DRDO to unveil catapult gun system built on Arjun MBT Mk-I chassis | GSQR trials in May

[Indischer]

Good news for India and Asia.

To India, YES, but to Asia? Isn't the Arty going to be used in Asia against a fellow Asian country?

 

[Water Car Engineer]

Listen guys, this isnt even about Arjun Mark 1-2. Go to those threads to talk about it.

If you're going to talking about the gun, talk about the one on this platform.

OFB and DRDO should've partnered to put the modified Bofors and Arjun Chassis together.

 

[Khaqan Humayun]

To India, YES, but to Asia? Isn't the Arty going to be used in Asia against a fellow Asian country?

Asia is going to be stronger. When Pakistan makes any thing it does not mean that Asia is not rising same as when India makes any thing it means Asia is rising.

To India, YES, but to Asia? Isn't the Arty going to be used in Asia against a fellow Asian country?

Asia is going to be stronger. When Pakistan makes any thing it does not mean that Asia is not rising same as when India makes any thing it means Asia is rising.

 

[jhungary]

......as far as the stuff i know, both side on this thread threw a lot of BS........

1.) Rifled Gun is more accurate than smoothbore, but Rifle gun have lighter range and generally less accurate if you "Run and Gun"

Rifled mean the bore of the barrel is rifled, hence the energy would spend on lateral movement more than the forward movement. Due to the rifling pattern, the round exited a rifled barrel will spin. The spin will gyrosopically stable the round, hence it would be more accurate than the smoothbore gun as they use "fin" round to stablise the round. Literally guide.

However, since some Kinetic Energy was transformed into Spinning, the round will bled out sooner than the a round fired from smoothbore gun.

Also a draw back is the capability of firing while moving. If the tanks has stopped. The round will only need to compensate for the recoil, however, when the tank is moving. A lot more parameter you will need to count too. First being the forward momentum will carry the round with an initial speed, say a round is fired at 070 at 20 degree elevation while the tank is moving ahead with 20mph. The round will constantly move forward at a speed of 20mph while aiming at a target along with a different axel, thus the round will go off.

Then you also need to compensate with the recoil from whenever the gun is facing. and the Potential Energy loss while spinning due to the carry on forward momentum. Even the world best fire computer cannot calcuate these 3 parameter when they were put together.

2.) Rifled Gun are god for Howitzer, the same as Smoothbore is the King of Armored.

That's basically operating on Accuracy and Drag ratio. In other word, the application.

While Armored Warfare is a moving engagement, while both side is running. Compare it to a game of trabuchet and throwing dart, which one would you perfer for you to hit a moving target?? Throwing dart of course. That's what APFSDS is all about.

However, when you are to hit a stationary target, then a better calculation on a rifled gun will serve you better. A forntal forward destruction round (Like HE and HESH) would be perferred. You don't try to kill a bunch of thing using throwing dart right??

That's why in the US M1 Abrams are smoothbore, but M1128 mobile gun sport a 105mm rifled. When you are doing infantry support, chances are you are using your gun platform for multiple target.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Your posts are very interesting. You are basing them on presumption that no tech development took place in rifled systems and HESH in this intervening time period. Amazing. I am yet to see you spew out any hard data upon which you are making claims about Arjun without giving tedious references to other threads and members. The APFSDs do NOT get 'screwed' in rifled guns of modern era. Your assumption is wrong. The only reason for shorter life span of rifled as opposed to smooth bore was slightly greater transit time comparatively of round leaving the barrel.

Modern guns? Which modern tank uses a rifled gun? The challenger?nope.. even they are replacing them see @Dazzler s post...

Yes they DO.. APFSDs DONT NEED TO SPIN... THEY ARE STABLE ALREADY... RIFLED GUN ONLY SCREWS ITSELF AND THE PERFORMANCE OF APFSDS...!!!

A FACT..

You are right about smooth bore and more modern armament not requiring further usage of HESH rounds (which are indeed ineffective against tanks) ...... but Indian army has requirement of the same for infantry support role.

Which role anti troops???? because its even ineffective against fortified positions...

Its dealt with.


The remainder of your post is waste of bandwidth. No real/effective information. So ignored

Well its Arjun Catapult system thread but you trolled about how Arjun as a MBT failed.So Hold on your BS and make a thread for Arjun MBT VS Al khilji .

Okay man every thing including arjunski n catapultski are both world class... you win.

 

[Penguin]

thats not the point, the point is that they are replacing the rifled one with smoothbores. The OEM of rifled guns is moving away from it, India remains the only country with rifled tech in the world. For which, they have to make ordinance by themselves, a tricky situaiton indeed considering how bad they are at making tank ammunitions (the OFB saga goes along).

It IS the point considering the original statement "Brits abandoned them back in 90s and went with smoothbores."
See my earlier wiki-link

The Challenger Lethality Improvement Programme (CLIP) was a programme to replace the current L30A1 rifled gun with the 120 mm Rheinmetall L55 smoothbore gun currently used in the Leopard 2A6. The use of a smoothbore weapon would have allowed Challenger 2 to use NATO standard ammunition developed in Germany and the US. This includes tungsten-based kinetic energy penetrators, which do not have the same political and environmental objections as depleted uranium rounds. The production lines for rifled 120 mm ammunition in the UK have been closed for some years, so existing stocks of ammunition for the L30A1 are finite.[22][dead link] Fortunately, in 2009, a new HESH round manufactured in Belgium has been trialled. This means that the Challenger 2 now has available a new Tungsten FIN and HESH rounds, if and when required, which secures a line of ammunition for its calibre Length 55 rifled main gun, the L30, when required in the future.
A single Challenger 2 was fitted with the L55 and underwent trials in January 2006

The reason for the switch is logistics, not gun performance. Service Challie 2's have yet to start receving a smoothbore 120mm. Just at single tank was thus fitted so far.

Please note that in the lower calibers, the L7 105mm rifled gun was/is in no way inferior to 100mm and 115mm smoothbores. See the 105mm prodominance in modern armored gun systems. Note also in the armored car category the predominance of 60, 75, and 90mm rifled guns and the absense of any smoothbores.

Uniquely among NATO main battle tank armament, the L30A1 is rifled, because the British Army continues to place a premium on the use of high explosive squash head (HESH) rounds in addition to APFSDS armour-piercing rounds. HESH rounds have a longer range (up to 8 kilometres or 5 miles) than APFSDS, and are more effective against buildings and thin-skinned vehicles

Relative to HEAT rounds there are advantages in range, engaging combined arms formations and FIBUA.

 

[Penguin]

I have a noob question,

Whats the difference between a 120mm MBT and 130MM SPG. Why is one a tank and the other a self propelled gun? Is it the range?

Tank (emphasis on armor protection: heavy armor) versus artillery (emphasis on mobility: keeping up with tankforces). 360 degree gun and turret traverse versus - in this particular case - limited traverse (point the vehicle to point the gun > less suited for mobile engagements against tanks). DIrect (flat line-of-sight trajectory, shorter range) versus indirect fire.

All modern arty is either 152 or 155mm these days... This one is nothing but a Soviet m46 placed on a tank chassis..

The M-46 Catapult is a self-propelled gun based on the conversion of ageing British/Indian Vijayanta (and now also new Arjun) tank's hull mounted with Russian 130mm M-46 field gun. Many users of this artillery piece have or are converting it tp 155mm

NORINCO (China North Industries Corporation) developed an upgrade package where the original barrel of the Type 59 (M-46 copy) is replaced by the 155/45 mm ordnance of the WA 021.
Another 155 mm upgrade of the M-46, Metamorphosis IOB M46 FG -, is designed by Ordnance Factory Board (OFB) of India
Israeli M-46S - This is an upgrade of an existing M-46 or Type 59, carried out by Soltam Systems Ltd. The original barrel is replaced by a new model of 155/45mm. 155/39 is option.
130 mm towed field gun M1954 (M-46) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So, it may just be a first step towards a Catapult variant on a modern chassis using a 155/45mm barrel

 

[Dazzler]

It IS the point considering the original statement "Brits abandoned them back in 90s and went with smoothbores."
See my earlier wiki-link


The reason for the switch is logistics, not gun performance. Service Challie 2's have yet to start receving a smoothbore 120mm. Just at single tank was thus fitted so far.

Please note that in the lower calibers, the L7 105mm rifled gun was/is in no way inferior to 100mm and 115mm smoothbores. See the 105mm prodominance in modern armored gun systems. Note also in the armored car category the predominance of 60, 75, and 90mm rifled guns and the absense of any smoothbores.


Relative to HEAT rounds there are advantages in range, engaging combined arms formations and FIBUA.

Google Circa 1976 smoothbore vs rifled gun trials, where smoothbore defeated every rifled version from L7 to L11. This experiment proved the worth of smoothbores.

The Amreicans went for localized L7 in M-1 series but then switched M-256 (Rheinmetal) 120 smoothbores for better performance and chamber pressure provided by smoothbore guns due to advantages such as adding a better barrel life (in some cases, almost double to what a Rifled barrel provided) and metallurgy to name a few, the increased accuracy provided by rifled guns has been proved to be wrong as L44/ 55 provide perhaps the most accurate ammo delivery out there.

It is established that Rifled gun tech is obsolete tech for a modern main battle tank due to several resaons. Your argument on more rifled guns are still fielded than smoothbores is weak to say the least because L7s and L11s and later variants fielded due to, cost, availablility of ammo through either local facilities (POF in our case) but surely NOT as a technological advancement over smoothbores. Smoothbore is the foreseeable future in mbts.

 

[Penguin]

What is the correlation of barrel length with range? The longer barrel seems to lob shells at longer ranges...
Tanks have shorter barreled guns..

Challie2: 120/55 rifled
LEO2A6: 120/55 smooth
SPzH2000: 155/52

Ok I had been wrong earlier, but what is the diffrence between this and Bheem

Bhim has a 155mm GH in a turret, with autoloader. The 130mm GH on Arjun is fitted in a casemat (fixed mounting with limited gun traverse). The latter (even with barrel replacement to 155mm) is a much cheaper solution. The Bhim turret is by Denel of South Africa. The Catapult is made in India from readily available components (new or obsolete tank hulls, M46 field guns, locally developed 155m replacement barrel).

 

[Penguin]

That's right. however Tanks like Arjun can fire ATGM having range of 8 KM.

ANy MBT fitted with the Israeli Lahat system can do that (from guns of 100mm and up)

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Tank (emphasis on armor protection: heavy armor) versus artillery (emphasis on mobility: keeping up with tankforces). 360 degree gun and turret traverse versus - in this particular case - limited traverse (point the vehicle to point the gun > less suited for mobile engagements against tanks). DIrect (flat line-of-sight trajectory, shorter range) versus indirect fire.


The M-46 Catapult is a self-propelled gun based on the conversion of ageing British/Indian Vijayanta (and now also new Arjun) tank's hull mounted with Russian 130mm M-46 field gun. Many users of this artillery piece have or are converting it tp 155mm

NORINCO (China North Industries Corporation) developed an upgrade package where the original barrel of the Type 59 (M-46 copy) is replaced by the 155/45 mm ordnance of the WA 021.
Another 155 mm upgrade of the M-46, Metamorphosis IOB M46 FG -, is designed by Ordnance Factory Board (OFB) of India
Israeli M-46S - This is an upgrade of an existing M-46 or Type 59, carried out by Soltam Systems Ltd. The original barrel is replaced by a new model of 155/45mm. 155/39 is option.
130 mm towed field gun M1954 (M-46) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So, it may just be a first step towards a Catapult variant on a modern chassis using a 155/45mm barrel

This is true as is the rest of what you say.
This version of the Catapult is an immediate and interim transitionary measure, leading into the 155mm SPGH eventually.

The fact of the matter is that the venerable M-46 130mm Howitzer is still an awesome piece of Arty.; both in terms of range and punch. It outperforms the US M-119 155 mm Howitzer on both counts; ranging nearly twice as much as the M-109. It also happens that IA has more than a 1000 M-46 Howitzers available, so this somewhat ersatz rig viz the Catapult is very cost and time-effective to turn out. Then again the IOFB Metamorphosis mod upgrade to the M-46 to 155 mm is available too.

The only down-side to the M-46 Howitzer in its present form is slow and cumbersome loading which leads to lower rates of fire compared to contemporary Arty pieces; hence the Indian projects for new SPGHs. But the M-46 still has life and "kick" remaining in it.

Another Arty Caliber that had 'fallen out of fashion' lately is the 105 mm gun. But the experience of the Allied forces in "Operation Anaconda" in Afghanistan has revived interest in it; for use in mountainous terrain. Even the IA has put off plans to retire its 105 mm IFG/MG guns. There is likely to be a move to make it lighter still and make a new range of more powerful ordnance for the guns.

 

[Penguin]

Google Circa 1976 smoothbore vs rifled gun trials, where smoothbore defeated every rifled version from L7 to L11. This experiment proved the worth of smoothbores.

The Amreicans went for localized L7 in M-1 series but then switched M-256 (Rheinmetal) 120 smoothbores for better performance and chamber pressure provided by smoothbore guns due to advantages such as adding a better barrel life (in some cases, almost double to what a Rifled barrel provided) and metallurgy to name a few, the increased accuracy provided by rifled guns has been proved to be wrong as L44/ 55 provide perhaps the most accurate ammo delivery out there.

It is established that Rifled gun tech is obsolete tech for a modern main battle tank due to several resaons. Your argument on more rifled guns are still fielded than smoothbores is weak to say the least because L7s and L11s and later variants fielded due to, cost, availablility of ammo through either local facilities (POF in our case) but surely NOT as a technological advancement over smoothbores. Smoothbore is the foreseeable future in mbts.

I don't know where you get the idea that I said we won't see smoothbores on MBTs in the forseeable future.

The soviets as well as the US interest in smoothbore also had to do with gun/missile combinations (See Sheridan, M-60A2, MBT 70S, T-64, T-72 etc) . This is one of the reasons why you don't see many smoothbores (short barreled low pressure infantry support weapons excepted) in the smaller calibers: you have to have sufficient size (diameter) barrel for effective HEAT warheads, and hence HEAT-rounds and CL-ATGW/GWS.

The first LEO2 tank was delivered in 1972, equipped with a 105-millimeter (4.1 in) smoothbore main gun. Between 1972 and 1975 a total of 17 prototypes were developed. The new 120 mm gun's ten-year development effort, which had begun in 1964, ended in 1974. Ten of the 17 turrets built were equipped with the 105 mm smoothbore gun, and the other seven were equipped with the larger 120 mm gun. Another program aimed to mount the 152-millimeter (6.0 in) missile-gun (MGM-51 Shillelagh) was also developed in an attempt to save components from the MBT-70, but in 1971 the program was ended for economic reasons.Although there were attempts to modify the 152-millimeter (6.0 in) tank gun to do so, the process proved extremely difficult, and the Germans began development of the future Rheinmetall 120 mm L/44 smoothbore tank gun. Originally the gun had a barrel life of between 400 and 500 rounds, but with recent advances in propellant technology the average life decreased to 260 rounds. In some cases, barrels have had to be replaced after firing only 50 projectiles....

I'm not surprise that in the 1976 trials for the gun on the M1 the 105mm rifled gun lost out. Interestingly, a hastily developed brit 120mm rifled gun actually came quite close to the much more mature German 120mm smoothbore:

Whichever of the two US prototypes won, it was intended that it should be evaluated in competition with the German Leopard 2 with the view of achieving standardization between the US and German tank fleets, ostensibly even to the extent of adopting the same tank for both. In the event all that happened was that the US Army decided in 1978 to adopt the 120mm smooth-bore gun produced in Germany for the Leopard 2. The decision was taken after trials carried out in 1977 when the German 120mm smooth-bore gun was compared with the US 105mm tank gun, which by then was 18 years old, and a new 120mm rifled gun hastily developed in Britain to suit US requirements.

General Motors XM-1 | Weapons and Warfare

And

The L11 wasn't involved in the final shoot-off trials in the US. The requirement was for a gun that fired one-piece ammunition, and therefore RARDE entered the experimental M13A, which ended up coming a very close second to the Rheinmetall 120mm.
...
EXP19-M13A was produced hurriedly for the trial but did very well.
...
the 110mm was in trials as well, not Aberdeen USA but Kirkbudbright and Shoeburyness, involving M68 and Rheinmetal 120mm-prior to the 1976 trials
...
Apparently the 110mm EXP-14 firing APDS outperformed 120mm L11/L15.

L11 Chieftain gun - Page 7

Cheiftain" by Rob Griffin has quite a lot of information in it, but little mention of an automatic 105mm gun. First mention is of initial design work being carried out around the US 105mm gun in the early 1950s. By the mid 1950s there was a 105mm gun with a bagged charge à la 120mm L11. Some comments that the 120mm L11 would have been interchangeable with the US 90mm smoothbore on the T95.

There's also a section on AFVs in "Cold War, Hot Science" by Richard Ogorkiewicz which is very detailed, but no mention of a 105mm L11A4. There is mention of the 110mm EXP-7 which had brass cartridges and was interchangeable with the 105mm L7. Then there was a 110mm EXP-14 with semicombustible cartridges. Things moved on to the 120mm M7, then redesigned into the 120mm M13A with one piece cartridges that came a close second to the Rheinmetall 120mm L/44 in competition for arming the M-1.

Chieftain Tank Development (post 3)

See also
Cold War, Hot Science: Applied Research in Britain's Defence Laboratories ...
By Robert Bud, Philip Gummett, Science Museum (Great Britain)
2002 - ISBN 1900747472
(a history of the UK reasearch establishments during the post war years)
Google Boeken
Search on: M-13A
On page 124, in chapter 5, there is a discussion of the developments leading up to the 1975 trials. "To suite the XM-1, RARDE was hurriedly to develop yet another gun, the M-13A, which fired one-piece ammunition" So new it was, it replaced the new 120mm M7 (which fired 2 seperated munition / 2-piece rounds), in the 2nd round of the trilateral competitive trials (in 1977). It came a close second to the German 120mm, which was all the more credible considering the hurried development AND the fact that RARDE had only recently taken up what had become the most important type of tank munition, APFSDS, which made rifling redundant (but rifled guns not necessarily obsolete or inferior).

The British Army has tested Rheinmetall's longer gun as replacement to the current L30A1 120 mm L/55 rifled main gun on the Challenger 2

The L/55 is 1.3 metres (4.3 ft) longer, giving an increased muzzle velocity to ammunition fired through it. As the L/55 retains the same barrel geometry, it can fire the same ammunition as the L/44.

This gun was retrofitted into German and Dutch Leopard 2s, and chosen as the main gun of the Spanish Leopard 2E, and the Greek Leopard 2HEL. It has been tested on the British Challenger 2 as a potential replacement for its current weapon, the rifled L30 120 mm cannon. This test however has been stopped due to the characteristics of the Challenger 2.

Rheinmetall 120 mm gun - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Would love a PDF version of this Future tank and tank gun: design, procurement trials; discussions with USA
Future tank and tank gun: design, procurement trials; discussions with USA | The National Archives

n January 2004, BAE Systems Land Systems (formerly RO Defence) was awarded a contract to develop a new smoothbore 120 mm gun for the British Army Challenger tanks. Under the contract, a Challenger 2 has been armed with the new Rheinmetall L55 smoothbore gun, as fitted on the Leopard 2A6 main battle tank, and began firing trials in January 2006.

Ballistically the new weapon is the same as the German 120 mm L/55 but externally can fit into the space previously occupied by the L30. The current Challenger 2 installation retains the L30 rifled gun's cradle, gun clamp, thermal sleeve, fume extractor and muzzle reference system. Following trials in Germany the weapon was also tested in a static mount installed on a Centurion MBT chassis in mid-2005 and later in the same year, was finally integrated into a Challenger 2 MBT.

This upgrade will enable the British main battle tank to use NATO-compliant 120mm ammunition.

Static firing trials have already been conducted against a wide range of targets firing the Rheinmetall 120 mm DM53 APFSDS projectile with a conventional penetrator. These trials, although classified information, seem to have shown that the DM53 round gives enhanced performance over the previous 120 mm Challenger Armament - CHARM 3 - firing a depleted uranium round.

Main Battle Tank - Challenger 2

 

[Penguin]

Another Arty Caliber that had 'fallen out of fashion' lately is the 105 mm gun. But the experience of the Allied forces in "Operation Anaconda" in Afghanistan has revived interest in it; for use in mountainous terrain. Even the IA has put off plans to retire its 105 mm IFG/MG guns. There is likely to be a move to make it lighter still and make a new range of more powerful ordnance for the guns.

Oh, but Denel has a very nice modern G7 105mm! from Light Experimental Ordnance (LEO) With a maximum range of 32 km (20 mi) it outranges all existing 105 mm howitzers, as well as most current 155 mm howitzers . In April 2007, it was reported that Armscor was about to award Denel a contract to develop a more advanced version of the G7, dubbed the Advanced Multirole Light Artillery Gun Capability (AMLAGC). Under the proposed contract, the G7 using V-LAP ammunition would see range boosted to 36km. Turreted version available

 

[Dazzler]

I don't know where you get the idea that I said we won't see smoothbores on MBTs in the forseeable future.

The soviets as well as the US interest in smoothbore also had to do with gun/missile combinations (See Sheridan, M-60A2, MBT 70S, T-64, T-72 etc) . This is one of the reasons why you don't see many smoothbores (short barreled low pressure infantry support weapons excepted) in the smaller calibers: you have to have sufficient size (diameter) barrel for effective HEAT warheads, and hence HEAT-rounds and CL-ATGW/GWS.

The first LEO2 tank was delivered in 1972, equipped with a 105-millimeter (4.1 in) smoothbore main gun. Between 1972 and 1975 a total of 17 prototypes were developed. The new 120 mm gun's ten-year development effort, which had begun in 1964, ended in 1974. Ten of the 17 turrets built were equipped with the 105 mm smoothbore gun, and the other seven were equipped with the larger 120 mm gun. Another program aimed to mount the 152-millimeter (6.0 in) missile-gun (MGM-51 Shillelagh) was also developed in an attempt to save components from the MBT-70, but in 1971 the program was ended for economic reasons.Although there were attempts to modify the 152-millimeter (6.0 in) tank gun to do so, the process proved extremely difficult, and the Germans began development of the future Rheinmetall 120 mm L/44 smoothbore tank gun. Originally the gun had a barrel life of between 400 and 500 rounds, but with recent advances in propellant technology the average life decreased to 260 rounds. In some cases, barrels have had to be replaced after firing only 50 projectiles....

I'm not surprise that in the 1976 trials for the gun on the M1 the 105mm rifled gun lost out. Interestingly, a hastily developed brit 120mm rifled gun actually came quite close to the much more mature German 120mm smoothbore:

General Motors XM-1 | Weapons and Warfare

And

L11 Chieftain gun - Page 7


Chieftain Tank Development (post 3)

See also
Cold War, Hot Science: Applied Research in Britain's Defence Laboratories ...
By Robert Bud, Philip Gummett, Science Museum (Great Britain)
2002 - ISBN 1900747472
(a history of the UK reasearch establishments during the post war years)
Google Boeken
Search on: M-13A
On page 124, in chapter 5, there is a discussion of the developments leading up to the 1975 trials. "To suite the XM-1, RARDE was hurriedly to develop yet another gun, the M-13A, which fired one-piece ammunition" So new it was, it replaced the new 120mm M7 (which fired 2 seperated munition / 2-piece rounds), in the 2nd round of the trilateral competitive trials (in 1977). It came a close second to the German 120mm, which was all the more credible considering the hurried development AND the fact that RARDE had only recently taken up what had become the most important type of tank munition, APFSDS, which made rifling redundant (but rifled guns not necessarily obsolete or inferior).

The British Army has tested Rheinmetall's longer gun as replacement to the current L30A1 120 mm L/55 rifled main gun on the Challenger 2

Rheinmetall 120 mm gun - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Would love a PDF version of this Future tank and tank gun: design, procurement trials; discussions with USA
Future tank and tank gun: design, procurement trials; discussions with USA | The National Archives


Main Battle Tank - Challenger 2

and what does this historic lesson prove? That West eventually saw more benifits in smoothbores rather than rifled. Soviets were using 115 mm (t-62, early 64s) and later the 125mm D-81 smoothbores since T-64s, everyone knows this.

 

[Speeder 2]

This DRDO technology should be quite advanced...

...for WW2!

The Russians, oh no, the Soviets didn't have this technology until 1954.


DRDO is quite something!

Is that going to be on India's DEFEXP 2014 with secrity clearnace clearance?

Don't bother, you can

1. go to any Soviet-era military museum (without security clearance) and check out what is Soviet M46 (1954 version) with 130mm. Actually it is the same as DRDO's 2014 version.

or 2. go to any county-level Chinese military museum (without security clearance, with 1 Yuan entrance fee) and check out similar version of PLA with 122mm from 1959 technology, or more advanced 130mm with 1972 technology - DRDO are welcome to send a spy there.

acutally, my bad , 1 correction, China had the same technology in 1959, with 130mm on the chasis of an old tank. google it - Vietnam War.