Artillery: News & Discussion

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Gyan » 20 Feb 2016 10:06

OFB is the conventional 155/52 howitzer while DRDO is developing ATAGS. Pls Note:- After OFB develops indigenous towed howitzers, all urgency to induct them has vanished and demand has shifted to some other imports.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby srai » 20 Feb 2016 10:24

Gyan wrote:OFB is the conventional 155/52 howitzer while DRDO is developing ATAGS. Pls Note:- After OFB develops indigenous towed howitzers, all urgency to induct them has vanished and demand has shifted to some other imports.


They are the same. It's a joint effort.

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

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.

Read more at:
http://www.indiandefencereview.com/news ... ia-marvel/
...

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3478
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Aditya G » 20 Feb 2016 14:32

JTull wrote:It is not "Make in India" but "Assembly, Integration and Testing (AIT) in India". Very HALisque!


My impression is that defence contracts with US have yielded more substantial offsets, which are based on "win-win" for both parties. For example, TASL is now global airfram contract for Sikorsky and also critical wing parts of the C-130. Boeing is also sourcing parts for Chinook and Apache, and i think they might just continue for other orders.

If the offsets leads to creating of local MRO and manufacture of kinetics, then that is great as well since it will add a protection layer from sanctions and keep factories humming long after the original order.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby member_22539 » 20 Feb 2016 15:08

^+1

Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3727
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Vipul » 20 Feb 2016 16:59

Upgraded India M46 contenders to shoot it out in desert trials in April.

Three Soviet-era M46 130 mm field guns, upgraded locally to 155 mm/45 calibre standard for the Indian Army, have completed their technical evaluation and will face off in desert field trials from April.

The army aims to upgrade 300 M46s for INR10 billion (USD153.84 million). The guns will equip around 16 regiments in a bid to boost the army's severely depreciated artillery inventory.

Punj Lloyd and Bharat Forge from the private sector, along with the state-owned Ordnance Factory Board (OFB), have replaced the M46's barrel, muzzle brake, breechblock, and recoil system to enable it to fire 155 mm NATO-standard ammunition.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Gyan » 20 Feb 2016 18:10

Personally I think that these non-automated Howitzers/Guns are more relevant to Indian scenario (also being 1/4th the cost) compared to automated towed howitzer. Though Upgraded M46 will have low elevation. We should develop a non-automated version of Dhanush/Howitzer which would come around 7 tons & 3-4 times cheaper.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Gyan » 20 Feb 2016 18:14




After tests carried out on the indigenously developed 5.56mm assault rifle at Mhow, Madhya Pradesh, over a month ago proved to be successful, the Ordnance Factory Board (OFB) hopes that it may be soon accepted by the Army. (Excaliber or MCIWS?)At the same time, the first batch of indigenously developed Bofors type guns (How many- 6?) may be dispatched to the Army in March, said OFB director general AK Prabhakar.


"The assault rifle is going to be the owner's pride and neighbour's envy," said Prabhakar while addressing the NADP function. Later, speaking to newspersons, he said that the process is at an advanced stage. "The tests were successful and it is hoped that the Army will accept it," he said.

A source in the OFB added the current Insas available with the Army is technically not an assault rifle. The new weapon being developed by OFB has rapid fire feature, matching it with the AK-47. The ordnance factory has also developed an assault rifle of 7.62mm calibre, which is being offered to the para military forces (AK variant?).

Prabhakar said that apart from the 155x45 mm calibre howitzers based on the Bofors guns, which will reach the Army in March, the OFB has also developed a 155x52 mm gun, which is a higher version. It was test fired recently at Pokhran. This gun has a higher range than the 155x45mm calibre and was made by improvising the existing 130mm guns available with the Army. (Is he talking about upgarde of M46 or Dhanush based 52 caliber or ATAGS??)

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7734
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 20 Feb 2016 18:56

The news about firing of 155/52 gun developed by OFB talks of disparate data sets.

