Artillery Corps: 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.
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8216
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby Pratyush » 07 Nov 2019 14:17

For NE the should remain as they are. Are they designed to be mule portable. I don't think so.

Though they should be whirly bird portable.

Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2697
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby Vips » 07 Nov 2019 18:32

Thakur_B wrote:Image
Image

Bharat forge ULH.


Hats off to the Kalyani's for putting in their personal funds in setting up the defense products division. This inspite of the PSU mentality of the majority of our (Gober)ments. Only wish other Indian industrialists had the vision and guts to do something similar.

Zynda
BRFite
Posts: 1881
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 00:37
Location: J4

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby Zynda » 07 Nov 2019 19:32

^^10+. Wish other private players were more enthusiastic...

Raghunathgb
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 97
Joined: 23 Apr 2019 18:16

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby Raghunathgb » 07 Nov 2019 19:42

Has Bharat forge offered it's ultra light howitzer to army for testing ? Last I heard that they are still working on it.

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3429
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby fanne » 07 Nov 2019 19:56

and Bharat Forge should be rewarded by contract for this. We need light guns in the Himalayas, 145 guns is too small a number.

Raghunathgb
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 97
Joined: 23 Apr 2019 18:16

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby Raghunathgb » 07 Nov 2019 20:01

fanne wrote:and Bharat Forge should be rewarded by contract for this. We need light guns in the Himalayas, 145 guns is too small a number.


Army should go with all steel, less expensive and maintenance free (lesser ) artillery gun which weighs 6.8 tonnes at lesser price. They even have titanium version at 4.5 tonnes.

Kakarat
BRFite
Posts: 1974
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby Kakarat » 07 Nov 2019 21:24

Raghunathgb wrote:
fanne wrote:and Bharat Forge should be rewarded by contract for this. We need light guns in the Himalayas, 145 guns is too small a number.


Army should go with all steel, less expensive and maintenance free (lesser ) artillery gun which weighs 6.8 tonnes at lesser price. They even have titanium version at 4.5 tonnes.


The steal gun is heavier but modular, it can be dismantlement into two for easy transportation and reassembled in the field with minimum effort

Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2302
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby Manish_P » 07 Nov 2019 21:24

I know we do not have the vehicle platform but regarding the gun itself.. is it the same 105mm gun system they are showing with truck mounting or a different one ?

Kalyani Group India to showcase Garuda-105 105mm ultra-light field gun mounted on Humvee

Image

Avinandan
BRFite
Posts: 216
Joined: 12 Jun 2005 12:29
Location: Pune

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby Avinandan » 08 Nov 2019 00:28

Manish_P wrote:I know we do not have the vehicle platform but regarding the gun itself.. is it the same 105mm gun system they are showing with truck mounting or a different one ?

Kalyani Group India to showcase Garuda-105 105mm ultra-light field gun mounted on Humvee

Image


That system is called Garuda 105 which is much lighter. Bharat Forge systems have been discussed in detail in previous thread in Sep 2014.

And we have Tata truck based solution too.
Image

Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2302
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby Manish_P » 08 Nov 2019 11:29

Thank you. Could you please point me to relevant post/s about the system itself.

I used the search function ('Bharat Forge') but could only find general news posts in the 'India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector' and the 'Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments' threads.

Avinandan
BRFite
Posts: 216
Joined: 12 Jun 2005 12:29
Location: Pune

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby Avinandan » 09 Nov 2019 21:39


Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2302
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby Manish_P » 09 Nov 2019 23:57

Thank you! These didn't turn up in the search results somehow..

VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2342
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby VinodTK » 22 Nov 2019 19:49

Indian Army to soon get longest range 'Advanced Towed Artillery Gun System'

Express News Service
BHUBANESWAR: India’s first indigenously built Advanced Towed Artillery Gun System (ATAGS) with automated ammunition handling facility will be inducted in the Army soon. The 155 mm and 52 calibre howitzer is the world’s longest range gun system in its class.

Union Secretary of Defence R&D Department G Satheesh Reddy on Thursday said the gun has cleared all developmental tests successfully and will be inducted in the Armed Forces after a couple of more trials.

Reddy was attending the 125th anniversary of Proof and Experimental Establishment (PXE), a laboratory of Defence and Development Organisation (DRDO), at Chandipur in Balasore district. "ATAGS is the pride of the nation. The gun has now the world’s longest range in 155 mm class. PXE has the distinction of testing the gun and making it certified. The Armed Forces have already given their consent for induction of a number of such guns," he informed.

Developed by Armament Research and Development Establishment of DRDO in a consortium model, the ATAGS comes with six round automated magazine capable of firing in 30 seconds. The existing 155 mm and 52-calibre guns have standard three-round magazine. Since the magazines need to be loaded manually, it leads to casualties during the exercise.

The project was taken up in 2013 to replace older guns in service with modern 155 mm artillery gun. Configured with an all electric drive the hydro lateral gun has a maximum firing range of 48 km and can be deployed in less than three minutes. It was first showcased publicly during the Republic Day parade in 2017.

The advanced gun system that weighs around 18 tonne with an elevation up to 70 degrees has undergone developmental trials at Balasore, Pokhran and Sikkim. While the ballistic internal trial and proofing were done at PXE and strength and design were validated during summer trials at Pokhran, winter trails were conducted in Sikkim.

Reddy, who is also the Chairman of DRDO, urged the scientists working with the PXE and Integrated Test Range (ITR) to come up with modern technologies, equipment and infrastructure to ensure that the test range is one the most modern ranges in the world.

He also warned to remain alert for future warfare. It is just not land, water or sky, threats related to space and cyber world have entered into the warfare spectre in a big way, he said.

“When gadgets have become part and parcel of life, we are always vulnerable to cyber attacks. Measures need to be taken by all to ensure that cyber security is insured. Advisories have been sent to all laboratories. It can be detrimental if not adhered to properly,” he added.
Image

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3579
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby nam » 24 Nov 2019 03:01

We regularly discuss about IA's obsession with weight. Here is one example, why it is important.

Now imagine ATAGS being towed, instead of bofors here.


srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby srai » 24 Nov 2019 04:54

^^^
Can’t have one-size-fits-all. There are 155mm ultra-light guns for rugged terrain and poor infrastructure.

uddu
BRFite
Posts: 1862
Joined: 15 Aug 2004 17:09

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby uddu » 24 Nov 2019 06:40

Ample space is there. More powerful trucks getting inducted today. So what's the problem. This weight obsession is unwanted to a great extend and has resulted in Army getting substandard products like T-90s and restricting itself. We have seen the example with Arjun.

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1954
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby srin » 24 Nov 2019 09:44

nam wrote:We regularly discuss about IA's obsession with weight. Here is one example, why it is important.

Now imagine ATAGS being towed, instead of bofors here.



That's more to to do with the FAT specs than that of the gun itself, no ?

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3579
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby nam » 24 Nov 2019 14:47

The FAT is not just towing the gun, it is also carrying ammo. More heavier the gun, lesser the ammo you can carry.

Ofcourse, you then induct new FAT. Which means extra cost, time & effort to test the new FAT in every type of ops environment.

Not to mention, higher you go, lower the performance of the FAT engine. Steeper the inclination, more difficult to tow the gun. This reduces the number of deploy-able location.

To prevent these extra headaches, IA wants weight optimized hardware.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3579
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby nam » 24 Nov 2019 15:25

How to build a SPH.


sarabpal.s
BRFite
Posts: 344
Joined: 13 Sep 2008 22:04

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby sarabpal.s » 24 Nov 2019 16:10

nam wrote:The FAT is not just towing the gun, it is also carrying ammo. More heavier the gun, lesser the ammo you can carry.

Ofcourse, you then induct new FAT. Which means extra cost, time & effort to test the new FAT in every type of ops environment.

Not to mention, higher you go, lower the performance of the FAT engine. Steeper the inclination, more difficult to tow the gun. This reduces the number of deploy-able location.

To prevent these extra headaches, IA wants weight optimized hardware.

Imho fat don't carry ammo while in long transportation mode

manjgu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2333
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby manjgu » 24 Nov 2019 19:34

why do I in my wet dreams see 1000 ATAGS firing together and razing Muzaffarabad !! why why :roll:

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12031
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby Aditya_V » 25 Nov 2019 12:04

In the video is the older Tatra fat or the NEw Ashok Leyland Fat's

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7726
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby rohitvats » 26 Nov 2019 17:33

WoW!

As is typical of BRF, love the way people disregard and wave-off operational issues.

ATAGS is 4 tonnes heavier? So what? Simply get a more powerful FAT!

Never mind the dimensions of such a FAT or the dimensions of gun itself. For example, barrel on Bofors has a length of about 19.5 feet while ATAGS has 22.8 feet. The difference in the traveling length of the two guns is likely to be higher still.

But yeah! Just get a more powerful FAT...

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19516
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby Karan M » 26 Nov 2019 17:51

Relook at the orderbook:

144 ATAGs (52 cal)
109 K-9 Vajra (52 cal)
114 Dhanush (45 cal)
300 Sarang upgrades (45 cal)
145 M777 ULH (39 cal)

A total of 812, 155mm guns and we are still not done with our orders.

The unannounced but operative policy to not induct arty in IA which seemed to have been in force during UPA is well and truly over.

Next, fingers crossed that ammo production also moves from OFB to private sector.

2x Pinaka regiments to add to the 2x Pinaka in service were ordered in 2016. That should be 40 launchers and 16x command posts. Apart from the loading vehicles etc.

