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.
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8228
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Indranil » 11 Dec 2012 02:46

^^^ The Bhim is essentially the same gun mounted on the Arjun chassis. Bhim (a tracked SPG) and Tata gun (a mounted SPG) are not competitors. For different classes of artillery that India is trying to acquire read this.

Bhim will be competing with:
1. K-9 through , L&T-Samsung Techwin
2. Donar, Ashok Leyland-KMW
3. Yet to be named, Tata PSED-Cenzin(?),
4. Arzu, Konstrukta-BEML
5. PzH-2000, Rheinmetall-M&M(?)
6. BEML/DRDO/CVRDE ;-)

The Tata SPG will be competing against
1. Caesar, L&T-Nexter
2. Archer, BAE
3. ATMOS, Elbit/Bharat Forge(?): Will be great if they can mount the FGH-155 on the DFAEG 6x6.
4. Nora (?), Punj Lloyd-Yugoimport


There are many more players. Jump to Page 5 of the link provided for a summary.

suryag
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3829
Joined: 11 Jan 2009 00:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby suryag » 11 Dec 2012 07:14

Looks like everything boils down to having the metallurgy right as the other things(ballistic computers/stabilisation items/targetting methodologies) are platform specific

Btw IRji(no i wont drop ji) you aree good at finding hidden docs and tenders

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10100
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby sum » 11 Dec 2012 08:10

Quote in the article on Desi arty:

Ironically, the initial response in India's defence establishment to the "desi Bofors" has been tepid. While one worthy reportedly remarked that the "MoD does not entertain unsolicited offers", another dismissed it as a "hobby project".

Guess we know this also will end up!!

Boreas
BRFite
Posts: 315
Joined: 23 Jan 2011 11:24

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Boreas » 11 Dec 2012 08:42

Some people (directly involved in project) have said that while the technology is imported, the barrel has been forged in house by TATA. And that in future it can be done without any 'further' assistance from foriegn companies.

Boreas
BRFite
Posts: 315
Joined: 23 Jan 2011 11:24

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Boreas » 11 Dec 2012 08:48

sum wrote:Quote in the article on Desi arty:

Ironically, the initial response in India's defence establishment to the "desi Bofors" has been tepid. While one worthy reportedly remarked that the "MoD does not entertain unsolicited offers", another dismissed it as a "hobby project".

Guess we know this also will end up!!

Following are the possibilities -

1. IA takes notice of it, help in verification/testing process and if satisfied proposes it to MoD for speedy induction.
2. TATA sends few lifafas to non-saint people in saint's office and they start to see light at the end of tunnel.

3. A new tender (which may conclude by the end of 2025).

Shrinivasan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Location: Gateway Arch
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Shrinivasan » 11 Dec 2012 12:08

^^^ you are forgetting another possibility..
Aman ki tamasha crowd can kill the whole Arty saga... after all CONgress needs all funds available for 2014 election...

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby aditp » 11 Dec 2012 19:09

Boreas wrote:.
2. TATA sends few lifafas to non-saint people in saint's office and they start to see light at the end of tunnel.
.


Barrel :D

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 11 Dec 2012 19:50

there is no problem that a case of johny walker blue label cannot resolve.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36416
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby SaiK » 11 Dec 2012 22:24

made by tata breweries, a new subsidiary! [imfl tag]

BTW, we have brain-storming when tata-denel is already placing the gun for field trials?
The four Indian private sector companies that held 'system level interactions' were Tata Power SED, Larsen & Toubro, Bharat Forge Ltd and Mahindra Defence Systems, BHEL along with state-owned BHEL and BEL. Eight private firms that held 'sub-system level interactions' were Dantal Hydraulics, Starwine India Ltd, PSPL, Avasarala Technologies, Accurate Engineering, HBL Power Systems Ltd., Moog Inc and System Controls Ltd.

According to DRDO, the 155mm gun it plans to develop at the Armament Research & Development Establishment (ARDE) in Pune, "Improved firepower to achieve first salvo effectiveness at longer ranges, higher accuracy and enhanced survivability are the primary requirements for this gun system. Efforts are being made to develop new technologies for weapon platforms, automation and control systems, recoil management, materials, etc., to achieve improved weapon performance."


OR this is all for future, and not available in existing systems?

Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3727
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Vipul » 12 Dec 2012 04:37

Its a good idea to have a Pvt Sector company involved in all future "indegenous" defence projects as only then can the babus/ministers get the cut or else the import lobby will not allow any project to come to fruition.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36416
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby SaiK » 12 Dec 2012 04:51

But it is a moot point in getting to have private industry as the middle men in terms of technology bridge besides business part. If private is sourcing technology from DRDO labs, then it is fantastic.. or else, it is a pain for us to ensure, disruptive technologies, bugs and security issues are handled at a federated policy level. Even with dealing with private, we have a mile long way to go.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 12 Dec 2012 07:48

in my opinion IA should outsource the artillery regiments to private players just like logistics, some aspects of base security, admin has been outsourced by the US army to pvt contractors. in india the front end of passport offices is also managed by TCS. NASA is awarding key contracts like crew vehicles to pvt players.

multiple pvt vendors can bring in or develop their own gear and be given the contracts regiment by regiment to recruit people, train them, kit them with the guns and gear and become part of the IA orbat. they can also take up all the current manpower of arty regiments . the school of arty should become a JV between IA and pvt players.

so we will have formations run by tatas, M&M etc equipped with their individual offerings and the contractor takes care of back end support. all guns fire the same std 155mm and 105mm ammo.

this is the only way to sidestep the whole issue of actually buying stuff. the vendors are free to make, buy or lease their guns from anywhere so long as they meet the uptime and shells on target metrics. they can buy guns from norinco if they want to, nothing like smacking cheen with their own stuff and keeping an eye on their kit.

seeing this greenfield opportunity, I am sure vendors can recruit leading experts as consultants from all over the struggling world mil-ind complex and have them share their brainpower for our benefit. even better setup offshore offices in europe, canada, south africa, korea and have them work in their native countries as well. if dassault systems, airbus, safran, GE and a host of aerospace cos can setup offices in bangalore, why cant we?

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10100
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby sum » 12 Dec 2012 11:37

From Livefist
A month before the Tata Power Strategic Electronic Division unveiled what was heralded as India's first 'indigenous' artillery gun, the company was among 14 Indian firms that sat across the table with DRDO officials at a three-day brainstorming session in Pune between October 29-31 on the latter's proposed 155mm/52cal advanced towed artillery gun system (ATAGS, since they love their long acronyms).
The four Indian private sector companies that held 'system level interactions' were Tata Power SED, Larsen & Toubro, Bharat Forge Ltd and Mahindra Defence Systems, BHEL along with state-owned BHEL and BEL. Eight private firms that held 'sub-system level interactions' were Dantal Hydraulics, Starwine India Ltd, PSPL, Avasarala Technologies, Accurate Engineering, HBL Power Systems Ltd., Moog Inc and System Controls Ltd.

According to DRDO, the 155mm gun it plans to develop at the Armament Research & Development Establishment (ARDE) in Pune, "Improved firepower to achieve first salvo effectiveness at longer ranges, higher accuracy and enhanced survivability are the primary requirements for this gun system. Efforts are being made to develop new technologies for weapon platforms, automation and control systems, recoil management, materials, etc., to achieve improved weapon performance."

The DRDO labs that propose to be part of the gun development include the Instruments Research and Development Establishment (IRDE), Vehicle Research and Development Establishment (VRDE), Centre for Artificial Intelligence and Robotics (CAIR) and DRDO HQ in Delhi.

So, will Tata SED, Bharat Forge etc help the DRDO for their gun as well as develop their own guns?? :-?

krishnan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7342
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 12:58
Location: 13° 04' N , 80° 17' E

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby krishnan » 12 Dec 2012 12:00

Probably be used to manufacture them...if they do get selected , not like getting dumped later on

member_20317
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3167
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby member_20317 » 12 Dec 2012 12:19

SaiK wrote:OR this is all for future, and not available in existing systems?



Hard to get so many people to discuss 'system level interactions' & 'sub-system level interactions' unless they are given some sort of idea as to what is in it for the people involved.

Looks like somebody is thinking right and trying hard to get the manufacturers, tech owners, dallas and research establishments to work on this. No way anything new can be introduced before 2014, even if based on Denel experience. So this is clearly not subject to Aman ka Tamasha at least till the thing comes upto evaluation stage which is very far away. In all this now both tatas and DRDO have some sort of common sourcing and developement experience.

smoke suggests some fire someplace.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 12 Dec 2012 15:50

http://www.flickr.com/photos/47686239@N ... otostream/

what do people think of this OFB 105mm gun turret on BMP2 chassis as a means of cheap support to infantry divs and mountain formations.

any 155mm SP gun will be big and expensive. there is a niche for 105mm guns, and its new gen shells are claimed to have 25km range and pack a good bite.

sarabpal.s
BRFite
Posts: 345
Joined: 13 Sep 2008 22:04

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby sarabpal.s » 12 Dec 2012 16:09

This ^^ indeed a good thinking Evan if they put it on Tata truck as they shown in Defexpo may reduce the cost, also wheeled one has certain advantage over tracked maintenance cost wise.

Bala Vignesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2017
Joined: 30 Apr 2009 02:02
Location: Standing at the edge of the cliff
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Bala Vignesh » 12 Dec 2012 16:11

OFB has already mounted it on truck and displayed it in Def Expo 12.. Jamwalmian had some photos of the gun on display..

sarabpal.s
BRFite
Posts: 345
Joined: 13 Sep 2008 22:04

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby sarabpal.s » 12 Dec 2012 17:28

sarabpal.s wrote:This ^^ indeed a good thinking Evan if they put it on Tata truck as they shown in Defexpo may reduce the cost, also wheeled one has certain advantage over tracked maintenance cost wise.

Bala ji your-truly is also there :wink:

jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5214
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby jamwal » 12 Dec 2012 17:44


ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5246
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ShauryaT » 12 Dec 2012 19:52

sarabpal.s wrote:This ^^ indeed a good thinking Evan if they put it on Tata truck as they shown in Defexpo may reduce the cost, also wheeled one has certain advantage over tracked maintenance cost wise.
We need to convert ALL our infantry to such type of a wheeled mobile vehicle with enhanced fire power and reasonable protection with ability to fire ATGM and some AAM for protection against heavier and faster opposing assets. It is a numbers game. Presuming the wheeled versions will be less than 15 tons, so they are heli transportable.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Surya » 12 Dec 2012 20:20

Aha Shaurya

Rohit and I have been crying for that. we are still a truck mobile army :(

now if we can get you to throw away your Siachen thoughts - we have some hope for you :)

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby D Roy » 12 Dec 2012 21:25

The Chinese have the same lament btw.

So much so that the new PRC head actually spoke about "mechanization" while taking over.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby shiv » 12 Dec 2012 21:33

Singha wrote:http://www.flickr.com/photos/47686239@N03/4369483629/in/photostream/

what do people think of this OFB 105mm gun turret on BMP2 chassis as a means of cheap support to infantry divs and mountain formations.

As long as it works, is reliable, and can be maintained in the field I would not complain that it is not pretty.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 12 Dec 2012 22:15

Singha wrote:http://www.flickr.com/photos/47686239@N03/4369483629/in/photostream/

what do people think of this OFB 105mm gun turret on BMP2 chassis as a means of cheap support to infantry divs and mountain formations.

any 155mm SP gun will be big and expensive. there is a niche for 105mm guns, and its new gen shells are claimed to have 25km range and pack a good bite.


So, its back again in discussion... :P

- To begin with, IA does not want 105 mm caliber. And that process will not start with en mass induction of 155/52 Cal guns but was begun in early to mid-90s when IA bought 130 mm guns at dirt cheap prices in their high hundreds. As far as I have been able to fathom, Medium to Field Regiment ratio is 1:1.5 - a big change from 1:3 in 80s and earlier when each Division Arty Bde had 3 x Field Regiments and 1 x Medium Regiment.

- Infantry Divisions don't need tracked SP Arty - they will do fine with towed and tracked ones, if SPH is required.

- There is no need to add to potpourri of calibers and guns types to the existing brew.

- SPH-Tracked are required for mechanized columns...when the army could manage, it equipped its armored divisions (and (I) armored bdes) with Medium Regiment.

- As for mountain formations, well, they need something of the type of M777 or even an advanced 105mm mountain gun - something which can be stripped if required and with high angle of fire. This gun will be limited to road heads and positions just off them.

- As I explained in my blog, IA is looking to deploy artillery for "maneuver by fire" role...that is, the fire assault delivered itself achieves superiority (by DESTROYING objectives) for self w/o troops coming into contact...this calls for guns which can hit farthest and with heaviest shell.

- This gun will be an anomaly in the current and planned set-up.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 12 Dec 2012 22:23

Surya wrote:Aha Shaurya

Rohit and I have been crying for that. we are still a truck mobile army :(

now if we can get you to throw away your Siachen thoughts - we have some hope for you :)


Aiyyooo...not this topic please...I might just tear me cloths off and go insane.... :evil: :cry: :x

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby D Roy » 12 Dec 2012 23:12

That 105mm SPH will do nicely in the export market.

Do remember

Our export list includes small arms & ammunition, mortars & ammunition, light field gun & ammunition, demolition stores, passive night sights and mine protected vehicles, brake parachutes etc. Our strength lies in the medium and high calibre ammunitions.

In many parts of the world, there is a need for the 84 mm mortar & 105 mm gun system. Considering the fact that we have variants of 105 mm gun including vehicle mounted one, OFB would be able to supply the same, once Indian Army completely switches over to the high Calibre ones. We have been exploring avenues for long term partnerships for exports with some South East Asian countries.


http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/tod ... 494614.ece

andy B
BRFite
Posts: 1619
Joined: 05 Jun 2008 11:03
Location: Gora Paki

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby andy B » 12 Dec 2012 23:17

rohitvats wrote:
Surya wrote:Aha Shaurya

Rohit and I have been crying for that. we are still a truck mobile army :(

now if we can get you to throw away your Siachen thoughts - we have some hope for you :)


Aiyyooo...not this topic please...I might just tear me cloths off and go insane.... :evil: :cry: :x


Joo know how they say a pic is worth a hazaar words onlee! :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

Image

Bala Vignesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2017
Joined: 30 Apr 2009 02:02
Location: Standing at the edge of the cliff
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Bala Vignesh » 12 Dec 2012 23:51

sarabpal.s wrote:[
Bala ji your-truly is also there :wink:

Oh sorrry, bhaaji.. Must have misread the post..

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby D Roy » 13 Dec 2012 00:07

Meanwhile,

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city ... 577077.cms
Though surprised by the sudden launch of home grown howitzer developed by Tata power strategic electronics division, the weapon development composite team at the Gun Carriage Factory (GCF), credited with manufacturing the first swadeshi bofors, derives solace from the fact that the new product will offer them little competition.

The two guns are quite dissimilar, general manager and head of the WDCT S P Yadav told TOI. The weapon showcased by Tata SED is 155/52 mm howitzer carried by eight-wheeled Tata truck. As against the vehicle mounted variety, our produce is what is technically classified as a toed gun.

So unlike misgivings in certain quarters Tata does not pose any threat to us. In fact the new range, he said, would give Indian army a vast choice and is a happy development."

Tata's launch, according to sources, had led to a major upheaval in the GCF where an expert team of 125 personnel had been working round the clock for last two years to come up with a technically superior and upgraded version of their Swedish counterpart.

The project was fast tracked at the behest of the defense ministry and A K Anthony had come down to personally monitor its progress four months ago. So the successful foray by a rival did not sound particularly encouraging, admitted a senior team member. Posturing by the workers union did not help matters, he said. In fact, the union leaders went to the extent of imputing a conspiracy to shut down GCF- one of the oldest defense installations in the country- and prepared to strike work.

The GM lays all these doubts to rest. We have brought out two prototypes and they are undergoing filed trials he said.

The first trial was held on November 30 at the central proof establishment (CPE) Itarsi and the next is slated for third week of this month when we transport the gun to PXE Balasore before finally handing it over to Indian Army.

The timing by Tata SED, he remarked, was a bit intriguing, "because it coincides with our launch and has contributed to some unnecessary confusion". Sure that 155/45 caliber boomer which can strike an object within the range of 40 kilometers, would give all national and international competitors a run for their money, Yadav said, "GCF, don't forget, has 109 years of experience in artillery manufacturing and others including Tata are just entering the field.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Surya » 13 Dec 2012 00:50

Oh andyb you evil fella

BTW the Boxer is apparently getting a lot of interest including supposedly the Russian :mrgreen:

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2659
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Prem Kumar » 13 Dec 2012 02:43

rohitvats wrote: - To begin with, IA does not want 105 mm caliber. And that process will not start with en mass induction of 155/52 Cal guns but was begun in early to mid-90s when IA bought 130 mm guns at dirt cheap prices in their high hundreds. As far as I have been able to fathom, Medium to Field Regiment ratio is 1:1.5 - a big change from 1:3 in 80s and earlier when each Division Arty Bde had 3 x Field Regiments and 1 x Medium Regiment.


Rohit: I am a newbie when it comes to Orbat, but was intrigued by the 105 mm caliber. If you check out Singha's link, you will see that the main purpose of the gun seems to be in an anti-tank rather than an artillery role. Its armament confirms this - APDS, HEAT, HESH etc. The question then becomes: if it can be used in a swing role - direct anti-tank fire or as artillery, doesnt it lend versatility to our mechanized divisions, especially considering its lower weight?

This is a versatility that neither the 155 mm or 130 mm Howitzers provide.

JMT and all that

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8103
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby nachiket » 13 Dec 2012 03:23

Prem Kumar wrote:Rohit: I am a newbie when it comes to Orbat, but was intrigued by the 105 mm caliber. If you check out Singha's link, you will see that the main purpose of the gun seems to be in an anti-tank rather than an artillery role. Its armament confirms this - APDS, HEAT, HESH etc. The question then becomes: if it can be used in a swing role - direct anti-tank fire or as artillery, doesnt it lend versatility to our mechanized divisions, especially considering its lower weight?

That could be because the gun is a copy of the Centurion's old L7 rifled gun. What you are proposing is a WW2 style Tank Destroyer. I don't know how much of use that dated concept will be in today's wars. The IA will be better off buying lots of NAMICA's to be used in the Tank Destroyer role along with flooding the infantry with man-portable ATGMs. A BMP with a 105mm gun will be outranged, outgunned and unprotected against a tank carrying a modern 125mm gun. It will never work. Since it has very little armor, it has to engage the tanks at a range greater than that of the tank's own weapons as far as possible.

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2659
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Prem Kumar » 13 Dec 2012 03:47

Nachiket: I am not guessing that it could be used for an anti-tank role. It actually says that in the brochure - bullet point #3

Agreed that its not a match for a modern tank. I am not talking frontal battles, but sneak attacks.

Shrinivasan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Location: Gateway Arch
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Shrinivasan » 13 Dec 2012 07:54

Nachiket, the Range of an 105mm field gun is way more than the range of the 125mm main gun of an MBT... Even Arjun's gun's range doesn't measure up... also I would think a Arty shell would pack more explosive power than a Tank Shell. JMT.
if this 105mm SP gun can tag along with the BMPs of the IA Mechanized formation, they can lay a curtain of fire at a good range... these 105mm beauties will only supplement the biggies.

Shrinivasan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Location: Gateway Arch
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Shrinivasan » 13 Dec 2012 07:57

Rohit, IA operates a large # of 105mm field guns in its light Arty regiments... why are you then saying IA would not agree for an 105mm SPH.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8103
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby nachiket » 13 Dec 2012 09:07

Shrinivasan wrote:Nachiket, the Range of an 105mm field gun is way more than the range of the 125mm main gun of an MBT... Even Arjun's gun's range doesn't measure up... also I would think a Arty shell would pack more explosive power than a Tank Shell. JMT.

Against tanks it would have to be used for direct fire, no? It can't hit a moving target 20km away. Or even a stationary target which cannot be seen.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 13 Dec 2012 10:03

D Roy wrote:<SNIP>So the successful foray by a rival did not sound particularly encouraging, admitted a senior team member. Posturing by the workers union did not help matters, he said. In fact, the union leaders went to the extent of imputing a conspiracy to shut down GCF- one of the oldest defense installations in the country- and prepared to strike work.

<SNIP>

The timing by Tata SED, he remarked, was a bit intriguing, "because it coincides with our launch and has contributed to some unnecessary confusion". Sure that 155/45 caliber boomer which can strike an object within the range of 40 kilometers, would give all national and international competitors a run for their money, Yadav said, "GCF, don't forget, has 109 years of experience in artillery manufacturing and others including Tata are just entering the field.


- If there ever was a glaring example of the chronic issues with OFB, the example is right here in front of you. So, GCF factory Worker's Union threatened to go on strike because TATA SED came out with a mounted howitzer? Reminds me of IA being forced to buy a rejected Milan-2T produced by BDL after 'protestations' from BDL workers/staff. So, is the procurement and arming cycle of Services will now be held hostage to whims and fancies of the workers? Just imagine the reaction when Bharat Forge comes out with its own 155/52 Cal Towed Gun... :evil:

- And 155/45 is going to set the world on fire? Which world are we talking about here? Let them first fill the order book of the army and get their QC in order before talking big and then falling flat on their face.

- And what exactly has GCF done in 109 years of its existence to warrant such bravado? Not much if you go by what has rolled out of their factory.

- Coming to 155/45 Gun from GCF - how does this fit into the FRAP and goal for standardization on 155/52 Cal? Will the IA buy these guns as interim measure - say for around 20 odd regiments - and wait for approval to purchase guns from Indian private sector/foreign vendors in 155/52 Cal category?

- As it is, foreign vendors have tied up with Indian companies in the mounted gun category (like TATA SED)...the towed gun segment is yet to see any domestic participation by way of JV. Something on TATA SED lines in this category may help to expedite the process of induction of these guns.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 13 Dec 2012 10:06

Prem Kumar wrote:<SNIP> Rohit: I am a newbie when it comes to Orbat, but was intrigued by the 105 mm caliber. If you check out Singha's link, you will see that the main purpose of the gun seems to be in an anti-tank rather than an artillery role. Its armament confirms this - APDS, HEAT, HESH etc. The question then becomes: if it can be used in a swing role - direct anti-tank fire or as artillery, doesnt it lend versatility to our mechanized divisions, especially considering its lower weight?

This is a versatility that neither the 155 mm or 130 mm Howitzers provide.

JMT and all that


PK - the days of artillery firing over open range in anti-tank role are long gone. ATGM of the variety available today are much better at doing this. Secondly, if a point comes where your SP Arty has to take on anti-tank role, then something very seriously has gone wrong to permit enemy armor to reach your rear areas - where your artillery is. You don't buy SPH because of their anti-tank capability.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 13 Dec 2012 10:10

Shrinivasan wrote:Rohit, IA operates a large # of 105mm field guns in its light Arty regiments... why are you then saying IA would not agree for an 105mm SPH.


First - Artillery Regiments equipped with 105mm guns are called Field Regiments and not Light Regiments. Light Regiments are equipped with 120mm Mortars.

Second - The Field Regiments equipped with 105mm guns are capable of doing their job w/o having to be mounted on tracked platform. There is no need to go on re-equipment spree just because there is something available - as its, 105mm caliber is out on its way.

Third - I've stated this before, IA does not equip arty bdes of mechanized troops with 105mm caliber; they are all Medium Regiments - either M-46 or Bofors.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 32 guests