Artillery Discussion Thread

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
krishna_krishna
BRFite
Posts: 590
Joined: 23 Oct 2006 04:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby krishna_krishna » 09 Jun 2018 07:25

manjgu wrote:Nth round of summer winter highalt lowalt underwater tests !!


Very pathetic state of affairs, I am afraid it will go this way with 10K modifications suggested and again tests. By in now any impartial professional army you would see from DG arty to chief tweeting on how satisfied they are with our indigenous capability and proud to induct Dhanush ASAP.

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2088
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Katare » 09 Jun 2018 07:50

Years before it was clear that it is a great gun to all including to army yet outdated procedures or rigid mentality held up the production. Which gun has not suffered and than rectified barrel and muzzle brusts, holding up production because of washers, nuts and misaligned components on chassis for years shows need for procedural reforms.

An indigenous product should be cleared for initial production, at least, as soon as all major performance factors have been demonstrated successfully. If Army determines that basic design and mfg is sound and lingering issues like teething pains are addressable it should start procurement immediately. Creating a 100% trouble free product takes a long time.

darshhan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2274
Joined: 12 Dec 2008 11:52

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby darshhan » 09 Jun 2018 11:38

Dhanush did come with one disadvantage in terms of organisational backing. The project's main backer in IA was the then chief Gen VK Singh himself. His tenure was scuttled by then current political dispensation and afterwards the powers that be proceeded to dismantle his legacy in everything constructive that was done by him.

When they didnt hesitate to destroy TSD, what chance Dhanush had? It is only a matter of fate that current rulers are substantially more nationalistic and hence the project is still prodding along.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 62342
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 09 Jun 2018 21:16

@SJha1618
3h3 hours ago
More
And during this last round of user exploitation trials for the Dhanush howitzer, Bi-modular Charge Systems (up to Zone 6) from both OFB's Nalanda factory as well imported ones from France and South Africa were used.


I don't think any more reasons can be given for delaying the induction of OFB's 155 mm / 45 calibre Dhanush howitzer. Between June 2-6, six production level prototypes fired some 300 rounds. And on June 7, 101 rounds were fired by these six units without incident.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 49648
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 10 Jun 2018 10:08

The development trials showed barrel gets worn out around 3000 rounds.
So these guns are in first quartile. OFB needs to make spare barrels for future.
Thats all.

I like the Dhanush for its affordability and as better than the Soltam upgrade.

Haridas
BRFite
Posts: 259
Joined: 26 Dec 2017 07:53

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Haridas » 10 Jun 2018 23:45

Take a bow Ramana for your accurate technical assessment from open source litrature, of the eventual root cause of barrel burst during Dhanush field trials and presstitute call for failed indian gun.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 943
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Gyan » 10 Jun 2018 23:58

As per General VK Singh, first basic prototypes of Dhanush have been firing since 2013. That means almost 6 years of testing.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5079
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Rakesh » 11 Jun 2018 00:00

Haridas wrote:Take a bow Ramana for your accurate technical assessment from open source litrature, of the eventual root cause of barrel burst during Dhanush field trials and presstitute call for failed indian gun.

+108 Haridas-Ji!

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 943
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Gyan » 11 Jun 2018 00:03

ramana wrote:The development trials showed barrel gets worn out around 3000 rounds.
So these guns are in first quartile. OFB needs to make spare barrels for future.
Thats all.

I like the Dhanush for its affordability and as better than the Soltam upgrade.


Do you mean to say, barrel gets worn out after "1000" full power rounds?

nam
BRFite
Posts: 971
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby nam » 11 Jun 2018 00:24

Let me be an outlier here and defend IA's testing procedure.

Imagine you are DG Artillery and OFB comes to you with a brand new howitzer. The unit, who has a history of supplying quality deficient product(where IA has lost men due to this) and never on time, would you trust a brand new product from it? I wouldn't.

If I was in his shoes, I would also demand OFB product be tested until the Artillery corp is satisfied, even it takes 6 years. I don't want to loose men in accidents.

Once the 45 caliber has gone through the entire cycle, I expect Artillery to have more trust in the product and 52 caliber will have a shorter test cycle.

Just as Akash had a very long testing cycle, upgraded Akash with a seeker had a very short test cycle.

ATAGS seems to have a shorter testing cycle than Dhanush. So let's not blame IA. They are being professional.

Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3115
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Kakkaji » 11 Jun 2018 01:41

ramana wrote:The development trials showed barrel gets worn out around 3000 rounds.
So these guns are in first quartile. OFB needs to make spare barrels for future.
Thats all.


ramanaji

Was your assessmen conveyed to he power that be?

If they do not replace barrels in time, the guns will fail again after a couple of years of use, and they will ask to stop production at that time.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7701
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Pratyush » 11 Jun 2018 07:07

The barrel life is always defined as EFC. once it goes beyond EFC the barrel needs changing. Every arty man knows that.

darshhan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2274
Joined: 12 Dec 2008 11:52

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby darshhan » 11 Jun 2018 08:05

ramana wrote:The development trials showed barrel gets worn out around 3000 rounds.
So these guns are in first quartile. OFB needs to make spare barrels for future.
Thats all.

I like the Dhanush for its affordability and as better than the Soltam upgrade.


Still much better than tank barrels whose life is measured in 100s of rounds. Is the metallaurgy for both that different?

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 62342
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 11 Jun 2018 08:36

Maybe tank barrels need higher accuracy rating also
Arty have a bigger cep thing due to 40kg warhead

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1274
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Manish_P » 14 Jun 2018 17:41

Cross post from the Armoured Thread

nam wrote:
Norwegian munition manufacturer Nammo revealed at Eurosatory that it is developing a ramjet-assisted, INS/GPS-guided round for 155 mm L52 artillery pieces that will extend the range of precision fires out to 100 km and beyond.


Although it would sound like a wonderful idea, this is the usual over expensive, over engineered ideas looking for a market.

At 100kms the target you would want to hit will a large one like airfield or factories or storage. How many of these rounds can you fire? Just a normal guided shell is uber expensive. This one will more expensive than those. And all for a 45 kg warhead?

You are are better off using air launched glide weapon with a large warhead. Artillery are meant to cheap and something you can fire in thousands and constantly..


Or rocket artillery like Pinaka

I agree that this seems to be a border-line over engineered idea. But it might be useful if these shells can be fired from existing artillery pieces. Kind of like a designated marksman/sharpshooter within a squad

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 62342
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 14 Jun 2018 21:54

I dont think a army division engaged in combat will want to recon and strike targets 100km behind a active battlefront. they will leave it to airpower and SRBMs each of whom can deliver 300-1000kg of warhead in one shot.

sniping at some small point target 100km out is useless in a conventional war. might have some utility in colonial bush wars...like small convoys of vehicles in eastern syria meets resistance and needs support from limited fixed firebases....they will gap fill the lack of tactical airpower

ArjunPandit
BRFite
Posts: 1061
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ArjunPandit » 14 Jun 2018 22:54

^^but it certainly allows us to fire from behind the front lines to slightly behind the frontlines. Anyways what is the linear width of porkistan, if you know what i Mean

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6099
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby nachiket » 14 Jun 2018 23:10

ArjunPandit wrote:^^but it certainly allows us to fire from behind the front lines to slightly behind the frontlines. Anyways what is the linear width of porkistan, if you know what i Mean

An ATAGS located in Amritsar can hit the middle of Lahore with regular unguided shells. We do not need these uber-expensive 100km ranged shells against the pakis. What we need is overwhelming numerical superiority in regular tube and rocket artillery. Keep it simple and buy in bulk should be our philosophy.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6787
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Prasad » 14 Jun 2018 23:32

This was from L&T Defence at DefExpo
https://vimeo.com/275115141

We don't have vimeo embedding and our youtube channel is "suspended" for some reason.

SBajwa
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4679
Joined: 10 Jan 2006 21:35
Location: Attari

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby SBajwa » 14 Jun 2018 23:55

nachiket wrote:
ArjunPandit wrote:^^but it certainly allows us to fire from behind the front lines to slightly behind the frontlines. Anyways what is the linear width of porkistan, if you know what i Mean

An ATAGS located in Amritsar can hit the middle of Lahore with regular unguided shells. We do not need these uber-expensive 100km ranged shells against the pakis. What we need is overwhelming numerical superiority in regular tube and rocket artillery. Keep it simple and buy in bulk should be our philosophy.


From Border to Defense housing authority in Lahore is 25 KM where the top kernails and gernails live. So is airport.

Middle of Sialkote from Gurdaspur district is 16 KM

Their Rawalpindi (GHQ) is 32 KM from LOC

ISI headquarter in Islamabad is at Khayaban-e-Suharwardy, G-7/4, G-7, Islamabad which is 85 KMs.

so are many other cities!

ArjunPandit
BRFite
Posts: 1061
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ArjunPandit » 15 Jun 2018 00:30

if I were the PM for one day, ISI HQ, muridke would be pinaked

nam
BRFite
Posts: 971
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby nam » 15 Jun 2018 01:01

I have been binge watching WW1 videos and some of the artillery duels were staggering.

The battle of Somme is famous, however there are other battles where crazy level of artillery was used.

In battle of Verdun Germans fired 2 million shells on the French! Flattened the entire town.

In another offensive, the French sprayed 17 million shells on a 40 mile by 2 mile German front!

Despite such numbers, the front hardly moved!

Bart S
BRFite
Posts: 1178
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:03

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Bart S » 15 Jun 2018 01:38

SBajwa wrote:ISI headquarter in Islamabad is at Khayaban-e-Suharwardy, G-7/4, G-7, Islamabad which is 85 KMs.

Totally OT, but I finally understood what that Harpal Bector character was referring to :oops: :lol:

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20762
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Prem » 15 Jun 2018 02:01

Bart S wrote:
SBajwa wrote:ISI headquarter in Islamabad is at Khayaban-e-Suharwardy, G-7/4, G-7, Islamabad which is 85 KMs.

Totally OT, but I finally understood what that Harpal Bector character was referring to :oops: :lol:


Artillery walon ko Keh do , ISI ko reverse EID Mubarak ka message bejho.

Kakarat
BRFite
Posts: 1245
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Kakarat » 15 Jun 2018 02:12

ArjunPandit wrote:if I were the PM for one day, ISI HQ, muridke would be pinaked


That's why you are not the PM

Attacking a government organisation & office is asking for war. Also ISI dosent operate only from its HQ

Most importantly Pinaka doesn't have the range and precision to do that

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1200
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Khalsa » 15 Jun 2018 02:54

nachiket wrote:
ArjunPandit wrote:^^but it certainly allows us to fire from behind the front lines to slightly behind the frontlines. Anyways what is the linear width of porkistan, if you know what i Mean

An ATAGS located in Amritsar can hit the middle of Lahore with regular unguided shells. We do not need these uber-expensive 100km ranged shells against the pakis. What we need is overwhelming numerical superiority in regular tube and rocket artillery. Keep it simple and buy in bulk should be our philosophy.


So can a M-77 located in Lahore or Mudkee be very successful in obliterating chosen targets in Amritsar.


Couple of points of view from spending way too much time with artillery officers.

You don't place your artillery inside urban areas. Prevents freedom of movement and opens you up to entrapment.
You don't other b4st4rd's built up areas, you scout and recee for bunched\ grouped\ massed infantry and hit em hard.

To give you an idea, my family owns a rather mega large orchard in Punjab, next to the border.
During exercises and during Op Parikaram, do you want to take a guess who was there the whole time.

yes the infantry, hunkered down and camo-ed.

The officers leading the men there were under no doubts that their location was marked and known to the Pak Army artillery.
Now I am sure the same exists in the other direction.

Flattenning cities for the sake of flattening cities was Stalingrad WW2 style.
it only came back in Iraq when both parties wanted to occupy the land and the insurgents took advantage of the Urban Jungle.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6099
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby nachiket » 15 Jun 2018 03:13

I gave the Amritsar-Lahore example to give an idea of the ranges we are dealing with on the Pak border and what is achievable with current guns and shells. I wasn't suggesting that the IA actually site an artillery battery in Amritsar city. That would be quite stupid.

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1200
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Khalsa » 15 Jun 2018 09:12

Sorry chief
:-)

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1274
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Manish_P » 15 Jun 2018 12:02

Singha wrote:I dont think a army division engaged in combat will want to recon and strike targets 100km behind a active battlefront. they will leave it to airpower and SRBMs each of whom can deliver 300-1000kg of warhead in one shot.


Yes, an army division on an active battlefront, in a hot war, certainly would not. And employment of Air Power and SRBMs would mean couple of rungs climbed up the escalatory ladder, not to forget the much higher costs thereof. The Pakis have usually been very careful to stay below that threshold. Hence our regular LOC skirmishes are mostly limited to small arms and mortars and at times man portable ATGMs and smaller caliber artillery.

The excaliber round costs around 70K USD per unit, so we can expect this ramjet round to cost much more than that. Plus space within the round for the fuel means compromise on the ammo. Just not enough bang for the buck. Then there is the question if and how much extra pressure the ramjet shells will put on the barrels, increasing the rate of decay of the rifling (leading to lowering of accuracy for the regular shells) and reducing the overall barrel life.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7701
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Pratyush » 15 Jun 2018 12:10

I can understand the rationale behind arty rounds such as Excalibur or the laser guided rounds or for that matter the PGK. to that extent I also understand the idea behind VLAP or ERFB.

But a ramjet powered round makes no sense to me. As you could simply add a solid booster and launch it like a missile. It will do exactly what needs to be done. So why add the complexity of shooting it through the barrel of the gun.

darshhan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2274
Joined: 12 Dec 2008 11:52

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby darshhan » 15 Jun 2018 17:46

Pratyush wrote:I can understand the rationale behind arty rounds such as Excalibur or the laser guided rounds or for that matter the PGK. to that extent I also understand the idea behind VLAP or ERFB.

But a ramjet powered round makes no sense to me. As you could simply add a solid booster and launch it like a missile. It will do exactly what needs to be done. So why add the complexity of shooting it through the barrel of the gun.


It is actually a solution looking for a problem. Probably will be sold at more than half a million dollars. Anything more and you are better off buying a cruise missile.

During the last 50 years or so, Europeans do not have much of combat experience. Hence it is understandable why they suck when it comes to designing cheap and effective weapons.

Bala Vignesh
BRFite
Posts: 1902
Joined: 30 Apr 2009 02:02
Location: Standing at the edge of the cliff
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Bala Vignesh » 15 Jun 2018 18:51

Well how about flipping it the other way, with propulsion, you can call in an Arty strike and take out particular vehicles in a High value convoy using these rounds since they wouldn't run out of Kinetic energy like ballistic rounds that too using a standard Arty battery. Drones and hellfire missiles that are usually employed for this role are not cheap either.

SBajwa
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4679
Joined: 10 Jan 2006 21:35
Location: Attari

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby SBajwa » 15 Jun 2018 18:59

Khalsa wrote:
nachiket wrote:An ATAGS located in Amritsar can hit the middle of Lahore with regular unguided shells. We do not need these uber-expensive 100km ranged shells against the pakis. What we need is overwhelming numerical superiority in regular tube and rocket artillery. Keep it simple and buy in bulk should be our philosophy.


So can a M-77 located in Lahore or Mudkee be very successful in obliterating chosen targets in Amritsar.


Couple of points of view from spending way too much time with artillery officers.

You don't place your artillery inside urban areas. Prevents freedom of movement and opens you up to entrapment.
You don't other b4st4rd's built up areas, you scout and recee for bunched\ grouped\ massed infantry and hit em hard.

To give you an idea, my family owns a rather mega large orchard in Punjab, next to the border.
During exercises and during Op Parikaram, do you want to take a guess who was there the whole time.

yes the infantry, hunkered down and camo-ed.

The officers leading the men there were under no doubts that their location was marked and known to the Pak Army artillery.
Now I am sure the same exists in the other direction.

Flattenning cities for the sake of flattening cities was Stalingrad WW2 style.
it only came back in Iraq when both parties wanted to occupy the land and the insurgents took advantage of the Urban Jungle.



I have seen artillery well hidden in sugar cane fields but in these times of weapons locating radars is this a good idea? Practicing Shoot and scoot should be the key now.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 49648
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 15 Jun 2018 20:03

Thanks guys.

The Army did right thing to fire those large number of rounds to find the limits of the design. Theoretical calculations are good to establish the design. But limits should be by testing to determine failure modes.

Barrels erode due to chemicals from charge combustion and less from physical wear.
Shell balloting happens due to gap between shell and barrel.

I think OFB shells past history of barrel burst was a red herring.
Army COI often cleared the gun for further trials shows theur confidence.

I would like to know what were the results of the instrumented shells fired from the M777 guns?

This would confirm the forces during the firing of the shells.

My guess us the measurements showed OFB shells are within family of the shells fired from M777. Otherwise we would hear about shoddy OFB made shells.
Then why did the shell 'exit in multiple pieces'?
The shell was ERFB which is lower fracture strength. It's was around 1160th round. Erosion can't be ruled out. So likely shell burst in the barrel.
Hope they clear this inquiry and resume M777 procurement. The MSC needs them

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12675
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Lalmohan » 15 Jun 2018 20:16

darshhan wrote:During the last 50 years or so, Europeans do not have much of combat experience.


UK, France have been very active in a number of wars - apart from Iraq and Afghanistan - lots of special forces engagements across Africa and elsewhere and a few sizeable deployments, plus peace keeping/policing roles
Most Nato members have contributed significant combat forces to Iraq and Afghanistan wars
the main country to not be heavily involved is Germany

doesn't usually get picked up in the US media

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 62342
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 15 Jun 2018 22:30

peacekeeping, kite flying, COIN, CT .... none have seen full on conventional large scale combat.

the british amphibious attack on Basra in ODS and OIF - I am yet to see credible account of how much real fighting they had to do.

about the only real fighting was in falkland islands but again at no more than batallion strength engagements, perhaps company strength for most part.

you can always pick and choose your best units and overprovision the support elements to give a good account. its when multiple corps have to fight that separates the men from the boys.

their capabilities at heavier end of spectrum have atrophied badly for ground forces - very little to no tanks, limited heavy artillery, belgium seems to have mothballed most of its F-16 , netherlands is nook nood wrt tanks, UK cannot afford even 2 carriers and will limp along with 1, harriers all gone, no money to invest in LRMP, dassault needing govt bailouts , ....... murica probably has 10x more stuff in its boneyards than EU in its cantonments.

hence the wailing and howling by "frontline" states like poland and ukraine for *murican bases* and *murican divisions* not the vaunted EU rapid reaction forces er um batallions.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6787
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Prasad » 16 Jun 2018 09:34

Their air forces too have only seen a ton of mud moving roles and not as many air to air in contested air space. Be it Libya or Iraq or Afg. In these same countries, including Syria, they've not fought against an equivalent army but ragtag talibunnies. Only Iraq had a semblance of an army but even they were a one legged army.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 49648
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ramana » 17 Jun 2018 05:54

Artillery usage in Kargil.

Singha calculate on number of shells per km and compare to earlier Wars.

https://twitter.com/indiandefence11/sta ... 93248?s=19

dinesh_kimar
BRFite
Posts: 220
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby dinesh_kimar » 17 Jun 2018 15:10

Per above tweet, pinaka fired 5000 rockets. Might not be true.

M-46 firing only 4000 shells is also hard to believe. Ammo was less expensive than Bofors, and gun is the backbone of Indian Army artillery.

If they fired more rounds from the 160 mm mortar than the 120 mm one, they must be indeed impressed with its performance. Wonder why they started phasing it out soon after Kargil, while the 120 mm one still continues.

Arun.prabhu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 74
Joined: 28 Aug 2016 19:26

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Arun.prabhu » 17 Jun 2018 17:51

From what I have read from western service men, anything above 120mm is not man portable. This could be the reason. 160mm shells may be more effective but leave you exposed to counter battery fire if the team can’t move to another firing location quickly.

dinesh_kimar wrote:Per above tweet, pinaka fired 5000 rockets. Might not be true.

M-46 firing only 4000 shells is also hard to believe. Ammo was less expensive than Bofors, and gun is the backbone of Indian Army artillery.

If they fired more rounds from the 160 mm mortar than the 120 mm one, they must be indeed impressed with its performance. Wonder why they started phasing it out soon after Kargil, while the 120 mm one still continues.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 17 guests