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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Wickberg » 04 Dec 2009 00:28

ramana wrote:Your English may be not good but your understanding is very clear.
Anyone who can deliver has been banned.
Its a unilateral disarmament move.

This way the IA cannot ask for weapons which can't be bought from abroad and hence they wont be ready till 2027 and beyond.


Seriously one way out would be to start mfg in India under new name.



I don´t quite get it. Why would´nt India want IA to buy artillery until 2027?
What is "mfg"?

BijuShet
BRFite
Posts: 1575
Joined: 09 Jan 2008 23:14
Location: under my tin foil hat

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby BijuShet » 04 Dec 2009 00:32

Wickberg wrote:...What is "mfg"?

"mfg" is short for manufacture (i.e. produce or make)

a_kumar
BRFite
Posts: 481
Joined: 18 Jun 2008 23:53
Location: what about it?

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby a_kumar » 04 Dec 2009 00:36

Wickberg wrote:
Its a unilateral disarmament move.

This way the IA cannot ask for weapons which can't be bought from abroad and hence they wont be ready till 2027 and beyond.
Why would´nt India want IA to buy artillery until 2027?


"sarcasm" (sarkasmen, sarkasm).

Raveen
BRFite
Posts: 835
Joined: 18 Jun 2008 00:51
Location: 1/2 way between the gutter and the stars
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Raveen » 04 Dec 2009 00:43

BijuShet wrote:
Wickberg wrote:...What is "mfg"?

"mfg" is short for manufacture (i.e. produce or make)


You mean manufacturing
mfg = 'manufacturing' and not manufacture, hence the 'g' in mfg.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby srai » 04 Dec 2009 03:53

tejas wrote:srai garu, what i don't understand is what has been done wrt 155mm howitzer development in the last quarter century?
Apparently nothing. I have no doubt that state of the art systems would require a good deal of time and money to develop but the GOI has neither done the needful via DRDO or purchased the tech. from abroad for what is approaching 3 decades.

I don't see how we can fight a one front conflict much less two without something as basic as field artillery.

Cheers.


Well ... the external appearance of 155mm howitzer may not have changed all that much ... but "under the hood" a lot has changed ;)

But I do agree with you on on your point regarding the delay of the field artillery (either giving DRDO the go to R&D or purchasing off-shelf w/ TOT). One of those needs to happen soon.

sumshyam
BRFite
Posts: 552
Joined: 23 Sep 2009 19:30
Location: Ganga ki dharti.
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby sumshyam » 09 Dec 2009 13:32

India To Acquire Russian 130mm Guns

Any words of wisdom...gurus...I am sorry if re-posted...!

Srivastav
BRFite
Posts: 142
Joined: 24 Jan 2009 17:23
Location: where the polar bears live

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Srivastav » 09 Dec 2009 13:45

SumShyam bhai this was discussed in detail a couple of pages back...Please go and read it, its pretty interesting.
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=4723&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=440

soutikghosh
BRFite
Posts: 178
Joined: 17 Feb 2008 11:21
Location: new delhi
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby soutikghosh » 09 Dec 2009 15:02

D Roy wrote:
:



Yup a field gun for the mountains. not optimal.

still, At least we have a new 130mm cargo round in production. so some airburst ammunition will be there for use.

'
BTW wasn't the truck mounted thingy at Pragati a 105 mm? or was it 155 ?

there was a DANA looking model at that expo which was 155 mm.


Yes it was an IFG of 105mm cal mounted on simple TATA truck,
And the Dana looking model was from L&T pavllion which was a K-9 THUNDER model from South Korea mounted on a TATRA type heavy chassis. For the Indian artillery tender L&T/BEML is presenting the Korean K-9 models.

D Roy
BRFite
Posts: 1176
Joined: 08 Oct 2009 17:28

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby D Roy » 09 Dec 2009 15:44

thanks for that Soutik Ghosh.

By the way given BEML's interaction with Bumar from Poland did they also look at the KRAB 155 mm. given that its based on a T-72 derivative (PT-91 probably ) chassis with AS-90s gun? I am talking about the tracked requirement here of course.

soutikghosh
BRFite
Posts: 178
Joined: 17 Feb 2008 11:21
Location: new delhi
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby soutikghosh » 09 Dec 2009 22:44

D Roy wrote:thanks for that Soutik Ghosh.

By the way given BEML's interaction with Bumar from Poland did they also look at the KRAB 155 mm. given that its based on a T-72 derivative (PT-91 probably ) chassis with AS-90s gun? I am talking about the tracked requirement here of course.


Even if they present KRAB type gun, I don't think it would be in partnership with Bumar as for chassis it would be either T-72/T-90 chassis both of which are assembled in India, although I would prefer ARJUN chassis because of it's larger internal volume.
The main ordnance of KRAB system is a 155mm 52cal derivative of AS-90 which is of 39cal. This gun belongs to Royal Ordnance Factory UK part of Vickers group which is itself a part of BAE. So I don't think in any way Bumar is going to present this gun, it would be BAE in partnership with Beml/Mahindra.

Btw pic of the model of the Wheeled version of K-9
http://img341.imageshack.us/img341/7602 ... 119lx1.jpg

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Dmurphy » 23 Dec 2009 23:26


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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Stan_Savljevic » 24 Dec 2009 09:34

Stage set for battle of big guns ----- SUJAN DUTTA

New Delhi, Dec. 23: The Indian Army’s original heavy artillery gun supplier whose name became synonymous with defence scandals — Bofors — and a blacklisted Singaporean firm are set to face-off in a competition with a prize money worth more than Rs 10,000 crore after an embargo on trials for howitzers was lifted.

http://telegraphindia.com/1091224/jsp/n ... 903605.jsp

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10098
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby sum » 24 Dec 2009 17:38


Do not understand one part of this "ingenious" new formula...It says that these vendors will be allowed to bid only where there is competition. Does this mean that Ultra Light Howitzer has no bidders since ST was th sole bidder for the ULH??

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Surya » 24 Dec 2009 19:52

If there is a God who cares about India - please show yourself now


Please get the 155mm flowing to our units :((

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 24 Dec 2009 21:06

my migraine has reappeared at the rise of this thread.

rajrang
BRFite
Posts: 415
Joined: 24 Jul 2006 08:08

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rajrang » 25 Dec 2009 23:34

Surya wrote:If there is a God who cares about India - please show yourself now


Please get the 155mm flowing to our units :((



and let those guns be of the self-propelled kind
and let there be several thousand of them (we can buy 10 of them for the price of one Su30)
and let half of them be of the ultra-light kind since half of India's borders are mountainous
and let them be delivered within 5 years

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Sagar G » 26 Dec 2009 00:20

rajrang wrote:
Surya wrote:If there is a God who cares about India - please show yourself now


Please get the 155mm flowing to our units :((



and let those guns be of the self-propelled kind
and let there be several thousand of them (we can buy 10 of them for the price of one Su30)
and let half of them be of the ultra-light kind since half of India's borders are mountainous
and let them be delivered within 5 years


God is nowhere to be seen and look at the wish list :lol:

Greedy Indians :P

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3478
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Aditya G » 27 Dec 2009 22:22

Is this confirmed?

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htweap/20090922.aspx

ndia Builds A 35mm AAA System

September 22, 2009: India has successfully tested a locally designed and manufactured 35mm anti-aircraft gun. India wants to replace hundreds of imported (in the 1970s) anti-aircraft guns 40mm guns. These fire 5.5 pound (2.5 kilogram) shells at the rate of 300 a minute. Max altitude is about 4,000 meters (13,000 feet). The Indian 35mm weapons system would also use an Indian radar and other locally made components.

A 35mm anti-aircraft weapon is already in use by Pakistan, where they manufacture, under, license, the Swiss Oerlikon weapon. India has also purchased technology and technical services from Oerlikon, for the development of the Indian 35mm autocannon. The 35mm shells weigh about 1.65 pounds (.75 kilograms) and have similar range to the older 40mm ones. This AAA (Anti-Aircraft Artillery) is still useful against helicopters and transports, and jets that are moving slowly over the battlefield.

satya
BRFite
Posts: 718
Joined: 19 Jan 2005 03:09

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby satya » 29 Dec 2009 18:34

Somenews at last : Artillery deal off the thanda basta . Winner will not not be from usual suspects .

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17050
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Rahul M » 29 Dec 2009 18:37

Aditya G wrote:Is this confirmed?

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htweap/20090922.aspx
India Builds A 35mm AAA System

we should wait for other sources.

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10098
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby sum » 29 Dec 2009 18:38

satya wrote:Somenews at last : Artillery deal off the thanda basta . Winner will not not be from usual suspects .

Sir,
Any hints? What does the "cryptic" statement mean? ( cynical since same stor has been bandied about for last 10+ years)

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7007
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Anujan » 29 Dec 2009 20:10

sum wrote:Sir,
Any hints? What does the "cryptic" statement mean? ( cynical since same stor has been bandied about for last 10+ years)


There was a school of thought which thought of not giving the MMRCA planes to Massa. Just as ABV said "Inki bhi khyal rakhni hai na ?" So give the guns to Massa.

Vinito
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 85
Joined: 16 Jun 2009 18:33

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Vinito » 29 Dec 2009 20:39

D Roy wrote:thanks for that Soutik Ghosh.

By the way given BEML's interaction with Bumar from Poland did they also look at the KRAB 155 mm. given that its based on a T-72 derivative (PT-91 probably ) chassis with AS-90s gun? I am talking about the tracked requirement here of course.


Isnt the Russian Giatsint 155mm / 52 cal gun also based on a T-72/T-80 chassis?

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10098
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby sum » 30 Dec 2009 10:01

Anujan wrote:
sum wrote:Sir,
Any hints? What does the "cryptic" statement mean? ( cynical since same stor has been bandied about for last 10+ years)


There was a school of thought which thought of not giving the MMRCA planes to Massa. Just as ABV said "Inki bhi khyal rakhni hai na ?" So give the guns to Massa.

The only silver lining then will be it will be a FMS and so will come through rapidly.

Juggi G
BRFite
Posts: 1070
Joined: 11 Mar 2007 19:16
Location: Martyr Bhagat Singh Nagar District, Doaba, Punjab, Bharat. De Ghuma ke :)

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Juggi G » 01 Jan 2010 02:47

The sources added the government was now looking to procure these guns from the United States through the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) route in an inter-governmental deal. US is offering the BAE systems made M-777 guns.

Link

nithish
BRFite
Posts: 437
Joined: 02 Oct 2009 02:41

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby nithish » 02 Jan 2010 05:39

Nod to US gun purchase minus bids

The government has authorised an outright purchase of 145 ultra-light howitzers from the US, a highly-placed defence ministry source said today.

The ultra-light howitzers are for the mountain artillery divisions of the Indian Army to be used in high-altitude frontiers opposite Pakistan and China. They can be transported slung from some helicopters.

The defence acquisitions committee has decided to take the foreign military sales route.

Two brands of ultra-light howitzers were initially in contention for the Indian Army’s estimated $2.5-billion artillery modernisation programme — ST Kinetics’ Pegasus and BAE Land Systems’ M777 made in the US.

If the government takes the foreign military sales route, the order is likely to go to BAE Land Systems. The source said the defence acquisitions council authorised the foreign military sales route before Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit to the US last month.

The army wants to buy 145 ultra-light howitzers, 158 towed and wheeled, 100 tracked, and 180 wheeled and armoured guns in the first phase as part of its field artillery rationalisation plan, the programme to upgrade its artillery divisions.

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4506
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby putnanja » 02 Jan 2010 05:45

^^^ That is good news indeed.

However, does FMS route also have an offset provision?

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7534
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Prasad » 02 Jan 2010 05:58

@^^^

How is it that this does not need to go through the standard tender route? Are there special provisions for such purchases that we don't need to send out tenders and the govt can buy directly from another government?

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7007
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Anujan » 02 Jan 2010 06:02

^^^^

IIRC, 12 AN/TPQ-37 firefinder radars were acquired from the US through FMS without a bid too.

This is OT but this firefinder radars thing truly makes me sad and pissed. Babus sat on their musharrafs even though the radar need and importance was realized from the 80s and it was also known that Pakis had them and deployed them. A lot of Soldiers needlessly died in Kargil because of this.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Surya » 02 Jan 2010 06:26

and once again the effectiveness of Paki arty fire was not due to the FF but due to their observers on the heights. Once they were dislodged the casualties dropped

George J
BRFite
Posts: 312
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby George J » 02 Jan 2010 08:55

Anujan wrote:..................IIRC, 12 AN/TPQ-37 firefinder radars were acquired from the US through FMS without a bid too.

This is OT but this firefinder radars thing truly makes me sad and pissed. Babus sat on their musharrafs even though the radar need and importance was realized from the 80s and it was also known that Pakis had them and deployed them. A lot of Soldiers needlessly died in Kargil because of this.


THIRD REPORT, STANDING COMMITTEE ON DEFENCE (1999-2000) wrote:Weapon Locating Radars (WLRs)
35. The Ministry of Defense in reply to a question stated that in February, 1995, request for proposal was issued to five manufacturers for supply of four WLRs after conducting trials of the equipment offered by them. Only one manufacturer M/s Hughes of USA responded to the RFP and offered their equipment for trials. Trials were conducted in India during 1995-96. It was found that the WLR of M/s Hughes, USA did not meet the prescribed General Staff Quality Requirements (GSQR) parameters in full.................

36. Icn September, 1998, taking into consideration the urgency expressed by the Army HQrs, import of tout WLRs was approved. Simultaneously, it was also deided that the indigenous development of WLR should be pursued. Meanwhile, in May, 1998, the Government of USA had imposed sanctions on India which precluded the possibility of import of WLR from USA. Accordingly, Request for Proposals (RFPs) were issued to M/s lskra of Ukraine and M/s Thomson CSF of France.

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10098
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby sum » 02 Jan 2010 09:42

What about the "normal" 155 cal towed and wheeled arty?

IIRC, this FMS seems to be for only the ultra light ones for the mountain strike corps. Was 145 the original requirement or is even this a compromise?

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17050
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Rahul M » 02 Jan 2010 09:44

GJ, for you. :)

http://www.india-defence.com/reports-3112

Indian Army Acquires 12 Weapon Location Radars (WLRs) from Raytheon
Dated 2/5/2007

The Indian Army has taken delivery of all the 12 sophisticated Weapon Locating Radars (WLRs) it had contracted to buy from leading US arms manufacturer Raytheon.
........
Designated AN-TPQ/37 Firefinder............
..............
The deal for WLRs, signed in 2002, was the first one India signed with the US in the post-Cold War era, thanks to the improving diplomatic ties between New Delhi and Washington.

Initially, India looked for only eight WLRs under the US Foreign Military Sales (FMS) programme for $140 million but later, another four were added, taking the value to nearly USD 200 million.

Although the Indian Army needs a number of WLRs, there is no transfer of technology (ToT) involved in the deal with Raytheon. The remaining requirement is being met by a newly developed phased array system indigenously built by the public sector Bharat Electronics Limited (BEL).

Carrier vehicles for the Firefinder radars and support systems are being supplied by another public sector company, the fast growing Bharat Earth Movers Limited (BEML).


---------
sum, looks like compromise to me. M777 is 39 cal isn't it ? what 52 cal does USarmy USMC use/will use ?

George J
BRFite
Posts: 312
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby George J » 02 Jan 2010 10:54

Rahul, I am well aware of WHEN it was signed my post was in response to the absolutely ill-researched flippant post made above me. The sanctions were LIFTED in 2001...so obviously it had to be signed AFTER that.

I am no fan of the IA...but you got to stick to the facts. The PAC report clearly indicates that by the 90's the IA was dead serious (you don't trial a system if you are not serious) about getting a WLR but POK-II made sure nothing could happen till after the sanctions were lifted....which is 2001.

Bheem
BRFite
Posts: 161
Joined: 12 Sep 2005 10:27
Location: Vyom

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Bheem » 02 Jan 2010 11:17




If this decision has been taken then I am all for it and it is very good one. There was no special need for bids. This cannon is being purchased and deployed in thousands. It was procured by US by tender and we will get similar price. it is only 39 caliber but its range would be adequate for mountains where it will be able to shoot at anything upto 40-50km range. also with new shells the range will further increase to anything upto 60-100km. Note with new developments, for long range area shelling and for long range accurate hits, military would use MLRS or MLRS+gps respectively. for short range mortars or for short range accurate shelling mortars + GPS. For mid range shelling 155mm guns will be used. Though with new PGM shells even its range can be pushed upto 100km+. Google and read excaliber shell.

I personally think that M777 variants should be used for all the requirements of tracked, wheeled SPG, mounted, automatic towed & ultra light.

This deal will also bring ToT and off set manufacturing. I think through L&T or Tatas or OFB.

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10098
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby sum » 02 Jan 2010 14:17

This only seems to prove that FMS/Govt-to-govt seems to be the only way for our forces to get speedy equipment.

Virtually every tendered equipment takes ages to come if it ever comes through ( since most seem to get canceled on whims and fancies)

I personally think that M777 variants should be used for all the requirements of tracked, wheeled SPG, mounted, automatic towed & ultra light.

Amen to that. No point day dreaming about the greatest and best if it never comes through ( like the arty saga so far). Better to take what is available and ensure huge numbers before a new govt/leader comes along and has second thoughts on the current deal.

mody
BRFite
Posts: 769
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby mody » 02 Jan 2010 16:26

The 52 cal requirement was not for the light howizter. It was always going to be 45 cal or 39 cal. ST Kinetics was going to upgrade their guns to 45 cal if selected.
The two original contenders were M777 and ST Kinetics Pegasus. The M777 is lighter and a proven system. The US Marines have ordered several hundreds of these. The Pegasus, while heavier then the M777, has its own powerpack, like the bofors, that allows it to shoot and scoot. The gun can move short distances using its own power pack. The IA loves this capability (if fact this was one the main features cited that tipped the balance in favour of Bofors as opposed to the french gun back in the '80s).

Also, at the time of the original tender, BAE didnot show much interest in offering the M777, as the production run for US marines and army units is going to continue for well over 1,000 units and delivery for Indian purchase, if finalized would take years. Hence the IA preferred the pegasus.
Now with the FMS route , I think the delivery time problem would have been taken care of, somewhat.
All in all the the M777 is very capable system, its the lightest in its class and is a proven system.

mody
BRFite
Posts: 769
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby mody » 02 Jan 2010 16:29

Most likely if the news about the M777 are true, then I would bet that a deal for the Chinook Heavy lift helicopters would also almost be certainty. Just my thoughts.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 02 Jan 2010 21:24

Juggi G wrote:
The sources added the government was now looking to procure these guns from the United States through the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) route in an inter-governmental deal. US is offering the BAE systems made M-777 guns.

Link


I open BRF after some time and get to see this news......NEW YEAR gift for the IA.....more power to IA....

Anurag
BRFite
Posts: 398
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Anurag » 02 Jan 2010 22:03

Yes, I believe 145 systems in total.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests