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.
Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3150
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Kakkaji » 26 Aug 2018 02:15

What happens to the Dhanush, now that 150 ATAGS have been approved? Will they still order 414 Dhanush, or just wait for ATAGS?

manjgu
BRFite
Posts: 1569
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby manjgu » 26 Aug 2018 09:58

the chinese are focussed people..not gasbags like Indians. How can u even think of selling something if u r forever in trials... and dont induct it in your own service !! we shuld be producing cheap equipment to sell overseas and fund our R&D but who gives a damn !

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6940
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Indranil » 26 Aug 2018 10:18

I think there is space for Dhanush which is lighter and cheaper than ATAGS.

Frankly, I won’t be sad if there isn’t too. Is this the first time, three major desi systems have gone up against each other and the two best have got the orders? If yes, that is a great day.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7843
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Pratyush » 26 Aug 2018 10:24

Do we know for sure that Dhanush cannot be upgraded to 52 cal.

Or maybe it can be used in the eastern front where it lighter weight may be or a major advantage.

PS on the issue of bridges in the border areas and the axel load limit on them. Do we know what is the axel load for the atags.

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1484
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby nam » 26 Aug 2018 11:39

Danush has a 52 cal version. It is on the ofb MGS.

Roles, I presume will be where ATAGS cannot go, dhanush will go, where dhanush cannot go M777 will go.

There might be a mix of dhanush and atags under a regiment assigned to a unit.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6935
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Prasad » 26 Aug 2018 17:02

The MGS is a truck mounted system. 52 Cal. Kalyani has a 39cal version. We seem to be having all combinations possible when it comes to artillery.

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1484
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby nam » 26 Aug 2018 18:59

Paks have got hold of surplus M109s from Italy. Around 100+ of them( out of 230). While we wait decades to induct brand new toys.

They are really beefing up their fluid artillery support to cater to our CS.

dinesh_kimar
BRFite
Posts: 259
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby dinesh_kimar » 26 Aug 2018 21:17

^ It appears so. How sad.

The M109 self propelled gun with Paki army will likely replace some towed Arty brigades.
Some plus and minus in terms of logistics of towed vs. Self propelled.

Overall, their heavy arty strength increases by 100-280 units, which is quite significant.

Also, their Heavy Industry Taxila seems comfortable with M109 maintenance and upgrades.

Their commanders now have at least 100 more units to fire back at us in sector like Rajasthan and Punjab.
They can wreak havoc up to 25 km range, which is better than our units.

Our towed gun Dhanush was first unveiled 9 years back, when Vk singh was chief.

Army can pls deploy 100 emergency purchase pieces to offer some parity.

Also, OFB upgrade of 130 mm to 155 mm involves same mechanisms and cradle, though new breech and barrel.

40 catapults/ Arjun can easily be upgraded to 155 mm. ( I, who am a relative newbie, made this same suggestion in a post in 2013.)

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50632
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 26 Aug 2018 22:58

Kakkaji wrote:What happens to the Dhanush, now that 150 ATAGS have been approved? Will they still order 414 Dhanush, or just wait for ATAGS?


They both are needed.

ArjunPandit
BRFite
Posts: 1423
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ArjunPandit » 26 Aug 2018 23:43

nam wrote:Paks have got hold of surplus M109s from Italy. Around 100+ of them( out of 230). While we wait decades to induct brand new toys.

They are really beefing up their fluid artillery support to cater to our CS.

From 2019 or 2020 onwards we will be gettting at least 150+ guns a year of different types
K9, ATAGS, Dhanush, and M777
Not to exclude the sarang (M46) update. Unless we have to fight in the next 6 months. Things should improve only.
M109 is not a new phenomena. If things were so dire, IA would have cried from top of their lungs(they did too in case of M777)

mody
BRFite
Posts: 396
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby mody » 27 Aug 2018 11:41

For Dhanush, the plan was to get 114 45 cal initially and then get 300 52 cal guns. The Dhanush 52 cal gun is also ready. Maybe OFB internal trials might have been conducted but other trials are pending. They wanted to first sort out the issues with the 45 cal gun.
Its a pity that it took so long. The gun was good to go from 3 years ago.

