What's new

Final trials of home-grown artillery gun start this month

The army is the worst of the 3 services when it comes to accepting and fielding new weapons platforms. New guns were required in 1999 during Kargil. It has been 17 YEARS and the army is still behaving in a ridiculous way demanding perfection when its artillery inventory is a complete joke. If a war happens and the army complains about its equipment they will get no sympathy from me. These guns could have been rolling off the lines for at least a year now if it wasnt for the fools in the army who have a say in these matters. Induct the systems and work out the teething probelms as time goes on, instead of demanding perfection and having no systems to deploy when they are required.
Agreed. They must demand perfection when they are already fully stocked and are just in the market for updated versions or improvements. When the existing inventory is so low, they must be inducting simultaneously and not paying in full till they are satisfied while ensuring that the supplier is not bankrupt.
But who know what the procedures are. No officer would risk their career if it was against procedure.
 
.
I have a doubt. God forbid if there is some issue found during the "final trials", will the procedure start from beginning? I mean will we have to wait another 6 months till they reach "final trails" again.
Yes

from internal documents and multiple interviews with MoD sources, an account of how the Indian Army has saddled itself with an underperforming, yet overpriced, version of the Russian T-90.

A) The T-90 would be priced only marginally higher than the T-72 by removing key T-90 systems; Shtora active protection system,

B) Maintenance vehicles, which are vital to keep the T-90s running, were not included in the contract

C) that the T-90s were not battle worthy. The T-90’s thermal imaging (TI) sights, through which the tank aims its 125mm gun, proved unable to function in Indian summer temperatures.


D) INVAR missiles assembled in India simply didn’t work. Since nobody knew why, they were sent back to Russia.

F) Even more alarmingly, the army discovered that the T-90 sighting systems could not fire Indian tank ammunition, which was falling short of the targets

G) The army has decided to fit each T-90 with an Environment Control System, to cool the delicate electronics with a stream of chilled air .

None of the world’s current tanks, other than France’s LeClerc, has such a system. The American Abrams and the British Challenger tanks fought in the Iraq desert without air-conditioning. India’s Arjun tank, too, has “hardened” electronics that function perfectly even in the Rajasthan summer.

http://ajaishukla.blogspot.in/2010/02/t-90-tank-piercing-armys-armour-of.html




That proved to rectified , and also pointed to sabotaged angle..



Did you know ???
A) Army asked to build the Tank with 4 Men Crews , So Army want a tank which can have 4 crew and size , weight of T-90



The Wanted list of AF like Zero Zero Seat / pressurised cabins was not available with any trainners, but just to prolong the development IAF demanded from the DRDO/ HAL.

Just like Tejas, Just to keep changes the goal post, Just See JF-17 / Euro/ Rafael planes, when inducted they only able to perform one function , either ground role or air role, non of them are Multi- role fighter when they are inducted.

BUT IAF want Multi-role fighter from the start just to long the development cycle and scrap the project.



Every trail is takes 3-4 yrs. trail for light GUN also gone for 3-4 yrs. this process need to be changed.



Navy is working with DRDO and see the level on Indian content with them...... they are happy with NLCA and also partly funding the program.

What happened with T-90 , if happened with Arjun , IA will declared it failed. Any tank which cannot fire in RAJ desert is failed tank , still Army bought it T-90? why?

The failure of T-90 is more serious then Arjun tank problems.
Well said bro super
 
.
The army is the worst of the 3 services when it comes to accepting and fielding new weapons platforms. New guns were required in 1999 during Kargil. It has been 17 YEARS and the army is still behaving in a ridiculous way demanding perfection when its artillery inventory is a complete joke. If a war happens and the army complains about its equipment they will get no sympathy from me. These guns could have been rolling off the lines for at least a year now if it wasnt for the fools in the army who have a say in these matters. Induct the systems and work out the teething probelms as time goes on, instead of demanding perfection and having no systems to deploy when they are required.
Are you sure what you talking ? I think not. It's NOT 17 years !!!! Count from Rajiv Gandhi
After Bofors no DM touched arty project thus army's repeated demands for arty sit on almost every DM's table more than 20 years.

This gun is modified version of what TOT we got from Bofors and yes apparently our PSU was sitting on it until last few years !!!!

So what's there to blame army ? It's just a fashion to blast the army.

And those who think upgrades are plug and play and should be inducted soon ; people firing arty is not lighting a Diwali rocket. Dangerous afair. People can die. So testing is must.

Even field proved M777 had to go under evaluation trials.

I am not saying are is curroption free and no lobby exists but

STOP BLAMING ARMY FOR EVERYTHING

Agreed. They must demand perfection when they are already fully stocked and are just in the market for updated versions or improvements. When the existing inventory is so low, they must be inducting simultaneously and not paying in full till they are satisfied while ensuring that the supplier is not bankrupt.
But who know what the procedures are. No officer would risk their career if it was against procedure.
Wrong on everything

1. Not demanding perfection. They are checking if it works or not in the area and climate where IA will have to fight. How in hell it's called perfection ??? Perfection is high caliber , accurate firing radar and many fancy stuff.

2. Induct simultaneously and do what ??? Troops needs to be trained on said arty. Or you expecting them to get the thing and do with it

3. PSUs are Govt funded and self from profit. Army pay what it buy.

4. Procedure is for safety. Better find the fault in testing range than field training. At testing range all safety measure are present. NOT on training ground.
 
Last edited:
.
Wrong on everything

1. Not demanding perfection. They are checking if it works or not in the area and climate where IA will have to fight. How in hell it's called perfection ??? Perfection is high caliber , accurate firing radar and many fancy stuff.
Sorry to be on the wrong side of this debate, being a civilian I don't know too much. But I do have experience with high tech equipment development and deployment and that is what I am using for the argument. So kindly excuse
Regarding checking on different climate areas, I don't deny that they must be checked, but the initial focus must always be on the primary deployment area. Choose one and work accordingly with the manufacturer.
The trials seem to have been going on for ever.

This trial for ex: says 2014
http://www.newindianexpress.com/nat...ials-in-Pokhran/2014/06/21/article2291439.ece

If the current test are for production quality pieces, will it require 6 months? Seems over cautious and redundant.

2. Induct simultaneously and do what ??? Troops needs to be trained on said arty. Or you expecting them to get the thing and do with it

Training can start can't it? Do you think the gun will be radically different from its current form to delay training?
You can also start to plan your deployment, spares, maintenance etc.

3. PSUs are Govt funded and self from profit. Army pay what it buy.
I'd beg to differ. Army's job is to defend the nation. It should not think like a consumer buying a new phone of tablet. It must invest in the ecosystem that produces, and creates the equipment and ideas to make its task easier.

4. Procedure is for safety. Better find the fault in testing range than field training. At testing range all safety measure are present. NOT on training ground.

I am in complete agreement. But then again, haven't we been seeing these trials going on too long?

I'm also not denying that the produced product can be completely crappy. If that was the case, care should have been taken to not release status of the product till everyone is reasonable satisfied.
 
.
Sorry to be on the wrong side of this debate, being a civilian I don't know too much. But I do have experience with high tech equipment development and deployment and that is what I am using for the argument. So kindly excuse
Regarding checking on different climate areas, I don't deny that they must be checked, but the initial focus must always be on the primary deployment area. Choose one and work accordingly with the manufacturer.
The trials seem to have been going on for ever.

This trial for ex: says 2014
http://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/‘Dhanush’-Ready-after-Final-Trials-in-Pokhran/2014/06/21/article2291439.ece

If the current test are for production quality pieces, will it require 6 months? Seems over cautious and redundant.



Training can start can't it? Do you think the gun will be radically different from its current form to delay training?
You can also start to plan your deployment, spares, maintenance etc.


I'd beg to differ. Army's job is to defend the nation. It should not think like a consumer buying a new phone of tablet. It must invest in the ecosystem that produces, and creates the equipment and ideas to make its task easier.



I am in complete agreement. But then again, haven't we been seeing these trials going on too long?

I'm also not denying that the produced product can be completely crappy. If that was the case, care should have been taken to not release status of the product till everyone is reasonable satisfied.
Dear frd I don't reply normally just read and move on. See my post count. But in this argument the guy got banned so I did. Otherwise I would have happily let him reply you.
1. It's good you work in Dev & Dpyt. You know the goals of product and allowed tolerance

2. There is no primary area here. And deployment is after arty group ( division/ battalion ) is formed or replaced existing.

