What's new

Bangladesh Army

Well Thanks for the historical references. Learned a few things. Interesting perspective.:thank_you2:

So - push comes to shove, we should buy more Nora B-52's? Maybe set up local ToT JV's? How badly do the Serb's need our business? And have the Serbs sold their 400mm MLRS systems to any country?

@Philip the Arab bhai your comments.
BD should avoid Turkey and go for nations that don't have hidden agendas that may ruin Bangladesh's relations like Turkey, China, USA, Russia imo. Serbia is a great example of that regardless of their views, and they have a lot of technology to offer including LGB, PGM, aircraft, etc. BD should try to get TOT for everything that Serbia can offer imo. The Serbian defense industry is vital to economy so they would be probably be willing to give TOT with some conditions like no exporting. I don't know if the 400mm was sold but it is a relatively new system that was being tested in Pakistan.



LGB


Air to ground missile similar to Maverick









BD should try to build a shock and awe type force using MLRS tactics that are unavailable for a country like Iran for example that needs ballistic missiles to strike their enemies because they are very far way. BD has its enemy's in relatively close proximities and could benefit from a HUGE MLRS force consisting of various calibers with the longest ranges possible. Of course BD needs TOT to make sure they can produce the right numbers but it is completely possible to destroy strategic Burmese, and Indian strategic targets while paving the way for airforce, and army to do the rest with artillery, and aircraft under their command.





Tamnava - 267/122 mm MLRS
t-12_0.jpg

The 267/122 mm MLRS is designed as a modular system. The modularity is reflected in the possibility of using launch pods armed with 267 mm rockets and all variants of 122 mm rockets.

The 267/122 mm MLRS is a completely automated weapon equipped with the GPS and INS that can perform a preset mission with full autonomy.

The basic option uses disposable launch pods. The 267/122 mm MLRS is capable of receiving two spare 122 mm launch pods. The system is (un)loaded with a hoisting device mounted on the platform. Another option is to use disposable launch tubes.

Range

70 km (267 mm) and 40 km (122 mm)





SHUMADIA- 267/400mm MLRS
p1727075_main.jpg

As a self-propelled multiple launch weapon “SHUMADIA“ is designed for transport and launch of fire-support artillery rockets with trajectory correction (Jerina 1 – J1) and a range of 285 km.

Depending on the tactical scenario/operating conditions, the launch weapon is capable of carrying and delivering four or eight rockets. Rockets are factory packed in modules that serve as storage, transport and launch containers. Each module contains two rockets packed in tubes made of composite segments joined with steel attachments and covers providing full protection against the environment.

The launch weapon is designed for transport and launch of 262 mm rocket as well, from two launch modules (each accommodating six rockets), to a distance of 70 km – J2 (Jerina 2).

The container module is made of steel, with two rocket tubes. When preparing the container for a mission, it is transferred by means of the utility vehicle lifting device on to the launcher elevation platform where it is fixed to place with a latch.

After the rockets have been launched, the empty container is replaced with a loaded container using the lifting device on the utility vehicle after leaving the battlefield. The launch platform is a rotary type, and the system is designed so as to allow launching over the cabin at an azimuth angle of ±30°.

The launch device consists of the azimuth and the elevation platforms, driven in traverse/elevation by way of an electric motor with pertaining reduction gears. It is equippped with digital traverse and elevation encoders, the inertial navigation system (INS) fixed on the elevation platform, and the orientation and navigation device is based on a GPS system with two GPS receivers housed on the cabin.

The launch device is secured to a frame which is then fixed to the vehicle chassis. The suspension system, consisting of four legs with electric motors (or hydraulically-operated), is also attached to the frame. Rockets can be launched at a maximum elevation angle of 48°. The crew includes four members, and the commander and the operator are seated in a cabin behind the driver’s cabin.

The rocket system is integrated in the modern network central battlefield through its command-information system, navigation system and fire control system. The system features a short transition time from traveling to combat position, and an extremely short time for leaving the battleground.

The system is capable of launching four or eight rockets against one or more targets at up to 285 km, with the circular error probability (CEP) of less than 50 m in the INS/GPS guidance mode, or of about 150 m in the INS mode.
 
Last edited:
. . . . . .
I had read somewhere long time ago that there is some sort of International restrictions to the type of weaponry border guards can place near the border. Perhaps to avoid any sort of skirmish escalation. I am not sure if that info I read is accurate though.

But if that is accurate, won't ATGMs be considered as heavy weapon? And won't it break those international norms if placed on the border bunkers?

BSF uses MILAN ATGM, Igla SAM and 105mm howitzer. So nothing is wrong with BGB using ATGM.

it missed, and yet there was clapping..........

Those two are flare and it flew through the middle of them. You can't expect a heat seeking missile to hit a flare and blast.
 
.
BSF uses MILAN ATGM, Igla SAM and 105mm howitzer. So nothing is wrong with BGB using ATGM.



Those two are flare and it flew through the middle of them. You can't expect a heat seeking missile to hit a flare and blast.
Why was there not a target drone?
 
. . . .
That's up to military. They know if it's better/economical to have TOT or not, for which they should get TOT for or from whom they should get it. But yes producing everything locally solely or under JV without compromising the quality is obviously good. And every country has hidden agenda, nothing comes free.
Yes of course, but can Serbia influence world stage much compared to Turkey, USA, China, Russia, etc.
But do you agree that having a rocket force itself would be a good idea?
 
. . .
No, Serbia can't and why having a rocket force would be a bad idea? :what: If the news is true army have plan to develop and manufacture ballistic missile under a project named "Bajro". There was talk about surface to surface attack missile (not MLRS) in this years army magazine. And Russia offered us Iskander missile. So it's looks like news about ballistic missile is true and procurement is under process.

http://www.newagebd.net/article/51935/dhaka-moscow-military-talks-dec-3-5
MLRS can be much more useful that ballistic missiles for a number of reasons being that they are much more portable, easier to reload, cheaper, and less restricted.

This is the area that Serbian 400mm rocket would cover if launched inside of Bangladesh. There are many strategic targets inside of Myanmar that could be destroyed by batteries spread out of 3-6 vehicles firing 12 or 24 missiles at the target. BD could effectively take out strategic targets without having to rely on BAF.
upload_2019-11-9_12-13-12.png
 
.
Back
Top Bottom