Military Review

The Swedish army received the first serial self-propelled mortars Mjölner

69
The Swedish armed forces received the first serial 120-mm self-propelled mortars Granatkastarpansarbandvagn 90 (Grkpbv90), made on the chassis of the CV90 infantry fighting vehicle. The first batch of mobile mortars was delivered by HB Utveckling AB, the portal janes.com reports.


The Swedish army received the first serial self-propelled mortars Mjölner


The 120-mm self-propelled mortar Grkpbv90 (Mjölner - Thor's hammer) was developed by the Swedish army by the Swedish units BAE Systems as a replacement for the previously planned 40 automated 120-mm double-barreled mortar systems AMOS (Finland) also based on the CV90 BMP. The contract for the purchase of 40 mobile mortars was concluded in 2016, and in February of this year, the Swedish army received four pre-production vehicles for military tests.

The Mjölner system, created by the Swedes, is a simple double-barreled smooth-bore mortar with "conventional mortar-type" barrels with anti-recoil devices and manual muzzle loading. Shooting is conducted by conventional mines at a range of up to 9 km. To help the loader there is a mechanism that delivers two mines. Shots occur alternately, with a small interval. Mortars are placed in a rotating armored turret with a manual rotation drive. The transportable stock of mines in the amount of 50 pieces is located at the rear of the tower; it is possible to place an additional stock of mines in the machine body. The crew is four people - a commander, a driver and two loaders. The calculation when shooting is in the fighting compartment in a standing position in full growth.

According to the Swedish military, it is the manual loading system that provides a higher rate of fire (10 rounds per minute, up to a maximum of 16 rounds per minute), however, some firing modes are not available to the Swedish mortar, as well as shooting on the go.

In total, the Ministry of Defense of Sweden plans to receive 2020 self-propelled mortars Grkpbv40 (Mjölner) by the end of 90. It is planned that these mobile mortars will partially replace the towed mortars GRK m / 120 of the Finnish model 41 of the year that are in service with the 1941-mm. Yes, this Swedish army of self-propelled mortars was not in service.
Photos used:
janes.com
69 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. The comment was deleted.
  2. Archivist Vasya
    Archivist Vasya 13 September 2019 13: 30
    +11
    some shooting modes are not available, as well as shooting on the go

    Well, the mortar is exactly the weapon that you need to shoot on the move ...
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 13 September 2019 13: 55
      +14
      You can go. You can’t move.
      1. san4es
        san4es 13 September 2019 15: 41
        +8
        Quote: Spade
        You can go. You can’t move ... hi


        1. PROXOR
          PROXOR 13 September 2019 16: 01
          0
          Like the rate of fire is nothing.
  3. rocket757
    rocket757 13 September 2019 13: 34
    +4
    The Swedes mortars straight chip! On the other hand, mounted fires in forests are more effective than field artillery ... in terms of supporting infantry units.
    1. Old tanker
      Old tanker 13 September 2019 16: 27
      0
      Why would it suddenly? belay
      1. rocket757
        rocket757 13 September 2019 17: 25
        +3
        In forests, when not clear cuts, but normal trees like that stand densely! Only on top, above them in a steep path.
        Even in the jungle, mortars were used, even very ....
    2. PavelT
      PavelT 14 September 2019 00: 50
      +1
      They even have 120mm anti-tank mines, homing on the descending part of the trajectory ...
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strix_mortar_round
      https://www.armyrecognition.com/october_2018_global_defense_security_army_news_industry/sweden_and_switzerland_last_customers_of_strix_120mm_mortar_munition.html
      1. rocket757
        rocket757 14 September 2019 10: 29
        0
        Quote: PavelT
        They even have 120mm anti-tank mines,

        That's right, an infantry unit, reinforced by effective heavy mobile weapons, in a forest area is a force, a problem for any enemy.
        They make their weapons highly accurate ... it's expensive, well, so their army is not great.
  4. BARKAS
    BARKAS 13 September 2019 13: 35
    0
    Two barrels is certainly cool but everything else is some past century.
    1. Catfish
      Catfish 13 September 2019 14: 27
      +2
      And our twin "Cornflowers" from what century in service? And they are just automatic and not muzzle-loading, but where does the Swede have automatic equipment, if the charger has to crawl out onto the armor and push the mine into the barrel. I served for a long time, and I saw "Vasilki" only in the photo, and if I am mistaken, let my knowledgeable colleagues correct me.
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 13 September 2019 14: 41
        +6
        Quote: Sea Cat
        our paired "Cornflowers"

        ?

        Quote: Sea Cat
        the charger has to crawl out onto the armor and push the mine into the barrel.

        Do not. All from under the armor. Though by hand.
  5. KVU-NSVD
    KVU-NSVD 13 September 2019 13: 37
    +1
    I never understood why mortars based on BMP? based on armored vehicles or just SUVs - cheaper and more economical, but they shoot and change position the same way.
    1. ProkletyiPirat
      ProkletyiPirat 13 September 2019 15: 17
      +3
      Quote: KVU-NSVD
      I never understood why mortars based on BMP?

      Armor and mobility allows you to shoot at short ranges with increased accuracy. The bottom line is that this allows you to spend less ammunition, destroy point targets and ALL THIS with the minimum-minimum reaction time and the maximum-minimum distance between friends and foes. In fact, this is a classic "barrage" but carried out on a smaller scale and, ideally, with smaller forces. If you use various LBBMs on such as armored vehicles and gantrucks, then they can be easily disabled due to DRGs and camouflage on the ground. Plus, such systems have a significant advantage in the "guerrilla / raid / harassing" battle tactics when the DRG / infantry conduct target designation without revealing themselves, and many dispersed self-propelled guns conduct concentrated fire. Well, I kind of chewed it up ..
      1. KVU-NSVD
        KVU-NSVD 13 September 2019 15: 33
        +6
        allows you to shoot at short ranges with increased accuracy.
        The bottom line is that the accuracy of the mortar fire does not depend on the distance. You can shoot equally accurately at both 700 and 7000 m. Here it is important: the accuracy of the calculation of the sight and turn, the freshness of the meteo, the gunner’s qualification, the quality of the shots (min), the deterioration of the barrel, the accuracy of its and target coordinates and the accuracy of determining their height above sea level and some other things. And any battalion commander on the proposal to place a position closer to the enemy to increase accuracy will send you far, and possibly forever. The farther from the line of contact, the more likely the battery is to survive. The essence of mortar battery tactics is to turn stealthily, hit the assigned target as quickly as possible, and topple over without focusing on the lagging ones.
        . Well, like chewing ..
        1. ProkletyiPirat
          ProkletyiPirat 13 September 2019 15: 50
          0
          Quote: KVU-NSVD
          The essence of mortar battery tactics

          What I described and what you described are just two different battle tactics, therefore they have different requirements for performance characteristics. The fact that I described a more complex and demanding option that gives advantages in a modern theater of war. It is another matter that declaring MRSI (and all that is connected with it) and putting it into practice are two big differences.
          psThe main difference of the new tactics is the absence of "batteries" and the problems and disadvantages associated with them.
          1. Old tanker
            Old tanker 13 September 2019 16: 46
            +2
            The main difference of the new tactics is the absence of "batteries" and associated problems and disadvantages.

            About how!
            Long neighing, almost torn my stomach!
            What are these battery shortcomings in front of a single mortar fire support? And what are the benefits of this single mortar?

            We need about this new tactic - a single self-propelled mortar on the front line to tell our mortars. Yes, I'm afraid to sleep!
            1. ProkletyiPirat
              ProkletyiPirat 13 September 2019 20: 52
              0
              Quote: Old Tankman
              What are these battery shortcomings in front of a single mortar fire support? And what are the benefits of this single mortar?

              The "batteries" have the disadvantage that they are easier to detect and destroy due to the greater number of AFVs and a larger basing area. It is also impossible to quickly push the batteries into the depths / bypassing the LDP to solve the problem of blind spots, in general I wrote about this below in another sub-branch.
              1. bayard
                bayard 13 September 2019 23: 07
                +2
                This is really a new tactic and it has been practiced nezalezhnoy lately - the coordinated fire of dispersed guns / mortars on a single target. Answering the battery, you can count on the defeat in the best case of a single gun \ mortar, and the difficulty in calculating the opponent’s coordinates when the volley occurs from different positions and directions.
                ... Challenging artillery games in positional warfare ...
      2. Old tanker
        Old tanker 13 September 2019 16: 32
        +1
        In what armored car does not have armor and mobility?
        But the men don’t know and sculpt our mortar “Drok” on Typhoon-Airborne!
        1. garri-lin
          garri-lin 13 September 2019 20: 01
          +2
          Do not mention the gorse. This is a creepy ersatz, a product of a sick imagination. Starting from the platform and ending with the art part.
          1. bayard
            bayard 13 September 2019 23: 12
            0
            I can imagine how this miracle of technology swings after each shot and what is the accuracy. Better "Nona" or, at worst, "Cornflower" on the BMD chassis - the suspension will extinguish the recoil. And the permeability is higher.
            1. garri-lin
              garri-lin 13 September 2019 23: 26
              0
              This is not so. Drock's equipment is good. Modern, with a lot of advantages. You just need to place it on an adequate chassis. And raise the rate of fire. Nona thing is more serious, and they need less. And Drok is 82mm the main friend of the infantry. There should be a lot of them and always at hand.
              1. bayard
                bayard 14 September 2019 00: 10
                +1
                He would have had a BMD chassis, but it is no longer available, but how will the suspension extinguish the Typhoon? ... I remember the footage as a combat module with 30 mm. they piled a cannon on the "Tiger" and how poor he swayed after each shot ... the impression is that if you give a good turn, it will turn over.
                All the same, the tracked chassis is more reliable.
    2. Andrey Andreev_4
      Andrey Andreev_4 13 September 2019 15: 29
      +2
      On a caterpillar track, patency is still better. The armor, the calculation, the ammunition is also not small, it’s not enough for the SUV to carry all this over rough terrain.
      1. KVU-NSVD
        KVU-NSVD 13 September 2019 15: 38
        0
        You are generally right, but only a mortar based on the BMP is expensive, and if they manage to cover the battery, then such armor will not save. Perhaps for particularly difficult and hot places it makes sense to have a certain number of mortars at the base of the tank. but it’s more likely as an exception and not for mass weapons .. Jews seem to have samples based on Merkava
        1. Andrey Andreev_4
          Andrey Andreev_4 13 September 2019 16: 01
          +3
          But this is not just a mortar, but a 120mm double-barreled caliber! A very effective weapon.
          And with BMP it seems to me not very correct to compare. It looks more like a lightly armored artillery tractor or a 76mm self-propelled gun, the cost there is of course lower than a modern BMP cabinet. Light armor certainly will not help from a direct hit or large-caliber fragments, but in the case of return fire it will increase the survivability from small fragments, an explosive wave.
          1. KVU-NSVD
            KVU-NSVD 13 September 2019 16: 15
            +2
            Quote: Andrey Andreev_4
            But this is not just a mortar, but a 120mm double-barreled caliber!

            Two SUVs with mortars are cheaper than one BMP with a double-barrel, and one hit and minus two barrels in the battalion at once. 120 mm - the usual mortar caliber - in Russia since the late thirties. Understand that I do not consider this option a worthless trinket, just for me - it’s an expensive and non-optimal option for the large-scale introduction of motorized infantry battalions into service.
            1. Andrey Andreev_4
              Andrey Andreev_4 13 September 2019 16: 42
              +2
              Well, 120mm for a mortar is still not quite an ordinary caliber. Two barrels and 50 minutes are enough to level the company’s fortified point in 5 minutes.
              As a large-scale tool for arming motorized rifle battalions, it may not be suitable, but life does not stand still. Everything flows, tactics change, new means of communication, intelligence, target designation appear. The need for a lightly armored cross-country vehicle with good weapons and ammunition for organizing operations in rough terrain is likely to exist, at least for Sweden. Our generals, who are used to fighting tank columns with support for infantry fighting vehicles and infantry, may have these mortar wedges and nothing)
              1. KVU-NSVD
                KVU-NSVD 13 September 2019 16: 51
                +2
                Quote: Andrey Andreev_4
                Well, 120mm for a mortar is still not quite an ordinary caliber.

                Enter in the search engine "Mortar sample 38 - 63 years." Its modern descendant is the mortar "Sanya". The most common mortar of the Soviet, and possibly still the Russian army.
                The need for a lightly armored cross-country vehicle with good weapons and ammunition for organizing operations in rough terrain is likely to exist, at least for Sweden.
                The Swedes know better.
                Our generals, who are used to fighting tank columns with support for infantry fighting vehicles and infantry, may have these mortar wedges and nothing
                You have an outdated view of our generals. Although there are certainly enough oaks, but as you know, the more oaks in the army, the stronger our defense soldier laughing
                1. Andrey Andreev_4
                  Andrey Andreev_4 13 September 2019 17: 03
                  0
                  Let it be, although it seems to me 82mm still somehow more closely matches the battalion unit)
                  1. Old tanker
                    Old tanker 13 September 2019 17: 45
                    +2
                    Let it be, although it seems to me 82mm still somehow more closely matches the battalion unit)

                    In motorized rifle units since 2008, the main caliber is 120mm. 82mm remained in the airborne and mountain battalions.
              2. Old tanker
                Old tanker 13 September 2019 17: 42
                +2
                And can you see the calculation-substantiation of the statement that 50 120mm min will be razed to the ground? No matter how long.
                Do you know that the hall of a howitzer battery of 6 152 mm guns covers 6 hectares? It is 60 sq.m.
                ROP has dimensions of 1500m per 1000m total 1 sq.m. Calculate how many 500mm shells you need to just cover this area. Well, when you count, do not forget to consider that the power of a 000mm projectile is greater than 152mm mines.
                And all these calculations are for openly located manpower and equipment. A ROP and people and equipment are hidden in fortifications.
                1. Mihail2019
                  Mihail2019 13 September 2019 18: 15
                  +1
                  Summing up the above, we can say that the concept of using this device is quite controversial. However, since the Swedes put them into service, it means that they see the point in this, based on their conditions. However, in our conditions, the advantages of using such an aggregate are not at all obvious.
                  I understand everything correctly?
                  1. KVU-NSVD
                    KVU-NSVD 13 September 2019 20: 03
                    +1
                    Quote: Michael2019
                    Summarizing the foregoing,

                    we can conclude that the Swedish reasons to us are not at all reasonable laughing You can draw conclusions, Michael
  6. Cympak
    Cympak 13 September 2019 13: 46
    +1
    Not overpowered AMOS
    1. strannik1985
      strannik1985 13 September 2019 13: 58
      0
      Overpowered, a bad idea.
      1. Den717
        Den717 13 September 2019 14: 43
        0
        Quote: strannik1985
        Overpowered, a bad idea.

        If not a secret, than? We have the likes of Nona and Vienna. Something everyone praises ....
        1. ProkletyiPirat
          ProkletyiPirat 13 September 2019 15: 25
          +1
          Quote: Den717
          Quote: strannik1985
          Quote: Cympak
          Not overpowered AMOS
          Overpowered, a bad idea.

          If not a secret, than? We have the likes of Nona and Vienna. Something everyone praises ....

          The idea is normal, the implementation is stupid, we need specialized weapons, specialized ammunition with a specialized automatic loader. AMOS did not have the last two elements, which is why MRSI was declared but was not implemented at the proper level. As for our "Nona with Vienna", there were initially completely different goals.
          1. Den717
            Den717 13 September 2019 16: 00
            0
            Quote: ProkletyiPirat
            the implementation is stupid, we need specialized tools, specialized ammunition with a specialized automatic loader

            I am not an artilleryman, so I apologize for the naive question. What are "completely different goals"? There is no difference in elevation angle. The chassis is the same, both are self-propelled. Both installations can fire on mounted and flat trajectories. AMOS, judging by the videos on the Internet, actually fired, which means there is a shot and AZ. Raw? Well, any product at birth is not without flaws. In terms of performance characteristics, these mortars have no fundamental difference. From the point of view of operation, production I can not say anything. I can't understand your technical claims about AMOS. I would be glad for clarifications, if possible.
            1. ProkletyiPirat
              ProkletyiPirat 13 September 2019 16: 36
              +2
              Quote: Den717
              What are "completely different goals"?

              When NONA was created, they had the goal of getting a cannon + mortar for their own and others' BPs based on a mobile airborne self-propelled gun. At the same time, the direct tactics of using this armored personnel carrier did not change relative to the usual artillery and was based on the "batteries" with all their advantages, disadvantages and problems.

              AMOS, like other similar projects, are created for a different tactic of use, where there is a rejection of "batteries" as minimal combat units. The essence of the tactics comes down to 1) performing fire missions with a smaller number of AFVs, ideally one AFV, 2) the distribution of AFVs in space in order to complicate their detection and destruction 3) the distribution of AFVs in space in order to minimize the "blind spots", ideally, the AFV should have the fastest possible break through / bypass, and strike from the other side of the shelter where other AFVs cannot reach. 4) to ensure the advancement of the armored vehicle closer to the line of contact in order to increase accuracy, or rather, the advancement of the allies closer to the enemy by minimizing the likelihood of "friendly fire".
              1. Den717
                Den717 13 September 2019 18: 10
                0
                Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                NONA at creation had a goal to get a gun + mortar for their own and other BP

                That is, the breech is filled with a simple cylinder, because you can shove anything there that fits the caliber. Frankly, I don’t quite understand why AMOS will not do the same with our mines, if any.
                Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                AMOS, like other similar projects, are created for a different tactic of use, where there is a rejection of "batteries" as minimal combat units

                Tactics in the heads of the commanders, how it can be reflected in the gland. Does Nona (Vienna) have a multi-unit management system in network-centric operations? I think that if on occasion our team takes a rich trophy in the form of a couple of dozens of their self-propelled guns, then with the remaining components, they will be able to successfully work out their tactical tasks in the division, as well as in our equipment. Whatever tactics are used, the essence of self-propelled artillery and the demand for it remains the same - to quickly take a position, shoot the required amount of ammunition within the margins of permissible errors, and quickly leave the return fire zone. And one there will be a car or artillery regiment, what's the difference? (in the sense of the specific requirements for performance characteristics). I am not special in the tactics of using artillery in the Swedish army, but the experience of wars and conflicts suggests that the success of defeating the enemy lies in the massive use of weapons, even today. Because guided ammunition is still very expensive, and it is necessary to crush VOPs and ROPs with ordinary shells at the rate of consumption per unit area. IMHO If you have other information, share the source ...
                1. ProkletyiPirat
                  ProkletyiPirat 13 September 2019 21: 11
                  0
                  Quote: Den717
                  Tactics in the heads of the commanders, how it can be reflected in the gland.

                  In my opinion, this is your erroneous opinion, for example, small arms in the process of WWII had a new tactic based on suppressing the enemy with automatic fire, this ultimately manifested itself first in the appearance of "automatic machines", and today in "light machine guns" with an intermediate cartridge. In general, there are many examples of new tactics and, as a result, new requirements for performance characteristics.
                  Quote: Den717
                  Does Nona (Vienna) have a multi-unit management system in network-centric operations?

                  Network centrism network centrism is different! For example, we mean network-centrism based on batteries and create one expensive KSHM and many cheap self-propelled guns for it, but in northern Europe they mean network-centrism based on a separate AFV, this is due to the peculiarities of ours and theirs. And so many of our artillerymen do not even try to understand what is the difference and, as always, "I am the boss, they are fools!"
                  1. Den717
                    Den717 13 September 2019 21: 34
                    0
                    Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                    but in northern Europe they mean network-centrism based on a separate BBM

                    The "roaming weapon" theory is good if you need to throw some Excalibur into a hut of some hottab. And take, for example, only one MSR on the march? This is already a gut of 300 - 500 meters. How many guided projectiles do you need? Pieces 20? Not expensive? And the area of ​​defense of the SMB (5x3 km) how will you at least simply "suppress"? And all this with three or seven "stray" tools, untied like bulls? It seems to me that the authors of the ideas of these "lascivious" weapons themselves wander in the darkness of the ideas of the forms and methods of future wars. And if they (Swedes, Finns) can afford it, then our country has an almost open border in the south, where the Basmachi defeated in Syria gather. But how will they go to break through in some of our former republics? How to stop her? On a plane, you don't run after every jihadmob. This is where the work of the artillery "detachments" will be. Do you think it's impossible? I hope so too. But well fed, fed and armed with our "partners", how long will they grow their beards in the north of Afghanistan? Already today there are tens of thousands.
                    1. ProkletyiPirat
                      ProkletyiPirat 13 September 2019 23: 46
                      0
                      Den717 (Den) I literally wrote in a previous post
                      Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                      And so many of our gunners are not even trying to understand what the difference is and as always "I am the boss, they are fools!".

                      Of course, there are different TVDs, there are different TBDs, and there are hellish heaps of different strategies and tactics based on various methods and technical features. Of course, what is good for some may be bad for others (in particular, huge armies are not acceptable for northern Europe, but vice versa for our south). BUT You yourself gave an example where exactly the "battery" units have the lowest efficiency, while you are throwing the battery, the "jihadmobile" you have voiced will have time to fire a thousand times and topple.
                      Quote: Den717
                      The "roaming weapon" theory is good if you need to throw some Excalibur into a hut of some hottab. And take, for example, only one MSR on the march? This is already a gut of 300 - 500 meters. How many guided projectiles do you need? Pieces 20? Not expensive? And the area of ​​defense of the SMB (5x3 km) how will you at least simply "suppress"?

                      Well komenty under this article is clearly not a place to discuss this topic. But here, in my opinion, you have a poor idea of ​​the modern battlefield, or rather, its difference from what was in WWII, the enemy is not grouped today, today the enemy is dispersed and more actively uses the terrain and camouflage means. In this regard, today on the battlefield there are more point targets, rather than areal ones, and it’s precisely for the destruction of point fortifications that such new tactics and weapons are being created.
                      1. Den717
                        Den717 14 September 2019 08: 30
                        0
                        Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                        today the enemy is not grouped, today the enemy is dispersed

                        Prove with an example. Just an example of a war, not WHO. And then, you forget that any military team - a crew or a division - is still a full-fledged economy with all its attributes, support systems, financing, education, training, etc. In any case, there can be no separate weapon as a unit, it will always be part of a larger unit.
                        Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                        But here, in my opinion, you poorly imagine the modern battlefield, or rather its difference from what was in WWII

                        Which of the troops and levels of command are you yourself? It seems to me that you don’t really imagine what fighting is. Even the landed VDD can be, in your terminology, a complex of 3-5 thousand point targets. But for the howitzer artillery unit, the landing zone, concentration center, extension routes - all these are targets that occupy large areas. And these goals will be hit by divisions, regiments, brigades .... A liberated or occupied territory is always characterized by the presence of a motorized rifle or motorized infantry unit on it - a contingent of troops of the side occupying the territory. This is an axiom of war. And the infantry, even today, is an area target. There were no more or less noticeable conflicts in which the nomadic weapon would show its viability. If you know otherwise, let's discuss.
              2. Mihail2019
                Mihail2019 13 September 2019 18: 22
                0
                By the way, and if you compare the performance characteristics of "Nona" and this "Swede" - what happens? Caliber seems to converge .. And the rest, how?
    2. Lopatov
      Lopatov 13 September 2019 14: 04
      +2
      Quote: Cympak
      Not overpowered AMOS

      Rather, the Finns were punished for abandoning the "Archer"

      In general, initially in the "family" there were both options, but the Finnish was abandoned.
  7. Amateur
    Amateur 13 September 2019 14: 12
    +1
    the Mjölner system is a simple double-barreled smooth-bore mortar .... and with muzzle manual loading.
    ?
    This is about such stuntmen will ride in the crew

    Only mines will be inserted into the trunks
    1. Den717
      Den717 13 September 2019 14: 32
      0
      Quote: Amateur
      Only mines will be inserted into the trunks

      A bit wrong.
      https://dambiev.livejournal.com/1556014.html
      Frankly, the loading process looks somewhat unusual. Not at all like our Tulip. laughing But the crew doesn’t skip armor ...
    2. Lopatov
      Lopatov 13 September 2019 14: 43
      +2
      The above picture. Everything is quite simple there.
  8. Sniper
    Sniper 13 September 2019 14: 14
    +3
    good country Sweden .. they have everything. and Volvo, and Saabs, and self-propelled tanks. and even ABBA) and live for themselves and do not climb into anyone.
    1. Catfish
      Catfish 13 September 2019 14: 29
      +2
      They do not have samovars, and instead of vodka they drink some muck. winked
  9. garri-lin
    garri-lin 13 September 2019 14: 22
    0
    Here I look and I can not understand about manual charging at low elevation angles. Although in comparison with the Drok, it looks more logical.
  10. Disorder
    Disorder 13 September 2019 14: 23
    0
    According to the Swedish military, it is the manual loading system that provides a higher rate of fire (10 rounds per minute, up to a maximum of 16 rounds per minute), however, some firing modes are not available to the Swedish mortar, as well as shooting on the go.

    laughing Is manual loading a transfer of mines from stacking to the feed tray?
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 13 September 2019 14: 47
      +1
      Quote: Trouble
      Is manual loading a transfer of mines from stacking to the feed tray?

      Then use the lever to send the mine to the "coordinator" and then use the "coordinator" lever to lift and turn. dropping a mine into the barrel.
      They have it all manually, do not confuse it with other systems like the Swiss RUAG Cobra.
      1. garri-lin
        garri-lin 13 September 2019 15: 28
        0
        Can you use a variable charge?
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 13 September 2019 18: 21
          0
          Of course. Manual loading
          1. garri-lin
            garri-lin 13 September 2019 18: 22
            0
            Thank you for clarification.
  11. Nadir shah
    Nadir shah 13 September 2019 14: 47
    0
    It looks cool, it even reminded me of a German self-propelled gun with a rocket launcher, I had a model as a child. I also thought later that the GW had written off its "Vindicator" from him (except for the bucket, of course), the gun looks exactly the same.
  12. Evil 55
    Evil 55 13 September 2019 15: 04
    -1
    A car with a stationary mortar will never go where the soldier will drag this mortar on the hump .. And here is our NONA for 13 km. throws suitcases ..
  13. Monar
    Monar 13 September 2019 16: 06
    0
    The calculation when shooting is in the fighting compartment in a standing position in full growth.
    What is it like? Only waist-high? Well, then what is the point in all the armor? Only for protection on the march?
  14. Ros 56
    Ros 56 13 September 2019 16: 17
    -1
    What, the Swedes want to experience the unforgettable experience of the time of the Battle of Poltava? That they are in vain, it is better to be at home with his wife and children than to lie in a field with a broken head.
  15. Old tanker
    Old tanker 13 September 2019 16: 25
    0
    Why mortar shooting at once?
  16. faterdom
    faterdom 13 September 2019 16: 27
    0
    Why duplicate what has already been developed by other NATO members, and, most importantly, by other NATO candidates? After all, there is already a well-run 120mm Hammer mortar? The Mayak recording plant is being built in Kiev ...
    But no - "Hammer" must be "Torah"!
    So Netanyahu can easily explain that "Torah" is "Torah" and "Hammer" is "Hammer".
  17. ser56
    ser56 13 September 2019 16: 39
    0
    why do they need 2 trunks?
  18. MoJloT
    MoJloT 13 September 2019 16: 51
    0
    It’s a pity there are no more Shumovs with us; they would have laughed heartily.
  19. sledak
    sledak 13 September 2019 18: 04
    0
    Can anyone explain why on the tower on the left, when viewed from the stern, the bag is stuck to the side?
    Not to "bleed off" the same pressure from shots from the tower ... or do they hide their heads from inside the tower at the moment of shots at it, so that "it doesn't hit the ears"?
    I'm talking about the video
  20. Slippery
    Slippery 13 September 2019 22: 22
    +1
    Quote: Old Tankman
    The main difference of the new tactics is the absence of "batteries" and associated problems and disadvantages.

    About how!
    Long neighing, almost torn my stomach!
    What are these battery shortcomings in front of a single mortar fire support? And what are the benefits of this single mortar?

    We need about this new tactic - a single self-propelled mortar on the front line to tell our mortars. Yes, I'm afraid to sleep!


    Not for fucking sake, Friday is all business, he is like that ... Show your mortar workers where the Swedes are going to fight, I specially picked up a photo with mobile communication towers ... but in essence, remind you how the Finnish shit before the army in number less than the police in Leningrad and Titovka in the 41st 173rd, the Jaeger Regiment drove the Komsomol division like kittens. The Swedes are preparing for their own conditions, they perfectly understand in the Bryansk forests a fur animal will come for them. Have a nice weekend Dear Butter.
    PS, And the question is how are you going to cover 60 hectares with 6 trunks in such elevations? How do you lock them in there? I’m even afraid to ask. )))