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.
sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10117
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby sum » 12 Nov 2009 09:24

The SP artillery gap is acknowledged and there is eagerness to plug this gap immediately.The delay is political.

Are there any signs of the "political obstacles" clearing any time soon? :-?

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7068
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Anujan » 12 Nov 2009 10:27

sum wrote:Are there any signs of the "political obstacles" clearing any time soon? :-?


Latest news is that ST Kinetics is back in the game ...

dorai
BRFite
Posts: 136
Joined: 10 Feb 2009 07:24

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby dorai » 16 Nov 2009 05:04

Brief preview of monday's papers in Sweden.


Bofors signed "memorandum of understanding" with India


MoU is about technical partnership.

http://www.dn.se/nyheter/varlden/bofors ... n-1.995006

Will hopefully soon get more than this to share lol

Craig Alpert
BRFite
Posts: 1440
Joined: 09 Oct 2009 17:36
Location: Behind Enemy Lines

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Craig Alpert » 16 Nov 2009 05:57

dorai wrote:Brief preview of monday's papers in Sweden.


Bofors signed "memorandum of understanding" with India


MoU is about technical partnership.

http://www.dn.se/nyheter/varlden/bofors ... n-1.995006

Will hopefully soon get more than this to share lol


Article translated into English....
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dn.se%2Fnyheter%2Fvarlden%2Fbofors-tecknar-avtal-med-indien-1.995006&sl=sv&tl=en&history_state0=

Wickberg
BRFite
Posts: 271
Joined: 01 Jul 2008 18:45

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Wickberg » 16 Nov 2009 06:19

Craig Alpert wrote:
dorai wrote:Brief preview of monday's papers in Sweden.


Bofors signed "memorandum of understanding" with India


MoU is about technical partnership.

http://www.dn.se/nyheter/varlden/bofors ... n-1.995006

Will hopefully soon get more than this to share lol


Article translated into English....
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dn.se%2Fnyheter%2Fvarlden%2Fbofors-tecknar-avtal-med-indien-1.995006&sl=sv&tl=en&history_state0=



Man, that was a surprise. I thought India MoD had banned anything even remotely connected to Sweden.Perhaps Gripen has a chance in the MRCA after all?

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17074
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Rahul M » 16 Nov 2009 06:21

:roll:

Wickberg
BRFite
Posts: 271
Joined: 01 Jul 2008 18:45

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Wickberg » 16 Nov 2009 06:43

Rahul M wrote::roll:


Man, that was a surprise. I thought India MoD had banned anything even remotely connected to Sweden.Perhaps Gripen has a chance in the MRCA after all?

I´m sorry if I hurt your feelings in any way with my post. I tried to find a way to post this internally to you but I could´nt.

Anyhow, has´nt Bofors won like 6 years of trials in a row? Perhaps and maybe this is the best howitzer and India have finally gotten over its Bofors-scandal ghost from like the 1980´s?

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17074
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Rahul M » 16 Nov 2009 07:12

nope, you didn't hurt my feelings. swedish products were never banned but the name bofors gun was not 'politically correct', so to speak. other swedish products never faced a problem, the carl gustav from the same stable(till a few years ago) for example is going strong .

Craig Alpert
BRFite
Posts: 1440
Joined: 09 Oct 2009 17:36
Location: Behind Enemy Lines

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Craig Alpert » 16 Nov 2009 08:51


RayC
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4333
Joined: 16 Jan 2004 12:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby RayC » 16 Nov 2009 09:13

Carl Gustav is being produced by the OFB based on ToT.

It replaced the 3.5 inch RL.

dorai
BRFite
Posts: 136
Joined: 10 Feb 2009 07:24

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby dorai » 16 Nov 2009 12:02

The Carl-Gustav is a SAAB product...

Found more about mou.

Bofors strengthen cooperation with India
KARLSKOGA

BAE Systems Bofors has recently signed a joint agreement on defense cooperation with India. This may eventually contribute to a positive development for both the Indian as the Swedish defense industry.

It says BAE Systems Bofors of Communications Christer Henebäck who was present at the visit to India for over a week ago.

Representatives from the Bofors and the Indian government signed a so-called Memorandum of Understanding.

- It means that we now have a legal platform for defense cooperation. A crucial step in the relationship, a necessary step, "says Christer Henebäck.

Increasingly important

That the step taken is also a clear change in the past. In particular, the aim is to develop technical cooperation, exchange of expertise.

- This is increasingly important for India because it wants to build its own defense, saying Henebäck while he stressed that the exchange not only go one way.

- India also has things to contribute, "says Henebäck.

Whether this step may also be relevant to India's planned purchase of a new artillery system remains to be seen. It is difficult to say how much it affects the Bofors advantage.

A prerequisite

Perhaps one can say that the agreement itself is a prerequisite for future business. Without a technology collaboration and an opportunity for India to develop its own production, it would hardly be any business at all.

Bofors howitzers and India have had a relationship since the large Indian order is in the 80s.

Since then, the Bofors howitzer developed with longer tubes and hence longer range. It can also be combined with the GPS-guided Excalibur shell developed in recent years.

India's purchase of new howitzers have been prepared in principle during the 2000s. Despite it is a business, far from being completed.

There are procedures that have been patiently trying to Bofors, which was from the beginning. While the deal is on the very large sums, and if it gets to be a considerable boost for the whole of Karlskoga, Sweden and the region around it.

The sums mentioned previously in this context has been moving around a business at two billion U.S. dollars.

New test-firing

Bofors came thus into the game early and has participated in a total of four test-firing. In the current situation, waiting for participating in yet another.

The procurement of India's new artillery systems have a very special history (see separate article below) and the story continues with some odd features.

- Right now it is completely still. We have waited to be called to a new test-firing and had anticipated that it would be the autumn. Because of inquiries about our competitors, however the deal completely quiet right now, "says Christer Henebäck.

Just like what's up

It is currently being investigated are questions about competitors' business, and before they are complete, is not on.

- The problem is that you can not move forward with just us. You can not have contracts with one supplier. Just like what's up and wait, "says Christer Henebäck.

The competitors are being investigated Israeli Soltam and Singapore Technologies Kinetics. A competitor has previously ruled out for irregularities in the business and it is South African Denel, which disappeared before the last tender round was launched two years ago.

Stir business

As India's investigation into the Bofors competitors do not know Christer Henebäck, not more than that relating to their business.

Israeli Soltam and Bofors has been from the beginning while Singapore Technologies joined the fight on the giant order of two years ago.

They manufacture guns as passed by the first technical evaluation.

If they then pass the tough tests that systems tend to be exposed to as good as Bofors fälthaubitsar and Archer, and to some extent, the Israelis' system remains to be seen when the test firings started.



google-transl...

http://karlskoga-kuriren.se/nyheter/kar ... med-indien

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17074
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Rahul M » 16 Nov 2009 12:17

carl gustav is a Saab Bofors Dynamics product.
In 1999 Saab purchased the Celsius Group, the parent group of Bofors. In September 2000 United Defense Industries (UDI) purchased Bofors Weapon Systems from Saab (the tube artillery interests), while Saab retained the missile interests.

when India opted for it, carl gustav was a bofors product, same company that made the FH-77b.

dorai
BRFite
Posts: 136
Joined: 10 Feb 2009 07:24

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby dorai » 16 Nov 2009 13:05

Rahul M wrote:carl gustav is a Saab Bofors Dynamics product.
In 1999 Saab purchased the Celsius Group, the parent group of Bofors. In September 2000 United Defense Industries (UDI) purchased Bofors Weapon Systems from Saab (the tube artillery interests), while Saab retained the missile interests.

when India opted for it, carl gustav was a bofors product, same company that made the FH-77b.


Couldn't be more wrong.

When India selected CG it was from FFV Ordnance a Swedish State owned company later put in the state owned Celsius corporation.

After privatization Saab got the CG as they bought Celsius.

The product was put in Saab bofors dynamics a business unit under SAAB.

No connection with Bae owned Bofors that makes artillery.

----
old news article...

http://www.financialexpress.com/news/ne ... uns/38272/


Soron Gidhan, sales president of FFV Ordnance, said Sweden was ready to offer the upgraded version of the Carl Gustaf system, which has already been inducted into the Indian Army and is capable of firing five to six types of ammunition, including dual-purpose tandem warheads and smart ammunition, to an extended range of upto 700 metres.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17074
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Rahul M » 16 Nov 2009 14:17

when was FFV taken up by celsius/bofors ? 1991 I think. since when is CG in production in India ?

dorai
BRFite
Posts: 136
Joined: 10 Feb 2009 07:24

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby dorai » 16 Nov 2009 16:08

Rahul M

when was FFV taken up by celsius/bofors ? 1991 I think. since when is CG in production in India ?


I believe the license-production began 1976.

The longer story on ownership is that in 1991 the owners of both FFV Ordnance and AB Bofors merged them (on paper only) in a reorganisation that created the reverse-name group Ordnance-FFV/Bofors AB co-owned by parent FFV group and Nobel Industries.

Then 1992 state group called Celsius bought them. SAAB bought Celsius 1999 and got a veeeeery large portfolio. They quickly (following year) sold off the Artillery products to United Defence of the USA (later BAE) and kept the rest in their SAAB Bofors Dynamics company such as RBS-70, Carl Gustav, BAMSE.

Now it's changing a bit again since SAAB reorganise and put companies like Barracuda & Saab Bofors in a new unit simply called Dynamics. And BAE is also reorganising so BAE Systems Bofors is becomming "Global Combat System" following a merger with the UK based Land Systems unit... confusing yet ? :lol:

But whatever, they both want partnerships with India. And I guess that is relevant not so much the name...

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17074
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Rahul M » 16 Nov 2009 17:20

so at least in the period 1991-2000 CG and FH-77 had a common stable (even if just technically) ! that's all I was saying.

thanks for the M&A history lesson though ! :D

Stan_Savljevic
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3522
Joined: 21 Apr 2006 15:40

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Stan_Savljevic » 19 Nov 2009 06:28

PM may sign major guns deal during US visit
India is expected to initiate the process for a major government-to-government deal in artillery guns with the United States during the visit of prime minister Manmohan Singh later this month. If it goes through, it will break the jinx of Bofors that has held back artillery modernisation since the mid-1980s. According to military sources, work is under way for a foreign military sales deal with the US for the purchase of ultra-light howitzer guns, worth over $1 billion (Rs5,000 crore). A military source said the proposed deal "could be taken forward" during Singh's visit to the US.

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_pm ... it_1313510
http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2009/11/ ... isted.html
Over this last decade, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) has “blacklisted” so many foreign arms corporations that the military’s modernisation plan has virtually stalled. The MoD “blacklist” is not a formal document; an arms vendor is mostly embargoed unofficially, when senior bureaucrats agree that it is playing dirty.

The hit list reads like a Who’s Who of global weapons suppliers, including corporations with good records of delivering arms to India. Starting with Bofors in the late 1980s, the list grew to include Denel of South Africa; Israel Military Industries (IMI); Singapore Technologies Kinetic (STK); and now Thales of France. Earlier this year the world’s biggest defence contractor, Lockheed Martin, was on the blacklist. Now another global giant, BAE Systems, seems headed there after problems with setting up an assembly line in HAL Bangalore for the Hawk jet trainer.

vavinash
BRFite
Posts: 556
Joined: 27 Sep 2008 22:06

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby vavinash » 19 Nov 2009 08:01

It would be really stupid for India to buy anything from US. If India-PRC war ever occurred I am sure we will need to depend on our russian, israeli and indigenous weapons.

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7068
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Anujan » 19 Nov 2009 08:08

vavinash wrote:It would be really stupid for India to buy anything from US. If India-PRC war ever occurred I am sure we will need to depend on our russian, israeli and indigenous weapons.

Better to buy the guns from Unkil and the planes from someone else.

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10117
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby sum » 19 Nov 2009 08:48

vavinash wrote:It would be really stupid for India to buy anything from US. If India-PRC war ever occurred I am sure we will need to depend on our russian, israeli and indigenous weapons.

Going by the sorry state of artillery in two decades, a bird is hand will be better than 100 in the bush...having any artillery will be better than having nothing ( which we are close to approaching)

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4541
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby putnanja » 19 Nov 2009 10:24

Yup, and given that there aren't that many light howitzers manufacturers around ( especially after black-listing almost every vendor out there), at least FMS route guarantees that no scandal will arise. We need those howitzers like yesterday!!

Now, if only we can order a few hundreds of regular towed and self-propelled artillery and modernize the bofors guns, that would really beef up our forces.

aditp
BRFite
Posts: 447
Joined: 15 Jul 2008 07:25
Location: Autoland

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby aditp » 19 Nov 2009 10:51

Someone needs to tell BAE, to offer to India the Bofors FH-77 renamed as the BAe M-abc and route all correspondence, bidding and shipments from Britain.

The IA will be happy, MoD will be happy and BAe will be happy.

asprinzl
BRFite
Posts: 408
Joined: 08 Sep 2004 05:00

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby asprinzl » 19 Nov 2009 11:43

What is this ultra light howitzer guns? I am guessing that these are being planned to be deployed on the Chinese frontier. Ultra light implies small caliber shells with small warheads and very short ranged guns almost like a heavy mortar piece. Against this the Chinese will be throwing what? Think about that for a second.

This is a merry go round all over again. Instead of building overwhelming superiority, money is possibly being thrown to maintain partial balance. This is the mentality that invited the Mumbai attack last year. The satanist realized that India didn't have overwhelming superiority in airpower and without overwhelming superiority or absolute dominance in the air, there would no chance in hell India would retaliate. Rightfully concluded, they proceeded to carry out their dirty deed.

Instead of increasing the capacity to deliver extremely painful punishment for any provocation by increasing the airpower assets and rocket assets, money is being thrown on little match sticks. India needs overwhelming air dominance and increase rocket batteries. A nation (India) that has less money to throw around compared to the neighbor (china), money must be spent on items that would have the biggest contribution towards increasing the national power. In my opinion it is airpower and rocket power at tactical level and icbms and mega-ton nukes at strategic level.
Avram

manjgu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2612
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby manjgu » 19 Nov 2009 12:20

well said asprinzl ..... its been almost 20 years since this terrorism business started...any sensible govt would have concentrated on building a capability with which we could have inflicted serious damage on the enemy or suitably deterred ...but alas indian statecraft has totally failed and is paralysed. and capability in all aspects and not only airpower or rockets etc as you seem to imply.

i am waiting to see what chidu meant by serious consequences....unless he meant continous verbal salvos or continous dossier salvos aimed across the border/LOC !!

vasu_ray
BRFite
Posts: 550
Joined: 30 Nov 2008 01:06

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby vasu_ray » 19 Nov 2009 12:23

while I second that, Indian aerospace command should have capable sats detecting IR signatures of missile launches anywhere in TSP and their neutralization on launch with air domination

wonder how the AAD performs if air launched at 20km altitude by the MKI? can it still intercept a heavier MRBM reaching 50km altitude in boost phase?

others things missing,

a quieter WSI Dhruv variant using NOTAR

and Predator style UAVs

kapilrdave
BRFite
Posts: 1566
Joined: 17 Nov 2008 13:10

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby kapilrdave » 19 Nov 2009 12:34

asprinzl wrote:What is this ultra light howitzer guns? I am guessing that these are being planned to be deployed on the Chinese frontier. Ultra light implies small caliber shells with small warheads and very short ranged guns almost like a heavy mortar piece. Against this the Chinese will be throwing what? Think about that for a second.

This is a merry go round all over again. Instead of building overwhelming superiority, money is possibly being thrown to maintain partial balance. This is the mentality that invited the Mumbai attack last year. The satanist realized that India didn't have overwhelming superiority in airpower and without overwhelming superiority or absolute dominance in the air, there would no chance in hell India would retaliate. Rightfully concluded, they proceeded to carry out their dirty deed.

Instead of increasing the capacity to deliver extremely painful punishment for any provocation by increasing the airpower assets and rocket assets, money is being thrown on little match sticks. India needs overwhelming air dominance and increase rocket batteries. A nation (India) that has less money to throw around compared to the neighbor (china), money must be spent on items that would have the biggest contribution towards increasing the national power. In my opinion it is airpower and rocket power at tactical level and icbms and mega-ton nukes at strategic level.
Avram


I agree to most of the points and I strongly believe that ultra light howitzer guns cannot be replacement of boforce.
But hey, you need small weapons also to win a war.
You need rifles, you need pistols and you need knives as well !!
ultra light howitzer guns would surely be useful in mountain warefare when they are in large number.
apparently we are guessing it, but i'm not sure if they are considered to fill up the vacuum of 155mm guns.

In case of conflict with pakis, i dont think PAF stand a chance against IAF IMHO.

Brando
BRFite
Posts: 675
Joined: 26 Feb 2008 06:18

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Brando » 19 Nov 2009 12:44

asprinzl wrote:What is this ultra light howitzer guns? I am guessing that these are being planned to be deployed on the Chinese frontier. Ultra light implies small caliber shells with small warheads and very short ranged guns almost like a heavy mortar piece. Against this the Chinese will be throwing what? Think about that for a second.

As far as the M777A2 Howitzer goes, the definition is confined to the total weight of the howitzer with all other performance capabilities remaining the same. The M777A2 can fire the same HE M107 round 32 kms away as well as the GPS guided Excalibur round with extended range. The major distinction being that the M777 lightweight towed howitzer is made from high tensile titanium rather than steel and that cuts its weight by half. It also has the a digital fire control and navigation systems like full fledged tracked modern artillery systems like the PZH2000, M109A6 etc, called the TAD. There is also an option of using a digital fire control system by Finmeccanica. Ultimately, the M777 howitzer is more mobile, faster to deploy, lighter and more accurate than current regular howitzers.

As I recall there were articles pointing to the Indian Military's lack of artillery capability for a military response to the November 26th Mumbai attacks. It would be prudent to employ the M777 system if they are pursuing it.

Brando
BRFite
Posts: 675
Joined: 26 Feb 2008 06:18

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Brando » 19 Nov 2009 13:05

asprinzl wrote:Instead of increasing the capacity to deliver extremely painful punishment for any provocation by increasing the airpower assets and rocket assets, money is being thrown on little match sticks. India needs overwhelming air dominance and increase rocket batteries. A nation (India) that has less money to throw around compared to the neighbor (china), money must be spent on items that would have the biggest contribution towards increasing the national power. In my opinion it is airpower and rocket power at tactical level and icbms and mega-ton nukes at strategic level.

Military reaction is no longer feasible in a nuclear standoff. In fact, investment in internal security and law enforcement would be most judicious. Introducing the Indian police to the 21st century would be the most potent weapon against actions like the Mumbai terrorist attacks as ultimately the biggest failure in case of the November 26 attack was the total collapse of the vaunted Mumbai police and government before the teenage terrorists.

I too support the deployment and expansion of air-power, rocket artillery and Multi-megaton nuclear weapons and their delivery vehicles. However there is no discernible indication that India is building or has built multi-megaton nuclear warheads and heavier missiles to deliver the same. A temporary increase of military expenditure to at least 8-10% of the GDP is required to build up for lost capacity due to past bureaucratic perfidy that has hobbled the entire acquisition process.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17074
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Rahul M » 19 Nov 2009 14:29

What is this ultra light howitzer guns? I am guessing that these are being planned to be deployed on the Chinese frontier. Ultra light implies small caliber shells with small warheads and very short ranged guns almost like a heavy mortar piece. Against this the Chinese will be throwing what? Think about that for a second.

M777 is 155 mm 39 caliber. against these the chinese will also have to deploy small caliber guns or NOTHING in the NE theaters that are likely to witness conflict. in fact PLA will likely be able to deploy only the 122mm D-30 knock-offs. most of PLA's newer tube artillery are heavy and bulky SP versions that can't be deployed in those terrain.
This is a merry go round all over again. Instead of building overwhelming superiority, money is possibly being thrown to maintain partial balance. This is the mentality that invited the Mumbai attack last year. The satanist realized that India didn't have overwhelming superiority in airpower and without overwhelming superiority or absolute dominance in the air, there would no chance in hell India would retaliate. Rightfully concluded, they proceeded to carry out their dirty deed.

India DID and DOES have overwhelming airpower superiority over TSP, if that's what you are referring to. the decision not to attack was a political one keeping in mind the nuclear angle and US presence in TSP military bases.
in hindsight, it wasn't such a bad decision. the time for attack will come but it hasn't arrived yet. a knee-jerk premature reaction would only have complicated matters for us.
anyway, this is OT for this thread.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3531
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Aditya G » 19 Nov 2009 20:42

Is this some coastal artillery position? I thought all IN Coast Batteries were equipped with Styx :-?

Image

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7745
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 19 Nov 2009 23:44

asprinzl wrote:What is this ultra light howitzer guns? I am guessing that these are being planned to be deployed on the Chinese frontier. ................... A nation (India) that has less money to throw around compared to the neighbor (china), money must be spent on items that would have the biggest contribution towards increasing the national power. In my opinion it is airpower and rocket power at tactical level and icbms and mega-ton nukes at strategic level.
Avram


And how does procurement of light howitzers not contribute to national power? You do realize that IA has raised new formations in North East and proper artillery system is required for these as well as existing formations? And as for these being match-sticks, these very match-sticks will be required to burn down the hawai-mahals of our freinds to west and north.....

Viv Sreenivasan
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 64
Joined: 23 Mar 2009 16:29

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Viv Sreenivasan » 22 Nov 2009 08:30

asprinzl has no idea what he is on about. ULH are now matchsticks? :roll: . ULHs are vital in mountainous terrain where they can be quickly deployed by helicopters into elevated areas.

ParGha
BRFite
Posts: 966
Joined: 20 Jul 2006 06:01

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ParGha » 23 Nov 2009 03:59

rohitvats wrote:
asprinzl wrote:A nation (India) that has less money to throw around compared to the neighbor (china), money must be spent on items that would have the biggest contribution towards increasing the national power. In my opinion it is airpower and rocket power at tactical level and icbms and mega-ton nukes at strategic level.

And how does procurement of light howitzers not contribute to national power? You do realize that IA has raised new formations in North East and proper artillery system is required for these as well as existing formations?

Rohit,
As an economical deterrent vis a vis the Chinese, two additional regiments of Agni IIIs would have bought you greater credibility and bargaining power than the two divisions (though they cost the same). When you have less money and resources than your opponent, you need to learn to allocate them creatively and to greater effect.
Viv Sreenivasan wrote:asprinzl has no idea what he is on about. ULH are now matchsticks? :roll: . ULHs are vital in mountainous terrain where they can be quickly deployed by helicopters into elevated areas.

You are totally missing his point. If there was money for the missiles, the nukes, the aircraft and the artillery... then by all means, buy everything necessary. Unfortunately it is not so. And if you try to play that game with the Chinese, they will beat you hands down. Instead you need to start thinking how you can get the job done with what you already have (i.e. mortars and rebuilt IFGs), and invest in things that can give you maximum ROI.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11213
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Gagan » 23 Nov 2009 08:00

Aditya G wrote:Is this some coastal artillery position? I thought all IN Coast Batteries were equipped with Styx :-?

That is from the navy's Gunnery training establishment at Fort Kochi in cochin.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3531
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Aditya G » 23 Nov 2009 23:39

Gagan wrote:
Aditya G wrote:Is this some coastal artillery position? I thought all IN Coast Batteries were equipped with Styx :-?

That is from the navy's Gunnery training establishment at Fort Kochi in cochin.


Ah! Should have guessed as much. thanks

Dmurphy
BRFite
Posts: 1543
Joined: 03 Jun 2008 11:20
Location: India

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Dmurphy » 01 Dec 2009 22:09

Surprise Surprise!

India To Acquire Russian 130mm Guns
In a sudden turnaround of events, the Indian Army has taken a decision to acquire additional 130mm field guns from the surplus stock of former Soviet republics. This change in policy has been deliberated due to the urgent need to deploy additional artillery along the Sino-Indian border.

Senior Indian Army officials have revealed that they will have to compromise with the 130mm guns as the procurement of light 155mm guns is likely to be delayed due to delays in the defence procurement. The purchase of 155mm guns has been pending for almost a decade. Officials added that the 130mm field guns can be sourced economically and are suited to be deployed along the high altitude border areas.

Currently, the procurement process of ultra light 155mm caliber guns has been stalled since Singapore Technologies, one of the forerunners of the program, was alleged in a scam and blacklisted.

Due to the growing requirements of the Indian Army, a $4 billion artillery modernization programme was cleared which aims to induct roughly 2,814 guns of different types.

The modernization program includes the $1.6 billion project to buy 400 155mm/52-calibre towed artillery guns, which is to be followed by indigenous manufacture of another 1,180 howitzers. The contenders for the acquisition of 400 155mm/52-calibre towed artillery guns are BAE Systems, ST Kinetics of Singapore and Israeli Soltam. India will also acquire 155mm/52-calibre self-propelled tracked guns which is to be followed by indigenous manufacture of another 1,180 howitzers.

There will be an off-the-shelf purchase of 200 155mm/52-calibre mounted gun systems from overseas and will be followed by indigenous manufacture of another 614 such howitzers under transfer of technology. Another project was to acquire 140 air-mobile ultra-light howitzers (ULHs) for $580 million. This is being eagerly awaited since the Indian Army needs ULHs howitzers to ensure artillery can be deployed in remote inaccessible areas.

The new guns are intended to replace the six different calibres the artillery currently deploys. The Indian Army currently has the towed 130 mm M-46 field guns which are used for close support, general support and counter battery fire.

In the mid-90s, India procured about 400 numbers of Russian M-46s and the Field Artillery now has 720 numbers of M-46s. The Indian Army also uses the 105mm Indian Field Guns deployed in the mountainous regions besides the 75mm Pack Gun-Howitzer which remains unsatisfactory in its performance. There is also the 130mm Catapult self-propelled gun which equips only one regiment. Besides, India has the 122mm D-30 towed howitzer used for close support by multiple regiments deployed on the plains.

As for the Bofors 155mm FH-77B howitzer deployed for general support and counter-bombardment, they are successfully deployed along the north-eastern border areas of India. Unfortunately, the Bofors 155mm FH-77B deal got bogged down earlier by a major scandal and India was able to acquire less than one-fourth of the number of howitzers it needed.

The recent move to buy the 130mm field guns has come as an embarrassment since it is a departure from the decision in 1999 to replace all field guns with 155mm caliber guns over the years. Added to that is the fact that no new artillery gun has been inducted ever since the Bofors scam in the 1980s.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17074
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Rahul M » 01 Dec 2009 22:10

they will buy old design 130mm guns from russia but not 155mm guns from India. sheesh !

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10117
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby sum » 01 Dec 2009 22:12

The modernization program includes the $1.6 billion project to buy 400 155mm/52-calibre towed artillery guns, which is to be followed by indigenous manufacture of another 1,180 howitzers. The contenders for the acquisition of 400 155mm/52-calibre towed artillery guns are BAE Systems, ST Kinetics of Singapore and Israeli Soltam. India will also acquire 155mm/52-calibre self-propelled tracked guns which is to be followed by indigenous manufacture of another 1,180 howitzers.

Who would want to bet that this same exact sentence will be around in print even in 2015?

The recent move to buy the 130mm field guns has come as an embarrassment since it is a departure from the decision in 1999 to replace all field guns with 155mm caliber guns over the years. Added to that is the fact that no new artillery gun has been inducted ever since the Bofors scam in the 1980s.

Mera Bharat Mahaan...

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7745
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 01 Dec 2009 22:26

The numbers in the report above do not add up:

1. Item 1 - 2,814 guns in a $4billion deal
2.Towed Guns: 400 (OTS)+1,180 manufacture
3.SP Arty - OTS (not mentioned)+1,180 manufacture
4.Mounted Guns - 200(OTS)+614 manufacture
5.ULWH - 140

Total - 3,714. What is the correct number and break up?
Also, I'm assuming ounted guns mean system like Archer - Wheeled Arty.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3531
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Aditya G » 01 Dec 2009 22:33

We can only pray that the OFB-Army combine get their act together and implement Metamorphosis upgrade on these guns.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 33 guests