Dhanush (155/45) is an evolution of 155/39 Bofors. And 155/52 upgrade on Dhanush would be next step forward. And IMO, a good one. Why wait for ATAGS to mature fully for conversion to take place? Start inducting 144 Dhanush and may be, next 155/52 iteration of the same gun. ATAGS gets inducted when it comes. This also gives room to the project and urgency factor is taken care of.

Now, the article talks about 155/52 derived from 130mm M-46 in IA service; this seems out of place. It is quite likely that OFB is working on upgrading the M-46 in our service. And the news mixes the two items.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 20 Feb 2016 19:21

yes manpower is not really a problem in our army, unlike western ones.

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3090
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby abhik » 21 Feb 2016 00:27

I really doubt how much the "automation" adds to the cost. If you can get an entire JCB for around $50K, how much can the additional COTS engine + hydraulics etc cost?

Also how hard is it really to assemble a gun like the M777 which seems to have so few parts. I would think the IA would be able to do it them selves.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby srai » 21 Feb 2016 06:16

ATAGS - upgrade "Dhanush" to 155 mm 52 cal with these features

Image

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 21 Feb 2016 08:06

sometimes I think the soviets got it all right - instead of spirals of ever increasing cost which the west has locked itself into in the quest for every less manned and high range systems , they still use the cheap basic D30 types in great numbers. a shell from one will kill the enemy the same as a uber gun.

I dont know how all these things help in getting 1 gun for the cost 4 basic ones.

when s*** hits fan its the number of shells in the air that counts, not the specs of the gun. we imo need 50 more artillery regiments than some uber guns in 5 regiments.

the only country with the printing press and budget for LARGE nos of high spec guns is Khan.

its foolish for a country like us with VOLUME needs and LIMITED BUDGET to be going after uber spec guns at the cost of masses of cheaper and basic artillery. atleast 3000 pieces of 155/39 basic bofors is needed and another 3000 155/45 dhanush

Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2437
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Manish_P » 21 Feb 2016 09:01

^ +1 Singha ji

IMVHO the same can be extrapolated to other items... guns, ships, combat aircraft.

Once the mass builds up there will be a higher probability of innovations coming up from the loads of ancillary industries which will be in place to service and support the mass.

Even if the unlikely event that it does not happen, the savings alone and perhaps even the internal income generated can help fund the uber imported systems.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54822
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 21 Feb 2016 09:41

srai or any one how do features compare whats on the market?

Wish RayC where with us!

GD all that makes accurate hit which kills them dead with first shot.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 21 Feb 2016 10:27

the USP of the uber systems to be
(a) less manpower (not an issue for us)
(b) higher firing rate (can be made up with greater numbers @ cost of greater prime movers - da usual stallions and tatras which are COTs now)
(c) longer range - has some relevance in remote mountain areas to 'dominate' more sq km

accuracy CEP would be about the same, as a func(range) with the same style of shells.

on the flip side the longer range RAP shells are very expensive and none have found a way to reduce their market cost yet - true cost to OEM country is a deep dark secret.

greater numbers also means more redundancy if some break down or are hit by enemy counter-fires, also we can spread them among more locations.

the greater numbers argument is a no brainer - we need greater numbers of every kind of artillery and rockets .... the next layer of decision is to find a price point to sustain buying and opex - clearly the uber M777/ Archer types are above that price band.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 21 Feb 2016 10:33

china is a prime example of the motto - first build mass at lower levels , then move up quality scale.

any militia or revolutionary front needing a trainload of small arms, light arty, mines, ATGMs ... NORINCO will deliver in a week.

soumik
BRFite
Posts: 124
Joined: 15 Jan 2009 21:01
Location: running away from ninja monkey asassins

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby soumik » 21 Feb 2016 10:34

+2 to Singhaji
We should Open up multiple lines of 155/52 guns and immediately order at least 1000 pieces of Dhanush alongwith 1000 copies of the Bharat-52 as well. Simultaneously 105mm Guns should be Modernized to the Bharat forge Garuda standards and passed onto the BSF and ITBP.
The M777 order should be increased as well to at least 5-600 pieces with indigenization and manufacture by Mahindra.
The Chinese deploy nearly 8000 pieces of artillery we need at least 5-6000 pieces of heavy guns to counter such odds.

Shanu
BRFite
Posts: 201
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Shanu » 12 Mar 2016 00:11

7000 crore for 244 air defence guns - a proposal cleared by DAC.

What are the guns being acquired? Considering the 'Buy and Make' category, this may be a foreign design to be manufactured in India. Gurus, any idea? Hope it is not another foreign vendor competition process.

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-go ... re-2188303

Kakarat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2123
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Kakarat » 27 Mar 2016 16:06

DefExpo Dhansuh at OFB stall @writetake

Image

RKumar
BRFite
Posts: 1289
Joined: 26 Jul 2009 12:29
Location: Evolution is invention, explosion is destruction.

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby RKumar » 27 Mar 2016 16:27

mean beast..

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby srai » 27 Mar 2016 18:43

Shanu wrote:7000 crore for 244 air defence guns - a proposal cleared by DAC.

What are the guns being acquired? Considering the 'Buy and Make' category, this may be a foreign design to be manufactured in India. Gurus, any idea? Hope it is not another foreign vendor competition process.

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-go ... re-2188303


Last time the IA favored Rheinmetall 35mm Skyshield. But then they got blacklisted. They are probably still the favorites ... Round 2?

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3478
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Aditya G » 28 Mar 2016 01:38

FYI & dance

Image

SJha1618

The first 3 Dhanush 155 mm howtizers have been delivered to the Army. So the first 'new' artillery in 3 decades has come from desi sources.

1:17 AM - 25 Mar 2016

Kakarat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2123
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Kakarat » 28 Mar 2016 14:46

Angad Singh ‏@zone5aviation
OFB now also has a 52 cal howitzer prototype. Development seems rapid till you realize they sat on this for decades!


Image

Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3727
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Vipul » 28 Mar 2016 16:29

Now that the OFB Dhanush 52 Cal version is ready. Shouldnt it now be expeditiously tested (cold and hot weather trials in a year) and then produce these guns in numbers instead of producing the 414 guns (45 caliber) and then again upgrade it to 52 caliber later? Needless duplication of work and upgradation later.

Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3049
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Kanson » 29 Mar 2016 11:10

Singha wrote:sometimes I think the soviets got it all right - instead of spirals of ever increasing cost which the west has locked itself into in the quest for every less manned and high range systems , they still use the cheap basic D30 types in great numbers. a shell from one will kill the enemy the same as a uber gun.

I dont know how all these things help in getting 1 gun for the cost 4 basic ones.

when s*** hits fan its the number of shells in the air that counts, not the specs of the gun. we imo need 50 more artillery regiments than some uber guns in 5 regiments.

the only country with the printing press and budget for LARGE nos of high spec guns is Khan.

its foolish for a country like us with VOLUME needs and LIMITED BUDGET to be going after uber spec guns at the cost of masses of cheaper and basic artillery. atleast 3000 pieces of 155/39 basic bofors is needed and another 3000 155/45 dhanush


In our context, it is not only for providing support role to army, but does counter-battery run(gun to gun exchange). In such cases it is not merely no. of shells fired but how quick you fire, move, re-deploy, fire again, hide etc... So automation helps; uber spec helps.

Akshay Kapoor
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1629
Joined: 03 May 2011 11:15

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Akshay Kapoor » 29 Mar 2016 11:16

+1

What matters most is (assuming reliability and accuracy are already there) range and some mobility. Rate of fire is not crucial. OFB 155/42 and Bharat Forge 52 both address these issues properly and are cheaper than the foreign guns. We should just order then in numbers. As I posted here before Baba Kalyani is raring to go but the MoD just won't give him orders. The procurement policies in MoD have not changed sadly. Never will.

Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3049
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Kanson » 29 Mar 2016 11:22

^ Kalyani group is working in ATAGS project.

ATAGS is dubbed futuristic weapon system with more power, less weight and features suitable to Indian condition.

OFB 52 cal is further extension of Dhanush tech from 45 cal to 52 cal. Weight wise, firepower wise it will be inferior to ATAGS, by their own terse statement made sometime back. It is meant as quick solution to 52 cal requirement.

Akshay Kapoor
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1629
Joined: 03 May 2011 11:15

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Akshay Kapoor » 29 Mar 2016 11:31

Here is where I don't agree with you and agree with Singha. We don't need the advanced futuristic features of ATAGS or foregin guns for that matter. What we need are guns that have 52 cal, decent accuracy (all are guns from IFG onwards have that) and some mobility. Dhanush is very advanced with auto laying, muzzle radar and ofcourse APU. Bharat Forge 52 has even more and is 52 cal. Thats it. We don't need anything more.

Apart from working on ATAGS Kalyani have a ready gun that they have built themselves. The Bharat Forge 52. I have seen it though not seen it fired. It is an excellent gun as all the features necessary for a really advanced gun and he can make about a 120-150 a year if we can give him a 1000 gun order at least.

We need to increase orders for Dhanush to 1000 and start testing Bharat Forge 52 and give orders instead of going the ATAGS way. Let the DRDO continue developing ATAGS but for gods sake lets give big orders to guns already in hand that can do the job and much more !!!

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Gyan » 29 Mar 2016 11:43

My guess is that after 144 Dhanush 45 caliber Howitzers, Army will insist on next batch being 52 caliber. Then after a small batch order for 52 caliber Howitzers, the demand will shift to ATAGS. Now what is this behavior called? Doing an "Arjun" on indigenous products.

While in reality costly heavy Howitzers are rapidly being overtaken in cost benefit analysis by MBRLs ie Pinaka. And where are the orders for Pinaka? Arjuned!!

But Army will give all it's love to IMPORTED super costly heavy SPGs 155/52 which have poor strategic mobility and lots of maintenance issues.

We should concentrate on 2 tube based on 4x4, 6 tube based on 6x6 and 12 tube Pinaka 1,2,3 based on 8x8 trucks and cancel ALL artillery and MRBL imports.

uddu
BRFite
Posts: 1873
Joined: 15 Aug 2004 17:09

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby uddu » 29 Mar 2016 11:51

There is space for all types of guns. ATAGS is also pretty close to testing. In two three years we will be seeing mass manufacturing of ATAGS in thousands. In Parallel, OFB and Kalyani can also manufacture their own guns. As per indiastrategic.in there is requirement for 2820 artillery pieces in Towed, Mounted, Self Propelled (Tracked and Wheeled) and Ultra Light guns. artillery guns in total. So around 2000 to 2400 will be towed artillery.
800 Dhanush+800 Bharat-50+(next 8 years with 100 per year) 800+ ATAGS (from 2020 onwards) can be manufactured.
The Dhanush 52 Caliber ones seems ready for testing possibly this year.

Akshay Kapoor
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1629
Joined: 03 May 2011 11:15

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Akshay Kapoor » 29 Mar 2016 12:01

Gyan you seem to have shot off a lot of sentences without understanding much.

1. MBRLS are no substitute for tube arty either in cost effectiveness or in battle effectiveness
2. Pinakas are being ordered in number and the army loves Pinaka. I have this first hand.
3. I heard 3/4 years ago that it is MoD which is not keen to order Pinaka as orders go to pvt sector and MoD is not comfortable with private sector for many reasons - PSU give a lot of goodies like cars, guest house, holidays to MOD, IAS officers get jobs in PSUs as Directors, if PSU clout comes down then so does MOD babu and mantri empire, pvt sector effeciency will expose PSUs, L&T and TATAs for sure will not give bribes and do jee hazuri
4. When everybody had given up it was your Army's DG Artillery who supported the Dhanush project and encouraged it to completion. OFB are very tahnkful to him for his support and encouragement through bad times. I forget his name but you can google it
5. Procurement decisions are in the ands of MOD, CCS etc not in the Army's hand. They give a requirement - it goes for acceptance of necessity in MOD, it is then put up to DAC, then once DAC approves that it is needed, a long process starts for procurement including drawing up ASQRs sending RFIs , having competions etc. Army is involved only till here. Once technical evaluation is over then its upto MOD, Finance Ministry, CCS etc etc.
6. If there is a single vendor situation then MOD will not let procurement go ahead. They will keep going for competition after competition.
Last edited by Akshay Kapoor on 29 Mar 2016 12:17, edited 1 time in total.

Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3049
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Kanson » 29 Mar 2016 12:02

^ Where I supported ATAGS over Dhanush 52 cal or over Bharat Forge 52...

One thing that is starkly different from previous MoD and GoI is, unlike dragging us to situation like "No Plan B", this MoD is indeed preparing for Plan B to Plan Z and whatever matures and suites the set of requirements becomes Plan A at that time. Situation is so fluid. So no more it is only OFB or Bharat Forge, or L&T, all bat for one team.
And this is same for Art Guns, LCA or Rafale/MMRCA. There is Plan B to Plan Z everywhere.(I guess you can understand what i'm saying)

In this case, if i'm not mistaken, BF capabilities are roped in ATAGS as well. So whatever that is good that can be taken from Bharat Forge is getting into ATAGS. Hope it clears.

Akshay Kapoor
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1629
Joined: 03 May 2011 11:15

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Akshay Kapoor » 29 Mar 2016 12:06

uddu wrote:There is space for all types of guns. ATAGS is also pretty close to testing. In two three years we will be seeing mass manufacturing of ATAGS in thousands. In Parallel, OFB and Kalyani can also manufacture their own guns. As per indiastrategic.in there is requirement for 2820 artillery pieces in Towed, Mounted, Self Propelled (Tracked and Wheeled) and Ultra Light guns. artillery guns in total. So around 2000 to 2400 will be towed artillery.
800 Dhanush+800 Bharat-50+(next 8 years with 100 per year) 800+ ATAGS (from 2020 onwards) can be manufactured.
The Dhanush 52 Caliber ones seems ready for testing possibly this year.


Lets hope so. Last I heard form Bharat Forge they were not even being allowed to test their guns. Army had agreed to testing but had got a rap from MOD for that. Bharat 52 is an excellent gun on paper and in sight. I would love to see it tested. Also Bharat Forge can make 150 guns a year.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby srai » 29 Mar 2016 12:11

Kanson wrote:^ Where I supported ATAGS over Dhanush 52 cal or over Bharat Forge 52...

...

In this case, if i'm not mistaken, BF capabilities are roped in ATAGS as well. So whatever that is good that can be taken from Bharat Forge is getting into ATAGS. Hope it clears.


ATAGS is a collaborative effort between DRDO, OFB and other private enterprises. According to IDR article, ATAGS is an upgraded version of Dhanush where the DRDO is making the gun lighter with more advance lightweight materials along with automation and digitization.

Regarding Bharat Forge 52, a couple of years ago read on the news that it is awaiting trails as no test range has been made available to them. Not sure what happened since then.

Akshay Kapoor
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1629
Joined: 03 May 2011 11:15

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Akshay Kapoor » 29 Mar 2016 12:13

^

DG Arty had instructed Commadant Arty School Devlali to arrange for testing of Bharat 52. MOD shot it down and censured Army.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3478
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Aditya G » 29 Mar 2016 12:23

The complete howitzer requirement and fulfillment is snowballing with ofb, l&t, tata and kalyani products ready or getting orders almost simultaneously.

Akshay Kapoor
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1629
Joined: 03 May 2011 11:15

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Akshay Kapoor » 29 Mar 2016 12:27

Ready yes but many a slip between that and orders sir. I will dance sans clothes when orders happen !!

Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3727
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Vipul » 29 Mar 2016 17:48

There was an interview where Baba Kalyani told that there is a lobby which is not allowing Bharat Forge's 52 cal gun to be tested in India. They are denied access to the army testing ranges. The alternative is for the Gun to be tested in South Africa which is very costly and the import lobby would then cite no desert/snow trials done on the gun for denying possible orders!!!!

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby vaibhav.n » 04 Apr 2016 20:12

K-9 & K-10 Vajra spec sheet

Viv S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5303
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 00:46

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Viv S » 08 Apr 2016 18:09

Extended Range Modifications Could Double the Range of Current Howitzers

By News Desk - Mar 29, 2016

Image

The newly modified M777A2 howitzer has the potential to double the system's current artillery range. Benet Labs designed the tube and Picatinny designed all of the carriage modifications. Photo by Erin Usawicz.


Picatinny Arsenal engineers have been working to create a longer, newly modified M777A2 howitzer that has the potential to double the range of current M777 artillery systems. Charged with developing technology to extend the range of all 155mm artillery, the Extended Range Cannon Artillery (ERCA) project is funded by science and technology office at the US Army Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center (ARDEC).

The ERCA program evaluates the introduction of a longer barrel, developed for the XM907 Common Cannon Assembly Support system, as well as the XM1113 rocket assisted projectile and XM654 supercharge, an autoloader and new fire control system. The program is funded program by the Army and the Marine Corps.

With nearly 1,000 pounds (453 kg) added to the system’s overall weight and an additional six feet (1.82 m’) of cannon tube, the demonstration is taking place to give the Soldiers and Marines more confidence that the gun will still meet all of its mobility requirements.

The Army Program Manager Towed Artillery Systems, (PM-TAS) has already demonstrated a modified M777A2 Howitzer with an integration kit for the mass mock-up of the modified XM907 ERCA cannon at Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona. Follow-on mobility testing will be conducted at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, to document the changes in mobility from a standard M777A2, if any.

After the ERCA program, the M777ER program is engaged in making sure that ERCA’s system is suitable for the M777 system.
The final ERCA system will be demonstrated with an M109A7 system, which is the Paladin self-propelled howitzer.

“The ERCA program is developing the cannon to give it more range. PM-TAS is doing the demonstration to the Marines to show how it would look, feel and move when integrated into the M777A2 carriage,” said David Bound, M777ER Lead, Artillery Concepts and Design Branch, which is part of ARDEC. At this stage the demonstration will not include firing the weapon, but will show how the gun responds when it travels and how it feels when the crew interacts with the controls. “Right now (the M777) can shoot about 30 kilometers, but once all of the upgrades are complete it will be able to shoot about 70 kilometers,” said Bound.

“The visual prejudice we are up against is that it looks like it may tip over with all that extra cannon. We are trying to increase confidence that the M777 is an acceptable candidate for an extended range upgrade” said Bound. In efforts to ensure that the gun will meet all of its requirements, a mobility cannon tube was created.

The mobility tube consists of an old 52-caliber tube that was modified to fit into an M777A2 at the weight of the XM907. Additionally, grooves were added to the exterior of the tube to allow Picatinny engineers to hang weights at different positions, enabling them to move the center of gravity of the weapon forward or rear.

This cannon will allow the Army and the Marines to assess the impacts to the M777 and how it’s operated as the ERCA program optimizes the cannon design.

“The weights allow the Center of Gravity to move and get to the point where we can start towing this around as the configuration of the tube changes as the ERCA figures out what they want to do because it’s in flux right now,” said Bound.

“We are able to replicate how that tube reacts in the system using the different weight configurations. Then, we can hook this up to a truck so we can see what the users can expect from a human-factors point of view of how much harder it is to elevate, traverse back and forth, and what the trucks are going to see as they tow the system around,” said Bound.


Return to “Mil-Tech Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests