Artillery. Large caliber. 2С7 "Peony" inside and out

54


Continuing the theme of the artillery weapons of the Russian army, we turn to the story of the gun, which is difficult not to see at any exhibition, in any museum or any other venue where it is exhibited. A weapon that can be called a very small number of gunners by the native.



As you understand, we are talking about the next flower in the bouquet of artillery systems, 203-mm self-propelled artillery cannon of the High Command Command 2-7 "Peony". The 2C7 ACS is one of the most powerful field artillery systems in the world today.



If SAU 2C5 "Hyacinth" gives the impression of God of war, then SAU 2C7 "Peony" puts pressure on the senses in a completely different way. By the way, almost all high-power tools affect our feelings in the same way. It would be more correct to, after all, another definition - increased power!

This system is rather a punishing sword of God. The sword, which is almost impossible to resist. The sword, from which you can not hide. The sword, bearing inevitable punishment.



The story of this system must start from afar. Since the reign of N. S. Khrushchev. Many gunners still recall this General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU with a nasty feeling. The man who decided to "kill God", kill the barrel artillery. The war, according to Khrushchev, is the exchange of nuclear strikes with the help of missiles and bombers.

But, despite this point of view of the country's leadership, the army understood that a global conflict would lead to the destruction of the planet as such. Use nuclear weapon huge power is stupid. Therefore, modern wars will no longer be as global as World War II. They will turn into a series of local conflicts.

But to give up nuclear weapons is stupid. The fact that it is impossible to achieve a huge caliber and a huge amount of explosives in ammunition, can be achieved by using a nuclear charge and missiles. No wonder the power of nuclear weapons in TNT equivalent are measured in kilotons. Thousands of tons!

Talk about the need to create weapons capable of firing projectiles with "nuclear stuffing" began openly in the middle of the 60's. This statement concerns not only the Soviet Union, but also its antipode - the United States. The military theorists of both countries arrived at the same conclusion at about the same time.

Thus, the second half of the 60-ies is characterized by the development of several artillery systems at once, capable of striking at the enemy with low-power nuclear ammunition. The army needed a "new old" carrier of nuclear weapons.

In 1967, an order was issued by the USSR Ministry of Defense Industry to begin developing high-powered self-propelled artillery. The main requirement was the firing range and the possibility of using a low-power nuclear charge. The rest of the restrictions were not delivered to designers. The main thing - the range of at least 25 km for conventional OFS.

Research to determine the appearance and basic performance characteristics of self-propelled guns of special power was initiated by order of the USSR Ministry of Defense Industry No. 801 from December 16 1967. On instructions from the Kalinin Artillery Academy, chose the caliber of the installation: 210, 72-mm gun C-180 and 23-mm coastal gun MU-180.

At the conclusion of the Academy, the ballistic solution of the 210-mm C-72 gun was considered the most appropriate. However, despite this, the Barricades plant, to ensure the continuity of the manufacturing techniques of already developed B-4 and B-4M guns, proposed reducing the caliber from 210 to 203 mm. The proposal was approved by the Grau.

At the same time, work was also done on the selection of the chassis and layout for the future heavy ACS:

- chassis variant of the MT-T multi-purpose tractor, made on the basis of tank T-64A - “Object 429A”;
- version of the chassis on the basis of a heavy tank T-10 - "Object 216.c1";

Due to the fact that an open installation of the tool was assumed, as well as due to the high resistance force to rollback (135 t), the existing chassis were not suitable for ACS. Therefore, it was decided to develop a new chassis with the maximum possible unification of the nodes with the tanks in service with the USSR.

As a result, the ministry made a Solomon decision. In 1969, the Kirov factory became the lead developer of the Pion. The construction of the artillery component engaged designers "Barricades".

Requirements for the new ACS were quite tough. Beskoshetnaya shooting range 8,5 — 35 km (for OFS). ACS must be sufficiently mobile. But most importantly, the system must shoot 3BB2 projectile! This marking was assigned to a nuclear warhead projectile. Those. Initially, designers were given the task to create a "nuclear cannon."

The chief designer of the chassis was N. S. Popov.

Artillery. Large caliber. 2С7 "Peony" inside and out


G. I. Sergeev became the chief designer of 203-mm 2A44 guns.



To close the topic of nuclear weapons, you need to run ahead. "Peony" really shot a shell 3BB2! Developed in 1977 in the All-Union Scientific Research Institute of Technical Physics specifically for the ACS 2C7.

More precisely, a stationary cannon with a barrel from an 2C7 gun fired. But it was only once. Therefore, we cannot talk about stable shooting on the basis of tests. One shot in the conditions of the landfill. But will the second be necessary in a combat situation? Given the charge power in 2 kilotons ...

In the period from 1973 to 1974, two prototypes of the 2 – 7 ACS were manufactured and sent for testing. The first sample was running trials at the site Strugi Red. The second sample was tested by shooting, but could not meet the requirements for the firing range. The problem was solved by the selection of the optimal composition of the powder charge and the type of shot.

In 1975, the new ACS was put into service, and from next year it began to be mass-produced and enter the artillery brigades of special power. 2С7 "Peony" is designed to suppress and eliminate the means of a nuclear attack (SNS), artillery, mortars, equipment, logistics, command and control points, enemy manpower.

We turn directly to the ACS itself. Moreover, it is really interesting even for a non-expert.



The self-propelled gun "Peony" is made according to a reckless scheme with an open installation of the gun in the aft part of the hull. On the march all the crew members are housed in the ACS building.

The case is divided into four compartments. In the front part there is a department of management with a place of commander, driver and a place for one of the members of the calculation.















Behind the department of management is the engine compartment with the engine.



Behind the engine-transmission compartment there is a compartment of calculation, in which the stacking with projectiles is located, the place of the gunner is traveling and the places for 3 (in the modernized version of 2) are members of the calculation.



In the aft compartment there is a folding plate-coulter and the gun of ACS.









The 2C7 case is made of two-layer anti-bullet armor with a thickness of 13 mm outer sheets, and 8 mm internal sheets.

The calculation, located inside the ACS, is protected from the effects of the use of weapons of mass destruction. The body reduces the effect of penetrating radiation three times.

The main implement is loaded with the ACS from the ground or from the truck using a special lifting mechanism installed on the platform on the right side of the main implement. Charging while it is to the left of the gun, controlling the process using the remote control.





By tradition, we will pay special attention to the instrument. Rifle gun 2А44 developed by OKB-3 (design bureau of the plant "Barricades").

The barrel of the gun is a free pipe connected to the breech. In the breech is a piston valve. The barrel of the gun and the recoil devices are placed in the cradle of the swinging part.

The swinging part is fixed on the upper machine, which is mounted on the axis and fixed by scraps.

Anti-recoil devices consist of a hydraulic brake recoil and two pneumatic knuckles arranged symmetrically with respect to the bore. This scheme of recoil devices allows you to securely hold the sliding parts of the gun in the extreme position before firing at any angles of the vertical guidance of the gun.

The recoil length when fired reaches 1400 mm.

Sector-type lifting and pivoting mechanisms provide guidance for the tool in the range of angles from 0 to + 60 ° vertically and from −15 to + 15 ° horizontally.

The guidance can be carried out both by hydraulic drives, powered from the pump station SAU 2C7, and by means of manual drives.

The pneumatic counterbalancing mechanism serves to compensate for the moment of unbalance of the swinging part of the gun.

To facilitate the work of the members of the calculation, the ACS is equipped with a loading mechanism that ensures the supply of shots to the line of loading and sending them into the gun chamber.



The folding base plate, located in the rear of the hull, transmits the force of a shot to the ground, ensuring greater stability of the ACS. On the charge number 3 "Peony" could lead direct fire without installing a coulter.

The self-propelled Peony self-propelled gun is a 4 shot (for the upgraded version of the 8), the main ammunition of 40 shots is carried in the vehicle attached to the ACS.



Like any system, ACS "Peony" is constantly being upgraded. The emergence of new technical solutions, new production technologies, new materials leads to the improvement of tools and self-propelled guns in general.

The “Peony” SAU 2C7M “Malka” became the “Continuation” SAU 2С7. This is not another weapon. This is exactly the modernization of the Pion. Changes were the engine and chassis. Trials started in February 1985.

For receiving and displaying information from the car of a senior officer of the battery, the gunner’s and commander’s places were equipped with digital indicators with automatic data reception, which made it possible to reduce the time needed to transfer the car from the traveling to the combat position and back.

Thanks to the redesigned styling, portable ammunition was increased to 8 shots.

The new loading mechanism made it possible to load the gun at any vertical aiming angle. Thus, the rate of fire was increased by 1,6 times (up to 2,5 rounds per minute), and the fire mode - by 1,25 times.

To monitor important subsystems in the ACS, the regulatory control equipment was installed, which carried out continuous monitoring of the armament, engine, hydraulic system and power generating units.

Mass production started in 1986.

It is probably worth talking about another version of the 2A44 gun. A variant that was specially developed for the Navy. And which was not implemented only because of the principled position naval chiefs in large caliber as such.

"Pion-M" - the project of the ship artillery, developed on the basis of the gun 2А44 at the end of the 1970-s. The mass of the artillery without ammunition was 65-70 tons. The ammunition should have been 75 shots, and the rate of fire to 1,5 shots per minute. Artillery installation "Pion-M" was supposed to be installed on ships of the 956 project of the type "Modern".

Today, it’s stupid to talk about the correctness of this decision of the fleet management. You can only express your own opinion. It seems to us that the admirals “drowned” the Pion-M for nothing. It was very short-sighted to focus all attention on rockets. Time has shown that in some cases, high-tech weapons are more vulnerable than good old projectile. He does not care for enemy EW and other technical innovations.

The main TTH SAU 2А7 "Peony":



Mass, t: 46,5
Tool caliber, mm: 203,2

Angles of guidance:
- vertical: 0-60 °
- horizontal: 15 °

Maximum range, m: 37 500
Minimum range, m: 8 400

Mass of high-explosive fragmentation projectile, kg: 110

Rate of fire, rds / min: up to 2,5

Ammunition, shots: 4

Types of shells: high-explosive, high-explosive, special

Transfer time from traveling to combat, min: 5

Calculation persons: 6

Engine power, hp: 780
Maximum travel speed, km / h: 51
Cruising on the highway, km: 500

In service with the Russian Army today is the 327 units of the ACS "Peony" and "Malka". However, most of them (up to 300) are in storage.



During the operation in the Soviet Army self-propelled guns "Peony" have never been used in any armed conflict. After the signing of the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe, all the Pion and Malka self-propelled guns were removed from the European districts and redeployed to the Siberian and Far Eastern military districts.

The only known combat episode of the 2C7 ACS is the war in South Ossetia, where the Georgian side of the conflict used a battery of six ACS 2C7. During the retreat, Georgian troops lost all six SPGs 2С7 in the Gori area. One of the installations was captured as a trophy by Russian troops, the rest were destroyed.

There is evidence of the presence of "Peonies" in the zone of armed conflict in the east of Ukraine as part of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, there is no reliable information on the application yet.

Unfortunately, we are still forced to stop and pause on this material. However, large calibers will return at the very beginning of autumn. So to all fans of big guns and howitzers - goodbye!

The authors heartily thank all true fans of artillery. Once again: see you again!
54 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +2
    7 July 2018 06: 28
    Great review good
    1. +3
      7 July 2018 12: 26
      I would like to read (well, at least available information) about the "Sapling" and "Kleschevina" shells for these self-propelled guns ..
  2. +2
    7 July 2018 07: 49
    Attach an AZ to this gun, increase the rate of fire to 5-6 rounds per minute, and transfer to an articulated chassis to increase the carrying capacity of the ammunition. And shoot lightweight up to 40-50kg projectile at 60-80km, with a penny shot price. 5-6 batteries will cover almost the entire territory of the same Syria.
    1. Alf
      +8
      7 July 2018 08: 27
      Quote: demiurg
      Attach an AZ to this gun, increase the rate of fire to 5-6 rounds per minute, and transfer to an articulated chassis to increase the carrying capacity of the ammunition.

      In short, make a new gun.
    2. +17
      7 July 2018 08: 54
      MLRS in this case is a much more adequate solution.

      Quote: demiurg
      with a penny shot price.

      It is "cheap" only if there is already a shot made during the USSR.
      For example, a 152-mm OF61 with a bottom gas generator and a long-range charge in 2005 was purchased for about 58 thousand rubles. For the same money it was possible to take 9 Gradovsky M-21F
      1. +3
        7 July 2018 11: 14
        If you shoot at 70 kilometers with a lightweight shell, then you need to compare not with hail, but with a Hurricane, or even with Tornado. And there the price of the rocket will be richer.
        1. +5
          7 July 2018 11: 42
          Quote: demiurg
          it must be compared not with hail, but with a Hurricane, or even with Tornado.

          8)))
          The "lightweight" 203 mm projectile is 110 kg, with 17.8 kg of explosives. "Uraganovsky" - 99 kg warhead at 52 kg of explosives
          You have to pay for everything, including overload when firing.
          1. 0
            7 July 2018 14: 59
            is there a concrete-piercing shell for a tornado / hurricane?
            52 / 17,8 = 2,9. roughly 3.
            if the target has a equal number of explosives, it will be spent:
            -or only three pig-iron bodies of rotation (lathe -ultrotechnology, yes?) + 3 standard fuses.
            -or one warhead rocket with GGE + 1 fuse (electric time device) + rocket stabilization control system block + mixed rocket fuel (weighing more than gunpowder mass) + rocket tail.
            Out of 810 kg of the 9M55F rocket, only 92,5 kg is accounted for by explosives; the rest is high-tech hi-tech. which is DISPOSABLE.

            so yes, you have to pay, for the "volley" MLRS you have to pay, and very expensive.
            1. +6
              7 July 2018 15: 44
              Quote: g_g2008
              is there a concrete-piercing shell for a tornado / hurricane?

              Sorry, but shooting at concrete with long-range concrete is a perversion similar to lighting a cigarette from a hundred-dollar bill.
              Quote: g_g2008
              or just three cast-iron rotation bodies (a lathe is an ultra-technology, right?) + 3 standard fuses.

              Exactly. Ultra technology. For shooting at long range. Precision processing, because the smallest kosyachok in the form of a shell at such ranges will give a miss in range of tens of meters
              1. +6
                7 July 2018 17: 45
                You see, what’s the matter, I’m an operator of CNC) a turner right now, and a milling cutter in the past.
                there is nothing supernatural in the lathe - I saw both the drawings of ammunition and their tolerances). an artillery shell is radically simpler and cheaper than a rocket. Whether you like it or not, it is.
                1. +7
                  7 July 2018 18: 38
                  Quote: g_g2008
                  You see, what’s the matter, I’m an operator of CNC) a turner right now, and a milling cutter in the past.
                  there is nothing supernatural in a lathe

                  Do you know that at long ranges you have to introduce a correction for the color of the projectile?
                  Therefore, the cost of a long-range 152-mm round with a projectile with a bottom gas generator is more than that of nine RS to Grad. Which. Incidentally, more explosives are “conveyed” to the enemy
                  These are the pies.
                  Shooting long-range barrel artillery is expensive and very stupid fun.
                  Especially if you have to use precision systems. Which is not only much more expensive for shells because of the need to hold a much larger initial acceleration.
                  As an example, a 155 mm Excalibur costs $ 160 thousand, a 227 mm managed PC costs $ 114 thousand. At a lower cost, it flies almost two times further, and even the warhead weighs like two Excalibur as a whole, together with all their steering machines, control equipment and a rocket engine
                  Whether you like it or not, it is.
                  1. +1
                    8 July 2018 14: 49
                    I don’t know where you got such price data from.
                    I do not know why you are so torn for 152mm ars. The reasons may be different - from drinking, to the banal lack of production, that is, the cost of deploying the series is also included in the price.
                    But to me, as a person working in production, with metal, including hands, it is clear that the projectile is more technologically advanced and simpler than a rocket. Is it logical to assume that it should be cheaper? Is logical. Well, we go to the site with the prices for ammunition and we are convinced of it.
                    203mm Russian HE: Weight: 153 kg; Price: $ 1530 (R / S) - for one piece.
                    Well, for three it means it will be $ 4590
                    Now look at the price of the Tornado projectile there
                    300mm Bloc HE: Weight: 830 kg; Price: $ 6040 (- / R)
                    for the difference in price with a rocket, you can buy another, fourth projectile of 203mm caliber.
                    L-Logic. And so yes, if you shoot with an escalibur, then art is more expensive, yeah.
                    1. +1
                      10 July 2018 20: 10
                      I doubt that Mr. Lopatov will argue with you further. The fact that you sharpened the shells did not particularly impress anyone. Did you also sharpen rockets? Have you studied external ballistics after work?
                      Mr. Lopatov quite correctly compared American products at American prices. Because they have remained virtually unchanged. You can’t compare Russians, and he also said about this: "It is" cheap "only if there is already a shot fired during the USSR."
                      For Russian products, only products manufactured in post-Soviet Russia can be compared. In most cases, this is already a completely different cost (than in the USSR). The cost of the product is not determined solely by manufacturability, and even by eye. There are a lot of factors that affect it.
                      So, roughly speaking, the optimal solution is determined by the parameters of efficiency / cost. Other parameters are taken into account, but these two are the main ones. To make it completely clear, when comparing different weapons (a rough estimate), one goal is determined and the total total cost of the different products required to defeat this target is compared. And Mr. Lopatov knows all this.
                      Who is illogical here? Judge for yourself.
  3. Alf
    0
    7 July 2018 08: 25
    But wasn’t it used in the Chechen wars? It seems to be somewhere, the Basmachi even howled, they say, the Russian troops use nuclear weapons.
    1. +9
      7 July 2018 08: 33
      Quote: Alf
      But wasn’t it used in the Chechen wars?

      240 mm were used.
      Guns are practically useless in the mountains and in settlements. Unlike mortars
      1. Alf
        +2
        7 July 2018 08: 34
        Quote: Spade
        240 mm applied

        I mean tulips?
        1. +7
          7 July 2018 08: 55
          Quote: Alf
          Quote: Spade
          240 mm applied

          I mean tulips?

          Yes.
          Moreover, they are practically the only ones who used high-precision ammunition. Adjustable "Daredevils".
          1. Alf
            +2
            7 July 2018 09: 05
            Quote: Spade
            Quote: Alf
            Quote: Spade
            240 mm applied

            I mean tulips?

            Yes.
            Moreover, they are practically the only ones who used high-precision ammunition. Adjustable "Daredevils".

            Thank you, I didn’t.
  4. +2
    7 July 2018 09: 30
    ... Unfortunately, we are still forced to stop on this material and pause. However, large calibers will return at the very beginning of autumn. So to all lovers of big guns and howitzers - goodbye! hi
  5. +1
    7 July 2018 10: 04
    A beautiful and powerful system, but alas, endangered dinosaurs (like Tulip). The first time I saw (live) in 1979 a mountain center (Rybachye Issyk-Kul). There they mostly checked the chassis (Hyacinth, Tulip too) in the mountainous desert and shot a little.
    1. +8
      7 July 2018 10: 23
      Quote: chenia
      but alas, endangered dinosaurs (like Tulip)

      As for the "Tulip" - not at all a fact. Heavy mortars in modern warfare are an arch-claimed thing.
      But the guns, especially of this caliber, are really an endangered species.
      1. 0
        7 July 2018 14: 21
        Quote: Spade
        in modern warfare, an arch-claimed thing.


        In modern warfare, and positional defense is a conditional thing. As far as I remember, in the late 80s, in every possible way paid attention to the concept security band both in offensive and defense. With such matters, the range is not enough to reach the field fortifications, and not just worthy goals for 240 mm (you need a high explosive action from above). Well, except that the caves in the mountains to destroy. so it is with barmaley.
        Special BP for a long time in 152 mm is not a problem. Cassette - reactivists have an order of magnitude more efficient.

        Anyway, finish with a variety of calibers. 120 mm - battalion, 122 mm mobilization option. (130 mm is also not needed), 152 mm main artillery system from the regimental level.
        82 mm - landing, mountains and other specific conditions and special forces.
        Infantry and tank calibers - a separate conversation.
        And if the remaining calibers are left and then only due to the supply of BP, modernization and export.
        1. +3
          7 July 2018 15: 49
          Quote: chenia
          In modern warfare, and positional defense is a conditional thing.

          And?
          Goals in urban development in a modern war will not be?
          Quote: chenia
          With such matters, the range is not enough

          And what prevents to drag mortars along with infantry? Or in modern warfare and infantry must be abandoned?
          1. 0
            7 July 2018 16: 52
            Quote: Spade
            Goals in urban development in a modern war will not be?


            240 mm? Artillery RGK? Samovar sharpened by a nuclear weapon.
            And cities are taken by storm as an exception, in the overwhelming case they are rented or occupied.

            Quote: Spade
            And what prevents to drag mortars along with infantry?


            120 mm - there is a place.
            1. +3
              7 July 2018 18: 52
              Quote: chenia
              240 mm? Artillery RGK? Samovar sharpened by a nuclear weapon.

              "Samovar" is actively used in Chechnya.

              Quote: chenia
              120 mm - there is a place.

              But one does not interfere with the other. For example, on the first floors of a five-story panel building with a 120-mm mortar, you will pick a target for carrot carving.
              1. 0
                7 July 2018 19: 15
                Quote: Spade
                "Samovar" actively used in Chechnya


                The level of conflict is different, and there they also shot at anti-tank anti-tank infantry.

                Quote: Spade
                For example, the goal on the first floors of a panel five-story building


                We persuaded the battery in the army artillery regiment, all the same piece-by-piece application.
                Although in this regard it is better that something aviation, the same accuracy (now even for unguided bombs), and more powerful. Or surround systems, folded the box and forgot.
                1. +3
                  7 July 2018 20: 22
                  Quote: chenia
                  Conflict level is different

                  In the "big war" the enemy will be so stupid that he will not take up defense in populated areas? Freshly imparted.

                  Quote: chenia
                  We persuaded the battery in the army artillery regiment, all the same piece-by-piece application.

                  I'm afraid the “big war” does not provide for such an application of artillery, with such a disregard for time.

                  Quote: chenia
                  Although in this regard it is better that something aviation, the same accuracy (now even for unguided bombs), and more powerful. Or surround systems, folded the box and forgot.

                  Somehow, I have little idea of ​​the possibility of aviation putting ammunition in the “well” of a courtyard in multi-story buildings without losing a couple of planes.
                  1. Alf
                    +1
                    7 July 2018 20: 50
                    Quote: Spade
                    In the "big war" the enemy will be so stupid that he will not take up defense in populated areas? Freshly imparted.

                    Moreover, modern wars are increasingly tied to cities. Nobody digs trenches in the middle of a flat field. But the cities, on the contrary, are davits.
                  2. 0
                    8 July 2018 09: 16
                    Quote: Spade
                    will the enemy be so stupid that he won’t take up defense in populated areas? Freshly imparted.


                    He can occupy wherever he wants, but when the threat of the environment looms, groups give up the city for a sweet soul. In the last war, hundreds of cities surrendered and only a few stormed (Berlin, Koenigsberg, Stalingrad). And then there certain circumstances forced it to do so.

                    Quote: Spade
                    Somehow, I faintly imagine the opportunity to put ammunition in aviation


                    Well, here I got excited, it is natural to put a bomb in the right house, with the monotonous appearance of the destroyed quarters it is problematic, although with modern means of target designation it may not be difficult. Anti-aircraft defense - and that they will no longer use aviation, the war however, everyone shoots.
                    Well, chemists can clog the sun.
                    Yes, and 99% of the goals in the city can be destroyed by direct fire (tank. Self-propelled).
                    Well, I do not exclude the use of such means as Tulip (but hardly a whole battery).
                    1. +3
                      8 July 2018 09: 49
                      Quote: chenia
                      In the last war, hundreds of cities surrendered and only a few stormed

                      Question: what do you think is the "city". In the last war, the vast majority of cities and other settlements had to be stormed.

                      Quote: chenia
                      Anti-aircraft defense - and that they will no longer use aviation, the war however, everyone shoots.

                      They will use. But at the same time with natural restrictions. Which will not allow to realize the full potential of aviation.

                      Quote: chenia
                      Yes, and 99% of the goals in the city can be destroyed by direct fire (tank. Self-propelled).

                      8))))
                      Quite the opposite. Believe me, direct fire in the city is one more crap. Even in areas with one-story buildings.
                      1. 0
                        8 July 2018 10: 14
                        Quote: Spade
                        In the last war, the vast majority of cities and other settlements had to be stormed.


                        Do not confuse with the storming of the city, when they decided to make a fortress out of it — units, and holding a settlement to cover the withdrawal of troops is here more often.

                        Quote: Spade
                        Quite the opposite. Believe me, direct fire in the city is one more crap.


                        And that only of mortars. Yes, of the mortars in the majority - semi-direct (pointed, and play with a range). How to take your shell during a battle?
                        You don’t feel 240 mm right away, but 82 mm
                    2. +3
                      8 July 2018 11: 14
                      Quote: chenia
                      Do not confuse with the storming of the city, when they decided to make a fortress out of it — units, and holding a settlement to cover the withdrawal of troops is here more often.

                      And what is there to confuse? Names? Cities are not only the size of Berlin. Some station Zubtsovo several times a day passed from hand to hand with a lot of losses on both sides. A normal commander ALWAYS uses a settlement to organize defense; too much he creates preferences for defenders

                      Quote: chenia
                      And that only of mortars.

                      Still howitzer mortar. But with the limitations associated with the trajectories.

                      Quote: chenia
                      Yes, of the mortars in the majority - semi-direct

                      uh ...
                      Semi-direct for a mortar is evidence of the exceptional mediocrity of the commanders.
                      1. 0
                        8 July 2018 14: 39
                        Quote: Spade
                        A normal commander ALWAYS uses a settlement to organize defense; too much he creates preferences for defenders

                        That is why the advancing and tried to get around it whenever possible.

                        Quote: Spade
                        Semi-direct for a mortar is evidence of the exceptional mediocrity of the commanders.


                        Here it was more about the experience of the Second World War. Well, who there could shoot up to 81 mm with a PDO? Mortars then essentially infantry.

                        We forgot the essence of the dispute - 240 mm weapons primarily designed to work with nuclear warheads, the rest on occasion. And you suggest using it to support an assault group.
                        Well, it happens in life. But as an exception, and not as a rule.
                    3. +2
                      8 July 2018 14: 56
                      Quote: chenia
                      Here it was more about the experience of the Second World War. Well, who there could shoot up to 81 mm with a PDO? Mortars then essentially infantry.

                      See something at your leisure NSD-40 82BM. And all questions about "essentially infantry" will disappear. Shooting half-line and in those days was the result of insufficient training, especially of command personnel.

                      Quote: chenia
                      We forgot the essence of the dispute - 240 mm weapons primarily designed to work with nuclear warheads, the rest on occasion.

                      The task for the development of the M-240 was issued in 1944. Explicitly for the use of nuclear warheads. 8)))
                      1. 0
                        8 July 2018 16: 36
                        Quote: Spade
                        The task for the development of the M-240 was issued in 1944. Explicitly for the use of nuclear warheads. 8)))


                        You have a subtle sense of humor.
                        When the M-240 was created, before our eyes was the Mannerheim line and the Koenigsberg forts.
                        And when they created a more or less miniature nuclear shell (after all, dabbled with much larger calibers), they remembered the mortar. Here and active-reactive, here and Daredevil.
                        It’s like a Kurchevsky gun in the form of a PT-garbage system (in a dynamic version). But with the cumulative thing.
                        Here the dialectic however.
                    4. +2
                      8 July 2018 18: 08
                      Quote: chenia
                      When the M-240 was created, before our eyes was the Mannerheim line and the Koenigsberg forts.

                      Yeah ... That is precisely why the 1947 Substation Study Guide indicates the inappropriateness of defeating the pillboxes in combat cover. With numbers indicated. Yes, and there was never a 240 mm mortar of concrete munitions ever.
          2. 0
            7 July 2018 17: 05
            Gunner and Spatula. God grant that in general such calibers do not shoot!
  6. +1
    7 July 2018 10: 17
    It seems to us that the admirals in vain "drowned" ,, Peony-M ".
    Well ... admirals are not Gerasim! "Peony," trick "- not to drown Mumu! Around that time, the Americans also developed the ship’s 203-mm artillery system Mk71, but also refused ... However, the trend!
    1. avt
      +2
      7 July 2018 11: 33
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      . However, a trend!
      request
      They developed an atomic 155mm projectile and it’s easier to communicate with it, as well as saving money.
      Quote: Spade
      But the guns, especially of this caliber, are really an endangered species.

      Well, for now, a vigorous "fire source in stock is not written off.
      1. +3
        7 July 2018 12: 42
        Quote: avt
        Well, for now, a vigorous "fire source in stock is not written off.

        With a probability close to unity, they are no longer available.
        Replaced by 152 mm
        1. 0
          7 July 2018 13: 06
          Quote: Spade
          With a probability close to unity, they are no longer available.



          Well, it’s not “zero”! wink
  7. +2
    7 July 2018 10: 26
    There is evidence of the presence of "Peonies" in the armed conflict zone in eastern Ukraine as part of the Armed Forces, there is no reliable information about the application
    Actually, it really is .... here you can find a video on the Internet where 3 self-propelled guns "Peony" are being rolled along the DNR city street and voice-overs explain that these self-propelled guns are "squeezed" by the militia of the APU ... Event. .. somewhere in the time of Debaltsevsky ...
  8. +1
    7 July 2018 12: 06
    The Pion-M marine system most likely had a rate of fire of not 1,5, but 15 rounds per minute. The AK-130 had a rate of fire of up to 45 rpm per barrel, or up to 90 rpm per installation.
  9. 0
    7 July 2018 13: 02
    Beautiful car. Can anyone have a 2s7 shooting table? the value of Wb is interesting for this artillery system. In my opinion, such a caliber will get a second wind thanks to simple and cheap systems for correcting projectile trajectory like SPACIDO
  10. 0
    7 July 2018 13: 41
    The article is interesting. About Corn Khrushchev a little mistake
    [/ quote] The war, according to Khrushchev, is the exchange of nuclear strikes with the help of missiles and bombers. [quote]
    This figure did not favor aviation either; from his rout of the Air Force, the 10 years came to life, as did the Navy with artillery. The aviation industry itself survived thanks to large injections into the Civil Air Fleet; Tu-104, 114, Il-18 cars went
  11. 0
    7 July 2018 14: 00
    Good gun! This will be useful to us for a long time! Let the darling be kept. Thanks to our fathers who created such a "God of war"!
  12. +3
    7 July 2018 16: 04
    "This system is rather a punishing sword of God. A sword that is almost impossible to resist. A sword that cannot be hidden from. A sword that carries an inevitable punishment."

    Machine-gun bunker No. 292 was built in 1932 and is part of a separate company defense area "C" of the Minsk fortified area. This is the most common structure in the fortified areas of the old border. The thickness of the floor walls is 1,5 m, the thickness of the floor is 1,1 m, the volume of reinforced concrete masonry is 150 cubic meters. m
    Walls and ceilings provided protection against hit by howitzer high-explosive shells of a caliber of 203 mm and cannon shells of a caliber of 152 mm.
    "The story about this system needs to be started from afar. Since the reign of N. S. Khrushchev. Many gunners still recall this general secretary of the CPSU Central Committee with a bad feeling ..."
    Khrushchev was not the General Secretary, Khrushchev was the First Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee.
    1. +1
      7 July 2018 16: 57
      I support, the authors need to know their story better. Those who are now teaching history are excusable for various blunders. Although now there are some who know the history of the Soviet period on5. In the spring, it was possible to check 2 11-class students and 8 people from 9-10 classes. For the majority of our knowledge of history, we would be given 3 (so that the director does not make noise), but there are those that would have received 5 under the Union!
  13. 0
    7 July 2018 16: 42
    Quote: demiurg
    Attach an AZ to this gun, increase the rate of fire to 5-6 rounds per minute, and transfer to an articulated chassis to increase the carrying capacity of the ammunition. And shoot lightweight up to 40-50kg projectile at 60-80km, with a penny shot price. 5-6 batteries will cover almost the entire territory of the same Syria.

    This is called: “if mushrooms were growing in the wort”
  14. 0
    7 July 2018 17: 49
    For its time, a very decent device, in a modern war, it can also be suitable to bomb a surrounded enemy who does not give up (hypothetically, they usually give up). Let it stand a year or two in service, but for 21 centuries, and the car was born in 1975.
  15. +1
    9 July 2018 14: 26
    Thanks to the authors for the review.
  16. 0
    10 July 2018 14: 57
    Thanks to the author. Of course there are many guesses in the text, but this does not spoil the article. If you dig information, you can find out that all the talk about moving this type of weaponry beyond the Urals is history. True, the current state of affairs is far from normal. Many of the great artillery would have to knock on their ears for this.
  17. 0
    10 August 2018 17: 53
    "Since the reign of NS Khrushchev. Many artillerymen still remember this General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee with a bad feeling."
    Dear Authors! N.S. Khrushchev was NEVER GENERAL. You have very interesting articles. But such "bloopers", unfortunately, greatly reduce the credibility of your information.
  18. 0
    27 May 2023 15: 29
    This is Hyacinth C.
    The text of your comment is too short and in the opinion of the site administration does not carry useful information.