Artillery Discussion Thread

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 21 Jul 2009 08:39

hmm..looks like the bofors is the superior weapon under stress test.

would have been good to sign a deal and lay in 400 of these puppies exclusively
allocated to the our mountain divs. we need to mass armour, helis, uav, wild
dogs, eagles, croco-cats and artillery in ladakh and sikkim for airland battle.

koti · Post by **koti** » 21 Jul 2009 08:52

It is said that each 150mm round costs around 40,000.
What would be the cost of each rocket in the Pinaka or Smerch or Grad system.

(Trivia: I've recently spoken to an Ex-para. He said he never heard of BM-21 or grad or MRLS etc....after little demonstration he said " Aaah.... woh Chalees round??")

sombhat · Post by **sombhat** » 21 Jul 2009 13:57

naird wrote:Bofor's is amazing ......

damn these politicians .....

I wish army can call a press briefing and just bare it all ....that may gather public opinion and might force politicians to just move forward on this crawling deal.

I think that is exactly what the Army is now doing. How do you think this confidential Army document ended up with Aroor. Such leaks, sustained over time, might just serve the Army's purpose.

naird · Post by **naird** » 21 Jul 2009 19:33

sombhat wrote:
naird wrote:Bofor's is amazing ......

damn these politicians .....

I wish army can call a press briefing and just bare it all ....that may gather public opinion and might force politicians to just move forward on this crawling deal.
I think that is exactly what the Army is now doing. How do you think this confidential Army document ended up with Aroor. Such leaks, sustained over time, might just serve the Army's purpose.

Nope Army is not doing anything ...I mean time for such leaks sustained over time is long gone. If Army is resorting to such kind of tricks under the impression that government might move their $%^ on this deal then its a day dream, after all did any media exploit Arror's leak ? Its known only to us jingo's and defence circle & not to aam janata.

I am taking about a full fledged press briefing from Army about the problems they are facing and how it is affecting their operational status.

sombhat · Post by **sombhat** » 21 Jul 2009 19:40

naird wrote: Nope Army is not doing anything ...I mean time for such leaks sustained over time is long gone. If Army is resorting to such kind of tricks under the impression that government might move their $%^ on this deal then its a day dream, after all did any media exploit Arror's leak ? Its known only to us jingo's and defence circle & not to aam janata.

I am taking about a full fledged press briefing from Army about the problems they are facing and how it is affecting their operational status.

Well, in this case, if these documents are not exploited by the mainstream media, it only shows their narrow-mindedness/apathy/bias/lifafa khori etc. Something we have come to call DDMitis.
If this was a test result showing Arjun is deficient in this and that, with a little nudging by the Natasha lobby, there would have been a large hue and cry by now, and tomorrows Telegraph would have printed in BOLD "Arjun not good enough, need T120: Army".

JMT

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 21 Jul 2009 19:41

‘ Don't block gun trials, Army chief urges Antony ’

A worried army chief, General Deepak Kapoor, has protested to Defence Minister A K Antony about the derailing of vital defence purchases by allegations of corruption.

The army chief, an artilleryman himself, has emphasised on the crucial need for modern artillery; the last important purchase was more than 20 years ago: the 155mm Bofors FH-77B gun in the mid-1980s. Even that was restricted, by allegations of kickbacks, to the direct purchase of 400 guns.

The chance to manufacture thousands more in India, through transfer of technology (ToT) was thrown away, even though India paid for the technology. In 2005, amidst a push to buy towed and self-propelled artillery, South African gun manufacturer, Denel, was banned. Soon afterwards, Israeli artillery firm, Soltam Systems, found itself under the scanner.

General Kapoor's request to Antony has counted for little; the CBI and the CVC suggested to the MoD that the ban on STK continues.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 21 Jul 2009 20:27

Sombhat, You mean T420!

rakall · Post by **rakall** » 21 Jul 2009 20:37

ramana wrote:Sombhat, You mean T420!

I think he just meant T120 > T90

if Russia take a T72, modifies a bit and calls it T100 -- our babus will feel it is a better tank than T90.. why bought the T90 because Pakis bought T85 from Ukraine.. you see 90 is greater than 85..

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 21 Jul 2009 20:47

Sigh, the perils of being a serious person. the sarcasm is lost. 420 refrs to IPC Sec 420 dealing with fraud or misrepresentation. My joke was that such T series are a fraud.

rakall · Post by **rakall** » 21 Jul 2009 20:53

ramana wrote:Sigh, the perils of being a serious person. the sarcasm is lost. 420 refrs to IPC Sec 420 dealing with fraud or misrepresentation. My joke was that such T series are a fraud.

Man that was too deep... I guess, I only got half-way..

Anabhaya · Post by **Anabhaya** » 21 Jul 2009 22:36

It is a sorry state of affairs that the IA recieves so much flak even on BR!

There is nothing that stops the IA top brass from organizing a proper press briefing about the state of artillery modernization plans. I recollect how navy/af chiefs went public about new acquisitions.

Yes, leaks are part of how things work but you don't merely leak after almost 20 years of inaction. The only plausible explanation is that the army itself is a hinderance...all that brochure bashing has hurt them and they don't even want to acknowledge it.

The continued acquisition of T-90 tanks is 420 indeed.

Willy · Post by **Willy** » 21 Jul 2009 22:43

Guys, there was an article about the arjun sometime back. Saying it was a world class tank. Anyone know where to find the article.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 21 Jul 2009 22:48

rakall wrote:
ramana wrote:Sigh, the perils of being a serious person. the sarcasm is lost. 420 refrs to IPC Sec 420 dealing with fraud or misrepresentation. My joke was that such T series are a fraud.
Man that was too deep... I guess, I only got half-way..

willy some more details ? do you mean an article that compared arjun with other tanks ?
I think it was in frontierindia website.

Willy · Post by **Willy** » 21 Jul 2009 22:54

Yes thats the one. Cant seem to find it

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 21 Jul 2009 23:03

replied in appropriate thread.
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 09#p703409

edit : ah, here is the article you were looking for.
http://www.ipcs.org/pdf_file/issue/1796 ... ort-23.pdf

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 27 Jul 2009 18:59

The negligence as regards artillery is criminal.

Actually what we really need to be developing as fast as possible is something like this:

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M982_Excalibur for full info.

The combat value of the projectile was indicated by the US Army's decision to rate it as one of the Top 10 Army Greatest Inventions of the Year Award for 2007

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 27 Jul 2009 19:47

Question for defense production experts:

DRDO has already demonstrated capability of manufacturing 120mm guns (in the Arjun tank). How long will it take them to make a 155 mm gun?

ParGha · Post by **ParGha** » 28 Jul 2009 04:15

Pranav wrote:The negligence as regards artillery is criminal. Actually what we really need to be developing as fast as possible is something like this: See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M982_Excalibur for full info.
The combat value of the projectile was indicated by the US Army's decision to rate it as one of the Top 10 Army Greatest Inventions of the Year Award for 2007

The need for precision-firing artillery is like the need for precision-firing machine gun - I am sure there is a singular scenario when it will become really necessary, but 99% of the time the main mission is something else. And when the 1% anomaly comes up, the Army will have to make do with something else it already has in the arsenal. In the US it will be a Predator/Reaper with Hellfire (~$60K vs. ~$80K for Excalibur + it is already in service and doing a lot of work). If I were an Indian gunny, I would be concentrating on my main mission - bringing down a LOT of HE as soon as possible and moving on - and let others worry about precision strikes.

sudeepj · Post by **sudeepj** » 28 Jul 2009 04:44

ParGha wrote:The need for precision-firing artillery is like the need for precision-firing machine gun - I am sure there is a singular scenario when it will become really necessary, but 99% of the time the main mission is something else. And when the 1% anomaly comes up, the Army will have to make do with something else it already has in the arsenal. In the US it will be a Predator/Reaper with Hellfire (~$60K vs. ~$80K for Excalibur + it is already in service and doing a lot of work). If I were an Indian gunny, I would be concentrating on my main mission - bringing down a LOT of HE as soon as possible and moving on - and let others worry about precision strikes.

I am not sure what your source for per unit cost of ex-calibur is, but all excalibur electronics will be digital and very low cost. On the other hand, sensors in hellfire etc. will be IIR/laser/mmw/tv guided and several orders of magnitude more expensive than the gps guided rounds sensors. Also consider the cost of deploying a predator versus the cost of deploying a 155mm gun.

As far as I can imagine, these rounds will be very very useful in low intensity conflicts or ones in mountains, both projected areas of future engagements for the Indian army.

ParGha · Post by **ParGha** » 28 Jul 2009 07:23

sudeepj wrote:I am not sure what your source for per unit cost of ex-calibur is, but all excalibur electronics will be digital and very low cost. On the other hand, sensors in hellfire etc. will be IIR/laser/mmw/tv guided and several orders of magnitude more expensive than the gps guided rounds sensors. Also consider the cost of deploying a predator versus the cost of deploying a 155mm gun. As far as I can imagine, these rounds will be very very useful in low intensity conflicts or ones in mountains, both projected areas of future engagements for the Indian army.

Doggone it... knew I shouldn't have mentioned $$$ - OK I concede, I am totally out of my depth here, and Wiki and SP are pretty shallow sources so I won't press it. GAO numbers for Hellfire IIs are public, and it is around $65K. I still remain skeptical about the cost of deployment. I can reroute a single Predator to a new fire-mission 200KM away in a matter of 2 hours... How many guns would I need to cover the same front? If I had to move a battery how long would it take me to get there? Is it even geographically/politically possible for me to move guns there? And while I have moved my guns, which formation is missing its kill-box wall? So many invisible costs.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 28 Jul 2009 10:46

ParGha wrote: Doggone it... knew I shouldn't have mentioned $$$ - OK I concede, I am totally out of my depth here, and Wiki and SP are pretty shallow sources so I won't press it. GAO numbers for Hellfire IIs are public, and it is around $65K. I still remain skeptical about the cost of deployment. I can reroute a single Predator to a new fire-mission 200KM away in a matter of 2 hours... How many guns would I need to cover the same front? If I had to move a battery how long would it take me to get there? Is it even geographically/politically possible for me to move guns there? And while I have moved my guns, which formation is missing its kill-box wall? So many invisible costs.

It is politically possible for the US to use predators because the Pakis won't dare shoot them down with SAMs. On the other hand these guided shells have extended range because of the wings/fins, and cannot be shot down.

Yes, the shells are expensive but IMHO the costs are mostly going to provide fat profits for the company. I'm sure it would be possible to make them in bulk at far lower costs.

Prem Kumar · Post by **Prem Kumar** » 29 Jul 2009 03:15

The IA has been testing Krasnopol-M precision guided shells, especially for use in the mountain regions, where a miss by a few meters will reduce the effectiveness drastically compared to plains.

I dont know how Krasnopol compares to Excalibur - cost & effectiveness wise.

So, it seems like precision guided shells are here to stay.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 01 Aug 2009 02:56

Someone had posted the details of the Krasnopol trials in J&K. Look slike IA was trialing the shells since march 99. Would have been useful during the war.

The key point is it provides a one shot kill probability for static and even tanks. And that helps the logistics trail.

They did mention the one that was missed when fired at 2.5 times the set parameters. I hope they acquire it before the Pakis get the clones from PRC or Ukraine while still going on about the to and froing.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 01 Aug 2009 13:50

This was a dud when it was tested when I was there in Kargil!

Prem Kumar · Post by **Prem Kumar** » 02 Aug 2009 11:12

And the failures seem to have been corrected - from the "unmentionable blog". There was a specific blog post on this with a brochure explaining the failure and its subsequent success. To be taken with a pinch of salt because the brochure seems to have been put together by a Russian PR agency.

Any confirmation of its performance from someone in IA artillery would be great!!

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 05 Aug 2009 02:17

Did it include making the shell in India? Such a shell even if it works half the time will change the logistics and the tactics in the high mountains. What was the OFB position?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 05 Aug 2009 02:22

RayC wrote:This was a dud when it was tested when I was there in Kargil!

Based on the brochure that dud was tested fired at twice the parameters to determine the limits. These shells guide their way by controlled fins. So they dont have any way to add velocity to correct errors. They do their thing by gliding. So high altitude with rare air density reduces margin to correct or guide its way. Again firing from lower altitude to higher target is bad within the parameters and vice versa is great.

sudeepj · Post by **sudeepj** » 05 Aug 2009 03:08

Here is the original report from Indian express. It turns out, the shell actually hit the targets intended, but failed to go off. If they can get the 'hitting of the target' correctly, the fuse would be a minor issue.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/most- ... urn/17346/

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 05 Aug 2009 03:23

Thanks Sudeepj. Can you collate all the 'defective' shells stories. I think they tell a story than the papers are painting. Its odd that they didnt get the seeker technology to be produced in India.

from what we know
1) Trials in Kargil in 1999 went awry due to
- propellent variability of the Bofors make
- air density being lower
- some charge being setoff later and add to the error

These were corrected per the reports in the brochure. Prem Kumar alludes to this brochure.

2) Trials in Rajasthan in 2006 didnt go off in the plains due to dud fuzes

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/most- ... urn/17346/

3) Trials in the mountains went awry and almost hit the observers or designators in a 2009 report.
- Could be a new seeker which is more sensitive. But how did the error correction capability get so much margin?

dorai wrote:
‘Precision ammo’ fails test at high altitudes

Posted: Tuesday , Jul 14, 2009 at 0052 hrs Drass, New Delhi:

Exhaustive trials of the new-generation Krasnopol ‘precision guided ammunition’ procured by the Indian Army are being conducted by a high-level Russian team after inaccurate fire almost killed some soldiers of an artillery observation unit. The Army, which had procured over 3,000 rounds of the Russian artillery ammunition, fired from the 155 mm Bofors Gun, at a cost of over Rs 500 crores, found it to be wildly inaccurate during use in high-altitude areas. The ammunition is supposed to hit targets accurately after they have been tagged by a laser designator.

Sources said that during a training exercise in Kargil, the shells went way off target and almost hit an artillery team that had been deployed kilometers away to check its accuracy. The Russian team is now conducting trials on the ammunition at heights of over 11,000 feet. “The problem is that the ammunition works when fired in the plains but goes totally inaccurate when it’s being fired from, say, 11,000 feet to a target at 17,000 feet,” sources said. The Army is hoping that the Russian team will find a way to correct the defect in the munitions.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/-Prec ... des/488887

I think this is what happened. The gun was fired at high elevation to reach the target located at 17k feet from its location of 11k ft. This is needed to give the look down capability for the shell and the fins some chance of energy gain to glide properly. What this did was to give the shell a very high altitude and a large field of view. So the shell sensor homed in on the AOP laser which would be brighter than the target reflection. So maybe a grating or a mask is need on the sensor to narrow the field of view. But then it will get misued and blamed. So may be the sensor should come in two types : plains and mountains versions.

Has anyone heard if the PRC is license producing these and if there are other sources like Ukraine?

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 05 Aug 2009 08:30

Howziter shells are more accurate & cheaper than MBRLs in general. But when we are putting guidance mechanism in them, then what is the point of craming it in shells rather than putting in rocket rounds as the cost of electronics far exceeds the cost of rounds

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 05 Aug 2009 09:00

Raj, Its a case of having many arrows in your bow. Guided shells are the cheapest option of all these. The MBRLS with guidance can deliver higher payloads more accurately.

Also there are German designs for 120mm guided mortar rounds which make micemeat of bunkers. Yes they cost a lot but its usually 1:1 kill ratio. It helps the logistics chain.

BTW in mid 80s saw an article in Interavia about how cost effective in terms of rounds vs target destroyed a guidance package for the MBRLs is and bingo 20 years alter they are in the frontlines.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 05 Aug 2009 09:47

I just returned from Barnes & Nobles spent about two hours reading about Artillery guns.
Bofors is legendary and has been sold, copied since 1939. I also found amazing thing that the German captured huge number of Russian guns during the battle of stalingrad, the quality of gun was so good that German HC rebored the barrels to suit German ammo.

Coming to IA and OFB, involvemet of Tata, L&T to develop upgrades, spares (we cannablised a whole lot of Bofors for want of spares) and ammo. Tata was teamup with BAE who own Bofors now and L&T with Soltam (IIRC).

Meanwhile If you go to OFB site
http://ofbindia.gov.in/index.php?wh=Weapons&lang=en

and click on
METAMORPHOSIS 155 mm GUN it takes you to a page which talks about hand gun/ pistol. SO much for OFB.
The information about "METAMORPHOSIS 155 mm GUN" I found in Janes below

http://www.janes.com/articles/Janes-Arm ... India.html

*****
Now here is my proposal.
The legendary India field gun never materialized. India has this habit of Foreign collobration (which was ok in 1950s 1960s even 1970s but no more) and the organizations never progres beyond what was obtained as TOT.

Just browse the equipment and capcities of the state of the art equipment these PSUs and OFB have.

1) The Artillery Gun can be designed by third year/ fourth year motivated engineering students
(eye eye tee students need not apply, they are neede to do more strategic things like go to MBA in ivy league schools or IIMs and then be financial wizards or develop marketing strategies for wite goods

)

2) 3 teams of 4 students 12 in total
Team 1 Team Mecahanical 2)Machine design, 2) FE analysis,
Team 2 Manufacturing, Hydraulic, Heat Transfer and Heat Treatment
Team 3 Metallurgy, Chemical, 2) Electronics & Electrical

3) A team of 6 Shop floor experienced Foremen as group leaders
Foundy, Forging , Machining, Heat Treatment, Assembly & Material Handling

4) Three professors to consult wth each team & Group leaders(foremen)

5) 3 Army officers to represent end users (role feed back, requirements specs validation and combat experience inputs) Ranks between Captains to Lt. Col s

Requirements grade (scale)
Ideal, Satisfactory, Passable.

Anything less than passable is fail to meet.

The team mandate is to design within the installed capacity of current OFB PSU and Pvt sector. Detailed drawings which can translate into manufacture, can be to BS DIn or Gost or Indian Standards ( not of the OFB kind).

Design delivery Max of two semesters desired one and half semesters.
All computational resources CAD CAM facilities provided to the team.
Project shall remain confidentail.

I think it is doable. The motivation, % of royalty once product is sold. I the product meets requirements and IA does not order, free and full exports to be allowed (even to TSP BD

)

The task of Electrical electronics guys will be to develop the following.

Recce rounds which will have multiple parachute to allow decelarated descent while transmitting a panaromic view of the enemy in real time and will self destruct (explode) when it is about 20 feet from GL. This should be able to do in Night vision mode as well as day light mode. If its cloudy then it should have Infra red c apability ( which is anyway in the night vision thingy). Note most cam corders these days have these kind of capabilities.

( if it can capture enemy {pictures} smiling with hands up in the air all the more better, example of desirable requirement likely to come up by IA chaps}

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 05 Aug 2009 09:55

John Snow wrote:I just returned from Barnes & Nobles spent about two hours reading about Artillery guns.
Bofors is legendary and has been sold, copied since 1939. I also found amazing thing that the German captured huge number of Russian guns during the battle of stalingrad, the quality of gun was so good that German HC rebored the barrels to suit German ammo.

Coming to IA and OFB, involvemet of Tata, L&T to develop upgrades, spares (we cannablised a whole lot of Bofors for want of spares) and ammo. Tata was teamup with BAE who own Bofors now and L&T with Soltam (IIRC).

Meanwhile If you go to OFB site
http://ofbindia.gov.in/index.php?wh=Weapons&lang=en

and click on
METAMORPHOSIS 155 mm GUN it takes you to a page which talks about hand gun/ pistol. SO much for OFB.
The information about "METAMORPHOSIS 155 mm GUN" I found in Janes below

http://www.janes.com/articles/Janes-Arm ... India.html

*****
Now here is my proposal.
The legendary India field gun never materialized. India has this habit of Foreign collobration (which was ok in 1950s 1960s even 1970s but no more) and the organizations never progres beyond what was obtained as TOT.

Just browse the equipment and capcities of the state of the art equipment these PSUs and OFB have.

1) The Artillery Gun can be designed by third year/ fourth year motivated engineering students
(eye eye tee students need not apply, they are neede to do more strategic things like go to MBA in ivy league schools or IIMs and then be financial wizards or develop marketing strategies for wite goods )

2) 3 teams of 4 students 12 in total
Team 1 Team Mecahanical 2)Machine design, 2) FE analysis,
Team 2 Manufacturing, Hydraulic, Heat Transfer and Heat Treatment
Team 3 Metallurgy, Chemical, 2) Electronics & Electrical

3) A team of 6 Shop floor experienced Foremen as group leaders
Foundy, Forging , Machining, Heat Treatment, Assembly & Material Handling

4) Three professors to consult wth each team & Group leaders(foremen)

5) 3 Army officers to represent end users (role feed back, requirements specs validation and combat experience inputs) Ranks between Captains to Lt. Col s

Requirements grade (scale)
Ideal, Satisfactory, Passable.

Anything less than passable is fail to meet.

The team mandate is to design within the installed capacity of current OFB PSU and Pvt sector. Detailed drawings which can translate into manufacture, can be to BS DIn or Gost or Indian Standards ( not of the OFB kind).

Design delivery Max of two semesters desired one and half semesters.
All computational resources CAD CAM facilities provided to the team.
Project shall remain confidentail.

I think it is doable. The motivation, % of royalty once product is sold. I the product meets requirements and IA does not order, free and full exports to be allowed (even to TSP BD )

The task of Electrical electronics guys will be to develop the following.

Recce rounds which will have multiple parachute to allow decelarated descent while transmitting a panaromic view of the enemy in real time and will self destruct (explode) when it is about 20 feet from GL. This should be able to do in Night vision mode as well as day light mode. If its cloudy then it should have Infra red c apability ( which is anyway in the night vision thingy). Note most cam corders these days have these kind of capabilities.

( if it can capture enemy {pictures} smiling with hands up in the air all the more better, example of desirable requirement likely to come up by IA chaps}

Why not have BRF challenge and fund it from member donations say $100/ head. We should have two designs.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 05 Aug 2009 09:59

I am all for it. you can count my $100 in any bank other TARP receipient bank

sudeepj · Post by **sudeepj** » 05 Aug 2009 11:09

Raj Malhotra wrote:Howziter shells are more accurate & cheaper than MBRLs in general. But when we are putting guidance mechanism in them, then what is the point of craming it in shells rather than putting in rocket rounds as the cost of electronics far exceeds the cost of rounds

Here is how I look at it.. electronics is expensive if its analogue or fragile like (IIR/laser guided mechanisms). If its digital, its cheap, so cheap infact, that it can drive out companies that manufacture it out of business. For e.g. look at the number of companies that were manufacturing GPS chips, there is only a handful left.

The second driving cost of electronics is the expense in developing the firmware, which is expensive because of the bloated cost structures in the high tech industries in the developed world.

The third issue is hardening and making the solution robust. This will actually be easier in MBRLs than tube launched stuff.

If these guidance kits are manufactured in quantity, the dominant cost once again will be the cost of the round and not the guidance system.

The benefits that accrue from such a system are immense... Each round is a cheap, small smart glide bomb. It will make the number of rounds needed per target reduce by perhaps an order of magnitude, help in reduction of collateral damage, help better close support of own infantry (if earlier, the separation between own and enemy troops had to be 500 mts, perhaps with the new systems it may need to be only 100 mts), itll make own arty direct war fighting arm, not support arm and enhance survivability from counter battery fire.

You could fire the round almost straight up from behind a cliff where you are immune from counter battery fire and the round could glide out to hit the enemy at fairly good ranges.

This is the future of war fighting, the faster India gets a leg up on this, the better it would be.

PS: In bulk, the cost of a gps receiver is < 1$ and the COTS chip is hard enough to withstand a few 10s of Gs.

rkhanna · Post by **rkhanna** » 08 Aug 2009 15:18

Seems like our Artillery upgrade is in further trouble.

BAE refused to upgrade 20 year old Indian Bofors

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

New Delhi: On the tenth anniversary of the Kargil conflict, the gun that did so much to facilitate that victory the 155 mm Bofors FH-77B could be staring at a major setback. With Indias artillery modernisation programme already stalled, the plan to refurbish and upgrade Indias old 155 mm FH-77B Bofors guns also seems headed for failure.

The reason: the Indian Army, long accused of framing its equipment requirements unrealistically, apparently wants the upgraded Bofors gun to deliver better performance than new guns in the market today.

The company that made the guns Swedens Bofors AB, now owned by British multinational BAE Systems has examined the armys technical demands and decided not to bid, since the demands are unrealistic. Industry sources close to the tender describe it as a high-tech wish list that fails to recognise the limitations in upgrading a 20-year-old gun.

http://news.in.msn.com/national/article ... id=3112222

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 08 Aug 2009 17:13

BAE Systems has examined the armys technical demands and decided not to bid, since the demands are unrealistic.

Someone predicted last year that it was only a matter of time before India issues a RFP and nobody turns up.

sum · Post by **sum** » 08 Aug 2009 17:53

Tempted to say IA and our netas deserve it but finally, its the nation which is the looser..

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 08 Aug 2009 18:57

I am officially taking up drinking

hopefully that will numb me to any news containing the words artillery and Indian army.

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 08 Aug 2009 19:10

Surya wrote:I am officially taking up drinking

hopefully that will numb me to any news containing the words artillery and Indian army.

It wont.