T-90 Bhishma / T-72 Ajeya of Indian Army : News and Discussions

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
15,577
11,326
India
can T 90 or T 90M autoloader hold bigger penetrator rounds like new russian vacuum -1 & 2 ?

Only the T-14 Armata's gun can fire the Vacuum-1/2.

Our version of the T-90S now has the weakest firepower. The new Russian version called T-90M Proryv-3 has roughly twice the firepower. The T-90MS is also similar to the T-90M. Of course, our T-90S will soon come in for upgrades, and I hope there's a gun/autoloader upgrade planned as well.

T-90 tanks are fitted with 2A46M smoothbore gun which can fire APFSDS with max penetration of 500-550mm at 0° for 2km.
T-90M tanks has the 2A82-1M smoothbore gun(similar to T-14) and can fire APFSDS like Vacuum-1 and Vacuum-2 with penetration of 900-1000mm at 0° for 2km.
Even if we upgrade our smootbore gun on the T-90 fleet to 2A46M-5 std then we will be able to fire Sinvets APFSDS which has penetration of 740mm of RHA at 0° for 2km.

The earlier reports of the T-90M carrying 2A82-1M are wrong. It's got the 2A46M-4/5. It's basically an improved Russian version of the T-90MS.
 

Nikhil

nik141993
Dec 1, 2017
503
296
India
T 14 autoloader design specially for longer penetrators like vacuum 1 & 2......can this one be put inside T 90? does Proryv-3 has same mechanism ? @randomradio

Here is one more design for longer penetrator
 
Last edited:

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
15,577
11,326
India
T 14 autoloader design specially for longer penetrators like vacuum 1 & 2......can this one be put inside T 90? does Proryv-3 has same mechanism ? @randomradio
Here one more design for longer penetrators

The entire autoloader for the T-90 has to be changed.

Of course, we do not know if there's enough space available inside to carry shells as big as the Vacuum, but at least the Svinets can be carried.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nikhil

Aniruddha

Member
Oct 3, 2019
225
74
Mumbai
The entire autoloader for the T-90 has to be changed.

Of course, we do not know if there's enough space available inside to carry shells as big as the Vacuum, but at least the Svinets can be carried.
But the RFP mentions the APFSDS round needs to be compatible with the current 2A46M smoothbore gun. And the Svinets-1 is designed to be fired from 2A46M-5 gun with a new autoloader.
I see only the Lekalo APFSDS round to be compatible with 2A46M gun but it has penetration capability of only 650mm of RHA at 2km for 0°.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
15,577
11,326
India
But the RFP mentions the APFSDS round needs to be compatible with the current 2A46M smoothbore gun. And the Svinets-1 is designed to be fired from 2A46M-5 gun with a new autoloader.
I see only the Lekalo APFSDS round to be compatible with 2A46M gun but it has penetration capability of only 650mm of RHA at 2km for 0°.

That RFI is a joke, written by someone incompetent.

Also, AFAIK, the 2A46M cannot handle the Lekalo either. Only 2A46M-2 and higher.

Even though the Arjun doesn't have any dimension problems, DRDO has still not made a shell that's actually world class. We are just really lucky that Pakistan's armour is significantly inferior. And there's a funny possibility that our airpower is enough to compensate for our tanks's lack of firepower, to the point where their armour may not even meet our armour with reasonable strength upon contact. Also we have missile firing capability, so that's a good thing.

Our current limit is less than 600mm at 2Km, 0° for Arjun, even lesser for the T-90. Arjun's previous firepower was inferior to the T-90 as well, but I suppose DRDO was going around telling it's better than the T-72 at the time. Israeli 125mm rounds manage 500-550mm. We couldn't get those earlier since IMI was banned. But I suppose we now have access to these shells.

The Pakistanis apparently have the Naiza DU round which does 570mm at 2Km. But we don't know to what extent that is true since they have the same problems we do with respect to the autoloader.

There's also the question of whether Russia will actually export anything better than the Lekalo. They are the downgrade champions when it comes to tanks, followed by the Americans.
 

Gautam

Moderator
Feb 16, 2019
12,725
10,045
Tripura, NE, India
IA T-72 up in the Himalayas :
5c1b345f1e4cd64ca20008d7_1546267710__o__DSC_8812-1WM 1920 X 1280.jpg

5c1b345f1e4cd64ca20008d7_1546267724__o__DSC_8917-1WM 1920 X 1280.jpg
 

Aniruddha

Member
Oct 3, 2019
225
74
Mumbai
That RFI is a joke, written by someone incompetent.

Also, AFAIK, the 2A46M cannot handle the Lekalo either. Only 2A46M-2 and higher.

Even though the Arjun doesn't have any dimension problems, DRDO has still not made a shell that's actually world class. We are just really lucky that Pakistan's armour is significantly inferior. And there's a funny possibility that our airpower is enough to compensate for our tanks's lack of firepower, to the point where their armour may not even meet our armour with reasonable strength upon contact. Also we have missile firing capability, so that's a good thing.

Our current limit is less than 600mm at 2Km, 0° for Arjun, even lesser for the T-90. Arjun's previous firepower was inferior to the T-90 as well, but I suppose DRDO was going around telling it's better than the T-72 at the time. Israeli 125mm rounds manage 500-550mm. We couldn't get those earlier since IMI was banned. But I suppose we now have access to these shells.

The Pakistanis apparently have the Naiza DU round which does 570mm at 2Km. But we don't know to what extent that is true since they have the same problems we do with respect to the autoloader.

There's also the question of whether Russia will actually export anything better than the Lekalo. They are the downgrade champions when it comes to tanks, followed by the Americans.
This issue can be solved by the purchase of T-90MS tanks.
Also, if you do a side by side comparison of the APFSDS made by DRDO to that of any American or European APFSDS, then you find that the actual penetrator is very much smaller in terms of length.
The penetrator extends only till half of the casing.

We need a much longer penetrator.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
15,577
11,326
India
This issue can be solved by the purchase of T-90MS tanks.

That was the assumption when the media started talking about 464 T-90MS, and then it suddenly changed back into T-90S.

It doesn't look like the IA is interested in the T-90MS. But I'm hoping at least the gun is upgraded in existing the T-90s during MLU.

Also, if you do a side by side comparison of the APFSDS made by DRDO to that of any American or European APFSDS, then you find that the actual penetrator is very much smaller in terms of length.
The penetrator extends only till half of the casing.

We need a much longer penetrator.

Yep. Read post 176.
 

STEPHEN COHEN

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
7,515
4,615
Yep. Read post 176.

How many Pakistani Tanks will Remain for Tank battles , after --
Artillery Barrages , MBRL strikes , Bombing by IAF , Attacks by Helicopters , ATGMs fired by Indian Army

Pakistan too will use ATGMs and IEDs for
Destroying our Tanks
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
15,577
11,326
India
How many Pakistani Tanks will Remain for Tank battles , after --
Artillery Barrages , MBRL strikes , Bombing by IAF , Attacks by Helicopters , ATGMs fired by Indian Army

Pakistan too will use ATGMs and IEDs for
Destroying our Tanks

Yep. Already pointed out in a previous post.

And there's a funny possibility that our airpower is enough to compensate for our tanks's lack of firepower, to the point where their armour may not even meet our armour with reasonable strength upon contact.

MBRL and artillery may only do a little more damage than before, but airpower has reached a point where any unprotected tank unit can be ripped into pieces very quickly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: STEPHEN COHEN

STEPHEN COHEN

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
7,515
4,615
Yep. Already pointed out in a previous post.

And there's a funny possibility that our airpower is enough to compensate for our tanks's lack of firepower, to the point where their armour may not even meet our armour with reasonable strength upon contact.

MBRL and artillery may only do a little more damage than before, but airpower has reached a point where any unprotected tank unit can be ripped into pieces very quickly

With Such long range ATGMs
Tank to Tank Battles will become a thing of the past in 10 years time

US Army to field Israeli-made long-range missile on helicopters

Even Artillery and MBRLs can damage the
Two weak spots of Every tank -- Turret where
Gun is mounted and the Tracks

I read that RPG 29 s can destroy the Tracks of even ABRAMS

Shrapnel can get stuck in Tank tracks
 

Aniruddha

Member
Oct 3, 2019
225
74
Mumbai
Yep. Already pointed out in a previous post.

And there's a funny possibility that our airpower is enough to compensate for our tanks's lack of firepower, to the point where their armour may not even meet our armour with reasonable strength upon contact.

MBRL and artillery may only do a little more damage than before, but airpower has reached a point where any unprotected tank unit can be ripped into pieces very quickly.
But it is still good to have APFSDS rounds which can penetrate as far as 800mm at 2km.
Also, is there any possibility that the Arjun mk2 will have a 120mm smoothbore gun instead of rifled one??
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
15,577
11,326
India
But it is still good to have APFSDS rounds which can penetrate as far as 800mm at 2km.

Right now that's only a dream. Even the US doesn't export such rounds to their allies. The Russians as well.

Also, is there any possibility that the Arjun mk2 will have a 120mm smoothbore gun instead of rifled one??

Dunno.
With Such long range ATGMs
Tank to Tank Battles will become a thing of the past in 10 years time

US Army to field Israeli-made long-range missile on helicopters

Even Artillery and MBRLs can damage the
Two weak spots of Every tank -- Turret where
Gun is mounted and the Tracks

I read that RPG 29 s can destroy the Tracks of even ABRAMS

Shrapnel can get stuck in Tank tracks

ATGMs have a lot of counters. APFSDS has only armour as a counter. So APFSDS will still be the primary way to kill tanks after contact.
 

Aniruddha

Member
Oct 3, 2019
225
74
Mumbai
Right now that's only a dream. Even the US doesn't export such rounds to their allies. The Russians as well.



Dunno.


ATGMs have a lot of counters. APFSDS has only armour as a counter. So APFSDS will still be the primary way to kill tanks after contact.
How good are our APFSDS compared to that of NATO??
Right now that's only a dream. Even the US doesn't export such rounds to their allies. The Russians as well.



Dunno.


ATGMs have a lot of counters. APFSDS has only armour as a counter. So APFSDS will still be the primary way to kill tanks after contact.
I had read somewhere on twitter that DRDO had developed a APFSDS round for Arjun tank that is able to penetrate 650mm of RHA at 2km
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
15,577
11,326
India
How good are our APFSDS compared to that of NATO??

We are 40 years behind.

I had read somewhere on twitter that DRDO had developed a APFSDS round for Arjun tank that is able to penetrate 650mm of RHA at 2km

Not sure if that was accomplished. If done, then we will be 30 years behind.

Current gen US and Russian shells can penetrate 1000mm.
 

vstol Jockey

Professional
Dec 1, 2017
6,255
12,180
New Delhi
Not sure if that was accomplished. If done, then we will be 30 years behind.

Current gen US and Russian shells can penetrate 1000mm.
I would like to correct you here. Their normal shells have just as much penetration power as that of Indian shells. The depleted uranium shells are better than ours.