Artillery: News & Discussion

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1216
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Thakur_B » 02 Jan 2018 14:11

Akshay Kapoor wrote:
Quiz - not arty but we used tanks in a very innovative way that had never been done before to take out Pak mortars/guns which were sighted in caves in one of our wars with Pak. This aupported a very important victory with big strategic consequences. Which action am I talking about.


Is there any successful use of Tanks in mountain / hilly terrain since operation duck? I believe any half decent infantry with cheap wire guided ATGMs will be able to make minced meat of any armoured column in the mountains today.

manjgu
BRFite
Posts: 1568
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby manjgu » 02 Jan 2018 15:45

akshay bhai... the same rule applies..if in a ambush , u r saving ur ass then its defensive...if u punishing someones ass its offence. i mean this whole offence defence business is stupid..weapon is to kill ur enemy.

manjgu
BRFite
Posts: 1568
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby manjgu » 02 Jan 2018 15:49

thakur bhai..no armoured column in mountains..but tanks used effectively as pill boxes on the LOC... now is that offensive/defensive? :eek:

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1436
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Manish_P » 02 Jan 2018 16:01

^ Both. They are mightly offending Pakistan while defending India's LOC :mrgreen:

BTW Tanks as pillboxes.. are they not-too-mobile tanks or are they not-too-stationary pillboxes ? :P

Akshay Kapoor
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1627
Joined: 03 May 2011 11:15

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Akshay Kapoor » 02 Jan 2018 16:47

manjgu wrote:akshay bhai... the same rule applies..if in a ambush , u r saving ur ass then its defensive...if u punishing someones ass its offence. i mean this whole offence defence business is stupid..weapon is to kill ur enemy.


I agree. Weapons are not inherently offensive or defensive. Though tactics are are another thing. I'm glad this point has been well made.

Akshay Kapoor
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1627
Joined: 03 May 2011 11:15

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Akshay Kapoor » 02 Jan 2018 16:50

tsarkar wrote:^^ Easy. You need mountains to build caves. The only tank action in the mountains was Zoji La (Chusul was a plateau).

And those two engagements made IA a firm believer of light/medium tanks :D


Sir forgot to ask you. Did you know the answer immediately or did you narrow it down to Chusul and Zozjila and then use the above logic.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2478
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby tsarkar » 02 Jan 2018 22:38

Akshay Kapoor wrote:
tsarkar wrote:^^ Easy. You need mountains to build caves. The only tank action in the mountains was Zoji La (Chusul was a plateau).

And those two engagements made IA a firm believer of light/medium tanks :D


Sir forgot to ask you. Did you know the answer immediately or did you narrow it down to Chusul and Zozjila and then use the above logic.

Akshay, I'm an avid student of strategy for decades in my spare time. Before Internet, I was the biggest borrower of books from the Command Library, even during Sri Lanka. History gives a lot of insight and has proven useful in my career. You learn from other's successes and avoid their failures.

So yes, I knew about Zoji La, but added the logical reasoning as well :)

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2478
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby tsarkar » 02 Jan 2018 22:54

Thakur_B wrote:Is there any successful use of Tanks in mountain / hilly terrain since operation duck? I believe any half decent infantry with cheap wire guided ATGMs will be able to make minced meat of any armoured column in the mountains today.

Yes, Chushul

More recently Afghanistan https://www.stripes.com/news/afghan-arm ... e-1.294062

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1225
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby sudeepj » 02 Jan 2018 23:45

There is a kind of fascination of 'ATGMS' in popular imagination. Its a David vs Goliath story so it appeals to our deepest internal narratives. However, ATGMS are inherently defensive weapons. Tanks will probe and probe and appear in mass numbers at a spot where you will not have enough ATGM teams. Further, active armor advances have made most ATGMs vulnerable. Active Armor is available with almost all major power blocks today, Americans, Russians, Chinese, Israelis for some free lance stuff..

Just how will an ATGM kill a tank with active armor that blows up the missile a few meters in front of the vehicle? Once again, the only way to kill tanks to going to become other tanks or Aircraft. The first attacking force with active armor is going to be wildly successful and tactics/strategy will need to go back to the days when infantry was nearly defenseless against tanks.

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2200
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby abhik » 03 Jan 2018 00:29

A little OT but Armor vs Anti Armor (ATGM) developments will always be a cat mouse game, I'm sure ways to defeat active armor are being researched into right as we speak (as should we). I would speculate that the next gen of ATGMs might carry radar jammers, decoys, may be even chaff, have the ability to home in on any laser (or light) dazzler etc.

Akshay Kapoor
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1627
Joined: 03 May 2011 11:15

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Akshay Kapoor » 03 Jan 2018 11:14

tsarkar wrote:
Akshay Kapoor wrote:
Sir forgot to ask you. Did you know the answer immediately or did you narrow it down to Chusul and Zozjila and then use the above logic.

Akshay, I'm an avid student of strategy for decades in my spare time. Before Internet, I was the biggest borrower of books from the Command Library, even during Sri Lanka. History gives a lot of insight and has proven useful in my career. You learn from other's successes and avoid their failures.

So yes, I knew about Zoji La, but added the logical reasoning as well :)


Not everyone has this thirst to learn about different arms of their own service forget another service ! Sign of a true professional. Do read Gen VS Raghavan's Infantry in India. And Op Kartikeya by Airavat Singh.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 62926
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 03 Jan 2018 12:24

imo human powered ATGMs are on way out. the proper armies will field SFW weapons enmasse delivered by artillery, 120mm mortars, air or MLRS to overwhelm any active or passive defence from the top aspects. infantry might still carry them as a last tool of defence but mainly will rely on networked fires from artillery units covering their grid.

given enough artillery(protected by SAMs), life is almost impossible for tanks when tracked by airborne GMTI sensors in any weather. if they mass for the attack, they will get hit by increasingly smarter top attack weapons and blocked by artillery and air delivered mines. if they scatter they lose their potency. there is no limit to how much artillery you unleash downrange, but nature of roads and bridges limits the volume and weight of tanks to below 65tons. unless new materials tech is applied, like turbine blades moved from titanium to some exotic composite material, the MBT is a evolutionary dead end like a mainframe computer.

perhaps masses of lightly protected but fast and heavily armed wheeled and tracked unmanned vehicles is the next gen. intelligent sharp shape shifting creatures like those AI bikes in terminators. all the tech is already there now.

VKumar
BRFite
Posts: 424
Joined: 15 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Mumbai,India

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby VKumar » 03 Jan 2018 13:55

Future is machines Vs machines. Then end of warfare because of MAD considerations. At least between developed nations.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4087
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby srai » 03 Jan 2018 14:43

VKumar wrote:Future is machines Vs machines. Then end of warfare because of MAD considerations. At least between developed nations.

Judgement Day is fast approaching ...

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 62926
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 03 Jan 2018 22:22

another RMA i see is adaptation of the SA15 tor type vehicle for modular packs of LR helina type ATGMs. multiple 'batteries' of such dumb vehicles could be given targets by command/spotter vehicles or UAVs. these packs could be towed on wheeled trailers also.

only in impassable mountains a man portable ATGM could find use.

Akshay Kapoor
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1627
Joined: 03 May 2011 11:15

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Akshay Kapoor » 03 Jan 2018 23:05

For serious students of how infantry can use Missiles against not only tanks but against defences like bunkers and Sangars one only needs to look at recent Indian army operations including Kargil. I also strongly recommend reading Infantry in India by Gen VS Raghavan to see how infantry tactics have evolved and are evolving using missiles.

For Sci fi fans like some posts above I see BR now has a Sci fi thread !!

Back to arty pls.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2629
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby kit » 03 Jan 2018 23:31

VKumar wrote:Future is machines Vs machines. Then end of warfare because of MAD considerations. At least between developed nations.


one step beyond .. it will be AI vs AI .. "thinking" missile swarms , self healing armour , active camouflage , active stealth , nano " active" composites with a myriad applications , battlefield real time AI , active threat perception ... adaptable engines , multi sensor missiles /torpedoes ., not to mention AI controlled ELINT .. sci fi ..no ..reality quite so

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1225
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby sudeepj » 04 Jan 2018 00:54

Even for air delivered 'Sensor Fused' type weapons, a fairly simple addition of ERA tiles to the top of current gen. tanks makes them survivable platforms again. Just as the battle of Sinai proved that tanks had to operate under SAM cover, when going against an adversary with arty fired sensor fused projectiles, tanks will have to move with mobile counter battery fire. The reinvention of the tank is already underway with the Russians coming up with their Armata, I suppose the next gen. Western tanks will have a two man crew (driver and WSO) and will be heavily automated and networked.

Bottom line is, in the next war between competent armies, the infantry soldier firing ATGMs will again have to relive the experience of the Americans on the Korean peninsula, they will fire their ATGMs and the damn tanks will continue rolling.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15468
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 04 Jan 2018 01:21

Not necessarily. ATGMs will keep pace.

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/ ... ility.html

The launcher engages the targets automatically and can perform salvo firing at two targets simultaneously, increasing its rate of fire and decreasing the number of vehicles needed for a mission. The two-missile salvo is intended to either defeat active protection systems or to ensure a single tank’s destruction in the absence of an active protection system.

Or:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPG-30

The RPG-30 was unveiled in 2008 by the State Research and Production Enterprise, Bazalt, as a modern anti-tank grenade launcher designed to address the challenge of reactive armor and active protection systems (APS) on tanks.[1] Active protection systems such as ARENA-E, Drozd and Trophy defeat anti-armor munitions by destroying them before they reach their target. The RPG-30 is an intended response to the introduction of these systems. The RPG-30 cleared its testing program and entered service in 2012–2013 and was immediately put on the Pentagon’s list of “asymmetrical threats to the US armed forces.”.[2][3][4]

The RPG-30 was unveiled in 2008 by the State Research and Production Enterprise, Bazalt, as a modern anti-tank grenade launcher designed to address the challenge of reactive armor and active protection systems (APS) on tanks.[1] Active protection systems such as ARENA-E, Drozd and Trophy defeat anti-armor munitions by destroying them before they reach their target. The RPG-30 is an intended response to the introduction of these systems. The RPG-30 cleared its testing program and entered service in 2012–2013 and was immediately put on the Pentagon’s list of “asymmetrical threats to the US armed forces.”.[2][3][4]

In 2012 Israel Defense reported that the Rafael military-industrial corporation has developed a defense system, "Trench Coat", against the RPG-30, to supplement the existing Trophy. It consists of a 360-degree radar that detects all threats and launches 17 projectiles, of which one should strike the incoming missile.[5]


And what if RPG-30s are salvo fired or even more sophisticated equivalents.

Its a cat and mouse game.

manjgu
BRFite
Posts: 1568
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby manjgu » 04 Jan 2018 11:37

how does long range AD cover provided by S 300/400 type systems affect tank battles given the short distances to be covered by Indian armour into Pakistan ?

VKumar
BRFite
Posts: 424
Joined: 15 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Mumbai,India

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby VKumar » 04 Jan 2018 11:39

IMHO Pakistan is heavily armed with ATGM and will not depend too much on CAS.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 62926
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 04 Jan 2018 12:02

the specs of the RPG30 make it completely useless against frontal aspect of even T72upg and its range only 200m. it is a RPG not a ATGM which is heavy enough as it is, without having to lug a precursor round.

The PG-30 is the main round of the RPG-30. The round is a 105 mm tandem shaped charge with a weight of 10.3 kg (22.7 lb) and has a range of 200 meters and a stated penetration capability in excess of 600 mm (24-in) of rolled homogeneous armor (RHA), 1,500 mm of reinforced concrete, 2,000 mm of brick and 3,700 mm of soil.

the kornet is 3x heavier, 3x the penetration and 25x the range.

I suppose hezbollah guerillas could use it at close range in the ravines and hills , but thats about it.

a wideband solution to active protective systems it is not.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15468
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 04 Jan 2018 13:08

Singha, you are missing the point.

Of course, the RPG is short ranged, its a RPG, the name says it all.

the specs of the RPG30 make it completely useless against frontal aspect of even T72upg and its range only 200m. it is a RPG not a ATGM which is heavy enough as it is, without having to lug a precursor round.


It has 600 mm penetration post ERA. I suspect it can take out many western tanks when hitting at the right spot - drivers hatch for instance!

For longer ranges you need missiles.

I posted two quick examples of how APS are being countered - 1) By Infantry Portable Weapons (i.e. Missiles) and 2) By Infantry weapons (eg RPGs).

The point is when deployed in large numbers (where infantry deployed weapons always score over tanks), in different conditions, APS systems can be overwhelmed and saturated. At most you made it more difficult than 1 ATGM per tank.

Here is an example. Tank with APS advancing in urban terrain - buildings etc, overlooking a tank column. Troops are behind the tank, because in the close confines of the street, the APS is dangerous to them.

Insurgents pop out of windows and fire some 3-4 RPGs and other rounds at the lead tank at the same area - can the tank APS take down every round in that sector? Especially if the RPGs themselves are advanced units with decoy rounds.

APS is useful, and its initial deployment can be game changing (same as SAMs in Vietnam then Yom Kippur) but countermeasures are fast advancing.

APS depends on radar guidance for instance. What prevents weapons manufacturers from launching chaff & flare payloads (you have an example in the DRDO thread about an anti-thermal, anti-laser) to blind the tanks sensors and then launch a salvo of ATGMs.

Same concept is there everywhere. Blind the sensors (even if momentarily), launch saturation attack. Its an age-old tactic which is deployed even today.

Even against S-3XX class systems, you will have the Khan deploy a wide array of jamming (of all kinds), launch decoys (max out the missiles) and then sneak in actual weapons in between.

With the relatively lower cost of ATGMs, they will be deployed en masse.

This does not mean we should not procure APS - just means it wont be a single shot silver bullet & heavy passive/active armor should still be used.

Akshay Kapoor
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1627
Joined: 03 May 2011 11:15

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Akshay Kapoor » 04 Jan 2018 14:35

Singha sir pls read up on Indian army infantry history and tactics and visualise use of rockets and missiles in different terrain and circumstances. Infantry and armour joint ops are very crucial reading. You will see our infantry often protects armour flanks and in fact that is essential in an armoured thrust in all armies. ATGMs are also used for destroying defendes and makes inf even more potent.

Pls pls do read Infantry in India by Gen Raghavan.

And may I again request all posters to return to arty discussion here. Armour vs ATGM technology is best suited to the armoured thread.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15468
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 05 Jan 2018 03:33

Interesting bit of information on Grad rocket dependency from Russia.

122mm GRAD BM 21 ER (01 Case). Ex-import deliveries for last contract of
quantity 15,000 signed in Aug 14 are in progress. DRDO has developed the rocket and
are in the process of production of the same indigenously


Also, Pinaka Mk2 Guided (or Pinaka Mk3) had successful tests last year.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-new ... ufFMN.html
http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease. ... lid=157988

Important point:
Trails of guided Pinaka Rocket were successfully conducted at Integrated Test Range (ITR) Balasore in two phases on 12th and 24th Jan 2017 with range of 65 km and 75 km, respectively. The guided version of Pinaka Rocket incorporates Inertial Navigation Systems (INS)/ Global Positioning System (GPS) for the mid-course guidance with accuracy of 60m to 80m at all ranges. In the recent trials conducted, the desired accuracy has been achieved.

Pinaka has been design and developed for induction into Army after successful User Trials. Two Regiments of Pinaka Unguided Version have already been inducted in Army. Current trials have been conducted for demonstrating the feasibility of the development of Guided Version of Pinaka Rocket using the same Launcher and Ammunition Configuration.


So if Pinaka 1 MBRL can be used to launch Pinaka 2, that is a very big thing

And then we had this news:
http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/com ... 650559.ece

So far 4 regiments of Pinaka are on order (with UPA delay of half a decade in clearing a 2nd order for 2 regiments) and now guided Pinaka has been demonstrated successfully.

IA now has a RFP out for 6 more regiments of Pinaka.
https://defenceupdate.in/indian-army-to ... h-systems/
https://sputniknews.com/asia/2017060910 ... et-launch/
http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/new ... 722264.ece

And notes:
Indian defense ministry had placed an order for two regiments i.e 36 systems last December. The Army intends to have 22 Pinaka regiments by 2026 including 12 regiments of Guided Pinaka. This is an advanced version of the Pinaka, wherein the firing range has been enhanced to 65+ km from the existing 38 km. India conducted two developmental tests of the 214-mm caliber Guided Pinaka earlier this year.


So, 4 regiments on order, 6 in procurement process, and 22 planned total, of which 12 will be guided Pinaka. This will be a windfall for indian industry.

And most positively, private sector is providing the propellant and motors.
https://www.investorwhiz.com/concalls/p ... ll-summary

Another recent test successfully conducted for Pinaka II which is an extended range guided rocket. This should translate into production but not definite timeline provided
The order will be shared between ordinance factory, Premier explosives ad another competitor
Company has provided 36 solid propellants till now, all used for tests. Order will be sizeable
Company is providing only solid propellants but is not the exclusive player


For entire missile:
Clarification on order from Ministry of Defense (MoD)_ When order is floated, a certain %age is reserved for Ordinance factory. But if Ordiance factory cannot supply in required time frame or cannot satisfy the quality, MoD is free to give the order to private players. Pinaka is reserved for Ordinance Factory. Pinaka II is available to private players


I hope Ordinance Factory is bypassed entirely for Pinaka and instead Pvt sector and BDL get the darn orders. If wishes were horses!

Solar is also building its plant:
http://www.financialexpress.com/industr ... 18/895488/

“Currently we are looking for missile assembling for ‘Pinaka’ rocket launcher. But any job related to rockets can be done and going forward missile integration as well,” Nuwal said, adding the transfer of technology agreement with the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) is already in place. “Once the construction is completed, we can then proceed for the assembling, subject to when the defence sector places orders,” he added.

SIIL’s facility in Nagpur manufactures HMX and HMX based compositions like Octol, Oma and Okfol for high explosive anti-tank ammunition and missiles like Akash, LR Sam, Invar and Konkur. It also manufactures propellants for BrahMos missile.


Along with ATAGS, we have serious firepower in the offing, if this Govt just starts handing out orders!! 55km range for ATAGS!
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-eGP39CxFC-o/ ... TAGS-1.jpg

ATAGS has already scored record ranges with ~25% more range than the existing 40 km Pinaka
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/i ... 693728.ece

Seriously, the IA should be asked to curtail some of the imported towed howitzer etc plans and move them to ATAGS!

ArjunPandit
BRFite
Posts: 1222
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ArjunPandit » 05 Jan 2018 03:57

OT but related,
Every time i read about the Pinaka acheiving success, I remember the pain of Germans in west Stalingrad, who were hammered day and night by Katyusha rockets. In the frigid russian winter, the sound of Katyusha made them wonder if it's their time to die for deutschland.

And then I smirk thinking about the pain that IA will be inflicting on these guys, seeking revenge for the needles they pricked us with. Hope we rain hell on these guys for all they have done keeping India down for last 70 years! Jai Ma Kali

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4087
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby srai » 05 Jan 2018 04:33

55km -> 65km -> 75km would be out of range of Pakistan's counter battery fire

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6210
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby nachiket » 05 Jan 2018 04:38

55km range is insane. We can shell the center of Lahore from inside Amritsar.

Bart S
BRFite
Posts: 1257
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:03

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Bart S » 05 Jan 2018 05:02

If something like the Hyper Velocity Projectile developed for the Railgun (that the US and BAE are trying to port to tube artillery) materializes, it could go up to around 80km, just about enough to shell the Islamabad from Poonch :twisted:

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15468
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 05 Jan 2018 05:40

With way DRDO is churning out stuff, I wouldn't be surprised if after BMD it takes up some CRAM program and what you guys are saying actually happens, with Indian cities shielded by defensive missiles & us happily plastering targets deep in TSP.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15468
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 05 Jan 2018 05:44

One of the first things Modi govt did after taking power was clear a $1Bn DRDO proposal to set up a seeker facility for Astra, strategic and other programs. I think seeker guided arty will also come about. Solid state items can presumably take much higher G-forces.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50197
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 05 Jan 2018 06:01

I think
- First priority is to move away from mechanical fuzes for artillery. This is being done by BEL new facility that is announced a few pages back for electronic fuzes. BEL already makes proximity fuzes for shells.
- Second priority is to develop guided fuzes like PGK that ARDE and its consortium are working on.
- Parallel or sequential project would be to develop a canted tail fin unit for inducing spin in mortars and combine with PGK. Even induced spin adds a lot to the effectiveness of mortars.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4087
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby srai » 13 Jan 2018 04:43

X-posting
srai wrote:Bofors 40mm 3P - All Target Round

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15468
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 13 Jan 2018 04:59

ramana wrote:I think
- First priority is to move away from mechanical fuzes for artillery. This is being done by BEL new facility that is announced a few pages back for electronic fuzes. BEL already makes proximity fuzes for shells.
- Second priority is to develop guided fuzes like PGK that ARDE and its consortium are working on.
- Parallel or sequential project would be to develop a canted tail fin unit for inducing spin in mortars and combine with PGK. Even induced spin adds a lot to the effectiveness of mortars.


Great catch Ramana, I had missed this, BEL facility at Pune.

Well elucidated, with tenders going to pvt sector away from ECIL, BEL etc, I think more tech will flow into India even if assembled/CKD stuff, helps in developing parallel source of supply.

As one gent from IIT working on processors told us in another discussion, build your systems first, then substitute later. As long we keep a focus on that and order decent amounts, not like Arjun forcing limited runs and imports onlee.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50197
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 13 Jan 2018 05:11

Is the BEL facility in Pune? I thought in Karnataka.


Look at the Bofors 3P Fuze.

It updates an old pre WWII gun system to take on new threats.

Once BEL masters electronic fuzes can update the OFB 40mm PreFragmented shell.


Look at that bunker. IA can make kheema of Paki bunkers on LOC.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15468
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 13 Jan 2018 08:08

R sir, here you go, comprehensive account of fuze requirement
http://www.defproac.com/?p=6219

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50197
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 13 Jan 2018 10:55

Thanks. Great summary. Lots of info to digest and how messed up we are.


So BEL fuze facility is tie-up with Reshef of Israel.

http://www.resheffuzes.com/index.aspx

ARDE did work on fuzes for HSLD and these were made by OFB. Somehow they were prone to mishaps and OFB removed all traces of their involvement,
Same with ARDE.

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4384
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby putnanja » 13 Jan 2018 13:41

The BEL Pune facility was inagurated in October:

Pune: Electronic artillery fuse manufacturing facility launched at BEL

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50197
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 13 Jan 2018 22:57

Thanks. So basic modern fuzes are in hand.

Now on to ARDE Version of PGK.

The BEL Pune facility was inaugurated in October:

Pune: Electronic artillery fuse manufacturing facility launched at BEL




Pune: Electronic artillery fuse manufacturing facility launched at BEL

The development comes after a ‘compliance report’ from the Comptroller and auditor general (CAG) of India, which was tabled before the Parliament in July this year, revealed 83 per cent shortage of artillery fuses with the Army.

Written by Sushant Kulkarni | Pune | Published: October 30, 2017 5:14 am


A STATE-OF-THE-ART electronic artillery fuse manufacturing facility was launched at the Pune unit of Bharat Electronics Ltd (BEL) on October 27.

The development comes after a ‘compliance report’ from the Comptroller and auditor general (CAG) of India, which was tabled before the Parliament in July this year, revealed 83 per cent shortage of artillery fuses with the Army.

{The IA is partly to blame. They decided in 1993 that they want to go for electronic fuzes and decertified the mechanical fuzes This resulted in OFB stop making the fuzes (the OFB regulations force them to get rid of machinery if there are no orders and this part of OFB moved at rapid speed to ensure scrapping of the machinery and tools :( ) and there was no effort to make the electronic fuzes till 2012 when a competition was launched. Then private sector objected on the complexity of the fuzes as they were used to simpler mechanical fuzes. Finally Reshef and BEl were chosen and resulted in this Pune facility}

Artillery fuses, known as the brain of the munition, are the devices that initiate explosion. They also determine how the explosion would be initiated — on contact with the target or some time after the launch.

Meanwhile, officials from the BEL said the newly-inaugurated facility can produce at least 50,000 fuses per month and the capacity can be increased as per requirement. The facility, located on the BEL campus, on Pashan NDA Road in Pune, was inaugurated by Lt General Shamsher Singh, director general of quality assurance, along with MV Gowtama, chairman and managing director, BEL, and Nataraj Krishnappa, director, Maj Gen Sanjay Chauhan, controller (ammunition) and Dinesh Batra, general manager, BEL, Pune. Capt Raju Kothari, deputy general manager, compered the inaugural ceremony.

Senior scientists from the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) laboratories and representatives of various defence establishments, involved in the process of manufacturing fuse were also present at the function.

A senior BEL official said, “Pune unit of the BEL, headquartered in Defence Public Sector Undertaking in Bengaluru, which has a multi-product facility that manufactures laser-based range finding equipment, power packs for wireless radio sets, infantry combat vehicle-based Nuclear Biological Chemical and reconnaissance systems, along with X Ray baggage scanners. The facility has diversified into the field of electronic artillery fuses. BEL has nine manufacturing units spread all over the country.”

“The newly-inaugurated facility has a capacity to make more than 50,000 electronic fuses per month, and can augment this capacity as per the requirement of the Army. BEL, Pune, also plans to expand the fuse manufacturing capability in the near future. With this facility going online, BEL is confident of fulfilling all the needs of electronic fuses for our artillery, today and in times to come,” he added.



ECIL makes the proximity fuzes with collaboration from South Africa.

Its rumored to be an assembly shop and not true mfg capability.


Sad thing is ECIL did pioneering solid state design for the proximity fuzes and even wrote a primer on this arcane subject.

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9933
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby arun » 15 Jan 2018 09:11

High Altitude trial of 155 mm 52-calibre Advanced Towed Artillery Gun System (ATAGS) in Sikkim next week:

High-altitude trials of indigenous gun


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Dennis and 20 guests