What is the difference? Full auto loaders don't need an operator to load the magazine?
The charge is still manually placed on the ATAGS and pretty much all other howitzers, this exposes the crew to enemy fire. There are only a few SPHs that are 100% automated, like the Swedish Archer, the Russian Coalition-SV and Serbian Nora B-52. K9A2 will be a future addition in 2027, and the American M1299 in 2025.
As of today, only the Coalition-SV and a future K9A3 will be unmanned. The Coalition has already been designed with an armored crew capsule.
You can see the massive difference between CAESAR and Archer. Fully manual versus fully automatic.
That difference is now enough to get you killed, as demonstrated in Ukraine.
So the IA is gonna look for a gun that's gonna meet the Archer's timeline of 74 seconds.
And even the Archer is a joke compared to the Russian Coalition, which can fire 16 rounds in just a minute to Archer's 8. The current version of ATAGS does 5 and 6 per minute alongside a manual charge loader. The primary benefit of a self-loading gun is the rpm is drastically increased. Like the new M1299 can be upgraded to 10 rpm versus its current 3 (carries 23 rounds). Plus the Coalition carries up to 70 rounds versus Archer's 21, all stored in the autoloader. Of course, tracked vs wheeled. Both only need a minimum driver and gunner to operate, and the Coalition has been designed for unmanned operation. The M1299 should provide similar capabilities, so will the K9A2.
Nora B-52 is a poor man's Archer. 12 rounds in autoloader, 12 stored and 6 rpm. It can be remote-controlled up to a short distance keeping crew safety in mind. So it's already better than ATAGS-MGS, while costing less even as an MGS.
You can see the autoloader in action at 1:41.
Compared to such specs, the ATAGS-MGS isn't gonna impress the IA. Plus the industry wants 7-10 years to develop a new upgraded MGS that can match the Archer's requirements (perhaps surpass it).
Krab, P2000 and K9A1 are manual.
Our defense industry is still WIP. So take all this talk of atmanirbharta with caution. It shouldn't come at the cost of capability.
Aren't those 2 based on tracked vehicles as opposed to the wheeled MGS?
Maybe IA should've placed a higher focus on tracked SP artillery in their field arty program.
Won't towed arty be under even more threat than wheeled SP arty? If arty of the future is increasingly going to focus on crew safety than towed arty is done for.
That seems like a solvable problem. We have one arm loading the shell & in the future we could have another arm loading the charge.
Has the Army put out any tenders for the wheeled arty yet? If crew protection is emphasized in the tender, I doubt BEML/DRDO can't retrofit the current MGS to suit that need. The question of course is time.
Tracked has benefits like more ammo and fire on the move, but is also expensive, and unlike the muddy European terrain, it's not as much of a problem for us. Trucks are better in the mountains as well. So MGS being wheeled is fine.
In fact, the IA's tracked requirement was just 100, it's ballooned to almost 300 'cause they had a separate wheeled gun requirement for 180 that was junked.
Towed guns are self-propelled as well, just much slower and for shorter distances, enough to escape CB fire. MGS is necessary for large maneuvers over longer distances, especially supporting armor.
The only exception is light guns, due to the airlift requirement. Quite a few light guns will be Garuda V2 based, but I guess it operates faster than the bigger guns.
It's a bit more complex since different charges are used for different ranges. So if you want MRSI, each shot will require a different charge. So, while the shell loader is a dumb system, the charge loader needs to be intelligent, hence the current manual system.
Wheeled gun is dead, subsumed into K9. Now we only have MGS. RFI was released in Feb last year. Indian companies have even sent EoIs to OEMs.
Honestly, I do hope the ATAGS autoloader is fully automated, 'cause we are yet to see if the charge loader does that. Even if the towed gun requirement fails, our artillery needs a local win. The Archer comes on a 6x6 versus ATAGS' 8x8, so it's already at a disadvantage.
The current requirement seems to be for 300 MGS out of 814. It's unclear if the 300 will turn into 800+ in the same order. The towed gun is expected to climb from 400 to 1600 after all.
ATAGS achieved the 48 km range with base bleed rounds. To achieve 100 kms of range the rounds have to be rocket assisted. Maybe this is that ramjet round that ADRE/IIT-Madras was developing.
Increasing the caliber of the gun's more important. The M777ER has been upgraded to 55 cal, gives base bleed 70 km. So RAP will do 130+ km. Standard M777s can be upgraded to ER as well.
But yeah, a RAP shell can give ATAGS 100+ km right off the bat. Ramjet will do even more.
Has there been any talk of increasing the gun's caliber? I have heard nothing of that sort. Maybe I missed something.
Doesn't the army have a problem with the weight of the ATAGS? Increasing caliber will certainly increase the weight.
The ATAGS doesn't need an increase in caliber to fire a RAP to 100 km, only base bleed.
What if the 100% automated ones jam or there is some electronic malfunction during counter shelling? Can they be then put on manual mode?
Backup crew for those with internal space, for Archer type systems. Or back to repairs, for Coalition-SV type systems.
Jamming and malfunctions are rare anyway. Confidence in autoloading systems is why crew can now be placed in armored capsules isolated from the turret.
Not from outside. But yeas,USA is working on such howitzer. Not able to remember the exact caliber though.
"ATAGS has already finished all trials. My estimate is that the order should be placed in this financial year, before March 31, for 307 guns," Mr Kamat said.
www.ndtv.com
Top Defence Chief Gives Big Update On India-Made Artillery Gun Systems Order
The first order of 307 Advanced Towed Artillery Gun Systems (ATAGS) for deployment along the borders with China and Pakistan will be placed before the end of the current financial year--FY 24, DRDO chairman Dr Samir V Kamat said.
www.ndtv.com
Although IDDM is mentioned, I think there's a possibility of repeating a Dristi 10 with either the Israeli or French system.
I hope it's either Dhanush or Bharat 52. Let's see.
Dristi happened because of failure by DRDO and industry which is not the case here.
Artillery DG is clear on this.
Yeah. IDDM means an Indian company can collaborate with a foreign company using their systems. They need a proper roadmap for indigenization, including software.
This competition is for ATHOS to win, they are providing up to 100% ToT, and Adani is the Indian partner. The closest competitors are Dhanush and Bharat 52, but I don't think they are advanced enough, at least Dhanush, in terms of computers and networking. There are other European competitors, but they are expensive, including Bofors.
In any case I don't think there's gonna be a cheaper and more advanced gun than ATHOS. It costs 10.7Cr versus Dhanush 45's 14.5Cr, not 52 cal. ATAGS is over 20Cr now. Bharat 52 is up to 14Cr.
