Artillery Discussion Thread

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 15 May 2012 00:22

^^^Even the Medium Regiments have BMPs which are for use of Observation Officers.

schowdhuri · Post by **schowdhuri** » 15 May 2012 11:03

Ajay Sharma wrote:Talking about tanks, there are some folklores based on some colorful yet distinguished officers that get handed from 1 generation to the next.

I once heard of an Arty officer who would insist going to the movie theater (somewhere in Punjab) in his Abbot

I don't know if this story is true, but it is very feasible. Have you ever had a ride in an abbot? It is small and compact, not the 155mm monsters you see today. Even compared to a T72, it looks/feels like a jeep.

As for the tanks used by Arty, no loan etc - the tanks were for dedicated use by Arty, and maintained by them - however my knowledge is dated, things may have changed.

On a different note, if you know Arty people, try to get a chance to see a battery/regt going into action - it is spectacular. I don't mean just the firing - I mean the gun positions being marked with a red flag, the gun areas being set up, while the battery comes racing in, and goes into action. Just be prepared to slip away if you see any fistcuffs between officers & jawans.

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 15 May 2012 13:56

chackojoseph wrote:Just take off the word 'Bofors' from your mind and concentrate on 'gun design.' You will be able to understand better.

All of us including IA, MOD, BRF arm chair experts etc should get the word Bofors out of our minds

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 15 May 2012 13:58

Ajay Sharma wrote:Talking about tanks, there are some folklores based on some colorful yet distinguished officers that get handed from 1 generation to the next.

I once heard of an Arty officer who would insist going to the movie theater (somewhere in Punjab) in his Abbot

Did he go to see the movie Guns of Navaronne ?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 15 May 2012 16:00

how did he parallel park that thing ? I guess he just crashed whatever was parked there lol.

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 15 May 2012 16:33

Singha wrote:how did he parallel park that thing ? I guess he just crashed whatever was parked there lol.

More like, "crushed".

member_22906 · Post by **member_22906** » 15 May 2012 17:20

Singha wrote:how did he parallel park that thing ? I guess he just crashed whatever was parked there lol.

I guess his wheels (or rather tracks) grounded everyone around him

member_22906 · Post by **member_22906** » 15 May 2012 17:27

rohitvats wrote:^^^Even the Medium Regiments have BMPs which are for use of Observation Officers.

This is news to me. Perhaps a new development or valid only for Armoured/Mech Divs.

schowdhuri wrote:I don't know if this story is true, but it is very feasible. Have you ever had a ride in an abbot? It is small and compact, not the 155mm monsters you see today. Even compared to a T72, it looks/feels like a jeep.

As for the tanks used by Arty, no loan etc - the tanks were for dedicated use by Arty, and maintained by them - however my knowledge is dated, things may have changed.

On a different note, if you know Arty people, try to get a chance to see a battery/regt going into action - it is spectacular. I don't mean just the firing - I mean the gun positions being marked with a red flag, the gun areas being set up, while the battery comes racing in, and goes into action. Just be prepared to slip away if you see any fistcuffs between officers & jawans.

Never ridden an Abbot but surely a T72. Even T72 is a very stuffy place to be in. Hats off the Armoured folks to sit in it while in the desert...

Been fortunate to have witnessed Art Regts getting into action. Its also an amazing sight to see an Arty Regt. on the move. Used to love the convoys and ofcourse awesome experience to see the firing

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 15 May 2012 19:07

Singha wrote:how did he parallel park that thing ? I guess he just crashed whatever was parked there lol.

On the other hand which tow truck guy would have the guts to tow it , if not parked properly

.

schowdhuri · Post by **schowdhuri** » 15 May 2012 19:49

Ajay Sharma wrote:Never ridden an Abbot but surely a T72. Even T72 is a very stuffy place to be in. Hats off the Armoured folks to sit in it while in the desert...

Indeed the discomfort has to be experienced to be believed. For the benefit of those who have not seen these masterpeices up close, the pictures below allow you to compare the turret/hatch size with my 8yr old son. Now imagine a full grown man inside.

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 15 May 2012 20:28

Ajay Sharma wrote:
Singha wrote:how did he parallel park that thing ? I guess he just crashed whatever was parked there lol.
I guess his wheels (or rather tracks) grounded everyone around him

He did not need a parking lot. He must have created his own parking lot !!!

Bala Vignesh · Post by **Bala Vignesh** » 15 May 2012 21:36

Based on what my chaiwalla says, the 72 is too cramped up for any body above 5'6" with appropriate weight..

member_22906 · Post by **member_22906** » 15 May 2012 21:41

I can believe that and I am 5'11''. It looks fairly crude from the inside but the troops swore by it

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 15 May 2012 21:52

there were people who swore by the Amby till exposed to something better

(of course there are some who will swear the Amby is better - no hope for them)

Unfortunately for sometime in future the numbers have been tilted.

member_20317 · Post by **member_20317** » 15 May 2012 23:31

One realises the worth of an Amby only once gets into a pile up.

Cheap, you loose nothing and yet the most precious thing lives.

Anyhow does someone has a video clip of some 155/52 SPH moving around in mountain roads?

Tried the tube. could not find any.

Thanks in advance.

Gurneesh · Post by **Gurneesh** » 15 May 2012 23:40

ravi_g wrote:One realises the worth of an Amby only once gets into a pile up.

Cheap, you loose nothing and yet the most precious thing lives.

OT that is not true.

Actually it will be safer to be in the newer (better designed for crash worthiness) cars than to be in Amby. Simply because Amby will transfer most of the impact inertia to it's occupants, while newer cars have crumple zones which absorb a large part of the impact. Newer cars are also designed to keep the driver cabin as intact as possible while everything around it is allowed to deform to the maximum extent something that will not happen in vintage cars like Amby.

sudeepj · Post by **sudeepj** » 15 May 2012 23:48

In Soviet Russia, tanker's heights were restricted to 5'3'' per wiki.

Like all Soviet-legacy tanks, the T-72's design has traded off interior space in return for a very small silhouette and efficient use of armour, to the point of replacing the fourth crewman with a mechanical loader. The smaller complement increases the crew's mental and physical exhaustion. The small interior also demands the use of shorter crewmen, with the maximum height set at 1.6 m (5 ft 3 in) in the Soviet Army (similar height restrictions exist in other Soviet-era armored vehicles).[12] The basic T-72 design has extremely small periscope viewports, even by the constrained standards of battle tanks and the driver's field of vision is significantly reduced when his hatch is closed. The steering system is a traditional dual-tiller layout instead of the steering wheel or steering yoke common in modern Western tanks. This set-up requires the near-constant use of both hands, which complicates employment of the seven speed manual gearbox.

Now, imagine our 6 foot jats in those tanks.. in the desert.. without an AC.. I recently came across a drdo pic of an upgraded Ajay, with the RHA values for front, side and hull armor thickness given. IIRC, it was 465mm turret front, 140mm side and 180mm hull.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 16 May 2012 00:08

That is not correct by design. Design for usability is anyway outside russkie philosophy.. they just use what is given.

The khans are trying capitalize russian industrial base, and public report says john deer making billions by exploring russian labor market. The principal difference between two culture is, hiding defects.. russkies always hide defects.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 16 May 2012 00:50

That 5'3" claim from wiki sounds bogus. Soviets had thousands of T-72s. It would have been impossible to find so many crews less than 5'3" in the army. Or maybe it was a rule not followed in practice.

srai · Post by **srai** » 16 May 2012 03:35

nachiket wrote:That 5'3" claim from wiki sounds bogus. Soviets had thousands of T-72s. It would have been impossible to find so many crews less than 5'3" in the army. Or maybe it was a rule not followed in practice.

T-72 ergonomics could have been designed for 5'3" height. So any crew significantly taller than that would be very uncomfortable inside, but that does not mean the Soviet/Russian/Indian armies disqualified soldiers basis on height for operating T-72s.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 16 May 2012 03:58

Why are you guys discussing tanks in this thread? Where is the focus?

member_22906 · Post by **member_22906** » 16 May 2012 23:42

So lets get back to focus Ramanaji since I was partly instrumental in OT'ing this thread

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/indiamade-ar ... 436-3.html

Two types of indigenously manufactured howitzers for the Indian Army will be ready for trials by December 2012 and by June 2013, Government told the Rajya Sabha on Wednesday.

In a written reply to the House, Defence Minister AK Antony said, "As per the Defence Acquisition Council (DAC) decision of October 2011, Ordnance Factory Board (OFB) is to manufacture 155mm howitzers." The OFBs have been asked to manufacture "two prototypes of 155mm/39 calibre FH-77-B02 guns" and the "upgraded version of 155 mm/45 calibre howitzers guns", he said.

On timelines for trials of these indigenous guns, Antony said that the two prototypes of 155mm/39 calibre howitzers will be ready by December 2012, followed by two samples of the upgraded 155mm/45 calibre guns by June 2013.

On Transfer of Technology (ToT) with the Swedish firm which supplied the 155mm/39 calibre Bofors guns, Antony said, "India had entered into license agreement with AB Bofors, Sweden for indigenous manufacture of 155mm/39 calibre FH-77-B02 guns and its ammunition."

member_22906 · Post by **member_22906** » 16 May 2012 23:44

^^
I am keeping my lungi nicely washed, starched and ironed for the D-Day. Hopefully happy days are here again (soon)

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 17 May 2012 02:42

Does above new item means the 155/39 cal are based on Bofors TOT? and the 45 cal is the upgraded barrel? Both could have other upgrades.

Is this the old ToT or a new one?

sum · Post by **sum** » 17 May 2012 08:23

On timelines for trials of these indigenous guns, Antony said that the two prototypes of 155mm/39 calibre howitzers will be ready by December 2012, followed by two samples of the upgraded 155mm/45 calibre guns by June 2013.

On Transfer of Technology (ToT) with the Swedish firm which supplied the 155mm/39 calibre Bofors guns, Antony said, "India had entered into license agreement with AB Bofors, Sweden for indigenous manufacture of 155mm/39 calibre FH-77-B02 guns and its ammunition."

Then what was the news of a desi Bofors being test fired on may 15 about?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 May 2012 08:34

bharat forge should also be encouraged by procuring 100s of their GHN45 after confirmation trials of locally produced kit. they have purchased and shifted a production line from austria to india.

and likewise mahindra defence also had some work going on iirc.

we should not again let OFB rule the it again as a single vendor situation. split the orders 30:30:30 with 10% for special imports like M777 and Krupp 8" truck mounted mounted bombardment guns.

age and ancestry does not matter...we need 1000s of these puppies and best to spread our bets and cast the net wide.

schowdhuri · Post by **schowdhuri** » 17 May 2012 08:50

Keep a close watch on Pranabda's austerity drive - I have a bad feeling about where it will hit.

member_22906 · Post by **member_22906** » 17 May 2012 09:13

ramana wrote:Does above new item means the 155/39 cal are based on Bofors TOT? and the 45 cal is the upgraded barrel? Both could have other upgrades.

Is this the old ToT or a new one?

Frankly speaking I am now thoroughly confused about whether it is a licensed copy or an upgraded gun or based/derived from the original Bofors design... Either ways, if this works, it is good for IA.

Either ways, my lungi is washed, starched and ironed in anticipation of the good news coming

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 May 2012 09:20

real austerity would be if lutyens delhi were given to the delhi ridge forest to reclaim, with some area kept for a large recreation park area like golden gate state park in SF, while our netas and servants of the poor shift to a few highrise towers - much lesser footprint, way more easy to secure and maintain.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 17 May 2012 09:52

I have tried to make a guide to this madness of arty. I am not claiming that it is 100% true, but, i think nearly true. Indian Army Field Artillery Rationalisation Plan

There is also a part 2 coming depending on the time I have.

koti · Post by **koti** » 17 May 2012 10:46

from your post

As part of the Field Artillery Rationalization Plan, Army has decided to standardize its artillery to 155mm/52 calibre barrel across the Towed, Mounted, Tracked and Wheeled platforms.

OFB is submiting prototypes of 155mm/45 calibre Bofors-type howitzers to Indian Army in June 2013.

Saab, If we plan to standardize the 52 caliber barrel, why even bother with the 45 caliber versions??

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 May 2012 11:06

technology risk reduction and stepwise increment and maybe 45cal barrels are more suited to mountain roads and at high alt shells fly farther. the M777 is only 39cal. adding teeth to our mountain formations is #1 in TODO list.

52cal barrel might need some new r&d and TOT for higher chamber pressure, stronger recoil dampers and such...but once it works we can put them in trucks and form our own OMGs for areas in ladakh and north sikkim.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 17 May 2012 11:13

I'm not going to fuss about the caliber. Any new guns which are available should be bought before the MOD blacklists the manufacturer or the parts suppliers or.... The present artillery situation is such that even a trebuchet pulled by a pack of mules will be a welcome addition.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 17 May 2012 11:25

I have only noted the facts. As I said, this is not 100% true.

However, to reply to your question, the 45 cal upg might be the best bet bet for the existing guns before the 52 cal is brought in.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 May 2012 11:30

52cal is overhyped . is it in active service in numbers anywhere in a tier1 army except Pzh2K ? khan still makes do with massive numbers of M109A6...its numbers and concentration that tilt the scale not just caliber. 55 cal is long common in naval 5" guns.

british AS90 SP is 39 cal still. 52 cal was scrapped.
AS-90 "Braveheart" - Basically the AS-90, but fitted with the 52 calibre length gun. This project was terminated due to non-compliant propelling charges.

member_22906 · Post by **member_22906** » 17 May 2012 11:38

^^
CJ Chetta, agree it is complete madness happening in FARP so I personally would doubt anyone (perhaps other than the DG Arty or COAS - that also with a pinch of salt) who claims to know everything what is happening there.

Not sure however about your below statement

Upgrading 130 mm/39 calibre M46 Russian guns to 155mm/45 calibre. 180 of 500 guns have been upgraded with Soltam kits. Metamorphosis project, as it is called, has no repeat orders.

Because, I thought the challenges with the Soltam kit had been resolved?

Moerover, with the next statement, I get confused more - how then are we upgunning the M46 130mm to 155mm if the Soltam/Metamorphosis project has no repeat order? Did we come up with our own upgrade?

> 600 of 105mm field guns and >700 Light Field Guns are being replaced by 130mm M-46 Field Gun to 155mm/45 calibre

Sorry for asking on this topic repeatedly. This SDRE has limited processing power to understand the complexities of Arty upgrades... So salpa adjust maadi...

wig · Post by **wig** » 17 May 2012 12:04

meanwhile it seems the made in India Bofors is faring reasonably well

An artillery gun produced within India to replace the Indian Army’s inventory of the 155 MM Howitzer supplied by AB Bofors, some 25 years ago, has reportedly performed well at the ongoing trials to test out the weapon in the heat of the deserts. The second round tests will be in winter in the mountains.

The India-made gun has been produced by the Ordnance Factory Board. The gun is presently being tested near Pokhran in Rajasthan and has done well. Source confirmed that yesterday, there were 12 rounds of firing from the gun and tests will continue till Saturday.

The 155 MM, 45 calibre Howitzer produced by the OFB looks similar to the Bofors and can reportedly fire at a distance in excess of 30 km. The accuracy reading will be out after tabulations at the end of trials. “All this delay and shortages of artillery guns could have been avoided had the OFB started work on the gun a year back,” said an official.

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2012/20120517/nation.htm#13

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 17 May 2012 12:09

Ajay Sharmaji,

It is a simple reply. 'If' the Soltham upg is sorted out, then expect the wheels to move. There is time lag between sorting out and actual placing of orders. If not, the process for alternative is still on. May be OFB will come up with a solution.

vic · Post by **vic** » 17 May 2012 12:14

deleted

vic · Post by **vic** » 17 May 2012 12:18

Army Chief VK Singh had said that OFB-Gun had fired around 450 rounds and result were good, so I don't think that there is any prospect of major f***up. Further oldies, like me remember that when Bofors gun was being bought, one of its features was that it was meant to be upgraded to 45 caliber, so perhaps chassis etc may have been designed accordingly. If 130mm gun can be upgraded to 155/45 then upgrading 155/39 to 155/45 should be cake walk.