Artillery: News & Discussion

dinesh_kimar
BRFite
Posts: 382
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby dinesh_kimar » 06 Jan 2014 19:08

By the way, NTW 20 designer, one Tony Neophytou from S Africa, is no longer with Denel, and is interested to provide "Work Assistance, Consultancy, Paid, Unpaid", etc.

(I wonder if im wasting my time.)

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18860
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 06 Jan 2014 19:51

Aditya_V wrote:The cancellation of the Denel anti material rifles and Nalanda manufacture of 155mm without any proof was more part of requests for Aman Ki asha than actual corruption.

This was due to Paki casualties in Parakram, it was this bending which these forces thought can lead to handing over Siachen to Pakis.

I hope this is brought to the knowledge of the general public.


Aditya, Singha

Any link for this? Any sources? I wouldnt be surprised if this sort of thing actually happened.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 06 Jan 2014 20:59

I am not able to find the source, but it seems we inducted just 300 of the 1000 ordered and there are problems in importing its ammo per the link below
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes ... associates

just as anything which increases the superiority of the IA , can be used in low intensity conflict and inflicts pain on PA is very allergic to the americans and their TSPian friends (155mm , any desi project intended for IA overmatch like arjun), this one too was surely targeted in a systematic way.

the nature of politics in this land is that people can wander around naked and shit in anyone's garden, but the DHOTI must remain spotlessly clean after the deed is done

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7304
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby nachiket » 06 Jan 2014 21:07

I have always blamed the MoD for overreacting. Random articles in obscure newspapers which allege corruption are enough for them to cancel all deals and blacklist the company. It is but obvious that our enemies are going to exploit this. It basically costs them next to nothing to halt IA's modernization. But the worthies at the MoD are way too interested in covering their own musharraf's to realize this and mend their ways. Nobody cares about the impact on national security.
Last edited by nachiket on 06 Jan 2014 21:08, edited 1 time in total.

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Lalmohan » 06 Jan 2014 21:08

werent there similar unsubstantiated letters related to MMRCA?

member_28041
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 47
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby member_28041 » 06 Jan 2014 21:09

Singha wrote:I am not able to find the source, but it seems we inducted just 300 of the 1000 ordered and there are problems in importing its ammo per the link below
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes ... associates

just as anything which increases the superiority of the IA , can be used in low intensity conflict and inflicts pain on PA is very allergic to the americans and their TSPian friends (155mm , any desi project intended for IA overmatch like arjun), this one too was surely targeted in a systematic way.

the nature of politics in this land is that people can wander around naked and shit in anyone's garden, but the DHOTI must remain spotlessly clean after the deed is done


There goes the indigeneous effort on Vidhwansask by OFB as smoke.
The current weight of Vidhwansask is becuase it has the ability to fire till 2000m and it actually weighted less compared to the denel weapon.

As per the link if the army is looking for a 1000m weapon, then shoud'nt the OFB have given at least an oppourtunity to produce a similar weapon instead of jumping for import again and licene manufaturing with "FULL TOT/screw driver assembly" ?

vic
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2412
Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby vic » 06 Jan 2014 21:59

As soon as OFB reverse engineered and offered Vidhawansk, the requirement was changed for the AMR rifle to weight less than 15kg to knock it out.

dinesh_kimar
BRFite
Posts: 382
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby dinesh_kimar » 14 Jan 2014 19:57

There goes the indigeneous effort on Vidhwansask by OFB as smoke.


Truly Sad.

In fact, a post from another thread speaks about launching a Mars Orbiter , yet calling for Tender to Import an Assault Rifle.

Many Systems need final approval from end user, in this case DG Artillery. Noting the 120mm LR Mortar Saga, where the QRs listed were "not available anywhere else in the world", it seems, IMHO, Army could have inducted some systems , maybe as a Mk-I.

agupta
BRFite
Posts: 262
Joined: 13 Oct 1999 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby agupta » 14 Jan 2014 22:15

GD - would you happen to recall off hand where/when that piece on the AMR deprecation as a CBM came out ?

A comparison of the Vidhwansak's specs with the NTW-20s makes it clear that Indian requirements were always geared more towards portability. The 2 calibers the AMRs share tell you the story, the V. is shorter ranged than the NTW-20 but loses weight in exchange. So a spec. ~ 1800m must have been deemed sufficient and lower-capability components (bullets/materials) accepted to get the weight and cost reduction.

What doesn't seem to be clearly demonstrated in open source material is if :
a) the V. gave up the 2-piece portability ?
< This could be why it makes sense for BSF but not IA>
b) the endurance of the gun was deemed satisfactory
< potential consequence of light/cheap - assuming this was standard reverse-engineering/adaption and no expensive, new hi-tech materials were used for weight reduction>

Anyone know or can shed light ?

PS: what a tragedy; perhaps AC's term as DRDO head and the "return to the basics" will see this fixed. You could argue that as a techno-political tool, a widely available on-the-line AMR would be a very effective deterrent to the PA's "thousand-cuts" philosophy... more so than many other options that indicate escalation.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53934
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 14 Jan 2014 23:36

agupta, The CBM is surmised from the fact that a non-entity like Renuka Choudary, MP from Andhra Pradesh brought up corruption charges and the Denel deal was scrubbed.
The AMR is a updated concept of the Boyes Anti Tank Rifle using a cannon shell versus a solid core tungsten bullet. Germans also had similar weapons in early years of WWII.
Denel might have benfitted from migration of Germans scientists after WWII.

I like the OFB approach of different changable barrels for the different cartridges. My gripe is about the 20mm shell which is not made by OFB. I wish they used the 23mm shell which is already made.

Did you see in the LOC flare up IA had to use 40mm Bofors (2pdrs) to destroy the bunkers?

agupta
BRFite
Posts: 262
Joined: 13 Oct 1999 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby agupta » 15 Jan 2014 02:25

Ramana... if that, then it fits more to a deliberate political "sabotage" moniker than a CBM (voluntary); oh well, potato/potatoe.... I get your point.

Yes...the changeable barrels makes it more likely to me that the primary customer was the IA. Can't imagine BSF chauki's needing that feature. Its likely that there's more volume of 12.7mm ammo in the IA logistics than 23mm... and in any case, if they were "derating" from the original stress specs to make their weight and cost goals, then they would be forced to go smaller than the NTW-20 "standard" 20mm that was forming the upper-limit condition. Going to 23mm would've probably forced a major re-design rather than "simpler" reverse-engineering+cost-out.

That's why the question of wether modularity (2-piece transportability) and NTW-20 like life/reliability was retained is a critical one... normal expected risks of going light/cheap than original (even when you are willing to give up range).

That said, the NTW-20 does seem much heavier than its contemporaries to begin with...does anyone recall if it was cost/ToT or the swappable barell feature that enabled its win over the others ?

If an intelligent discussion without this becoming yet another brainless OFB vs. Import thread is possible, I think the change in specs from the 1st tender to this new one could be an indicator of a real shift in what and how the Army wants to use the AMR for. In Round 1, the preference seemed to be for the heavier 20mm barrell option with a larger round that can do real damage to larger targets; now in Round 2, its pointing to a more "conventional" AMR closer to the 12.7 - 14.5 /50cal class that's significantly lighter and hence mobile. Its delivering less energy at its target, but if this is effective enough against a large percentage of the targets the IA is likely to see, then its a good trade-off.

Lets just hope this one doesn't get sabotaged either.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby koti » 15 Jan 2014 03:47

agupta wrote:Can't imagine BSF chauki's needing that feature. Its likely that there's more volume of 12.7mm ammo in the IA logistics than 23mm

I think he was mentioning why 20mm vs 23mm, not .50cal.

agupta wrote:That said, the NTW-20 does seem much heavier than its contemporaries to begin with

I think it is not. The only thing with notably lower weight is the Croatian RT-20, but it is a recoilless design and has much lesser mussle velocity then the Vidhvanshak/NTW-20.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53934
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 15 Jan 2014 03:53

agupta, then they are looking at the Barrett stable of AMR which are really elephant guns!

The NTW-20 can take out a bunker. The Barrett can take out a truck engine.


Koti is right. I was arguing for 23mm which is already there vs the 20mm which needs to be purchased.
23 mm comes in HEI and AP.
I once did the cartridge comaprison long ago. They are about same. But then it would introduce another round n IA.

agupta
BRFite
Posts: 262
Joined: 13 Oct 1999 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby agupta » 15 Jan 2014 04:02

HI Koti

Yes, I understand Ramana's question on 20 vs 23mm. The V. is a lite reverse-engineered derivative of the NTW-20... so it stands to reason that the "20" standard of the NTW-20 is retained. And now you have 2 choices for the 2nd alternate caliber.. keep the smaller caliber we know it can take (12.7, 14.5) OR up-engineer for 23mm. My point was tht the latter may not be possible for a variety of reasons - cost, weight, engg. capability etc. AND may not be preferred given the logistics chain commonality of 12.7 vs 23mm in the IA.

True on your 2nd point... but was the 20mm a min. spec requirement or a nice-to-have feature for the original IA AMR tender ? This shift in requirements from the 1st tender to this new one (if my hypothesis is true) is what's interesting... it might mean there will be a welcome enhancement (more guns, more dispersal of lighterweight guns) of fire-power in the infantry

agupta
BRFite
Posts: 262
Joined: 13 Oct 1999 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby agupta » 15 Jan 2014 04:07

ramana wrote:Koti is right. I was arguing for 23mm which is already there vs the 20mm which needs to be purchased.
23 mm comes in HEI and AP.
I once did the cartridge comaprison long ago. They are about same. But then it would introduce another round n IA.



Understood. But that's the double edge of reverse-engineering vs. clean sheet design, I suppose. If they're starting from the NTW-20, then the 20's "design loads" prob. set the limit conditions (materials, life) that cannot be exceeded. Especially if they want to go lighter/cheaper by "derating" the original design AND not having the cost-room or capability to infuse new adv. materials to take the up-engineering

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4438
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby putnanja » 16 Jan 2014 09:41

Tarmak blog has an article on Catapult based on Arjun chasis. Some good pictures too.

DRDO to unveil catapult gun system built on Arjun MBT Mk-I chassis | First public display likely at Defexpo | GSQR trials in May

...
CVRDE Director Dr P Sivakumar told Express on Wednesday that the catapult has adopted advanced technologies of Arjun MBT automotive system along with 130 mm (SP) M-46 gun system. “It offers the users in the battle field a self propelled system with excellent fire power, high mobility and required protection. The catapult would fulfil the interim and immediate requirements of Artillery to replace two Regiments holding Vijayanta Catapult Guns, there by extending the life of 130 mm guns,” Dr Sivakumar said. Tipped as the fastest realisation project of DRDO, the Arjun Catapult had its first field development trials in November 2012, four moths after receiving the Army requirement.
...
He said the Arjun Catapult has better stability, accuracy and consistency. “The gun barrel is mainly used to engage in indirect fire up to a maximum range of 27.4 km. The gun can also be fired directly on targets up to 1.4 km range. It can be fired at various angles of elevation as well. The catapult has STANAG Level II protection (a NATO standardisation agreement) for the crew from the side as well as from the top. It has low silhouette and has integrated fire fighting detection and suppression system,” he further said.
Ergonomics using anthropometric data of Indian troops has been kept in view while designing the fighting and engine compartments and maximum possible protection to crew have been ensured. Embedded with a global positioning system, the catapult is armed with night vision devices for both the driver and the commander.
...

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11522
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Aditya_V » 16 Jan 2014 12:53

I wish we can have some 155mm captapults, meanwhile, can we get 130mm guns from former Soviet block make 400 Catapults, given the power of the Arjun engine I am sure these will be useful in Ladakh as well

Shrinivasan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Location: Gateway Arch
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Shrinivasan » 16 Jan 2014 21:52

We should Induct couple of regiments of 130mm Arjun-Catapults into IA and deploy them (1 each) with the Armoured Divs, Rather than wait for 155mm SPH, this would be an interim solution...

Shrinivasan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Location: Gateway Arch
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Shrinivasan » 16 Jan 2014 21:55

Aditya_V wrote:I wish we can have some 155mm captapults, meanwhile, can we get 130mm guns from former Soviet block make 400 Catapults, given the power of the Arjun engine I am sure these will be useful in Ladakh as well

Aditya, 155mm SPH will come in due course, we recently read about a plan to resurrect the Bhim project... These 130mm guns should be treated as an interim solution. Maybe help IA to devise tactics etc... Eventually we would need a decent number of 130mm and 155mm SPH for both our Armoured and RAPIDS apart from the SPH regiments which we badly need in our Arty Divs...

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3415
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Aditya G » 16 Jan 2014 22:45

Noob pooch; why does the Catapult system point backwards?

Rupak
Webmaster BR
Posts: 322
Joined: 14 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Rupak » 17 Jan 2014 01:12

Aditya G,
Since the engine pack is rear mounted and the gun is fixed, mounting the gun rear facing reduces the footprint of the entire system. This makes for easier storage and transportation. It is therefore the lowest cost (time and money) conversion!

member_20317
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3167
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby member_20317 » 17 Jan 2014 12:06

^^ should help in absorbing the recoil better too. Imagine a heavy gun recoiling in the direction the heavy engine is mounted. I wish they install the 155 mm 45 cal gun onto that and probably add a powered spade too. Then order a total of 150 of these at 15 Crore a piece.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 17 Jan 2014 12:13

how does the gun traverse right and left?

member_20317
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3167
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby member_20317 » 17 Jan 2014 12:44

^^ - won't except perhaps to something like 12* either side. But being tracked, should be possible to change the orientation fast enough without having to change positions drastically. Also with turret it will probably cost 25 Crore a piece and a politics that you cannot get out of.

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9984
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby sum » 17 Jan 2014 17:35

^^ Video of the Arjun Catapult trials posted on Tarmak007 FB site

Kakarat
BRFite
Posts: 1970
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Kakarat » 17 Jan 2014 20:10


Nitesh
BRFite
Posts: 899
Joined: 23 Mar 2008 22:22
Location: Bangalore
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Nitesh » 17 Jan 2014 20:36

Why they are using the rope to fire? Or I am mistaken here

sattili
BRFite
Posts: 162
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby sattili » 17 Jan 2014 21:20

^^^^^
To Make sure that the first ever firing of the gun is safe for the Jawans operating it. Obviously no body wants to risk the lifes while testing the gun for the very first time. The second video actually shows Jawans standing on the tank and operating it.

tushar_m

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby tushar_m » 20 Jan 2014 19:19

does anyone notice the stability of platform(arjun) when the round is fired ???(almost no effect )

its very good & it may handle 155mm very easily

sattili
BRFite
Posts: 162
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby sattili » 20 Jan 2014 19:51

tushar_m wrote:does anyone notice the stability of platform(arjun) when the round is fired ???(almost no effect )

its very good & it may handle 155mm very easily

+1.

Remember Arjun was originally used for Bhim SPG which is 155mm. Wish that project gets revived soon.

BTW, is it possible to mount TATA SED's 155mm gun on Arjun chassis like this catapult (minus the turret as in Bhim)? Wishful thinking, this might give us a quick win solution while Bhim development and testing is completed later.

arijitkm
BRFite
Posts: 137
Joined: 12 Oct 2009 23:23

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby arijitkm » 22 Jan 2014 15:42

Strolling on TOI, there is an interesting news. Nothing heard about it before.

Army to get 155 mm 'dhanush' gun, advanced radar equipment soon

The Indian Army will soon be adding the 155 mm gun 'Dhanush' to its range of guns which have been proving their prowess and deadly firepower in various battlefields.

The Indian army, which already has the 155 mm Bofors gun, will induct Dhanush, which would add even more might to the regiment of artillery, said army officials at the Exercise Mahasangram, which was conducted in the firing ranges of the School of Artillery at Deolali on Tuesday.


Army officials said that while the Bofors has a rate of fire of three rounds per 14 seconds, the indigenous Dhanush could fire eight rounds per minute. Dhanush, which in the trial stage, would soon be inducted, said the army officers.
.........


Is it Desi 'Bofors' ? can anyone enlighten me on this.

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9984
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby sum » 22 Jan 2014 16:06

^^ So many versions of 155 mm desi stuff floating around that completely lost which is which!

All of them seem to be in perennial trials though!

sattili
BRFite
Posts: 162
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby sattili » 22 Jan 2014 16:31

arijitkm wrote:Strolling on TOI, there is an interesting news. Nothing heard about it before.

Army to get 155 mm 'dhanush' gun, advanced radar equipment soon

The Indian Army will soon be adding the 155 mm gun 'Dhanush' to its range of guns which have been proving their prowess and deadly firepower in various battlefields.

The Indian army, which already has the 155 mm Bofors gun, will induct Dhanush, which would add even more might to the regiment of artillery, said army officials at the Exercise Mahasangram, which was conducted in the firing ranges of the School of Artillery at Deolali on Tuesday.


Army officials said that while the Bofors has a rate of fire of three rounds per 14 seconds, the indigenous Dhanush could fire eight rounds per minute. Dhanush, which in the trial stage, would soon be inducted, said the army officers.
.........


Is it Desi 'Bofors' ? can anyone enlighten me on this.


Yes looks like its Desi bofors mfg by OFB.

I couldn't find many references on google, everyone seems to carry same news which appeared in TOI. However there were 2 interesting links:

1. A tender issued by OFB- "Supply of Forging For Planetary Pinion To Drg. No. P155 Hrg-3002-3 For Project Dhanush"
http://www.tenders.tradeindia.com/tender-details/5210922/

2. There is a reference to Dhanush 155mm gun system developed by OFB in Defence Accounts Department (DAD) news magazine in Oct 2013
http://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=25&cad=rja&ved=0CEIQFjAEOBQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fcgda.nic.in%2FDAD%2520News%2520magazine%2520%2520(October).pdf&ei=WajfUt3FMamCiQfYl4DQCA&usg=AFQjCNEvtjlkIH-JmHUskScKfpS7Qq49Hw
scroll to page 20 bottom of left side column

I am assuming these are the ones produced based on FH-77B TOT.

OT...they have a diagram showing the SWOT analysis of OFB on Page 21 of that DAD magazine...thought it might be interesting to see what they think of themselves :D
Last edited by sattili on 22 Jan 2014 18:07, edited 1 time in total.

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4289
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Manish_Sharma » 22 Jan 2014 17:25

Could this be Dhanush?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DRDO_155_mm_artillery_gun

The DRDO 155 mm artillery gun project was started by India since there are delays associated with the procurement of artillery guns due to issues of corruption and irregularities. Many of the companies that bid for the contract are either blacklisted for utilizing unfair means to gain the contract leading to single vendor issues and guns not meeting the requirement of the Indian Army. The artillery guns were not procured after the Bofors scandal. Hence it was planned to replace the older guns with a modern indigenously developed 155mm artillery gun.[1] DRDO along with private companies including L&T, Bharat forge are developing a 155 mm artillery gun, that is to be handed over to the Indian Army for trials in 2013.

In a presentation made to defence minister A K Antony, the Army informed DRDO that it would place orders for over 140 howitzers after the artillery guns are field tested. DRDO’s Pune-based Armament Research and Development Establishment (ARDE) is the lead research agency to develop the 155mm 52 calibre indigenous howitzer for the Army.

sattili
BRFite
Posts: 162
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby sattili » 22 Jan 2014 18:16

^^^^^
No, I think DRDO guns is a completely new development from scratch for future use. It would be 155mm/52 cal

As per the DAD magazine link I posted earlier, Dhanush is a OFB project. Most likely the gun based on FH77-B designs that OFB received during the Bofors TOT. Reason for my thinking is that this project is listed as one of the achievements of OFB along with others like Ammo, INSAS Carbine and few other projects.

Dhanush could be 155mm/39cal like the original FH77-B. Or 45cal developed by OFB Kanpur. Picture on Militaryphotos.net
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?206570-India-had-developed-its-first-155mm-gun

Added later: "Dhanush" is the project name for producing the Desi Bofors. 144 guns were ordered in 2012. (Credit for the Links goes to Kunal Biswas from Militaryphotos.net)
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/newsrf.php?newsid=19668
http://epaper.patrika.com/c/2023710

So its good news that Army is finally getting these guns this year.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53934
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 22 Jan 2014 19:59

sattili, Good and persistent work in finding out the details.

Can someone translate the hindi e-patrika news item. Looks like 100 rounds were fired.

SanjayC
BRFite
Posts: 1557
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby SanjayC » 22 Jan 2014 20:22

Here is the translation:

Over 100 rounds fired from Dhanush

The internal trials of the indigenous Bofors gun Dhanush have now been completed. Over 100 rounds were fired at Orissa's Balasore range in trials that lasted for about two weeks.

During firing, the gun could hit targets 38 km away. The fifth prototype of the 155 mm "Desi" Bofors gun Dhanush, made by the Gun Carriage Factory, was tested in trials that began in the third week of November at the Balasore range.

The trials of the gun, that lasted till the first week of December, gave very good results. According to sources, during testing of the earlier four prototypes, some defects were observed related to the automatic shell loading mechanism. These problems were later rectified.

The Factory management has been taking special care in manufacturing the gun after the barrel of the fourth prototype burst during testing on August 10.

After the trials at Balasore, the results of the tests would now be analyzed. Thereafter, the gun would be handed over to the army for winter trials.

The army will test the gun in January in Sikkim. Preparations have already begun for this.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Will » 22 Jan 2014 20:30

sattili wrote:
tushar_m wrote:does anyone notice the stability of platform(arjun) when the round is fired ???(almost no effect )

its very good & it may handle 155mm very easily

+1.

Remember Arjun was originally used for Bhim SPG which is 155mm. Wish that project gets revived soon.

BTW, is it possible to mount TATA SED's 155mm gun on Arjun chassis like this catapult (minus the turret as in Bhim)? Wishful thinking, this might give us a quick win solution while Bhim development and testing is completed later.



Isn't the TATA gun based on the Denel gun that was part of the Bhim? So maybe not wishful thinking after all.

sattili
BRFite
Posts: 162
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby sattili » 22 Jan 2014 20:38

SanjayC wrote:Here is the translation:

Over 100 rounds fired from Dhanush

The internal trials of the indigenous Bofors gun Dhanush have now been completed. Over 100 rounds were fired at Orissa's Balasore range in trials that lasted for about two weeks.

During firing, the gun could hit targets 38 km away. The fifth prototype of the 155 mm "Desi" Bofors gun Dhanush, made by the Gun Carriage Factory, was tested in trials that began in the third week of November at the Balasore range.

The trials of the gun, that lasted till the first week of December, gave very good results. According to sources, during testing of the earlier four prototypes, some defects were observed related to the automatic shell loading mechanism. These problems were later rectified.

The Factory management has been taking special care in manufacturing the gun after the barrel of the fourth prototype burst during testing on August 10.

After the trials at Balasore, the results of the tests would now be analyzed. Thereafter, the gun would be handed over to the army for winter trials.

The army will test the gun in January in Sikkim. Preparations have already begun for this.


Thanks SanjayC. One observation I had is that when the 155mm/45cal gun was displayed at DefExpo it is said to be developed by OFB Kanpur. This latest news talks about gun manufactured at GCF Jabalpur. Not sure if these 2 are same or different guns.

If they are different then Dhanush could be 39cal and Kanpurwala could be 45cal...am I right in my assumption?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53934
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 22 Jan 2014 21:10

The cold weather could inhibit the propellant and hence the cold weather trials to see the gun performance.
So range could be a minor shortfall.


Return to “Mil-Tech Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests