Artillery Discussion Thread

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 11 May 2012 06:29

ramana

or maybe we could use both

but the 155s are definitely needed

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 11 May 2012 08:37

Nobody can deny they are needed in numbers...but there are dark clouds over even the M777 FMS deal apparently for unknown reasons! can anyone say how a FMS deal with no middlemen could fall under a cloud?

the 105mm could still be used if and when the M777 comes in a 2nd line of artillery closer to the front for tactical targets and providing support in areas where the 155 cannot move into.

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 11 May 2012 09:51

From what gurus are saying 105 has its advantages - It is here and now, easy, cheap, almost no logistical issues, mobile easy, can be airlifted. - One the negative side - lack of range and can not penitrate bunkers. I feel that it is almost like a heavy mortor. If Army can develop a way if this system can be best used - may be move along with rapid moving IFV and Tank etc, prepositioning them in himalayas etc it would be good. Just thinking loud with out knowing much.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 11 May 2012 10:05

> I feel that it is almost like a heavy mortar

I think range and ammo of 105mm far exceeds any heavy mortar. we need to infuse as much technology as possible to keep these guns relevant and permit higher sustained fire rates and lighter weight - like EDE option on engine, titanium components to save weight, increasing the traversal degree...work should always go on.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 11 May 2012 18:51

What BR not yet posted this news.

In a FIrst After Bofors, Army buys Howitzers for 3000 crores

The defence ministry has cleared the acquisition of 145 Ultra Light Howitzers from the United States under a Rs 3,000 crore deal, according to sources.

Kakarat · Post by **Kakarat** » 11 May 2012 18:51

India buys new artillery guns, 27 years after Bofors

New Delhi: The Indian Army got a shot in the arm today with the defence ministry clearing its long-pending $660 million (Rs.3,000 crore) proposal to buy 145 ultra-light howitzer guns to add teeth to its ageing inventory.

This is the first time the army is buying artillery guns in 27 years, since the Bofors guns payoff scandal broke out in the late 1980s, defence ministry sources said here.

The Defence Acquisition Council (DAC), headed by Defence Minister A.K. Antony, cleared the deal for the M777 BAE Systems guns that will be bought through the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) route of the US government.

The purchase comes in the wake of Indian Army chief Gen. V.K. Singh writing to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in March highlighting the gaps in its preparedness.

Being light in weight, the 155mm 39-calibre guns can be easily airlifted and will be deployed in the high altitude mountainous areas in the northeast and in the Ladakh region of Jammu and Kashmir bordering China.

A couple of weeks ago the defence ministry had approved infrastructure development projects in the northeast, including strategic roads and rail lines that will enable easy and quick mobilisation of troops.

The DAC cleared the M777 gun following a favourable report by a committee headed by Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) chief V.K. Saraswat that studied the suitability of the weapon system.

The army had recommended the gun following a series of rigorous trials.

vic · Post by **vic** » 11 May 2012 18:55

Narayana Rao wrote:From what gurus are saying 105 has its advantages - It is here and now, easy, cheap, almost no logistical issues, mobile easy, can be airlifted. - One the negative side - lack of range and can not penitrate bunkers. I feel that it is almost like a heavy mortor. If Army can develop a way if this system can be best used - may be move along with rapid moving IFV and Tank etc, prepositioning them in himalayas etc it would be good. Just thinking loud with out knowing much.

Range of Mortar is around 8-9 km while 105mm HEER+basebleed can go upto 20-25km. In mountains 105mm can go upto 30-35 km

vic · Post by **vic** » 11 May 2012 19:25

Big guns are slowly being replaced by missiles/rockets. Israel has moving to MBRLS from 155guns while US is not developing "new" heavies. 175mm and 203mm is going out of fashion. The accuracy of unguided rocket like Pinaka has improved to 1% of the range from 5% and hence the need for big guns is decreasing.

vic · Post by **vic** » 11 May 2012 19:28

Army's new mountain divisions to get light field guns instead of howitzers

NAGPUR: As the wait for modern ultralight howitzers gets longer, the Army has apparently decided to arm its two new mountain divisions on the Indo-China border with the old generation (as$hole from TOILET) 105 light field guns (LFGs). (USArmy has also ordered similar guns for use in mountains and production is to continue till 2013)

The Gun Carriage Factory (GCF) at Jabalpur has bagged an order to supply over 150 units of 105-LFGs to the Army over a period of three years starting from May 2010. A source in the Ordnance Factory Board (OFB), who was part of the deal, said the order has been hiked on account of increased deployment on the eastern front. (Cool so we may see upto 300 guns)

He added that the 155mm ultra light howitzers, which the Army has been scouting for since 2007, would have been the ideal choice as LFGs have now become an obsolete weapon system. The 105 LFGs have a range of 18km while a howitzer covers over double the distance. (DDM + Liar from Toilet. LFG is not obsolete, range has been increased with new ammo like HEER and LFG is a howziter)

A senior official at GCF Jabalpur said that the order was received in 2010 and so far 100 pieces have been delivered. Another 50 are expected to be dispatched this year. The source confirmed that this was the biggest order in the recent past.

The LFG is derived from the 105 Indian field gun (IFG), developed over three decades ago. Experts say that given the changing scenario, howitzers would be a better option than a field gun. However, procurement of the guns has been mired in controversy. (DDM + Liar from Toilet. LFG is not obsolete, as sometimes 30 year old technology remains contemporary especially in mechanical equipment and LFG is a howitzer)

Former director general of artillery LT General (retd) Vinay Shanker says that this could be a stop gap arrangement. Although a 105 in a mountainous area cannot be the ideal weapon, but it is still better to have something rather than nothing. (DDM liar from TOILET, your pants on fire, LFG is super specialized howitzer especially designed for mountains) The procurement of weapon systems is a lengthy process, as the delivery still takes around five to six years after the order is placed. The 105 LFGs can be replaced by the howitzers when they arrive, he said.

According to Colonel US Rathore (retd), an independent defence analyst, howitzers are the ideal choice in a mountainous frontier. Field guns have a lesser lethality as the shells are not so effective, when the defences have time to be strengthened. (LFG is a howziter)Also, howitzers provide a higher trajectory, which is required in a mountainous area. For achieving the same trajectory in a LFG, it has to be moved further from its original position which leads to a compromise in the range. (LFG is a howziter)

"The Chinese are known for better defences and bunkers, and a 105 shell may not have the desired impact on certain armoured vehicles too," said Rathore. (There are v few areas where armored “heavy” armored vehiles can be used in Himalayas. In any case, 105mm howitzers will be coupled with Pinakas, Nag missiles etc.)

It is attack of pimps, dalals and DDM on indigenization of artillery

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 11 May 2012 19:37

I do not think the chinese are armed with 155mm towed artillery in abundance either. probably they are managing with a mix of 122 and 130 mm in their mountain units.

here are their mainstays
http://www.sinodefence.com/army/artille ... _122mm.asp
http://www.sinodefence.com/army/artille ... _122mm.asp

the type86 has the benefit of lifting its wheels and rotating 360' to quickly change direction of fire.

we are NEVER going to be able to afford enough M777 to match the low cost and production rate of these norinco products. while some M777 would be good to have for corps level artillery, we need volumes of upgunned 130mm and 105mm produced locally and cheaply to counter the fire rates that will be brought to bear + ofcourse more and more BEL WLR radars and networking to counterbattery MLRS units.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 11 May 2012 19:48

The DRDO 155 mm artillery gun coming soon by 2013 should be filling the large gap.

member_23364 · Post by **member_23364** » 11 May 2012 19:49

+1

M777 range with normal ammo is 24 Km and with base bleed ammo 30 Km. Given this, the 18 km range of the 105 LFG range is very acceptable. Taking into consideration the cost, availability and numbers in which the 105 LFG can be procured vis-a-vis the M777, i am totally with the Army to order the 105 LFG in numbers (300 is good) in addition to purchasing/license building the M777.

At the same time, the M777 purchase is a much needed capability for the IA. Hope there are no issues with induction, quality and ammo.

Here's an idea for TOILET-Why don't they show a logo of the "sponsor" of the article either beneath or on top of the article?

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 11 May 2012 20:00

Big guns are slowly being replaced by missiles/rockets. Israel has moving to MBRLS from 155guns while US is not developing "new" heavies. 175mm and 203mm is going out of fashion

.

Tell me this story when they have none or down to the pathetic numbers (of 155s) we have

Right now they have larger holdings of these weapons.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 11 May 2012 20:11

khan has around 500 each of M777 for the marine corps and army on order. and older M198 towed inventory would surely be in 1000+ range.

todays news
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/new ... 095688.cms

India clears $660 million deal for artillery guns
11 MAY, 2012, 05.02PM IST, IANS

NEW DELHI: The Indian Army got a shot in the arm today with the defence ministry clearing its long-pending $660 million (Rs.3,000 crore) proposal to buy 145 ultra-light howitzer guns to add teeth to its ageing inventory.

This is the first time the army is buying artillery guns in 27 years, since the Bofors guns payoff scandal broke out in the late 1980s.

The Defence Acquisition Council (DAC), headed by Defence Minister A K Antony, cleared the deal for the M777 BAE Systems guns that will be bought through the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) route of the US government.

The purchase comes in the wake of Indian Army chief Gen. V K Singh writing to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in March highlighting the gaps in its preparedness.

Bala Vignesh · Post by **Bala Vignesh** » 11 May 2012 20:39

Time to breakout the champagne bottles and do a lungi dance.. At last a new artillery type is being inducted, since I was borne..

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 11 May 2012 20:57

Singha

Israel would have more than us

those buggers do not discard anything

old new everything

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 11 May 2012 21:22

from wiki:

for such a small army, their arty holding is frightening.
600 M109 SP, 350 x 155mm towed guns, and lots of MLRS...plus the usual israeli jugaad of captured 122mm and 130mm which they never throw away but keep in heavy grease for emergencies.
and 70 x 175mm guns

so all in all, in excess of 1000 x 155mm tubes + MLRS + UAV and WLR support for an area hardly bigger than Assam! - against rivals who are nowhere in the league of TSPA and PLA.

if we are to match that kind of density, we need 1000 for the TSPA, 1000 for northern command in ladakh-HP belt, 500 for sikkim and 1000 for arunachal = 3500.

against this we have a grand total of 400 bofors at best! truly miles to go....we need the cheap and rugged OFB or Mahindra or Bharat forge guns whatever be the model and chi chi ability, because we will never to be able to import the Archers or M777 in much quantity due to cost reasons.

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 11 May 2012 22:02

Vic
Why don't you try posting your comments on TOI site? Just go easy on expletives

abhischekcc · Post by **abhischekcc** » 11 May 2012 22:21

Singha,

Israel's strategy is driven by its sheer lack of strategic depth, which makes it more aggressive in taking the fight to enemy's land. Similar to Pakistan, and even pakistan is more jugaadoo than us when it comes to weapons acquisition.

India can afford to trade land for time, draw in enemy deep inside out land and crush them.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 11 May 2012 22:48

wouldn't namica more maneuverable and useful than artillery guns?

srai · Post by **srai** » 11 May 2012 22:58

Kakarat wrote:India buys new artillery guns, 27 years after Bofors

New Delhi: The Indian Army got a shot in the arm today with the defence ministry clearing its long-pending $660 million (Rs.3,000 crore) proposal to buy 145 ultra-light howitzer guns to add teeth to its ageing inventory.

...

145 guns comes out to around 8 regiments (@18 guns/regiment). This is equivalent to around 24 batteries (@6 guns/battery).

rajsunder · Post by **rajsunder** » 11 May 2012 23:54

Link
I had to protest openly and called these Sundarji's "Red Herrings". Later on he told the JPC, as quoted in the Hindustan Times on 1 May 88 that the Bofors gun was chosen to counter the American ground radar ANTPS 37 acquired by Pakistan, which brought about a "sea-change" to India's vulnerability, and induced the Defence Ministry to order the Bofors gun!!

can someone please inform how Bofors gun helps us to evade the artillary radar??

rajsunder · Post by **rajsunder** » 11 May 2012 23:55

SaiK wrote:wouldn't namica more maneuverable and useful than artillery guns?

do you want to install artillery gun on namica????

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 12 May 2012 00:00

the bofors apu provided a limited shoot n scoot capability over other guns that had to be packed up for towing after releasing a few shots.
in reality this apu moves the gun quite slowly it seems from videos.

rajsunder · Post by **rajsunder** » 12 May 2012 00:56

Singha wrote:the bofors apu provided a limited shoot n scoot capability over other guns that had to be packed up for towing after releasing a few shots.
in reality this apu moves the gun quite slowly it seems from videos.

from the same link, the author while discussing the Austrian Gun says

While moving under its own power, six crew members and six rounds of ammunition could be carried. So it moved to its new position at great speed, and came into action well before the Bofors gun arrived.

To move cross-country for 1000m, the Bofors at 6 kmph (maximum speed 8 kmph) would take 10 minutes, and the Austrian gun at 24 kmph (maximum speed 34 kmph) would take only 2.5 minutes, thus enabling the Austrian gun to come into action in its new position much before the Swedish gun arrived and, if digging was required, dig a position quicker than either the Bofors or French guns, because of its lower silhouette..

the Austrian gun was mounted on a vehicle with 6 wheels which was faster than the Bofors which has a APU which was no where near the capability of the Austrian vehicle.

srai · Post by **srai** » 12 May 2012 01:17

rajsunder wrote:
Singha wrote:the bofors apu provided a limited shoot n scoot capability over other guns that had to be packed up for towing after releasing a few shots.
in reality this apu moves the gun quite slowly it seems from videos.
from the same link, the author while discussing the Austrian Gun says
While moving under its own power, six crew members and six rounds of ammunition could be carried. So it moved to its new position at great speed, and came into action well before the Bofors gun arrived.

To move cross-country for 1000m, the Bofors at 6 kmph (maximum speed 8 kmph) would take 10 minutes, and the Austrian gun at 24 kmph (maximum speed 34 kmph) would take only 2.5 minutes, thus enabling the Austrian gun to come into action in its new position much before the Swedish gun arrived and, if digging was required, dig a position quicker than either the Bofors or French guns, because of its lower silhouette..
the Austrian gun was mounted on a vehicle with 6 wheels which was faster than the Bofors which has a APU which was no where near the capability of the Austrian vehicle.

^^^

That's an unfair comparison. For a fairer comparison, truck-mounted vs truck-mounted would be more accurate. Bofors with its APU is better than other towed artillery because it allows movement of the gun under its own power allowing for faster/easier/lesser fatigue setup compared to manual setup of other towed pieces.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 12 May 2012 01:25

Finally! Better late than never.Reg. the role of MBRLs,some time ago,a Lankan general told me that it was their MBRLs that saved the day when facing major LTTE attacks.If we are able to field in the mountains a combination of heavy (lightweight) 155mm artillery,105mm field guns as well as heavy mortars ,Pinaka MBRLs (any recent info on the performance of Smerch ?),and tactical battlefield missiles,all of which can be airlifted by our heavy transports and heavy-lift and medium helos,where they are required on the ground,it will be a very commendable achievement and give the IA considerable firepower in the mountains.The problem is that the border is so immense and the threat widely dispersed-now a two front threat from the Sino-Pak combine,that unless we are able to solve the logistic equation,we will be very vulnerable to any short,swift incursion by either the Chinese or Pakis or both,as we saw in '62 and Kargil.

stryker · Post by **stryker** » 12 May 2012 02:25

Great news for the army. This M777 howitzer uses titanium and is about half the weight of a regular 155 mm gun. It can be airlifted by chopper. Can you imagine the firepower that these guns will generate by being airlifted to mountains and heights which were previously inaccessible to heavy weapons? I am thinking specifically of places like Kargil and other areas near the LOC. Could be a game changer and force multiplier. Much easier to tow across land at high speeds and will provide tremendously mobile firepower for surgical strike incursions across the international border. US Marines use this gun and it is state of the art.

My hope is that these guns are positioned not only on the China border but against the Pakis as well.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 12 May 2012 03:09

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kb3tfk8dxvU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8sWCkX4m7t4

that is a beast

member_20453 · Post by **member_20453** » 12 May 2012 05:12

I think a follow up order of around 2000+ should follow soon after first delivery. The follow up order can be made locally by Mahindra so the cost per unit will reduce certainly.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 12 May 2012 07:35

^^ +100
Hopefully FMS route will be bribe-accusation proof and IA gets the loads of these.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 12 May 2012 07:54

>> It can be airlifted by chopper

are you sure our choppers like dhruv and Mi17 can airlift this? sure a CH53 can airlift even a F18 but thats not ours. can the chinook do it?

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 12 May 2012 07:59

Yes, SaiK's video shows chinook carrying it. Using titanium they brought its weight down to 9800 pounds from previous model's 16000 pounds.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 12 May 2012 08:15

but we are proposing to buy only 12 chinook @ 600mil if the FMS deal goes through. wont make a dent on the problem even if 12 are devoted to the M777 operating corps.

key question is can our Mi17V carry it internally or externally at 12,000 ft ? if not, there is no chance to airlift this thing on a widespread basis.

Gurneesh · Post by **Gurneesh** » 12 May 2012 08:30

Wiki says that Mi 17-1V has load carrying capacity of 5tons (when externally slung). M777 weighs 4218 kg. So, in theory Mi17 should be able to carry it. Can it carry that at high altitude is anybody's guess (but i think probably not).

srai · Post by **srai** » 12 May 2012 09:05

M777 Highlights:

Titanium - extensive use for lighter weight (~9,800lbs)
CH-47 - carry 1 underslung plus ammunition
C-130H - carry 2 internally plus ammunition
8x8 truck - tow plus carry extra (40% more) ammunition
Range - 15-18 miles (standard HE round); 24 miles (smart munition)
5 - men crew
computer built-in - knows where it is and where it is pointing at (very accurate - first shot on target)

Also, read somewhere that a C-17 can carry 6 x M777.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 12 May 2012 09:42

At last, der aaye, and possibly durust aaye!

sudeepj · Post by **sudeepj** » 12 May 2012 11:10

Singha wrote:but we are proposing to buy only 12 chinook @ 600mil if the FMS deal goes through. wont make a dent on the problem even if 12 are devoted to the M777 operating corps.

key question is can our Mi17V carry it internally or externally at 12,000 ft ? if not, there is no chance to airlift this thing on a widespread basis.

2 Mi17V5 will be needed operationally, 1 for the gun (possibly with some parts breech lock/firing patform removed..), 1 for the crew (5-9) and ammo and the stripped parts.

member_20453 · Post by **member_20453** » 12 May 2012 13:12

apart from the high admin cost of FMS, it is one of the cleanest forms of deal making. FMS also is great for quick deliveries, once production begins, I think we can see first deliveries of this gun by early 2013 or even before.

srai · Post by **srai** » 12 May 2012 13:15

A C-17 air dropping 2 x M777 with paratroopers sitting on the side.