155mm Dhanush MK2 of 52 caliber

[Kunal Biswas]

Length of the barrels, Range is not redundant as 52cal has increased range with special rounds and with increased charge ..

What are the core differentiating factors between 45 cal and 52 cal if range is a redundant factor?

 

[Navnit Kundu]

52cal has increased range with special rounds and with increased charge..

Special rounds meaning Base Bleed rounds? Our 45 cal can't fire those? but it seems the 39cal M777 fires Base Bleed rounds and other special rounds like Excalibur just fine. Is this where our 45 cal lacks? Why wasn't this capability made an essential requirement at the time of designing of Indian 45 cal?

 

[Kunal Biswas]

I haven't said or read anywhere that 45cal cannot use special rounds or larger charge ..

What i said, 52cal has longest barrel and with larger charge and special rounds its range is more than 45cal ..

============

For example, If Excalibur shell fired from 45cal it range is around +50kms, Where the same shell fired from 52cal is some where +60kms ..

But with regular charge and regular shells both guns have more or less same range, Like using M 107HE shell with regular green charge on a 45cal the range is 18-21 kms which is same for 52cal ..

With ERFB BB round the range is again more or less same as 38-40kms for both 45cal and 52cal ..

Special rounds meaning Base Bleed rounds? Our 45 cal can't fire those? but it seems the 39cal M777 fires Base Bleed rounds and other special rounds like Excalibur just fine. Is this where our 45 cal lacks? Why wasn't this capability made an essential requirement at the time of designing of Indian 45 cal?

 

[Navnit Kundu]

----------accidental post----------

 

[abingdonboy]

So you say that MOD will simply import MGS and disregard bids from Tata and Bharat Forge.
Yours is a BIG statement.

I don't agree with PKS but L&T are going to get the MGS deal for the Nexter built in INdia on an AL chassis.

+ @Gessler I don't get what PKS is saying about the SPG not being of any use/value to India and he seems to have entirely ignored that L&T has bagged this deal with Samsung to make the K9 in India already.

 

[abingdonboy]

Tracked SPGH are very much needed at present, Army presently improvising with Catapult systems which are now mounted on Arjun chassis, Their is a need for 40 system of catapult and addition 80 when first batches delivered to Army, Army already chosen Korean SPGH for mass production, This will be suppliment to already operating catapults, I am not sure how he missed this ..

The catapult never entered into service- it is woefully outdated and was never even remotely of interest to the IA.

 

[Gessler]

I don't agree with PKS but L&T are going to get the MGS deal for the Nexter built in INdia on an AL chassis.

+ @Gessler I don't get what PKS is saying about the SPG not being of any use/value to India and he seems to have entirely ignored that L&T has bagged this deal with Samsung to make the K9 in India already.

I believe he is making the statements keeping the aforementioned prioritization program in mind. The requirement is probably there, but put on the back burner for the moment.

 

[abingdonboy]

I believe he is making the statements keeping the aforementioned prioritization program in mind. The requirement is probably there, but put on the back burner for the moment.

His comments stillmake no sense- the L&T deal with Samsung for the K9s is done whilst the MGS deal is nowhere to be seen.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

A date in the month of November, 2012 was fixed by the DG (artillery) for the first field trial. The CVRDE, Avadi, took up the challenge after they were given a spare gun system to mount on the Arjun, Mk I in July, 2012. The trials were held between 27 November to 3 December 2012. The Arjun mounted chassis outmatched Vijayanta by a large margin, also in the test for stability, while firing charged rounds.

˜The firings and mobility trials were absolutely smooth which gave full confidence to the users as well as the development agency, that the requirement of Arjun Catapult of artillery would soon be a reality. It is expected that the user trials based on General Staff Qualitative Requirement (GSQR) would be held in November-December 2013, and 40 Catapult Guns would be inducted by the army, a senior DRDO official stated.

Tipped as the fastest project of the DRDO, the Arjun Catapult had its first field development trials in November 2012, four months after receiving the order from the Army.

The catapult will meet the interim and immediate requirements arising out of the replacement of two regiments holding Vijayanta Catapult Guns, by extending the life of 130 mm guns," he said.

Source :
Arjun 130 mm gun: DRDO tastes success | Millennium Post
http://tarmak007.blogspot.in/2014/01/drdo-to-unveil-catapult-gun-system.html

==================

Their were two regiments of Catapult operated since early 90s, The Indian Army wanted only advance chassis and same gun and other details as was in past, Arjun based catapult are now operational ..

Though this is not Arjun catapult thread, Visit and reply here :
http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/threads/arjun-catapult-artillery-system.56218/

The catapult never entered into service- it is woefully outdated and was never even remotely of interest to the IA.

 

[abingdonboy]

Source :
Arjun 130 mm gun: DRDO tastes success | Millennium Post
http://tarmak007.blogspot.in/2014/01/drdo-to-unveil-catapult-gun-system.html

==================

Their were two regiments of Catapult operated since early 90s, The Indian Army wanted only advance chassis and same gun and other details as was in past, Arjun based catapult are now operational ..

Though this is not Arjun catapult thread, Visit and reply here :
http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/threads/arjun-catapult-artillery-system.56218/

The catapult is an embarassment in this day and age, the IA really is stuck in the 1930s.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

I suggest go through the thread link i posted below ..

The catapult is an embarassment in this day and age, the IA really is stuck in the 1930s.

 

[porky_kicker]

difference between 45 and 52 cal is that

1.52 cal gives u longer range than 45 cal but the range increment is not as huge as when u transition from 39 cal to 45 cal.
2.dispersion of given no of rounds fired, is more for 52 cal than 45 cal.
3.52 cal are better off than 45 cal for firing sub-munition - dispensing payloads rather than conventional unitary blast fragmentation payloads in terms of payload , range , dispersion error etc
4.muzzle velocity higher for 52 cal than 45 cal
5.direct firing performance and range better for 52 cal than 45 cal.
6. 52-cal firing at full charge will result in barrel wear , therefor it is restricted usually to lesser ranges unless it is for unexpected special occasions.

Artillery influences battle mainly through the effects of its munitions.

Combined with accurate target location and updated firing data, 45 cal guns are best for cost effective barrage using standard no frills munitions with good adequate self-location and on-board fire control systems at medium ranges.

while 52 cal will require extensive accurate target location and real time updated firing data so that artillery rounds after adjustment can accurately impact within <50 meters of a target location. Those impacting <30 meters of a target have the same desired effects as a direct hit.
more ever Sensor-fused “shoot-to-kill”, Terminally homing “hit-to-kill” , Course-corrected “area effect warhead” munitions will be worth the price if employed at extended ranges via 52 cal. (dispersion being taken care of by the guided mechanisms)

52 cal baharwali
45 cal gharwali

 

[aditya g]

Informative post - thanks.

It seems that 45 cal might actually be better, if not as good as 52 cal. I read #2 as a disadvantage - am I correct?

difference between 45 and 52 cal is that

1.52 cal gives u longer range than 45 cal but the range increment is not as huge as when u transition from 39 cal to 45 cal.
2.dispersion of given no of rounds fired, is more for 52 cal than 45 cal.
3.52 cal are better off than 45 cal for firing sub-munition - dispensing payloads rather than conventional unitary blast fragmentation payloads in terms of payload , range , dispersion error etc
4.muzzle velocity higher for 52 cal than 45 cal
5.direct firing performance and range better for 52 cal than 45 cal.
6. 52-cal firing at full charge will result in barrel wear , therefor it is restricted usually to lesser ranges unless it is for unexpected special occasions.

Artillery influences battle mainly through the effects of its munitions.

Combined with accurate target location and updated firing data, 45 cal guns are best for cost effective barrage using standard no frills munitions with good adequate self-location and on-board fire control systems at medium ranges.

while 52 cal will require extensive accurate target location and real time updated firing data so that artillery rounds after adjustment can accurately impact within <50 meters of a target location. Those impacting <30 meters of a target have the same desired effects as a direct hit.
more ever Sensor-fused “shoot-to-kill”, Terminally homing “hit-to-kill” , Course-corrected “area effect warhead” munitions will be worth the price if employed at extended ranges via 52 cal. (dispersion being taken care of by the guided mechanisms)

52 cal baharwali
45 cal gharwali

 

[porky_kicker]

if you want best optimization of everything without compromising on none ( range, rate of fire , dispersion error , cost ) than 45 cal is the best option.

however 52 cal is not far behind , depend on the quality of the gun if the barrel can be sustain for a longer time without compromising on range than it too is a good option.
sustained rate of fire may be less than 45 cal and at maximum charge may lead to spike in chamber temperatures.but again better metallurgy and fine tuned operational parameters will make it shine

The disadvantage for longer range munitions is accuracy, because increasing range exposes the round to varying crosswinds and varying atmospheric density along its flight path. A doubling of range thus results in at least a doubling of the dispersion error.
"I read #2 as a disadvantage - am I correct? " yes

but as i said above 52 cal counters this by using sub-munition dispensing payloads.
Base Bleed (ERFB-BB) projectiles and Rocket Assisted Projectiles (RAP) can allow ranges near to <70 km.

52 cal combines sub-munition dispensing payloads with extended range carriers/projectiles to provide good counter battery weapon system.
also modern sub-munition dispensing payloads are inclusive to Precision Guided Artillery Munitions like
M898 SADARM (Sense and Destroy Armor) carrying a pair of SADARM smart sub-munitions. Each sub-munition is deployed over the target, the sub-munitions dangling on drogue parachutes while using their millimetric wave and infrared dual mode seekers to detect targets. Once the target is acquired the sub-munition fires its charge, propelling a self-forming penetrator slug into the top of the target.


u will need to invest money in systems able to locate and target targets at ranges extending 60 km in real time.
plus smart munitions costs lots of money.

therfor
its like u have 2 garwalies each with their nakhera
u got to utilize them on the bases of their strengths or nakhera

 

[garg_bharat]

So basically 155/45 is a good gun for mass production. Something that can be used with ordinary dumb shells 99% of the time and occasional guided shell or cargo shell.

So why not buy Tata and Kalyani guns to supplement OFB guns? The towed guns with powerpack are partially mobile. They are good for mountains. Why MGS?

The guns will have to be pre-positioned in difficult areas. The mobility issue is more about able to change firing position; rather than a rapid deployment which is not possible in Himalayan heights.

 

[porky_kicker]

So basically 155/45 is a good gun for mass production. Something that can be used with ordinary dumb shells 99% of the time and occasional guided shell or cargo shell.

So why not buy Tata and Kalyani guns to supplement OFB guns? The towed guns with powerpack are partially mobile. They are good for mountains. Why MGS?

The guns will have to be pre-positioned in difficult areas. The mobility issue is more about able to change firing position; rather than a rapid deployment which is not possible in Himalayan heights.

u want something of everything( range, rate of fire , dispersion error , cost , weight , mobility etc )and that too in adequate amounts then 155/45 cal is the answer.

155/52 will come there but it will require time and additional technology implementation.


variants provided by OFB offers commonality of resources and spares and eases maintenance i suppose.

so why unnecessarily increase the type by including Tata and Kalyani guns.

but it is solely due to merit than their guns can replace the others , will depend on the army.

Why MGS?
MGS is a entirely different thing , as i see in coming years it will replace towed artillery.
plus points are maneuverability, ability to keep up with mechanized and armored units, including rapid deployment forces.
survivability- quick reaction time, rapid shoot and scoot ability

i don't think any worthwhile MGS needs any pre-positioning , this defeats the whole purpose of having MGS.

it can do cross country / valley runs in the himalayas. the MGS will go, provided it has the juice to do so, problem is on the indian infra development side.

 

[garg_bharat]

I think we should not lean on big import programs. Two issues:

1. Intentions - we can never be sure of intentions of the foreign supplier. They may stop supplies when you need it most.

2. Numbers - foreign goods always get limited by cost (and fx). You need 1000, but get 100, because country cannot afford 1000. A local program can generate much larger numbers because it involves local resources. GOI can print rupees but not dollars.

 

[aditya g]

The biggest problem with range is that you dont always have the luxury of exercising it to your advantage. The kind of warfare we saw in Kargil, the weapons could be sited only in select locations... so you may not necessarily have the ability to be farther away from the border.

If your guns are mobile like in MGS than the mobility and weight are more important considerations than range IMHO.

I think IA should go for 52 cal: they have been consistent in that demand. But they should not hesitate inducting lower calibres till OFB and other companies develop the same.

 

[garg_bharat]

You may need to prepare the site before deploying the gun. You may not get a suitable prepared space even for MGS. The benefit of MGS is mobility which is defeated in the mountains.

My view is that towed guns will be better for mountainous areas. and for plains and low hills where road infrastructure is good, you can deploy MGS or SPG.

 

[AMCA]

45 cal and 52cal versions of Dhanush howitzer.