Artillery Discussion Thread

pushkar.bhat · Post by **pushkar.bhat** » 05 Jul 2009 11:33

I guess in the next couple of years the Babu's would have managed to get every firm that manufactures Artillery guns across the globe blacklisted. Finally indigenous manufacture will stand a opportunity at least for a couple of years.. LoL

dorai · Post by **dorai** » 06 Jul 2009 04:30

^^

lol

I am wondering with all the downsizing in EU/Russia has there been any offers of cheap 2nd hand guns and/or leasing of gun systems?

Leasing weapons before something new is bought is a method many countries is using to fill a capability gap. I know for instance Italy lease F-16 while "waiting" for F-35.

Vinito · Post by **Vinito** » 09 Jul 2009 03:07

dorai wrote:^^

lol

I am wondering with all the downsizing in EU/Russia has there been any offers of cheap 2nd hand guns and/or leasing of gun systems?

Leasing weapons before something new is bought is a method many countries is using to fill a capability gap. I know for instance Italy lease F-16 while "waiting" for F-35.

Why is the US not willing to sesll India its M777 towed howitzer or the M109A5 self propelled howtizers...given the lucrative Indian market for this it is surprising that the Americans are not willing to join the fray.

Vinito · Post by **Vinito** » 09 Jul 2009 03:12

AmitR wrote:
dorai wrote:Two things there.. The reporter says the new gun will have capability to hit several targets all at the same time.. I'm not sure the caesar can do this as it's semi-automatic and not fully automatic. And wasn't there supposed to be field trials before any decision.. I don't think any wheeled gun has even been over for tests at all?

Maybe it was a general report about getting new guns...
You heard it wrong and I don't blame you, it was a poor piece of reporting and video editing. They mixed the Agni V and the Bofors in the same news item. Agni V has the ability of multiple target attack.

The reason its mentioned that the Caesar can hit multiple targets was due to the new battlefield management system which enables a control truck to provide co-ordinates to multiple guns who can then target them simultaneously.

Avinash R · Post by **Avinash R** » 09 Jul 2009 12:15

Why the Army loves the Bofors gun
Press Trust of India, Wednesday July 8, 2009, Kargil
http://www.ndtv.com/news/india/why_indi ... rs_gun.php

The Bofors gun continues to give India "an edge" over the adversary on the Line of Control (LoC) and has helped the country to win "artillery duels" till the time the ceasefire came into effect in 2003, Indian Army officers say.

"With a range of over 35 kilo metres in the high-altitude terrain, the gun helped us to win artillery duels with Pakistani Army on the LoC till the 2003 ceasefire between the two countries. During that period, after unprovoked shelling by them, we would retaliate with our Bofors howitzers and quietened them up," a senior artillery officer from the Kargil-based 'Forever in Operations' Division said in Kargil.

The FH77 Bofors guns, he said, were better than the medium artillery guns available with the Pakistani Army.

"Superiority of our gun, which can fire three rounds in 12 seconds, has been proved during the 1999 war and they also know that their guns are of no match to our medium guns. After Kargil, the guns proved their mettle during Operation Parakram in 2001 also where they would fire 80-90 rounds every day causing immense damage to enemy posts and morale," the officers added.

During the Kargil war, the gun was extensively used by the Army to dislodge Pakistani Army regulars and militants from Indian peaks after they had intruded into Indian territory in the winters when both the sides vacated their respective posts at high altitude areas.

The guns today, the officers said, have been deployed at altitudes ranging between 10-13,000 feet and were helping the Indian troops to achieve "total dominance" over the adversary in the region.

"With the Bofors guns now being deployed at such high altitudes and its extended range here, we can strike deep with in the enemy territory. The Bofors can easily take on targets in Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK) towns such as Skardu and others," they said.

Asked about the deployment of the guns at such high altitudes, the officers said that the auxiliary power unit in the Bofors guns made it easy for reaching such heights.

"The guns have a Mercedes Benz engine in them and they are able to move short distances on their own. This capability helped us during the war also as guns would move from their location after firing a salvo to other positions in order to avoid enemy counter fire," they said.

SivaVijay · Post by **SivaVijay** » 09 Jul 2009 14:07

pushkar.bhat wrote:I guess in the next couple of years the Babu's would have managed to get every firm that manufactures Artillery guns across the globe blacklisted. Finally indigenous manufacture will stand a opportunity at least for a couple of years.. LoL

Rumor has it that after seeing so many scandals the MOD has decided to ban itself....

koti · Post by **koti** » 09 Jul 2009 22:26

Vinito wrote:
dorai wrote:^^

Why is the US not willing to sell India its M777 towed howitzer or the M109A5 self propelled howitzers...given the lucrative Indian market for this it is surprising that the Americans are not willing to join the fray.

I don't think there was a RFI sent for these guns. Moreover Bofors, Denel are relatively cheaper and good enough.

Vinito · Post by **Vinito** » 13 Jul 2009 14:42

Avinash R wrote:
Why the Army loves the Bofors gun
Press Trust of India, Wednesday July 8, 2009, Kargil
http://www.ndtv.com/news/india/why_indi ... rs_gun.php

The Bofors gun continues to give India "an edge" over the adversary on the Line of Control (LoC) and has helped the country to win "artillery duels" till the time the ceasefire came into effect in 2003, Indian Army officers say.

"With a range of over 35 kilo metres in the high-altitude terrain, the gun helped us to win artillery duels with Pakistani Army on the LoC till the 2003 ceasefire between the two countries. During that period, after unprovoked shelling by them, we would retaliate with our Bofors howitzers and quietened them up," a senior artillery officer from the Kargil-based 'Forever in Operations' Division said in Kargil.

The FH77 Bofors guns, he said, were better than the medium artillery guns available with the Pakistani Army.

"Superiority of our gun, which can fire three rounds in 12 seconds, has been proved during the 1999 war and they also know that their guns are of no match to our medium guns. After Kargil, the guns proved their mettle during Operation Parakram in 2001 also where they would fire 80-90 rounds every day causing immense damage to enemy posts and morale," the officers added.

During the Kargil war, the gun was extensively used by the Army to dislodge Pakistani Army regulars and militants from Indian peaks after they had intruded into Indian territory in the winters when both the sides vacated their respective posts at high altitude areas.

The guns today, the officers said, have been deployed at altitudes ranging between 10-13,000 feet and were helping the Indian troops to achieve "total dominance" over the adversary in the region.

"With the Bofors guns now being deployed at such high altitudes and its extended range here, we can strike deep with in the enemy territory. The Bofors can easily take on targets in Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK) towns such as Skardu and others," they said.

Asked about the deployment of the guns at such high altitudes, the officers said that the auxiliary power unit in the Bofors guns made it easy for reaching such heights.

"The guns have a Mercedes Benz engine in them and they are able to move short distances on their own. This capability helped us during the war also as guns would move from their location after firing a salvo to other positions in order to avoid enemy counter fire," they said.

Its true that the gun did play a big role in the Kargil conflict...but so did the M46. No mention made of that

dorai · Post by **dorai** » 16 Jul 2009 13:28

‘Precision ammo’ fails test at high altitudes

Posted: Tuesday , Jul 14, 2009 at 0052 hrs Drass, New Delhi:

Exhaustive trials of the new-generation Krasnopol ‘precision guided ammunition’ procured by the Indian Army are being conducted by a high-level Russian team after inaccurate fire almost killed some soldiers of an artillery observation unit. The Army, which had procured over 3,000 rounds of the Russian artillery ammunition, fired from the 155 mm Bofors Gun, at a cost of over Rs 500 crores, found it to be wildly inaccurate during use in high-altitude areas. The ammunition is supposed to hit targets accurately after they have been tagged by a laser designator.

Sources said that during a training exercise in Kargil, the shells went way off target and almost hit an artillery team that had been deployed kilometers away to check its accuracy. The Russian team is now conducting trials on the ammunition at heights of over 11,000 feet. “The problem is that the ammunition works when fired in the plains but goes totally inaccurate when it’s being fired from, say, 11,000 feet to a target at 17,000 feet,” sources said. The Army is hoping that the Russian team will find a way to correct the defect in the munitions.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/-Prec ... des/488887

chandrabhan · Post by **chandrabhan** » 16 Jul 2009 16:26

Sanku wrote:These are Chankian moves by GoI to force IA to work with DRDO and get DRDO to make guns. Lets title this "Revenge of the Arjun"

I agree

Applause

negi · Post by **negi** » 16 Jul 2009 20:03

This aint funny...Arjun prototypes were already developed when the tender for the T-90's was floated; however DRDO as on date has no working prototype in the league of Bofors and the most important issue is we need the guns 'NOW','TODAY'.

I wonder how come trenton and P-8I deals went in so smoothly without any issues while Army's tender for SPH seems to take ages , infact they have long back left behind the ultra slow 'HAWK' deal in terms of twiddling thumbs and doing nothing.

I wonder if one can actually file a PIL under RTI act to seek following info:

1. Amount of public money spent on this tender until now which has until now yielded nothing .
2. Time frame needed for closing this deal.

While GOI is definitely the one who should be driving this deal I think its high time IA high command show some urgency and follow up with the BABUS, at least this is the least they can do . I wonder how IN's acquisitions and even big ticket items get procured with the same GOI being at the helm .

VikB · Post by **VikB** » 17 Jul 2009 17:29

negi wrote:This aint funny...Arjun prototypes were already developed when the tender for the T-90's was floated; however DRDO as on date has no working prototype in the league of Bofors and the most important issue is we need the guns 'NOW','TODAY'.

I wonder how come trenton and P-8I deals went in so smoothly without any issues while Army's tender for SPH seems to take ages , infact they have long back left behind the ultra slow 'HAWK' deal in terms of twiddling thumbs and doing nothing.

I wonder if one can actually file a PIL under RTI act to seek following info:

1. Amount of public money spent on this tender until now which has until now yielded nothing .
2. Time frame needed for closing this deal.

While GOI is definitely the one who should be driving this deal I think its high time IA high command show some urgency and follow up with the BABUS, at least this is the least they can do . I wonder how IN's acquisitions and even big ticket items get procured with the same GOI being at the helm .

I have long fantasised keeping a portion of my salary for filing RTI on GOI for such issues. 'Tried roping in some undergraduate students of Law colleges to take up such things with all dues paid by me but failed to enthuse them enough. Such practical work was not of their interest apparently. But at the same time I also have a feeling that any such queries will be easily be crushed by Babus under 'National Interest' kind of excuse. Neverthless, worth a try.

abhiti · Post by **abhiti** » 17 Jul 2009 18:20

Vinito wrote:Why is the US not willing to sesll India its M777 towed howitzer or the M109A5 self propelled howtizers...given the lucrative Indian market for this it is surprising that the Americans are not willing to join the fray.

M777 is made by BAE which is British (not US). M777 has a good demand ahead of itself. US marines are going to standardize on M777. So are Canadians and many others. It has more orders in hand than it can handle. So at the moment it is not interested in customizing to MOD requirements.

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 18 Jul 2009 03:01

Cross Posting from "Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments" thread:

Army chief to Antony: Don't block gun trials

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 18 Jul 2009 03:45

Army chief to Antony: Don't block gun trials

Finally - Thank God

Maybe the gunner chief read my posts

Jokes aside - a sign how terrible our arty position has become

abhiti · Post by **abhiti** » 18 Jul 2009 06:13

VinodTK wrote:Cross Posting from "Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments" thread:

Army chief to Antony: Don't block gun trials

Artillery acquisition always gets stuck in the mud with some kind of scandal. Pak and China must be very happy about the state of affairs.

sum · Post by **sum** » 18 Jul 2009 09:53

VinodTK wrote:Cross Posting from "Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments" thread:

Army chief to Antony: Don't block gun trials

Simple conclusion: We will get the shaft when the next mountain war happens due to lack of adequate artillery.

Prem Kumar · Post by **Prem Kumar** » 18 Jul 2009 10:10

Not "we will get the shaft" - we already have gotten the shaft - multiple times. Most recently - the IA developing cold feet when we were considering an offensive against Pakistan post 26/11 (this was only reported via news leaks). And the urgent import of artillery shells from Israel during Kargil. Its ok to make a mistake once but to show apathy after several identical mistakes is criminal negligence. The fault is largely at the door of the MOD and the GOI (black-listing etc) but the IA needs to share the blame as well. Why weren't the IA top brass not raising a stink - like Gen. Kapoor seems to be doing belatedly?

Each of our services seem to suffer its own unique Achilles heel, which repeatedly pop-up:

IA --> artillery
IN --> subs
IAF --> engines
Missiles --> seeker

AmitR · Post by **AmitR** » 18 Jul 2009 20:56

Prem Kumar wrote:Why weren't the IA top brass not raising a stink - like Gen. Kapoor seems to be doing belatedly?

Each of our services seem to suffer its own unique Achilles heel, which repeatedly pop-up:

Prem, you should understand that India is a democratic country where army is under the control of the civilian setup. If army starts meddling in the civilian government's decision then we will become like the Pakis. Just because we have the freedom to write whatever we want in the forum does not mean everything works that way. In a country where Kargil is called BJP's war how can you expect anything else from our politicians.

Hitesh · Post by **Hitesh** » 19 Jul 2009 05:25

Even in the US, generals and admirals would raise a big stink if they feel that Washington is shafting the military. Remember the Admirals' revolt in 1950 or 1951 and the Generals' revolt in the 60s and 2006-7?

Sure the generals and admirals fell on their swords after they raised a big stink. But at least they had the balls and courage to do it and fall on their swords in order to make sure the military gets what they needed.

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 19 Jul 2009 06:00

^^^

One area where the US scores is that it hasn't hesistated in handing over the reigns of the country to capable military men like Washington and Eisenhower. In that respect, the US is a saner version of our dear neighbour Pakistan. Don't know what it is about the Indian system that makes it reluctant to do something similar by electing or appointing distinguished Generals as Prime Ministers.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 19 Jul 2009 07:03

Vinito wrote:Its true that the gun did play a big role in the Kargil conflict...but so did the M46. No mention made of that

Could you amplify?

sanjaychoudhry · Post by **sanjaychoudhry** » 20 Jul 2009 01:36

10 yrs after Kargil, Bofors upgrade hangs fire

Ajai Shukla

On the tenth anniversary of the Kargil conflict, the gun that did so much to facilitate that victory — the 155 mm Bofors FH-77B — could be staring at a major setback. With India’s artillery modernisation programme already stalled, the plan to refurbish and upgrade India’s old 155 mm FH-77B Bofors guns also seems headed for failure.

The reason: the Indian Army, long accused of framing its equipment requirements unrealistically, apparently wants the upgraded Bofors gun to deliver better performance than new guns in the market today.

http://www.business-standard.com/india/ ... re/364407/

A bird in hand is much better than two in the bush, didn't somebody tell the generals this basic lesson? The world's second-or third-best gun already deployed and ready to fire is much much better than the world's "best" gun which never arrives.

dorai · Post by **dorai** » 20 Jul 2009 17:15

Is it OK if I post about artillery in this thread?

BAE Bofors is not bidding on the Bofors gun upgrade citing unrealistic demands.

Brigadier Khutab Hai, Chief Executive of Mahindra Defence Systems (MDS), which partners BAE Systems in India, confirms, “It is true that we didn’t respond. We have given the MoD (Ministry of Defence) our reasons. I would not like to comment on why we are not participating, other than to say that some of the specifications asked for by the army cannot be met technically.” BAE Systems India declined to comment.

From:
http://news.in.msn.com/national/article ... id=3112222

I mean... it has to be something really weird going on when a arms supplier even during bad economic times refuses to offer a bid.

abrahavt · Post by **abrahavt** » 20 Jul 2009 18:27

I am sure the Army's requirements are quite challenging but I also think that BAE would rather sell new guns. If the Army's requirements are challenging as BAE claims I am sceptical that OFB can meet those requirements. I hope we dont get into a situation where the Army goes with OFB's claims and finds out many years later that they are unable to do it. You need more than blueprints to build a gun to the latest standards. You need prior experience.

sum · Post by **sum** » 20 Jul 2009 22:02

The country is faced in a "unique" situation: a army which wants specs which not even martian guns can meet and a government which will reject any bidder the army finally manages to convince (citing corruption)

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 20 Jul 2009 22:44

sum wrote:The country is faced in a "unique" situation: a army which wants specs which not even martian guns can meet and a government which will reject any bidder the army finally manages to convince (citing corruption)

We might not understand it but both are parties to the piss process. IA doesnt want those weapons for it might be forced to fight and the GOI doesnt want the weapons to retain the pissful image. So in the unlikely event that the IA agrees to acquire a weapon system that meets their unobtanium specs, the GOI will unleash the CBI on the process and find some scam and cancel and blacklist the supplier. The idea is all the suppliers give up on India as a market and make it a land of pure and pissful people for whom fighting is below their dignity.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 20 Jul 2009 22:57

it gives me great pleasure that many are batting for Indianisation!

I would too. And very proudly so!

However, when I am told to go to war, I sure would like an equipment that there is no doubt about. My planning on assumptions should not lead to unwarrented loss of life.

I am aware that the CAG is a lot of 'baikhata' types, but if they raise an objection it is worth taking them on.

Why have the been not sorted out as yet?

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 20 Jul 2009 23:02

Dhruv related posts moved to army thread.
Please continue there.
Rahul.

Anabhaya · Post by **Anabhaya** » 20 Jul 2009 23:36

However, when I am told to go to war, I sure would like an equipment that there is no doubt about. My planning on assumptions should not lead to unwarrented loss of life.

Ray, when was the last time an army fought with all the equipment they wanted?

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 20 Jul 2009 23:43

Why have the been not sorted out as yet?

which have not been sorted out sir ? any names ?

p.s. if this is related to ALH please reply in mil aviation thread. I'm tired of removing OT posts from this thread even after requesting people not to.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 21 Jul 2009 02:56

sum wrote:The country is faced in a "unique" situation: a army which wants specs which not even martian guns can meet and a government which will reject any bidder the army finally manages to convince (citing corruption)

There seems to be a lobby of losing bidders and special interest paid groups to derail any army gun contract.

A few well placed articles by pliant journos, shrieking baseless allegations by motivated anchors who often shoot and scoot, quoting "sources" is enough to get the govt of the day to sit up and scuttle any looming embarrasment.

This well tried and tested ploy continues to derail army acqiusitions of critical equipment and seems to work everytime.

I am surprised that this is all it takes to keep our army weak and vulnerable and render decision making impossible.

Prem Kumar · Post by **Prem Kumar** » 21 Jul 2009 04:06

You gotta read this - from LiveFist. Results from the artillery trials in 2007 - comparing performance against GSQR. So, who should get their ass kicked for this - the IA or the MOD?

http://livefist.blogspot.com/2009/07/gl ... llery.html

Shocking - to say the least!!

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 21 Jul 2009 04:38

Prem Kumar wrote:You gotta read this - from LiveFist. Results from the artillery trials in 2007 - comparing performance against GSQR. So, who should get their ass kicked for this - the IA or the MOD?

http://livefist.blogspot.com/2009/07/gl ... llery.html

Shocking - to say the least!!

The Bofors gun appears to meet most of the GSQR. So what is the issue here?

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 21 Jul 2009 04:44

RaviBg wrote:
Prem Kumar wrote:You gotta read this - from LiveFist. Results from the artillery trials in 2007 - comparing performance against GSQR. So, who should get their ass kicked for this - the IA or the MOD?

http://livefist.blogspot.com/2009/07/gl ... llery.html

Shocking - to say the least!!
The Bofors gun appears to meet most of the GSQR. So what is the issue here?

1987 Rajiv Gandhi corruption stink

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 21 Jul 2009 04:51

Speak to the opposition leaders, get the army top brass to give them a confidential briefing and go ahead with the purchase. Even the BJP is aware of how good the bofors guns were in kargil. So how long should the ghost of bofors hang over the artillery acquisition program?

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 21 Jul 2009 04:59

RaviBg wrote:Speak to the opposition leaders, get the army top brass to give them a confidential briefing and go ahead with the purchase. Even the BJP is aware of how good the bofors guns were in kargil. So how long should the ghost of bofors hang over the artillery acquisition program?

Its offtopic, but why will the congress politicians do it? They know touching bofors is a cesspool. That the artillery is not being brought doesnt mean that they are not going to get their share of corruption. If they bring BJP into the board, they will have to share the corruption. Why should they share, when they can eat all of it?
If in the mean time the army suffers due to lack of artillery who cares? Give the noisy army chief the lollypop of governorship and he will keep quiet. The babu the ever non-mover, the ever timid (except for corruption) one will never push for it.

All in all, a very happy family. If someone 500 kms away at Kargil dies due to its lack, why should anyone care? After all, isnt the same attitude shown when people died in mumbai?

dorai · Post by **dorai** » 21 Jul 2009 06:19

Politics.

But look at the sustained rate of fire on the Bofors from the tests... it's just incredible.

naird · Post by **naird** » 21 Jul 2009 08:00

Bofor's is amazing ......

damn these politicians .....

I wish army can call a press briefing and just bare it all ....that may gather public opinion and might force politicians to just move forward on this crawling deal.

Sandipan · Post by **Sandipan** » 21 Jul 2009 08:14

The artillery seems to be like the MRCA project, never ending!. We finalise something and again some whistle blower comes and again people start running in the merry go round. We seem have to do with the 400 odd bofors gun in the coming decade as well.