Artillery: News & Discussion

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby vaibhav.n » 14 Feb 2014 08:07

SagarG, Unlikely they would ever achieve those kind of ranges.Vanilla 155mm HE round does 18-20Kms.

1. 155mm HE-ER BoatTail does 30Kms
2. 155mm HE-ER BaseBleed does around 38-39Kms

Such ranges are only acheived by VLAP rounds which we donot have in production after Denel Scam. Could be otherwise. The Bofors does it because the Indian Army asked for and Bofors built the latest variant with a 25 Litre Chamber. Standard 52 Calibre Guns have a 23 Litre Chamber.

Hari,

The Indian Army has been extremely clear in its choice, they would like the Bofors period!!

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2628
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Victor » 14 Feb 2014 09:33

Arun Menon wrote:The IA is not some holy cow that should be protected against the slightest of criticism.

No the IA is not a holy cow and should not be immune to criticism but if criticism is due in the cow dung heap we have that passes for weapons procurement, the IA is the very LAST in the list for criticism. Politicos and MoD including all the DPSUs come way before IA for a kicking from internet commandos like us.

Just because you "served in the field" doesn't make you better than any other poster on this forum.

Err, when talking about WEAPONS like we are here, it actually does since most of us have not served in the forces or even fired a weapon. None of us who have not seen action or even gone thru NCC training have the right to be arrogant enough to claim to be better. We simply are not and don't know as much, so get over it. It's clear that you have no respect or gratefulness at all for the army and that's perfectly OK in a country like ours. There are many like you, specially nowadays, and the forces are getting used to it.

If all we had here were the pontifications of learned internet commandos, this would be an awfully boring place and pointless too. Thankfully its not because of folks like Akshay. I hope he was kidding and takes the time to participate in future.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8286
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Pratyush » 14 Feb 2014 09:39

The specification of the 60 km round , looks like the South African VLAP to me.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 14 Feb 2014 09:50

>> Pakistani 155/52 guns is a old discarded US gun

I thought the TSP 155/52 was the turkish panter which weighs 18t ? are we referring to the same thing?
for shells they have established a plant with samsung defence in TSP to make them.

they do not have the best of kit, but once they get hold of funding, their decision making is clear and quick. not having a wide menu helps. not having to prove themselves as uber clean and congi-sickular at every step also helps. chiriya in hand vs peacocks in push concept.

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2628
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Victor » 14 Feb 2014 09:51

^ Or the Excalibur GPS round which has aerodynamic fins for extended range.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12330
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Aditya_V » 14 Feb 2014 09:52

While we were doing everything to close the Nalanda plant so as not to give any credit to George Fernandes.

Even today, so we manufacture 155mm shells. Surely not a rocket technology but why cancel Nalanda plant when you do not have an alternative?

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby vic » 14 Feb 2014 10:14

Nobody is saying Army should not get good weapons, we are saying that some politicians, babus and Jarnails are using the PRETEXT of sacrifice by Jawans to line their own pockets and as a side effect weakening the strategic and tactical security set up of the nation. Also an argument that army knows everything is as puerile as an argument that army is completely corrupt. The argument that army cannot be criticized or questioned be best left to Musharaff of Pakistan. Also what has Akshay added to technical issues in discussion here? Assuming that his assertion that he is an army officer is correct. Even the poorest of poor Indian working hard but whose family cannot get even one meal a day is a voter and a taxpayer ( due to vat and modvat), hence common people also make sacrifices for the army.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby vic » 14 Feb 2014 10:26

ramana wrote:vic, Dont' make unnecessary alleagations on Rohitvats. He has the right to defend his views.
Suggest you delete your post.
ramana


I have deleted my post, to avoid blue on blue, but I do have a problem with his tendency to use abusive language against any BRF poster who questions the army. I feel that he is trying to kill any discussion on the issue. Then we have victor, sanku, Philip, eklaya joining with him all the while raining posts, abusing all indigenous products and promoting imports. Nowadays, it seems Pakdef is more appreciate of Indian products than BRF.

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2628
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Victor » 14 Feb 2014 10:36

vic wrote:Nowadays, it seems Pakdef is more appreciate of Indian products than BRF.

As long as we're clear that by "Indian products" you mean DPSU products, why shouldn't Pakdef be appreciative? That's what I've been saying all along--the DPSUs are the paki's secret weapon.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17036
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Rahul M » 14 Feb 2014 11:12

victor, this clubbing of DRDO and relatively better PSU's with non-performers like OFB has been the bane of our MIC. why continue with this ?

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 14 Feb 2014 11:40

Hari Sud wrote:No, Phillip you got it wrong.

Indian army with endless trials and retrials were able to delay the whole process of acquisitions.


And what good would delaying the process of trials do to the IA? Or, Generals and top leadership which you consider as inept and other more uncharitable things? After all, if the Generals were really corrupt, conniving and foreign import 'pasand', one would wager that they'd make relaxed GSQR for the foreign products, take their cut and induct the weapons post haste. It is not as if there was a domestic product in fray and Army delayed trials to scuttle the induction of home-grown system in favor of foreign product. But it seems the same compromised leadership actually wanted something which was the best bang for the buck. And some of the vendors actually worked on their guns to make it compliant with Indian requirements.

So, what exactly are you implying?

Now Desi Bofor is all what the army will get, hence they have reconciled to it, provided it works. Again endless trials. That is where army could be faulted again.


The endless trials are important to see if the weapon actually works. Unless you're stating that an 'indigenous' product should be given a free pass.

mody
BRFite
Posts: 764
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby mody » 14 Feb 2014 11:48

Well saying that the OFB or DRDO could have come up with a bofors clone years ago, is valid only in hindsight and that no one was sure what the OFB capabilities were 10 years ago, doesn't make any sense. Offcourse no one will know what the capabilities are, unless one tries.

The issue is that Army never asked DRDO to come with up with an indigenous arty solution, when enough indicators existed, that with the right kind of effort, atleast a bofors 39 cal clone was achievable.
Maybe with the new money flowing, sanctions being done away with and trials of latest western guns in the offing, the army didn't want to opt for an interim solution. The fear could have been, that if the OFB and DRO actually did come with a desi bofors clone, that passed all the trials, then the justification for going for uber cool imported systems would get diluted. DRDO could have then claimed, that they would come with the next generation 155/52 cal gun also and till then the interim solution would continue and suffice.

The army knows how these interim solutions work. The T90 purchase itself was supposed to be an interim solution.

After all these years, it seems the Army has a little more confidence in DRDO's capabilities and for the arty systems, doesn't have an import option left. Hope the situation with regards to the army and indigenous products and army taking ownership of projects and wiling to work through incremental improvements for desi products, improves in the future. My last words on the subject.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 14 Feb 2014 11:50

vic wrote: I have deleted my post, to avoid blue on blue, but I do have a problem with his tendency to use abusive language against any BRF poster who questions the army.


The fact that you consider any counter-point to your self-declared righteousness and verdict on a subject as 'abusive' shows that you aren't can't be part of any meaningful debate. All you do is post couple of lines of 'what-you-think' is right course of action and everyone else is supposed to gulp that down as manna from heaven.

If you've problem debating with people in an objective manner, then it is your problem and not mine.

I feel that he is trying to kill any discussion on the issue. Then we have victor, sanku, Philip, eklaya joining with him all the while raining posts, abusing all indigenous products and promoting imports. Nowadays, it seems Pakdef is more appreciate of Indian products than BRF.


So, anyone who presents a counter-point with facts is killing the discussion? As I said, if you're idea of a discussion is to be part of echo-chamber where everyone agrees to your assertions, then it is not going to happen. If you can't hold your point in a debate, the problem is yours, not mine. And this actually shows the shallowness of your though process - just write couple of lines and that is it. As if it is the word of god and everyone is simply to nod his head in agreement.

Tough luck! Not going to happen.

merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2153
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby merlin » 14 Feb 2014 11:58

Akshay Kapoor wrote:
merlin wrote:I could go on but never mind. IA is doodh ka dhoola so I'll let it pass.


Dear Merlin and others,

Thank you for your kind comments on your incompetent or perhaps even anti-national army. Perhaps you have served in the army and given blood and sweat in ops or perhaps you have worked in the MoD or in some other part of GoI ? Or are you that august breed - an armchair warrior with an 'opinion' ? Emboldened by sitting behind a PC and making general statements with little analysis or heaven forbid facts is easy. And sensible. Very sensible.

The idiotic thing to do is to actually join up, get paid a pittance, battle an enemy on your own soil with your govt doing everything possible to make you loose. The idiotic thing to do is to lead troops into action and afterwards hearing from an injured jawan that his ancestral property has been stolen by the local politician. You tell him that CO shaib will write a letter to the DM. He says 'sahib aajkal kaun poochta hai'? You wince and remember stories of a bygone era where a CO's letter would work but he is right. The silly thing to do is to use captured AKs in CI Ops because your INSAS jams, its magazine cracks. You are told that when the weapon was made by the DRDO they had a jeep or a road roller (depending on who is telling the story) go over it and it was fine. But then OFB wiaved its wand and here you are. The silly thing to do is to carry on.

I could go on and on. But whats the point? This is the Indian army. Its supposed to serve in impossible circumstances and make miracles of vision happen despite the babus and the Anthonys and the Manmohan Singhs. And when the inevitable happens then 'sensible' armchair warriors express outrage. After all as Indians, we know we can talk but do not to have to act.

So my friends, keep spewing your venom. Your countrymen in OG are used to getting it from the enemy. Why shouldnt they get it from 'home' ?


First of all you don't have to take it personally. Secondly I would like to see examples of venom. Thirdly less emotion is always good. Fourthly stating that people who have not served have no right to criticize the IA is something that I have utter contempt for. Fifthly you don't have to be holier than thou and tell me about tough times in the army like I don't have a clue, I may not have served but know of some who have and have heard of enough stories about that.

Lastly you need to realize that criticism of the IA does not equate to contempt. That is a pure emotional reaction that has no place in a rational discussion.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby vic » 14 Feb 2014 12:52

Image

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby vic » 14 Feb 2014 12:53

Image

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby vic » 14 Feb 2014 13:14

Bharat Forge 155mm/52 Caliber Howitzer specifications


http://i.imgur.com/eaFHe7Y.jpg

mody
BRFite
Posts: 764
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby mody » 14 Feb 2014 13:21

Pictures of the old OFB upgraded Bofors with 45 cal indigenous barrel. Also picture for the OFB 155 mm 45 cal upgrade for the M46. The picture for the M46 is from Defense Expo '04.
Not sure about the photo of the Bofors upgrade, but I think it was from around the same time frame. The barrels for Bofors upgrade to 45 cal or the same 39 cal barrels were developed by OFB much before 2007. The current barrel design seems to have been changed a little.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ftjdHcqphsI/U ... totype.jpg

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/at ... 1158248983

alexis
BRFite
Posts: 468
Joined: 13 Oct 2004 22:14
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby alexis » 14 Feb 2014 13:46

The problem is Indian Army is not much tolerant to small faults unlike say Pakistan. If DRDO made the gun with a weight of 12.5 tons instead of 12 tons would Army induct or not? Past experience like Arjun indicate they wont!

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8286
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Pratyush » 14 Feb 2014 14:32

has the ia issued a gsqr for the 155. stating it wants a 12 ton gun.

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Sagar G » 14 Feb 2014 20:33

vaibhav.n wrote:SagarG, Unlikely they would ever achieve those kind of ranges.Vanilla 155mm HE round does 18-20Kms.

1. 155mm HE-ER BoatTail does 30Kms
2. 155mm HE-ER BaseBleed does around 38-39Kms

Such ranges are only acheived by VLAP rounds which we donot have in production after Denel Scam. Could be otherwise. The Bofors does it because the Indian Army asked for and Bofors built the latest variant with a 25 Litre Chamber. Standard 52 Calibre Guns have a 23 Litre Chamber.


Well DRDO was working on ramjet assisted 155 mm artillery shell at one time, maybe they have the required knowhow or the designs that gives them the confidence to make such claim publicly. It's also possible that this particular shell is a future integration with the artillery gun and in the beginning they will just restrict themselves firing the regular daal roti rounds.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12330
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Aditya_V » 14 Feb 2014 20:48

Ok forget about guns, we started manufacturing the shells for 155 MM in 2012. At the time of Kargil media was all about each shell costing USD 1000. George Fernandes was setting up a plant in Nalanda which was cancelled by UPA in 2004, since he will get political credit. 8 years of imports for Amaan Ki Asha and Politics.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20954
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Philip » 15 Feb 2014 01:13

Get your facts straight.
Then we have victor, sanku, Philip, eklaya joining with him all the while raining posts, abusing all indigenous products and promoting imports.


Where has been the "abuse" of desi products? One has always supported indigenisation,but not indefinite elastic deadlines stretching for years.Just look at AKA's latest statement in the house about the delays of key desi projects.Is this acceptable? If you read my posts on the LCA for example,after it turned the corner,one has been advocating 300+ aircraft for quite some time,something that is now supposedly being contemplated by the MOD/IAF.Anyway there is no use in debating with prejudiced,jaundiced minds who will like MOD babudom support slipshod work by DPSUs at any cost,because they pull the strings and determine budgets,who do not want pvt. Indian industry to have a key role in defence contracts,while prefering the monopoly of the DPSUs and their elastic deadlines and budgets and sub-standard products.Such minds have little thought for the end-users,the services,who need reliable weapon systems to defend the nation.Just make out a list of the deplorable decision making by the MOD and the number of key items required pending for years.Yet,the babu supporters will continue to blame the services.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19683
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 15 Feb 2014 03:01

When it comes to indefinite elastic deadlines for Russian projects though, you always have ready explanations. When local developers run into actual challenges, you constantly berate them. Like it or not, there is a severe lack of consistency in your approach.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16815
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby NRao » 15 Feb 2014 03:06

I think he is one of the most consistent posters here:

you always have ready explanations. When local developers run into actual challenges, you constantly berate them

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19683
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 15 Feb 2014 03:27

Ha! True that. I meant the inconsistent approach in terms of applying different yardsticks for local as versus Russian programs. The former do no wrong. The latter deserve to be kicked around ..

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54780
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 15 Feb 2014 03:39

Guys by replying to vic you are proving him right! Disengage for now.
He has edited his post as I asked him.

Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3286
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Kakkaji » 15 Feb 2014 08:45

I fail to understand why the Bharat Forge and Tata guns are not being tested by the army/ MOD? Granted they are foreign-source-derived, but I am sure they will be progressively indigenized by these companies for the sake of their own profit margins. Something is not quite right here. :-?

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16815
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby NRao » 15 Feb 2014 08:54

^^^^^

Sir,

Are you a loyal subject of King George III by any chance?

tushar_m

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby tushar_m » 15 Feb 2014 09:15

More organized approach could've got LCA faster: DRDO official

NAGPUR: In light of defence minister A K Antony recently expressing concern over delay in development of the indigenous Light Combat Aircraft (LCA), Avinash Chander, director general (R&D) in Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), said government should adopt an organized approach in such projects.

Chander, who is also the scientific advisor to defence ministry, was in the city to attend valediction function of Indian Ordnance Factory Service (IOFS) probationers, passing out from the National Academy of Defence Production (NADP), here. He said, "both research, production of prototypes and trials should go simultaneously. However, in the current system, a separate approval is required for each stage."

In LCA, first 9 prototypes were made and then trials followed. Each step of initial development, trials and making fresh units needs separate permission. An integrated approach will work better, said Chander. Finally with a substantial 40 LCAs ready, the DRDO can hope for faster progress in subsequent stages, he said. The project was sanctioned in 1994 and given the track record of other aircraft including F-16s, it takes at least 15-16 years to develop a new plane, he said.

Chander also pointed out at low budgetary allocation for defence research. In India, around 5.2% of the total defence budget is earmarked for research. In South Korea, it is as much as 20% and China spends 16% of the defence budget on research. On LCA's Kaveri engine that failed to meet the requirements of aircraft, he said it had been subsequently evolved to be now used in the futuristic unmanned combat aircraft to be made by DRDO. The failure of Kaveri engine in LCA was called a major setback. DRDO is now depending on US-made GE engines for the aircraft.

Chander said one of the biggest challenges before DRDO now was to make guided artillery shells. At present, the artillery has conventional shells. These needed repeated bombarding to ensure the target was hit. Guided shells are like smart bombs that can be pinpointed at the target. However, the challenge is to develop a technology that would prevent electronic guiding equipment embedded in shells from getting damaged when the gun fired. Artillery guns fire with almost 60,000 G-force. Even as the design for smart shells was there, the technology to resist the impact was yet to be developed, he said.

DRDO to turn to campus

DRDO is planning to reach out to the campuses to hunt for research ideas. Avinash Chander said plans were under way to start separate centres dealing in different areas of research for tying up with the universities. So far, research outside of DRDO was limited to ordnance factories. In coming years, many new ideas could come from the campuses, he said.

source: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city ... 427110.cms

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54780
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 15 Feb 2014 10:42

rohitvats hat tip to you on predicting the guided shells project.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8286
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Pratyush » 15 Feb 2014 12:48

A guided shell if developed in India, will remove a major source of anxiety, I have in respect of mountain warfare, capacity of the Indian army.

Hari Sud
BRFite
Posts: 182
Joined: 12 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Hari Sud » 15 Feb 2014 20:12

If MOD scuttles the TATA and Bharat Forge 155/52 guns under one excuse or the other, it will be a sad day and huge delay in upgrading the IA artillery units.

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9846
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Yagnasri » 15 Feb 2014 20:21

Hari sir wait for NDA to come to power.

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2628
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Victor » 15 Feb 2014 21:34

Narayana Rao wrote:Hari sir wait for NDA to come to power.

Bingo. So much is at stake.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 15 Feb 2014 22:30

expat rental market around lutyens delhi will take a major hit. so many wheeler-dealers will need to take the next flight home.

Hari Sud
BRFite
Posts: 182
Joined: 12 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Hari Sud » 16 Feb 2014 01:07

Singha wrote:expat rental market around lutyens delhi will take a major hit. so many wheeler-dealers will need to take the next flight home.



If that happens, I will celebrate Diwali before its time this year.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby vic » 16 Feb 2014 16:48

It may be difficult to digest on first note but the 155/52 howitzer is not as important as it is made out to be.

Till the 1990s MBRLS system used to be costly and inaccurate compared to artillery. For instance OFB manufactured unguided rockets for Grad had accuracy of 8% of range compared to 4% of range of Russian rockets. While accuracy of artillery is around 0.5% of range. Therefore powerful and accurate howitzers were very important force multiplier till 1990s.

But “today” Indian technology has moved ahead with Pinaka. The accuracy of unguided rocket of Pinaka is around 1% of range, cost around Rs 10 lakhs per rocket and big warhead of 100kg which makes costly, heavy, immobile artillery out dated for lomg range shelling. MBLRS unguided rockets have not only become much cheaper but with the added advantage that one can stock a few INS/GPS guided rounds for point strike. With Only INS the accuracy is around 0.1% and with INS+GPS-GLONASS around 0.01% of the range. That’s why nations like USA concentrated only on non-automated towed artillery of 39 caliber ie M777 while Israel is slowly phasing out its heavy artillery.

No nation in the world is ordering or is interested in huge number of 155/52 caliber artillery. Details of main US artillery howitzer is:-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M198_howitzer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M777_howitzer

Russia where artillery is king also uses only non-automated 152mm artillery like 2A65
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/152_mm_howitzer_2A65

The heavy automated towed artillery was special European need due to their special requirement of terrain of Central Europe and limited Manpower. Slow ponderous beasts were ok for Hard European ground and good road infrastructure.

Indian Army has latched onto these costly howitzers and is undermining not only OFB but also DRDO products. While Pinaka-1 is not being ordered in large numbers and requirement has been shifted to longer ranged Pinaka-2. (Same as Arjun-1 and Arjun-2) Prahaar is also still not getting orders. But imports of Grad and Smerch rockets is on through pretext of JV.

If Army procurement system was bonafide then the first thing to do would have been to develop a non-automated towed howitzer equivalent to M198 (aforesaid) weighing 6 tons and then reduce its weight in future variants by use of titanium like M777 weighing 4-5 tons.

For Plains we could have gone in for non-automated towed howitzer equivalent with higher 45 caliber and then increased it to 52 caliber, if required. The long range heavy punch can be provide by Pinaka and Prahaar. Now we are trying to develop super sophisticated automated howitzers of 155/52 caliber in titanium while starving OFB, TATA, Kalyani of orders.

Hari Sud
BRFite
Posts: 182
Joined: 12 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Hari Sud » 16 Feb 2014 18:57

If "Vic" is right then the blame game has shifted back to the Army.

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2628
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Victor » 16 Feb 2014 21:51

Hari Sud wrote:
Singha wrote:expat rental market around lutyens delhi will take a major hit. so many wheeler-dealers will need to take the next flight home.



If that happens, I will celebrate Diwali before its time this year.

So will the pakis. Hopefully the wheeler dealers will be replaced by enough real partners who have the goods and are willing to work with us. Our main problem is not foreigners. It is us and the current dispensation's wooly-headedness that has ensured that our forces have remained in a position of dire need for everything from rifles and artillery to subs and fighters.


Return to “Mil-Tech Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests