Artillery: News & Discussion

Locked
Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1596
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by Gyan »

GPS guided shells are about USD 100,000 a pop but GPS guided screw-in fuse/fins are only USD 10,000 a pop.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by brar_w »

Overall yes, although late batches of the M982 Excalibur had an RF cost in the $70-$80K range. You would really need to aim for a triple digit monthly build rate to get them to be more affordable whereas at its peak production was still shy of 1000 rounds a year. You could probably land in the JDAM price point if you cranked them out as fast. Alternatively, with maturity the later increment PGK can probably come in at $15,000 or even crack the $10,000 barrier if produced in quantity.
Last edited by brar_w on 07 Sep 2017 19:36, edited 2 times in total.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by ramana »

Gyan wrote:GPS guided shells are about USD 100,000 a pop but GPS guided screw-in fuse/fins are only USD 10,000 a pop.
ARDE is working on.this option.
Much lower cost.
Excaliber is Cadillac solution.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by Singha »

but unlike a JDAM, a shell has to withstand 1000s of G on launch.
not as simple as clipping on a pair of wings, a few sensors and computer.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by brar_w »

Singha wrote:but unlike a JDAM, a shell has to withstand 1000s of G on launch.
not as simple as clipping on a pair of wings, a few sensors and computer.
I'm only claiming it to the JDAM kit's cost not suggesting that you turn the JDAM into an artillery shell. Production volume has an impact on cost and the best way to drive out cost is to either produced at a higher rate (say go from 900 per year to say 3000-5000 a year) or reduce performance requirements and find cheaper solutions as the PGK does while hitting a significantly lower cost. A a reference, JDAM production is in the thousands per month.
Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1596
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by Gyan »

At US$ 100,000 a pop, an economic question arises, which is, why not use Guided MBRL? which is in the same price range but double the range and 5 times the bang. Therefore at present economic argument is made only by screw-in fins/gps.
srin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2509
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by srin »

At that price, it is worthwhile having Pinaka or heck, even a Grad rocket with guidance kit. Will be way cheaper. The G forces on a rocket aren't as much as a howitzer shell.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by ramana »

Gyan wrote:At US$ 100,000 a pop, an economic question arises, which is, why not use Guided MBRL? which is in the same price range but double the range and 5 times the bang. Therefore at present economic argument is made only by screw-in fins/gps.
Excuse me please stop and smell the roses. Who in India has the $100,000 artillery shells?
Why keep the continuous bs?
Bart S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2938
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:03

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by Bart S »

Compared with a howitzer an MBRL unity might have:
-Larger logistics requirement due to the refills required for it's salvos
-Is easier to shoot down with an Iron Dome type system
-Might not have the same level of mobility or access all areas, especially in mountainous regions
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by Singha »

but with easily 50km range and lesser cost, the pinaka type TCS is the way everyone is going.
the GPS guided shells are probably a khan specific evolutionary dead end unless someone finds a way to make it way cheaper like 5k a round.
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12195
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by Pratyush »

People who are asking about the price of so called smart shells need to compare the costs of firing a full battry worth of ammo to kill a strong point over a period of several hrs. To a few smart shell. Laser guided or Gps guided. Then decide which one is cheaper.

I suspect that a single Gps guided she'll will be cheaper than 75*6 normal shells. That is one battry firing 75 shells per gun for one hrs. With no assurance that a hit will be scored in 1 hrs.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by brar_w »

Precision artillery rounds fulfill a niche and as I said look attractive under an expeditionary setup when your logistical footprint matters. Just like fuel from a tanker halfway across the world does not cost the same per gallon to somewhere on a fixed base at land, there is a cost involved to maintain and deploy a capability to field enough munition both forward supplied/stored and flown form home to accomplish given mission objectives. The ability to switch to more accurate munitions reduces this burden and has a cost saving of its own. You can dial the precision up or down like is done through the three types of rounds that are available depending upon the mission. It also impacts mobility since you can re-deploy with a much smaller logistical footprint (generally means more speed) while still possessing the capability to attack the same number of targets.

The guns that utilize them are same. Sure you could carry other fires option say an artillery gun for unguided rounds, an MRLS setup for guided rounds and an ATACMS like solution for heavier and longer ranged support but all that comes in at a cost. PGK and Excalibur are there to serve a niche role and the former is actually quite affordable for an expeditionary sort of system where getting gear into the theater and then supporting that footprint has a cost of its own which must be factored in while making system trades and formulating requirements.

Image

M1156 kit costs were in the $12-13K range a few years ago but as per contract awards in 2016 they are down to around $8500 per shot driven by both full rate production, higher production rates in part due to larger US orders but also due to export to Australia and Canada.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by Singha »

so the CEP of a conventional 155mm round is 260 meters at around 30km ? I was thinking of positive neuj lines of 100m.

against area and soft skin targets may not matter as i heard the lethal radius of such a shell is around 100m?
but against "point" hard targets like a concrete bunker i guess one would need a 6 round salvo to score a good glancing hit or two.

no wonder we plastered kargil with enough shells to make the melted snow undrinkable for the pakis but the rats still hit under stones and fired back.

the PGK looks promising and not too costly ... just a screw on nose thing
Image
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by brar_w »

PGK has been extensively used in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the kits have been seen with the USMC in Syria based on released video. The aim with that is to get the CEP down to <30m and I think the most recent increment is aiming for something even better. The M982 has its place but naturally due to cost and capability it is an even smaller role and more of a niche. It is basically there to provide artillery the ability to substitute for the lack of GMLRS or air support, or in an urban area where you are fighting close to the enemy position you need to strike. It is a good capability to have and this is why it is ordered but done so in quantities commensurate with that niche role but as is reflected in the order size PGK is a much more widely used capability.

Last edited by brar_w on 08 Sep 2017 09:04, edited 2 times in total.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by Singha »

sweet. i suppose the challenge is in the small form factor - the canards and their actuators, battery, high G tolerance, fuse, GPS receiver, FCS computer in that tiny package.
makes good sense in this era of bush wars, small / agile / hard targets rather than a general all-out war.
abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3090
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by abhik »

Its quite a clever design, the canards are fixed (no actuators) and the CEP is now claimed to be <10m.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by brar_w »

Yes they did end up demonstrating better than objective CEP. From its operational testing report -
PGK exceeded its accuracy requirement
of 50 meters Circular Error Probable (CEP) by
demonstrating a median radial miss distance of 10 meters
in accuracy testing. Accuracy data indicate that with
90 percent confidence, the true CEP is less than or equal to
20.9 meters.
Image
Last edited by brar_w on 09 Sep 2017 03:49, edited 1 time in total.
SBajwa
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5778
Joined: 10 Jan 2006 21:35
Location: Attari

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by SBajwa »

Can we use PGM against specific targets like house of JEM chief in Bahawalpur or house of Hafiz suar at Muridke?
nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4712
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by nam »

Some excalibur impacts. Should give us an idea of the impact radius.

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1976
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by sudeepj »

abhik wrote:Its quite a clever design, the canards are fixed (no actuators) and the CEP is now claimed to be <10m.
If the canards/wings dont move, how will it guide the projectile? The little wings move alright.
kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6278
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by kit »

Islamabad suddenly looks quite near :mrgreen: ..a bit of help from extended range munitions ..instead if shelling the border next time shell Islamabad :mrgreen: ..a nice bombardment every time some one sneaks up near the border
nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4712
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by nam »

Here my view on what IA is thinking.

ATAGS is a no holds bar, all bells and whistles gun. Will be deployed all front, where it's weight will not be a constraint.

Now where weight is an issue, guess what,we have dhanush. With 12 ton,it can go where Bofors can go especially in mountains. It has common parts ammo with atags. It is atags lite.

Where even dhanush is a problem, we will have M777!

I think we may be saved of "weight goose chasing"! IA should not have any issues with atags weight.

By the way Bharat forge version did 48 km + today.
Bishwa
BRFite
Posts: 314
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by Bishwa »

https://defenceaviationpost.com/make-in ... e-pokhran/

As Nam mentioned, Bharat Forge gun did 48+ KM

"A steady but arduous, technically challenging journey has seen many firsts in the development of this gun, culminating with achievement of range in excess of 48 KM with HE ERFB BB and 38.5 KM with HE ERFB BT ammunition (the long range high explosive-base bleed ammunition),” said a senior official who witnessed the trial firings at Pokhran range."
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20773
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by Karan M »

Guys, still remember the contempt and derision DRDO faced when they said they would do ATAGS. Glad to see the courage Shri VKS and ARDE showed giving the nation such dividends. Never forget, next time some advanced program is mooted and people pop up to shower epithets.

