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
Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3866
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by Kakkaji »

Pratyush wrote:Why did the gun have the systems it did. Was it because DRDO people didn't care about the army's inputs.

Or is it because the army asked for it and now they are refusing to accept the end result.

Sure would be nice to know.
Looks like the ATAGS has been effectively 'Arjun-ed'. They have used the same playbook.

Well played, Army! :roll:

Dhanush/ Bharat 52 are old technology for us. ATAGS is too new technology for us.

Give us the ATHOS. It is perfect for us. :((
Last edited by Kakkaji on 12 Jul 2021 20:55, edited 1 time in total.
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14331
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by Aditya_V »

Anyone asking for a HPS instead of EPS is like asking for a Propeller engine in the Jet age. Can we have the names in the public of anyone making such decisions, either the media is wrong which has been proved wrong many times before, or there is someone upto tricks.
mody
BRFite
Posts: 1362
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by mody »

The Indian army is still stuck in the 1980's. The whole world would laugh at these kind of requirement changes. Sigh :|
sanjayc
BRFite
Posts: 1091
Joined: 22 Aug 2016 21:40

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by sanjayc »

Generals have learnt the trick of imposing late-stage changes in home grown systems which are on verge of completion, to keep delaying them for years. Then they pull the card of "urgent operational necessity" out of their hat to ask for imports. Maybe they need to be sent to the gulag to get some lessons in nationalism. They have become the biggest bottleneck in developing India's military capability, which is quite ironic. We now have the skills, the know-how, the R&D to develop into a military production powerhouse .. but generals demur and keep acting like a non-serious buyer who has no stake in the sale.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25085
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by SSridhar »

Truly mind boggling, if true.
arvin
BRFite
Posts: 672
Joined: 17 Aug 2016 21:26

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by arvin »

Any other country would have focused on increasing the range.
Kargil to Skardu is 100 km.
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14331
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by Aditya_V »

Guys there will be some speculation till the ATAGS orders are placed.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by ramana »

Pratyush wrote:Why did the gun have the systems it did. Was it because DRDO people didn't care about the army's inputs.

Or is it because the army asked for it and now they are refusing to accept the end result.

Sure would be nice to know.
The Army has new folks who want to change the requirements.
The way forward is to have those as block 1 change if they prove efficient which they won't.
Also if the single hydraulic unit fails for any reason like shell fragment the gun is a sitting duck.
Whoever is suggesting has not fought in a war or fired a gun in anger.
jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5727
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by jamwal »

Firing a 155mm shell 100 km across with any sort of accuracy is still beyond any technology in existence, apart from railguns maybe.

On a related note, I've stopped paying much attention to this shameless obsession Indian armed forces have with foreign stuff. It'll be better for mental and physical wellbeing of everyone here to do the same. Till Indian armed forces see massive purges, court martials and executions like PLA had, there is no hope.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10694
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by brar_w »

jamwal wrote:Firing a 155mm shell 100 km across with any sort of accuracy is still beyond any technology in existence, apart from railguns maybe.
.
The only reason why that level of precision at that range hasn't been fielded yet is because it has not really been a requirement for cannon artillery on account of the fire-control loop limitations. With UAV's and advanced networking that limitation is much less now allowing folks to now begin to demand it as that "total cost" of completing the loop (target acquisition to destruction) is now more practical and affordable compared to other options (like using a guided MLRS or air-launched effect using fixed or rotary winged aircraft). A modified Excalibur can already hit targets at 70 km without a reduction in its precision requirements. The XM1155 ERAP is going to do the same at 100-120 km range from the same 58 cal 155 mm guns that launch the 70 km Excalibur. It isn't as huge a technology lift as it is a change in requirements, doctrine, and networking catching up to a point where folks are willing to pay for this capability because they can now actively employ it in a meaningful way (either those limitations have reduced or are on a path to reduction). From a munition technology perspective, propulsion and guidance have caught up and can support these efforts - the limiting factor was always the operational case of investing in this capability for the artillery units given other limitations (ISR and CCISR).

https://news.northropgrumman.com/news/r ... he-us-army
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12187
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by Pratyush »

Over the last few hours I have been thinking about stuff in general regarding ATAGS weight and DRDO and IA discussion about the same.

Because even though I in my initial post on this topic was reacting purely from surprise.

I had this nagging feeling of deja vu.

Where the DRDO had agreed to delete some features related to the electric drive system. In an effort to shed some weight.

Given the time that had passed between then and now ATAGS should has received all the changes and newer iteration should have become be ready to be tested.

