Pakistan's Artillery Upgrade Discussions

[DESERT FIGHTER]

I don't think we make Guns as per tank and artillery Guns, if we do it would be a pleasant surprise. I thought the Gun for the Al-Khalid was made in China.

We used ti import tank guns (AK) from France not China.

Till 2011:

http://www.dawn.com/news/621771

Making the barrel is the most technically difficult part. If we can make the barrel, then why aren't we making our own artillery, SP or towed. What's stopping us?

There was a project to produce arty guns. Seems it was put on hibernation or worse.

 

[Bossman]

We used ti import tank guns (AK) from France not China.

Till 2011:
View attachment 586743
http://www.dawn.com/news/621771


There was a project to produce arty guns. Seems it was put on hibernation or worse.

I don’t think we imported the finished guns from France but the blanks for the barrel which were machined locally. The blanks are now procured from either Peoples Steel Mills or Heavy Mechanical Complex, I am not sure.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

I don’t think we imported the finished guns from France but the blanks for the barrel which were machined locally. The blanks are now procured from either Peoples Steel Mills or Heavy Mechanical Complex, I am not sure.

ISLAMABAD, April 17: The first locally-produced tank gun is ready for delivery to the Heavy Industries Taxila (HIT) for Al-Khalid and Al-Zarar tanks.

So far the HIT used to get 125 millimetre 'blanks' from France for the two main battle tanks (MBTs) of the Pakistan Army. Blanks are the final shape of the gun barrel prior to its finishing and its fitting into the tank is done at the HIT.


The first blank has been jointly produced at the Heavy Mechanical Complex (HMC) in Taxila by experts of the HIT, the Peoples Steel Mills Limited (PSML) of Karachi and other defence-related organisations, in coordination with the army -- the end-user.



According to sources, the army and the HIT wanted the barrels to fire at least eight rounds a minute, and for the automatic ammunition handling system, with 24-round ready-to-fire magazine of Al-Khalid tank.

The official said that the manufacturing of the first 125mm tank gun was an achievement of the Strategic Plans Division (SPD) set up in 2000 to improve the control of nuclear operations and monitor and develop coordination among various defence production and research organisations in the country.

The specialised weapons grade steel was manufactured at the PSML and the block of metal was retreated at the HMC which has such facilities under the heavy forge and foundry section. The block of specialised metal is pressed to become a five-metre-long square bar that is forged into a smooth bore 125mm barrel.

The HMC also has specialised facilities of large vertical furnace where the blanks are given heat treatments several times. Since it was the first job for the HMC, experts from other defence organisations monitored the process which took almost two to three months to complete.

The HIT has finalised a deal Rs200 million for 50 barrels which is slightly less than the cost of each barrel procured from France.

The official said that after the completion of 50 tank barrels, the HMC would consider producing artillery guns for the Pakistan Army.

Al-Khalid is a product of a joint venture between Pakistan and China. It has been in use of the army since 2001. Al-Zarar is an upgradation of T-59 tanks. The new barrels are likely to be part of the project for upgraded variants of Al-Khalid II and III now under way at the HIT.

We used ti import tank guns (AK) from France not China.

Till 2011:
View attachment 586743
http://www.dawn.com/news/621771


There was a project to produce arty guns. Seems it was put on hibernation or worse.

 

[Zarvan]

ISLAMABAD, April 17: The first locally-produced tank gun is ready for delivery to the Heavy Industries Taxila (HIT) for Al-Khalid and Al-Zarar tanks.

So far the HIT used to get 125 millimetre 'blanks' from France for the two main battle tanks (MBTs) of the Pakistan Army. Blanks are the final shape of the gun barrel prior to its finishing and its fitting into the tank is done at the HIT.


The first blank has been jointly produced at the Heavy Mechanical Complex (HMC) in Taxila by experts of the HIT, the Peoples Steel Mills Limited (PSML) of Karachi and other defence-related organisations, in coordination with the army -- the end-user.



According to sources, the army and the HIT wanted the barrels to fire at least eight rounds a minute, and for the automatic ammunition handling system, with 24-round ready-to-fire magazine of Al-Khalid tank.

The official said that the manufacturing of the first 125mm tank gun was an achievement of the Strategic Plans Division (SPD) set up in 2000 to improve the control of nuclear operations and monitor and develop coordination among various defence production and research organisations in the country.

The specialised weapons grade steel was manufactured at the PSML and the block of metal was retreated at the HMC which has such facilities under the heavy forge and foundry section. The block of specialised metal is pressed to become a five-metre-long square bar that is forged into a smooth bore 125mm barrel.

The HMC also has specialised facilities of large vertical furnace where the blanks are given heat treatments several times. Since it was the first job for the HMC, experts from other defence organisations monitored the process which took almost two to three months to complete.

The HIT has finalised a deal Rs200 million for 50 barrels which is slightly less than the cost of each barrel procured from France.

The official said that after the completion of 50 tank barrels, the HMC would consider producing artillery guns for the Pakistan Army.

Al-Khalid is a product of a joint venture between Pakistan and China. It has been in use of the army since 2001. Al-Zarar is an upgradation of T-59 tanks. The new barrels are likely to be part of the project for upgraded variants of Al-Khalid II and III now under way at the HIT.

If we can produce Tank Main Gun why can't we produce new Towed 155 MM Artillery Gun on our own

 

[Ahmet Pasha]

Pakistan sab kuch kar sakta hai bas motivation chahiye. And we need to get rid of the Afsar Syndrome.

If we can produce Tank Main Gun why can't we produce new Towed 155 MM Artillery Gun on our own

 

[Smarana Mitra]

If we can produce Tank Main Gun why can't we produce new Towed 155 MM Artillery Gun on our own

Do you know the pressure difference n between tend gun and 155mm artillery gum? Just compare the weight and the muzzle velocity of the shells to understand

155mm barrel requires massive strength to resist the blast pressure and also to resist gravity pull in bending the barrel under its own weight

 

[iLION12345_1]

M-109 L is a variant of M-109 A3 with L/39 Gun. Auto loader is not present. FCS is of M-109 A3G (german variant) which makes M-109 L capable as an MBT in direct fire mode.

Thanks. That’s interesting to hear.

Do you know the pressure difference n between tend gun and 155mm artillery gum? Just compare the weight and the muzzle velocity of the shells to understand

155mm barrel requires massive strength to resist the blast pressure and also to resist gravity pull in bending the barrel under its own weight

Pakistan is capable of producing those barrels. We probably might even have done so once or twice in the past. But they are not mass producing them. There could be a few reasons as to why.

 

[ali_raza]

Do you know the pressure difference n between tend gun and 155mm artillery gum? Just compare the weight and the muzzle velocity of the shells to understand

155mm barrel requires massive strength to resist the blast pressure and also to resist gravity pull in bending the barrel under its own weight

tiny european nations r making the same things since 20s
here we r crying about steel fabrication
serbia in smaller then azad kashmir and producers of some of nice equipment
cz factory is barely 5000 sqm and productive like hell

 

[Smarana Mitra]

tiny european nations r making the same things since 20s
here we r crying about steel fabrication
serbia in smaller then azad kashmir and producers of some of nice equipment
cz factory is barely 5000 sqm and productive like hell

Serbian factories is using USSR technology. When USSR split, the factories in Serbia, Ukraine etc remained there. As a result, these countries have high end technology despite not having put any efforts.

Next, EU countries did not make 155mm barrels in 1920s. It was only in WW2 that USA made them. Even these were not as stable as they are now and usually exploded or bent in operation. But since there was urgency and sudden starting of WW2 made a compulsion, USA made them in a hurry. So, if Pakistan makes them in a hurry, it will also get artillery that is unreliable and explodes now and them. If Pakistan is OK with loss of few soldiers and just wants immediate manufacturing, it can go for inferior design. There is always a way to trade off quality with speed. The question is whether it is worth it

 

[Bossman]

Do you know the pressure difference n between tend gun and 155mm artillery gum? Just compare the weight and the muzzle velocity of the shells to understand

155mm barrel requires massive strength to resist the blast pressure and also to resist gravity pull in bending the barrel under its own weight

No difference for tank guns. Modern tanks including AKs and AZs have devices which measure the change in barrel due to gravity and include it in the ballistics calculations

 

[ali_raza]

Serbian factories is using USSR technology. When USSR split, the factories in Serbia, Ukraine etc remained there. As a result, these countries have high end technology despite not having put any efforts.

Next, EU countries did not make 155mm barrels in 1920s. It was only in WW2 that USA made them. Even these were not as stable as they are now and usually exploded or bent in operation. But since there was urgency and sudden starting of WW2 made a compulsion, USA made them in a hurry. So, if Pakistan makes them in a hurry, it will also get artillery that is unreliable and explodes now and them. If Pakistan is OK with loss of few soldiers and just wants immediate manufacturing, it can go for inferior design. There is always a way to trade off quality with speed. The question is whether it is worth it

who was stopping us from starting some crucial projects in 60-90s
when we were close to americans
or 90s when ex soviets were in disaster
everything was up for grab.
i even heard there nuclear scientists approached us but we gave them cold shoulder
back then CARs states were even struggling to gather food.we were very much in picture cos of afghan jihad.
we got good deal of tot from ukrain.but that was it.we didn’t pursued much further

 

[Ahmet Pasha]

Afsar syndrome bro.
Just sit back sip coolaid and just be an afsar.

who was stopping us from starting some crucial projects in 60-90s
when we were close to americans
or 90s when ex soviets were in disaster
everything was up for grab.
i even heard there nuclear scientists approached us but we gave them cold shoulder
back then CARs states were even struggling to gather food.we were very much in picture cos of afghan jihad.
we got good deal of tot from ukrain.but that was it.we didn’t pursued much further

 

[ali_raza]

Afsar syndrome bro.
Just sit back sip coolaid and just be an afsar.

lol

 

[Smarana Mitra]

who was stopping us from starting some crucial projects in 60-90s
when we were close to americans
or 90s when ex soviets were in disaster
everything was up for grab.
i even heard there nuclear scientists approached us but we gave them cold shoulder
back then CARs states were even struggling to gather food.we were very much in picture cos of afghan jihad.
we got good deal of tot from ukrain.but that was it.we didn’t pursued much further

Do you really think that nuclear scientists will approach Pakistan? Or that USSR will sell their technology to Pakistan for money? USSR dissolution was mainly about splitting of industrial base of USSR amongst the new countries. For example, some countries like Ukraine got Antonov factory, countries like Yugoslavia got factories to make some other heavy equipments etc and as a result, no single country had all the infrastructure to make proper weapons. For example, Russia could not make transport planes because of Ukraine having the antonov factory whereas Ukraine had no other industry and hence could not do anything else. All the countries that split from USSR did so after USA assured them of soft loans and hence they did not have funds deficit. The problem was not with funds but with industrial base. Only those countries like India, China, which already had industrial base, managed to gain somethings from USSR. India, China offered their domestic industry to help Russia get equipments and parts for their weapons and in turn USSR allowed India and China to have full license to manufacture all the items which was jointly produced. India offered HAL, which already had ability to make MiG21 to develop Su30 and hence India got Su30 technology as return. It is unlikely that Pakistan could offer anything meaningful to these countries to get any technology during 90s.

Yes, Pakistan could have developed technology and its know how earlier itself. But Pakistan never industrialized. Pakistan did not have enough technical manpower and never had enough engineers and scientists to form large base of scientific community to start new projects. Pakistan was indeed close to USA but that does not mean that USA will spoon feed Pakistan. For example, Iran was also close to USA but Iran managed to get several technology and even developed a small industrial base with USA support. Iran then used it after revolution to get some amount of indigenisation. Pakistan on the other hand, did not even think of developing any industry and never tried to develop enough skilled manpower for industry.

 

[ali_raza]

Do you really think that nuclear scientists will approach Pakistan? Or that USSR will sell their technology to Pakistan for money? USSR dissolution was mainly about splitting of industrial base of USSR amongst the new countries. For example, some countries like Ukraine got Antonov factory, countries like Yugoslavia got factories to make some other heavy equipments etc and as a result, no single country had all the infrastructure to make proper weapons. For example, Russia could not make transport planes because of Ukraine having the antonov factory whereas Ukraine had no other industry and hence could not do anything else. All the countries that split from USSR did so after USA assured them of soft loans and hence they did not have funds deficit. The problem was not with funds but with industrial base. Only those countries like India, China, which already had industrial base, managed to gain somethings from USSR. India, China offered their domestic industry to help Russia get equipments and parts for their weapons and in turn USSR allowed India and China to have full license to manufacture all the items which was jointly produced. India offered HAL, which already had ability to make MiG21 to develop Su30 and hence India got Su30 technology as return. It is unlikely that Pakistan could offer anything meaningful to these countries to get any technology during 90s.

Yes, Pakistan could have developed technology and its know how earlier itself. But Pakistan never industrialized. Pakistan did not have enough technical manpower and never had enough engineers and scientists to form large base of scientific community to start new projects. Pakistan was indeed close to USA but that does not mean that USA will spoon feed Pakistan. For example, Iran was also close to USA but Iran managed to get several technology and even developed a small industrial base with USA support. Iran then used it after revolution to get some amount of indigenisation. Pakistan on the other hand, did not even think of developing any industry and never tried to develop enough skilled manpower for industry.

i m not joking
i have solid information
i met people who met them in peshawar
cant disclose there identities but its solid