Artillery: News & Discussion

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Cosmo_R » 19 May 2015 03:58

Austin wrote:..
Are we going to end up with US type , Israel upgraded Russian Type another Indian Type and then Bofors built in india ......why not just standardise on M777 ?


We like tutti frutti. We are a diverse, pluralistic nation and we value one of each. E Pluribus Pluribum. :)

Ankit Desai
BRFite
Posts: 502
Joined: 05 May 2006 21:28
Location: Gujarat

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Ankit Desai » 25 May 2015 21:50

Army to get 114 Dhanush guns in three years

The Army’s quest for new artillery is nearing completion with the indigenous gun upgraded by the Ordnance Factory Board (OFB) clearing trials. The Army has placed an indent for 114 guns in the first phase and these will be delivered in three years, informed sources said.

“After the Pokhran fiasco with one barrel-burst, Dhanush barrels were tested in Sikkim under cold conditions and in other temperatures — and came out with flying colours. The Army is fully satisfied,” officials told The Hindu.

A Dhanush prototype suffered a barrel burst during firing trials at Pokhran in August 2013 which delayed the process.
80% indigenous

The initial deal for 114 guns is expected to cost around Rs.1,600 crore. Pleased with the performance of the gun, the Army has given strong indications of an additional order for 481 guns, sources added.

The Dhanush is an upgraded version of the Swedish 155-mm Bofors howitzers bought by India in the mid-1980s based on the original design. It is a 155-mm, 45-calibre gun with a maximum effective range of 38 km in salvo mode compared to the 39-calibre, 27-km range of the original guns. It is 80 per cent indigenous, with the APU (auxiliary power unit), electronic dial sights and a few other small items being imported.

The Army is desperately short of new long-range artillery, having failed to induct any new gun after the Bofors scandal. Recently, the Defence Acquisition Council (DAC) headed by Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar approved a revised proposal from BAE Systems for 145 Ultra-Light Howitzers for mountainous areas under a government-to-government deal with the United States.

Additionally last November, the DAC cleared the process for purchase of 814 mounted gun systems through the ‘Buy and Make’ category to be built by an Indian private partner in collaboration with a foreign manufacturer.


-Ankit

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18654
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 25 May 2015 22:33

Austin wrote:If MOD has decided to opt of M777 why not just go the extra mile and lic buid that in Numbers with TOT ...whats the point of having multiple types of 155 mm Gun ?

Are we going to end up with US type , Israel upgraded Russian Type another Indian Type and then Bofors built in india ......why not just standardise on M777 ?


Better to have a bunch of local types even if a logistical issue from local firms like Kalyani, alliance for the ATAGS etc. The M777 is not a true shoot and scoot gun anyhow. We can standardize on the ammo, charges etc.

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2523
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby abhik » 26 May 2015 08:31

5% local content? Sounds like a scam. The private sector company which will get to screwdriver it together will make a neat few 100 crores. MP is losing it, first the Ka-226 deal and now this.

member_22539
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2022
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby member_22539 » 26 May 2015 11:03

^Maybe the situation is that desperate (though I can't think of how these buys will really change that). Either way, its a punch in the gut for Make In India.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20149
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Philip » 26 May 2015 11:58

If the BAe plant is being closed down,then why don't we simply acquire it lock,stock and barrel and get TOT manufacturing 450+ light-weight guns in India meant for mountain warfare? Now that the desi Bofors with better performance has cleared trials and is to be built ,the OFB can also pass on the same tech/manufacturing data to interested pvt. players as well to accelerate indigenous production.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5233
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ShauryaT » 26 May 2015 16:26

Philip wrote:If the BAe plant is being closed down,then why don't we simply acquire it lock,stock and barrel and get TOT manufacturing 450+ light-weight guns in India meant for mountain warfare? Now that the desi Bofors with better performance has cleared trials and is to be built ,the OFB can also pass on the same tech/manufacturing data to interested pvt. players as well to accelerate indigenous production.
A good idea. We need local production for mountain artillery.
@Austin: The "light" M777 will not be able to produce the same sustained rate of fire as the Bofors/Dhanush "heavy" guns. So, standardizing on a "light" gun only would not be a good idea.

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4432
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby putnanja » 26 May 2015 18:06

Philip wrote:If the BAe plant is being closed down,then why don't we simply acquire it lock,stock and barrel and get TOT manufacturing 450+ light-weight guns in India meant for mountain warfare? Now that the desi Bofors with better performance has cleared trials and is to be built ,the OFB can also pass on the same tech/manufacturing data to interested pvt. players as well to accelerate indigenous production.


BAe, like any other big company, probably outsources at least 50-60% of the parts, if not more more and mainly does integration in house, apart from their core IP parts. So, you would still need to source all these parts from outside even if you move the factory to India.

One other issue is the ToT. The US government/Congress determines what techonology can be transferred. if I remember right, the barrel manufacturing tech cannot be transferred to other countries without its approval, which I doubt US will hand out.

So BAe is basically doing the same thing as we will do if we but the BAe factory, that is move lock, stock & barrel, the entire assembly/integration plant to India, but still procure all parts from its suppliers worldwide :lol:

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 26 May 2015 19:07

the m777 apart from its weight is a throwback to WW2 model of operation, totally manual and needs some 10 people per gun.

if it ever comes in range of mounted guns with WLR support, it will be hammered and destroyed.

Kejri style shoot n scoot is the only way to remain alive

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20149
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Philip » 26 May 2015 19:45

Drones are going to be all over the battlefield in any case,from both sides,spotting locations of arty,etc. The LW arty is meant to be airlifted to regions where heavier arty cannot be airlifted/supported. Q.How effective are WLRs in the mountains? Reg. the scoot and shoot issue,why light tanks with a reasonable main gun are also needed. The Russian Sprut amphib light tank (with extra ERA armour) could fit the bill.the IA in amphib ops too. Could also serve Other western light tanks could also be evaluated.

Protection of the Sprut-SD has a very limited. . Despite that protection can be increased with add-on armor and various countermeasures system. Vehicle is fitted with an NBC protection and automatic fire extinguishing systems.

[b] The Sprut-SD is armed with a fully-stabilized 125-mm smoothbore gun, fitted with an autoloader.[b] This gun is also used to launch anti-tank guided missies in the same manner as ordinary projectiles. This feature is common to all modern Russian MBTs. Laser-guided anti-tank missiles has a range of effective fire of up to 5 km. Missiles can also be used against low-flying helicopters. A total of 40 rounds including missiles are carried for the main gun. An autoloader holds 22 of them. The 2s25 Sprut SD has a rate of fire of 7 rounds per minute. Vehicle is fitted with a modern fire control system.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7918
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby brar_w » 26 May 2015 20:16

Singha wrote:the m777 apart from its weight is a throwback to WW2 model of operation, totally manual and needs some 10 people per gun.

if it ever comes in range of mounted guns with WLR support, it will be hammered and destroyed.

Kejri style shoot n scoot is the only way to remain alive


The M777 will be the artillery system for the Stryker Brigade Combat Teams (SBCT). The M777 is normally operated by a crew of eight men but can be operated with a reduced detachment of five.


http://www.army-technology.com/projects/ufh/

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20149
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Philip » 26 May 2015 20:37

Excellent IDR review.Long feature,ck link for full details.

http://www.indiandefencereview.com/news ... ia-marvel/
Dhanush 155mm Artillery Gun: A “Make in India” Marvel

By Danvir Singh
Issue Vol. 30.2 Apr-Jun 2015 | Date : 24 May , 2015

Dhanush as an artillery system has proved to be one of the best amongst its class. A 45 Calibre towed gun system capable of targeting at long ranges incorporating autonomous laying features and having one of the most sophisticated suites of electronic and computing systems in the world.

…the success of 155mm/ 42 Cal Dhanush under trial is of paramount importance for the futuristic ATAGS programme.

It is important to place on record a little known fact about this Project Dhanush. It was started with a unique initiative from Lt Gen Anjan Mukherjee, an Artillery Officer, who was then Director General of Financial Planning (DGFP) maintained the need for in self-reliance in artillery capabilities. The visionary leadership of DGFP, who later took over as DG Artillery, resulted in creation of the road map for initiating the programme for indigenous development of the 155 mm gun during March 2011.


(*He richly deserves a Padma award)

A leading Indian daily “The Times of India” quoted the defence minister, Mr Manohar Parrikar when he addressed the parliamentary consultative committee on defence on April 21, that the 155mm/45-calibre Dhanush howitzers had “successfully met all technical parameters” during the winter and summer trials at Sikkim and Pokhran. He also stated that Dhanush incorporates “many improved features” over the Army’s existing artillery guns.

This revelation has created a buzz amongst the arms manufacturers and rightly so since Dhanush as an artillery system has proved to be one of the best amongst its class. A 45 Calibre towed gun system capable of targeting at long ranges incorporating autonomous laying features and having one of the most sophisticated suites of electronic and computing systems in the world.

koti
BRFite
Posts: 1119
Joined: 09 Jul 2009 22:06
Location: Hyderabad, India

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby koti » 26 May 2015 21:06

ShauryaT wrote:
Philip wrote:If the BAe plant is being closed down,then why don't we simply acquire it lock,stock and barrel and get TOT manufacturing 450+ light-weight guns in India meant for mountain warfare? Now that the desi Bofors with better performance has cleared trials and is to be built ,the OFB can also pass on the same tech/manufacturing data to interested pvt. players as well to accelerate indigenous production.
A good idea. We need local production for mountain artillery.
@Austin: The "light" M777 will not be able to produce the same sustained rate of fire as the Bofors/Dhanush "heavy" guns. So, standardizing on a "light" gun only would not be a good idea.

The requisite numbers can be built in a few months. Why buy a full production line if we don't plan to standardize a 39mm piece.

vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5556
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby vishvak » 26 May 2015 23:38

The article on Dhanush by IDR is exceptional. It is upto the govt and sena to make the most of the gun. For example, see how western countries prize their IP rights, and at most give out screwdriver tech as ToT.

Another example is oil drilling tech industry, wherein the exploration/drilling companies demand % of profits - indirectly becoming stakeholders by strength of tech and logistics, while still keeping the core tech rights all the time, and firm grip on standards and specs.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5233
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ShauryaT » 27 May 2015 02:04

koti wrote:The requisite numbers can be built in a few months. Why buy a full production line if we don't plan to standardize a 39mm piece.
I guess, the expectation is ALL our mountain based corps could use this "light" gun, instead of just the MSC? So, Corps, 3,4 23 in the east and Corps 14,15 in the North should also get these guns. The ability to move these guns quickly to desired zones under the AOR for these corps would be a critical ability, when shit hits the fan. The more heavier guns, MBRL's, Ballistic and Cruise missiles can follow, where we have roads. Where there are no roads and this is a 4000+ KM arch, the ability to provide fire power will make a difference. The other unmentioned uses of these guns are for marine ops. Like it or not, we live in a volatile zone and the US will not always be there around to act as the global cop. It is high time, we have the requisite fire power and mobility needed to do some gun diplomacy, when needed in the area. This category is not to be a replacement for the heavier and longer range howitzers. This is about mobile fire power and hence many use case scenarios exist. The only other solution, I like is a slow moving aircraft with a howitzer!! OK, they have talked about this one, but do not think it is really viable.

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Cosmo_R » 27 May 2015 03:06

vishvak wrote:....
Another example is oil drilling tech industry, wherein the exploration/drilling companies demand % of profits - indirectly becoming stakeholders by strength of tech and logistics, while still keeping the core tech rights all the time, and firm grip on standards and specs.


And well they should. Not only do they fund the tech and logistics (without any guarantee that it will work), they also drill at their own risk after competitive bidding. They get paid through 'cost oil' and 'profit oil' mechanisms. In this, they are direct stakeholders: they take all the upfront risk and get paid out over time.

Why would they want to share the tech and put themselves out of business?

Indian rules about O&G are interesting: if you strike oil, you cannot export it, you must sell it back in India at prices that are lower than international ones, you must treat any gas from the wells separately etc. This means bidders figure in these costs into the 'cost oil'.

I have been hearing about ToT since some guy at the IBRD coined it in the 1960s. It started with the idea that in place like India, the way to utilize skilled labor (R&D) locally before they became part of the 'brain drain', was to move low-end research to 'LDCs'.

I know a little about this: I wrote one of my papers on how ITT should do this but laced it with 'social' and 'moral' obligations :). The Chief Scientist at ITT was quite polite, even invited me to lunch.

Ultimately, this theme manifested itself in such things as the Jack Welch institute in BLR. I doubt however, their work ever seeps into every day Indian life.

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5180
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby RoyG » 27 May 2015 03:18

Did we ever consider the 105mm atlternative to the M777? The SAfricans came up with the G7.

http://www.aafonline.co.za/news/world-l ... lification

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4322
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby srai » 27 May 2015 07:12

Philip wrote:Excellent IDR review.Long feature,ck link for full details.

Dhanush 155mm Artillery Gun: A “Make in India” Marvel

By Danvir Singh
Issue Vol. 30.2 Apr-Jun 2015 | Date : 24 May , 2015
...

Good info on ATAGS. This article confirms that DRDO's 155mm/52 Cal ATAGS is an advanced version of Dhanush!
...
Presently the DRDO is developing 155 mm / 52 Cal Advance Towed Artillery Gun System (ATAGS) that will upgrade the 155 mm / 45 Cal Dhanush in future. The Advance Towed Artillery Guns System (ATAGS), a light-weight long-range automated gun being developed by DRDO with private participation, will be ready for production by 2019 after undergoing six years of development and testing.

Going by the views of experts on gunnery; the physics part of it has proved that a 155mm / 52 Cal is an optimum technical parameter within its class in achieving maximum range with highest accuracy. A sources at the Integrated Head Quarters of the Ministry of Defence, say that the success of 155mm / 42 Cal Dhanush under trial is of paramount importance for the futuristic ATAGS programme. The success of Dhanush in all the major trials held so far has brought in cheers and much needed hope to all those who wish to see indigenisation and self-reliance in defence sector a reality. He further added that Dhanush is 87 percent indigenous baring the Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) which is from BAE SYSTEMS and the sighting system from SAGEM. Indian private company FORCE MOTORS is developing an APU which will replace the existing foreign make in times to come.

Extolling the virtues of Dhanush further, sources informed the IDR that this gun system has laid the foundations for India catapulting itself straight on to the world stage. India will soon emerge as a leading Artillery Gun design and manufacturer in the form of evolution of ATAGS, which would be the highly advanced version of Dhanush. It will potentially take over guns in this category in the future. “Its long range, light-weight and automation features will help it immensely. Loading ammunition will be fully automatic, and it will be compatible with various kinds of ammo as well. Private players like Tata, Larsen and Tubro, Bharat Forge have all been roped in to complete the project,” this official added.

He further added that the ATAGS concept design is ready. “It will weigh 12 tonnes — two tonnes lighter than other guns of its category. It will also be capable of shooting off five successive rounds in short duration. Total development will take three years and testing will last for another three.
...

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4322
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby srai » 27 May 2015 07:26

RoyG wrote:Did we ever consider the 105mm atlternative to the M777? The SAfricans came up with the G7.

http://www.aafonline.co.za/news/world-l ... lification


Army's new mountain divisions to get light field guns instead of howitzers
Shishir Arya, TNN | May 1, 2012, 04.30AM IST

NAGPUR: As the wait for modern ultralight howitzers gets longer, the Army has apparently decided to arm its two new mountain divisions on the Indo-China border with the old generation 105 light field guns (LFGs).

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

He added that the 155mm ultra light howitzers, which the Army has been scouting for since 2007, would have been the ideal choice as LFGs have now become an obsolete weapon system. The 105 LFGs have a range of 18km while a howitzer covers over double the distance.

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

The LFG is derived from the 105 Indian field gun (IFG), developed over three decades ago. Experts say that given the changing scenario, howitzers would be a better option than a field gun. However, procurement of the guns has been mired in controversy.

India intends to buy around 140 howitzer guns. Singapore-based ST Kinetics was shortlisted, but has now been blacklisted after a bribery scandal. In fact, similar scandals have put plans to replenish the artillery inventory too on hold.

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

According to Colonel US Rathore (retd), an independent defence analyst, howitzers are the ideal choice in a mountainous frontier. Field guns have a lesser lethality as the shells are not so effective, when the defences have time to be strengthened.

Also, howitzers provide a higher trajectory, which is required in a mountainous area. For achieving the same trajectory in a LFG, it has to be moved further from its original position which leads to a compromise in the range. "The Chinese are known for better defences and bunkers, and a 105 shell may not have the desired impact on certain armoured vehicles too," said Rathore.


Also, when it comes to reinforced bunkers the destructive power of 105mm shell is far less than 155mm one.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20149
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Philip » 27 May 2015 09:59

Why those light tanks with 125mm main guns could also be useful. Is ther eany data available on the sue of MBRLs in the mountains? I think there was some debate about SMERCH some time ago,after it was first inducted. Could MBRLs in addition to the 105mm light field guns add significant firepower.This is what I've been able to find thus far.

Wik.
MRL are still rarely able to properly shoot at rear slope positions in mountain warfare because the MRL crew cannot determine the trajectory as well as a howitzer's crew can do by adding or removing propellant increments. Simple MRL rocket types have a rather long minimum firing range for the same reason. An approach to lessen this limit is the addition of drag rings to the rocket nose. The increased drag slows the rocket down relative to a clean configuration and creates a less flat trajectory. Pre-packaged MRL munitions such as with MLRS do not offer this option, but some MRL types with individually-loaded rockets do.[3]

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby vina » 27 May 2015 13:03

Holy Pakistan!

What they seem to have done with the Dhanush is to jump from 1975 to 2015!

Electronic Suite & Auto Laying
The electronic suite is a module package, combining a hybrid (Inertial+GPS) Navigation System, a Muzzle Velocity Radar (MVR) and powerful Software solving in real time the ballistics for static or moving targets and for any combination of projectile-change available. The Inertial Navigation System (INS) is an extremely precise system determining the elevation and northing angles of the gun. The system corrects automatically the firing for any variation in ammunition, charge or meteorology. Auto laying is adaptable to any orientation and elevation system hydraulically or electronically powered, it provides an effective solution for automatic laying of the gun barrel


Brilliant. This is real time measurement and correcting the next one and real time IT/Vity ballistics computation will ensure deadly accuracy , well on par with the other analogues elsewhere in the world. This along with powered laying will increase the rate of fire as well.

Expect brown salwars across the border in Pakistan.

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby vina » 27 May 2015 14:33

Kalyani Group to Make Jet Engines & Artillery

Watch the interview and shiver in your Dhotis!

vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5556
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby vishvak » 27 May 2015 20:58

The point about oil drilling tech standard is that it is a standard in the industry wherein the oil drilling and tech giants demand % of profits, regardless of whether initial geological data was available or not, or even if discovery is already made. Even Russia had to invite foreign (western) giants at certain places to help with efficiency (and oil drilling went on during the entire Ukrain crisis). In case of India, most of the oil discoveries are made by govt agency (ONGC) or private players though the tech giants demand the same conditions.

This is the state of 'international' cooperation in tech industry.
Why would they want to share the tech and put themselves out of business?

Exactly. And, field artillery guns are a very important part of overall Army defense structure.

Another point is that US domestic tech for shell oil has way fewer standards (compared to international standards and specifications), and it has helped to generate much more oil - practically adding output the size of Iraq in few years from now. In case of artillery, Russia has policy of producing in bulk - guns and artillery pieces - with huge number in supply/reinforcements that has helped Russia in hand.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18654
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 27 May 2015 21:46

vina wrote:Kalyani Group to Make Jet Engines & Artillery

Watch the interview and shiver in your Dhotis!


TBH, Kalyani has been making these sort of statements for a decade now. Perhaps now with a new Govt in power, there may actually be some progress as they might get the required support.
Kalyani group can easily supplant/replace the OFB in many areas.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53475
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 27 May 2015 22:01

vina, Have they accounted for hypersonic lift at high altitudes in the ballistic computer? At high altitude due to the lower air density the shell acquires more lift based on the Mach number at that time. Solution is reduced charge to slow it down or fire short projectiles as its length dependent also

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5180
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby RoyG » 27 May 2015 22:37

According to Denel Land Systems, there is no other artillery system in the world with the capabilities of the 105 mm Light Experimental Weapon which includes a maximum range of 30,000 m.

This is similar to that of 155 mm/39 calibre artillery systems with the new 105 mm high-explosive artillery projectile, having a lethal area of 1,900 m2 against targets. This is claimed to be better than a first-generation 155 mm artillery projectile.


http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product1940.html

Not sure about bunkers but cutting down personnel in the open field shouldn't be a problem with newer 105 rounds. I think this may be an area where Kalyani and others should consider tapping into.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53475
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 27 May 2015 23:35

RoyG, 30Km range would be powered by unobtanium or lightweight round. Looks like they have a long barrel:52 calibers long. And add 5 more calibers with the muzzle brake.

Essentially they claim their pre-fragmented round would do all that damage over that area of ~2 sq km.
Most likely a number of BBs being dispersed over the area.

US has round called Beehive that is similar.
Old idea was by Col. Shrapnel.

In India context there wont be so many people hovering in the open in the high mountains.

Read the 105mm LFG article linked by srai above.

Basically India needs a howitzer with high angle which the LFG types don't have.

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1698
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby sudeepj » 28 May 2015 03:12

srai wrote:
RoyG wrote:Did we ever consider the 105mm atlternative to the M777? The SAfricans came up with the G7.

http://www.aafonline.co.za/news/world-l ... lification


Army's new mountain divisions to get light field guns instead of howitzers
Shishir Arya, TNN | May 1, 2012, 04.30AM IST

NAGPUR: As the wait for modern ultralight howitzers gets longer, the Army has apparently decided to arm its two new mountain divisions on the Indo-China border with the old generation 105 light field guns (LFGs).

...

According to Colonel US Rathore (retd), an independent defence analyst, [b]howitzers are the ideal choice in a mountainous frontier. Field guns have a lesser lethality as the shells are not so effective, when the defences have time to be strengthened
.

Also, howitzers provide a higher trajectory, which is required in a mountainous area. For achieving the same trajectory in a LFG, it has to be moved further from its original position which leads to a compromise in the range. "The Chinese are known for better defences and bunkers, and a 105 shell may not have the desired impact on certain armoured vehicles too," said Rathore.


Also, when it comes to reinforced bunkers the destructive power of 105mm shell is far less than 155mm one.


The OFB 105mm LFG is a howitzer, its a field gun only in name. It has an elevation of 70+ degrees, which is even higher than that of the Bofors Howitzer.
http://ofbindia.gov.in/products/data/weapons/wlc/3.htm

The 105mm fragmentation shell is a potent weapon against soft targets. The only weapon the gun may not be able to deploy is a cargo round. Considering the absence of static defenses on the Chinese border, and the guns weight of only 2.4 tons, its an excellent weapon in mountains. Its actually heli capable compared to the M777 even with the choppers we have today! With smart rounds and a longer barrel, this gun can live on for a long time to come.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 28 May 2015 07:42

the OFB should be able to take the design and substitute some better/lighter parts and network electronics to make it upg.
we could probably buy 5 x 105mm locally than 1 x m777. we need vast numbers - mountain warfare soaks up resources like a sponge due to lack of mobility and need to fire way more rounds. 145 is a joke, 1450 would barely dent the problem its a 2000km of front.

I was studying the ORBAT of the OIF formations and many of them like USMC (mix of 105 and m777) and 82nd/1st airborne (105) still have the 105 caliber. its only the blue blooded mechanised divs that rely entirely on SP 155 M109 as they must for long range mobile warfare.

the TSPA have scored a home run by getting 100s of M109 for free over the years. these are going to give a lot of pain, backed up by chinese supplied WLRs. we still have our thumbs stuck deep where the sun does not shine on SP arty and truck arty front. if its going to be the K9 panther and Archer fh77B05 so be it, but get moving. and the paris have efficiently got samsung tech win to setup a 155mm ammo plant years ago. our nalanda plant is in "process of completion" since before my son was born, and he is nearly 11 now!!

those C17s will come in handy to airlift emergency stocks from israel and korea :(

vaibhav.n
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 575
Joined: 23 Mar 2010 21:47

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby vaibhav.n » 28 May 2015 10:05

ramana wrote:vina, Have they accounted for hypersonic lift at high altitudes in the ballistic computer? At high altitude due to the lower air density the shell acquires more lift based on the Mach number at that time. Solution is reduced charge to slow it down or fire short projectiles as its length dependent also


Artillery firing tables for mountain use are separate. AFAIK beyond 10k feet even rifles shoot the round higher and have to be rezeroed.

vaibhav.n
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 575
Joined: 23 Mar 2010 21:47

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby vaibhav.n » 28 May 2015 10:16

105 are good guns esp the LFG with its lighter alloy barrel.

However, they cannot use a whole gamut of modern more accurate rounds like boat tail, extended range base bleed to gps ones to give varied trajectories for which these guns are charge case dependent in addition to being man intensive. On the other hand these guns are probably the only ones to fire HESH rounds in a direct fire role.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5233
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ShauryaT » 28 May 2015 16:25

The best thing about the IFG is, it can be transported on a mule pack.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8117
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Pratyush » 28 May 2015 16:47

Are you sure of the Mule pack?

Cause IIRC, the 75MM Mountain Guns were only Mule Pack Guns in the IA.

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1698
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby sudeepj » 28 May 2015 18:00

ShauryaT wrote:The best thing about the IFG is, it can be transported on a mule pack.


Cant be mule packed. The barrel alone weighs 400kg. But a heli lift under the Mi17 is certainly possible.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5233
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ShauryaT » 28 May 2015 18:46

Pratyush wrote:Are you sure of the Mule pack?

Cause IIRC, the 75MM Mountain Guns were only Mule Pack Guns in the IA.
Read this at this post at defense forum india, could be wrong. it would be in parts.

105mm Indian field Gun will remain in Indian Army in mass specially in Mountain terrain that is because it can be transported by mules in parts to some of the inaccessible posts over LOC as well as LAC,

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/thre ... uns.52945/

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53475
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 28 May 2015 19:16

vaibhav.n wrote:
ramana wrote:vina, Have they accounted for hypersonic lift at high altitudes in the ballistic computer? At high altitude due to the lower air density the shell acquires more lift based on the Mach number at that time. Solution is reduced charge to slow it down or fire short projectiles as its length dependent also


Artillery firing tables for mountain use are separate. AFAIK beyond 10k feet even rifles shoot the round higher and have to be rezeroed.



Vaibhav.n Thanks for the info.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20149
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Philip » 29 May 2015 15:00

Ck out Karnad's latest piece posted in the IN td,about US carrier tech being touted and the LH's,the acquisition of which he has a bone to pick with. Could be reposted here too.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7918
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby brar_w » 29 May 2015 17:25

Philip wrote:Ck out Karnad's latest piece posted in the IN td,about US carrier tech being touted and the LH's,the acquisition of which he has a bone to pick with. Could be reposted here too.


Thanks for pointing the article out, the author overlooks certain key data on the first portion...I have replied in the IN thread..

vaibhav.n
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 575
Joined: 23 Mar 2010 21:47

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby vaibhav.n » 29 May 2015 21:10

Bharat Karnad is a dinosaur who has had the hotts for Roosy maal like no other. He cried rivers when the Mig lost the MMRCA downselect.

His prediction during the MMRCA was......
Whatever the merits and demerits of the aircraft in the fray and the other allurements offered by the supplier states, the Gripen, Rafale, and Typhoon are unlikely to make it to the shortlist.


Then gives us this nugget......

The Russian military cooperation with India has also been predicated on the joint need to deal with the common Chinese threat. Buying the F-16 or F-18 will upset Moscow, which perceives the MMRCA decision as something of a litmus test of its continued good standing with India. By way of raising the costs to India of making the wrong choice, the tourniquet of spares and servicing support could be applied across the board, resulting in a rapid degrading of the readiness aspects of the Indian military. Indian armed forces still depend on Russia for about 70 percent of their equipment needs. The souring of the Russian attitude towards India, moreover, may have other consequences as well, such as a cutback in the Russian involvement in many high value military technology collaboration projects, raising of the acquisition costs of other items, and delays in the contracted delivery of, say, the nuclear-powered hunter-killer submarine Akula on lease, and the aircraft carrier Gorshkov.


Good Friends????? :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

The General Staff, Artillery Branch, a decade ago recommended the standardisation of the fine, locally-produced, Dhanush 155mm/45 calibre howitzer across categories—towed, self-propelled, wheeled, tracked, and truck-mounted. This recommendation was endorsed by the army’s Northern, Eastern, Central, and Western Commands who vouched for this gun’s employability in the remotest areas.


Factually incorrect, it is well known that the FARP mentions the caliber to be standardized at 155/52 Cal as early as 1995. The CAG report corroborates it.

Besides a decade ago, Dhanush was on paper and everyone and their aunt was itching for Weapons Trials.

For that matter why did the MoD under MP issue RFP's for 155/52 Cal MGS or did DRDO continue with ATAGS??

The obsolete 120mm gun (8 regiments) apart. The 97-odd artillery regiments are pretty up-to-date featuring, besides the sensor-fused Dhanush, the Grad, Pinaka, and Smerch multi-barrel rocket launchers, the Brahmos (Block II) cruise missile, and the extraordinarily destructive point and area weapon—the Prahar missile.


So much for actual numbers, we have (180) Field and Medium Regiments not 97 and (25) 120mm Mortar Light Regiments.

Most not anywhere near up-to-date.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12424
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby pankajs » 31 May 2015 12:29

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/new ... 483979.cms
Pinaka Mark-II rocket successfully test-fired
"Pinaka Mark-II trials were successfully tested in Pokhran field firing range near Indo-Pak border. Target was successfully hit in Keru area which was situated 55 km from the firing point," said the Defence sources.
......
According to the sources "the ongoing developmental trials at Pokhran range in western Rajasthan by Army and scientists of DRDO was to test the advance stage of development of Pinaka Mark-II weapon system with upgraded version of software".

The development and trials will continue and the rocket is expected to enter service any time now, they said.


Return to “Mil-Tech Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests