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.
milindc
BRFite
Posts: 660
Joined: 11 Feb 2006 00:03

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby milindc » 13 Sep 2017 19:44

My discussion with chaiwala, and one of the topics was Artillery shells, was before the M777 incident. I came back thinking these OFBs should be disbanded.

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1067
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby sudeepj » 13 Sep 2017 21:09

milindc wrote:
Singha wrote:>> Look at the way they pour powder into the brass. It's very uneven. This is likely how OFB does it's powder allocation.

I doubt it. making of bombs and shells at huge automated plants is a lot different from dara adam khel, they could not meet supply requirements in that mode nor meet any safety norms with tons of explosives lying around.


Recent Chaiwalla discussion was that artillery shells by OFB is not different from dara adam khel. The artillery men actually shake the shell to see if there are any gaps in the power. :x
whole Chaiwalla gang was very mad at OFB quality.


Arty shells dont have 'powder' inside, the projectile is filled with plastic explosive with a wax like consistency. Even if you shake it, you wont hear anything! Its really insensitive too.. Were the high explosive inside the shell to explode in the barrel, there would not be much left of the gun or the crew! There is cordite or propellant inside single piece shells.. That could rattle a bit, but that isn't of any concern. Bofors and the M777 use a bi modular charge system for the propellant. The projectile and the propellant are two different pieces. Chaiwallas often tell tall tales, which often get even more unintelligible with retelling.

The OFB shell wobbling inside barrels, particularly in large caliber guns is an issue that could be caused by many things, including improper storage, bad design, improper methodology in use or plain manufacturing flaws. It could even be all of the above! Unless a proper analysis is done scientifically, pouring scorn on one thing or the other only shows the biases of the individual and has no relation to reality. For instance, this ndtv presstitute came up with a headline screaming 'faulty OFB shells cause shiny new imported howitzer to break..'. I wonder how this chap knows for sure even before the experts do? And I wonder what he is getting in return for putting his objectivity on ice and pushing for one thing over the other.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 48098
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 13 Sep 2017 21:23

nvishal, Do you know for a fact that is how OFB makes shells like that video? If not please post elsewhere. It does not bring value to the discussion.
Singha. Again stop posting bokwas videos because you find them. What has it to do with the OFB shell exploding in the M777 gun?

Philip, You need to read my posts on how wobble happens.

Shell exploding in barrel is a rare thing but does happen.
The odd thing in India is so many happening during trials and exercise whether the gun is Bofors (40 times), upgraded 130mm barrels, Dhanush (1time), and now M777 (1 time).
When there is clearance due to excess gun barrel wear and under-dimensioned shell, when the shell is rammed with debris and gun is at high angle, when the gun bore is not evacuated, when fuze Safe and Arm is activated all these lead to shell bursts.

milindc, Can you confirm form the chaiwala that they saw the OFB shell making factory for the 155mm shells made same as that silly video?

I bet they cant. Its just prejudice.

OFB makes 155mm shells per M 756 spec in Ambajhari. It has a modern forging, heat treatment CNC machines to make the shells. The filling is done in a different factory.

http://www.ofb.gov.in/units/index.php?u ... es&lang=en

if OFB shells were katara, Indian Artillery would be self defeated in training exercises.

I think people should not misuse their stature to pass bogus comments.

milindc
BRFite
Posts: 660
Joined: 11 Feb 2006 00:03

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby milindc » 13 Sep 2017 21:41

I chatted with folks who are from the artillery brigade. Folks who take time off in Bhagyanagaram every year. FYI, I'm not expert. Just relaying my chaiwalla conversation.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 60476
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 13 Sep 2017 21:55

Ndtv

Written by Vishnu Som | Updated: Sep 13, 2017 18:48

But today, in a statement to NDTV, the state-owned manufacturer which supplies at least 90 per cent of artillery shells in use with the Army, seemed to suggest that the failure was not unusual. "The number of rounds successfully fired during user trial with ERFB BT ammunition from [the] M-777 howitzer gun were more than 1,100 and the round in which malfunction occurred was [the] 1164th round," said Dr U Mukherjee, a spokesperson for the manufacturer.


When asked if this failure rate was acceptable, Mr Mukherjee said "Ideally, this is not acceptable."

Senior officers of the army told NDTV that the manufacturer's explanation was unacceptable and that they expect consistency in the quality of ammunition supplied to them. Experts from the Ordnance Board have visited the site of the trials and interacted with executives from BAE Systems, the manufacturer of the M-777 to determine what went wrong.

The OFB manufacturers shell hardware at the Ordnance Factory Ambajhari, Nagpur. Explosives are filled at its facilities at Chandrapur in Maharashtra and Bolangir in Odisha.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 60476
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 13 Sep 2017 21:57

I check both the chandrapur and bolangir plants on google earth.
Both have extensive bunkers to store explosives and ready shells

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1067
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby sudeepj » 13 Sep 2017 22:28

Singha wrote:I check both the chandrapur and bolangir plants on google earth.
Both have extensive bunkers to store explosives and ready shells


Whoever is going to check this issue will need to check the storage dumps where the fired shell was stored through its life, not just the plants which likely only have temporary storage till the shells are shipped out to different storage dumps. It could even be an issue with Indian cordite burning hotter or possibly having some issues with the composition including some corrosive elements that causes barrels to wear faster.

The only thing that can be conclusively said is, shells are causing some issues in many different guns that we know of, so its likely not an issue in the guns. Exactly where the issue is, we can only say after a proper, scientific inquiry.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 913
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Gyan » 13 Sep 2017 22:40

negi wrote:I am amazed at how moment foreign weapon system gets involved people want to come up with all kinds of excuses ; I have seen how sales cycle happens for even a piddly SW product you go in completely prepared gold plated hardware , RAID 0 storage , low latency network cards etc etc and then you do your demos and trails . The M777 being field tested came from BAE factory do you think a western company picks a gun from a batch at random for field trials ? The sales team might have asked for the gun to be 'hand picked' and sent here , the only thing consistent here is OFB's shells :)


Shells are also carefully selected and old batches are not used for Trials.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 48098
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 14 Sep 2017 00:43

Shells are also carefully selected and old batches are not used for Trials.

We know for a fact that shelf life for M 107 shell is 10 years and 20 years on life extension.

The shell that burst in Dhanush prototype was 12 years old.

vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1466
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby vasu raya » 14 Sep 2017 00:47

sudeepj wrote: It could even be an issue with Indian cordite burning hotter or possibly having some issues with the composition including some corrosive elements that causes barrels to wear faster.

The only thing that can be conclusively said is, shells are causing some issues in many different guns that we know of, so its likely not an issue in the guns. Exactly where the issue is, we can only say after a proper, scientific inquiry.


Can they take X-ray pictures of the shell just after it is loaded into the gun, enabling to quantify the chemicals and their shape and feed these real world measurements to ballistics simulation software that can give the probability of successful fire?

Pooling data from hundreds of successful firings or otherwise from the field, one is increasing the confidence in the probability numbers given, should be possible as we have entered the big data era

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 48098
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 14 Sep 2017 01:09

Some data for RCA:

Singha wrote:Ndtv

Written by Vishnu Som | Updated: Sep 13, 2017 18:48

But today, in a statement to NDTV, the state-owned manufacturer {Why cant he say OFB?}which supplies at least 90 per cent of artillery shells in use with the Army, seemed to suggest that the failure was not unusual. "The number of rounds successfully fired during user trial with ERFB BT ammunition from [the] M-777 howitzer gun were more than 1,100 and the round in which malfunction occurred was [the] 1164th round," said Dr U Mukherjee, a spokesperson for the manufacturer.


When asked if this failure rate was acceptable, Dr Mukherjee said "Ideally, this is not acceptable."

Senior officers of the army told NDTV that the manufacturer's explanation was unacceptable and that they expect consistency in the quality of ammunition supplied to them. Experts from the Ordnance Board have visited the site of the trials and interacted with executives from BAE Systems, the manufacturer of the M-777 to determine what went wrong.

The OFB manufacturers shell hardware at the Ordnance Factory Ambajhari, Nagpur. Explosives are filled at its facilities at Chandrapur in Maharashtra and Bolangir in Odisha.



Facts from this news report:

1) Shell fired is the ERFB BT shell. OFB Link to ERFB BT

This means it is maximum range and hence maximum charge 8 or 9

2)1100 shells were fired successfully. Were all these ERFB shells or a mixture of M107 and ERFB shells? The 1164th shell had the accident.
Now what was the M777 barrel life for firing 155mm shells and the ERFB type shells?

Members can ask why am I asking this question?


In Vietnam, the US troops were firing the 175mm gun aka Long Tom against Viet Cong troops. They had instances of barrel burst.

The barrels had life of ~1200 firings but were failing at ~450. Many of the guns were stopped and investigation launched as to what was happening. Appears guns were being fired at max charge to hit the attackers at farthest distance possible. What this did was to create high stresses in the barrel and that caused fatigue micro cracks. Further firing would burst the barrel. Others had excessive internal wear that caused balloting our favorite phenomena!!!!

So if any one can find out what is the M777 barrel life is for conventional and ERFB type shells would appreciate.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 48098
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 14 Sep 2017 01:13

sudeepj, The OFB webpage I linked above says the shells have to be stored at 21 +/- 2 degree C.


However I don't think the shell explosive deteriorated and blew up.

It got shocked in the barrel.

Wonder why the Fuze is not being questioned.

OFB webpage says PD M 572 or the ECIL M85 P13A3. So which was the fuze used here.

We know PD M572 has issues in long barrels per the Janes transcript linked so many pages ago by tsarkar.
Essentially the safety is defeated inside long barrels at high charge due to the spin rate.
Rifling rate assumed to be 1: 20 calibers the standard.
And if it strikes the side i.e. wobble off it goes from the graze function in the fuze.


What was the fuze used in series of Bofors, 130 mm upgraded barrels, Dhanush, and this M 777 accidents?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 48098
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 14 Sep 2017 01:48

I found via Google chacha Wear and Erosion of Large Caliber Gun Barrels. Its report from US lab on the phenomena.

I think this thread participants could use this gnan.

Also please read this about how the M777 was developed and qualified.


Army Guide-M777

Am quoting only relevant portions. Interseted can read the webpage.

Initial proof of concept

The complete upper part of the weapon was test fired at Eskmeals in June 1989 with a total of 50 rounds being fired at all elevations, 12 of which were zone 8S (top charge).


and

Following its unveiling at the 1989 Association of the United States Army Exhibition in Washington DC, one of the two prototypes went to the US for early evaluation. ...
Under the five-year Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) contract a total of nine systems were built at the BAE Systems Land Systems facility at Barrow-in-Furness. These have underwent an extensive series of tests in the US during which more than 10,000 rounds of ammunition have been fired.



So qualification trials the gun was fired assuming equal usage 10000/9 = 1100 rounds of fire!!!!

And Pokhran trials had gun that was firing its 1164 round.

Just some perspective.

What is the BAE guarantee for M777 barrel life?

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5999
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby brar_w » 14 Sep 2017 03:09

Generally in developmental testing, not all are performing the same function. There would have been examples used for durability, weather, mobility, logistical footprint testing etc etc. Also note that these were developmental test articles. US DOD testers did not agree with the program office when it came to using guns produced in England for Operational Test and evaluation as they wanted something produced under the production arrangement that would represent operational articles (70% work subcontracted to US firms). So operational testing of full production representative variants was over and above developmental testing efforts that took place earlier This delayed the program by 2 years as production transitioned into LRIP in order to provide production representative guns for the OT&E to take place later .

Image
Last edited by brar_w on 14 Sep 2017 03:42, edited 1 time in total.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 48098
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 14 Sep 2017 03:41

So can you figure out what was the barrel life for M777 of the US production lots?
There are manuals of the M777 gun on the web which I couldn't read.
Specifically for the M 777 gun when is a barrel due for change? After how many rounds?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 48098
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 14 Sep 2017 04:56

Ok. From brar_w chart posted above the Cannon specification fatigue life is 2650 EFC which is means much more actual number of shells fired. And the fatigue life exceeds the wear life. The demonstrated fatigue life would be much, much more.

What this tells us is the gun barrel can withstand 2650 EFC which is less than actual shells firing.
So Pokhran test firing of 1100 shells did not cause barrel fatigue.

However the wear life is less than the fatigue life. We need to look this factor.

BTW from tejasmrca site the M 777 is great gun.

http://tejasmrca.weebly.com/land-system ... t-howitzer

Its light, its 39 calibers long like the Bofors, and is very accurate at intermediate ranges with CEP of 20m

At intermediate ranges the M-777 unguided shells can be expected to land within 20m of their target. However, the HE shells having a kill radius of 35m makes up for the large CEP. This however has not limited the M-777 to demonstrate accurate and effective fire against targets in Afghanistan at ranges of 22 miles.


Looking at the barrel being 39 calibers and the maker is BAE, maybe this is the redesigned Bofors?

IA should look at the old 40 shell failures of the Bofors to see if there is pattern.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 48098
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 14 Sep 2017 06:40

M777 is 39 calibers.
So PD M572 Fuze malfunction ruled out as so far this manifested in 45 caliber barrels only.
This leaves barrel wear due to erosion combined with shell cg offset.
Also this shell was the fifth in a series. So what was the chamber condition? Any debris/residue/sand?

We do not know about the earlier 40 Bofors failures.
Therefore this is not new : 155mm shell and 39 calibers.

I wonder if the CAG or Parliament reports had looked into the reports of these instances.

it would be good to back and categorize the previous incidents with respect to type of shell, fuze, charge and number of shells already fired from that gun barrel.

Shouldn't be too hard if they could give the exact number of incidents wrt to Bofors as 40.

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1400
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby srin » 14 Sep 2017 09:47

Is it possible that shell wobble inside the barrel is caused by unbalanced casting of the shell ?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 48098
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 14 Sep 2017 10:29

The shell casing is a machined forging on a CNC lathe. So it runs true to its axis. Then it gets filled with explosive which is melted with wax. Looks like a slurry. Shell total weight about 42 kg. The filling is about 8 kg. So shell casting would be difference. There is no spin balance required for shells.

BTW, OFB factories are converting to full CNC run shops. The only hindrance if HMT lack of support to the purchase requirements. This is in the Khanduri Parliament 2017 report.
Anyways the OFB tenders pages shows many German CNC machines being imported.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5999
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby brar_w » 14 Sep 2017 15:21

Here is a something for Singha.. Heat, lots of dust, helo deployment, and no automation whatsoever.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EltEXNQbR9w

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 60476
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 14 Sep 2017 16:49

as usual the marines get the tough dusty jobs and the most basic equipment while the army only moves out in vehicles and a huge logisitics chain.
if you ask me I was all for getting CH53K king stallions instead of the Chinooks which are neither here or there. these CH53k could have taken over some of the role vacated by the retired Mi26 we had.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5999
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby brar_w » 14 Sep 2017 16:57

The key performance permaneters in terms of airframe life, and availability that the Marines have put up has driven the cost considerably. At the moment it is obviously expensive because the first batch of two just entered production (and LRIP-1 always carries future production infra costs) but even at full rate production this will be one of the most expensive helicopters in the medium, or heavy lift categories. It works for the Marines because literally everything they bring ashore relies on it. From their Howitzers, to troops, to vehicles and even their latest GaN radars. These also serve their maneuver forces while redeploying. But the CH-47 is a much better helicopter if you require medium capacity and don't want to pay a lot more for the ability to carry heavier loads.

Bala Vignesh
BRFite
Posts: 1865
Joined: 30 Apr 2009 02:02
Location: Standing at the edge of the cliff
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Bala Vignesh » 14 Sep 2017 18:06

I was watching a video on the application of 155mm arty in Afghan theater by ISAF and noticed a slight change in one of the procedures between US Army and Canadian army on the firing sequence of the M777. The person who secures the breech(operating the LBM)
usually cleans the residue in US Army seen here; while the same is missing in the Canadian procedures seen here. Would be interesting to see if this has any effect on the life and reliability of the barrel??

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7528
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Pratyush » 14 Sep 2017 19:13

Bala Vignesh wrote:I was watching a video on the application of 155mm arty in Afghan theater by ISAF and noticed a slight change in one of the procedures between US Army and Canadian army on the firing sequence of the M777. The person who secures the breech(operating the LBM)
usually cleans the residue in US Army seen here; while the same is missing in the Canadian procedures seen here. Would be interesting to see if this has any effect on the life and reliability of the barrel??



Bagged charges leave residue but modular charges don't.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15947
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby chetak » 14 Sep 2017 19:17

Image

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 48098
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 14 Sep 2017 19:54

Saab has a new mortar round

https://twitter.com/ramana_brf/status/9 ... 3979120640

Essentially it has a predetermined fragmentation pattern.
Maybe like a shot shell pattern using fragments packed in the front portion and a bursting charge behind and functioned by the proximity fuze.

Bala Vignesh
BRFite
Posts: 1865
Joined: 30 Apr 2009 02:02
Location: Standing at the edge of the cliff
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Bala Vignesh » 14 Sep 2017 20:51

Pratyush wrote:Bagged charges leave residue but modular charges don't.

Pratyushji,
In the first couple of shots fired by US forces in the video they are also using modular charges and not bags. So i assume it is something apart from it.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 48098
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 14 Sep 2017 22:45

Singha, Please this is the arty thread...

brar_w posted the video for you to see the environment that artillery operates on and you go off admiring helicopters.
And people are forced to reply!!!

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 48098
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 14 Sep 2017 22:59

Bala Vignesh wrote:I was watching a video on the application of 155mm arty in Afghan theater by ISAF and noticed a slight change in one of the procedures between US Army and Canadian army on the firing sequence of the M777. The person who secures the breech(operating the LBM)
usually cleans the residue in US Army seen here; while the same is missing in the Canadian procedures seen here. Would be interesting to see if this has any effect on the life and reliability of the barrel??



Bala, Thanks for the video of operation use of the M 777 an the M119.
The former has the modular charges.
First the operator uses a rigid dust mop head to wipe the breech. After that the rounds are loaded and pushed with the flexible dust mop head and then modular charges are loaded. and this repeats. One thing is look at the shake of the gun. The shell has to leave the muzzle break before the recoil shake starts for accuracy. Hence those high number of charges which impart most muzzle velocity.

I did not see when the hard mop is used again after how many rounds.


The M119 has those fixed cartridges and is like old fashioned cannon.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17814
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Philip » 16 Sep 2017 11:58

Sensational! Kudos to the team.
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/i ... 693728.ece
Indigenous artillery gun sets new record in range
Dinakar Peri SEPTEMBER 15, 2017 21:14 IST

The Advanced Towed Artillery Gun System at the 68th Republic Day Parade. | Photo Credit: R.V. Moorthy
NEW DELHI: An indigenous artillery gun, Advanced Towed Artillery Gun System (ATAGS), being jointly developed by the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) and the private sector has set a new world record in range by hitting targets at a distance of 48 km.

“During trial firings at Pokhran ranges last week, ATAGS registered the longest ever distance of 48.074 kms, surpassing the maximum ranges of 35-40 kms fired by any artillery gun system in this category,” an industry source told The Hindu.

ATAGS is a 155mm, 52 calibre towed artillery gun being developed in mission mode by DRDO as a part of the Army’s artillery modernisation programme. The record was achieved with special ammunition, “high explosive – base bleed” (HE – BB) by the ATAGS variant developed by Kalyani Group.

The development is being done through a consortium based model, similar to that adopted for the Pinaka multi-barrel rocket launch system. It was designed by DRDO’s Armament Research and Development Establishment (ARDE) in Pune. In addition, Bharat Forge Limited of Kalyani Group, Tata Power Strategic Engineering Division and Mahindra Defence Naval System from the private sector are involved in a big way along with the Ordnance Factory Board (OFB). For instance, the barrel and breech mechanism, on both variants of ATAGS, was developed at Kalyani Group.

Summer trials are currently underway and the next round of trials are likely to held in Sikkim in December.
“The trials are progressing well. Additional prototypes are being made to speed trials,” one official said.

The gun has several significant features including an all-electric drive, high mobility, quick deployability, auxiliary power mode, advanced communication system, automated command and control system. It has a six round magazine instead of a standard three round magazine. Also, the gun weighs slightly more than normal due to the larger chamber.

The Army has not inducted any new artillery gun since the Bofors in the 1980's. After decades of failed attempts, the service is gearing up to induct the Dhanush artillery gun which is an indigenously upgraded variant of the Bofors gun. In addition, last November India signed a contract for 145 M-777 Ultra-Light Howitzers from the US.

(EOM)


Earlier report:
XCPT
DRDO’S ATAGS Howitzer creates World record in Hitting Target Range
Published September 5, 2017 SOURCE: Ajai Shukla / Business Standard