The Sarang project to upgrade M46 guns has also been hanging fire since a long time. The solution was offered a long time ago. In fact a solution was offered at the time of the first Soltam upgrade itself. However, the OFB gun suffered a barrel burst, likely again due to faulty ammo at the time and the contract was given to Soltam. Due to the bribery allegations, the project was capped after the 1st 180 guns. The original plan was to upgrade 600 guns. Now, it seems the OFB solution has been accepted and another 300 guns are likely to be upgraded. Hope the contract for the same is signed ASAP.

With regards to the truck mounted solution, the picture is not clear. OFB has offered a solution with Dhanush. Tata had offered a solution few years back with Denel gun. I am sure they can modify the same to change the gun to ATAGS. However, they have not displayed any such solution. Along with the towed guns, truck mounted guns are also needed.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9823
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Aditya_V » 27 Aug 2018 15:45

nam wrote:Paks have got hold of surplus M109s from Italy. Around 100+ of them( out of 230). While we wait decades to induct brand new toys.

They are really beefing up their fluid artillery support to cater to our CS.

While on the internet 2nd hand guns are as good as new. Many of these guns would good for cannibilization. HIT Pakistan can change engine oil etc, all the parts are manufactured in US and would need to there for major repairs. So hardly 50% of 2nd hand equipment will be available. A serious threat to us but we need to put Paki internet forum numbers in perspective.

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1484
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby nam » 27 Aug 2018 16:24

ArjunPandit wrote:
nam wrote:Paks have got hold of surplus M109s from Italy. Around 100+ of them( out of 230). While we wait decades to induct brand new toys.

They are really beefing up their fluid artillery support to cater to our CS.

From 2019 or 2020 onwards we will be gettting at least 150+ guns a year of different types
K9, ATAGS, Dhanush, and M777
Not to exclude the sarang (M46) update. Unless we have to fight in the next 6 months. Things should improve only.
M109 is not a new phenomena. If things were so dire, IA would have cried from top of their lungs(they did too in case of M777)


There are two aspects. One is countering M109s. I don't know if a 155MM round can damage/knock off M109, during a counter battery fire. If yes, then we have the counter tech available. They need to be in numbers.

Second is overall procurement. Pak is really good at getting their bread & butter stuff in place, even if they cannot spend a lot on the top end. This allows them to create a constant threshold of threat and hold us to a stalemate even at 1/5 of our defence budget.

Our problem, we are short of basic stuff and on top on it we ignore it. For us it is about spending money on toys we may never use, but it makes us look like mini US/Russia. And we are ready to spend decades waiting for it.

What is our investment in a war which we are actually fighting on LoC? ATAGS is fabulous. Just that, we may never use it.

What are we doing about neutralizing Pak artillery & motar position on reverse/hidden position? which has caused the biggest amount of losses on our civilians and forces?

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1484
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby nam » 27 Aug 2018 16:30

Aditya_V wrote:
nam wrote:Paks have got hold of surplus M109s from Italy. Around 100+ of them( out of 230). While we wait decades to induct brand new toys.

They are really beefing up their fluid artillery support to cater to our CS.

While on the internet 2nd hand guns are as good as new. Many of these guns would good for cannibilization. HIT Pakistan can change engine oil etc, all the parts are manufactured in US and would need to there for major repairs. So hardly 50% of 2nd hand equipment will be available. A serious threat to us but we need to put Paki internet forum numbers in perspective.


M109 parts should be easily available. Pak can route them through turkey. Ofcourse not saying all M109 will be available for action, however they are adding numbers and on the cheap.

They know what really kills. It is the bread & butter stuff. Not fancy PGM or stealth jets. Unless we have complete air superiority & availability, Pak land forces cannot be easily defeated.

Fundamentally a stalemate, which Pak wants.

ArjunPandit
BRFite
Posts: 1423
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ArjunPandit » 27 Aug 2018 16:47

^^nam i see your point and agree to it as well. But just for the heck of arguing, India knows that even having the response or counter fire will not deter pakis (them being pakis only) with their pop growth, they have almost endless supply of cannon fodder. So this cycle is never going to stop unless we level up and hit them and make them cry when the day comes. This is not to say i do not support your strategy.

ks_sachin
BRFite
Posts: 657
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ks_sachin » 27 Aug 2018 17:15

nam wrote:
There are two aspects. One is countering M109s. I don't know if a 155MM round can damage/knock off M109, during a counter battery fire. If yes, then we have the counter tech available. They need to be in numbers.



What are we doing about neutralizing Pak artillery & motar position on reverse/hidden position? which has caused the biggest amount of losses on our civilians and forces?


What makes you think direct 155 shell will not incapacitate a m109.
That shell will definitely make the m109 or any such vehicle unviable to a significant degree. There is a US army test paper I read.

Also how's arty to be used for reverse slope position neutralisation?

For rest of the scenario today the IA is inducting WLR.

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1484
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby nam » 27 Aug 2018 17:28

ks_sachin wrote:
What makes you think direct 155 shell will not incapacitate a m109.
That shell will definitely make the m109 or any such vehicle unviable to a significant degree. There is a US army test paper I read.

I mentioned I don't know if it can or cannot. I don't have the details.
Also how's arty to be used for reverse slope position neutralisation?

For rest of the scenario today the IA is inducting WLR.


Not sure you understood my question.

Ofcourse artillery cannot be used. The only way to some extent, is mortar rounds. But then it will not have range to knock off 105MM artillery.

So my question is what are doing to neutralise Pak 105/120MM artillery on mountains? WLR can point the direction and calculate possible position. What do we do next? We cannot use airpower.

Along with being on reverse slope, on plains PA mortars are fired from trenches, giving them decent protection.

So what is our investment on countering such counter measures?

ks_sachin
BRFite
Posts: 657
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ks_sachin » 27 Aug 2018 19:35

nam wrote:
ks_sachin wrote:
What makes you think direct 155 shell will not incapacitate a m109.
That shell will definitely make the m109 or any such vehicle unviable to a significant degree. There is a US army test paper I read.

I mentioned I don't know if it can or cannot. I don't have the details.
Also how's arty to be used for reverse slope position neutralisation?

For rest of the scenario today the IA is inducting WLR.


Not sure you understood my question.

Ofcourse artillery cannot be used. The only way to some extent, is mortar rounds. But then it will not have range to knock off 105MM artillery.

So my question is what are doing to neutralise Pak 105/120MM artillery on mountains? WLR can point the direction and calculate possible position. What do we do next? We cannot use airpower.

Along with being on reverse slope, on plains PA mortars are fired from trenches, giving them decent protection.

So what is our investment on countering such counter measures?


My apologies...

Not much can be done unless we are prepared to cross the border or launch airstrikes. The only other response to firing across the LoC is to respond disproportionately at a place of our choosing.

If WLR can point the direction nd calculate possible position then you respond in that direction and possible position with force..

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19628
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Philip » 27 Aug 2018 20:19

More LW arty pieces reqd. for the mountains with enough stocks of ammo for a 3 month conflict needed.
The approval of ATAGS is the first step.More desi arty ordered will give a huge boost to domestic industry. I forsee the most effective option to countering Paki cross-border mischief as being massive arty. barrages to grievously wound the Paki army. This will require a large number of additional arty. pieces of various types.Upgrading the erstwhile 130mm pieces to 152/55mm a worthwhile exercise.We also need extra batteries of Pinaka-ER too.

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1484
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby nam » 27 Aug 2018 21:33

ks_sachin wrote:
My apologies...

Not much can be done unless we are prepared to cross the border or launch airstrikes. The only other response to firing across the LoC is to respond disproportionately at a place of our choosing.

If WLR can point the direction nd calculate possible position then you respond in that direction and possible position with force..


No need to apologize. Unfortunately our adversary does not care for civilians losses and our leaders will not allow for crossing the LoC. We did excerise that option till 2003. So firing some random amount of artillery is not going to help.

Unless technical solutions are found out, we cannot stop it.

1. Need better ways to pin point Pak position. Something like air based WLR? or air based optical sensor? Providing us with larger field of view and depth. Can a UAV or airship carry these?

2. Rocket powered or BB guided mortar? which provides extended ranges to target such position.

3. Howering missile which can monitor these position once launched and target them?

4. vertically launched missile which can mimic the trajectory of a mortar, but to longer range?

Unfortunately such requirements are not coming from IA to DRDO. Our preferred way of stopping the fire is DGMO hotlines!

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50632
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 28 Aug 2018 00:03

nam,
Dhanush and ATAGs can out range the M109s.
The DRDO radar can track the locations.
What needed are those PGK fuzes to reduce the number of shells to destroy it.
Even otherwise both the systems can do the job.

souravB
BRFite
Posts: 233
Joined: 07 Jun 2018 13:52

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby souravB » 28 Aug 2018 01:40

We need arty fired precision guided shells like US Excalibur but with a perpendicular drop feature over the target to destroy arty positions in reverse slope.
The idea of a ramjet powered shell doesn't seem too crazy anymore.
Norway's ramjet powered artillery shell
If we can destroy two positions of theirs with pin-point accuracy they will have to move back out of range and the cease fires will become a lot less bloody for us. Sure the shells will be costly but we might only need to fire four or five and it will be worth it.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50632
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 28 Aug 2018 02:29

souravB, Ramjet shell provides more range. ATAGS already has some of the longest range. the need is accuracy to hit the position. However ERFB/BB shell burst radius is quite large: kill radius is 150 feet/50m and casualty radius is 300 feet/100m. With PGK it will be 30 feet.

Picklu
BRFite
Posts: 1720
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Picklu » 28 Aug 2018 02:42

Ramjet won't take care of reverse slope, neither would rail gun.

For reverse slope, miniaturization and ruggedisation of guidance package need to improve multiple order of magnitude.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50632
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 28 Aug 2018 03:23

X-Post...
Looks like Technology Development Fund has funded the CCF fuze development.

https://tdf.drdo.gov.in/funding_details/index/13

This was the ARDE PGK fuze of which we had heard many times.

It was supposed to be ARDE, IIT Mumbai and OFB to fabricate.

Wonder what is going on. If this is a competetion to the ARDE version?

darshhan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2293
Joined: 12 Dec 2008 11:52

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby darshhan » 28 Aug 2018 13:50

souravB wrote:We need arty fired precision guided shells like US Excalibur but with a perpendicular drop feature over the target to destroy arty positions in reverse slope.
The idea of a ramjet powered shell doesn't seem too crazy anymore.
Norway's ramjet powered artillery shell
If we can destroy two positions of theirs with pin-point accuracy they will have to move back out of range and the cease fires will become a lot less bloody for us. Sure the shells will be costly but we might only need to fire four or five and it will be worth it.


You can easily use loitering munitions of various sizes and capacity to take out such targets. Not to mention our Air force consisting of more than 30 squadrons. Sooner or later we have to initiate them.

So I really dont see the need for such uber expensive platinum plated solutions like ramjet powered arty shells. Its like a solution in search of a problem.

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1484
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby nam » 28 Aug 2018 14:17

Guided rounds are preferred over normal rounds in the LoC battle, however a key question remains.

How do you see the target? Laser guided, GPS, IN or whatever you take, you need to see the target.

If a artillery is placed on mountains pass in reverse, there is a huge valley behind the target. Counter battery rounds fly overhead and fall in the valley. They will not explode near the target because 1) you don't know how high should the round explode 2) the round will explode few mts from the ground and the "ground" would be the valley floor.

So it is not just guided rounds. We need mechanism to locate the target. Visually.

Important point: We will not be using 155 rounds. We will not be using Airforce. We do calibrated response. So pointless to discuss 155 rounds or air power or future all out war.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9823
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Aditya_V » 28 Aug 2018 14:37

How about use of weaponized Laksya to do photo reconnaissance and do some bombing of enemy artillery, at night visually it will be difficult to spot , can be audibaly hidden by our artillery and small arms fire, Mountains in and around LOC means I doubt Pakis will have the nessecary radar coverage to detect the small UAV.

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1484
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby nam » 28 Aug 2018 16:39

Aditya_V wrote:How about use of weaponized Laksya to do photo reconnaissance and do some bombing of enemy artillery, at night visually it will be difficult to spot , can be audibaly hidden by our artillery and small arms fire, Mountains in and around LOC means I doubt Pakis will have the nessecary radar coverage to detect the small UAV.


We need high flying UAV, flying on our side, which can look on the other side of the mountains on demand, at a distance of 40-50 km from LoC. This means high power optics, net centric ops, which can guide rounds on these positions.

if not UAV, then atleast jets with high powered recon optics flying at 50k feet and above. Relay the co-ordinates back to ground units, in real time for instant counter battery. The horizon will be more than 250KM at 50K feet.

The jets would be flying safely atleast 10KM from LoC within our territory.

So what we need is optics, networking & guided rounds.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1071
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Gyan » 28 Aug 2018 17:04

Reverse side of Mountain can only be hit by Prahaar or Nirbhay missiles

ks_sachin
BRFite
Posts: 657
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ks_sachin » 28 Aug 2018 17:15

nam wrote:
Aditya_V wrote:How about use of weaponized Laksya to do photo reconnaissance and do some bombing of enemy artillery, at night visually it will be difficult to spot , can be audibaly hidden by our artillery and small arms fire, Mountains in and around LOC means I doubt Pakis will have the nessecary radar coverage to detect the small UAV.


We need high flying UAV, flying on our side, which can look on the other side of the mountains on demand, at a distance of 40-50 km from LoC. This means high power optics, net centric ops, which can guide rounds on these positions.

if not UAV, then atleast jets with high powered recon optics flying at 50k feet and above. Relay the co-ordinates back to ground units, in real time for instant counter battery. The horizon will be more than 250KM at 50K feet.

The jets would be flying safely atleast 10KM from LoC within our territory.

So what we need is optics, networking & guided rounds.


Looking at the terrain is what you are suggesting possible? I.e.photos.


Also can photos be converted into coords for return fire on the fly?

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2520
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby tsarkar » 28 Aug 2018 17:44

ks_sachin wrote:
nam wrote:One is countering M109s. I don't know if a 155MM round can damage/knock off M109, during a counter battery fire.
What makes you think direct 155 shell will not incapacitate a m109. That shell will definitely make the m109 or any such vehicle unviable to a significant degree. There is a US army test paper I read.

If you read Parvez Musharraf's biography, in 1965 he was with a SP artillery unit operating older version of M109/M110. His best friend was killed when his SPA was completely destroyed in Indian Counter Battery fire. SPA have a tank's mobility but very minimal protection.

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1484
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby nam » 28 Aug 2018 18:02

ks_sachin wrote:
Looking at the terrain is what you are suggesting possible? I.e.photos.
Also can photos be converted into coords for return fire on the fly?


Not photos, but video streaming, like the ones we see from Predators. In the case of LoC, the uav/jet has to fly quite high and look quite deep. Higher it goes, the inclination of field of view reduces.

If it can lase such positions, then even better.

The Khan may be having such a kit for Global Hawk.

Vips
BRFite
Posts: 1125
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Vips » 28 Aug 2018 19:57

US Army builds new self-propelled Howitzer - cannon will hit 43.5 miles(70 Kms).

The Army is starting formal production of a new Self-Propelled Howitzer variant engineered for faster movement, better structural protection, improved drive-train ability, new suspension and advanced networking tech, service and industry developers said.

The new vehicle is built with a more capable, larger chassis, designed as an initial step toward building a next-generation cannon able to outgun existing Russian weapons.

As part of a longer-term plan to leverage the new larger chassis built into the Army’s new M109A7 variant, the Army’s Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center is beginning work on a new cannon able to hit enemies out to 70 kilometers (43.5 miles), senior Army developers said.

Senior Army weapons developers have explained that the current 80s-era 39 calibre Howitzer is outgunned by its Russian equivalent - a scenario the service plans to change.

A 70-kilometer target range is, by any estimation, a substantial leap forward for artillery; when GPS guided precision 155mm artillery rounds, such as Excalibur, burst into land combat about ten years ago - its strike range was reported at roughly 30 kilometers. A self-propelled Howitzer able to hit 70-kilometers puts the weapon on par with some of the Army’s advanced land-based rockets - such as its precision-enabled Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System, which also reaches 70-kilometers.

In a modern threat environment, wherein near-peer and smaller-level rivals increasingly possess precision-guided land weapons, longer-range C4ISR technology and drone weapons, increasing range is a ubiquitous emphasis across the Army and other services. Russia’s violations of the INF treaty, new S-500 air defenses, new Armata tanks and fast growing attack drone fleet - all point to a growing need for the US to outrange and outgun potential adversaries.

Furthermore, given the Pentagon’s emphasis upon cross-domain warfare, land weapons are increasingly being developed to attack things like enemy ships, aircraft and ground-based air defenses; naturally, the idea is to pinpoint and destroy enemy targets while remaining at a safer, more protected distance.

Former Deputy Program Executive Officer for Missiles & Space, Brig. Gen. Robert Rasch (Rasch is now the PEO) told Warrior in a previous interview that the service is making a decided push to upgrade and develop longer-range weapons as a way to address current threats - and re-adjust following more than 15 years of counterinsurgency.

Building a Higher-Tech, More Lethal Paladin

Following years of development and advanced engineering, the Army and BAE Systems are now formally entering full-rate production of the new M109A7 and accompanying M992A3 ammunition carrier vehicles. BAE officials said the new Howitzer, designed to replace the existing M109A6 Paladin, will have 600-volts of on-board power generation, high-voltage electric gun drives and projectile ramming systems.

​ Army developers say the A7 has a turret ring down revamp, including a new hull along with a new suspension and power-train. The new Howitzer will, among other things, greatly improve speed and mobility compared to the A6.

“In the past, the A6 Paladin was the slowest vehicle in the Army. It needs to leapfrog. We are restoring that mobility so it will be one of the faster vehicles. Howitzers can now outrun 113s," a senior Army weapons developer said.

Also, as part of maintenance, life-cycle and service extension - all aimed to improve logistics - the new Howitzer is built with an engine and other parts common to the Bradley Fighting Vehicle and emerging Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle.

Improved on-board power is, similar to other emerging higher-tech platforms, designed to enable the vehicle to quickly accommodate upgrades and new weapons technologies as they may evolve - such as lasers or advanced ammunition.

The advanced digital backbone and power generation capability provides significant growth potential for future payloads, a BAE Systems statement said.

One senior Army official told Warrior Maven that improved combat connectivity can enable multiple Howitzers to quickly share firing data, as part of a broader effort to expand battlefield networking and operate in more dispersed formations depending upon mission requirements.

The Army has also been working with the Pentagon’s Strategic Capabilities Office to explore additional innovations for the Howitzer platform.

While initially conceived of and developed for the Navy's emerging Rail Gun Weapon, the Pentagon and Army are now firing the Hyper Velocity Projectile from an Army Howitzer in order to potential harness near-term weapons ability, increase the scope, lethality and range ability to accelerate combat deployment of the lethal, high-speed round.

The rail gun uses an electromagnetic current to fire a kinetic energy warhead up to 100 miles at speeds greater than 5,000 miles an hour, a speed at least three times as fast as existing weapons.

Firing from an Army Howitzer, the hypervelocity projectile can fire at high speeds toward enemy targets to include buildings, force concentrations, weapons systems, drones, aircraft, vehicle bunkers and even incoming enemy missiles and artillery rounds.

"We can defend against an incoming salvo with a bullet," a senior Pentagon weapons developer told reporters during prior testing of the HVP.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50632
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 28 Aug 2018 20:50

Gyan wrote:Reverse side of Mountain can only be hit by Prahaar or Nirbhay missiles

There was a news report in 2013 that Indian Army was working to replace the Prithvis with Prahaar.
Have not heard much since then.
Then there is the Pralay.

Nam counter battery radar can be used to pin point the incoming artillery location.
There are Youtube videos of the Weapons Locating Radar (WLR) from DRDO in action.

Picklu
BRFite
Posts: 1720
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Picklu » 28 Aug 2018 21:13

A GRAD or Pinaka launched SAAW or SANT variant would be excellent to attack reverse slope.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50632
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 28 Aug 2018 21:21

tsarkar wrote:
ks_sachin wrote:What makes you think direct 155 shell will not incapacitate a m109. That shell will definitely make the m109 or any such vehicle unviable to a significant degree. There is a US army test paper I read.

If you read Parvez Musharraf's biography, in 1965 he was with a SP artillery unit operating older version of M109/M110. His best friend was killed when his SPA was completely destroyed in Indian Counter Battery fire. SPA have a tank's mobility but very minimal protection.



In the 1965 war thread, its clear Mushy was at Asal Uttar and the counter battery fire was from the 5.5 " medium guns.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BL_5.5-inch_Medium_Gun
They were out ranged by the Pak 155mm guns but did deliver a useful 82 lb shell. Lt. Col P.R.Jesus was the officer in charge of the 91st Medium artillery there.

BTW during the Burma campaign Indian Army units developed the tactics to use 5.5" gun for direct fire as a Imperial Japanese troops bunker busting weapon.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19628
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Philip » 29 Aug 2018 15:12

http://www.defencenews.in/article/Bhara ... yer-570279

Bharat Forge expects orders for up to 4,000 guns from army; looks to become global player
Wednesday, August 29, 2018
By: CNBC
The Indian army requires 3,000-4,000 artillery weaponry in the next 15 years, said Baba Kalyani, CMD of Bharat Forge.

The defence ministry has approved the purchase of 150 advanced towed artillery gun systems at a cost of over Rs 3,300 crores. "This is a positive for Bharat Forge. There is the added tailwind of the new NAFTA agreement as well," he said.

"I think there will be many more opportunities that will come but this is a very good and a game-changing decision that the government has made,” he added.

Kalyani said that the company was aiming to become a global leader in artillery.

"In the next seven years, we want to be at the top of the league as far as artillery systems are concerned on a worldwide basis,” said Kalyani.

“In two to two and a half years, the order will get completed. This is a fully indigenous equipment, completely right from steel to forgings to machining to everything else, so hopefully we will do well,” said Kalyani.


Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1573
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Manish_P » 29 Aug 2018 17:20

Picklu wrote:A GRAD or Pinaka launched SAAW or SANT variant would be excellent to attack reverse slope.


Sir, how about a CBU 105 type bomb mated on a Pinaka/Smerch type rocket.

Or on an UCAV

Currently the CBU 105 is carried by the Jags

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1484
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby nam » 29 Aug 2018 17:30

Pinaka, Grad, SANT, ballistic missile, CBU etc can only be used in a full fledged war. In that scenario there is no reverse slope. IAF can directly hit them using LGB.

We are discussing the current fight on LoC, where none of these are available. And no, GoI will not ask IAF to bomb, unless Pak invades us.

Even if you want to use guided Pinaka, you need to know where to hit. And that is the crux of the problem and the reason artillery is deployed on reverse slope.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ravishankar, uskumar, Vips and 49 guests