Indian Army Artillery

[Killswitch]

ATAGS is the way to go. Having an insanely diverse towed artillery inventory would be a very bad move.

 

[Bleh]

ATAGS is the way to go. Having an insanely diverse towed artillery inventory would be a very bad move.

They'd still be of same callibre though... Aren't the shells interchangeable?

 

[Enquirer]

They'd still be of same callibre though... Aren't the shells interchangeable?

Yes.
But the logistics for spares & maintenance & personnel & training will become a nightmare.

Guns that take the shock of 60,000 Gs do require a lot of maintenance

 

[Bleh]

Yes.
But the logistics for spares & maintenance & personnel & training will become a nightmare.

How come?
A very large-sized unit will get the same guns. Maybe a whole corps would get the same model of 155mm gun for all its batteries, won't they?... maybe even multiple adjoining corps for good measure (large orders).

 

[Shaitan]

ATAGS and Dhanush 52 are the only ones needed. However, can production be met on time is the question.

 

[Enquirer]

How come?
A very large-sized unit will get the same guns. Maybe a whole corps would get the same model of 155mm gun for all its batteries, won't they?... maybe even multiple adjoining corps for good measure (large orders).

Just imagine if one corps deployed in one region runs out of all its spares...while another corps deployed in another area has all its spares intact BUT for a different gun! Now you're reduced to just 1 operational corp as the spares are not interchangeable.
Alternatively, you can double the spares available with each corp so a corp never runs out of spares. But as you can see....it comes with an increased cost!!

Same with maintenance facilities. If one type of gun in one area is used to the max and requires maintenance for a lot of guns............but has to rely only the 1 maintenance facility that can exclusively work on that gun. While another maintenance facility sits idle......you cannot interchange. Solution again is to double the maintenance capacity at each location...........again this comes at an increased cost.

Apply the same logic to personnel etc....

Supply-Chain 101! The more varieties you have the bigger the complexities and cost!
Southwest airlines has always been profitable (even in the worst of the times) because it has flown only ONE type of aircraft - 737!!!!

You can have different varieties....if the EXCLUSIVE CAPABILITY outweighs the logistics issues....But having the same function being performed by different types of guns is sure way to defeat during wars....

 

[Bhadra]

Just imagine if one corps deployed in one region runs out of all its spares...while another corps deployed in another area has all its spares intact BUT for a different gun! Now you're reduced to just 1 operational corp as the spares are not interchangeable.
Alternatively, you can double the spares available with each corp so a corp never runs out of spares. But as you can see....it comes with an increased cost!!

Same with maintenance facilities. If one type of gun in one area is used to the max and requires maintenance for a lot of guns............but has to rely only the 1 maintenance facility that can exclusively work on that gun. While another maintenance facility sits idle......you cannot interchange. Solution again is to double the maintenance capacity at each location...........again this comes at an increased cost.

Apply the same logic to personnel etc....

Supply-Chain 101! The more varieties you have the bigger the complexities and cost!
Southwest airlines has always been profitable (even in the worst of the times) because it has flown only ONE type of aircraft - 737!!!!

You can have different varieties....if the EXCLUSIVE CAPABILITY outweighs the logistics issues....But having the same function being performed by different types of guns is sure way to defeat during wars....

I think the requirement and distribution of 155 Artillery Guns is not understood by you in proper perspective,

155 x 45 cal 145 ULH = 6 Regts for mountain strike Corps
155 X 45 Dhanush 414 = 4 Mountain Corps
155 X 52 Cal for plain Corps
SP Guns X 100 for strike Corps
Towed guns 155 X 52 more than 3500 for plains and desert Corps.
Where does multiplicity of equipment, spares and maintenance within Corps Zone or in adjacent Corps area come into being being ? Above Corps is the Command area which by and large has same terrain types and will have maximum two types of 155 guns.

There is hardly any variability as you imagine. Show me .

 

[Enquirer]

I think the requirement and distribution of 155 Artillery Guns is not understood by you in proper perspective,

155 x 45 cal 145 ULH = 6 Regts for mountain strike Corps
155 X 45 Dhanush 414 = 4 Mountain Corps
155 X 52 Cal for plain Corps
SP Guns X 100 for strike Corps
Towed guns 155 X 52 more than 3500 for plains and desert Corps.
Where does multiplicity of equipment, spares and maintenance within Corps Zone or in adjacent Corps area come into being being ? Above Corps is the Command area which by and large has same terrain types and will have maximum two types of 155 guns.

There is hardly any variability as you imagine. Show me .

Please read the full conversation to understand the context before casting aspersions on my understanding!
My post was a response to a specific issue/situation. You just need to make the effort of scrolling up to read 'few' posts!!

Even if you didn't make that effort for understanding the context, you should've read that one post completely....because I make it clear:

"You can have different varieties....if the EXCLUSIVE CAPABILITY outweighs the logistics issues....But having the same function being performed by different types of guns is sure way to defeat during wars...."

 

[garg_bharat]

When requirement is large, it is safer to split the order between multiple suppliers. This also reduces the risk that a single system carries if issues develop in future.

I think a very smart move to acquire ATHOS gun. Israeli systems are battle proven.

 

[Enquirer]

When requirement is large, it is safer to split the order between multiple suppliers. This also reduces the risk that a single system carries if issues develop in future.

I think a very smart move to acquire ATHOS gun. Israeli systems are battle proven.

