“Destroy an entire company of infantry”: Serbia appreciates the potential of the Pantsir-C1 air defense missile system

In addition to outstanding capabilities in the fight against air targets, the Russian Pantsir-C1 air defense missile system can equally be effectively used to destroy ground enemy orders. Thanks to the advanced fire control system and powerful 2A38M cannons, this system can become a "real nightmare" for enemy manpower. This assessment gives the Serbian edition of Mars.online.

According to him, the "Shell" compares favorably with universality. Its 2A38M guns with a caliber of 30x165 mm “differ in a very high speed of fire”, reaching 4800-5000 rounds per minute.

You can only imagine the effect of the impact of these guns on the enemy’s manpower [...] In just one second, one “Shell” fires 70-80 shells

- notes Mars.online.

As the publication explains, the Serbian army has experience in using such systems. In particular, self-propelled anti-aircraft gun of Czechoslovak origin M53 / 59 “Prague” of a similar caliber was widely used in the vast expanses of the former Yugoslavia.

According to veterans, she has proven herself in the destruction of ground targets, in particular, protected by shelters. According to Mars.online, the Pantsir air defense missile system, located on a completely different technological level and having incomparable combat potential, is capable of "destroying a whole company of enemy infantry."

Comments

[Victor_B]

This would be a technique, but against NATO in the 90s.
But then it simply did not exist.
And to deliver it AT ALL there was no possibility.

[Spektr]

Nevertheless, the Serbs, like real brothers, survived. Serbs are probably the only ones who have never betrayed Russia. But the Union republics turned out to be ungrateful trash (i.e., cheap things), with the exception of one Asian republic.

[abvgdeika]

Her now does not exist !!!!

[St Petrov]

there is no bridge either!

[Stalllker]

If my grandmother had eggs, then .....

[seregatara1969]

We have against the infantry there are other efficient vehicles but cheaper. Serpent gorynych for example or the infernal thresher zu57-2

[St Petrov]

here you can immediately see the bros by blood. according to the infantry from these machine guns - this is just evil.
Kosovo је Србија.

[CBR600]

... There are 200 million of us in a place with Russians. I directly squeezed a tear. Looks like nerves are already a damn nickname.
___ As far as I know, the Shell is being upgraded without brakes. 1c (gy) is not the limit. The device will be more interesting there.

[Eugene-Eugene]

What did your drunk mind say?

[CBR600]

1:08 if blind

[aszzz888]

ZRPK "Shell", located on a completely different technological level and having disparate combat potential, is able to "destroy an entire company of enemy infantry."

The infantry can destroy everything shooting, and not only. I believe the defeat of something, or someone else depends on the circumstances and objectives of the calculation. It will be necessary - more companies will be swept away.

[St Petrov]

4,800-5,000 rounds per minute.

but this is the pace of special love.

[aszzz888]

s. Petrov Today, 00:43 NEW
0
4,800-5,000 rounds per minute.


but this is the pace of special love

"Love is evil ..." Squeeze, and this pace will come down.

[loki565]

Here the tunguska would be better suited, she could go right behind the tanks and suppress manpower. And the shell mainly stands on the object and covers it only if the infantry itself runs into it.

[St Petrov]

on the go there you don’t shoot much. in the same way - stop and shoot.
only the TOP shoots immediately on the concept, but there are no guns and it is not for infantry

[asv363]

Quote: s-t Petrov

only TOR shoots right away on the concept

It shoots on the go, not in concept, but in reality. Here is a short video of the exercises with live firing:

[Starover_Z]

Quote: loki565

Here the tunguska would be better suited, she could go right behind the tanks and suppress manpower. A shell

... a higher profile, it can be used against ground targets, it's like a Katyusha against tanks. Very noticeable, sorry if "demolished".

[abvgdeika]

Hello couch warriors !!!!!

[NEXUS]

Quote: loki565

Here tunguska would be better suited

No, it wouldn’t work ... The automatic submachine guns of the Tunguska 1936 shells, and the rate of fire from 4000 to 5000 rounds per minute. That is, the ammunition is enough for a little more than half a minute of battle.

Quote: loki565

And the shell mainly stands on the object and covers it only if the infantry itself runs into it.

Well, you can hammer nails with an iron, if you have a hammer ... but only we are not looking for easy ways.

