Total Pageviews

Sunday, December 9, 2012

TATA Power SED's 155mm/52-cal Motorised Howitzer Detailed

Since none of the “desi” journalists have so far bothered to showcase the first fully-functional prototype of the 155mm/52-calibre truck-mounted howitzer unveilled last week by TATA Power’s Strategic Electronics Division (SED), I might as well as be the one to provide certain insights!
Dubbed as being 55% indigenous by content, this motorised howitzer was jointly developed by TATA Power SED and South Africa’s DENEL Land Systems. Essentially a re-engineered version of DENEL’s T5-52 motorised howitzer (which was showcased during DEFEXPO 2002 along with SOLTAM Systems’ ATMOS, with both of them at that time making use of a TATRA-built truck, the latest ‘avatar’ of this weapon system has unveiled last March/April at the DEFEXPO 2012 expo at Pragati Maidan, New Delhi. At that time, TATA Power SED officials seemed confident of exporting this motorised howitzer to Indonesia. If this deal does fructify, then Indonesia’s Army (TNI-AD) would become the third ASEAN army to procure such howitzers, the other two being the Royal Thai Army with six Nexter Systems-built Caesars in service, and Myanmar’s army with 12 Yugoimport SDPR-built Noras in service.
DENEL Land Systems has supplied the monoblock gun barrel fitted with a double-baffle muzzle brake, gun cradle with an integrated buffer system, swing-and-slide breech mechanism, electrically-activated firing mechanism, autoloader/rammer, ballistics charts, muzzle velocity radar, an automatic laying and land navigation system using a RLG-INS, a panoramic optical-mechanical sight mounted directly to the trunnion, incorporating a compensation system for trunnion cant, which forms a backup for indirect fire, and a telescopic sight for direct fire that is mounted to the compensation system. TATA Power SED, on the other hand, developed the digital ballistics computer, telecommunications system, the hydraulic system that supplies hydraulic power for deployment of the outriggers and the top-carriage hydraulics, all on-board electrical systems, the gun management computer, and the ‘Rajak’ driver’s vision enhancement system. The customised 8 x 8 truck comes from TATA Motors.
Overall, TATA Power SED’s solution is being touted as being the cheapest option, a claim that will undoubtedly be contested by the likes of other contenders like the Larsen & Toubro/Nexter Systems partnership that is offering the Caesar, the Kalyani Group/ELBIT Systems partnership that is likely to offer the ATMOS, and the Punj Lloyd/Yugoimport SDPR partnership that is likely to propose the Nora. However, a simple visual comparison between TATA Power SED’s solution and the Caesar reveals the fact that the latter’s overall design is superior as it can be airlifted by transporters like the C-130J-30. In addition, the Caesar has also been combat proven in both Afghanistan and along the Thai-Cambodian border.
However, one thing is certain: the Indian Army’s demand for such motorised howitzers (labelled by the Indian Army as Mounted Gun Systems), which first arose immediately after OP Vijay in 1999, will be for at least 1,800 units (and not 814 as is being erroneously claimed in some quarters) in the years to come, since it is now virtually certain that the Indian Army will no longer procure the 1,580 towed 155mm/52-cal howitzers that it had earlier planned to, given the fact that the DRDO has succeeded (only God knows how!) in convincing the Ministry of Defence that it, along with India’s private-sector firms and public-sector undertakings, will be able to deliver a futuristic 155mm/52-cal advanced towed artillery gun system (ATAGS) by 2022.
The 155mm/52-cal MGS is the second such product to emerge from TATA Power’s stable, the first being a truck-mounted version of the 105mm India Field Gun Mk2, which was co-developed with the MoD-owned Ordnance Factory Board (OFB) about seven years ago.

229 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 229 of 229
Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@1.19AM: VMT. These luminous objects are neither drones nor lanterns, for their sightings by multiple sources have confirmed that these objects indulge in flight-patterns that are intelligently vectored, & are by no means random. In addition, drones/UAVs are never luminous. Also, lanterns to the naked eye appear luminous, but not to digital cameras. Plus, lanterns that are man-made are all detectable by radars. In this case, since the radars could not detect or track them, it means these luminous objects are not man-made structures. Finally, lanterns are launched only during certain festivals, & not on a round-the-clock 24/7/365 basis. Bottomline: The Govt of India will have to come up with someone much more qualified & capable than ISRO to get to the bottom of this issue....most probably contact either the US or Russians, both of whom have far more experience in investigating such phenomena. It will also involve the setting up of remote-controlled network of FLIR sensors of the type that were previously set up in the US, Sweden, Norway & Finland to investigate similar phenomena in the past, starting from the early 1990s.

Anonymous said...

Sir I for one whole heartedly support this peace process and am looking forward to your article.
I have some questions also:
1. What is the opinion of Kashmiris on these developments?
2. What will be the status of India's support of Tibet?
3. What does China gain with regards to its aggressive posture towards Japan (rekindling Japanese nationalism and an arms race) keeping in mind the recent aerial incursion and as you report peace overtures towards India?
[with regards to the last question IMHO China as the shrewd businessmen they are need to strive for regional peace and stability for fostering trade/Chinese exports to the very countries they are posturing against]
Thank You.

Anonymous said...

Sir, Very very thanx. Why didn't Dassault designed a Rafale with a bigger nose ? Didn't it see other fighter designs like Typhoon with large nose. The original Gripen has a bigger nose than Rafale. What is the aperture size of ES-05 Raven AESA ? You have seen it before. What do you exactly mean by identical ? Could you precise as to what is the aperture size difference of APG-81 and RBE-2 ? You have seen many 1:1 models of APG-81. You have previously claimed in a thread that RBE2 has 1001 TR elements. From where you got this info ? Is the peak emitted power of per TR element of RBE2 more than APG-81 ? IAF can well buy 20 less jets. Afterall the radar is the primary sensor of a fighter . Has IAF thoroughly tested the various radars , max detection range of all mrca during incountry evaluations. ? Sukhoi-30 is cheaper and much better than Rafale. Higher thrust engines for Rafale will require structural changes and flight testing. This will require money.
Has IAF even approached Dassault for redesigning the nose section of Rafale ? I have one thing to know . With a smaller aperture PESA radar how could Rafale out gun Typhoon in counter air, air domiace in Swiss AF evaluations.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@2.16AM: VMT. I will dwell upon all your queries with greater depth later today, since they require comprehensive explanations of past developments since 1949.

To Anon@2.19AM: Rafale’s R & D process was concluded long before that of the EF-2000. JAS-39A/B/C/D Gripens all use the mechanically-scanned PS-05 MMR & therefore have a bigger nosecone. The same goes for EF-2000s now using the ECR-90 MMR with mechanically-scanned antennae. Once Caesar airborne AESA-MMR-equipped EF-2000s begin to roll out, you will see the reduction in nosecone dimensions of EF-2000. Size differences between airborne AESA-MR are all in a few inches only & that too due to antenna shaping in order for the nosecone to conform to the airframe’s aerodynamic profile. Therefore, while some AESA-MMRs feature circular antennae, others feature rectangular or square-shaped antennae. The number of 1,001 T/Rs for RBE-2 was an estimated figure, not the exact figure. Peak power output figures too are classified. During any flight evaluation, exact range envelopes of any combat aircraft are never tested nor are offered for tests. Exact range envelopes depend on many localised factors like the weather, temperature patterns, operating altitudes etc, all of which cannot be tested within either 14 days or even a month. Higher-thrust levels for any future variant of M88 turbofans won’t require a single structural change on the Rafale since the increase is sought only for operations out of desert-based air bases with extremely high temperatures during daytime, like those prevailing in the Middle East. The existing air-intakes are more than enough to cater for any extra reqd airflow. The same goes for Super Su-30MKI with 20% extra thrust ratings, but with the same air-intake design as that of Su-30MKI. No one in their right mind wants a redesigned nose for Rafale for the reasons I had mentioned previously & no one wants to reduce the procurements by 20 units either. Rafale outperformed the EF-2000 due to its superior non-cooperative threat recognition (NCTR) modes of operation.

To Mr.RA 13: Looks like the five slain terrorists that attacked Peshawar airport were all Uzbeks from the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, who had used Soviet-era 107mm MBRLs to target the eight AH-1S HueyCobra helicopter-gunships housed at the air base adjacent to the airport.

Anonymous said...

Hi Prasun sir,

If all the airborne AESA apertures Rafale, Typhoon, F-18IN are having near identical dimensions? then what makes the AN APG-77 (Also considering N050 BRLS AESA/PESA Radar An enhancement of IRBIS-E) more powerful (AN APG-77 is supposed to carry greater than 1400 T/R modules, Irbis E also is not far behind). Compared to these two high powered radars no other airborne radars seems to not even come close in detecting targets at such far ranges (Excluding the AEW&CS platforms carrying AESA radars) clearly outclassing other AESA radars.

Also an AESA is very robust against electronic jamming (Because of its wider operating frequencies), but how can an aircraft radome support (Be transparent to such wide range of frequencies) such a radar? Traditionally the radomes were carefully designed to have a resonant frequency matching the radar frequency (The radar frequency matches the resonant frequency of a radome), for all the other frequencies the radome itself is a blocker. Are modern radomes of F-22, PAK-FA/FGFA, Super sukhoi's etc (All air crafts which carry an airborne AESA radar) are made of Carbon Fibre Composites? (Since its non metallic nature it can support almost all the operating frequencies of an AESA radar) or other modern non metallic composites. Please clarify prasunji... VMT in advance.

bradshaw said...

VMT Prasun Da for ur Answers.

When Narendra Modi raises the qustion of Sir creek and said that Manmohan Singh wants to negotiate or surrender that to Pakistan, than what was worrying was the answers from the congress. They told it is rubbish and Modi is trying o ignite the Nationalist sentiment, but they never denied that negotiations are going on sir creek.

Do you really think that India can negotiate/surrender sir creek to Pakistan , in lieu for permanant peace in Kashmir and LOC being conceded as an International Border by both sides ??

Also Manmohan Singh seems too lame and soft in negotiations. There is no reason to go for such friendly visa policies, giving the MFN status to pakistan one sidedly or resuming cricket ties when the cross border terrorism is intact. Your view on this.

Anonymous said...

Sir, you said that China and India are working behind the scenes to pressurise Pakistan, to improve relations with India.
http://currentnews.in/2012/12/16/three-days-of-rehman-malik-eat-pray-insult/
Is this the result of China-India hardwork.......?
May the journalist be baised in his views but his statements
1-- He said Indian Islamist Abu Jundal was a criminal who “worked as a source for (an)
elite agency of India” and added that he could have turned into a double agent.
2--also insisted that Pakistan was in no way involved with the 2008 Mumbai terror
that left 166 Indians and foreigners dead
3--We have non-state actors, you have non-state actors,” he said, adding it was important
to tell the truth “so that we find a way forward
4-- Pakistan
was awaiting “substantial evidence” from New Delhi to act against Saeed.
5--on the first day of his visit Friday with his purported
comparison of Babri mosque demolition with the Mumbai attack. He later denied making
a comparison.
What does this mean ?
Is it worth improving relation with such a ridiculous neighbour.
Sir, I 'm not trying to confront you, but can you help get me a clearer picture out of this hotch-potch ?

Anonymous said...

http://zeenews.india.com/news/nation/india-planning-to-procure-two-more-awacs-for-iaf_817320.html

it's been eons since the last Phalcon was delivered...so what are they waiting for??

confirmation iaf wants to operate both types of AWACS.

Anonymous said...

Sir, No more Tatra trucks for Indian Army This means R&D of various weapons systems that use Tatra trucks will get delayed as indicated by DRDO .
Pilots not main reason for IAF crashes.Why is Antony telling that no upgradation of Su-30 is planned when everyone is claiming that Sukhois will be subjected to Super upgrade .


Is IAF seriously considering buying 2 more AWACS ?

What was the cause of the Jaguar crash in Sikkim ? Which compoment failed ?

Why isn't IAF , IN thinking about buying the F-35 Litening ?

Anonymous said...

sir , when will we see the project sanjay thread ?
not fair sir..

joydeep ghosh said...

@Prasun da

this piece below says a lot many things about Brahmos as super rocket, whats your opinion

http://indrus.in/articles/2012/12/17/brahmos_set_to_become_a_super_rocket_21069.html

I wanted to know can the MTA if developed by India & Russia be used as bomber to carry air launched Brahmos, Nirbhay or cluster bombs

thanks

Joydeep Ghosh

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Read This: http://www.gfintegrity.org/content/view/591/70/

To JOYDEEP GHOSH: BrahMos-1 is already a super rocket. How much more 'super' it ought to be? Of course the MTA, C-130J-30, C-17A & An-32B can all be used as bombers for dropping clister bombs or any other type of bombs.....PROVIDED......total air supremacy is achieved over hostile airspace. BrahMos-1 & Nirbhay are best launched from combat aircraft since transport aircraft flying at medium-altitudes will be easily detectable by long-range airspace surveillance radars, whereas combat aircraft can resort to terrain-masking & pop-up just prior to launching their cruise missiles.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Anon@10.09PM: Looks like the MoD has done some introspection to conclude that it indeed is imperative to procure more A-50I PHALCONs. The total reqmt for such platforms is 12 platforms at the very minimum if the IAF has to sustain a 14-day high-intensity limited war across a single front.

Anonymous said...

Sir,

It is claimed that the new AEW&C platforms from Israel will cost even more (Steep raise in unit cost) when compared to the previous order of 3 units. Is there any considerable increase in the performance of the new units when compared to the older units? (Like housing a next generation radar as you've mentioned in previous thread)

Also can the DRDO developed Emb 145 AEW&C platform can be used for ocean surveillance (Like the P-8I), if it can then what are changes that are required to make it suitable for ocean surveillance roles... Can it fulfill the role of an MRMR aircraft for which IN had floated a request. VMT sir.

Anonymous said...

" Looks like the MoD has done some introspection to conclude that it indeed is imperative to procure more A-50I PHALCONs. The total reqmt for such platforms is 12 platforms at the very minimum if the IAF has to sustain a 14-day high-intensity limited war across a single front."
But its not helping anyone if we are gonna order them in batches of 2's. By the end of the year even IN might place an order for a couple of AWACS. It will be good if this order is added to A50I AWACS or DRDO AEW&CS. Similarly IN also wants to procure tankers and it makes sence but its order should also be added to iaf's procurement.

How many aerial tankers is iaf gonna purchase ?

Anonymous said...

Sir,

From on going modernization of all types of Multi Role Combat Aircrafts and phasing out of older air crafts and induction of new generation modern air crafts, by coming decade almost all IAF squadrons will be housing fighter bombers with In flight refueling capability. So it boils down to one Aerial refueling tanker per squadron which counts to more than 40 odd Midas type tankers serving in IAF.

Similar analogy for AEW&CS platforms but with a mix of Israel ELTA, DRDO Emb AEW&CS and DRDO AWACS India platforms serving together in IAF per squadron level, which eventually makes it a highly lethal force to reckon. (Provided funds are released for such an estimation) Your thoughts Sir..

VMT again...

Anonymous said...

Sir, Dassault once stated that it could supply 40 Rafales at a very fast pace as a stopgap to MMRCA procurement and to resist depleting squadron levela. When Rafale deal is signed could this 40 ac fast delivery take place as we are facing a dire ahorage of acs. If more PHALCON are procured will it only two or more than this no. Atleast 3 should be bought.

raw13 said...

Hi Prasun, an interesting article for you:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/18/world/asia/pentagon-to-reimburse-pakistan-688-million.html?_r=0

There is a paragraph at the end of page 1, where you can have some input:

" The one exception to the state of calm has been a tense set of discussions about Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal. United States officials have told their Pakistani colleagues that Islamabad’s move to smaller, more portable weapons creates a greater risk that one could be stolen or diverted. A delegation of American nuclear experts was in Pakistan last week, but found that the two countries had fundamentally divergent views about whether Pakistan’s changes to its arsenal pose a danger. "

I guess this mean that the tactical weapons are near operational status in Pak.?

Anonymous said...

Ca you shed more light on Brahmos 2 hypersonic project ? Whats the progress ? What will be India's share in this project ? What did India learned from Brahmos 1 project ? Can India now build a supersonic cruise missile on its own ?

You said in one of your previous reply's that India is building directed energy weapon with Israel. Can you shed more light on this project ? Who from Indian side is working on this project ? What kind of laser it is ? How much does it generate ? Is this project different from KALI project which is in some advanced stages but considering it is being build for research purpose only and not defence it will take some time to use it as a weapon on a weapon platform.

"There have been reports of placing the weaponized KALI in an Il-76 aircraft as an airborne defence system."
I hate to ask as the source is wiki but is it true ?

Is HAL gonna go ahead with LUH or it will just license produce the winner of IA's 197 helicopter competition ?

DRDO's MUNTRA is a good development in unmanned ground vehicle area. Has IA ever said they want such a platform ? If not then has IA shown any interest after its display in Defexpo 2012 ? Is this project just a technology demonstrator for a much bigger project ? If IA decides to procure them, then how many of these do you think they will procure ?

Millard Keyes said...

So according to you Sn tata why are the Pakistanis seen as villains or the Taliban as threats if every action produces and justifies violence?No matter whatever the reason talking to real life individuals NOT media portrayals will tell you innocent peope are attacked, beaten and often murdered by mobs all because of people practising their faith.Not foreigners, not millionaires, not saboteurs...innocent people and Anonymous calls it foul!I do not wish to perpetuate and hijack Prasun's great blog but guys get a reality check and read mR Markanday's article again.By the way, time will tell who was right so say no more.

Anonymous said...

@Pierre Zorin

A Check: http://onfaith.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/panelists/ramdas_lamb/2010/03/missionaries_the_good_the_bad_and_the_ugly.html

ChadaSingh said...

This is getting better and better:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-20779477

What would the situation be like in 20 years time. We could be world leaders ;-)

Anonymous said...

BEL’s radar warning systems fail to take off

http://idrw.org/?p=16693

This could be very bad news for BEL Sir, BEL developed RWRs were said to be part of all modern fighter bombers of IAF. VMT.

accidental loser said...

Dear Prasun, i really appreciate ur visionary on indo-china strategic relationship. Actually v cudn't hv matchd china tit-for-tat in every damn weapon segments & china cud neithr afford hvin an evr goin dispute @ it's backyard wid a rising regional power, especially coz of it's present confrontations with d US,JAPs as well as othrs. D agreement, if evr signed wud see india china b d joint custodian of regional peace & stability in asia. Evn it wud guarantee energy security fr d nation by joint construction of gas & oil pipelines frm d central asian countries. I see it as a cause in china's gwadar port construction also. A mutual peace treaty wud also gv india time 2 make up infra-gap present in north-east. Also most of all i really do favour ur idea of restructuring d armed forces into mobile,fast reacting expeditionary forces. D army sud actually dispose new mountain corps plan in favour of converting existing RR formations into mountain warfare or air-mobile groups whch in turn wud free large capitals fr modernisation. BTW wht cud b d playgrounds:-)) fr d armed forces in d 2020-30 tym period!!!

ChadaSingh said...

with the male : female ratio so unbalanced...the IA will be protecting the indian women from themselves :-)

....afterall they will not have any test ranges to test their equipment on.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...

Will post replies to all the outstanding queries over the past 3 days within 24 hours.

Play Angry-Bird Game said...

great
very informative blog

Unknown said...

Thanks for a great blog. I was able to get the information that I had been looking for. Thanks once again!
tourist places in odisha

Ravi Gupta said...

Any idea what's the current status of this weapon system? I checked TATA Power strategic weapons site but even there isn't any information.

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 229 of 229   Newer› Newest»