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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby D Roy » 20 Oct 2010 09:22

First part totally off topic -

the biggest thing to wonder about is their first new carrier being built right now. Its going to be completed without cats, never going to see UK service and will either be mothballed or presumably sold to somebody.

The Prince of Wales (second carrier) will see cats and start with an initial complement of just 12 F-35Cs. The F-35B stands cancelled.


Second part - more relevant -
Some ( 25 odd) AS-90s are going to be up for grabs. Given that the Poles offer the turret on a '72 chassis wonder if something will happen there.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8269
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Pratyush » 20 Oct 2010 10:08

IMO, the IA will not look at the second hand gear.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby D Roy » 20 Oct 2010 10:43

Really?

The IA is currently scouring for battle worthy M-46s from all over Eastern Europe.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7732
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 20 Oct 2010 13:09

D Roy wrote:Really?

The IA is currently scouring for battle worthy M-46s from all over Eastern Europe.


Battle worthy M-46 which is the back bone of Indian Medium Arty Regiments.

The AS-90 numbers are too miniscule to be of any use - not evena a brigade woth - they are not worth the logistical hassle. BTW, the manufacturers of AS-90 had refused to mate the turret on T-72 during trials in 90s.

Another thing - the T-72 chassis was found unsuitable to take on the SP Arty turret. That is why Arjun chassis was mated to Denel Gun.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby D Roy » 20 Oct 2010 14:26

the poles with whom we have gotten pretty cozy have a solution called the KRAB ready. They already have the braveheart turret mated to a twardy hull.

So things have moved beyond the "mid-nineties" so to speak. Take a look for yourself.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krab_%28howitzer%29


The T-6 naturally requires a more robust base. But not in this case.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7732
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 20 Oct 2010 14:47

^^^I'm aware of the Krab and development behind it (the modified T-72 chassis). The point is - availability of 25 second hand guns of a particular type (I don't have any issue with second hand stuff) should not dictate the choice of hundereds of these types....In case we finalize the Krab Gun, these 25 guns will stick out as sore thumbs.

As for Denel and Arjun chassis - IMO, the issue was with respect to all the contenders which agreed to allow mating of turret to different platform....(AS-90 was not mated with T-72)

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby D Roy » 20 Oct 2010 14:57

Again that was the latish nineties not now. Given that you are aware of KRAB.

and also the point is what you say i.e "availability of 25 second hand guns of a particular type yada yada ..." and not that the solution is not available.

They may look at it as part of a larger follow on order - take 25 older huns now add 155 later.

But then again given that BEML is all ga ga over the DND Himalaya solution, who knows?


Let's see what happens.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7732
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 20 Oct 2010 15:06

D Roy wrote:Again that was the latish nineties not now. Given that you are aware of KRAB.

and also the point is what you say i.e "availability of 25 second hand guns of a particular type yada yada ..." and not that the solution is not available.

Let's see what the IA does.


That 90s mating stuff was just for reference and not to support my POV about not going for 25 second-hand AS-90 guns....My POV is quite simple - those 25 guns will not make any difference - even in short term- to Indian requirement and cannot even act as stop-gap measure. 25 guns is only one Regiment plus one battery.....IA is better of purchasing M-46 and moving Bofors to any armored formation, if required for 155mm caliber is felt.

IA may go for AS-90 or KRAB or the BEL 'indeginious' SP Gun....the same are not related to AS-90 purchase from British Army. You don't decide on order for 100s of guns because 25 second hand guns might become available.....

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby D Roy » 20 Oct 2010 15:12

agreed. but it may be looked at given how utterly hopeless FARP has become when looked at linearly.

In any case the requirement for tracked SPh was initially 220 which was then whittled down to 180. So its not really even a few hundred anymore.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7732
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 20 Oct 2010 15:23

The requirement for SP Arty was 22 Regiments - which is 396 units+some more for training. IMO, the requirment for Wheeled SP Arty was in addition to this number.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby D Roy » 20 Oct 2010 15:29

yeah that wheeled requirement was brought down to just 100 from the previous 180.

So it has gone from 220(tracked) + 180(wheeled) = 400 to 180 + 100 = 280.

and that 400 is of course the 22 x 18 = 396 number that you refer to. This was the total heavy SPH requirement. But this has now changed.

And as you know the change is due to the requirement for 200 + 614 Mounted gun systems of the Caesar variety. In the MOD's parlance MGS is considered distinct from what they call "wheeled".

Obviously these are more transportable than the Rhino variety solution. Just for recollection purposes Rheinmettal was also offering its wheeled solution using the same vehicle as Denel. But this is what the MOD refers to when it says wheeled.

And the lighter truck mounted guns are referred to as MGS.

at the moment total FARP type new induction requirement - 280 heavy SPH + (200 + 614) MGS + (400 + 1180) towed + 145 ( 290 more in the future) helo transportable. So 2819 + 290 future will re-equip 170 plus regiments.

The rest 40-50 regiments will be made up of upgraded Bofors and metamorphosis 155 mm. and I guess some non upgraded 130 mm still lying around since this is Circa 2022.

4000 modernish howitzers firing PGMs , cargo rounds what have you and slaved to Shakti IACCS with UAV support should do the job.

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 » 21 Oct 2010 22:29

Hard Bargain on US Pacts
The Telegraph - Calcutta
The US was also expecting the agreements to be signed along with announcements of two major arms deals. The Indian Air Force has decided to buy 10 C-17 Globemaster-III heavy airlifters in a deal that could be worth $4.4 billion.

A Second Deal — for Up to 300 M-777 Ultra Light Howitzers – under the Pentagon’s direct Foreign Military Sales programme is in the Works but an Announcement is Unlikely because the Indian Army has Not Yet Finished Evaluating the Guns.

The Guns are for Deployment in High-Altitude Border Positions on the Chinese Frontier.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7732
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 22 Oct 2010 12:17

300!!!!.......now that is one heck of a good number to war the cockles of a jingoes heart........(if the news is true..and not DDM)

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8269
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Pratyush » 22 Oct 2010 12:29

That will make 180 + 300 = 480.

If the same gun is to be made by the OFB under licence. What are the requiremets the vendor will have to fuilfill. Can some one shed light on this.

narayana
BRFite
Posts: 366
Joined: 27 Jun 2008 12:01

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby narayana » 22 Oct 2010 14:38

why Not few "AC-130J" when we are already getting C-130J's?

palash_kol
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 40
Joined: 05 May 2010 13:07

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby palash_kol » 22 Oct 2010 15:01

narayana wrote:why Not few "AC-130J" when we are already getting C-130J's?


I love AC-130J.......But its very costly....And IAF will not buy it..... :roll: No country other than USA has it till now.....So IMO, USA will hardly sell it to us, even if IAF will request to buy it...

6 AC-130j would give us an edge over all other countries in this region.... 8)

Avid
BRFite
Posts: 304
Joined: 21 Sep 2001 11:31
Location: Earth

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Avid » 22 Oct 2010 19:22

Another suitable variant would be the MC-130, which is specifically designed for special ops support.

Avid
BRFite
Posts: 304
Joined: 21 Sep 2001 11:31
Location: Earth

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Avid » 22 Oct 2010 19:29

Juggi G wrote:Hard Bargain on US Pacts
The Telegraph - Calcutta
The US was also expecting the agreements to be signed along with announcements of two major arms deals. The Indian Air Force has decided to buy 10 C-17 Globemaster-III heavy airlifters in a deal that could be worth $4.4 billion.

A Second Deal — for Up to 300 M-777 Ultra Light Howitzers – under the Pentagon’s direct Foreign Military Sales programme is in the Works but an Announcement is Unlikely because the Indian Army has Not Yet Finished Evaluating the Guns.

The Guns are for Deployment in High-Altitude Border Positions on the Chinese Frontier.


If it is indeed thinking of purchasing M777, it would be the second biggest operator of the gun, and with numbers upwards of 400 it would hold significant bargaining power.

