Bhadra
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2011
- Messages
- 11,991
- Likes
- 23,756
Please collect your thoughts...Kalyani has two offerings in ulh category one full titanium like m777 at 4 ton. and another a bit heavier at 6-7 ton but less titanium in this. This 6-7 ton gun should be lot cheaper if produced in numbers.
These guns won't be moved only in emergency but they will be permanently at heights. Emergency movement will only be used to reinforce weaker sections faster which is very useful in standoff like we are having now.
If the guns are meant to a permanent sector specific then why mount those on Vehicles and make those MGS.... every thing has a cost..
How can one strip artillery guns from their fundamental traits - flexibility and mobility and ability to switch between sectors and theaters...
The current problem the towed artillery faces in mountains is the turning radius when towed. At many places the vehicle and towed gun can not negotiate the turns being lengthy. So the idea was to used MGS in place of towed guns... Army HQ though has issued a RFI for a small tower and bend negotiator device, I do not think hat is a satisfactory arrangement.
There is quite a lot of difference between ULH and MGS. OFB is offering MSG based on BEML left hand driven TATRAS. That may be good for deserts and plains but still a problem for mountains. But their Guns would be minimum 155/45 where as Kalyani is offering 155/39 with max range of 29 km.
In this context what CDS might have suggested to Kalyani is to mount steel ULH on 4 X 4 TATA / Layland carrier . That will result is smaller gun on smaller vehicles usable anywhere even on a class 9 road.
Overall the things have to be seen in terms of cost and economy of efforts.