Artillery: News & Discussion

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 18 Dec 2016 16:53

It appears that the Arty is finally seeing light at the end of the tunnel.

I hope that it doesn't turn out to be light of an incoming train.

ragupta · Post by **ragupta** » 18 Dec 2016 17:20

shiv wrote:
Kakkaji wrote: Our military procurent always makes the best the enemy of 'good enough'.
Unfortunately we Indians have various "levels" of criticism for anything that is done in India

When "good enough" is accepted, the next level of criticism is
Look at what Pakistan is doing - why can't we do it
Look at what china is doing - why can't we do it
Comments of both these categories have been made on this forum in the last few days, but comments on any other site -such as IDRW reveal exactly the same sentiments

We Indians are such hard task masters on ourselves that our only hope of perfection lies in doing something that no one else can see - like intense tapas and claiming "I have seen Brahman" and have attained the absolute. No one can criticize you then

"Pursuit of perfection" is good, but being upset for not being one is going to make you unhappy and unsatisfied.
Look at the people from the company this tag line is, they strive for perfection, work very hard, have acheived a lot, once of the top economy in the world, envy of the world, but unhappy lot, because everyone is looking for perfection (Wife from Husband, husband from wife, Managers from employee, people from products). That make then overworked, unhappy, depressed, and suicidal.

Better to follow Gita aka Work life balance to keep yourself happy.
Jyada khana or Kum Khana ya Jyada chahna or Kum chahna, will make you unhappy and unsatisfied.
So a point of 80-90 achievement is good, then set the rest for next phase, that is how successfull enterprise have proceeded.
Our Armed forces sought perfection in first go (LCA, ARJUN, AWACS etc) even after achieving a lot, they are unhappy and unsatisfied with indigenous products. In the hope of getting better they import based on brochure, and we all know what they get from it.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 18 Dec 2016 17:28

I see from pix that ATAGS apart from having high angle fire (haubitze) also has low elevation D-30 type direct fire (field gun). I read it has a thermal imager also.

hopefully IA will not put in a req that it needs a FCS to hit on the move targets like a tank can do. its direct fire mode I see as a emergency if position is about to overrun or if its on a hill and needs to fire down at targets below.

Bheeshma · Post by **Bheeshma** » 19 Dec 2016 01:09

Is the weight 12 tonnes as DRDO promised ? Else IA will again use it as an excuse to buy some foreign crap. Anyway a good beginning for Arty. Needed these 155mm and Pinakas like yesterday. Hopefully the same gun can be used for Mounted and Wheeled SPG's. I guess on to Pinaka-II and Prahaar after this.

Avinandan · Post by **Avinandan** » 19 Dec 2016 04:00

Singha wrote:I see from pix that ATAGS apart from having high angle fire (haubitze) also has low elevation D-30 type direct fire (field gun). I read it has a thermal imager also.

hopefully IA will not put in a req that it needs a FCS to hit on the move targets like a tank can do. its direct fire mode I see as a emergency if position is about to overrun or if its on a hill and needs to fire down at targets below.

Singha Saar, I suspect they will ask for Bofor's like ammo crane. IMHO they are quite useful for sustained firing.

Additionally, please advise on the demerits of Bharat-52, Turkish Panter design?
One thing to this Abdul's eyes is the inability to rotate in its axis quickly like the Bofors design does.

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 19 Dec 2016 07:22

Has there been any clarity on ATAGS chamber volume, 23 or 25 litres? The latter would be a better scenario.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 19 Dec 2016 08:18

ragupta wrote:
shiv wrote: We Indians are such hard task masters on ourselves that our only hope of perfection lies in doing something that no one else can see - like intense tapas and claiming "I have seen Brahman" and have attained the absolute. No one can criticize you then
"Pursuit of perfection" is good, but being upset for not being one is going to make you unhappy and unsatisfied.
Look at the people from the company this tag line is, they strive for perfection, work very hard, have acheived a lot, once of the top economy in the world, envy of the world, but unhappy lot, because everyone is looking for perfection (Wife from Husband, husband from wife, Managers from employee, people from products). That make then overworked, unhappy, depressed, and suicidal.

Better to follow Gita aka Work life balance to keep yourself happy.
Jyada khana or Kum Khana ya Jyada chahna or Kum chahna, will make you unhappy and unsatisfied.
So a point of 80-90 achievement is good, then set the rest for next phase, that is how successfull enterprise have proceeded.
Our Armed forces sought perfection in first go (LCA, ARJUN, AWACS etc) even after achieving a lot, they are unhappy and unsatisfied with indigenous products. In the hope of getting better they import based on brochure, and we all know what they get from it.

I have no dispute with your post - but I only want to point out that we have so much philosophy, but no pride in what we do because nothing that we do is considered perfect. The act of "doing" gets nothing, only perfection is sought.

Positivity has a dynamic of its own. I have seen the way some people of HAL/DRDO on the one hand and IAF on the other hand don't give a rats ass for each other. The IAF saw HAL as incompetent and uncaring, and HAL saw IAF as plane drivers. yes I do exaggerate - but the more Indians excoriate our own people the more it adds to the mass of perception that we are all bad. This has been an ongoing process from colonial days. I recall - from 5th std - many decades ago for me a classmate of mine called Paul Menon who told me, at the age of 10 that "Indians are lazy. I am going to migrate to Australia"

Excellence and morale are interlinked, and morale is linked to positivity. As a nation we are so negative about ourselves that we have sunk into a deep pit where there is nothing positive that does not have a dozen negative responses. Indians shine outside India because they get an instant morale and self confidence boost - not because they belong to some special smart caste. Sorry to digress.

Bart S · Post by **Bart S** » 19 Dec 2016 09:02

Singha wrote:I see from pix that ATAGS apart from having high angle fire (haubitze) also has low elevation D-30 type direct fire (field gun). I read it has a thermal imager also.

hopefully IA will not put in a req that it needs a FCS to hit on the move targets like a tank can do. its direct fire mode I see as a emergency if position is about to overrun or if its on a hill and needs to fire down at targets below.

Pistol mode is essential for giving thappad to Pakis on the border during peace time.

What is the use-case for a thermal imager?

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 19 Dec 2016 09:07

Am I the only one who is seeing the G5 lineage in the carriage. The gun seems to be some thing else entirely.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 19 Dec 2016 09:37

Singha wrote: hopefully IA will not put in a req that it needs a FCS to hit on the move targets like a tank can do. its direct fire mode I see as a emergency if position is about to overrun or if its on a hill and needs to fire down at targets below.

The moving target requirement is met by tanks, not artillery

Positions about to be overrun require heavy and high rate of fire at ranges of less than 1 km where terrain is a problem. Artillery is generally unsuitable for that - unless Tipu Sultan type muzzle loaders are used. But AAA like Bofors L-70 will work

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 19 Dec 2016 09:41

Pratyush wrote:Am I the only one who is seeing the G5 lineage in the carriage. The gun seems to be some thing else entirely.

On the contrary, G5 derives its lineage from Austrian GC-45 designed by Gerard Bull - the same gun whose manufacturing/production set-up and everything else was scooped by Kalyani.

Gerard Bull worked with South Africans (Denel) on the artillery bit quite extensively - the mobile mounting was designed by Denel for the gun designed by Bull. G5 is further evolution of Gerard Bull's design by Denel.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 19 Dec 2016 11:23

Actually in our scenario firing in low elevation is a key requirement especially in mountains. We extracted price from pakis on LoC as recently as this year when firing I pistol mode.

shiv wrote:
Singha wrote: hopefully IA will not put in a req that it needs a FCS to hit on the move targets like a tank can do. its direct fire mode I see as a emergency if position is about to overrun or if its on a hill and needs to fire down at targets below.
The moving target requirement is met by tanks, not artillery

Positions about to be overrun require heavy and high rate of fire at ranges of less than 1 km where terrain is a problem. Artillery is generally unsuitable for that - unless Tipu Sultan type muzzle loaders are used. But AAA like Bofors L-70 will work

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 19 Dec 2016 11:49

GOI can give the design etc to Tatas L&T and Baba and allow them to make the same system in three assembly lines to that the required systems can be produced faster and all the available infrastructure is put to use.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 19 Dec 2016 12:48

Rohit. I said carriage and not the whole gun system.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 19 Dec 2016 12:54

Yagnasri wrote:GOI can give the design etc to Tatas L&T and Baba and allow them to make the same system in three assembly lines to that the required systems can be produced faster and all the available infrastructure is put to use.

That is what is actually happening - DRDO is working with both Bharat Forge and TATA Power SED. Barrel is being designed by DRDO/OFB. Once the final design is ready and up for production, expect both the groups to get production contracts. That is why we don't hear of BHARAT-52 gun which BF was proposing earlier.

Pinaka production is a template for this - of the two regiments inducted initially, one each was produced by L&T and TATA Power SED. The renewed order for Pinaka is likely to continue along these lines. Army is pretty happy with this kind of set-up.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 19 Dec 2016 13:05

Pratyush wrote:Rohit. I said carriage and not the whole gun system.

The BHARAT-52 gun proposed by BF had somewhat similar layout. But closer inspection shows this layout is indeed very similar to two guns - DENEL G5 and Soltam ATHOS-2052.

1. GHN-45 - https://i.ytimg.com/vi/Lm4T8tKdaBA/maxresdefault.jpg

2. ATHOS-2052: http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-O9WDri5uCvI/T ... S-2052.jpg

3. Denel G5-52: http://www.army-guide.com/images/p0567818.jpg

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 19 Dec 2016 13:20

thermal imager is for night firing/dust/rain etc where visibility is poor. another tidbit is the syrians are using the new thermal imagers on their T72 tanks (25% changed so far) to locate and take out rebel snipers...in the daytime. the heat and muzzle flash of a gun registers loud and clear.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 19 Dec 2016 13:49

I remember to have seen a work package for dynamic stabilization system of ATAGS coming our way circa 2011. It was not our area of expertise so we let it pass. But good to see ATAGS coming up now. Hope trials would be swift and induction will start in 2yrs in good numbers. We should not be buying any 155mm Artillery system anymore after M777. Just churn out Dhanush/ATAGS based artillery in various forms like towed, mounted, tracked etc as per requirement and line them up on Western border in 000s.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 19 Dec 2016 16:00

Can someone explain to me the need for a Thermal imager or a dynamic stabilization system for an artillery piece that is expected to sit in one place hit targets 30-40 km away way way out of line of sight.

Note that a parabolic path that takes a shell to a distance of 40 km may be at least 60 km long and at a muzzle velocity of 800 meters per sec it will take the shell several minutes to reach the target so hitting a moving target is not what it is meant for. Hitting a moving target would require tracking of the target by UAV/aircraft PLUS terminal guidance of a normally dumb artillery shell.

Thermal imagers would not be useful except within line of sight. From the ground - in mountainous terrain that maye be s little as a few hundred meters up to a few km. 40 km is unlikely

ragupta · Post by **ragupta** » 19 Dec 2016 16:07

shiv wrote: ...
Excellence and morale are interlinked, and morale is linked to positivity. As a nation we are so negative about ourselves that we have sunk into a deep pit where there is nothing positive that does not have a dozen negative responses. Indians shine outside India because they get an instant morale and self confidence boost - not because they belong to some special smart caste. Sorry to digress.

Agree. I am hopeful things are changing for better, right set of people governing the country. the new generation are full of energy and they will bring in the change we desire, and I wil die a peacful, happy and satisfied man. In the meantime, will continue with good karma to push in that way...

by the way I have admired your thoughts for all these years... since I joined BR late 90s.

Mihir · Post by **Mihir** » 19 Dec 2016 22:50

Singha wrote:I see from pix that ATAGS apart from having high angle fire (haubitze) also has low elevation D-30 type direct fire (field gun). I read it has a thermal imager also.

hopefully IA will not put in a req that it needs a FCS to hit on the move targets like a tank can do. its direct fire mode I see as a emergency if position is about to overrun or if its on a hill and needs to fire down at targets below.

All modern howitzers are capable of firing at low angles. The FH-77, Dhanush, ATAGS can all do it.

Indian arty crew are trained fire over open sights. There's no FCS to track and hit moving targets, but they could hit tanks in a pinch. A 155mm HE shell hitting the hull or turret would pulverise the crew.

Bheeshma · Post by **Bheeshma** » 19 Dec 2016 23:07

Any chance the Kalyani's 105mm mounted gun (that reportedly weighs 900 kg) will be accepted by BSF atleast? It would be a great addition and will help pulverize the pakis without escalating to the army level.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 19 Dec 2016 23:37

I feel so happy about the arty now. We are spoilt for so many indigenous choices. There are so many backups. Bravo! I am sure the same is going to happen with FICVs. Now onto tanks and aircrafts please.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 20 Dec 2016 00:22

Aiyo wait a little bit more

lets see a 100 dhanush and few dozen ATAGS

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 20 Dec 2016 01:06

Bheeshma wrote:Any chance the Kalyani's 105mm mounted gun (that reportedly weighs 900 kg) will be accepted by BSF atleast? It would be a great addition and will help pulverize the pakis without escalating to the army level.

Bheesmaji, why only BSF? It would be a tremendous weapons system for army too.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 20 Dec 2016 01:23

darshhan wrote:Bheesmaji, why only BSF? It would be a tremendous weapons system for army too.

Army's standardizing on 155 mm for arty. Over the long term, the BSF ought to be making the same transition too.

Bheeshma · Post by **Bheeshma** » 20 Dec 2016 01:47

Army will also have field Arty regiments that require 105 mm guns. I doubt they will do away with them. The Mountain divisions will definitely retain 105 mm guns and if they are only 900 odd kg then rest assured IA will buy enough of them.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 20 Dec 2016 07:50

Mihir wrote: Indian arty crew are trained fire over open sights. There's no FCS to track and hit moving targets, but they could hit tanks in a pinch. A 155mm HE shell hitting the hull or turret would pulverise the crew.

The only problem is that while elevation and depression are built-in features of artillery, side-to-side traverse is not. The gun position would have to be "re-laid". So that means that unless a tank just happened to be sitting static in line of sight of the artillery piece it would not get hit. In a hypothetical face-off between one tank and 3 artillery pieces at 1500 meters from each other the tank with its mobility and 120 mm gum would be able to finish off all 3 artillery pieces because of its rate of fire, mobility and ability to traverse and fire on the move

Artillery is more like air force. Hitting at a distance and devastating an adversary. Not close in fighting.

But I think 105 mm field artillery can be rotated and re-laid manually, quickly

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 20 Dec 2016 11:21

shiv wrote:The only problem is that while elevation and depression are built-in features of artillery, side-to-side traverse is not. The gun position would have to be "re-laid". So that means that unless a tank just happened to be sitting static in line of sight of the artillery piece it would not get hit. In a hypothetical face-off between one tank and 3 artillery pieces at 1500 meters from each other the tank with its mobility and 120 mm gum would be able to finish off all 3 artillery pieces because of its rate of fire, mobility and ability to traverse and fire on the move

Artillery is more like air force. Hitting at a distance and devastating an adversary. Not close in fighting.

But I think 105 mm field artillery can be rotated and re-laid manually, quickly

Shiv - many Soviet artillery pieces came with traverse capability. The degree of traverse depended upon the intended use of the piece. For example, M-46 (which was and remains long range medium artillery piece) comes with 50 degree traverse while D-30 gun comes with 360 degree traverse. 50 degree traverse for M-46 should mean 25 degree either ways from centre-line.

Guns like D-30 were designed from ground-up to also have anti-tank capability in addition to populating the field regiments which have lower range than likes of M-46. I think this ability of lower caliber guns in Field Regiments to traverse along wide arc is carry forward from WW2. Field Regiments had lower range which meant they were that much closer to the front-line. In case of enemy breakthrough, they ended up providing anti-tank capability.

Our very own 105mm IFG comes with 46 degree traverse. Both D-30 and our IFG come with design to allow this traverse on a pivot. BTW, we also have some 20-22 regiments of D-30 guns.

1. D-30: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... (D-30).jpg
2. IFG: http://www.armyrecognition.com/images/s ... 40_001.jpg

When it comes to something like Bofors, the APU allows it to traverse 360 degree using the two massive tyres; even then, there is some degree of traverse from centre-line built into the system. Our own FH-77B Bofors has 60 degree arc (30 degree either side from center-line) of traverse.

Bofors traverse source: http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product4673.html

manjgu · Post by **manjgu** » 21 Dec 2016 19:42

Shiv..i think if a gun is to be fired in 'pistol mode' ( for targets between 2 to 4 km ) at night or in low light conditions would require a thermal imager. Not sure abt dynamic stabilization though.

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 21 Dec 2016 19:52

Following images lists out all features in ATAGS, including thermal imaging and traverse system.

srin · Post by **srin** » 21 Dec 2016 20:15

shiv wrote:
Singha wrote: hopefully IA will not put in a req that it needs a FCS to hit on the move targets like a tank can do. its direct fire mode I see as a emergency if position is about to overrun or if its on a hill and needs to fire down at targets below.
The moving target requirement is met by tanks, not artillery

Positions about to be overrun require heavy and high rate of fire at ranges of less than 1 km where terrain is a problem. Artillery is generally unsuitable for that - unless Tipu Sultan type muzzle loaders are used. But AAA like Bofors L-70 will work

An additional thing: howitzers have lower muzzle velocity (~500 m/s) compared to tanks (~1700 m/s). So, unless a target is stationary, it will be hard to hit.

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 21 Dec 2016 20:44

^ Folks i think Singha ji was being sarcastic when he said that

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 21 Dec 2016 20:50

manjgu wrote:Shiv..i think if a gun is to be fired in 'pistol mode' ( for targets between 2 to 4 km ) at night or in low light conditions would require a thermal imager. Not sure abt dynamic stabilization though.

After the first round is fired need to stabilize the system for firing shock and movement and from nearby guns. So its very much needed.
Thermal imaging is good to ensure the system is in calibration. A known feature(hill, building etc.) is locked on and the sight keeps track of it. So both are needed for accuracy.

All this from Arun_S.

Mihir · Post by **Mihir** » 21 Dec 2016 21:48

shiv wrote: The only problem is that while elevation and depression are built-in features of artillery, side-to-side traverse is not. The gun position would have to be "re-laid". So that means that unless a tank just happened to be sitting static in line of sight of the artillery piece it would not get hit. In a hypothetical face-off between one tank and 3 artillery pieces at 1500 meters from each other the tank with its mobility and 120 mm gum would be able to finish off all 3 artillery pieces because of its rate of fire, mobility and ability to traverse and fire on the move

Oh, I agree. If enemy tanks are within line-of-sight of your artillery, something has gone very wrong and you've probably lost the battle. In that sense, its a last-ditch defensive measure.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 21 Dec 2016 22:26

Sid wrote:Following images lists out all features in ATAGS, including thermal imaging and traverse system.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ikRva2ALmbo/U ... ster-1.JPG

What is that 3/4 3/4 3/4 business?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 21 Dec 2016 22:34

3/4 etc is an artifact of power point conversion. Its a - or a bullet point.

hnair · Post by **hnair** » 22 Dec 2016 14:23

Confusing, this FAS diagram. Is that ATAGS or the DRDO's own ULH based on the original FH77 ? Does not seem to have a bulky APU like the ATAGS (95kw) and looks like a stripped down version of FH77.

ATAGS: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cz8GDMxUAAAhE8J.jpg:large
old FH77s: http://xedknowledge.com/Image%20Storage ... bdfee5.jpg

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 22 Dec 2016 17:36

^^^The diagram was the earlier proposed one. It seems after interaction with the Kalyani Group, the APU has changed and resembles the one on Denel G5 gun.

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 22 Dec 2016 19:01

I am hoping just like Pinaka, DRDO will field its ATAGS on two prototype APU/platform. One by both vendors involved. This particular one seems to be from Kalyani group, i.e. Bharat 52.