Artillery Discussion Thread

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 24 Jul 2010 09:15

tejas wrote:The Denel T6 turret on the Arjun chassis, the Archer wheeled artillery and the FH-77 Bofors towed artillery would give the Indian Army quite a punch. Can't the PM make an executive decision and simply order the MoD to purchase these immediately on the grounds of national security? Along with enough M777s to simultaneously engage the Pukes and Chinese in the mountains and we'll be all set.

These purchases aren't that complex and should take months not years to take place

Added later: I forgot India's unelected "leader" MMS needs permission from Sonia first and her days working as a waitress don't impress upon her the urgency of the situation.

You want *this* PM to take an executive decision? Man, WTF are you smoking?

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 24 Jul 2010 09:54

Dear Posters,

I have been thinking. For over 20 years this 155 MM arty acquisition drama going on. The question i have is just how difficult it must have been for the IA to agree for a domestic development of this Vital piece of kit. That only Phorn Bendors are asked for providing the guns. no...........

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 24 Jul 2010 10:15

tejas wrote:^^^ Yes. The factory to manufacture them in Bihar ( Nalanda?) was never built.

The OFB Product Website clearly shows 155mm shells of various kinds.....so,where are those manufactured?

Just check here - http://ofbindia.nic.in/index.php?wh=A-E ... #subclass3

vic · Post by **vic** » 24 Jul 2010 10:27

OFB refers to upgarde kit of 130mm gun to 155mm in 39 caliber in Mark-1 and Mark-2 versions. Is this Soltam upgrade or Met upgrade? Is Met upgrade in production?

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 24 Jul 2010 11:10

vic wrote:OFB refers to upgarde kit of 130mm gun to 155mm in 39 caliber in Mark-1 and Mark-2 versions. Is this Soltam upgrade or Met upgrade? Is Met upgrade in production?

That is the Soltam kit. The initial number was 180 with additional order of 220 (?).

tejas · Post by **tejas** » 24 Jul 2010 13:07

I guess the shells are "made" in India but the fuses are imported from South Africa. Read it and weep.

“I would not call it indigenous, especially when a company is importing 70 percent of the fuses and assembling the components in India,” says Jagdish Prasad, chairman of HBL Power Systems, which has a far higher percentage of indigenous components in its fuses. Why, then, does ECIL remain the Indian Army’s sole choice? “All government policies have been bypassed just to accommodate the South African product under the cover that it is a PSU,” Manvendra Singh, MP and a member of the Committee of Petitions, wrote in his report. This was not all. Another committee member, HN Sharma, pointed out that ECIL merely assembles fuses from components supplied by Fuchs, and that the main components — a safety and arming device, the battery along with an electronic timer kit — are all imported.

http://www.tehelka.com/story_main44.asp ... fiasco.asp.

rahulm · Post by **rahulm** » 27 Jul 2010 08:23

Shukla makes a lot of sense in relation to the 155mm artillery drama.

Ajai Shukla: An Indian journey sans Bofors baggage

SAditya · Post by **SAditya** » 27 Jul 2010 08:55

tejas wrote:I guess the shells are "made" in India but the fuses are imported from South Africa. Read it and weep.

“I would not call it indigenous, especially when a company is importing 70 percent of the fuses and assembling the components in India,” says Jagdish Prasad, chairman of HBL Power Systems, which has a far higher percentage of indigenous components in its fuses. Why, then, does ECIL remain the Indian Army’s sole choice? “All government policies have been bypassed just to accommodate the South African product under the cover that it is a PSU,” Manvendra Singh, MP and a member of the Committee of Petitions, wrote in his report. This was not all. Another committee member, HN Sharma, pointed out that ECIL merely assembles fuses from components supplied by Fuchs, and that the main components — a safety and arming device, the battery along with an electronic timer kit — are all imported.
http://www.tehelka.com/story_main44.asp ... fiasco.asp.

From my point of view, this is half full- half empty scenario. I look at this as positive point. Instead of importing the whole shells from abroad atleast we are making some part of it locally. That is a step forward. And one does crawl before starting to run. Of course, even after say 10-15 yrs we are doing the same thing than it is a concern. And it is common practice, where eever the final assembly is done that country's "Made in" tag is placed on the product. So it is same here.
As far as our media is concerned, they always try to look at the negative points of any issue. I can't be bothered to say more about them.
But I definitely feel that we should look at half full glass

Kailash · Post by **Kailash** » 27 Jul 2010 13:57

Shukla makes a lot of sense in relation to the 155mm artillery drama.

Ajai Shukla: An Indian journey sans Bofors baggage

Whatever happens can not stop the acquisitions from outside. A foreign buy would provide an assured, tested, working system. Timelines are somethings DRDO has no record of keeping. For the Army, time is everything.

Perhaps they can offer a split deal similar to what IAF and HAL have worked out on the LUH. "The sooner you deliver, the more systems I will buy from you" approach. Penalty for breaching timelines or missing milestones, would be lesser and lesser orders.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 27 Jul 2010 16:38

Those supporting forign acquisitions. Please note that even if DRDO takes 20 years to diliver a piece of new hardware. The Boforce gun was acquired 25 years ago. If the requirement of the IA was known then a decision to go for Indiginious arty gun would have resulted in the domestic Indian FH by now.

Won't you say. Having said that even today it is not too late to initiate a national project and develop an Arty piece.

I hope (against hope ) that it is taken as a national project.

ManuT · Post by **ManuT** » 28 Jul 2010 07:07

Pratyush wrote:Those supporting forign acquisitions. Please note that even if DRDO takes 20 years to diliver a piece of new hardware. The Boforce gun was acquired 25 years ago. If the requirement of the IA was known then a decision to go for Indiginious arty gun would have resulted in the domestic Indian FH by now.

Won't you say. Having said that even today it is not too late to initiate a national project and develop an Arty piece.

I hope (against hope ) that it is taken as a national project.

Well then, India should acquire the foreign gun now and let DRDO build the indigenous one over the next 20 years.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 28 Jul 2010 19:27

I guess the best way forward for towed artillery will be to follow the light helicopter model, allocate a certain number to be acquired from foreign vendors, and leave the rest to a DRDO & private sector venture. Even if they take 10 years they will be left with a large chunk of the pie. Any delay and their annual quota will be given to the foreign vendor.

tejas · Post by **tejas** » 28 Jul 2010 20:55

I'm sorry but the artillery quagmire India is in proves how much closer India is to Guatemala than to America. Forget about arttillery
itself-- such a high tech. item that countries the size of small cities can produce them but not India-- India cannot produce even 155 mm shells by itself without importing the fuses. The US put a man on the moon in less than a decade following the decision to do so. India has not been able to produce an uber hight tech.item, the 155mm howitzer, in nearly 3 times the amount of time.

Is there any wonder why countries like Malaysia and Bangladesh treat India with contempt, forget about the US or China. Countries that import pistols and rifles are deservedly laughed out of the UNSC. Don't worry about blockading India during a war just blockade Israel and India will be on its knees. At least the OFBs will be standing with us as Min. of State for Defense production MM Pallam Raju recently said.

Ankit Desai · Post by **Ankit Desai** » 29 Jul 2010 01:17

Courtesy: Ajai Shukla 155-mm gun contract: DRDO enters the fray

Within the DRDO, we are discussing how to develop a 155-mm gun. We can make it, no problem, with the help of Indian industry. A 155mm gun requires high-class manufacturing; we have Bharat Forge and L&T in and around Pune, which are keen to join us.

Datar claims ARDE — given adequate support from the private sector, and from the DRDO network of 50-odd laboratories — could develop a world-class 155-mm gun within three to three and a half years. The Defence Metallurgical Research Laboratory, in Hyderabad, would develop special alloys and materials for the gun. Ammunition would be tested at the Proof and Experimental Establishment at Balasore, Orissa. Warheads would be tested at the Terminal Ballistics Research Laboratory, Chandigarh.

Ankit

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 29 Jul 2010 02:13

Ankit Desai wrote:Courtesy: Ajai Shukla 155-mm gun contract: DRDO enters the fray

Within the DRDO, we are discussing how to develop a 155-mm gun. We can make it, no problem, with the help of Indian industry. A 155mm gun requires high-class manufacturing; we have Bharat Forge and L&T in and around Pune, which are keen to join us.

Datar claims ARDE — given adequate support from the private sector, and from the DRDO network of 50-odd laboratories — could develop a world-class 155-mm gun within three to three and a half years. The Defence Metallurgical Research Laboratory, in Hyderabad, would develop special alloys and materials for the gun. Ammunition would be tested at the Proof and Experimental Establishment at Balasore, Orissa. Warheads would be tested at the Terminal Ballistics Research Laboratory, Chandigarh.
Ankit

Glad it came out!

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 50#p782850

Ever since the notion of blacklisting the STK came up, it become obivious, considering the prevailing situtaion, drdo must be asked by MoD to take up the 155 gun project. One can expect a proposal from them as soon as possible, i guess so. One dont have wait till 3 yrs to see the desi gun. Things will fall in place effortlessly. Is it not this should be taken as proof once again that our desi development thrives only when the import option is shut down?

And, ARDE produced a heavy 185-mm gun, but that never entered service because the army was not interested then.”

My god!

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 29 Jul 2010 02:17

from the above story,

Today, defence minister A K Antony informed Parliament that the Central Bureau of Investigation had recommended the blacklisting of four companies that had been involved, at various stages of this procurement: Singapore Technologies Kinetics (STK); Germany’s Rheinmetall; Israel Military Industries (IMI); and another Israeli company, Soltam. Denel, a South African company, had been blacklisted earlier;

Quite an achievement I have to say , managing to blacklist almost all the reputable artillery manufacturers (in a span 6years?). Now that they are going to blacklist even Rheinmetall , tracked SP acquisition too is doomed. Maybe DRDO should add it to its list.

ManuT · Post by **ManuT** » 29 Jul 2010 02:25

This decision will have decisive consequences, alas, a word unkown to GoI.

Maybe, MoD should be made independent like the judiciary.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 29 Jul 2010 02:26

The CBI is a joke

Seriously every arty manufacture worth their salt is blacklisted.

Bunch of effing morons

ManuJ · Post by **ManuJ** » 29 Jul 2010 03:40

Diabolical thinking - could it be that the CBI was used to arm-twist the army into accepting indigenous 155 arty?

tejas · Post by **tejas** » 29 Jul 2010 05:44

Wow!! The political interference that has made the CBI the joke that it is may end up transforming India's defense production paradigm. Once DRDO bypasses the decrepid cesspools that are the OFBs and instead production goes to world beaters like L&T as well as Bharat Forge the results will be there for all to see.

Still, just as India backed into market reforms due to lack of foreign exchange in 1991, private production of artillery which should have been done a decade ago is only now being started only due to banning of most of the planet's artillery manufacturers. Also what the hell was the IA thinking? 10 years ago they told DRDO don't bother despite not having new artillery for a decade and a half at that point. Plenty of effing morons in this pathetic scenario. Hopefully once again India can move (albeit a$$backwards in the right direction). A slimmed down, more directed and properly funded DRDO can clearly be a world beater. However this needs to be done in partnership with India's now mature private industry. The GOI needs to get the hell out of defense production.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 29 Jul 2010 07:53

I said so- take it as a omen.

vic · Post by **vic** » 29 Jul 2010 11:41

The DRDO spokesperson in New Delhi, Ravi Gupta, confirmed to the Business Standard, “The DRDO is very keen to develop 155-mm guns for the army. We had formed a team to work on this more than a decade ago, but the army did not give us a firm requirement then. Now, the army has expressed interest in the 155-mm gun project and preliminary work has already begun.”

I had pointed out repeatedly in this forum that Army was preventing DRDO from working on 155mm gun project. Anyway the gun being preferred by Army continues to be Bofors and we have most of the drawings for the same. So DRDO will start on a good/strong footing. If they are smart they will also hire some foreign consultants to quicken the project. With the experience of Arjun, T-90 barrel, 105mm upgunning, Met 155mm behind them, the pace should be pretty quick

nrshah · Post by **nrshah** » 29 Jul 2010 11:49

Courtesy: Ajai Shukla 155-mm gun contract: DRDO enters the fray

ahhhhhhh, finally dawn...

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 29 Jul 2010 12:25

vic wrote:
The DRDO spokesperson in New Delhi, Ravi Gupta, confirmed to the Business Standard, “The DRDO is very keen to develop 155-mm guns for the army. We had formed a team to work on this more than a decade ago, but the army did not give us a firm requirement then. Now, the army has expressed interest in the 155-mm gun project and preliminary work has already begun.”

I had pointed out repeatedly in this forum that Army was preventing DRDO from working on 155mm gun project. Anyway the gun being preferred by Army continues to be Bofors and we have most of the drawings for the same. So DRDO will start on a good/strong footing. If they are smart they will also hire some foreign consultants to quicken the project. With the experience of Arjun, T-90 barrel, 105mm upgunning, Met 155mm behind them, the pace should be pretty quick

Its to deaf ears. Same with Tank-Ex.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 29 Jul 2010 12:32

This is exactly what I've been saying all along about the lopsided priorities of the GOI/MOD/DRDO resulting in the services suffering.A long list of most urgent priorities can be drawn up for the three services and related technology to be acquired/developed.For well over a decade,we've known about the shortfall in artillery,yet to date no decision has been taken but for upgrading Russian 130mm guns by Soltam (notewowrthy,but an interim measure).
Instead we are rushing to buy C-17 transports and other eqpt. tangential to the main priorities where the services have been yelling themselves hoarse with out much succour.

Artillery is of the highest priority in the IA,as it suffers from lack of numbers.Had a decision been made with respect to obtaining artillery from abroad instead of the C-17,one would welcome it.However,this still does not explain certain lapses,as thanks to the Arjun programme,tank gun barrels have supposedly been indigenously developed,and the tech, supposedly developed by the DRDO used to further develop a tank with such a main gun,plus artillery pieces.At least the light-weight air portable gun for use in the Himalayas coul'dve been developed all these years! If we have to wait for the DRDO to produce an artillery piece

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 29 Jul 2010 14:14

Guys, even though I had asked for the 155 mm project in the previous post. I am not very positive about this project considering the IA attitude WRT Arjun and Tank EX.

nrshah · Post by **nrshah** » 29 Jul 2010 15:56

Pratyush wrote:Guys, even though I had asked for the 155 mm project in the previous post. I am not very positive about this project considering the IA attitude WRT Arjun and Tank EX.

I share your concern but this time it is different, I believe... Like tanks, IA dont have option to import with MOD not have guts to buy from BAe (FH 77 version). All other OEM are already banned and black listed...

As if the final nail into the coffin, all current tenders are canceled which means no guns on horizon for another 3/4 years considering time taken for new tenders, All other OEMS are still blacklisted and single vendor situation is not currently looked for by MOD

Artillery guns are crucial need since 1980..> Even than we were to purchase more but the scandal limited the qty to some hundreds...

I am hopeful this time we will see a all together different attitude from Army towards indigenous development

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 29 Jul 2010 17:35

Alternatively, one could see a lot more M777s being purchased through the FMS route. If the requirement is that urgent.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 29 Jul 2010 18:10

per wiki, the M777 is indeed replacing the regular towed M198 howitzer in US army. so its not just a niche weapon for expeditionary or mountain forces, but bread and butter too. wiki claims 370 on order for us marines and 250 for us army.

lacks the APU of the bofors fh77 but is otherwise a match and lighter.

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 29 Jul 2010 18:34

yeah but 39 calibre just doesn't cut it in the plains anymore. Yeah you can achieve 60 km with RAP and all that but a 52 calibre would obviously to better with RAP as the argument goes.

Saw a whole story in a recent DTI about how even the US Army is looking for something between the M777 and the old M109s. They seem to be now ruing the cancellation of the Crusader and the NLOS-LC.

vic · Post by **vic** » 29 Jul 2010 18:47

One needs to understand the rationale of Guns vs MRLS

Gun has an accuracy of around .5% of the range using conventional shells.

MLRS had an accuracy of around 3-5% of the range using conventional rockets therefore it was always an area suppression weapons.

Now with INS/GPS guided rockets coming into the fore, the counter battery/long range role will be taken over by MLRS or cruise missiles while the short range work will be done by Guns

Hence US continues to stick to 39 caliber for its M777, FCS etc while cancelling crusader. India should go in for reasonable GSQRS for the guns i.e. a 45 caliber gun designed quickly around Bofors drawings to be slowly upgraded.

I hope DRDO does not use this project for indulging long term research but quickly delivers a usable Gun based on FH77 drawings which are in India's possesssion and (use?)

P Chitkara · Post by **P Chitkara** » 29 Jul 2010 18:55

Per wiki pukeland has close to 550 pieces of SP arty (M109)! Is it anywhere near the reality? If it is, how far do we lag behind?

Coming back to the discussion, it is time we had production of at least towed arty at home. Let us keep our fingers crossed and hope that something good materializes locally out of the present situation.

nrshah · Post by **nrshah** » 29 Jul 2010 18:56

But doesnt M777 lacks the rate of fire of bofors... I believe that is a trade off for making it ultra light....that gives me a feeling that though it is very good gun for expeditionary / mountain forces and for faster logistic foot print, it still does not serve the need of a proper artillery gun required for IA.

vic · Post by **vic** » 29 Jul 2010 20:15

nrshah wrote:But doesnt M777 lacks the rate of fire of bofors... I believe that is a trade off for making it ultra light....that gives me a feeling that though it is very good gun for expeditionary / mountain forces and for faster logistic foot print, it still does not serve the need of a proper artillery gun required for IA.

Does Bofors rapid fire and scoot every used? Is practical? Is it required? I repeat donot see Gun in isolation but in conjunction with MLRS. Lot of roles of the gun have/will be taken over by Pinaka 1 & 2

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 29 Jul 2010 20:46

iirc pakis had around 150 M109 earlier and got 100 more under GOAT. but could be wrong.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 29 Jul 2010 22:33

That 185mm must be similar to the 7.25 howitzer of WW I fame. WOnder why they felt the need for it? US used to have heavy 203mm ie 8" for nuke shell

nrshah · Post by **nrshah** » 29 Jul 2010 22:35

vic wrote: Does Bofors rapid fire and scoot every used? Is practical? Is it required? I repeat donot see Gun in isolation but in conjunction with MLRS. Lot of roles of the gun have/will be taken over by Pinaka 1 & 2

There can be and will be situation requiring it.. and the value it adds in those rare situation is the reason why it is designed painstakingly for it..

Scoot - yes it is very much useful and will be used many times to avoid counter battery fire...

Even assuming they will not be used as you suggest, why should not be same preferred if they are available? I dont think cost wise it is more expensive than M 777 you are comparing
it with...

And when MBRLs are taking over a lot of roles of gun, why do we need guns at all.... Accuracy problem can be solved by adding guidance system to projectile.. ARDE is doing it on Pinaka as per reports

Or it is just because unkil now has accepted M 777 having low rate of fire and no scoot capability, we suddenly have started feeling both are not required and are debating on the the frequency of use or will be ever used at all...

I am not against m 777, it is an excellent gun with very high logistic foot print.. but every segment has its niche...

Telang · Post by **Telang** » 29 Jul 2010 22:42

vic wrote:
nrshah wrote:But doesnt M777 lacks the rate of fire of bofors... I believe that is a trade off for making it ultra light....that gives me a feeling that though it is very good gun for expeditionary / mountain forces and for faster logistic foot print, it still does not serve the need of a proper artillery gun required for IA.

Does Bofors rapid fire and scoot every used? Is practical? Is it required? I repeat donot see Gun in isolation but in conjunction with MLRS. Lot of roles of the gun have/will be taken over by Pinaka 1 & 2

Rockets, mortars, Guns, Gun/Howitzers, Howitzers, and their Rapid fire and scoot capabilities are all required, or not required, depending on the terrain and field tactics. One is not a substitute of the other, each has its own importance. No, Pinaka has not taken over any of the roles of mortars, Guns, gun/Howitzers or Howitzers, it has just taken over ITS OWN ROLE, nor can the others TAKE THE ROLE OF PINAKA. It is the ground situation which decides what is to be deployed where.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 29 Jul 2010 23:23

P Chitkara wrote:Per wiki pukeland has close to 550 pieces of SP arty (M109)! Is it anywhere near the reality? If it is, how far do we lag behind?

<SNIP>

The TSPA has always had a leg up on the IA wrt the SP Arty branch. However, the number of MI09 should be in the range of 300-350...with later models (delivered over last 24 months) of the M109A5 variety. IA Mechanized units rely on Bofors...we don't have SP Arty in service.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 29 Jul 2010 23:44

nrshah wrote:
There can be and will be situation requiring it.. and the value it adds in those rare situation is the reason why it is designed painstakingly for it..

Scoot - yes it is very much useful and will be used many times to avoid counter battery fire...

Even assuming they will not be used as you suggest, why should not be same preferred if they are available? I dont think cost wise it is more expensive than M 777 you are comparing
it with...

And when MBRLs are taking over a lot of roles of gun, why do we need guns at all.... Accuracy problem can be solved by adding guidance system to projectile.. ARDE is doing it on Pinaka as per reports

Or it is just because unkil now has accepted M 777 having low rate of fire and no scoot capability, we suddenly have started feeling both are not required and are debating on the the frequency of use or will be ever used at all...

I am not against m 777, it is an excellent gun with very high logistic foot print.. but every segment has its niche...

(A) The shoot and scoot capability of Bofors is a must....it is one of the reasons that gun was chosen......To be able to move to alternate fire positions to protect against counter-battery fire is one such small example. As to when it has been used - well, unless, one has seen each and every deployment of Bofors in IA service, guess, no one can answer the question. But I have seen Bofors moving in and out of firing positions and maneuvering in the general area on their own power. Imagine moving a 12tonnes mosnter and making minor adjustments using the Scania Gun Tractor?

(B) Coming to the M777 and 39 Caliber weapon and light weight - we are confusing issues here. The M777 is result of US Army requirement borne out of their doctrical requirment. Has anyone wondered that an Army (or Defence Services) which field some of the most advanced equipment in every field, makes do with guns like M119A2/M198/M777/M109A6 - which are not exactly cutting edge when compared to systems like FH77B05 or PzH-2000 or Archer? For them , Artillery is one of the Arms which delivers the firepower.....apart from this, they have preponderance on integral air support like Attack Helicopters and USAF+liberal spread of MLRS. For them, it makes sense to replace a M198 with M777.

For us, Artillery is the God of War - the prime delivery platform od destruction. We need the 155/52 Caliber gun - and don't forget that there is enough bunker busting and concrete pill-boxex which we need to blow up.

(C) MLRS versus Guns - Has anyone bothered to check the number of MLRS Regiments IA has? Or plans to induct in future? So, what is the ratio of MLRS to guns going to be? There is a reason the recently inducted Regiments of Pinaka (2 nos.) have to the Artillery Division. The numbers of these systems will be such that they'll be held by a central authority - like Corips Artillery Bde or Artillery Divisions.

So, let us stop this canard of MLRS taking up role of CB fire.