On Monday, in trial firing at the Pokhran Ranges in Rajasthan, the advanced towed artillery gun system (ATAGS) being indigenously developed for the Indian Army demonstrated its potential to be a world-beating system. The 155-millimetre, 52-calibre gun-howitzer fired three shells out to a world-record distance of 47.2 kilometres from the gun position. This was achieved using special, long-range ammunition called “high explosive – base bleed” (HE – BB). In comparison, 155-millimetre, 52-calibre guns in service worldwide fire this ammunition to maximum ranges of 40-45 kilometres. The achievements coincides with the appointment of Nirmala Sitharaman as defence minister. The ATAGS is being developed by the Defence R&D Organisation (DRDO) on two parallel tracks – one prototype in partnership with Tata Power (Strategic Engineering Division) and another with Bharat Forge. The prototype that broke the record was the Tata Power (SED) gun. Earlier, on Saturday, the same gun had broken another record by firing “high explosive – boat tail” (HE – BT) ammunition to a range of 37.2 kilometres. Range, accuracy and consistency are the key attributes of an artillery gun. A longer range allows more area to be engaged from a “gun position”, without having to redeploy (or shift) the guns. The secret of the ATAGS longer range is its larger chamber – 25 litres, compared to 23 litres in most 155-millimetre guns like the French Nexter and Israeli Elbit guns the military has evaluated. A larger chamber packs in more high explosive propellant, which shoots out the warhead further. The need to cater for this higher “shock of firing” makes the ATAGS a heavier gun. It weighs in at 17-18 tonnes, while comparable guns worldwide weigh 14-15 tonnes. So promising is the ATAGS that both existing prototypes were paraded on January 26 in New Delhi. After the gun successfully completes development and firing trials, the army is likely to procure at least 2,000 ATAGS. At an estimated Rs 15 crore apiece, that will result in Rs 30,000 crore in business for the production eco-system, benefiting a large number of private defence firms.

idrw.org .Read more at India No 1 Defence News Website http://idrw.org/drdos-atags-howitzer-cr ... get-range/ .


PS:Tx,noted.
Last edited by Philip on 16 Sep 2017 15:22, edited 1 time in total.

darshhan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2206
Joined: 12 Dec 2008 11:52

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby darshhan » 16 Sep 2017 14:51

Philip, Do not post complete idrw articles

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33958
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby shiv » 20 Sep 2017 09:48


ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 48098
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 20 Sep 2017 09:53

Shiv, Thanks for the YouTube link.

They fired the shell with the lifting lug. No fuze.
If we zoom in we can see the Mach or Shock waves near the nose tip.
Very good imagery.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 48098
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 20 Sep 2017 10:11


Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3767
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Karthik S » 23 Sep 2017 16:12

Image

N Sitharaman checking out ATAGS.

PC: Livefist.

Supratik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4918
Joined: 09 Nov 2005 10:21
Location: USA

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Supratik » 23 Sep 2017 17:08

sudeepj wrote:
Singha wrote:I check both the chandrapur and bolangir plants on google earth.
Both have extensive bunkers to store explosives and ready shells


Whoever is going to check this issue will need to check the storage dumps where the fired shell was stored through its life, not just the plants which likely only have temporary storage till the shells are shipped out to different storage dumps. It could even be an issue with Indian cordite burning hotter or possibly having some issues with the composition including some corrosive elements that causes barrels to wear faster.

The only thing that can be conclusively said is, shells are causing some issues in many different guns that we know of, so its likely not an issue in the guns. Exactly where the issue is, we can only say after a proper, scientific inquiry.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7528
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Pratyush » 23 Sep 2017 18:27

regarding the ATAGS we know that it has a bigger chamber then a typical nato standard 52 cal 155. We are also inducting the K 9 which is a nato standard 155. The difference in chamber will bring about a difference in maximum range. How will the army adjust its arty fire support doctrines in case of the field employment of the two weapons.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33958
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby shiv » 23 Sep 2017 22:14

Enjoy: Effect of artillery fire
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrubDDcygb4

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 48098
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 24 Sep 2017 02:08

Pratyush wrote:regarding the ATAGS we know that it has a bigger chamber then a typical nato standard 52 cal 155. We are also inducting the K 9 which is a nato standard 155. The difference in chamber will bring about a difference in maximum range. How will the army adjust its arty fire support doctrines in case of the field employment of the two weapons.


K9 will be with Armored strike corps.

ATAGS will be with the Artillery regiments.

tandav
BRFite
Posts: 231
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 08:24

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby tandav » 24 Sep 2017 09:01

brar_w wrote:Here is a something for Singha.. Heat, lots of dust, helo deployment, and no automation whatsoever.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EltEXNQbR9w


Though its mobile and easily heli transportable... it appears extremely vulnerable to counter battery fire/ UAV /PGM strikes due to its immobility once sited.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Indranil, Kakarat and 50 guests