DRDO and PSU's

karn said:
Vulnerable to autocannons.
Click to expand...

I doubt that... Our FICV platforms are rated to take 40mm auto-cannon from front & 23mm from sides. Can't be thinner than that!
I'd have placed the engine on front tho, like the K-9 platform is derived from (probably). K-21-105 did that.
K21-105-Hanwha.webp

IMO its 105mm is outdated. Every light gun carrier used 120mm today. Would allow it to use CLGM & the launchers can be repeated with APS add-ons
 
Bleh said:
I doubt that... Our FICV platforms are rated to take 40mm auto-cannon from front & 23mm from sides. Can't be thinner than that!
I'd have placed the engine on front tho, like the K-9 platform is derived from (probably). K-21-105 did that.
View attachment 9214

IMO its 105mm is outdated. Every light gun carrier used 120mm today. Would allow it to use CLGM & the launchers can be repeated with APS add-ons
Click to expand...
We know for a fact that the turret is not rated for auto cannons 30mm and up at 500 meters .. that too only from the front .. and the turret is supposed to be the most heavily armoured part .
120mm means lower gun elevation less ammo . 105 is a good choice atleast it can outrange autocannon IFVs and give dug in troops a headache.
 
Blademaster said:
Practically no armour worth shit since it is a light tank.
Click to expand...
But then again whatever it'd face will be having more or less the same armour.
karn said:
Vulnerable to autocannons.
Click to expand...
Yup, given how everyone have now standardized 30mm or even bigger; auto-cannon based APFSDS are a serious threat.
Bleh said:
IMO its 105mm is outdated. Every light gun carrier used 120mm today. Would allow it to use CLGM
Click to expand...
But it's still a high-pressure gun, not that bad.
Also it was us who went for a bigger diameter CLGM to get marginally better penetration but at the cost of losing platform compatibility. Otherwise typical CLGMs like LAHAT can be fired from everything; from 105mm recoil-less rifles to 120mm main guns.
125mm_Smoothbore said:
Pr
Click to expand...
That's just typical of any Indian platform. It would take atleast half a decade to see a Jindal Steel like ad for an Indian weapon.


Well you all are kind of right, but not exactly. Turns out the biggest flaw on Zorawar is its lack of an indigenous turret.

In 2013 Indonesia decided to have a light tank resulting in the joint venture of Pindad (Indonesian) and FNSS (Turkish). FNSS brought their tracked hull, engines from Caterpillar, Aselsan offered APS and John Cockerill supplied one of their turrets...with Pindad being the integrator.

But turns out, the turret is now a whopping 63% of the cost of the whole vehicle.
Screenshot_2024-09-11-23-04-42-27_680d03679600f7af0b4c700c6b270fe7.jpg
We also use the same John Cockerill 3105 in Zorawar.
 
karn said:
We know for a fact that the turret is not rated for auto cannons 30mm and up at 500 meters .. that too only from the front .. and the turret is supposed to be the most heavily armoured part .
120mm means lower gun elevation less ammo . 105 is a good choice atleast it can outrange autocannon IFVs and give dug in troops a headache.
Click to expand...

How do we know this? 😨
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest Replies

Featured Content

Trending Threads

Share this Site

VPN-HSL-250-X250
Back
Top