Artillery: News & Discussion
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
Mounted Dhanush.
I hope that OFB works with Tata. They seemed to have a much more TFTA solution on their 8X8 platform.
I hope that OFB works with Tata. They seemed to have a much more TFTA solution on their 8X8 platform.
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
I am woefully behind the development of Indian arty scene. Amazing initiative by OFB.
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
Great pics Kartik.Drool time! One Q.How many crew members.There appear to be 2 hatches forward of the turret, presumably for the driver and commander, two more in the turret- gunner and loader?
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
My opinion Tata's should not. Tatas must be designing a MGS based on ATAGS. I want the OFB one to be pitted against a Tata MGS, who will beat the OFB hands down on automation and sensor fusion. Not to mention a better paint job.Indranil wrote:
I hope that OFB works with Tata. They seemed to have a much more TFTA solution on their 8X8 platform.
The ideal scenario, BF for towed, Tatas for MGS, OFB for Dhanush & L&T for K9. L&T should make a deal with the Koreans to produce K9 cheaper in India and market it worldwide jointly.
From a time when we struggle to induct a single piece, we will have four producers! And artillery could become our biggest arms export!
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
We are well on the path of having 3000 thundering guns in 10 years, inshallah.
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
Wonderful development! The Artillery team at OFB is working wonders!Indranil wrote:Mounted Dhanush.
Unlikely, OFB being a PSU would work with BEML Tatra since its another PSU. And technically the Tatra is a higher mobility platform than the Tata solution (though as a consequence Opex of Tatra is more than Opex of Tata). The initial Indian contenders including Soltam and Denel T5 Condor were Tatra based gunsIndranil wrote:I hope that OFB works with Tata. They seemed to have a much more TFTA solution on their 8X8 platform.
https://www.army-technology.com/projects/atmos2000/
http://www.military-today.com/artillery/t5_52.htm
Later Denel went via Tata to circumvent the ban.
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
OT, but Thunderstruck by AC/DC has to be one of the greatest songs ever composed by humanity.
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
It's just glorified screwdriver giri. We should have done this in-house based on Dhanush/ATAGS and Arjun.abhik wrote:Are those actually built by L&T or are they the first set of fully built/knocked down kits imported from SoKo? The K9 deal was finalized only a few months ago.
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
They have developed 11 systems got india specific optimizations
It is not screw driver giri, it is more of an MKIsed version that is being made. The mobility/powerpack can easily be swapped with another and the barrel can be replaced with indigenous maal once it gets through its paces. All in all a good start(considering we had to start somewhere)The L&T-produced indigenous systems on the gun will include the fire control system, hull, turret, electronics, NBC systems, auto loaders, air conditioning and direct fire systems. The VAJRA-T was declared the sole qualified gun after user evaluation trials at Pokhran. The Russian competitor could not meet the requirements. Among the 13 Indian systems on the winning prototype was a fire control system to cater to a huge mix of Indian ammunition.
The deal is being described as a “step higher than licensed production”. “It will be an Indian product made made in an Indian factory,” claimed the L&T executive.
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
One of the advantages of having a R&D ecosystem. Arms manufacturer will more than willing to do a true local production (at least partially) when they know India has the required tech to build one itself. This is format we need to follow to rapidly build up MIC.
L&T needs to go to town with this. Locally produce items, reduce the cost and make it extremely competitive against Chinese maal.
DRDO does not need to invest time and effort on developing a SPH. Just use K9 as the base platform and L&T can work with DRDO to build the capability. MoD just needs to make sure the order flows.
L&T needs to go to town with this. Locally produce items, reduce the cost and make it extremely competitive against Chinese maal.
DRDO does not need to invest time and effort on developing a SPH. Just use K9 as the base platform and L&T can work with DRDO to build the capability. MoD just needs to make sure the order flows.
Last edited by nam on 10 Apr 2018 21:21, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
The powerpack is MTU, similar to Arjun. Lower rating though. So we know the engine.suryag wrote:
It is not screw driver giri, it is more of an MKIsed version that is being made. The mobility/powerpack can easily be swapped with another and the barrel can be replaced with indigenous maal once it gets through its paces. All in all a good start(considering we had to start somewhere)
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
Was thrilled to see the OFB Dhanush Mounted Gun..so good to see them being proactive and coming up with a solution internally that could mean no need for an imported solution that is made in India like the NEXTER CAESAR.
Here's the NEXTER CAESAR Mounted Gun on an Ashok Leyland truck..being done as part of a consortium with L&T here
Elbit Kalyani ATMOS Mounted Gun
Do these 2 foreign designs honestly look that much more TFTA than the OFB Dhanush Mounted Gun? Get a better paint job and then people will be going waah waah over the desi solution as well.
Now to find out more details on the OFB MGS solution..
Here's the NEXTER CAESAR Mounted Gun on an Ashok Leyland truck..being done as part of a consortium with L&T here
Elbit Kalyani ATMOS Mounted Gun
Do these 2 foreign designs honestly look that much more TFTA than the OFB Dhanush Mounted Gun? Get a better paint job and then people will be going waah waah over the desi solution as well.
Now to find out more details on the OFB MGS solution..
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
+1Rakesh wrote:OT, but Thunderstruck by AC/DC has to be one of the greatest songs ever composed by humanity.
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
The mounting points is different. OFB seems to have loaded the turret behind the wheels, whereas ATmos, Caesar and even the Tata solution was loaded atop the back wheels. That gives a much more shorter overhang. I don't think this OFB solution is complete yet. Imagine the gun firing at 90 degrees to the truck's orientation. What is stopping it from rolling the truck over. I think Tata will do a fantastic job of mounting the gun on their truck.Kartik wrote: Do these 2 foreign designs honestly look that much more TFTA than the OFB Dhanush Mounted Gun? Get a better paint job and then people will be going waah waah over the desi solution as well.
Now to find out more details on the OFB MGS solution..
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
^Can it turn 90deg..? Looks unlikely. +-30deg or so more likely to my noob eyes.
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
+1 .. i can imagine these howitzers dishing it out at the Pakistani border with this as the backgroundJTull wrote:+1Rakesh wrote:OT, but Thunderstruck by AC/DC has to be one of the greatest songs ever composed by humanity.
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
The Denel system can traverse quite a bitJayS wrote:^Can it turn 90deg..? Looks unlikely. +-30deg or so more likely to my noob eyes.
https://www.armyrecognition.com/south_a ... 11163.html
OFB historically never had a traverse mechanism and will need to develop it from scratch. Bhim used Denel turret and the Bofors FH-77B02 used APU and wheels to traverse. The OFB truck mounted looks like a quick fix job.
Even in the Tata Denel gun, the traverse mechanism is from Denel rather than Tata. Not sure whether Denel will allow Tata to use it with OFB gun.Indranil wrote:I think Tata will do a fantastic job of mounting the gun on their truck.
But its not a big thing to develop. We can use components from Arjun turret traverse mechanism but this gun, its elevation & recoil mechanism will much heavier than Arjun gun & turret.
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
Quite TFTA .. The ordnance factories are better off privatizedKartik wrote:More images of K-9 Vajras on the assembly line at L&T's facility at Hazira, Gujarat.
<snip>
Last edited by nachiket on 11 Apr 2018 02:01, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: edited out quoted images
Reason: edited out quoted images
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
deleted
Last edited by kit on 11 Apr 2018 01:29, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
Happy to see the artillery segment of the IA picking up after years of decades of neglect ..shows how policy changes do help
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
The Denel traverse mechanism is quite good
http://www.military-today.com/artillery/t5_52.htm
http://www.military-today.com/artillery/t5_52.htm
Kit - you dont have to quote a whole series of images for a one line post. For those of us using mobiles, its a pain scrolling.This artillery system can fire in 360° arc, however it has to return to the 80° arc to simplify the loading process.
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
Indeed. Looks odd that the front wheels are not airborne already in the process of toppling back.Indranil wrote:The mounting points is different. OFB seems to have loaded the turret behind the wheels, whereas ATmos, Caesar and even the Tata solution was loaded atop the back wheels. That gives a much more shorter overhang.Kartik wrote: Do these 2 foreign designs honestly look that much more TFTA than the OFB Dhanush Mounted Gun? Get a better paint job and then people will be going waah waah over the desi solution as well.
Now to find out more details on the OFB MGS solution..
...............
I think the current solution is a quick PoC and the entire Dhanush mechanism "as is" added to Tatra giving it the lopsided look.
Further refinement would be needed to add the ploughs to different position of the truck and add traversing mechanism.
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
Tata denel mgs. It is quite neat. OFB looks like they welded dhanush on to the first tatra they found.
Hope ofb refines it and Tata brings out a mgs based on atags.
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
I think there are shovels underneath that overhang that are not deployed, that will transmit the recoil to the ground. These shovels are not clearly visible in that picture.Indranil wrote:The mounting points is different. OFB seems to have loaded the turret behind the wheels, whereas ATmos, Caesar and even the Tata solution was loaded atop the back wheels. That gives a much more shorter overhang. I don't think this OFB solution is complete yet. Imagine the gun firing at 90 degrees to the truck's orientation. What is stopping it from rolling the truck over. I think Tata will do a fantastic job of mounting the gun on their truck.Kartik wrote: Do these 2 foreign designs honestly look that much more TFTA than the OFB Dhanush Mounted Gun? Get a better paint job and then people will be going waah waah over the desi solution as well.
Now to find out more details on the OFB MGS solution..
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
Yes, there are mounts that basically anchor the gun to the ground and if I'm not wrong, the truck itself gets its rear tires lifted off the ground. I can't believe that OFB would've prototyped that entire system without realising that they would need to have a way to prevent the entire truck and gun from tipping over when the gun is pointing at 90 degrees to the truck.
Somewhat similar to the Ashok Leyland 6 x 6 with the Nexter CAESAR gun
Somewhat similar to the Ashok Leyland 6 x 6 with the Nexter CAESAR gun
Last edited by Kartik on 11 Apr 2018 04:12, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
Tata should do this with the ATAGS and bring it out in a couple of years' time. That should eventually become the most common Mounted Gun system for the IA. But the OFB- Dhanush MGS should offer a cheap alternative that could be brought into production sooner than the ATAGS-MGS.nam wrote:
Tata denel mgs. It is quite neat. OFB looks like they welded dhanush on to the first tatra they found.
Hope ofb refines it and Tata brings out a mgs based on atags.
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
ATAGs is one of the biggest guns around. The Dhanush mounted on a properly designed Tata 8X8 would do great wonders. Between OFB, Tata and DRDO, they have all the pieces of this puzzle.
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
tsarkar, The Dhanush has 360 traverse. Recall the fake Chinese made Swiss bearings. Now they get them from the OEM used on the Bofors. They provide the traverse.
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
Do the truck mounted systems fire their guns at 90 degrees angle? I can't recall seeing photos of those mounted guns firing at those angles to the truck.Indranil wrote:The mounting points is different. OFB seems to have loaded the turret behind the wheels, whereas ATmos, Caesar and even the Tata solution was loaded atop the back wheels. That gives a much more shorter overhang. I don't think this OFB solution is complete yet. Imagine the gun firing at 90 degrees to the truck's orientation. What is stopping it from rolling the truck over. I think Tata will do a fantastic job of mounting the gun on their truck.Kartik wrote: Do these 2 foreign designs honestly look that much more TFTA than the OFB Dhanush Mounted Gun? Get a better paint job and then people will be going waah waah over the desi solution as well.
Now to find out more details on the OFB MGS solution..
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
The prototype Swedish came out for their FH-77B, mounted on a modified variant of Volvo's commercial dump trucks A25C (6x6)
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
We do so much analysis based on images and paint schemes. If people on BRF get swayed so easily by paint schemes fata abdul has no chance to figure out which system is good based on technicalities.
Why are we so quick in running down OFB design...? Because it doesnt look like other designes...? Did we see how actually the gun stabilization system works for OFB design..? Surely its not only the truck which keeps the gun in place while firing. There are hydralic powered legs which will plant the system in ground to absorb the recoil. How are the positioned..? If that is good enough then it doesnt matter that much where the gun is mounted vis a vis rear axel. Why are we jumping guns to think OFB desiners were so naive that they could not think of basic factors as recoil forces while firing sideways...? Why are we so quick to dismiss it as a shoddy welding job..?
May be it was easiest to mount it that way with Dhanush changed minimally as it is. It looks like a prototype anyhow. It could even be just a Proof of Concept.
Why are we so quick in running down OFB design...? Because it doesnt look like other designes...? Did we see how actually the gun stabilization system works for OFB design..? Surely its not only the truck which keeps the gun in place while firing. There are hydralic powered legs which will plant the system in ground to absorb the recoil. How are the positioned..? If that is good enough then it doesnt matter that much where the gun is mounted vis a vis rear axel. Why are we jumping guns to think OFB desiners were so naive that they could not think of basic factors as recoil forces while firing sideways...? Why are we so quick to dismiss it as a shoddy welding job..?
May be it was easiest to mount it that way with Dhanush changed minimally as it is. It looks like a prototype anyhow. It could even be just a Proof of Concept.
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
Most howitzers, including FH-77B dont have 360 degree traverse.ramana wrote:tsarkar, The Dhanush has 360 traverse. Recall the fake Chinese made Swiss bearings. Now they get them from the OEM used on the Bofors. They provide the traverse.
https://www.forecastinternational.com/a ... RC_ID=1455
30°left/30°right
Photos of 90 degree traverse in the link.srai wrote:Do the truck mounted systems fire their guns at 90 degrees angle? I can't recall seeing photos of those mounted guns firing at those angles
http://www.military-today.com/artillery/t5_52.htm
This artillery system can fire in 360° arc, however it has to return to the 80° arc to simplify the loading process.
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
To me, I am least concerned if OFB prototype will work or not. May be it is prototype and will be refined or if it doesn't work,it will be trashed. We ignore good products as well - Arjun, so compared to that it is fine. I am sure Tata will take this up in that case.
What is truly amazing is change in attitude of OFB. This is in stark contrast of Dhanush where it sat for donkey years while having blue prints of Bofors. atleast they are being proactive... See the no of rifles they are churning in small arms thread... Many will be junked, but a successful product always have history of other proof of conepts and prototypes... F23 precursors to F22 and Sukhoi berkut to T50......
What is truly amazing is change in attitude of OFB. This is in stark contrast of Dhanush where it sat for donkey years while having blue prints of Bofors. atleast they are being proactive... See the no of rifles they are churning in small arms thread... Many will be junked, but a successful product always have history of other proof of conepts and prototypes... F23 precursors to F22 and Sukhoi berkut to T50......
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
You have a fair point, however I think OFB deserves the bad press here. They held nation's defense under siege, for all they are bothered about is overtime pay. Service men have lost their lives because of OFB's negligence.JayS wrote:We do so much analysis based on images and paint schemes. If people on BRF get swayed so easily by paint schemes fata abdul has no chance to figure out which system is good based on technicalities.
Why are we so quick in running down OFB design...? Because it doesnt look like other designes...? Did we see how actually the gun stabilization system works for OFB design..? Surely its not only the truck which keeps the gun in place while firing. There are hydralic powered legs which will plant the system in ground to absorb the recoil. How are the positioned..? If that is good enough then it doesnt matter that much where the gun is mounted vis a vis rear axel. Why are we jumping guns to think OFB desiners were so naive that they could not think of basic factors as recoil forces while firing sideways...? Why are we so quick to dismiss it as a shoddy welding job..?
May be it was easiest to mount it that way with Dhanush changed minimally as it is. It looks like a prototype anyhow. It could even be just a Proof of Concept.
Forget Dhanush, they have been building IFG for donkey's years. Yet they did not bother to create a bare bones 155 MM version of the gun. For all the TFTA, the Chinese primary gun in Tibet is a bare bones 155MM!
Now their back side is on fire due to fear of loosing contracts, they seem to taking initiatives. The fact that they have charging double to four time the market rate for product sold to forces, I am sure they could get some consultant to design a sensible prototype.
Given our requirement in mountains, I would very curious to know how well the truck can travel through the gradients with 7-9 ton on it's back, without flipping over.
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
Dont be surprised, Babudom has realized that Private sector threatens their breakfast , lunch and dinner so they have to perform.nrshah wrote:To me, I am least concerned if OFB prototype will work or not. May be it is prototype and will be refined or if it doesn't work,it will be trashed. We ignore good products as well - Arjun, so compared to that it is fine. I am sure Tata will take this up in that case.
What is truly amazing is change in attitude of OFB. This is in stark contrast of Dhanush where it sat for donkey years while having blue prints of Bofors. atleast they are being proactive... See the no of rifles they are churning in small arms thread... Many will be junked, but a successful product always have history of other proof of conepts and prototypes... F23 precursors to F22 and Sukhoi berkut to T50......
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
The denel system looks TFTA with 360 degree traverse, but the optimal position is with the barrel facing "backwards" else loading is not practical. Also (I assume) the crew would be operating from the small platform (truck flat bed) rather than the ground which might present it's own risks.
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
BF CEO gives an update on the change in MoD, where now companies like have access to testing ranges for weapons. It was not the case before 2015.
https://twitter.com/DefencePost/status/ ... 4433378304
https://twitter.com/DefencePost/status/ ... 4433378304
Re: Artillery Discussion Thread
Just had a look at BF's Bharat ULWH. That thing is definitely more TFTA than M777.
M777 looks a cowboy product in front of it.
M777 looks a cowboy product in front of it.