Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

Artillery Discussion Thread

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.
Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3501
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Rakesh » 19 Mar 2017 05:05

Coming up Desi 155mm/39 ULRH to compliment M777 howitzer in Indian Army
http://idrw.org/coming-desi-155mm39-ult ... dian-army/

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5578
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Indranil » 19 Mar 2017 06:14

I am kind of sure now that people from IDRW scan BRF and then write up a "news".

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47326
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 19 Mar 2017 11:23

I wanted a thread to track articles based on BRF discussions.

abhik
BRFite
Posts: 1981
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby abhik » 19 Mar 2017 11:40

Indranil wrote:I am kind of sure now that people from IDRW scan BRF and then write up a "news".

Next time you post the image of a scoop I would suggest putting some subtle marker/alteration on the image (not something obvious like a watermark - but hidden in plain sight), and see if idrw nooz netwark takes the bait. :twisted:

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3501
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Rakesh » 23 Mar 2017 09:44

Swati radar could be a game changer at the LoC
http://www.indiandefencereview.com/news ... t-the-loc/

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 740
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Manish_P » 23 Mar 2017 17:45

The American Flycatcher Radar we had up till now proved to be ineffective for the Army.


Any idea what were the possible causes ?

Were the trials not exhaustive ? Or was this found out only later...

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9035
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Aditya_V » 23 Mar 2017 18:17

Manish_P wrote:
The American Flycatcher Radar we had up till now proved to be ineffective for the Army.


Any idea what were the possible causes ?

Were the trials not exhaustive ? Or was this found out only later...


There was no trial, it was an off the shelf panic purchase after Kargil and how effective Pakistani anti artillery radar was in Kargil and how it caused the most casualties.

pandyan
BRFite
Posts: 331
Joined: 31 Jul 2006 05:12

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby pandyan » 23 Mar 2017 18:40

How come the same/similar radar on pakistani side worked so well? Both were supplied by US Right?

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3423
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby srai » 23 Mar 2017 19:15

^^^

Firefinder radar not Flycatcher.

I think the IA had issues with shortage of spare parts from what I vaguely remember.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5690
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby brar_w » 23 Mar 2017 20:18

The AN/TPQ-36 is a legacy system (origins in the 70s) which is now past its prime. Even in the US services it has been (or is being) replaced by the AN/TPQ-53 on the Army side and AN/TPS-80 on the Marine Corps side (both AESAs, -53 GaAs and -80 GaN).

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 740
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Manish_P » 23 Mar 2017 21:58

From the link of the AN/TPQ-53

This is a new generation of counterfire sensor with the flexibility to adapt to uncooperative adversaries and changing missions.


Yea i am sure that sometimes the adversaries will be uncooperative :)

Hey, maybe that's why the AN/TPQ-36 didn't work so well for us.. the Pakis were not being cooperative :P

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10471
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Gagan » 23 Mar 2017 23:24

Baba Kalyani is going to make Jet engines!
He is sending his initial chota engine out for testing - a 25 kg output.
He is planning a 1000kg output helo engine - that is close to what the Dhruv Shakti is like. he says lead time of about 5 years

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 951
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Khalsa » 24 Mar 2017 00:27

ramana wrote:I wanted a thread to track articles based on BRF discussions.


Saar.
Is there one yet ?
Not a bad idea.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5690
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby brar_w » 24 Mar 2017 00:39

Manish_P wrote:From the link of the AN/TPQ-53

This is a new generation of counterfire sensor with the flexibility to adapt to uncooperative adversaries and changing missions.


Yea i am sure that sometimes the adversaries will be uncooperative :)

Hey, maybe that's why the AN/TPQ-36 didn't work so well for us.. the Pakis were not being cooperative :P


It refers to its ability to switch very rapidly from sectored coverage to 360 degree coverage which was one drawback of the AN/TPQ-36. The changing mission portion is the layering of additional missions through software upgrade and increase in the power supply (generator bump). It is going to be one of the sensors in the IFPC node as for the Counter UAV mission which would be layered on top of the CRAM role it currently performs so the same radar sets can switch and perform missions as and when required.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7571
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 24 Mar 2017 10:18

Manish_P wrote:
The American Flycatcher Radar we had up till now proved to be ineffective for the Army.


Any idea what were the possible causes ?

Were the trials not exhaustive ? Or was this found out only later...


Well, whoever wrote the above needs to get his/her facts correct. Flycatcher radar is a an Air Defense (AD) Fire Control Radar (FCR). Indian Army uses these in their L-70 guns equipped AD Regiments. Each radar manages 3 x L-70 guns.

And it is an exceptional radar. The AD guys swear by it.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7571
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 24 Mar 2017 10:20

Aditya_V wrote: There was no trial, it was an off the shelf panic purchase after Kargil and how effective Pakistani anti artillery radar was in Kargil and how it caused the most casualties.


It was not a panic purchase.

The purchase of WLR from US was mooted by the army BEFORE the Kargil war. DRDO vetoed the import stating that a domestic solution can be developed in a short time-frame. Which never saw the light of the day for many-many years later. And this meant IA was without any WLR during Kargil.

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 740
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Manish_P » 24 Mar 2017 10:26

rohitvats wrote:
Well, whoever wrote the above needs to get his/her facts correct. Flycatcher radar is a an Air Defense (AD) Fire Control Radar (FCR). Indian Army uses these in their L-70 guns equipped AD Regiments. Each radar manages 3 x L-70 guns.

And it is an exceptional radar. The AD guys swear by it.


Probably DDM. Unlikely that the good general made a mistake

Major General Gagandeep Bakshi believes that with the induction of this radar, the Indian Army has not only filled a gaping hole but also gained a slight advantage since Swati has a longer tracking range and are more accurate than American ANTPQ 36/37 radar system. “The American Flycatcher Radar we had up till now proved to be ineffective for the Army. With Swati, we can track and attack seven targets simultaneously. This increases Pak Army’s problems,” G.D. Bakshi said.
Read more at:
http://www.indiandefencereview.com/news ... t-the-loc/

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7571
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 24 Mar 2017 10:28

^^^If it is Maj General Bakshi, then he seems to have mixed up things. Not very surprising.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5578
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Indranil » 24 Mar 2017 10:48

rohitvats wrote:The purchase of WLR from US was mooted by the army BEFORE the Kargil war. DRDO vetoed the import stating that a domestic solution can be developed in a short time-frame. Which never saw the light of the day for many-many years later. And this meant IA was without any WLR during Kargil.

Just curious to know more about this. Is there any literature regarding this?

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7571
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 24 Mar 2017 11:05

Indranil wrote:
rohitvats wrote:The purchase of WLR from US was mooted by the army BEFORE the Kargil war. DRDO vetoed the import stating that a domestic solution can be developed in a short time-frame. Which never saw the light of the day for many-many years later. And this meant IA was without any WLR during Kargil.


Just curious to know more about this. Is there any literature regarding this?


General VP Malik mentions this in detail in his book on Kargil.

PS: I very distinctly remember having a debate many years back on BRF about how adhering to timeline in R&D projects is important from operational perspective. And mentioned the WLR example with respect to Kargil. How a certain timeline was quoted by DRDO (2-years I think) and how it was never met. A study showed 86% or 96% of casualties in Kargil were because of enemy arty fire.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33298
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby shiv » 24 Mar 2017 12:48

IIRC one of the issues re Paki artillery in Kargil was not just their US built WLR, but actual spotters sitting up in the heights with the highway and other targets in full view

pandyan
BRFite
Posts: 331
Joined: 31 Jul 2006 05:12

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby pandyan » 24 Mar 2017 19:26

Interesting discussion. Was the need for WLR identified during kargil or even before that?

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 60187
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 24 Mar 2017 19:57

cross border shelling had started a decade before kargil and the pakis had the ANTPQ36 since mid 80s. they also have around 30 of the M115 203mm howitzer that may be short on range but fires a huge 90kg shell on indian border posts and camps. its lethal radius is more than 100 meters so anyone caught in open was dead.

a 155mm shell is 45kg.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5690
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby brar_w » 24 Mar 2017 20:18

pandyan wrote:Interesting discussion. Was the need for WLR identified during kargil or even before that?


Rohit has mentioned that it was a pre-Kargil identified need and to that end I've come across Jane's IDR articles from the 1995-1997 time frame that further highlight this. It was probably something that moved through the requirements phase in the early 90's (probably even earlier) if it was in the acquisition phase by the mid to late 1990s.

Jane's International Defense Review, December 1997 : The United States has agreed to sell 12 AN/TPQ-37 Firefinder weapon-locating radars (WLRs) to meet an urgent Indian artillery requirement, according to military sources in Delhi. A deal to deliver the first four WLRs in early 1998 is being finalized, with the remaining eight units to be delivered by 2002. However, the deal awaits clearance by the Indian defense ministry - some officials in India are hoping to procure improved WLRs with better antenna design and updated computer systems, which the US is not offering....

India currently employs improved Cymbeline mortar-locating radars, but these lack the gun-locating capability that is an operational requirement of the artillery. ...



Jane's Defence Weekly October 1996: The Field Artillery's longest range weapon is the Prithvi SS-150 surface-to-surface missile which is to equip the newly formed 333 Missile Group stationed at Secunderabad. The missile has a range of 150 km with a 1,000 kg payload.

Among specialised equipment for the Field Artillery's new role, top priority is procurement of unmanned air vehicles (UAVs), a few of which are being purchased from Israel. The UAV command posts will be co-located with the divisional and/or corps counter-bombardment command posts. As the procurement of artillery locating radars is not a high priority with the government, the Field Artillery is seeking better means for target analysis and standardisation of maps and computer-based C{2} systems.
Last edited by brar_w on 24 Mar 2017 20:27, edited 1 time in total.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33298
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby shiv » 24 Mar 2017 20:25

Problem with WLR is that it is a defensive item - that is, it locates the other guy's artillery after he shoots. In Kargil the mofos in the heights took the initiative and were guiding offensive shelling on the Srinagar Leh highway and their locations were not known A few WLRs in our hands would have helped silence their artillery but our guns were also being spotted by men on the heights (and a TV reporter on the ground ).

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33298
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby shiv » 24 Mar 2017 20:28

In 1997 Pentium II or something was state of the art. I used to be desperate to make videos but my machine used to take 1 minute for rendering 1 second of video. I wonder how well WLRs were doing back then in terms of quick calculation of trajectory and providing coordinates.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5690
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby brar_w » 24 Mar 2017 20:46

Not just processing but Electronically Scanned Arrays have allowed for much higher efficiency enabling better performance, higher MTBF's within the same power and cooling limits..so they have improved by leaps and bounds over what was state of the art in the 1980s. I guess older systems just required a larger deployed footprint and the operators worked around sensor limitations.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 60187
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 24 Mar 2017 21:11

They would have used dedicated asics or fpga for radar data processing and likely still do..not a general purpose cpu with floating point unit. Techniques from parallel computing arena could also help.

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 740
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Manish_P » 24 Mar 2017 21:38

Thanks, others and Shiv ji (re the human eyeball point). Got some answers to my questions.

One thought ... (and apologies for getting my pet subject in), would not UAVs/drones also help, especially if we are on the lower ground.

Need not be the high and mighty Global Hawks types, need not even be the mid range IAI Searcher type, but a smaller (harder to detect on radar or with the human eye) battlefield operable one with good optics and with a reasonably good loiter time

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5578
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Indranil » 24 Mar 2017 21:41

Those years were very interesting. 1991-1995 we did not have much money to buy anything new. 1998-Pokhran II. Buying weapons from USA at that time was tricky.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33298
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby shiv » 24 Mar 2017 21:42

Manish those guys were well hidden. I recall a few stories from 1999. A Mig 25 tasked for Recce could barely fly slow enough to be effective. A Jag pilot on recce saw something suspicious from the corner of his eye and returned to discover the camp at Muntho Dalo .

I made a video story out of that

nam
BRFite
Posts: 410
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby nam » 24 Mar 2017 21:54

I wonder if IAF pilot were visually able to see the source of Paki artillery.

Is it possible to see the artillery rounds flying and the plume at some distance while flying in a jet?

Pakis must have brought target spotters when they took over the peaks. And looks like we were not able to jam their comms, which would have prevented them from relaying co-ordinates.

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 740
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Manish_P » 24 Mar 2017 22:23

Shiv ji, with reference to the drones, i was alluding to the possibility of using them (in the future) to detect the paki artillery which might be behind the mountains. They will compliment the WLRs of course, probably as a cost effective backup system. Just in case the WLRs might be not working/not accurate or simply not available at the stretch required and/or it is too risky (ManPADS) to send in Helis and Ground attack/Recce fighters

But i fear this is getting OT for this thread, or even worse, bordering on Tom Clancy fanciful stuff :-)

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5024
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Surya » 24 Mar 2017 22:35

shiv wrote:Problem with WLR is that it is a defensive item - that is, it locates the other guy's artillery after he shoots. In Kargil the mofos in the heights took the initiative and were guiding offensive shelling on the Srinagar Leh highway and their locations were not known A few WLRs in our hands would have helped silence their artillery but our guns were also being spotted by men on the heights (and a TV reporter on the ground ).


This was the real problem

don't think the WLRs worked for pakis too

after the heights were evicted arty casualties came down based on whaty I heard

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3298
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Cosmo_R » 24 Mar 2017 22:47

shiv wrote:Problem with WLR is that it is a defensive item - that is, it locates the other guy's artillery after he shoots. In Kargil the mofos in the heights took the initiative and were guiding offensive shelling on the Srinagar Leh highway and their locations were not known A few WLRs in our hands would have helped silence their artillery but our guns were also being spotted by men on the heights (and a TV reporter on the ground ).


Agree in part. The larger issue is not being tied down by politicos who see any response other a symmetrical one as escalation. Sure, you couldn't bomb the ridges but a couple of plausibly deniable FAE raids on the other side of the LOC ('We are positive this was well within out territory" ) would have quickly put an end to the nonsense by pakis. As Salman Rushdie says "Ek dum! fut a fut!, double quick!".

The 'surgical strikes' were an eye opener for the pakis. They too would have to anticipate, defend, and not just lob stuff and take the initiative.

JMT

nachiket
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5803
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49
Location: Соединенные Штаты Америки

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby nachiket » 24 Mar 2017 22:52

How do the WLR's actually work in the mountains? IA artillery was at the base of the mountains on our side and PA radars and artillery would be on their side with the mountains in between. IA shells were striking the mountain tops. So how would their WLR's detect their rounds and have enough data to calculate the firing location? By watching for any rounds that went too far and crossed the peaks to fall on the reverse slope?

It seems the spotters on the peaks would be far more effective in this kind of terrain as shiv says.

Prem Kumar
BRFite
Posts: 1983
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Prem Kumar » 25 Mar 2017 00:02

The other pathetic situation is that "even after knowing that our casualties & Paki casualties were max inflicted by artillery", IA went through its summer trials. hot & high, cold & low trials etc for a decade & a half after Kargil!

nam
BRFite
Posts: 410
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby nam » 25 Mar 2017 00:23

Personally not convinced that WLR was a major advantage for the Pakis. If it was the case, they would have decimated our artillery. Instead majority of the causalities were infantry, which require target spotters on the ridge.

Even if the Pakis could calculated the source using WLR, how can they target them if they are placed on reverse slopes on a gradient? The same problem applies to us as well. Not sure how can we target Pakis artillery deployed on reverse slope? without FO teams.

Having said that India needs to thank the Pakis for Kargil. It taught us quite a lot about mountain warfare. I would love to see the TFTA PLA 15th Airborne trying out their "within 10 hrs" stunt in mountains of the East.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33298
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby shiv » 25 Mar 2017 06:21

Manish_P wrote:Shiv ji, with reference to the drones, i was alluding to the possibility of using them (in the future) to detect the paki artillery which might be behind the mountains. They will compliment the WLRs of course, probably as a cost effective backup system. Just in case the WLRs might be not working/not accurate or simply not available at the stretch required and/or it is too risky (ManPADS) to send in Helis and Ground attack/Recce fighters

But i fear this is getting OT for this thread, or even worse, bordering on Tom Clancy fanciful stuff :-)

Neither OT nor fanciful. Dead right in fact. UAVs will be the "new AOP". AOP stands for "Air Observation Post" - typically a spotter sitting in a plane - which is an artillery guiding system that has been used from WW1. In fact HAL had a plane that was used exactly for these duties - the HAL "Krishak". There was also a dedicated British aircrfat called an Auster AOP.

When one finishes reading about Air Force and Army heroics in Longewala - one might also come across the story of Maj Atma Singh who was flying an AOP (Krishak??) over Longewala. He played a seminal role in guiding the IAF to the Paki tanks. He had a fuel line malfunction and landed on the battlefield. He calmly repaired the defect under fire and took off again while being given cover by a couple of IAF aircraft.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33298
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby shiv » 25 Mar 2017 06:24

nachiket wrote:How do the WLR's actually work in the mountains? IA artillery was at the base of the mountains on our side and PA radars and artillery would be on their side with the mountains in between. IA shells were striking the mountain tops. So how would their WLR's detect their rounds and have enough data to calculate the firing location? By watching for any rounds that went too far and crossed the peaks to fall on the reverse slope?

It seems the spotters on the peaks would be far more effective in this kind of terrain as shiv says.

Valid point. In fact Indian artillery hitting mountaintops was targeting the spotters in "direct fire" mode rather than lobbing shells over the mountains. Once the spotters were barbecued, Paki artillery became useless.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Eric Leiderman, Manish_Sharma, Shankk and 38 guests