Artillery: News & Discussion

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 29 Jun 2016 00:13

Other advantages of MGS are in terms of reduced length of the system during road transportation as gun is mounted ON the truck. And better air mobility ( if dimensions are in sync with main carrier a/c). Basically, roll-on/roll-off kind of firepower. Not to forget, lower preparation time for getting the gun ready for action.


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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby soumik » 15 Aug 2016 12:21

As of Today the artillery Acquisition seems to have picked up steam in a big way
1)The Initial Towed 155 gun requirement of 1580 is pretty much wrapped up with 114 Dhanush guns already on order &a commitment for 300 more.Also 500 M-46 are being upgraded to 155mm & a understanding for at least 500 ATAGS exists.
2) The Initial light gun requirement of 145 has already been wrapped up, this requirement shall undoubtedly increase as the New Mountain Strike Corps is formed.
3)The Initial tracked SP reqmt of 100 pieces is also closed witht he K9 order, this too is projected to increase to a total inventory of 250-300.
4)The Wheeled SP gun requiremnt of 400 has been merged with the Mounted gun requirement and a total of 1000 units will finally be acquired, this requirement has still not been closed.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8311
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Pratyush » 15 Aug 2016 17:46

The test rig looks very TFTA. gone are the days of jugad tech.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5246
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ShauryaT » 16 Aug 2016 01:28

5 facts about DRDO’s new 155 mm x 52 calibre advanced towed artillery gun for Indian Army

1) With a firing range of 40 kms, the gun boasts of advanced features such as quick deployability, auxiliary power mode, high mobility, advanced communication system, automatic command and control system with night firing capability in direct fire mode.

2) ATAGS comprises of a breech mechanism, barrel, muzzle brake and recoil mechanism to fire 155 mm calibre ammunition. It has longer range, accuracy and precision and provides greater fire power, claims DRDO.

3) The system is configured with an all electric drive. The idea is the manufacture the gun in a way that it is maintenance free and offers reliable operation over a longer period of time.

4) DRDO’s nodal laboratory Armament Research & Development Establishment (ARDE), Pune takes the credit for the design & development of ATAGS, along with other DRDO laboratories.

5) DRDO aims to develop the artillery gun system with participation of private industry. Establishing indigenous critical defence manufacturing technologies, is one of the key focus areas of the project.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5246
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ShauryaT » 16 Aug 2016 01:32

Thing to note, ATAGS is 52 calibre and speced to weigh 12 tons, reducing the calibre, will reduce weight further. In mountains, the range can be made up due to environment at altitude. Stick to schedule --- Mid 2017 to user testing and all will be well.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54825
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 16 Aug 2016 04:15

Twitter had a picture of the new Arjun tank gun thermobaric round destroying a concrete bunker wall 5 meters thick.

PratikDas
BRFite
Posts: 1927
Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby PratikDas » 16 Aug 2016 04:21


Kashi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3636
Joined: 06 May 2011 13:53

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Kashi » 16 Aug 2016 06:22

soumik wrote:3)The Initial tracked SP reqmt of 100 pieces is also closed witht he K9 order, this too is projected to increase to a total inventory of 250-300.
4)The Wheeled SP gun requiremnt of 400 has been merged with the Mounted gun requirement and a total of 1000 units will finally be acquired, this requirement has still not been closed.


Isn't Vajra purchase expected to take of the self-propelled artillery requirements of ~814 units? If not then which mounted guns are we looking at?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54825
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 16 Aug 2016 06:30

PratikDas wrote:Ramana Ji, the wall was 500 mm thick.
https://twitter.com/bete_n0ire/status/764929142299070466



Thanks so it was 0.5 meters thick. Pretty good.
It is thermo baric and not squash head.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 16 Aug 2016 16:32

The required for SP Arty was 100 (Tracked) and 180 guns (wheeled) for a total of 280 guns. While 100 gun order K9 takes care of SP (Tracked), the Wheeled SP requirement seems to have been junked. The Mounted Gun System (MGS) requirement is for 814 units. Technically, even MGS is a SP gun but w/o the protective cover.

KBDagha
BRFite
Posts: 160
Joined: 10 Dec 2005 21:47
Location: Mumbai

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby KBDagha » 16 Aug 2016 16:52

‏@SJha1618
The initial ATAGS order will be of 150 units.

Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3287
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Kakkaji » 16 Aug 2016 17:56

Has K9 been ordered yet?

Has M777 been ordered yet?

Month after month passes, but no orders are placed.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby soumik » 16 Aug 2016 18:17

Kashi wrote:Isn't Vajra purchase expected to take of the self-propelled artillery requirements of ~814 units? If not then which mounted guns are we looking at?


Nope the mounted gun reqmt is separate from the tracked SP one that Vajra covers. The frontrunners as of now seem to be the Tata-Denel T5-52 & the Ashok Leyland Nexter Caesar.
Both have key advantages while the Caesar is combat proven. DENEL & Tata have pledged to make the gun in India if selected.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby soumik » 16 Aug 2016 18:19

Kakkaji wrote:Has K9 been ordered yet?

Has M777 been ordered yet?

Month after month passes, but no orders are placed.

AFAIK papers for M777 have been signed.
Commercial negotiations for Vajra are in an advanced stage ,parrikar has said he'll close the deal in 2016.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4068
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby kit » 16 Aug 2016 21:12

the thermobaric rounds are just the thing for the next kargil !

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54825
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 16 Aug 2016 21:17

I would like a Thermo Baric round in a 155mm shell with Gagan guidance. Will tak out all those bunkers around Lahore.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5246
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ShauryaT » 16 Aug 2016 21:22

kit wrote:the thermobaric rounds are just the thing for the next kargil !
Will they work at that altitude? Depleted Oxygen levels.

Bheeshma
BRFite
Posts: 592
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 22:01

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Bheeshma » 16 Aug 2016 21:26

There won't be another kargil, It will be useful in taking PoK though.

Will
BRFite
Posts: 637
Joined: 28 Apr 2011 11:27

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Will » 17 Aug 2016 02:22

Wasn't the ATAGS supposed to have a range of 60 km with special ammo. Though I remember readin some article that 40km was the optimum for a 155mm 52 cal gun.

Bart S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2438
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:03

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Bart S » 17 Aug 2016 12:07

Bheeshma wrote:There won't be another kargil, It will be useful in taking PoK though.


OT but:

Hope they can leverage the thermobaric expertise to build a wider family of thermobaric weapons, along the lines of the Russians have developed over the decades. They have systems for urban warfare, and those have been used to great effect in Syria. Our future wars at least on the western border will likely be fought in urban areas where the landscape resembles Iraq/Syria, so we need all these tools in our arsenal.

Also, hopefully we can build a mini daisy cutter type weapon, can be very useful to quickly clear wooded areas like the mountains around Tral (where most of the militants are reported to be hiding) or in fighting Maoists, levelling entire terrorist camps of Ulfa/NSCN type groups etc.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 17 Aug 2016 13:02

the TOS1 thermobaric rocket has been used in syria. there are videos on youtube of it setting a entire mountain on fire in Latakia. so Pinaka could be adapted to carry a single such warhead instead of bomblets.

but as in all artillery matters its a question of scaling up our production rate and inventory at all costs. rest will fall into place.

Will
BRFite
Posts: 637
Joined: 28 Apr 2011 11:27

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Will » 17 Aug 2016 15:37

soumik wrote:
Kakkaji wrote:Has K9 been ordered yet?

Has M777 been ordered yet?

Month after month passes, but no orders are placed.

AFAIK papers for M777 have been signed.
Commercial negotiations for Vajra are in an advanced stage ,parrikar has said he'll close the deal in 2016.


Believe that when you see it . :evil: Its just frustrating to hear stories day in and day out with no tangible results and a lot of it stems from the fact that there is just not enough money allocated. Much was expected from this govt on the defence front. For one the defence budget should be raised to at least 2.5 % of GDP but what do you get? The finance minister penny pinching.

Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3287
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Kakkaji » 31 Aug 2016 23:55

So, August deadline is now over. Did the GOI sign the letter of acceptance on the FMS offer for the M777 howitzers?

All these talks about strategic partnership with the US, the LEMOA etc are useless, if the acquisition decisions are strung out forever.

Parrikar needs to learn from Gadkari about how to get work actually started, instead of forever just talking tough and blaming the previous Government for the sad state of acquisitions. Otherwise, he is just Saint Anthony with tough talk. :roll:

ranjan.rao
BRFite
Posts: 520
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 01:21

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ranjan.rao » 01 Sep 2016 00:02

^^ Seems like this is not false
http://idrw.org/india-likely-to-seek-mo ... howitzers/

"Despite giving approval to import $750-million 145 BAE Systems’ M777A2 155mm/39 calibre lightweight howitzers from the US through the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) route, India has sought freeze on the price for three more months. Highly-placed sources told FE that “the deadline for signing the deal is September 10, but the ministry of defence (MoD) is planning to seek three-month extension and a freezing of the price of 145 M777A2 LW155 howitzers for the Indian Army."

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby vaibhav.n » 01 Sep 2016 20:36

According the latest Defence Tech Review, MoD is expected to sign the K-9 Vajra contract only by early 2017.

The shocker is that they have neither gone in for the K-10 Ammunition Resupply Vehicle nor the K-77 Fire Direction Centre Vehicle.

They will realise it 5 years later they haven't procured the legs or the brains and scratch their heads....

malushahi
BRFite
Posts: 351
Joined: 16 Jul 2008 03:08
Location: South of Berkshires

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby malushahi » 02 Sep 2016 03:57

looks like they have decided to keep the tail lean as a significant portion of medium howitzers to be inducted in strike units will be mounted or towed. given that the other guns will be manually-loaded, and their supply trucks thin-shelled anyways, it makes little sense to have an additional logistical headache/expense for the k-9s.

ditto for fire direction control. it might have made more sense to go with existing infra.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby vaibhav.n » 02 Sep 2016 09:38

Nonsense, what logistical headache they all use the same chassis which would already be made in country.

What is the need then to fight high intensity mechanised battles when artillery cannot be supported properly?

We might as well stroll into the fight.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby abhik » 02 Sep 2016 11:21

The tender probably didn't call for a specialised resupply vehicle so we aren't buying it, simplest and explain I could.think of.

malushahi
BRFite
Posts: 351
Joined: 16 Jul 2008 03:08
Location: South of Berkshires

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby malushahi » 02 Sep 2016 11:49

1. korea will be producing 1,136 k9 and 179 k10 for their own forces. assuming that they know better than every one else, their ratio of k9:k10 comes to about 100 k9:15 k10. any rational person can see that producing 15 k10s (even with the common hull) for the 100-unit l&t order makes no production sense.

2. korea's very large holding of k9 is due to a very different doctrine than IA's. any conflict on the korean peninsula (a mere 250km frontage) will have a far greater nuclear overhang than that on indian subcontinent. use of k9s and k10s is more for nbc survivability of their crews rather than any other reason.

3. a k10 carries 104 rounds to a k9's 48 (one k10 supports a mere 2 k9s). who loads the projectiles into the k10 once it runs out in the middle of that mythical "high intensity mechanized battle"? it is the supply trucks and their topchi crews who will stroll into the mix eventually. no marks for guessing which one of the two (k9 or k10) will get loaded first.

come back with real arguments and facts the next time instead of sticking out a sub-par post starting with the word "Nonsense". it only pollutes the thread with high intensity plaintiveness and churlishness, and that has nothing to do with high intensity battles.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 02 Sep 2016 12:43

the mighty Pzh2000 also does not feature a automated reload vehicle. things are loaded by hand using a drawer system at the back. I suspect its a more fail safe system under cover than a complex reload vehicle.... the shells are 45kg and the charges much less...can be man handled for short distance using a daisy chain of loaders.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby vaibhav.n » 02 Sep 2016 14:44

malushahi wrote:1. korea will be producing 1,136 k9 and 179 k10 for their own forces. assuming that they know better than every one else, their ratio of k9:k10 comes to about 100 k9:15 k10. any rational person can see that producing 15 k10s (even with the common hull) for the 100-unit l&t order makes no production sense.


Compliment you on basic math skills but it doesn't take effort to study the actual ORBAT. The ROKA deploys more than 700 K56 ARV's something they were producing till 2015 which are fully compatible with their in production K9 guns. That is why you have a lesser number of the newer K10 ARV's.

malushahi wrote:2. korea's very large holding of k9 is due to a very different doctrine than IA's. any conflict on the korean peninsula (a mere 250km frontage) will have a far greater nuclear overhang than that on indian subcontinent. use of k9s and k10s is more for nbc survivability of their crews rather than any other reason.


False.

Please do read up more on DPRK's oversized artillery force firing from hardened prepared sites onto Seoul itself, which requires such large artillery for ROKA. One of the reasons that the K9 built for good counter-battery performance.

Additonally, the threat in the korean peninsula in case of a conflict is more from North Korean chemical weapons followed by nuclear ones. For that matter to suggest that own mechanised forces don't suffer that same nuclear overhang under Paki tactical nuclear weapons is being rather naive.

malushahi wrote:3. a k10 carries 104 rounds to a k9's 48 (one k10 supports a mere 2 k9s). who loads the projectiles into the k10 once it runs out in the middle of that mythical "high intensity mechanized battle"? it is the supply trucks and their topchi crews who will stroll into the mix eventually. no marks for guessing which one of the two (k9 or k10) will get loaded first.


A mechanised resupply vehicle has the same level of off-road mobility as the SP guns. It allows your gun troops not having the headache to make those trips to a resupply point close to a roadhead away from its probable axis of advance. A regular BK party in a towed regiment carries a much smaller share in comparision.

One of the reasons that SP guns like PzH 2000 or Koalytsia-SV with no dedicated ARV's have much larger magazine capacities.

malushahi
BRFite
Posts: 351
Joined: 16 Jul 2008 03:08
Location: South of Berkshires

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby malushahi » 02 Sep 2016 21:16

1. from hanwha techwin's product page "K56 ARV is an automatic tracked vehicle to supply ammunition to K55A1 Self-propelled Howitzer". there is nothing about compatibility, alluded or implied, with k9. so maybe you know something they don't. do you have a reference that clearly mentions said compatibility? again, the 700 nos. of k56 are planned and not part of "the actual orbat". k56 began production in 2013, so not sure what "they were producing till 2015"? finally, while including k56 (planned), your smug math did not account for the 1040 k55 units (existing and upgraded) that the k56 is based off.

2. i mentioned the 250km frontage vis-a-vis large artillery holdings for a reason,viz., the fire density will be many magnitudes higher than anywhere on the subcontinent. you rehash that as "good counter-battery performance". not sure where you get that "chemical weapons followed by nuclear" idea from, for the north's chem-holdings are severely debilitated after years of economic sanctions. that is why it has taken the road to nukes - and it has a stated intention to use them. br readers are informed enough to decide if the nuclear threat is more real on the peninsula or in the subcontinent - i don't see a point in even acknowledging that pov.

3. the "headache to make those trips to a resupply point" depends on the tography and last- mile issues, and you are painting a broad-brush scenario. the korean theatre is one of mountains, valleys, and paddy fields, quite unlike the flat terrain along likely strike-axes on the subcontinent. in general, supply trucks on the subcontinent will be able to get to points that does not involve large detours for armored columns.

more churlishness and povs. argue with facts and references, we are all here to share and learn.

hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4000
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby hnair » 03 Sep 2016 07:11

malushahi wrote:br readers are informed enough to decide


Spot on.... BR readers are informed but unfortunately above posts are very distracting to a moderator. Now what are these crappy lines doing in you both's exchanges about concepts of artillery resupply?

malushahi wrote:come back with real arguments and facts the next time instead of sticking out a sub-par post starting with the word "Nonsense". it only pollutes the thread with high intensity plaintiveness and churlishness, and that has nothing to do with high intensity battles.


vaibhav.n wrote:Compliment you on basic math skills but it doesn't take effort to study the actual ORBAT.


malushahi wrote:more churlishness and povs. argue with facts and references, we are all here to share and learn.


Desist posting these extra lines! Please continue the debate otherwise

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8228
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Indranil » 27 Sep 2016 23:40

Moderator note: Continue the discussions without the remarks on each other.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21177
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Prem » 29 Sep 2016 09:23

http://web.timesnowmobile.com/story?id=49159
Operational gaps handicap military on several fronts

NEW DELHI: The cabinet committee on security (CCS) has cleared the acquisition of two more regiments of the indigenous Pinaka multiple-launch rocket systems (MLRS) for the Army, which will help the force boost its medium-range, high-volume firepower.
Sources said the CCS, chaired by PM Narendra Modi, cleared the third and fourth Pinaka regiments for over ₹3,300 crore. With a strike range of 40km, the Pinaka MLRS are manufactured by the Tatas and L&T based on technology developed by DRDO. But with the government yet to really cut the flab in the cumbersome defence procurement procedures or fast-track crucial acquisitions, the armed forces continue to suffer from critical operational gaps on several fronts.
The Navy, already grappling with the prospect of commissioning the new Scorpene submarines without torpedoes and frontline warships without multi-role helicopters, for instance, sounded yet another red-alert on Wednesday. It asked the Manohar Parrikar-led defence acquisitions council (DAC) to quickly resolve the question of acquiring the main 127mm guns for 11 frontline warships.The reason is that the 127mm Otomelara guns selected for the seven stealth frigates and four guided-missile destroyers, under-construction for over ₹80,000 crore at Mazagon Docks (Mumbai) and GRSE (Kolkata), are manufactured by Italian conglomerate Finmeccanica.The NDA government has virtually blacklisted Finmeccanica and its subsidiaries, with all fresh deals with the conglomerate already on hold since the VVIP helicopter scandal rocked the country over a couple of years ago, as was earlier reported by TOI.The DAC did clear modernisation proposals worth ₹1,900 crore, ranging from the ₹330 crore electronic warfare system for a mountain corps to the ₹405 crore procurement of over 3,100 Konkurs antitank guided missiles, on Wednesday but they were relatively minor in nature.The first victim of the VVIP helicopter scandal fallout was the long-pending ₹1,200 crore proposal to buy the Black Shark heavy-weight torpedoes from a Finmeccanica subsidiary for the six Scorpene submarines under construction at MDL. The Navy will now commission its first new conventional submarine in over 16 years, INS Kalvari, without its primary weapon by the end of this year.

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4701
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Manish_Sharma » 29 Sep 2016 10:31



The loading from K10 to K9 is shown at 1:32 mins, seems quite slow and needs plain surface to align them for tranfer process, won't be possible in our himalayan region I think.

pushkar.bhat
BRFite
Posts: 411
Joined: 29 Mar 2008 19:27
Location: prêt à monter dans le Arihant
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby pushkar.bhat » 02 Oct 2016 12:12

Heard that Bharat forge recently inaugurated its facility for production of arty guns. Maharashtra CM attended.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby soumik » 02 Oct 2016 21:41

Inaugrated yesterday, Hopefully should open up the road for Bharat Forge Howitzers

https://twitter.com/manoharparrikar/status/782289306811568128/photo/1

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1553
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Gyan » 02 Oct 2016 22:27

Two additional regiments of Pinaka is good news. I presume they will be 65km+ Pinaka 2 and DDM are misreporting as usual. I hope that we also develop 6 rocket pod version or even 2 rockets pod mounted on 4x4 and 6x6 vehicles for mountain regions.


Return to “Mil-Tech Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests