Artillery: News & Discussion

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 18 Jul 2014 03:35

BTW, on the data point about IA having 62 launchers of SMERCH in inventory - last I knew, IA had 3 x SMERCH Regiments each with 12 Launchers. And organized into 3 x Batteries @ 4 launchers each. That would make is 36 launchers in total. You can couple of more for training but that should be about it. IA would have no more than 40 SMERCH launchers.

Misraji · Post by **Misraji** » 18 Jul 2014 05:12

rohitvats wrote:.... I'm waiting for someone to say that these are being 'upgraded' to prevent induction of PINAKA Regiments!

vlc wrote:....Further costly upgrade of Grad while still continuing to restrict Pinaka to only 2 regiments is also suspicious

Too late.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 18 Jul 2014 05:45

Misraji wrote:
rohitvats wrote:.... I'm waiting for someone to say that these are being 'upgraded' to prevent induction of PINAKA Regiments!

vlc wrote:....Further costly upgrade of Grad while still continuing to restrict Pinaka to only 2 regiments is also suspicious
Too late.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 18 Jul 2014 07:32

in a environment of limited capex, all these costly upg of imported dated eqpt be it M2k or Grad WILL take away money from purchases of domestic eqpt whether related or unrelated 1:1 .... if I spent 2L on getting in a road bike, I will have none in the piggy bank to buy my son a 10k bike on his birthday for sure.

this constant money sink is one killer of domestic projects apart from ofcourse the import lobby and apathy of the higher ups in the forces to anything not imported unless they have no option like strategic missiles.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 18 Jul 2014 09:52

Russia refuses technology transfer for Smerch rockets to India

?????

member_20317 · Post by **member_20317** » 18 Jul 2014 10:21

Singha wrote:do we make the grad rounds locally ?
OFB makes only fuze it seems and not the rocket per this link http://www.ofbindia.gov.in/index.php?wh=A-E-P-C&lang=en

looks like its another import deal going on there for decades now.

I think an extended range version of BM-21 is still being ordered as an import from Russia.

The old BM-21 rocket OFB used to make must have been discontinued by now since the phasing out was supposed to be during 2011 and thereafter and the Pinakas was getting taken seriously by the IA.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 18 Jul 2014 13:29

ravi_g wrote:
Singha wrote:do we make the grad rounds locally ?
OFB makes only fuze it seems and not the rocket per this link http://www.ofbindia.gov.in/index.php?wh=A-E-P-C&lang=en

looks like its another import deal going on there for decades now.
I think an extended range version of BM-21 is still being ordered as an import from Russia.

The old BM-21 rocket OFB used to make must have been discontinued by now since the phasing out was supposed to be during 2011 and thereafter and the Pinakas was getting taken seriously by the IA.

DRDO had developed extended range rockets for BM-21. These are the ones used by IA.

member_20317 · Post by **member_20317** » 18 Jul 2014 13:49

This was quoted earlier on the forum. Only ~7 months old article.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 600574.cms

Antony defers decision on critical but controversial missile deals with Israel
Rajat Pandit, TNN | Nov 11, 2013, 08.48PM IST

NEW DELHI: Defence minister AK Antony on Monday refused to bite the bullet on two critical but controversial major missile deals with Israel, but cleared other proposals for rockets, night sights, munitions, simulators and vehicles worth over Rs 7,000 crore for the armed forces.

Sources said the Antony-led defence acquisitions council (DAC), attended by the three service chiefs and defence secretary, kept the decision on the over Rs 15,000 crore project to equip the Army's 355 infantry battalions with Israeli "Spike" third-generation anti-tank guided missiles (ATGMs) "on the hold" for now.

<snip>

As reported by TOI last week, both the Spike and Barak deals are with Israeli firm Rafael on "a single vendor" basis without global competition. The two have been kept pending for long despite the military pressing for these "critical operational requirements" due to controversies like "leaks" of top-secret documents and the pending seven-year-old CBI case into the original Barak missile deal.

<snip>

Among the projects cleared were the Rs 3,794 crore one to acquire "night sights for carbines" from Indian companies, the Rs 682 crore procurement of Russian extended range Grad BM-21 rockets and the Rs 137 crore purchase of technical support vehicles for Russian T-90S main-battle tanks.

The DAC also approved the waiver of certain offset provisions for the Rs 4,381 crore order for four more American P-8I long-range maritime patrol aircraft. The Navy is already inducting eight P-8I aircraft under a $2.1 billion deal inked with aviation major Boeing in January 2009.

The DAC also extended by three months the tender for the proposed Rs 13,000-crore project to acquire 56 transport aircraft to replace the ageing Avro fleet of the IAF. This comes in the backdrop of NCP leader and heavy industries minister Praful Patel questioning the MoD's decision to keep state-run units like defence PSU Hindustan Aeronautics out of the project. "The matter is being examined in detail," said an official.

Pls note the writer may not be trustworthy on all counts but he is taking pains to clarify on the origin of the weapons being ordered. A reasonable level of due diligence & after such care, for me, even a less trustworthy reporter may become adequately believable. Esp. when the only real concern the last Raksha mantri displayed, was w.r.t the country of origin of the equipment.

Hence I inferred that even though DRDO did develop the ER version but we are importing the rockets. Probably because OFB cannot yet produce it.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 18 Jul 2014 14:23

now someone will say we have onlee 100 BM21 so whats the harm in importing?

my response would be if we cannot produce a unguided BM21 rocket first, how shall we produce something to match the smerch or latest gen guided rockets. one has to start somewhere...and cloning these bottom drawer russian kit, scaling production and learning is how NORINCO found its feet in the world.

so despite perhaps higher costs we simply cannot afford to let such consumables be in imported basket.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 18 Jul 2014 14:55

NRao wrote:Russia refuses technology transfer for Smerch rockets to India

?????

Hope we get rid of these shits, probably reverse engineering chinese suits this putin baztard more.

Successful Test of Pinaka

By Hemant Kumar Rout - BALASORE

| Published: 21st December 2013 01:26 PM |

Four months after a failed attempt, India’s indigenously developed Pinaka Mark-II rocket system was successfully tested from a defence base off the Odisha coast. At least six rockets were fired from a multi-barrel rocket launcher (MBRL) from Chandipur-on-sea on Thursday.

Defence sources said the rockets were test fired from the testing range of Proof and Experimental Establishment (PXE). The successful trials were morale booster for the Pune-based Armament Research and Development Establishment (ARDE) of DRDO which conducted the tests.

Pinaka, which has undergone several tough tests since 1995, has been inducted into the armed forces and the trials were conducted with some improvements in the system. The unguided rocket system has been developed to neutralise large areas with rapid salvos.

The older version of the rocket system has a strike range of 40 km while its advanced version can strike a target beyond 55 km and is capable of acting as a force-multiplier. It has been developed to supplement artillery guns. The system can be operated in four modes - autonomous, stand-alone, remote and manual.

The rocket launcher can fire 12 rockets with 1.2 tonne of high explosives within 44 seconds and destroy a target area of 3.9 sq km at a time. The quick reaction time and high rate of fire of the system gives an edge to the Army during a low-intensity conflict situation.

This rocket system’s capability to incorporate several types of warheads made it deadly for the enemy as it could even destroy solid structures and bunkers.

On August 7, two rounds of second generation Pinaka rocket were test-fired from a multi-barrel rocket launcher which had failed to provide the result as expected by the mission team. The rockets reportedly could not cover the expected distance and some of their sub-systems too did not function properly.

However, in July similar trials of the Pinaka Mark-II version from Chandhan area in Pokhran field firing range of Rajasthan were stated as successful by the DRDO. The trials were conducted by the DRDO and Indian Army.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 18 Jul 2014 15:09

btw munna khan gave up on cluster munitions in his MLRS in favour of a single big 250kg warhead because could not control the dud rate of these below a best case of 1% failure.

its got to be factored in that some of every system including strategic ICBMs and their warheads will fail.

member_20317 · Post by **member_20317** » 18 Jul 2014 15:15

Singha wrote:now someone will say we have onlee 100 BM21 so whats the harm in importing?

my response would be if we cannot produce a unguided BM21 rocket first, how shall we produce something to match the smerch or latest gen guided rockets. one has to start somewhere...and cloning these bottom drawer russian kit, scaling production and learning is how NORINCO found its feet in the world.

so despite perhaps higher costs we simply cannot afford to let such consumables be in imported basket.

Saar I do not doubt the OFB or DRDO or any other Indian sub contractor's ability to make these.

Most likely what happened was that the ER version got made in Russia and DRDO did it separately/cooperatively, a few years late (for there own time/resource constraints). Further only because of paucity of time the manufacturing may not have been translated to OFB. In any case OFB was busy ironing out the Pinaka rockets. So no real issue there except that of meeting time and supply schedules. The 20 km grad is already almost reduced to a patakha level ordnance. The only way this smaller dia rocket makes sense is when its range is extended etc. etc.

And unguided BM-21 may have been produced in India right from the beginning of its induction.

Leo.Davidson · Post by **Leo.Davidson** » 21 Jul 2014 04:50

DRDO keeps calling all the heterogeneous rockets in development as INDIGENOUS. And they don't know how to derive a larger solid propellant rocket motor from the Pinaka, go figure. Clearly implies their indigenous claims are screw driver technology.
MRLS is the most primate rocket technology one can imagine and we want technology transfer to build one!

symontk · Post by **symontk** » 21 Jul 2014 06:35

BM-21 might have been built in India, but there is a critical difference between that and a Pinaka. BM-21 is having a liquid engine while Pinaka has solid motor

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 21 Jul 2014 06:44

Leo.Davidson wrote: MRLS is the most primate rocket technology one can imagine and we want technology transfer to build one!

Yes, the Gorillas and Orangutans are currently the world leaders in MBRLs.

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 21 Jul 2014 07:00

There are reports of contract signed with improper wordings, Smerch rockets not tested in the specified temperature etc etc. The import lobby do find ways to get things imported by hook or crook. Lot of Indian money to steal.
Regarding BM-21, they are getting replaced by the Pinaka's.
Indigenous Rockets for Smerch, and India's own launcher is a new project so we'll have to wait for sometime to see that in action.
Did read an article around one year before when DRDO conducted test of a 300mm rocket tested from Smerch launcher.

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 21 Jul 2014 07:14

http://idrw.org/?p=40371
Present situation
Pinaka 214 mm rockets capable of reaching 65 km compared to Smerch's 90 km
Work going on to develop a 300 mm rocket that can reach 90-120km

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 21 Jul 2014 07:25

Leo.Davidson wrote:DRDO keeps calling all the heterogeneous rockets in development as INDIGENOUS. And they don't know how to derive a larger solid propellant rocket motor from the Pinaka, go figure. Clearly implies their indigenous claims are screw driver technology.
MRLS is the most primate rocket technology one can imagine and we want technology transfer to build one!

Prahar?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 21 Jul 2014 07:25

what exactly would be the diff between a MLRS 300mm / 120km range rocket and the current Prahaar?
both would be mobile on a truck with maybe 6-8 rounds.

at those ranges some form of gps or ins would obviously be necessary to correct trajectory and prevent huge dispersion if we simply scaled up a bm21 style diwali rocket. that I think the prahaar already has.

so dont we already have the replacement for Smerch and with proper guidance as well?

the long 'silence' and 'displeasure' on the prahaar after successful tests so many years back might be just the import lobby trying to protect their plate of meat by sustaining the smerches through bulk imports and lock in that segment of the pie, having lost the mid range to pinaka after a bitter fight.

I think a PMO level fact finding panel led by scowling Namo himself is needed to call army jernails and MOD mandarins in 3s and 4s to explain and justify some of the things that were done in the last 20 years.

a lot of dirt could be under the rug.

vic · Post by **vic** » 21 Jul 2014 08:45

Even so called Grad upgradation was an import disguised as an upgrade.The upgrade is costing around 90% of a new system. Go figure.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 21 Jul 2014 15:33

vic wrote:Even so called Grad upgradation was an import disguised as an upgrade.The upgrade is costing around 90% of a new system. Go figure.

This upgrade is costing 90% of which new system? And does it involve? Thanks.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 21 Jul 2014 15:41

The issue with Arty is that too many people have too many perceptions. The caused was not helped, by the bureaucracy, sitting on the FH77 Blueprints, for over 20 years. The IA struggling to import big guns, MOD blacklisting every single vendor of note.

When it comes to the MLRS, systems, while the situation with the war Reserves of Smerch rockets is Alarming. It is foolish to expect, that the Russians will provide the TOT.

Perhaps, the best solution could be to develop a rocket at home, "if" the Pinaka tech can be scaled up to work with the Smerch.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 21 Jul 2014 16:39

attack the problem from two ends - upsize the pinaka tech and productionize the pragati. nothing more is needed. 150km max range means the pragati probably has a min range of 50k and max range of 150k...its plenty cost effective for vital target at 90k imo.
and 6 of these bad boys on a truck will wipe out a village.

if needed make a stubby version of 100k max range also that flies out the same tube. another cost reduction is delete the radar imaging seeker on one model and just go with the pinaka style TCS. this chota-pragati can cover the area targets, while the radar imaging mota-model the precision targets. improve the propulsion, increase the warhead weight, use composite airframe .... it can be done.

sitting around waiting for some gora tech to save our backsides is just not done.

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 21 Jul 2014 16:53

Of what good are 36 Smerch launchers for their so called niche roles if there are no rockets for them ?
Roosies as usual are going back in the agreement and trying to gouge Indians again. I'd rather have a few doZen Pinaka launchers with enough rockets rather than100 Smerch with empty tubes waiting to be filled with gold plated rockets.

srai · Post by **srai** » 21 Jul 2014 21:02

^^^
Here is the advantage of home grown product

5,000 Pinaka Rockets To Be Produced Every Year

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 21 Jul 2014 21:49

^^^^^

Since that article is from 2012, we should be able to see what the progress has been on that front and is it reliable.

Leo.Davidson · Post by **Leo.Davidson** » 21 Jul 2014 22:04

The difference between MRLS and Prahaar, is that MRLS is a Rocket, while Prahaar is a Missile and various components like electronics &navigation, storage & transportation, etc clearly differentiate the two. I don't have the numbers at hand, but the Smerch and the Prahaar, will have similar attributes and characteristics, but the Prahaar will be atleast 2 times more expensive.
The purpose of MRLS is to cheaply and effectively carpet bomb a particular sector which is out of reach of the friendly howitzers. The purpose of the Prahaar would be to take down specific targets within range. It is ironic that we have a solid propellant rocket motor for the Prahaar, but are asking for Smerch TOT.
We know that the Pinaka MRLS has had significant assistance from the Israelis. Then what do we want from the Russians?

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 21 Jul 2014 22:25

Still better than the defective stuff brought from Russia like defective T-90 barrels, hangar queens like Mig-23, Mig-27 and many more.

vic · Post by **vic** » 21 Jul 2014 22:40

Army demanded accuracy 5 to 10 times better than Grad from Pinaka.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 22 Jul 2014 01:30

vic wrote:Army demanded accuracy 5 to 10 times better than Grad from Pinaka.

First, 5-10 times is too big a range. You either know the number or don't. But don't make these inane statements. Secondly, what did you want DRDO to deliver in 2008? Same tech level as developed in 60s for BM-21 GRAD? Finally, you still haven't answered the question about upgrade of BM-21 being 90% which NEW system?

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 22 Jul 2014 02:15

Thing with Smerch is that Roosies are going back on the agreement over manufacture of Smerch, just like they did with T-90, Gorshkov and numerous other big and small projects which has now extended to FGFA .

Now India has the option to either play their inflated prices for those magic rockets or spend the money on developing and inducting better versions of Pinaka, Prahar etc. Giving in to their blackmail yet again will encourage them yet again. Going by the past history, I wouldn't count on Army taking a proper stand on it though. Yet again, imports will be rushed in citing whatever reasons and we'll have people claiming that army is really helpless in front of MOD babooze, netas and PSU defence factories.

And at least the Mig 23 and 27s resulted in real hardware flying; or are you guys accepting that the hangar queens are bad - and we should diversify away from them ? I would have no quibbles with that either...

Real hardware which spent majority of time getting pampered with expensive spares instead of flying as it's supposed to.

That said, why is a burst T90 barrel worse than a burst Pinaka ?

You like getting ripped again and again by foreigners too much, do you ?

vic · Post by **vic** » 22 Jul 2014 11:38

The accuracy of imported Grad rockets was 5% of range and Ofb rockets 8% of the range. Pinaka has achieved 1% but 100 new Grad launchers are being bought on the pretext of upgrade. Import Jindabad.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 22 Jul 2014 13:16

vic wrote:Import lovers will always protect imports. The accuracy of imported Grad rockets was 5% of range and Ofb rockets 8% of the range. Pinaka has achieved 1% but 100 new Grad launchers are being bought on the pretext of upgrade. Import Jindabad.

With respect to the bold part of your post: I'm reporting your post. Enough of this nonsense of labeling people X, Y and Z because they don't agree with your POV.

Secondly, it might not make a difference to you as you type these inane one liners but 3% difference in accuracy makes sh1t load of difference to the people who actually go out and fight - for a 40 km range that is difference of 1.2 km in accuracy. Go figure how many rockets it would require to be fired so that decent number land on target. And may be, then you'll understand why IA has never been a fan of these type of weapons.

As for Pinaka - it would be useless to have a 40 km system w/o this level of accuracy. Which btw is between 1%-2%. And one that is being inducted in 2008-2010 time period. Unless you feel that IA should have relax specifications and go easy on DPSU to meet your definition of it being 'patriotic' enough!

Again, on GRAD BM-21 upgrade, this is what has been reported in press in mid 2013: http://articles.economictimes.indiatime ... ravi-rishi

According to people familiar with the development, a consortium of Ashok Leyland and L&T emerged the lowest bidder two weeks ago when commercial bids for procurement of 100 multi-barrel rocket launchers (meant to upgrade the BM21 rocket launchers) were opened. The value of the contract is about Rs 100 crore, according to industry sources.

The contract involves refurbishing the existing rocket launchers and mounting them on new vehicles. The weapons-related work will be done by L&T and the vehicle is a new Ashok Leyland platform. The Leyland-L&T combine left behind a team of Tata Group companies (Tata Motors and Tata Power SED) and a team of Tatra, Bharat Earth Movers and Bharat Electronics. The last two are public-sector defence companies.

So, tell me this: What is being imported here if two Indian companies are going to do the work? And, assuming you're referring to value of contract (INR 100 Crore) as 90% of new system (which can only be Pinaka), does INR 112 Crore fetch you 100 Pinaka systems? Mind you, I said systems and not only launchers. This is what a single battery has:

"A Pinaka battery has six launchers, six loader vehicles, six replenishment vehicles, two vehicles for ferrying the command post and a vehicle for carrying the meteorological radar, which will provide data on wind."

As per a 2009 Hindu Report and PIB release, IA had placed an order worth INR 1,300 Crore for Pinaka 'System' for 2 x Regiments.

Hindu: http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/thscrip/p ... prd=fline&
PIB: http://pib.nic.in/newsite/efeatures.aspx?relid=72477

The same 'import' pasand army has been crying from roof-tops for more Pinaka rockets and government in its magnanimity finally decided to clear a sum INR 1,500 Crore in 2013.

http://archives.deccanchronicle.com/130 ... ka-rockets

The IA is not complaining about PINAKA, the DRDO/DPSU are not complaining about IA's attitude to PINAKA but here we're manufacturing conspiracy theories to fit our prejudice and lack of any interest to do back-ground search.

Next time you decide to make an argument, at least make an effort to think through it.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Hindu report I've linked above has interview with then ARDE Head and he says ARDE will 'SOON' build rockets with 60 km range. Well, that soon has taken 5-years to materialize and ARDE just successfully tested the rockets in May 2014.

I've no iota of doubt that Russians refused to sign TOT because they clearly see the writing on the wall - this TOT will only assist ARDE to develop the 120 km range rocket which they have said they will, and this will take away the revenue stream away from Russians. They will want to squeeze last bit of juice before they do sign the TOT.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To those who've been taking about using Prahaar instead of 120 km range rocket, please read this from ARDE Director (same 2009 Hindu report linked above)

The ARDE will soon build Pinaka rockets with a longer range of 60 km compared with the present 40 km and make them smarter too. These rockets will have a combination of inertial guidance systems and global positioning systems. Datar described such guided rockets as “something between ordinary rockets and missiles”. Missiles are expensive because they have precise guidance systems. “In the next five years, we will have guided rockets. This is a cheaper way to meet the challenge of getting at high-value targets with high accuracy. In the future, we may go for rocket systems with a 120-km range,” Datar said

The people who actually matter in what enters production and deployment, seem to be pretty clear about what is what.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 22 Jul 2014 15:10

Prem Kumar wrote:
We should let these guys be fired & the plant be closed, setup a JV, offer the good ones high paying jobs in India as part of the JV, sign M777 deal & as part of offsets offer to license produce it in India by moving the production plant lock, stock & barrel here

that would not be different than a licensed production deal which anyways have foreign supervisors initially for training and QC, albeit the machines might be cheaper than buying on open market.
the people who designed the gun cannot be brought over, they would already have moved on to other projects.
the 100s of smaller suppliers would be all over, and we would still need to import these sub components.
it is unclear if we have the metal plants to supply all the titanium components needed...perhaps midhani if provided all the tech blueprints could come up with something in a year or two.

likewise, Kalyani has the drawings and machinery of the GHN45, but can they produce a next gen GHN45-mk2 today ? I dont think so. but atleast Kalyani has its own heritage of metals and machining and GHN45 is not special titanium.

Ranjani Brow · Post by **Ranjani Brow** » 22 Jul 2014 20:20

The Indian Army has completed trials for two 155 mm/52 calibre howitzer systems and is preparing a report for the Ministry of Defence.

Official sources said two competing 155 mm/52 cal towed gun systems and two 155 mm/52 cal self-propelled tracked howitzers recently completed maintainability acceptance trials and secured Directorate General of Quality Assurance clearance.

These processes followed summer and winter trials involving all four howitzers in Rajasthan in mid-2013 and Sikkim state in the Himalayas late last year and in January.

France's Nexter Systems modified its Trajan 155 mm/52 calibre for the Indian tender and Elbit submitted its ATHOS 2052 for the towed gun tender.

Indian Army completes self-propelled howitzer trials

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 22 Jul 2014 20:39

I don't get it. Why don't we just go with the g6 which was already mated with the Arjun and use the towed and self propelled version. This will standardize the technology across the forces. At the same time we should induct the locally developed 45 caliber bofors variant. Why is this dragging on like this?

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 22 Jul 2014 21:06

hecky wrote:Indian Army completes self-propelled howitzer trials

While I can understand the SP Tracked guns undergoing trials, why are the towed guns being trialed? I thought the Dhanush and subsequently the DRDO gun would be inducted. What gives? This does not make any sense.

(1) This is the NEXTER Trajan - http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product4975.html - The article talks about NEXTER partnering with L&T to offer this gun for Indian competition.

Athos 2052:http://elbitsystems.com/Elbitmain/files/ATHOS.pdf

(2) Here is a 2012 communication from L&T on their partnership with NEXTER and possible work-share:

http://www.larsentoubro.com/lntcorporat ... ch2012.pdf

(3) CAESAR Mounter Gun System on Ashok Leyland 6x6 truck:

http://defense-update.com/wp-content/up ... and450.jpg

(4) L&T has partnered with Samsung for their K-9 Thunder SP (Tracked) Arty system:

http://www.larsentoubro.com/lntcorporat ... ch2012.pdf

(5) BEML+ Konstrukha SP Arty System: http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/8776/dsc02624i.jpg

Antony had said that three vendors had been approached with Russians being the third party - but they seem to have not participated.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 23 Jul 2014 02:17

>>>What gives? This does not make any sense.

Nothing about the howitzer saga makes any sense anyways. This is what, the 100th RFI/RFP/trial?

And yes, logistics for a toss. How many types.

Kakkaji · Post by **Kakkaji** » 23 Jul 2014 05:59

Why not revive Bhim?

And what were the results if Dhanush summer trials?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 23 Jul 2014 06:44

the Dhanush is a 39 cal (or 45?) weapon based on the FH77b we have. OFB has not attempted to rock the boat but focussed on delivering a working a reliable analogue of the imported bofors. this is obviously the first priority...even a 'trailing edge' 39cal weapon is better than being nook-nood.

the 52cal towed is supposed to be bideshi hifi tech for which no development precedent exists in india (never mind bharat forge has the GHN45 tech in hand) and so the trials. I dont know which two candidates are in the fray there...can anyone name them?

one I think is the FH77-B05-L52 , the other one from ST kinetics was blacklisted, ...so who is the other one?

the requirements are so high that nobody was able to meet them in most of the trials. and those that came for later trials were modified pieces to meet the reqs. I think atmos also suffered a barrel burst once.

there is confusion and corruption, but in this instance various factions and lobbies have cancelled each other out so that nothing can move.