3. Trust me there isn't much changed in Arty since WW2 except the mobility and accuracy by new tech. And caliber off course

4. Yes ok. Now tell me manufacture has made 3 pieces only. And 3 more in making. Why blame army for this ??? It clearly shows manufacture isn't confident or don't have needed production facility. How is that Army's fault. How can the army start storing spare for that ???

5. Finally this upgrade isn't a plug and play. If you think busting the barrel of gun isn't worth testing barrel and ammo isn't worth the retest then what is ???????

6. Testing ranges are also use by army so they are not always free. And PSU always test in Army's presence for feedback. That takes time.

AND there isn't any kind of rejection for this gun. They have already ordered 100 plus.
 
.
Dear frd I don't reply normally just read and move on. See my post count. But in this argument the guy got banned so I did. Otherwise I would have happily let him reply you.
1. It's good you work in Dev & Dpyt. You know the goals of product and allowed tolerance

2. There is no primary area here. And deployment is after arty group ( division/ battalion ) is formed or replaced existing.
Thats strange. Considering the terrain and critical areas of ingress and defense, we should be able to say that we will deploy the guns more in plains and such.

3. Trust me there isn't much changed in Arty since WW2 except the mobility and accuracy by new tech. And caliber off course

4. Yes ok. Now tell me manufacture has made 3 pieces only. And 3 more in making. Why blame army for this ??? It clearly shows manufacture isn't confident or don't have needed production facility. How is that Army's fault. How can the army start storing spare for that ???
Can't Army get more than 3 pieces if it wants?

5. Finally this upgrade isn't a plug and play. If you think busting the barrel of gun isn't worth testing barrel and ammo isn't worth the retest then what is ???????

6. Testing ranges are also use by army so they are not always free. And PSU always test in Army's presence for feedback. That takes time.

AND there isn't any kind of rejection for this gun. They have already ordered 100 plus.

If at this stage upgrades are not plug and play, the designers must be kicked in the rear.
I still feel there is a lot of scope for improvement in this aspect. In the interest of the nation, I hope some brass realizes it and takes some action.
Thanks for taking time to answer my queries.
 
.
Thats strange. Considering the terrain and critical areas of ingress and defense, we should be able to say that we will deploy the guns more in plains and such.
no. Our border isn't homogenous. We have plains, we have deserts, we have mountains and we have jungles. Gun must function everywhere. Light arty is dedicated for mountain but that doesn't means regular arty won't be needed there.
Can't Army get more than 3 pieces if it wants?
Army didn't restrict them on production. It's their choice how many units they need to test. i think they don't have an assembly line so they are making it inhouse labs. That's why only 3. Production line isn't army's Job. It for PSU. What do you expect from them when they sit on this same design for decade without doing anything.

If at this stage upgrades are not plug and play, the designers must be kicked in the rear.
I still feel there is a lot of scope for improvement in this aspect. In the interest of the nation, I hope some brass realizes it and takes some action.
Thanks for taking time to answer my queries.
1st thing they are not designers. They have this design as TOT in Bofors and said to be incomplete.

Plug and play will come in when other improvement come in light like advance fire control radar.
Let me put it more simple. They have designs for 39 caliber and they are making a 52 caliber gun. Simple proportion don't work here. Ammo power is different so is range. You have 39 as base and making 52.

Actual army req is 55 so next upgade will be for 55. That will be fast and with less testing.

Nobody stopped our dear PSU on working on this design or simply making same pieces since 90's. They didn't wake up till 2001. After Kargil Army's decade old req got attention and DMs start looking for Arty.

Had this design simply outsourced to like of L&T or TATA result would have been great.

If these Guns get inducted this year IA will be adding Arty after 30 years !!!!!!!!

And Army is asking for Guns every year in those past 30 year. No govt dare to touch the Bofors ghost
 
. .
.
Guns are fully tested. I think they are the trials of electronics and some accuracy and fine tuning.
 
. .
18 guns only. It's not mass production. But we will get there.

It is more like LSP
 
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom