Military Review

Msta-S vs Paladin - duel of Russian and American self-propelled guns

Both self-propelled artillery guns are designed to solve the same tasks and have guns of almost equal caliber. The combat capabilities of the domestic 2C19 "Msta-S" and the overseas M109A6 Paladin were compared by the candidate of military sciences Sergey Suvorov.


Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site:

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. svp67
    svp67 30 August 2017 13: 04
    No, “Mstu” should not be compared with the “old man” “Palladin”, for this we have “Acacia”, but with the German “PZ-2000"
    1. 11 black
      11 black 30 August 2017 16: 18
      Quote: svp67
      No, “Mstu” should not be compared with the “old man” “Palladin”, for this we have “Acacia”, but with the German “PZ-2000"

      The "old man" was upgraded seven times - so everything is fair, but with Pz-2000 you need to compare 2С35.
      By the way - here, so to speak, is a comparison in "combat training" conditions. Turn on both videos together and bend your fingers yes

      Anticipating curiosity - Palladin in the modification of A6.

      1. svp67
        svp67 30 August 2017 21: 55
        Quote: 11 black
        The “Old Man” was modernized seven times - so everything is fair,

        And what prevented us from doing the same with Acacia?
        Quote: 11 black
        and with Pz-2000 it is necessary to compare 2C35.

        Our 2C19 appeared as a BREAKTHROUGH, and not as a response to the next modernization of Palladin, but in response to the appearance of Mst, the PZ-2000 appeared. And this is now the MAIN SPG on the European theater. And when and how many “Coalitions” appear, we will find out only after some time, during which the PZ-2000 can also “rejuvenate”, and then we will compare them
        1. Basilevs
          Basilevs 4 September 2017 16: 17
          Video fragments are not comparing correctly. On the upper fragment 2C19, which is a minimum of modification M1, judging by the commander’s equipment 1B169, it fires in emergency mode (duplication mode). If we were to compare, they would have shown work in the normal mode. The maximum rate of fire, however, with short series, reaches 5sec / shot.
          1. 11 black
            11 black 4 September 2017 21: 03
            Quote: Basilevs
            judging by the commander’s 1В169 equipment, it fires in emergency mode (duplication mode)

            They could have specially cut down the coordinator - in case of intensive counter-firing of the enemy, the “own" battery will shoot just like that - every second is expensive.
            PS - well, in normal mode, not in 4, but would be two times ahead of the Americans (those penguins in the video are three) yes
  2. Vladimir K
    Vladimir K 30 August 2017 20: 25
    Yes, we have a more progressive rammer, but we did not get rid of the cartridge case, unlike the Americans. On the other hand, the presence of a sleeve reduces the risk of self-ignition when the barrel warms up, there is no need to install a trigger every time, which, moreover, has a cord drive. In addition, it seems that the “Palladin” works worse muzzle ejector.
    1. Fedot57
      Fedot57 30 August 2017 21: 20
      so ours already during this time five times lupanuli))))))))))))
  3. SergF123
    SergF123 31 August 2017 05: 57
    What are 8 shots per minute for palladium ??? !!! amerzotka, as always, brechet without hesitation!
  4. ventel
    ventel 31 August 2017 12: 17
    In artillery, the rate of fire is not so critical. The main thing is accuracy. Without it, artillery simply turns into a heap of iron.
    1. Barmal
      Barmal 31 August 2017 14: 30
      There are two options for a heap of iron. Quickly stalling from a position after mining, and another: a slowly firing and long-leaving heap of iron. All that the author wanted to show. Being in time to get out of position on time is sometimes more important than getting there exactly, but only once or twice. And quickly become a motionless heap of iron. Fast shooting has one plus - it quickly knocks everything where it goes. And while the shelling raises her head, she is no longer in place, and she can again throw something from another place that did not throw right the first time. And the gas contamination of the “salon”, ceteris paribus, may make it impossible to quickly shoot any pile of iron.
      I am pleased with the Russian artillery system. The calculation works beautifully, the classics of the genre are the gods of war.
      1. ventel
        ventel 31 August 2017 18: 21
        Sorry, but your arguments are ridiculous. The First and Second World War showed that mass and rate of fire do not guarantee against losses, and water accuracy is the guarantee that losses will be several times less. What is the point of firing if the target was not hit from the first or second volley, the enemy would be scared to scare the infantry in the attack and they won’t understand these pontoons. When you look at the artillery, where it was quickly fenced off and changed its position, but the principle is true: be careful not to be afraid to get into battle turns into a lot of blood.
        1. vlanis
          vlanis 31 August 2017 22: 07
          If it was a duel shooting, then you might be right, but alas, in reality there are usually more than one hunter, and in this case you hit one or not - doesn’t play a special role, another has already aimed at you, and the ability to quickly reel fishing rods, no less important than accuracy
          1. ventel
            ventel 31 August 2017 23: 17
            If you want, I’ll prove to you that you’re wrong. Let's take the Yutlan naval battle, but the battle between the battle cruisers the British had more ships than the Germans and what we see, they only got into the Germans after 20 minutes and the Germans drowned 2 ships during this time, what do you think which gave such a result is the mass of a volley or accuracy. You can argue that this is a naval battle, but also on land artillery performs the same tasks and suppresses enemy firepower. Now imagine a picture except for a bead and a rangefinder, there’s nothing else under your omandyvaniem 2 batteries your opponent 1 battery but it does have UAVs, satellites that transmit the coordinates to within Meta and US intelligence in real time as you think who quickly destroy the enemy.
            1. Barmal
              Barmal 1 September 2017 22: 45
              There is such a couch principle: War of hen is the main maneuver. While the smoked Negro will do something there with reloading the mortars, raise the stops behind the caterpillar device, the relocated Msts will catch up with the firewave in positions. Duel - this is with Lieutenant Rzhevsky. He has dirt on the sole and not shit. It dries and disappears by itself. A frenzied infantry will not wait when it dries. Although NATO does not expect shelling, they drink coffee.
              1. kwochka
                kwochka 2 September 2017 01: 07
                You are both right and wrong. Shooting accuracy is just as important as rate of fire. But in this type of artillery, rate of fire is still more important, since firing is not direct fire, and a large number of factors act on the projectile. This is the number of rifling, their steepness, and even the direction (left or right), barrel length, quantity and quality of gunpowder, barrel wear. And after the projectile takes off: humidity, air temperature, wind direction and speed. This is what I remember. Therefore, howitzers fire HE (high-explosive) shells at the target square. And hit the target with shrapnel and explosive impact. And here the caliber and weight of the explosive in the shell is important. And if you're lucky with a direct hit, then wonderful. Of course this does not apply to guided missiles. But these are usually single shots, or a small series.
  5. Nuclear fuel station
    Nuclear fuel station 3 September 2017 01: 54
    It is pointless to compare the duel of two self-propelled guns without taking into account target designation with UAVs and reconnaissance, because without this their duel will not even start. Given the overwhelming, absolute superiority in this United States, it remains to reassure oneself with hopes of a "Negro error" or "damage to dry closets / air conditioners," to engage in primitive hacking.
    1. Rash
      Rash 4 September 2017 11: 09
      "At the training ground of the Russian military base" Dzartsemi "in South Ossetia with the beginning of a new training period, the crews of infantry fighting vehicles BMP-3, T-72BM tanks and self-propelled artillery systems (ACS)" Msta-S "," Akatsiya "," Gvozdika "started to field exercises with the use of UAVs, "the report said.

      RIA Novosti

      The military will practice the use of 152 mm self-propelled howitzers Msta-S, multiple launch rocket systems (MLRS) Hurricane and Tornado-G.

      In addition, perspective zoological artillery reconnaissance systems capable of servicing fire at several targets at once will be used to adjust the fire and track the air targets of the conditional enemy.
      The exercises involved MSTA-S self-propelled artillery systems delivered from the Russian Federation. In the course of the exercises, it is planned to develop the practice of preparing calculations for battle and conducting live firing. It is envisaged to work on individual targets and their accumulations, including through adjustments from UAVs.

      What decade-century are you stuck with?