Next, here is a key takeaway!
“A steady but arduous, technically challenging journey has seen many firsts in the development of this gun, culminating with achievement of range in excess of 48 KM with HE ERFB BB and 38.5 KM with HE ERFB BT ammunition (the long range high explosive-base bleed ammunition),” said a senior official who witnessed the trial firings at Pokhran range.
Note attention being paid to the entire ecosystem.
The ordnance including barrel and breech mechanism, on both variants of ATAGS, is developed at Kalyani Group Advanced Artillery Manufacturing Facility.
and:
According to defence sources, the ATAGS trials being conducted at Pokharan ranges are targeted at various distances to validate firing capacity of zone 7 with 25 litres effective chamber volume and the guns are performing as per expectations.
Repeated trials for the design, material, machining
A special feature of ATAGS, all electric drives for laying and ammunition handling system, in any artillery system is a first. It ensures better and more reliable performance compared with earlier less reliable hydraulic systems.
Good move to learn for many other gun programs - AD to tank ones, for which DRDO has a special program.
It may be noted here that this artillery gun project started in 2014 with the selection of Bharat Forge Ltd, a Kalyani Group company and TATA Power SED as two major Development Partners of DRDO-ARDE’s prestigious program. The two platforms which were tested earlier in PXE Balasore in Dec 2016 were publicly showcased at 68th Republic Day Parade on 26th January 2017.
Careful vendor selection by DRDO. Proven systems house ie TATA SED via Pinaka and Akash programs. And then Kalyani for the gun itself.
The first proof firing of the armament was conducted in 2015 with maximum record chamber pressure of over 560MPa as P2 pressure.

The barrel and breech mechanism for ATAGS is developed by Bharat Forge with specially designed metallurgy to cater for zone 7 and comes under critical technology. Both firing platforms have the ordnance systems made by Bharat Forge Ltd., flagship company of Kalyani Group.
Now here is the awesome part.
http://www.makeinindiadefence.com/List% ... 4%2016.pdf
SHQ(ARMY)
Project No.1
125MM SMOOTH BORE GUN BARREL FOR T-72 & T-90 TANKS WITH MISSILE
FIRING AND IMPROVED AMMUNITION
1.Name of Project
125MM Smooth Bore Gun barrel for T-72 & T-90 tanks with missile firing and improved ammunition.
2.Brief
The current T-72 & T-90 tank barrels are not capable of firing
high penetration APFSDS rounds (above 600mm Depth of Penetration(DoP)) due to limitation of safety margin of 600 Mega Pascals (Mpa). There is a requirement to upgrade a common barrel system and ammunition for existing tanks.
Development of ammunition to provide capability of penetration and missile firing capability with these barrels also required to be developed together.
With this program Kalyani & DRDO are in striking range of the latest & greatest barrels on our T-90s already.

Now, the base exists to take this forward, which has a direct correlation for the FMBT and the Arjun program as well (which BTW, can achieve 612 MPA https://drdo.gov.in/drdo/pub/techfocus/feb02/arjun.htm).

DRDO now has a private sector partner to develop the next generation gun platform for the Arjun follow on (if it appears) & a current program underway for making a Gun launched missile as well. For the Army, it is now making FSAPDS (in development) hitting the 500mm-600mm RHAe limits.

There is another program underway for an electric drive system for tanks.

Earlier this year we saw the brand new EOFCS program available for tanks, QRSAM and Aerostats. In production.

A FCS is being developed for the T-90 fleet, after a commanders basic Thermal sight was developed by DRDO.

ERA Mk-2 has been developed equal to K-5. But a follow on is planned.

A 1500 hp engine program is also underway and funded.

In short, the basics of a FMBT are being put in place despite Arjun fracas.
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12195
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by Pratyush »

Personally I don't believe that the weight of any modern towed howetzer is an issue in any situation. Because most of them have APU and that can be slaved to the power train of the FAT. As was the case with the Scania and FH 77 and the south African g 5. So in difficult area the abilty for the gun to assist the FAT already exists for some time.

DRDO having had access to both can easily execute this approach with ATAGS.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by Singha »

standing next to one (with ear protectors) and seeing and feeling thump on chest as it unloads 6 round mag must be a deeply religious experience.
abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3090
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by abhik »

sudeepj wrote:
abhik wrote:Its quite a clever design, the canards are fixed (no actuators) and the CEP is now claimed to be <10m.
If the canards/wings dont move, how will it guide the projectile? The little wings move alright.
No they don't, here's a video which explains how it works (albeit it is for the mortar version).
https://youtu.be/u-d5MbZoNpg?t=40s
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by ramana »

abhik wrote:
sudeepj wrote:
If the canards/wings dont move, how will it guide the projectile? The little wings move alright.
No they don't, here's a video which explains how it works (albeit it is for the mortar version).
https://youtu.be/u-d5MbZoNpg?t=40s

I like this fuze that makes mortar more effective.
Use it on 120mm and 81mm mortars and defeat the bunkers and sangars in POK.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by ramana »

ramana wrote:Kanson, ARDE and a group are working on Smart Fuzes like the US GPS Fuze and another. Will move away from mechanical fuzes is the goal.
In fact the pitch has same photo as the US GPS Fuze. Will link it on Saturday. Its on internet.

Link here:

http://ofb.gov.in/download/make_in_indi ... a_AMMN.pdf
Here hope they hurry up.

Looks like plan is to develop for 155mm guns and onwards.
Thakur_B
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2404
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by Thakur_B »

The absence of a GPS guided mortar program is a glaring omission from our munitions list. Its far more achievable than making GPS guidance for shells which has to withstand up to 40000Gs
manjgu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2615
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by manjgu »

about the deeply religios experience.. i live close to a ordanance depot and they routinely do controlled explosions... the controlled explosions happen away from my home..but the thump of the explosions rattles the whole house and the body shakes...
vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1658
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by vasu raya »

nam wrote:Some excalibur impacts. Should give us an idea of the impact radius.

Lot of sharpnel flying around, not safe in urban areas, and for all its cost, without a direct hit the vehicle isn't destroyed, one can gauge the effectiveness of unguided shells on bunkers...
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by brar_w »

I think the point is to kill or otherwise take out of action its inhabitants.

Image
Last edited by brar_w on 09 Sep 2017 22:16, edited 1 time in total.
vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1658
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by vasu raya »

brar, in the context of friendlies nearby, the safe zone is probably closer by 250 meters to the target when using a guided shell
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by brar_w »

It wouldn't be any different than of the other assets employed for CAS for example. J series weapons and SDBs are used under those circumstances. One advantage of both the M982 and the M1156 is that you can set it up so as to not go off if it is not within an established target area. The PGK video posted on the last page has the Canadian solider describing this.

In his critique of the US Army and the Marine Corps's employment of the M982 in Afghanistan, Major General Toney Stricklin has this interesting tidbit -
The M982 is designed to be employed against targets where collateral damage must be minimized and the target is accurately located. The M982 is best used in situations with ‘troops in contact,’ friendly forces within 100 meters of the target, and where collateral damage must be limited. With the M982, ‘danger- close’ is a technique that may be no longer necessary. I have read reports that Army units, using the M982, are surprised and disappointed the building being engaged was not destroyed. Other munitions are engineered to destroy structures and kill its inhabitants – the M982 is engineered to provide a precision kill without destroying the structure or infrastructure surrounding the target.
vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1658
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by vasu raya »

brar_w wrote: One advantage of both the M982 and the M1156 is that you can set it up so as to not go off if it is not within an established target area.
Looks like the M982 is a different kind of munition, this above statement on fuse activation is GPS dependent?
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by brar_w »

vasu raya wrote:
Looks like the M982 is a different kind of munition, this above statement on fuse activation is GPS dependent?
https://youtu.be/yFSA8pS_Bgk?t=57

Meanwhile the M928 also has a dual mode variant that comes with an additional laser guided mode which will probably make it even more accurate and help with hitting moving targets. Internally Raytheon has also acknowledged an existence of internal R&D on an active mmW RF seeker aimed at maritime, anti surface warfare role.
Lot of sharpnel flying around, not safe in urban areas
The M982 has a near vertical attack profile across its range envelope, and is equipped with a Multi mode fuze.

https://s26.postimg.org/70akk7owp/Profile_Excalibur.png

On cost, yes it is costly ($70-$80 K range). But cost is relative to need, alternatives and other costs not factored into the equation. If I have forward deployed marines, what is the cost of not being able to use field artillery as an alternative to close air support? How many extra V-22s do I need to buy and forward deploy to resupply my field artillery units as they go through their rounds? What about barrel fatigue..etc etc. Again, keep in mind that it is a niche capability giving the soldiers to tailor their response to the need and NOT use the expensive rounds for every mission that needs fires support.
sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1976
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by sudeepj »

abhik wrote:
sudeepj wrote:
If the canards/wings dont move, how will it guide the projectile? The little wings move alright.
No they don't, here's a video which explains how it works (albeit it is for the mortar version).
https://youtu.be/u-d5MbZoNpg?t=40s
Clever Indeed..!!! :idea: :idea: :idea: :idea:
vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1658
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by vasu raya »

brar_w wrote:On cost, yes it is costly ($70-$80 K range). But cost is relative to need, alternatives and other costs not factored into the equation.
Thanks brar, would it be possible to breakdown the cost components?

so, these laser guided or mmW sensors are g rated for an artillery shell, incredible!
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Post by brar_w »

vasu raya wrote:
brar_w wrote:On cost, yes it is costly ($70-$80 K range). But cost is relative to need, alternatives and other costs not factored into the equation.
Thanks brar, would it be possible to breakdown the cost components?

so, these laser guided or mmW sensors are g rated for an artillery shell, incredible!

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=6922&p=2211136#p2211136
Last edited by brar_w on 10 Sep 2017 00:07, edited 4 times in total.
Locked