Russian junks are like, hell yeah...
@randomradio by the way do we have any indigenous option? And what would be the gun requirements?
@randomradio by the way do we have any indigenous option? And what would be the gun requirements?
NGMBT will be indigenous. FRCV may or may not be indigenous, but IP will be Indian.
They are talking about an electrothermal-chemical gun. 120mm smoothbore at the minimum. But it depends on our threat environment for us to opt higher calibers than that.
These are future possible programs, released yesterday 
One intresting to notice is that US Amy is moving towards survivability in their future armoured vehicles but Indian Army is focusing more on mobility.
M-10 Booker vs DRDO Light Tank
OMFV vs FICV
AMPV vs APC
M-10 Booker vs DRDO Light Tank
OMFV vs FICV
AMPV vs APC
Light tank weight requirement is low due to mountain terrain.
FICV is light for a proper amphibious capability. RFP to delivery is expected to take a minimum of 9 years.
APC only requires protection from small arms up to 14.5mm.
FRCV tank's main support will be a heavy IFV design on the same hull. It will have battle tank class protection.
So, what the IA wants is a set of T-14, T-15, Kurganets-25 and Bumerang class vehicles.
Korean K3 MBT
mil.in.ua
Possibly what the Koreans will offer for FRCV. With the Russians offering Armata, we now know there are 2 competitors.
South Korean company presented the concept of a next-generation tank
South Korean company Hyundai Rotem has presented an updated concept of a next-generation tank
mil.in.ua
Possibly what the Koreans will offer for FRCV. With the Russians offering Armata, we now know there are 2 competitors.
I haven't read up on it yet. Looks like the K3, but the turret is a lot bigger. The crew compartment seems to be in the hull.
It is probably a concept tank rather than a real upgrade.
Last edited:
Army aims to fast-track Future Ready Combat Vehicle to replace T-72 tank, induct it from 2030
Technical parameters are being finalised & plan is to have first prototype in four years, it is learnt. FRCV is expected to weigh not more than 60 tonnes as against 45-tonne T-72 tank.
New Delhi: The Indian Army is in the process of finalising the technical parameters of Future Ready Combat Vehicle (FRCV), which will gradually replace T-72 tanks. The plan is to have the first prototype in four years and inductions starting 2030, it is learnt.
The Army is looking at the FRCV to cater to ‘future capability requirements and enhance overall operational effectiveness index’ in varied terrains. “The role of the FRCV will be to offer multiple options for rapid operational employment,” a source in the defence establishment told ThePrint.
The project, the source added, is currently in the feasibility study stage, to be followed by the issuance of the Preliminary Staff Qualitative Requirements (PSQR) in a few months. PSQR is one of the processes undertaken as part of capital procurement for a preliminary assessment of essential and desirable parameters.
“Thereafter”, it is learnt, “the process of selection of the interested developing agencies would be done.”
Sources added that the prototype should be ready in about four years from now, following which trials and production would be undertaken, which will require approximately two years before deliveries can begin.
“The Army is looking to procure 1,700 tanks in three phases. The Army expects each phase to deliver nearly 550-600 tanks. However, this depends on the production rate and the agencies that will be selected to manufacture the FRCV,” said the source mentioned earlier.
The Army had floated Request for Information (RFI) for FRCV in June 2021. The project for procurement has attained the Approval in Principle (AIP) under the Make-I Category, which involves government funding of up to 90 percent, released in a phased manner based on the progress of the project.
The FRCV will be developed under the Make-I category involving the ‘Indigenously Designed, Developed and Manufactured’ (IDDM) component, which requires the platform to not only be designed indigenously but also have a minimum of 50 percent indigenous content.
Sources explained that a decision on which of the components are to be imported will depend on the two agencies that will be selected and funded for the development of these platforms — as long as the 50 percent indigenous content criteria is fulfilled.
Once commissioned, the FRCV are expected to remain in service for a period of 35-45 years.
On whether engines for the FRCV would be sourced from abroad, it is learnt that it would depend on the ‘design’ and the ‘power-to-weight’ ratio of the tanks. “It would depend on the manufacturer,” said the source mentioned earlier.
Weight, firepower of FRCV
The combat weight of the FRCV, as of today, is envisaged to not exceed 60 tonnes as opposed to the 45-tonne T-72 tanks which they seek to replace.The FRCV would be designed to carry a crew of four troops. Moreover, the Army has expressed its need to be able to transport the FRCV by aircraft, ships, rail and road.
As for firepower and lethality, it is conceptualised that the calibre of the main gun would be of 120 mm and above — capable of engaging targets in static and dynamic mode by day and night using suitable ammunition.
The project was earlier under the Strategic Partnership Model (SPM), wherein a foreign original equipment manufacturer (OEM) is required to tie up with an Indian partner to manufacture weapons systems in the country.
Countries including South Korea, the UK, the US, Germany, France, Russia and Ukraine had responded to an RFI issued by the Director General Mechanised Forces (DGMF) for the FRCV in November 2017.
The Mahindra Group, Bharat Forge, Punj Lloyd Group, Tata Power SED, Tata Motors, Reliance Defence and Engineering Ltd (now Reliance Naval and Engineering Ltd), Titagarh Wagons, and Tractors India Ltd were reportedly among Indian partners who responded to the RFI.
The FRCV is among the six big-ticket Make-I projects in the works at various stages, besides Light Tanks, Tactical Communication Systems and the Terminal End Secrecy Device etc.
The Terminal End Secrecy Device — a single portable device for end-to-end secure transmission of voice, data and text — could enable formation commanders to disseminate classified material in a secure manner.
Under various schemes and categories of the Make in India initiative, the Army is also procuring niche technologies like logistic and nano drones, counter-drones, loitering munitions, Unarmed Aerial Vehicle-launched precision-guided missiles and Automatic Spectrum Monitoring Systems.
Nope. It could at best be under testing by then. Possibly even evaluations.
Saw a recent work tender for some part HRBJ of some AFV, would that be the same type of FICV etc? it was very good.
AFV related work is picking up
(I am yet to figure out if this is related to MBT thread or FICV thread btw)
(I am yet to figure out if this is related to MBT thread or FICV thread btw)
Quick & Short Analysis - Will IA induct Stryker?
- Here's a prediction - Nothing will happen to this Stryker deal.
- Yes, I know our GOI and MOD can align quickly when it comes to geopolitical interests (purchase of Apache, P-8I, C-17, C-130) and a suitable AON can be created.
- But Stryker as a weapon system does not fit any operational requirement of the army.
- Let's understand the role of Stryker: It's basically a battle-taxi in the US Army for infantry which otherwise would've gone to battle on military transport vehicles, Humvees and then on foot.
- US Army's standard IFV is M2 Bradley; Cavalry uses the M3 version.
- While you can get option(s), Stryker comes w/o armed turret. At best it has RWS with an HMG and Automatic Grenade Launcher (AGL).
- Similarly, in case of India, our standard IFV is BMP-2.
- We don't have, yet the concept of motorized infantry.
- So far, with exception of few WhaP/Kestrels and Kalyani M8 under Infantry Protected Mobile Vehicle (IPMV) category.
- I had argued earlier that the induction of these vehicles could be the green shoots for emerging Motorized Infantry in the Indian Army.
- Another unique requirement which the Indian Army has is that its IFV/APC should be amphibious.
- This is driven by the presence of rivers and multiple layers of canals in the Western front where Pakistan uses Canals as a defensive feature to slow down and channel Indian mechanized forces.
- Plus, having amphibious IFVs and APCs means less requirement of engineering resources like bridge laying tanks/vehicles and other bridging equipment.
- We've seen BMP-2 swimming across water bodies even in eastern Ladakh.
- Stryker is not amphibious.
- Plus, if the Indian Army is planning to have larger degree of mechanization in the form of motorized infantry, we've the amphibious Kestrel.
- It offers various turret solutions as well.
- Which means it can be used as a standard Wheeled Armored Personnel Carier (APC) with basic RWS as well as a Wheeled Infantry Fighting Vehicle.
- BTW, when tenders were floated for IPMV and Wheeled IFV, former was floated by DG Infantry while the latter was floated by DG Mechanized forces.
- It makes ample common sense to have the same platform for both types.
- Any large-scale induction of Stryker will require a major change in the way whole of the Indian Army operates and fights.
- And I don't think this is happening over Stryker because it does not bring anything cutting edge or substantial to the table.
- Here's a prediction - Nothing will happen to this Stryker deal.
- Yes, I know our GOI and MOD can align quickly when it comes to geopolitical interests (purchase of Apache, P-8I, C-17, C-130) and a suitable AON can be created.
- But Stryker as a weapon system does not fit any operational requirement of the army.
- Let's understand the role of Stryker: It's basically a battle-taxi in the US Army for infantry which otherwise would've gone to battle on military transport vehicles, Humvees and then on foot.
- US Army's standard IFV is M2 Bradley; Cavalry uses the M3 version.
- While you can get option(s), Stryker comes w/o armed turret. At best it has RWS with an HMG and Automatic Grenade Launcher (AGL).
- Similarly, in case of India, our standard IFV is BMP-2.
- We don't have, yet the concept of motorized infantry.
- So far, with exception of few WhaP/Kestrels and Kalyani M8 under Infantry Protected Mobile Vehicle (IPMV) category.
- I had argued earlier that the induction of these vehicles could be the green shoots for emerging Motorized Infantry in the Indian Army.
- Another unique requirement which the Indian Army has is that its IFV/APC should be amphibious.
- This is driven by the presence of rivers and multiple layers of canals in the Western front where Pakistan uses Canals as a defensive feature to slow down and channel Indian mechanized forces.
- Plus, having amphibious IFVs and APCs means less requirement of engineering resources like bridge laying tanks/vehicles and other bridging equipment.
- We've seen BMP-2 swimming across water bodies even in eastern Ladakh.
- Stryker is not amphibious.
- Plus, if the Indian Army is planning to have larger degree of mechanization in the form of motorized infantry, we've the amphibious Kestrel.
- It offers various turret solutions as well.
- Which means it can be used as a standard Wheeled Armored Personnel Carier (APC) with basic RWS as well as a Wheeled Infantry Fighting Vehicle.
- BTW, when tenders were floated for IPMV and Wheeled IFV, former was floated by DG Infantry while the latter was floated by DG Mechanized forces.
- It makes ample common sense to have the same platform for both types.
- Any large-scale induction of Stryker will require a major change in the way whole of the Indian Army operates and fights.
- And I don't think this is happening over Stryker because it does not bring anything cutting edge or substantial to the table.
Inducting this shit will mean deadend for WhAp and removing a future competitor from the market for Stryker. We must never accept this proposal and should never induct this shit in IA.
Both will be bought actually. Not necessarily WhAp, but an indigenous solution will form the bulk. But Stryker is necessary 'cause it's ready and available.
Merely equipping 15 infantry brigades will require over 5000 APCs. Just 4 brigades will require 1300+ Strykers. And these Strykers can increase the mobility of our SCs or RAPIDs.