[Astra wild]

Maybe I'm wrong, but the anti-aircraft systems are designed for air defense, and use for ground purposes only as a last resort. As in WWII, anti-aircraft guns were used in EXCLUSIVE cases against tanks.
Somehow, as a child, I watched a movie about the defense of Stalingrad and there were our air defense guns on the tank-dangerous section, and their calculations were girls. They also asked permission to go barefoot into the battle: the boots are huge. My grandmother, when she watched, she cried

[icant007]

Quote: Astra wild

As in WWII, anti-aircraft guns were used in EXCLUSIVE cases against tanks.

Not in exceptional cases. Often. If you look at the anti-aircraft gunners of the Heroes of the Soviet Union, then many of them received this title precisely for the destruction of tanks, not planes.
And among the Germans, in general, the 88-mm anti-aircraft gun was actively used precisely as an anti-tank weapon, and as an infantry support device.

[Grigory_45]

Quote: icant007

And among the Germans, in general, the 88-mm anti-aircraft gun was actively used precisely as an anti-tank weapon, and as an infantry support device.

just because this sector of the front did not have sanctioned VET means.
Yes, an anti-aircraft gun can snap back on armored vehicles, since there are all the makings for this - excellent ballistics, etc. But this is not her purpose. The anti-aircraft gun is heavy, inactive, has a large calculation and a lot of extra for firing at ground targets. Used them in armored vehicles not from a good life

[icant007]

Quote: Gregory_45

Anti-aircraft gun is heavy, inactive,

That's why they were often put on the site of semi-tracked tractors.

For example, a fairly common occurrence, in any case, in the initial period of the Second World War

[Eugene-Eugene]

There will be no reprimand for this?

https://topwar.ru/index.php?cstart=22&do=lastcomments&userid=189083#comment

[Nikolaevich I]

Quote: aszzz888

ZRPK "Shell", located on a completely different technological level and having disparate combat potential, is able to "destroy an entire company of enemy infantry."

I remember that earlier there were intentions to arm the Pantsir complexes with surface-to-surface missiles from the Hermes project! Assuming that "product 305" is a "derivative" of "Hermes". then the "chance" remains! By the way, taking into account the "purpose" of the "Shell", it is worth having a zur with a warhead other than the "current" ... with a fragmentation, "multinuclear" ... with a controlled fragmentation flow ...! This can be done within the framework, for example, of creating an "anti-helicopter" version of the zur ... Such zur "should" fight not only with helicopters hiding in the "folds" of the terrain, but also with eres, artillery shells ... and also, with manpower, equipment in the "trench"!

[Grigory_45]

Quote: Nikolaevich I

I remember that earlier there were intentions to arm the Pantsir complexes with surface-to-surface missiles

and you remember the universal missile system ADATS. And what came of that venture. Too contradictory requirements are imposed on the missile and the OMS for hitting air targets, and ground targets, especially armored ones. No, it’s real to do everything, but just like ADATS, it won’t take off - because of the high cost.

[Lord of the Sith]

The shell is a thing))

[parkello]

CSIP THING, in capital letters .. BECAUSE THING!

[NEXUS]

The funny thing is that absolutely all of our air defense systems are very good at working on the ground. But firing at infantry from an air defense system is when all the infantry is over, helicopters, artillery, etc. ... all have their own functions and purpose. RCC can also be hit along the shore, but only expensive, stupid and to hell.

[Astra wild]

Nexus colleague, so I’m not mistaken that it is not clever to use air defense systems for ground targets?

[Stalllker]

Of course use, memory 23 a vivid example

[parkello]

great thing by the way ... I shot from this. on the truck .. at firing range.

[Doliva63]

Quote: Stalllker

Of course use, memory 23 a vivid example

Do you mean ZU-23-2, probably? ZSU 23-4 (aka Shilka) in infantry and tanks, too, could work well. Then the comrade said correctly - all of our air defense, not only ZSU, were designed for use on the ground. Including using special ammunition. Go through the war taught, so to speak.

[Stalllker]

If my memory serves me, then Shell has no negative declination of the cannons. I do not think that it can be effectively used against ground targets, especially at "high altitude"

[Astra wild]

In this case, the Serbian edition is AT ALL not in the subject?