Guided Pinaka is also on the order book, with 6 regiments of orders to be placed. That's 120 launchers, and 48 command posts.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12031
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby Aditya_V » 26 Nov 2019 18:31

How about 52 call Atags for the plains and 39/45 call 155mm for the hills.

hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3826
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby hnair » 26 Nov 2019 19:22

Karan M, was there a down-select of a specific model of ATAGS based on the two distinct ones by Kalyan’s and TATA’s ? Could not track that one down

Hopefully they go with both, so the two design and manufacturing streams stay alive. Bofors/Bae stayed alive with orders in the low hundreds, as did NEXTER and IAI. Even compared to khan, we have a huge potential order book

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8161
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby Indranil » 26 Nov 2019 19:53

rohitvats wrote:WoW!

As is typical of BRF, love the way people disregard and wave-off operational issues.

ATAGS is 4 tonnes heavier? So what? Simply get a more powerful FAT!

Never mind the dimensions of such a FAT or the dimensions of gun itself. For example, barrel on Bofors has a length of about 19.5 feet while ATAGS has 22.8 feet. The difference in the traveling length of the two guns is likely to be higher still.

But yeah! Just get a more powerful FAT...

I dont understand this discussion at all because I don't have knowledge of the context. But, your response surprised me. How can you build a 23 ltr chamber volume without commensurate increase in weight and length?

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8161
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby Indranil » 26 Nov 2019 19:57

Aditya_V wrote:In the video is the older Tatra fat or the NEw Ashok Leyland Fat's

It is actually a Tata FAT. Orders placed in 2014. Ashoka Leyland FATs exist too, 450 of them. They can be distinguished from their cabins.

ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3492
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby ArjunPandit » 26 Nov 2019 20:09

Karan M wrote:Relook at the orderbook:

144 ATAGs (52 cal)
109 K-9 Vajra (52 cal)
114 Dhanush (45 cal)
300 Sarang upgrades (45 cal)
145 M777 ULH (39 cal)

A total of 812, 155mm guns and we are still not done with our orders.

The unannounced but operative policy to not induct arty in IA which seemed to have been in force during UPA is well and truly over.

Next, fingers crossed that ammo production also moves from OFB to private sector.

2x Pinaka regiments to add to the 2x Pinaka in service were ordered in 2016. That should be 40 launchers and 16x command posts. Apart from the loading vehicles etc.

Guided Pinaka is also on the order book, with 6 regiments of orders to be placed. That's 120 launchers, and 48 command posts.

I see pinaka orders going through a lot more easily than the arty guns...which kind of surprises me because arty guns are going to be the first weapon of choice (in the artillery spectrum). May be this has to do with the indigenization, more rigorous testing by IA, bureaucratic hurdles or just that pinaka is seeing repeat orders..either ways..i, like most here, would have wanted things to go faster..
that said karan & rohit what is your take on BF ULH do you see orders for it down the lane....

pkudva
BRFite
Posts: 168
Joined: 23 Jul 2008 13:57

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby pkudva » 26 Nov 2019 20:16

ArjunPandit wrote:
Karan M wrote:Relook at the orderbook:

144 ATAGs (52 cal)
109 K-9 Vajra (52 cal)
114 Dhanush (45 cal)
300 Sarang upgrades (45 cal)
145 M777 ULH (39 cal)

A total of 812, 155mm guns and we are still not done with our orders.

The unannounced but operative policy to not induct arty in IA which seemed to have been in force during UPA is well and truly over.

Next, fingers crossed that ammo production also moves from OFB to private sector.

2x Pinaka regiments to add to the 2x Pinaka in service were ordered in 2016. That should be 40 launchers and 16x command posts. Apart from the loading vehicles etc.

Guided Pinaka is also on the order book, with 6 regiments of orders to be placed. That's 120 launchers, and 48 command posts.

I see pinaka orders going through a lot more easily than the arty guns...which kind of surprises me because arty guns are going to be the first weapon of choice (in the artillery spectrum). May be this has to do with the indigenization, more rigorous testing by IA, bureaucratic hurdles or just that pinaka is seeing repeat orders..either ways..i, like most here, would have wanted things to go faster..
that said karan & rohit what is your take on BF ULH do you see orders for it down the lane....


Order on ATAGS is Yet to be Placed.
Handing over of Dhanush- Delay is seen.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7726
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby rohitvats » 26 Nov 2019 20:59

Indranil wrote: I dont understand this discussion at all because I don't have knowledge of the context. But, your response surprised me. How can you build a 23 ltr chamber volume without commensurate increase in weight and length?


The chamber volume is actually 25 liters. And here's the most brilliant part - IA did not ask for increased chamber volume and range!!!

- Bofors is 12 tonnes and it seems foreign 155/52 are 15 tonnes. Most likely because of 23 liter chamber volume.
- It should be between IA and DRDO to decide on this aspect of trade-off between range and weight.
- Traditionally, I've not seen IA being too enthusiastic about sector specific weapons.
- Also, I think ATAGS original weight was 20-tonnes which was brought down to 18 tonnes. Can they bring it down any further? I don't know.

But the good thing with ATAGS is that we've time. With Dhanush being a success, and it being inducted, DRDO still has time to address whatever issues the gun has and work out an action plan in conjunction with the army.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8161
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby Indranil » 26 Nov 2019 21:31

Got it. And thanks for the correction.

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2579
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby Katare » 26 Nov 2019 23:44

Bofors is 39 caliber, 29 KM range artillery gun while ATAGS is 52 caliber 48KM range gun (65% increase). How come there weight be comparable? If you want big guns you would need big FATs and better roads. They also have option to keep using smaller Bofors and Dhanush to utilize their existing infrastructure while upgrading the same as new big bad boys come on board and little ones go off on retirement.

Also weight can only go down from here as design matures and technology improves and roads/infra would also only going to get better so from my POV ATAGs with larger chamber is future ready design that’ll serve us well into second part of the 21st century.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7726
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby rohitvats » 26 Nov 2019 23:58

From Twitter handle of Lt Gen Shankar, ex-Arty DG, who led the whole Dhanush effort; I had asked him about weight issue of ATAGS:

Too heavy. major issues involved. Accuracy and consistency suffers badly. Future Range increment from ammunition technologies, not from barrel lengths or increased chamber capacity any more. I welcome it as an indigenous effort only if weight comes down.

On being asked if Excalibur is the answer:

Not necessarily Excalibur. We need to go in for ramjet technology or something there.

On being asked about using ATAGS in plains/desert to mitigate weight issue:

Who said weight is not an issue in plains. One has to deploy off roads in x country and move in deserts.
------------------

I hope this clears some air on the subject.

Avinandan
BRFite
Posts: 216
Joined: 12 Jun 2005 12:29
Location: Pune

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby Avinandan » 27 Nov 2019 00:09

rohitvats wrote:Too heavy. major issues involved. Accuracy and consistency suffers badly. Future Range increment from ammunition technologies, not from barrel lengths or increased chamber capacity any more. I welcome it as an indigenous effort only if weight comes down

Rohitji,
It is too bad :cry: :cry: .
I was having wet dreams that ATAGS is closer for induction.

But there would be some merit in the overall design otherwise why would Army even bother about ATAGS, no ?

Regarding accuracy, can't we take leverage from Kalyani Bharat 52 or Dhanush experience.

As for the weight, there is a 3 Ton difference (desired 15 Vs 18 Tons) now.From your knowledge do you feel we could reduce it a bit further while keeping the costs in check ?

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1434
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby Gyan » 27 Nov 2019 00:16

Welcome M777 Caliber 52

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8161
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby Indranil » 27 Nov 2019 00:17

Rohit,

I bow the generals expertise in the field. And yes a lot of refinements coming from the shell. I read about them because I am interested in the aero stuff.

But isn't it true that the calibre was restricted earlier on because the accuracy suffered way too much. Now with the shells being able to correct their trajectories, people are looking at higher capacity guns again. I know this is true in the US for sure.

The ramjet tech comes from Norway. We have discussed it here. That is phenomenally expensive way of extending range with current technology. It's been around for a while.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7660
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby nachiket » 27 Nov 2019 00:27

rohitvats wrote:The chamber volume is actually 25 liters. And here's the most brilliant part - IA did not ask for increased chamber volume and range!!!

Interesting. I wonder why the DRDO decided to go that route then. Surely they must have looked at the tradeoffs (size and weight) and discussed with their only customer what the desired specifications should be? If not, they have only themselves to blame.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3579
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby nam » 27 Nov 2019 00:29

To reduce weight, would require use of Titanium, like it has been done for BF ULH or M777. However this means higher cost and maintenance.

Not necessarily Excalibur. We need to go in for ramjet technology or something


Exaclibur, ramjet are silver bullet solutions. Artillery rounds are meant to be cheap volume fire. You will not get volume with such a path.

US which has all these PG kit, has gone for 55 caliber, 25 litre M109 upgrade! PGK then provides the low cost course correction. Having longer barrel and higher chamber volume is the economical way to increase range.

We do have the option of using 25 litre on SPH & MGS, if towed becomes an issue.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3579
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Postby nam » 27 Nov 2019 00:34

Personally, it is difficult for me to believe DRDO themselves decided on 25 litre chamber volume. They were building a artillery for the first time and there was no other known gun in other parts of the world with such chamber volume.

Is this a case where IA asked for longer range and DRDO implemented it through increase chamber volume rather than through PG kit on a shell?


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: sanjayc, suryag and 64 guests