Artillery: News & Discussion

vaibhav.n
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 575
Joined: 23 Mar 2010 21:47

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby vaibhav.n » 30 Apr 2015 07:09

Karan M wrote:The ARDE gun is already in prototyping. It would be singularly unwise to stop it based on prior history where AHQ tends to ask for the latest and best after endless trials of basic stuff.


Lol...Possibly, but this time they donot have a way to wriggle out.

In all honesty, the Arty Dte has had a close partnership to get the gun going....They will accept the gun with a prayer on their lips.

For the 85 odd 155mm Towed Regiments would augment a capability to persecute targets across the board we have never had.

pragnya
BRFite
Posts: 728
Joined: 20 Feb 2011 18:41

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby pragnya » 30 Apr 2015 07:44

srai wrote:From the Dhanush article, one can imply that remaining 155mm 39 caliber Bofors (200 odd units) would also be upgraded to the new 155mm 45 caliber standard. This would be on top of new orders (total of around 400 guns).


that would be most logical and sensible.

When OFB Bofors 155mm 52 caliber initiative bears fruit (another decade or so), Dhanush could be upgraded to that standard.


Thakur_B wrote:As per Saurav Jha OFB is already developing a 52 caliber Dhanush.


is this the same gun the DRDO is planning? possible if you read this -

Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) is in the process of developing the advanced towed arty Gun, 155mm, 52 calibre with advanced technology. “The prototype will be ready in three years by 2016, user trials will finish by 2018 Production post this by OFB,” Sundaresh, former Director of Combat Vehicles Research and Development Organisation (CVRDE)


just for the record, OFB along with many pvt sector companies were part of the DRDO effort.

“We will be making the Mark-1 gun with new ammunition within three years. We have formed work packages for the Ordnance factories and private industry through a transparent tendering system. We have been receiving an overwhelming response from the private sector,” the ARDE director said.


http://www.sakaaltimes.com/NewsDetails. ... lery%20gun

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Gyan » 30 Apr 2015 22:19

dinesh_kumar wrote:OFB Magazine "Ayudh" link has good pic of Ghatak / various Arty items built in OF Kanpur. Strictly for the Arty buffs....
http://ofbindia.gov.in/download/pr/december2014.pdf


It seems OFB is also developing a new light 7.62x51mm LMG. Hope to soon see its pics. Also there seems to be uncanny silence about MCIWS assault rifle.

Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3727
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Vipul » 01 May 2015 05:07

Tata Power, L&T to supply mobile artillery system to the Army; contract yet to get defence ministry approval.

The army is set to get an artillery boost with a proposal being moved to raise six new regiments of the indigenous Pinaka Multi­Launcher Rocket System (MLRS), a formidable system designed to annihilate enemy targets with a blanket of precisely guided rockets.

Tata Power and Larsen & Toubro (L&T) will get a major share of the Rs 1,950­crore contract that is to be approved by the defence ministry as they are the primary manufacturers of the mobile artillery system, along with state­run Bharat Earth Movers ( BEML).

Sources said the army has moved a proposal to add six new regiments — with a total of 108 launchers — to its existing holding of three regiments to plug gaps in its artillery arm. The proposal is to process it as a repeat order under the buy Indian category with an initial allotment of Rs 1,950 crore.

The value of the contract could however go up, sources said. Impressed by the capabilities of the MLRS — the system is capable of flattening a 3.9 sq km area at a range of 40 km in less than a minute — the defence ministry is also moving ahead to increase the capacity of the Ordnance Factory Board to produce the rockets in India.

From the existing capacity of 1,000 rockets a year, the government has sanctioned an increase to 5,000 rockets annually, in a project that would costRs 1,388 crore. In addition, Defence Research and Development Organisation is also working at increasing the range of the system from the present 40 km to 60 km by making improvements in the rockets. Field trials for this new, improved Pinaka II rocket are expected to start shortly.

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1614
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Thakur_B » 01 May 2015 07:45

Gyan wrote:
dinesh_kumar wrote:OFB Magazine "Ayudh" link has good pic of Ghatak / various Arty items built in OF Kanpur. Strictly for the Arty buffs....
http://ofbindia.gov.in/download/pr/december2014.pdf


It seems OFB is also developing a new light 7.62x51mm LMG. Hope to soon see its pics. Also there seems to be uncanny silence about MCIWS assault rifle.


It says right after LMG, multi caliber rifle :) There's plenty of stuff wrong with MCIWS as of now, biggest of them being the 45 degree gas port.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4436
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby srai » 01 May 2015 08:01

pragnya wrote:...

Thakur_B wrote:As per Saurav Jha OFB is already developing a 52 caliber Dhanush.


is this the same gun the DRDO is planning? possible if you read this -

Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) is in the process of developing the advanced towed arty Gun, 155mm, 52 calibre with advanced technology. “The prototype will be ready in three years by 2016, user trials will finish by 2018 Production post this by OFB,” Sundaresh, former Director of Combat Vehicles Research and Development Organisation (CVRDE)


just for the record, OFB along with many pvt sector companies were part of the DRDO effort.

“We will be making the Mark-1 gun with new ammunition within three years. We have formed work packages for the Ordnance factories and private industry through a transparent tendering system. We have been receiving an overwhelming response from the private sector,” the ARDE director said.


http://www.sakaaltimes.com/NewsDetails. ... lery%20gun


You are most probably right! It makes sense to base the new 155mm 52 calibre on upgraded Bofors/Dhanush design, which is already 80% indigenized by OFB in over 25-years of R&D on it. That would explain how Mk.1 version could be ready within three years.

Hobbes
BRFite
Posts: 219
Joined: 14 Mar 2011 02:59

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Hobbes » 02 May 2015 09:05

Saurav Jha tweets about the Pinaka II being tested at Balsore. He confirms a range of 60 km. Tweet at https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/594053028438638592.

Saurav Jha ‏@SJha1618 20h20 hours ago New Delhi, Delhi
ARDE's Pinaka MK-II rocket being tested at Balasore. Has a max range of just over 60 kms. Courtesy @DRDO_India

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1614
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Thakur_B » 03 May 2015 04:37

Hobbes wrote:Saurav Jha tweets about the Pinaka II being tested at Balsore. He confirms a range of 60 km. Tweet at https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/594053028438638592.

Saurav Jha ‏@SJha1618 20h20 hours ago New Delhi, Delhi
ARDE's Pinaka MK-II rocket being tested at Balasore. Has a max range of just over 60 kms. Courtesy @DRDO_India


The range can be up to 66-67 kilometers under favourable conditions. Check the graph at the bottom.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-_5Fqc5MZe4o/UOqP4NLzqbI/AAAAAAAADFk/cfc2tQT5g1Q/s1600/Pinaka+2+MBRL-1.JPG

vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1658
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby vasu raya » 04 May 2015 02:23

Hopefully next on the roadmap is something like this for Pinaka,

Image

Ground-launched SDB
Boeing is modifying the Small Diameter Bomb with a rocket motor to be launched from ground-based missile systems such as the M270 MLRS. With the Army demilitarizing cluster munitions from M26 rockets, the company says a special adapter case could reuse the rocket to launch the SDB. After the motor launches it to a high enough altitude and speed, the wings will deploy and glide the bomb to its target. The company believes it can fill a gap for long-range precision fires while using its smaller warhead to save larger rocket munitions for strategic targets. While typical MLRS systems follow a ballistic trajectory, the rocket-launched SDB can be launched to an altitude and glide on a selected trajectory.[29][30] Boeing and Saab Group conducted three successful GLSDB tests in February 2015. The system is cost-effective, utilizing an existing weapon paired with a stockpiled rocket motor, while maintaining the loadout on a rocket artillery system. Unlike other artillery weapons, the GLSDB offers 360-degree coverage for high and low angles of attack, flying around terrain to hit targets on the back of mountains, or circling back around to a target behind the launch vehicle. The GLSDB has a range of 150 km (93 mi), and can also hit targets 70 km (43 mi) behind it.[31]

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21125
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Prem » 04 May 2015 05:32

Imagine launching sensor fused skeets/ weapons using long range artillery/ MRLs. Few hundreds fired across Wagha/ Rajasthan will make 72 making factories over loaded.


srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4436
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby srai » 06 May 2015 13:51



...
The Dhanush, however, will plug just a small operational gap. The overall artillery modernisation plan for 155mm/52-calibre guns, worth around Rs 1 lakh crore, envisages the induction of 814 mounted, 1,580 towed, 180 wheeled and 100 tracked guns, among others.


So the 814 mounted option will be different than the 180 wheeled? It sounds like wheeled version will be similar to tracked version's turret.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 06 May 2015 14:06

Saurav Jha @SJha1618 · May 3

Let's see how the C-17 'global sustainment' program turns out. We'll soon also know from CAG just how much the Air force will pay for that.

Saurav Jha @SJha1618 · May 3

Why? Zimple, that particular radar is no longer in production and nobody for the love of the ****** will give you spares for only 12 radars.


Saurav Jha @SJha1618 · May 3

To remind people about serviceability, the ANTPQ-37 WLRs ordered by the Army from America are currently inoperational on account of spares.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby hnair » 06 May 2015 15:55

:oops: teething troubles are causing lack of teeth

kvraghavaiah
BRFite
Posts: 126
Joined: 16 Feb 2008 17:20
Location: Chennai
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby kvraghavaiah » 06 May 2015 20:54

vasu raya wrote:Hopefully next on the roadmap is something like this for Pinaka,

Image

Ground-launched SDB
Boeing is modifying the Small Diameter Bomb with a rocket motor to be launched from ground-based missile systems such as the M270 MLRS. With the Army demilitarizing cluster munitions from M26 rockets, the company says a special adapter case could reuse the rocket to launch the SDB. After the motor launches it to a high enough altitude and speed, the wings will deploy and glide the bomb to its target. The company believes it can fill a gap for long-range precision fires while using its smaller warhead to save larger rocket munitions for strategic targets. While typical MLRS systems follow a ballistic trajectory, the rocket-launched SDB can be launched to an altitude and glide on a selected trajectory.[29][30] Boeing and Saab Group conducted three successful GLSDB tests in February 2015. The system is cost-effective, utilizing an existing weapon paired with a stockpiled rocket motor, while maintaining the loadout on a rocket artillery system. Unlike other artillery weapons, the GLSDB offers 360-degree coverage for high and low angles of attack, flying around terrain to hit targets on the back of mountains, or circling back around to a target behind the launch vehicle. The GLSDB has a range of 150 km (93 mi), and can also hit targets 70 km (43 mi) behind it.[31]

I do not think that DRDO scientists have as much foresight and desire as we have. I was talking to some DRDO scientits a few years back - A scientist working on Agni project does not know that cruise missiles fly using turbofan engines. Pathetic temper in DRDO.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19147
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 06 May 2015 21:54

And some IAF officers in Bison squadrons don't know Jaguar has Elta radar or Griffin LGB. Clearly, they dont have as much foresight and desire as you and all of the armchair generals on BRF and should be replaced en masse. Seriously, as long as the Agni guy gets his particular job done, nobody gives a darn whether he knows or doesn't know what Janes or BRF says.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19147
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 06 May 2015 21:56

Singha wrote:Saurav Jha @SJha1618 · May 3

Let's see how the C-17 'global sustainment' program turns out. We'll soon also know from CAG just how much the Air force will pay for that.

Saurav Jha @SJha1618 · May 3

Why? Zimple, that particular radar is no longer in production and nobody for the love of the ****** will give you spares for only 12 radars.


Saurav Jha @SJha1618 · May 3

To remind people about serviceability, the ANTPQ-37 WLRs ordered by the Army from America are currently inoperational on account of spares.


This is in-credibly bizarre. Cant the IA do a large volume, multi year buy for spares to raise the EOQ for the supplier?

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 06 May 2015 21:59

well I guess most of capex has gone into the T90 over the last few years! and now akash.

no artillery for sure. no new small arms. grudging bones for arjun. no IFVs.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19147
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 06 May 2015 22:03

Basically UPA had a nice strategy. Cut funds & watch the capabilities wither. Somehow a few big ticket local items got through - Pinaka, Akash, but peanuts compared to the overall spend on recurring items like Tatra and who knows what else most of which didn't work as planned whether it be Smerch or Krasnapol or Tatra or Bumar ARVs. I am willing to bet big money was made by some worthies in UPA/IA through the T-90 and other deals. VKS put a stop and wouldn't play along on Tatra so was targeted.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 06 May 2015 22:30

UPA seems to have taken dictation from foreign capitals to specially target the artillery because good artillery is the key to any punitive moves.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19147
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 06 May 2015 23:20

Exactly Singha.. any terror attack would have been met with a tough arty response.. it was clearly a well planned out plan to keep the IA weak & defanged. When an aggressive chief came in, he was removed as well. One day I hope MMS & his fellow jerks are all held accountable for the crimes they committed.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4436
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby srai » 07 May 2015 03:11

Karan M wrote:
Singha wrote:Saurav Jha @SJha1618 · May 3

Let's see how the C-17 'global sustainment' program turns out. We'll soon also know from CAG just how much the Air force will pay for that.

Saurav Jha @SJha1618 · May 3

Why? Zimple, that particular radar is no longer in production and nobody for the love of the ****** will give you spares for only 12 radars.


Saurav Jha @SJha1618 · May 3

To remind people about serviceability, the ANTPQ-37 WLRs ordered by the Army from America are currently inoperational on account of spares.


This is in-credibly bizarre. Cant the IA do a large volume, multi year buy for spares to raise the EOQ for the supplier?

The IA, historically speaking, has this tendency of making irregular purchases of spare parts in small quantities. They don't seem to look at it from a complete lifecycle support for x-years point of view, which would be more effective for arranging appropriate inventory and support for the life of the product. Apart from keeping costs low and higher serviceability rates , it would help MSEs recoup their investments better. I have read a few articles where MSEs have complained about the IA ordering only a small batch and then no orders for several years. The IA expects them to keep their tooling/machinery around (even if idle). It doesn't make business sense.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19147
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 07 May 2015 13:27

Srai, IA does that to conserve its budgetary allocations and get best current bang for its (limited) buck; short term optimization.
If properly funded, a lot of this mentality will change.

vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1658
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby vasu raya » 07 May 2015 15:26

kvraghavaiah, that SDB picture was in support of a theme called "be ahead of the customer", when phoren origin weapons are so much preferred by the armed forces, you want to bridge the gap where you can, and within DRDO there should be an analysis of the world wide trends in weapon development across the spectrum. Actually the LTPP? is such a long term initiative, not sure if it is any different than a 5 year plan when it comes to execution.

They already have Gruthma, the glide bomb and the rocket booster in the form of Pinaka, so in terms of foundational tech they are already there, why not the next level of integration? when its already proven elsewhere, the test date of Feb 12 2015 for the ground launched SDB says that you will close the gap soon vs. being 10 years behind in some other tech areas.

While Chinese go after even classified info through hacking, one would be happy if DRDO hacks the armed forces servers that host the detailed brochures from foreign vendors to know whats crossing their mind, just to keep it more focused than a world tour.<sarcasm>

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9747
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Yagnasri » 07 May 2015 15:53

Good idea. hack the websites for brochures. :rotfl:

member_22539
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2022
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby member_22539 » 07 May 2015 17:16

^+1 Indeed :D

VibhavS
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 64
Joined: 04 Jan 2011 16:56
Location: Classified

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby VibhavS » 07 May 2015 21:18

Yagnasri wrote:Good idea. hack the websites for brochures. :rotfl:


Why hack Sir. All you have to do is hit the download button :twisted: and give fake personal data :twisted: If required to provide a contact.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 07 May 2015 21:36

nobody facing the kind of threats we do , would settle for 400 dhanush now and wait for the uber 52 cal in atleast another 7 yrs minimum.

by that time someone like Oto would have ported existing naval tech for a 155/55 or god forbid the 155/62 that would throw arty directorate into a unhandled exception and infinite loop of making the atags jump through 500 new hoops.

155/45 will cover the vast bulk of our needs because its not as if we have a over abundance of mech corps running around in open desert needing very deep fires by supporting artillery.

VibhavS
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 64
Joined: 04 Jan 2011 16:56
Location: Classified

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby VibhavS » 07 May 2015 22:00

Well Dhanush would be a start right, for an Army systematically starved of even basic requirements. To go up against Chipanda, we would need an SPH system, they would out-number us in artillery and would also have Fire Finder Radar support. We would need the flexibility and survivability of an SPH rather than an ATGS. Which would be targeted in the opening salvos.

Towed guns will have trouble surviving in a full blown war.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 07 May 2015 22:03

the border roads can barely take a towed gun let alone a meaty arjun sized SPH.
nothing can move cross country in the mountains so the whole mobility of SPH is moot in such limited roads
people hide guns in caves , pits and reverse slopes and hope for best.

VibhavS
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 64
Joined: 04 Jan 2011 16:56
Location: Classified

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby VibhavS » 07 May 2015 22:10

What about a system like Caesar (17.7 tons) or Archer (30 tons) or ATMOS? Those are not much heavier than a truck and towed gun (with the exception of Archer) and could be used in the mountains. Secondly the towed gun has troubles due to the turning radius of the weapon attached to the truck than just weight right?

I am not calling for importing these systems I am talking about utilizing Tata/Kalyani/L&T to create a solution in India based on the Dhanush or even the Kalyani Gun. I am sure it is within our engineering capability to do that? It may not be the best solution or even the most elegant, but it is a workable solution.

member_22539
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2022
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby member_22539 » 08 May 2015 06:29

^Thats why we have a requirement for 814 mounted gun systems. Basically guns on the back of trucks.

nash
BRFite
Posts: 868
Joined: 08 Aug 2008 16:48

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby nash » 08 May 2015 09:45

Make in India: Tata, Mahindra and Larsen & Toubro in race to partner gunmaker BAE for howitzers

Read more at:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/art ... aign=cppst

The government will soon take a call on a fresh army proposal on acquiring BAE's M777 Howitzer after the American company offered to shift the manufacturing and testing facility from Hattiesburg, Mississippi, to India. The deal size is around $700 million.

BAE has now offered to set up an assembly, integration and testing facility with the help of an Indian partner; and is looking at a potential investment of over $200 million. BAE's offer includes not only manufacturing for the army but also shifting its export orders that come from the Middle East, South America and Europe


Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Gyan » 08 May 2015 10:26

Karan M wrote:And some IAF officers in Bison squadrons don't know Jaguar has Elta radar or Griffin LGB. Clearly, they dont have as much foresight and desire as you and all of the armchair generals on BRF and should be replaced en masse. Seriously, as long as the Agni guy gets his particular job done, nobody gives a darn whether he knows or doesn't know what Janes or BRF says.



The type of knowledge and information soldiers have is sometimes very different than Defense academics/scientists/engineers and even amateurs. For instance, hardly any soldier will know the exact length of barrel or muzzle velocity of INSAS rifle but they can dismantle & reassemble the rifle blind fold!

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Gyan » 08 May 2015 11:09

BAE M777 is just a simpler and outdated version of DRDO ATAGS which is automated Titanium 155mm/52 caliber Howitzer. Hence no need for M777, just let DRDO develop a ULH version of ATAGS.

durairaaj
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 86
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby durairaaj » 08 May 2015 12:11

nash wrote:Make in India: Tata, Mahindra and Larsen & Toubro in race to partner gunmaker BAE for howitzers

Read more at:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/art ... aign=cppst

The government will soon take a call on a fresh army proposal on acquiring BAE's M777 Howitzer after the American company offered to shift the manufacturing and testing facility from Hattiesburg, Mississippi, to India. ...
BAE's offer includes not only manufacturing for the army but also shifting its export orders that come from the Middle East, South America and Europe

I don't like this deal.
Putting my CT hat on.
I see it as a way to export the titanium metal out of India. Extraction of Ti is energy intensive and polluting.
By making this deal as "Make in India" they want to extract Ti as metal for artillery barrels and export it out.
Later on after the artillery's life is over it can be used for missiles, aeroplanes and spaceships components.
I don't like this deal. While the american company will reap all the licensing $ without loosing a single ounce of Ti or facing pollution related expenses.
CT hat off.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19147
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 08 May 2015 12:38

Gyan wrote:
Karan M wrote:And some IAF officers in Bison squadrons don't know Jaguar has Elta radar or Griffin LGB. Clearly, they dont have as much foresight and desire as you and all of the armchair generals on BRF and should be replaced en masse. Seriously, as long as the Agni guy gets his particular job done, nobody gives a darn whether he knows or doesn't know what Janes or BRF says.



The type of knowledge and information soldiers have is sometimes very different than Defense academics/scientists/engineers and even amateurs. For instance, hardly any soldier will know the exact length of barrel or muzzle velocity of INSAS rifle but they can dismantle & reassemble the rifle blind fold!


Specialization and focused interests are a fact of life. DRDO has a program by which scientists can change labs, domains etc. But most will remain in their specific area of focus. Its bizarre to post as the other guy did, bragging that he/we know more about superficial details across the topic. Real expertise lies in knowing the one topic really well.

rkhanna
BRFite
Posts: 1160
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 02:35

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rkhanna » 08 May 2015 12:51

I see it as a way to export the titanium metal out of India. Extraction of Ti is energy intensive and polluting.
By making this deal as "Make in India" they want to extract Ti as metal for artillery barrels and export it out.
Later on after the artillery's life is over it can be used for missiles, aeroplanes and spaceships components.
I don't like this deal. While the american company will reap all the licensing $ without loosing a single ounce of Ti or facing pollution related expenses.


Sir - let me try and break it down

1. There is very real need for domestic consumption so Internal consumption will definitely take place.

2. Exporting Weapons (irrespective of who holds the IP) is a net gain to the economy and defence industry specially as a part of the AMC will also be directed our way. Also dont forget R&D for upgrades, etc may also trickle down to India.

3. Titanium is a commodity - How much reserves do we have? If our Internal needs are being met why cant we export the commodity - which it is. nothing more nothing less.

If you are worried that parts of our tech will be used for something else we should not export anything. Guidance systems from Brahmos can be used for something else, etc etc

durairaaj
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 86
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby durairaaj » 08 May 2015 13:27

^ I agree to all of the above points with no comments. There are tradeoffs, hope it works out good.

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1614
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Thakur_B » 08 May 2015 13:32

Gyan wrote:
The type of knowledge and information soldiers have is sometimes very different than Defense academics/scientists/engineers and even amateurs. For instance, hardly any soldier will know the exact length of barrel or muzzle velocity of INSAS rifle but they can dismantle & reassemble the rifle blind fold!


Do it enough times with the drill instructor screaming in your ears and you too might be able to do it.

Gyan wrote:BAE M777 is just a simpler and outdated version of DRDO ATAGS which is automated Titanium 155mm/52 caliber Howitzer. Hence no need for M777, just let DRDO develop a ULH version of ATAGS.


The only real competitor to M-777 was Pegasus by ST Kinetics who got blacklisted. Those placing their hopes on Kalyani's ultra light shouldn't be placing too much of them because the Mandus group is working with soft recoil technology, which though impressive hasn't been very successful.


Return to “Mil-Tech Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests