Artillery: News & Discussion

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Cosmo_R » 20 Jun 2016 21:15

Probably posted before but here goes:

"Bharat Forge, an Indian firm of Kalyani Group, has recently purchased Noricum and brought the entire manufacturing workshop to India. It has made Bharat-52, a 52 caliber variant of the 155mm howitzer to meet the Indian Army's long delayed field artillery requirement."

And some interesting history

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GC-45_howitzer

wig
BRFite
Posts: 1893
Joined: 09 Feb 2009 16:58

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby wig » 24 Jun 2016 08:55

http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/nation ... 56259.html
Parrikar likely to approve purchase of artillery guns
In what will be the first major weapon purchase aimed at bolstering the upcoming Mountain Strike Corps of the Army, the Ministry of Defence is expected to approve the purchase of 145 artillery guns specially meant for deployment in the Himalayas.
The Defence Acquisition Council (DAC), headed by Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar, is scheduled to meet on Saturday to take a final call on the purchase of the 155mm M777 ultra-light howitzer (ULH). It will also decide on new warships carrying deadly missiles. It will also discuss the issue of having the ‘midget’ submarines used for special operations under the sea.
The cost negotiation with BAE Systems for the supply of 145 guns is complete and the deal is expected to be signed at price between $725 million and $740 million. This will be the main ground-based weapon for the Mountain Strike Corps. The BAE has further tied up with Mahindra to make 50 per cent of the guns in India.
BAE Systems will be asked to start deliveries within six months after signing the contract. In May last year, the DAC had approved the purchase of the ULH, which was originally proposed in 2008. Made of titanium, each gun weighs 4,000 kg, making it transportable by CH-47 Chinook helicopters, C-17 Globemaster and the C-130 Hercules aircraft or by trucks to ensure increased mobility in the mountains.
In case of the warships, the Navy will be setting six missile carrying vessels that will replace the 1980’s design Soviet-era ships of this type. These will carry the BrahMos, surface-to-air missiles, medium-range guns, and close-in weapons systems. It will cost Rs 13,000 crore (approx).
Also, the DAC will approve the installation of the 300-km range BrahMos missile on six warships, three of the Delhi class and three of the Talwar class. It will cost Rs 2,700 crore.
The DAC will also decide on buying 44,000 automatic hand-held carbines for the Army. An Israeli company has emerged as the top bidder following trials.

uddu
BRFite
Posts: 1873
Joined: 15 Aug 2004 17:09

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby uddu » 24 Jun 2016 09:08

lol the funny part is this. The U.S want that gun because they could lift it using Chinook. And without a proper delivery system we are going for this light gun and transporting it them using road. So what's the advantage? Nothing it seems. Next is the purchase of Chinooks to lift and transport them.

abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby abhishek_sharma » 25 Jun 2016 16:53

All India Radio News Verified account 
‏@airnewsalerts
Defence Ministry nods for purchase of 145 Ultra Light Howitzers guns, worth about 750 million dollars from US.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Gyan » 25 Jun 2016 18:11

uddu wrote:lol the funny part is this. The U.S want that gun because they could lift it using Chinook. And without a proper delivery system we are going for this light gun and transporting it them using road. So what's the advantage? Nothing it seems. Next is the purchase of Chinooks to lift and transport them.


+1

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9243
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby brar_w » 25 Jun 2016 18:41

Chinooks have already been ordered by the IAF.

http://www.boeing.co.in/news-and-media- ... pters.page?

Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3287
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Kakkaji » 26 Jun 2016 06:08

After Bofors, time for 'son' - Three-decade freeze ends

New Delhi, June 25: The Centre has finally ordered the son of a gun - Bofors ka bachcha, if you will - marking a first for the army's artillery divisions in the nearly three decades since the Bofors controversy spooked successive governments.

The government-run Ordnance Factory Board has been asked to deliver six Dhanush 155mm/45 calibre howitzers to the army, three by June 30 and three more by September 30. A further 18 guns will be ordered later, the army has been assured.

A senior government source said here today: "The DAC (Defence Acquisitions Council) has noted satisfactory progress in manufacturing the 'indigenous' Dhanush guns."

The council has also approved an "offsets" programme of BAe Land Systems to assemble, integrate and test M777 ultra-light howitzers meant largely for use by the army on the high-altitude frontier with China.

The guns are being bought from the US through the Pentagon's Foreign Military Sales route in a government-to-government deal that has been in the works for#nearly 10 years.

The Indian army's "field artillery rationalisation programme" (FARP) had gone haywire since the allegations of Bofors kickbacks against then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi snowballed into a political row that cast a shadow on successive governments. The institutionalised bureaucracy simply staved off decision-making on big guns.

For nearly three decades the army has not inducted a single big gun. The 410 Bofors bought in 1987 are being cannibalised to keep the artillery going. The army says it cannot wage war without these cannons or howitzers.

The FARP, drawn up in the 1990s, projected a need for five types of howitzers: towed, self-propelled, tracked, mounted and light. In all, the army needs some 18,000 pieces of artillery guns to be comfortable with its war-waging potential.

Five years ago, the Ordnance Factory Board discovered a set of papers that were meant for the transfer of technology from then Swedish firm Bofors AB. The Bofors AB plant now belongs to BAe Land Systems.

The Ordnance Factory Board's engineers at the Gun Carriage Factory in Jabalpur tried to assemble the gun from the manuals. But they were unable to decode the details in the data pack. Now the government has returned to Bofors AB/BAe Land Systems and asked their experts to decode the manual for an undisclosed fee.


The engineers of the Ordnance Factory Board re-invented the original FH77B02 Bofors. The difference is that while the original was a 39 calibre, the Dhanush is a 45 calibre. This is said to give the Dhanush a longer range of up to 40km in the plains.

The artillery's desperation and the threat perceptions have forced the government to begin with the orders even as the Dhanush is being tested for its range and rate of fire, traverse and elevation capabilities, and shoot-and-scoot ability.

Sounds familiar? Yes, these were the words used to describe and justify the purchase of 410 Bofors FH77B02 guns in 1987.

Tests of the Dhanush have been conducted in high and low altitudes in summer and winter. The government claims the gun is vastly improved since the first test, when its barrel burst three years ago.

The Defence Acquisitions Council's approval of the offsets programme for the M777 means that BAe Land Systems will, after the inter-government agreement, fly 25 readymade guns to India.

A further 120 would be sent in kits that would be "assembled, integrated and tested" by the Mahindras in a facility in Maharashtra. The entire deal is estimated to cost $750 million. A contract would follow the inter-governmental agreement. Deliveries could take two years or more from contract.

uddu
BRFite
Posts: 1873
Joined: 15 Aug 2004 17:09

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby uddu » 26 Jun 2016 06:38

brar_w wrote:Chinooks have already been ordered by the IAF.

http://www.boeing.co.in/news-and-media- ... pters.page?

Those are meant for Special forces and going to IAF. Will be of use when moving these artillery during peacetime. But the real advantage which we sought with this guns are their easy heli-lift capability (probably where there are no roads) during war time is non-existent without the helicopters that Army can use specifically for these guns. Now what we have is a gun that's just like any other guns but with limited range. The same work can be done by Dhanush but with better range.

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Surya » 26 Jun 2016 06:44

we need to get over this special forces fascination

C 130s are for special forces, Chinooks are for SF etc

there are lots of other needs and plans for these equipment and the SF will be just one of the users

uddu
BRFite
Posts: 1873
Joined: 15 Aug 2004 17:09

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby uddu » 26 Jun 2016 06:57

Agree, but the number of helicopters that we have are very limited in number to fully utilize the advantege of 145 M777. Either we need more helicopters+C17's or this advantage turns to disadvantage. And especially during war, the C17's and the other assets will be pretty busy with other kind of operations and the 145 light weight howitzers as usual will be like normal artillery and after the war, everyone will be complaining how we had a gun, but not the delivery systems to take advantage of it..blah blah blah..
also in the case of manufacturing if one look at what's being manufactured in India, we went with making Apache parts. In the long run, we will be using the LCH and possibly a larger variant of its follow on. So better must have been to go with the Chinook manufacturing, that must have been better to take care of the medium lift helicopter need that's affecting us. And can any gurus or garus shed some light on whether the planned HAL medium lift helicopter will be able to lift and transport these type of guns?

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Gyan » 26 Jun 2016 09:05

When Ch-47 will be flying in and deploying M777 in forward positions, then off course Chinese/Pak SAMs will be taking a time out. And 15 Chinooks, say available 10 will be able to look after the whole war/border.

BharadwajV
BRFite
Posts: 116
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby BharadwajV » 26 Jun 2016 12:51

^^
Conjecture time!
Off course IAF would be playing Cricket in Australia and not be performing SEAD/DEAD so that their rotary wing can fly straight into enemy SAMs.

Anyways, new guns are always welcome. Especially if they are the best in the world! (In its class)
Hopefully we make Excalibur like rounds with NAVIC and keep costs economical.
Dhanush, ATAGS and the M777: Future looks real bright for our Arty regiments.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4066
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby kit » 26 Jun 2016 13:03

How is the Bharat Ultra Light Howitzer – 155mm/39 Cal Ultra Light Gun compared to the M 777 ..any field tests ?

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3473
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Aditya G » 26 Jun 2016 13:33

The whole thing about M777 transportable by Chinook, and thus being anti PLA weapon is a red herring.

Say I have one squadron of 11 Chinooks servicable and ready. I can deploy the guns, along with the men. but what about the ammo? how many sorties will that take once order for fire is given.

Now I do think heli transport is a useful option to have - we have used it successfully in op falcon. But once the balloon goes up you need road logistics to sustain arty.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5246
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ShauryaT » 26 Jun 2016 16:07

uddu wrote:lol the funny part is this. The U.S want that gun because they could lift it using Chinook. And without a proper delivery system we are going for this light gun and transporting it them using road. So what's the advantage? Nothing it seems. Next is the purchase of Chinooks to lift and transport them.
Can the Mi-17 not lift the M-777?

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5246
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ShauryaT » 26 Jun 2016 16:13

kit wrote:How is the Bharat Ultra Light Howitzer – 155mm/39 Cal Ultra Light Gun compared to the M 777 ..any field tests ?
That gun has not been tested yet. The M-777 is a 2nd generation weapon, in its class.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 26 Jun 2016 16:57

the point about ammo makes the whole idea of isolated hilltop firebases moot in a full fledged war.
were oK in afpak vs sporadic attacks from light taliban units
were mixed results in vietnam for the french(dien ben phu) and many american bases
will be a disaster vs PLA well supported with rocket and tube artillery and swarming with acclamatized manpower.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8308
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Pratyush » 26 Jun 2016 17:00

oh brother here we go again with Chinooks and m 777. has the Indian army ever said anything about mating the 2 and using the gun as a part of helo mobile formation.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5246
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ShauryaT » 26 Jun 2016 17:01

Singha wrote:the point about ammo makes the whole idea of isolated hilltop firebases moot in a full fledged war.
were oK in afpak vs sporadic attacks from light taliban units
were mixed results in vietnam for the french(dien ben phu) and many american bases
will be a disaster vs PLA well supported with rocket and tube artillery and swarming with acclamatized manpower.
But somehow the PLA will not have any of these ammo supply challenges? Or do we want to make the case that only 155mm ammo will have supply issues but 105mm guns will not?

SanjayC
BRFite
Posts: 1557
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby SanjayC » 26 Jun 2016 17:06

I think helicopter lift of the M 777 will be useful for quick deployment or rearranging their deployment when the situation is tense and breakout of hostilities is imminent, but shots have not been fired yet. They can also be quickly dropped a distance behind our troops to give them fire support with enough ammunition to last a day or two, till regular supply chain catches up.

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Surya » 26 Jun 2016 19:32

my thinking is that the M777 is easier to transport even by road on account of weight compactness

vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5836
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby vishvak » 26 Jun 2016 19:54

Previous discussions about this around Aug/Sept 2013 onwards.
viewtopic.php?p=1491293#p1491293

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7734
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 26 Jun 2016 19:57

Surya wrote:my thinking is that the M777 is easier to transport even by road on account of weight compactness


In the fantasy world of BRFites, simple matter(s) impacting movement in mountains like weight of the gun do not count. Too much of a boring issue to be dealt with. Debating air-mobile artillery and such stuff is more sexy.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54822
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 27 Jun 2016 01:36

RV, How is the ammo and fuzes situation?
In mountains every round must count for logistics is difficult.

Long ago you mentioned ARDE working on GPS fuzes and hence reluctance for laser guided Krasnopol shells.

Any updates?

Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3287
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Kakkaji » 27 Jun 2016 04:55

Have they started testing the Kalyani (Bharat Forge) guns yet? Their 155mm, 130mm, and 105mm products, perhaps not as fancy as the ATAGS, M777 etc, ought to be good enough to be ordered for induction. That is the only way the numbers shortfall can be made up.

I think Baba Kalyani said in an interview that he can deliver one 155mm/52 gun every two days if he gets the order.

PratikDas
BRFite
Posts: 1927
Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby PratikDas » 27 Jun 2016 05:38

rohitvats wrote:
Surya wrote:my thinking is that the M777 is easier to transport even by road on account of weight compactness


In the fantasy world of BRFites, simple matter(s) impacting movement in mountains like weight of the gun do not count. Too much of a boring issue to be dealt with. Debating air-mobile artillery and such stuff is more sexy.

You're here as well, mate - in BRF.

Eric Leiderman
BRFite
Posts: 364
Joined: 26 Nov 2010 08:56

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Eric Leiderman » 27 Jun 2016 07:52

Parikar has heard the Baba out, give it some time there will be multiple versions on artillery coming out of kalyani forge

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9858
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Yagnasri » 27 Jun 2016 08:16

How does the 100% FDI thing now works out now. We already have lot of Indian companies with systems on offer for testing etc.

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Vipul » 27 Jun 2016 08:24

^^^^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOQkukUOhZc

See from 1:40 onwards. Baba Kalyani mentions that "the 155/52 guns have undergone firing trials and have come out with flying colors".

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 27 Jun 2016 10:04

Parrikar sir needs to look into building a comprehensive framework in which private players can get access to Govt run land, air and sea test ranges for testing their gear on a concessional or govt rate basis. all the american pvt sector get access to the huge missile and munitions test ranges like white sands in new mexico, nellis + area 51 etc. we are not a land surplus nation like aus,canada or usa for pvt players to have lakhs of acres of unpopulated land for testing.

Kalyani projects have been delayed due to lack of permission from MOD to use the Govt ranges. some heads need to be cracked by minister and a clean and fair framework written up.

manjgu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2483
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby manjgu » 27 Jun 2016 10:58

if kalyani can roll out good stuff no need for FDI in artillery ... once we have proven capability the terms of engagement with firangi vendors can be on better terms. this needs to be encouraged 200%

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

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 27 Jun 2016 11:00

^ we can import small subsystems until local vendors catch up, and then local vendors can import components, but overall design of the gun and its architecture and IP has got to remain with us - same for any platform down to rifles. this removes much price gouging.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7734
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 27 Jun 2016 12:06

manjgu wrote:if kalyani can roll out good stuff no need for FDI in artillery ... once we have proven capability the terms of engagement with firangi vendors can be on better terms. this needs to be encouraged 200%


The artillery requirement consists of Towed, Mounted Gun System, Tracked, Wheeled and Light Guns.

Of these, Dhanush and ATAGS will take care of the towed requirement. The next biggest category is MGS - we should work with Kalyani to modify Dhanush and ATAGS to have a mounted version. These two categories form the bulk of our artillery requirement.

Tracked has been awarded to Koreans while Wheeled SP seems to be either shelved or not being pursued vigorously. Light 155/39 is going M-777 way. However, I distinctly remember reading somewhere that IA is working with Kalyani on the mounted 105mm gun with soft-recoil technology.

wig
BRFite
Posts: 1893
Joined: 09 Feb 2009 16:58

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby wig » 28 Jun 2016 08:35

Artillery gun purchase first ‘baby step’ towards meeting Army’s needs
http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/nation ... 58123.html
recent decision of the Ministry of Defence (MoD) to acquire a new set of artillery guns is literally the first “baby step” towards meeting the Army’s artillery modernisation plans drawn up in 1999.
The MoD okayed the letter of acceptance that would be delivered to the US supplier, BAE Systems, for 145 ultra light howitzers (ULH) of the 155 mm variety. This was the first formal okay for a 155 mm gun since March 1986 when the Bofors guns were purchased.
The Army’s artillery modernisation has ambitious needs. Called the Field Artillery Rationalization Plan, and drawn up in 1999, it talks about acquiring 2,800 guns by 2027. The first step in that direction was taken on Saturday, but the follow-up steps are expected to be rapid.
The plan talks about 155 mm guns of all types—that is 1,580 towed guns, 814 truck-mounted guns, 100 tracked self-propelled guns,180 wheeled self-propelled guns and 145 ultra light howitzers.
The bulk will come through when mounted guns and towed guns are procured. International companies have been invited for this to join the “Make in India” initiative.
To apply for the contract of the 1,580 towed guns, French company Nexter has teamed up with local partner Larsen & Toubro. Israel’s Elbit Systems has partnered with Bharat Forge.
In case of the 814 truck-mounted guns, Nexter and L&T have bid, along with Ashok Leyland. TATA has South African gun-maker “The Denel” as its partner.
The immediate addition to the artillery gun numbers could come from two separate tenders. First is a “tracked self-propelled” gun mounted on a tank-track type chassis. India plans to buy 100 pieces of this. The MoD is negotiating with the L&T-Samsung combine. The evaluation process is over and the price bids were opened in December 2015.
The second will be the indigenous Dhanush gun, based on Bofors design and transfer of technology. The MoD yesterday laid down a stiff time line for the Ordnance Factory Board (OFB), its maker, to be ready with six “production-level prototypes” for trials and bulk orders will follow. The Army want to acquire 114 pieces of this.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21046
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Philip » 28 Jun 2016 15:48

Finally some real movement on an issue that has bedeviled the IA for over 3 decades!

With the boulders removed,one should now move full steam ahead with the various arty requirements asap. If we are to give Pak a bloody nose for its terrorist perfidy,then exterminating as many Paki army and terrorist bases across the LOC/border will be greatly aided by LR arty and MBRLs.The LW arty is also needed most urgently on our borders with China to beef up the firepower of the forces stationed there.In fact the LW requirement should be hugely increased.

srin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2033
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby srin » 28 Jun 2016 16:43

Is the same 155mm caliber shell used by all guns ? Or does it vary by make - Dhanush vs original Bofors vs M777 vs K9 ?

BharadwajV
BRFite
Posts: 116
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby BharadwajV » 28 Jun 2016 17:19

Same shells...
Caliber corresponds to the Barrel length...

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54822
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 28 Jun 2016 20:09

Rohitvats just for clarification what is mounted artillery? How is this different than wheeled? And why so many self propelled versions: tracked and wheeled. And thus numbers are split.

If its truck mounted then basically the recoil has to be transferred to the ground bypassing the truck chassis.

Don't mind lekin looks like supermarket approach for picking and choosing systems without regard to cost or availability.

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Cosmo_R » 28 Jun 2016 20:41

ramana wrote:Rohitvats just for clarification what is mounted artillery? How is this different than wheeled? And why so many self propelled versions: tracked and wheeled. And thus numbers are split.

If its truck mounted then basically the recoil has to be transferred to the ground bypassing the truck chassis.

Don't mind lekin looks like supermarket approach for picking and choosing systems without regard to cost or availability.


Yeah! bewildering array of guns. I thought the IAF was a bit anal about LCA/MCA/HCA but this is salami slicing of another magnitude. Unless of course, there is some method to this. The range of spares, kinds of shells etc is mind boggling.

The US Army for example appears to have four types"

"The U.S. Army employs several types of field artillery weapons systems. The four towed howitzer weapon systems in use are the M102 (105 mm), used primarily by honor guards, the M119A1/A2 (105 mm), the M198 (155 mm) howitzers, and the M777 155 mm howitzer. The M109A6 Paladin is a 155 mm self-propelled howitzer. The M270A1 Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS) is the Field Artillery's heaviest and longest-ranged weapons system, a self-propelled rocket launcher using either 270 mm unguided rockets or the Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) Block I missile. The United States Marine Corps is currently transitioning from the M198 howitzer to the M777."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Field_Art ... _States%29

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7734
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 29 Jun 2016 00:08

ramana wrote:Rohitvats just for clarification what is mounted artillery? How is this different than wheeled? And why so many self propelled versions: tracked and wheeled. And thus numbers are split.

If its truck mounted then basically the recoil has to be transferred to the ground bypassing the truck chassis.

Don't mind lekin looks like supermarket approach for picking and choosing systems without regard to cost or availability.


Difference between wheeled SP gun and Mounted Gun System (MGS) is that wheeled SP gun is simply the wheeled counterpart of Tracked SP gun. IA feels that there are some areas where tracked vehicle might not be the right solution. Rather, a wheeled SP Arty gun is the answer. Between tracked and wheeled SP Arty we've a requirement of 280 guns. This is about 15.5 Regiments worth of SP Arty. And much lesser than number required if the idea was to equip all mechanized formations with tracked or wheeled SP Arty guns.

For example, assuming 4 SP Arty Regiments per Armoured Division, we'd need 12 Regiments only for our three armored divisions. Not to forget requirement for RAPID and independent armored and mechanized brigades.

This is where the mounted guns come in. Simply a towed gun mounted on a 6x6 or 8x8 truck. Much cheaper than tracked or wheeled SP Arty. But with the required level of mobility and automation.

Had we gone the US route, IA would've been asking for tracked/wheeled SP Arty instead of MGS. And we'd be looking at expensive SP Arty guns in thousands instead of 280 being sought now.

Enough MGS solutions available from Israel, France, TATA SED and Czech.

Mix of towed and MGS regiments give flexibility to the commanders. Even mechanized formations might have mix of wheeled/tracked and MGS regiments.


Return to “Mil-Tech Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests