Artillery: News & Discussion

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19954
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 06 May 2015 21:56

Singha wrote:Saurav Jha @SJha1618 · May 3

Let's see how the C-17 'global sustainment' program turns out. We'll soon also know from CAG just how much the Air force will pay for that.

Saurav Jha @SJha1618 · May 3

Why? Zimple, that particular radar is no longer in production and nobody for the love of the ****** will give you spares for only 12 radars.


Saurav Jha @SJha1618 · May 3

To remind people about serviceability, the ANTPQ-37 WLRs ordered by the Army from America are currently inoperational on account of spares.


This is in-credibly bizarre. Cant the IA do a large volume, multi year buy for spares to raise the EOQ for the supplier?

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 06 May 2015 21:59

well I guess most of capex has gone into the T90 over the last few years! and now akash.

no artillery for sure. no new small arms. grudging bones for arjun. no IFVs.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19954
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 06 May 2015 22:03

Basically UPA had a nice strategy. Cut funds & watch the capabilities wither. Somehow a few big ticket local items got through - Pinaka, Akash, but peanuts compared to the overall spend on recurring items like Tatra and who knows what else most of which didn't work as planned whether it be Smerch or Krasnapol or Tatra or Bumar ARVs. I am willing to bet big money was made by some worthies in UPA/IA through the T-90 and other deals. VKS put a stop and wouldn't play along on Tatra so was targeted.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 06 May 2015 22:30

UPA seems to have taken dictation from foreign capitals to specially target the artillery because good artillery is the key to any punitive moves.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19954
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 06 May 2015 23:20

Exactly Singha.. any terror attack would have been met with a tough arty response.. it was clearly a well planned out plan to keep the IA weak & defanged. When an aggressive chief came in, he was removed as well. One day I hope MMS & his fellow jerks are all held accountable for the crimes they committed.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4870
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby srai » 07 May 2015 03:11

Karan M wrote:
Singha wrote:Saurav Jha @SJha1618 · May 3

Let's see how the C-17 'global sustainment' program turns out. We'll soon also know from CAG just how much the Air force will pay for that.

Saurav Jha @SJha1618 · May 3

Why? Zimple, that particular radar is no longer in production and nobody for the love of the ****** will give you spares for only 12 radars.


Saurav Jha @SJha1618 · May 3

To remind people about serviceability, the ANTPQ-37 WLRs ordered by the Army from America are currently inoperational on account of spares.


This is in-credibly bizarre. Cant the IA do a large volume, multi year buy for spares to raise the EOQ for the supplier?

The IA, historically speaking, has this tendency of making irregular purchases of spare parts in small quantities. They don't seem to look at it from a complete lifecycle support for x-years point of view, which would be more effective for arranging appropriate inventory and support for the life of the product. Apart from keeping costs low and higher serviceability rates , it would help MSEs recoup their investments better. I have read a few articles where MSEs have complained about the IA ordering only a small batch and then no orders for several years. The IA expects them to keep their tooling/machinery around (even if idle). It doesn't make business sense.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19954
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 07 May 2015 13:27

Srai, IA does that to conserve its budgetary allocations and get best current bang for its (limited) buck; short term optimization.
If properly funded, a lot of this mentality will change.

vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1658
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby vasu raya » 07 May 2015 15:26

kvraghavaiah, that SDB picture was in support of a theme called "be ahead of the customer", when phoren origin weapons are so much preferred by the armed forces, you want to bridge the gap where you can, and within DRDO there should be an analysis of the world wide trends in weapon development across the spectrum. Actually the LTPP? is such a long term initiative, not sure if it is any different than a 5 year plan when it comes to execution.

They already have Gruthma, the glide bomb and the rocket booster in the form of Pinaka, so in terms of foundational tech they are already there, why not the next level of integration? when its already proven elsewhere, the test date of Feb 12 2015 for the ground launched SDB says that you will close the gap soon vs. being 10 years behind in some other tech areas.

While Chinese go after even classified info through hacking, one would be happy if DRDO hacks the armed forces servers that host the detailed brochures from foreign vendors to know whats crossing their mind, just to keep it more focused than a world tour.<sarcasm>

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9970
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Yagnasri » 07 May 2015 15:53

Good idea. hack the websites for brochures. :rotfl:

member_22539
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2022
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby member_22539 » 07 May 2015 17:16

^+1 Indeed :D

VibhavS
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 64
Joined: 04 Jan 2011 16:56
Location: Classified

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby VibhavS » 07 May 2015 21:18

Yagnasri wrote:Good idea. hack the websites for brochures. :rotfl:


Why hack Sir. All you have to do is hit the download button :twisted: and give fake personal data :twisted: If required to provide a contact.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 07 May 2015 21:36

nobody facing the kind of threats we do , would settle for 400 dhanush now and wait for the uber 52 cal in atleast another 7 yrs minimum.

by that time someone like Oto would have ported existing naval tech for a 155/55 or god forbid the 155/62 that would throw arty directorate into a unhandled exception and infinite loop of making the atags jump through 500 new hoops.

155/45 will cover the vast bulk of our needs because its not as if we have a over abundance of mech corps running around in open desert needing very deep fires by supporting artillery.

VibhavS
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 64
Joined: 04 Jan 2011 16:56
Location: Classified

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby VibhavS » 07 May 2015 22:00

Well Dhanush would be a start right, for an Army systematically starved of even basic requirements. To go up against Chipanda, we would need an SPH system, they would out-number us in artillery and would also have Fire Finder Radar support. We would need the flexibility and survivability of an SPH rather than an ATGS. Which would be targeted in the opening salvos.

Towed guns will have trouble surviving in a full blown war.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 07 May 2015 22:03

the border roads can barely take a towed gun let alone a meaty arjun sized SPH.
nothing can move cross country in the mountains so the whole mobility of SPH is moot in such limited roads
people hide guns in caves , pits and reverse slopes and hope for best.

VibhavS
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 64
Joined: 04 Jan 2011 16:56
Location: Classified

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby VibhavS » 07 May 2015 22:10

What about a system like Caesar (17.7 tons) or Archer (30 tons) or ATMOS? Those are not much heavier than a truck and towed gun (with the exception of Archer) and could be used in the mountains. Secondly the towed gun has troubles due to the turning radius of the weapon attached to the truck than just weight right?

I am not calling for importing these systems I am talking about utilizing Tata/Kalyani/L&T to create a solution in India based on the Dhanush or even the Kalyani Gun. I am sure it is within our engineering capability to do that? It may not be the best solution or even the most elegant, but it is a workable solution.

member_22539
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2022
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby member_22539 » 08 May 2015 06:29

^Thats why we have a requirement for 814 mounted gun systems. Basically guns on the back of trucks.

nash
BRFite
Posts: 898
Joined: 08 Aug 2008 16:48

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby nash » 08 May 2015 09:45

Make in India: Tata, Mahindra and Larsen & Toubro in race to partner gunmaker BAE for howitzers

Read more at:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/art ... aign=cppst

The government will soon take a call on a fresh army proposal on acquiring BAE's M777 Howitzer after the American company offered to shift the manufacturing and testing facility from Hattiesburg, Mississippi, to India. The deal size is around $700 million.

BAE has now offered to set up an assembly, integration and testing facility with the help of an Indian partner; and is looking at a potential investment of over $200 million. BAE's offer includes not only manufacturing for the army but also shifting its export orders that come from the Middle East, South America and Europe


Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Gyan » 08 May 2015 10:26

Karan M wrote:And some IAF officers in Bison squadrons don't know Jaguar has Elta radar or Griffin LGB. Clearly, they dont have as much foresight and desire as you and all of the armchair generals on BRF and should be replaced en masse. Seriously, as long as the Agni guy gets his particular job done, nobody gives a darn whether he knows or doesn't know what Janes or BRF says.



The type of knowledge and information soldiers have is sometimes very different than Defense academics/scientists/engineers and even amateurs. For instance, hardly any soldier will know the exact length of barrel or muzzle velocity of INSAS rifle but they can dismantle & reassemble the rifle blind fold!

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Gyan » 08 May 2015 11:09

BAE M777 is just a simpler and outdated version of DRDO ATAGS which is automated Titanium 155mm/52 caliber Howitzer. Hence no need for M777, just let DRDO develop a ULH version of ATAGS.

durairaaj
BRFite
Posts: 117
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby durairaaj » 08 May 2015 12:11

nash wrote:Make in India: Tata, Mahindra and Larsen & Toubro in race to partner gunmaker BAE for howitzers

Read more at:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/art ... aign=cppst

The government will soon take a call on a fresh army proposal on acquiring BAE's M777 Howitzer after the American company offered to shift the manufacturing and testing facility from Hattiesburg, Mississippi, to India. ...
BAE's offer includes not only manufacturing for the army but also shifting its export orders that come from the Middle East, South America and Europe

I don't like this deal.
Putting my CT hat on.
I see it as a way to export the titanium metal out of India. Extraction of Ti is energy intensive and polluting.
By making this deal as "Make in India" they want to extract Ti as metal for artillery barrels and export it out.
Later on after the artillery's life is over it can be used for missiles, aeroplanes and spaceships components.
I don't like this deal. While the american company will reap all the licensing $ without loosing a single ounce of Ti or facing pollution related expenses.
CT hat off.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19954
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 08 May 2015 12:38

Gyan wrote:
Karan M wrote:And some IAF officers in Bison squadrons don't know Jaguar has Elta radar or Griffin LGB. Clearly, they dont have as much foresight and desire as you and all of the armchair generals on BRF and should be replaced en masse. Seriously, as long as the Agni guy gets his particular job done, nobody gives a darn whether he knows or doesn't know what Janes or BRF says.



The type of knowledge and information soldiers have is sometimes very different than Defense academics/scientists/engineers and even amateurs. For instance, hardly any soldier will know the exact length of barrel or muzzle velocity of INSAS rifle but they can dismantle & reassemble the rifle blind fold!


Specialization and focused interests are a fact of life. DRDO has a program by which scientists can change labs, domains etc. But most will remain in their specific area of focus. Its bizarre to post as the other guy did, bragging that he/we know more about superficial details across the topic. Real expertise lies in knowing the one topic really well.

rkhanna
BRFite
Posts: 1165
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 02:35

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby rkhanna » 08 May 2015 12:51

I see it as a way to export the titanium metal out of India. Extraction of Ti is energy intensive and polluting.
By making this deal as "Make in India" they want to extract Ti as metal for artillery barrels and export it out.
Later on after the artillery's life is over it can be used for missiles, aeroplanes and spaceships components.
I don't like this deal. While the american company will reap all the licensing $ without loosing a single ounce of Ti or facing pollution related expenses.


Sir - let me try and break it down

1. There is very real need for domestic consumption so Internal consumption will definitely take place.

2. Exporting Weapons (irrespective of who holds the IP) is a net gain to the economy and defence industry specially as a part of the AMC will also be directed our way. Also dont forget R&D for upgrades, etc may also trickle down to India.

3. Titanium is a commodity - How much reserves do we have? If our Internal needs are being met why cant we export the commodity - which it is. nothing more nothing less.

If you are worried that parts of our tech will be used for something else we should not export anything. Guidance systems from Brahmos can be used for something else, etc etc

durairaaj
BRFite
Posts: 117
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby durairaaj » 08 May 2015 13:27

^ I agree to all of the above points with no comments. There are tradeoffs, hope it works out good.

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1861
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Thakur_B » 08 May 2015 13:32

Gyan wrote:
The type of knowledge and information soldiers have is sometimes very different than Defense academics/scientists/engineers and even amateurs. For instance, hardly any soldier will know the exact length of barrel or muzzle velocity of INSAS rifle but they can dismantle & reassemble the rifle blind fold!


Do it enough times with the drill instructor screaming in your ears and you too might be able to do it.

Gyan wrote:BAE M777 is just a simpler and outdated version of DRDO ATAGS which is automated Titanium 155mm/52 caliber Howitzer. Hence no need for M777, just let DRDO develop a ULH version of ATAGS.


The only real competitor to M-777 was Pegasus by ST Kinetics who got blacklisted. Those placing their hopes on Kalyani's ultra light shouldn't be placing too much of them because the Mandus group is working with soft recoil technology, which though impressive hasn't been very successful.

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4017
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby deejay » 08 May 2015 15:54

Thakur_B wrote:
Gyan wrote:
The type of knowledge and information soldiers have is sometimes very different than Defense academics/scientists/engineers and even amateurs. For instance, hardly any soldier will know the exact length of barrel or muzzle velocity of INSAS rifle but they can dismantle & reassemble the rifle blind fold!


Do it enough times with the drill instructor screaming in your ears and you too might be able to do it.



:rotfl: Seriously :rotfl: You made me remember - "I love my rifle"

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4541
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby putnanja » 08 May 2015 18:23

Wasn't there a news item sometime back that the barrel's tech cannot be imported for M777(US govt restriction?), so it has to be imported in full for assembly here?

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 08 May 2015 18:37

those kind of clauses will always be there regardless of claims that assembly line will be moved.
assembly line moving does not mean subsystem all suppliers will move.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19954
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 08 May 2015 19:56

rkhanna wrote:3. Titanium is a commodity - How much reserves do we have? If our Internal needs are being met why cant we export the commodity - which it is. nothing more nothing less.


OT but almost everything is a commodity till you start running out of it. Then it becomes a scarce resource and the strategic stockpiling stuff starts.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 08 May 2015 20:16

the titantium parts were made by a part of Alcoa named howmet in michigan and ohio
http://www.azom.com/article.aspx?Articl ... Production

now you tell me if they will be relocating to pune :rotfl:

see their customer list - its a whos who of the big boys https://www.alcoa.com/howmet/en/info_pa ... i-Cast.pdf
even samsung for all of Soko's strength in steel industry buys from them/ i have no doubt even their SP gun in our race has alcoa howmet parts in it.

khan chacha is second to none in high precision high cost metal working and use of exotic materials.


Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Gyan » 10 May 2015 16:01

BAE has only offered assembly in India with ZERO manufactering. Go screwdrivergiri!

ArmenT
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 4239
Joined: 10 Sep 2007 05:57
Location: Loud, Proud, Ugly American

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby ArmenT » 10 May 2015 23:34

Karan M wrote:
rkhanna wrote:3. Titanium is a commodity - How much reserves do we have? If our Internal needs are being met why cant we export the commodity - which it is. nothing more nothing less.


OT but almost everything is a commodity till you start running out of it. Then it becomes a scarce resource and the strategic stockpiling stuff starts.

Interesting thing about titanium is that it is a fairly commonly occurring element (7th most common metal and 9th most common element on earth) and occurs in many minerals. The only trouble is that extracting the titanium is only commercially viable from a few minerals and finding large concentrated deposits of these are relatively rare. Research is still happening to find better processes to extract it.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19954
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 11 May 2015 00:03

India managed to get a titanium processing plant running last year IIRC for making its own stuff. Per se, I'd rather we imported and saved our own reserves for everything, but then it becomes so cost prohibitive that the strategic value becomes questionable (money saved could be used for many other high value activities). Thats actually the crux of the current Govts ire with Green Peace, Ford Foundation and many other such organizations which the GOI believes are a cats paw for vested interests which block mineral development/extraction in India so as to force India into costly imports. Another interesting thing is that post the Ukrainian crisis and the US vs Russia throwdown (sanctions and what not), US is said to have started stockpiling Titanium per media (VDM?) reports. Looks like Russia remains a top dawg in that field.

partha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4033
Joined: 02 Jul 2010 15:25

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby partha » 11 May 2015 11:21

Karan M wrote:Another interesting thing is that post the Ukrainian crisis and the US vs Russia throwdown (sanctions and what not), US is said to have started stockpiling Titanium per media (VDM?) reports. Looks like Russia remains a top dawg in that field.

I remember reading in a book how CIA setup a complex web of front companies to import titanium from USSR for Lockheed's Blackbird SR71 plane at the height of cold war to be used against USSR.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7585
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Prasad » 13 May 2015 22:09

DAC clears M777 purchase.

Word on Twitter is that the kalyani light gun is almost ready for approval. Do we need more light guns than the M777 ones we're getting. Local vs foreign is of course a no brainer.

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Cosmo_R » 13 May 2015 22:20

A little artillery levity is in order:

How not to move an artillery piece

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... truck.html

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 13 May 2015 22:53

to me the only virtue of the M777 seems to be its light weight. other than it needs a very large crew of troops like 10 to service it during firing....a truck mounted system like the mighty Archer outguns and outranges it by miles . with manual loading, it is unlikely to be able to participate in intimidating co-ordinated multi regiment MRSI attacks where 10s of rounds drop on target area within few seconds.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 13 May 2015 22:57

I figure the kalyani soln would have been cheaper if they considered it. the mandus group which provided the technology maintains the M198 guns for us army.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19954
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 13 May 2015 23:52

Ajai Shukla was right in that in India, Defence Minister is just Defence Acquisition Minister.
Parrikar saar has said a lot of good sounding stuff about local industry, his ability to make quick decisions and generally talked things up. Yet to see that acumen translate into significant push for local programs.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 10944
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Artillery Discussion Thread

Postby Rakesh » 14 May 2015 01:59

Karan: There is a saying....you campaign in poetry, but govern in prose. Reality has struck our Raksha Mantri and our Prime Minister. No fault of theirs necessarily, because they do mean well, however they are faced with a lumbering, slothful & corrupt bureaucracy and industry that for the past 68 years has always lived by the mantra Chalta Hai. We SDREs are like this onlee. Dassault had to remind us, quite embarrassingly, that they have no faith in HAL's ability to deliver a quality product.

P.S. It is not for a lack of will or technical know how (Tejas, Arjun, INSAS, our in house naval design bureau are just a few to dispel such a myth) but rather it is a mix of vested interests, lobbyists i.e. our very own Philip :roll:, and the reasons above to explain the present malaise. That combined with a healthy dose of Bofors which neutered us quite badly. We became impotent in our decision making because of Bofors. This is why we are still among the top arms importers in the world.

I have said this before and I will keep saying it. We need excellent project managers that can ruthlessly cut through red tape and people to stay on focus and achieve the goal. Bash on Regardless! :)


Return to “Mil-Tech Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests