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.
Post Reply
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by ramana »

If IA doesn't want the Garuda, BSF can deploy quickly all along the border. They sure can use it for mobility.
vimal
BRFite
Posts: 1902
Joined: 27 Jul 2017 10:32

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by vimal »

thanks ramana, i'm just a cynical old man atm
YashG
BRFite
Posts: 936
Joined: 22 Apr 2017 00:10

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by YashG »

ramana wrote:
YashG wrote: subtext is interesting + important. an IAS in defence dept. tweeting this with aplomb. Goodluck going to this guy with an gun import list. He knows and well enough what is available in country.
He is a Mechanical Engineer in IAS along with cost Accounting expertise. For once a round peg in a round hole.
Cynicism is nice but please learn to be optimistic.
These are the final trials after Dhanush had barrel bursts during trials.
Quite informative is the 45 rounds continuous fire in the second set of trials with charge 6.
This heats up the barrel and any issue will show up.
saar whr is cynicism in my post. indeed im upbeat abt the fact tht a mod babu is tweeting this. This guy will not be okay with gun import since he knows well that dhanush works. like i said goodluck to anyone trying to go to this guy with gun import list.
mody
BRFite
Posts: 1362
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by mody »

https://www.msn.com/en-in/money/markets ... d=msedgntp

Dhanush second line trails complete. ATAGS final trials set to start. With the no import list and the Ukr-Rus war finally driving the atmanirbhar mantra home, hopefully the trial of ATAGS will go off smoothly too and the orders will follow by the end of the year!!
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by ks_sachin »

mody wrote:https://www.msn.com/en-in/money/markets ... d=msedgntp

Dhanush second line trails complete. ATAGS final trials set to start. With the no import list and the Ukr-Rus war finally driving the atmanirbhar mantra home, hopefully the trial of ATAGS will go off smoothly too and the orders will follow by the end of the year!!
Why should we have 2 diff types of 155mm guns?
arvin
BRFite
Posts: 672
Joined: 17 Aug 2016 21:26

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by arvin »

One has a bigger chamber. So can throw farther. But its a new design with electric drive.
Other is a proven design.
Risk mitigation.
Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7806
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by Anujan »

We had news reports of Army wanting to change ATAGS from electric to hydraulic drive. Is that change no longer on the table? (hard to believe they could have pulled off the change in less than a year)

If so better sense has prevailed (or someone has used the danda or the writing was on the wall with the push on atma nirbharta)

Om Shanti to Athos. Gives me great pleasure.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by ramana »

Also post 4 state elections NaMo in his victory speech emphasized AtmaNirbhar Bharat.
This and new CDS with theatre commands will come.
srin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2508
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by srin »

^^^ Next level too is realizing Atma Nirbhar Bharat.
https://www.timesnownews.com/india/army ... e-90082670
"The biggest lesson is we have to be ready to fight future wars with indigenous weapons. Steps towards Aatmanirbhar Bharat in defence have to be taken more urgently. Wars of future should be fought with own weapon systems," Army Chief General MM Naravane told news agency ANI.
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by ks_sachin »

arvin wrote:One has a bigger chamber. So can throw farther. But its a new design with electric drive.
Other is a proven design.
Risk mitigation.
What risk mitigation?
If both guns pass the tests then choose the better one. Logistics and training are an important part of warfare or is that something that is no longer important.
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12187
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by Pratyush »

The Indian tendency to build a circus of types is quite annoying.

But IMO, in arty space, the ATAGS is the chosen one. The Dhanush in the numbers planned will be a replacement of the existing Bofors holding. ( I have no evidence of that. Just a hunch)

Between the ATAGS and the MGS, we are looking at over 2700 guns.

Add to that the ULH procurement, IIRC, we have a requirement of nearly 900 pieces. Of which we have currently fulfilled only 145. The tracked SPH requirements for 100 is met. The requirements of 280 wheeled SPH will be met by additional production of the tracked guns.

We are looking at nearly 4500 new pieces at the end of the program. If we remove planned Dhanush procurement of 480 from the above number. We are still looking at over 4000 guns.

The numbers are large enough that logistical trail can easily be maintained in our case.
arvin
BRFite
Posts: 672
Joined: 17 Aug 2016 21:26

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by arvin »

ks_sachin wrote: What risk mitigation?
If both guns pass the tests then choose the better one. Logistics and training are an important part of warfare or is that something that is no longer important.
Biggest Risk mitigation is OFB vs Bharat Forge.
Another is cost. I guess ATAGS will be expensive than Dhanush. But will bring more capability.

ATAGS will be important when RAM jet artillery gets inducted.
Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by Vips »

How relevant are/will be the stationary or even slow moving self propelled guns and should we be planning to buy/induct these guns by these huge numbers when you have 155MM 52 caliber guns now available on 6X6 platforms?
Nick_S
BRFite
Posts: 533
Joined: 23 Jul 2011 16:05
Location: Abbatabad

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by Nick_S »

Dhanush artillery finally comes good in confidence trials, ready for induction
by Vishal Thapar

http://bwdefence.businessworld.in/artic ... 22-422579/

Code: Select all

The Dhanush was developed for a longer strike range of 38 km as compared to 27 km of the old Bofors, which had a 155 mm 39 calibre barrel. The range extension required a longer barrel ((45 calibre) and a modified double baffle muzzle brake (MDBMB) system to limit the stress on the structure to 155/39 levels. A design flaw which was resulting in muzzle hits has now been corrected, and its reliability validated through the second round of reliability tests. 
Further info on advances made as compared to the Bofors is in the article.
Barath
BRFite
Posts: 474
Joined: 11 Feb 2019 19:06

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by Barath »

ks_sachin wrote: Why should we have 2 diff types of 155mm guns?
You're right.

Ultra light M-777
Extra range towed ATAGS by Tata /BF
Self propelled K-9
Public sector towed bofors sucessor Dhanush
M46 cheap and limited upgrade Sharang

Before we beat up on Athos, Vehicle borne bharat forge guns or any other.

Did we say 2 diff types ?
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by ks_sachin »

Vips wrote:How relevant are/will be the stationary or even slow moving self propelled guns and should we be planning to buy/induct these guns by these huge numbers when you have 155MM 52 caliber guns now available on 6X6 platforms?
Not a one size fits all. Terrain and operations dictate type.
k prasad
BRFite
Posts: 962
Joined: 21 Oct 2007 17:38
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow
Contact:

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by k prasad »

ks_sachin wrote:
Vips wrote:How relevant are/will be the stationary or even slow moving self propelled guns and should we be planning to buy/induct these guns by these huge numbers when you have 155MM 52 caliber guns now available on 6X6 platforms?
Not a one size fits all. Terrain and operations dictate type.
Also, if the platform of a truck-mounted or self-propelled gun breaks down (engine trouble, damage, puncture... take your pick), the gun is also a dead duck as far as usability is concerned. Not so with towed artillery. It takes a bit more time to set up and move, but the flexibility of operational usage is higher. Visual signature is also smaller. It's much easier to hide a few towed guns than a few 6x6 Tatra with a big pipe sticking out from them.

There's always trade-offs to be made, so the right way to go is to have a healthy mix of towed, ultra-light, wheeled, and self-propelled (tracked) artillery, and in different calibers - 39 cal howitzers, 45 cal, 52 cal, etc.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by brar_w »

Finally someone talks about logistics and sustainment . If you have terrain, weather, distance and quick deployment needs you will prefer to tow as opposed to an integrated system. It is the same for air defense or counter fire radars, power supply and a whole host of other equipment. Folks often look at these and see shortcomings and not their advantages and why militaries they world over with experience in large force employment extensively use this option for a portion or a large chunk of its force.
k prasad
BRFite
Posts: 962
Joined: 21 Oct 2007 17:38
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow
Contact:

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by k prasad »

brarji, could you explain how towed artillery might have deployment time advantages? I thought towed was probably slower to deploy than wheeled and tracked artillery.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by brar_w »

Towed is slower to deploy and is slower to move and to use the shoot and scoot tactics that might be vital to successfully employing artillery. But that isn't the only requirement and there are several situations where that need not be a units prime requirement. You might not have artillery in theater and might need to deploy it very long distances. Here towed systems are advantages as they aren't wedded to a prime mover and are more deployable. In theater, when units attrit you have more options with towed systems as you can move your prime movers around and prioritize what you have left. Similarly, with LW systems like the LW155 (M777) you can sling load it, stuff it into cargo aircraft etc etc. All advantages. Disadvantages is that they take longer to prepare, and are more susceptible to counter-fire compared to highly integrated monolithic systems like say the Archer. Do keep in mind that something as automated as the Archer requires trucks to move cross country, and is probably not theater deployable using tactical airlift and if your truck, or any of its autoloader or electronics breaks down you've lost the gun for the time till its fixed. So you are trading off easy of use, utility vs logistics, deployability, and sustainment. Same with those giant radar units you see with the radar, power supply, and control station all integrated into one vehicle. Looks great but you can lose the entire system if your logistical system can't sustain it for a period of time. Contrast this with a radar group, a power group, and a command group all disaggregated and all compatible with multiple small to large prime movers in your inventory. If you are a tactical unit worried about sustaining these vital systems when you've lost say a third of your logistical supply, you will be much more confident if you can move these systems around and use what you have left.
k prasad
BRFite
Posts: 962
Joined: 21 Oct 2007 17:38
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow
Contact:

