If the media is talking about something which was not in our planned requirement, then take that news with 2 buckets of salt.
I am not an expert on the terrain along LAC. But to me light tanks seems useless. Any place along the LAC where tank movements are possible we can get T72s and T90S there. Untill we plan any invasion tactics into the Tibet plateau, we will not need light tanks.
He made IA look complete fool in front of civilians in the court.Ukranians are lob, followed by Ruskies and then French
Both in weapons and women
For him posting on FB is more important that security of his country and countrymen. As per him all of his family and friends are in foreign countries. Wonder what stopped him from jumping the fence.
We need 300 light tanks, and this was a requirement since a decade.
The tanks can be airdropped and are needed to support the infantry. The US is working on something similar with the MPF.
Do we actually have even enough transporters to transport a 30 ton tank ?
The moment we start talking of light tank, its basically an APC with a large calibre gun minus the troop carrying capability with poor protection. That's basically an IFV with a gun of calibre equal or larger than SRGM with ATGM launchers.
And the moment we talk about shedding 20 tons of weight from a medium MBT, we are shedding the protection. That's not good in our conditions.
USA has its marines for which the concept of light tanks is useful.
The tank itself is needed to deal with all kinds of targets that the infantry will not be able to without suffering losses, hardened bunkers, HMG positions and even helicopters if necessary.
Other than that, such tanks need scalable armour and active APS in order to increase survivability. But dunno if there are such options available in the 22 ton weight class. The way I see it, the IA will have to actually design their own tank.
We have 17 IL-76 and 11 C-17s, that's enough transport capability necessary.
Even the modern IFVs with ERA racks only in the frontal arc weight above 30 tons. Having anything below 25 tons seems very difficult.
That said, for the roles you mentioned, NAMICA on BMP2 and future tracked IFVs and a gun used on our T55s installed on 8x8 Wheeled APCs should be good enough.
What you are saying is definitely a good thing to have. But in the absence of any kind of investment in MBT program to replace T72 and BMP2 replacement, it would be foolish to take up even 1 more program and then struggle to find the resources to complete it.
We can't have anything in the mountains based on old Russian tech like BMP-2. We need modern hydropneumatics based suspension and turret designs that can handle a modern gun and APS, along with detachable armour. Along with engine and fuel lines that are compatible with rarefied air and cold.
Light tanks are important for mobilty. See it shows a clear change in defence policy of India
a) Chine has deployed light tanks in LAC because they want to capture Indian territory so mobility is key
b) India deployed heavy tanks T 90 because we are defending out territory and heavy guns to take out the chinese tanks are important
So if India is now ordering light tanks it means only one thing- Modi has decided to capture Aksai Chin....overall good news. It will come with some pain but it is our manifest destiny.
We can always have a modern IFV fitted with a larger canon. Let's say our FICV program leads to creation of something like CV90 used by the Europeans, we can use the same platform to develop a light tank version. We would actually be saving costs and time that way.
Remember in that case we will be the climbing force, we will need a huge vertical lift capability in Army Aviation alone.
Light tanks are not useful for us. Even when we advance into Tibet, we can use tanks or even light tanks only if we are talking of crossing into the plateau region of Tibet, because before that, all the places where a 30 ton light tank can be used, we can pretty much use a T72CIA with the same supply lines.
What you are suggesting is 10-12 years minimum in future.
First , if I am optimistic then within a couple of years we shout start seeing Indian Army attacks and occupation of peaks and posts from just down of Siachen in Gilgit Baltistan to strengthen our supply routes and force the Pakistanis to abandon their positions up north.
Even this effort will need deeper pockets , full political backing to Central government and no questions asked to Armed forces and a capacity in our citizens to accept casualties.
We cannot mount any meaningful counterattack into Tibet without freeing our formations from any potential threat from the west.
And for that Light Tanks under emergency procurement doesn't makes sense.
An order for SPIKE ATGMs, 2nd hand C130Hs and CH47s from USA, reserve S300 batteries from Russia under emergency procurement makes sense.
A decade back Army did issue an RFI for 200 Wheeled Armoured Platforms armed with 105-120mm guns and 100 Tracked Armoured Platforms. They were to be of around 22 tons. The RFP to RFI was never followed up. These armoured tank Destroyers were to be used by units along LAC. But instead Army later chose to use the T72M1/T90S and BMP2 combo instead as it was realised that the conditions required in RFI couldn't be met by a 22 ton light Armoured Platforms, but it will need to be much heavier and more costly. So existing capabilities of IA was redeployed as it was found that almost all the possible locations where there was a chance of Armour being used, Army could use its existing tanks too. Therefore T72M1s were first deployed, and starting 2017-18 more than 150 T90S tanks joined too. As and when the latest order of 464 tanks with more powerful engines comes, which will help in better mobility at those locations, the T72 and T90S will get augmented/replaced by them.
A lot of noise was created by some sections of media and keyboard fanboys on Twitter which later caught view of some retired Armed Forces personal, who also supported the view that it would be good to have these systems. But as it usually happens, all these talks remained inconclusive and nothing came out on this matter from the recent DAC meeting.
A lot of noise was created by some sections of media and keyboard fanboys on Twitter which later caught view of some retired Armed Forces personal, who also supported the view that it would be good to have these systems. But as it usually happens, all these talks remained inconclusive and nothing came out on this matter from the recent DAC meeting.
Army: How Red Tape Delayed the Procurement of Lightweight Tanks Until After Ladakh Faceoff
A handful of desultory indigenous attempts were initiated from the 1980s to locally develop a light tank, all regrettably stillborn.
Wouldn't the sprut fit the bill though??
It's 18 tons add some heavy era and get it up 22-25 tons you get first hit protection atleast and maybe slap an aps too. It would be a cheap deal too.
No 22-25 ton is gonna resist any hit from any vehicle armed even with a 40mm canon with armour piercing rounds.
The most modern IFVs in Europe has all round protection against 14.5mm Russian HMG fire, and frontal arc protection of 20mm-30mm Armour piercing rounds. And that itself makes all of them heavy above the weight of 32tons. Even with ERA at STANAG level 5 protection those European IFVs weighing upto 42 Tons provide frontal arc protection from older generation tank ammo only.
If we have WhAPs today with a Bofors or even Russian 57mm with armour piercing ammo, they would be alone taking out those Chinese light tanks.
See the term light tank is a misnomer. It is at the end of the day just an APC/IFV with a larger caliber main gun. And the problem doesn't stop here, even that main gun gets restrictions as it cannot be too heavy. So even those guns aren't utilised to their full potential.
T90 with the newer V96 engines and T72 with V92S2 is all we need.