Artillery: News & Discussion

RKumar · Post by **RKumar** » 12 Jul 2014 14:00

Govt confirms deal for ultra-light howitzer artillery guns with the US has hit a dead-end

NEW DELHI: The government on Friday confirmed the long-pending $885 million deal with the US government for 145 ultra-light howitzers, which were to be acquired for the new Army divisions being raised along the border with China, had hit a dead-end.

TOI was the first to report that the proposed deal for the M-777 howitzers, which had escalated from $647 million (Rs 3,882 crore) to $885 million (Rs 5,310 crore), was not going to be inked because the Indian defence establishment felt the artillery guns were way too expensive.

Moreover, artillery manufacturer BAE Systems has "failed to come with a viable and compliant offsets package'' in what was supposed to be a government-to-government deal under the US foreign military sales (FMS) programme.

"The case has not progressed due to cost issues and because the vendor has not been able to come up with a proposal fully-compliant to the offset requirements," said defence minister Arun Jaitley, in a written to Lok Sabha on Friday.

The defence establishment feels "alternatives" to the M-777 howitzers can be found at half-the-cost involved. The Army, however, has been demanding 155mm/39-calibre light-weight howitzers, with a strike range over 25-km range, for around a decade without any success till now.

Such howitzers can be swiftly air-lifted to "threatened high-altitude areas" along the 4,057-km Line of Actual Control (LAC) with China, which has the military infrastructure in place to swiftly mobilize troops and equipment to outnumber Indian forces by 3:1 there.

The howitzer project, among others, is meant to equip the new XVII Mountain Strike Corps (90,000 troops) being raised to gain "quick reaction force capabilities" against China.

The Indian Defence Acquisitions Council (DAC) in June 2006 had formally given the go-ahead for acquiring 145 ultra-light howitzers from abroad. But the frontrunner, the Pegasus gun of Singapore Technology Kinetic's, was ejected after the firm was blacklisted in the corruption scandal against former Ordnance Factory Board chairman Sudipto Ghosh.

India then went in for the M-777 howitzers under the FMS programme, which does not involve an open competition. The US Defence Security Cooperation Agency in January 2010 notified its Congress of the Obama administration's intention to sell the 145 M-777 guns to India for $647 million. The US offer was renewed in August 2013 with the new project cost being pegged at $885 million.

For what ever it is worth ... only thing I can say is BAE tried to milk again and this time they failed. Only chance is that they move the production line to India for 0.5 Billion or let the equipment rust in UK.

Victor · Post by **Victor** » 12 Jul 2014 22:57

^ That's exactly the kind of stuff 100% FDI was intended to encourage. M777 was sabotaged by Anthony-a deliberate move to saddle NDA with another huge sandbag to carry.

RKumar · Post by **RKumar** » 13 Jul 2014 01:32

100% FDI is no go in this case as it is not a critical technology.

Max. 75-25% for the guns provided full technology transfer for shells.

vic · Post by **vic** » 13 Jul 2014 15:09

dinesh_kumar wrote:In the Video Dr. Chander talks about the Advanced Artillery Gun.

(He says) 158 units are to be built for the IA, and will have better features than current imports , for which production lines have to be re-started.

Features: All electric drive, high salvo rate, better shock absorbing capability and higher mobility.

So, is DRDO building a light weight 155 mm gun ?

Also, Pinaka Mk 3 MLRS will be comparable to Smerch in range (it is an unguided dumb rocket, no trajectory correction, WLR integration and other features like Pinaka, the only thing going for it is awesome firepower and range of 70 - 90 km.)

Details of this howitzer has been discussed on the BRF, it is a titanium aluminium 52 caliber howitzer which would be around 30% lighter compared to conventional howitzers (or equivalent Dhanush Variant).

Kakkaji · Post by **Kakkaji** » 14 Jul 2014 06:30

The defence establishment feels "alternatives" to the M-777 howitzers can be found at half-the-cost involved.

What are these alternatives?

member_25400 · Post by **member_25400** » 14 Jul 2014 10:03

RKumar wrote:Govt confirms deal for ultra-light howitzer artillery guns with the US has hit a dead-end

"The case has not progressed due to cost issues and because the vendor has not been able to come up with a proposal fully-compliant to the offset requirements," said defence minister Arun Jaitley, in a written to Lok Sabha on Friday.