From some USMC folks who have used the gun in AfPak, it is one of the deadliest howitzers.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7918
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby nachiket » 22 Oct 2010 19:39

Hold your horses guys. IIRC the deal was for 145. When the original deal itself is not done yet, how can the numbers suddenly increase to 300? More likely to be DDM.
Of course as rohit said, 300 M777 howitzers does indeed warm a jingo's heart and makes him start dreaming about 400 FH-77B05s and 150 Pzh-2000s to complement them. :twisted:

dinesha
BRFite
Posts: 1168
Joined: 01 Aug 2004 11:42
Location: Delhi

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby dinesha » 25 Oct 2010 08:15

the Multi-Barrel Rocket System PINAKA, an area weapon system to supplement the existing artillery gun, now has an increased range that goes beyond 30 km with increased accuracy levels, too.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/foe-o ... d/701856/1

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4486
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby putnanja » 28 Oct 2010 04:43

Boom of guns and business battle - Singapore firm speaks out after sikkim trial of us arms

...
In the Indian Army’s high-altitude firing range, artillery officers are supervising what they call “confirmatory trials” of the BAE Land Systems 155mm/39cal M777 ultra-light howitzers even as the foreign and defence ministries in New Delhi look for a big idea — such as a multi-million-dollar cheque — to add zing to Barack Obama’s India visit.
...
...
Whether the contract is signed during the presidential visit or not has become secondary. The Singaporean rival vying for the order has complained and cried foul but both the Indian defence ministry and the Pentagon have decided the deal will be pushed through.

The army wants the guns to equip six new Indian artillery regiments — the initial order will be for 145 howitzers — being raised especially for the China border.
...
...
The aircraft carrying the guns overflew Gwalior where a gun of the same category — called the Pegasus, after the winged horse of Greek mythology, has been idled.

The Pegasus is made by Singapore Technologies Kinetics (STK) that is swinging in the grey area of a blacklist and a ban after the defence ministry asked the CBI to probe its links with former chief of the Ordnance Factory Board, Sudipto Ghosh.

...
But Indian Army officials — and BAE sources — say that the M777 has been ready for trials for long. Last year, one of the trials got deferred after the Indian Army said the Pegasus was yet to be calibrated to fire Indian ammunition.


...
Even now, as the gun is being evaluated, senior officers call it a “confirmatory trial”, a phrase that conveys both a confirmation of the order and the testing of the guns.

...
BAE Land Systems, that has a joint venture in India with Mahindra & Mahindra, is also in competition with STK for an order of towed howitzers of the 155mm/52cal. BAE has fielded the FH77B05, a modernised version of the Bofors gun that was seen in action in the 1999 Kargil war, and STK was in the competition with its iFH 2000. But a frustrated STK, whose Indian partner is Punj Lloyd, has flown-out the gun that it had brought for the trials to India.

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2743
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby JTull » 28 Oct 2010 13:51



Do we need any more confirmation how US now owns this government?

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 » 28 Oct 2010 15:07

Image

Willy
BRFite
Posts: 283
Joined: 18 Jan 2005 01:58

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Willy » 28 Oct 2010 15:20

If this is the only way to get some guns then so be it. Enough of the mudslinging. The state is such that the army would be grateful for a 12 bore shortgun :mrgreen:

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8269
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Pratyush » 28 Oct 2010 15:45

Yes but what about the sanctions aspect, minus all the alphabet soup treaties ?

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Lalmohan » 28 Oct 2010 15:59

i'm with willy, army is now desperately short of arty, and this one is plenty good enough
process be damned

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8269
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Pratyush » 28 Oct 2010 16:12

The thing is that you are correct but still it is not making me comfortable. What if the weapons have to be used in the North Western sector what will happen then. Can we be sure that no sanctions will be applied against India.

If yes then I have no issues. If no then we have take a hand granade, removed the pin and are holding it against out temple. Telling people as they run away from us, just how clever we truly are.

JMT

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby vic » 28 Oct 2010 17:14

I think India should order/rely on the combination of M777 + Pinaka 1 + Pinaka2 till DRDO delivers on indigenous gun solutions

Nihat
BRFite
Posts: 1256
Joined: 10 Dec 2008 13:35

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Nihat » 28 Oct 2010 17:18

The possibility of unkil imposing military sanctions on India in case of conflict with either pak or china is minimal in my honest opinion. Any such move would not only throw this so called strategic partnership out of the window but would also totally shut down India as a market for american weapons, thereby pushing India firmly in Russian arms ( pun very much intended).

Unkil Cannot afford for this to happen as it will have a significant ripple effect on the larger dynamics of the relationship. Also, I trust the indian armed forces to have prepared advance contingency plans to counter such a possibility and maintain operational readiness at all times. Besides, if we want to completely rid ourselves of any possibility of phone interference then we must produce all major weapon systems inhouse.

rohiths
BRFite
Posts: 399
Joined: 26 Jun 2009 21:51

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rohiths » 28 Oct 2010 18:58

India can easily service and maintain the artillery. The ammunition is anyway Indian made. There can be no kill switch since there are no sophisticated electronic controls.
These types of weapons pose no danger.
I am more worried about strategically important weapons like F-18 (if selected)

manjgu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2446
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby manjgu » 28 Oct 2010 20:21

rohiths... i think u r terrible misinformed. its not abt kill switch ..its abt spares.

without spares, ur gun serviciability will progressively go down.. u will have to resort to cannabilising to keep up the numbers. this is what has happened to the bofors ... cannabalising is resorted to keep the numbers.

There is no subsitute to local dev and production. The chinese have learnt this mantra very well.. dont know when will we??
Last edited by Rahul M on 29 Oct 2010 00:00, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: what's with the sms speak ?

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21166
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Prem » 28 Oct 2010 23:40

Wont IA be keeping spare spares for war use ?

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5314
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Kartik » 29 Oct 2010 00:11

It is indeed sad to hear of the way in which STK is being treated in India. This must really come as a shock to them considering that Singapore was one of the countries rated as being the least corrupt of all nations in the world. the corruption and opaqueness in our defence deals must be an eye-opener for them.

Nevertheless, I too believe that the IA's artillery state is so pathetic that I'd be more than happy if they got the guns any which way. If that means that palms have to be greased, then so be it. The bigger picture is that the IA has something to fight with at the end of the day.

Avid
BRFite
Posts: 304
Joined: 21 Sep 2001 11:31
Location: Earth

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Avid » 29 Oct 2010 02:32

STK vs. M777
Weight: 5.4 tons vs. 3.1 tons
Crew: {6 to 8} vs. 5
Range with unassisted ammo: 19km vs. 24km
Range with assisted ammo: 30km vs. 30 km (base bleed ammo); M777 with Excalibur ammo is 40km

Noteworthy points about M777
1. CEP @ 24 km range with Excalibur ammo: 5 meters
2. Battle tested -- extensive field use in Afghanistan
3. The 2+ ton difference is hell of a lot when considering transportability, and more importantly ground conditions where to operate from.
4. Significantly more compact for air transport
5. Ammo for 40km range -- the STK Pegasus simply cannot do this.


Sanctions:
We have operated the Bofors for decades now without spares

Comparing the M777 to Pegasus is like comparing Range Rover to Gypsy for all-terrain operations. They are technologically vastly different. The very fact that M777 is being made available to us is very important. In May 2010, it was reported that BAe refused to offer M777, but IA actually sought it out through FMS route -- where the request was made to the Pentagon instead of BAe. Our purchase would be through Pentagon and not direct from BAe.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7918
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby nachiket » 29 Oct 2010 03:36

Avid wrote: In May 2010, it was reported that BAe refused to offer M777, but IA actually sought it out through FMS route -- where the request was made to the Pentagon instead of BAe. Our purchase would be through Pentagon and not direct from BAe.

:shock: So BAe refused and the Pentagon accepted?? This makes absolutely no sense.

Santosh
BRFite
Posts: 710
Joined: 13 Apr 2005 01:55

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Santosh » 29 Oct 2010 06:43

vic wrote:I think India should order/rely on the combination of M777 + Pinaka 1 + Pinaka2 till DRDO delivers on indigenous gun solutions

Does DRDO have an indigenous gun program? BEML is just a nodal agency for license manufacturing with TOT. And they are pushing for some Slovakian gun.

sathyaC
BRFite
Posts: 124
Joined: 23 Mar 2010 19:34

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby sathyaC » 29 Oct 2010 08:52

Santosh wrote:
vic wrote:I think India should order/rely on the combination of M777 + Pinaka 1 + Pinaka2 till DRDO delivers on indigenous gun solutions

Does DRDO have an indigenous gun program? BEML is just a nodal agency for license manufacturing with TOT. And they are pushing for some Slovakian gun.


DRDO does have indigenous gun program, it was reported 2-3 months ago in BR other blogs, BEML offer like stop gap program

Pranav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5280
Joined: 06 Apr 2009 13:23

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Pranav » 29 Oct 2010 08:59

Rocket assisted artillery shells:

BAE Systems Completes Successful Rocket Ballistic Test of 5-Inch Long Range Land Attack Projectile
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... tems01.htm

16 Sep 2010 | Ref. 208/2010

MINNEAPOLIS, Minnesota -- BAE Systems has conducted a successful rocket ballistic flight test of its 5-inch Long Range Land Attack Projectile at Dugway Proving Ground in Utah.

Employing a tactically configured airframe propelled by a rocket motor, the rocket ballistic test met all predicted performance parameters during its flight. Coupled with previous component and subsystem testing, this successful test sets the stage for planned guided flight demonstrations of the 5-inch LRLAP.

The 5-inch LRLAP is being designed to allow deployed surface ships to strike shore-based targets at ranges that exceed 50 nautical miles.

"Our team continues to progress toward demonstrating the full capability of a highly effective and low-cost 5-inch Long Range Land Attack Projectile," said Gary Slack, president of BAE Systems U.S. Combat Systems. "We stand ready to support the U.S. Navy by providing technology to meet the future needs of the fleet within three years."

The 5-inch LRLAP is a GPS-guided projectile being developed for the MK 45 Mod 2 and 4 naval guns on board Arleigh Burke-class destroyers and Ticonderoga-class cruisers within the U.S. Navy fleet, and various MK 45 guns in allied fleets around the world.

This internal research and development project is run jointly by BAE Systems, Lockheed Martin Corporation and Science Applications International Corporation. Additionally, a saboted variant of the munition is being developed to be fired from 155mm artillery howitzers employed by the U.S. Army and U.S. Marine Corps.

Further tests of the 5-inch LRLAP will follow in the upcoming months.

About BAE Systems

BAE Systems is a global defense, security and aerospace company with approximately 107,000 employees worldwide. The Company delivers a full range of products and services for air, land and naval forces, as well as advanced electronics, security, information technology solutions and customer support services. In 2009 BAE Systems reported sales of £22.4 billion (US$ 36.2 billion).

For further information, please contact

Stephanie Bissell Serkhoshian, BAE Systems
Tel: +1 703 894 3522 Mobile: +1 703 785-7891
stephanie.serkhoshian@baesystems.com

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3038
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby abhik » 29 Oct 2010 10:26

Avid ji, I don't think the specs. you posted are completely accurate. But any way it doesn't matter if the gun we chose weighs 3.x or 5.x tons, it will need a heavy lift helicopter to field which could carry either with ease. And if you are transporting by road wont a full sized towed artillery be able to go any where the light artillery can go? On any day light weight artillery will get out gunned by the full sized 52cal artillery. So unless significant numbers of full-sized artillery pieces are acquired I feel we will still be at a significant disadvantage and the current situation will not be completely mitigated not withstanding the acquisition of ultra-light-weight howitzers. Of course some guns is better than next to no guns.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7732
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 29 Oct 2010 10:54

^^^The weight matters a lot. Please look up the under slung weight carrying capacity of the Mi-17 and compare the weights of the guns. And how that effects any plans for vertical movement using the helicopters.

As for the 52cal artillery - in case we manage to get a mix of 3+1 Regiments of M777 and 52Cal guns in Arty Brigades, we'd have imparted significant firepower to the formation. These guns will end up replacing the 105mm IFG - think of the massive increment in firepower and range.And the possibility of rapid movement.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests