US naval artillery three times surpassed the guns of the Russian Navy in range

The United States managed to bring the firing range to 50 km with a new projectile, designated the Excalibur N5. Fire was fired from the MK45 Mod. 4, which in its basic version is able to effectively hit a distance of 15-16 km. At the same time, low firing accuracy is observed, leading to overuse of shells.


US naval artillery three times surpassed the guns of the Russian Navy in range


The caliber of the new ammunition is 127 mm. Its development was entrusted to Raytheon. A special navigation system has been created for the projectile, implemented via the GPS channel. It makes it possible to conduct accurate fire, despite the increased range to 48,1 km. During the last test, a satisfactory result was announced.

According to a Raytheon spokesman, the Mk45 Mod 4 gun acquired the ability to hit targets at a distance three times the range of the AK-176MA system, which is the most advanced artillery system available to the Russian Navy.

This product was created on the basis of AK-176, used since 1979 year. The new modification fires at a distance of 15 km with a rate of 124 rounds per minute. One of the main differences from the American Mk45 is the AK-176MA caliber, which is only 76 mm.

Photos used:
www.naval-technology.com
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

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

I have an account? Sign in

  1. olhon 26 November 2019 02: 13 New
    • 26
    • 24
    +2
    I do not believe (s).
    1. Crash_117 26 November 2019 02: 31 New
      • 52
      • 101
      -49
      Quote: olhon
      I do not believe (s).

      What did you think that only Russian weapons are the best in the world and all other countries are forever behind?
      1. Nikolai Grek 26 November 2019 03: 28 New
        • 69
        • 24
        +45
        Quote: Crash_117
        Quote: olhon
        I do not believe (s).

        What did you think that only Russian weapons are the best in the world and all other countries are forever behind?

        noooooo ... we just know how these overseas humpback sculpts !!!! wassat wink wink laughing laughing laughing
        1. A1845 26 November 2019 14: 44 New
          • 11
          • 4
          +7
          the ability to hit targets at a distance three times the range of the AK-176MA system

          cost of 1 shot compare, everything will become clear
          1. tihonmarine 26 November 2019 15: 59 New
            • 10
            • 2
            +8
            Quote: A1845
            cost of 1 shot compare, everything will become clear

            Compared, appreciated and realized that for sale, "fools" will go with a bang. India has already made an application. About the MK45 Mod. 4 I can say "A good commercial product, but no more."
            1. hydrox 26 November 2019 17: 14 New
              • 22
              • 9
              +13
              You, as a mariman, can certainly say that these new MARINE guns (along with shells!) As a weapon are NOT worth anything, because:
              1. Stripes NEVER dare to approach our shores at a distance closer to the working distance of the Bastion.
              2. In the event of declaring martial law, the distance of guaranteed defeat for naval targets of the enemy is increased by min to 1000 miles.
              3. And what, some bastard really thinks that squadron naval battles are possible in our times ???
              I wallow patstalom !!!!!!!! laughing laughing laughing
              1. tihonmarine 26 November 2019 19: 34 New
                • 2
                • 1
                +1
                Quote: hydrox
                1. Stripes NEVER dare to approach our shores at a distance closer to the working distance of the Bastion.

                Well, and what kind of trample with a gun and ashore, it's like "Vasily Ivanovich, well, which one climbs his heel on a saber" said Petka wiping his saber. The gun at the present time is more a weapon of defense, a general fire brigade, guards troops, repulsing a landing, i.e. close combat (shot from a corner, and again ran around a corner).
              2. tihonmarine 26 November 2019 19: 35 New
                • 7
                • 3
                +4
                Quote: hydrox
                I wallow in patstalom!

                And I already choked with a glass of vodka from laughter.
                1. lukewarm 27 November 2019 15: 54 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  laughing Be careful with that. Under the new rules, the driver’s commission will not pass. She was just suspended. Sorry, not the topic.
                  1. tihonmarine 27 November 2019 19: 20 New
                    • 1
                    • 0
                    +1
                    Quote: unwillingly
                    Be careful with that. Under the new rules, the driver’s commission will not pass.

                    The last rights were taken away in the army 36 years ago, now I go on foot, and I can skip a glass too.
              3. Eroma 26 November 2019 21: 37 New
                • 6
                • 2
                +4
                This shell is not for naval battles, but for the destruction of ground targets, with the support of the landing, for example.

                Not all shores need to be located for 1000 miles, there are shores where you can and get in touch

                Just what are you comparing with a 76mm gun? Our 130 km also 40
                1. Fat
                  Fat 27 November 2019 21: 01 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Quote: Eroma
                  This shell is not for naval battles, but for the destruction of ground targets, with the support of the landing, for example.

                  Not all shores need to be located for 1000 miles, there are shores where you can and get in touch

                  Just what are you comparing with a 76mm gun? Our 130 km also 40

                  You can not compare the 3 x inch with 5-inch universal, the weight categories are different. MK45 missile ERGM reaches up to 115 km,
                2. Igor K 18 December 2019 10: 21 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  The shell is active-reactive, and therefore there are few cc in it, as a result of the high-explosive action "no." What are you going to support them landing (I am silent about the cost of this marvelous device).
                  1. Eroma 19 December 2019 13: 10 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Point targets: radar, CP, fuel barrels under an awning (in action movies they usually do), schooners at the pier, airplanes at the gates, you can find what to shoot
            2. SovAr238A 26 November 2019 19: 57 New
              • 22
              • 3
              +19
              Compared, appreciated and realized that for sale, "fools" will go with a bang. India has already made an application.


              India is not fools. as if they were laughing.

              do not forget that all. what we now have from Sukhoi - only thanks to the Indians.
              Their contract for the Su-30MKI saved the remains of our military aircraft industry.

              do not forget that all. what we now have from Tankova - only thanks to the Indians.
              Their contract for the T-90 saved the remains of our military tank industry.

              do not forget that the life-giving caliber appeared for the Indians ...
              And much more...


              And now on the topic of the article.
              I read a bunch of articles about marine excalibur ...

              And nowhere - believe me, nowhere is there a single comparison with the AK-176MA.

              News Authors - Do you want to be notified in court?
              For fake news?

              Administrative Code of the Russian Federation Article 13.15. Abuse of freedom of the media ...

              200 thousand rubles to start the site does not want to pay?
              False Edition ...
              A huge amount of news - false, distorted.
              really fake.

              It’s time to start wetting news authors .... according to the laws of the Russian Federation.
              Well, when do you learn to think with your head?

              Delete such heresy - until the statement has flown to court ....
              1. tihonmarine 26 November 2019 20: 34 New
                • 1
                • 4
                -3
                Quote: SovAr238A
                Delete such heresy - until the statement has flown to court ....

                Well, you’ve split up today, smash everyone. Yes, let them write.
                1. SovAr238A 26 November 2019 20: 41 New
                  • 9
                  • 3
                  +6
                  Quote: tihonmarine
                  Quote: SovAr238A
                  Delete such heresy - until the statement has flown to court ....

                  Well, you’ve split up today, smash everyone. Yes, let them write.


                  I think it’s necessary to bring this anti-Russian (in fact) publication to court ...
                  That would return 5-8 years ago to that normal professionalism. not the current fake news level ...
                2. hydrox 26 November 2019 22: 05 New
                  • 5
                  • 2
                  +3
                  He’s right, the fake guns are unbelievable: any material on BV can turn out to be fake, and while discussing it, we are fools
              2. Leonid Anatolevich 26 November 2019 21: 36 New
                • 0
                • 2
                -2
                He had to give a link to a representative of the raceon. They could actually try to sneak about the AK-176, they would have thrown these firewood long ago
              3. Suhow 26 November 2019 22: 38 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Plus for India.
              4. asv363 27 November 2019 02: 35 New
                • 1
                • 4
                -3
                Quote: SovAr238A
                Administrative Code of the Russian Federation Article 13.15. Abuse of freedom of the media ... doesn’t the site want to pay 200 thousand rubles to start? A false publication ... A huge amount of news - false, distorted. Realistically fake. It's time to start the news authors to wet .... according to the laws of the Russian Federation. Well, when do you learn to think with your head? Delete such heresy - until the court statement flies ....

                You will first study all the points of article 13.15. CAO, before presenting. Gramoteev divorced ... a lot. Only none of the items fit. You have 200 thousand rubles to funds for helping children in the DPR and LPR and a public apology to the editors of VO so that I can see. Got it? Do it!
          2. eklmn 26 November 2019 17: 58 New
            • 3
            • 16
            -13
            “Compare the cost of 1 shot, everything will become clear”
            Russia is a rich country, it can spend a dozen blanks on the destruction of one goal. But the Americans know how to count. In addition, if the target is dangerous, it is better to put it down with the first shot.
            1. tracer 26 November 2019 18: 37 New
              • 5
              • 7
              -2
              Will you put the battleship with a shell? Hmm .. yeah ..
              1. eklmn 26 November 2019 20: 56 New
                • 3
                • 7
                -4
                And the battleship will allow him to approach the distance of the shot? Hmm .. yeah ..
              2. tihonmarine 26 November 2019 20: 58 New
                • 6
                • 1
                +5
                Quote: tracer
                Will you put the battleship with a shell? Yeah ... yes

                To be honest, it’s impossible to destroy a battleship from a cannon. And the strength is not enough, and there are only 4 US battleships “Iowa”, “New Jersey”, “Missouri” and “Wisconsin”, but all of them are now museums. So to test the artillery on the battleships, and even less to lay. The time of the battleships is gone, just as the time of the sail era is gone, leaving us with the memory "Here, the Katti Sark is preserved as a monument of its time, as a tribute to people and ships of the sail era." Time is running out, some ships die, others are born. Artillery on the fleets of the world will also soon go into oblivion. (Exception coast guard).
                1. BARHAN 26 November 2019 22: 25 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  This year I saw in St. Petersburg, the battleship "Poltava")))
                  1. tihonmarine 27 November 2019 09: 56 New
                    • 1
                    • 0
                    +1
                    Quote: BARHAN
                    This year I saw in St. Petersburg, the battleship Poltava

                    It's just a “remake” although it's nice to see.
                2. tracer 27 November 2019 02: 33 New
                  • 2
                  • 3
                  -1
                  You are a hell of a thousand times right. The fleet’s artillery time is running out, if it’s not at all. My opinion at this level is not at all extravagant. It’s just logical, due to the rapid growth of missile weapons. Just like super long-range sniper rifles lose their meaning. Not answering the main question - the fig? There they rule the system by orders of magnitude more powerful. With arylery the same thing. We discuss the power of the "pistol" against a tank shot.
                  1. tihonmarine 27 November 2019 09: 58 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Quote: tracer
                    We discuss the power of the "pistol" against a tank shot.

                    Here I am talking about too. One must look at things realistically, progress, just like life moves only forward.
            2. kventinasd 27 November 2019 00: 24 New
              • 3
              • 2
              +1
              Quote: eklmn
              But the Americans know how to count. In addition, if the target is dangerous, it is better to put it down with the first shot.

              Well, judging by the launches of cruise missiles in Syria, where most did not even reach their targets, the Americans are very prudent. laughing
            3. eklmn 27 November 2019 16: 58 New
              • 1
              • 4
              -3
              A lot of minuses? So something didn’t say so. I'll fix it now.
              I ask instead of the phrase “Russia is a rich country, ...”
              read “Russia is a poor country ...”
        2. The comment was deleted.
      2. Maverick78 26 November 2019 03: 36 New
        • 80
        • 4
        +76
        For example, I think that it is incorrect to compare 127 and 76 mm)
        1. mister-red 26 November 2019 16: 30 New
          • 6
          • 0
          +6
          And what do they compare with the AK-130, which is fired by 60 130 mm shells per minute?
        2. clidon 26 November 2019 20: 16 New
          • 1
          • 8
          -7
          They wrote with the "most modern" AK-176. It is not possible to compare with the ancient AK-130, which, although it shoots a little farther away, is outdated like a mammoth tusk and is not put on new ships. I’ll build them in and it’s left to count on my fingers.
          1. Captain Pushkin 26 November 2019 21: 10 New
            • 4
            • 0
            +4
            Quote: clidon
            They wrote with the "most modern" AK-176. Do not compare with the ancient AK-130

            Duc, they have 1 year difference in age ...
            1. clidon 27 November 2019 13: 12 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Obviously, I mean the latest modifications of this weapon AK-176MA
              1. Captain Pushkin 27 November 2019 19: 19 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Quote: clidon
                Obviously, I mean the latest modifications of this weapon AK-176MA

                I’m embarrassed to ask, what is there besides the fire control system (LMS) of the new, relative to the AK-176?
                To develop a new SLA for the AK-130 is not a problem.
                1. clidon 28 November 2019 10: 32 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  And what is not enough? Are we producing other artillery systems?
                  Not a problem for anyone? And most importantly, why should they be in the fleet with a gulkin nose. Rather, they will be replaced by 176, which will be tormented.
      3. Vladimir_2U 26 November 2019 03: 38 New
        • 69
        • 6
        +63
        I ride naturally under the table! Compare 127 mm and 76,2 mm guns !!! Epic, but what was not compared with Kalashnikov, how did you miss this opportunity? Will you find a picture of Lavrov yourself?
        1. Prisoner 26 November 2019 08: 21 New
          • 11
          • 3
          +8
          Do not tell, otherwise the next time they will begin to compare with the Russian 10-pound unicorn. laughing
      4. Bykov. 26 November 2019 05: 19 New
        • 28
        • 2
        +26
        Quote: Crash_117
        Quote: olhon
        I do not believe (s).

        What did you think that only Russian weapons are the best in the world and all other countries are forever behind?

        So they would compare the Russian shells with the Amregad shells, otherwise they would compare the p-ndos ARS with the usual Russian artillery shell. What cunning comparators.
      5. Zhan 26 November 2019 08: 19 New
        • 18
        • 0
        +18
        Quote: Crash_117
        Quote: olhon
        I do not believe (s).

        What did you think that only Russian weapons are the best in the world and all other countries are forever behind?

        And who told you that someone’s weapon is better or worse? For this caliber, a distance of 50 km, only an active rocket projectile. And the regular one is 15 km
        Now compare the Caliber 76mm and 129mm ... and the standard distance for both systems is the same, however. hi
        1. malyvalv 26 November 2019 12: 47 New
          • 3
          • 5
          -2
          Not the fact that it is reactive. Maybe they just attached wings since GPS control is present.
          It would be nice to have such in the arsenal.
          1. tihonmarine 26 November 2019 16: 04 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            Quote: malyvalv
            Maybe they just attached wings since GPS control is present.

            About wings, I already heard somewhere when they said, "Can you imagine Luzhkov with wings?"
      6. abrakadabre 26 November 2019 10: 45 New
        • 7
        • 0
        +7
        What did you think that only Russian weapons are the best in the world and all other countries are forever behind?
        Why are 127 and 76 mm caliber systems designed for completely different purposes? Still with Kalash compared.
        Moreover, a conventional unguided munition is compared with an active-reactive munition. In the same article, it is indicated that with an ordinary shell the American babakh is firing at ... tadaaaaam ... some 15-16 km, which is no different from our artillery gun.
        1. Katanikotael 26 November 2019 18: 03 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          different, it is written there - low accuracy leading to cost overruns.
        2. Captain Pushkin 29 November 2019 13: 07 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: abrakadabre
          And why are the caliber systems 127 and 76 mm compared

          That's why they compare, if you compare with the 130mm AK-130, then with an ordinary projectile the American firing range is one and a half times lower than ours.
          What is even surprising, in land artillery on the samples in service with armaments the opposite is true.
      7. The comment was deleted.
        1. tihonmarine 26 November 2019 16: 12 New
          • 8
          • 2
          +6
          Quote: Iskander of Alexandria
          in vain you are so! Russian is the best! And everything else can not be compared with fast-paced developments!

          I’m already a little old, and I remember when they said that during the Patriotic War the Germans had the best equipment, and the MP-40, MG-34 and the Messerschmidt and the Tiger, and even the Panzerfaust, not to mention the ersatz cigarettes against ours " Morshanskaya "shag. But for some reason Egorov and Kantaria raised the flag of Victory over the Reichstag. Here I sit and think the "Morshanskaya" shag with a Russian soldier won, or Soviet equipment? Can you tell me?
          1. Leonid Anatolevich 26 November 2019 21: 39 New
            • 0
            • 11
            -11
            It’s an honor to show off the flag.
            1. tihonmarine 27 November 2019 09: 53 New
              • 3
              • 0
              +3
              Quote: Leonid Anatolyevich
              It’s an honor to show off the flag.

              The Soviet flag is an honor for me, under it my father went through three wars, and I gave him the oath, and I also fought for it. And for you, someone else's flag can be more respected. But I am Russian, Soviet and for me the flag is a great honor.
              1. Leonid Anatolevich 27 November 2019 15: 50 New
                • 0
                • 7
                -7
                Flag over Berlin - a symbol of the defeat of the USSR in the war against fascism
      8. Horon 26 November 2019 14: 50 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        Instead of a shell, a missile with a control and orientation unit was inserted into the barrel, but how much space would there be for warheads? If this shell gets into a martyr’s mobile, then yes, an effective thing. And firing at a fortified position will be expensive. Until they manage to do serious damage, a packet of conventional missiles will arrive in response, with fatal consequences for the carrier of this weapon! Therefore, apparently, the Americans themselves gave such an assessment:
        During the last test, a satisfactory result was announced.

        This weapon is more likely for special operations, but not for conducting serious military operations.
      9. aleksandroff 26 November 2019 15: 24 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        and if the GPS shuts down, what will be the range and accuracy?
      10. michaelruss 21 December 2019 17: 48 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        There is nothing outstanding about launching a missile through the barrel. Well, nothing at all. It was still decided and implemented on Soviet tanks.
        And the most interesting thing is that this invention is worthless for ships (on new destroyers of the Zumwalt type, they refused it, and again they gave birth to the old one). At this range you can’t use it against the ship as it’s a moving target, and guidance on DPS is most likely will be drowned out. Yes, and it is unlikely to come to the use of these systems in naval combat, since at much greater distances all friend-friend crumble into a salad of missiles.
      11. asr55 26 December 2019 15: 31 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        yes the best is undoubtedly not available to pots
      12. ydjin 11 February 2020 16: 46 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0

        Crash_117
        26 November 2019 02: 31
        -49
        Quote: olhon
        I do not believe (s).

        What did you think that only Russian weapons are the best in the world and all other countries are forever behind?

        As if I consider it incorrect to compare the range of 127 caliber with 76 caliber.
    2. Alexander Petrov1 26 November 2019 02: 45 New
      • 22
      • 5
      +17
      It's okay, on the new Coalition, 152 mm shells hit up to 70 km, so you can put it on the new Leader or on Nakhimov or make a smaller caliber 130 mm on it on Gorshkov, so there will be a direct competitor to the US cannon ...
      1. Galleon 26 November 2019 09: 17 New
        • 11
        • 9
        +2
        Quote: Alexander Petrov1
        Nothing wrong

        It has long been known which category of people is not afraid of anything.
        In Soviet times, work was underway to replace the AK-130 naval gun mount with a more powerful 152mm caliber. At the test site after the first salvo, a tower with 152mm, they say, was twisted from the foundation. Do you understand the difference between the Coalition and the ship’s gun turret? Imagine the difference in load distribution when returning to individual damping nodes and elements? Nothing to shrink, nowhere to move.
        This is how it is.
        1. Alexander Petrov1 26 November 2019 09: 29 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          I understand that this is a very responsible and knowledge-intensive business, but you probably read that there are such plans to put a 152 mm gun on the Leader, and there you can make a long-range projectile under the Gorshkovskaya gun 130 mm ...
          1. Galleon 26 November 2019 10: 00 New
            • 10
            • 4
            +6
            Quote: Alexander Petrov1
            and there you can make a long-range projectile under the Gorshkovskaya gun 130 mm ...

            The usual 130-mm projectile destroyer threw 25 km, long-range ... I'm not sure that it can be thrust into the unitary cartridge of the installation, although, why not. It is a pity that such a technique is not in demand right now: 90 piglets per minute from the tower - it sounds proudly, and jolts through the body like a beat of a heart repeat
            Put on the future "Leader", which is not, a gun mount, which is not ... read, but did not attach importance.
            1. Alexander Petrov1 26 November 2019 10: 04 New
              • 1
              • 2
              -1
              Well, I think if the Americans did, then ours should, especially now we don’t have to complain about the lack of funding like 90 years ...
              1. bairat 26 November 2019 10: 09 New
                • 7
                • 1
                +6
                What for? It is impossible in all to be ahead of the rest. Especially with our military budget.
                1. Alexander Petrov1 26 November 2019 10: 11 New
                  • 2
                  • 1
                  +1
                  It may be the first, if only for its own safety and multibillion export ...
                  1. bairat 26 November 2019 10: 16 New
                    • 5
                    • 1
                    +4
                    Well, what safety will this miracle-gun shooting at 50 km provide for us? In modern combat, everything is decided by anti-ship missiles, air defense and electronic warfare. And this cannon can only be cleaned from the shore.
                    1. Alexander Petrov1 26 November 2019 10: 52 New
                      • 2
                      • 0
                      +2
                      The main thing is not to lag behind competitors, if only because of export ...
              2. Alien From 26 November 2019 13: 55 New
                • 0
                • 1
                -1
                The main thing is to control our financing, and not to throw the whole amount at once .... otherwise it will be like with the East ....
                1. Alexander Petrov1 26 November 2019 14: 07 New
                  • 2
                  • 0
                  +2
                  It is necessary that one person does not decide where and when to transfer huge amounts of money, but decides publicly in the company and Moscow is in the know about the Internet, then there will be no multi-billion dollar thefts, and you still need to return the death sentence as in the USSR it is now life imprisonment for those who steals more than 1 million rubles and I can argue then 90 percent of Kaznokrad comrades will calm down, because it will not be profitable for them to steal, it will be easier to go into honest business and earn your own 1 million rubles, or maybe even dollars, in the USA .. .
        2. Dimon19661 26 November 2019 09: 31 New
          • 6
          • 0
          +6
          And such calibers as 381,406mm on the ships did not stand ???
          1. Galleon 26 November 2019 09: 51 New
            • 7
            • 4
            +3
            They stood. And they stood bigger, on the Yamato, for example. But how many tons can you and decide to weight the hull for the sake of installing such a gun? How much due to this weighting will the capacity of the main power plant and the displacement of the ship have to grow? Perhaps you didn’t understand: the AK-130 gun mount (2 barrels of 130 mm each) had the maximum possible power for long-term operation on destroyers 956, etc. And 152 mm ... I heard tales that on the 68-bis artillery cruisers I had to change bulbs and plafonds, torn and broken during volleys.
            1. Dimon19661 26 November 2019 14: 27 New
              • 6
              • 0
              +6
              But you know, I didn’t hear the tales, I was just the guaranteeman of the MP-123 VYMPEL, and often intersected with the guys involved in the Lions (AK-130 control station). In the 68s, the bulbs really burst by the way. and from weapons too.
        3. basmach 26 November 2019 09: 50 New
          • 3
          • 1
          +2
          Oh, what about all the battleships and cruisers of the beginning and middle of the last century with their gun mounts?
          1. Galleon 26 November 2019 09: 52 New
            • 5
            • 3
            +2
            Ships have changed, basmach. see above.
        4. cormorant 26 November 2019 11: 33 New
          • 1
          • 2
          -1
          Imagine the difference in load distribution when returning to individual damping nodes and elements? Nothing to shrink, nowhere to move.
          This is how it is.

          How, then, the guns fired on the battleship Yamato almost 80 years ago. But there was the main caliber of 460 mm. By the way, this caliber is not the largest for those times. yes
          1. Galleon 26 November 2019 12: 08 New
            • 3
            • 2
            +1
            Cormorant, want a simpler example? So we filed an application for art warehouses to install on the wings of the signal bridge with a machine gun as a weapon of last chance (against anti-ship missiles). In the 80s, it was practiced in the Navy. And they handed us 2 KPVT to keep up. So they stayed with us for 2 years in the arsenal until they turned in: a light alloy bridge - it breaks a light bulwark and rips that KPVT from the first stage. A PKK would suit us well.
            1. cormorant 26 November 2019 13: 03 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              I understand everything, but there are design bureaus for this. And the gun will not be delivered from Yamato.
        5. de_monSher 26 November 2019 13: 00 New
          • 4
          • 4
          0
          At the test site after the first salvo, a tower with 152mm, they say, was twisted from the foundation.


          A coalition, like on the T-90 chassis, is being put, for now. And nothing seems to be "twisted from the foundation" and "does not tear dampers." And if the self-propelled chassis "holds" the coalition, then what are your words about, "the fucking ground has been rolled up" then? *))))
          1. JD1979 26 November 2019 13: 25 New
            • 10
            • 1
            +9
            Quote: de_monSher
            A coalition, like on the T-90 chassis, is being put, for now. And nothing seems to be "twisted from the foundation" and "does not tear dampers." And if the self-propelled chassis "holds" the coalition, then what are your words about, "the fucking ground has been rolled up" then? *))))

            And about the fact that some do not understand the difference between land artillery, which can safely throw off returns to the ground through the chassis or bed and the sea, where everything that is not extinguished by dampers goes to the hull. And for large calibers it is necessary not only to recalculate the power set of the case a little less than completely, but also the alloys most likely to use others.
            1. Galleon 26 November 2019 15: 00 New
              • 3
              • 1
              +2
              Thank you, Dmitry! drinks
            2. Alexey RA 26 November 2019 15: 21 New
              • 3
              • 3
              0
              Quote: JD1979
              And about the fact that some do not understand the difference between land artillery, which can safely throw off returns to the ground through the chassis or beds

              Well, yes, yes ... the hull and the self-propelled gun are much stronger than the frigate’s hull. And reinforcements under the gun on land equipment (weighing no more than 60 tons and dimensions no more than railway) are undoubtedly much easier to do than on a ship of 5000 tons. smile
              And as soon as the Germans put towers from 6 "on the destroyers?
              1. The comment was deleted.
              2. The comment was deleted.
            3. de_monSher 27 November 2019 01: 15 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              which can safely throw off returns to the ground through the chassis or bed and the sea, where everything that has not been extinguished by dampers goes to the body.


              Ummmmmmm ... You are wise, my friend. Even - they were too smart, one might say, a little. And now, out of sheer stubbornness, make further wisdom, it seems to me. And what, through the ship’s hull, “recoil does not fold” into the same elastic medium, with a lower viscosity than the “lithosphere”, called the “hydrosphere”? = I, too, got infected from you - I’m wise = ... *))))
              1. JD1979 27 November 2019 11: 46 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Quote: de_monSher
                Ummmmmmm ... You are wise, my friend. Even - they were too smart, one might say, a little. And now, out of sheer stubbornness, make further wisdom, it seems to me.

                Physics ... no, not heard ...
                1. de_monSher 27 November 2019 11: 46 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Physics ... no, not heard ...


                  Nope ... did not hear ...
        6. boriz 26 November 2019 13: 41 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          Listen to you, as ships never set trunks with caliber more than 130mm. And 460mm on Yamato?
          1. faridg7 26 November 2019 14: 00 New
            • 3
            • 1
            +2
            Well, you compared ...
            Yamato had a main caliber of 460mm, but also a displacement of more than 72000 tons.
            And for example, the frigate pr.22350 displacement of 5400 tons.
            Well, where is 130 mm? Yes, and why? at distances of over 20 km, all tasks can be solved with missile weapons.
            1. boriz 26 November 2019 16: 05 New
              • 1
              • 1
              0
              You wrote about a cannon twisted from the foundation. What does the displacement have to do with it?
        7. Alexey RA 26 November 2019 15: 17 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: Galleon
          In Soviet times, work was underway to replace the AK-130 naval gun mount with a more powerful 152mm caliber. At the test site after the first salvo, a tower with 152mm, they say, was twisted from the foundation.

          EMNIP, the caliber of 152 mm was cut down by the naval themselves - they needed a universal cannon. And 6 "with the possibility of firing at aircraft and URO came out too monstrous.
        8. mister-red 26 November 2019 16: 32 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Well, somehow, after all, they put it before and 380mm and even 420
      2. Alexey-74 26 November 2019 10: 26 New
        • 1
        • 3
        -2
        Quite right, all the more so in our design bureaus, it turns out to "mess up" land equipment.
        1. Galleon 26 November 2019 11: 56 New
          • 8
          • 1
          +7
          Quote: Alexey-74
          at our design bureaus it turns out to "nibble" land equipment.

          Yes, remember only how the S-300 was wetted. so messed up that a special commission of the CPSU Central Committee dealt with this. And how they repaired the REB MP-407 station, taken from aviation. So we messed up that its output blocks had a resource of no more than 4 hours of operation. 4 HOURS. 2 pcs. drove in the spare parts, although one put.
    3. Bykov. 26 November 2019 05: 14 New
      • 12
      • 0
      +12
      Quote: olhon
      I do not believe (s).

      Yes, this is not a shell, but in fact - a rocket. He has an active jet engine. Hence, such an effective range.
    4. Prisoner 26 November 2019 08: 16 New
      • 4
      • 1
      +3
      I believe in 50%. In terms of low accuracy. winked
      1. novel66 26 November 2019 08: 36 New
        • 8
        • 1
        +7
        you shoot further - less often you get ..
        1. Serg65 26 November 2019 09: 39 New
          • 5
          • 2
          +3
          Well, it depends on what you shoot. wink
          hi Great!
          1. novel66 26 November 2019 10: 08 New
            • 5
            • 1
            +4
            one fig - you can’t deceive physics! healthy marine guerrillas hi
            1. Serg65 26 November 2019 10: 11 New
              • 5
              • 2
              +3
              for every physics, there is its own chemistry! wink
    5. Private-K 26 November 2019 09: 47 New
      • 7
      • 0
      +7
      Modern naval artillery 57-127 mm traces its history to the universal artillery of the WWII period. The point is to have a gun capable of firing at both surface and anti-aircraft targets.
      For modern naval artillery, the task of firing at ground targets is almost not set. The reason is simple - too low efficiency due to small calibers (76-100-127 mm) and very small numbers (1, very rarely 2 gun mounts per ship).
      Why does an American ship need a shell with a 40-50 km range? Yes, the Americans therefore want to replace short-range anti-ship missiles! But this is an obvious drink of the budget dough, because the accuracy of the shooting is completely insufficient for a small maneuvering target. In order to get into a ship of the “frigate” class with at least one shell, dozens of such “Escaliburs” must be dumped, and in 1-2 minutes. No, RCC is much more reliable and cheaper, oddly enough. For how much is Escalibur? About identity.
      1. Good_Anonymous 26 November 2019 12: 56 New
        • 0
        • 2
        -2
        Quote: Private-K
        Why does an American ship need a shell with a 40-50 km range?


        Zumwalt planned to shoot from long-range guns along the shore.
        1. Private-K 27 November 2019 08: 34 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          How many zumwalt 127 mm trunks? One? Two? How many batteries are these? request How many field artillery divisions are these? request Not a single division. belay hi It doesn't even reach one battery. belay hi (Here we recall what forces of the same artillery ships did the Americans concentrate when the sea landing ... belay )
          Well, that’s all you need to know about the potential effectiveness of zumwalt along the coast.

          Threat For shelling the coast, you need specialized missile-artillery ships with at least a battery of automated 152-mm guns, with multi-barrel MLRS launchers, with launchers for SLCMs, UAVs for reconnaissance and adjustment. No one has it. wassat
          1. Good_Anonymous 27 November 2019 11: 14 New
            • 0
            • 2
            -2
            Quote: Private-K
            How many zumwalt 127 mm trunks? One? Two?


            155mm guns were planned at Zumwalt.

            Quote: Private-K
            Well, that’s all you need to know about the potential effectiveness of zumwalt along the coast.


            The potential efficiency of a land battery along the coast is zero. Because the land battery cannot shoot from the sea.
            1. Private-K 27 November 2019 15: 03 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              155mm guns were planned at Zumwalt.

              Anyway, this would not have done the weather - an absolutely insufficient number of trunks.

              The potential efficiency of a land battery along the coast is zero. Because the land battery cannot shoot from the sea.


              In order for artillery to achieve the desired effect, there should be: many barrels firing a certain number of shells per unit of time. To hit targets, you need HUNDRED shells produced by TENS trunks. That's clearer?
              And, by the way, ground guns were not infrequently placed on ship decks. Just because of the lack of normal naval artillery.
              1. Good_Anonymous 27 November 2019 20: 57 New
                • 0
                • 1
                -1
                Quote: Private-K

                In order for artillery to achieve the desired effect


                And what effect is needed? Are you going to carry out artillery preparation on the Kursk Bulge with the help of a destroyer?

                Quote: Private-K
                To hit targets, you need HUNDRED shells produced by TENS trunks. That's clearer?


                No. How many targets are you going to hit, how many shells are you going to use for one target, and why exactly so many?
                1. Private-K 28 November 2019 09: 04 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  From the very beginning, I suggested looking at what kind of artillery ship support was provided during the WWII.
                  Look at the normative tables for user agents.
                  Take a look. Enlighten yourself and do not defend a deliberately losing, albeit “politically adjusted” (tm) position.
                  1. Good_Anonymous 28 November 2019 10: 30 New
                    • 1
                    • 1
                    0
                    Quote: Private-K
                    From the very beginning, I suggested looking at what kind of artillery ship support was provided during the WWII.


                    Since then, guided weapons have been created.

                    Quote: Private-K
                    Look at the normative tables for user agents.


                    Give me a link.
                    1. Private-K 30 November 2019 11: 40 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      Rules for shooting and fire control https://studfile.net/preview/6726022/page:73/
                      Amers - about the same thing.
                      De facto, Zummwalt is only capable of raiding and sabotage operations with the defeat of a very small number of stationary (with a predetermined unchanged location and previously explored) unprotected targets.
                      1. Good_Anonymous 30 November 2019 12: 00 New
                        • 1
                        • 1
                        0
                        Thank. Take, for example, a radar located openly: to suppress 200 rounds of 122mm caliber (unguided) are required. I have not seen a radar station, for the destruction (not even suppression) of which one would need more than 2 shells (Don-2M do not take). Suppose you need 4 guided missiles to suppress - then each of them can cost 50 times more than a conventional unguided. Data on 122mm shells is not found quickly, but they write on the network that one 155mm unguided projectile costs $ 2.5 thousand, controlled by Excalibur $ 68 thousand - i.e. the difference is "only" 27 times.
    6. Crimean partisan 1974 26 November 2019 11: 46 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      I don’t believe it (c) ..... what did I look in the mirror? The fact is not that they scoff at such a range, it already happened, the Germans also scoffed at 180 km, and the Saddam had “big Babylon”. and what's the point, it's a game in the sandbox, there’s nothing sensible of it, you don’t have to shoot a lot of minds in huts
    7. The comment was deleted.
    8. Technical engineer 26 November 2019 17: 26 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      And in vain, a miserable 127 mm gun with a range of 16 km (and therefore a miserable, Soviet 130 mm AK-130 had a range of 23 km, as they say, feel the difference) compared with a 76 mm gun. Already a catch and juggling. Well, about 48 km with an active rocket. Nothing beyond. Just a significant mass of the projectile falls on the engine. Probably the power of the remaining one corresponds to 76 mm. Now the question. What can be sunk in 76mm caliber? In fact, nothing. But you can damage and disable a missile boat. Is it true that getting into it even with zhps at such a range is problematic, and what's the point ???
    9. your1970 26 November 2019 17: 29 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: olhon
      I do not believe (s).
      too ... into this:
      "The new modification fires at a distance of 15 km with a rate of fire 124 (!!!!!) mine shotsthat one. "
      Her out machine-gun did what?
    10. Evil Booth 27 November 2019 01: 31 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      good I guarantee! a projectile is more expensive than a missile of a similar range, from real targets the current projectile has a budget fool
  2. The comment was deleted.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. The comment was deleted.
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. The comment was deleted.
          1. The comment was deleted.
            1. The comment was deleted.
              1. The comment was deleted.
                1. The comment was deleted.
                  1. The comment was deleted.
                    1. The comment was deleted.
                      1. The comment was deleted.
                      2. The comment was deleted.
                      3. The comment was deleted.
    3. ddmm09 26 November 2019 03: 19 New
      • 4
      • 1
      +3
      This bird is a bald eagle. Eagles don’t eat, but this eagle eats whatever it gets.
      1. Bykov. 26 November 2019 05: 26 New
        • 5
        • 1
        +4
        Quote: ddmm09
        This bird is a bald eagle. Eagles don’t eat, but this eagle eats whatever it gets.

        Scavenger, as short as a crow.
      2. Private-K 26 November 2019 08: 28 New
        • 15
        • 1
        +14
        In profile - like an eagle. But in full view - kretinos.
  • kot423 26 November 2019 02: 36 New
    • 7
    • 0
    +7
    America ahead).

    Superfood is the high-tech response of “exceptional Ggmon” to hyper-speed Zircon. As always, mattresses are ahead of the rest! laughing
    1. Crash_117 26 November 2019 02: 40 New
      • 5
      • 46
      -41
      Quote: kot423
      America ahead).

      Superfood is the high-tech response of “exceptional Ggmon” to hyper-speed Zircon. As always, mattresses are ahead of the rest! laughing

      And again this zircon, no one saw him, but he is.
      1. kot423 26 November 2019 02: 43 New
        • 7
        • 0
        +7
        Oke, a dagger won't work either?
        1. Crash_117 26 November 2019 02: 52 New
          • 2
          • 31
          -29
          There is a dagger. And what from this?
          1. kot423 26 November 2019 03: 06 New
            • 14
            • 3
            +11
            And what from this fart at 48km? Che, BAE sawed the loot, when back in 12g LRAP was promised for the same cannon at 90 + km, and now, like in the city, they dropped it - at least 48, but soooo propiar, everyone will take laughing by analogy with the sieve "patriot", which even with surcharge from mattresses, no one wants to take, having seen enough of his work with the Saudis and listening to the mooing of mattresses after this incident laughing
            1. Crash_117 26 November 2019 03: 14 New
              • 5
              • 45
              -40
              Update the training manual and the mat part of the school, for which Patriot is responsible for a start. And then I can say by your logic that I didn’t bring down a single target in Syria with 400. But I have enough intelligence to not say this, since I know what layered air defense is.
              1. kot423 26 November 2019 03: 23 New
                • 10
                • 3
                +7
                since I know what layered air defense is.

                It is a masterpiece! Those. you are in the courses, and Secretary of State (which he took advice from the Pentagon) - no, that's why he chewed snot, making excuses laughing It seems that NORAD is completely rotten, and there are Russian spies with the name Dmitry and nickname Crash_117, because it’s not without reason that he knows best laughing
                1. Crash_117 26 November 2019 03: 28 New
                  • 5
                  • 40
                  -35
                  On the topic, will you answer that yourself, or will you continue to mock? Namely, what lines is Patriot responsible for?
                  1. kot423 26 November 2019 03: 32 New
                    • 9
                    • 3
                    +6
                    And what does not suit you? That my conversation doesn’t succeed in diverting the conversation from the topic of the article to the side (picture with chicken, layered pro, etc.)? So I gave advice below where to complain
                    1. Crash_117 26 November 2019 03: 34 New
                      • 3
                      • 36
                      -33
                      Will you answer a simple question or not? What milestones does the Patriot missile system meet?
                    2. kot423 26 November 2019 03: 36 New
                      • 14
                      • 4
                      +10
                      laughing Better write a message. It’s not interesting with a clown whose job is to stupidly flood the topic on third-party conversations, to communicate wassat
                      PS do not forget to write about my sink, at least somehow in your own eyes rise above the baseboard!
                    3. Crash_117 26 November 2019 03: 39 New
                      • 3
                      • 42
                      -39
                      As it was necessary to prove, your entire level of knowledge is limited to a video from YouTube. Adies.
                  2. JD1979 26 November 2019 13: 40 New
                    • 5
                    • 6
                    -1
                    Quote: Crash_117
                    Will you answer a simple question or not? What milestones does the Patriot missile system meet?

                    He won’t answer, he couldn’t do anything except hoax and clowning, stupid flood, hackneyed urapatriotic jokes for 100 and a bunch of emoticons - a generation of instagram ...
              2. Shuttle 26 November 2019 04: 00 New
                • 10
                • 3
                +7
                Quote: Crash_117
                On the topic, will you answer that yourself, or will you continue to mock? Namely, what lines is Patriot responsible for?

                Yes, here it turned out to be a nadis that it is no longer responsible for any lines. Spilled polymers. Sorry, not polymers, but hydrocarbons in CA. Yeah.
                1. Crash_117 26 November 2019 04: 46 New
                  • 4
                  • 32
                  -28
                  A question for backfilling, and to you, for what lines is the Patriot air defense system responsible? Is populism and water so hard to answer?
                2. YakimovSS 26 November 2019 09: 51 New
                  • 5
                  • 1
                  +4
                  Perhaps you yourself will answer this question?
                  And then every time this complex is very necessary in business, it turns out that again the goals were not from its echelon, but from other echelons and were not planned in defense. This is not only the Saudis will tell. Not long before that, something from Korea flew over the wrong echelon over Japan. And when at last (even earlier stages) something flew in the right direction and at the right levels and the Patriot worked, so the “fragments” of this still successfully flew to the mattress base and there were human casualties.
                3. Crimean partisan 1974 26 November 2019 12: 04 New
                  • 3
                  • 2
                  +1
                  for which milestones does the Patriot missile system meet? ..... and it depends on which BLOCK, for example, Rayton completely spioned the Soviet missile H48 of the S-300 PMU complex for the Patriot BLOCK 3, you can’t tell her god, the only one is up to H48 speed of 3000 meters per second almost doubled, and nothing
        2. Prisoner 26 November 2019 08: 41 New
          • 4
          • 1
          +3
          Your advice would be yes to your ears. To update your training manuals weakly? laughing
      2. Good_Anonymous 26 November 2019 10: 32 New
        • 2
        • 2
        0
        Quote: kot423
        Che, BAE sawed the loot, when back in 12g LRAP was promised for the same gun at 90 + km


        LRLAP did, for those very 90+. Now here is another shell made, not BAE, and cheaper.
  • Crash_117 26 November 2019 02: 42 New
    • 7
    • 64
    -57
    By the way, the question is off topic, why Americans can be abused, on this site, this is so to say, and what can you say to the Russian nation so immediately in the ban? What are double standards?
    1. kot423 26 November 2019 02: 45 New
      • 24
      • 2
      +22
      I will urgently dispatch to the mattresses - they behave unpatriotically on the VO in relation to the Ggmon, another sack of sanctions!
    2. WILL 26 November 2019 02: 49 New
      • 20
      • 2
      +18
      Quote: Crash_117
      By the way, the question is off topic, why Americans can be abused, on this site, this is so to say, and what can you say to the Russian nation so immediately in the ban? What are double standards?

      You are an American? Or so ... for the idea of ​​$ work? request
      1. Crash_117 26 November 2019 02: 53 New
        • 6
        • 47
        -41
        I just asked. Can anyone answer this question intelligibly?
        1. PROXOR 26 November 2019 11: 31 New
          • 8
          • 2
          +6
          What you sow, you will reap. This is not a diplomatic relationship and people regard striped people by their actions and behavior. And even more so they don’t choose expressions to say what they think (within the rules of this site).
          I think you are unlikely to be respectful of your neighbor when he deserves good to have his face stuffed.
    3. Shuttle 26 November 2019 04: 16 New
      • 27
      • 0
      +27
      Quote: Crash_117
      By the way, the question is off topic, why Americans can be abused, on this site, this is so to say, and what can you say to the Russian nation so immediately in the ban? What are double standards?

      Firstly, the Oscar, which you somehow clumsily mention, has nothing to do with it.
      Secondly, the Americans, as you yourself have shown, but have not noticed, are stupid, and there are also quite reasonable.
      Thirdly, it is really unreasonable to compare the 76-mm ammunition with the 127-mm ammunition neither in terms of power, nor in range, nor in the air-to-air ratio, and is not reasonable for anything. Those. simply stupid. What we are in the article and can observe.
      Fourth, about the picture you posted with the sparrow. Yes, it’s not prohibited. But a cultured person differs from his wild brother not rational in that he observes the rules of decency guided by the most effective law - conscience. In a wild man, conscience knocks, beats in the skull in search of its master of reason, but not finding it falls asleep. And then wild, impudent and ugly "falls out to people around" and what such? The one that can capture the mind of even an airport employee from my beloved republic.
    4. novel66 26 November 2019 08: 48 New
      • 7
      • 0
      +7
      this is a Russian site ... on mattresses, mabut, in another way
      1. SovAr238A 26 November 2019 20: 08 New
        • 3
        • 2
        +1
        Quote: novel xnumx
        this is a Russian site ... on mattresses, mabut, in another way

        with servers in Germany.

        With a huge number of supposedly urya-patriots, whose task is to further divide between ordinary residents and their everyday realities. and shouts of Urya-urya and throwing bonnets.
        the site is very actively fueled by money and it has a paid entry and a paid account in Zen.
        To expand the readership.

        And even more masses of people spoil the nerves and make them dissatisfied with the state and government.

        Those. site. hiding behind a supposedly military-patriotic theme is actually anti-Russian.
        Anti-state.

        These are really subtle Internet technologies.
        Anyone who has been doing this and after a few years staying on the site sees everything quite transparently.

        so the site is actually anti-Russian.
        1. asv363 27 November 2019 03: 28 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: SovAr238A
          And even more masses of people spoil the nerves and make them dissatisfied with the state and government. site. hiding behind a supposedly military-patriotic theme, it’s actually anti-Russian. It’s anti-state. These are really subtle Internet technologies. Those who did this and after a few years on the site see everything quite transparently. So the site is actually anti-Russian.

          No, news / articles are usually neutral. But there are participants who comment only on politota. And they don’t see the coast. But you are also wrong, answered above. And in general, they do not climb into a strange monastery with their own charter.
    5. Vogel 26 November 2019 12: 36 New
      • 3
      • 2
      +1
      Twitter out for good news from Russia stupidly bans, why so distracted? Spit on those mattresses.
  • YOUR 26 November 2019 03: 57 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    As you can see, not everyone understood your sarcasm.
  • WILL 26 November 2019 02: 27 New
    • 16
    • 2
    +14
    Well, now the only thing left for the Mattresses is to build - an Armadillo! wink
    On the topic, how much is 1 such snail? What is its advantage over short-range missiles? And where will he fly with the active counteraction of electronic warfare, having lost the GPS signal?
    1. Good_Anonymous 26 November 2019 03: 00 New
      • 5
      • 4
      +1
      Quote: ANIMAL
      On the topic, how much is 1 such snail?


      Vicki says Excalibur Ib (155mm) costs $ 68k. Excalibur N5 has less caliber, but 70% of the common parts, so it’s probably about the same.
      1. Avior 26 November 2019 04: 04 New
        • 3
        • 1
        +2
        155 mm shell for Zamvolt reached 800 thousand.
        The price drops as the volume of output. This one fell from 260 thousand to 68 for the 155 mm version
        1. Good_Anonymous 26 November 2019 04: 11 New
          • 4
          • 2
          +2
          Quote: Avior
          155 mm shell for Zamvolt reached 800 thousand.


          It was a unique projectile for a unique gun.

          Quote: Avior
          This one fell from 260 thousand to 68 for the 155 mm version


          Well, that is, a shell for AGS initially cost 3 times more smile
          1. Avior 26 November 2019 04: 15 New
            • 3
            • 1
            +2
            Different firms did.
            Therefore, for weapons of the same caliber, they tried to make different shells, their fleet, their army.
            Now combined, it turned out much cheaper.
            Here and there they write that naval versions also have laser guidance
            1. Good_Anonymous 26 November 2019 04: 27 New
              • 4
              • 2
              +2
              Quote: Avior
              Therefore, for weapons of the same caliber, they tried to make different shells


              As far as I understand, the problem was the uniqueness of AGS. Under it, they tried unsuccessfully to adapt Excalibur.
              1. Avior 26 November 2019 12: 14 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                I didn’t hear that they tried.
                Lockheed Martin did not make his projectile based on Excalibur developed by Raytheon.
                Although it was logical to unify them as much as possible.
                in size for Zamvolt it was even simpler, especially since it was squeezed into even 127 mm.
                1. Good_Anonymous 26 November 2019 12: 18 New
                  • 1
                  • 2
                  -1
                  Tried: https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a24310/zumwalt-destroyer-excalibur-ammunition/
                  1. Avior 26 November 2019 12: 39 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    it later.
                    if they were originally made on the basis of escalibur, the price would have been much lower.
                    and why "unsuccessfully"?
                    1. Good_Anonymous 26 November 2019 12: 43 New
                      • 1
                      • 2
                      -1
                      Quote: Avior
                      if they were originally made on the basis of escalibur, the price would have been much lower.


                      Initially, a new gun was made there. They could not adapt Excalibur to it (or could not do it at reasonable costs, I do not know).
                      1. Avior 26 November 2019 13: 48 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        and did not try.
                        different companies did.
                        and the fleet, by tradition, wanted to have nothing to do with the land hunters.
                        and when the new shell turned out to be of overwhelming value, they began to adapt Exalibur for these purposes.
                        127 mm has already broken, let's see what they will do with 155 mm.
                      2. Good_Anonymous 26 November 2019 21: 20 New
                        • 1
                        • 2
                        -1
                        Quote: Avior
                        and did not try.


                        They included refurbishment money in the budget. I think that before that, at least a feasibility study was conducted.

                        Quote: Avior
                        different companies did.


                        So what? One did not succeed - the next applicant, please.

                        Quote: Avior
                        and the fleet, by tradition, wanted to have nothing to do with the land hunters.


                        Just the fleet asked for money to transfer AGS to Excalibur.
                      3. Avior 26 November 2019 21: 30 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        the fleet traditionally makes for itself even the weapons and ammunition that can be unified with the land hunters.
                        and switched to Excalibur, after it became clear that no one would buy a shell from Lockheed Martin at an exorbitant price.
                        but a lot of money was spent on development.
                        Now they want the adaptation of Excalibur, otherwise the gun without a shell will remain at all.
  • novel66 26 November 2019 08: 49 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    and here it is not necessary here !! how rockets run out - art will go, and there is not far to boarding
    1. Serg65 26 November 2019 09: 47 New
      • 4
      • 2
      +2
      and partisans ... do not forget the partisans! lol
      1. novel66 26 November 2019 10: 05 New
        • 3
        • 1
        +2
        sea ​​partisans ??? did not hear ...
        1. Serg65 26 November 2019 10: 08 New
          • 4
          • 2
          +2
          Yes, no, I heard ..... some misunderstand the pirates call them!
          1. novel66 26 November 2019 10: 10 New
            • 3
            • 1
            +2
            privateers, if we are talking about the war
            1. Serg65 26 November 2019 10: 23 New
              • 4
              • 2
              +2
              privateers are pirates in the service of the state for money and without pirate romance ...
              1. Mouse 26 November 2019 10: 57 New
                • 7
                • 3
                +4
                then maybe filibusters? recourse
                1. Serg65 26 November 2019 10: 58 New
                  • 2
                  • 2
                  0
                  laughing Well, you can!
                  1. Mouse 26 November 2019 11: 10 New
                    • 7
                    • 3
                    +4
                    to complete the picture and corsairs worth mentioning! laughing
                    1. Serg65 26 November 2019 11: 13 New
                      • 3
                      • 2
                      +1
                      pirates, they are also pirates in Africa, even though they call them basmachi laughing
                    2. Mouse 26 November 2019 11: 15 New
                      • 7
                      • 3
                      +4
                      the essence is one, with some nuances .... hi
                    3. novel66 26 November 2019 15: 21 New
                      • 2
                      • 0
                      +2
                      Ushkuynikov forgot
            2. Okolotochny 27 November 2019 00: 00 New
              • 2
              • 1
              +1
              This is all a disguise, they are really Kyrgyz.
    2. Souchastnik 26 November 2019 14: 57 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      sea ​​partisans ??? did not hear ...

      On inflatable boats and boats. almost like airplane partisans laughing
  • Hoist 26 November 2019 02: 28 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    What about installing the A-192M. It has not yet been adopted, or is it less modern than the AK-176MA?
  • Avior 26 November 2019 02: 42 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    It is more logical to compare with A 192.
    True, I did not hear that for her there was a guided projectile with a range of 50 km.
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. Avior 26 November 2019 02: 50 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        Redid from 155 mm to 127 mm, a robust approach, the fleet began to count the money, took the shell from the land explorers.
        It is simply not clear why they compared it with a 76 mm gun.
  • Nikolaevich I 26 November 2019 02: 45 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    I’m not catching up with something! Is it so customary now, to compare 127 mm (!) (And take a 155 mm caliber ...!) Artillery system with 76 mm artillery system ?? belay In the Russian Navy "finally and irrevocably" disappeared ship 130-mm and 100-mm artillery installations? (In response to the insidious plans of the Americans, who planned to introduce 155-mm and even 203-mm artillery systems on the ships of their Navy, as far back as the USSR, projects were considered to create 152-mm and 203-mm shipboard artillery systems .. .) request
  • Avior 26 November 2019 02: 47 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    The new projectile was made out of 155 mm of a universal cannon shell.
    The fleet ended up doing stupid things with LRLAP for Zamoltov at an unbearable price.
  • avdkrd 26 November 2019 04: 01 New
    • 8
    • 0
    +8
    127mm compare with 76mm. Enchanting representative of Raytheon ...
    Just fabulous ... well, you get the point.
    We need to tell him that 30mm Russian guns have a shorter range and he could boast a 15-fold advantage.
  • YOUR 26 November 2019 04: 05 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Somehow, it is difficult to believe that in modern naval combat, ships will converge in an artillery duel.
    And according to the experience of past wars, no more than 1-3% of the projectiles fired at the target. Covering was considered to be a gap or hit of a shell near the ship.
    Now guns are more likely a tribute to tradition and the ability to destroy small targets such as a boat.
    1. Avior 26 November 2019 04: 17 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Laser-guided or jeepies-guided missiles for naval combat are not very good, but the Swedes seem to have radar-guided missiles
    2. Nikolaevich I 26 November 2019 05: 24 New
      • 8
      • 0
      +8
      Quote: YOUR
      Somehow, it is difficult to believe that in modern naval combat, ships will converge in an artillery duel.

      Quote: YOUR
      Now guns are more likely a tribute to tradition and the ability to destroy small targets such as a boat

      Well, I don’t want to discuss the possibility of artillery duels either ... but ship artillery is capable of more than "a tribute to tradition and the ability to destroy small boats ..." This is: 1. the ability to destroy "merchant" ships without the expense of anti-ship missiles ...; 2. fire support for amphibious assault; 3. fierce blow to port and coastal facilities. It would be nice to "cough up" the American experience in Vietnam (and maybe "capture" Lebanon ...) on the use of battleships (or rather, large-caliber naval artillery ...) Or maybe it is even better to recall the Falklands! Here, for example, are some excerpts from the Falkland "mothers":1.Englishmen already note the significant role of naval artillery in this conflict, but only 114-mm guns of British frigates and destroyers fired. ; 2. For the artillery support of the landing, a battleship is not needed either - for this it is more than enough to equip one or two powerful 152-203-mm guns with sufficient ammunition for each of the British assault transports. One glance at the map suggests that the naval artillery system with a firing range of 25-30 km reliably covers any defensive positions of Guus Green, Darwin, Port Stanley ... Field reinforcements of the Argentines could not resist artillery of eight-inch caliber, but really serious fortified areas like a memorable "line Maginot ”was not there: 3. Naval fire support also played a significant role in the battles for the Falklands: more than 114 thousand shots were fired from only 8 mm guns; 4. Using paired contact trawls, the British without much difficulty destroyed minefields. Sliced ​​mines were shot by naval artillery. ; 5. An important and indispensable means of fire support in the naval landing operation was naval artillery. And so on and so forth...
      1. riwas 26 November 2019 06: 27 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        Now, to defeat ground targets, bet is on Caliber and Tomahawks. Although I think it is advisable to have a specialized ship to support the landing armed with adapted Smerch MLRS.
        1. YOUR 26 November 2019 07: 56 New
          • 5
          • 0
          +5
          Clarify - Ground reconnaissance stationary targets.
        2. Nikolaevich I 26 November 2019 10: 45 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Quote: riwas
          Now, to defeat ground targets, bet is on Caliber and Tomahawks.

          As the actor Kartsev said: "Yesterday there were cancers of 5 r., And today 3 r. ...." In general, it is better when there are cancers of your choice: and 5 r. , and 3 p. ... worse when in your pocket and the ruble is dumb! They also say: on legs you need to stretch your legs. Not every goal should be harassed by a tomahawk! Still, this is a rather expensive weapon ... And, as Comrade rightly remarked. YOUR, “Tomahawks” and “Caliber” are good for “explored stationary” purposes! Naval artillery, to a large extent, can be deprived of these "shortcomings" ...
          Quote: riwas
          it is advisable to have a specialized ship to support an assault armed with adapted Smerch MLRS.

          Then your lo ... the idea was a little late! Firstly (1), there is in nature a naval MLRS A-215 Grad-M for arming amphibious and small artillery ships ... secondly (2), there was a message about the upcoming modernization of this MLRS ... thirdly ( 3): "At the" Start ", the possibility of creating on the basis of the Grad-M MLRS (marine) with the MS-73M launcher - a universal launcher for missiles of various calibers and purposes" is being studied; in the fourth (4), there is a naval 140-mm MLRS A-22 (MS-227) "Fire" (there were rumors about a possible modernization of this system ...) PS On the pages of military-themed magazines, various authors proposed ideas for creating 220- mm and 300 mm ship MLRS ... but the marine "top ranks", for some reason, are launched ... but paragraph 3 does not exclude this possibility ..
    3. common man 26 November 2019 07: 22 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: YOUR
      Now guns are more likely a tribute to tradition and the ability to destroy small targets such as a boat.

      Those. missile gets into a small boat, and misses into a larger vessel (ship)?
      If the ship's CIUS can instantly process data from the radar and enter the coordinates in the projectile, it will turn out quite effectively.
      1. YOUR 26 November 2019 08: 00 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        Do you know that the Earth has the shape of a ball?
        You can calculate the target detection range yourself, in the search engine calculate the line of sight and then substitute only the numbers.
        And this
        Quote: man in the street
        and enter the coordinates in the shell

        Cool, excuse me for scamming. Where did you see such shells, but let's say there is, what to do if during this time the target moves a hundred meters.
        1. common man 26 November 2019 08: 48 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: YOUR
          Do you know that the Earth has the shape of a ball?

          Well, what is not on three pillars, I know for sure. At 30 km take radar? And then thank God.
          Quote: YOUR
          Where did you see such shells

          And how are they being programmed now? Are you entering coordinates on the shore? By connecting usb cable to PC. Just not special. Sorry.
          1. YOUR 26 November 2019 12: 15 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            What shells? Could you name those.
            The fact that the same Tomahawks are programming on the shore, so there is no programming on board the ship. In 2007, the Americans talked about how they achieved a breakthrough in this matter; now programming Ax takes only a day.
            And what can be programmed in an artillery shell?
            In the Kyrgyz Republic, it is clear that the flight altitude, the reference points of the course change, lay a map of the area, and what to program in the projectile. The height to which he will explode?
            1. Souchastnik 26 November 2019 15: 09 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Ax programming takes only XNUMX hours.

              I apologize for my 5 cents. As far as I am aware - the last axes can be on duty in the air and receive healing in flight. If it’s a lie, then it’s not mine. But I think that is true.
              1. YOUR 27 November 2019 03: 39 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Quote: Souchastnik
                But I think that is true.

                This is because you have a poor idea of ​​what kind of information you need to enter into memory. This is not a team for a sniper, but bang that one in a shiny caftan.
            2. SovAr238A 26 November 2019 20: 18 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Quote: YOUR

              And what can be programmed in an artillery shell?
              In the Kyrgyz Republic, it is clear that the flight altitude, the reference points of the course change, lay a map of the area, and what to program in the projectile. The height to which he will explode?


              Flight time (fuse timer) cocked at the muzzle ... on unguided shells.

              The coordinates of the target. correction (up to retargeting) during the flight - already implemented in BAE in its version of the guided missiles MS-SGP (Multi Service-Standard Guided Projectile)
              1. YOUR 27 November 2019 03: 44 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                Quote: SovAr238A
                Flight time (fuse timer) cocked at the muzzle ... on unguided shells.

                I wrote about this. Otherwise, do not overestimate real technology
                https://topwar.ru/83681-obzor-artillerii-chast-6-boepripasy.html
                read. Such shooting is possible, but only for stationary targets.
        2. common man 26 November 2019 08: 51 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: YOUR
          if during this time the target moves a hundred meters.

          To do this, there are proxy shooting computers. A ship is not a plane, how many seconds does a projectile fly?
          1. YOUR 26 November 2019 12: 16 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            There are those who set the lead point and aim the gun at this point, but what is shell programming?
          2. Yuriy_999 26 November 2019 17: 13 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Well, the initial somewhere 850 m / s. Let the whole way fly at this speed (actually not).
            Minimum 50000/850 = 58 sec. Really think 1,5-2 minutes. Ship speed let 25 knots.
            25 * 1800/60 = 750 meters per minute. Obviously not for moving targets. By the way, Vicki speaks about the CEL of Escalibur - 20 meters.
            1. SovAr238A 26 November 2019 20: 24 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Quote: Yuri_999
              е

              I recommend reading ...

              https://topwar.ru/109011-artilleriya-i-upravlyaemye-snaryady-krupnogo-kalibra.html
              1. Yuriy_999 26 November 2019 20: 45 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Read. AND...?
                1. SovAr238A 26 November 2019 20: 52 New
                  • 2
                  • 0
                  +2
                  Quote: Yuri_999
                  ttps: //topwar.ru/109011-artilleriya-i-upravlyaemye-snaryady-krupnogo-kalibra.html


                  sorry. that they didn’t see ...


                  The BAE System company has proposed its single standard guided projectile MS-SGP (Multi Service-Standard Guided Projectile), which, however, was developed within the framework of common requirements, since this same projectile can be fired from 155 mm systems when equipped with a pallet. ...
                  The MS-SGP active-reactive ammunition is also equipped with a rocket engine, which underwent complex tests: when shooting from the Mk 45 gun, it allowed to hit the target at a distance of 36 km, while at a meeting angle with a target of 86 degrees the deviation was only 1,5 meters.

                  The MS-SGP projectile is equipped with a data channel that allows you to retarget the projectile in flight. A flight time of 70 km is about 3 minutes 15 seconds, which is enough to transfer from one target to another, the circular probable deviation (CVO) is estimated at 10 meters, although tests have shown that the average CVO is significantly less.
                  [B] [/ b]
                  1. Yuriy_999 26 November 2019 21: 05 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    I read it.
                    Well, they give a KVO of 10 meters. Stating that they have achieved the best (at the training ground)
                    What does this projectile have to do with Excalibur? The truth in this article is written about the KVO for him, too, at 10 meters. Data on 20 meters in Wiki, to her and questions.
                    True, and I deeply doubt the submeter accuracy in real conditions.
                    And I consider shooting from 155 graph paper with a 127 mm shell the height of stupidity.
                    By the way, they also write that the warhead of a 155 mm shell weighs 16 kg.
                    At 152 mm OFS from 40 kg.
  • Volga073 26 November 2019 04: 40 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    Put a GPS jammer, and not a single shell hits the target)))
  • rocket757 26 November 2019 04: 54 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    Oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
    Even to compare it makes no sense an expensive hybrid device, with a simple but reliable thing to that of another class.
  • letinant 26 November 2019 06: 08 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Quote: Crash_117
    Quote: olhon
    I do not believe (s).

    What did you think that only Russian weapons are the best in the world and all other countries are forever behind?

    We know physics and artillery science!
  • pexotinec 26 November 2019 06: 19 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    And how much will one shot cost? winked
  • K-50 26 November 2019 07: 22 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The Mk45 Mod 4 gun acquired the ability to hit targets at a distance three times the range of the AK-176MA system, which is the most advanced artillery system available to the Russian Navy.

    Well, we have better guns than the AK-176MA. For example, A-190 and A-192. In terms of range, of course, they are inferior to two times the declared 48 km of Raytheon.
    But who said range is important? The main thing to get. Again, the guns now are mainly a means of air defense of the ship (one of the means). And why should he then GPS-guidance? what belay
    Against the shore, so our “Ball” and “Bastion” cover them 48 km, like a mosquito bull. lol
  • Basarev 26 November 2019 08: 36 New
    • 2
    • 7
    -5
    And our caliber is miserable, and the range is poor, and there is no accuracy ... Russia definitely needs new artillery systems.
    1. Redfox3k 26 November 2019 09: 14 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      What for? What tasks do the existing art systems not cope with? What are the challenges facing new art systems?
  • aleksandrs95 26 November 2019 09: 19 New
    • 0
    • 2
    -2
    Such toys over time become a formidable weapon, but there is the opportunity to jam the satellite signal. Nevertheless, 3-4 shells can solve the problem for 30-40 km, for example, on land. Reaching $ 50 per shot, it’s cheaper than a rocket. True, the caliber should be 000mm, otherwise the explosives in such shells are much smaller. It is also necessary for us to deal with such topics, but wisely and without scattering resources like our opponents do.
    1. K-50 26 November 2019 10: 10 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: aleksandrs95
      3-4 shells can solve the problem for 30-40km, for example on land. Reaching $ 50 per shot, it’s cheaper than a rocket. True, the caliber should be 000mm, otherwise the explosives in such shells are much smaller.

      And in response, it will fly from the Coalition-SV from a range of up to 70 km, with a large projectile power, because it is 152 mm caliber. Or coastal complexes "hello pass" for 300 km range. lol
      GPS is unambiguously jammed, and what can be solved with shells for half a hundred greenery? Jam fish? Or gophers on the shore to scare away, because there is nowhere else to get them. fellow lol
    2. ZAV69 26 November 2019 11: 04 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Well, such a projectile will fall into the 3 dugout dugout. Does he even scare anyone?
  • Stalnov I.P. 26 November 2019 09: 56 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    Well, why lie, a caliber of 127 mm, we have a caliber of 130 mm, shoots more than 22 km with a conventional projectile, and if active-reactive, in the same range as the Americans. A 76 mm cannon is generally another artillery. How stupid and mediocre you need to be comparing the caliber 127 and 76, you sewed another 152 or 188 mm.
  • seregatara1969 26 November 2019 10: 08 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    But the price of one lope bullet?
  • Rwmos 26 November 2019 10: 49 New
    • 1
    • 2
    -1
    Somewhere I heard this ... Oh yes!

    Power and strength! And what, that only painted - it seems after all the truth! The truth is, he has nothing to shoot at the seas ... But by the way, they did something like that.
    Author - shooting on the water - where? What artillery? Once again - as in the case of Zyama - SHORE! And with no bolt ship, you see a ship?
    It’s just the defense minister from Reiteon’s office, not the ship’s art hi
  • ZAV69 26 November 2019 11: 03 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    On buzzards, the trunks are 130 mm, on the bpk 100 mm. 76 few remained. There is an inflating cheeks. Although if you compare the guns standing in the Iowa Museum, Missouri here will be even steeper result. And if you come up with their 406 mm stems controlled active projectile .......
    1. garri-lin 26 November 2019 13: 08 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      It’s easier to slightly bore the barrel and buy calibers from Russia in the export version from Russia. The same result will be. (smiley)
  • Dzafdet 26 November 2019 11: 41 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Nonsense! This is not just a shell, but a jet ...
  • Sergey Eliseev 26 November 2019 11: 48 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    For an accurate shot at 50 km, convolution guidance is required. However, the expansion will be several tens of meters. Ships do not stand still. And what's the point of scorching dozens of large-caliber shells, except to confuse the enemy. There are rockets for an accurate hit. However, they are expensive. So it’s more efficient to use a projectile or a rocket, choose only by the military.
  • Evpator 26 November 2019 12: 24 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    This channel that moved to America?
  • Vogel 26 November 2019 12: 29 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    And how can you compare 76 and 127 mm?
    Tools of different weight categories.
  • Bersaglieri 26 November 2019 12: 52 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    ARS or with DGG?
  • Nikolay Fedorov 26 November 2019 13: 37 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    "Our American fur seal is 23 times cooler than the Russian cook !!! We are the coolest !!"
    This is what the left roof of American experts looks like. laughing
  • awdrgy 26 November 2019 13: 37 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    So in the near future there will be no railgun
  • Vkd dvk 26 November 2019 13: 46 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: malyvalv
    Not the fact that it is reactive. Maybe they just attached wings since GPS control is present.
    It would be nice to have such in the arsenal.

    And will he flap his wings, increasing the flight distance?
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Incvizitor 26 November 2019 14: 04 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    What should they drive with these shells of Somali pirates? Such as dill or hryzunsky can be driven at close range. This is probably "Fashington's answer to zircon" lol
  • VLADIMIR VLADIVOSTOK 26 November 2019 14: 39 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    American duck. Unih is hundreds of times worse. They cannot even make a normal automatic loader for a tank gun. Hamburgers they can do ane guns. They don’t have normal national food. They can’t. Steal someone else’s technology, yes.
  • mmaxx 26 November 2019 14: 56 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    ABOUT!!! And I understood why they compare 127 mm and 76. Because the sense of this long-range projectile is 127 mm as from 76 mm. That is, almost none.
  • zenion 26 November 2019 15: 08 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    From German battleships, at the same time, they shot at such a distance.
  • Reserve buildbat 26 November 2019 16: 28 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    That’s what can’t be taken away from mattresses, because it’s the ability to present any “it” as candy. Advertisers are not worried about realism, because they are not responsible for the words laughing
    And by the way, to compare 127mm caliber systems with 76mm systems is the "giftedness" of the highest standard. Let them compare with our 130mm caliber guns. Here and laugh laughing
  • eklmn 26 November 2019 17: 52 New
    • 1
    • 4
    -3
    From the text:
    “According to a Raytheon spokesman, the Mk45 Mod 4 gun acquired the ability to hit targets at a distance three times the range of the AK-176MA system, ...”
    Raytheon representative could say about increasing the distance of defeat, but he will not say ANYTHING about the Russian AK-176MA system, because him to the bulb that Russia has. These are just fantasies of the author of the article and, by the way, his own incorrect comparison.
    Below is information about Excalibur N5.
    “The Excalibur projectile is a high-precision weapon that strikes with a dispersion radius of less than 2 meters from the target. Unlike “near-precision” guidance systems, Excalibur weapons provide accurate first-shell effects at all distances in all weather conditions. This weapon system also extends the range of .39 caliber artillery to 40 km and .52 caliber artillery to more than 50 km. ”
    “Using the precision level of the Excalibur shell, you can significantly reduce the time, cost, and logistical burden associated with other artillery ammunition. The analyzes showed that on average at least 10 conventional ammunition could be required to accomplish what one Excalibur weapon can do. ”
    “Raytheon has developed a variant of the Excalibur Shaped Trajectory, or EST, which will allow soldiers to destroy targets in hard-to-reach spots, choosing the final angle of attack of the projectile. It successfully passed tests in 2018 and is currently deployed in the U.S. armed forces.
    The company is also developing a version of a laser-guided projectile, Excalibur S. This option includes a digital semi-active laser finder, allowing it to hit moving targets and hit targets without accurate location information. It also reduces the risk associated with GPS interference. ”
    By the way, the shell is used in the Army, Navy, and helicopters.
  • Jcdenton 26 November 2019 18: 27 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Not everything is so simple, as the author writes:
    This shell costs 85000 USD apiece, and according to the latest data it can reach 90-100 thousand forever green American money. Well, for them, apparently a penny. BUT then why did the MEGA WONDER Zumwalt irons remain without these guns and shells for them, although the expensive LRLAPs were offered the replacement of BAE Systems for 40000 USD at a range of 40 km? Apparently it turned out to be a little expensive even for the ov ... Yes, and at sea the tendency to abandon large-caliber artillery weapons in favor of missiles ...
  • Archivist Vasya 26 November 2019 18: 49 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    The caliber of the new ammunition is 127 mm

    This is not serious for the fleet. So a few weather hits will not do. Downs should be set from 200 mm and above, as on battleships.
  • SovAr238A 26 November 2019 19: 52 New
    • 3
    • 2
    +1
    I read a bunch of articles about marine excalibur ...

    And nowhere - believe me, nowhere is there a single comparison with the AK-176MA.

    News Authors - Do you want to be notified in court?

    Administrative Code of the Russian Federation Article 13.15. Abuse of freedom of the media ...

    200 thousand rubles to start the site does not want to pay?
    False Edition ...
    It's just that all the news is false, distorted.
    really fake.

    It's time to start the news authors to wet and his admins .... according to the laws of the Russian Federation.
    Well, when do you learn to think with your head?
    1. Ryaruav 26 November 2019 21: 53 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      al, admins are busy blocking true comments
    2. asv363 27 November 2019 04: 05 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: SovAr238A
      I read a bunch of articles about marine excalibur ... And nowhere - believe me, nowhere is there a single comparison with the AK-176MA. News authors - do you want to be notified in court? Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation Article 13.15. Abuse of freedom of the media ... doesn’t the site want to pay 200 thousand rubles to start? A deceitful publication ... It's just that all the news is false, distorted. It’s really fake. It's time to start the news authors to wet and its admins .... according to the laws of the Russian Federation. Well, when do you learn to think with your head?

      I wrote to you above, you need to answer for defamation of the editorial board of VO. Your ignorance of the laws has ruined you. You want to sue me, an illiterate hamlo.
  • Vkd dvk 26 November 2019 19: 59 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Coalition NE fires a special projectile at 70 km. I mean, active-reactive, as I understand it .... If so, it will be necessary, you can weld a little fluff from the Coalition. But, probably, this is not necessary. To bang the trough of the enemy for sure, faster and more reliable to send him greetings with other pieces of iron. More expensive? How to count.
  • Taoist 26 November 2019 20: 16 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    What kind of nonsense? First of all, with what fright are the 76 mm and 127 mm systems compared?
    those. AK 130 doesn’t exist?
    "Russian ship gun mount A-192M. The number of barrels is 1, caliber - 130 mm, firing range - up to 23 km, rate of fire - 30 shots / min, ammunition load - 60 shots, cartridge weight - 52,8 kg," (s )
    secondly, okay, they made an active rocket with him with a range of 50 km ... with correction for jeepies ... It’s clear that such shells can be fired only along the coast - for targets with known coordinates ... Well, so we have shells are not news ...
    What is the point?
    1. SovAr238A 26 November 2019 20: 38 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      Quote: Taoist
      What kind of nonsense?
      What is the point?


      The meaning is a lie ...
      All lies in the text. as for the alleged comparison with Russian military equipment.
      A technique that is incomparable and allegedly compared on behalf of the American side is specially selected.
      thereby gaining a flurry of feedback from people. who are used to believing any lies.
      Which, in principle, never read the source.
      And who came running here, including for money.

      thereby gaining a huge amount of feedback and views in Yandex.Zen.
      Thus, this article is seen and read by those who, in principle, are on the drum. but a lot of people read everything.
      thereby, Normal readers will immediately see inconsistencies in the article.
      thereby, these very normal readers will read hundreds of completely stupid, out of the blue patriotic, chauvinist, anti-American, anti-Zionist and other hat-making posts - and m will just be unpleasant from what they read.
      and then there will be another article similar and equally deceitful, which will be "paid" and introduced by the wave "idiot" into the same Zen.

      thus, over a certain amount of time, the attitude of the state is reformatted to the peoples. they see from the life around them. that the king is naked. Rather, on the contrary, the people are naked. and the king and his retinue - otherwise ...

      Or do you think. that all color revolutions took place according to other scenarios?
      Or a revolution in Kiev made a couple of hundred militants?
      no, it was made by hundreds of thousands of dissatisfied with the authorities, who were prepared just like that on the exact contrast of real life on the one hand and ur-ur-patriotism on the other ...
      1. asv363 27 November 2019 04: 21 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: SovAr238A
        The meaning is a lie ...

        Where is the evidence? Four times you blamed the publisher publicly and did not provide a single link.
        1. SovAr238A 27 November 2019 07: 16 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Quote: asv363
          Quote: SovAr238A
          The meaning is a lie ...

          Where is the evidence? Four times you blamed the publisher publicly and did not provide a single link.


          give a link to the words of the representative of Reiteon about the comparison with our 76mm guns ...
          give. so that I could find it on the site of the reiteon ...
          1. asv363 27 November 2019 12: 50 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            The composition of all paragraphs of Article 13.15. study for a start, and admit that there is nothing there that could refer to inaccurate or incomplete translation of advertising brochures and statements of persons, both officially representing foreign companies and foreign media.

            Quote: SovAr238A
            False Edition ...
            Simple more news - unreliable, distorted.
            really fake.

            Explain why your words are a lie to the editorial board of VO? Or do you understand?
  • Nikolai 26 November 2019 21: 02 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    We have Krasnopol 152 mm, but there are no marine speakers 152 mm, 125 mm in operation with + GPS.
    Raytion with Excalibur has sales problems - shells (+ programming equipment) at the price of gold, and that's trying to slip it wherever possible. And the effectiveness of guided and long-range shells is low - the number of explosives in the shell - the cat cried - hit, but did not destroy.
  • Vkd dvk 26 November 2019 21: 08 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: hydrox
    You, as a mariman, can certainly say that these new MARINE guns (along with shells!) As a weapon are NOT worth anything, because:
    1. Stripes NEVER dare to approach our shores at a distance closer to the working distance of the Bastion.
    2. In the event of declaring martial law, the distance of guaranteed defeat for naval targets of the enemy is increased by min to 1000 miles.
    3. And what, some bastard really thinks that squadron naval battles are possible in our times ???
    I wallow patstalom !!!!!!!! laughing laughing laughing

    For such an event, penguins have already imprisoned ukrov. They even brought boats for reinforcements. But they themselves will fart from them towards the natives of New Zealand. Just in case, moving away from the coast at this respectful distance. You never know what. God saves man, who save himself.
  • Freedim 26 November 2019 21: 25 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    If the projectile costs as much as a rocket, then you had to do something ...
  • Ryaruav 26 November 2019 21: 47 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    explain the shooting of a 127mm installation at 50km (30 miles) on a target with a course of 25 knots (46 km h) with an ordinary projectile it’s zero if it’s steep then it seems to me better
  • Dima_Anlim 26 November 2019 22: 18 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    To approach 10-15 km to the coast of some kind of Papua country and to hit it with this gun is a normal occupation. Against warships such as Russian-not a ride. Get the rocket on board.
  • Lexxtech 26 November 2019 22: 57 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    I didn’t understand, for how to compare the active-reactive range with the homing (read missiles) 127 mm excalibur with a 76 mm quick-shooter? His, then it is necessary to compare with "Caliber". 50 km and 2000 ...
  • storm 26 November 2019 23: 11 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    That's what you need to compare!
    A-192M "Armat" In 2014, the first production model of the installation was delivered for installation on the head frigate of project 22350
    Gun caliber - 130 mm

    Installation weight - 24000 kg
    Shot mass - 52,8 kg
    Projectile weight - 33,4 kg

    Vertical guidance angles - from -12 to +75 degrees
    Horizontal pointing angles - + -180 degrees

    Target range:
    - on sea targets - 23 km
    - for air targets - 18 km
    Rate of fire:
    - up to 30 rds / min

    Ammunition - 22 to 60 rounds
  • kostik-oz 26 November 2019 23: 29 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    And what about the magpie - they did not compare?
  • Evil Booth 27 November 2019 01: 33 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: Shuttle
    it is unreasonable to compare the 76-mm ammunition with the 127-mm ammunition neither in terms of power, nor in range, nor in the KVO, nor is it reasonable for anything
    crying but what is the meaning of our life ... to drive purguuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu =)
  • Ilya_Nsk 27 November 2019 07: 33 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    What kind of miracles? 50 km ... Well, let's say there is a bottom pyrotechnic device - ECA is not visible. Judging by the length of the barrel, the energy of the projectile is high, I agree. GPS guidance - so what? At sea, such shells are useless - targets move. We have for the GRADES new 122mm shells also with GLONASS and fly 40 km. In addition, why send a 76 mm shell to 50 km? Again, it is very incorrect to compare the artillery of such different - almost twice - calibres! Compare 152 and 155 mm, but not 76 and 127. There is no need to show idolatry here. I remember that for the notorious Zamvolta they promised 100 km. shells, but it turned out that there is no goal that such a shell could hit and which would be more expensive than this shell!