Artillery Discussion Thread

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
alexis
BRFite
Posts: 468
Joined: 13 Oct 2004 22:14
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby alexis » 03 Apr 2013 15:39

Guru_Tat wrote:I keep reading that Tatra trucks cost 1 crore each and they sell for 50-60% less in Europe. Having stayed in Britain and continental Europe, this is not something i agree with.

The place where I bought my used car from also had a sister truck dealership in UK and i happened to check the prices stuck to the 6X6 or bigger trucks. 1-2 year old trucks usually cost >80,000 GBP.

See the ad below for a 1 year old 6X6 Tipper truck (tippers are usually cheaper than Mil grade trucks and more expensive than flatbeds) which is 90K GBP (INR 75L). And these are USED.

http://www.mascus.co.uk/transportation/ ... izn0l.html

Now I am in the US and only tractors (the cab and the engine)retails for $100,000+

http://www.truckenterprises.com/pre_own ... Vb63ByHsXg.

And these are all commercial trucks, not mil grade.

Was the 1 crore figure for smaller than 6x6 Tatra trucks ? I thought IA Tatras were 8X8 or larger?

Or did the Indian Army import used Tatras? (unlikely)

And how much does a comparable TATA or Ashok Leyland 6X6 or a 6X8 truck cost?


TATRA is made in Czech were the prices are comparatively lower. Also there are economies of scale in case of large orders like that of IA.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3263
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby tsarkar » 03 Apr 2013 15:56

Lalmohan is right. Historically field guns were cannons with wheels. Limited elevation. Used against infantry & cavalry in battles. For lobbing shells from inside the fort to beseigers outside the fort, or for lobbing shells from outside the fort to inside, one required elevated cannons called howitzers. These days, the differences have disappeared. 105mm guns were used by IA as howitzers at Kargil and as field guns at Sierra Leone shortly thereafter.

krishnan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7342
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 12:58
Location: 13° 04' N , 80° 17' E

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby krishnan » 03 Apr 2013 16:00

another thing is, i dont think field guns the shell explodes .....

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8434
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Pratyush » 03 Apr 2013 17:05

^^^^

:eek: :shock:

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby koti » 05 Apr 2013 22:48


VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2442
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby VinodTK » 12 Apr 2013 03:17

In a first, pvt Indian firms can bid to make artillery guns
Crossing an important milestone at the last meeting of the Defence Acquisition Council (DAC), the Ministry of Defence has, for the first time, decided to allow Indian private entities to participate in a bid for making artillery guns.

It is learnt that while approving the Army's proposal for upgunning of 300 more 130 mm M-46 field guns to a 155 mm gun system, the DAC on April 2 also decided that the request for proposal (RFP) would also go to interested private players. The Ordnance Factory Board, which used to automatically get these orders, will now be one of the contestants.

This is the first time that South Block has decided to let the Indian private sector make an offensive weapon platform. While companies have been keen, the opportunity has never come. However, private entities such as the Tatas and L&T have been involved in making important ancillary equipment such as launchers for the Pinaka missile.
:
:
:
:

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby vic » 12 Apr 2013 11:46

I hope Indian Companies hire good middlemen and get lot deals

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Vipul » 14 Apr 2013 21:32

Defence Ministry allows pvt sector to participate in howitzer upgrade.

The Defence Ministry has allowed private sector companies to take part in a tender to upgrade 300 M-46 artillery guns of the Army.The meeting of the Defence Acquisition Council (DAC), headed by Defence Minister A K Antony approved a proposal in this regard.

Under the proposal, the Defence Ministry plans to upgrade the 300 M-46 howitzers from 130 mm to 155 mm guns systems.Indian private sector companies would be competing with state—owned Ordnance Factory Board for the project.

Indian private sector companies such as Tata and L&T have successfully developed mounted 155 mm howitzers and are planning to offer them for trials to the Army for its requirements for artillery modernisation.The upgrade of the 130 mm howitzers was stuck after the blacklisting of Israeli Soltam guns.

After the recent scams in the procurement of military hardware systems from abroad, the Defence Ministry has been working towards developing policies to promote indigenisation which includes encouraging the private sector in a big way.The Defence Ministry also approved proposals under which the first right of refusal in defence tenders would be with the indigenous industry and procurement from abroad would be the last option.

The DAC also approved a proposal under which the status of Raksha Udyog Ratna (RUR) has been discontinued under which 12 private sector companies were to be selected and given opportunities in defence procurement process. The RUR status was first proposed in the DPP—2006 but it could never take off due to opposition from local industry.

member_23629
BRFite
Posts: 676
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby member_23629 » 14 Apr 2013 21:46

Crossing an important milestone at the last meeting of the Defence Acquisition Council (DAC), the Ministry of Defence has, for the first time, decided to allow Indian private entities to participate in a bid for making artillery guns.

It has taken babus 65 years to take a commonsensical decision that should have been taken in 1947 itself.

Nikhil T
BRFite
Posts: 1286
Joined: 09 Nov 2008 06:48
Location: RAW HQ, Lodhi Road

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Nikhil T » 29 Apr 2013 22:06

PIB: Test of Guns

Ordnance Factory Board (OFB) has carried out several internal firings of their in house developed 155mm x 45 calibre Artillery Gun and it has met the planned objectives. However, User Test Fire is yet to be carried out.
OFB has received indent for 114 Nos. of 155mm x 45 calibre Artillery guns which are to be delivered as per following delivery schedule:

SI. No. | From | To | No. of Guns | Remarks
1.|T* | T+8 months | 06 |*T is the date of accord of Bulk Production Clearance.
2.|T+9 months | T+12 months | 12
3.|T+13 months |T+24 months | 36
4.| T+25 months | T+36 months | 60 |
Total Guns:114


This information was given by Minister of state for Defence Shri Jitendra Singh in a written reply to Shri Rakesh Singhin Lok Sabha today.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby vic » 29 Apr 2013 22:18

From foreigners Indian army wants to import 1600 guns in one go, from OFB just 100 guns in three years. Happy indigenisation!!

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Sanku » 30 Apr 2013 16:56

vic wrote:From foreigners Indian army wants to import 1600 guns in one go, from OFB just 100 guns in three years. Happy indigenisation!!


Firangis in question have many decades of making and supplying working guns.

OFB struggles to make licensed production stuff.

Giving 10000000000000000000000 Rs to a 16 year old who does not know how to manage his 500 ruppee pocket money wont turn him into Ambani, no matter how much he say "the root of capitalism is capital and if only I had the money I would beat Ambani and rockerfeller in one shot"

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby vic » 30 Apr 2013 17:47

Order will be placed after indigenous Howitzer clear the tests, so your argument is absurd.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Sanku » 30 Apr 2013 18:25

vic wrote:Order will be placed after indigenous Howitzer clear the tests, so your argument is absurd.


Clearing tests for one off prototype != proven track record of production

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby vic » 01 May 2013 08:44

The only track record foreign companies have is successfully bribing the decision makers.

nrshah
BRFite
Posts: 578
Joined: 10 Feb 2009 16:36

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby nrshah » 01 May 2013 12:08

sanku,

i wonder why similar argument of
one prototype does not apply to IL 476
or pakfa or P8I? The only common factor in
all three is they are foreign as i understand.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Sanku » 01 May 2013 12:26

nrshah wrote:sanku,

i wonder why similar argument of
one prototype does not apply to IL 476
or pakfa or P8I? The only common factor in
all three is they are foreign as i understand.


already talked about -- credibility --
1) On the basis of about decades of manufacturing and development and track record.
2) On going current performance level, productivity, QC issues etc.

Just because I am jingo I am not going to say my factories make the cut, when they don't. Because I am a jingo, I would want my factories to really achieve the level of competence and credibility which is currently assigned to them on BRF but is right now only a hope.


arnab
BRFite
Posts: 1136
Joined: 13 Dec 2005 09:08

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby arnab » 07 May 2013 06:57

I think the best way to improve the "manufacturing and development and track record" of Indian ordnance factories is to keep buying phoren :)

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Surya » 12 May 2013 18:23

will have to get my gps out and find my way to the local temple

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Will » 13 May 2013 00:08

L&T and which other Indian company?

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby vic » 13 May 2013 11:41

I think we should mount OFB 155mm howitzer on tracks or wheels for self propelled guns. Indirect imports through private parties should be discouraged.

member_26622
BRFite
Posts: 537
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby member_26622 » 14 May 2013 03:06

OFB 155 mm howitzer on Arjun chassis will be ideal but will never take off unless we sell Avadi to L&T. This will pay off our investment in Arjun and increase commonality of systems. Brilliant move if it ever happens.

Indian army has trained on and operated russian goodies for last 50 years. It will be a herculean task to get them off roosie dope.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7743
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 14 May 2013 09:59

nik wrote:OFB 155 mm howitzer on Arjun chassis will be ideal but will never take off unless we sell Avadi to L&T. This will pay off our investment in Arjun and increase commonality of systems. Brilliant move if it ever happens.

Indian army has trained on and operated russian goodies for last 50 years. It will be a herculean task to get them off roosie dope.


Allow me to take you down the memory lane...the original SP Arty (tracked) solution short-listed by India was South African turret of G9 gun mounted on, hold your breath, ARJUN chassis. IA wanted the turret to be mounted on T-72 chassis for commonality but the same developed cracks during test firing and was found to be unsuitable.

Russians never had a product which IA liked. As it is, the best SP Arty used by IA was the Abbot 105mm gun by the Britishers.

member_22019
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 27
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby member_22019 » 14 May 2013 11:12

Indegenous recoil fluid for boforse.
http://www.jagran.com/uttar-pradesh/luc ... 90397.html

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby merlin » 14 May 2013 17:06

rohitvats wrote:Allow me to take you down the memory lane...the original SP Arty (tracked) solution short-listed by India was South African turret of G9 gun mounted on, hold your breath, ARJUN chassis. IA wanted the turret to be mounted on T-72 chassis for commonality but the same developed cracks during test firing and was found to be unsuitable.


G6 turret.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7743
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 14 May 2013 17:16

merlin wrote:
rohitvats wrote:Allow me to take you down the memory lane...the original SP Arty (tracked) solution short-listed by India was South African turret of G9 gun mounted on, hold your breath, ARJUN chassis. IA wanted the turret to be mounted on T-72 chassis for commonality but the same developed cracks during test firing and was found to be unsuitable.


G6 turret.


I stand corrected. G6 it was. Thanks.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby vic » 14 May 2013 19:15

We should use OFB Bofors on an open mount on tracked Arjun chassis, to allow for time to develop fully turreted howitzer

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 14 May 2013 19:17

^ and you think IA will remote accept something thats not == with the K9 ? if rheinmetall was not blacklisted the Pzh2000 would be held up as the new idol - "why cant you be more like him?"

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby RoyG » 14 May 2013 19:49

The G-6 howitzer mounted on the Arjun chassis should be re-looked at. The G6 howitzer has a higher rate of fire, longer range, and MRSI (5-6). The extended version has also fired the excalibur munition. The k-9 overall is an inferior system.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 14 May 2013 20:01

K9s main claim to fame is
- automated reload vehicle
- (I think) fully automated loading of both shell and charges
- (drumroll) not on the blacklist

as a pure gun or tracked vehicle it is nothing special and more like a M109 than the heavies like Bhim or Pzh.

the M109 seems to work well though and the Brits claim the AS90 as well. so I am not sure what advantage a heavier platform like Pzh/Bhim gives. could it be in ability to mount 52cal more easily or even dare I hope the naval std 55cal barrels with 100km range guided ammo for theater C3I/IADS targets....almost a missile launcher of sorts.

member_26622
BRFite
Posts: 537
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby member_26622 » 15 May 2013 05:04

Can one financially justify doing local production for '100' howitzers? Even setting up a local assembly line will not make sense...a repair and refurbish plant is more viable.

Also, do tracked guns usually go with strike units. If the Army disqualified Arjun as too heavy to be part of strike units then how will they use this heavy tracked gun? How many of these will be still be usable after four weeks of war fighting? The spares supply chain will be the weakest point given the low numbers and zero commonality. Arjun chassis with OFB gun will be downright more available for a prolonged war.

But, we can show it off on Republic day parades...who cares about fighting long hard wars.

Gurneesh
BRFite
Posts: 465
Joined: 14 Feb 2010 21:21
Location: Troposphere

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Gurneesh » 15 May 2013 05:16

Singha wrote:K9s main claim to fame is
- automated reload vehicle
- (I think) fully automated loading of both shell and charges
- (drumroll) not on the blacklist

as a pure gun or tracked vehicle it is nothing special and more like a M109 than the heavies like Bhim or Pzh.


K9 is 52cal and thus in the league of Pzh.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 15 May 2013 06:30

Are all 52 cal guns rated to the same muzzle velocity ie chamber pressure?

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby RoyG » 15 May 2013 08:27

The g6 is 52 caliber as well and can lob v-lap shells at targets 73 km away. Mounted on an Arjun chassis would be ideal b/c it is an indigenous platform and spares will be readily available in times of war.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 15 May 2013 08:38

I think more than the eternal debate of 39 vs 45 vs 52 we need
- lowest local cost of production of conventional non-RAP shells than be reach out to 30km say
- lowest local cost of production of RAP shells that can reach to 45km say
- a reliable import line for limited amts of VLAP type shells (these kind of overlap with the Pinaka2 whose cost/throw weight will likely be cheaper)
- ability and willingness to invest a couple of billion in a WORLD CLASS plants to churn out the item1 & 2 like china produces shoes and toys
- ability to forge the barrels and other high stress parts locally to the highest std under TOT or local tech
- barrel tech has to be very long lasting ... longer the better as in a high tempo war they will need to be constantly on the move and launch dozens of shells in bursts .... lighter the logistical footprint the better

one thing is clear as daylight, we cannot fight a high tempo war vs China without a stockpile of shells and munitions (both IA and IAF) to permit heavy usage for 45 days ready reserve and LOCAL production lines safe in the heartland to produce a running pipeline to keep it fed as long as needed to see the matter through.

we also need to operationalize prahaar instead of more smerch, operationalize the pinaka2 and pinaka in HUGE numbers.

need to stop lusting after imported maal and whining about tibet infra ...... BRDO needs to be mandated to use the heaviest and best machinery available for quick results than functioning as a cottage industry NREGA scheme with village women manually chipping at rocks.

a lot of thought and size12 boots needs to be applied at right places. what we need to do is quite clear, political leadership is sorely lacking.

and finally we need to lose the strike corps fetish wrt TSP. re-equip , re-base and re-target two of the existing strike corps for the Cheen front asap....they anyways have T90 which is the new munna light tank anointed...so they should have no issues operating in the cold (or so its claimed!). move one to near Demchok-Leh axis and the other to north Sikkim tabletop with permanent basing north of Gangtok.

Gurneesh
BRFite
Posts: 465
Joined: 14 Feb 2010 21:21
Location: Troposphere

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Gurneesh » 15 May 2013 08:52

With the blacklisting of Denel, G6 equipped Bhim is as dead as it can be. DRDO cannot do any direct business with Denel. The only way to get a g6 on Arjun chassis is for TATA to acquire rights for G6 (like they did with the mounted gun) and then sell it to DRDO.

But weight again will be a big issue as these tracked vehicles are also expected to accompany formations featuring T series tanks. If IA says that Arjun is too heavy for some areas, then Bhim will also be too heavy (if it is in the 55 ton weight class like Pzh).

KrishnaK
BRFite
Posts: 949
Joined: 29 Mar 2005 23:00

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby KrishnaK » 15 May 2013 09:20

Singha,
I doubt our Khadi Gramudyog centre doesn't know all this. The pace at which we're building our infrastructure/armed forces seems calibrated to suit our (perceived ?) needs.
Last edited by KrishnaK on 15 May 2013 19:40, edited 1 time in total.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4823
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby srai » 15 May 2013 11:12

Gurneesh wrote:With the blacklisting of Denel, G6 equipped Bhim is as dead as it can be. DRDO cannot do any direct business with Denel. The only way to get a g6 on Arjun chassis is for TATA to acquire rights for G6 (like they did with the mounted gun) and then sell it to DRDO.

But weight again will be a big issue as these tracked vehicles are also expected to accompany formations featuring T series tanks. If IA says that Arjun is too heavy for some areas, then Bhim will also be too heavy (if it is in the 55 ton weight class like Pzh).


Denel being blacklisted for 10 years is almost up. They will be able to participate in Indian contracts again.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 15 May 2013 11:24

here is a interesting product to supplement our M777 guns...the Denel T7/105mm on a Stryker vehicle.
http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product3167.html

this is portable inside C130, and hence can be flown into every airbase including the ALGs and self-deploy from there. getting systems like the Bhim into north sikkim and tawang could be a real big problem though in ladakh it is feasible.

should be cheaper for sure than 155mm systems.

this could be a close fire support weapon for infantry divs as well....lobbing the kind of shells that impact fortifications (tanks will carry bulk of their 40 rounds as AT, not HE).


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests