[Inde] Les programmes de blindés

[Serge]

Pour mieux suivre l'actualité indienne terrestre, un fil dédié aux blindés.

Et pour commencer, un problème de clim':

Government auditor slams Indian Army for T-90S air-conditioning failures

Rahul Bedi, New Delhi - IHS Jane's Defence Weekly

24 February 2014

India's Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) has censured the Indian Army for spending INR90.83 billion (USD1.47 billion) since 2001 on 657 Russian T90S main battle tanks (MBTs) that do not have air conditioning.

In a report tabled in parliament on 18 February, the CAG also reproached the Ministry of Defence (MoD) for agreeing to license-build another 1000 T90Ss at the Heavy Vehicles Factory (HVF) in southern India under a separate INR3 billion contract, also without air conditioning.

The CAG revealed that other than crew discomfort, the absence of air conditioning affected the "performance of the MBT's fire control system, thermal imaging (TI) sights and missile firing mechanisms due to their prolonged exposure to heat and dust conditions".

A majority of the about 800 T90S MBTs inducted into service are deployed in the Rajasthan desert region where daytime summer temperatures exceed 55 degrees Celsius, rising to around 70 degrees Celsius inside the MBTs, armoured corps officers said.

According to the CAG, the MoD initiated a programme between the original equipment manufacturer and the HVF to co-develop an air-conditioning plant three years after the first batch of 310 T90S MBTs were imported in 2001.

The MoD considered this essential in order to "derive the optimum level of performance of all systems in the MBT", the CAG declared. However, trials of the new cooling plant, which were conducted in India in August 2006, failed and the project was abandoned.

The purchase of 347 additional T90S in 2007 led to renewed efforts by the army in 2010 to try and air condition the MBTs with help from indigenous vendors, but these also failed.

"As of October 2013, further action on the procurement of ACs [air conditioners] for all the 1,657 T90S tanks was still awaited and procurements were planned to be carried out under the Annual Acquisition Plan 2012-14," the CAG report concluded.

Meanwhile, armoured corps officers told IHS Jane's that from 2004-05 onwards the fire control systems of several T90S MBTs were rendered inoperable after their Thales Catherine thermal imaging (TI) cameras stopped working due to Rajasthan's excessive heat.

Recurring problems with the TI systems led to the establishment in early 2008 of Thales India, a maintenance facility on Delhi's outskirts, to keep the equipment serviceable.

"These breakdowns could have been avoided had the MBTs been air conditioned" said former armoured corps officer, Lieutenant General V K Kapoor (rtd), who added that the army "needs to fit the T90S with cooling plants to realise their full operational potential."

[Serge]

Tata Leads Development of Indian Infantry Combat Vehicle

Feb. 24, 2014 - 12:39PM | By VIVEK RAGHUVANSHI

NEW DELHI — India’s Tata Motors, along with Lockheed Martin and General Dynamics, have developed an infantry combat vehicle that could compete for India’s Future Infantry Combat Vehicle (FICV) if the program is relaunched.

A Tata Motors executive said the Wheeled Armoured Platform (WHAP), based on a vehicle developed by state-owned Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), fits Army requirements.

Under the FICV program, which has been on the shelf for more than three years, 2,600 combat vehicles would replace about 1,400 Russian BMP vehicles at a cost of more than $10 billion. The project would be in the Make India category, meaning only domestic companies can serve as prime contractor.

While FICV has been on hold, the Army still wants to buy some kind of combat vehicle.

For WHAP, Lockheed and GD serve as technology partners. DRDO developed the basic frame of the vehicle, officials said, while Tata built the transmission, gear box and integrated other systems.

Under FICV, the plan was for the shortlisted company or consortium to develop its own prototype while the government funded about 80 percent of the cost. Thereafter, production would be done in India by the winner.

India last year rejected a Russian proposal to provide its advanced BMP-3 infantry combat vehicle along with technology transfer. Russia’s offer was conditional on India putting aside the indigenous FICV project to replace the BMP-1 and BMP-2 vehicles.

The WHAP prototype is integrated with a Raytheon-Lockheed Javelin anti-tank guided missile system, fitted with a 12.7mm machine gun made by General Dynamics and is also mounted with a Norwegian-built Kongsberg medium-caliber remote turret.

The US has already offered technology transfer on the Javelin and the proposal is still under consideration by the Defence Ministry, according to an MoD source.

The Tata Motors vehicle weighs 22.5 tons and is powered by a 600 horsepower engine. Both wheeled and tracked forms of the amphibious vehicle are being developed.

An Army official said the WHAP is close to the FICV’s specifications of weighing 20 tons and having a 25:1 ratio of horsepower per ton. WHAP also is amphibious, as required under FICV.

The FICV project was approved in 2009, and since then, India’s Mahindra Defence Systems has tied up with BAE and Larsen & Toubro is working on overseas partnerships. Tata Motors had initially joined Rheinmetall but had to abandon the partnership after the company was blacklisted on charges of alleged corruption. State-owned Ordnance Factories Board is also in the race.

[Serge]

L'Arjun, c'est pas ça.

Army's fleet of Arjun tanks face technical issues; major proportion of 124 tanks in service not operational

By Manu Pubby, ET Bureau | 30 Apr, 2015, 04.50AM IST

NEW DELHI: The Army is facing major technical issues with its 'indigenous' Arjun tanks, as a significant proportion of its fleet has become inoperable in recent months and are non-serviceable due to continued maintenance problems.

The Army, which reluctantly inducted 124 tanks from 2009, after the UPA government insisted that a token number have to be ordered to keep the tank development programme viable, has of late been having quality problems with the fleet.

The Army is surprised that quality issues have started arising even though the entire fleet came into service as recently as 2013 when deliveries ended. Given that the tanks are highly dependent on foreign equipment — 60% of the tank is imported — the failure to get maintenance technology means that the systems have to be sent abroad for even minor repairs.

[prof.566]

L'Arjun est une vraie cata, reconnue par les indiens d'ailleurs. Qui pour une fois ne peuvent pas trop rejeter la faute sur un fournisseur étranger...

[Cadia]

L'Arjun est une vraie cata, reconnue par les indiens d'ailleurs. Qui pour une fois ne peuvent pas trop rejeter la faute sur un fournisseur étranger...

 

Si, mais à 60% uniquement >:D . En gros c'est la version terrestre du grippen.

[Serge]

India's Tank Plan Clouds Future of Arjun

By Vivek Raghuvanshi 1:41 p.m. EDT June 27, 2015

(Photo: SAM PANTHAKY/AFP)

NEW DELHI — The Indian Army's plan to develop and build a medium-weight main battle tank to replace more than 2,500 Russian T-72s has raised questions about the future of the homemade Arjun tank and likely would kill a decade-old proposal by the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) to build a tank, according to analysts and officials.

The Indian Army this month floated a global request for information to seek partners to design the new tank under a program called Future Ready Combat Vehicle (FRCV). As a medium-weight platform it would weigh 40-plus tons, compared with the Arjun, which weighs 60 tons.

"The proposed FRCV is in the medium category and is more likely to be around the T-90 platform than the Arjun Mark-II platform, which is getting close to the medium-heavy/heavy category," said Anil Chait, retired Indian Army lieutenant general. "Designing and developing the product around proposed qualitative requirements afresh would suggest that we may be looking toward the end of the Arjun saga," he said.

However, Rahul Bhonsle, a retired Army brigadier general and defense analyst, said the Arjun will progress from the current Mark-1 level to Mark-3.

"The lead time for the FRCV to be manufactured, if all goes well, is likely to be approximately 15 years or so. This provides adequate scope for the Arjun series to be progressed to at least Mark-3. Moreover, there is a need in the Indian Army for an Arjun class of tank."

While no Ministry of Defence official would comment on the fate of the decade-old Futuristic Main Battle Tank (FMBT) project to be developed by DRDO, an Army official said FRCV has "surely killed" the FMBT.

The FMBT, intended to be in the 50-plus ton category, was also meant to replace the T-72s.

"The FRCV seems to be a completely new project which possibly junks the FMBT, which was being worked upon by the DRDO or may be a lead to the developing agency to add on to the existing work that has already been done on the same," Bhonsle said.

"I surely see Americans, Russians, French, Germans, Koreans and British participating along with Indian companies in stand-alone or joint venture mode. We could see leading companies from there which are involved with tank design, participating in it," Chait said.

Unlike the earlier tank effort, the FRCV does not restrict production to the DRDO. Domestic defense companies in tie-ups with overseas defense companies can serve as the production agencies.

"As this is an open competition, private agencies could also be roped in to develop the tank. The best option would be for DRDO designing and developing the same with a foreign partner as it is best placed technically to do so. For an Indian private company in collaboration with a foreign partner it would be a Greenfield venture," where the foreign company would construct new facilities for the project, Bhonsle said.

The Army plans to begin induction of the basic FRCV by 2025-27, which would be the platform on which numerous variants would be developed to serve different functions. These variants will include a tracked light tank, a wheeled version, a bridge layer tank, a trawl tank and mine plows, armored recovery vehicle, self-propelled gun, anti-aircraft tank, artillery observation vehicle, engineer reconnaissance vehicle, and armored ambulance.

According to the request for information, FRCV will be executed in three stages: design, prototype developmental and production.

The request says the design agency and developing agency can be separate entities. The best design will be chosen and given to the nominated development agency for prototype production. The selected prototype will be given to the production agency or agencies for bulk production.

Shankar Roy Chowdhury, retired Army general and former service chief, said the paramount requirement for the tank is survivability.

"Russian designers sought to achieve this [survivability] by smaller size [three-man crew and lighter armor], lower profile and speed. The West preferred larger turrets, hence thicker armor, heavier tanks. The test for both designs has been the Arab-Israeli wars and the gulf war. The Russian designs did not do too well. Blame that on the crews if you like," Roy Chowdhury said.

The most important requirement, however, is that the future FRCV must be indigenously designed, Roy Chowdhury said.

Email: vraghuvanshi@defensenews.com

Pour répondre à cet appel d'offre, je propose à Kant de monter la tourelle T21 sur un châssis bas dérivé du SPz-Puma avec moteur arrière.

[Drakene]

J'ai également pensé à la T21. Et effectivement ça pourrait être un bon test pour la toute nouvelle coopération franco allemande sur le sujet.

[Serge]

Pour respecter le devis de masse, les arguments que je vois sont :

- La tourelle T21 dans les cartons de Nexter pèse dans les 15t.

- Le SPz-Puma fait 43t en ordre de combat avec une réserve de puissance pour l'alourdir.

- Si on retire sa tourelle, on gagne 2,5t.

- En rejetant le moteur à l'arrière, on peut obtenir un châssis bas ce qui fait gagner un volume important de blindage donc de masse. 10t ?

- Les contraintes de fonctionnement du GMP du SPz-Puma sont celles en position avant, soit le cas le pire pour obtenir un bon refroidissement. Rappelons en effet qu'il ne peut y avoir de grandes ouvertures. Si on rejète à l'arrière le même GMP, alors les techniciens ont des solutions de refroidissement avec peu d'ouverture ci n'aurait jamais été développé sinon. Aussi, pour des conditions climatiques désertiques et d'altitude propre à l'Inde, on peut augmenter les ouvertures tout en obtenant une solution plus enveloppante que d'autres chars.

Le client peut décider d'alléger en blindage l'arrière car le moteur peut être moins à protéger.

Il reste d'autres arguments comme la filtration NRBC qui peut être plus compacte car on passe de 9 hommes à 3.

Dernier atout de cette proposition, elle est totalement modulable. Les indiens pourraient rajouter ce qu'ils veulent, c'est prévu. Le blindage est ainsi totalement modulable et pourrait être local.

Ma seul inquiétude est sur l'étroitesse du compartiment du SPz-Puma. Peut-on encastrer un puit de tourelle de Leclerc ? Il faut être prudent, si le XL et le SPz-Puma ont la même largeur, c'est quand ce dernier a son surblindage. Sans, il fait seulement 3,1m de large.

Modifié le 29 juin 2015 par Serge

[Serge]

Autre question : les indiens ont-ils intérêt à introduire un char avec un canon de 120mm OTAN ?

Il leur faudrait constituer un stock.

[Sovngard]

Ils doivent déjà jouer avec des munitions de 120 mm (Arjun) et de 125 mm (T-72/90), on va pas compliquer les choses en introduisant du 120 mm OTAN.

[Shorr kan]

 

 

La question devrait être de savoir si le gain en performance de nouvelles munitions au format OTAN  justifierait la constitution d’un nouveau stock.

 

Sinon pour l’Arjun, on lui reprochait quoi ? Sur le net ils parlent de nombreuses casseroles et j’en ai trouvé quelque unes ; notamment le temps de développement, le changement du cahier des charges à mi-chemin (un classique...), le manque de précision du canon, et un moteur qui chauffe un peu trop ; mais encore ? Quelqu’un aurait une liste exhaustive ?

[Sovngard]

Ils sont encore en plein dans les années 80 avec leurs munitions flèche.

 

 

Modifié le 29 juin 2015 par Sovngard

[clem200]

C'est à dire ? On fait quelque chose de mieux que les flèches ?

[Thyd]

Sans doute que les caractéristiques de leurs flèches sont celles des flèches occidentales de ces années.

[g4lly]

C'est à dire ? On fait quelque chose de mieux que les flèches ?

 

Aujourd'hui les fleche sont en plusieurs partie, font 1m de long, et on un sabot ultra léger ... elle pese 10kg etc.

[Serge]

Les barreaux sont monoblocs, sans quoi ils ne pourraient percer.

[Sovngard]

Les barreaux sont monoblocs, sans quoi ils ne pourraient percer.

 

 

Les barreaux monoblocs sont apparus dès la fin des années 70, comme ici, ci-dessous, le M111 Hetz (flèche) israélien, entré en dotation en 1978 et ayant donné à l'époque des sueurs froides aux glacis des T-72A et T-80B.

 

Pour en revenir à l'armement de l'Arjun, son seul modèle d'obus-flèche actuellement en dotation, le FSAPDS/T 1A, à un ratio d'allongement d'à peine 17/1 alors que les dernières flèches américaines de 105 et de 120 mm affichent des ratios de 30/1.

 

Sa capacité de perforation des cibles OTAN simple, double et triple char lourd est revendiquée à 5000 m alors que l'OFL 105 G2 français (qualifié en 1993) faisait tout aussi bien mais à 7400 m.

 

Concernant son canon, c'est un tube rayé (ce qui implique une v0 inférieure à un canon lisse pour un projectile et une charge propulsive d'un poids donné) avec une pression tolérable en chambre inférieure à celle du canon Rh-120  du Léopard 2 pour une longueur identique (44 calibres).

 

Outre la durée interminable de son développement ainsi que ses maladies de jeunesse, il y a des choix dans la conception du Arjun qui me laissent perplexes.

Modifié le 30 juin 2015 par Sovngard

[Serge]

Is India's Main Battle Tank Finally Doomed?

The Indian Army may be finally giving up on the indigenously developed Arjun main battle tank.

By Franz-Stefan Gady

June 18, 2015

Last week, the Indian Army released a global request for information (RFI) inviting responses by 31 July to develop a multi-purpose Future Ready Combat Vehicle (FRCV) in order to replace older license-built Soviet-era main-battle tanks (MBTs).

“The Indian Army is planning to design and develop a new generation, state-of-the-art combat vehicle platform for populating its armored fighting vehicle fleet in the coming decade. This vehicle, which will be called the future ready combat vehicle (FRCV), will form the base platform for the main battle tank which is planned to replace the existing T-72 tanks in the Armored Corps,” the RFI reads.

The Indian military envisions the FRCV system as a platform for as many as 11 different tracked vehicles, including light tracked, wheeled, bridge layer and trawl tanks, self-propelled howitzers (SPH), air defense guns, artillery observation post and engineering reconnaissance vehicles, and armored ambulances.

Additionally, the RFI notes that the FRCV “should be in the ‘Medium Tank’ category” and should “match contemporary MBTs in engagement ranges, all weather day/night fighting capability, depth of penetration and variety of ammunition.” The Indian Army wants the new FRCV ready for induction by 2025-27 – a deadline that almost certainly will have to be extended given India’s defense procurement track record.

Consequently, in the meantime, India will do well to continue upgrade its 1900 strong T-72 MBT force. As I noted in a previous article (“Breakdown: What’s Happening With India’s Tank Force?”), New Delhi has so far failed to successfully mass-produce an indigenously developed modern main battle tank.

The recent RFI could also very well ring the final death-knell for India’s indigenously developed third generation Arjun MK-I main battle tank – a poorly designed vehicle (e.g., too much heavy armor versus too little horsepower) that encountered repeated delays due to a flawed procurement and testing process. Almost eighty percent of the 124-strong Arjun MK-I tank force is currently grounded due to more than 90 technical issues.

India has been working on an improved version of the Arjun, the MK-II, which has done very well in comparative trials with license-built Russian tanks such as the T-90M. It displays more than 93 improvements over the older version and contains 60 percent locally manufactured components. However, a decision to indigenously develop a new anti-tank missile to be fitted onto the MK-II will, in all likelihood, delay the induction of the upgraded platform.

As I noted in my previous article:

Due to the repeated delays, India decided to acquire T-90s main battle tanks from Russia in the early 2000s. While the first 310 were directly imported from Russia, India is currently locally producing a customized and improved version of the T-90, the T-90 M Bhishma. A total of 500 T-90 and T-90 M tanks are currently in service in the Indian Army. India plans to field 21 tank regiments of T-90s by 2020 through license-production, with 62 tanks per unit and more than 1,300 armored fighting vehicles total, although that number could go up.

http://thediplomat.com/2015/06/is-indias-main-battle-tank-finally-doomed/

[Serge]

Quand on réalise un char en Inde, il y a des options très "locales"

[Zarth Arn]

Quand on réalise un char en Inde, il y a des options très "locales"

ils doivent s'imaginer être comme sur un éléphant dans l'antiquité ..... on leur a dit qu'on pouvait aussi entrer dedans ?

 

le truc devant c'est un canon pas une trompe !!!!!

Modifié le 12 juillet 2015 par Zarth Arn

[Serge]

Un petit article de décembre 2014 sur la faible capacité de production de char en Inde malgré les transferts de technologie :

T-90 tank induction short by 40%

Posted at: Dec 22 2014 2:04AM

The MoD has decided to import 124 T-90s, and assemble 272 from kits and licence-build 300 T-90 tanks in India. A file photo

Vijay Mohan

Chandigarh, December 21

There is a shortfall of over 40 per cent in the indigenous production and issue of T-90 battle main tanks that were to form the cutting edge of the Indian strike formations.

Against a target of 300 tanks by 2010, only 167 tanks were handed over to the Army by 2013 by the Ordnance Factories.

The delay in indigenous production resulted in fresh imports of T-90 tanks at a cost of Rs 5,000 crore. The delays in the indigenous production come in the backdrop of the Army reporting a 38 per cent shortage of tanks against its authorised holding of 3,717 machines in 2000.

To overcome the shortage, the MoD decided to import 124 T-90s, assemble another 272 T-90s from kits and licence-build 300 T-90 tanks in India along with 124 Arjun tanks. The Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG), in its latest report tabled in Parliament, has observed that the Defence Ministry planned to achieve self-reliance in manufacture of tanks by a phased induction of Arjun during 1985-2000. This schedule shifted to 2002-09.

The production of indigenous T-90 tanks based on transfer of technology (ToT) from Russia was slated to be accomplished during 2006-10. However, production of the indigenous tanks did not meet the schedule planned for timely fulfilment of the Army’s needs. In numbers, the ordnance factories have met the indent for Arjun — 119 out of 124 were delivered after holdups arising out of frequent changes in design, delay in establishment of production infrastructure and problems of sourcing components.

The ToT for indigenous production of T-90 tank was marred by delays in translation of design documents, which took six years, and the Russian firm’s failure to share designs on critical assemblies such as the gun assembly. The problem was compounded by delays in decisions on alternative solutions on these designs.

CAG pointed out that a case in point is the Directorate General of Quality Assurance thwarting the proposal by the ordnance factories for using “modified chemistry” proposed for the barrel for T-90 tank. This was despite the fact that the factories had experience with “modified chemistry” for the barrel of T-72 tanks.

Modifié le 12 juillet 2015 par Serge

[Sovngard]

Le Future Main Battle Tank (FMBT) indien, ce projet a été présenté en 2001 pour succéder initialement aux T-72M1 Ajeya et éventuellement à l'Arjun vers l'horizon 2025-2030, ce n'est pas la première fois que ce programme est enterré puis déterré. Aux dernières nouvelles, le nouveau programme FRCV (nouvelle famille de blindés chenillés d'une quarantaine de tonne dont un char) lui ferait de l'ombre.
 
 

[Frost]

Je comprends pas, comment peut-on avoir un chargement en nuque et des munitions de 125mm ? Munitions monoblocs ? Mais du coup ca créerai un troisième calibre dans les stocks (120 rayé et 125 en deux parties) ...

[Serge]

Ou tout simplement les deux parties, l'une dernière l'autre poussées ensemble dans la culasse.

[Sovngard]

J'ai un brevet russe concernant un chargeur automatique en nuque de tourelle pour munitions de 125 mm en deux fardeaux : http://fofanov.armor.kiev.ua/Tanks/EQP/al-640-patent.pdf

Modifié le 13 juillet 2015 par Sovngard