Military Review

"Shoot and run." 105 mm Hawkeye self-propelled howitzer on Humvee chassis

63
As part of the 19 Northern Strike exercise in northern Michigan, US National Guard forces tested a new lightweight Hawkeye 105 mm howitzer (Hawkeye) with reduced recoil on the chassis of the Humvee multipurpose army SUV. The Hawkeye howitzer system is still considered experimental, although it was first introduced to the public back in 2011. In total, about 22 of thousands of National Guard troops, as well as members of the US allied countries: Great Britain, the Netherlands, Bulgaria, Latvia, Estonia and Jordan, take part in the exercises, which are held from 2 July to 2019 August 5.




Features 105-mm howitzer Hawkeye


The Hawkeye 105 mm self-propelled howitzer on the Humvee four-wheel drive chassis meets the demands of not only the US military, but also meets the requirements of foreign customers for such artillery systems. Today it is a unique opportunity to get a self-propelled howitzer at an affordable price. In this case, the artillery installation can be used by expeditionary forces and highly mobile units. The artillery installation satisfies the concept of fire support for airborne and air assault units. This artillery system is ideally suited for weapons of light infantry units, whose role in the United States has recently been played by the 101-I airborne (air-assault) and 82-I airborne divisions.

This self-propelled artillery system ideally fits the concept of an artillery raid, which has been practiced by field artillery of the above divisions for more than half a century. The main striking force in such an operation is field artillery, while very limited forces such as a platoon or battery can be involved in an attack. This is enough to achieve most tactical or operational goals. At the same time, a self-propelled artillery installation with an 105-mm gun on the Humvee chassis provides quick movement of artillery weapons to the required positions both by their own course and by air. The main criterion for effectiveness here is not the power of 105-mm ammunition or the maximum firing range, but good rate of fire in combination with the high mobility of artillery mountings capable of conducting quick fire raids and quickly leaving firing positions.



The 105 mm Hawkeye howitzer based on the chassis of the well-proven Humvee SUV in the army significantly improves the mobility, mortality and fire efficiency of light infantry units. At the same time, the installation survives due to the ability to quickly change its location and maneuver with fire. This artillery system is particularly suitable for conducting airborne operations. In this case, it is possible as transportation of the system by air by helicopters or transport aviation and landing by landing method, and landing by parachute method. Hawkey artillery installation significantly increases the combat power and readiness of the landing units, providing them with an effective artillery fire support tool, which is ready for battle almost immediately after landing. Thanks to the universal 105-mm caliber and the use of a time-tested chassis, logistics operations for the use and maintenance of the artillery installation in the troops are simplified to the maximum. At the same time, fighters with artillery skills they already have can easily master the installation, long training is not required.

The Hawkeye self-propelled 105-mm howitzer system on the platform of a multi-purpose army off-road vehicle is characterized by the presence of reduced recoil technology (“soft recoil”, soft recoil). This technology is used to reduce the recoil force of the howitzer when firing. The essence of the technology lies in the fact that the rolling parts of the guns are provided with counter acceleration immediately before ignition of the powder charges. Thanks to this, the recoil energy can be reduced by approximately 50 percent. In turn, this leads to a decrease in the load on the gun mount through the trunnions, allowing developers to significantly reduce the weight of the artillery system compared to ordinary towed howitzers of the same caliber, but with a full barrel rollback.



The combination of the 105-mm low-impact artillery system with the legendary, proven time and reliable chassis of Humvee became the key to creating a dynamic artillery platform that allows you to quickly take the necessary artillery positions and also quickly leave them if necessary. The self-propelled artillery system tested in the 19 Northern Strike exercise enhances the combat capabilities of light infantry units and their tactical flexibility. At the same time, it is important that the calculation of such an installation is half as much as that of the traditional 105-mm towed artillery systems available to the US military.

Technical capabilities of the Hawkeye 105 mm self-propelled howitzer


The lightweight Hawkeye 105 mm howitzer with reduced recoil technology is based on the standard American M102 howitzer. The barrel length of the new howitzer is also 27 calibers, but at the request of customers this value can be increased. The firing range of the new artillery system is limited to 11,5 km when using standard ammunition and 15,1 km when using 105-mm active-missile shells. It is worth noting that the entire range of 105-mm ammunition that is currently in service with the US Army, including high-explosive fragmentation shells, smoke, lighting, cluster munitions with ready-made striking elements, etc. can be used for firing.



The maximum rate of installation is 10-12 rounds per minute. With its high rate of fire, the artillery mount on the chassis of the multi-purpose American off-road vehicle Humvee (HMMWV) is ideal for implementing the concept of "shoot and run." Having fired several shells at the enemy, the installation can very quickly take off and change position, avoiding a retaliatory strike from the enemy. In this regard, the mobile version of the light American 105-mm howitzer is much more practical than the towed M102 and M119 howitzer options. Another important difference is the reduction in calculation to 3 people, and in case of emergency, only two fighters will be able to service the Hawkeye 105 mm howitzer. Placing on an open platform provides easy horizontal guidance at 360 degrees. At the same time, the gun’s vertical aiming angles range from -5 to + 72 degrees. All this together makes the new artillery mount an excellent alternative to the standard 105-mm towed artillery systems in service with the US Army.

The combat weight of the Hawkeye self-propelled gun on the Humvee chassis does not exceed 4,4 tons. The installation length is about 5 meters, width - 2,4 meters, height in the stowed position - 2,3 meters. At the same time, the reduced recoil, which is one of the main features of the Hawkeye 105 mm howitzer, allows you to place the artillery system on various chassis. Previously, Mandus presented the option of placing howitzers on the chassis of a light tactical vehicle Mack Sherpa with an armored cab. It is also possible to install conventional commercial pickups on the chassis, for example, on the Ford F250 chassis. Due to its low weight, the self-propelled gun can be lifted into the air by a heavy transport helicopter CH-47 Chinook (transport on slings) and can easily be placed in a medium-range military transport aircraft C-130 Hercules.

"Shoot and run." 105 mm Hawkeye self-propelled howitzer on Humvee chassis


Mounted on a Humvee chassis, the artillery mount has good running characteristics. The maximum speed is up to 100 km / h, the range on the highway is 400 km. The car is able to overcome vertical obstacles up to 0,3 meters high, trenches up to 0,5 meters wide and fords up to 0,76 meters deep (with preparation up to 1,52 meters). At the same time, the car has a full-time all-wheel drive (4x4), which, in combination with an 190-powerful diesel engine, provides the installation with good cross-country ability in most types of terrain.
Author:
Photos used:
defence-blog.com
63 comments
Ad

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: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. svp67
    svp67 1 August 2019 05: 40
    0
    In this case, the artillery installation can be used by expeditionary forces and highly mobile units.
    But here is the American version of the "artillery cart"
    1. Mountain shooter
      Mountain shooter 3 August 2019 12: 21
      0
      The Chinese have "Cornflower" on a similar platform. IMHO, more effective ... And our airborne forces "Vienna" and coming to replace it ... It seems, "Lily" ...
  2. Vasily Ponomarev
    Vasily Ponomarev 1 August 2019 05: 42
    +2
    God, poor Humvee, what did you do to him?
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 1 August 2019 08: 52
      +1
      Quote: Vasily Ponomarev
      what did you do with it?

      This is called "lobbying"
      With a more adequate chassis, you don’t need to pervert like that.
      1. Vasily Ponomarev
        Vasily Ponomarev 1 August 2019 13: 34
        +1
        well, why there is a lot of lobbyism, humvee, if they learn to install 105 militia on them, it will be possible to save a lot of money and increase the effectiveness of troops
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 1 August 2019 19: 09
          0
          Quote: Vasily Ponomarev
          well why lobbyism, a lot of humvee

          MTV is also a lot
  3. Amateur
    Amateur 1 August 2019 05: 48
    +8
    The number of words "unique, excellent, perfect" is off the charts. Where does she carry the shells?
    (average weight of a shot is 105 mm ~ 18 kg.) winked
    1. Sentinel-vs
      Sentinel-vs 1 August 2019 06: 22
      +8
      I thought it was a translation of an American advertising booklet, and then I look, at the end of enthusiastic sobs - an author is signed by the name Yuferov.
    2. Zeev Zeev
      Zeev Zeev 1 August 2019 06: 31
      +3
      And where is the ammunition shown at the recent exercises of the Russian airborne UAZ with 120-mm mortars? With the same projectile weight, which is characteristic
      1. Amateur
        Amateur 1 August 2019 06: 33
        -2
        So you don’t know either? drinks
        1. Zeev Zeev
          Zeev Zeev 1 August 2019 06: 35
          +6
          I know. Carries on itself. Only the 120mm is not a 105mm howitzer, and the UAZ-469 is not a Hummer at all.
          1. Amateur
            Amateur 1 August 2019 06: 41
            -1
            UAZ-469 is not a "Hummer"

            So you learned the Main Military Secret!
            Just where did you find 469? He has not been released since 1985.
            UAZ-469B was launched in December 1972, before that, since 1964, several pilot-industrial series have been produced. In 1985, the production of the modernized UAZ-3151 model began
            1. Zeev Zeev
              Zeev Zeev 1 August 2019 06: 42
              -1
              Okay, I’ll say in more detail. No UAZ is "Hummer" at all.
              1. Amateur
                Amateur 1 August 2019 06: 47
                0
                Totally agree with you!
                No UAZ is "Hummer" at all.
                And together they are not Lamborghini at all.
                Nevertheless: where do they carry shells?
                1. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 1 August 2019 11: 06
                  +1
                  Quote: Amateur
                  Nevertheless: where do they carry shells?

                  On another car. With a trailer. For Americans, this is normal.
              2. The comment was deleted.
      2. Professor
        Professor 1 August 2019 06: 50
        0
        Quote: Zeev Zeev
        And where is the ammunition shown at the recent exercises of the Russian airborne UAZ with 120-mm mortars? With the same projectile weight, which is characteristic

        Behind the cab.


        And in another vehicle.
    3. Kuroneko
      Kuroneko 1 August 2019 07: 30
      +4
      Quote: Amateur
      The number of words "unique, excellent, perfect" is off the charts.

      Well, this is a translation of a western advertising article.
  4. andrewkor
    andrewkor 1 August 2019 05: 50
    +1
    Well, yes, foreign customers! I remember from the Ishilovites out of nowhere hundreds of brand new Toyota with machine guns appeared and these self-propelled guns will appear in the same place, you will see!
    1. donavi49
      donavi49 1 August 2019 08: 15
      0
      The Libyans already have it! True with guns from European partners (Cockerill - Belgium).




      Well, in Syria, they have been chasing the local Caesars for a long time, and unlike the original Caesar for 100500 money, the locals use what is at hand + a disguise in the form of installation tenting.

  5. Professor
    Professor 1 August 2019 06: 39
    +4
    The Hawkeye 105 mm self-propelled howitzer on the Humvee four-wheel drive chassis meets the demands of not only the US military, but also meets the requirements of foreign customers for such artillery systems. Today it is a unique opportunity to get a self-propelled howitzer at an affordable price. In this case, the artillery installation can be used by expeditionary forces and highly mobile units.

    Advertising counted. I take it. laughing

    Having fired several shells at the enemy, the installation can very quickly take off and change position, avoiding a retaliatory strike from the enemy

    How fast is it? Supports until they put, while they remove them ...



    Rate of fire is 8 rounds per 3 minutes, not "10-12 rounds per minute."

    PS
    Without emphasis ... good
    1. Mestny
      Mestny 1 August 2019 10: 13
      0
      That's right. if you shoot "backwards", then the supports are not needed.
      In general, a good thing.
  6. g1washntwn
    g1washntwn 1 August 2019 07: 21
    0
    In the absence of an analogue of Nona, for their light cavalry, they mold guns on what is and can be dropped. But in fact it turned out only in some places better than the recoilless M40 on the jeep of the Vietnamese period (with a maximum range of about 7 km). The situation will be corrected only by guided projectiles and an external missile defense system for them, otherwise it’s only minor damage to the harassing fire from different positions.
    1. Zeev Zeev
      Zeev Zeev 1 August 2019 08: 23
      -5
      Why do Americans need an analogue of "Nona"? 105mm howitzers are enough for them. Until recently, the American Airborne Forces did not even think about raids from the landing zone, and for the defense of the bridgehead and these funds, and even covered by aviation, were quite enough. The firing range of 11 km for perimeter defense, especially with the use of ballistic computers and when using an artillery reconnaissance UAV (the weight of such an aircraft is 7.5 kg, it is launched from the hand, and fits in a large backpack) is quite acceptable. Now this howitzer has been made mobile (previously they were used in a towed version).
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 1 August 2019 09: 14
        +3
        Quote: Zeev Zeev
        American airborne troops until recently did not even think about raids from the landing zone

        No. they have exactly the same "artillery raid" in their regulations for 20 years already. 105 mm howitzers. helicopters. have landed. occupied the OP, shot, ran away, took

        Quote: Zeev Zeev
        and for the defense of the bridgehead and these means, and even covered by aviation, it was enough

        Again, quite a while ago, their artillery division consisted of two batteries of 105 mm howitzers and one battery of 155 mm M777. Plus, as far as I remember, 8 units. 120 mm mortars in each battalion

        Quote: Zeev Zeev
        Now this howitzer has been made mobile (before they were used in a towed version).

        This is so, toys. Around which the Americans have been dancing since the 60s of the last century. And not the fact that they will not abandon the topic yet again.
    2. Lopatov
      Lopatov 1 August 2019 08: 59
      +2
      Quote: g1washntwn
      For lack of an analogue of Nona

      "Nona" doesn't suit them. Not even the Chinook can handle it.
      1. g1washntwn
        g1washntwn 1 August 2019 14: 07
        -5
        For the Americans, the concept itself is built on "minimum armor, maximum stealth and mobility." At least take the cavalry, at least specialists, at least helicopters and any other stealth. Therefore, everything comes not from a lack of delivery vehicles, but from a tactical component. If there was a need to cover from shrapnel, then the analogs of the BMD, and the Nona, and the twin Chinook would have done. So far, the mentioned tactics are enough for them "hit screw it up - run. "
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 1 August 2019 19: 12
          +1
          Quote: g1washntwn
          There would be a need to cover from splinters

          It was. And it took a strong-willed decision of the Minister of Defense and cutting down a bunch of military programs to provide warriors, while dying or injured soldiers, with adequate protection.
          1. g1washntwn
            g1washntwn 2 August 2019 06: 34
            -1
            And how does this fit with this concept, where the calculation is also not protected by anything? At least minus (maybe this is not for you) even the "barmaley" mold a minimum of fragmentation screens on their "carts", but here we just have the same 105mm, but not on two wheels, but on four with a motor, and the absolute confidence of Americans that they will have time to escape from return fire. Here this "strong-willed decision of the US Department of Defense" is not visible at all.
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 2 August 2019 07: 29
              +1
              Quote: g1washntwn
              even the "barmaley" mold a minimum of shrapnel screens on their "carts"

              Yah...
              Actually, the real picture is the opposite.
              The highest possible protection. It's just that in garage conditions a large number of cars cannot be booked. Although they are trying


              Quote: g1washntwn
              and here we just have the same 105mm but not on two wheels, but on four with a motor and the absolute confidence of the Americans that they will manage to escape from the return fire.

              Here we have a very expensive gun, the main requirement for which is air transport
              1. g1washntwn
                g1washntwn 2 August 2019 08: 23
                0
                I do not dispute that the Americans are trying to put expensive and large guns on stools that can be conveniently transported by what they have now. My questions and comparisons were about drug survival. Argument for this. What has changed dramatically over the past 60+ years after non-skidding on Willis, and why not?
                1. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 2 August 2019 08: 28
                  0
                  Quote: g1washntwn
                  My questions and comparisons were about drug survival. Argument for this.

                  1. g1washntwn
                    g1washntwn 2 August 2019 08: 35
                    0
                    Explain the survivability of the calculation outside the bulletproof and anti-fragmentation armor of the product under discussion (specially circled for those who are in Abrams):
                    1. Lopatov
                      Lopatov 2 August 2019 08: 53
                      0
                      Quote: g1washntwn
                      (specially circled for those who are in Abrams):

                      Gee .... So you think. that finding the calculation outside the car when shooting is a confirmation of your thesis "For the Americans, the concept itself is built on" minimum armor, maximum stealth and mobility. "?

                      There is indeed "mobility" in the concept. Airmobility and air transportability. The notorious "possibility of transportation by" Hercules "and other things. This is the main thing.
                      And everything else is forced measures. Including, by the way, keeping the 105 mm howitzers in service. Well, your "minimum armor, maximum stealth". When a striker unit is routinely landed from an armored personnel carrier for the sake of a tactical helicopter landing. when they have only that armor. that on itself, instead of "Tou" - "Javelins", instead of 120-mm mortars with ASUNO self-guided 60-mm ..... You have to be secretive
                      1. g1washntwn
                        g1washntwn 2 August 2019 11: 00
                        0
                        And looking at Nona and Octopus, our Airborne Forces means, with a saber on horseback, attacking everyone head-on and spitting on the concept of stealth and mobility? At least don't say that in public today. There was already (or is with an incomprehensible status) such a "Zauralets-D":

                        But the concept is still more tenacious on the basis of the BMD-4M (with a caliber of 120 / 152mm) and not on the Wolf-3.
                      2. Lopatov
                        Lopatov 2 August 2019 11: 06
                        0
                        Quote: g1washntwn
                        And looking at Nona and Octopus

                        Actually, these are basically different cars. And according to purpose, and in place in battle order.

                        Quote: g1washntwn
                        There was already (or is with an incomprehensible status) such a "Zauralets-D":

                        It now looks like this:
                      3. g1washntwn
                        g1washntwn 2 August 2019 11: 36
                        0
                        You jump off topic again. We have a question "Why does NATO have no airborne self-propelled guns?" (excluding German Wiesel). You say that the root cause is that there is nothing to transport. Although there is an analogue of the IL-76 - S-17A Globmaster3 and not only, therefore this is not an argument and not a reason. I do not look at the aircraft fleet, but at what lies at the basis of one or another tactic of their use, incl. and landing ("light cavalry").
                        According to Zauralts, in your example, it’s not for airborne forces, but for sheikhs.
                      4. Lopatov
                        Lopatov 2 August 2019 12: 29
                        +2
                        Quote: g1washntwn
                        We have a question "Why does NATO have no airborne self-propelled guns?"

                        Because it is not economically feasible for them
                        The biggest airborne of the Americans. 4 parachute landing brigades; 4 artillery divisions.
                        To develop a separate self-propelled gun for four divisions is painfully curly, even for Americans.
                      5. g1washntwn
                        g1washntwn 2 August 2019 12: 37
                        0
                        Quote: Spade
                        impractical for them

                        Now you have changed your point of view on the economic question. Understand that the first thing on this issue was not a chicken (transport aircraft) or an egg (an airborne assault), but the Word (strategy and tactics). It determines how the chicken will look, and how much it will eat oats, and how many eggs will be laid.
                        Quote: Spade
                        it hurts curly even for Americans.

                        Yet again. What's wrong with torn to shreds? smile
                      6. Lopatov
                        Lopatov 2 August 2019 12: 46
                        +1
                        Quote: g1washntwn
                        and the Word (strategy and tactics).

                        And?
                        Quote: g1washntwn
                        Yet again. What's wrong with torn to shreds?

                        And?

                        So I point-blank in your reasoning do not see the "minimum armor" and other "secrecy".
                      7. g1washntwn
                        g1washntwn 2 August 2019 12: 59
                        0
                        You yourself wrote about the raids. Is it difficult to compare the tactics of attacks and what is more convenient to escape (or not a pity to quit)? I'll knock on the Abrams commander's hatch again: Hit-run is more convenient to do not on heavy MFPs and armored platforms. And stealth tactics do not involve entering a clinch at all. I didn’t see a single explanation "why not" from you. You refuse to understand. Therefore, further I see no reason to explain my position. We talked.
                      8. Lopatov
                        Lopatov 2 August 2019 13: 11
                        +2
                        Quote: g1washntwn
                        You yourself wrote about the raids.

                        These are completely different raids. And there the main vehicle is a helicopter 8))) And they also flee by helicopter. If they can ...

                        Quote: g1washntwn
                        A stealth tactic does not mean entering the clinch.

                        I would like to see the stealthy transfer of an artillery battery by helicopters. Only for "firemen", excluding control machines, etc. two Chinooks per 105 mm gun.
  7. Brigadier
    Brigadier 1 August 2019 09: 52
    0
    A standard machine for maneuvering war, only a machine gun was replaced by a cannon.
    Put the guides from the PC there and the mobile Katyusha is ready.
    Arrived, released in 10 seconds. ammunition and run. Recharged and back to position.
    1. Mestny
      Mestny 1 August 2019 10: 15
      -1
      Yes, actually a great machine, what’s there.
  8. VicktorVR
    VicktorVR 1 August 2019 10: 24
    +1
    Grad-B will be better :).
    12 122mm RS in 6 seconds and a range of 20km with standard RS.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 1 August 2019 11: 47
      0
      Quote: VicktorVR
      Grad-B will be better :).

      They were not in the troops.
      What is the point of landing an installation if this cannot be done with missiles for it? Because only in a landing way. So, no need to pervert. normal BM-21 can be applied.
      1. garri-lin
        garri-lin 1 August 2019 13: 05
        -1
        I am very sorry that I remember the old. But you don't think that such an embodiment looks more logical for Drok. Only add the sides. Judging by the videos posted, the "firing from the button" mode is implemented here.
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 1 August 2019 19: 03
          0
          Quote: garri-lin
          that for Drock, such an incarnation looks more logical.

          And what side is he here?
          A completely different level, obviously not battalion artillery
          1. garri-lin
            garri-lin 1 August 2019 19: 29
            -2
            Well, he’s not at all sideways. But looking at the 7 ton 105 mm howitzer and recalling the 14 ton 82 mm Drok, I want to cry. Even a martyr Niva with 82 mm looks more logical than a monstrous Typhoon. And here we see a good balance of guns and platforms. The Tiger pickup platform seems to be good but I know little about it to say so.
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 1 August 2019 22: 25
              0
              Quote: garri-lin
              But looking at a 7 ton 105 mm howitzer and recalling a 14 ton 82 mm Droch

              And where did you get that 7 tons? 7 tons self-propelled howitzer. plus roughly 5 tons of ammunition, plus almost half a ton of trailer .... This is already 12.5 without ammunition and other things. And if you add a reservation?

              Quote: garri-lin
              Even shahidNiva with 82 mm

              Loses in everything. Drain time, efficiency, accuracy, security of calculation. And what is such castration for? For a "good balance?"
              1. garri-lin
                garri-lin 2 August 2019 11: 54
                0
                Any idea can be implemented logically and illogically. Here is what you described is very illogical. And Droch is very illogical. And the Typhoon (a purely VVS and quartermaster) in the Airborne Forces is also illogical.
                1. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 2 August 2019 12: 14
                  +1
                  Quote: garri-lin
                  And Droch is very illogical.

                  But effective.

                  Quote: garri-lin
                  And the Typhoon (a purely VVS and quartermaster) in the Airborne Forces is also illogical.

                  "Tiger" in the special forces is even more illogical. And nothing...
                  1. garri-lin
                    garri-lin 2 August 2019 12: 37
                    +1
                    You know perfectly well what 82mm is for the guys on the front line. The best friend and irreplaceable helper who is always there, always ready to help, cover. Do you think Drok can do that? At its price, they will be several times less. They will be protected. In fact, a situation may arise that the guys in the trenches will be left with pocket artillery and without the help of a mortar. 82mm should be massive. Movable. Simple. Information about Drok malr and it is replete with "pearls" of zhurnoliski stupidity but it is already clear that the car is unsuccessful. Reminiscent of British tanks: heavy, sedentary and with a ridiculous caliber.
                    1. Lopatov
                      Lopatov 2 August 2019 12: 48
                      +1
                      Quote: garri-lin
                      You perfectly know what 82mm is for guys on the front lines. Best friend and an indispensable assistant who is always there, always ready to help, cover. Do you think Drok can do that?

                      Definitely. and will do it much faster and more accurately than mortars available in the system
                      1. garri-lin
                        garri-lin 2 August 2019 13: 38
                        0
                        That is, you really think that each of the mortars will be replaced by Drok, how is the MO distributed? I do not doubt its efficiency. If all the equipment that they promised, the installed machine should turn out to be good. This is me about the SLA. The argument does not make sense. The introduction of Typhoon in the Airborne Forces is a huge step back. By the way, if anyone reads Happy Desantura.
                      2. Lopatov
                        Lopatov 2 August 2019 14: 12
                        +1
                        Quote: garri-lin
                        That is, you really think that each of the mortars will be replaced by Drok

                        It would be good. "Gorse" is definitely better than "KamAZ" Only not "everyone". And only tog where 82-mm mortars are in service. That is, the Airborne Forces, the marines. If this works out. mountain.

                        Quote: garri-lin
                        The introduction of Typhoon in the Airborne Forces is a huge step back.

                        Looking from which side to look at it.
                        Too BMD and BTR-D roads.
                      3. garri-lin
                        garri-lin 2 August 2019 14: 55
                        0
                        Nouveau in general is not yet clear how much a serial Typhoon Airborne will cost. So far, the sky-high price has been voiced, but the real price or notion is also unclear. Still does not swim. They make some police forces from the Airborne Forces akin to SOBR.
  9. Shuttle
    Shuttle 1 August 2019 11: 04
    +1
    Something tells me that the piece of iron was designed and built in response to a request and on a tip from some organization not entirely loyal to Bashar Assad.
    Great weapon for sabotage.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 1 August 2019 19: 05
      +2
      Quote: Shuttle
      Something tells me that the piece of iron was designed and built in response to a request and on a tip from some organization not entirely loyal to Bashar Assad.
      Great weapon for sabotage.

      For the money for one such weapon, you can buy a dozen D-30s, and just throw howitzers after a fire raid
  10. exo
    exo 1 August 2019 12: 42
    +1
    In general, the trend itself is interesting: the concepts of technology used by the "partisan" formations are beginning to come to the regular army.
  11. Operator
    Operator 1 August 2019 16: 45
    -2
    And in a fig city garden - the 105-mm gun shoots like an 120-mm mortar (the range and weight of the shells coincide with a higher rate of fire at the mortar).

    Purely specifically cut the budget.
  12. Andrey VOV
    Andrey VOV 1 August 2019 18: 16
    +2
    I read the article and caught myself thinking .. somehow it’s really enthusiastic ....
  13. itarnmag
    itarnmag 1 August 2019 19: 33
    +1
    But you still need a car with ammunition. Judging by the photo, they aren’t on the machine itself
  14. Cartridge
    Cartridge 3 August 2019 23: 02
    0
    An interesting system for partisan actions: no ASUNO; the panorama is normal without electronics; the shutter wedge is MANUAL, i.e. there is not even an auto-ejection of the sleeve after the shot; the truth is there is a ballistic adder, but it is not clear why with such a buildup even on the stops. All this leads to "sad thoughts": 1. The ammunition load is fiddled with the 2nd vehicle (another 5 tons of the vehicle, 2 t b / n and 2-3 people + to the calculation). 2. Use only in a group (there must be a control vehicle, at least one, and it is on an armored personnel carrier, since they cannot use a pencil and a matchbox) for binding a firing position, orienting guns and other measures for preparing an MSA. 3. The maximum rate of fire - up to 3 rpm, but without restoring the pickup (as in the advertising video), and this is 50% of the shells "to nowhere". That is, in a good scenario, 1-2 fire raids. Then "hang up" and change of OP. 4. Calculation "in the air", the car has pneumatic wheels, hydraulic hoses (for the operation of the supports), an open rollback brake and knurler, and other mechanisms. Therefore, one projectile (mine) on the OP and immediately there will be losses in l / s and weapons and military equipment (SAO, TZM, etc.). Conclusions: 1. created in case "What if someone likes it"; 2.It is possible to use it from a closed base for applying a good 1 fire raid on an area target, and after that, changing the base (time - 4 -5 minutes, occupation with guns of the base and unloading a re-entry to guns for a fire raid; preparation with shooting - 4-5 min (parallel); a series of rapid fire - 1-2 minutes; leaving the OP - 2-3 minutes (the hydraulics cannot be accelerated); total - about 10 minutes. "- these are losses. 3. Firing by semi-direct fire (as in the commercial) is impossible due to the height and open location, since any machine gunner in one burst will cause" unacceptable damage. "4. Reconnaissance means are needed (for reconnaissance of the target and You can also "look closer", but there is only one conclusion - they are preparing help for the barmale - and it is not expensive, and there are a lot of stocks. But in the clips - beautifully filmed!