DRDO, PSU and Private Defence Sector News

[Chinmoy]

yeah,, look at the range. max 50km for ATAGS. pinaka mk-2 can hit upto 60km. smerch can hit upto 90km

https://www.drdo.gov.in/sites/default/files/inline-files/arde-2.pdf

if you are able to field a 40 tonne tank at those locations, you can even field a 40 tonne rocket artillery.

Not 40 ton, we did deployed 55 ton tank in Ladakh along with 47 ton Vajra. But those 55 or 47 ton is with full battle load. Means it is inclusive of the 40 odd rounds it carries internally. But a rocket artillery like Pinaka is accompanied by atleast one resupply vehicle and one reloader cum supply vehicle. That's three vehicle convoy.

ramjet artillery will be extremely costly, you literally have liquid propellant with small fuel tank and ramjet engine coupled with a micro turbo pump and atomiser to release fuel into the engine per EACH SHELL.

the cost of manufacturing will be so high per each shell. not to mention the cost of training work force to assemble them. you are literally manufacturing small scale ramjet engines coupled with ordinary detonatable charged cells(6 or 7).

You need to read about the Ramjet artillery program before making any statement. I am quoting the interview of Prof Shankar who is working on it.
Ramjet artillery is based on solid fuel rather then liquid fuel.

Prof Shankar: We expect to develop a working prototype within three to five years. Development of this shell would require a synergy between different types of engineering. We’ll have to combine expertise in Fundamental engineering of propulsion (solid propellants), structural design, a lot of design capability in geo-referencing and guidance with a lot of engineering capability and principles of rocket technology. In the case of a missile, we can design from scratch, but here we are taking an existing ramjet technology and fusing it with an existing shell to get something that doesn't exist. But if we manage to fit a ramjet into an artillery shell, it would pole vault us into the next generation.

On your high cost factor per shell, this is what he has to say.

Prof Shankar: Primarily this technology is a first for artillery shells. Being a new product and new technology, they tend to be very costly. But it is certainly less expensive when compared to missiles and other weapons that have a range of over 60kms. There is also scope for exporting this type of shell to friendly foreign countries.

A general arty shell costs 1 lakh/ unit. Even if the cost of a ramjet shell increases by 20 times, it would cost 20 lakh/unit. One Pinaka Mk1 unguided rocket with a range of 40 km costs 23 lakh/unit.

thats not all. a single artillery gun in itself is useless. you need to field atleast 10-15 guns to destroy an area each gun weighing 15 -20 tonnes. the same amount of destruction could be achieved by a single truck with 10-15 rockets in salvo firing.

the main issue is here.

rocket artillery
advantage : massive firepower, destruction and chaos in salvo under a minute. enemy has less time to react or even take cover. longer ranges.
disadvantage : reloading between salvos takes a lot of time. enemy, if survived might hit back.

gun artillery
advantage : sustained firepower for days and even weeks. denying enemy any offensive role. enemy has to literally wait until the artillery is gone. lower reload per each gun.
disadvantage : need to localise a lot of guns(a lot of mass) to destroy an area. enemy can easily survive and escape even if some % is lost. lower ranges. impractical to increase ranges. (however not impossible if you want to have a rail gun with 150km range)

same guns but better shells: like ramjet artillery : i have already explained it above in this comment.

Rocket artillery is used for area saturation attack. In mountainous warfare, it is more about point saturation rather then area saturation. You don't have the enemy spread over a huge area in mountains, but you would have specific locations which enemy would dominate. Example is in front of you during Kargil and Galwan.

So you need to hit a point accurately over and over again in mountainous warfare which could be achieved by Guns only. A rocket fired from tube number 2 would not hit the same spot as the one fired from tube number 1.

Moreover as I mentioned earlier, mountainous warfare is more of close combat warfare. So when you want to bring in artillery support within a few meters of your position, which one would you prefer? a 7.5 kg payload or 100 kg payload?

We share a 2,101 km of border with Pakistan where rocket artillery would play a huge and decisive role by area saturation attack. But we also share 4973 km of combined mountainous border with Pakistan and China where Guns would be more effective then rockets.

So our requirement of gun artillery is higher then rocket. We need increment not just in numbers, but also in range too. You can't replace Guns with Rockets.

 

[Chinmoy]

Is ngmbt or gnmbt and fmbt same ?

Yes. All are concept.

 

[airstrike99]

Not 40 ton, we did deployed 55 ton tank in Ladakh along with 47 ton Vajra. But those 55 or 47 ton is with full battle load. Means it is inclusive of the 40 odd rounds it carries internally. But a rocket artillery like Pinaka is accompanied by atleast one resupply vehicle and one reloader cum supply vehicle. That's three vehicle convoy.



You need to read about the Ramjet artillery program before making any statement. I am quoting the interview of Prof Shankar who is working on it.
Ramjet artillery is based on solid fuel rather then liquid fuel.



On your high cost factor per shell, this is what he has to say.



A general arty shell costs 1 lakh/ unit. Even if the cost of a ramjet shell increases by 20 times, it would cost 20 lakh/unit. One Pinaka Mk1 unguided rocket with a range of 40 km costs 23 lakh/unit.



Rocket artillery is used for area saturation attack. In mountainous warfare, it is more about point saturation rather then area saturation. You don't have the enemy spread over a huge area in mountains, but you would have specific locations which enemy would dominate. Example is in front of you during Kargil and Galwan.

So you need to hit a point accurately over and over again in mountainous warfare which could be achieved by Guns only. A rocket fired from tube number 2 would not hit the same spot as the one fired from tube number 1.

Moreover as I mentioned earlier, mountainous warfare is more of close combat warfare. So when you want to bring in artillery support within a few meters of your position, which one would you prefer? a 7.5 kg payload or 100 kg payload?

We share a 2,101 km of border with Pakistan where rocket artillery would play a huge and decisive role by area saturation attack. But we also share 4973 km of combined mountainous border with Pakistan and China where Guns would be more effective then rockets.

So our requirement of gun artillery is higher then rocket. We need increment not just in numbers, but also in range too. You can't replace Guns with Rocjets.

that comment was like some 2-3 weeks old. so it took you 2-3 weeks to study and answer back again.

Not 40 ton, we did deployed 55 ton tank in Ladakh along with 47 ton Vajra. But those 55 or 47 ton is with full battle load. Means it is inclusive of the 40 odd rounds it carries internally. But a rocket artillery like Pinaka is accompanied by atleast one resupply vehicle and one reloader cum supply vehicle. That's three vehicle convoy.

i used 40 tonne as a figure of speech to represent medium mass category tanks. if you want to be a grammer nazi, fine then. we also deployed 14.3 tonne BMP-2/2k not just vajra and T-90S. also i said Tonne not Ton. both are different. since you want to argue on particulars rather than the concept.

But a rocket artillery like Pinaka is accompanied by atleast one resupply vehicle and one reloader cum supply vehicle. That's three vehicle convoy.

so what? if we deploy 3 vehicle convoy.
the vehicles travel on ground separately. they don't piggy back on each other. ground pressure is what matters not the overall mass. overall mass matters during transportation.


the enemy isn't pakistan terrorists. the enemy is a fully equipped chinese army.
they don't use small bunkers to hide, attack and run away.

you need a weapon that is capable of area destruction not point destruction like artillery guns.

You need to read about the Ramjet artillery program before making any statement. I am quoting the interview of Prof Shankar who is working on it.
Ramjet artillery is based on solid fuel rather then liquid fuel.

i don't need to hear about battlefield requirements from a scientist. i would hear it from army staff.
i don't need to hear about engineering designs from army. i would hear it from an armament engineer or a scientist.

Match Chinese MRLs with Pinaka: Lt Gen. P. Ravi Shankar

Lt Gen. P. Ravi Shankar, former director-general, artillery, on the need for India to fill the gaps in its rocket artillery and train at high altitudes

www.indiatoday.in

solid ducted ramjet technology is still in adolescence stage. china won't wait until 2030's or 40's for us to develop & deploy ramjet artillery

Moreover as I mentioned earlier, mountainous warfare is more of close combat warfare.

why do you need extended range artillery guns when you yourself pointed out that its more of a close combat warfare. you contradicted yourself.

 

[SUPERPOWER]

that comment was like some 2-3 weeks old. so it took you 2-3 weeks to study and answer back again.



i used 40 tonne as a figure of speech to represent medium mass category tanks. if you want to be a grammer nazi, fine then. we also deployed 14.3 tonne BMP-2/2k not just vajra and T-90S. also i said Tonne not Ton. both are different. since you want to argue on particulars rather than the concept.



so what? if we deploy 3 vehicle convoy.
the vehicles travel on ground separately. they don't piggy back on each other. ground pressure is what matters not the overall mass. overall mass matters during transportation.


the enemy isn't pakistan terrorists. the enemy is a fully equipped chinese army.
they don't use small bunkers to hide, attack and run away.

you need a weapon that is capable of area destruction not point destruction like artillery guns.



i don't need to hear about battlefield requirements from a scientist. i would hear it from army staff.
i don't need to hear about engineering designs from army. i would hear it from an armament engineer or a scientist.

View attachment 93081
View attachment 93082

Match Chinese MRLs with Pinaka: Lt Gen. P. Ravi Shankar

Lt Gen. P. Ravi Shankar, former director-general, artillery, on the need for India to fill the gaps in its rocket artillery and train at high altitudes

www.indiatoday.in

solid ducted ramjet technology is still in adolescence stage. china won't wait until 2030's or 40's for us to develop & deploy ramjet artillery



why do you need extended range artillery guns when you yourself pointed out that its more of a close combat warfare. you contradicted yourself.

An kya bolke fayda..2nd thing how is hoing to match chinese Long range rockets with Pinaka.!!!!!! We need prahaar, pralay, Pranay which they themselves will not allow to induct..

 

[THESIS THORON]

.2nd thing how is hoing to match chinese Long range rockets with Pinaka.!!!!!! We need prahaar, pralay, Pranay which they themselves will not allow to induct..

but why??

 

[not so dravidian]

An kya bolke fayda..2nd thing how is hoing to match chinese Long range rockets with Pinaka.!!!!!! We need prahaar, pralay, Pranay which they themselves will not allow to induct..

As for countering phl 03, smerch-m replacement is in the making ( 300 mm class)

As for the chinese 600-760mm class ie., df 12 and another new missile in development
Our ans is pralay. As of now all we have is prithvi but its too old

@Chinmoy ji, any update on pralay and smerch-m replacement
Will the range of the repalcement be >150 km?

 

[SUPERPOWER]

As for countering phl 03, smerch-m replacement is in the making ( 300 mm class)

As for the chinese 600-760mm class ie., df 12 and another new missile in development
Our ans is pralay. As of now all we have is prithvi but its too old

@Chinmoy ji, any update on pralay and smerch-m replacement
Will the range of the repalcement be >150 km?

Whatever systems you saying which can match chinese rockets are still in making...they willl not see a battlefield for another 3 years....

Lets talk about the actual ground situation...Pinaka around 7000 in making, we have smerch but dont know how many regiments, we have grad rockets. Some prahaars i believe... dont know will counter a massive attack of chinese long range rockets..

 

[THESIS THORON]

Whatever systems you saying which can match chinese rockets are still in making...they willl not see a battlefield for another 3 years....

Lets talk about the actual ground situation...Pinaka around 7000 in making, we have smerch but dont know how many regiments, we have grad rockets. Some prahaars i believe... dont know will counter a massive attack of chinese long range rockets..

spyder is also present in lac for rocket barrage

 

[not so dravidian]

Whatever systems you saying which can match chinese rockets are still in making...they willl not see a battlefield for another 3 years....

Lets talk about the actual ground situation...Pinaka around 7000 in making, we have smerch but dont know how many regiments, we have grad rockets. Some prahaars i believe... dont know will counter a massive attack of chinese long range rockets..

As for counter attack, we can only at som g 106 road or some road whose name i dnt know. What we need is iron dome in large no
However, i have heard that some DEW is already deployed but no conformation.

@Chinmoy is SAAW a sort ofDEW?

 

[THESIS THORON]

SAAW a sort ofDEW?

nope it is smart anti airfield weapon used to destroy airfield infrastructure

 

[not so dravidian]

nope it is smart anti airfield weapon used to destroy airfield infrastructure

I know bro, but i remember seeing something like that on internet. Naybe trishul blog i guess.
I'll check

 

[THESIS THORON]

ARE WE WORKING ON ARTIFICIAL MUSCLE FOR EXO SKELETON????


Carbon Fiber Artificial Muscles Can Lift 12,000 Times Their Weight

• By Ryan Whitwam on April 19, 2018 at 11:10 am

Today, most robots and machines that need to move around use motors to do it. In the future, they might use artificial muscles that work more like our own biological versions. Researchers from the Department of Mechanical Science and Engineering at the University of Illinois have created a new artificial muscle design based on coiled carbon fiber and rubber. They say this material can lift more than 12,000 times its own weight.
Coiled artificial muscles are not an entirely new idea, but other teams have used nylon fibers. The University of Illinois team believed greater strength-to-weight ratios were possible with a more versatile base material. They chose carbon fiber because of its high tensile strength and low weight. They combined carbon fiber with polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) rubber, then coiled the material to create a muscle that can contract and relax.
Like your muscles, the artificial muscle responds to an electric current. The mechanism is quite different, though. The current heats up the rubber component and pushes the carbon fiber strands apart. That causes the coil to expand outward, thus contracting lengthwise. The researchers also found the muscles would contract when exposed to liquid hexane, but the electric current is somewhat more practical.






In the video, you can see a coiled artificial muscle with a diameter of just 0.4mm in operation. It’s lifting a half gallon of water, which weighs 12,600 times more than it does. It required just 0.172 volts per centimeter to contract. This is just a single version of the carbon fiber muscle. The artificial muscle is capable of 758 Joules of work per kilogram, which is 18 times higher than your biological muscles.
The team says it should be able to design different versions of the material that are suited to different tasks. For example, one might be able to lift less weight but do it faster. As you might notice, the video is shown at 4 times normal speed. So, the carbon fiber muscle is still rather slow compared with your own. Speeding the muscle up, even if it’s less powerful, might be a valid tradeoff.
These artificial muscles could be used in human assistive devices, like the motorized exoskeletons that help people lift heavy objects and recover from injuries. They could also find their way into robots, and if there’s anything the future needs, it’s robots that are 18 times stronger than humans. That’s no way that could go wrong.

 

[Adrian Corvus]

ARE WE WORKING ON ARTIFICIAL MUSCLE FOR EXO SKELETON????


Carbon Fiber Artificial Muscles Can Lift 12,000 Times Their Weight

• By Ryan Whitwam on April 19, 2018 at 11:10 am

Today, most robots and machines that need to move around use motors to do it. In the future, they might use artificial muscles that work more like our own biological versions. Researchers from the Department of Mechanical Science and Engineering at the University of Illinois have created a new artificial muscle design based on coiled carbon fiber and rubber. They say this material can lift more than 12,000 times its own weight.
Coiled artificial muscles are not an entirely new idea, but other teams have used nylon fibers. The University of Illinois team believed greater strength-to-weight ratios were possible with a more versatile base material. They chose carbon fiber because of its high tensile strength and low weight. They combined carbon fiber with polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) rubber, then coiled the material to create a muscle that can contract and relax.
Like your muscles, the artificial muscle responds to an electric current. The mechanism is quite different, though. The current heats up the rubber component and pushes the carbon fiber strands apart. That causes the coil to expand outward, thus contracting lengthwise. The researchers also found the muscles would contract when exposed to liquid hexane, but the electric current is somewhat more practical.






In the video, you can see a coiled artificial muscle with a diameter of just 0.4mm in operation. It’s lifting a half gallon of water, which weighs 12,600 times more than it does. It required just 0.172 volts per centimeter to contract. This is just a single version of the carbon fiber muscle. The artificial muscle is capable of 758 Joules of work per kilogram, which is 18 times higher than your biological muscles.
The team says it should be able to design different versions of the material that are suited to different tasks. For example, one might be able to lift less weight but do it faster. As you might notice, the video is shown at 4 times normal speed. So, the carbon fiber muscle is still rather slow compared with your own. Speeding the muscle up, even if it’s less powerful, might be a valid tradeoff.
These artificial muscles could be used in human assistive devices, like the motorized exoskeletons that help people lift heavy objects and recover from injuries. They could also find their way into robots, and if there’s anything the future needs, it’s robots that are 18 times stronger than humans. That’s no way that could go wrong.

Yep I remember reading an article,last year, on DRDO developing self healing artificial muscles

 

[Adrian Corvus]

Read the first article in this

 

[airstrike99]

An kya bolke fayda..2nd thing how is hoing to match chinese Long range rockets with Pinaka.!!!!!! We need prahaar, pralay, Pranay which they themselves will not allow to induct..

pralay, prahaar are "tactical" ballistic missiles similar to 9K720 iskander missile.
you can't mass produce them. both are different weapon systems.

artillery rockets , artillery missiles, cruise missiles, ballistic missiles all are different.


any mass that is thrown without continuous exhaust is called a projectile.
any mass with a continuous exhaust is called a rocket.

if a guidance is attached to the rocket, it becomes a missile.
if a warhead is attached to the missile, it becomes a missile weapon system
missile carries the warhead to the target. warhead detonates (close to ground through proximity fuze or after impact or with a timer after launch)

the thing that provides continuous force to a rocket is called "rocket motor."
the thing that provides one time force to a projectile is called " charge"

any flight path that has the influence of gravity is called a ballistic path or a ballistic

the parabolic path of a projectile and a rocket is a ballistic.

projectiles or rounds fired from cartridge loaded rifles or shells fired from charge loaded guns are ballistics.

(note : only heavy caliber tubular weapons can be called as guns. i.e howitzers and long range artillery are called as guns. rifles are technically not guns and should not be called as guns.)

the path of a missile isn't a ballistic. since it is not guided by gravity, but by inbuilt navigation system.

cruise missile isn't a ballistic.

ballistic missile isn't a ballistic. only the descent of the warhead follows a ballistic path.

tactical ballistic missiles are those whose warhead follows a ballistic path with uncertainity functions. i.e uncertainity functions generate random variations along the ballistic path.

for example

1)ballistic trajectory for a war head of ballistic missile( not the missile itself)
2)skip trajectory for a tactical ballistic missile

3a)only the steady glide part for a cruise missile (not launched into space)
3b)only the skip glide part for a tactical cruise missile( not launched into space)

note : cruise missiles use air breathing engines and are "NOT" launched into space. image for representation purposes only in the case of cruise missiles.

and simple parabolic ballistic paths for rockets and projectiles inside the atmosphere.

cruise missiles are much slower than ballistic warheads and have much larger ranges than ballistic missile for the same brake-fuel mass supplied.

 

[Ayushraj]

As for countering phl 03, smerch-m replacement is in the making ( 300 mm class)

As for the chinese 600-760mm class ie., df 12 and another new missile in development
Our ans is pralay. As of now all we have is prithvi but its too old

@Chinmoy ji, any update on pralay and smerch-m replacement
Will the range of the repalcement be >150 km?

Phl 3 and phl 16(AR3) are not rocket artillery
These are close range ballistic missiles
Indian weapons that are of this category are prithvi 1,pinaka 2 guided rockets, prahaar

This is list of Chinese close range ballistic missile never confuse it with rocket artillery

 

[not so dravidian]

pralay, prahaar are "tactical" ballistic missiles similar to 9K720 iskander missile.
you can't mass produce them. both are different weapon systems.

artillery rockets , artillery missiles, cruise missiles, ballistic missiles all are different.


any mass that is thrown without continuous exhaust is called a projectile.
any mass with a continuous exhaust is called a rocket.

if a guidance is attached to the rocket, it becomes a missile.
if a warhead is attached to the missile, it becomes a missile weapon system
missile carries the warhead to the target. warhead detonates (close to ground through proximity fuze or after impact or with a timer after launch)

the thing that provides continuous force to a rocket is called "rocket motor."
the thing that provides one time force to a projectile is called " charge"

any flight path that has the influence of gravity is called a ballistic path or a ballistic

the parabolic path of a projectile and a rocket is a ballistic.

projectiles or rounds fired from cartridge loaded rifles or shells fired from charge loaded guns are ballistics.

(note : only heavy caliber tubular weapons can be called as guns. i.e howitzers and long range artillery are called as guns. rifles are technically not guns and should not be called as guns.)

the path of a missile isn't a ballistic. since it is not guided by gravity, but by inbuilt navigation system.

cruise missile isn't a ballistic.

ballistic missile isn't a ballistic. only the descent of the warhead follows a ballistic path.

tactical ballistic missiles are those whose warhead follows a ballistic path with uncertainity functions. i.e uncertainity functions generate random variations along the ballistic path.

for example
View attachment 93089


1)ballistic trajectory for a war head of ballistic missile( not the missile itself)
2)skip trajectory for a tactical ballistic missile

3a)only the steady glide part for a cruise missile (not launched into space)
3b)only the skip glide part for a tactical cruise missile( not launched into space)

note : cruise missiles use air breathing engines and are "NOT" launched into space. image for representation purposes only in the case of cruise missiles.

and simple parabolic ballistic paths for rockets and projectiles inside the atmosphere.

cruise missiles are much slower than ballistic warheads and have much larger ranges than ballistic missile for the same brake-fuel mass supplied.

Biraadar u aerospace or mechanical engineer?

 

[not so dravidian]

Phl 3 and phl 16(AR3) are not rocket artillery
These are close range ballistic missiles
Indian weapons that are of this category are prithvi 1,pinaka 2 guided rockets, prahaar

This is list of Chinese close range ballistic missile never confuse it with rocket artillery

View attachment 93091

Nope. As far as phl 03 and A100 is concerned, they r guided mrbl like pinaka but less accurate

 

[THESIS THORON]

OFB HAS FAILED TO DELIVER EVEN 1 REGIMENT OF DHANUSH ARTILERY SYSTEM

THIS IS BEST TIME TO PRIVATIZE OFB AND GIVE THOSE FUCKTARDS WORKING IN OFB A LESSON
YEH KABHI NAHI SUDHRENGE



COVID, PRODUCTION QUALITY CONCERNS DELAY INDUCTION OF ‘DESI BOFORS’ DHANUSH BY ARMY
THURSDAY, JUNE 03, 2021 BY INDIAN DEFENCE NEWS

Since the induction of Dhanush started in April 2019, only 12 guns have been delivered so far and six of them were delivered that month only


New Delhi: The much anticipated large-scale induction of the Dhanush artillery guns, also known as ‘Desi Bofors’, has been hit due to the Covid-19 pandemic as well as production quality concerns flagged by the Army.

Since April 2019, when the induction started, only 12 of the indigenously built long-range artillery guns have been delivered. This is far below the 18 guns required to make a full regiment.

Incidentally, the first six guns were delivered in April 2019 itself and more of the 155mm x 45mm Dhanush were to be produced subsequently. The delay meant that the first regiment of Dhanush, which was to be raised by the end of 2019, had not been completed by then and the date was later pushed to March 2020.

Furthermore, while the Army is satisfied with the guns in terms of fire power and mobility, it has flagged multiple concerns regarding the production quality. Dhanush is being manufactured by the Gun Carriage Factory (CGF) in Madhya Pradesh’s Jabalpur, which comes under the state-run Ordnance Factory Board (OFB).

“The production system has still not stabilised. After integrated firing checks, issues have cropped with regard to the hydraulics, sight and even mounting in some cases,” a source said.

Sources further noted that the Army is awaiting the production system to stabilise so that a larger number of guns, which is an advanced variant of the Bofors, can be inducted.

Incidentally, the CBI had registered a case in 2017 against a Delhi-based firm and unidentified officials of the Gun Carriage Factory for China-made parts camouflaged as those ‘Made in Germany’ finding their way to the production line of Dhanush.

Covid Delayed Production Too

Another issue that has delayed the production is the Covid-19 pandemic which has halted the work at the factory for quite some time now.

According to sources familiar with the matter, several cases of Covid emerged at the Jabalpur factory.

The national lockdown last year and the pandemic also meant that the supply chain got affected, sources said. OFB officials said t that initial manufacturing plans faced certain constraints in the supply chain “which have largely been settled”. They said that the pandemic had a widespread global impact but the OFB is making “all efforts to ensure timely supplies”.

They added that further production of guns is underway. However, they did not respond to a query on the quality concerns raised by the Army.

Army Has Ordered 114 Dhanush

Dhanush passed its final test at Pokhran in June 2018, after trials in high altitude areas like Sikkim and Leh and in hot and humid weather in Balasore, Odisha and Babina in Jhansi. The GCF got the Dhanush project in October 2011 and the first prototype was built in 2014. The Army had ordered 114 Dhanush guns in 2018.

A towed howitzer with a strike range of 38 km, Dhanush has been developed on the basis of the first phase of Transfer of Technology (ToT) deal as part of the Bofors contract in the late 1980s.

However, the Swedish Bofors company (now owned by Britain’s BAE System) could not complete the ToT as the deal got embroiled in a major political row following allegations of kickbacks under the then Rajiv Gandhi government.

The Bofors gun subsequently became the backbone of the Indian Army’s operation in the 1999 Kargil conflict with its pinpoint accuracy in targeting enemy positions.

Costing about Rs 14.5 crore a piece, Dhanush is equipped with an inertial navigation-based sighting system, auto-laying facility, onboard ballistic computation, and an advanced day and night direct firing system.

The self-propulsion unit of the gun allows it to be easily deployed in mountainous terrain.

 

[DivineLight]

The thing is, DRDO or whatever announce their stuff and desi maal fanatics defend it like religious zealots. How much of it actually used by the actual forces? We are still fielding T-72. Something similar to MiG-21 situation.

We can't make tank. We can't make aircraft. We can't make radar. Heck we can't even make our own riffle. Makes me wonder what sorta reality everyone living in.