desert operations, even though in europe you would look at 800 - 1200 due to towns and woods. With new technology that is out there Russia and the U.S can design DU penetrators that have higher muzzle velocity and lessen barrel wear. Both Russia and the U.S are content with sticking to current gun calibers. As you may already know Germany has gone to a longer 120 gun tube, reason being is to go back to tungsten type KE penetrators. ( I may be in for it from Chrom and Extern)
haha~ what a strong "western-ism"
russian tanks never enter a war in good condition. You have to bere this in mind.
T-90 & T-80 are not in the family while T-90 & T-72 are... and the logic of develop behind the russians and NATOs are not the same... so matching of "genaration" depends on personal desire.
I totally agree with this statement..although T-90 might appear to be an upgraded T-72 to a few people..(although it doesnt look to meand the logic of develop behind the russians and NATOs are not the same... so matching of "generation" depends on personal desire.
)..there is hell lot of difference of performance between the 2..&&The thing about the change in "generation" cant be said true..u cant compare a M-60 with a T-72 in any case...believe me..T-72>>>>>M-60
...The T-90 is in fact a upgraded T-72, after the Chechen and Persian Gulf wars the T-72 got a unfair reputation because of tank losses,when in fact it was more of a issue of poor tactics, because of this the Russians went with the designation T-90 so they could place it back on the world market.I totally agree with this statement..although T-90 might appear to be an upgraded T-72 to a few people..(although it doesnt look to me
&&The thing about the change in "generation" cant be said true..u cant compare a M-60 with a T-72 in any case...believe me..T-72>>>>>M-60
I guess Russia had to make up for the sight over heating issue.
That actually reinforces the project planning problems they're having. They also have FCS overheating problems with the arjun - and thats because they're not air conditioned. The temps reach 60deg cent inside - so the project team should have been kicked up the rear for not airconditioning the platform.I guess Russia had to make up for the sight over heating issue.
I suspect that some idiot bean counter who is completely unaware of the sensitivity of modern electronics and who sees aircon as a luxury for the blackhats, has decided to save project money by culling the aircon option.
60degs cent will fry FCS and optics - it is not in the ideal operating range.
I seriously doubt that the russians can be blamed for this - esp if they have built the component to the end users specs. IMV The blame fairly and squarely lies with the failure of the Definition Team. (The arjun history supports it as well IMV)
Regarding the Russian Gen topic here's a tree graph that might help.
http://img367.imageshack.us/img367/594/all7zr.gif
sorry for inconvenience, because the graph size is too large to attach here.
and for the Ts armor topic, I have and interesting article here, but unfortunately is in Chinese. My English is poor so not going to translate. Suggest you guys can use lingo and stuff to translate. I tried and I think the result still OK for understand.
The article is about due to bad performance of T-72 in Gulf War, the Russians held a large-scale live round experiment on T-80U and T-90 to check the protection capabilities. They had various of anti-tank weapon shot on both tanks with and without addition armor (both used Kontakt-5). In conclusion, the result is quite OK, at least not as bad as western predicted, and, it was T-90 whom had a better result
url origin article
url with google translator
http://img367.imageshack.us/img367/594/all7zr.gif
sorry for inconvenience, because the graph size is too large to attach here.
and for the Ts armor topic, I have and interesting article here, but unfortunately is in Chinese. My English is poor so not going to translate. Suggest you guys can use lingo and stuff to translate. I tried and I think the result still OK for understand.
The article is about due to bad performance of T-72 in Gulf War, the Russians held a large-scale live round experiment on T-80U and T-90 to check the protection capabilities. They had various of anti-tank weapon shot on both tanks with and without addition armor (both used Kontakt-5). In conclusion, the result is quite OK, at least not as bad as western predicted, and, it was T-90 whom had a better result
url origin article
url with google translator
Last edited:
Agreed - but you know how clientel can be, they are giving the Russians an ear full for not taking it in account on the ambient temperatures over there, it`ll be interesting to see what they will do, from what I have been told, the T-90 is a electronics nightmare due to size of vehicle. Makes you wonder why they can`t go with a over pressure system designed like western armor style MBT`s.
the other peripheral thing that the sight problem hilights is that these T-90's are obviously not NBC kitted - and that means utility and tasking restrictions.
I like the chart of different models, you can rest assured that a M829A2 or M829A3 DU rounds will be very deadly to the latest T-80/90/95 models at a range of 2000 meters, that is what these rounds are designed specifically to take out. As for the German L-55 yes, it is a good performance gun but, with our latest generations of DU KE ammunition we are getting the same amount of performance that the Germans are getting with Tungsten type KE rounds, so we will not be switching from M256 to L-55 anytime soon, there is no need to except from a environmental viewpoint.Regarding the Russian Gen topic here's a tree graph that might help.
http://img367.imageshack.us/img367/594/all7zr.gif
sorry for inconvenience, because the graph size is too large to attach here.
and for the Ts armor topic, I have and interesting article here, but unfortunately is in Chinese. My English is poor so not going to translate. Suggest you guys can use lingo and stuff to translate. I tried and I think the result still OK for understand.
The article is about due to bad performance of T-72 in Gulf War, the Russians held a large-scale live round experiment on T-80U and T-90 to check the protection capabilities. They had various of anti-tank weapon shot on both tanks with and without addition armor (both used Kontakt-5). In conclusion, the result is quite OK, at least not as bad as western predicted, and, it was T-90 whom had a better result
url origin article
url with google translator
And that would be quite interesting due to the fact of Pakistani and Irainian capibilities. Pakistan has been quite satisfied with their T-80`s even though they do not have all the bells and whistles on them like the Indian T-90`s, maybe their procurement team took the temperature factor into account.
But u thought that the performance difference between the 2 was as much as between a M-60 && an ABRAMS..isnt that true???The T-90 is in fact a upgraded T-72, after the Chechen and Persian Gulf wars the T-72 got a unfair reputation because of tank losses,when in fact it was more of a issue of poor tactics, because of this the Russians went with the designation T-90 so they could place it back on the world market.
- Status