Artillery: News & Discussion

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 01 Dec 2016 14:54

Manish_P wrote: The Bofors 155 (at about 6kph, 12 tonnes) and the truck mounted Caesar(about 50-100 kph depending on terrain, 18 tonnes) are both mobile

I think this is less about keeping up with a fast advance and more about transportability. The Bofors 6 kmph is to change its position to avoid counter battery fire - for which 6 kmph is fine. But to move it 20 km it has to be towed by a truck

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 01 Dec 2016 15:14

^ Exactly Doc Ji

Er so then what is the answer to the question by Khalsa Ji - Why is Bofors 155 better or worse than a CAESAR self propelled artillery piece

It seems to me that (purely in terms of own mobility) the Caesar SPG can move a few hundred kms compared to the Bofors 155 few kms

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 01 Dec 2016 15:20

Manish_P wrote:^ Exactly Doc Ji

Er so then what is the answer to the question by Khalsa Ji - Why is Bofors 155 better or worse than a CAESAR self propelled artillery piece

It seems to me that (purely in terms of own mobility) the Caesar SPG can move a few hundred kms compared to the Bofors 155 few kms

I'm guessing you don't need to spare a truck for every artillery piece - the truck comes with the weapon. That aside - I don't know how well Bofors "travels" on a narrow mountain road while being towed. Intuitively it would seem that a towed load is more likely to jump off the road

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 01 Dec 2016 15:29

^ Good point

Another thought, which occured to me only because i saw a couple of broken down trucks on the highway to my workplace this morning.., what if the truck breaks down (engine trouble, transmission failure, axle shearing whatever)...Military trucks are more rugged no doubt but not as rugged as the guns themselves.

In this situation wouldn't the the towed artillery like bofors 155 have an advantage as the gun could be hitched to a backup truck more quickly. In the case of the truck mounted artillery like the Caesar, the truck has to be repaired and made mobile else the gun ain't going anywhere.

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 01 Dec 2016 15:49

There is the question of cost.

Towed would be cheaper than SP.

Also deployment is again a factor of the adversary being faced and the threat perception.

Plus also logistics.

Typical sparty would be further up than towed.

You have to think of deployment in combined arms terms. I would say armour, sparty and mechinf form the pointy end of the spear...

manjgu · Post by **manjgu** » 01 Dec 2016 16:04

boss ... faster mobility of self propelled artillery allows it to be shifted from one location to another to meet emerging threats...not only in terms of being able to keep pace with moving columns... deployment of SP artillery is also faster than towed. Towed artillery needs to be unlimbered .. fired and then limbered again..ie attached to the thing pulling it. the propulsion system of Bofors was to give it some movement enegy for shoot / scoot without limbering it again. Sp arty can be brought into action quicker. a modern army needs all kinds of arty.... Towed arty can be airlifted to difficult places..not so easy with Sp arty. all things break down in war..and there are plans to repair them.

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 01 Dec 2016 16:28

@ ks_sachin.

Yes. Towed is usually cheaper than SP. My obervations were more from the point of view of mobility.

And even mobililty has a lot of variables. For that would depend on the terrain - flat, deserts, mountain, marshy, urban - which leads to questions like tracked or wheeled..

For our country, given our size and our varied terrains, there is very very little chance of 'one type fits all'. We need different types.

And it applies to guns, tanks, aircrafts (as the good doc mentioned in the Single Engine Aircraft or IAF thread) et all.

@ Manjgu

'a modern army needs all kinds of arty'.

Agree totally. That's the answer. One type being better than the other depends a lot on the situation and the requirement.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 01 Dec 2016 16:44

Guns themselves will ou tlast the trucks by at least 20 years.

I would say neither is better than the other, both have their own niches. IA with diverse requirements needs towed, truck mounted, aux power, tracked and mule powered arty!

Bart S · Post by **Bart S** » 01 Dec 2016 17:20

One pooch on the light howitzers: Does 'light' also mean lower barrel life or lower capability for sustained fire?

I wonder how/whether they would stand up to a Kargil war like scenario where the Bofors proved themselves by enduring high intensity usage round the clock.

manjgu · Post by **manjgu** » 01 Dec 2016 17:22

another aspect is crew protection in case of SP arty as compared to towed.

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 01 Dec 2016 17:34

manjgu wrote:boss ... faster mobility of self propelled artillery allows it to be shifted from one location to another to meet emerging threats...not only in terms of being able to keep pace with moving columns... deployment of SP artillery is also faster than towed. Towed artillery needs to be unlimbered .. fired and then limbered again..ie attached to the thing pulling it. the propulsion system of Bofors was to give it some movement enegy for shoot / scoot without limbering it again. Sp arty can be brought into action quicker. a modern army needs all kinds of arty.... Towed arty can be airlifted to difficult places..not so easy with Sp arty. all things break down in war..and there are plans to repair them.

I know that boss. i was not comparing the two i was saying both have their place....see deployment of assets and you will get an idea of how they will be used..

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 01 Dec 2016 17:36

But some TOE in some areas of Sikkim I found quite surprising....

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 01 Dec 2016 20:16

Bart S wrote:One pooch on the light howitzers: Does 'light' also mean lower barrel life or lower capability for sustained fire?

I wonder how/whether they would stand up to a Kargil war like scenario where the Bofors proved themselves by enduring high intensity usage round the clock.

a) Barrel life - Not necessarily. A lot depends on the type (rifled, smooth bored), the material of the barrel, the protective coatings used and the type and quantity of rounds fired (erosion of barrel due to chemical reactions with the propellant gases is the most common cause of barrel degradation. Different types of rounds could have different compositions of propellants released)

b) Sustained fire - Again not necessarily a factor at the start of life (other factors also come into play) but yes, difference in barrel degradation over time does have effect on sustained fire capacities even among the same model

Some info at this link

Note - It is a pdf document

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 01 Dec 2016 20:17

Bart S wrote:One pooch on the light howitzers: Does 'light' also mean lower barrel life or lower capability for sustained fire?

I wonder how/whether they would stand up to a Kargil war like scenario where the Bofors proved themselves by enduring high intensity usage round the clock.

Lite is Tite - I mean Titanium. that's why it's light. It will last just as long

Bart S · Post by **Bart S** » 02 Dec 2016 01:56

Manish_P and Shiv saars,

Thanks for the explanation.

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 02 Dec 2016 05:27

Shiv and Manish.
Thanks a ton for the responses. Some of my questions have been answered and some linger on.

I shall take the time to get more specific and create focus areas in the next few days and ask more of you all.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 02 Dec 2016 07:45

Manish_P wrote:^ Good point

Another thought, which occured to me only because i saw a couple of broken down trucks on the highway to my workplace this morning.., what if the truck breaks down (engine trouble, transmission failure, axle shearing whatever)...Military trucks are more rugged no doubt but not as rugged as the guns themselves.

In this situation wouldn't the the towed artillery like bofors 155 have an advantage as the gun could be hitched to a backup truck more quickly. In the case of the truck mounted artillery like the Caesar, the truck has to be repaired and made mobile else the gun ain't going anywhere.

Yes - in fact this is why self propelled artillery - even if it can move at 100 kmph is not actually going to be moving any faster than a mountain road or convoy can go.. Broken down trucks can be pushed off the side of the road, but the artillery piece is a bit more precious.

When an army wants artillery that moves they use tanks. Artillery by definition is something that sits in one place and powders the enemy. The need for some movement is to avoid counter battery fire and of course transport.

I suspect that self propelled artillery can move more easily from inland India to the border regions. But once in position they are not going to be scurrying about like tanks

the other thing to remember is that artillery requires exact location of the artillery along with the exact location of the target. That means that if you are in charge of an artillery piece you can't rush here and there, raise the barrel and shoot into the atmosphere. You need your location and the location of the target, the range and the altitude and weather conditions. Typically there is a forward observation post, or an AOP aircraft or helicopter or UAV that surveys the target area and guides the artillery. GPS and accurate positioning becomes vital when the target is in the same place, but the artillery has to move 500 meters after every 2-3 rounds. So by nature artillery is not something that rushes forward. That is why it is called artillery, The stuff that rushes forward is called cavalry - formerly horses, now tanks

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 03 Dec 2016 02:43

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vpd06MBkFTg
These guns look solid.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 03 Dec 2016 13:59

Overview of 155mm gun acquisition. Comments and corrections welcome:

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 03 Dec 2016 15:05

^^ Less than 200 Bofors are believed to be in service now.

Commitment of 400+ for atags

rakall · Post by **rakall** » 05 Dec 2016 17:38

Aditya G wrote:Overview of 155mm gun acquisition. Comments and corrections welcome:

I don't understand why you have Dhanush-2 with 155mm*52cal !!

There is only one Dhanush.. 155mm*45cal. The orders for it are 114+300 = 114 initial order with option for 300more.

The only 155mm*52cal Towed Arty from DPSUs will be ATAGS as you have rightly included.
yeah.. lets see if Bharat-52 get a look in.. but it looks like BharatForge might just become a component supplier for ATAGS manufacturing while OFB will remain lead integrator..

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 05 Dec 2016 19:08

^^ Dhanush 2 is being pursued actively by ofb.

ashishvikas · Post by **ashishvikas** » 05 Dec 2016 19:15

Dhanush 2 will be 155mm/52 caliber with 42 km range.

'Work on version 2 of the Dhanush is already in progress. It is going to be an upgraded version from the current 155mm/45 caliber to 155mm/52 caliber. This is a parallel program that the OFB has undertaken on its own and will compete with the Advanced Towed Artillery System which is a 155mm/52 caliber howitzer which is being developed by India’s Defence Research and Development Organization (DRDO) in association with Indian private sector companies."

http://swarajyamag.com/politics/finally ... s-dhanush/

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 05 Dec 2016 23:29

Aditya G wrote:Overview of 155mm gun acquisition. Comments and corrections welcome:

Arjun-Catapult? What became of it?

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 06 Dec 2016 00:03

Viv: Like Salman Khan and Aishwariya Rai's relationship. Nothing.

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 06 Dec 2016 00:48

Viv S wrote:
Aditya G wrote:Overview of 155mm gun acquisition. Comments and corrections welcome:
Arjun-Catapult? What became of it?

I am sure two regiments worth are in service.
Correction
Just one regiment

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 06 Dec 2016 00:55

Khalsa: Source?

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 06 Dec 2016 01:05

Viv S wrote:
Aditya G wrote:Overview of 155mm gun acquisition. Comments and corrections welcome:
Arjun-Catapult? What became of it?

Arjun catapult is a 130 mm system.

Acquisition is underway. Replaces the existing 105mm catapult.

Shortly going to post the revised table.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 06 Dec 2016 01:06

Aditya: Has even one been inducted to form a regiment?

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 06 Dec 2016 01:28

Revised summary - there is a lot of half facts here and there so making up the accurate picture is quite challenging;

Competition underway under 'Pipeline' tenders;

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 06 Dec 2016 01:30

Rakesh wrote:Aditya: Has even one been inducted to form a regiment?

I am assuming that it has/will replace the existing catapult regiments.

ashishvikas · Post by **ashishvikas** » 06 Dec 2016 01:53

Aditya G wrote:Revised summary - there is a lot of half facts here and there so making up the accurate picture is quite challenging;

Competition underway under 'Pipeline' tenders;

Sir, please pass on this to RM, he will need it

In his recent interview, RM mentioned SP Tracked gun is in "Extremely Final phase of financial approval" and may be by this Dec end contract can be signed.

Also, follow on orders of light towed can be purchased from Indian company in place of import/M777

Listen from 17:15 minutes of this interview
https://youtu.be/gEZkbO7QREU

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 06 Dec 2016 01:54

Older Catapult guns were also 130mm but on a Vijayanta chassis. 105mm caliber was on Abbot SP guns.

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 06 Dec 2016 05:05

Rakesh wrote:Khalsa: Source?

Saar.... I went back and checked and I got this wrong.
There is a budget approval to purchase 46 but this has never been exercised (executed).

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 06 Dec 2016 06:11

Finally M777 howitzers through FMS: Lt Gen Prakash Katoch

ashishvikas · Post by **ashishvikas** » 06 Dec 2016 11:55

Saurav on twitter says:
The aim is to enhance OFB's Dhanush 155 mm howitzer production rate to 60 per year, not just to 36.

Rishi Verma · Post by **Rishi Verma** » 06 Dec 2016 12:59

Too bad the Army has only ordered 116 Dhanush given the improvements. DRDO 155/52 ATGS seems like another science project with no set completion date.

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 06 Dec 2016 17:27

Viv S wrote:
Aditya G wrote:Overview of 155mm gun acquisition. Comments and corrections welcome:
Arjun-Catapult? What became of it?

Abandoned.

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 06 Dec 2016 17:29

Rishi Verma wrote:Too bad the Army has only ordered 116 Dhanush given the improvements. DRDO 155/52 ATGS seems like another science project with no set completion date.

ATAGS trials start early next year. If things go right, possible induction from 2020.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 07 Dec 2016 20:24

And I suppose the deal to import/screwdriver 800 mounted and 1000+ towed artillery will be finally signed, just before Dhanush-52, ATAGS and Bharat Forge 52 are ready to be inducted after jumping through n hoops.