Firstly, ATAGS manufacturing is already split between multiple vendors!

Secondly, if you're stating that the 'design' itself should be different to guard again any 'malfunction' (despite burgeoning logistics cost) then the option should be Dhanush 155x52 & ATAGS 155x52. An Israeli gun in the midst doesn't make much sense at all!!!

Lastly, 'Towed gun' by definition is the least flexible of all guns.....as such all other guns (e.g. truck mounted guns, Wheeled propelled gun etc) can also do the job of the towed gun!

Think of the assault rifles........the infantry battalions don't have different guns to counter the risks you mentioned! The extensive 'battle condition' tests are precisely to make sure there are no surprises in the battle!!

 

[garg_bharat]

I think INSAS system was extensively tested before induction still declared a failure by Army today. Even small differences in design can prove invaluable sometimes.

Towed artillery is the dominant type of artillery everywhere. There must be a reason why? Truck mounted or self propelled artillery increases complexity and maintenance cost.

 

[garg_bharat]

India is more likely to fight intense wars rather than hit and run. Self propelled artillery seems romantic but towed units will be as effective.

 

[Enquirer]

I think INSAS system was extensively tested before induction still declared a failure by Army today. Even small differences in design can prove invaluable sometimes.

Towed artillery is the dominant type of artillery everywhere. There must be a reason why? Truck mounted or self propelled artillery increases complexity and maintenance cost.

The solution is to test extensively...........not make soldiers carry multiple guns
Surely, once design/manufacturing defects were found the guns should have been replaced!

You're living in 'history' to think that 'towed artillery' is the dominant artillery for 'modern' warfare! The fact is most artillery gun manufacturers have completely STOPPED making towed guns....the few that still keep a towed gun in their portfolio are once who aspire to someday win the LARGE contract from Indian army!

30 YEARS ago Indian army came up with its field rationalization plan....that reflected more of what's prevalent/available at that time. 30 yrs later, the same plan is just getting implemented........alas, with not much change to a historical plan.

As I said before, unique REQUIREMENTS of certain battlefields should lead to selection of unique CAPABILITIES in systems. Having varieties just for the sake of variety is a recipe for defeat!

The largest airforce in the world operated thousands of F16s as the only dominant fighter....there were other fighter jets but for unique set of roles.

 

[Enquirer]

India is more likely to fight intense wars rather than hit and run. Self propelled artillery seems romantic but towed units will be as effective.

There's absolutely no logic in your statement!

The days of 'intense wars' are over! Even if they do happen, self propelled guns will be more effective than towed ones!

 

[garg_bharat]

There's absolutely no logic in your statement!

The days of 'intense wars' are over! Even if they do happen, self propelled guns will be more effective than towed ones!

Maybe I am blind but the visuals of Kargil and subsequent border events do not prove you right.

Maneuvering warfare like USA/Iraq is very unlikely in case of India. It is more like USA/Afghanistan (mountain warfare) where a towed gun is good enough.

 

[garg_bharat]

Bofors, Dhanush, Athos all three have mobility packs. means the gun can change its firing position quickly. This should be good enough.

 

[Enquirer]

Maybe I am blind but the visuals of Kargil and subsequent border events do not prove you right.

Maneuvering warfare like USA/Iraq is very unlikely in case of India. It is more like USA/Afghanistan (mountain warfare) where a towed gun is good enough.

Just in case you forget to look at your calendar.........Kargill was fought 20 yrs ago!! (And Indian army wasn't the epitome of modernization even then.)

What's next? You're going to show me the visuals of WWI and claim that Indian army should fight with bayonets?

Towed guns work okay for Indian needs, but there's no real operational/technical advantage to be gained form it.

As is always said about Indian military.....they're always planning to fight the previous war......not the future war!!!

 

[Enquirer]

Bofors, Dhanush, Athos all three have mobility packs. means the gun can change its firing position quickly. This should be good enough.

Those mobility packs can only move it to adjust it's position in the firing pit.......it cannot move long distances.

Towing such a large gun is not very conducive in mountainous and uneven terrain.........mounted guns, wheeled gun are are superior in that regard.

That said, I am not going to advocate for ditching of ATAGS - which is a fine gun (built to IA's requirement - no matter how archaic the requirement was)

 

[garg_bharat]

Those mobility packs can only move it to adjust it's position in the firing pit.......it cannot move long distances.

Towing such a large gun is not very conducive in mountainous and uneven terrain.........mounted guns, wheeled gun are are superior in that regard.

That said, I am not going to advocate for ditching of ATAGS - which is a fine gun (built to IA's requirement - no matter how archaic the requirement was)

See the number of guns of different types is Army requirement. Army must have done its research to arrive at the numbers. What I can see is that truck mounted guns have the best mobility. But focus seems to be on towed and tracked ATM. Hopefully truck mounted guns will arrive soon too.

 

[Bhadra]

Please read the full conversation to understand the context before casting aspersions on my understanding!
My post was a response to a specific issue/situation. You just need to make the effort of scrolling up to read 'few' posts!!

Even if you didn't make that effort for understanding the context, you should've read that one post completely....because I make it clear:

"You can have different varieties....if the EXCLUSIVE CAPABILITY outweighs the logistics issues....But having the same function being performed by different types of guns is sure way to defeat during wars...."

I shall gladly do that and come back. Cheers !