M65 Atomic Annie. First U.S. Atomic Gun

In the late forties in the United States began work on artillery systems of special power, capable of using shells with a nuclear warhead. The first specimen of this kind to come into operation was the M65 gun. The gun, nicknamed Atomic Annie, was not built in a large series, but took a special place in stories American artillery.



M65 complex at the Aberdeen Museum. Wikimedia Commons Photos


In the interests of the army


The first prerequisites for the appearance of American nuclear artillery took place at the final stage of World War II. Faced with German railway artillery, American troops wished to have their own weapon with similar characteristics. At the end of 1944, the development of the promising 240-mm T1 long-range gun began.

In 1947, the air force was separated from the army into a separate military branch, as a result of which the ground forces were left without their own nuclear weapons. After lengthy disputes in 1949, it was decided to start developing special ammunition for land artillery and guns for them. In May 1950, the T131 project was launched, which provided for the creation of a new 280-mm transportable gun using T1 developments. In parallel, the creation of a special ammunition.


Components of the complex and systems in different configurations. Figure Globalsecurity.org


The development of the T131 gun was carried out in the Picatinny arsenal with the participation of several other organizations. When designing, specialists had to solve a number of specific design problems, and some of their proposals were of great interest. For example, the T131 part was taken as the basis for the T1 barrel. The existing 240-mm barrel had a sufficient margin of safety, and it could be drilled to a larger caliber.

280-mm gun needed a special carriage and specific means of transportation. This problem was solved with the help of two regular tractors of a special design. With their help, the gun could move between positions. Deployment took no more than half an hour. The means of transportation of the guns were borrowed from the finished project with serious improvements.

M65 Atomic Annie. First U.S. Atomic Gun
M65 gun in stowed position. Photo Globalsecurity.org


The T131 design process coincided in time with the outbreak of the Korean War, which was the reason for the acceleration of work. The technical project was completed at the end of 1950, and only a few months later the first prototype gun appeared. Then the tests started.

The operation of serial guns began in the first half of the fifties, but officially they entered service only in the 1956. The official army index M65 was assigned to the gun. There was also the nickname Atomic Annie ("Atomic Annie") - a hint of the name Anzio Annie, coined by the Americans for the German high-powered guns K5.

Artillery complex


In fact, within the framework of the T131 / M65 project, they created a whole artillery complex, which included all the necessary devices and systems - from guns and ammunition to transportation means and communication systems. The complex also included individual vehicles for calculation and ammunition.


Geirf in a fighting position. Photo Globalsecurity.org


The T131 / M65 gun was a rifled gun with a caliber of 280 mm. A trunk length of 38,5 feet (11,7 m) was used. The breech was equipped with a piston shutter, diverted down. The barrel was fixed on a swinging part with developed hydropneumatic recoil devices. Using a hydraulic actuator, vertical aiming was carried out in the range from 0 ° to + 55 °. The barrel could move on its mounts along its axis. For transportation, he lowered to a horizontal position, and then retracted backward, shifting relative to the mounts. After that, the barrel did not protrude beyond the gun carriage.

The swinging part with the gun was fixed on a special T72 carriage. It was made in the form of a solid frame with developed side walls, between which the swinging part was suspended. A support plate with a diameter of approx. 3 m. A smaller plate was located at the other end of the gun carriage. The main support had an axis on which the carriage rotated for horizontal aiming within a sector of width 15 °.


Preparing for the shot. Photo Guns.com


T72 was equipped with its own power plant, which ensured the operation of the drives. Hydraulics was responsible for aiming in two planes and for supplying the components of the shot to the barrel. There were also redundant manual drives. A characteristic feature of the T72 gun carriage was the presence of additional buffers that extinguished the remaining recoil momentum.

The carriage with the gun was transported using a pair of special tractors developed by Kenworth Truck Company. M249 and M250 machines, with the help of special restraints, had to pick up and lift the T72 product. At the same time, a design with two joints was formed, which has sufficient mobility, cross-country ability and maneuverability.

The "leading" M249 was a tractor with a front cab, an 375 horsepower engine. and wheel formula 4x4. The “closing” M250 machine had the same composition of units, but differed in a rear-mounted cab, in front of which was placed a fork for lifting the carriage.


Transportation of guns by rail. Photo by National Nuclear Security Administration


Before firing, the M65 complex was supposed to arrive at the position, after which the T72 carriage was lowered to the ground, the tractors retreated, and the gun was put into combat position. To leave the position it was necessary to lay the barrel and hang the carriage between the tractors.

The total length of Atomic Annie in the stowed position reached 26 m, in combat - less than 12 m. The transport height was not more than 3,7 m. The total mass of the complex reached 83,3 m, of which 47 m was a gun mount. The maximum speed of the complex on the highway is 45 miles per hour (more than 70 km / h).

Shells for M65


The objective of the promising weapon was to defeat important enemy targets at the operational and tactical depth using conventional and nuclear shells. For M65, there was only one conventional munition - the high-explosive T122. This product had a mass of 272 kg and carried 55 kg of explosive. The initial velocity of the projectile reached 760 m / s, the maximum firing range - 28,7 km.


M65 at the parade, 20 January 1953 Propulsion Photo Guns.com


In the early fifties, the first American artillery shell with a nuclear warhead was created - W9. The 280 mm product had a length of 1,38 m and weighed 364 kg. In the shell of the shell was a nuclear device of the cannon scheme with 50 kg of enriched uranium. The estimated blast power was 15 kt TEQ. The shell accelerated in the barrel to 630 m / s and could fly at 20-24 km.

In 1955, the W19 shell appeared, which was an upgrade of the previous W9. It was slightly longer, but weighed 270 kg and carried a charge of similar power. Due to the reduction in mass, the initial velocity was increased to 720 m / s, and the range to 28 km.

Guns in the ranks


Testing of individual M65 system components began in 1950-51. In the spring of 1951, a full-fledged artillery complex, built as part of the cooperation of several organizations, was sent to the Nevada training ground. For some time, the tests consisted of checking the components of the system, and firing was carried out only by practical and high-explosive shells.


Operation Grable - a weapon and the result of his shot. Photo US Army


20 on January 1953 The T131 gun was first shown to the public. It took part in a parade dedicated to the inauguration of President Dwight Eisenhower. The new weapons expectedly attracted attention both in the United States and abroad. Published data on him became an additional incentive for foreign projects of atomic artillery.

In May of that year, one of the M65 guns was involved in the Upshot – Knothole nuclear test. On May 25, a test blast took place with the Grable code - Atomic Annie sent a real W9 shell to a conditional target at a distance of 11 km. This was the first and last case of the use of special weapons with a nuclear projectile in American practice.

By this time, mass production of guns was launched. In just a few months, they built a total of 20 artillery systems worth 800 thousand dollars each (about 7,6 million dollars at current prices). The constructed guns were distributed between several artillery units of the ground forces.


One of the M65 guns during NATO exercises in Germany, 15 Sep 1955. Photo by the National Archives of the Netherlands / nationaalarchief.nl


In October 1953, M65 guns appeared in Europe. They arrived in Germany as part of the armaments of the American 868th field artillery battalion. Soon, guns of special power went to South Korea. At that time, nuclear artillery was considered both as a real tool for use in war, and as a means of demonstrating strength and intentions.

End of service


Already in the mid-fifties, the barrel artillery began to lag behind its characteristics from modern and promising missile systems. Tools of special power, such as the M65, had no particular prospects and should have left the stage in the near future.

In the case of atomic artillery, it was not only a question of tactical and technical characteristics. Of great importance were the military-political consequences of the presence of such weapons, as well as questions of prestige. For this reason, the army was in no hurry to abandon Atomic Annie, even when obsolescence became apparent.


Shooting in exercises - without nuclear shells. Photo by the National Archives of the Netherlands / nationaalarchief.nl


M65 was withdrawn from service only in 1963. By this time, the army received new, more advanced models of tactical nuclear weapons, showing obvious advantages over the gun. The development of technology has allowed the creation of new nuclear shells of smaller calibers, compatible with existing weapons. As a result, "Atomic Annie" became the first and last cannon, originally created for a special munition.

After decommissioning, the fate of the M65 guns was different. More than half of the products went to remelting. Seven guns were preserved in museums. Some of them are shown only with a gun carriage, but several complete complexes with standard tractors have been preserved. Of most interest is the cannon from the Fort Sill Base Museum. It was she who, in 1953, participated in the Grable tests and fired a single shot with a real nuclear projectile.

The M65 gun has a special place in the history of US artillery. It was the result of a single attempt to create a specialized weapon for a nuclear shell. The resulting product had limited prospects and quickly became outdated. For this reason, the concept of a separate atomic weapon of special power was abandoned. Much more profitable was the introduction of special shells of smaller caliber in the ammunition of other guns and self-propelled guns.
Author:
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

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

I have an account? Sign in

  1. mat-vey 8 September 2019 06: 26 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    In the USSR, due to some lag in the creation of nuclear weapons, self-propelled guns with a caliber of 406 mm had to be made - the famous "Capacitor-2P".
    1. Lopatov 8 September 2019 08: 48 New
      • 9
      • 1
      +8
      Quote: mat-vey
      In the USSR, due to some lag in the creation of nuclear weapons, self-propelled guns with a caliber of 406 mm had to be made - the famous "Capacitor-2P".

      All these Capacitors-Oka-Transformers in the series we did not go. They were abandoned in favor of tact. rockets. Which, even in the uncontrollable version, were much more adequate.

      So the lag turned into a blessing. The USSR did not have such a foolish thing as specialized "atomic artillery".
      1. mat-vey 8 September 2019 08: 56 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        Abandoned not only because of this. Science in front of the projectile gone did a caliber. Smaller.
        "So the lag turned out to be good. The USSR never got such a dope as specialized" atomic artillery. " - 2C7 than you did not please?
        1. Lopatov 8 September 2019 09: 25 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Quote: mat-vey
          Science in front of the gone shell made a caliber. Smaller.

          It was later, and did not give much result.
          Our barrel artillery has never been the main means of using nuclear weapons. Tactical missile systems could do this by orders of magnitude better.

          Quote: mat-vey
          specialized "atomic artillery." - 2C7 what did not please you?

          At only on these your 2C7 Internet is "atomic artillery."
          In the USSR, each artillery school had its own specialization. Kolomna then trained officers for the Airborne Forces and for artillery of great and special power. Including for 2C7. And that is characteristic, most of the release went to ZabVO and the Far East.
          1. mat-vey 8 September 2019 09: 45 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            "With us, barreled artillery has never been the primary means of using nuclear weapons." - And what does the "main tool" have to do with it - what are you talking about?
            "At only on these your 2C7 Internet is" atomic artillery. " - then after every 60 shots on a complete change in the geometry of the barrel it was necessary to shoot.
            1. Lopatov 8 September 2019 10: 11 New
              • 3
              • 0
              +3
              Quote: mat-vey
              "With us, barreled artillery has never been the primary means of using nuclear weapons." - And what does the "main tool" have to do with it - what are you talking about?

              Despite the fact that the main objective of 2C7 and 2C4 is not the use of nuclear weapons at all.

              Quote: mat-vey
              then after every 60 shots on a complete change in the geometry of the barrel it was necessary to shoot.

              Another "urban legend"
              1. mat-vey 8 September 2019 10: 12 New
                • 1
                • 1
                0
                I kind of saw her alive.
                1. Lopatov 8 September 2019 10: 21 New
                  • 6
                  • 1
                  +5
                  Quote: mat-vey
                  I kind of saw her alive.

                  So what? Was "resource-60" written on the trunk? Or "Charge only nuclear shells"? laughing

                  Tell me, as a man who saw the gun, why did you have to suffer and develop the concrete minnow "Minnow" for the "nuclear weapon"?
                  1. mat-vey 8 September 2019 10: 28 New
                    • 2
                    • 0
                    +2
                    Are you supposedly trying to joke? For accounting, there was an ordinary magazine of guns.
                    Have you heard anything about Gorbachev’s GNSS? All the "Pions" from the North-West Military Command were sent across the Urals and restrictions were imposed on nuclear-fired shells.
                    1. Lopatov 8 September 2019 11: 08 New
                      • 4
                      • 1
                      +3
                      Quote: mat-vey
                      Are you supposedly trying to joke? For accounting, there was an ordinary magazine of guns.

                      No, at you are trying to joke, telling tales about a resource of 60 shots (these are less than two BK guns)

                      Quote: mat-vey
                      For accounting, there was an ordinary magazine of guns.

                      Another fabulous character. There is no such document. There is a tool form. But the number of shots by default cannot be a guide to categorizing the barrel. Because such guns do not fire a single projectile, a single charge once an hour and in the table conditions of fire.
                      Therefore, there are objective methods for determining barrel wear. And not the "average in the hospital", which a certain "genius" picked and launched somewhere on the Internet.

                      In short, do not count shots, but use PZK. Instrument for measuring the extension of the charging chamber


                      Quote: mat-vey
                      Have you heard anything about the Gorbachev GNSS? All the "Peonies" from the Northern Council of Guilds were sent across the Urals to him.

                      laughing CFE Treaty and not "DOS".
                      But here's the ficus picus, Gorbachev “merged” with the Chinese one year before the signing of this treaty, February 4, 1989. Moreover, the main "striking force", the 39th Army, began to be withdrawn from Mongolia in mid-May 1989. At the same time, large reductions were taking place in ZabVO and DalVO, most of the units were transferred to the category of cropped ones.
                      So if the "Peonies" and drove for some reason beyond the Urals, then only to settle on the storage bases of the GRAU.


                      Quote: mat-vey
                      and for nuclear-filled shells, restrictions were imposed.

                      When was this?
                      As far as I know, the Americans were never able to put TNWs under the control of any contracts. Neither the USSR nor Russia has never been profitable. Although Americans whine about it to this day
                      1. mat-vey 8 September 2019 11: 15 New
                        • 2
                        • 2
                        0
                        Well, we will assume that you know better. Although we confuse the resource and changing the geometry of the barrel, requiring individual amendments after 60 shots at full charge, humor is so-so.
                        “But here is the ficus picus, Gorbachev“ merged ”with the Chinese one year before the signing of this treaty, February 4, 1989. Moreover, the 39th Army began to withdraw the main“ strike force ”from Mongolia already in mid-May 1989. In At the same time, large reductions took place in ZabVO and DalVO, most of the units were transferred to the category of cropped ones.
                        So if the "Peonies" and drove for some reason beyond the Urals, then only to settle on the storage bases of the GRAU. "- and this joke is generally worthy of Petrosyan.
                      2. Lopatov 8 September 2019 11: 56 New
                        • 3
                        • 2
                        +1
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        Although confusing the resource and changing the geometry of the barrel, requiring individual amendments after 60 shots at full charge, humor is so-so.

                        Why not after a total solar eclipse? An event is orders of magnitude more likely than 60 consecutive shots at full charge by the same projectile with the same weight marks, with absolutely the same deviation of the initial speed due to the charge party ... and so on. That is, it is easier to get the Hero of Zimbabwe than everything would coincide laughing

                        By the way, about the "trunk geometry", how are you going to define it? And moreover, what corrections "on the geometry of the trunk" did you intend to introduce?
                        laughing laughing laughing

                        Quote: mat-vey
                        and this joke is worthy of Petrosyan in general.

                        You know, I didn’t expect it. An argument is an argument ...
                        In short, "nuclear artillery" never appeared, even in virtuality. Thanks to the 203 mm concrete projectile. Oddly enough, not at all atomic. And no Gorbachev could prevent this.

                        By the way, specially under the “Peony”, at the same time, new shells were developed at the same time; Moreover, immediately after the appearance of 2C7 in the troops, work began on the creation of a cluster shell
                        Somewhat strange for the "atomic gun", do not you? Or maybe she, horror, is not "atomic" at all. Like the same 2C3, Acacia is also not a "nuclear weapon" despite the existence of 3BV3
                      3. mat-vey 8 September 2019 13: 26 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        "what corrections" to the geometry of the trunk "are you intending to introduce?" - or something that stupidly falls range?
                        "Somewhat strange for the" atomic gun ", do not you find?" - what is strange?
                        “You know, I didn’t expect it. The argument is such an argument ...” - Indeed, that’s probably why in Yurg they traveled around the firing range and fired at all kinds of D-48 and D-1. Oh yes, sometimes from Novosibirsk vigorous exercise equipment was brought in, but this could not be because it is an internet fairy tale.
                      4. Lopatov 8 September 2019 18: 05 New
                        • 2
                        • 1
                        +1
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        "what corrections" to the geometry of the trunk "are you intending to introduce?" - or something that stupidly falls range?

                        And why "range falls." Do you have a geometry that can change only in one single way? wink

                        Quote: mat-vey
                        "Somewhat strange for the" atomic gun ", do not you find?" - what is strange?

                        It is strange that it is intended for another. And therefore has a wide range of conventional ammunition. Concrete-breaking, OF, ARS, cassette.
                        That is, long-range shooting at area targets and destruction shooting, including concrete structures.

                        Quote: mat-vey
                        Indeed, this is probably why in Yurg they traveled around the training ground to unfold, and fired at all kinds of D-48 and D-1.

                        Replacement guns. When the USSR used ALWAYS. There are even indications of this in the CPA.
                        But the funny thing is that their use is vivid evidence that they practiced sighting. Well, destruction shooting. That for shooting nuclear weapons is not necessary absolutely.
                        In general, this practice is very common. At the school, I “met” with the D-44 and ZiS-3, in the troops with the standard 2C3 and 2C19 only the commanders of batteries and divisions fired. The rest of the officers were served by “Kulak sawn-off shotguns”.

                        Quote: mat-vey
                        Oh, yes, sometimes they brought vigorous exercise shells from Novosibirsk, but this could not be because it is an internet fairy tale.

                        And also we carried loose trunks to each field exit. Apparently, this is a reinforced concrete argument in favor of the fact that the 2C3 and 2C19 are actually anti-tank self-propelled guns laughing
                      5. mat-vey 8 September 2019 18: 15 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        "It is strange that it is for another." - But Popov and Sergeyev did not even know.
                      6. Lopatov 8 September 2019 18: 17 New
                        • 1
                        • 1
                        0
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        Popov and Sergeyev did not even know.

                        Have you asked them?
                      7. mat-vey 8 September 2019 18: 19 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        They had a technical task for what and why ... But you know better than designers.
                      8. Lopatov 8 September 2019 18: 20 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        They had a technical task

                        You asked them, and they gave you the terms of reference to read?

                        By the way, in the technical task for 2С3 it was indicated that there should be the possibility of direct fire including a cumulative projectile. And self-propelled guns have a direct-sight, which you can do without. If you do not "butt" with enemy tanks. Just some bunker can also be destroyed using panoramic.

                        What do you think this should mean? Is 2C3 really not an "atomic howitzer" but an anti-tank gun?
                      9. mat-vey 8 September 2019 18: 28 New
                        • 0
                        • 1
                        -1
                        And you need to believe he was given? And 3BV2 was made for her out of scientific interest.
                        Well then, and 2S7 anti-tank gun, and the length of the barrel is suitable. True, at first, apart from the concrete-breaking and high-explosive from the B-4, there wasn’t anything, oh yes some kind of special projectile had to be made because of which the truth and a range of 25 km required mobility, that’s from dope.
                      10. Lopatov 8 September 2019 18: 37 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        And 3BV2 was done for her out of scientific interest.

                        Well done, so what?
                        3BV3 did too. But he does not turn 2C3 into a "nuclear weapon"
                        BP-540 did too. But he does not turn 2C3 into an anti-tank gun
                        3НС23 does not turn 2С3 into an electronic warfare
                        3X3 does not turn 2C3 into a "chemical weapon."
                        And so on.
                      11. mat-vey 8 September 2019 18: 42 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        "does not turn 2C3 into a" nuclear weapon "- and what do you think is a" nuclear weapon "? Familiarize yourself with your classification?
                      12. Lopatov 8 September 2019 18: 48 New
                        • 2
                        • 0
                        +2
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        and what do you think is a "nuclear weapon"?

                        This is a weapon designed exclusively for firing nuclear weapons. Like the one described in Article M65, which received the HE shell "by inheritance" and used only for educational purposes to work out nuclear strikes.

                        Well or not less American dope "Davy Crocket", a nuclear recoilless weapon
                      13. mat-vey 8 September 2019 18: 55 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Then check out the history of the 2C7. The entire "nomenclature" was created later, and in the beginning there were two shells inherited from the progenitor B-4 and three charges.
                      14. Lopatov 8 September 2019 19: 04 New
                        • 3
                        • 0
                        +3
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        The entire "nomenclature" was created later, and in the beginning there were two shells inherited from the progenitor B-4 and three charges.

                        Yah...
                        HE projectile - development began in 1970, adopted for service with self-propelled guns, in the 75th
                        ARS development began in 1970, adopted in the 75th along with the gun.

                        But nuclear weapons, as Karpenko, Efremov and Spiridonov testify, appeared later, in the year 77.
                        That is, you actually claim that the "nuclear weapon" was adopted without ammunition?
                      15. mat-vey 8 September 2019 19: 09 New
                        • 0
                        • 1
                        -1
                        Appeared later, but began to do earlier. I claim that they did nuclear in parallel for B-4. And this is the only nuclear non-reactive with a range of 18 km. I wonder why it has such a range?
                      16. Lopatov 8 September 2019 19: 12 New
                        • 3
                        • 0
                        +3
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        Appeared later, and began to do earlier.

                        I will tell you a terrible secret. It is strange that your Zampotech did not give it to you. A "nuclear weapon" without regular ammunition simply would not have been adopted.
                      17. mat-vey 8 September 2019 19: 16 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        I will give you another secret 2S7 when it never fired a nuclear charge, only the barrel fired and then once - is it also a mess?
                      18. Lopatov 8 September 2019 19: 18 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        I will give you another secret 2S7 when it never fired a nuclear charge

                        This does not negate the fact that the "atomic weapon" without ammunition could not be adopted
                      19. mat-vey 8 September 2019 19: 20 New
                        • 0
                        • 1
                        -1
                        So you are not even the head of artillery - you are a member of the Central Committee.
                      20. Lopatov 8 September 2019 19: 22 New
                        • 2
                        • 0
                        +2
                        Are you the person who will buy a car without wheels? Type "when we find, bring, while in the garage put on the bricks" laughing
                      21. mat-vey 8 September 2019 19: 23 New
                        • 0
                        • 3
                        -3
                        Have you heard anything about a planned economy?
                      22. Lopatov 8 September 2019 19: 24 New
                        • 3
                        • 0
                        +3
                        And often in the USSR with the "planned economy" cars without wheels were sold?
                      23. mat-vey 8 September 2019 19: 25 New
                        • 0
                        • 3
                        -3
                        So you are definitely not a political officer?
                      24. Lopatov 8 September 2019 19: 28 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        That's it, your argument has fallen under the baseboard.

                        It’s not interesting for me to discuss myself.
                      25. mat-vey 8 September 2019 19: 31 New
                        • 0
                        • 2
                        -2
                        Well, you have an argument at the level of "I am God and I do not believe."
  2. mat-vey 8 September 2019 19: 05 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    And yes, I trust the division’s deputy team more than you, so you can draw any kind of faces. All my “fabrications” are from his “lectures”.
  3. Lopatov 8 September 2019 19: 08 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: mat-vey
    And yes, I trust the division’s team as more than you

    When did he send you with a bucket for the transmission too trusted? laughing laughing laughing
  4. mat-vey 8 September 2019 19: 12 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    The lieutenant colonel in Germany received and mastered them one of the first and never depicted a clown.
  5. Lopatov 8 September 2019 19: 16 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    That is, they trusted and walked laughing

    Quote: mat-vey
    and he never portrayed a clown.

    Well yes. He told stories with a smart look. Fortunately, he had nothing to do with the combat use of these guns.
    For example, in our division, Zampotech was a tanker at all. And he did an excellent job, although in artillery he was a complete zero.
  6. mat-vey 8 September 2019 19: 18 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    Well, you know all that - it becomes terribly scary ...
  7. Lopatov 8 September 2019 19: 20 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    And because Kolomna’s honors and service in Vladikavkaz-you are not a muhra muhra. The punishment for ignorance is too strong.
  8. mat-vey 8 September 2019 19: 22 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    Have you ever seen her in your eyes?
  9. Lopatov 8 September 2019 19: 23 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: mat-vey
    Have you ever seen her in your eyes?

    And you do not know how to read?
    I wrote, Kolomna.
  10. mat-vey 8 September 2019 19: 24 New
    • 0
    • 4
    -4
    Who knows, maybe they gave you a political officer.
  11. Lopatov 8 September 2019 19: 25 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: mat-vey
    Who knows, maybe they gave you a political officer.

    That is, you do not know how. Cool.
  12. mat-vey 8 September 2019 19: 27 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    That is, that in the USSR in different departments tasks were carried out simultaneously, you are not aware?
  • Amurets 8 September 2019 14: 01 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    Quote: mat-vey
    At only on these your 2C7 Internet is "atomic artillery". "- then after every 60 shots on a complete change in the geometry of the barrel it was necessary to shoot.

    Or maybe turn to the experience of naval artillery in the time of the Second World War? Near Leningrad and Sevastopol, the trunks were changed for wear on the 30th battery: criterion: falling range and accuracy. On the 35th battery, a shell exploded in the barrel channel, disabling both turret guns, on Krasnaya Gorka the barrel was changed due to a shell burst in the barrel channel. The battleship Sevastopol got to the point where after the shells the frayed pieces of trunks flew. Resource 12 "barrel of 100 shots, set in imperial time when creating guns.
    1. mat-vey 8 September 2019 14: 06 New
      • 1
      • 2
      -1
      No, just after shooting 60 rounds at full charge, technicians from Novosibirsk were called up with their balalaikas.
      1. Lopatov 8 September 2019 17: 46 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        Quote: mat-vey
        technicians from Novosibirsk were called

        Well, here you are really into writing ...
        1. mat-vey 8 September 2019 17: 49 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          Oh, the district artillery chief is with us again. Can you write a complaint about the service regulations?
          1. Lopatov 8 September 2019 17: 53 New
            • 2
            • 1
            +1
            Quote: mat-vey
            Can you write a complaint about the service schedule?

            Not a complaint, I’ll ask you not to compose again.
            Just type in the search engine "ballistic training" and no longer invent fairy tales.
            Especially about the "technicians from Novosibirsk" 8)))
            1. mat-vey 8 September 2019 17: 55 New
              • 1
              • 2
              -1
              Just take a trip to Yurga, all of a sudden there is someone left alive.
            2. Lopatov 8 September 2019 18: 16 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              Quote: mat-vey
              Just take a trip to Yurga, all of a sudden there is someone left alive.

              What for?
              I just know how this should all happen and how it happened. I was taught this, I put it into practice.
              I’m thinking of a case here, as in a joke about "Gogol ob ..

              In fact, we are talking about the recommended timing for checking the extension of the charging chamber with a PZK device. And not about "checking the geometry."

              And this is due not to a certain strong shooting of the trunks, but to the fact that the firing is carried out at long ranges. That is, even a slight deviation of the initial speed due to wear of the bore will creep out into large corrections.
              There is something like the rotation of the earth. On mortars it is not taken into account. Even the table has no such amendment.
            3. mat-vey 10 September 2019 17: 16 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              In fact, we are talking about the recommended timing for checking the extension of the charging chamber with a PZK device. And not about "checking the geometry." - and the rifling and uneven cross section means does not affect?
            4. Lopatov 10 September 2019 18: 24 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Quote: mat-vey
              and rifling and uneven cross-section means does not affect?

              It affects. Only now there are no means capable of determining this in the field. Therefore, PZK for rifled trunks, PKI for smoothbore. And that’s it.
              Well, ABS, artillery ballistic station. Which, in fact, inflate on the geometry, it measures the total deviation of the initial velocity from the table velocity using radio waves and the Doppler effect. That is, for all reasons.
            5. mat-vey 10 September 2019 18: 53 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              “capable of determining this in the field.” - how many “field”?
            6. Lopatov 11 September 2019 09: 15 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              So that "not at the factory" and without removing the barrel.
              High-precision 3D laser systems have just begun to be offered to the military, but for now everyone prefers to save.
            7. mat-vey 11 September 2019 16: 28 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              If it’s no secret, what ode school did you graduate from?
            8. Lopatov 11 September 2019 16: 33 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Who cares?
              Do you think that even from the time of my graduation, from the time of the USSR, something has changed?
            9. mat-vey 11 September 2019 16: 34 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              It has changed a lot - judging by you.
            10. Lopatov 11 September 2019 16: 40 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Quote: mat-vey
              It has changed a lot - judging by you.

              Again, in the absence of knowledge of the materiel, did you have a strong desire to discuss me instead of discussing the essence of the issue?
              I have already written to you, it is not interesting to me.
            11. mat-vey 11 September 2019 16: 42 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              But you allow yourself about the "transmission buckets."
  • mat-vey 10 September 2019 17: 24 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    "What for?" - you had to “exploit” 2s7? What is written in the manual?
  • Lopatov 10 September 2019 18: 27 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: mat-vey
    What is written in the manual?

    Great question ... So what is written there? laughing
  • mat-vey 10 September 2019 18: 33 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Well, you should know something. Or do you think that they were used by eye in Jurga?
  • Lopatov 11 September 2019 09: 23 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: mat-vey
    Well, you should know

    Actually, it’s you who began to assert all dregs here. Therefore, you need to climb into a kind of “leadership” and find there a fundamental difference between 2C7 and other guns.
    Because as in the Primer, i.e. in the Shooting Rules no special differences between the ballistic preparation 2C7 are indicated.

    Look for confirmation of your tales. "Geometry checks" after the shooting of 60 shells, the obligatory arrival for this of some "technicians" with some super equipment capable of doing this in the field.
    To “enter corrections for geometry” you also need to find the Shooting Tables. And manage to dig up these "amendments"

    Well and so on. Get involved. laughing
  • mat-vey 11 September 2019 16: 23 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    So you did not read the admonition and theorize from your own fantasies?
  • Lopatov 11 September 2019 16: 28 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: mat-vey
    So you did not read the manual

    How do you know? In theory? 8)))))
    You can’t even indicate its correct name.
  • mat-vey 11 September 2019 16: 32 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    And you can’t name it, but I talked with people who exploited the cannon almost from the first samples, although you deigned to be a fool for this.
  • Lopatov 11 September 2019 16: 36 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: mat-vey
    And you can’t name

    I can’t just “name” it, I even downloaded it. laughing laughing laughing
    Knowing what it is called, it is not difficult to find.
  • mat-vey 11 September 2019 16: 43 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    “I can’t just name it, I even downloaded it” - well?
  • Lopatov 11 September 2019 16: 46 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: mat-vey
    “I can’t just name it, I even downloaded it” - well?

    And I am waiting for you to give me extracts from it, confirming your words. I will check laughing
  • mat-vey 11 September 2019 17: 13 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    I even downloaded it "- and for some reason, at the request" Artillery weapons 2A44 technical description and operating instructions "all available Internet gives -" the file is deleted or does not exist. "
  • Lopatov 8 September 2019 18: 07 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Quote: Amurets
    changed the trunks for wear on the 30th battery

    Not that case. Trunks of self-propelled guns in the field do not change. And sending them to the factory after shooting 1 2/3 BK is a bit silly.
  • Lexa-149 10 September 2019 10: 40 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    It makes no sense to compare guns with a caliber of 305mm produced at the beginning of the 203th century with a gun of XNUMXmm caliber of the second half of the XNUMXth century.
    The companion is driven, having coined the new term "change in the geometry of the trunk." How does he imagine this ?! The trunk has become crooked ?! What amendments to the installation for firing, he was going to introduce "on the curvature of the barrel" ?!
    There is wear on the bore and it depends on many parameters, and the trunks are made with a margin of safety. And in the installation for firing, an adjustment is made for the wear of the bore. And anyway, if the resource on a 305mm gun barrel was 100 rounds at full charge, then on a 203mm barrel fired half a century later, every resource would be higher.
    1. Amurets 10 September 2019 13: 27 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: Lexa-149
      And anyway, if the resource on a 305mm gun barrel was 100 rounds at full charge, then on a 203mm barrel fired half a century later, every resource would be higher.

      This is all clear, it’s not clear to Comrade Matvey. At the beginning of the 203th century, RI, only fastened barrels were made of carbon steel. Equipment and technology for the production of liners and re-milling of 180 mm guns to a caliber of 30 mm were purchased in the early 12s by EMNIP in Italy. Equipment for the production of large-caliber liners from 16 "to 305" (406 mm) was ordered and purchased in Germany. So it is not surprising that the resource of the liner made of high-alloy steel will be much higher than the monoblock barrel made of high-quality carbon steel.
      1. Lexa-149 10 September 2019 13: 32 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Yeah ... He, at times, begins to carry such a blizzard, trying to prove the truth of his previous ridiculous post.
        1. mat-vey 10 September 2019 16: 45 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          "He, at times, begins to carry such a blizzard, trying to prove the truth of his previous ridiculous post." - eg?
          1. Lexa-149 11 September 2019 11: 08 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            For example, about "changing the geometry of the barrel", shot in 60 shots and more.
          2. mat-vey 11 September 2019 16: 24 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Did you mean the instruction?
          3. Lexa-149 12 September 2019 17: 23 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Did you read it yourself? Have you studied?
            I, by the way, studied the discipline "Design and Operation of Artillery Guns" and passed "excellent". Can you brag about it?
          4. mat-vey 22 January 2020 16: 35 New
            • 0
            • 1
            -1
            Well, then about all sorts of PKI license plates in the know.
          5. Lexa-149 23 January 2020 22: 49 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            I dare say that PKI is used on smoothbore guns. I hope you understand that this adaptation is out of place here?
          6. mat-vey 24 January 2020 14: 01 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Come on .. are you so sure?
          7. Lexa-149 26 January 2020 02: 00 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            I agree. I forgot it over the years.
          8. mat-vey 26 January 2020 05: 28 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Yes, there it seems generally bad with memory, which nevertheless does not prevent you from posing as a guru ..
          9. Lexa-149 27 January 2020 10: 30 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Yes you, my friend, hamlo!
          10. mat-vey 27 January 2020 15: 07 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Yes Yes. About hanging out with nonsense and casting in granite with the "forgotten" basics, I started ...
  • mat-vey 24 January 2020 14: 39 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    2A44 monoblock pipe.
  • mat-vey 10 September 2019 17: 20 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    "The comrade is driven, having invented a new term," changing the geometry of the barrel. "How does he imagine this ?! The trunk has become a curve ?!" - a change in the shape and depth of the rifling, as well as the uniformity of the cross section .... Do you imagine this?
    1. Lexa-149 11 September 2019 11: 20 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Do not talk nonsense! What fright will it change ?! I, as a professional artilleryman, will tell you the secret that the length of the charging chamber changes due to its height.
      With prolonged firing from a gun, an increase in the volume of the charging chamber occurs due to its lengthening from the height. This leads to a decrease in the loading density Δ and a decrease in the initial velocity V0, which reduces the firing efficiency and increases the dispersion of shells.

      The extension of the charging chamber can be determined using a special chamber measuring device (CCD), consisting of a bar with divisions in millimeters and a measuring ring, the diameter of which is close to the diameter of the leading shell of the projectile. Trunks with lengthening the charging chamber, which has reached the limit at which shooting becomes ineffective, are discarded.

      Here you can learn https://studfiles.net/preview/3168756/page:16/
      And if you have a "change in the shape and depth of the rifling, as well as the uniformity of the cross section," then how did this trunk leave the plant altogether ?! He was blinded from manure in the cold ?!
      1. mat-vey 11 September 2019 16: 27 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        “Do not talk nonsense! What fright will it change from ?!” - are you serious? Does the gunpowder have any physical or chemical effect on the barrel?
        1. Lexa-149 12 September 2019 17: 21 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          You, instead of issuing pearls and "cast in granite", can you provide any documentary evidence of your innocence? For example, I have provided.
        2. mat-vey 22 January 2020 16: 34 New
          • 0
          • 1
          -1
          And what was determined by barrel wear in your table?
        3. Lexa-149 23 January 2020 22: 51 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          To measure the lengthening of the charging chamber of the rifled guns, use PZK - a device for measuring the camora.
        4. mat-vey 24 January 2020 14: 00 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          For wear of the bore, PKI of various numbers are used.
  • Lexa-149 11 September 2019 11: 31 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0

    You can also study the RAB categorization table.
  • Nfl1.6 8 September 2019 09: 36 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    These are just the times of the construction of the type cruisers in the USSR. Stalingrad with their phenomenal GK range, especially the sub-caliber projectile ...
    It is customary to criticize Comrade Stalin for lobbying for this project .. or maybe he just knew about them that is still not officially announced.?
  • Kote Pan Kokhanka 8 September 2019 06: 27 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    Kirill thank you so much, Annie heard and read about Atomic, but for the first time in a separate and dedicated article.
    Regards, Kote!
    1. Alf
      Alf 8 September 2019 21: 33 New
      • 6
      • 1
      +5
      Quote: Kote Pan Kokhanka
      Kirill thank you so much, Annie heard and read about Atomic, but for the first time in a separate and dedicated article.
      Regards, Kote!

      At one time, a model of this halabud was even released.
      1. Alf
        Alf 9 September 2019 13: 48 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: Alf
        At one time, a model of this halabud was even released.

        Well, what alternatively gifted put a minus? He wants to say that there was no such model?
  • KVU-NSVD 8 September 2019 08: 09 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    Great article. After all, maybe the author when he wants to give out an interesting article, rather than a mixture of water with repetitions. The gun is certainly interesting, but it’s somehow too monstrous for such a caliber, and the tractors on both sides of the gun carriage in general, in my unique solution, have made the Americans here, in my opinion, superfluous.
    1. mat-vey 8 September 2019 10: 10 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      "and the tractors on both sides of the gun carriage in general, in my unique decision, have made the Americans here, in my opinion, superfluous." - most likely the normal tracked chassis did not work.
    2. Undecim 8 September 2019 19: 58 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      "Excellent article. After all, maybe the author ..."
      Can not.
      The development of the T131 gun was carried out in the Picatinny arsenal with the participation of several other organizations. When designing, specialists had to solve a number of specific design problems, and some of their proposals were of great interest. For example, the T131 part was taken as the basis for the T1 barrel. The existing 240-mm barrel had a sufficient margin of safety, and it could be drilled to a larger caliber.
      Nobody drilled any trunks. Moreover, trunks of this caliber are not monoblocks.
      As a basis, Robert Schwartz took the German 280 mm German railway gun K5. And since the largest shell in the American land artillery was 240 mm (howitzer 240 mm M1), this shell was increased to 280 mm. Not the barrel was bored, but the shell was increased. Even the English Wikipedia knows about this.
    3. Alf
      Alf 8 September 2019 21: 21 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: KVU-NSVD
      and the tractors on both sides of the gun carriage in general, in my unique decision, made the Americans here, in my opinion, superfluous.

      We also had a similar traffic pattern. It is well shown in the series Cars in uniform.
  • Popov Konstantin Ivanovich 8 September 2019 10: 12 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Well, in the Atompank universe, it’s the place for her. It’s interesting, but what kind of protection was this “prodigy”. Okay done, but how were you going to apply request ? Military thought in the 50s of the last century changed, if not monthly, then probably annually. Still, "weapons monsters" are really big money and the possibility of cutting it and the impossibility of large-scale production, in the absence of a guarantee that a war will begin in which they can be used. wink
  • Old26 8 September 2019 13: 33 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Quote: KVU-NSVD
    Great article. After all, maybe the author when he wants to give out an interesting article, rather than a mixture of water with repetitions. The gun is certainly interesting, but it’s somehow too monstrous for such a caliber, and the tractors on both sides of the gun carriage in general, in my unique solution, have made the Americans here, in my opinion, superfluous.

    Of course, we had a less monstrous gun of the same caliber - the Czech 210 mm V-3 cannon. It weighed 55,5 tons in the stowed position
  • Old26 8 September 2019 20: 08 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    Quote: mat-vey
    Well, you have an argument at the level of "I am God and I do not believe."

    You know, Matvey, I read your skirmish with comrade Lopatov and I will say that the argument of the comrade is much more logical than yours. Atomic artillery, in principle, is one that shot exclusively with nuclear charges. It basically began and ended in the 50s. Products can be counted on the fingers of one hand. Then there were only artillery systems capable of, among other things, firing nuclear weapons as well. Like the mortar "Tulip" or domestic artillery systems with a caliber of more than 152 mm. That's when special charges for such systems were created AFTER the artillery system was adopted. Agree, this is nonsense that it is being put into service, as you say, an atomic artillery system, and the shell for it is being adopted in a few years. This was never allowed in the USSR.
    1. mat-vey 9 September 2019 14: 40 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Only here, according to the "operators" and throughout the existing literature, the gun was made primarily as a "carrier" of tactical nuclear weapons and was originally conceived as a 210-mm system, but the Leningraders "begged" for 203-mm since the B-4 was already mastered and the special projectile for it seems to have been done since 1965 ... The B-4 barrel and breech were taken as the basis, the barrel was extended to achieve the required range indicators, as a result of which, he worked to the limit at full charge. And by the way, from Germany they were kicked out precisely as "nuclear weapons of short and medium range" - at least no matter how much they fool around.
  • Alf
    Alf 8 September 2019 21: 19 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    In the penultimate photo, the officer on the far right apparently asks himself a question, well, and what to do with this ... shit?