152-mm towed howitzer Msta-B (2А65)

The 152-mm howitzer "Msta-B" (GRAU index - 2А65) can be considered the last in a long series of post-war field howitzers of Soviet development. At the same time, much less is known about it than about the 152-mm self-propelled howitzer 2C19 “Msta-S”, it can be said that the towed variant is in the shadow of the self-propelled unit. At the same time, the 2X19 "Msta-S" (put into service in 1989) and the towed howitzer 2A65 "Msta-B" (put into service in 1986) were the most modern guns of the field artillery of the Soviet Army, and now the Russian one.


Both artillery systems are still in service and actively exploited. The artillery units of both systems (2А64 and 2А65, respectively) have the same design, the only difference is that the 2А64 has an ejector to remove powder gases from the barrel after the shot. Serial production of the towed version began in the 1987 year. Currently, the 152-mm howitzer Msta-B is in service with the Russian army, as well as several countries of the former Soviet Union - Belarus, Kazakhstan, Georgia and Ukraine. Howitzers managed to make war during the second Chechen war, as well as the armed conflict in the east of Ukraine on the territory of Donbass. Also, artillery systems are used in Iraq, were purchased from Russia by the government of the country to fight ISIS and in Syria.

Towed Howitzer Msta-B

In the middle of the 1970s in the Soviet Union, almost simultaneously with NATO, they realized the need for a radical modernization of artillery systems and a transition to a single caliber in the army and divisional element of the ground forces. In the future, the 120, 130, 152, 180 and 203 mm caliber guns should have been replaced by a single 152 mm caliber artillery system of separately-cartridge loading, developed in towed and self-propelled versions, with a unified set of used ammunition. Such an artillery system was to be the new howitzer Msta, which was developed from 1976, under the leadership of chief designer G. I. Sergeev. Work on the creation of a new artillery system was carried out at the Barrikade Design Bureau (today TsKB Titan) in the city of Volgograd.



According to the terms of reference received from the military, the Msta howitzer was intended to destroy tactical nuclear weapons, mortar, artillery and missile batteries delivery vehicles, destroy field fortifications and other defensive structures, command and control posts, air defense and missile defense systems, tanks and other armored targets, manpower and fire weapons of the enemy. The firing range was to impede the maneuvers of enemy reserves located in the depths of his defense. The howitzer was supposed to fire at both observable and unobservable targets from closed positions and direct fire, including operation in mountainous conditions. Despite the fact that the main goal of creating a new artillery system was superiority over foreign competitors, both existing and only being developed, the requirement was again left to use with the artillery system the old full-time shots of towed howitzers D-20, ML-20, 2C3 self-propelled guns and 2C5, with variable charges in both steel and brass sleeves.

The R & D complex on the creation of a new towed howitzer Msta-B began in 1976 year. The main purpose of the development of the artillery system was: increasing the range of fire, increasing the angle of vertical guidance, increasing the effective action of the projectile at the target, maneuverability and other characteristics in comparison with the D-1, ML-20 and D-20 howitzers that were in service with the Soviet Army .

The main attention in the development of the new howitzer was paid to the problem of ensuring high accuracy of shooting with the help of constructive measures. The layout of the main nodes 152-mm howitzers Msta-B was implemented in view of ensuring the stability of disturbing moments arising from shooting. At the design and tooling stage of the instrument, the designers carried out a study on choosing the optimal combination of the structural and geometric parameters of the projectile, which ultimately allowed for improved aerodynamic characteristics of the high-explosive fragmentation projectile, as well as its stability on the trajectory, despite the significant length and long-range projectile .



Howitzer "MSTA-B" was equipped with a semi-automatic breech and rammer spring type designed for chambering a shell and liner, hydraulic jack with a pallet for shooting with put wheels, hydraulic recoil device with a liquid-cooled recoil buffer, two-speed screw mechanism of the horizontal guidance and a two-speed mechanism sector-type vertical guidance, sighting device intended for firing from closed positions and direct fire, pneumatic system of braking wheels, beds with folding bipod and under-hood rollers.

Work on the creation of a howitzer ended successfully, in 1986, the new artillery system was adopted by the Army of the USSR Armed Forces, the mass production of towed howitzers began in 1987. The howitzer was manufactured by Perm Machine-Building Plant (today Motovilikha Plants). In total, in Perm about 1200 such howitzers were assembled. For the development of 152-mm towed howitzer Msta-B, a large group of design engineers at the Barricades design bureau was awarded various government awards, and the design work of the artillery system and shots to it was awarded the USSR State Prize.

The following design solutions were successfully implemented in the MNTA-B 152 mm howitzer:
- three-chamber muzzle brake, which had an efficiency up to 63%;
- loading mechanism with throwing spring shearer, cocked from the sliding parts, and the guide tray with the drive from the shutter;
- two-speed gun pointing mechanisms that provided vertical guidance angles up to 70 degrees and horizontal guidance on slopes up to 5 degrees;
- automatic shutdown of the suspension of the wheels when breeding the bed.



The towed 152-mm howitzer Msta-B (2А65) was built according to the classical scheme for artillery guns. The howitzer received a barrel-monoblock equipped with a three-chamber cast muzzle brake and a semi-automatic vertical wedge gate, the barrel length - 53 caliber. Above the barrel were hydropneumatic recoil devices (knurler and recoil brake with liquid cooling). To protect the calculation (consisted of 8 people) and howitzer mechanisms from small fragments and bullets, the howitzer had a top machine with shield shield. There were also swiveling (two-speed, screw), lifting (two-speed, sector type) and balancing mechanisms.

The lower howitzer machine received two box-section beds and a two-wheeled chassis. A special pallet was installed on the lower machine of the howitzer gun carriage, on which the gun was lowered with the help of a hydraulic jack when transferring the artillery system from the marching to the combat position. Auxiliary metal rollers were placed at the ends of box beds with which the howitzer could be turned to fire in any desired position (without changing the position of the howitzer beds, the angle was 55 degrees). In the vertical plane, the existing lifting mechanism of the upper machine provides guidance of 152-mm howitzer Msta-B to the target in the range of angles from −3,5 to + 70 degrees. To reduce the fatigue of howitzer calculation numbers and increase the rate of fire, it was equipped with two throw-type spring-loaded rammers for sending charges and projectiles.

When translating the howitzers to the stowed position, the pallet rises and fastens to the trunk and the cradle, and the beds are shifted and then connected to the trailer hitch. The Ural-4320 army off-road utility vehicle with the 6x6 wheel formula serves as a regular means of transporting an artillery system. The sprung wheel travel of the howitzer provides its towing along the highway at speeds up to 80 km / h, and when driving on rough terrain - up to 20 km / h.



The ammunition 152-mm towed howitzer MSTA-B consisted of several types of high-explosive shells (including 3OF61 extended range having a bottom gasifier), shells Staging radio, cassette shells with a high-explosive and cumulative-fragmentation submunitions, smoke bombs-designators . Also with a howitzer can be used adjustable artillery ammunition 3OF39 complex "Krasnopol" with laser illumination of the target. A three-person calculation can highlight a target using a laser target-rangefinder, which is part of the Malachite portable automated fire control system. Small tank type targets can be highlighted from a distance to 4 km at night and 5-7 km in the daytime, larger targets up to 15 km.

The maximum firing range of conventional high-explosive fragmentation projectiles is 24,7 kilometers, 3OF61 projectile with a gas generator of bottom injection and long-range charge - up to 30 kilometers. With the howitzer, all types of separate-charge shots can be used, created for both the towed Msta-B and ACS 2С19 Msta-S, as well as for earlier artillery systems of the same caliber - howitzers D-20 and ML-20, SAU 2C3 " Acacia".

Tactical and technical characteristics of the Msta-B howitzer:

Caliber - 152 mm.
Weight - 7000 kg.
The maximum shooting range is 24,7 / 30 km.
Rate of Fire - 7-8 rds / min.
Ammunition - 60 shots.
Projectile weight - 43,56 kg.
The elevation angle is from -3 to + 70 degrees.
The angle of horizontal guidance - 55 degrees.
Staff tractor - Ural-4320 or MT-LB.
Transportation speed - up to 80 km / h (on the highway).
Calculation - 8 people.

Information sources:
http://otvaga2004.ru/kaleydoskop/kaleydoskop-art/msta-po-uralski
http://army-news.ru/2015/12/152-mm-buksiruemaya-gaubica-msta-b-2a65
http://mz.perm.ru/products/21/479
http://www.russianarms.ru/forum/index.php?topic=3528.0
Open source materials
Author:
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

73 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Lopatov 23 September 2016 07: 13 New
    • 10
    • 0
    +10
    Nothing better has been invented for conflicts of low intensity in the absence of counter-battery struggle. Great gun.
    But nevertheless, it needs to be finalized - the installation of ASUNO, some mechanization and automation. For example, a mechanism is needed to ensure a rapid change in the fire sector.

    To reduce the fatigue of howitzer calculation numbers and increase the rate of fire, it was equipped with two spring-type throwing rammers for sending charges and shells.

    Yes, there’s not much “fatigue is reduced”. Rather, on the contrary, it is necessary to perform unnecessary actions instead of a banal poke with a doselnik.
    But the use of these mechanisms increases the accuracy of the fire due to the uniform force of sending.
    1. svp67 23 September 2016 07: 23 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Spade
      Nothing better has been invented for conflicts of low intensity in the absence of counter-battery struggle.

      That is, as soon as it falls out of this formula, how does this tool become bad? By and large, towed artillery, in the form in which it now exists, sings its "swan song."
      1. Lopatov 23 September 2016 08: 08 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Well, for example, the second Chechen. Trunks 2C3 and 2C19 were shot to such a mother. Why it was impossible to drive 2A65 and D-20 there, overhaul with re-re-installation of which is much cheaper?
      2. megavolt823 23 September 2016 10: 38 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        svp67 totally agree. 20 century has passed. towed gun and xnumx man calculation for china. for us, revenge, peonies, tulips, acacias, and a coalition. MLRS. hi Well, if for training and that would be in stock. hi
        1. Alexey RA 23 September 2016 11: 14 New
          • 4
          • 0
          +4
          Quote: megavolt823
          The 20th century has passed. towed gun and 8 people calculation for china.

          The interesting Chinese today have gone ...
    2. Alex_59 23 September 2016 07: 25 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Spade
      Nothing better has been invented for conflicts of low intensity in the absence of counter-battery struggle.

      And if there is a counter-battery fight, what will it be? The opinion of a professional artilleryman is interesting. And what is the role and prospects of the self-propelled and towed Hyacinth (they have a slightly larger range) - is there a place for them under the condition of modernization, or in the furnace, like 2С7?
      1. svp67 23 September 2016 07: 39 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: Alex_59
        And if there is a counter-battery fight, what will it be?

        And in this case, if the calculations do not have time to curl up and leave the fire after a couple of volleys, everything will be rather sad ...
        1. kov123 23 September 2016 10: 21 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          So for contraband not every barrel is applicable. For these purposes, a division or battery is allocated, usually self-propelled. Attach intelligence - ARC, drones. In the old days, a sonic intelligence battery. Allocate a bait - a nomadic gun / platoon. Etc. This is a whole system, if done wisely.
      2. Lopatov 23 September 2016 07: 53 New
        • 8
        • 0
        +8
        Quote: Alex_59
        And if there is a counter-battery fight, what will it be?

        Khan will be. Too long she leaves the fire.

        If you equip the MSTA-B ASUNO, this will reduce losses during counter-battery combat, which will turn into counter-weapons. Large distances between the BGs will make it possible to hit the battery on the fire, not as a group target with one fire attack
        (for example, a six-gun battery at a firing position with classic distances between guns providing fire control without an ASUNO. It is necessary to suppress it one fire attack with the consumption of 180 152 mm shells. If we “smash” them, then the enemy will have to hit six single targets. i.e 6 firing raids with a consumption of 300 x 6 = 1800 152 mm shells)
        The second possible step to increase combat stability is to make it self-propelled (almost all modern towed 155-caliber guns are self-propelled. Besides the M777, but there is a special case. It is imprisoned for air mobility)

        Quote: Alex_59
        And what is the role and prospects of the self-propelled and towed Hyacinth (they have a slightly bigger range) - is there a place for them under the condition of modernization, or in a firebox, like 2C7?

        While they are needed. But they have no prospects. Apparently they are going to replace them with Coalitions in the “top-end configuration” with artillery radars to increase firing accuracy over long ranges.
        "Genocides" are guns. With all the ensuing problems — lack of unification in terms of ammunition, high dispersion in range, inconvenience of sighting. Also, because of the "cannon" trajectory, the "Genocides" are practically useless in the mountains and for conducting military operations in settlements.
        1. Alex_59 23 September 2016 08: 02 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Thanks for the detailed answer, interesting things turn out. hi
          1. Lopatov 23 September 2016 08: 23 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            Quote: Alex_59
            interesting things turn out

            "It's not so simple" (c) 8)))
            At the end of the 90's, the military industrial complex offered the generals universal automation kits for towed guns (D-30, D-20, 2A36, 2A65). But to see, the amount of rollback did not suit them ...
            1. Alex_59 23 September 2016 08: 32 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Quote: Spade
              But to see, the amount of rollback did not suit them ...

              Sadness ...
              I am still insolent and I will ask yet another amateurish question. You do not know what is wrong with 2С34? It was kind of a good idea. From the media reports FIG that you understand. It seems to write two problems - ACS and chassis. With ACS it’s understandable - I didn’t make a rollback again, and "there is no money, you stay there." But the second is the chassis. What, is she right there so unstable? Is the "Vienna" on the BMP-3 chassis stable, in the "Host" on the MT-LB chassis, is it not stable and sways when fired? Something is wrong here ...
              1. Lopatov 23 September 2016 09: 09 New
                • 6
                • 0
                +6
                Quote: Alex_59
                It was kind of a good idea.

                The idea was full-time.

                Created VPKshniki cool breakthrough machine for battalion artillery 2S31 "Vienna". Able to perform both the function of a self-propelled mortar, and direct fire support vehicles. Including guided projectiles (on each, a rangefinder, target designator. Can highlight targets when fired with "Whalers". Plus "Curtain" for some, but protection from the WTO)

                However, the military decided that for the battalion artillery it hurts curly. Honestly, the way it is, for most motorized shooting battalions such a system is redundant.

                And then came the "brilliant" idea to castrate the combat capabilities of the "Vienna" in order to reduce its cost. So there was a "Host"

                - Remove all the electronics from all the cars, except for one “commander” (it is not known just which “commander” they were going to put there. Well, our ingenious designers of the staff and duties of officers of battalion mortars do not know)
                - Replace the expensive new chassis based on the BMP-3 with a major overhaul from 2C1

                In terms of combat capabilities, this is a misunderstanding at almost the Sled level. With a lower rate of fire and at the same time much more expensive.
                In terms of cost, the chassis seems to win at first glance. Little. But if you calculate the full cost of the life cycle, then the figure creeps out, if not more expensive, then at least at the level of the chassis based on the BMP-3.

                The result is logical. The military does not want to buy a misunderstanding, regardless of the amount of kickbacks.
                1. Alex_59 23 September 2016 09: 24 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Quote: Spade
                  The military does not want to buy a misunderstanding, regardless of the amount of kickbacks.

                  Clear. And our Motovilikhinsky (I am from Perm, but not from the factory) write the opposite - they say that the military wanted, they got it. Allegedly they were asked "cheaper", so the electronics were removed from the linear machines, and the overhaul chassis was used. In short, who is right - you won’t understand, blame each other. It is clear that the gun did not take place. Sadness again ...
                  1. Lopatov 23 September 2016 09: 35 New
                    • 7
                    • 0
                    +7
                    The gun then took place, "Vienna."

                    And about "what they wanted, they got it" - one must also think with his head when "you cut off the excess." The testes were also chopped off with the appendicox, and afterwards they were surprised "but how much is the patient unhappy"

                    Hosts have no particular advantages over motorized rifle Nona-SVK and Sled, for sure.
                    1. Alex_59 23 September 2016 10: 27 New
                      • 1
                      • 0
                      +1
                      Quote: Spade
                      Hosts have no particular advantages over motorized rifle Nona-SVK and Sled, for sure.

                      Duck Nonu-ICS also does not buy something. The Marines were given little and silence.
                2. chenia 23 September 2016 10: 37 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Quote: Spade
                  However, the military decided that for the battalion artillery it hurts curly. Honestly, the way it is, for most motorized shooting battalions such a system is redundant.


                  For troops of constant readiness, it’s normal (enough to save on artillery, in the 80th small and medium business on BMP, and the M-120 min. Battalion on Gaz-66 is a wretched sight).

                  For the mobilization option - Vodnik installed in the aft niche M-120 on the swingarm or Nona-K in tow.

                  Regimental artillery (HSV) -Msta-S, mobilization version-Msta-B.

                  Well, finalize the range (regimental artillery should preferably not cross the line of contact with the enemy (before the offensive) before the division performs the mission of the day).
            2. Vladimir Postnikov 24 September 2016 01: 26 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              "It's not so simple" (c) 8)))
              At the end of the 90's, the military industrial complex offered the generals universal automation kits for towed guns (D-30, D-20, 2A36, 2A65). But to see, the amount of rollback did not suit them ...

              Interesting information. I cannot understand why this has not been done so far.
              Well, the nineties are over. Why didn’t they come back to this problem again and again?
              In storage was about 4000 D-30. I guess that it’s less now (I see them both in Syria and Ukraine). But, there is still a lot left. Why?
        2. hiroyashy 23 September 2016 14: 23 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          "Genocide" is my favorite ..... I didn’t shoot, but we, young people at the training ground, were shown how he was groaning. Terrible power. It's a pity .... that there are no prospects.
        3. tima_ga 24 September 2016 23: 02 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          If it’s not difficult, you can briefly talk about the differences in the tactics of using Msta and Geocint. I always thought they were about equally noble. And now I really understand that there is one howitzer, and another cannon.
      3. Zaurbek 23 September 2016 13: 29 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        The role of towed artillery is now performed by an art system based on wheeled chassis (civilian with a high resource) in this direction and all go.
        1. chenia 23 September 2016 14: 18 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: Zaurbek
          based on wheeled chassis (civil


          Can,
          but firstly, armored (at least a cabin that accommodates the entire calculation).

          secondly, the platform with the gun should lower to the ground, and the barrel is deployed in the opposite direction (from the cab). Then you can horizontal sector of fire. increase to 270 degrees (to have lateral support beds, and the car body and elements of the drive mechanism in the BP-main emphasis.

          Well, something like this. And it will be cheaper, reliable and secure calculations are relatively secure, and a mobility plan is acceptable.
  2. svp67 23 September 2016 07: 20 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    The 152 mm Msta-B howitzer (GRAU index - 2A65) can be considered the last in a long line of Soviet-developed post-war field howitzers.
    In general, the last was the 152-mm PAT-B
    1. Lopatov 23 September 2016 07: 26 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      "Pat-B" was not accepted into service and she did not join the troops. For the simple reason that the concept of "weight reduction by limiting the maximum firing range" did not suit the military.
      1. svp67 23 September 2016 07: 33 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Nevertheless, it is the LAST developed and embodied in metal SOVIET towed howitzer
      2. Alex_59 23 September 2016 07: 33 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: Spade
        "Pat-B" was not accepted into service and she did not join the troops. For the simple reason that the concept of "weight reduction by limiting the maximum firing range" did not suit the military.

        She would have to attach her to Shamanov, he has divisions in the SAPs like the 2A18 division in the state, why not change it to Pat? 152-mm is still more convincing, and everyone rejects 122-mm. And the weight, in principle, is acceptable for landing, Mi-8 certainly will not pull it, and Mi-26 or, in the future, Mi-38 - completely.
        1. Lopatov 23 September 2016 08: 01 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          Damn, even the Chinese were able to create a 155-mm light howitzer for the Airborne Forces with a normal firing range. Moreover, in three versions, the usual, self-propelled and in the option "ersatzSAU"

          Do we have stupid people?
          1. Alex_59 23 September 2016 08: 11 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            Ehhh ... does it seem like this wonderful Chinese device in the 122-mm caliber exists? Not?
            https://topwar.ru/62444-kompaniya-norinco-vpervye
            -pokazala-sau-cs-sh-1.html
            1. Lopatov 23 September 2016 08: 28 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              Pancake. Specifically in this photo, yes. But there was information that in the same way they were going to "gamble" the AH4, a seamless copy of the M777. Slightly reducing barrel length
            2. kot11180 23 September 2016 08: 40 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              it doesn’t seem to pull by 155, the trunk is thin and the size is small
              1. Lopatov 23 September 2016 09: 28 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                The Chinese are generally quite creative guys in terms of “wherever to steal and adapt to business”.

                Spetsnaz Raid Machine

                An unlicensed copy of the OTO Melara M50 mountain howitzer created in the 105s was installed on it.
  3. PKK
    PKK 23 September 2016 08: 47 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    When such a howitzer is among the militias, it’s good, and when it shoots from dill, it’s bad. It’s very bad.
    1. AUL
      AUL 23 September 2016 11: 28 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      I read the article. The howitzer is good. Article - hack. Just taken a few articles on the internet and combined into one. Solid repetitions. For example, about two-speed mechanisms of vertical and horizontal aiming repeated at least three times - apparently, for those especially gifted who are in the tank. And many more similar places. Well, if at the end of the article is "The author of this", then you need to work on the text more thoroughly, and not just kick pieces from the Internet!
  4. Oleg43 23 September 2016 09: 15 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Brothers do not tell me, but there will be more advanced howitzers than this, because science does not stand still, or until we use all the old ones, we will not buy new ones? After all, this development is already 27 years old. And another question is the secretive deployment, in those places where the self-propelled, will not pass or because of the noise of the engines, the heat radiation from the engines is more noticeable and more dependent on breakdowns of the mat part and fuels and lubricants?
    1. Lopatov 23 September 2016 09: 42 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Quote: oleg43
      and there will be more perfect howitzers than this because science does not stand still,

      Of course they will. The same "Coalition" is an electrothermochemical tool of generation 1+.
    2. AUL
      AUL 23 September 2016 15: 56 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      And another question is the secretive deployment, in those places where the self-propelled, will not pass or because of the noise of the engines, the heat radiation from the engines is more noticeable and more dependent on breakdowns of the mat part and fuels and lubricants?

      Do you think that in this situation, the position of the gun can be brought on hand?
      1. Kasym 23 September 2016 16: 32 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        To create or upgrade it is necessary not only "trunks", but also ammunition. hi
        1. Kasym 23 September 2016 17: 13 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Shovels, I do not agree with you that all the barrel art. must be changed to self-propelled guns. Once Khrushchev decided to replace all artillery and aviation with missiles. And then, with their pants tucked behind the west, they fled to catch up. Yes, and for the money it ... can not afford even the United States. And if you take into account the territory of the Russian Federation? In short, it’s expensive to change the entire barrel artillery to self-propelled guns.
          Or here's another interesting point. EW complex "Mercury", which acts on the radio.-elektr. fuse (in the west 80% of all ammunition have similar detonators) and detonates ammunition on approach. So it is necessary to equip the barrel artillery with these complexes, to bury as it should from enemy fire. hi
          1. Lopatov 23 September 2016 17: 57 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            Quote: Kasym
            Shovels, I do not agree with you that all the barrel art. need to change to self-propelled guns

            Where did I write this?

            Quote: Kasym
            In short, it’s expensive to change the entire barrel artillery to self-propelled guns.

            Self-propelled guns are also barrel artillery. 8)))

            Personally, I think that at the level of motorized rifle brigades there should only be full-fledged self-propelled guns. Higher-grade self-propelled guns, “automotive” self-propelled guns and towed self-propelled guns. Battalion artillery - "Vienna" for the "shock" / "heavy" motorized rifle battalions on BMP and TBMP. The rest is self-propelled mortars easier

            Available towed guns are mostly at storage bases. But at the same time they should be equipped with automation kits. Plus, as a weapon, substitutes in the troops. Each division has at least three guns. It is painful to coach the gentlemen officers (and, more intellectually, sergeants, unit commanders) curiously, using standard self-propelled guns.
            1. Vladimir Postnikov 24 September 2016 02: 08 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Available towed guns are mostly at storage bases. But at the same time they should be equipped with automation kits. Plus, as a weapon, substitutes in the troops. Each division has at least three guns. It is painful to coach the gentlemen officers (and, more intellectually, sergeants, unit commanders) curiously, using standard self-propelled guns.

              The question I already asked above. Why still no? As for the automation of tools at the storage bases, I completely agree. And I can’t understand why this has not been done so far. Guns equipped with ASUNO do not require training firing. They will only require routine verification firing, and all guidance exercises will be carried out on the built-in simulators. For loaders, you will need to create a separate special simulator so that they perfect their skills there for days on end. In addition, with towed guns, only the loaders will remain directly at the firing position. The commander, who is also a gunner, will be able to be in cover.
  5. evge-malyshev 23 September 2016 10: 05 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Interesting, but for the nonspeakers, much is incomprehensible. I realized only one thing, that both self-propelled and towed howitzers of a uniform caliber are needed. And they are. Which is already good.
  6. Rurikovich 23 September 2016 10: 22 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Personally, my opinion: a towed howitzer (especially if it is an excellent and reliable system) is good. But now is the age of technology. There are means for detecting positions, there are means for air and space reconnaissance that do not imply a long battery life cycle. Yes, if any "Papuans" are fighting, stuck at the level of the middle of the 20th century, then the presence of such batteries is allowed there. But personally, I am only self-propelled for artillery. Mobility, short deployment-folding time, and nothing drips on your head ...
    This, of course, is purely my opinion hi
    1. Alexey RA 23 September 2016 11: 27 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Quote: Rurikovich
      Personally, my opinion: a towed howitzer (especially if it is an excellent and reliable system) is good.

      The towed howitzer is now a fairly narrow niche system. As already written, it can be used:
      - in a conflict of low intensity, when the enemy does not have means of counter-battery combat (however, judging by Ukraine, the parties acquire such means quite quickly - no one likes to lie under artillery fire).
      - during the counter-guerrilla campaign - both in classical stripping operations, and from stationary and temporary bases to support their light forces, raid and reconnaissance groups (tactics dating back to Vietnam).
      - in compounds where the weight and dimensions are critical (various kinds of landing forces).
      1. Rurikovich 23 September 2016 14: 10 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Do not deny. paratroopers, as far as I know, order systems under their own restrictions.
        The low-intensity conflict is about what is currently being observed in the southeast of Ukraine. In the absence of change, you can also shoot from the tows, especially if the front is stable. With all of what I have said, I, in principle, agree. I didn’t deny this. But a modern army, counting on many dividends in the fight against the enemy, must have adequate systems that can quickly, efficiently, without loss solve the tasks of identifying the enemy and the associated threats ... And these are self-propelled complexes with high automation and quality control. Which, in principle, is combined with self-propelled installations. Yes, and their vitality will be higher ... hi
      2. Vladimir Postnikov 24 September 2016 02: 16 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        The towed howitzer is now a fairly narrow niche system.

        From the very beginning, they had to be used in Syria to create strong points along the roads. And so, step by step, move towards the goal. The old tactics of fortresses, or the Great Wall. Each new one is built under the guise of an old one. Such targets are not so easy to bomb by mistake (but possible). And if you try, then they could answer. But it is seen from the couch. Strategists think differently.
  7. Oleg43 23 September 2016 11: 28 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Rurikovich
    Personally, my opinion: a towed howitzer (especially if it is an excellent and reliable system) is good. But now is the age of technology. There are means for detecting positions, there are means for air and space reconnaissance that do not imply a long battery life cycle. Yes, if any "Papuans" are fighting, stuck at the level of the middle of the 20th century, then the presence of such batteries is allowed there. But personally, I am only self-propelled for artillery. Mobility, short deployment-folding time, and nothing drips on your head ...
    This, of course, is purely my opinion hi



    I want to ask, how do you think we will always fight with weaker technologically advanced armies and locally? Technology was thrown into World War II due to breakdowns and lack of fuel, such a story with a larger conflict will not happen again? And will there always be an opportunity to use aviation, or helicopters or rockets? Will it be cost-effective in a global war? (cost of guns + ammunition = cost of missiles production)
    1. AUL
      AUL 23 September 2016 12: 20 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Will it be cost-effective in a global war? (cost of guns + ammunition = cost of missiles production)

      Profitability in war is an ambiguous thing. It is necessary to evaluate not only the cost of manufacturing a rocket, but also the cost of what it can do! How to estimate the cost of human life? Or a child’s disability?
      Here the Israelis created their own “Iron Dome”, which costs a lot of money, and it knocks down a penny Arab home-made items from water pipes. And that is not with 100% probability. And they are not going to abandon this system. And it’s hard to blame the Jews for excessive wastefulness.
      So no need to compare cost of guns + ammunition and cost of missiles production, not everything is measured in rubles / bucks / shekels / yuan ...
      1. Oleg43 23 September 2016 16: 38 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        will you have to decipher, I wrote unsuccessfully, globally, when one or two plants that participate in the production chain are destroyed, will the Israelis be able to replace them with others in the production of the Iron Dome? When evacuating, one of the mass tanks in World War II became the T-70 light tank, although the front needed others.
        1. Lopatov 23 September 2016 18: 11 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          In this case, it is cheaper to produce "automotive" self-propelled guns than towed guns. Look at Syria. New weapons of this type appeared not only among government forces, but also among militants. And this is, to put it mildly, not very good starting conditions. The industry of Syria before the war did not shine.
      2. Vladimir Postnikov 24 September 2016 02: 33 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Profitability in war is an ambiguous thing.

        Sorry, but you wrote nonsense. Profitability and war from a universal point of view are two incompatible things. Of course you can talk about the profitability of the war for the state, if as a result of this war you destroy. for example, all of Gazprom’s competitors, as a result of which Gazprom will become a monopolist and push up prices and pay back all costs of the war on profit. In today's reality, it is almost impossible.
        Quote: AUL
        So you don’t need to compare the cost of the gun + ammunition and the cost of missiles production, not everything is measured in rubles / bucks / shekels / yuan ...

        Why not? Just right. It is only being solved at a different level.
        The military is telling the leadership of the country what they want. But, in the end, they will fight with what will happen. And at the beginning of this period (between Wishlist and realities) the comparison you say "no need" will be made. If a problem can be solved cheaper, then it must be solved cheaper, because such tasks are the turn. And the budget is limited. But there are also shareholders, kickbacks, etc.
  8. The leader of the Redskins 23 September 2016 12: 55 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    At one time, our tactician, a veteran of Angola, pointing to the barrel artillery of the USSR combined guns with one parameter - a small firing range. We quickly looked in reference books - it seems to be the same as that of the "likely NATO foe". It turns out that South Africa is not focused on NATO in this regard and has stepped much further. And then he was still a major, made such a conclusion, hitting a couple of times under fire attack, and trying to organize a counter-battery shooting ...
    1. Alexey RA 23 September 2016 17: 11 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Leader of the Redskins
      At one time, our tactician, a veteran of Angola, pointing to the barrel artillery of the USSR combined the guns with one parameter - a small firing range. We quickly glanced at the directories - sort of the same as that of the "probable NATO adversary." It turns out that South Africa in this regard did not focus on NATO and stepped much further.

      Duc ... Gerald Bull really wanted to eat - and as a result of South Africa received the world's best 155-mm towed and self-propelled artillery systems (G5 and G6). Then came the turn of China.
      Paradoxically, the main NATO countries embodied Bull’s ideas into the metal one of the last (except Canada - it all started with its Bullish CG-45 long-barreled).
    2. mr.redpartizan 23 September 2016 21: 06 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Long range without the use of adjustable shells does not make much sense. The dispersion of shells at ranges of over 50 km is enormous.
  9. Operator 23 September 2016 15: 26 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Barrel systems (with the exception of tank guns, small-caliber guns and 120-mm mortars) are artillery yesterday. In the conditions of mass use of radar for notch firing positions, they are disposable products at the rate of two to three shots before the response from the enemy arrives. The constant change of firing positions is pointless - infantry and tanks require continuous fire support.

    Therefore, in the regimental / divisional unit, it is time to completely switch to the Tornado-G / Tornado-U MLRS, and in the battalion unit, to the Solntsepek. Since the range of their ammunition includes rockets with GLONASS and the laser population of the MLRS, they have already become a universal artillery weapon for firing both multiple salvo fire on the principle of “fired - changed position”.

    A self-propelled / towed artillery caliber 152-mm must be sold abroad to combat slippers.
    1. Oleg43 23 September 2016 16: 42 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      With the conquered dominance of the enemy in the air, it is possible to use the Tornado-G / Tornado-U MLRS Solntsepek.?
    2. Alexey RA 23 September 2016 17: 00 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Operator
      The constant change of firing positions is pointless - infantry and tanks require continuous fire support.

      Therefore, in the regimental / divisional unit, it is time to completely switch to the Tornado-G / Tornado-U MLRS, and in the battalion unit, to the Solntsepek. Since the range of their ammunition includes rockets with GLONASS and the laser population of the MLRS, they have already become a universal artillery weapon for firing both multiple salvo fire on the principle of “fired - changed position”.

      And how does a similar use of MLRS ("issued 2-3 correctable RS - changed position") differs from self-propelled guns ("2-3 volleys - and change of position")? After all, MLRS will run from position to position in the same way in order to avoid an answer.

      I'm not talking about the MLRS reload cycle ...
      1. Operator 23 September 2016 17: 26 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        A volley of a single MLRS installation in time is equal to firing a series of three shells of a whole battery of self-propelled guns.

        When firing single shells, the installation of MLRS also successfully replaces an entire battery of self-propelled guns.

        Well, after a volley / single firing, the MLRS installation is much easier to relocate to a reserve position than an ACS battery.

        The reloading of the MLRS installation in time is comparable to the replenishment of the ammunition load of self-propelled guns.
        1. Lopatov 23 September 2016 18: 18 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          PCs for rocket artillery are by default expensive. They can not be used in settlements, and very limited in the mountains. They are not able to hit the enemy on the reverse slopes. By default, they have much more dispersion of ammunition in a salvo.

          In addition, the MLRS are unable to perform most of the tactical tasks assigned to the barrel artillery.
          1. Operator 23 September 2016 19: 42 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            In modern conditions, self-propelled guns are also not used in combat in the city when firing direct fire (otherwise they say ATGM). To do this, use tanks with a completely acceptable gun caliber in 120 mm (T-14 to 152 mm).

            I did not understand your thesis about the impossibility of conducting multiple rocket launchers of indirect fire (including with the defeat of targets on the back cliffs of heights). In my opinion, MLRS only shoot.

            I agree - uncontrolled RSs have a greater KVO than artillery shells (when firing single shots). So, in this case, you must use managed PCs.

            The increased cost of RS is offset by a multiple reduction in the cost of installing an MLRS in comparison with self-propelled guns and better survival in the conditions of contrabattery.
            1. Lopatov 23 September 2016 20: 28 New
              • 3
              • 0
              +3
              Quote: Operator
              In modern conditions, self-propelled guns are also not used in combat in the city when firing direct fire

              Of course not apply. They shoot where you can’t get in by direct fire. Mortar fire (elevation angle of more than 45), along with mortars.

              Quote: Operator
              I did not understand your thesis about the impossibility of conducting multiple rocket launchers of indirect fire (including with the defeat of targets on the back cliffs of heights). In my opinion, MLRS only shoot.

              They shoot not mounted, but flat. Moreover, the greater the maximum range of the RS, the less the ability to work on reverse ramps. And higher dispersion when firing at short ranges. Up to the inexpediency of shooting. And no brake rings help.

              Quote: Operator
              I agree - unmanaged RSs have a larger quo

              In artillery there is no concept of "KVO". Dispersion of shells is an ellipse.


              Quote: Operator
              The increased cost of RS is offset by a multiple reduction in the cost of installing an MLRS in comparison with self-propelled guns and better survival in the conditions of contrabattery.

              "Survival" is the same for them. Well, "cost compensation" occurs only during the short life of the gun / installation on the battlefield. The longer the MLRS "works", the more expensive its use in relation to the gun of the barrel artillery.
              1. Operator 23 September 2016 21: 19 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                I think that in the design of the new Solntsepek RSs they finally solved the problem of indirect firing of MLRS at an angle 45 ° at a short range - by cutting off the thrust of the rocket engine.

                Exactly. self-propelled guns short life. conditions counter-battery and makes effective MLRS - the cost of Msta is an order of magnitude higher than the cost of Grad.
                And in the case of multiple launch rocket fire - by two orders of magnitude (considering the battery of self-propelled guns).
                1. Lopatov 23 September 2016 22: 19 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  Quote: Operator
                  I think that in the design of the new Solntsepek RSs they finally solved the problem of multiple rocket launchers firing at an angle of 45 ° at short range

                  On the contrary. This was inherent in Pinocchio rockets with their microscopic range. But the “Solntsepeka” with an increase in the maximum range of missiles, the trajectory becomes more and more stable. Soon there will be such a characteristic as "minimum range", firing less than which will not only be ineffective due to high dispersion, but also dangerous for its troops.

                  Quote: Operator
                  Exactly. self-propelled guns short life. counter battery conditions

                  Damn, why are you making such a "thoughtful" conclusion? What is a "short life"?
                  Now let's introduce the six-gun battery of modern self-propelled guns. Suppose you spotted it at the moment when the first shell left the barrel. Suppose the return fire is open at the same instant. Suppose the shells flew instantly. You need 1800 guns to destroy this battery.

                  In fact, after a one-minute fire attack and leaving the fire there is a possibility that the ode from the self-propelled guns can be damaged. Shards will scratch the armor.
                  1. Operator 23 September 2016 23: 59 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    You do not understand - the engine of well-known PCs works until the fuel burns out completely. The engine of the new Solntsepek RS works until the thrust cut-off programmable by time — perforation of the vault of the combustion chamber of the engine (analogue of a variable artillery charge).

                    To suppress the battery of self-propelled guns (which did not have time to change position) after the radar-serif coordinates of each of the six guns, 12 guided missiles with GPS guidance will be required.
                    1. Vladimir Postnikov 24 September 2016 03: 11 New
                      • 1
                      • 0
                      +1
                      Quote: Operator
                      You do not understand - the engine of well-known PCs works until the fuel burns out completely. The engine of the new Solntsepek RS works until the thrust cut-off programmable by time — perforation of the vault of the combustion chamber of the engine (analogue of a variable artillery charge).

                      To suppress the battery of self-propelled guns (which did not have time to change position) after the radar-serif coordinates of each of the six guns, 12 guided missiles with GPS guidance will be required.


                      The maximum range of Solntsepek 6 km. Shoots Nurses. Why introduce some kind of traction cutoff (an additional source of failure) if it is easier to change the trajectory? Where did 12 guided missiles come from? Some kind of compote.
  10. mr.redpartizan 23 September 2016 21: 17 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Towed artillery can only be used against a weak adversary who does not have the means of counter-battery combat. The inability to quickly leave the position makes the calculation of the guns suicide bombers in a collision with a serious enemy. A good option are self-propelled guns with fairly good mobility.
    1. magician 23 September 2016 21: 30 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      If you already know from intelligence, where the battery is located. as well as self-propelled artillery has a low result, but the price of the issue plays a role. Am I the standards for the deployment-folding calculation? In WWII and shorties 152mm they managed to do business, despite the professionalism of the calculations of German artillery in counter-battery combat.)
    2. voyaka uh 23 September 2016 23: 29 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1

      "having no means of counter-battery control." /////

      Unless you have a sharp edge on
      firing range. Projectiles like Excalibur with
      55 km range. Then no one is up to you
      will reach with counter-battery fire.
      Howitzer M777 "three sevens" breathed new life into
      towed artillery. Because it’s not a tow truck towing
      but a helicopter. At a speed of 300 km per hour. Over the mountains, over
      forests.
      1. Operator 23 September 2016 23: 46 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Oil painting - every three shots the helicopter transfers the M777 howitzer to the next emergency position laughing
        1. Alexey RA 26 September 2016 09: 57 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: Operator
          Oil painting - every three shots the helicopter transfers the M777 howitzer to the next emergency position

          Duc ... this is some kind of Dune. A few shots - and we call Carryall, until Shai-Hulud came. smile
      2. Vladimir Postnikov 24 September 2016 04: 02 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: voyaka uh
        Unless you have a sharp edge on
        firing range. Projectiles like Excalibur with
        55 km range.

        Proverb: "For every nut with a non-standard thread, there is always a bolt." Not today, so tomorrow.
      3. yehat 19 May 2017 15: 43 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        the Indians are now receiving these guns, according to their documentation, the excalibur flies for 42 km
  11. magician 23 September 2016 21: 23 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    what can I say, if we apply the term to weapons, then beauty!)
  12. ydjin 29 September 2016 16: 07 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    But what about the special warhead did not mention? The caliber 152 contains tactical nuclear weapons!