India to acquire 400 more T-90 tanks from Russia

Originally posted by COWlan
See that I used "were"? Read my posts man. And not all problems were fixed on the Arjun, still has foreign engine, optics are only compromised....
Whatever, this could go on forever back and forth.

Wow, I just noticed that Arjun takes 4 personells to man. Thats more people than the other modern MBTs.

[edit on 22-4-2005 by COWlan]

prove it here with strong link that optics are compromised with new link like from 2004 to 2005 only not from dust

Originally posted by COWlan


Wow, I just noticed that Arjun takes 4 personells to man. Thats more people than the other modern MBTs.

[edit on 22-4-2005 by COWlan]

the mre the number of personnel, the better

Not really, an autoloader like the one on the Type-98 does things faster than a manual loader. Anyway, both the Arjun and T-90 are solid tanks, good enough to deter Pakistan from starting another ground war.

arjun and t-90 is can take on any thing [not hitler type]i mean they are the best in this asia as well as type xx [becuse names is often change so quite difficult to track them]

did you have any information about what kind of armour type xx has and did they protected with ERA.

The Type-98G has a thick layer of composite armor with additional ERA modules for quick replacement of damaged ERA. THe thickness of the armor is highly classified as well as the ERA attributes.

The dual armour of both composite and ERA materials are good for anytype of attack, be it ATGMs, fin stabilized rounds, DU rounds. The composite armor is not as good as the might Choubham but our ERA adds additional armour so its not that far off from M1A2 and Challenger 2 armors.

[edit on 24-4-2005 by COWlan]

same i hear about arjun armour [Kanchan] it is composte material made with thick layer of diffrent mater.

it is highly clasified no one know more than this.

they said arjun did not need any add on armour [ERA] but they can add it to.


[edit on 24-4-2005 by mirza2003]

Type-98 had no ERA but Type-98G did, the ERA is different from other ERAs, its outer appearance is very smooth and well fitted unlike the big blocks other tanks seem to use (not all but most).

Your telling me that the Type-98 armor be it ERA or not is going to stop a LOSAT? And where is the ERA placed is it on the turret?

Do you think M1A2's American Choubham can stop a LOSAT?

The ERA is placed on its sides, front, back and everywhere on the turret. Turn to page four and you'll see Type-98G, a picture is worth a thousand words.

[edit on 24-4-2005 by COWlan]

abrams is vulnerable to sabot shell i see one abrams pic in which sabot rauond pierced in to compartmeant[in iraqi] destroyed by USA becuse tank is neutrlize by enmay attack and unmovable.

Do you think M1A2's American Choubham can stop a LOSAT?

Don't know, probably not.

And mirza can I see a picture of that Abrams or am I supposed to take your word for it?

here is the link 1.3mb
tank pdf abrams

Originally posted by WestPoint23

And mirza can I see a picture of that Abrams or am I supposed to take your word for it?

Considering the US has lost over 80 M1A2's to hostile forces... I would say his statement is fairly strong

Originally posted by W4rl0rD
Not really, an autoloader like the one on the Type-98 does things faster than a manual loader. Anyway, both the Arjun and T-90 are solid tanks, good enough to deter Pakistan from starting another ground war.

There isn't an auto loader yet which can reload faster than a crewman. Most autoloaders require the barrel to be raised to reload, which means tha barrel then has to realigned to the target, taking time.

^^..
Very true..One of the few instances that man is faster than machine..

Ok,maybe I was wrong...Too much influence by CNC Gens I guess, In Zero Hour, have you seen the speed those Tank general's Battlemasters (Type 88 ripoff I think) fire with autoloaders? Simply magic.

Considering the US has lost over 80 M1A2's to hostile forces... I would say his statement is fairly strong

Lost? Damaged describes the situation better. The U.S. has had tanks damages from roadside bombs RPG and what have you, and some have been destroyed but not 80.
And his statement did not say that an Abrams had been destroyed it said that it had been pierced by an Enemy Sabot Round? From a T-72? And I cant open a PDF document don't feel like downloading Adobe.

perhaps i am knocking worng door ^^^

what tank is this??

lol if you looked at the picture link it would give you the answer. It is a Leopard 2 Austere Version C2.