But for the life of me I am unable to locate that report.
VickyAvinash
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 89
Joined: 02 Oct 2017 07:31

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by VickyAvinash »

jamwal wrote:
On a related note, I've stopped paying much attention to this shameless obsession Indian armed forces have with foreign stuff. It'll be better for mental and physical wellbeing of everyone here to do the same. Till Indian armed forces see massive purges, court martials and executions like PLA had, there is no hope.
+1 to that. System is not going to change, at least we will be safe from high BP and blood boiling. Ram bharose chalta hai MoD
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by ramana »

Actually it's criminal disloyalty to demand changes with PLA knocking on LAC.

If the gun met the trials then order it.
A working gun today is worth more than a super gun ten years from now.
vera_k
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3982
Joined: 20 Nov 2006 13:45

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by vera_k »

IMO, its a political issue. There is no mandate for an offensive mission, and the defensive mission can be met with whatever nukes are available. No harm then in trying to perfect weapons in the lab. China went through a similar period during its modernization.
Haridas
BRFite
Posts: 878
Joined: 26 Dec 2017 07:53

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by Haridas »

jamwal wrote:Firing a 155mm shell 100 km across with any sort of accuracy is still beyond any technology in existence, apart from railguns maybe.

On a related note, I've stopped paying much attention to this shameless obsession Indian armed forces have with foreign stuff. It'll be better for mental and physical wellbeing of everyone here to do the same. Till Indian armed forces see massive purges, court martials and executions like PLA had, there is no hope.

I said almost the same thing to a friend: "Indian armed forces need massive purges of officer ranks, court martials and executions; NDA, Higher Command and Staff Course needs major restructuring"

The artillery leadership must be fired for incompetence / integrity deficit.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by ramana »

I think the big three are allowing the puppies to bark before they announce the decision.
Never heard of a more silly change in requirement.

Lets see.
kvraghav
BRFite
Posts: 1136
Joined: 17 Apr 2008 11:47
Location: Some where near the equator

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by kvraghav »

Most of the top leadership in the military , IAS, ministries and judiciary have all their kids carted off to foreign. Hence their future simply does not lie in India and they do not care about india. Gone are the old patriotic days of legendary field marshals
shaun
BRFite
Posts: 1385
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by shaun »

This article below quite apt for the prevailing situation , written by an artillery man

DEFENCEAATMANIRBHARTA AND DEFENCE PROCUREMENT

Aatmanirbharta (indigenisation) is the only route to strategic independence.”

To attain great power status India must strengthen its internationally identified weak link—defence procurement. In the current environment we either indigenise or remain a soft power. The CDS recently made statements to the effect: “Boost ‘Make in India’. Give opportunity and hand-hold domestic industry to deliver cuttingedge technology. Initially accept weapons with 70% GSQRs. Formulate GSQRS on acceptable and desirable requirements, give a plus minus leeway. Be flexible while not compromising on performance. Need to promote domestic defence manufacturing and reduce imports.” All this was later emphasised by our Finance Minister. It appeared that GSQRs are the main culprits and armed forces do not hold the hand of indigenous defence industry.

GSQRS

Let us examine GSQRs first. There are 15-30 layers to penetrate before a GSQR/ JSQR/PSQR is finalised. Each layer gives its input to justify its existence. It complicates and stiffens GSQRs to kill flexibility and enhance unattainability. Further, vested interests attempt to modify QRs to suit their ends or eliminate competition like in the Augusta Westland case. Vendors make tall claims during post-RFI interactions. Later they cannot deliver. Weapons based on a new QR get finally acquired after a decade. Hence, vision and knowledge are important. That is not institutionally available in India. Overambition is normal like the QR of a replaceable barrel for a rifle. Sufficient leeway and flexibility in QRs are available only in the developmental route via the DRDO. However that route has many pitfalls despite best potential. The whole thing needs greater thought.

Indigenisation efforts

Development of Pinaka MBRL commenced in 1987 with a QR of 45km range, based on 1960s vintage technology of USSR. After meandering for 23 years, Army, DRDO, OFB, L&T and TATAs came up with a system. It was inducted into the Army in 2010. Range: 37.5 km! What if the range was 7.5 km short? It was indigenous, fully supported and accepted. The system stabilised. An extended range (55 km) version was quickly developed. It was inaccurate. Hence in an out of the box solution a guidance system was incorporated in 2016. Within a year initial trials were carried out successfully with a range of 70 km and outstanding accuracy. The investment paid off. As further trials continued, production facilities should have been set up in parallel. If parallel production had been set up, by now some of the critical Chinese facilities in Ladakh would be in reach including parts of the Western Highway. The Guided Pinaka increases range and precision. It enhances firepower tremendously. It has potential for 30% range enhancement. It has a plethora of warheads. It offsets the gap in depletion of aircraft in the IAF. Completely indigenous. It has deterrent value. This is what Pakistan says: “Pinaka is an artillery missile system capable of destroying 900 square metres at a 20-80 kilometre range by firing a salvo of 12 rockets within 48 seconds. The Pinaka Mk-II rocket is modified as a missile by integrating with the navigation, control, and guidance system to improve the end accuracy and enhance the range. It is believed that the guided version of the Pinaka system is being developed to deliver nuclear warheads at short ranges” Clearly worried! However, four years back, we halved the number of regiments which were originally visualised. Even for the number of regiments sanctioned, orders are hanging fire. Force multiplication or force division?

The Dhanush 45 cal 155mm gun started off as a reverse engineered and upgraded Bofors. We realised more could be achieved, took the risk, and went big. A Weapon Development Team under a Brigadier was placed at GCF Jabalpur for constant interaction, input, and monitoring. The first gun was developed and fired. It went well. The OFB team kept asking for the QRs. I constantly refused. My logic: develop the gun, establish all parameters, and then make the QRs. The gun was put through all trials internally by Artillery. Once satisfied, the QRs were made. It could not fail. Ultimately Dhanush met all parameters during actual trials barring some minor ones. It was still cleared with some provisos but not stopped. After-all this was the first modern gun India was making in 30 years. Despite a major accident which rattled everyone, invoked widespread skepticism and vested interest calls to shut the project and go in for a reliable foreign gun, we continued. All hurdles were crossed. Uniquely, Dhanush was put through special trials with three guns in high altitude and three in plains. Thereafter six guns were used as a subunit. Literally speaking, Dhanush went through a trial by fire when cleared for production. Finally! India had a topline 155 mm Gun. Our future. However, the government started negotiating for a foreign gun! Dhanush was sidelined after 10 years of hard work! Even the OFB which had quoted Dhanush as a shining example of success dumped its own baby. “Aatmasamman” and “Aatmanirbharta” go hand in hand.

In 2000 it was decided that all new Guns would be 155mm guns. Existing 130mm guns were first upgraded to 155mm. Simultaneously, indigenous manufacture of ammunition commenced. It included modern Bi Modular Charge Systems (BMCS) as the propellant. We bought some BMCS through a global tender when a plant was being established at Nalanda through TOT. Scandals surfaced. Firms were blacklisted. The plant never got commissioned. Our stocks started depleting. We went in for a global tender with the old GSQR. Not a single OEM met the QRs! Ammunition levels continued dipping. It was suggested to dilute QRs to ensure we got some ammunition at least. I put my foot down. Inaccurate heavy artillery ammunition will invariably miss the target, fall short in range, and endanger own troops apart from wasted expenditures. Taboo! We re-tendered with the same QRs. An indigenous route was also opened. DRDO by new development and OFB by reverse engineering. The second-round tender and trials were successful. In the meanwhile OFB and DRDO came up with BMCS which were 80% ok. 20 % missing with one was available with the other. Due to internecine animosity they would not share technology. We stepped in and virtually read out the riot act. The then Member OFB, Dir HEMRL and I, finally came to a mature understanding. An Artillery officer led committee forged a way forward. However the Nalanda Factory was still non-operational. So with some dedicated DRDO and OFB officers a hybrid solution to start producing BMCS at Nalanda evolved. That process has now stabilized. I understand that for the present, adequate amount of BMCS are available for the new 155mm guns being inducted. However the main plant remains dysfunctional even now. It needs to be operationalised. Otherwise it will impinge on operational effectiveness as more new guns are inducted. Ammunition!

Analysis

I could give half a dozen more examples. However, analyse these cases. There are many sides to this story. The sides differ for each story. They also reinforce the views of the FM and CDS. Equally the government needs to do a lot more if we are to truly indigenise. It will be argued that all these cases pertain to Artillery only. Agreed. In fact the Navy has a better model. So has air defence. Should successful models not be replicated elsewhere? Incompetent leadership or lack of knowledge, or both? To further elucidate, all Artillery programmes, if aggregated, and prioritised as per current operational requirements, and appropriated equitably to defense industry as per capability and capacity, all indigenous defense majors (public and private) will have assured orders for the next three decades and beyond. India will not be ever short of firepower. If this concept is expanded sensibly and transparently in a consultative manner, it will lead to a major revival to propel India to strategic Independence. Extend this concept to identified, measurable and benchmarked Import Substitution, Reverse Engineering and Upgradation projects and India will be at a different level. It needs Vision, Knowledge, and Innovation. Financial issues can be worked out if a virtuous cycle of confidence is injected. The government must get its act together if it means business. Holistic thinking needed.

Ground realities

Some fundamental overarching shifts have occurred in this pandemic period. These will be constants here after.

India’s role in world affairs is expanding. Its weight will increase only if it can indigenise defence.

Our rise is a direct threat to our adversaries. They will act in concert to put us down. “Aatmanirbharta” is the only answer.

Amidst the economic squeeze which is likely to last at least 5 years, imports are unaffordable.

India’s bureaucratic processoriented procurement needs an overhaul to promote timely outcomes. Our situation demands extraordinary responses.

There is an ongoing ‘Disruption in Military Affairs’ through concepts like “Multi-Domain Operations” and “Unrestricted Warfare”.

Manpower preponderance of Indian armed forces inhibits modernisation.

There are some ground realities. Armed forces that face the enemy and the politicians who face the country need weapons not bureaucracy or OFB or DRDO or industry. They need cases, indents, projects, and orders, respectively. Hence forces must assume leadership and control their destiny. Insist on it from the MoD. Everyone responds when Generals know their beans.

The CDS says, “You have to see what your threat and what kind of a weapon you should need…” Very correct. We need a national threat perception and a strategy to develop requisite capabilities. Hence a prioritised strategy based on threats, affordability, availability, alternate means, technology trend line, alliances, jointness and operational concepts is mandatory. Import Substitution, Reverse Engineering, Upgrading, and Innovation are part of the deal. The ‘ideal’ will never happen. Examine how Iran has done it. Eye opener.

The DPP has been amended a greater number of times than the weapon systems procured. The DPP is only a GO TO reference for procedure and rules. It has enough leeway to go around all hurdles. Let me confess. I never took the DPP seriously. Civil-military fusion in cyberspace, AI, telecom, space, nuclear, ISR, and Robotics should be the watchword. There is adequate technology and knowledge available in India. Microsoft, Amazon, Google, and many multinationals are tapping this knowledge daily. That knowledge will not come to South Block. It must be harnessed and harvested from grassroots. Do not treat the knowledge centres as another DRDO or OFB or DPSU. AI is one of the priority programmes of US Army Futures Command. It is being executed from Carnegie Mellon University and not Pentagon. There is a $3 billion lesson there.

Conclusion

After the recent reforms were announced, I attended a few webinars by industry bodies. I heard people saying the same old things. It did not bear results earlier. It cannot deliver under the current extraordinary times. Is the defence establishment reinforcing failure? India needs to do something different. Time for talking is over. Lt Gen P.R. Shankar was India’s DG Artillery. He is highly decorated and qualified with vast operational experience. He contributed significantly to the modernisation and indigenisation of Artillery. He is now a Professor in the Aerospace Dept of IIT Madras and is involved in applied research for defence technology.
https://thedailyguardian.com/aatmanirbh ... ssion=true
mody
BRFite
Posts: 1362
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by mody »

The above article from Lt. gen P.R. Shankar (Retd) was good, however, even he has been rather cold towards the ATAGS program. Apparently in his opinion Dhanush and Sharang are much better.
Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4215
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by Prem Kumar »

ramana wrote:Actually it's criminal disloyalty to demand changes with PLA knocking on LAC.

If the gun met the trials then order it.
A working gun today is worth more than a super gun ten years from now.
Not only did the ATAGS pass the firing trials with flying colors, it also passed the mobility trials all the way to LAC. Its more advanced than anything we or the Israelis have, on almost every parameter: unprecedented range, electric drives, sustained firing rate etc.

The blood boils
Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3866
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by Kakkaji »

Prem Kumar wrote:
ramana wrote:Actually it's criminal disloyalty to demand changes with PLA knocking on LAC.

If the gun met the trials then order it.
A working gun today is worth more than a super gun ten years from now.
Not only did the ATAGS pass the firing trials with flying colors, it also passed the mobility trials all the way to LAC. Its more advanced than anything we or the Israelis have, on almost every parameter: unprecedented range, electric drives, sustained firing rate etc.

The blood boils
Did they even perform the summer trials that were scheduled to start in June, or did they spring this request for change just before the trials and scuttle them?

If the trials were conducted, what were the results?
hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4633
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by hnair »

One interesting trivia I heard from a friend, who was an artillery colonel was that the M46 was very popular in the mountains, despite its elevation issues, because it rarely freezes up. The Soviets designed most of its actions based on levers, rather than hydraulics. Probably because of issues with hydraulics in their weather conditions. And the frozen working fluid in addition to pipe bursts of hydaulics caused by high altitude also must have been an issue for Indian conditions. So despite the advances provided by the FH77, it seem the M46 is a very popular gun in the IA, due to this simplicity. So it seems usage of hydraulics is not some "good old days" for artillery in IA, as is being projected by those changing specs

Granted, the wide prevalence of electro-mechanical controls (rare-earth magnets etc) is of more recent vintage, even though it is the pre-dominant method of getting work done in the harsh conditions of outer space for long! The tech is quite mature and even can be adopted from COTS. An electro-mechanical system powered by a quiet APU seem to be the next best solution to the M46 levers, in cold and high alttitude regions of India. Field maintenance and swapping out of parts is also easier due to not needing specialist hydraulics qualified technicians

ATAGS got that right and whomever is changing the specs is doing a grave disservice
Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2904
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by Cybaru »

hnair wrote:One interesting trivia I heard from a friend, who was an artillery colonel was that the M46 was very popular in the mountains, despite its elevation issues, because it rarely freezes up. The Soviets designed most of its actions based on levers, rather than hydraulics. Probably because of issues with hydraulics in their weather conditions. And the frozen working fluid in addition to pipe bursts of hydaulics caused by high altitude also must have been an issue for Indian conditions. So despite the advances provided by the FH77, it seem the M46 is a very popular gun in the IA, due to this simplicity. So it seems usage of hydraulics is not some "good old days" for artillery in IA, as is being projected by those changing specs

Granted, the wide prevalence of electro-mechanical controls (rare-earth magnets etc) is of more recent vintage, even though it is the pre-dominant method of getting work done in the harsh conditions of outer space for long! The tech is quite mature and even can be adopted from COTS. An electro-mechanical system powered by a quiet APU seem to be the next best solution to the M46 levers, in cold and high alttitude regions of India. Field maintenance and swapping out of parts is also easier due to not needing specialist hydraulics qualified technicians

ATAGS got that right and whomever is changing the specs is doing a grave disservice
this information needs to be in an article! a DDR article or whoever is plagiarizing information. That is invaluable service! Call this out early on.
arvin
BRFite
Posts: 672
Joined: 17 Aug 2016 21:26

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by arvin »

brar_w wrote:
jamwal wrote:Firing a 155mm shell 100 km across with any sort of accuracy is still beyond any technology in existence, apart from railguns maybe.
.
.
With UAV's and advanced networking that limitation is much less now allowing folks to now begin to demand it as that "total cost" of completing the loop (target acquisition to destruction) is now more practical and affordable compared to other options (like using a guided MLRS or air-launched effect using fixed or rotary winged aircraft). A modified Excalibur can already hit targets at 70 km without a reduction in its precision requirements. The XM1155 ERAP is going to do the same at 100-120 km range from the same 58 cal 155 mm guns that launch the 70 km Excalibur.
.
Words of wisdom there in bolded parts.
Since technology exists and is well within our industrial ability, IA should be pushing for these cost-effective punitive measures.
This also stays under the threshold limit on what might attract attention.
The gradual evolution path for ATAGS should be to introduce a new model with progressively increasing range every few years.

Balakot to LOC is approx 53 Km. They placed the camp just beyond the range of regular Artillery.
With ATAGS and ATAGS+++ with range in excess of 100 km, A future Balakot type strike within 100 Km of LOC, would need only Artillery fire instead of Air mobilization.
It becomes costly for them to shift everything deep, beyond the range of fire.
We should be investing more in ATAGS precision fire solutions rather than cosmetic and beauty enhancements like changing electric to hydraulic drives.
ashishvikas
BRFite
Posts: 850
Joined: 17 Oct 2016 14:18

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by ashishvikas »

Army looks at ordering 40 more K9 Vajra howitzers for mountains

https://theprint.in/defence/trials-in-l ... ns/711436/
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12187
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by Pratyush »

Rohit had always maintained that additional vajra SPH will be ordered. If the order is actually placed. It will be a vindication of his stance.
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14331
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by Aditya_V »

Order Vajra but order Atags also with Electric Actuators not Hydraulics which is a step backwards.
mody
BRFite
Posts: 1362
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by mody »

150 units of ATAGS with the existing electric drive should be ordered. This will get the production going at both the private sector manufacturers.
The further changes can be done concurrently and trials carried out. Only if wishes were horses.
ashishvikas
BRFite
Posts: 850
Joined: 17 Oct 2016 14:18

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by ashishvikas »

Larsen & Toubro Defence has offered to supply 400 (Nexter) towed artillery gun systems

- Sandeep Unnithan

https://www.indiatoday.in/amp/india-tod ... ssion=true
The Indian army’s urgent requirement for towed artillery guns has taken an interesting turn.

Larsen & Toubro Defence has offered to supply 400 towed artillery gun systems, which the army earlier wanted to import from an Israeli firm. The L&T guns, jointly developed with French gun maker Nexter, will be made locally with an indigenous content of over 70 per cent.

L&T is understood to have made the unsolicited offer to the Indian army recently. The firm has said it can deliver the first gun in less than a year. The offer comes even as the army’s bid to buy the Israeli guns has hit a dead end.

Last month, the defence ministry overruled the army and Department of Military Affairs’ (DMA) case to buy 400 artillery guns from Israeli firm Elbit Systems.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by Rakesh »

Can the MoD not overrule this as well?
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by ramana »

Elbit was a mostly imported gun?
Nexeter, French is said to be 70%.
ATAGS is local.
That's the logic looks like.
Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3866
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by Kakkaji »

Whatever happened to the trials of the Bharat52 gun from Kalyani? Baba Kalyani had sid he can supply two guns per week if ordered.

May not be as sophisticated as the ATAGS, Athos, or Nexter, but it would have done the job, and quickly provided the numbers that the army needs as of yesterday.
Barath
BRFite
Posts: 474
Joined: 11 Feb 2019 19:06

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by Barath »

Even indigenous guns can have foreign systems ?

Its not clear to me what the difference is between nexter offer that was L2 during the competition and the L&T nexter offer now
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by ramana »

Nothing. Maybe price?
Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by Vips »

ramana wrote:Elbit was a mostly imported gun?
Nexeter, French is said to be 70%.
ATAGS is local.
That's the logic looks like.
Elbit had already proposed to build the first 400 ATHOS gun in India with Bharat Forge with 70% indigenous content. It had also offered to give TOT to OFB to make another 1180 Guns.
L&T has been forced to match the aggressive Elbit offer. whether it matches Elbit's price bid per gun remains to be seen. ATHOS gun was offered at Rs 10.7 crore, while cost per gun for Nexter is much higher at Rs 17.3 core.
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12187
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by Pratyush »

If the MOD has overruled the army plan for Athos. Then there is no chance in hell that nexter gun screwdriver-ed in India will be acquired.

End of issue.
Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by Vips »

In the meanwhile there are quality issues in the Dhanush that have been delivered by OFB, so we will continue our reliance on 200 odd original bofors acquired in 1986 and on the upgraded Sharang Guns which will also be delivered over a 4 year period.
Bottom-line: Best of luck with the 105 MM and 130 MM guns.
sanjayc
BRFite
Posts: 1091
Joined: 22 Aug 2016 21:40

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by sanjayc »

If there are quality issues with OFB-produced Dhanush, government should simply hand over the design to Bharat Forge or others. Why this cussed insistence of getting it produced by inefficient and corrupt public sector company while world-class assembly lines of private companies lie idle? Worse, generals will be rubbing their hands in glee at OFB quality issues, as they can raise the banner of "emergency imports" after a few years.
Kakarat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2223
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by Kakarat »

Seems Bharat Forge continues to refine mounted gun systems

https://twitter.com/TejForTweet/status/ ... 6770849794
TC20 with 39 Calibre gun
- via Ravinder
Image

https://twitter.com/TejForTweet/status/ ... 2277853184
Image

https://twitter.com/TejForTweet/status/ ... 4218530832
Update 1: Total end-to-end product is from Bharat Forge and their supply chain. The vehicle/truck is also believed to be from Bharat Forge's inventory.
https://twitter.com/TejForTweet/status/ ... 8740993028
Video

Updated 105mm
https://twitter.com/TejForTweet/status/ ... 3473228801
Image
Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

Post by Vips »

Super work by Bharat Forge. Their earlier 155 MM mounted system was on a 6X6 Truck.

The latest version on a 4X4 would be mighty useful at the LAC.
Post Reply