Arjun Catapult artillery system

[Kunal Biswas]

Arjun Catapult artillery system

Arjun Catapult artillery system is a Self propelled Gun, The System compromise of 130mm M46 field gun mounted over Arjun MK-1 Chassis ..

Specifications :

Weight :44.5 tonnes
Caliber : 130 mm
Breech : Horizontal sliding wedge
Elevation :-2.5° to 45°
Maximum Gun range : 40km
Rate of fire : 6 (normal) 8 (burst) 5 (sustained)
Engine : MTU 838 Ka 501 diesel 1,400 hp (1,040 kW)
Transmission : Renk epicyclic train gearbox, 4 fwd + 2 rev gears
Suspension :hydropneumatic
Ground clearance : 0.45 metres (1 ft 6 in)
Fuel capacity : 1,610 litres (350 imp gal; 430 US gal)
Operational range : 450 kilometres (280 mi)[7]
Speed : 72 km/h (45 mph) Road or 40 km/h (25 mph) Cross country


===================================
===================================

Arjun 130 mm gun: DRDO tastes success

Feasibility study of mounting 130 mm Catapult Gun on Arjun Chassis Mk-I was carried out in May- June 2012. The technical study concluded that upgradation of the existing Catapult on the chassis could be carried out in a very short time and the equipment capabilities increased.

A date in the month of November, 2012 was fixed by the DG (artillery) for the first field trial. The CVRDE, Avadi, took up the challenge after they were given a spare gun system to mount on the Arjun, Mk I in July, 2012. The trials were held between 27 November to 3 December 2012. The Arjun mounted chassis outmatched Vijayanta by a large margin, also in the test for stability, while firing charged rounds.

The developmental trials were held between 31 July to 13 August, 2013 during the summer. Arjun Catapult was fitted with two sets of Goegraphical Positioning System and one Gyro used in Arjun Mk-I during these trials. Driver's Night Vision Device (DNS) and Commanders' night sight (HHTI) were also successfully tested. It was also provided with fire fighting system based on Instant Fire Detection Suppression System as existing in Arjun Mk-I tanks.

The Arjun Catapult was run for about 500 kms during this trial and subjected to maximum intense and sustained firings.

'The firings and mobility trials were absolutely smooth which gave full confidence to the users as well as the development agency, that the requirement of Arjun Catapult of artillery would soon be a reality. It is expected that the user trials based on General Staff Qualitative Requirement (GSQR) would be held in November-December 2013, and 40 Catapult Guns would be inducted by the army,' a senior DRDO official stated.

Source : Arjun 130 mm gun: DRDO tastes success | Millennium Post

 

[Abhi9]

 

[Abhi9]

self delete

 

[Defenceindia2010]

Why not build a proper turret similar to the one on the Russian 2S19 Msta.

 

[Shaitan]

Why not build a proper turret similar to the one on the Russian 2S19 Msta.

They should, they literally took the design from the old catapult.

 

[bhramos]

Kunal Bhai.

Why is it called catapult?

Arjun Catapult artillery system

Arjun Catapult artillery system is a Self propelled Gun, The System compromise of 130mm M46 field gun mounted over Arjun MK-1 Chassis ..

Specifications :

Weight :44.5 tonnes
Caliber : 130 mm
Breech : Horizontal sliding wedge
Elevation :-2.5° to 45°
Maximum Gun range : 40km
Rate of fire : 6 (normal) 8 (burst) 5 (sustained)
Engine : MTU 838 Ka 501 diesel 1,400 hp (1,040 kW)
Transmission : Renk epicyclic train gearbox, 4 fwd + 2 rev gears
Suspension :hydropneumatic
Ground clearance : 0.45 metres (1 ft 6 in)
Fuel capacity : 1,610 litres (350 imp gal; 430 US gal)
Operational range : 450 kilometres (280 mi)[7]
Speed : 72 km/h (45 mph) Road or 40 km/h (25 mph) Cross country


===================================
===================================

Arjun 130 mm gun: DRDO tastes success

Feasibility study of mounting 130 mm Catapult Gun on Arjun Chassis Mk-I was carried out in May- June 2012. The technical study concluded that upgradation of the existing Catapult on the chassis could be carried out in a very short time and the equipment capabilities increased.

A date in the month of November, 2012 was fixed by the DG (artillery) for the first field trial. The CVRDE, Avadi, took up the challenge after they were given a spare gun system to mount on the Arjun, Mk I in July, 2012. The trials were held between 27 November to 3 December 2012. The Arjun mounted chassis outmatched Vijayanta by a large margin, also in the test for stability, while firing charged rounds.

The developmental trials were held between 31 July to 13 August, 2013 during the summer. Arjun Catapult was fitted with two sets of Goegraphical Positioning System and one Gyro used in Arjun Mk-I during these trials. Driver's Night Vision Device (DNS) and Commanders' night sight (HHTI) were also successfully tested. It was also provided with fire fighting system based on Instant Fire Detection Suppression System as existing in Arjun Mk-I tanks.

The Arjun Catapult was run for about 500 kms during this trial and subjected to maximum intense and sustained firings.

'The firings and mobility trials were absolutely smooth which gave full confidence to the users as well as the development agency, that the requirement of Arjun Catapult of artillery would soon be a reality. It is expected that the user trials based on General Staff Qualitative Requirement (GSQR) would be held in November-December 2013, and 40 Catapult Guns would be inducted by the army,' a senior DRDO official stated.

Source : Arjun 130 mm gun: DRDO tastes success | Millennium Post

 

[Kunal Biswas]

You should have said 'Bhim' our own 155mm SPGH , It was the system given green flag for mass production and cleared all trails, Unfortunately GOV at the crucial moment banned the Company causing the project to fall, Now Denel is out of the black list, Wonder why there are no progress the field .

Bhim SPGH

--------------------

Btw, Without denel help OFB is fully capable of making good SPGH, Like the one offered for BSF --------- >>

105MM SPGH on BMP Chassis produce by OFB

----------------------------

Now coming to original question, " Why not build a proper turret similar to the one on the bhim spgh. " you should read the link i have posted in first post which says :

" The technical study concluded that upgradation of the existing Catapult on the chassis could be carried out in a very short time and the equipment capabilities increased. "

IA dont have any SPGH, IA need some sort of Mobile SPGH fast and which can be mass produce hence the ' Rebirth of Catapult ', Corruption in defense is costing us dearly now what is the solution is ' Improvisation ' which is again better than nothing ..

================================
================================

It is a Indian terminology for such improvisation ..

Why not build a proper turret similar to the one on the Russian 2S19 Msta.

They should, they literally took the design from the old catapult.

Kunal Bhai.

Why is it called catapult?

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Thanks for sharing, Some modifications ---------- >>

 

[Decklander]

Corruption can never be of benefit to anyone except we Indians. direct fall out of corruption in India is indigenious production. Something we cud not achieve by forcing our Generals, corruption has achieved it for us Indians.

 

[sayareakd]

Re: Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT)

Arjun Catapult doing fine over Thar, It is possible more than 100 will be inducted besides 117 orders of MK2 ..

sir one obsevation. Gun barrel is at thre bank of tank. One previous photi confirms that.

What does it means?

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Re: Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT)

Due to sloped feature of frontal hull, It facilitate ease of loading of charges and rounds once the main magazine empty, there is rack placed over sloped front hull of the chassis too, The same procedure would be harder if the gun`s breach placed towards the rear of the tank chassis ..

sir one obsevation. Gun barrel is at thre bank of tank. One previous photi confirms that.

What does it means?

 

[JBH22]

Re: Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT)

Russian MSTA

German PZ-2000

The above pics shows where modern SPG are.No offence but the Arjun Catapult system with an open hatch seems more like the vintage Sexton SPG, but alteast this instead of nothing.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Re: Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT)

I wouldn't compare to WW2 junk with The Indian Catapult as its a FAR evolution of sexton SPG

Lets see those in same league and in service ..

=====================>>

I would start with Russians and then US and there is also a French one still in service ..

2S5 Giatsint-S >>

In service with Russian Army : 1978 – present

Army: 399 units (+500 in storage)
Navy: 170 units (+some in storage)

======================

2S7 Pion >>

In service : 1976 – present

Users :
Azerbaijan - 12; (3 acquired in 2008 and 9 acquired in 2009[4])
Belarus - 36
Georgia
Russia - 37
Ukraine - 99
Uzbekistan - 48

======================

M110 howitzer >>

In service : 1963 – present

Users :
Belgium Belgian Army 11 M110A2 between 1972 and 1993.
Egypt Egyptian Army Received 144 M110A2 as aid in 1996.
Iran Islamic Republic of Iran Army.
Israel Israeli Army 36 M110.
Japan Japan Ground Self-Defense Force as 91 M110A2.
Jordan Jordanian Armed Forces as M110A2.
Morocco Moroccan Army as M110A2.
Pakistan Pakistan Army 60 in service as of 2010.
Bahrain Royal Bahraini Army 13 M110A2 from Netherlands delivered in 1994, 25 M110A2 from US delivered in 1996.
taiwan Republic of China Army 60 as M110A2
United States US Army & United States Marine Corps.

====================

AMX Mk F3 >>

In service : 1962 – present

Users :

Argentina - 24
Chile - 47
Cyprus - 12
Ecuador - 15
France
Morocco - 100
Saudi Arabia
Peru - 12
Venezuela
Qatar - 22

=============================
=============================

The Indian Catapult is perhaps the best among all other above & there is no hard feelings if it get inducted in numbers in our situation ..

The above pics shows where modern SPG are.No offence but the Arjun Catapult system with an open hatch seems more like the vintage Sexton SPG, but alteast this instead of nothing.

 

[methos]

Re: Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT)

I wouldn't compare to WW2 junk with The Indian Catapult as its a FAR evolution of sexton SPG

Lets see those in same league and in service ..

You both are comparing apples with oranges.
The Sexton and the M7 Priest are based on the Sherman tank and are from a different era. Back then nearly all self-propelled guns didn't have the gun enclosed in a turret (with very few exceptions like the Heuschrecke), because of technical constraints (size, recoil).

The Panzerhaubitze 2000 and the 2S19 Msta should be used as reference for seeing how a modern self-propelled gun based on a tank chassis should look. The 2S19 Msta chassis is based on the T-72 and T-80, while most of the components of the PzH 2000 are based on the Leopard 1 and 2.

The M110, 2S5, 2S7 and AMX Mk F3 are all not based on a tank chassis and all use very large guns in relation to the size/weight of the chassis. The M110 and 2S7 use 203 mm guns, the AMX Mk F3 is based on the 14 tonnes AMX-13 tank and the 2S5 is based on the 2S3 designed for a much shorter D-22 howitzer. All of these vehicles are still in service somewhere in the third world, but all of these are from the early Cold War (1950s to 1970s).

The Arjun Catapult should be considered a stop-gap solution by the Indian authorities, because it clearly is inferior to the current technical standard and also to it's Pakistani and Chinese counterparts.

 

[hitesh]

How this Gun turns left right ? does the whole tank chassis need to be moved for it .

 

[Kunal Biswas]

You missed the context of my post ..

The post was made for comparison with SPGH of similar design not era or different platform or calibers ..

=================
=================

As this system does not have a turret the chassis need to be moved but, It has limited Traverse ability to some 15 degrees both sides ..

You both are comparing apples with oranges.
The Sexton and the M7 Priest are based on the Sherman tank and are from a different era. Back then nearly all self-propelled guns didn't have the gun enclosed in a turret (with very few exceptions like the Heuschrecke), because of technical constraints (size, recoil).

The Panzerhaubitze 2000 and the 2S19 Msta should be used as reference for seeing how a modern self-propelled gun based on a tank chassis should look. The 2S19 Msta chassis is based on the T-72 and T-80, while most of the components of the PzH 2000 are based on the Leopard 1 and 2.

The M110, 2S5, 2S7 and AMX Mk F3 are all not based on a tank chassis and all use very large guns in relation to the size/weight of the chassis. The M110 and 2S7 use 203 mm guns, the AMX Mk F3 is based on the 14 tonnes AMX-13 tank and the 2S5 is based on the 2S3 designed for a much shorter D-22 howitzer. All of these vehicles are still in service somewhere in the third world, but all of these are from the early Cold War (1950s to 1970s).

The Arjun Catapult should be considered a stop-gap solution by the Indian authorities, because it clearly is inferior to the current technical standard and also to it's Pakistani and Chinese counterparts.

How this Gun turns left right ? does the whole tank chassis need to be moved for it .

 

[methos]

You missed the context of my post ..

The post was made for comparison with SPGH of similar design not era or different platform or calibers ..

But the design is not similar unless you say "the gun is not in a turret". The gun on the Catapult is however located completely above the turret ring and it's elevating mechanism is not connected to the chassis. The Catapult also has the gun mounted in the center of the vehicle. So all the reasons to go for a design similar to the AMX MK F3 or 2S7 Pion (like being able to incorporate the elevating and recoil mechanisms in the chassis or simply "being able to fit a big gun on a actually too small chassis") were not followed by the Catapult designers.

So speaking about "comparing apples and oranges" is valid.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Term 'Similar ' Definition : having a resemblance in appearance, character, or quantity, without being identical...

But the design is not similar unless you say "the gun is not in a turret".

 

[methos]

Term 'Similar ' Definition : having a resemblance in appearance, character, or quantity, without being identical...

I don't know if you are doing this with an evil intention, if this is because of possibly different mentality or you are just having problems admitting any sort of mistake, but this is the internet and everything can be read minutes, hours, days and even years after it was posted. This is now the third time that you claimed I would have missed any sort of context (see post #16 in this thread) and if I remember correctly the fourth time that you react with some sort of obfuscation tactic after I did disagree with one of your posts.

Now let's see: You said "similar", I cannot argue with that. But before you wrote "Lets see those in same league and in service .. " (see post #13, the one I originally replied to). In what kind of twisted world is a purpose-designed artillery plattform carrying a 203 mm gun "in the same league" as a 130 mm gun adopted ad-hoc on a tank chassis in some very odd way?
As I pointed out several times already, they are not technical comparable nor from the performance point of view. So unless you did mistake "being in the same league as" as an expression for optical similarity (and then I suggest you should read a dictionary instead of quoting from one), you clearly have some sort of antipathy against me for whatever reasons (might it be the fact that I am not an Indian or the fact that I criticized the Arjun). So please stop doing this kind of obfuscation posts.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

You missed the context of my post ..

The post was made for comparison with SPGH of similar design not era or different platform or calibers ..

^^ Let me put in simple words .. >>

SPGH of similar design : Field Gun / howitzer mounted over a tracked vehicle without a turret , It is that simple
Now lets see the Term 'Similar ' Definition : having a resemblance in appearance, character, or quantity, without being identical...

==========================

You are talking my thoughts too far and getting confused, You are correct in you grounds and i am mine, Its not nessasary important that i share same meanings of things you think of ..


No evil intentions, Never had ..
Just having a good debate, The moment you go negative the spirit of the debate will lost ..

I don't know if you are doing this with an evil intention, if this is because of possibly different mentality or you are just having problems admitting any sort of mistake,

Now let's see: You said "similar", I cannot argue with that. But before you wrote "Lets see those in same league and in service .. " (see post #13, the one I originally replied to). In what kind of twisted world is a purpose-designed artillery plattform carrying a 203 mm gun "in the same league" as a 130 mm gun adopted ad-hoc on a tank chassis in some very odd way?