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.
Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16946
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Rahul M » 05 Sep 2010 22:48

this is completely baseless insinuation. IAF selected the AJT way back in the 80's, it was the govt that sat over the proposals. same with MRCA, IAF didn't ask for this dog and pony show, they wanted the mirage, again forced by the govt.

ShivaS
BRFite
Posts: 701
Joined: 16 Jul 2010 14:23

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ShivaS » 05 Sep 2010 23:49

I have been saying for a long time any Machine tool Maker who is into manufacturing Jig boring, Finishing forgings (boring grinding machining etc) SPMs
should be able to make Artillery of every kind, only exception is India where even dedicated OFPs can make simple ....
Skoda

Image
Image

http://www.militariarg.com/index.html
Go here for nosatlgia, mostly argentinian.

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2226
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Vivek K » 06 Sep 2010 01:06

Rahul M wrote:this is completely baseless insinuation. IAF selected the AJT way back in the 80's, it was the govt that sat over the proposals. same with MRCA, IAF didn't ask for this dog and pony show, they wanted the mirage, again forced by the govt.

Then IAF should come out and say so. They should also shoulder some of the responsibility in this. It takes decades to buy foreign goods and twice that amount of time for local ones to pass all the tests designed to test them. Why shouldn't the Chinese laugh!!

ManuT
BRFite
Posts: 595
Joined: 22 Apr 2005 23:50

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ManuT » 06 Sep 2010 04:05

My 2 cents, as they say, 'If I had 8 hours to cut a tree, I would spend 7 hours sharpening the ax.' 

In India's case, everyone fights over the design and the price of the ax for 7 hours, leaving 1 hour to sharpen it and to cut the tree.  

Wickberg
BRFite
Posts: 252
Joined: 01 Jul 2008 18:45

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Wickberg » 06 Sep 2010 07:29

Ajatshatru wrote:
And your point being? Since, according to you, producing them is not easy, India should then not even try to locally design and manufacture them (thus keep buying it from abroad till Kingdom come)?


My point being, many replies in the artillery thread is like "- Why by them abroad, just build the damn guns our selves!". Designing and building howitzers sounds easy, but it really is an art. And even experienced countries like Finland can bodge up and make mistakes.
That what my point. And when it comes to India, make a deal with any country (gladly Bofors :)) , license produce it, get the most Tot you can get and then go the China way. Pirate copies for the win. It´s a win-win situation....

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 06 Sep 2010 07:40

even in WW1 era, france had a 75mm gun that couple allegedly pump out 20 aimed rounds per minute with a well drilled crew.
in polish hands during the polish-bolshevik war , a motorized column of polish army attempting a deep attack came across 3 armoured trains bristling with guns and artillery sent to block them. in the ensueing contest the 75mms trounced the armoured trains which ran away with tails tucked between legs and emitting smoke and showing lots of holes.

and this was the state of technology in west 100 years ago.

we dont have any excuse to claim we cannot do it 100 yrs later. if we can build a moon rocket, we need to be able to build simpler stuff at 80% of the worlds-best level.

even various maoist basket case countries operating on the 'horde army' principle always pay attention to basic rice & roti stuff like
small arms, mortars, LMGs, 105mm guns, pack howitzers and so on...Noko probably has a sound base in these areas atleast...perhaps we could obtain TOT from them ? :((

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54179
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 06 Sep 2010 08:06

GD, The Soixante Quince (75mm) was a famous WWI field gun. It was license made in US. India can do an average 155mm field gun. This might be adequate in 1980s. What is needed is a SOTA(State of The Art) 155m field gun which can out shoot the best in the West for invariably that model will be transferred to the Pakis.

In 1971 even though the Pakis had US made 155mm guns which could fire a heavy shell, India was quite happy with the Russian made 130mm gun which fired a lighte shell to a greater range so Indian arty did out shoot the Pakis.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7719
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 06 Sep 2010 09:59

Vivek K wrote:
Rahul M wrote:this is completely baseless insinuation. IAF selected the AJT way back in the 80's, it was the govt that sat over the proposals. same with MRCA, IAF didn't ask for this dog and pony show, they wanted the mirage, again forced by the govt.


Then IAF should come out and say so. They should also shoulder some of the responsibility in this. It takes decades to buy foreign goods and twice that amount of time for local ones to pass all the tests designed to test them. Why shouldn't the Chinese laugh!!


What should IAF do? Hold a press conference and say that GOI has been dilly-dallying on the MMRCA and AJT? And why? To satisfy the jingoes on this thread or else where?

IAF had projected the requirement in requisite timeframe. They know more than anyone about the timelines - of phasing out of aircraft and required induction schedule. So, please desist from pointing fingers for the sake of it.

ks_sachin
BRFite
Posts: 1023
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ks_sachin » 06 Sep 2010 10:39

rohitvats wrote:
What should IAF do? Hold a press conference and say that GOI has been dilly-dallying on the MMRCA and AJT? And why? To satisfy the jingoes on this thread or else where?

IAF had projected the requirement in requisite timeframe. They know more than anyone about the timelines - of phasing out of aircraft and required induction schedule. So, please desist from pointing fingers for the sake of it.



Well said...

ShivaS
BRFite
Posts: 701
Joined: 16 Jul 2010 14:23

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ShivaS » 06 Sep 2010 12:01

Wickberg wrote:Despite what many thinks producing modern artillery isn´t that easy. Just look at the Finnish GH 52 that they sold to Egypt. And Finland has long tradition in designing artillery...


Dont bring Egyptians, the only thing they know is to have belly dancers in the trenches to entertain them not firing guns...

India has the tradition of transforming any inferior eapon into high performance weapon.
Even the bofor use in kargil was innovative, use of Alouette III in high( record) altitude is to the credit of IAF.

I can go on and on but ramana has already covered it in terms of Artillery (Russian 130 mm) use.
***
from Wiki

155 GH 52 APU is a Finnish gun developed in 1998. It is an enhanced and upgraded version of the 155 K 83. The 155 GH 52 is considered to be one of most modern field artillery cannons to date and was originally manufactured by Oy Tampella AB industries (today a part of Patria). It has a high rate of fire (6 rounds per minute) and can fire all types of 155 mm ammunition. The Kainuu Brigade and the Artillery Brigade in Niinisalo operates the guns in Finland. In 2003 a gun was mounted on a Soviet T-55 chassis for use as a self-propelled howitzer cannon prototype. This vehicle was designed primarily as a design study for the Egyptian Army. It was later sold to Egypt.
The gun's deployment power is 78 kW and its driven speed (in terrain, to location) is 7.5 km/h or 15 km/h when pulled by a heavy truck. The cost of one system is 500,000 euros.

On 21 May 2007, the Finnish Yleisradio revealed some problems with the 155 GH 52 APU, dealing with reliability issues of the towing system and the barrel behavior when firing long-distance round. These facts had been withheld from the Egyptians at the time of the deal.


jai
BRFite
Posts: 366
Joined: 08 Oct 2009 19:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby jai » 06 Sep 2010 14:44

My humble 2 pennies say that MOD could show a preference for and allow the Indian JV partners / Companies to bid for the RFP's ( Mahindra BAE systems can for example field Bofors guns as Mahindra - BAE guns, while L & T, Tata's etc can bring in others ) and can manufacture, supply and maintain them in India - with all contracting to happen with Indian vendors.....on one hand it will open up the bottlenecks of direct imports and on the other help create a domestic industry as well...and thus hopefully help Kangrass / Lotus lovers and more so IA - get over the ghosts as well....

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20517
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Philip » 14 Sep 2010 16:01

In scribe Prasannan's report in the Week's cover feature on our tensions with China,he mentioned that the ground troops had been equipped with "light artillery".Is it so and if so what type? I was under thge impression that a dela was in the offing for BAe lightweight artillery that could be transported by helos.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Austin » 14 Sep 2010 16:09

^^ Could be the 105mm Light Field Gun from DRDO ?

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2226
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Vivek K » 14 Sep 2010 19:58

Rohit, post the Arjun fracas, you are working hard to restore perhaps your image in the eyes of the armed forces. Please don't throw the debate with your change of heart nor try to dumb it down. Every question is not frivolous like you would have us believe.

IAF shoul do whatever it can to help the GOI make it's decision - press conferences at regular intervals, appearance regularly on TV to discuss defense matters, leaks press releases regularly, face to face meetings with the top leadership including the.opposition etc.

The three Defense Services should be held to this standard in the interest of national security.

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10018
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby sum » 14 Sep 2010 21:00

Austin wrote:^^ Could be the 105mm Light Field Gun from DRDO ?

Article clearly mentions 155 mm light artillery...IIRC, what he means that the divisions have been allotted the guns is that the newly FMS ordered M777s have specific number of pieces already pre-allotted to specific divisions and doesn't mean that they have it in hand right now...

IMHO, of course..

Gaur
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2009
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 23:19

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Gaur » 14 Sep 2010 21:38

Vivek K,
No one denies that forces have numerous faults but it seems to be the fashion nowadays to bash them for no reason at all. And the series of posts by you are a perfect example of what I am talking about.

First you show your ignorance by accusing IAF for delaying AJT and MRCA. And when RahulM and rohitvats point out to you the absurdness of your accusation, then instead of accepting the incorrect nature of your statement like a mature person should, you begin to argue just for the sake of arguing and start to dish out senseless blabber.

Rohit, post the Arjun fracas, you are working hard to restore perhaps your image in the eyes of the armed forces.

Yeah right! :roll: That's exactly what the armed forces do. You provide such brilliant insight into the working of armed forces that it dazzles my eyes. The armed forces spend all their day searching internet forums to filter out the people who post against them. Then, I assume they detain them, take them to J&K and under the cover of the inhumane AFSPA, teach them their lesson? Am I right? I know I know, its all a big conspiracy. So forgive rohitvats for trying to "restore his image".
I guess that's exactly why RahulM was against your accusation too. He gained too much notoriety in the Armed Forces for blaming IAF and IA for their attitude towards tejas and arjun respectively.

IAF shoul do whatever it can to help the GOI make it's decision - press conferences at regular intervals, appearance regularly on TV to discuss defense matters, leaks press releases regularly, face to face meetings with the top leadership including the.opposition etc.

As far as the top brass is concerned, no one would argue that there is left much to be desired. However, the particular accusation you laid on IAF is ridiculous. As RahulM pointed out, it is public knowledge that IAF selected AJT way back in 80s. So is their earlier demand for Mirage-2000. That is all public knowledge, so what do you want the IAF chief to come out and say regarding this? What do you want them to leak?
And face to face meetings with the top leadership of opposition? :rotfl: Are you for real? Do you have any idea the level of politics goes on at those levels? You want the Service Chiefs to play politics against the politicians? Sadly, Admiral Vishnu Baghwat would tell you how that will go.

If you are some boy in his early teens with little world experience, then your reaction is understandable but if you are an adult then your statements are baffling to say the least.

Again, let me repeat that the Services are no holy cows. They have several of their own faults which are discussed in the forums with full enthusiasm. However, one must desist to lay blame where none exists.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7719
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 14 Sep 2010 22:59

Philip wrote:In scribe Prasannan's report in the Week's cover feature on our tensions with China,he mentioned that the ground troops had been equipped with "light artillery".Is it so and if so what type? I was under thge impression that a dela was in the offing for BAe lightweight artillery that could be transported by helos.


And you're right in your opinion, sir. The dear author has had many flights of fancies in that article and this thing about Light Arty is one of them.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54179
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 15 Sep 2010 02:08

Dont get into slanging match. And self police.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19156
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 15 Sep 2010 02:14

Sure, but bringing in the AJT to tarnish the IAF has to be the worst excuse ever, which has no place on any Indian defence forum.

As Rahulm notes:

this is completely baseless insinuation. IAF selected the AJT way back in the 80's, it was the govt that sat over the proposals. same with MRCA, IAF didn't ask for this dog and pony show, they wanted the mirage, again forced by the govt.


I mean, how hard is to google, to find out about the La Fontaine Committee?

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... ia/ajt.htm

The La Fontaine committee set up to make an in-depth study into the accident pattern and entire training process found noticeable co-relation between the pattern of training and aircraft accidents. It pointed out in 1982 that there exists a quantum jump in skill/judgement as IAF had no suitable operational transitional trainer aircraft to fill the intervening gap before the pilots are taken on to the operational fighter aircraft. The Ministry stated that Hunter and MiG-21 were not specially designed as advanced trainer and had some limitations for imparting air combat and weapon delivery training. It added that acquisition of an advance jet trainer (AJT) would enable the IAF to impart better operational training to the pilots. As no AJT was acquired by IAF the stage III training continued on Hunter and MiG-21.

The idea of the trainer was mooted in 1983, the Air Staff Requirement prepared next year and after government approval in 1986, a joint IAF-HAL-DRDO team evaluated the British Hawk and Franco-German Alfa Jet.


For whatever reason, the Govt of the day sat on it. To blame the IAF for this, is completely bizarre.

Surely, a simple -"I was wrong" would have sufficed once rahulm provided the facts and google provided the rest, but instead:

Rohit, post the Arjun fracas, you are working hard to restore perhaps your image in the eyes of the armed forces. Please don't throw the debate with your change of heart nor try to dumb it down.


:| :roll:

Now, the simple point is that political discussions are verboten on this forum. Otherwise, one can clearly point out that it is a complete failure of the GOI to set a direction for proper, effective, procurement in tandem with local development.

Where is India's National Aerospace Commission? Where is India's National Land Systems Working Group? Where is India's Strategic Defense & Security Review, forecasting short term and long term threats for driving modernization? Where is the Indian Govt's stated objective, to deal with terror sponsors like Pakistan, instead of leaving the Armed forces to fend for themselves in a vacuum with faster mobilization/Cold Start or whatever.

What of the utter mockery that is the Artillery Procurement? Or is that another victim of the "piss process" between India & Pak so as to not upset the applecart? Or is it ad-hocism?

Whatever, the buck stops with GOI, and GOI's leadership. They should lead, not waffle and eat waffles, trying to be the modern day Nero.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20517
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Philip » 15 Sep 2010 14:28

I tend to agree with Karan.The AJT acquisition must be the world's best example of the worst way in which to acquire a weapon system! After decades,we finally decided on the Hawk which had been sold to a galaxy of nations and was getting rather long in the tooth adn have had problems with the local manufacture as a sting in the tail.I think it was AM P.Rajkumar who gave us some great insights into this acquisition when he visited France to evaluate the Alfa-jet,which fitted the bill perfectly,as well as the UK to evaluate the Hawk.The delay in deciding took so long that the Alfa-jet went out of production and by virtual default the Hawk won,even though there were new players in th skies like the MIG-AT,Yak trainer and the Italians wiht their Aermacchi MB versions,one which flew at an Aero-India show.The latest M-346 trainers seem to be heading to Singapore too.

The artillery acquisition seems to be heading the AJT way! The latest "F" mag has an interview with the Sing-Tech worthy who explained why and how they came to be blackballed "not their fault",after one of our PSU execs was caught with extra moolah in his pockets.His claims about their light gun being better/lighter than the BAe contestant needs to be put to the test though.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Surya » 15 Sep 2010 15:49

Lets not mix up things

the AJT process was screwed up but the Hawk is better than the Aermacchi, yak, mig whatever out there.

they were all in the same class but less mature (seperate question why we choose the version of the Hawk that we are getting)

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 » 18 Sep 2010 10:26

BAE Systems Bids for Indian Army's Artillery Gun Order
..:: India Strategic ::..
The Army is known to be immediately looking for 400 towed howitzers as part of its artillery modernisation programme that has suffered inordinate delays. The numbers could eventually go up to 1,600.

If the Entire Modernistion Programme is taken into account, the Indian Army will be Shopping for some 5,000 Howitzers in the Next Two Decades in a Combination of Towed, Self-Propelled and Ultra-Light Guns.

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10018
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby sum » 18 Sep 2010 10:29

Got to hand to BAe for persistance....

They keep applying, the IA keeps testing , the GoI keeps rejecting and the IA starts reissuing RFP and then loop back to first step...

Have even stopped reading any article related to "IA about to end hunt for 155 mm gun etc" since its become too common to even be funny anymore.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8188
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Pratyush » 18 Sep 2010 12:41

Sum ji,

The best option will be togive the specs to the OFB to develop. Giv them 5 years and if they fail they try again. But this will not even be tried. Alternatively, if India can have a FMS arrangement with the US and buy guns from that route. Then what stops the Singaporiean govt from offring Arty through the FMS route. That way the alligation of coruotion can be removed.

JMT.


tejas
BRFite
Posts: 768
Joined: 31 Mar 2008 04:47

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby tejas » 30 Sep 2010 07:34

BEML would be lucky to develop the paint to apply to this gun which is Slovakian. BEML's contribution is ZERO. Even if somehow under "technology transfer" this parasitic state undertaking (PSU) was able to produce this gun, what happens in 10 years ? We will again need tech. transfer this time from Romania or Lichzenstein. :evil:

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8188
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Pratyush » 30 Sep 2010 07:54

CT hat on

could this be the reason for cancelling the 155 contract repeatedly

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21126
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Prem » 30 Sep 2010 07:58

Still something better than nothing otherwise CBI will be calling for the ban on very words like Artillery, 155m etc.
http://www.kotadef.sk/uk_04_04.html

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Srivastav » 30 Sep 2010 07:59

if this can even slightly help in fulfilling the army's need than so be it.

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10018
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby sum » 30 Sep 2010 08:46

Pratyush wrote:CT hat on

could this be the reason for cancelling the 155 contract repeatedly

Would have agreed wiith the CT if a Amirkhan company was involved. Tough to believe for a Czech company...

Anyways, dont care if it is even a Martian artillery co as long as the babus clear it and the IA gets some of them..

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8188
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Pratyush » 30 Sep 2010 09:06

+ 1 to that onlee.

Lets hope that no aligations of curruption is made against them.

Kailash
BRFite
Posts: 1062
Joined: 07 Dec 2008 02:32

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Kailash » 30 Sep 2010 10:01

It is a Slovakian Zuzana gun, which already has a tracked version called the Himalaya (how convenient a name for Indian janta to be impressed with) which uses the same gun with a T-72 chasis. (http://www.kotadef.sk/uk_04_02.html)

Would be a perfect fit as we already have experience manufacturing the T-72. I just hope that the army has no qualms and places a bulk order. What we don't want is a token batch with the Slovakians while rewarding uncle by selecting his gun as mainstay!

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4441
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby putnanja » 30 Sep 2010 10:06

All it takes is someone to say that BEML was bribed to get into JV with the slovakian group, and the CBI director will write on a piece of blank paper that it may be true and we will be back to square one :roll:

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8188
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Pratyush » 30 Sep 2010 10:15

If that happens then it will be a great disaster for the IA. They should searously consider disbanding the arty branch if it happens. :x

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Gurneesh » 30 Sep 2010 20:38

Nice way for a foreign company to try and get orders without comparative trials as suddenly the gun is touted as Indian. Contrast with BAE which went with a Private Partner.

Meanwhile, BEML continues to stamp Made in India tags on CKD's and be proud of it.

A question for the guru's. Wouldn't the 45 cal be a hamper wrt to say the Archer (which has 52 cal) when the trials are held.

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 Oct 2010 14:39


rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7719
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 01 Oct 2010 14:40

With the BAehaving tied up with Mahindra's....I expect strong push from the indian partner to push the case through political corridors...

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8188
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Pratyush » 01 Oct 2010 14:53

I feel that the workshare proposed for the FICV can be implimented in Arty programme as well. In that the looser gets to make 1/3 rd of the numbers at the cost accepted by the winners.

That way we may see an end to political manuverings by the interested parties.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Srivastav » 20 Oct 2010 08:19

Xpost
UK slashes armed forces by 10 percent
-- The military will also immediately retire its flagship aircraft carrier, HMS Ark Royal, as the government slashes budgets.
-- Decommissioning either HMS Ocean or HMS Illustrious, two ships on which helicopters can land;
-- Cutting about 40 percent of the Army's Challenger 2 tanks and 35 percent of its heavy artillery;
-- Retiring the Hercules C-130 air transport fleet 10 years earlier than planned.


maybe we can try getting some of this artillery, but who knows if its the archer theyll be retiring or something else.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 20 Oct 2010 09:05

I wonder how old their C-130's are?


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests