Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 08 Jul 2011 11:30

D Roy wrote:
II Corps has one Armoured, one RAPID (partially mechanized) and one vanilla infanty division
We don't know for sure. May have changed.

As in? The infantry brigades of RAPID 'may' have be mechanized?

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 08 Jul 2011 12:33

Yes. the enhanced rate of BMP-II/IIk production points to it.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 08 Jul 2011 13:43

D Roy wrote:Yes. the enhanced rate of BMP-II/IIk production points to it.

Well, the enhanced rate first needs to take care of requirement to replace older BMP-1 in service and additional regiments required for taking the number of RAPIDS from 4 to 7.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 08 Jul 2011 16:37

is the 'magnetic neutralization' thing the concept which UK is working on? could be if BAE has tied up with the auto major offer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle_ar ... ged_armour

Electrically charged armour is a recent development in the United Kingdom by the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory.[13][14][15][16][17][18][19] A vehicle is fitted with two thin shells, separated by insulating material. The outer shell holds an enormous electrical charge, while the inner shell is at ground. If an incoming HEAT jet penetrates the outer shell and forms a bridge between the shells, the electrical energy discharges through the jet, disrupting it. Trials have so far been extremely promising, and it is hoped that improved systems could protect against KE penetrators. Developers of the Future Rapid Effect System (FRES) series of armoured vehicles are considering this technology.

from 2004:
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/ar ... 30125.html

The Ministry of Defence recently demonstrated to top Army officials a technology they have been working on for some time now called Electric Armour.

In demonstration the new armour was applied to a medium sized general personnel carrier and it was fired upon with several anti-tank rocket propelled grenades (RPG-7's), enough to destroy the armoured car several times over. After what would normally be considered a severe beating, the vehicle trundled away under its own power, seemingly unscathed by the onslaught to which it had been subjected.

The new armour employs a technique used for some time now in non-lethal weaponry such as Tazers where a modest power source is used in a stepping form to charge capacitors (somewhat like a battery) up to a very high capacity. The armour itself is in several parts. Firstly the electrically grounded outer skin which is bullet proof and made from an unknown composite. The second is an insulated yet live skin. And finally there is the hard vehicle hull. The capacitors directly connected to these skins, when charged provides for the electric armour.

When the RPG round impacts with the outer armour, the inner core is detonated and liquefied and propelled forward into the armour, where it then meets with the second skin also. This makes a connection between the second inner skin and the outer skin. When the armour is active, this will essentially ground the full potential power stored in the capacitors connected to the second skin. In an instant, the full power is discharged into the armour, through the molten copper and expelled through the grounded outer skin. In this instant, most of the molten copper core is vaporised, leaving only a small amount of the copper core to be easily absorbed by the vehicle hull.

pragnya · Post by **pragnya** » 08 Jul 2011 18:20

it is known IA wants to upgrade the BMP 2s. an RFI has been issued for the same. now why can't they go for ABHAY which looks better in all respect. i can understand they may still have a lot many BMP 2s with good life left in them - in which case, ABHAY can atleast replace the older lot. or is there any serious issue with ABHAY?? considering FICV is years away, does not it make sense??

nikhil_p · Post by **nikhil_p** » 08 Jul 2011 21:16

@Pragnya

The Abhay was a Technology Demonstrator, not an operational vehicle. IIRC from a discussion with a senior chap earlier it is cheaper to upgrade the existing fleet of ICV's/AFV's than replace them completely even over the next 20 years. The IA preferably wants to use the funds elsewhere (Tanks,Air Arm, Howitzers, SPG's etc).

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 08 Jul 2011 22:15

I wonder if there's a possibility that as the FICV starts replacing the BMP's in mech inf, the upgraded BMP's will be given to the inf divisions (1 btn each, say) in order to increase their share of motorisation.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 09 Jul 2011 05:17

rohitvats wrote:The mechanization in IA is very lop-sided and even our Strike Corps are unbalanced with respect to that. I mean, II Corps has one Armoured, one RAPID and one vanilla infanty division.

Adding to this, IA has more tanks than APCs, typically armies have it the other way round. IA has relied too much on Lorries to move troops into action... before it was the Shaktiman, now it is the Stallion.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 09 Jul 2011 05:24

Rahul M wrote:I wonder if there's a possibility that as the FICV starts replacing the BMP's in mech inf, the upgraded BMP's will be given to the inf divisions (1 btn each, say) in order to increase their share of motorisation.

An interesting development it will be (Yoda Speak!!!). Apart from tracked FICV we need to have another project to build wheeled APCs. We should have versions for scout, recce, Artillery and above all transporting troops.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 09 Jul 2011 08:02

Ordnance factory develops system to airlift LFGs

Recently, the factory had developed an indigenous barrel for Russian T-90 tanks. A barrel has to be changed after around 200 to 250 shells are fired. Earlier, the Army had to completely depend on Russia for the supply of the barrels but now it won't be needed as the factory has finally developed the T-90 barrels, he added.

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 09 Jul 2011 08:07

Adding to this, IA has more tanks than APCs, typically armies have it the other way round. IA has relied too much on Lorries to move troops into action... before it was the Shaktiman, now it is the Stallion.

Don't you get it? the IA will have its men ride Desant into battle with full NBC gear and two BPJs. Far more effective than wasting money on wheeled APCs. You think you know better than the IA, hain?

P.S : They fix chairs on tanks for the Afsar class.

vic · Post by **vic** » 09 Jul 2011 08:42

I think we should plan for massive future requirement of 3 important things being Wheeled APC, Turboprop An-32 replacement & thermal imagers rather let it go answered like our Basic Trainer requirment

Samay · Post by **Samay** » 09 Jul 2011 09:20

D Roy wrote: ..
P.S : They fix chairs on tanks for the Afsar class.

Had they issued RFP for chairs effective in armoured vehicles with improvised, fire resistant seat belts, ?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 09 Jul 2011 10:22

a photo would be truly a keeper.

pragnya · Post by **pragnya** » 09 Jul 2011 10:56

@Pragnya

The Abhay was a Technology Demonstrator, not an operational vehicle.

nikhil, i know it has 'remained' a tech demonstrator. why has it remained so is basically my query?? particularly when it is a good improvement on BMP 2s. does it need many years to productionise/operationalise it?? even the upgrades will take lot of time.

IIRC from a discussion with a senior chap earlier it is cheaper to upgrade the existing fleet of ICV's/AFV's than replace them completely even over the next 20 years.

which is why i said those older BMP 2s which need total replacement is where ABHAY can come into the picture. the newer lot of BMPs can get an upgrade which obviuosly will be cheaper. consider FICV is years away.

nikhil_p · Post by **nikhil_p** » 10 Jul 2011 02:28

pragnya wrote: nikhil, i know it has 'remained' a tech demonstrator. why has it remained so is basically my query?? particularly when it is a good improvement on BMP 2s. does it need many years to productionise/operationalise it?? even the upgrades will take lot of time.

It was intended to show that the DRDO is capable of designing and developing an AFV if need be. The FICV was conceived after this. Yes, it will take quite some time to put it into production, esp considering HVF Avadi already has its hands full. Upgrades are considerably quicker as it is done in stages and most of the work can be carried out by repair depots as well.

which is why i said those older BMP 2s which need total replacement is where ABHAY can come into the picture. the newer lot of BMPs can get an upgrade which obviuosly will be cheaper. consider FICV is years away.

FICV is not too far into the distance. The older BMP's are being converted into second line vehicles (ambulances and stuff like that) which are not at the frontline of a spearhead.

Also, a lot of the ICV role will be taken over by cheaper options like MRAP's ( Marksman/Rakshak/ Mine protected vehicles) which offer similar or superior levels of protection at cheaper costs of acquisition and maintenance. Also a wheeled MRAP kind of vehicle will give better mobility in urban conflict as well.

I envisage that we will move into a different level soon where Tanks lead the charge - AFV's (Tracked) do the cleanup - Wheeled APC's carry in the strike infantry - Lightly armoured trucks and trucks bring up the rear of the infantry. NAMICA type vehicles protect the flanks. I think the IA is moving to a force which can deploy rapidly and use shakinah

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 10 Jul 2011 09:50

HVF Avadi having its hands full is a bull peddled by Army/DG Mech Forces, HVF Avadi has always been saying we can do it... IA gives piecemeal orders and HVF is forced run shop in a single shift to retain #s. obviously Laal-Jhanda wont allow them to layoff any workers here right? Let IA order 500 Arjuns, HVF will run 3 shifts to deliver these... For years IA has cried about "low output of HVF" what did it do to rectify this sitn... in HALs case atleast IAF is offering a solution. Desi Shipyards have IN admirals managing these...

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 10 Jul 2011 09:55

nikhil_p wrote:I envisage that we will move into a different level soon where Tanks lead the charge - AFV's (Tracked) do the cleanup - Wheeled APC's carry in the strike infantry - Lightly armoured trucks and trucks bring up the rear of the infantry. NAMICA type vehicles protect the flanks. I think the IA is moving to a force which can deploy rapidly and use shakinah

hmmm, i have been dreaming of such a day... to achieve we need couple more HVF Avadis and OFB Medak...FICV needs to see light of the day soon, NAMIKA, Pinaka and Prahaar launchers need to get inducted in hundreds. LCH and DRUV WSIs should be inducted in large numbers to field a squadron with every strike division of IA (OK agree it can be held at Corps or Command level but should be available to a divisional commander during operations.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 10 Jul 2011 09:58

Missed two important additions:
1) Artillery induction (SP, towed etc)
2) Wheeled APC/ICV (troop carriers, mortar carriers, recce-scout, light arty, SAM carrier, ATGM carrier)

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 10 Jul 2011 10:03

Couple of days back I was asking about a Truck mounted Arty...Gurus stated, it does not exists.
Today's TOILET talks about this...

The ordnance factory has also developed a mounted version of the 105mm gun. The gun can be placed on a truck and fired. This increases its mobility and enables it to be fired even while shifting positions. The gun was test-fired recently and the ordnance factory hopes that the Army may place an order for its bulk production

mounting a 105mm field gun on a small truck would give it much needed mobility and offer a cheap shoot-and-scoot capability. a truck with adequate storage and crew compartments would enable IA regiments to mount a sustained barrage in a theater and the best part is, we make the gun, the truck and the shell in India... will IA accept it?
Edited some OT Rants

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 10 Jul 2011 10:06

there was a picture of it from one of the exhibitions\brochures whatever.

whether it will be ordered is a million dollar question

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 10 Jul 2011 10:23

Both truck mounted and BMP mounted versions have made it to different editions of Def expo. Moi has seen them. Brochure for BMP mounted was posted on this forum as well.

Truck mounted was a Tata display.

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 10 Jul 2011 11:27

Are you talking about this?

Full size pictures: 1st

Any picture of truck mounted version ?

Kakarat · Post by **Kakarat** » 10 Jul 2011 12:03

jamwal wrote:Any picture of truck mounted version ?

sarabpal.s · Post by **sarabpal.s** » 10 Jul 2011 12:08

Self deleted
Kakarat has the movement

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 10 Jul 2011 12:12

Shrinivasan wrote: <SNIP> mounting a 105mm field gun on a small truck would give it much needed mobility and offer a cheap shoot-and-scoot capability. a truck with adequate storage and crew compartments would enable IA regiments to mount a sustained barrage in a theater and the best part is, we make the gun, the truck and the shell in India... will IA accept it? probably it needs a JV with Yehudi's to get their Chappa, form a JV for IA to buy it.

Can you think for a minute before passing such gratuitous remarks?

So, you, in all your wisdom deem the truck mounted 105mm gun to be of immense value and something IA should order pronto. And then go on to pass the stupid remark on how the IA will not buy it because OFB has made it. How do you know that IA will not buy it? Has it been offered to the IA yet? Have the IA given any comment on it yet? Just because the OFB has woken up after donley years means the IA should just go ahead and order the system?

Or, may be, there is no requirement for such a system. That may be, a truck mounted 105mm gun does not make sense? That in case IA required such a weapon, it might have asked for it already? After all, we have been operating the gun for donkey years now. And while you're at it, can you please explain what role does the 105mm caliber play in the IA service? And how same will receive a boost because it is truck mounted? Another point - how many such 105mm guns might there be in IA Service and how many of them might require modification? And how does this truck-mounting business gel with the planned standardization of to 155mm/52 Caliber? How would the two processes - modification of 105mm gun to truck mounted version and induction of new systems - run?

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 10 Jul 2011 12:52

rohitvats wrote:That in case IA required such a weapon, it might have asked for it already? After all, we have been operating the gun for donkey years now. And while you're at it, can you please explain what role does the 105mm caliber play in the IA service? And how same will receive a boost because it is truck mounted? Another point - how many such 105mm guns might there be in IA Service and how many of them might require modification? And how does this truck-mounting business gel with the planned standardization of to 155mm/52 Caliber? How would the two processes - modification of 105mm gun to truck mounted version and induction of new systems - run?

We are planning to buy light Arty for our Mountain divisions and future Mountain Strike Corps. the M777s which IA is planning to acquire is an 155mm gun 39 cal gun... we need a large # of artillery, hence this hybrid solution to mount it on a truck to give it high mobility. Even in the mountain of NE, it would be easier to transport and deploy a truck mounted Arty than a Truck towed Arty... what do you think?
I am talking about NEW 105mm/155mm Guns mounted on Trucks. not converting existing 105mm field guns from the field. we need every piece we can lay our hands on. IA still operates 105mm, 122mm, 130 mm arty apart from 155mm arty (which it wants to establish as a gold std). we can mount different guns for different missions on the same truck platform for deployment in different theaters (Not the SAME TRUCK per-se

) or standardise on 155mm/52 cal itself.
Rohit, my intent was to propose an out-of the box solution, I could be WRONG, but let us debate the idea and not shoot the messenger.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 10 Jul 2011 13:05

rohitvats wrote:So, you, in all your wisdom deem the truck mounted 105mm gun to be of immense value and something IA should order pronto. And then go on to pass the stupid remark on how the IA will not buy it because OFB has made it. How do you know that IA will not buy it? Has it been offered to the IA yet? Have the IA given any comment on it yet? Just because the OFB has woken up after donley years means the IA should just go ahead and order the system?

Added by Shrini: Looks like my previous post got deleted, so i am reposting it. thanks to backups.
I value your opinion immensely, so am going to ignore any personal attack on me... I wrote what i wrote after thinking through the matter, so off the cuff rant here from my side... I laid out why a truck mounted Arty would be of value...IMMENSE VALUE, maybe... not sure.
IF IA has not asked for a truck mounted Arty gun why? it was not the OFB but some private player who showcased it I think, doesn't matter who produced it, let us analyse "If it is useful?" shall we?
Before we get struck up on 105mm or 155mm, IA operates both...a truck mounted 155mm would also be a better idea but I don't know if we make a 155mm gun in desh...
Utility of a truck mounted Arty? as i already said, it give shoot and scoot. can be deployed along our newly built road network and with offroading capability, venture offroad. better mobility than those heli hauled or Towed guns.
I proposed an option, let us consider the advantages / disdavantages..
Agreed that my rant about the Yehudi Chapa was going overboard, but i mean no ill-will towards IA. probably i'll remove those line, lest someone quote me as the gospel truth!!! my analysis continues...

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 10 Jul 2011 13:10

everyone and their unkil (esp lizard and its serpent pets) are loading up with phased array WLRs , and counterbattery MLRS systems tied together in loops with UAV support. the threat is just getting worse even on Pakfront as the WS-x rocket systems proliferate and chinese WLRs get better.

the old mantra of digging in and operating from reverse slopes wont work when a bunch of rockets fired at a steep angle will be plunging down at a high angle and saturating the whole area with 1000s of bomblets. and these MLRS often outrange the field guns handily...they could arrive with zero warning from 100km away fired from another sector.

so we need to ensure every artillery gun in IA is preferably mobile except those intended to be airlifted into fwd bases like 105mm/M777 where roads do not exist.

that automatically implies the 105mm too needs to get trucked and new shells with 40km range (matching the fh77 39cal) are being claimed, with increased lethality too. 105mm is no outdated caliber...its likely to see a renaissance with new wheeled vehicles proliferating of the stryker species.

we will never be able to afford the uber expensive Archer types in huge nos even if the artillery deal get a lease of life. we need to think of cheap solutions and fully local manufacture - a improved 105mm IFG, stabilization pkg, armoured compartment for ready rounds, a feed system for the gun, a automatic reload vehicle, a automatic feed vehicle....the idea is launch a tremendous 5 mins barrage and then relocate instead of digging in.

it needs a change in mindset and hard work to define and source the solution from within indian industry as much as possible. the last war (kargil) is already more than a decade old...the next could be 2020. to prepare for 2020 we need to start in 2010 with a plan. we must prepare for the changing world.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 10 Jul 2011 13:24

Singha wrote:so we need to ensure every artillery gun in IA is preferably mobile except those intended to be airlifted into fwd bases like 105mm/M777 where roads do not exist.

that automatically implies the 105mm too needs to get trucked and new shells with 40km range (matching the fh77 39cal) are being claimed, with increased lethality too. 105mm is no outdated caliber...its likely to see a renaissance with new wheeled vehicles proliferating of the stryker species.

we will never be able to afford the uber expensive Archer types in huge nos even if the artillery deal get a lease of life. we need to think of cheap solutions and fully local manufacture - a improved 105mm IFG, stabilization pkg, armoured compartment for ready rounds, a feed system for the gun, a automatic reload vehicle, a automatic feed vehicle....the idea is launch a tremendous 5 mins barrage and then relocate instead of digging in.

it needs a change in mindset and hard work to define and source the solution from within indian industry as much as possible. the last war (kargil) is already more than a decade old...the next could be 2020. to prepare for 2020 we need to start in 2010 with a plan. we must prepare for the changing world.

Agree with your surmise, you brought it our beautifully.
What do you mean "roads do not exist", isn't it our plan to have strategic roads along our borders? would it hurt to have suprs along these roads. if mounted on a compact TATRA platform couple of miles of offroad movement can be achieved. Even our Stallions have offroad capabilities... leveraging a local product to provide a cheap solution is the key. I am eagerly awaiting Rohits counter point.

Kakarat · Post by **Kakarat** » 10 Jul 2011 13:38

As we are looking to buy M777, how do you people like this

http://www.baesystems.com/ProductsServi ... ystem.html
http://www.military-today.com/artillery/m777_portee.htm

...
Cab of the M777 Portee provides light armor protection and NBC protection for the crew.

The M777 Portee is mounted on the chassis of the Supacat 8x6 high mobility truck. Vehicle can be carried by the C-130 transport aircraft. Unique feature of the M777 Portee is that artillery system can be easily removed or attached to the chassis. Thus it can be carried underslung by two CH-47 Chinook helicopters.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 10 Jul 2011 14:03

Shrinivasan wrote: <SNIP> IF IA has not asked for a truck mounted Arty gun, why? It was not the OFB but some private player who showcased it I think, doesn't matter who produced it, let us analyse "If it is useful?" shall we?

Not so fast, dude. The news item you quoted while making that post very clearly said that OFB has developed a truck mounted version. The fact that TATA has showcased such a product is a different matter. And the way you worded your post, it was quite clear that has some private and foreign player showcased this product, IA would have ordered it ASAP.

Utility of a truck mounted Arty? As i already said, it give shoot and scoot. can be deployed along our newly built road network and with offroading capability, venture offroad. better mobility than those heli hauled or Towed guns.

It would have been great if you has stuck to the analysis part like above.

Now, coming to shoot-and-scoot - while it is good to have, I don't think IA will be in position to get the same for the entire gamut of 105mm in its service. I mean, every 3 out of 5 regiments with most of the infantry divisions are either D-30 or IFG. As for off-road capability, in all these years that IA has operated the IFG, I don't think it has faced any challenge (apart from LFG not being light, actually) in deploying these guns. As it is, they are with Infantry Divisions which are deployed in the plains of western India...where mobility is not exactly a problem in terms of terrains. Though, the physical labor of adjusting the gun is something that will be addressed by such a system - along with preparing firing positions.

Another area where a mounted system would have been of help was in terms of keeping pace with maneuvering formations. But as these are with vanilla infantry divisions, this aspect is also not important in present set-up.

The 'new' road network argument is a non-starter as road network used in west has been there for many years now. As it is, the main deployment happens away from the main road.

Also, one needs to understand the increment in capability to warrant this change (and expenditure) when the IA is trying to standardize on 155mm caliber. Why opt for something if it might be replaced in another 5years time? You might also be interested in knowing that in absence of any 155mm induction, IA had initiated the process of converting their Field Regiments to 130mm caliber with M-46. The 105mm caliber is increasingly loosing relevance in todays battlefield - both in terms of range and weight of shell.

If there ever is, there might be a small order for some select formations. But I don't see any large scale induction of such a sytem.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 10 Jul 2011 14:29

Shrinivasan wrote: We are planning to buy light Arty for our Mountain divisions and future Mountain Strike Corps. the M777s which IA is planning to acquire is an 155mm gun 39 cal gun... we need a large # of artillery, hence this hybrid solution to mount it on a truck to give it high mobility. Even in the mountain of NE, it would be easier to transport and deploy a truck mounted Arty than a Truck towed Arty... what do you think?

In the mountains, the placement of guns is dicated by the geography and availability of real estate. The angle of fire is more important that mobility. And btw, the kind of mobility we're looking at for MSC is vertical and not horizontal - those guns should be light enough to be lifted from firing position X in valley A to firing position Y in valley B. By mounting them on trucks, you'd kill this feature. Even adding APU will add enough weight to rule out 'light' designation.

Another point - the shoot-and-scoot capability does not neccessarily refer to wheeled or tracked gun. A gun with APU, like our present bofors, can move between alternate firing positions to tackle the threat of counter battery fire. And that is quite sufficient - the largest component of planned induction of 155mm is towed guns for some reason.

As far as mobility is concerned - it needs to seen in context - the guns with Armored columns need to more mobile then with a present day RAPID or infantry division. The movement is more restricted in case of mountain formations - after all, what is the pace of warfare to warrant high mobility? And mobility in what sense? Reaching from point A to point B? Or traversing cross-country? In mountains, IMO, the towed gun system (traditional 155mm and not M777) holds good enough. As it is, the long term solution to mobility is widening of roads - like IA did to Srinagar-Leh road to allow for movement of T-90.

I am talking about NEW 105mm/155mm Guns mounted on Trucks. not converting existing 105mm field guns from the field. we need every piece we can lay our hands on. IA still operates 105mm, 122mm, 130 mm arty apart from 155mm arty (which it wants to establish as a gold std). we can mount different guns for different missions on the same truck platform for deployment in different theaters (Not the SAME TRUCK per-se ) or standardise on 155mm/52 cal itself.

New systems inducted will be of 155mm caliber, the 105mm is on its way out along with all other caliber types.

The requirement for SP( Tracked/Wheeled), mounted and towed 155mm/52 Cal weapons have been established clearly. The interesting point for me was that IA does not consider the Archer Gun as "wheeled SP". For it, it is a mounted SP - and mounted SP forms a big part of the order after towed guns. Wheeled SP for IA is the SA G6 or the wheeled version German PzH 2000.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 11 Jul 2011 00:00

Singha wrote:everyone and their unkil (esp lizard and its serpent pets) are loading up with phased array WLRs , and counterbattery MLRS systems tied together in loops with UAV support. the threat is just getting worse even on Pakfront as the WS-x rocket systems proliferate and chinese WLRs get better.

the old mantra of digging in and operating from reverse slopes wont work when a bunch of rockets fired at a steep angle will be plunging down at a high angle and saturating the whole area with 1000s of bomblets. and these MLRS often outrange the field guns handily...they could arrive with zero warning from 100km away fired from another sector.
..

This presents a really interesting scenario. What one must think upon is here is "How long will the Weapon Locating Radars(WLRs) last?" To be effective the WLR will have to be placed very close to the front-line, and be stationary with its radar on for long periods where it will be venerable to aircraft launched anti-radiation missiles, loitering drones like the Harpy and simple triangulation followed by an artillery attack among others. Any focused attack on it will surely will result in its destruction unless the enemy withdraws it or switches off the radar where it becomes redundant. But because of inherent mobility(of varying degrees) of the artillery systems themselves, counter battery might have limited effectiveness. My guess is that the attrition rate of the WLRSs will be much higher than the artillery. So the there might great emphasis on mobility of artillery at the start of the conflict but within hours(or days) as the enemy WLRs are knocked out(and hence making enemy counter battery much less effective) the emphasis on mobility will also reduce.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 11 Jul 2011 06:43

that Portee M777 thing I hope has a raiseable suspension....else it might run aground on BLR speedbreaks not a mile from home on ORR-BLR ... though it might get to Tawang easily. BLR is the ultimate market for 4x4 stallion sedans...and BBMP keeps literally 'raising the bar'
there is also DONAR if the Pzh155mm cannon is desired..looks almost the same.

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 11 Jul 2011 09:07

abhik wrote:
Singha wrote:everyone and their unkil (esp lizard and its serpent pets) are loading up with phased array WLRs , and counterbattery MLRS systems tied together in loops with UAV support. the threat is just getting worse even on Pakfront as the WS-x rocket systems proliferate and chinese WLRs get better.

the old mantra of digging in and operating from reverse slopes wont work when a bunch of rockets fired at a steep angle will be plunging down at a high angle and saturating the whole area with 1000s of bomblets. and these MLRS often outrange the field guns handily...they could arrive with zero warning from 100km away fired from another sector.
..
This presents a really interesting scenario. What one must think upon is here is "How long will the Weapon Locating Radars(WLRs) last?" To be effective the WLR will have to be placed very close to the front-line, and be stationary with its radar on for long periods where it will be venerable to aircraft launched anti-radiation missiles, loitering drones like the Harpy and simple triangulation followed by an artillery attack among others. Any focused attack on it will surely will result in its destruction unless the enemy withdraws it or switches off the radar where it becomes redundant. But because of inherent mobility(of varying degrees) of the artillery systems themselves, counter battery might have limited effectiveness. My guess is that the attrition rate of the WLRSs will be much higher than the artillery. So the there might great emphasis on mobility of artillery at the start of the conflict but within hours(or days) as the enemy WLRs are knocked out(and hence making enemy counter battery much less effective) the emphasis on mobility will also reduce.

I have to ask this question. And no question is a dumb question.

Won't intel satellites be useful in locating enemy assets. Whether arty or electronic assets?

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 11 Jul 2011 09:11

rajanb wrote: <SNIP> I have to ask this question. And no question is a dumb question.

Won't intel satellites be useful in locating enemy assets. Whether arty or electronic assets?

Forget intel satellites, there are dedicated resources with-in artillery set-up for accurate targeting and location of enemy assets. Intel satellites will only add to the picture. With the proliferation of UAV in the IA, this task will be undertaken by them. There is something known as Surveillance and Target Acquisition (SATA) Battery or Regiment whose job is exactly as you say!

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 11 Jul 2011 09:21

Thanks Rohit.

mikehurst · Post by **mikehurst** » 11 Jul 2011 10:07

Singha wrote:a photo would be truly a keeper

Samay wrote:
D Roy wrote: ..
P.S : They fix chairs on tanks for the Afsar class.
Had they issued RFP for chairs effective in armoured vehicles with improvised, fire resistant seat belts, ?

On popular demand and Singhaji's order, i have been authorised to release advance information on the latest development in mechanised infantry transportation system.
1. this is the basic version for mechanised infantry: http://www.ohgizmo.com/2006/04/23/offro ... ank-chair/
2. This is the Special Forces version: http://elitechoice.org/2008/01/09/15000 ... -ces-2008/

There is more good news for our patriotic brethren. The latest technological innovations that you see above have been developed by our own top defence ergonomics manufacturer "Nilkamal". Now we can go to war in style, comfort and above all good posture.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 11 Jul 2011 11:36

OMG

I do have a couple of nilkamal plastic cupboards for my kid.