India then went in for the M-777 howitzers under the FMS programme, which does not involve an open competition. The US Defence Security Cooperation Agency in January 2010 notified its Congress of the Obama administration's intention to sell the 145 M-777 guns to India for $647 million. The US offer was renewed in August 2013 with the new project cost being pegged at $885 million.

For what ever it is worth ... only thing I can say is BAE tried to milk again and this time they failed. .[/quote]

Not so. This is more likely a case of an incompetent and broken defense acquisition process trying to cover up its inadequacies. It has been over 4 years since the proposal. BAE had given notice that it's production line was shutting down and costs could not be held to but the Indian government slept on it. Once the production line shuts down, it is always much more expensive to restart. FMS program is always more expensive as the US government is acting as procurement agent and takes its cut for administering and overseeing it. Offsets must always be negotiated separately (without involving US government) in case of FMS.

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 14 Jul 2014 10:30

so no one is buying this product that they have to shut down the assembly line ??? If so why where they trying to sell it to us ???

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 14 Jul 2014 12:42

The assembly line it self could be picked up by an Indian Pvt sector entity. Along with the license to make it at home. That should reduce the costs, some what.

member_20317 · Post by **member_20317** » 14 Jul 2014 14:21

RKumar wrote:100% FDI is no go in this case as it is not a critical technology.

Max. 75-25% for the guns provided full technology transfer for shells.

I don't think FDI referred to critical technology. They instead referred to 'state of art'. With the 'State of art' qualification getting decided by a relevant expert body that would say that the Indian MIC can/cannot make it in the required time frame and constraints. Nothing to do with engineering sheer ability either (ego boost agenda items).

For example IMHO, the FDI in M-777 may not be justifiable because I expect the Indian establishments to be able to make the prototype of the reasonable alternative, within what would be considered reasonable time as defined by the earlier mentioned expert body. Only a guesstimate.

OTOH a small little sub-component of a major defence equipment, that is not getting made simply because our establishment does not have time/money/inclination/strategic mandate, for concentrating on and can only be sourced from one supplier from out of India.
.................................

For critical items every body can be expected to be reasonable. Ballistic missiles. SAMs and Ships with no real alternative within the cost/time.

Ergo make everything critical

Everybody would cooperate

.

alexis · Post by **alexis** » 14 Jul 2014 15:01

Unless IA guarantees a 200-300 order, no pvt entity will enter into such a venture. Also, US is unlikely to allow this.

pralay · Post by **pralay** » 17 Jul 2014 10:23

Russia giving India lessons on "Importance of self-reliance"

Russia refuses technology transfer for Smerch rockets to India
The Army faces a peculiar situation in strengthening its offensive weaponry. While the Russians have backed out of providing technology transfer for rockets used in the Smerch multiple-launch rocket systems (MLRS), the Finance Ministry has refused to import the same rockets.

As of now, the Army is left with Smerch rockets for less than half-a-day in a battle. The Smrech, an effective domination weapon, is tasked with the three Strike Corps – head quartered at Ambala, Mathura and Bhopal, respectively. The Army has 62 such launchers, which move in squadrons with Strike Crops and have the capacity to hit targets at 70-80 km away, allowing the Infantry and tanks to move forward in case of an assault. These rockets can neutralise enemy troop concentrations, command posts, artillery and missile locations.

Sources said Russia had expressed reservation to meet Indian conditions to indigenise the production of rockets, allowing the Ordnance Factory Board (OFB) to produce them here. In August 2012, an MoU was signed between the OFB and Russian companies — Rosoboronexport and Splav “SPA” to manufacture five versions of Smerch Rockets.

The Russian side has expressed reservations on allowing technology transfer. The worried Army moved a fresh case through the Ministry of Defence to import rockets. The Finance Ministry turned it down, saying that the original permission was given for local production and a fresh permission has to be sought for importing the rockets.

Sources said a fresh case had been taken up, but till then the Army had to wait for the rockets.

Each year, India displays the Smerch in the Republic Day parade to showcase its might. These have been acquired at a cost of Rs 2,600 crore. So far, rockets for the launchers are purchased from Russia.

India is so dependent on Russia that international think tank — the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI)-— observed in its report in March 2014 that the major supplier of arms to India between 2009-13 was Russia — accounting for 75 per cent of Indian imports.

source: idrw[dot]org/?p=40366

Lets hope IA & MoD learns the lesson.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Jul 2014 10:55

>> As of now, the Army is left with Smerch rockets for less than half-a-day in a battle

again a crystal clear example that Rus does not want to honour agreements when its cash cow products like consumables are at stake. sell the printer cheap, rape people on the cartridges. they will agree to anything to make the sale and then backtrack deftly.

India should sell off the Smerches to any other operators around the world and instead double down on the Pinaka2 orders, and make the OFBs deliver quickly.

we better not keep our hopes too high on how far the brahmos-2 , brahmos air launched and brahmos-A pans out.

nash · Post by **nash** » 17 Jul 2014 10:58

sameer_shelavale wrote:Russia giving India lessons on "Importance of self-reliance"

Lets hope IA & MoD learns the lesson.

Well I have not much of hope that IA will learn from this, because of some whole Army has to suffer.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Jul 2014 11:01

given the failure of their industry to get a proper new helicopter design going for the last 20 yrs, we should ask them to purchase 150 Dhruv in any model they want to balance the lopsided defence trade balance.
we can also let them license build the P17 with zorya power plant , its a far superior ship to the dated krivak-III.

this whole producer-consumer relationship has to end.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 17 Jul 2014 11:39

The original article which the IDRW jokers ripped off as usual.

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2014/20140717/main5.htm

I guess Army will now run after DRDO, OFB to make these rockets. T-90 all over again.

ashish raval · Post by **ashish raval** » 17 Jul 2014 11:58

^^ brfites have been crying for indigenization of technologies like smerch, 155mm guns, precision guided weapons, tanks and fighter a/c for at least a decade and half since I have been following br. I am not sure how thick skinned people can be in the army to not understand the vitality of developing this technology at home even after experience of kargil !!! Or is it that import lobby and corruption is endemic in army as any other government machinery ? I think latter is the case. I like navy approach of persistent effort to indeginize technologies at whatever cost. I saw many projects in my university days funded by navy but never ever witnessed any project funded by army. That said it all about which services places priority to indigenization.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 17 Jul 2014 12:22

Karan M wrote:The original article which the IDRW jokers ripped off as usual.

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2014/20140717/main5.htm

I guess Army will now run after DRDO, OFB to make these rockets. T-90 all over again.

I fail to see the comparison with T-90 here.

IA purchased Smerch and like any other weapon system, the ammunition will have to be either purchased from abroad or manufactured in India (if we can get the contract going).

MOD/OFB had actually tried to enter into TOT with Russians on rockets of various types (5 types) - if they've reneged on the earlier understanding, India will simply have to buy the rockets. And frankly, given that we've grand total of 3 x regiments of SMERCH, I don't know how manufacture in India made sense.

To me, it looks like India was angling for technology more than the manufacture part. And Russians would've decided to not let go of a revenue stream. They know that India is developing newer versions of PINAKA with Mk3 being in the SMERCH category. Last thing the Russians would want is to see Pinaka Mk3 marketed world-wide with rockets mastered using their technology!

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 17 Jul 2014 12:27

ashish raval wrote:^^ brfites have been crying for indigenization of technologies like smerch, 155mm guns, precision guided weapons, tanks and fighter a/c for at least a decade and half since I have been following br. I am not sure how thick skinned people can be in the army to not understand the vitality of developing this technology at home even after experience of kargil !!! Or is it that import lobby and corruption is endemic in army as any other government machinery ? I think latter is the case. I like navy approach of persistent effort to indeginize technologies at whatever cost. I saw many projects in my university days funded by navy but never ever witnessed any project funded by army. That said it all about which services places priority to indigenization.

Go easy on this sermonizing business!

Not everything is a conspiracy. SMERCH came into Army when PINAKA was no where on scene and belongs to a category which DOES NOT overlap with PINAKA. IA has grand total of 3 x regiments of SMERCH with 1 per Strike Corps. Last I checked, IA has not asked for more SMERCH and is pretty happy with PINAKA. With 4 regiments already inducted. In fact, going forward, PINAKA Mk2 and PINAKA Mk3 will be the mainstay of the army. With Mk3 being in the SMERCH range territory.

member_20453 · Post by **member_20453** » 17 Jul 2014 12:39

Investing in Smerch furhter is waste of time and money, we need massive order of Pinaka MK-2 right away. We already produce around a 1000 MKI-1 rockets a year and production will increase as well. What also bothers me is that we have the Prahaar/Prgati but we don't hear anything about its future trials/orders and production. Why are we screwing about the Smerch when we have something with nearly double the range? We need to focus more on getting it ready fast and work on newer warheads including Cluster/Defrag/bunker busting etc.

Using the G3OM guidance module we can have Pinaka mk-1/2 eventual MK-3 and Prahaar missiles hit targets with pin point precision.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Jul 2014 12:45

well a ammo stock of half a day with the current smerch regiments means the rounds are quite expensive and we did not stock up with the initial purchase in anticipation of licensed volume manufacture here.

62 launchers is not a small number at all, given each one has 12 tubes in a single salvo.

in a war, we can expect each launcher to be used for say 6 fire missions every 24 hrs. daily need = 6*12 = 72 rockets.
multiple by 30 (50% smerches) and it comes to 2160 rockets a day!!

the 70km range M30/M31 rockets used by the MLRS system cost $95,000 - each. the smerch rockets are bigger and longer ranged but lets assume same cost.

$200 million worth for 2160 rockets. you can see the US army has been spending roughly $200-300 mil / annum latety buying annually around 2000 rockets to add to whatever old stock exists.
http://www.bga-aeroweb.com/Defense/GMLRS.html

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Jul 2014 12:48

Septimus P. wrote:Investing in Smerch furhter is waste of time and money, we need massive order of Pinaka MK-2 right away. We already produce around a 1000 MKI-1 rockets a year and production will increase as well. What also bothers me is that we have the Prahaar/Prgati but we don't hear anything about its future trials/orders and production. Why are we screwing about the Smerch when we have something with nearly double the range? We need to focus more on getting it ready fast and work on newer warheads including Cluster/Defrag/bunker busting etc.

Using the G3OM guidance module we can have Pinaka mk-1/2 eventual MK-3 and Prahaar missiles hit targets with pin point precision.

I completely agree. let us not throw good money after bad. 50% of the smerch inventory can perhaps be mothballed and rest 50% kept with one strike corps until EOL.

pinaka2, pinaka3 and prahaar has got to be where our limited $$ goes, not disappear down the endless tunnel to russia.

the well fed import lobbies will try to lock us into smerch for 30 yrs and ensure pinaka2 let alone pinaka3 is rejected on various grounds, as well as prahaar.

its time for Namo to crack some skulls and wield the stick on this.

member_20317 · Post by **member_20317** » 17 Jul 2014 12:55

With a limited number of Smerch in the inventory, indigenous production of merely the unguided rockets does not seem convincing. Better to import whatever count of rockets are needed. Else best would be to sell the units, even if at a loss to Vietnam et al, in sync with the coming into the picture of the future Pinaka 3 with G3OM etc.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 17 Jul 2014 13:21

rohitvats wrote:
Karan M wrote:The original article which the IDRW jokers ripped off as usual.

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2014/20140717/main5.htm

I guess Army will now run after DRDO, OFB to make these rockets. T-90 all over again.
I fail to see the comparison with T-90 here.

IA purchased Smerch and like any other weapon system, the ammunition will have to be either purchased from abroad or manufactured in India (if we can get the contract going).

MOD/OFB had actually tried to enter into TOT with Russians on rockets of various types (5 types) - if they've reneged on the earlier understanding, India will simply have to buy the rockets. And frankly, given that we've grand total of 3 x regiments of SMERCH, I don't know how manufacture in India made sense.

To me, it looks like India was angling for technology more than the manufacture part. And Russians would've decided to not let go of a revenue stream. They know that India is developing newer versions of PINAKA with Mk3 being in the SMERCH category. Last thing the Russians would want is to see Pinaka Mk3 marketed world-wide with rockets mastered using their technology!

62 launchers would require a bunch of rockets considering live fires - unlike Tank ammo we don't even have practise rounds or sims per memory - and in all probability we planned for more Smerches as well. From what I hear, Russians ahve this newly picked up post FSU habit of constantly escalating prices. Lead time for their orders is also crazy - we are talking of a year to two years for spares/other items! Hence, we have to build local for any semblance of order, otherwise we will always be either looking at empty stocks or not issuing rounds to formations. IAF is in a similar quandary. In past, it has hoarded items even beyond expiry, because of lack of surety about when new orders would arrive & original plans to use up old stocks in live fires went haywire.

No coincidence that the ARDE is now talking of a Pinaka Mk3 with these issues - earlier, it would have been dismissed because Smerch was there.

T-90 comparison on many counts -
TOT denied on ballistic computer (CVRDE/IRDE/Tata tech for Arjun used), armor plates (DMRL tech transferred from Arjun), ERA (Arjun Mk2 ERA is to be used for T-90), INVAR missile imbroglio (till India as usual paid up & asked Russia to fix the issue)..gun barrel issue (last we heard, the OFB had got a local barrel as replacement, there was news from a few weeks back?).

None of this would have happened if TOT was given/available as required.

Basically, this is the old game that some Russian suppliers (and others) have become experts at playing. They dont provide items on time (CKD/SKD kits, drawings) so that local production gets delayed & additional orders are placed on them for follow through.

In T-90, it was delays in local production & we placed additional orders on the Russian suppliers to compensate.

Then finally, deny the TOT - with a large inventory we have no choice but to run around for local/alternatives & then end up buying more from them in the meantime. Eg, with no BC codes, we had no option but to buy Russian 125mm FSAPDS for the T-90 (of course, Antony later blacklisted IMI and Rheinmetall so only Russia remains)..

Its a sophisticated game played at multiple levels, sometimes the suppliers show the finger to the main agency like Rosoboronexport which pleads helplessness. The services acquisition groups simply don't seem to learn though & still think that these imports with strings attached will be the panacea. Latest one hears is that "the Russians do this, the west won't, Rafale will be better". Oh well!

All of them do it, which is the reality w/imports.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 17 Jul 2014 13:30

Singha wrote:
Septimus P. wrote:Investing in Smerch furhter is waste of time and money, we need massive order of Pinaka MK-2 right away. We already produce around a 1000 MKI-1 rockets a year and production will increase as well. What also bothers me is that we have the Prahaar/Prgati but we don't hear anything about its future trials/orders and production. Why are we screwing about the Smerch when we have something with nearly double the range? We need to focus more on getting it ready fast and work on newer warheads including Cluster/Defrag/bunker busting etc.

Using the G3OM guidance module we can have Pinaka mk-1/2 eventual MK-3 and Prahaar missiles hit targets with pin point precision.
I completely agree. let us not throw good money after bad. 50% of the smerch inventory can perhaps be mothballed and rest 50% kept with one strike corps until EOL.

pinaka2, pinaka3 and prahaar has got to be where our limited $$ goes, not disappear down the endless tunnel to russia.

the well fed import lobbies will try to lock us into smerch for 30 yrs and ensure pinaka2 let alone pinaka3 is rejected on various grounds, as well as prahaar.

its time for Namo to crack some skulls and wield the stick on this.

Smerches also has maintenance issues from a few years back, don't know whether they were fixed or we persist with our own jugaad (as often). Unlike Pinaka etc you can't armtwist the Russians beyond a point. Not with our dependence on them.

Like I said before, there is an attitude issue "athiti devo bhavah" --> "imports devo bhavah" which combined with largesse in defence budgets towards imports for decades (we all know why the UPA/INC did this, and it was not their love for "national security") has led to a complete reliance on imported gizmos, license manufactured at OFB etc as the solution.

About the only quasi-import that has done well is the Brahmos, with tons of effort put into fixing everything + leveraging SDRE programs for tech & even that was almost sought to be scuttled by a section pitching the Harpoon as Brahmos was too expensive for the IA!

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 17 Jul 2014 13:36

Singha, agree with you that it takes a Modi to break the Gordian knot. Somebody to stand up to the import lobbies and say "enough".

In fact over the past decade plus, the imports have gone so out of hand, that even an IAF officer (a rare one willing to break ranks & omerta) deputed at IDSA was ruing the candy shop mentality of hoarding disparate items - all from different OEMs purchased at inflated prices & with very little effort to source local. He even mentioned that there were some who wanted to drop even the local programs to develop AEW&C and keep importing the Phalcons - which he noted was "financial lunacy". But such is the way of things. It makes you think of how much the abused babus have done to actually keep local programs running + the service folks themselves who support these and have to face such entrenched opposition.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 17 Jul 2014 13:47

Apparently Russia itself has only 106 Smerch systems, so 62 is by no means less. A few years back there was a CAG report about a multitude of systems on the imported Smerch being found to have been defective, I hope atleast those were fixed. We need to start junking the Russian maal, it's hard to believe that we ordered over 1000 T-90s AFTER the the Arjun tank went into production.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Jul 2014 13:53

that mlrs link i posted mentions they have a practice round also, which cost only $5k vs $96k for the real rocket. well thought out idea, which we hopefully are doing on pinaka atleast. http://www.bga-aeroweb.com/Defense/Budg ... FY2014.pdf

they are steadily purchasing around 2000 of these cheap practice rockets a year , which means their crews will get good realistic firing training...it shows in the way the US army moves and operates in a real battle.

i hope our jugaad and enforced savings due to high import costs does not bite us when its time to fight.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 17 Jul 2014 14:20

You said it. Basically we need to open up the ammo production to pvt sector as well. Bharat Forge, Tatas etc can all make rounds, ammo. Why not announce an open tender to all private firms as to who can get us Smerch compatible rounds and make them locally? OFB needs a rival to shake it up.

member_20317 · Post by **member_20317** » 17 Jul 2014 15:07

If I am right then Smerch rockets were meant to be produced in India. If the Russians have blocked it now then either their understanding was different or the Indian babudom cannot today properly administer/enforce their contracts.

For the rocket artillery scene in India:

70+ Pinaka 1 launchers already in.

Pinaka 2 testing is not getting any bad press.

Pinaka 3 is the way to go with newly available technologies.

Prahaar can be sweetened easily.

That Smerch rockets are priced like an extortion racket should have entered as an input in the decision matrix when these were ordered (today it carries much lower importance). Pinaka 3 will most likely be considerably different from Smerch. The market size for Smerch is limited and not many are going to order this thing. Why would the private sector be interested?

With Pinaka 3 route at least the private sector can fight to have a viable market for its product in the Indian Army.

Production of Pinaka 1 rockets has just gotten out of a rough patch. Hardly any point in pushing the system beyond its capacity for change.

The rocket artillery scene is already moving well why disturb it for something that is part of life.

Unless off course the IA pays upfront or at least takes a disproportionately larger risk in the import substitution of Smerch rockets. Indian Private sector is not meant for being used to prop up the negotiating position of whoever drove the Smerch decision. That was how the Indian private sector got out of the civilian supplies business - long delays in payments wagehra. Why get into such a situation in the defence sector.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Jul 2014 15:53

http://z3.invisionfree.com/WorldTech_In ... /ar/t9.htm

// this one comes with 72 HE submunitions
Cost of 9M55K 12-pack- $1,000,000

// this one comes with a single 243kg warhead having 95kg explosive
Cost of 9M528 12-pack- $1,250,000

so if this be correct, the cost per rocket varies from $83K to $104k which tallies nicely with the american cost of $96k I found.

it aint cheap by any means. and the Splav website does not show the existence of a low cost training round.
http://splav.org/en/arms/smerch/m55k.asp

2000 rockets per annum means a cool $200 mil. no wonder they dont want to part with manufacturing these rounds.

if we need to stockpile some 12000 rockets its a 6 yr purchase plan and due to shelf life, the older ones will keep on getting retired and newer ones kept purchasing. permits 16 salvo fires per launcher...which I guess might take us through a 2 week war with one salvo a day. if we want 3 salvos, we need 36000 rocket ready-use stockpile. not having enough rockets is a total waste of buying the launcher and associated systems like having a great gun with no ammo.

we are looking at many billions here over a 30yr life cycle.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 17 Jul 2014 16:54

^^^
I believe that those MLRS rounds are GPS guided version (GMLRS).
http://www.bga-aeroweb.com/Defense/GMLRS.html

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 17 Jul 2014 17:29

Singha wrote:JVs can be useful between near equals like UK-US or US-Germany or US-Japan.

else its just one side doing some of the manufacturing and the other doing manufacturing and all of the design and testing.

Generally true. However, it also depends a great deal on what is being co-developed. The Javelin is in a different category than say co-developing next gen drones or apaches.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Jul 2014 17:30

indeed the basic round before they went 100% gps was likely much cheaper.

http://www.tank-net.com/forums/index.ph ... opic=29838

the M26 rocket costs $10,400 per unit.

above is the equivalent of the current smerch round albeit smaller. ie with no ins/gps guidance. without such corrections, the dispersion at max ranges must be quite high.
and thats why khan moved entirely to the M31 gps/ins model purchase in the last decade.

they have a plan to keep purchasing and build volume of 100,000 rounds.

Hitesh · Post by **Hitesh** » 17 Jul 2014 18:01

IA should forego Smerch and concentrate on Pinaka. Smerch is a money racket for the Russians and there is no reason why we should keep propping the Russians up. We have paid enough to the Russians.

vic · Post by **vic** » 17 Jul 2014 19:24

Hitesh wrote:IA should forego Smerch and concentrate on Pinaka. Smerch is a money racket for the Russians and there is no reason why we should keep propping the Russians up. We have paid enough to the Russians.

+1

Further costly upgrade of Grad while still continuing to restrict Pinaka to only 2 regiments is also suspicious

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Jul 2014 20:03

do we make the grad rounds locally ?
OFB makes only fuze it seems and not the rocket per this link http://www.ofbindia.gov.in/index.php?wh=A-E-P-C&lang=en

looks like its another import deal going on there for decades now.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 17 Jul 2014 20:37

They should look at making the future Pinaka versions with a generic launcher which could launch Grad, Pinaka Mk1/Mk2/Mk3 etc rockets or missiles. Something like the Israeli lynx rocket launcher:-

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 17 Jul 2014 22:03

What's with spinning fantasy yarns?

It seems every bit of imported equipment is seen in indigenous versus foreign debate with common sense being the first casualty!

Has it occurred to anyone that SMERCH have been inducted in whatever numbers because they're expected to fill a niche role? And may be, given this niche role, the expense on the rockets is justified? It's not as if these will be raining fire on massed infantry about to break-through. Given the type of rocket it uses, it will have more specific uses like attacking massed high value targets in the enemy rear.

IA has never been fan of spray-and-pray type MRLS system - or it would not have restricted itself to grand total of 5 x GRAD Regiments. Those things came dirt cheap and IA could have had them by dozens. If it wanted.

And BTW - the EXPENSIVE upgrade of GRAD system consists of changing the truck carrying the system. I'm waiting for someone to say that these are being 'upgraded' to prevent induction of PINAKA Regiments!

Going ahead, it will be PINAKA which will be mainstay of Rocket Artillery in IA. Along with Prahaar in Missile Regiment.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 17 Jul 2014 22:05

Hitesh wrote:IA should forego Smerch and concentrate on Pinaka. Smerch is a money racket for the Russians and there is no reason why we should keep propping the Russians up. We have paid enough to the Russians.

How exactly are PINAKA and SMERCH in the same league? Did induction of SMERCH undermine PINAKA in anyway? Do you see IA hankering about inducting more SMERCH?

IA in its wisdom considers SMERCH type of Rocket Artillery as useful - it is not some trinket picked up from road side vendor which can tossed out!

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 17 Jul 2014 23:15

Porkies have Smerch clone aka Chinese A-100 (stated range 120KM) and they plan to locally produce it.

So until we can produce something of similar caliber Smerch is the answer.