| Add caption |
It is constantly called a badly designed tank for its rifled gun, lame ammunition, basic and uneven composite armor package, and poor ammo storage among other things.
| Add caption |
While these things are generally true, it is prudent to note that these things are only bad by today’s standard. The real reason the Arjun is a failure is due to a ridiculous development process. The development of this tank started in 1974. It didn’t reach service until 2009!! Think about if the Arjun had entered service in 1985, the originally planned date. Rifled gun? Challenger 1 still had one. The armor protection would have been comparable than a B-tech Leopard 2 or T-72B minus ERA. Separated blowout ammo storage was still a new thing. Indigenous first gen tanks like Merkava Mk1 didn’t have it either.
If the Arjun entered service when planned, it would have been a decent, arguably good tank, especially considering it was first generation domestic. However, lack of production capabilities and overbearing bureaucracy doomed this tank to a 35 year development.
That is the failure in Arjun. Not a failure of design, but a failure of execution from the top down.
No comments:
Post a Comment