[Stalllker]

Maybe not in the subject. Now in the modern world 99,99% of publications are completely off topic, they write such nonsense. I’m silent about Zen, and people read it and find out information for themselves

[icant007]

Why not in the subject? They are talking specifically about the use of the cannon part of the complex for infantry, and not missile.
They write quite correctly.

[Stalllker]

Did I write something about rocket?

[icant007]

I'm not for you, I'm a girl)))

[Stalllker]

Yes?) If you look at the branch, it seems to work out for me))) oh well

[icant007]

Well, you also answered her, and I am after you) I just had to give a quote, then it would be clearer.

[Astra wild]

I beg your pardon, but my colleague stalllker says: "Panzer has no negative cannon declination. I don't think it can be effectively used against ground targets," and you say "they write quite correctly"

[parkello]

why can't it? back up the hill and the trunks will look down ... just like an infantry fighting vehicle in Afghanistan .. only there they pulled up before getting to the top of the mountain or hill, and then on the ass., you lift the trunk down. it's just an extreme method ... the shell has its own tasks. And nobody assigns the tank's tasks to it ... the Serbs simply liked the shell very much and they mentioned its ability to solve problems on the ground as a bonus to its capabilities ... but the main ones his tasks are work on goals in the air.

[Stalllker]

Why run over with the rear wheels, it is enough to lower the front wheels of the wheeled carrier, somewhere -3 ° "we will win")))) but, of course, this machine is not to destroy the infantry. To celebrate, she will now be credited with a "sea of ​​opportunities". But on the other hand, let them "advertise")))

[svp67]

As the publication explains, the Serbian army has experience in using such systems. In particular, self-propelled anti-aircraft gun of Czechoslovak origin M53 / 59 “Prague” of a similar caliber was widely used in the vast expanses of the former Yugoslavia.

and a very characteristic and frightening look from the "German heritage"

[Antidote]

The enemy company of infantry straight from the Napoleonic wars, in formation, with bayonets at the ready, pace. Yeah.

[Stalllker]

Why be sure to step ?! On the same chess machine can move or BMP, 30 mm is enough to grind

[Snail N9]

Yes, yes, in terms of manpower in general, "vesch". One sniper with a 12,7 mm sniper and "things" ambets - in such a "chaise" it is impossible to miss .... And if, in addition, the ptur-sik is so "low-low" ...

[aszzz888]

Snail N9 (Snail) Today, 06: 28
+2
Yes, yes, in terms of manpower in general, "vesch". One sniper with a 12,7 mm sniper and "things" ambets - in such a "chaise" it is impossible to miss .... And if, in addition, the ptur-sik is so "low-low" ...

"Nothing is eternal under the Moon". Sonnet 11. Shakespeare.
It’s me that ALL is killed, and can be killed. And there are a lot of options for that.

[Bare]

We taught the grandfather of this product. Glorious. The best military-industrial complex technique is Russian. So it was, is and will be.

[Doliva63]

Quote: Bere

We taught the grandfather of this product. Glorious. The best military-industrial complex technique is Russian. So it was, is and will be.

Soviet. Before her, there was nothing in Russia, and after her there is nothing new yet.

[Astra wild]

Quote: Stalllker

Maybe not in the subject. Now in the modern world 99,99% of publications are completely off topic, they write such nonsense. I’m silent about Zen, and people read it and find out information for themselves

I agree: many publications lie godlessly. Yes, and on our site come across low quality materials. And some colleagues admire

[Eugene-Eugene]

Please ask, what is your publication?

[Astra wild]

Eugene-Eugene, what site are we on?

[Eugene-Eugene]

be affectionate, how is your vision?

[Grigory_45]

According to Mars.online, the Pantsir ZRPK, located on a completely different technological level and having incomparable combat potential, is capable of "destroying a whole company of enemy infantry."

You can only imagine the effect of the impact of these guns on the enemy’s manpower [...] In just one second, one “Shell” fires 70-80 shells

yeah, let's use a microscope to chop nuts and nails)
Maybe the Serbs to deliver cars in a trimmed configuration? Without radar, OLS, SLA and other electronics. Leave the radio and the optical sight, and they will be happy)

[Eugene-Eugene]

... and hodov deprive