"Peonies" for the fleet. Coastal troops will receive new artillery

Artillery of coastal naval forces fleet will receive new weapons systems. In addition to the available towed and self-propelled systems, they will receive 2C7 Peony products. In the coming months, 203 mm caliber self-propelled guns will arrive in the Baltic Fleet. Then, delivery of such equipment to troops in other directions is expected. The positive consequences of such a rearmament are obvious.

SPG 2С7М Malka fires

Latest news

On the transfer of "Peonies" to the coastal troops on September 16, the publication Izvestia reported. Perspective new weapon artillerymen of coastal forces of all fleets will receive, and the Baltic will be the first. In addition to 2С7 guns, artillerymen will receive Zoo counter-battery firing radars. The new material part will increase the combat potential of the coastal forces as a whole.

The main formations and units of the coastal forces of the Baltic Fleet are part of the 11 Army Corps. In the city of Kaliningrad, the 244th Artillery Neman Red Banner, the orders of the Suvorov and Kutuzov brigade, armed with various weapons, are serving. Apparently, it was she who was to master a new technique.

According to Izvestia, the self-propelled guns will be available to the Baltic Fleet at the end of this year or at the beginning of the next. More precise terms, as well as the number of transmitted "Peonies" have not yet been published.

It should be noted that before 2С7 the coastal troops were absent. The Russian Navy has various artillery systems in its arsenal, but "Peonies" were previously available only to the ground forces. Now they will be in both the army and the navy, which can give certain advantages.

Guns and locators

At the moment, the self-propelled 2С7 "Peony" is one of the most powerful domestic artillery systems capable of showing unique combat qualities. The solution of the main tasks is entrusted to such equipment, and in the near future such an effective tool will be available not only to the ground forces.

Preparation for shooting

The 2X7 Pion or 2X7M Malka combat vehicle carries an 2A44 rifled gun of 203 mm caliber with a barrel length of 55 caliber. The gun mount is mounted on a self-propelled armored tracked chassis with high mobility rates. In recent years, a project to modernize equipment has been implemented, providing for the replacement of parts of equipment and the introduction of new fire control equipment. All these improvements provide the updated technology with significant advantages over the base model.

The 2X7 ammunition can include shots of seven types for various purposes. Nuclear munitions have also been developed in the past. Conventional shells have a mass of about 110 kg and carry a warhead weighing 13-17 kg. The maximum firing range depends on the type of projectile. Active-reactive 3ОФ44 - 47,5 km shows the greatest. "Peony" independently carries 4 shots, "Malka" - 8. As a result, the bulk of the ammunition from 40 rounds is transported by a separate transport vehicle.

1L259 “Zoo” reconnaissance radar system is designed to track the flight of artillery shells. It is intended for reconnaissance of enemy positions and for monitoring the results of firing own artillery. Also, the radar complex is able to track aircraft and provide data about them. The complex’s equipment is mounted on an MT-LBu armored chassis, which simplifies deployment and departure from a position.

When working on large-caliber artillery shells, the Zoo complex is capable of calculating gun positions at ranges up to 15-20 km. For multiple launch rocket systems, this parameter increases to 25-35 km. Information about the enemy or the places where their shells fall in automatic mode are issued to the command post.

Self-propelled guns 2С3 coastal forces of the Pacific Fleet at the training ground

"Peonies" and "Zoos" can be used to effectively defeat the various targets encountered by coastal forces. First of all, these are enemy troops in positions, fortified objects, warehouses, etc. It is also possible to use artillery on surface targets. The presence of radar reconnaissance provides both the timely detection of targets and the adjustment of fire.

203-mm shells of all types are highly powerful and can effectively hit a wide range of targets. Depending on the type of target, the calculation of "Peony" can use high-explosive, concrete-piercing or cluster shells.

With the help of modern communication systems, “Peonies” will be included in the general control loops, ensuring effective joint work with other artillery complexes and military branches. Having received self-propelled guns 2С7, artillery units, already armed with various self-propelled guns and towed guns, will become a more flexible tool for solving combat missions.

Other guns

The Navy's coastal forces are armed with several artillery systems of different classes, both towed and self-propelled - from portable 82-mm mortars to 152-mm self-propelled howitzers. Almost all such samples are used not only by coastal, but also by ground forces.

The most powerful and long-range models of barrel artillery in the coastal forces are the 2X19 Msta-S self-propelled guns, as well as the towed 2A65 Msta-B and 2A36 Hyacinth-B self-propelled guns. All these systems have an 152 mm caliber and are capable of hitting targets at ranges up to 33,5 km. Moreover, in a number of key characteristics, they are inferior to the 2С7 “Peony” product.

Coastal artillery complex A-222 "Coast"

The most important component of the naval artillery is the coastal complex A-222 "Coast". It includes up to six self-propelled guns with 130-mm guns, as well as a control point and auxiliary equipment. "Shore" can use several types of shells and attack moving targets at ranges up to 23 km. The main objective of the A-222 is the defeat of small and medium surface ships moving at speeds up to 90-100 nodes. For a number of reasons, the Bereg complex was not widely used, and so far not all fleets of the Russian Navy have it.

Artillery reinforcement

For the first time in modern stories coastal troops will receive artillery of high power, so far only available to the army. The transfer of the necessary self-propelled guns and RLC for them will take place at the turn of the 2019-2020 years, and together with the equipment the fleet will get new opportunities.

It is easy to see that the self-propelled 2X7 "Peony" has serious advantages over other coastal artillery. Such advantages are provided by a greater range of fire with any type of shells and a greater ammunition capacity. The help of the 1L259 “Zoo” radar reconnaissance complex will ensure accuracy growth to the required values.

The introduction of "Peonies" in the coastal forces will increase the area of ​​responsibility of their artillery. First of all, it will be useful in organizing coastal defense. The ships of the likely enemy will have to stay farther from the coastline, and breaking through the cannon fire zone will become more difficult and dangerous. Moreover, any hit of an 203-mm projectile can be fatal for a small or medium ship.

When using 2С7 against land targets, coastal troops will receive all the advantages that the army already has. 203-mm artillery will be able to effectively destroy the fortifications and accumulations of enemy troops in the entire range of ranges, including when used together with other complexes.

In general, the transfer of a certain number of self-propelled guns 2С7 "Peony" to the coastal forces of the Russian Navy should be considered the right step that could positively affect their combat effectiveness. High-powered artillery showed itself in the best way in parts of the ground forces, and its appearance in the fleet should have only positive consequences.

Comments

[Vadim237]

"Ponty for the Fleet" - The Coastal Forces need complexes with anti-ship missiles with a range of 50 to 1500 kilometers.

[Sandor Clegane]

Quote: Vadim237

"Ponty for the Navy"

yah))

Quote: Vadim237

Coastal troops need complexes with anti-ship missiles with a range of 50 to 1500 kilometers.

from 50 there are, but at 1500 is what?

[Lexus]

I think this event is not from a good life. Here we laugh at "neighbors with a fork", but, for some reason, in stupidity we strive to bypass them. There are a million examples. They are the main fleet of the tanker - we are the commander-in-chief of the VKS of the pvoshnik, they are 60 thousand to the National Guard - we are to the Russian Guard 360 thousand, they are in the landing of tank companies - we are battalions, they are in the coastal artillery "Hyacinths" - we are "Peony"

[Alexey RA]

Quote: lexus

they are in the landing of tank companies - we are battalions, they are in the coastal artillery "Hyacinths" - we are "Peonies".

Read the article carefully - this is not coastal artillery, but artillery of coastal troops. The fleet has now been cut into its own defense areas, in which it was reassigned to all formations of the ground forces, which overnight became coastal forces.
Specifically, these "Peonies" will go to the corps artillery brigade of the "naval" army corps, covering the Kaliningrad region.

[Saxahorse]

Quote: Alexey RA

Read the article carefully - this is not coastal artillery, but artillery of coastal troops.

This is puzzling. Coastal troops are designed to defend their coast, as the name implies. And Peony, on the contrary, is designed to break into enemy fortifications. What will he do in the coastal forces? Demolish their fortifications?

[Amurets]

Quote: Saxahorse

This is puzzling. Coastal troops are designed to defend their coast, as the name implies.

To understand this topic, it would be nice to read the coastal defense veterans: Kabanov, Melnikov, the work of Perechnev "" Soviet coastal artillery: at what targets did the coastal artillerymen shoot. EMNIP. Only artillerymen of the 221st Sredny Peninsula had experience in coastal and sea targets.

[Monar]

That's just interesting. Well, such a "pig" from Peony will fly when breaking the defense or defending its coast from the foe. What is the difference?
Yet again. We just read the nomenclature of the Pionov shells.
3VG11. Concrete Slaughter Yes. Hacking the enemy defense.
3BO15 (16) Cassette. Special for a breakthrough?
3ВОФ34 (35, 42) High-explosive. Special for a breakthrough?
I’ll keep silent about the long-loaf. In my humble opinion, it’s a very problematic shell for breaking into defense.

[Lopatov]

Quote: Monar

3BO15 (16) Cassette. Special for a breakthrough?
3ВОФ34 (35, 42) High-explosive. Special for a breakthrough?

Yes.
In order to hit targets in depth at the stage of artillery preparation.

Do not forget, "Peonies" can be used only in the absence of a counter-battery.

[Monar]

Those. Do you deny the possibility and expediency of the use of large-caliber artillery in defense? Did I understand you correctly?

[Lopatov]

Quote: Monar

Those. Do you deny the possibility and expediency of the use of large-caliber artillery in defense?

I deny the possibility and expediency of using 2C7

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Saxahorse

This is puzzling. Coastal troops are designed to defend their coast, as the name implies.

You see what the matter is ... the Navy has only two names for its land units and formations: it is either marines or coastal troops. Obviously, the transferred Navy from the SV 11 AK does not pull the marines. So, only coastal troops remain.
And to defend the coast, as shown by the practice of the Second World War, the fleet most often has to land. By the way, in those days the fleet also had army units with army artillery - the same SOR on Sredniy / Rybachy, in which there were coastal batteries. working on ships, and field batteries (including long-range A-19), working on targets on the land front.

[Amurets]

Quote: Alexey RA

And to defend the coast, as shown by the practice of the Second World War, the fleet most often has to land. By the way, in those days the fleet also had army units with army artillery - the same SOR on Sredniy / Rybachy, in which there were coastal batteries. working on ships, and field batteries (including long-range A-19), working on targets on the land front.

I would have formulated a little differently: coastal batteries working on ships and coastal targets and field batteries firing on sea targets. But this is just a style, and the essence of this does not change.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Amurets

I would have formulated a little differently: coastal batteries working on ships and coastal targets and field batteries firing on sea targets.

As far as I remember, before the appointment of Kabanov on Srednee and Rybachye, most of the field artillery of the SOR was in antiamphibious defense. And Kabanov was just engaged in replacing field guns on the "sea" front with normal coastal ones, and transferred the released field artillery systems to work on ground targets on the land front and counter-battery warfare.

[Amurets]

Quote: Alexey RA

As far as I remember, before the appointment of Kabanov in Sredniy and Rybachy, most of the field artillery of the Special Forces was in the airborne defense.

Yes, but he began to remove field guns from the marine direction after they began to transfer the battery No. 130 to the battery No. 140 to the medium 221mm, and before that, as Kabanov writes:

I asked Ponochevnoy what tasks his [29] battery had. He named two: the first - in cooperation with the 15th separate machine-gun battalion and 107-mm batteries of Kokorev and Zamyatin, prevent the enemy from landing on the western shore of the Sredny Peninsula, the second - block the Petsamo-vuono bay with fire.

[Saxahorse]

Quote: Amurets

I would have formulated a little differently: coastal batteries working on ships and coastal targets and field batteries firing on sea targets. But this is just a style, and the essence of this does not change.

The bottom line is that Peony is not suitable for coastal batteries, much less for field batteries. Below in the comments several times reminded him of TTX. A leisurely bandura sharpened for firing at stationary, long-term fortifications. There is Msta, there is the Shore, there is finally Acacia. Any of these guns will be much more useful in the coastal forces.

[Amurets]

Quote: Saxahorse

The bottom line is that Peony is not suitable for coastal batteries, much less for field batteries.

If you think with your head, then life will teach a lot. 107mm tsar’s cannons were even less suitable for coastal defense, but were successfully used in the blockade of Petsamo-Vuono Bay. The guns of the 104th artillery regiment were set up by the NZO, blocking the entry / exit of ships and vessels from the bay, and the 140th and 221 coastal batteries of 130mm guns fired.
Tactical and technical characteristics of the 107-mm gun arr. 1910 / 30's:
Overall dimensions (combat position): length - 7530 mm, width - 2064 mm, height - 1735 mm.
Caliber - 106,7 mm.
Barrel length - 38 calibers, 4054 mm (without muzzle brake).
The height of the line of fire - 1175 mm.
Weight in the stowed position - 3000 kg.
Weight in the fighting position - 2535 kg.
Vertical guidance angles: from −5 to + 37 °.
Horizontal guidance angle: 6 °.
The maximum firing range is 16,1 km.
Rate of Fire - 5-6 rds / min.
Calculation - 8 man
.

[Saxahorse]

Quote: Amurets

If you think with your head, then life will teach a lot. 107mm tsar’s cannons were even less suitable for coastal defense, but were successfully used in the blockade of Petsamo-Vuono Bay.

War, especially unfortunate development, will force you to use everything that can shoot. Remembering during the Dardanelles Allied operation, one of the battleships got hit by a stone core from the ancient Turkish mortar. But you must admit, this is not a reason now, in peacetime, to roll mortars from museums. Strengthening coastal defense by Peonies indicates a lack of common sense among decision-makers. It is sad. :(

[Saxahorse]

Quote: Alexey RA

And to defend the coast, as shown by the practice of the Second World War, the fleet most often has to land.

This is what we are talking about. Peony is completely unsuitable for defense. This is a gun to support the assault troops. If it was necessary to strengthen the coastal defense, there is an A-222 Coast for this. I do not like the Beach, there is a great 2S19 Msta, but not Peony.

[Old tanker]

The introduction of "Peonies" in the coastal forces will increase the area of ​​responsibility of their artillery. First of all, it will be useful in organizing coastal defense. The ships of the likely enemy will have to stay farther from the coastline, and breaking through the cannon fire zone will become more difficult and dangerous. Moreover, any hit of an 203-mm projectile can be fatal for a small or medium ship.

These are the words of the author of the article, which immediately give any sober person a reason to doubt his competence, But with what pathos it is written!

[Monar]

And up to 50 km with what?
The multilevel air defense (from S-400 to MANPADS) does not cause any doubts, objections. But for some reason you refuse the fleet.
UAV problem. for modern armies. Tomorrow BPPA (floating above or under water) will go into the series. With similar (taking into account specifics) prospects for combat use. And to spend on each discovered trifle RCC?

[Vadim237]

Such artillery has already lost its relevance in the Navy, since no enemy will approach the coast until the systems and air defense of coastal missile systems are completely suppressed, all ships are sunk and all artillery is destroyed.

[sgrabik]

One absolutely does not exclude the other, for example, when an enemy landed on our coast, which, exceptionally, can only be dispensed with RCCs ???

[polpot]

The good news will not be superfluous.

[Jager]

The MLRS missile can still be shot down, and a cast-iron disc weighing one centner, which absolutely does not give a damn about all of your electronic warfare and other GPS - is extremely doubtful))
The solution is correct, but without special warheads it is not complete.
I can see it from the sofa.

[voyaka uh]

To hit this moving target in a moving target
hard, like knocking her down.

[Jager]

And who was going to shoot at tanks from a caliber of high power?
The goals for such weapons, if they move, then only together with the continent))

[garri-lin]

How perfect the SLA is in the modernization process. That is the main question.

[Lopatov]

Quote: garri-lin

How perfect is the LMS

Irrelevant.
2C7 it will not help

[garri-lin]

If the first salvo by means of landing at the time of landing (directly at the time of landing of landing) from a distance of 30+ km. Who will be able to work counter-battery? Than? Destroyers supporting the landing, missiles or aircraft. With proper air defense, Peonies will be able to work. Not for long but they can.

[Lopatov]

Quote: garri-lin

With proper air defense, Peonies will be able to work. Not for long but they can.

One or two shots at the gun. With a real microscopic probability of getting thereafter they will endure it. I don’t think it makes sense.

[garri-lin]

So I’m talking about that. If the SLA allows you to hit the first second shell, then it makes sense. If not, then a waste. And two shots are few. In the landing zone, the enemy’s landing will not have the means to quickly spot the position of Pion. Support ships will have to do this and they will be even further. Kilometers 15 further. So a few volleys and time for a change of position will be possible.

[Lopatov]

Quote: garri-lin

If the SLA allows you to hit the first second shell

Extremely unlikely.
They were not created at all as a means of combating moving goals.
Breaking other people's pillboxes and firing at long range at stationary objects

[garri-lin]

Not on the move. The means of delivery at the time of the landing of the deant. Fixed barges unloading equipment the most vulnerable targets. You can shoot the coastline in advance. The time the barge is in this position is short, but enough for a couple of volleys. "Coast" will be driven by all means. If anyone breaks through Peony as a second line. Exactly not if but when.

[Old tanker]

The "Peony" 1,5 rounds per minute, the "Malki" increased to 2,5. But the article is about Peonies. So what are you talking about a few volleys? 1-2 and a change of position - this is from the moment the system was created. Therefore, the transported b / c large is not needed.
Transfer time from combat to marching from marching to combat for 10 minutes! Malki has 5 and 7, respectively. So it is unlikely that after the second volley they will have time to leave the position.
One salvo for an important goal and to blame!
All tactics.

[garri-lin]

Which of the landing troops will be able to work counter-battery? I suspect that no one. The only place where Peony is fit for anything is to clean the bridgeheads of the enemy landing. Although in relation to Kaliningrad it is rather a psychological pressure on the misunderstood. On such a theater, everything is too close and too tight.

[Lopatov]

Quote: garri-lin

Which of the landing troops will be able to work counter-battery? I suspect that no one.

Artillery, aviation, ship grouping.

[garri-lin]

The artillery will not appear at the landing immediately, I'm talking about the bridgehead on which the landing takes place. And the problem of aviation and the shipbuilder of grouping is solved by air defense. Due to the range, Peony will be able to work from distances inaccessible to naval artillery. Ships will have to shoot rockets. Typical target for Thors and Carapace. Like turntables. It is more difficult with airplanes, since serious air defense before landing will be meticulously cleaned.

[Bad_gr]

Quote: garri-lin

If the SLA allows you to hit the first second shell, then it makes sense. If not, then a waste ...

If a landing ship is heading for the coast, or something like Mistral begins to drop amphibious assault forces directly into the sea, Peony allows breaking this idyll already at a distance of 47 km from the coast. When the landing party comes closer, they will fall under the shells = MCTA-s = or = Shores =. If even closer, then there is a place for mortars.

[garri-lin]

Reread the comments. Here people with great experience explain meticulously. Peony is not designed to hit a moving target. If without fantasies, then his destiny is to finish off on the shore the "means of disembarkation" that have broken through at the time of the landing. The target is soft and motionless. And you can shoot in advance.

[Bad_gr]

Quote: garri-lin

Reread comments.

I do not argue with them.
From amphibious assault ships of the type = Mistral = amphibious assault is being dropped? An armored personnel carrier floating in the sea requires an accurate hit of a 203-mm shell in it, so that it releases bubbles? Will the amphibian armor protect against fragments of a 203mm projectile that exploded in the air?

[garri-lin]

The highways will stand farther from the shore. That is their meaning. Floating armored personnel carrier is tight. And n5 is badly armored. To drown, you need a fairly close hit. Amphibian is a landing barge? Their speed is not small. It’s hard to get there. Well, the shell hits 100 meters, showers with fragments. It will do harm but not much. But such a barge will approach the shore, and here it can be covered.

[samaravega]

What is the LMS? What are you writing about? Is there a means to observe a moving target 37 km away? Especially ground-based, small-sized (which becomes any landing from the moment of landing). Is it possible to know the speed and direction of the wind in the surface zone at a distance of 30 - 35 km? A simple question: HOW TO GET in such conditions "the first, second projectile" into a small-sized or moving (or both) target? What kind of firing at ships can we talk about with MANUAL guidance in the sector 15 degrees from the longitudinal axis of the vehicle? A huge request: in addition to the Internet, read at least sometimes textbooks of physics, geometry, mathematics. I'm not talking about the shooting tables.

[garri-lin]

The target is stationary, motionless. Located in advance of a known point. Soft and fragile and unshielded. A dream is not a goal. To shoot the coastline on which landing is possible a matter of several hours. The time spent by the enemy’s landing means at the landing site is short, but enough for five shells from the barrel.

[samaravega]

Will you shoot the coastline with 110-kg "suitcases" in peacetime? How do you imagine this? Or will the enemy give you a few hours for zeroing in the war? And the time to transfer the "Peonies" to a combat position? I repeat: loosening the track tension and lowering the idler wheel to the ground, all manually. The norm is 10 minutes. "Malka" is not much better - 7 minutes. Plus the generation of data for shooting. Rate of fire - 1 / m, i.e. another 4 minutes for the release of ammunition. It's too long these days. Yes, and heels of shells will not work - he has a transportable ammunition of only 4. A quick maneuver with fire is impossible - the angle of horizontal fire is only 30 degrees, manual guidance. The re-rotation of the entire installation is possible only after its transfer to the stowed position. And I would not call the goal soft. The landing field either maneuvers, or spreads out and digs in, the landing vehicles leave.

[garri-lin]

Shoot them in peacetime. Immediately after deployment. Do what you want on your territory. Peony will work in parallel with the Shore, from the depths of its territory. A priori there cannot be many landing zones. Too many factors should be favorable. It will be up to the command to decide on the possible and most likely in advance. So it won't be a problem to resolve the weapons in advance. If there is parity, air defense / aviation, you can fight. The landing party will simply have nothing to get Peony with for counter-battery combat. And each newly arrived "barge" can be greeted with a salvo. Little will not show. And the barge and the landed equipment.

[samaravega]

Oddly enough, the usually convenient landing spots overlap with beaches, areas used by fishermen, small coasters, etc. Here they will be delighted with the sighting! As for the favorable zones, I'm sorry, you are wrong. Read the story. There are many methods, starting with disembarkation directly at the port and at the pier (Kerch-Feodosia operation) and ending with the creation of berths from sunken ships (D-Day, Normandy). I am not an expert, experts will probably bring a dozen more. Not to mention the "vertical coverage", the seizure of RDG bridgeheads, distracting landings, etc. Arrange the guns in advance a) it is not possible, too many zones need to be blocked, and the number of guns is very limited, besides, do not forget the angle of horizontal firing of the Pion - only 30 degrees, b) suicidal with the current means of reconnaissance: the earlier you place, the earlier will reveal. Meeting the barge with a salvo is an idea of ​​the class, but I have to send you back to the performance characteristics of the "Pion" - vertical and horizontal guidance - manual. Rate of fire - 1,5 / m maximum. With such characteristics, it is difficult to get even into a UDC or a dock ship. And they will not approach the shore, the landing of the "first wave" - ​​amphibious combat vehicles and landing boats. Getting into them from "Peony" is a circus act. And there is supposedly a cluster shell for this gun, but there is no information about the production or its supply to the troops, even during the Soviet era. She generally has a very narrow range of ammunition: high-explosive fragmentation, active-reactive and SBS.

[garri-lin]

The first wave will be turntables with a landing. Then light floating equipment. The goals for Peony are heavy equipment on landing barges. 30 degrees at a distance of 30 km is how much will it be? Kilometers 17-18 of the shore can be kept at gunpoint without moving the hull. This is your little? You can shoot in advance without any problems. Practical shell and cordon and no problem. Ships also train in shooting. He declared the water area closed in connection with exercises and shmaley. The question with accuracy and rate of fire is incomprehensible. Malka is better than Peony in this matter. I think that it will be delivered exactly Malka and even in a modernized form. And these are completely different possibilities. On cluster shells, you may be right, but they are not really needed.

[samaravega]

Let's go over the text:
1. Do you chair the US Army Chiefs of Staff? Where does the information come from that the "turntables" will be the first? I have to repeat myself: the enemy should not be underestimated, they have a wealth of experience in large and successful amphibious assault forces, from the Pacific Ocean and "D-Day" to Incheon (Chemulpo, if that tells you something), which turned the tide of the war in Korea. It is foolish to expect them to act routinely.
2. "Targets for" Pion "heavy equipment on landing barges". Excellent. Three questions: 1) what heavy equipment cannot be lifted by LCAC hovercraft? 2) what are the chances of "Peony" getting into this boat? 3) what "landing barges" are we talking about? Is there a type, project name, brand, model? What amphibious assault ships are used on?
3. "I declared the territory closed and shmalyai". And I, as a fisherman or a coaster owner, "rolled in" a claim for lost income. Considering how many thousands of people there SURVIVE at the expense of the sea, depriving them of their legitimate income is at least stupid and shortsighted: who will they support then?
3. The length of the coast of the Kaliningrad region is 140 km. The "Pion" battery covers 18 km (let's forget that according to its performance characteristics "Pion" cannot do anything at all with sea targets), Question of the 3rd class level: how many batteries are needed to cover the coast of the Kaliningrad region?
4. The question with accuracy and rate of fire is, of course, not clear to you. Just look at the performance characteristics of coastal defense guns, rate of fire, firing angles, guidance speeds, target detection and guidance systems. Perhaps you will understand something.
5. Who can "Peony" hit at a distance of 30 km? A barge with a speed of at least 2 knots? How? Share, I have no idea.
6. I already wrote that "Peony", that "Malku" had ceased to be produced back in 1990. Where are the supplies of guns from? There are two options: "remove" from warehouses or "take away" from the SV. Where then is the confidence that it is "Malki"? "I blinded you, from what was."
7. Can you tell us more about "Malka" in a modernized form? Who is modernizing? What is the modernization?

[garri-lin]

Well on points.
1. The first lovers will be turntables with military intelligence. As the coast is not ironing, there will be surprises, and helicopter landing groups will look for these surprises.
2. I spoke about them. Which are on the pillow and which the abrams carry. Its speed doesn’t matter. How to throw ashore so you can shoot. Fixed soft and vulnerable target.
3. About the fishermen pleased. Since we have fishermen who may not reckon with our own aircraft, I’m calm for the state. Mob reserve of regular parts.
3.1. (You have 2 thirds of the point) how many of the 140 km of coast are suitable for landing? And the ground target will be repeated many times.
4. The question is not clear from the article. It is a question of a Peony that has undergone modernization (Malka) and has received a new SLA. There is hope that the accuracy will be at the level.
I’ll interrupt for a couple of minutes.

[samaravega]

Sorry, forced to repeat:
1. Did their commander-in-chief about turntables report to you? Read how they fought in Korea, Vietnam and Iraq. Template actions are prohibited by the charter.
2. Will their headquarters tell you where and when they will "be thrown" ashore? Will they unload the equipment and wait for your fire? Or will they leave right away so as not to be a "soft" goal? Even if they remain, how will the "Peony" hit them at a distance of even 25 km? At a rate of fire of 1 / m? If they "wash" ashore 10 km away, how will you turn the "Peonies"?
3. You made me happy in terms of our armed forces. If we have the army, the National Guard and others who, in peacetime, do not want to reckon with the citizens on whose taxes they exist, then I am worried about the state. Usually such an attitude of "siloviks" towards citizens leads to defeats. Especially considering the draft nature of the aircraft.
4. If you cannot write about the "modernization of" Malka ", write at least about the" modernized "Peony" (he passed it back in 1986, there was not even a talk about any "new LMS") and, especially, about the "new LMS". What is the novelty? What is the difference from the old one? What does it include? Well, other specifics.
5. What does the phrase "level accuracy" mean? What "level" is meant specifically? The first projectile hit a small target? What is this (or another level) provided?

[garri-lin]

1. A tricky move to work for the viewer. Stereotyping is prohibited by the charter. Do not remind why I wrote about turntables?
2. If you do not know where your opponent is, then you need to do two indispensable actions. Shoot all who are responsible for intelligence. Shoot himself. From shame. (minus the second most likely argument.)
3. If our fishermen put the interests of their profit higher than the security interests of the State, then do we need such fishermen? Maybe they have one. To the loggers. (minus the third, a childish argument drawn by Zaoshi.) (As with air defense students, planes disperse several times a year and nothing. But you didn’t know about it)
4. Does a cc know that Malka can be driven not by hand but by a hydraulic drive? And the tracks do not need to be loosened. And twice as many shells. And much more. And in the information about the transfer of Peonies to Kaliningrad, they talk about the modernization and installation of an automated OMS. If this is not enough for you, then hire spies to find out.
5. At the level it means at the level. At the level of compliance with the tasks.

[samaravega]

Intelligence is cool. Have you come up with? Tell me at least one war, a conflict, where ALL the moving targets of the enemy were known with precision sufficient to defeat artillery. Or simply: what technical means will enable CONTINUOUSLY and UNSCREWABLE for the enemy to observe and accurately determine the coordinates of at least two detachments of ships that freely maneuver in direction and speed?
If you don't know the essence of the question, at least don't write about it. In the case of "Malka", the steering wheel is lowered to the ground in the same way before shooting, and this cannot be done without loosening the tension of the caterpillar. Without this and the lowering of the coulter, the stability of the installation is not ensured when firing. It's just that on the "Peony" it is done manually, and on the "Malka" by hydraulics. It does not strongly affect combat readiness, I already wrote: the standard for "Peony" is 10 minutes, for "Malka" - 7 minutes. Read not only "Wiki", but at least popular literature, although now you can even find in free access even TO and IE (although you hardly know what it is), or at least carefully look at the photo, the "Peony" and "Malka" have external differences, in all photos from the firing of both installations the opener and guide wheels are lowered. "They are talking about installing an automated control system." We have a lot of things to say. If you don’t know, I’ll explain: in artillery, an automated control system is simplified to mean a set of devices and systems that allows, taking into account the placement of guns on the ground at the battery command post (at least), to automatically work out the angles of horizontal and vertical guidance for each gun, automatically transfer the generated data to each tool and in automatic or semi-automatic mode to ensure the processing of these data by each tool. Read TO and IE 2S7M, see photos of calculation jobs. For this gun, this is not possible by definition and is not necessary, given the horizontal guidance angle.
About the level of compliance with the assigned tasks - the phrase fire. Steeper than Peskov. A simple question: the task: the defeat of a naval small-sized target (and for large-caliber artillery, even a destroyer is a small-sized target) at a distance of 29 km, the coordinates are known, moving at a speed of 7 knots, the direction is known. What properties, technical characteristics will allow your "LMS at the level" to ensure the fulfillment of this task? Before writing the usual answer from general phrases, look at the firing tables for 2S7, there are indicated the values ​​of deviations in range and direction, compare these values ​​with the dimensions of the destroyer.

[garri-lin]

1. The ship moves on the water. On which there are no folds of terrain. Usually Radar is used to detect ships. This device is so new. He is only a little less than a hundred years old. The accuracy of the radar allows you to generate data for firing artillery. Over land, radar is less effective. But that is no longer important.
2. A lot of words about the tracks. We omit it as unnecessary.
3. About MSA you wrote everything beautifully, but didn’t explain why it’s all impossible for Peony / Malki. Faith does not allow?
4. And another pearl. Once again you are about to shoot at moving ships. This is a PDA from a cannon on sparrows but only on the ships. For ships there is a Ball and a Bastion. For means of landing on the route there is a Shore. And now there is Peony / Malka to work on the erupted. Motionless, unshielded. Be aware. Turn on your head. If such a sign of the tables, then tell me which KVO at a distance of 30 km.

[samaravega]

I am forced to once again teach you specifics. Let's go through your text:
1. You opened my eyes about the radar! Hooray!! And on the ship there are no RTR, electronic warfare equipment, it is not covered by aviation with PRR. Nowadays, turning on the radar is like turning on a bright lantern at night: "here it is, I am, fire it." Back in 1986, the inclusion of target detection radar ("radar", just like GPS, leave "civil rams", let's operate with the CORRECT terms) only TWO antenna turns (i.e. 2 s) by the Libyan MRK pr. 1234E (if this tells you anything) allowed the CG-48 Yorktown not only to correctly identify the target, but also to determine the direction to it. After 15 minutes, the Libyan MRK was destroyed by the Harpoon anti-ship missile system from A-6E aircraft. The main thing is: where is the radar provided in the 2S7 batteries (battalion)? How is the control system envisaged and will be carried out from it to the guns? How are they going to work out this control center? At what distance can they be from it so as not to get hit by aircraft that easily detect the radar?
2. You have neither a word about the track, nor about the wheels, nor about the movement under the threat of an enemy strike. Well, write at least something specific!
3. I am already tired of writing about the possibilities and limitations dictated by the fundamental design features of the 2C7 and 2C7M. You wrote it "nicely" about "new, automated LMS". I just repeatedly asked to clarify: what exactly is new? What exactly is automated?
4. "For ships there is" Ball "and" Bastion ", for means of disembarkation on the route there is" Coast ". You look at the state defense order for the period from 2015 to 2019, then write about the fact that there is" Ball "," Bastion " and "Coast". Where are they and how much? The basis of the RF BRAV is still the "Rubezh", using the P-15M, hopelessly outdated by 1990 (see "TV" No. 7 of 2019). Until now The Redoubt has not been removed from service with the P-35, which is more than 50 years old.
5. Sorry, turn on your head and realize at least something yourself. Are those breaking through will be motionless and unprotected? Give at least one example when the landing, having seized the bridgehead, remained motionless and unprotected. With a favorable outcome, there is a continuous deepening and expansion of the bridgehead, a search for weaknesses of the enemy, an increase in effort, and with an unfavorable one, dispersal, entrenchment, camouflage. And in fact, and in another case, these goals are not for 2C7.
6. Don't know the terms - don't use it. The term "circular probable deviation" is used for MANAGED ammunition (UR, UAB, corrected projectiles), measured in ABSOLUTE units (meters or kilometers). In the firing tables (it is immediately clear that you did not open them. Or you opened them, did not understand anything and closed them), the "mean deviations in range and direction of fire" are indicated in RELATIVE units (% of the range).
So I return your advice: READ. It is desirable, at least, magazines, better than books, and not only "Inet".

[garri-lin]

Are you a historian? You have so many entertaining stories. Especially about 15 minutes pleased. It is necessary to give a medal for such a service. With rivets on the back. History is based on facts, and since the facts speak of the uselessness and even danger of radars, we cross them out completely.
2. Will Sam strike 30 km into the enemy defense? What will be the threat?
3. What specifically is automated? And how much do I know. Nowadays everything is being modernized and a lot of things are being modernized quite well. The fact of automated data generation for firing and their transmission in real time is already a good upgrade. And if the MSA compares the actual position of the barrel with the necessary, then this is absolutely lovely.
4. And where does the shortage of certain means of counteracting the enemy? Peony can not replace them. Will do tht can. At least something will do. If during the defense of the airborne hazard direction they forgot to put long-range anti-ship missiles, then Peony is not to blame for this.
5. The landing is motionless and unprotected at that moment when it is unloaded from the landing craft. The time is short but enough for several volleys. Further Peony will be more difficult. But for this there is Msta and all kinds of flowers.
6. That is precisely why he indicated 30 km. So that you, as a connoisseur of the tables, say how many meters from the aiming point the projectile will fall in the worst case. But alas, apparently the tables of the wrong system.

[samaravega]

1. I am not a historian, I just operate with FACTS, not my own speculations. And these are not entertaining stories, but combat experience paid for in blood. It is always recommended to study someone else so that you have to pay less for yours. Hooray! "Radars" (once again I recommend at least CORRECT to use the terms, because there is a target detection radar, target tracking radar, etc., the term "radars" is the level of the plinth in high school) have been deleted !! How will we detect, how will we determine the position and parameters of movement of sea targets?
2. Do not confuse cause and effect. "Peonies" 30 km from the landing party are absolutely not interesting to the landing party, because can neither get into the landing craft, nor cause serious damage to subunits in battle formation. But if they find themselves stupid shooting, they will be dealt with by aviation, MLRS and support ships. If you are not in the know, the US ILC has MLRS MLRS with a range of up to 40 km.
3. "How should I know." Well then, in general, everything is simple: if you don't know, don't talk.
4. Funds are always less than you want. The question is not this, but the fact that with limited funds, they should be used effectively. From the point of view of efficiency, it would be preferable to transfer more Msta to the Navy instead of the Peonies. "Peony" is not guilty of anything at all, a good gun, but intended for completely different purposes. Blame the one who "shoved" her into the BRAV, where she does not belong at all.
5. Please read the "entertaining story" about the "D" day or the Kerch-Feodossiysk operation, or at least about the landing at South Ozereyka and Stanichka. It is possible about the landing in Incheon, or to Grenada, but there is much less literature on them. Maybe then, instead of the childish idea of ​​"the moment when the landing force is unloaded from the landing facilities," you will form an adequate one.
6. Can you read? I am forced to repeat: the tables of shooting indicate the MEANED VARIATIONS, which means this term, look in the textbook, I am already tired of doing "educational program" with you. The "worst case" question is meaningless. Take the trouble to read and calculate at least something yourself, get some real knowledge and ideas. But if you want the numbers, please: 102 m in range and 19,5 m in direction. I repeat: these are the MEANED VARIATIONS, calculated in accordance with the shooting tables for OFS 3OF43 "Albatross" and a range of 30 km.

[garri-lin]

1. Radar is a common understanding for a huge range of radars with a variety of capabilities and functions. So the radar remains the radar. But since you crossed it out, then it is not there.
2. Once you crossed out the radar / radar, what will the enemy determine the location of the Peony in order to cause counter-battery raid? Again Navajo recruit people? Shamans? Hurriedly you cross out the radar. Now for countermeasures. MLRS? He has not been landed yet. How can he work? Korpbley. Rockets? There is air defense for this. Artillery? If the ship approaches the shore at a distance sufficient for the arthur along the Peony, which is 30 km deep into our defense, then it will remain there for the joy of divers. Aviation? I repeat about air defense.
3. Since I don’t know, I don’t chat. But you chat about what you don’t know.
4. As you correctly noticed, funds are always not enough. The question is where to get Msta to pass it on? Transfer from existing units? Or re-preserve and modernize old designs? In what condition will they be?
5. About Day D, please do not. This is a vivid example of failure and deafening / catastrophic !!!! So many organizational shoals that they didn’t understand the PDA at all. Name such resources and so much time to prepare !!! It’s a pity that those soldiers who were killed in that meat grinder. Due to organizational stocks. I also have an idea about the moment when soldiers are being unloaded onto the beach, and about how heavy equipment is loaded onto the shore and the rear also with a convoy.
6. Thanks for the educational program. I hope to clarify the numbers voiced by you, you noticed that they are not large. There is enough accuracy to iron the beaches of 110 kg with suitcases.

[samaravega]

1. It is because of the variety of "radars" that I ask you to operate with CORRECT and SPECIFIC terms and definitions. But, apparently, it is beyond your strength.
2. The enemy is in a more advantageous position, because a) "Peony" shoots exclusively from the spot, and it takes a lot of time to switch from the traveling position to the combat position and vice versa, the ships move, arbitrarily changing the speed and direction b) Again you are minus in physics. Ground-based radars detect ship superstructures with a height of 30 m at a distance of 25 - 28 km, no more (radio horizon), and the height of the trajectory of the Pion projectiles when firing at 30 km is almost 7000 m. Who will detect whom earlier and more reliably? Shells on the trajectory with electronic warfare cannot be covered, and the task of calculating the position of artillery along the trajectory of shells has been reliably solved since the 60s of the last century. Plus aircraft of the Jistars system, specially "sharpened" for detecting ground targets at a distance of up to 250 km. I'm not even talking about the AIR (instrumental artillery reconnaissance, if that tells you something). which includes a whole range of tools and techniques. With its help, they fought counter-battery battles in World War II, when the ground artillery had no "radars" at all, and they fought successfully. It is still relevant now, the last textbook I found is dated 2011. I repeat once again: "Peony" shoots only from a place, in a narrow sector of horizontal firing angles, with low targeting speeds and a very low rate of fire. Look at the characteristics of the post-war coastal defense guns (KSM-65, CM-4-1, CM-9), compare with the "Pion". Look at the data of 127-mm Mk45, 114-mm Mark8, and keep in mind that they are automatic, have several targeting modes, wide firing angles and high targeting speeds, installed on maneuvering platforms. After that, even you will understand that the 2C7 is not a weapon for coastal defense at all. As far as air defense is concerned, this is an aid, not a panacea. Name any war where air defense would achieve 100% coverage of all objects. Even in 1967 and 1982, in the conditions of complete enemy air domination and very serious enemy air defense on the ground, the Syrians inflicted tangible strikes on Israel's ground forces. Air defense will not be able to create an "impassable shield", especially at a short distance from the sea.
3. Am I chatting about what I don’t know? Before rushing to make such accusations, refute at least ONE argument I have given with the FACTS and NUMBERS. You have not yet brought a single fact or a single figure. Poor with them?
4. And what about the new "Peonies"? I have already written, I repeat: the latter were transferred to the troops in 1990, they have not been producing since then, now even the plant has been redesigned. They were removed from storage in the same way (which is unlikely), or, rather, "taken away" from the SV. Where is your elementary logic? If we "take away", it is probably wiser to take away what is most suitable for the IUD. By the way, "Msta-S" is still in production, read the manufacturer's website (if you know who the manufacturer is).
5. Before writing and approving something, take the trouble to look for FACTS. Take the GERMAN data on their losses and the losses of the allies on D-Day, then write about "failure and disaster." I repeat - you don’t know, don’t talk. I would like to learn more about the idea of ​​the moment "when the soldiers are unloaded on the shore." Plus, I do not recommend comparing our skills and methods and theirs. If their 18 Airborne Forces and 101 Airborne Forces in terms of mass landings are "children" compared to our Airborne Forces even now, then in the Marine Corps the opposite is true.
6. A miss of 100 m is "not great" if you shoot with a battalion at a stationary target, for which 2C7 was done. When shooting at ships and infantry in battle formations, this is a waste of ammunition.

[garri-lin]

1. You can watch the carts with a huge range of radars right up to overseas radars with a range of thousands of kilometers. Such radars will not give data for firing, but they will tell you when to turn on the profile radar for a short time to transmit data with high accuracy. All vieste these devices are generally called radar. That's why I'm writing a radar.
2. Detect can at the first volley. But to hit with difficulty. At such a distance, only weapons vulnerable to air defense can use the landing. If the air defense is lively and capable, then the defense will work. If not then it will be a meat grinder.
3. Figures are specifics. If we are to operate with numbers, then in full. And this is a completely different level of discussion. And binding to a specific area is required.
4. Peonies weren’t taken from anywhere. They are simply needed in NE because of all those minuses about which you are repeating. Against a strong opponent, not tenants. And for barmaley redundant. So they attach equipment where at least a little can come in handy. And the fact that Msta in production is good. And it's good that she is in production in a modern configuration. Satisfied with the NE and the Navy will drop hope.
5. Loss is good. When the enemy has losses. The question is who the enemy is, by what means the enemy was suppressed and could resist after such suppression. And I'm silent about the airborne assault.
6. And you about ships. Are you tired of it? Have I ever written about ships? I say a thousand times. Goals ashore at the time of going ashore. Do you know the concept of deployed units? The most vulnerable moment. Crowded and without shelter. A concentrated volley of 8-12 guns will thin out anyone on the shore. Landing barges will be damaged, as well as light equipment unloaded or swam under its own power. A heavyweight technician can also overstep. And since there will be limited opposition, there may be several volleys.

[samaravega]

Thank you very much! I am writing to you last time, tk. again NOT ONE FACT, NOT ONE DIGIT, NOT ONE DISCLAIMER, only "blah blah".
1. Once again, a HUGE minus to you in physics. Look at the frequency at which over-the-horizon radars operate. Proceeding from it, imagine what size the receiving and transmitting antennas of this station should have. There is not enough knowledge to master physics at the high school level, look at your favorite Internet photo of antennas of such stations (photos of Russian stations are in the public domain). This is an early warning means, in the event of hostilities, their stationary antennas spaced hundreds of meters long on the ground become a highly vulnerable target for strike weapons, not counting electronic warfare.
2. I already wrote about air defense, even if it is alive, it does not provide 100% protection against air strikes, I gave examples, there are examples against it - bring it. I wrote to you about the specific artillery mounts of the US and British Navy, which can provide support to the landing. How are they vulnerable to air defense? Explain.
3. I am only for the specifics of which I have repeatedly written. Another level of discussion? Great, I'm ready.
4. You, it seems, either do not know how to read, or you only see what suits you. If 2C7 was not taken from anyone, then where did it come from? "Fuck-tibidoch" or what? SV are not needed due to the disadvantages I have listed? Plus to you, so no one has misinterpreted me yet! I’m just the opposite, from the first comment to this article I write and almost shout that the place of 2S7 is EXACTLY in the NE, but in the coastal artillery they have NOTHING TO DO. Give me at least one quote against. I repeat: read something other than "Ryabov Kirill" and others who have no idea what they are writing about. Look at the site of the manufacturer "Msty-S" (do not be lazy, he is on the internet), look at the state defense order (he is the same on the internet). "Msta-S" in serial production FOR FOREIGN CUSTOMERS! In 2018, we ordered UNITS for the Russian Army, in 2019 there is NO order for the Russian Federation! "Satisfy CB"? What are you writing about? I have to repeat: if you don't know, don't talk.
5. P. 5 from you, I did not understand. Silence about the airborne assault - it’s good, it’s unlikely that something real is written. And such clever, even philosophical thoughts about losses - what's the point? You need to communicate with Medvedev and Rogozin, approximately their level.
6. And again, you imagine that the enemy will notify in advance where and when he will land the MAIN FORCES of the landing, will not use false and distracting landings, will not use RDGs to capture coastal areas or ports, will not use "vertical coverage" (that for a helicopter at an ultra-low altitude, hardly vulnerable to air defense, 30 km?), will all go ashore at the same time, in one narrow section (maneuver along the front and separation in time - such concepts are familiar to you? Moreover, LCAC boats provide a good opportunity for any kind of maneuver). Study the landings on D-Day and in Incheon, their term "deployment" is different from that of the ground forces, although it does not contradict the USSR GW BUSV. As for the volley. There are several questions: a) where are 8 - 12 guns from? Judging by the introduction of 2S7 into a ready-made brigade, there will be a battery (4 pcs.), The edge - two (8 pcs.). And we will know in advance where the main troops are and will be able to pull them all there? Given the low tactical mobility and the narrow sector of fire. "You will make fantasies". Already, probably, for the FIFTH time I am writing: specify what kind of "barges"? Have you even seen the data of the landing craft? Limited opposition? How is it limited? Your fantasy? I wrote about gun mounts, there is no answer, about airplanes - there is no answer. I don't even want to write about helicopters - again, don't answer anything. Read "Ryabova", believe in your illusions, God forbid you to NEVER participate in REAL hostilities. Okay, you will die yourself, you will also kill a bunch of "soldiers".

[garri-lin]

Well extreme so extreme.
1. Conflicts differ in intensity and degree of involvement. If there is a massive landing and the destruction of the military infrastructure in the rear, this is already a so-called "unlimited conflict". Everything that is will be used. We are not considering TNW. It will change a lot.
2. In the war, just do not have 100% protection from anything. So it’s clear that air defense is not a panacea. The question is what will be the effectiveness. Gun mounts vulnerable to air defense? What are gun mounts? They are only planted. They are not yet combat ready. Gun mounts of ships will not reach, they are far away. Missiles remain. From ships and planes. Both this and that is unstable to air defense. They argue the majority.
3. I am not ready for such a deep discussion. In fact, this will not be a discussion, but a staff-level exercise. Step-by-step strategy.
4. You’re contradicting yourself from the first post but don’t notice it. Or do not understand. List the disadvantages of Peony in relation to coastal defense. And ignore that in SV there will be the same minuses. More precisely there. Nobody is turning you over. About Mstu and orders for foreigners is also unclear. There are contractions that need to be performed. That is production. This year they will sell, in the next they will do it again. Or have you personally been informed that there will be no more purchases?
5. Do you want a separate discussion on day D? On unsuppressed defense in which the landing rested? About defense gaps that you knew about and didn't take advantage of? About the scattered airborne assault? About the supply of the landing detached from reality. About a whole bunch of organizational stocks. Or intentional.
6. The enemy by the very fact of his presence will inform about the landing and the expected coordinates. Land suitable for landing equipment is much smaller than the total length of the coastline. A huge number of factors. On their coast, they are well known. Predict the business of the General Staff. Defense is built on the geography of the area. And any defense is multi-layered. Covering the most convenient landing areas with minefields is no longer an obstacle. Anti-boat and anti-bottom mines were used in WWII.
And about clarifying which barges do you need this? Will this affect landing conditions? By default, they are always expected to be the most perfect. So then there would be no surprise.

[samaravega]

1. I participated in what the West calls a "low intensity conflict." And the war on 08.08.08/16/27, according to local criteria, is considered a "low-intensity conflict." For a soldier and an officer who takes part in it, this is not easier. Judging by the wounded generals and downed planes, the same is not easier for the Russian army. Yes, TNW will change a lot if used. They have any F-23, its carrier, we have MiG-17, MiG-24 and Su-34 cut into metal, there are still rare Su-XNUMX and even rarer Su-XNUMX. Do you want to compete in the use of TNW? Or is there another problem with arithmetic?
2. I repeat: you cannot read or don’t want to. Are you going to land Mk45 or Mark8? In fact, these are ship gun mounts. Air defense against them? Something new, can you give more details, with numbers and facts? They won't get it? The same something new, but it immediately shows that you even have to read "Wiki" broke. Range Mk45 - 23 km (this is without the use of new abstruse ammunition, the usual OFS). At a speed (you can't accelerate near the coast, although your beloved automated control system allows you to conduct aimed fire at an invisible coastal target and at 30 knots) of 10 knots, how long will a destroyer take to reduce the range from 30 km to 23 km? How many shots will the 2S7 fire during this time, taking into account its rate of fire? Will he be able to accompany such a target with fire, taking into account his horizontal guidance sector? Will he be able to hit it with a median deviation in range of 100 m? At least once, turn on your brains, and not "talk". If you are in doubt about the capabilities of the LMS really designed for this, read the books by our authors about the destroyers of the project 56 and the cruisers of the project 68-bis. Lacking automatic medium caliber artillery, they could conduct intense and targeted fire at 2 (cruisers) or 1 (destroyers) invisible coastal targets at speeds up to 30 knots! This is the 50s level. That is why they were kept in service for a long time and were written off only after the arrival of the Project 956 destroyers, carrying two twin 130-mm automatic guns with the broadest possibilities of shelling the coast.
4. There is an ATGM "Fagot". He is very good at hitting tanks and other armored targets, but he cannot shoot at helicopters. And there is such a MANPADS "Igla". Not bad at hitting helicopters, but unlikely to help against tanks. Each weapon system has its own purpose. The characteristics of the 2S7, which make the use of this gun in coastal defense UNUSUAL, in the ground forces, as part of the RGK formations, on the contrary, give this gun advantages. If somewhere I wrote something else, please quote.
They didn’t report anything to me about purchases, I operate on FACTS. Have purchases in 2019? No. You were informed that they will buy in 2020? Or in 2021? Share it. Already fingers hurt to write the same thing: bring the FACTS!
5. Yes, I want a separate discussion on D-Day. Ready?
6. The enemy is now present on a very long stretch of our land border, not to mention the sea. And here and there there is the possibility of maneuvering along the front (already wrote about this). Enlighten exactly where to expect a strike on the border with the NATO bloc? It is desirable, with an accuracy of 3 km, that a section wider than 2S7 at a distance of 30 km cannot be blocked without reversing the installation. I have already written about the plots "much less", read the story! There are no sections - the cruiser enters the harbor of the port (USSR), there are no sections - old ships and vessels are sunk, they make breakthroughs out of them, and forces and means are unloaded along them (France). In terms of destroying their own kind, people are very inventive. About minefields you opened America to me! I had no idea that mines existed! True, again you have a big problem with the terms: there are no antiboat and anti-bottom mines in sea mines. "Antiboat" mines do not exist at all, there are sea mines (many types, I will not list) and antiamphibious mines. There are anti-bottom mines, but this term refers to the type of anti-tank land mines. Learn materiel. Do you think the Germans did not mine the coast of France? Read history, see figures and facts. Did this help Rommel ("Desert Fox", it was he who led the "Atlantic Wall")? You are not talking about "barges", you should at least clarify something, at least give some specific information, otherwise the weight is "blah" and "blah", neither FACT, nor NUMBERS.

[garri-lin]

Well, do not keep the word. They promised the last one and start again.
1. Well, generally the "low intensity conflict" is more complicated by default. In many ways. It's strange that you forgot. About nuclear weapons is not entirely clear. If you say that the enemy is destroying strategic objects in the depth of the defense, then this is a full-scale attack. At this point, excuse the nuclear weapons in the course will go to the fullest and that landing will be dead still on the ships' carriers.
2. I’m silent about this point. 2.1 you brought large warships to the shore at the time of landing. Ingenious. The highest enemy award was earned with one stroke of the pen. 2.2. Oh mistake. Will not work. Since Peonies are deep in the land. And the destroyer will have 30 minus 23. Equally, the 7 destroyer will have 7 kilometers to go dry. I did not know that such destroyers were already in service. And no SLA destroyer will not reach. Only missiles and hence the survivability of the Peonies depends on air defense. And I repeat again. Peonies will not work on sea targets at sea. Tired of repeating but apparently wasted.
4. What are the advantages of the RGC? list. And consider the opposition of a full-fledged enemy and not the paratroopers. By procurement. Have you been informed that there will be no more purchases?
5. Start a new discussion with you, when in the old you talk nonsense about the approach of the destroyers to the defending shore right at the beginning of the landing operation. And repeat for the tenth time about shooting from the Peony at the ships. What's the point? Moreover, there is so much written there that you can find your FACT on any nonsense.
6. Strikes usually await those where enemy forces are concentrated. A century ago, this was tracked quite quickly. And now it’s even easier. That is why there is the concept of operational environment.
In the mines. He considered the term anti-boat correct. Google it. And the anti-bottom ones are precisely the anti-bottom ones. Which work great when buried in water. The main thing is not deep and there were a lot of metal.
You ask for facts. Which specifically. Any fact is nothing more than a tool and it can be applied in different ways.

[samaravega]

Strange logic and memory work for you. Very selective. You were the first to write about nuclear weapons. I point out that the "foe" has more media - you "forget" that you were the initiator of this topic, write that this will lead to a "big war". Why did you start? Can you tell us more about "more complex in all respects"? I’m probably asking you for the tenth time: in more detail, at least about something, with digits and facts. I'm tired of writing about the "moment of disembarkation". Well, read at least ANY literature on how to do it. At least about the war in the Falklands, there were very few places for a possible landing, and the British did not have much strength. Do you really think there will be one "big parade" that you will be notified about in advance? How will you determine where the diversion is, where is the main one, and where is the RDG "having fun"? Moreover, according to your logic, it is necessary to determine this even before the landing, without having means of observation on the enemy ships (again, the selectivity of your memory: they wrote about the "radars", then they forgot, mentioned the over-the-horizon ones, received an argument against, again "forgot", they did not offer in exchange NOTHING). Do you write what specific facts do I want? Please provide the name and characteristics of the detection and guidance system, which will allow you to monitor in real time the enemy ships, continuously determining their location, course and speed. Otherwise, they will land troops 3 km to the side along the front and you will have to redeploy "Peony", taking into account its firing sector. Do you really think that 2C7 will fire along the edge of the coast, being 30 km from it? With a miss of 100 meters will this make sense? I’m already tired of writing that 2C7 WILL NOT HIT, and WILL NOT BE ABLE TO CAUSE any landing and landing equipment or infantry in battle formations. It was not created for this. Not to mention the fact that 2C7 must have a range reserve for maneuvering fire, both along the front and in depth. Have you even looked at the map? The Kaliningrad region is covered from the Baltic by sand spits, creating the Vistula and Curonian bays. Drive 2C7 to the scythe? Better in scrap, at least some benefit. But the landing can be landed there. So you don’t have to walk on dry land, but 2C7 will be much closer than 30 km to the coast. And here the detection systems come into play (your selective memory somehow again missed the Jistars, etc.), guidance, firing angles and rate of fire become important. We look further. The most vulnerable section is from Baltiysk (the main naval base is there if you didn’t know, although where - reading literature is not for you) to Zelenogradsk. The coast is approximately 90 km long. When moving 40 km from the coast, the distance increases to about 170 km. At a speed of 15 knots (although modern large landing ships give 21), it takes only 6 hours to maneuver along the entire coast. At the same time, you can approach from several directions at once, detach individual landings at Yantarny and Pionersky (for example). How to determine where the main? And even before the landing? Otherwise, you will not have time not only to open fire on the "barges at the time of disembarkation" (Lord, where is this nonsense!), But even pull up ALL 4 (or 8) 2C7s there. But you can direct the LCAC to the coast with a maneuver along the coast, with their speed of 90 km you need an hour or a half. So what about concentration? Or are you hoping from 2C7 to get into LCAC on the go? 2C7 was created specifically for the RGC. Each type of weapon has its own mission, these samples were created by entire scientific and design teams for specific requirements and goals. I have already given you examples, what else to bring you to understand this? For example, to fight with mortars with "Solntsepek" is an idea for a complete layman, mortars are firing from CLOSED positions along a HINGED trajectory, "Solntsepek" is a direct-fire weapon with a FLOOR trajectory. He will not be able to aim or, moreover, "throw" his ammunition along a trajectory that makes it possible to hit the mortars (with the correct use of mortars). He was not CREATED for this! As for the mines, I don't recommend googling. I recommend READING. Fortunately, in the same Internet you can find a sea of ​​decent literature. Start, for example, with Shirokorad "Weapons of the domestic fleet", look at "Equipment and weapons", there is a series of good articles about sea mines, read "Foreign Military Review", there is a lot of information about any foreign mines. Then you will not be illiterate to confuse the anti-landing one with the anti-bottom one (by the way, there are also such "anti-vehicle" ones, according to your logic, they will not explode under the aircraft carrier, but the tanker will be ditched. And there are also "protivobortovye" - the same can be played out fantasy). About "buried in water" is fire. They are actually all "buried". "Horned" balls on the surface are only in the cinema, for entertainment. If correctly set, then even at low tide they should not rise to the surface. What did you mean by "buried"? Anchor? Bottom? Torpedo mines? Anti-airborne? Or land, allowing installation in water? Or maybe river ones? Quite, quite with you with terms (and with knowledge) it is bad. A fact is a fact, whether it is or not.

[garri-lin]

About nuclear weapons, I just pointed out that once the enemy destroys our strategic radars in the interior of the country, the conflict means unlimited and therefore nuclear weapons will be used. Tactical is almost certain. Strategic is in question. And here you no longer guess. What will happen. NATO has many carriers, but the conflict is on our shores. This gives our carriers a good chance. Aviation I will not say anything else.
2. Do you really think that small groups planted along the coast can do something? There will be a "Parade" and a big one. And along the entire length at once. Otherwise, the khan to the paratroopers.
3. And again about hitting naval targets on the go. I'm tired of seeing you no. Will the entire landing be on LSAS? With their high speed? Nobody will go out on their own? Will they use slower high-rise products? How many LSACs will be at a time? How many are available today? How far will the DC from which the landing will take place? What opposition will they have on the route? What will be the opposition to LSAC?
. Landing on the braid? Another medal from the enemy. Tobish from Us. There is no maneuver. Giving nowhere. Driving directions are 100 percent predictable.
. Solntsepekom fights with mortars. Here in a parallel branch this has already been proposed. But there was a nickname like a woman. Had some fun. Thank you for reminding me. I did not know that Solntsepek direct fire weapons. Thought it MLRS battlefield. And fighting mortars with this system is illogical not because of the trajectory of the projectile but because of the cost of the volley.
. in mines. PTM 3 and analogues. Anti-tank mines with a magnetic target sensor. Anti-bottom as it affects the entire projection of the bottom of the BT and not just the tracks. Work great without pressure. Go ashore, seeded with these gifts. They do not care for the waves and shallow depth.
And you forgot about the advantages of Peonies in the RGC to tell. I'm interested in listening.
.

[samaravega]

Quote: garri-lin

Peonies didn’t take from anywhere.

Production curtailed 29 years ago, where are they from?

Quote: garri-lin

You can watch the boxes with a huge assortment of radars up to overseas radars with a range of thousands of kilometers.

Quote: garri-lin

You ask for facts. Which specifically.

I asked to specify specifically which (or which) specific surface lighting systems (means) you intend to use to control the movement of enemy ships, correctly determine the place of landing of the main forces even before the landing, and ensure targeted fire from 2C7 for 30 km, taking into account the reserve time to relocate 2C7. Where's the answer?

Quote: garri-lin

times the enemy destroys our strategic radars inland

Again you have a terrible problem with terms. "Strategic radars" - what is it? Early warning? Airspace control? Spacecraft tracking? How did they prevent the landing? If over-the-horizon detection of NC, then why in the interior of the country?

Quote: garri-lin

We are not considering nuclear weapons. It will change a lot.

You started about him, and explain to you what it has to do with it.

Quote: garri-lin

And binding to a specific area is required.

I gave you a specific location. Where's the answer?

Quote: garri-lin

A concentrated volley of 8-12 guns will thin out anyone on the shore.

Where does 12 come from? 8 is the best case. If you miss 100 m (you shoot from 30 km) whom will they "thin out"?

Quote: garri-lin

And since there will be limited opposition, there may be several volleys.

With a rate of 1 v / m? Even a loaded fighter will run more than 100 m in a minute, and even AAV-7 will travel even more along the beach, at least along the front, at least in depth. What will we follow? How to get in?

Quote: garri-lin

Anti-boat and anti-bottom mines were used in WWII.

Quote: garri-lin

He considered the term anti-boat correct. Google it. And the anti-bottom ones are precisely the anti-bottom ones. Which work great when buried in water. The main thing is not deep and there were a lot of metal.

Give an example of at least one mine, with a specific brand name and at least one example of application (this is according to WWII). Desirable, another example of a "not buried in the water" mine used against ships or troops during the landing.

Quote: garri-lin

I'm interested in listening.

Quote: garri-lin

Do you really think that little groups planted along the coast can do something? There will be a "Parade" and a big one. And along the entire length at once.

Really, my fingers already hurt to write the same thing: read at least something worthwhile. Along the entire length at once (this is 90 km without taking into account the sandy spits, you write them off in vain, learn history) to land troops in order to capture the Kaliningrad region is the greatest folly. It will take so many marines that the ground forces will have nothing to do in the capture of the enclave. It doesn't work that way. The landing will have its own specific tasks (for example, Baltiysk) and limited means and forces, as in any war. "Small groups", having landed, will be counted and you will be informed that they are small? Their task is to make as much noise as possible. Distracting assault forces are often larger than the first wave of the main one. How to determine where which one (tired of repeating) EVEN BEFORE LANDING, with a margin of time to transfer 2C7 to 60 km (minimum, tie to the terrain). And, I understood, you invite psychics. The place of the "Big Parade" is often not known even by the attacking, distracting landing more than once became the main one. Read about Stanichka and Yuzhnaya Ozereyka, and on D-day there were several such episodes (you are an expert on D-day?).

Quote: garri-lin

I did not know that Solntsepek direct fire weapons. Thought it MLRS battlefield. And fighting mortars with this system is illogical not because of the trajectory of the projectile but because of the cost of the volley.

You are doing well! Tired of using terms incorrectly, we started to invent it ourselves! "MLRS of the battlefield" is something new, although, of course, it is somewhat inferior to "mines buried in the water". But it sounds beautiful. Direct fire is a method of firing. There are weapons that can shoot both direct and indirect fire (howitzers, many guns, even Soviet tanks), there are weapons that can only fire with indirect fire (mortars, mortars). And there is a weapon capable of firing only direct fire (small arms, most tanks, many cannons and "Solnesepek"). Example: mortars are firing from behind a grove. "Solntsepek" will not be able to detect them (hope only for a very accurate external control center), nor measure the range to them, nor determine the exact direction, nor "throw" its NURs across the grove. The cost of the volley has nothing to do with it.
Alas, the case, so the analysis of the "blooper" about the PTM-3 and the arguments about the RGK later.

[garri-lin]

1. Remove from storage. Derived from NE as unnecessary.
2. Do you think that the group of landing ships 150 miles from the coast will not be watched? There will be. Anything you can. From radar to UAV. And I will not say specific names because it says "Don't talk."
3. About the strike on all working radars you said. I just clarified that once such strategic important goals are attacked, then the conflict is unlimited and will be maximized in a short time. Before the use of nuclear weapons and then the strategic nuclear weapons.
4. TNW despite the fact that it changes many plans. Anyone who will take into account the possibility of its use will try to abandon the concentration of troops and this is at the hands of "foot soldiers" in all their diversity. Small pieces are easier to destroy.
5. He said it clearly in that post. The discussion will turn into a turn-based strategy and this is pointless. It's like a game of chess with the ability to cancel the move.
6. Have you seen the explosion of a Peony shell? What about 8 shells? 2,5 rounds per minute for Malki. 8 shells every 24 seconds. Those who survive will be washed for a week. From warm.
7. The rate of fire for Malka is 2,5 per minute. Since you are such a specialist in artillery, you should know perfectly well what the concept of "advanced art / aircraft gunner" is. The WWII is used everywhere. A vehicle with an observer a couple of kilometers from the coast and a UAV with a camera will perfectly help determine the moment of opening fire.
8. Woooooh! The landing will have its own specific goals. And they will land to achieve these goals. Finally. Narrows down landing zones. Factor of. Landing on the braids is illogical due to the limited maneuver and predictability of the route. Additional reconnaissance from the air and MLRS and no landing.
9. I will tell you a secret. In many cases, there is no mainstream and distraction. There are several groups, and depending on the resistance and the development of events, some groups become bridgeheads and are strengthened by the landing of the main forces, while others are either removed, if possible, or divert attention. You need to destroy all groups, if there are several groups in the zone of fire, then you need to choose the most dangerous one. There is a Headquarters for this. There are trained people.
10!!??!!. On day D, I'm not a specialist. There, in order to become a specialist, you need to know the truth. And not historical propaganda stuffing.
11. A little later I will continue.

[garri-lin]

No need for the Sunshine. Direct fire he does not shoot. It no longer sounds funny but tragic. MLRS turns themselves discover their goals? Tragedy has reached the Shakespearean scale. Snepek, like any MLRS, destroys area targets, and it doesn't matter what happens on the square. Mortar or company of special forces.
And you didn’t write how much it will be for the AU PM to land? Where will the recreation centers be and how many will there be. By what other means will the landing party be delivered ashore. Equipment.
Let's say Widby Island with 4 hp. How many of them do you need to land a sufficient number of troops? How long will it take? What will happen to the engines and especially the lsas skirt after getting hit with fragments of a 110kg shell? How long will the recreation center survive in countering them with aviation from the coast? Ordinary soldiers, motorized rifles, when will they engage in a battle with a landing?
Now for the mines. The term anti-boat is not really used. Used anti-airborne. But this is not so important.

[samaravega]

The last example of YOUR COMPLETE UNKNOWLEDGE of both terms and material. Cherry on the cake. And also another GREAT MILITARY SECRET for you! "Solntsepek", like "Buratino" - not a MLRS and never was! Not even planned! This is TOS - a heavy flame thrower system. It does not even refer to artillery, like all MLRS, but to RChBZ (if you know what it is). He even has a nomenclature of ammunition not for MLRS, but for flamethrowers (the same for RPO, RPO-A, M202, etc.). I will not write about the difference between its characteristics and those of other MLRS - it is useless for you, you will not compare anyway. But if suddenly, look at the firing range and aiming angles. Yes, another MILITARY SECRET is a direct fire weapon! He has an LMS (you love it very much, although you don't understand this term) specifically for direct aiming, an optical sight and a laser rangefinder. He will not hit the target if he does not see it! If this is not direct fire, then what? And area target or point target, DOESN'T AFFECT AIMING METHOD! Moreover, in Chechnya and Syria, it was used against pinpoint targets, not square targets. Yes, he doesn't care whether a spetsnaz company or mortars. If direct fire will destroy. And if they are behind a grove, a building, a block of buildings - it's useless. Only a spetsnaz company will not be able to shoot through the block, but for mortars this is the BASIC method of shooting. I will not write the term "antiboater" about the main and distracting landing, landing on the scythe, the number of fragments from a 110-kg projectile, it is useless to waste time on your "educational program". Not a single fact, not a single example, not a single figure, I still can't wait from you - you DO NOT KNOW them! I recommend spending time not on stupid comments about the same stupid articles, but on reading NORMAL literature, there is a lot of it on the internet. Good luck!

[garri-lin]

It wasn’t about you for a long time, I was already scared. Sunshine TOZ is not by the method of shooting but by the ideology of application. But in fact it is the usual MLRS with a limited range of ammunition. Surprised about the range. 6 km in Washington is direct fire? And from time to time increase the range. Speak angles? And the angle of approach of the ammunition to the target? That will be a surprise. They will decide on the last step and make a cluster munition with controlled detonation so just do the charm. And the terms are just terms. There is a Bumblebee with a thermal bar. And there is an analogue but the flamethrower is called. In fact, there is no difference. By construction, at least but by name and accessory terribly different things. We multiply entities. Although this is not advised.
. If the target is directly behind the barrier, then only a mortar can get it. Only in his final section the trajectory is close to the vertical. So comparing sunflower and mortar is a strange decision. Why do you undertake it is not clear. And can you elaborate on the use of Solntsepek on point targets? I can hardly imagine it.
. About everything else, you can also not write. Here, by the way, the other day there was a good article on the modernization of Malki, which answered most of your questions about modernization, automation, giving staffing means of intelligence and target acquisition. Check out. No, don't be so enlightened.

[samaravega]

You are hopeless. You mean Thomas, you mean Eremu. It is under the ideology of use that any weapon is created! Find at least one specialist, at least one serious publication, where TOC is referred to as MLRS. They don't even "give" it to the artillery! There are none of them in any artillery unit! About 6 km you surprised me. This is just a range with a margin + there are conditions (shooting from a hill) when you can see beyond the usual 3 - 5 km. Even the tank rangefinder (by the way, it is on the TOS) is set up to 10 km. TOS will not be able to shoot from closed positions with indirect aiming (which is the main method of shooting for MLRS) - there are NO APPROPRIATE SIGHTS (or rather, guidance devices). Or about the MSA you missed? Do not confuse direct fire with direct fire. Once again, please read. You even read the news about the modernization of "Malki" "diagonally". There, after all, it is written in Russian in white: they change the control panel, power supply units (autonomous generators), communication equipment (R-123 and R-124 have already had nothing to repair for 10 years), observation devices (with our storage, the triplexes become cloudy after 10 years), means anti-nuclear protection (also quickly "die" in storage ") and" means of receiving and processing information "(because they simply did not exist before), and they are not mentioned everywhere and are not specified anywhere. From the reportage of the semi-official "RIA Novosti" it is clear that it receives information ONLY by the battalion's command post, the AUs work out its (KP) settings manually (quote: "the gunners are making the last adjustments." , in this report, the SV artillerymen are practicing the CORRECT way of using the 2S3: firing a battalion at a particularly important STATIONARY target. Read on, otherwise you will get confused in everything and in details. I can’t spend my time on you anymore.

[garri-lin]

Why Solntsepek in artillery if there is something similar with a greater range? And more application flexibility. About direct fire from a hill pleased. The enemy will be happy. Once again you have earned an adversary’s medal. About the sights is understandable. Guidance is possible on what you can see. But only the ammunition will fly to this point from above, which means that it can fly into the ravine beyond the house. That is, to work on goals that are out of line of sight. What was the point.
About a stationary target with known coordinates in advance, everything is clear. It’s just that artillery, for the most part, always shoots at a certain stationary point. Just milking each subsequent shot, the point may be different. Carry fire as the target moves. There are no problems. The main thing is to have real-time location information about the target. Or do you think the manual pickup speed is so low?
About the control center from the UAV, only the CP of the division is also unclear. Do you want each gun to separately scout targets and fire? Despite the fact that only volley shooting is effective? For this reason, the KP of the division is for the division to shoot together and harmoniously. And flogged.

[samaravega]

How is your logic? Just as with the terms? Between bad and very bad? Lack of time, going in the reverse order.
You again confuse fundamental questions with technical ones. You generally confuse everything, but write a lot.

Quote: garri-lin

Do you want each gun to separately scout targets and fire?

At such a range, even a division does not carry out TARGETS. He does not have the means and strength for this. See the staff structure of the artillery battalion and artillery regiment. This is where the question of subordination comes in, or more correctly, the organizational structure (again an ambush, a term, for you - a dark forest). If the 2S7 division is part of the RGK (or the artillery of the army, front, etc.), it will be PROVIDED by a higher headquarters, if it, or even more so a battery, is "independent", even as part of a motley artillery brigade, who will do this?
Again you are reading diagonally. I'm not talking about the command center from the command post of the division, it's NERRUSABLE, I'm talking about working it off. You write about the modernization without reading the sources, I give an example: in the 2S3M version, the control unit from the battery control was carried out in several modes, the main one was automatic. For such a great "thunderbolt" like you, I chew: the data for the firing of EACH ACS was generated at the battery control panel, transmitted to the ACS via the telecode communication line and worked out by the guidance drives without the intervention of the crew, which controlled the accuracy of the execution, the modernization went into the series since 1987. Where is it now for 2C7? Or are designers and entire institutions dumber than us? No, just by virtue of manual guidance on the 2C7, this option is impossible.

Quote: garri-lin

Carry fire as the target moves.

This is called "barrage" (ambush, again a term). Officially used with the 1st World War, although it arose earlier, it is used both in the offensive and in defense. But (again an ambush), even in the standards of the 1st World War, for its implementation, you need at least 4 v / m per gun (I didn't think it was Ferdinand Foch). Moreover, it was about the offensive of the infantry, neither tank, nor mechanized, nor airborne formations existed in his time.
Bonus: You are confused again: artillery shoots where it is ordered and where it can. But the differences between stationary and moving targets are PRINCIPAL. It doesn’t matter who tries to hit them: artillery, aircraft or tanks and infantry.
In order to fly into a ravine, on a return slope, the ammunition must have an angle of incidence of at least 50 grams, for a house - at least 80 grams. I ask you to prove with physical and mathematical data how unguided munitions fired with a maximum elevation angle of 30 g are capable of this?
If the sights are clear, explain how the ammunition can fly, even from above, even from below, to a point that the gunner DOES NOT SEE? How will the pickup be carried out?

Quote: garri-lin

Guidance is possible on what you can see. But only the ammunition will fly to this point from above, which means that it can fly into the ravine beyond the house. That is, to work on goals that are out of line of sight.

Do you yourself read what you write? And beyond the house, how do you see this point?

Quote: garri-lin

And flogged.

With such "pros" as you, everyone will have to "PICK".

Quote: garri-lin

Why Solntsepek in artillery if there is something similar with a greater range? And more application flexibility.

If it is not needed in artillery, then why then at all such a MLRS? By the way, again you have selective attention: you still haven’t answered who, besides you, considers the MLRS CBT?
Maybe stop pushing? It's time to do self-education.

[garri-lin]

1. Lots of stories and buzzwords. What prevents the command post from transmitting data for firing to the gun in the form of anything, a telecode, pigeon mail, a radio signal. And what prevents the trained gunner from understanding the applied signal in seconds to bring the barrel to the required position. This is if the stepper motors to the controls cannot figure out how to attach them with a blue ribbon. What is the difference due to what force the flywheels will turn? Gunner muscle strength or electric motor? This is absolutely irrelevant and the time difference will also be minimal. Much more important is the fact that now, with the help of the "Eagles", the command post of the division will be able to conduct reconnaissance (more precisely, additional reconnaissance and control) itself. At the specified range. And do not wait for data from a higher level, which will have a lot of worries anyway.
2. For the fire shaft, the rate of fire is not critical. The lower the rate of fire, the more guns needed.
3. See the point behind the house? The sun strikes bad targets. This is not a precision weapon. In the affected area, everything is within a radius of many tens of meters from the aiming point. Take aim at the house and burn everything that was behind the house, in front of the house, on the sides. The house itself. And it is possible that under the house will also get.
4. MLRS multiple launch rocket system. Under which of these 4 criteria does the Sun fit? In the moyma for everything. Artillery has its own systems capable of doing all the same as Solntsepek. Why duplication.
5. In general, can you explain why you were drawn to the discussion of Peonies by this disinterested Solntsepek? What does he have to do with it? Diversification?

[samaravega]

"It's much easier to manage the blind anytime, anywhere." YES. Borisenkov, "The Stolen Sun". Although, given your level of knowledge, you will have to separately CHEW who is D.A. Borisenkov, what kind of work "Stolen Sun" and what is "Black Obelisk". You hardly know the difference between E.M. Remark and a rock band. READ! Stop disgracing yourself.

[garri-lin]

And away we go. Can you indicate the source of the quote? In the context. And since I'm so impossibly wrong, why are you wasting so much time dissuading me?

[garri-lin]

Continue
5. Why get into the barge on the go if she herself safely strides to the coastline to land an assault. And the place is storgo fixed. We can say two-dimensionally. This is the line. How come and shoot.
6. Again, it is written that they will be transferred from the troops where they are used now. And about the modernization of the transfer and about the fact that some have already gone through modernization. The upgraded Peony is Malka.
7. Specifically, who is currently involved in modernization? Do you work for intelligence? To the enemy? What is the modernization in the implementation of automated OMS. Everything is written. Read.

[samaravega]

Yes, I work for enemy intelligence. Three countries at once: Cape Verde, Guinea-Bissau and Monaco. "Knock" where will you run? Who will this help? But seriously, I am not trying to extol everything American or NATO as the best and call to "raise paws" and shout "give up." There is one simple truth: they are not "s", but a very serious and DEADLY adversary. Both they and we have strengths and weaknesses. To make as few mistakes as possible (no one ever does without them), you need to seriously study these strengths and weaknesses of them and us, not relying on "the best supersonic ultra-long-range" ones. It is necessary to CAREFULLY in the characteristics and problems, in the guidance and communication systems, in contrast to the advertising characteristics from the real ones, the influence of the terrain and weather, etc., and not blindly believe "Ryabov Kirill". For the price of error is one - death.

[garri-lin]

I agree with you completely. And I perfectly know all the disadvantages of Peony. Potive of an adequate enemy will be enough for 2 shots. Because of the ability to use nuclear weapons, he will be on the list of priority targets. As they find it, they will level it. By all means. The Takis landing force has almost no strength. And the distances to the ships helping the landing force are many times greater. Covered from missiles, standing in the depths of the defense, Peony will be able to work. And this is perhaps the only thing he can do in modern warfare. Kaliningrad is of course a special case. There he is rather needed for psychological pressure. And it will be deployed in such a way as to remind of itself regularly. Due to the compactness of the theater, he is also not a tenant there. But "grandfather's arquebus" looks scary and you can scare her.

[chenia]

Quote: Spade

One or two shots at the gun. With a real microscopic probability of getting thereafter they will endure it. I don’t think it makes sense.

If the calculation for special BP (unless of course they still remain). then one by one, for a specific task. will still go, and by the way it is in this capacity (coastal, 130mm does not have such a "gift").
And in art divisions (in brigades of high power) there is definitely no place. By the way, did the art division still remain, or is there no formation above the brigade?

[Old tanker]

For a long time there are no art divisions. The last in Mulino Serdyukov finished.

[chenia]

Quote: Old Tankman

The last in Mulino

34 guards? Sorry.
Potsdam. Nettlitsy. Oh, it was a long time ago.

[samaravega]

"Peonies" will not "work" on landing. The long time of transfer to the firing position, small angles of horizontal guidance, low speed of horizontal and vertical guidance (both manual), low rate of fire will fail. Nice gun, but that's not her business.

[garri-lin]

By means of landing on the route will not be able to. But at the time of unloading brought ashore just right.

[garri-lin]

Well, or on ships that will iron the shore with their artillery. For what and the zoo. But there is a dilemma, the ship can shoot on the move. But Peony for such a goal is difficult to get. So it’s less likely.

[Lopatov]

Quote: garri-lin

Well, or on ships that will iron the shore with their artillery.

The probability, again, is microscopic. Especially when the ships will know that they have been fired upon and leave under fire. "Peony" is not "Beach" with its 12 shots per minute

[garri-lin]

Well, knowing that the ships will shoot from the shore, they will go with a maneuver. A small circulation of 1-2 degrees once a minute will make the probability of getting vanishingly small.

[samaravega]

Did someone talk about the modernization of the SLA?

[samaravega]

And who writes about "modernization"? There is simply a transfer of guns from one owner to another. No upgrades are planned.

[garri-lin]

Have you read the article? Or immediately rushed to comment on the name? It clearly says that in recent years there has been a phased modernization. Including fire control.

[chenia]

Well, that’s it. And then they did not know where to cram. In principle, firing with a special projectile will still take place (so that one shot, even nearby, the target is hit). And so the rate of fire is small.

[Igoresha]

21 first century and cannons are set on the shore well that they do not shoot cores but forge them if you have nowhere to go and sow wheat

[Lopatov]

Quote: Igoresha

21st century and cannons set on the shore

And it is right. Because to destroy boats and AAV with anti-ship missiles is not enough money.
Coastal cannon artillery is great. Here are just "Malka" in this capacity is not at all suitable

[CTABEP]

Quote: Spade

Quote: Igoresha

21st century and cannons set on the shore

And it is right. Because to destroy boats and AAV with anti-ship missiles is not enough money.
Coastal cannon artillery is great. Here are just "Malka" in this capacity is not at all suitable

So, the 130-mm Shore is just for this, or am I mistaken? Kmk for these purposes it is better, not to beat a cruiser with a 3-inch armored deck.

[Lopatov]

Quote: CTABEP

So the 130-mm Shore is just for this, or am I mistaken?

Exactly.
Upgrade, give a new shell.

Well, or, as promised, create the reincarnation of the "Shore" using the "Coalition"

[Alexey RA]

So this is not coastal artillery, but corps. Her tasks remained the same as before, and the main goals will be on land. It is unlikely that anyone will land from the sea in the Kaliningrad region, when you can also come there by land from Poland or Lithuania.

[Lopatov]

Quote: Alexey RA

So this is not coastal artillery, but corps. Her tasks remained the same as before, and the main goals will be on land. It is unlikely that anyone will land from the sea in the Kaliningrad region, when you can also come there by land from Poland or Lithuania.

In this capacity, it is equally useless.
It will take a very long time to wait for victory in the counter-battery.

[Avior]

looking what kind of RCC.
not all three-ton .....

[Chaldon48]

A cannon shell is a cheap and powerful argument, especially when the ammunition load of even more powerful, but expensive and rare anti-ship missiles is used up.

[Sergei 23]

"Peonies" and "Zoos" geocints and snakes Gorynych, Pinocchio - all these fabulously floral names of our combat systems are so glad to hear and enter into a stupor of the adversary.

[samaravega]

Dear Kirill Ryabov! Before writing something for a large audience, you at least HAVE FAMILIARED with the characteristics of the military equipment you are writing about. Neither "Peony" nor "Malka" are CATEGORALLY suitable for firing at sea targets according to the following characteristics: a) rate of fire (maximum - 1,5 v / m, real - 1 v / m), b) transportable ammunition - 4 shots "Peony", 8 - "Malka", after using it, the rate of fire decreases even more, c) the main thing is the horizontal firing sector - only 30 g (15 g each from the longitudinal axis in both directions), which is categorically not suitable for shooting at moving from high speed for sea targets, especially since the drive wheel is lowered to ensure stability when firing on the ground (and on the Pion the track tension is released and the drive wheel is lowered manually) and the opener (the lowered opener and drive wheel are visible even in the photo in your article ), plus the aiming of the gun, both horizontally and vertically, is manual, its speeds are clearly not sufficient for firing at targets with high radial speeds. The reversal of the entire installation is not possible for the above technical reasons. The purpose of such guns is especially important GROUND stationary targets in the depths of the enemy's troops. For this there are parts of the RGK artillery, what's the point of transferring these guns to the Navy? Another reform for the sake of reform? Msta-S is much more suitable for hitting naval targets from combined arms, although the specialized Bereg is superior to it. But, apparently, "There is no money, but you hold on" - than to re-produce the specialized "Coast", it is cheaper to remove from storage (or withdraw from the SV) the old "Peonies", and even present it as "a great increase in firepower."

[Lopatov]

Quote: samaravega

especially important GROUND stationary targets in the depths of the enemy troops.

In the context of the conquest of "local domination in artillery". That is, bringing the enemy to a state of impossibility to conduct counter-battery combat. Otherwise, they will be taken out long before the defeat of these targets.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: samaravega

For this, there are parts of the artillery of the RGK, what's the point of transferring these guns to the Navy? Another reform for the sake of reform?

We read carefully:

The main formations and units of the coastal forces of the Baltic Fleet are part of the 11 Army Corps. In the city of Kaliningrad, the 244th Artillery Neman Red Banner, the orders of the Suvorov and Kutuzov brigade, armed with various weapons, are serving. Apparently, it was she who was to master a new technique.

So everything is simple: the corps artillery brigade of the "naval" army corps, located in the Kaliningrad exclave, is reinforced with 203-mm guns. The task of this brigade is to support the ground forces, who, by the will of fate, were reassigned to the fleet and became coastal troops.
You can’t hope for Kaliningrad in the RGK - in which case the reserves simply won’t be there and you’ll have to fight back

[samaravega]

The use of guns of the class "Peony" in the number less than the brigade is simply meaningless. That is why guns, howitzers and even mortars of a similar class (B-4, M-160, Br-2, Br-17, Br-18, etc.), starting with the Red Army and until sunset of the SA, were used in the composition of the brigades (in good times, even the corps) of the RGK. The principle is the same as that of tanks: having twice as many tanks as the Wehrmacht (and the overwhelming majority of French tanks were qualitatively superior to German ones, and only the French had heavy ones), the French sprayed them a little bit where it was necessary and not necessary, the Germans from their own, by and large at that time, "scrap metal" (compare the T-1, T-2 and early T-3 models with the S-35, R-35, not to mention the T-26 and BT-7) were able to collect strong and mobile "fists" and use them correctly. The battery of "Peonies" in the Kaliningrad artillery brigade can only "die heroically" in wartime and "devour" a lot of funds and personnel in peacetime. There is no way to resist by force - you have to resist with "cunning" - mobility, camouflage, etc. Here, instead of "Peonies", the same "Akatsia" or MLRS would be more useful, I cannot say specifically, I am not familiar with the physical and geographical features of the Kaliningrad region. But the "Peony" class cannons in the number of simultaneously used in a narrow area less than 24 pieces - empty spraying of funds. If we are not talking about the use of SBS.

[Undecim]

Dear Ryabov Kirill! Before you write something for a large audience, you at least got to know the characteristics of the military equipment you are writing about.
This is not a royal affair. Knowledge of the subject does not affect the size of the article, and the content for this author is secondary.

[Old tanker]

And now it’s not at all fashionable to delve into the characteristics and details of why you write this. The main thing is Urya-Peremoga! Announce.

[Dart2027]

In the city of Kaliningrad, the 244th Artillery Neman Red Banner, the orders of the Suvorov and Kutuzov brigade, armed with various guns, are serving. Apparently, it was she who was to master a new technique.

Before resenting the "stupidity" of the leadership, you better look where these guns are going.
The 244th Artillery Neman Red Banner, the Orders of Suvorov and Kutuzov Brigade is an artillery formation of the Coastal Forces of the Navy of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation. The team is deployed in the city of Kaliningrad, Kaliningrad region.
That is, the Russian Federation is reinforcing the Kaliningrad garrison with large-caliber artillery.

[Lopatov]

Quote: Dart2027

The team is deployed in the city of Kaliningrad, the Kaliningrad region.

In a territory that can be completely shot through by NATO artillery. There definitely is no place for such cars.

[Dart2027]

Quote: Spade

In a territory that can be completely shot through by NATO artillery.

That is, you need to withdraw all the troops from there?

[Lopatov]

Quote: Dart2027

That is, you need to withdraw all the troops from there?

That is, it is necessary to have self-propelled guns there capable of a normal minute fire attack and a counter-fire maneuver after it.
2C7 cannot provide either one or the other.
The upgraded 2S19 sends 430 kg of shells per minute and evades retaliation.
Upgraded 2S7 sends 275 kg per minute and cannot escape a retaliatory strike

Choose

[Dart2027]

Quote: Spade

That is, one must have self-propelled guns capable of

And there is no other artillery besides the "Peonies"?

The 244th separate Neman Red Banner Order of Suvorov II degree and Kutuzov III degree artillery brigade is deployed in Kaliningrad. It is considered a military unit of constant readiness and is intended for the defense of the Kaliningrad special region. It includes two cannon artillery and one rocket artillery divisions. The brigade is armed with 152 mm Msta-S self-propelled howitzers and 9K51 BM-21 Grad multiple launch rocket systems.

https://iz.ru/791446/aleksei-kozachenko-aleksei-ramm/morskoi-uragan-ognevaia-moshch-artilleriiskikh-chastei-vmf-budet-usilena
The fact that different types of weapons are designed to solve different tasks is not a secret, and, by the way, 2C7 is capable of shooting an enemy at a distance to which 2C19 simply can’t reach it, like the American M109, so it doesn’t really need to move away from return fire.

[Lopatov]

Quote: Dart2027

And there is no other artillery besides the "Peonies"?

What's the difference? Are we going to attack from Kaliningrad, breaking the Kaczynski Brothers Line and the Dali Line?
To inflict unacceptable losses, to ensure victory in the counter-battery, to ensure the ability to operate air defense and the "far arm". "Peonies" will not be able to do any of the above.
At the moment, this is a very specialized firearm.

[Dart2027]

Quote: Spade

What's the difference? Are we going to attack from Kaliningrad, breaking the Kaczynski Brothers Line and the Dali Line?

Quote: Dart2027

That is, you need to withdraw all the troops from there?

Quote: Spade

"Peonies" will not be able to do any of the above.

Who said?

[Lopatov]

Quote: Dart2027

Who said?

Sorry, but are you trying to claim that our troops in the Kaliningrad exclave consist exclusively of 2C7 units?

[samaravega]

Enough general "blah blah blah", you are not "Ryabov Kirill"! See the specifics! How many Peonies can be in a mixed artillery brigade? Battery. What can she do in the event of a serious war? To die heroically. Is it worth spending money, time and a WELL-TRAINED personnel on it? Maybe two or even three Msta-S batteries are better for the same money? Based on the principle that different types of weapons are designed to solve different problems, let's drive a couple of Topol-M launchers to Kaliningrad, they reach even further than the Pion.

[Dart2027]

Quote: samaravega

Enough general "blah blah blah", you are not "Ryabov Kirill"! See the specifics!

Peonies reach 47 km, Msta 30 km.

Quote: samaravega

Based on the principle that different types of weapons are designed to solve different problems, let's drive a couple of Topol-M launchers to Kaliningrad, they reach even further than the Pion.

That is, essentially nothing to say?

[Lopatov]

You just "in essence" and indicate.
"Peonies" were originally highly specialized machines. Now they have become even more niche due to the very low rate of fire and the huge time to transfer from combat to field and back.
And the firing range doesn’t solve this problem

[Dart2027]

Quote: Spade

You just "in essence" and indicate.
"Peonies" were originally highly specialized machines.

It's funny And what are they going to introduce as a replacement for Mste? Of course, this is a specialized machine for applying a point impact. Now, if they were going to translate all the artillery to 203 mm, then it would really be strange.

[Lopatov]

Quote: Dart2027

It's funny And what are they going to introduce as a replacement for Mste?

Exactly. The division, instead of being armed with 2C19, is armed with a misunderstanding.

Quote: Dart2027

Of course, this is a specialized machine for applying a point impact.

About the point you are very excited. When firing at long ranges, this is an analogue of the MLRS. Only slow.

[Newone]

Does it make sense to use Peonies from positions (bunkers) that are well protected in the engineering plan in counter-battery combat?

[Lopatov]

Quote: Newone

Does it make sense to use Peonies from positions (bunkers) that are well protected in the engineering plan in counter-battery combat?

Can. But the problem is that imperceptibly creating this will not work.
And it’s enough to strike at previously explored positions. Even in Poland.

[Newone]

Well, to strike does not mean to destroy, or am I wrong? Means to reduce the accuracy of precision weapons are now enough, and, as shown by the assault of Mosul and the assault of Raqqi, a bunker that is quite effective against precision weapons is cheap (even ISIS can afford it). In conditions of war in a limited territory, bunkers are just obvious.

[Lopatov]

Quote: Newone

Well, to strike does not mean to destroy, or am I wrong? Means to reduce the accuracy of precision weapons are now enough, and, as shown by the assault of Mosul and the assault of Raqqi, a bunker that is quite effective against precision weapons is cheap (even ISIS can afford it). In conditions of war in a limited territory, bunkers are just obvious.

If the cost of a major overhaul with 2C7 modernization is also added to highly protected bunkers for shelter during firing, is it not easier to buy Hurricane-1M for the same money? And cheaper, and further, and more efficiently, and much less vulnerable to counter-battery

[Newone]

much less vulnerable to counter-battery

Not in the conditions of the Kaliningrad region being shot through and illuminated from all sides. And the bunker is not only small. The bunker is for Iskanders, and for Bukov and for the same Hurricane. The first is a blow for the enemy. And this strike will be an artillery strike on reconnoitered air defense systems, electronic warfare systems and military aviation airfields.

[Lopatov]

Quote: Newone

Not in the conditions of the Kaliningrad region being shot through and illuminated from all sides.

It is in such conditions.

[Newone]

You know better. Although in my opinion the security by changing position, taking into account the appearance of increasingly sophisticated real-time reconnaissance equipment, is decreasing, and the security of highly fortified bunkers, taking into account the development of active defense systems and the creation of interference, is growing.

[Dart2027]

Quote: Spade

The division, instead of being armed with 2C19, is armed

artillery of a larger caliber.

Quote: Spade

About the point you are very excited.

And you, of course, were shown all the characteristics of the Peonies with the updated SLA.

[samaravega]

I have just written everything to the point. I already wrote about 47 km for "Pion" and 30 km for "Msta" - these are shells with a bottom gas generator, NOBODY has ever fired them, as I understand it, dispersion exceeds all conceivable limits. The usual ranges are completely different, see. And when firing at naval mobile targets, one "Msta" will be much more effective than a battery of "Pions" - look at the firing sectors, targeting speeds, rate of fire, ammunition ready to fire. I wrote the same about this. Is this not essential?

[Dart2027]

Quote: samaravega

nobody and never shot them

What is even on the tests of military acceptance?

Quote: samaravega

And when firing at mobile targets, one "Msta"

Let me tell you a secret - the A-222 "Bereg" is used for shooting at the MPTs. "Msta" is not intended for this.

[samaravega]

You don't seem to read me at all. Even in the first commentary, I wrote that the specialized "Coast" is best suited for hitting sea targets, but, apparently, there is no money for the purchase of new systems, so they take them from warehouses or from the ground. And from this list "Msta" is much preferable to "Peony". I can't say anything about the ARS tests, there is no information. If you have - share. But in hostilities they were definitely never used.

[samaravega]

Thank you so much! You have revealed to me a "great secret" - there is such an A222 "Coast"! I do not want to remain in debt, but I will also reveal to you an EVEN MORE great secret: the fundamental and irreparable shortcomings of this complex, which restrain its widespread distribution. In addition to the high cost of the SYSTEM (it is the system, without means of target detection and fire control, the gun mount itself is an overweight second-rate (why is it, lower) wheeled ACS), the military perfectly see the fundamental shortcomings of this system, which is why there is no high enthusiasm for it implementation. So, the disadvantages of "Shore" on points:
1. Unambiguously excessive weight and dimensions of all machines of the complex, ACS, KP, MOBD. They seriously reduce tactical mobility (not every bridge and road can withstand such vehicles, and the ground and fords are for tracked vehicles, the "wheels" will never catch up with it). The large dimensions create very serious problems with camouflage, which is a critical problem in the conditions of the "adversary" in the air.
2. Manual loading. It gives several disadvantages at once. A large crew (8 people per gun mount), a strong dependence of the rate of fire on the state of 4 loaders (no one canceled fatigue, it can also be the result of a long march, etc., etc.), the uselessness of firing at air targets in the result of a low rate of fire. Such a scheme is a serious step backward even in comparison with the modernized Akatsia and Tulip, where mechanized ammunition racks were used, not to mention the Msta.
3. Unitary ammunition. If in the "mother" of the "Shore", a shipborne 130-mm, their use is justified by automatic loading and a high rate of fire of the installation (which, together with shells with a radio fuse, makes it possible to effectively use it even against anti-ship missiles), then in a land installation with manual loading this leads to an unjustified reduced flexibility of shooting. Compare the firing tables of even Akatsia, especially Msta, with the AK-130 tables (I have not seen it in the open press for Bereg, but it has the same ballistics and ammunition as the AK-130). From the point of view of an artilleryman, due to the impossibility to use different charges and flexibly change the trajectory of projectiles and the firing range, the A222 is "not up to the gun", at the high cost of both the ACS itself and, even more so, the entire system.
4. The low power of 130-mm shells compared to 152-mm accepted in the NE, as well as their low nomenclature (there are no cassettes of various types, adjustable, electronic warfare, smoke, lighting, chemical, nuclear - this is what I remembered for a vskidka .) There is no division into high-explosive and high-explosive fragmentation; high-explosive or predominantly high-fragmentation action cannot be established in high-explosive ones (which is even the case with SV tank ammunition). All this again reduces the flexibility and efficiency of these installations as artillery.
5. Narrow specialization. At a cost comparable to "Msta-S" or even higher, we get a wheeled highly specialized installation weighing the same, much larger in size, and not very suitable for any other purposes. Neither a minefield "throw in", nor a point target with the "Kitolov" to hit, nor the troops in the concentration area to cover with cluster shells. I'm not even talking about SBCH.
Do you have a well-founded objection? I would be glad, but please, with figures and facts, and not "blah blah blah" about everything and nothing.

[Dart2027]

Quote: samaravega

but, apparently, there is no money for the purchase of new systems, so they take it from warehouses or from the ground. And from this list "Msta"

Source "apparently" will not be? Msta is in service with the army and is in the same Kaliningrad.

Quote: samaravega

I can’t say anything about the ARS tests, no information. If you have it, share it. But in the fighting they just never used.

I have information that any weapon passes military acceptance. Just because it's a weapon. And there were no combat uses, simply because the Peonies never fought.

Quote: samaravega

1. Definitely excessive weight and dimensions

Given the fact that this tool is intended for coastal defense, it is interesting by which thickets you intend to carry it?

Quote: samaravega

2. Manual loading.

The disadvantage is true.

Quote: samaravega

3. Unitary ammunition.

This is an anti-ship weapon, and not anti-aircraft, so that they were not going to shoot down anti-ship missiles by them.

Quote: samaravega

4. The low power of 130-mm shells compared with 152-mm accepted in the NE, as well as their low nomenclature

I don’t know about low power, 130-mm is enough for modern ships with "tin" sides, about the nomenclature - this is an anti-ship weapon.

Quote: samaravega

5. Narrow specialization.

Try to shoot down planes from Msta.

[samaravega]

What source do you need? For the production of "Msta"? Please: "Regarding the missile and artillery armament for the current year, the troops have been supplied with the Khrizantema-SP and Kornet anti-tank systems, the Msta-SM self-propelled howitzers, the Iskander-M ATGM divisional kit, the Caliber and Onyx cruise missiles ". In total - more than 120 units of rocket and artillery weapons." A.Yu. Krivoruchko, Deputy Defense Minister on the implementation of the state defense order in 2018. If 120 units even include ATGMs, as well as individually counted "Caliber" and "Onyx", guess how many "Msty" were released. And there are 18 of them in each regiment (tank or motorized rifle), in the artillery regiment of the division - from 36 to 54. The Msta-S is absent in the state defense order for 2019. The production of "Pionov" and "Malok" was completed in 1990, which was produced by LKZ as a result of re-profiling in 2000-2010. does not produce military or tracked vehicles (source - the official website of the plant). Where are the installations transferred to the Navy? By the way, I did not find "Bereg" in the state defense order, since 2017, I just did not look before.
I asked for specific information, and not "blah blah" about "military acceptance". You can find in the public domain enough, both technical literature and memories of participants about the tests of various ammunition, from guided missiles to tank shells. None of them mentions the tests of the ARS to me. There is a specific mention - indicate. Let me tell you two terrible military secrets. First, the Peonies fought. True, against the Russian army, but this is not a reason not to use the entire range of ammunition. Secondly, apart from the "Pions" ARS are included in the ammunition load of the 2A36 (respectively, 2S5) and C-23 guns, these guns fought decently on different fronts, there is no information about their use of the ARS. There is also no information from the word at all about the use of ARS by "adversaries", although thanks to NATO's long-standing agreement on common ballistics, almost all 155-mm guns can use them. Our "sworn partners" do not differ in shyness and economy of money.
Practically any equipment will have to be transported through the thickets. disguise is the first rule of survival. I can send you a question: are you going to drive exclusively along the highway during the war? Are you leaving far? Moreover, I repeat, not every bridge can withstand the A-222.
Something you are fixated on the anti-aircraft theme. And what about the other shortcomings: the flexibility of fire, the range of ammunition, exorbitantly large calculation, etc. Modestly forgot?

[samaravega]

It is not necessary to withdraw the troops, but you need to assign them REAL tasks and arm and equip the troops for these tasks. It would never occur to anyone to drag the Pion to Elbrus as part of mountain infantry units or to place ICBMs in the Kaliningrad region. I repeat: in number, less than a brigade, "Peonies" in a war with a NATO-class enemy (we will not fight the "barmaley" in the Kaliningrad region?) BESTOLKOVS, if we are not talking about the use of SBS. Although, in the case of NATO, the SBS will not help either: knowing about the Pion battery, the "adversary" will not spare the effort and resources to destroy them. In such conditions, the same D-20 or "Akatsii" will be more effective, at a cheaper price, in more numbers? Moreover, they shoot shells with SBCHs, and they will be even more effective at the ships than the "Peonies".

[samaravega]

The use of guns of the class "Peony" in the number less than the brigade is simply meaningless. That is why guns, howitzers and even mortars of a similar class (B-4, M-160, Br-2, Br-17, Br-18, etc.), starting with the Red Army and until sunset of the SA, were used in the composition of the brigades (in good times, even the corps) of the RGK. The principle is the same as that of tanks: having twice as many tanks as the Wehrmacht (and the overwhelming majority of French tanks were qualitatively superior to German ones, and only the French had heavy ones), the French sprayed them a little bit where it was necessary and not necessary, the Germans from their own, by and large at that time, "scrap metal" (compare the T-1, T-2 and early T-3 models with the S-35, R-35, not to mention the T-26 and BT-7) were able to collect strong and mobile "fists" and use them correctly. The battery of "Peonies" in the Kaliningrad artillery brigade can only "die heroically" in wartime and "devour" a lot of funds and personnel in peacetime. There is no way to resist by force - you have to resist with "cunning" - mobility, camouflage, etc. Here, instead of "Peonies", the same "Akatsia" or MLRS would be more useful, I cannot say specifically, I am not familiar with the physical and geographical features of the Kaliningrad region. But the "Peony" class cannons in the number of simultaneously used in a narrow area less than 24 pieces - empty spraying of funds. If we are not talking about the use of SBS.

[Dart2027]

Quote: samaravega

I repeat: in number, less than a brigade, "Peonies" in a war with a NATO-class enemy (we will not fight the "barmaley" in the Kaliningrad region?) BESTOLKOV

In a war with NATO, everything is useless except nuclear weapons.

Quote: samaravega

The use of guns of the class "Peony" in the number less than the brigade is simply meaningless.

Is it the same for point strikes?

[samaravega]

Point strikes on what specific targets? Conventional shells at a range close to the maximum "Pion" do not allow one or two "point" strikes to be delivered, corrected for this gun has not been created. The good old artillery attack remains no less than a division.

[Dart2027]

Quote: samaravega

Remains the good old artillery raid no less than a division.

Which will have to take the enemy artillery to a distance, substituting it under the good old artillery strike.

[samaravega]

Do you have another option? Sound. Only without delirium about "point strikes".

[Dart2027]

Quote: samaravega

Only without delirium about "point strikes".

The source of the fact that this is nonsense you certainly have?

[samaravega]

Explain to me how it is possible to achieve one direct hit from at least two shots from the "Peony" to at least a 9-storey building at a distance of 25 km, a specific house, and not the next one or the first one. But the CP, PU SAM or SD of the enemy is a much smaller target, not talking about camouflage, false targets, etc. You can - I admit that the "pinpoint strike" with the help of "Peony" is not nonsense.

[Dart2027]

Quote: samaravega

Explain to me how you can achieve one direct hit from at least two shots from the "Peony"

Quote: Dart2027

The source of the fact that this is nonsense you certainly have?

I did not participate in the shooting of the "Peonies" and, apparently, neither did you. But the fact that LMS in our time is better than those that were at their creation is an obvious fact.

[samaravega]

I didn’t even take part in the shooting from “Acacia”, “Msta” or “Carnation”. But for them there are Krasnopol and Kitolov, whose characteristics allow them to perform a similar task, albeit at a shorter range. He himself fired a TUR with a T-72B, saw the "work" of the "Brave". The defeat of a small target with these means is real. There is nothing like this for 2C7, i.e. there is no such possibility even in theory. Read the literature, 2C7 is intended for completely different purposes and fully meets these goals. As for "the LMS is better nowadays," I ask for specific facts on a specific LMS. If for "Akatsiya" and "Msta" the MSA was really modernized, then there is information about this both in the literature and on the manufacturer's website with a SPECIFIC listing of changes in each modification. Anything specific about 2C7? Facts in the studio. Or just the words "Ryabov Kirill", whose materials have long been distinguished by an extremely low level.

[Dart2027]

Quote: samaravega

As for "the LMS is better nowadays," I ask for specific facts on a specific LMS.

For example
https://iz.ru/699322/sergei-valchenko-aleksei-ramm/dalnoboinyi-pion-sdelaiut-vysokotochnym

Quote: samaravega

2C7 is intended for completely different purposes and fully meets these goals

Initially, it was intended for firing shells with nuclear weapons, if you are talking about this.

[Dart2027]

Quote: samaravega

What source do you need? For the production of "Msta"?

By the fact that there was not enough money. Maybe there is simply no need?

Quote: samaravega

I asked for specific information, and not "blah blah" about "military acceptance".

The fact that any weapon and any ammunition is always tested by the military is unknown to you? And the fact that someone writes in his memoirs is his own business. That is, I believe that some officer wrote the pure truth about what he was a witness, but it does not follow from this that he saw everything that was.

Quote: samaravega

there is no information on the use of ARS by them. There is also no information from the word at all about the use of ARS by "adversaries", although thanks to NATO's long-standing agreement on common ballistics, almost all 155-mm guns can use them.

Nevertheless, for some reason, no one refuses them

Quote: samaravega

Practically any equipment will have to be transported through the thickets. disguise is the first rule of survival. I can send you a question: are you going to drive exclusively along the highway during the war? Are you leaving far?

Considering the fact that the Coast is intended for coastal defense, then where are you going to relocate it?

Quote: samaravega

Something you are fixated on the anti-aircraft theme. And what about the other shortcomings: the flexibility of fire, the range of ammunition, exorbitantly large calculation, etc. Modestly forgot?

Quote: Dart2027

I don’t know about low power, 130-mm is enough for modern ships with "tin" sides, about the nomenclature - this is an anti-ship weapon.

About the calculation was

Quote: Dart2027

Disadvantage right

[CTABEP]

Quote: Spade

Exactly.
Upgrade, give a new shell.

Well, or, as promised, create the reincarnation of the "Shore" using the "Coalition"

Thanks, I thought so. What is it about, that some strange decision. A 130mm emnip was chosen precisely at the request of the fleet, which includes coastal defense batteries. Solely for the purpose of standardizing the BC with the fleet.

[Lopatov]

Quote: CTABEP

A 130mm emnip was chosen precisely at the request of the fleet, which includes coastal defense batteries.

Most likely due to the lack of a unit with a caliber of more than 100 mm. In those days, there were no other methods to achieve such a rate of fire (12 per minute) in other ways.

[bandabas]

Who will we fight with? Do we have partners everywhere?

[sen]

The coastal forces of the Navy are armed with several artillery systems of different classes, both towed and self-propelled - from wearable 82 mm mortars up to 152 mm self-propelled howitzers. Almost all such samples are used not only by coastal, but also by ground forces.

Well, as I understand it - the coastal troops are ground forces, the theater of operations of which borders the sea. Accordingly, they have the same weapons.
Although a guided missile for the "Pion" will not hurt, and small missile-ship missiles against landing boats will not hurt either.

[Old tanker]

Shoot from the "Peonies" at the ships, and even at a great range ?!
How does the author imagine this? With quite a long time of preparation of the "Peony" for shooting, low rate of fire and a very limited sector of fire. Of these, only if the standing barges in the raid burn.
"Peony" and "Malka" - purely to defeat land targets. And the most significant. In the Baltic and possibly in the Crimea they can be useful, but in other fleets ...

[Newone]

On ships it can be bad (although with apples it’s quite normal), but at the place of landing, it’s quite suitable.

[Nikolai]

2C7 in the Kaliningrad region makes sense only in one case - with special ammunition (along the Suvalk corridor).

[cat Rusich]

For the defense of the coast from attack "from the sea" Rubezh-ME with 4 anti-ship missiles Kh-35UE, because the range is 260 km and its own radar in one car. For the defense of a "base" from an attack "from land", conventional self-propelled guns (for example, the Ground Coalition) "Peony" and "Malka", "Tulip" are needed to storm fortified cities, for example Aleppo, Grozny (1994-1995 and 1999-2000).

[evgeniy.plotnikov.2019mail.ru]

"Zoo" should be placed on a wheeled chassis of the BTRovsky type. Maybe use the base of new armored personnel carriers? The complex needs increased mobility. Work it out - and tear. Otherwise - a probable hit under the 155 mm caliber "response". Who would be interested in all this