Artillery Corps: News & Discussion

[Prem Kumar]

Former COAS. General Narvane.

Acquisitions being planned should cater for the battle field milieu of the next few decades, in which towed artillery may be a liability.

If you wait long enough, all weapons will become useless. Give the IA 20 more years and they will, after 0 inductions, claim that artillery itself is a liability in 27th generation warfare

[Tanaji]

ATGS should be used in ladhak area. They can be transported by heli.If the Vajra being 50 ton can be moved there so can the ATGS.

They should have gone for incremental upgrades for every 300 guns.

K9 is not heli transportable, its a SPG
ATAGS is 18/20/22 tons depending on who you ask. Absolute maximum of Mi-26 is 20 tons which will fall further at altitudes of Ladakh so I dont think ATAGS is either

[ashthor]

K9 is not heli transportable, its a SPG
ATAGS is 18/20/22 tons depending on who you ask. Absolute maximum of Mi-26 is 20 tons which will fall further at altitudes of Ladakh so I dont think ATAGS is either

Let me rephrase that....i meant transported by air(aircraft).

[ramana]

Link: https://x.com/MeghUpdates/status/170888 ... 87579?s=20

Ukrainian artillerymen are complaining that 155-mm shells received from Pakistan tear apart the barrels of American-made M777 howitzers and are generally of poor quality.

[ramana]

It looks like the muzzle strike blew the shell.

[NRao]

How does it matter?

After all, Pakistan got a few billion USD.

Pakis have made a fool of Americans. Again.

[Suresh S]

how did u diagnose that ramanji by looking at that picture whether it was the shell or the muzzle, could u explain.

[ramana]

The muzzle material is still ductile. See how it looks bent and not sheared.
So most likely the shell hit the muzzle and blew up.
A similar thing happened in IA trials when the said "shell exited in multiple pieces" aka blew up.

Can someone do a favor and research what explosive filling is used in POF 155mm shells?

[Suresh S]

thx

[ramana]

Artillery is the king of the battlefield but they must adapt now, move away from towed guns
Acquisitions being planned should cater for the battlefield milieu of the next few decades, in which towed artillery may be a liability.
Manoj Naravane
MANOJ NARAVANE
02 October, 2023 09:07 am IST



Artillery is often called the ‘King of the Battlefield’ because of its enormous impact in both offensive and defensive operations. In fact, Joseph Stalin, the former Soviet leader had even gone as far as to say that artillery was the ‘God of War’. In terms of the effective weight of fire that can be brought down on any objective, nothing can match the artillery in terms of sheer cost-effectiveness. The development of new technologies and systems that can enhance the capabilities of artillery, like precision-guided munitions, loitering munitions, long-range ammunition, drones, GPS systems, and mounted gun systems have made it even more versatile and further enhanced its role in battle. The clamour by Ukraine for more and more artillery, including long-range rocket artillery systems like the M-142 HIMARS (High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems), only reinforces this fact.


The future of artillery in the 21st century will depend on several factors, such as the nature of the conflicts and the threats faced by that nation’s armed forces. Some conflicts may require more precision, mobility, and agility from artillery, especially those that are short and sharp. Longer conflicts may necessitate more firepower, range, and endurance. Since one cannot really predict the nature and duration of the conflict, all possible contingencies will have to be catered for. The availability of resources and logistics to support the operation and maintenance of artillery including the cost, quantity, and quality of ammunition, fuel, spare parts, and personnel will also be a major factor.

{Basically he wants a diverse mix of firepower systems. However, the IA doctrine should govern the procurement. What does the IA doctrine say about artillery requirements? There are delivery systems like guns and missiles, ammo systems, and logistics. All three form the artillery chain By eternal delay in decision making the supply chain never gets established.}


As a thumb rule, to support the attack of one battalion group, up to a hundred guns are catered for to provide covering fire. Each of these guns would fire up to a hundred rounds each on various targets, making it a grand total of 10,000 shells fired over a 24-hour period. For a brigade comprising three battalions, this comes to a staggering 30,000 rounds, and for a division comprising three brigades, a humongous 90,000 rounds spread over several days. These figures might seem mind-blowing, but are in fact borne out by the actual consumption figures of various wars, including the ongoing conflict in Ukraine.

{These numbers must be from inaccurate firing. With siting and ranging and the explosive shell capability for a 155mm round these numbers should go down.}


Keep the gun firing

While it is a challenge for the gun-crews to man their guns, an even greater challenge is in the logistics involved in keeping the supply chain flowing. In the absence of adequate artillery support, the tempo of operations cannot be sustained and will come to a standstill. It is quite possible that something similar might have occurred in Ukraine where after initial successes the Russian offensive petered out due to lack of artillery ammunition. This logistics chain flows right from the factories manufacturing the ammunition, through various depots in the communications zone and supply echelons in the tactical battle area. These depots cater for the immediate foreseeable needs of ammunition based on anticipated expenditure rates and likely duration of war. However, maintaining such large stocks is in itself problematic.

Ammunition of all types, including artillery, has to be stored at various ammunition depots that have very stringent safety norms based on international standards. This requires vast expanses of land, far from populated areas, housing large sheds built to exacting specifications. Stocks have to be periodically inspected, defective ammunition destroyed and replaced and stocks recouped based on their shelf life. All this costs money. The amount of ammunition a country can stock-pile will therefore always be finite. The solution lies in being able to significantly ramp up production in times of need. Since the existing ordnance factories would not be able to ramp up production to that extent the power of the civil industrial base will have to be harnessed. India would do well to keep in mind the example of the United States, as brought out in the book Freedom’s Forge by Arthur Herman, wherein in World War II, the US transited from a consumer-oriented manufacturing industry into a military arms powerhouse, what is referred to as the military-industrial complex. Russia seems to have learnt this lesson and as reported in the Business Insider, Western sources now claim that Russia could produce up to two million artillery shells in the coming years.

{US Scranton Arsenal is ramping up production 5x. And it is not a private company. Lt Gen Ravishankar says the Nalanda factory is hardly stretched. Adani has a new ammo plant coming up in the Lucknow defence corridor.}

The challenges

Notwithstanding their glorious past, the artillery will also have to adapt to the changing character of war. Some of the challenges that it is already facing in Ukraine and may face in the future are primarily on account of the proliferation of anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) systems that can limit the induction of artillery into the TBA, and hamper the deployment and redeployment of artillery units in response to changing battlefield scenarios. Enemy counter-bombardment (CB) will focus on artillery gun areas, so the guns will have to be capable of rapid movement to avoid enemy CB. Some modern platforms like the Bofors have limited shoot-and-scoot capability, but are essentially still towed gun systems (TGS) as is the majority of the inventory, including the M-777, 155mm Ultra-Light Howitzer acquired from the US. However, these platforms might not have the desired survivability or mobility required in a futuristic battlefield.

{There are only 145 M-777 guns procured. Of the 400-odd Bofors how many are still working is anybody's guess.}

The need of the hour is therefore to progress from towed to mounted gun systems (MGS) with the gun and its prime mover, the truck, fused together. Not only would this reduce the time taken for the guns to come into action, but would also give them the inherent mobility to move over large distances, a much-enhanced version of the existing ‘shoot and scoot’ feature. Many Indian firms, notably Bharat Forge and Larsen & Toubro have already developed both the 105mm and 155 mm versions of an MGS, which are under evaluation. That is the way forward and towed artillery needs to be phased out as part of planned obsolescence. Tracked gun systems like the K9 Vajra are even more mobile but are that much more expensive. Mounted Gun Systems, therefore, fill the operational gap between towed and tracked artillery.

In conclusion, artillery is a vital component of modern warfare that can provide decisive advantages to the armed forces. However, artillery also faces many challenges and uncertainties that require constant adaptation and improvement. The future of artillery will depend on how well it can balance its role and capabilities with the changing demands and realities of the 21st century. Acquisitions being planned should cater to the battlefield milieu of the next few decades, in which towed artillery may be a liability.

General Manoj Mukund Naravane PVSM AVSM SM VSM is a retired Indian Army General who served as the 28th Chief of the Army Staff. Views are personal.

(Edited by Anurag Chaubey)

Quite a balanced article but what did he do as Chief to move the arty procurement dragon?
I find it odd as an infantryman he is making suggestions on phasing out towed guns which are the mainstay of the artillery.
Even MGS are vulnerable to Lancet-type drones which are wreaking havoc in Ukraine.

[Kakkaji]

In Gen Shankar's video, he said the towed guns are lighter and cheaper, and that mounted gun systems are too heavy to be deployed in the mountains.

But then, wouldn't the towed gun + the truck that tows it, together end up being as heavy (and somewhat unwieldy compared to MGS) to drive in the mountains?

Also, how is the Dhanush doing in the field now? I understand the Army was not happy with the performance of the first lot that was delivered. Have they sorted out the quality and production issues?

IIRC, when it was time to order the Dhanush in large numbers, there were multiple stories in the press saying the ATAGS, which was then under development, will be the most advanced gun in the world, hence it is better to wait for ATAGS than ordering Dhanush in larger numbers.

Now when the time has come to order ATAGS in large numbers, it is being said that it is too heavy, and better order more Dhanush which is more suitable for the mountains. So, are they going to increase the orders for Dhanush?

I don't care whether the IA orders the ATAGS or Dhanush, they are both made in India.

[rohitvats]

Thanks, Rohit for decoding Gen P.R. Shankar video.
He is a rare officer who worked with IGMP and knows the DRDO process.

ramana, need to look at the big picture while trying to make sense of the artillery procurement story.

I know there are more questions than answers, but we make do with what we have, and what we can deduce.

Coming to the modernization picture, consider the following. -

1) Field Artillery Rationalization Plan (FRAP) spoke of 1,580 towed guns, 814 MGS, 100 SP(Tracked) and 180 SP (Wheeled).

2) The ULWH requirement was added later and as I mentioned several times earlier, it seemed like the MOD import mafia basically created this category for the Singapore Technologies ULWH gun. The firm got blacklisted, and General VK Singh pushed for M-777 instead and got it after tremendous opposition from the civilian side who still favored Singaporean gun for obvious reasons.

3) Where do we stand today?

- 100 x SP (Tracked) - Done.
- 180 x SP (Wheeled) - dropped as a segment and will now be filled completely by SP (Tracked) units. This is what makes more purchase of K-9 an easy option because it will be classified as a follow-on order and hence, bureaucratically easier to process.
- Towed:
-- 180 x Israel upgrade of M-46 + 300 x Sharang (WIP) = 480 guns (very cheap; under Rs 70 lakh per gun for Sharang).
-- 114 x Dhanush - WIP. Production rate at GCF is an issue and very slow.
-- 145 x M-777 - WIP.
-- 307 x ATAGS - WIP.
Total: 1,046 guns
- This is about 66% of the 1,580 towed gun numbers.
- Dhanush - The planned induction was for 414 guns. But the production is just too slow with GCF. If we assume that we'll see full 414-gun order on GCF, then the above total goes up to 1,346 guns or ~85% of the planned towed guns number.
- Done at a very effective cost (remember, the GOI hasn't been very liberal to say the least with defense budget and this is frugal acquisition)
----
* With ATAGS, IA has done away with inducting only the best option; here we have the former DG Arty saying that ATAGS is overweight and yet, we've a 307-gun order to begin with.
* Lt General Shankar alludes to ATAGS being used for West and hence freeing up Dhanush and Bofors for North and East.
---

- We need to see these parallel programs as a means to ensure rapid upgrade at marginal cost and w/o waiting for the unobtanium.
- As newer guns come, they will start replacing the older guns, starting from 130mm M-46 and then Sharang, and Bofors and so on and so forth.
---

* The only black hole in this entire acquisition process is 814 x MGS
* IA wants the system to weight 30 tons.
* If you look at other MGS systems around the globe, 8x8 versions are in this range.
* This again will come from either the ATAGS stable or Dhanush (155/52 version).
---

* Other programs about which we don't know any details except for interest shown by the army at various points is upgrade of 105mm system, including a mounted 105mm system.

[rohitvats]

With respect to drones and towed and self-propelled artillery -

1) If a drone like Lancet is in the general area of a gun position, then it does not matter whether the gun is a self-propelled one or a towed gun.

2) Simply because the drone being a guided and an aerial object, can easily cover whatever distance that you hope to cover from the time its detected.

3) The main use of MGS and SP Arty is in terms of counter-battery fire and the ability to relocate positions faster.

4) Today, the focus is on compressing the sensor to shooter cycle - so, after your batteries have had a go at the enemy, you need them to relocate ASAP to prevent against counter-battery fire which will come at you.

5) Also, please don't underestimate the prowess of towed gun crews when it comes to the time taken to position a gun and move it away from it. These things are practiced day-in and day-out till it becomes a muscle memory.

Check this video (I know it is compressed in terms of the timeline, but it gives you an idea: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X17FHwZuVnE)

PS: There is a reason the gunners in Medium Regiments were all 5 feet 10 inches minimum in height. This is to ensure the equipment is held at the same level (height) while the gun is being prepared by the crew. And we don't have dearth of manpower.

[Tanaji]

If one is to believe this link:

https://aninews.in/news/national/genera ... 928215102/

There is no order, just a proposal. Plus, it states to be done by 2042 so 400 guns over 20 years. Hardly a ringing endorsement by IA.

Dont know how reliable the report is.

[titash]

If one is to believe this link:

https://aninews.in/news/national/genera ... 928215102/

There is no order, just a proposal. Plus, it states to be done by 2042 so 400 guns over 20 years. Hardly a ringing endorsement by IA.

Dont know how reliable the report is.

The video by Lt. Gen. P. R. Shankar is very clear on the 'what' and the 'why':

(1) Artillery has been committed to the "Artillery Profile 2017" and "Artillery Profile 2027" documents since the early 2000s. There is no document called the "Field Artillery Rationalization Plan (FARP)". Its a figment of the media's imagination

(2) Artillery wanted 7 Gun Types + 5 Rocket/Missile Types

#1: a lightweight titanium gun ---> fulfilled by 4-ton 155mm/39 M-777
#2: a resurrection of the Kargil-proven Bofors 155mm gun ---> plans dusted off and reborn as 14-ton 155mm/45 Dhanush
#3: DRDO was an untapped design house and was therefore engaged in 155mm gun ---> this is the 18-20 ton 155mm/52 ATAGS
#4: 130 mm M-46 guns were to be converted to 155mm guns at 2 cr./gun (cheap) ---> this is the 155mm/45 Soltam & Sharang
#5: Self Propelled (Tracked) 155mm gun ---> K9 Vajra
#6: Self Propelled (Wheeled) 155mm gun ---> aborted; more K9 Vajra to be ordered

The 7th gun I couldn't glean from the presentation.

The point he was trying to make is that ALL these guns are indigenous. Even the M-777...most of the parts are made in India; likewise for the K9 Vajra. He mentions that contractual obligations prevent us from 100% indigenization and not capability

He mentions that the "Artillery Profile 2017" and "Artillery Profile 2027" documents had only envisaged 300 guns to be purchased from the DRDO stable. This may have been due to hedging risks among the 7-pronged acquisition process. In any case he mentions that the ATAGS gun is very capable but overweight and will be used in the plains only. This means the Bofors/Dhanush/Sharang pieces will be taken to the mountains on the Chinese front.

He also mentions that artillery will be constantly evolving and he does not want to be stuck with 1200 guns of a single design. He is very much in favor of constant iteration with order size of 300-400 guns only (for any design).

He also mentioned that the current DG Artillery is sticking to the original plan as envisaged in the "Artillery Profile 2017" and "Artillery Profile 2027" documents.

My take: we'll see a "Artillery Profile 2037" document with lessons from the Ukraine war, and constant iteration over 300-gun batches every 5 years. the good news is all these guns will be made in India

[Tanaji]

Titashji,

The only confirmed orders that IA has places are for K9 Vajra and the M777 gun. There is a small order for Dhanush but it is instructive that IA only has placed firm orders for foreign guns.

The Indian guns are stuck in a cycle of trials , concerns on weight etc. but no firm orders. There are a lot of grand plans on “Rationalisation” “profile” etc but until not a single order. This is straight out of the Arjun playbook.

[ramana]

In 2018, India Today came out with this article. Written by Sandeep Unnithan, so believable.

BTW, Sandeep uses the Metric Tonne measurement system in his article.

Bang for the buck?
https://www.indiatoday.in/magazine/the- ... 2018-02-22

The gun weighs 20 tonnes, nearly 70 per cent over its 12-tonne weight limit. The weight restrictions are because most bridges in the mountainous forward areas are designed to bear 18-tonne loads. On the plains, too, the added weight can lead to mobility issues because the army's 6x6 artillery towing trucks are designed for 12-tonne guns. Inducting ATAGS in its present form would mean more investments in heavier trucks. The imported towed artillery pieces, they point out, weigh only 15 tonnes.

The developers say they plan to shave two more tonnes off the gun to bring its weight down to 18 tonnes.

More than five years since this article was published, a number of articles have been using the number 18 to illustrate the present weight of the gun.

I think this article is the one that says the goal for ATAGS is 18 tonnes. (BTW tonne is metric measure)
And FARP is quoted as requiring 3000 guns for 169 regiments.

The Indian army's Field Artillery Rationalisation Programme (FARP), approved in 1999, aims to equip its 169 artillery regiments (one regiment has 18 guns) with over 3,000 155 mm howitzers-towed, tracked, self-propelled, wheeled and ultra-light-by 2025.

[ramana]

(2) Artillery wanted 7 Gun Types + 5 Rocket/Missile Types

#1: a lightweight titanium gun ---> fulfilled by 4-ton 155mm/39 M-777
#2: a resurrection of the Kargil-proven Bofors 155mm gun ---> plans dusted off and reborn as 14-ton 155mm/45 Dhanush
#3: DRDO was an untapped design house and was therefore engaged in 155mm gun ---> this is the 18-20 ton 155mm/52 ATAGS
#4: 130 mm M-46 guns were to be converted to 155mm guns at 2 cr./gun (cheap) ---> this is the 155mm/45 Soltam & Sharang
#5: Self-Propelled (Tracked) 155mm gun ---> K9 Vajra
#6: Self Propelled (Wheeled) 155mm gun ---> aborted; more K9 Vajra to be ordered

The 7th gun I couldn't glean from the presentation.

The point he was trying to make is that ALL these guns are indigenous. Even the M-777...most of the parts are made in India; likewise for the K9 Vajra. He mentions that contractual obligations prevent us from 100% indigenization and not capability

So many varieties add to logistics problems which is the third leg of the system. Looks like catalog shopping.
M-777 BAE has stopped production and is now reviving after the Ukraine War. Also being developed as a 52 caliber version.
So making parts by Mahindra is nice but not sufficient.

The 100 K-9 was a meager procurement. Now the challenge is along LAC. Initially reluctant to deploy but once deployed found superb.

The Sharang was better than the Soltam upgrade as it reduces muzzle strikes. And is on track. How many M-46s are slated for conversion?

[Tanaji]

What I don’t understand is if IA (who btw was reportedly involved in development from the beginning) has such a massive issue with ATAGS weight, why did it go through the charade of summer winter rainy full moon low tide trials? They could have just proved the system and rejected it at first unit test?

What were the IA officers that presumably were deputed to DRDO doing when the first prototype was being built? Did they not raise a non acceptance then?

[ramana]

What I don’t understand is if IA (who btw was reportedly involved in development from the beginning) has such a massive issue with ATAGS weight, why did it go through the charade of summer winter rainy full moon low tide trials? They could have just proved the system and rejected it at first unit test?

What were the IA officers that presumably were deputed to DRDO doing when the first prototype was being built? Did they not raise a non-acceptance then?

They want to be fair and then reject it!!! They see what's happening to IAF with its only imports mindset.
See the subtle potshots by unnamed sources that ATAGS was not to meet a IA requirement and the excess weight is due to the 27-litre chamber which DRDO forced on them! I would like one of those sources to say it openly.

[sanjayc]

When the gun is being developed for years with full knowledge and even involvement of the Army, the army keeps quiet. Trials of the gun are done for years and years in all kinds of possible weather and terrain. The moment the product has proven itself as world-class and is ready for induction, two standard arguments come:

1. Weight is a big issue
2. We have changed our doctrine, and this kind of product is no longer needed

This always happens like clockwork when the product is finalized and ready for induction.

[ramana]

After the long saga of defence procurements, I realize the following:

Defence procurements should be guided by three principles:

- Procurement funds should be used to support our own industrial base. Sounds self-evident except for import general and marshals. Otherwise, Indian revenues will be used to fund foreign entities. This leads to vulnerabilities.
- Procurement should support supplier diversity. This means there should be at least two suppliers. The artillery plan of 60:40 is a good start. In the fifties, the Indian military relied on overpriced British weapon systems. Then for the next 50 years, they relied on the Soviet Union and when it collapsed suffered a grievous shock to IAF, IA, and IN to some extent. Israel was the preferred supplier for some systems. Then they started going for US systems which are mostly non-combat systems. Despite these lessons, the services did their utmost to give lukewarm support for Tejas, Indian artillery, and no interest in marine gas turbines. Even the enemy at LAC did not shake their strong support for imports!!!
- Procurement should support national security objectives. This means no frivolous systems. Should have enough systems to wage a war. Do not dribble the procurement in small batches.
The bottom line is India needs affordable/low-priced weapons systems not subject to geopolitical risks. Due to the large size of the forces the systems have to be affordable to be inducted in quantity to make a difference.

[ramana]

When the gun is being developed for years with full knowledge and even involvement of the Army, the army keeps quiet. Trials of the gun are done for years and years in all kinds of possible weather and terrain. The moment the product has proven itself as world-class and is ready for induction, two standard arguments come:

1. Weight is a big issue
2. We have changed our doctrine, and this kind of product is no longer needed

This always happens like clockwork when the product is finalized and ready for induction.

They can write their requirements but they will get only Make In India weapons.
The worst is the repeated muzzle strikes and barrel bursts without a decent explanation.
How the hell did you manage to destroy an already-proven gun in the M-777?
Or the Dhanush prototype with an old shell?
Generally to prove a new system you will use new ammo. And later uses various vintage ammo. But that is for qualifying the ammo.
The intent was to fail the gun.
How about the Let Gen holding the INSAS like a carbine and having to be told by the handler how to hold the rifle?

[Tanaji]

Ramanaji, the 27 litre chamber part is spot on. It was IA that wanted a best in class gun with long range. A bigger chamber has impacts everywhere: it will result in a heavier barrel to withstand the explosive force and a larger or at least heavier base to withstand the recoil. No wonder the gun is heavier than expected.

Which 27 litre gun system is 18 tons?

[sudeepj]

From DRDO techfocus on ATAGS, 70% of the ATAGS weight is the carriage.

https://www.drdo.gov.in/sites/default/f ... ug2023.pdf
"Gun Structural System: Gun Structural System contributes to nearly 70 per cent of the weight of the integrated gun which provide strength and rigidity to the gun during firing as well as it provides the platform for mounting of the armament system, automation & system, propulsion and drive system, communication & sighting system. The gun structural system has been configured and designed to provide three modes of operations namely Towed, Self-propelled (SP) and Deployed/Firing Modes. The gun structure is divided into two major sub-systems namely the supper structure
and under carriage. Further the supper structure consists of critical precision assemblies like cradle, saddle, balancing gear, trunnions, layer's station,
loader's station. The structural elements for the under carriage consists of slew ring bearing, Chassis, Trails (LH & RH), central firing platform, engine housing, towing mechanism, spades and draw bar."

So the passive structural system itself weighs anywhere from 14 to 12.5 tonnes. There is plenty of fat to be cut here and I am sure we will see a 15-16 tonne gun in a few years. However, Gen Shankar is wrong in saying it could be a completely new gun. We should pick a platform, and stick to iterative upgrades on that for long production runs.

A somewhat lighter gun with a more powerful engine will immediately make the gun more survivable. Protection from loitering munitions is an orthogonal problem that also needs to be solved, but expecting the ATAGs platform to solve it is a bit much.

[Pratyush]

Snip....

Which 27 26 litre gun system is 18 tons?

The better question to ask is how many guns are in service arround the world with a 26 liter chamber?

With the features present in ATAGS.

Such as high speed under APU mobility.

Ammo handling crane for 5 shells. That's an ability to handle 250 kg right there. How much weight is that crane adding to the gun?

Then try to arrive any conclusion about the weight of the gun.

The gun just right for Indian requirements.

[ramana]

sudeepj, Look at page 11 on the FEA results. Lots of under-stressed parts shown as mostly royal blue color.

So there is scope for weight optimizations.
Call this Mark I or Mod1 and get it inducted fast.
Think of 1.5km direct fire for incoming PA combat brigades.
Five vehicles shot up in one minute.

[ramana]

ATAGs has a 48 km range.
BM-21 has 40 kim range
Pinaka also same 40 km range. https://www.militarytoday.com/artillery/pinaka_mlrs.htm

[Manish_P]

..

Defence procurements should be guided by three principles:

- Procurement funds should be used to support our own industrial base... Otherwise, Indian revenues will be used to fund foreign entities... This leads to vulnerabilities.
- Procurement should support supplier diversity. This means there should be at least two suppliers. ...
- Procurement should support national security objectives. This means no frivolous systems. Should have enough systems to wage a war. Do not dribble the procurement in small batches.

The bottom line is India needs affordable/low-priced weapons systems not subject to geopolitical risks.

Perfectly encapsulated. This is the very essence of Atma-Nirbharta, at it's core.

Due to the large size of the forces the systems have to be affordable to be inducted in quantity to make a difference.

And systems become more affordable (per unit rate), when they are ordered in quantity. India has a very large military. So number of units required will still add up to a huge total. But India is also a growing economy. When we buy internally developed systems the monies will stay and circulate within the country and thereby make it more affordable as a whole, even in the large numbers required. As an add-on we will be an exporting nation and it will get in monies which can be directed to R&D or getting those uber critical items which we cannot produce in-house, yet.

[ashthor]

There is another thing the Lt General said that they didn't have any clue about the Vajra reload vehicle. Watch from 1:12:33

[Kersi]

Pardon by skeptism, but

Is ATAGS as overweight as a three-legged cheetah ?

[ramana]

Pardon by skeptism, but

Is ATAGS as overweight as a three-legged cheetah ?

What value is added by that remark?

[Kersi]

What I don’t understand is if IA (who btw was reportedly involved in development from the beginning) has such a massive issue with ATAGS weight, why did it go through the charade of summer winter rainy full moon low tide trials? They could have just proved the system and rejected it at first unit test?

What were the IA officers that presumably were deputed to DRDO doing when the first prototype was being built? Did they not raise a non acceptance then?

They were waiting for the new brochures of a uber unobtainium gun !!

Sorry for being negative

[ramana]

The Army team was headed by a Colonel with two Lt Col per the TechFocus.
It is the Generals who are making objections.

[Neela]

Ramana-ji,
You forgot to add. There is an operational cost to wars. From mobilization, deployment, and usage of weapons - all of it is expensive. A long sustained war would deplete the treasury and will have a huge dent on finances. You need weapons and ammo that are cheap, locally sourced, and dont cost a lot during actual operations. Especially artillery , which would be the most widely used weapon system . YOu cannot rely on imported systems where the dealers would hike prices the moment war breaks out.

Frankly, mid-level management in commercial industries get exposed to AOP , budgets & OPEX. Similar exercise must be part of defense curriculum . Defense forces and their management should be asked to make comparisons of the cost of their operations during war and should understand the impact of their choices.

[ramana]

One fallout of the Hamas attack.on Israel will be the Athos gun.

A section of IA decison makers were advancing the idea that India should buy from a production line outside India as a hedge against PLA destroying Indian mfg facilities!

This Hamas attack shows Israel will need all weapons for themselves and the facilities are vulnerable to drone attack


ATAGS saranam gachhayami!

[Atmavik]

^^ i think israel might have to import Arty shells from us the way things are hedaed.

[vera_k]

A section of IA decison makers were advancing the idea that India should buy from a production line outside India as a hedge against PLA destroying Indian mfg facilities!

Surely this was not taken seriously. More than one production facility was planned from the beginning. And if they think the one facility operational today cannot be defended, the AFB near the facility needs to be moved elsewhere as well.

[Pratyush]

One fallout of the Hamas attack.on Israel will be the Athos gun.

Snip....

ATAGS saranam gachhayami!

1)The production of Athos was ment to be done in India.

What happens to Israeli facilities makes no difference for its production in India.

2) On the basis of what the Indian army is seeking in the new generation Howitzers. The Athos itself is disqualified.

3) Indian army has successfully sabotaged the ATAGS. With its attitude towards indigenous program.

4) The ATAGS barrel can be used by Indian vendors to build a light weight 155 howitzer like the Singaporean Pegasus.

From an engeneering standpoint it should be possible under 12 tons.

However, some development work with have to be required to integrate lazer ignition. Instead of primer based propellent ignition for the existing gun.

Baba Kalyani has in the past spoken of, Bharat Forge's capacity to build a 58 calibre 30 liter gun.

[basant]

Does GSQR stand for Generic Sabotage of Qualitative Requirements?