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by k prasad »

Thanks for the clarification and detailed explanation, brar! I did get confused by this part of your earlier post:
brar_w wrote:If you have terrain, weather, distance and quick deployment needs you will prefer to tow as opposed to an integrated system.
...hence my question.

btw, first time I have ever seen the word 'attrit' being used. thanks for teaching me a new word!
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by ks_sachin »

Actually that is a good point Brar has made. Getting arty into some of the places we have them makes sense only with towed arty.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by brar_w »

k prasad wrote:Thanks for the clarification and detailed explanation, brar! I did get confused by this part of your earlier post:
brar_w wrote:If you have terrain, weather, distance and quick deployment needs you will prefer to tow as opposed to an integrated system.
...hence my question.

btw, first time I have ever seen the word 'attrit' being used. thanks for teaching me a new word!
Sorry for that confusion. I used deployment in the sense that you are moving equipment to a warzone or between theaters. Here towed systems can be sent faster. When in theater, they are generally slower than self propelled wheeled systems to go from one firing position to another though that might not always be the case depending on the type of terrain you are dealing with. As mentioned earlier, armed forces run a very complex logistics system involving several hundreds of thousands of parts, and people. Each time you buy a new equipment type you are introducing additional items into that logistical system that must then be sustained be made made available at the tip of the spear and at rates commensurate with your desire for the availability of that weapon system. Similarly, the logistical system needs to be designed in such a way to be resilient enough in that it degrades gracefully and not lead to catastrophic supply short fall when most needed at the front line. Towed systems stress this system far less than highly integrated self-propelled systems. So its an often under appreciated advantage of these as they are literally self contained guns that are towed by existing equipment already in the logistical system and can often be towed by multiple types fielded by the armed forces . I know of a weapon system (a sensor) where several automated features were removed/vetoed in favor of hand cranking the radar system during emplacement and displacement because of the logistical footprint it would create and require sustainment of very unique parts (not shared by any other system) at the front lines during conflict which was deemed as disadvantageous to readiness and too complex to be worth the advantage of a faster emplacement/displacement. There is no such thing as free lunch as the saying goes..
Anoop
BRFite
Posts: 632
Joined: 16 May 2002 11:31

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by Anoop »

Very interesting, Brar. In light of the deliberate simplification you mentioned above, how would you assess that tradeoff for hydraulic drive vs electric drive for a howitzer? I am speaking of the recent demand for the replacement of the newer electric drive with the older hydraulic drive system for the ATAGS.
k prasad
BRFite
Posts: 962
Joined: 21 Oct 2007 17:38
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow
Contact:

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by k prasad »

brar_w wrote:Sorry for that confusion. I used deployment in the sense that you are moving equipment to a warzone or between theaters. Here towed systems can be sent faster. When in theater, they are generally slower than self propelled wheeled systems to go from one firing position to another though that might not always be the case depending on the type of terrain you are dealing with.

As mentioned earlier, armed forces run a very complex logistics system involving several hundreds of thousands of parts, and people. Each time you buy a new equipment type you are introducing additional items into that logistical system that must then be sustained be made made available at the tip of the spear and at rates commensurate with your desire for the availability of that weapon system. Similarly, the logistical system needs to be designed in such a way to be resilient enough in that it degrades gracefully and not lead to catastrophic supply short fall when most needed at the front line. Towed systems stress this system far less than highly integrated self-propelled systems. So its an often under appreciated advantage of these as they are literally self contained guns that are towed by existing equipment already in the logistical system and can often be towed by multiple types fielded by the armed forces .

I know of a weapon system (a sensor) where several automated features were removed/vetoed in favor of hand cranking the radar system during emplacement and displacement because of the logistical footprint it would create and require sustainment of very unique parts (not shared by any other system) at the front lines during conflict which was deemed as disadvantageous to readiness and too complex to be worth the advantage of a faster emplacement/displacement. There is no such thing as free lunch as the saying goes..
An excellent post, brar-sir. I remember watching live the assembly and disassembly of the Bharani Radar, and was quite impressed by how quickly and easily it was done, and the design that allowed the snap-on snap-off assembly. All done - from on to boxed and sealed in 20 minutes, and this was with the LRDE folks going at a leisurely pace.

You're absolutely on point re logistic footprint. One point that came to mind reading your post was that towed arty is probably faaar easier to transport over rail - you can fit multiple guns on a single bogie rather than a single truck or Vajra that'd fit if it were wheeled or tracked SP-artillery.

Do you think logistics-related considerations were the reason IA asked for the electric drive to be replaced with a hydraulic drive?
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12187
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by Pratyush »



There is a consensus on BRF that m46 upgraded to 155 mm, lack the elevation capacity of the FH77.

Seeing that video, the two guns are placed side by side and the elevation appears to be nearly identical.
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14331
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by Aditya_V »

Pratyush wrote:

There is a consensus on BRF that m46 upgraded to 155 mm, lack the elevation capacity of the FH77.

Seeing that video, the two guns are placed side by side and the elevation appears to be nearly identical.
The extra elevation is not in plains, only in Mountains where Howitzers will use the extra angle to clear Mountain tops, 45degree should give max range in Plains. In plains I guess propellant can be reduced to hit closer Targets. at 1:22 you can see the K-9 Vajra Elevation
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by brar_w »

k prasad wrote:Do you think logistics-related considerations were the reason IA asked for the electric drive to be replaced with a hydraulic drive?
I have no idea on those systems. But decisions taking based on logistics or other considerations can sometimes appear to be weird or a step backwards when not factoring in these important but very specific (and often under-discussed) considerations. Imagine a bunch of engineers developing a 20+ million dollar AESA radar and then being told to to remove all automation because the customer prefers to have 3-5 Marines manually emplace and displace it :rotfl: . It is perplexing until you realize that the unique parts you're removing would have required considerations like X # of provisioned V-22 sorties to move from a ship to the field, and a non trivial impact on forward spare and equipment basing and C-130 sorties to sustain any unique equipment your design is adding to the already taxed logistical system.
srin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2508
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by srin »

Insightful interview, but horrible editing ... There is some stuff at the end about aero engines, but it is quite vague.
We Are Hopeful Of Not Only ATAGS To Be Inducted But Garuda And Light Weapon Also—Baba Kalyani, CMD Bharat Forge
So in the seventies, for example, we used to make 81 millimetre mortars that was very popular with the Indian army at that time. In the 80s we started making larger mortars, 120 millimetre, started making shells 105, 120 and 130 millimetre and later on in the 90s when the Kargil operation started, India ran out of ammunition for the artillery guns of Bofors, which was 155 millimetre. So, we got an emergency request from the MOD to make ammunition. The definition of ammunition at that time was ready-to-fill-shell because no private sector company was allowed to be in the exclusive business to fill explosives. Nobody had licenses to do that. So we did the metal parts finished machine.
So we make our own barrels. And that's the most difficult part in an artillery is to make barrels. We make our own barrels. We have a huge capacity and two production lines. We make our own breech, we make our own recoil systems, and we make our own muzzle brakes. Now we make our own electronic control systems that go into this. We have a lot of sub supplies, who we work with, but they're all local.
But when you're designing a gun and you're making something, you make an improvement then you need to see how it works. So you need to be able to test fire, but you can't wait for one year to go and fire, then it takes a longer time. But in spite of this, I think we have made good progress. I think we should now see very quickly the induction of this gun in the Indian Army. In the meantime, we have designed three more platforms. One platform has been tested for almost close to a four to six months in the Northern and Eastern areas in the mountains, which is our, what we call as Garuda, it's a very unique technology. It's a 3 ton 105 field gun. Now, this is the capability that we have and it's been fired, it's been tested even on the vehicle on which this gun sits. So we not only design the gun, we can design the vehicle. We can do all this thing.
If you put a rocket propulsion, ammunition on it, it will go 70 kilometres. Okay. Now we can make the 52 caliber to 58 caliber, but you'll be, I think our Mach 2 or Mach 3 program and then to a 62 caliber. Will go pretty much to 90, to a 100 kilometres in five years. And this capability apart from one or two countries in the world, nobody else has.
DRDO is doing the basic design. Okay. They don't do every detail like board and produce some 10,000 drawings of every component. They give you an envelope design.

The conceptual design is done by DRDO. And whoever is the production partner in case of ATAGS, it is the Tata and us, we start making the product based on their design. But it is not that Tata product is exactly the same as our project. They use their own engineering knowledge. The way they think is right. We use our own engineering knowledge, but the performance, what is important is the performance characteristics have to be the same. Now this is a very, very good approach because with this approach, you have the best of both worlds. You have the best of industry capability. The best of applied research capability of DRDO.
The most difficult part of an artillery gun is barrel and breech. So you can make a gun without making the barrel and breech that is the only fabrication that even if you go outside this factory, I can get that made with a fabricator.

Why barrel and breech are important? Because the amount of calculations that go into creating you know, the whole pressure, the ballistics data, the strength of material data and all those kinds of things is humongous. Believe me, it's very, very large. And it requires a lot of experts who have knowledge in this area. In the old days, everything used to have formulas, I mean, some of them are the old formulas now. And in the new age, a lot of formulas, got replaced with simulations, but even to do a computer simulation, you required a lot of knowledge. And that knowledge, no foreigner is ever going to give you for sure. And that is why DRDO is extremely important. It's important for national security, it’s important for industry to develop natural capability.
Whether it's Israel, whether it's France whether it's US, you know, nobody is willing to give you the, technology, the real technology. They are only willing to give you peripheral technology. And we have a lot of discussions on this with our partners, trying to make them understand that this will not work.
For 40 years, India has been making TOT agreements with many companies. I mean, mainly the Indian government with and DPSUs and all that. Today, we should have had a fantastic defence industry. How come we are still importing 70 percent?
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by ramana »

Nick_S wrote:Dhanush artillery finally comes good in confidence trials, ready for induction
by Vishal Thapar

http://bwdefence.businessworld.in/artic ... 22-422579/

Code: Select all

The Dhanush was developed for a longer strike range of 38 km as compared to 27 km of the old Bofors, which had a 155 mm 39 calibre barrel. The range extension required a longer barrel ((45 calibre) and a modified double baffle muzzle brake (MDBMB) system to limit the stress on the structure to 155/39 levels. A design flaw that was resulting in muzzle hits has now been corrected, and its reliability was validated through the second round of reliability tests. 
Further info on advances made as compared to the Bofors is in the article.
Very good article. It does not tell what was the design flaw? Looks like the shell wobble at the highest charge could hit the muzzle. So the solution was to make it a larger diameter to encompass the nutated shell diameter. Only this explanation fits the need to have 45 rounds fired at the max charge in the second trial.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by ramana »

Lt Gen Ravishankar on Future of Indian Artillery

https://www.gunnersshot.com/2022/03/the ... y.html?m=1
Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5128
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by Manish_Sharma »

114 Dhanush guns were ordered by Indian Army in 2018 from OFB. By 2022 only 12 have been delivered with quality defects. The world's best forging firm Bharat Forge has built formidable expertise in arty. Give them designs, orders for Dhanush guns. OFB cant hold nation hostage !
https://twitter.com/Ak5985965/status/15 ... mMHbw&s=19
________________________

Army not only stopped production of OFB dhanush but also refused to order ATAGS from both Bharat Forge & TATAs. Even for ATAGS, both designs have defects as per Army. So, More trials.

Jab dil mange imports toh tooph kaya kare.
https://twitter.com/bheemmz/status/1510 ... eiDSw&s=19
_____________________

Dhanush order was halted pending re-confirmatory trials as army said it found defect with hydraulics and sighting system if remember correctly...now dhanush has again cleared those trials..so lets see how it goes with army requirement.
https://twitter.com/raflanker/status/15 ... 4waVA&s=19
_________________________

There were barrel burts with troops injured !
https://twitter.com/Ak5985965/status/15 ... PXPgA&s=19
Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7806
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by Anujan »

It will take some time, but it will slowly sink in that there is no chance of any imports.

Now that leaves the army with two options: Fight without guns, or work with manufacturers - be it OFB, DRDO, Kalyani, L&T ityadi to iterate and improve on local maal.

People will see the light and better sense will prevail soon.
Atmavik
BRFite
Posts: 1985
Joined: 24 Aug 2016 04:43

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by Atmavik »

Anujan wrote:It will take some time, but it will slowly sink in that there is no chance of any imports.

Now that leaves the army with two options: Fight without guns, or work with manufacturers - be it OFB, DRDO, Kalyani, L&T ityadi to iterate and improve on local maal.

People will see the light and better sense will prevail soon.

i hope your right. but the Lobby is saying "you may have the clock but we have the Time". need some large orders from our pvt industry..
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by ramana »

New CDS will lay the law. No imports.
The Dhanush has cleared all trials.
And ATAGS is being delayed with new requirements.
If the gun is qualified for old requirements then buy them.
Can get an upgrade once it's proofed if that is important.
No requirements will be flowed down without upper-level review.
SidSoma
BRFite
Posts: 241
Joined: 16 Feb 2018 15:09

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by SidSoma »

Anujan wrote:I
Now that leaves the army with two options: Fight without guns, or work with manufacturers - be it OFB, DRDO, Kalyani, L&T ityadi to iterate and improve on local maal.
There are yet other options.
1. MoD and Army Take no action. Reject all Indigenous options.
2. Wait for Govt change to happen, in the next 2 years and then order foreign guns enmass.
3. If that does not happen, precipitate a border emergency. Blame the govt for inaction and force an emergency clearance for foreign guns (worst case in an G to G deal)

This is the livelihood of many many scores of ppl. They will get inventive and vindictive.
Vidur
BRFite
Posts: 309
Joined: 20 Aug 2017 18:57

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by Vidur »

ramana wrote:New CDS will lay the law. No imports.
The Dhanush has cleared all trials.
And ATAGS is being delayed with new requirements.
If the gun is qualified for old requirements then buy them.
Can get an upgrade once it's proofed if that is important.
No requirements will be flowed down without upper-level review.
New CDS :?: The value of the appointment has already been degraded by waiting so long and momentum has been lost. And no, the army line of succession argument is a red herring. Mohanty and Joshi who were 6 months senior to Pandey retired in Jan. Raj Shukla is same seniority as Pandey and even he has retired
A Sharma
BRFite
Posts: 1205
Joined: 20 May 2003 11:31

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by A Sharma »

India successfully test-fires Pinaka missile systems

A new version of the Pinaka rocket system has been successfully flight-tested by the DRDO and the Indian Army at the Pokhran firing ranges, the defence ministry said on Saturday.

As many as 24 Pinaka Mk-I (Enhanced) Rocket Systems (EPRS) were fired for different ranges during the last fortnight and the weapons met the required accuracy and consistency, it said.

The EPRS is the upgraded version of the Pinaka variant that has been in service with the Indian Army for the last decade.

The ministry said the rocket system has been upgraded with advanced technologies enhancing the range to meet the emerging requirements.

"Pinaka Mk-I (Enhanced) Rocket System (EPRS) and Pinaka Area Denial Munition (ADM) rocket systems have been successfully flight-tested by Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) and Indian Army at Pokhran firing ranges," the ministry said in a statement.

"With these trials, the initial phase of technology absorption of EPRS by the industry has successfully been completed and the industry partners are ready for user trials/series production of the rocket system," it added.

The Pinaka rocket system has been developed by Armament Research and Development Establishment, Pune, supported by High Energy Materials Research Laboratory, another Pune-based laboratory of the DRDO.

After establishing the performance efficacy of the enhanced range version of Pinaka, the technology was transferred to Munitions India Limited (MIL) and Economic Explosives Limited, Nagpur.

"Rockets manufactured by MIL under transfer of technology from DRDO were flight-tested during this campaign. Different variants of munitions and fuses which can be used in the Pinaka rocket system were also successfully test evaluated in the Pokhran field firing range," the defence ministry said.

DRDO Chairman G Satheesh Reddy has congratulated the teams involved in the project for completing the flight trials of the rockets.
Anoop
BRFite
Posts: 632
Joined: 16 May 2002 11:31

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by Anoop »

Vidur wrote:And no, the army line of succession argument is a red herring. Mohanty and Joshi who were 6 months senior to Pandey retired in Jan. Raj Shukla is same seniority as Pandey and even he has retired
Vidur, what does this mean? Since the current Chief is due to retire only on April 30, what relevance does the earlier retirement date of the other officers have, on this matter? CDS or no CDS, they would have superannuated before the current Chief demits office.
Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by Vips »

DRDO has issued a tender for a new 8X8 truck to carry 155 MM 52 caliber gun. Disappointing that when the rest of the world has already moved to 6x6 vehicle, we will in the future have a logistically more challenging truck for the MGS. (Weight, Speed, Range, Maneuverability etc)
Post Reply