NomeNclatureA Distance between sprocket to CG W Gross vehicle weight in N INtroDuctIoNMain battle tank (MbT) Forms the backbone of the mechanised forces for any conventional army. Traditionally these platforms were designed keeping in mind the conventional warfare philosophy or the iron triangle of firepower, mobility and protection. Such an iron triangle underwent minor changes with the introduction of un-conventional warfare by non-state actors post 1 9/11. Hence, the conventional design philosophy based on contemporary threat scenario needs to be modified or incorporated with fresh threats in order to extrapolate it as a future combat scenario. One such future combat scenario is as shown in Fig. 1. This threat scenario forms the baseline for arriving at the configuration for the generation next main battle tank (GNMbT). However, the dilemma facing designers of such GNMBT is whether to arrive at a configuration which is evolutionary or revolutionary in nature.An evolutionary approach per se is an extension of an existing platform with add-ons or technology upgrades so that contemporary threats are addressed. Examples for such an approach include Arjun (Mk-I and Mk-II), Challenger (1,2 and TES), M1 Abrahms (A1 and A2), Leopard 2 (A1 to A7+) etc. On the other hand, the alternate approach includes arriving at an altogether new configuration which not only addresses the future threats but also truly revolutionary in configuration and design. Design Configuration of a Generation Next Main Battle Tank for Future Combat ABsTrACTThe future combat scenario will undergo a sea change as compared to the conventional and un-conventional warfare employed by the traditional armies and non-state actors. In such a scenario, the main battle tank which serves as a game changer during these conflicts has to face the dilemma whether its design should be either evolutionary or revolutionary. To determine the basis of selecting the right type of design based on the above, the broad parameters that define the configuration namely number of crew, weight, armament system, survivability, operating range, transportability, tactical mobility, trafficability, intelligence -surveillance -target acquisitionreconnaissance (ISTAR), system modularity and theatre of operation have been considered. Taking these parameters into account, this study evaluates both the evolutionary and revolutionary design configurations for a generation next main battle tank. Finally, from the outcome of this study it is observed that the revolutionary design approach not only fares better compared to the evolutionary approach, but also possess ease of adaptiveness as an universal combat weapon platform.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Materials with high hardness are usually preferred in armour applications and are difficult to weld due to high Carbon Equivalent (C.E). In this investigation, an attempt was made to weld Ultra-high Hard Armour (UHA) steel (having C.E of 0.91) by Shielded Metal Arc Welding (SMAW) process using three electrodes (i) austenitic stainless steel (ASS- E307-16), (ii) super duplex stainless steel (SDSS-E2594-16) (iii) low hydrogen ferritic (LHF-E12018M-low-alloy steel electrode). The mechanical properties (tensile, impact toughness, and microhardness) were evaluated and correlated with microstructural features along with Cr eq /Ni eq ratio of weld metal. The joints fabricated using LHF electrodes showed superior strength of 962 MPa and hardness of 341 HV. The joints made using ASS electrode showed superior impact toughness of 72 J and Notch Strength Ratio (NSR) of 1.32 due to the higher energy absorption capability of the austenitic phase. At the weld interface, joints fabricated using ASS and SDSS electrodes show the unmixed zone (UMZ) and martensitic band (MB) due to sudden change of crystal structure (Face Centred Cubic (FCC) / Body Centred Tetragonal (BCT)). It is also found that the strength property increases (651 MPa to 856 MPa) with an increase in Cr eq /Ni eq ratio (1.87 to 3.2) of weld metal and with a decrease in ductility.