Total Pageviews

Saturday, September 10, 2011

T-90AM MBT Officially Unveilled At Nizhny Tagil


Sagar said...

Arjuns turrent would be similar in looks t90am?

Anonymous said...

It looks hot....

Thanx for the reply for IN queries in the article.

You said government has yet to sanction P17A but i thought even the CCS has sanctioned 42000 crores INR for Project 17A.

Also can you take a look at this pdf and the picture in it ? Is it arjun mk2 ?

Austin said...

Some details on the new T-90MS

1> Has a new Turret with enhanced protection of frontal projection, roof and sides.
2> Has new ERA "Relic" It has an improved ability to withstand modern sabot projectiles and HEAT rounds
3> Can withstand current and future anti-tank weapons , The level of protection of the new tank exceeds any competitor
4> Weight increased by less than 2 Tons , Tanks weighs a little more than 48 T
5 > T-90MS new fire control system "Kalina" is equal tothe best world samples
6 > Has implemented auto tracking of Targets
7> The gunner has combined thermal sight, laser and optical channels. The commander has a panoramic multi-channel scope.
8> The tank has a single automated control system at the tactical level. it is able to exchange information and receive indication from other machines Battalion ( BMS )
9> Has satellite navigation system GLONASS-GPS and modern means of communication.
10> T-90MS can be fitted with an existing gun or new gun of high power 125 mm caliber
11> Has ammunition capacity of 40 rounds , in secure underfloor loader and rear bustle reducing the risk to the crew
12 >T-90MS has a new 1130 horsepower engine
13> Has electronic automatic gear change and motion control using the steering wheel

Anonymous said...

beautiful pics... i'm getting hard!!

prasunji, i have a question: is what is Mr.Browne's religion? It says online that he's Christian but his children's name are Alisha & Omar - Muslim names. And he was reported on Shiv Aroor's blog as saying Inshalah. Could you clarify?

PS- I posted this on Livefist but Shiv won't publish it!!


Anonymous said...

Anon 10:48 AM,
Does Air Marshal Mr. Browne's religion really matter? Not at all. He is a person who has come up tot his level just because of his qualities. You mentioned his son, Mr. Omar, right?. Do you know that he is/was also a pilot in IAF? Also, Mr. Browne worked in Israel in late 90s (when BJP was ruling India) as Def Attache. We, Indians, are fortunate to have some fantastic minority defense officers.

Anyway, what is the point of having so called "Hindu" leaders? Look at the so called leaders who rule our country. Lalu Prasad, M Yadav (who used defense planes as his taxis), etc, and of course the congress leaders. The less we talk about the present "Hindu" Congress leaders the better. I remember a retired Muslim IAF officer (Mr. Maurouf), who writes about Indian defense force.
So NEVER discriminate anyone in the name of skin color or religion. Just look how good the person is for India.

Anonymous said...

sir was arjun mk2 sporting the new 1500hp powerpack in the recent trials....?? ie with the cummins qsk 38 engine coupled with esm500 tranny hooked with the indigenous apu....

is the 400-500kgf class laghu shakti engine really under development or does it exists only on dwaing boards or drdo posters....????

Anonymous said...

anon@12:25 -- i just asked. did i condemn him? why are u jumping? anything wrong if i ask what's his religious affiliation?

. said...

awesome blog,would be good if u can enhance the skin/appearance.this paki colour does not do too well.just a suggestion.thanks:)

JEET SINGH said...

SIR, there any information about how many ALH Rudra will be inducted by the indian army AAC.

JEET SINGH said...

Will the new NAG missile carrier will based on BMP or a brand new platform will be used for it?When the trial of this new carrier will start?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Sagar: The SArjun Mk2's frontal turret portion will be sloped.

To Anon@9.17AN: The amount you've mentioned is a notional allocation, not a firm sanction. The photo is that of the M-1A2 Abrams. PSUs like BEML always indulge in displaying such deceptive illustrations. HAL's Korwa-based Avionics' Division brochure, for instance, carries a photo of the JAS-39 Gripen's glass cockpit on its cover page. These PSUs and DPSUs are utterly shameless.

To Austin: By the way, no Indian T-90S MBTs have been fitted with Iron Fist APS and there's no chart that mentions Iron Fist being on board an Indian T-90S. The second and third tranches of T-90S MBTs delivered/being delivered by HVF have the Saab LEDS-150 APS (, a fact which I had highlighted back in 2009 ( The competition is now on between SAAB and IMI for supplying Iron Fist APS for the first 310 T-90S MBTs that will be upgraded to T-90AM/MS standard, as well as for the new-build T-90AM/MS units to be ordered in future for the Indian Army. Presently, the Iron Fist APS is on board only the Arjun Mk2 prototype MBTs and will also be retrofitted on the Arjun Mk1 MBTs.

To Anon@10.48AM: Alisha and Omar sound like Christian names to me. How can Omar be a Muslim name when one had legendary WW-2 Generals like Omar Bradley? Even several Hindu females go by the name Alisha or Ayesha, while Muslim females have adopted the name Payal.

To Anon@1.27PM: The Laghu Shatki is under development and will be series-produced.

To JEET SINGH: Leave alone how many 'Rudra' ALHs will be inducted by the AAC, not even the weapons configuration has been finalised as yet. Let's wait and see if the NAMICA will have a new avatar, like a T-72-based hull.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@12.25PM: The leaders can't even be called 'Hindu' in religious terms. Hinduism is a way of live and does not have a theocratic foundation, unlike Judaism or Christianity or Islam or Sikhism. What the leaders can be referred to as are followers of sects (Vaishnavites or Shaivites) or cults (like followers of Krishna, who belong to the Bhakti cult). And none of these sects and cults even adhere to the essence of religious philosophy (the Vedanta philisophy as propagated by the Vedas) that refers to only the universal creational force of the cosmos, and not any creator (pf 'God') defined by a physical shape or form. In scientific terms, the closest explanation of the universal creational force of the cosmos came from Albert Einstein's Droplet Theory. And in modern times we have the likes of Bal Thakeray and Shiv Sena who don;lt even know the etymology of the term 'Hindustan', yet never cease to refer to Bharat as Hindustan. And these precisely are the morons that have, since the early 1990s, totally polarised the average-IQ personnel serving with the state police forces along communal lines and we all can what the results are today: lack of ground intelligence about impending terrorist strikes. Well, shit happens!!!

Austin said...

@Prasun ,I have yet to see any pictures of T-90 tank fitted with APS.

I was under the impression that current upgrade priority for T-90's are

1> Fitting it with APU
2> Fitting it with an AC for the crew

What is the status of these two upgrade ?

How many T-90 Bishma has been delivered so far ?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Austin: This is what you had said in another forum, r4eferring to the chart that I had uploaded in the previous thread: "It seems Indian Army is using Iron Fist APS on T-90" (
The second and third tranches of T-90S MBTs (330 + 347 Bhishma-standard)feature as standard fit the APU and Kinetics-supplied air conditioning/ventilation system. About 450 Bhishma-standard T-90S MBTs have been delivered to date.

Austin said...

@Prasun: Yes I know that is why I said it seems , I am not certain yet becuase I have never seen Iron Fist on actual production Bhishma.If you have any picture of Iron Fist on actual production model of Bhishma please share if possible.

Mr. Ra said...

It is heartening to know the growing potential of T-90 Series.

In the fields of MBTs and MBRLs, Indian growth now appears to be properly oriented. Now I hope they will do something deserving for the growth of variants of 155 mm Howitzers.

SherKhan said...

One hell of a hindsight it seems IA made a good decision going with the T-90.

saurav jha said...

Hi Prasun,

Can we have a comparison between LEDS and Iron-Fist ..? Why are we going for two separate systems..Commonality would have brought down the cost.
And Israel is using Trophy on its tanks. Any particular reason for Iron-Fist..?


Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Austin: As I had stated earlier, no Indian T-90S MBTs have been fitted with Iron Fist APS, and therefore, there is no such photo in existence.

To Saurav Jha: Apparently the choice of an appropriate APS is dictated by the turret design and configuration. Circular turrets of the type seen on T-55s, T-72s and T-90s are more suited for the LEDS-150, while the Iron Fist is found to be more suitable for rectangular turrets of the type on the Arjun and T-90AM.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SherKhan: It would thus seem that the Russians have at last admitted to the fact that an ammo bustle located in the turret is better than the carousel-mounted bustle sitting on the floor of the hull--an admittance about which the Soviets and Russians were in denial since early 1991. Of course, the Ukrainians too had admitted and recognised the reality, but did so much earlier than the Russians.

Anonymous said...

Dear Sir

Thanks a lot for posting these New and very positive developments about T 90

When Arjun tank had OUT GUNNED and OUT RUN the T 90 in Comparative Trials Then there was A lot of Criticsm that India had bought a DUD

And with this better T 90 tank, Russia has proved that all of its several decades experience in Tank Making Business has only helped Russian Armour Industry

In the photos available There is an Indian Official CLEARLY visible taking an active interest in the tank's features

So we can expect this powerful tank soon in Indian Army Strike Corps

Anonymous said...

Dear Sir

Please answer my question

Has any country or Company tried to increase the Barrel Length of 105 MM Artilerry

In your earlier Replies you have mentioned about 55 CALIBER Gun For Arjun Mark 3

So I was thinking ,1f 120 MM Guns can be converted into 55 Caliber
THEN IS IT POSSIBLE to increase the BARREL length of 105 MM Artilerry

Anonymous said...

Hey Prasun and Austin...

Yes prasun is right there is no Iron Fist on Indian t90 and Austin is also right that there is pic of t90 with Iron fist but its just an advertisement most probably before Saab was selected and IMI was also competing for Indian t90 APS competition.

@ saurav jha
LEDS was selected by IA in their competition while Iron Fist was selected by DRDO. There is a chance of corruption by one of these parties and one of the APS was the wrong choice.

As far as Trophy selection is concerned it was selected because US selected it. And selection of Iron Fist by India may be to support this program for Israel as Israeli government has pulled the funding for this project and since the project had progressed to such a level it would be a waste to abandon the project when its almost complete.

Another reason which might be possible for selection of iron fist is that it can be used on any kind of armored vehicle whether its an ICV or an MBT. So its possible Indian army will use the same APS for every armored vehicle in the future instead of purchasing different one for MBTs and ICVs.

Good for us that Iron Fist is one of the best, i don't know whether its better than trophy but there prasun can help us.

On May 2011 the system intercepted Kinetic energy penetrators and Metis anti tank missiles during a test in the U.S

Anonymous said...

sir will us be looking for a replacement for the c130j in the near future ??

sir why is the payload capacity of hal/uac mmrta being pegged at 18.5 tns when we all know that ficv will be certainly heavier than that.....

shouldn't we be going for sor an 70 for our medium lift aircraft req....??

an 70 which is alot less riskier plus time saving plus alot more capable option still we are developing an all new aircraft which wud less capable....???

Shree said...

New anti-ship missile defence radar system developed by CEA Technologies on board Australian Anzac-class frigate.
*The system seems to have impressed the Americans what is your assessment on it and what is the comparable system in Indian navy?
*U.S. Army is developing a next-generation, 40-ton 155mm Howitzer artillery cannon able to fire precision rounds Indian army desperately needs them should we co-develop them with US?
*Sad to hear another Mig-21 crashed whats wrong with them.
And China and Pakistan too have sizable numbers of its variants what is there crash record n why wont be hear about them?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@8.50AM: Compared to the Arjun Mk1, the T-90S is indeed an inferior product. The T-90S was procured simply because the Arjun Mk1 wasn’t available when it should have been. What the fielding of the T-90AM proves is the following:
1) The Russians have FINALLY admitted to the fact that an ammo bustle located in the turret is better than the carousel-mounted bustle sitting on the floor of the hull--an admittance about which the Soviets and Russians were in denial since early 1991. Of course, the Ukrainians too had admitted and recognised the reality, but did so much earlier than the Russians.
2) Since the export market for high-end MBTs is extremely small and limited, the Russians have no choice but to implement and incorporate the MBT survivability features which are insisted upon by its principal MBT export customers, i.e. India.
3) Despite this belated upgrade, Russia’s chances of selling such MBTs to India in large numbers in future are slim. At most, less than 500 T-90AMs would be procured by India, while the rest of the T-90S MBTs will be upgraded to T-90AM standard.
4) Between the T-90AM and Arjun Mk2, the latter would still reign supreme on the battlefield since it can fire both HESH and FSAPDS rounds.
5) If the R & D momentum is maintained or even accelerated for the Arjun Mk3 (which is the FMBT) then the Arjun Mk3 will be a generation ahead of the T-90AM in terms of integrated vectronics suite, mobility, firepower and reliability/serviceability.

To Anon@8.55AM: Everything is possible.

To Anon@10.02AM: FYI the LEDS-150 was selected in February 2009, while the IMI poster on Iron Fist is of February 2011 vintage. There was no element of corruption when choosing LEDS-150. As I’ve mentioned above, the Iron First is optimised for MBTs with rectangular turrets like those of the Arjun and T-90AM.

To Anon@1.26PM: For airlifting the FICV there’s the C-17A Globemaster III option available. The MRTA and C -130J-30 will be able to airlift 155mm howitzers like the LW-155 and Caesar (if and when these two products are ordered). Now that the C-17As have been ordered and more will be procured, there’s no reqmt for the An-70T.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To SHREE: The EL/M-2248 MF-STAR AESA-based multifunction radar on board the three Project 15A FFGs, four Project 15B DDGs, seven Project 17A FFGs and the IAC-1 (INS Vikrant) will be far more versatile than what CEA Technologies Inc has been able to come up with. If you’re asking me about co-developing new-generation 155mm/52-cal howitzers, the best option available now for India is to task the JV of Mahindra Defence & BAE Systems with developing two new variants of the existing M-777/LW-155 155mm/39-cal howitzer: a motorised version equipped with a 52-cal barrel and mounted on a wheeled vehicle capable of being airlifted by the C-130J-30 or IL-214 MRTA; and a tracked self-propelled version equipped with a 52-cal barrel and mounted on an existing T-72M hull, but being modular enough to fit on to the hull of the FICV. The motorised version, being less risky to develop, should be made available for field evaluations within 24 months of contract signature. This is doable, possible and achievable and if I were in A K Antony’s shoes this is what I would do and also rope in the Indian Army to be involved in this R & D project from the ground-up. Hope A K Antony takes heed of this humble proposition of mine. This is the time for him to be audacious and innovative.
Why the persistent MiG-21 crashes? Just ask IAF HQ why on earth has the IAF NEVER acquired any cockpit procedures trainers or full-flight simulators for its MiG-21bis and Bisons??? Had such simulators and flight training aids been available, the number of fatal crashes involving MiG-21s and MiG-27M s could have been reduced by 90%!!! Usage of such simulators is the very reason why the number of fatal crashes involving Jaguars and Mirage 2000s is far far lower. The IAF should also induct into service ASAP such simulators for the MiG-29UPGs. Just ink a supplementary contract with Germany’s Rehinmetall Defence Systems to supply another MiG-29 simulator (almost identical to what this company has already supplied for the Indian Navy’s MiG-29K). That’s all it takes. The synthetic flight training aids, like part-task trainers (for training on aerial refueling and on weapons-launch procedures), came come from Russia and they were displayed during the MAKS expo in Zhukovsky, Russia, last month. Train as you fight, as the saying goes, and therefore one needs realistic flight training aids as well. Merely acquiring upgraded combat aircraft or brand-new combat aircraft without such training aids is suicidal in today’s world, to say the least. Which brings up another interesting topic: who will supply such training aids for the Tejas LCA Mk2? Has anyone done anything about it so far?

Anonymous said...

sir are my regarding the arjun mk2 being repeatedly deleted ???

all i wanted to ask was that was arjun mk2 was using the 1500hp powerpack in the recent trials or not ??

Austin said...

@Prasun; The problem with T-90/72 etc was the free ammo inside the turret , post penetration there was a chance of spall hit or splinters that might ignite it or explode inside the turret , ofcourse the problem is not limited to Russian tanks alone , all western MBT barring Abrams carry free ammo inside the turret and post penetration it might ignite or cook off

Ofcouse there are 22 rounds in the underfloor loader which are better protected and safer then free ammo in racks.

T-90MS/AM moves the free ammo from inside the turret to rear bustle which is much safer for the crew

Shree said...

Regarding upgrading Su30MKI a Russian Test pilot Yury Vaschuk said, "The IAF's Su-30MKI upgrade will bring the aircraft close to the Su-35 aircraft, which already has fifth generation features."
*Well I thought Su30MKI was better than Su35 Because of the Israeli And French avionics and it was modifies with the features developed for Su35.So if its upgraded again it should be better than su35 what do you think?
*In addition to AESA Radar what other modifications are planned ?
*Do u think its necessary now?
*I think the MoD and IAF too have made a very very bad decision to upgrade Mirage2000 at such an exorbitantly priced deal .It makes no sense since IAF could spend that money on more MMRCAs and here's the KICKER the upgrade will take 10 YEARS!!!!! I know it is one the most stupid decisions , Why do think the IAF as went through the deal as if it had no other options?

Mr. Ra said...

I also could not understand the logic of Mirage upgrade especially when the MMRCA, FGFA and more Su-30MKI are surely joining, until and unless there is some other nuclear like angle.

The upgrading is a technical and competitive necessity, which can be avoided to maximum extent only if one goes to the future and makes purchases from there. Lol...

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@6.58PM: You will find your answer here:

To AUSTIN: Firstly, it is not called free ammo, but the ammunition reserve. Secondly, are you suggesting/saying/claiming that catastrophic denotation of the ammo reserves does not result in the ammo stored in the autoloader carousel being subjected to catastrophic detonation as well? Are you suggesting/saying/claiming that in case of all the T-72Ms destroyed in the battlefield thus far it was only the detonation of the ammo reserve that caused the T-72’s turret to go ballistic for up to 15 metres before coming back to rest upside down atop the hull? If one is really interested in seeing with one’s own eyes how exactly the T-72s were massacred one ought to visit the Singapore Army’s SAF School of Armour at Sungai Udang where one of up to 3 destroyed Iraqi T-72s ‘imported by Singapore after OP Desert Storm are on display for one and all. That will really dispel all doubts about the so-called hit survivability of Soviet-era MBTs that many sympathisers of Soviet MBT design philosophies never tire arguing about. This has nothing to do with so-called Western propaganda that these armshair sympathisers always allege. Seeing is believing and let the eyes and sights do all the talking. It also must be borne in mind that the VERY FIRST publicised catastrophic destruction of a T-72M did not take place in the deserts of Iraq or Kuwait, but in northern Jaffna (due to an IED blast right below a T-72M), which brought to life the worst fears of the Indian Army concerning the T-72M’s much touted survivability features—fears which the Indian Army had expressed way back in 1980. As regards the T-90AM/MS MBT, the autoloader carousel design is a totally new one and carries an innovative shielding mechanism between its lower surface and the floor of the hull (this being done in response to a specific reqmt of the Indian Army). In addition, unitary FSAPDS rounds can now be carried within this autoloader. The weight of the T-90AM goes beyond 52 tonnes when mine ploughs are attached. It’s all there in a 32-page illustrated technical presentation of the T-90AM which was prepared as far back as November 2009 by Uralvagonzavod JSC for the Indian Army (an identical copy of which I had obtained last year from Rosoboronexport State Corp), and is similar in many respects to the document prepared earlier for the T-90S, from which I had extracted the combat effectiveness flowcharts and had uploaded them at:

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Shree: If indeed the Russian Test pilot Yury Vaschuk said this about the Super Su-30MKI, then he must have said it when he was sober, for Russians only tend to open up and tell the truth after emptying a few bottles of Vodka!!! What you must understand is that no one in Russia is intellectually or professionally qualified to talk about air combat operations involving aircraft equipped with AESA-based MMRs? Why? Simply because there’s no operational aircraft today inside Russia flying with AESA-MMRs (the MIRES AESA-MMR for the Super Su-30MKI and FGFA/PMF is still under development in the laboratory, while the MiG-35 equipped with Phazotron’s Zhuk-AE AESA-MMR has yet to enter service), while in countries like the US, Super Hornets are today flying with fourth-generation AESA-MMRs. And if you were to ask any USAF pilot whether he likes to go on offensive air campaigns flying in a F/A-22 Raptor or F/A-18F Super Hornet, he will immediately say that he prefers the Super Hornet. Why? Because in a single-seat F/A-22 there is only so much that a single pilot can do despite all the automated mission avionics. On a tandem-seat cockpit like that of the Super Hornet or Su-30MKI, there will be no such biological limitations and the worksharing will be such that one member of the aircrew will be able to both fly the aircraft and maintain his situational awareness regarding airborne threats, while at the same time the other aircrew will be able to detect, identify and engage distant ground targets (both moving and stationary) with pinpoint accuracy weapons like the RAFAEL-built Popeye missile or laser-guided bombs and at the same time also continue jamming hostile air-defence radars. This type of worksharing is called ‘interleaved operations’, involving activities in multiple dimensions in multiple levels of efficiency. The only prerequisite for achieving this you must have a two-man crew. And as we all know, this is not possible with either a Su-35, or F/A-22 Raptor, or T-50 PAK-FA. And that is also the reason why the majority of M-MRCAs and FGFA/PMFs to be acquired by India will be the tandem-seat variants of these aircraft.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To MrRA & SHREE: The Mirage 2000 upgrade would have made perfect sense had the contract been awarded to a joint HAL-Israel Aerospace Industries team bidding at much lower price-levels, and had the money saved been reallocated for re-engining the MiG-27M with the AL-31F turbofan . That is one part of the story. The other part of the story concerns the IAF’s reluctance to wholeheartedly embrace the concept of ‘effects-based operations’. Given the fact that the Super Su-30MKIs, upgraded Jaguar ISs, upgraded MiG-29UPGs, Tejas Mk1s, Tejas Mk2s and the to-be-acquired M-MRCAs will all possess higher fleet serviceability, availability and reliability, this gives rise to a serious question: is it really worthwhile maintaining 39.5 squadrons or 42 squadrons or 45 squadrons of combat aircraft? Afterall, the sanctioned strength of the IAF was devised at a time when there were no AEW & C aircraft and when combat aircraft availability/serviceability figures were much lower than what is achievable today and in the years to come.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To MrRA: It's like fighting a future war with yesterday's mindset. Like a nerd from some other forum who had recently said this: "So, the number is 1,647 T-90, 1,200 T-72 and ~750 odd Arjuns. That makes it ~3,600 MBTs. We need another ~1,000 units and here, I have a feeling that more T-90 are going to sneak in".
What's the use of having 4,000+ MBTs when in all the previous all-out wars fought in the subcontinent the biggest tank-versus-tank engagements were only at the isolated brigade-level and most of the decisive engagements--be it at Longewala or Chawinda or Asal Uttar or Khem Karan or Husseiniwala--involved only regimental-sized armoured thrusts? Wouldn't it be better instead to do a rightsizing of MBT fleet strength, for instance, and balance it with the deployment of say 40 armed aeroscout helicopters, up to 24 attack helicopters, and six MALE-UAVs (like the Heron) equipped with belly-mounted synthetic aperture radars for locating both static and moving ground targets in support of each armoured division of the Indian Army? Right now, the Army's ORBAT seems terribly lopsided and out of date--as if to fight a war of yesteryears.

Austin said...

To Prasun , please find my response inline

>>>> Firstly, it is not called free >>>>ammo, but the ammunition reserve. >>>>Secondly, are you suggesting/saying/claiming that catastrophic denotation >>>of the ammo reserves does not >>>> >>>>result in the ammo stored in the >>>>autoloader carousel being subjected >>>>to catastrophic detonation as well?

By free i mean ammo kept freely in racks inside the turret , but ok lets call it ammo reserve and lets be clear that such ammo reserve inside the turret exist in all Western MBT barring the Abrams , this is nothing unique to T model , so we talking of catastrophic denotation of ammo reserves post penetration , the chances are after penetration of turret in Western or Easten tank the crew for all practical purpose will be dead or badly wounded , now the spall/splinters hits and detonates one of the ammo in the reserve and it will cause explosion for sure , even a single detonation of ammo ( HEAT or HE-FRAG ) will kill the crew ( if at all they survive the splinters/spalls post penetration of turret ) and will blow up inside the turret causing the rest of ammo reserve to explode in sympathetic detonation , and such risk exist in T's and all Western tank ...How is that such catastophic detonation will only affect the T's and wont affect a western tank when both types carry ammo inside the turret ?( barring Abrams and now T-90MS )

Now the blowing of turret or catastrophic detonation is as much a theoretical exercise as the crew would be dead much before that and the tank is destroyed.

Austin said...

>>>>Are you suggesting/saying/claiming >>>>that in case of all the T-72Ms >>>>destroyed in the battlefield thus >>>>far it was only the detonation of >>>>the ammo reserve that caused the >>>>T-72’s turret to go ballistic for >>>>up to 15 metres before coming back >>>>to rest upside down atop the hull? >>>>If one is really interested in >>>>seeing with one’s own eyes how >>>>exactly the T-72s were massacred >>>>one ought to visit the Singapore >>>>Army’s SAF School of Armour at >>>>Sungai Udang where one of up to 3 >>>>destroyed Iraqi T-72s ‘imported by >>>>Singapore after OP Desert Storm are >>>>on display for one and all. That >>>>will really dispel all doubts about >>>>the so-called hit survivability of >>>>Soviet-era MBTs that many >>>>sympathisers of Soviet MBT >>>>design philosophies never tire >>>>arguing about.

The blow up of turret is commonly seen in T-72 becuase it lack a blow up/back panel which would release the pressure of ammo explosion and only Abrams have those blow up pannels beside the turret that will release the pressure of the explosion by blowing itself up and channeling the pressure through it.

If similar reserve ammo explosion occured in other western MBT ( barring the Abrams ) the result would be the same which is blowing up of the turret since there is no other way to channel the pressure out of the turret after ammo reserve explosion, some MBT like Merkava 4 has blow out panels for the bustle loader but not for the turret.

Having said that i have seen pictures of turret blown of Abrams from IED in recent Iraqi conflict , I have seen videos of Abrams turret being blow apart with just RPG-29 fired at it from side but in any case it does not speak bad about the tank and it still remains a well engineered among all western tank with greater emphasis on crew protection/survivibility but still they lost nearly 100 M1 tanks in recent Iraqi conflict , in reality there are many reason for such blowing of turret and armour like Angle of attack ,Speed of Projectile in case of APFSDS , Weak Spots on tanks ,Penetration capability of hostile HEAT/Sabot round.

Austin said...

>>>>>This has nothing to do with >>so-called Western propaganda that >>>these armshair sympathisers always >>>allege. Seeing is believing and let >>>the eyes and sights do all the >>>talking.

Well the West are quite PR savy , they know the ill effects of pictures or videos of tank kills hence most of the pictures of IED kills and RPG hits of Abrams can be attributed to some Jehadi video and not from Western source which is quite few and yes the Western magazine have used the T-72 video/pictures extensively for its benefit nothing wrong in that , its as much is a PR war.

>>>It also must be borne in mind that >>>the VERY FIRST publicised >>>catastrophic destruction of a T-72M >>>did not take place in the deserts of >>>Iraq or Kuwait, but in northern >>>Jaffna (due to an IED blast right >>>below a T-72M), which brought to >>>life the worst fears of the Indian >>>Army concerning the T-72M’s much >>>touted survivability features—fears >>>which >>>the Indian Army had >>>expressed way back in 1980.

Well I have seen video of M1A2 Abrams blowing up due to IED in Iraq , And T-72M certainly is lower down protection figures and crew safety compared to Abrams , Infact the T-72M (export model ) is atleast 2 generation behind the M1A2.

>>>As regards the T-90AM/MS MBT, the >>>autoloader carousel design is a >>>totally new one and carries an >>>innovative shielding mechanism >>>between its lower surface and the >>>floor of the hull (this being done >>>in response to a specific reqmt of >>>the Indian Army). In addition, >>>unitary FSAPDS rounds can now be >>>carried within this autoloader. The >>>weight of the T-90AM goes beyond 52 >>>tonnes when mine ploughs are >>>attached. It’s all there in a >>>32-page illustrated technical >>>presentation of the T-90AM which was >>>prepared as far back as November >>>2009 by Uralvagonzavod JSC for the >>>Indian Army (an identical copy of >>>which I had obtained last year from >>>Rosoboronexport State Corp), and is >>>similar in many respects to the >>>document prepared earlier for the >>>T-90S, from which I had extracted >>>the combat effectiveness flowcharts >>>and had uploaded them at: >>>http://>>>>>>/2009/08/t-90s-mbts-combat-effectiveness.html

Well the loader of T-72 is well shielded as well

"Note however, that opposite to a common belief the carousel is well protected from above. During loading, the round passes through the door that closes after the tray has retracted, and therefore in the case of turret penetration the incandescent splinters will land on the autoloader roof and not ignite the carousel."

If you recollect we had a discussion on T-90M and at that point of time you had mentioned to me that the T-90M upgrade was what you had mentioned since the AM model upgrade had taken much later then the IA decision to freeze its option for the T-90M model hence the IA T-90M model will not be similar to the T-90MS/MA model.

If thise UVZ chart is to be believed then T-90S is just slightly below Abram and Leclerec in combat potential , speaks well about the tank.

Austin said...

From UVZ via Gurkhan blog

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To AUSTIN: Very well-debated issue indeed. Many thanks. My personal belief is that the T-90AM/MS is the ultimate evolution in terms of what can be achieved out of a legacy design. And by the way, good going on that "other forum" about the quality-versus-quantity debate. The name of the game today is 'effects-based operations', i.e. accuracy of delivery without collateral damage through quantitatively minimal usage of ammunition, thereby minimising the quantity of inventory holdings and reducing the logistics tail, and ensuring concentration/massing of firepower (i.e. bridging the sensor-to-shooter gap) by employing information domination concepts/practices (which is what the BSS, ACCCS, BMS and F-INSAS are all about). On the ground, indeed manoeuvre warfare (involving armoured vehicles, self-propelled field artillery, army aviation--inclusive of helicopters and UAVs--and vertical envelopment capacities) has come a long way since the days when 4,000+ MBTs were required, a point which is often neglected by armchair specialists. I guess these folks are still stuck with the 'fire and manoeuvre approach' instead of the 'fire as you manoeuvre' norm.

F said...


Would you agree that of the many
Merkavas and M1A2s that were hit in Lebanon and Iraq, very few were actually destroyed, though most may have suffered serious damage - mainly due to having a superior baseline/passive armour protection level than Russian MBTS? Very few Isreali or American crews were actually killed, which would not have been the case if those tanks were T-90s, T-72 or T-80s.

It is interesting in how you mentioned that the T-90 is the ultimate evolution with what can be reached with the T-90/T-72 design. So the million dollar question is if a particular country had enough cash, should it go for a current generation Western MBT or for the still cheaper T-90AM which now has a lot of improvements or features that were missing from Russians tanks and is the best protected variant of the T-90/T-72 family?

Also, has it ever occured to you why relatively few or no countries apart from Russia has made investments in arming its troops with thermobaric shoulder launched weapons for urban use? A whole range of Russian made thermobaric shoulder launched weapons are available for export but have found no takers, despite the proved utility of such weapons in an urban enviroment, why do think this is so?

Given that the PT-91M is vulnerable to KE warheads and shoulder launched missiles due to a lack of an APS and thin armour around the rear of the turret and engine deck, as well as the legacy carousel loader, do you think the army's Armour Directorate has given any serious thought to upgrading its PT-91Ms in the near future? From what I've bben told, apart from a lack of a thermal for the commander, which would mean that the PT-91M only has a day time hunter killer capability, the commander also does not have an overide function, to stop the gunner from what he's doing and to rapidly engage another target. Will the Arjun and T-90AM have an overide function?

F said...


In your opinion was Singapore's purchase of Iron Dome mainly in response to Malaysia's 36 ASTROSs or is it mainly due to concerns that a regional country will intoduce ballistic missiles into service in the near future?

Atul said...

Prasun, todays announcement of mazgaon dock pipavav ltd. Looks like more navy orders in pipeline fr MDL. Gud. All majdoori and real wrk by pipavav, and credit by MDL. May b even pipvs is trying to get a strong experience log behind it. Main long term focus seems exports. Am happy, nehrus selfrelianc fr 60 ys has resulted in 70% imports. Maybe, with pvt sector focus on exports., v can b selfsuffient! ! of mazgaon dock pipavav ltd. Looks like more navy orders in pipeline fr MDL. Gud. All majdoori and real wrk by pipavav, and credit by MDL. May b even pipvs is trying to get a strong experience log behind it. Main long term focus seems exports. Am happy, nehrus selfrelianc fr 60 ys has resulted in 70% imports. Maybe, with pvt sector focus on exports., v can b selfsuffient! !

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun,
you mentioned US/UK paying less for Iraqi crude.

That i believe is not true as Iraqi govt. signed production sharing agreements with not just US but even Chinese/Russian companies.Infact the first contract was won by the Chinese.

If mayanmar was not an existential threat,how come Iran is one which never publicly promised to "wipe the US off the map?"

Perhaps it is oil and Gulf stats that US wishes to keep under a tight control that the US keeps propping up the Iranian bogeyman.

What abt IAF proposal for building
HS-748 Avro transport by the Private sector as reported by Broadsword?Is the aircraft good enough with modern cockpits?

Broadsword's charge of BEL getting the EW contract.What do you make of it?

Will it be foreigners who will supply the subcomponents?

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun,
What do u think of this
abt China cooperatiing with the US on central asia?

Has china sacrificed a lot for being in the good books of the US
And has US again in the process of acieving a victory? After all SCo is a powerful regional grouping.Will Russia agree to this?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To FARIS: Firstly, Western MBTs along with those developed by Israel and India are built around the concept of MBT survivability, whereas the Soviet-era MBTs like T-72s, T-80s and T-90s had embraced the hit avoidance concept. That’s why in the latter one doesn’t see features like blowout panels or turret-mounted bustles housing the ammo reserve. The only way the former can be destroyed is through IEDs that are detonated underneath the MBT while it is on the move. That’s what happened to one or two Merkava MBTs in Gaza and Southern Lebanon. As for the Abrams, 99% of them were disabled or destroyed by deliberate friendly fire and not by hostile action. And of these the majority of them were subsequently rebuilt and restored. The Russians have always known about the acute vulnerabilities of their MBT designs and even at present they themselves have acknowledged that the T-90S MBT has serious shortcomings (see:, as the ammo reserve compartment and autoloader carousel are in close proximity to one another and none of them are insulated against catastrophic detonation by various means. As for future orders of the T-90AM< yes, the Russians will use the cost advantage to their benefit but one also has to remember that the safety features incorporated into the much more expensive autoloader carousel were largely incorporated at the behest of Uralvagonzavod JSC’s biggest and most reliable customer, i.e. India. But if someone were to be given the choice of choosing between a brand-new T-90AM and refurbished Leopard 2A4, the latter will undoubtedly be the first and most logical choice.
Shoulder-launched thermobaric weapons have been exported in limited quantities to Jordan as well as to some Central American countries, but in most cases they have lost out to the Spanish Alcotan C-90 LAW (bought by both India and Malaysia). In India’s case, the anti-bunker C-90 emerged victorious in the firing trials against the Shmel in 1998 since the latter was totally ineffective when used at high altitudes in rarified atmospheric levels.
For the PR-91M MBT, the future envisaged upgrades would include a new commander’s sight from the SAVAN family that incorporates a thermal imager, plus an APS suite. The commander’s thermal imager was selected back in 2004 but was dropped due to the cost factor at that time.
As for Singapore’s purchase of the Iron Dome, it is not targetted against the Astros-2, the bulk of which are deployed in East Malaysia at present. Going by historical precedents, both Malaysia and Singapore have always faced existential threats from the bigger neighbor down south and its as yet unrealised dream of unifying the Malay Nusantara (do read RPK’s related obituary on Malaysia at: It is this neighbor that is now developing a family of MBRLs and cruise missiles in cooperation with China-based OEMs and to both Malaysia and Singapore this is a worrisome development.

To ATUL: The MDL-Pipavav JV is indeed very good news as it will enable MDL to subcontract the construction of modular blocks for principal surface combatants, thereby severely cutting down the time taken for warship construction. But the first priority should not be on exports (as this still is a highly unrealistic target) but on additional warship-building capacity creation, since both the Indian Navy and Coast Guard are woefully short of new vessels. For instance, the order for the three Project 17 FFGs of the Shivalik-class ought to be increased to eight vessels at least in order to make the programme a financial success. Without economies of scale being achieved, there’s been a tremendous NOTIONAL loss to the exchequer to date, which the CAG has not yet calculated or taken into account.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@10.57PM: The production-sharing agreements inked between Iraq and Chinese, Russian companies relate to the exploration and development of new oilfields/blocks, whereas the arrangements between Iraq and the US/UK relate to oil taken out of existing oilfields in northern and southern Iraq. Iran is viewed as an existential threat by all the Sunni-ruled GCC member-states. Just look at what recently transpired in Bahrain. The IAF doesn’t want India’s private sector to build HS-748 Avros, but to build their new-generation replacements. As for BEL being awarded the contract for producing the ‘Samyukta’ EW system and the MoD’s discredited defence of this decision, all that one can say is that the ‘licence raj’ is very much entrenched within the MoD, no matter what the Indian PM keeps on saying to the contrary. This ‘licence raj’ regime within MoD will prove to be extremely disastrous in the long run. And if this persists, then I for one will by all means encourage Indian private-sector companies to develop similar systems in-house and export them to China and Pakistan, since these companies have already for all intents and purposes been branded as ‘untrustworthy’. Foreigners supplying the components for BEL are companies located in South Africa and Germany, the very same companies that have supplied similar components for the IAF’s ‘Diyva Dhrishti’ passive surveillance/radar fingerprinting system.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@10.57PM: One can read all about the 'Samyukta' EW system at:

saurav jha said...

Hi Prasun

Is it true that the Kaveri Project is unofficially abandoned and only option left is partnership with snechma..? Please dig this issue up..


Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Saurav Jha: The Kaveri as it now exists will NOT go on board any manned combat aircraft. It could be used for powering a UAV, no problems about that. It could also be produced in a marine industrial gas turbine variant.
The JV with SNECMA Moteurs calls for developing from scratch a new variant of the Kaveri.

Austin said...

Prasun Thanks , The reason why the IA is slow at rationalising its tank fleet is perhaps because of organisational inertia but eventually they would do that as cost of new weapon system would force them to rethink on their strategy , just a matter of time.

On the T-90MS , well yes its a prototype tank and yes Gen Makarov in your rian link did say it has flaws and that it would be rectified , he even praised the tank saying it was superior to western system on many characteristics. The only flawless tank is the one that is on the drawing board because you know not enough to criticise it.

On Russian tank being developed for hit avoidance concept that is something unheard of unless you mean russian tanks have low silhouette making it difficult to hit them compared to western ones at similar ranges.

Every tank designer worth its salt would know that his tank would take hits and depending on the most vulnerable area of hit they would beef it with armour , stastics has shown in tank to tank combat the frontal arc of the turret will take most of the hits hence all tanks inrespective if Eastern or Western design have similar rated frontal armour , the side armour of Western tank are much thicker compared to Russian ones , since Western tank designer did not work with weight restriction like Russian designer did ( restricted to max 55 T because of logistics reason ) they could beef up the turret ,Russian designer went for ERA approach which reduced weight and offered protection comparable to western system using only composite armour. Since the Russian had 3 man crew compared to 4 man crew of Western tank ,the western tank was larger and consequently heavier , the russian tank were comparatively smaller but both had the same volume to armour ratio

Just two different approaches to arrive at the same solution.

So this whole idea of hit avoidance is simply not true , its much like saying US M60 tank commander would try to avoid hits when faced against a T-80 and T-90 because of unequal advantage , in much the same way a T-72 tank commander would not want to see him self in equal combat with M1A1 or M1A2 due to unequal advantage.

Regarding blow up panel like i have mentioned before the flaw exist on all Western tank barring Abrams and if you see the most common fight between Western tanks and Eastern in past 2 decades has taken between T-72 and Abrams not a fair fight even my a mile but war is always unfair to some one.
BTW even Arjun does not have a blow up panel contrary to popular myth that it has one.

Regarding Merkava well it took its own toll in recent fight many Merks mk2/mk3 were destroyed by Kornet,RPG-29 etc in the hands of hizbollah[tt_news]=876

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To AUSTIN: The reality on Soviet/Russian MBTs being developed around the philosophy of hit avoidance was never a figment of my personal imagination, but was conveyed in such words by none other than Soviet MBT designers to the Indian Army evaluation team back in 1980s. Ask any Indian Army personnel type-certified on T-72s and T-90s and they will corroborate it. Folks like Vassily Fafanov et all may argue about this endlessly, but it still doesn’t change the reality about what was then the official explanation from the Soviets in response to serious queries emanating from a potential export customer,.i.e. India, during the T-72’s evaluation process. And I had also explained in my earlier thread what exactly was the operational art concerning the massed employment of MBTs of Soviet MBTs. I as a customer would give a damn about weight restrictions applicable to another country and would never try to even justify the retention of such restrictions if it interferes with MBT survivability aspects. It would be totally illogical to do so, maybe except for the Soviets. As for Soviet MBTs having the same volume-to-armour ratio with their Western counterparts, try telling that to export customers like the Indian Army, which were never even allowed to be exposed to ERA-equipped T-72s throughout the 1980s and early 1990s. In addition, do try comparing the volume-to-armour ratio of IDF-Army M-60A3s equipped with CMS-developed ERA tiles versus the Syrian T-72Ms as they clashed in the Bekaa Valley in mid-1982 and the discrepancy will increase even further. Furthermore, as I had mentioned in my previous thread, the frontal armour of a standard Indian T-72M was routinely penetrated by 105mm FSAPDS rounds fired by an Indian upgunned T-55. Regarding blow-up panels and their existence on either the Arjun Mk1 or Arjun Mk2, all I can say is seeing is believing, if not at an operational base, then at least during a DEFEXPO expo and one will find convincing answers. Regarding fair versus unfair fights, way back in 1992 when I was attending a firing demonstration in Sweden of the BOFORS BILL ATGW, in front of the entire assembled audience (which was allowed to do a hands-on inspection of the wreckage after the firing demo), a BILL not only went pass the ERA tiles mounted on a ex-Warsaw Pact T-80UD MBT, but also penetrated the frontal armour of the MBT. The issue of a fair fight or unfair fight simply does not arise. OEMs making MBTs must simply build better MBTs instead of providing excuses like the MBTs were employed in a way that they were not meant to—that’s the only logical and obvious conclusion. Lastly, Merkava MBTs destroyed? And that too beyond usage or retrieval? Where’s the proof? Damaged or disabled maybe, but destroyed beyond retrieval by RPGs and Metis-M and Kornet-E ATGMs? Where’s the proof? None of the links provided by you provide any kind of conclusive evidence. Bottomline: Videos uploaded on YouTube never provide the kind of evidence required for definitive conclusions. Whereas first-hand in-depth analysis of an incident,plus interacting with the operators and OEMs of weapons do produce conclusive results.

Austin said...

@Prasun , You are the only person I have come across that has used the term of hit avoidance for Russian/Soviet tanks , I have heard many critiques of Soviet tank design philosophy say many things about Soviet design but nothing called Hit Avoidance. Coz if its not designed to take hit and survive with varying degree it is not a tank then.
I can give you credit for coining that term though ;)

Since this is purely based on your conversation with IA official i will let it pass , Since I am not privy to this conversation and I am certainly disinclined to believe it , so lets agree to disagree here.

You do not have to worry about damn requirements of weight if it meets your needs , the Merkavas would weigh in 60 plus tons but who would care as long as it meets Israel needs.

The Soviet knew the challenge associated with weight and went about a different approach to solve a problem , Infact they are the first to come with a integral modular armour approach ( base armour + ERA ) as base design and did not rely only on composite armour which were heavy but did their job. Now you would find the western designers opting for add on Armour in their design , the problem is they already have a heavy armour which are getting penetrated in weak areas to over come it they are resorting to add on armour which is making it heavier.

My only complain about Soviet Design is they did not try to isolate the crew from ammo reserves in turret and in successive design they followed the same approach which was really bad as it has a good chance of catastrophic explosion post penetration , ofcourse it also means if crew survives post penetration of turret where chances are slim they could die due to ammo explosion.

Obviously as experienced tank designer and war experience they knew this and they tried to rectify the problem with the Black Eagle Design and T-95 both of which isolated the crew from ammo with their own solution but that never saw the light of the day , now with T-90MS they have tried to rectify this.

Obviously as I has said before this problem exist in most western tank but since most of these have not seen war or have seen a one sided armour war the problem is not well exposed or known ( barring Abrams )

On the penetration of T-72 by upguned T55 tank , a lot of factor will come into play there like the range to the target , speed of the APFSDS , angle to turret ....... it is not hard to believe that it was getting penetrated if you have a favourable factor that would assist penetration. The problem was even experienced when US fired rounds at captured T-72 tanks from M1A1 got frequently penetrated and when they applied the K5 and fired at the same target it would not penetrate and the US went ahead and developed the M829A2 APFSDS round to deal with K5 threats.

Regarding BILL penetrating frontal armour of T-80UD well Shit Happens , there is a famous incident of Challenger 2 getting penetrated on the frontal armour by RPG-29 and injuring the crew ..... even frontal armour has weak spots

As far as youtube video goes unfortunately thats the best you will get in open source medium and that too sadly from a Jehadi propaganda video because the protagonist will not agree to say things that show their tanks in bad light.

On Merkava incident its famously documented , I had links that gave the figure on Merkava loss to anti-tank weapons specially to Kornet , the Israel even went to the Russians and showed them captured Kornet from Hizbollah that later led to tighter restriction on the sale of this weapon.

If i get the Merkava loss link I will post it.

Anonymous said...

Austin Power-International man of mystery.Didn't you know taking on Prasun is like playing with the ISI and ending up like Shahzad? :) well not literally of course!Leave critiques to Dr Sanjay Badri Maharaj (Maharaj ki jay ho).

Austin said...

@Anonymous : I am not here to win or loose but to have meaningful and informed debate on the subject.

@Prasun: You can find the official statement on Merkava loss during Lebanon campaign

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To AUSTIN: The term 'hit avoidance' wasn't coined/invented by me (Lolz!), but had been extensively written about since the early 1980s in magazines like MILITARY TECHNOLOGY and ARMADA INTERNATIONAL after the non-Russian press got some credible inkling about what it was all about after witnessing the MBT versus MBT battles in Khorramshahr (near Avadan) in 1981 and 1985
between the Iranian Chieftains and Iraqi T-62s, T-72s and Chinese Type 69IIs. In the military press circles, the debate got more critical and scathing once data began arriving on how the T-72s fared against Israeli Merkava and M-60A3s--both of the latter at that time being armed with 105mm rifled-bore cannons.
I totally agree with you about the Russians drawing the correct lessions from past wars and applying them in models like the Black Eagle and now the T-90AM/MS. But serious note also ought to taken of the fact that export customers of Soviet-era MBTs like India, Poland, Czechoslovakia etc were never supplied with the then prevailing state-of-the-art MBTs by Moscow.

To Anon@3.27PM: Are yaar, Austinji ne kaha na: it is not about winning
or losing, but having meaningful and informed debate on the subject.

Anonymous said...

"The defence ministry has cleared the offloading of 10% equity of Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL), the country's only military aircraft manufacturer, making it the third defence PSU after BEL and BEML to be headed for disinvestment."
--------------------------------- Prasunji, it is happening exactly as you had predicted!

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun!
Is it true that India has yet to reach a level before implementations of RMA (and changes accordingly) actually starts making sense? This is what someone from BR is asking? Your comments?

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@6.22PM: Well, there’s two types of commentators concerning RMA: one is the type you’ve quoted who can only afford to be wet-dreaming about this issue, and the other who has a comprehensive understanding of this subject and who takes the trouble to attend various seminars held to discuss and deliberate upon such issues, such as those organised by the Centre for Land Warfare Studies (CLAWS). For those who may not know, the Indian Army’s C4I, ISTR and spectrum allocation networks/bandwidth have been in place since 2007 for accommodating a full-fledged Combat Aviation Brigade, which was to be raised during the 11th Defence Plan (2007-2011) as per original Army HQ projections. Adequate infrastructural and operational-level preparations have already been made to utilise such a Brigade in support of Corps-level or Division-level operations. However, the principal problem has been the MoD, which has not even approved even till this day the 11th Defence Plan. Which means for the past five years, tens of thousands of crores have been allocated for defence spending on a year-by-year basis, without any medium-term or long-term articulation of how this money should be spent. It is the MoD, therefore, that has delayed sanction for raising the projected Combat Aviation Brigade. It has nothing to do with the lack of or deficiency of RMA.

Austin said...

@ Prasun: Although I have my reservation on the concept of "Hit Avoidance" used against T series and did not come across this term in Military Technology or Armada that I used to read for many years now but it would still be interesting to get hold of such article , If you have any article on this can you please post it.

Anonymous said...

This is Ad. given by pak in US newspapers

this should be actual ad which should be published by US newspapers.

Anonymous said...

Prasun da, in a recent press article, HAL mentioned that they are working on breakaway fuselage. I tried to search for this tech term but was unable to find it. What is a breakaway fuselage, does it mean that when the fuselage is hit by missile to save the crew fuselage breaks away safely?.
Apologies on ignorance, i am not a technically literate person, but curious to know what it is.
thanks in advance.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Austin, kindly check out the June 1991 issue of MILITARY TECHNOLOGY. Am still trying to digest the heated and acrimonous intellectual firefights witnessed this morning between the Army and IAF in the Defence Minister's presence at the CLAWS-sponsored seminar on Army Aviation in Delhi.

Mr. Ra said...

Can some advanced versions of RMA, be practically applied against the guerrilla war, terrorism and silent wars.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Mr.RA: My dear ol'chap, that is exacrly what's been going on since 2002 when the CIA's Predator & later Reaper UCAVs began taking out the terrorists in the AF-PAK area of operations.

Mr. Ra said...

Thanx! But I was asking about India.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

The capabilities are there, but the political will to unleash them isn't.

Mr. Ra said...


Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Mr.RA: Read this:

Mr. Ra said...

Quite interesting, useful and exhaustive study. I may be taking some more time to go properly through it.

Austin said...

Updates on T-90MS from Gur Khan Blog

Modernised Battle Tank T-90MS

T-90MS Protection

T-90MS FCS Kalina