"Malka" with a new engine will go to the troops

43 909 95

Until recently, Russian industry was engaged in the modernization of the 2S7M Malka self-propelled gun of special power. A few months ago it became known about the tests, and now the enterprise-developer has reported on the completion of the project. Updated equipment is ready to go to the troops.

Completion of work


On April 7, the press service of NPK Uralvagonzavod told about the intermediate results of the modernization project. The company announces the completion of the modernization project with the desired results. The Uraltransmash plant, which is part of the corporation, performed the design, and then modernized the prototype machine.



The first model, modernized by a new project, passed a full cycle of tests. All design characteristics are fully confirmed in practice. According to the results of the update, it was possible to obtain an increase in running characteristics, maneuverability, team handling, etc.

It is alleged that the first modernized 2C7M Malka model is already ready and can be transferred to the troops. In addition, preparations were made for full-scale work to upgrade equipment from combat units of the ground forces. How soon this modernization will begin is not specified.

It is necessary to recall the messages of the recent past. In mid-December, the management of Uralvagonzavod spoke about the start of testing the updated 2S7M self-propelled guns. Work on overhaul and modernization was planned to be completed in the coming weeks. Plans for 2020 included preparations for mass modernization of equipment.

According to recent reports, all of this work has already been completed. The Uraltransmash enterprise is ready to accept old equipment and rebuild it according to a new project.

New from old


The current project provides for major repairs and deep modernization of available equipment; construction of new cars is not planned. For revision they will go 2S7M self-propelled guns, which are distinguished by a rather large age and have partially consumed a resource.

The development work of Malka was carried out in the first half of the eighties, its goal was to deeply modernize the existing 2S7 Peony self-propelled guns. Ready-made self-propelled guns were launched in 1986 instead of the base Peony. Production continued until 1990, and during this time several dozen military vehicles were built.

According to open sources, now there is approx. 60 self-propelled guns of the Malka type. Their main characteristics still meet the highest requirements, but a respectable age imposes some restrictions. The resumption of production, discontinued 30 years ago, is impossible or does not make sense. For these reasons, several years ago it was decided to launch a deep modernization project.

The first results of such a program have already been obtained. One instance of 2S7M underwent major repairs and modernization with the replacement of parts of equipment. In the near future they plan to return it to the army. Then, the expected process of mass restructuring of equipment will begin, which will ultimately allow to increase the combat qualities of artillery formations.


"Malka" with a new engine will go to the troops

Repair and upgrade processes are likely to affect most of the existing fleet of self-propelled guns. This will allow continued operation of the Malok for a long time, and with the maximum possible results.

Domestic and modern


Last year, NPK Uralvagonzavod specified the main features of the new project. It provides for the restoration of the technical readiness of a combat vehicle, the replacement of parts of units and the installation of new devices. Replacement is made both for reasons of obsolescence and for reasons of import substitution.

The need to switch to domestic components most of all influenced the completion of the armored chassis. The V-84B diesel engine and mechanical transmission with planetary rotation mechanism and hydraulic control were produced by Ukrainian industry. They were replaced by Russian-made units. A similar adjustment was carried out in a number of other systems, such as energy supply, etc.

Import substitution and modernization have affected the on-board electronics complex. Under the replacement went the equipment of internal and external communications. New means of receiving, processing and issuing data for firing are used. Changed viewing devices for the crew.

Replacing the power plant and other equipment does not require serious alteration of the hull. Bulletproof booking remains the same, the layout does not change. The chassis retains the original design. One of the main differences between the modernized Malki and the base Peony was the availability of routine monitoring equipment. With the next modernization, it remains.

Artillery The unit and associated equipment have not been modified. The 203 mm 2A44 gun shows outstanding performance and does not need to be replaced. The ammunition stowage and loading mechanism were improved during the development of the 2S7M Malka project and still show sufficient performance.

Positive effects


The expected serial modernization will positively affect the condition and potential of the existing 2S7M self-propelled guns. This will allow the continued operation of such equipment for a long period of time upon receipt of all the necessary combat capabilities.

On the service life, first of all, the performance of major repairs will affect. All Malki are of a considerable age and may need restoration work. Of great importance is the replacement of imported components with domestic ones. Now, the operation, repair and maintenance of equipment will not face problems in international relations.



Updating communications and control has a positive effect on the combat capabilities of self-propelled guns. After modernization, Malka can quickly receive and process information from the command post and provide data for firing.

In addition, the possibilities for interaction with artillery reconnaissance are expanding. Thus, last autumn, the first experiments on the use of a non-modernized 2S7M self-propelled gun in conjunction with a reconnaissance UAV were reported. UAV detected the target and determined its coordinates, and based on this data the self-propelled gun delivered a precise strike. Probably, the new devices on board the self-propelled gun will allow receiving target designation both from the UAV and from other available sources

The direct fire capabilities of the modernized Malka remain the same - very high. The 2A44 gun is capable of using a wide range of separate-loading shots with 203-mm shells for various purposes. It is possible to use several types of high-explosive, cluster and concrete-piercing shells. Depending on the type of projectile, shooting at a range of up to 30-35 km or up to 45-47 km is possible.

Awaiting Delivery


After modernization, the 2S7M Malka self-propelled gun remains a special-purpose firearm capable of hitting particularly important enemy targets at tactical depths. At the same time, new units and assemblies make it possible to simplify operation and expand combat capabilities - without the need for a fundamental restructuring of part of the systems and assemblies.

So far, the troops have not received a single upgraded Malki, but the delivery of the first model has already been planned, followed by new ones. The rearmament of artillery brigades will take several years and will have the most noticeable consequences.
95 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +19
    April 8 2020 05: 11
    The V-84B diesel engine and mechanical transmission with planetary rotation mechanism and hydraulic control were produced by Ukrainian industry.
    Now I read it and there were a LOT of questions. Neither this engine, nor transmission elements for this engine were produced in Ukraine. There were produced similar, but for their two-stroke, boxer engines of the "TD" family.
    And the tracked chassis “Object 216M”, developed by the design bureau of the St. Petersburg Kirov plant, is largely unified with the tracked chassis for air defense systems - S-300 (“Object 830, 831, 832, 833, 834, 835”)
    1. +1
      April 8 2020 06: 03
      Strange, but Ukraine and the State Department were not involved in the reasons for modernization (deep?). What a twist. Cyril, in this case, is probably also not to blame. I just reprinted UVZ's press release. It remains for the military prosecutor's office to check which such engines have been replaced by the "Orthodox" V-84D.
    2. +9
      April 8 2020 06: 25
      And I immediately felt in my eyes - "... il skis do not go, or I ..."?
      Which V-84 in Ukraine? !!!
      Yes, if production was there, the neighbors would have been rich for a long time!
      1. +2
        April 8 2020 09: 13
        Of great importance is the replacement of imported components with domestic ones. Now, the operation, repair and maintenance of equipment will not face problems in international relations.

        So does this mean the engine and transmission? And I think that there is such an import ....
    3. +3
      April 8 2020 14: 46
      That is an awkward case where comments carry more information than the article itself.
    4. +2
      April 8 2020 15: 58
      The V-84B diesel engine and mechanical transmission with a planetary rotation mechanism and hydraulic control were produced by Ukrainian industry


      Ukrainian industry is a factory, Malysheva? Before the war, B2 was released there, but then their push-pull opponents began to drive there. And all the descendants of B2 drove Chelyabinsk as far as I know.
      What it is? Somehow it became bad in VO, a low class, not reading the game.
  2. -6
    April 8 2020 06: 24
    In modern realities, the firing range is max-47 km. obviously not enough!
    How to shoot at 100-120 km.?
    1. +17
      April 8 2020 07: 23
      And on .... why shoot from barreled artillery at such a distance? In my opinion, using tactical missile weapons in this case will be both cheaper and more effective. Because it is possible to shoot from barreled artillery at such a distance only with a guided projectile in the presence of over-the-horizon external control (drones, satellites - underline the necessary). The cost of such a shot will approach (taking into account the design of the projectile that can be thrown at such a distance) to the cost of the rocket. But you still need to modernize the weapon for this - more precisely, create a new one, because everything will have to be refined (or rather redesigned): guidance systems, barrel, charging chamber, etc. There is no need for this - in its tactical niche "Malka" as a weapon is good in its current performance.
      "Malka" is a strange Hebrew name
      Malka is not only a Jewish female name (by the way, the name of the mother of Prince Vladimir the Saint (the Baptist of Russia) - Malusha is also according to the chronicles of Malka), but also the names of rivers in Russia, I am inclined to believe that the modernization code of the ACS 2S7 "Peony" the name of one of these rivers.
      1. +1
        April 8 2020 08: 03
        Quote: Alexander72
        ACS 2S7 "Pion" was chosen by the name of one of these rivers.

        It was just that at first there was a "flower" series for names - Carnation, Tulip, Hyacinth ... and then they switched to rivers ..
      2. AAK
        +7
        April 8 2020 09: 05
        Colleague, 2S7 is, first of all, the main weapon of the "atomic artillery" of the Russian army, the bulk of the stockpiled shells with TNBPs of this caliber, therefore, support the presence of this system in the states of the artillery brigade of the high power reserve of the main battery.
        1. +4
          April 8 2020 09: 45
          Quote: AAK
          it is, first of all, the main weapon of the "atomic artillery" of the Russian army,

          It turns out that the modernization of this class of weapons is a logical step after the actions of the Americans to reduce the power of nuclear charges in the troops. They are developing a new one, and ours got the old one with the same characteristics from the zashnik.
          In Kaliningrad, they must be located, from there all the goals are at hand.
        2. +4
          April 8 2020 12: 57
          Quote: AAK
          the bulk of the stockpiled shells with the shells of this particular caliber,

          ?
          Come on....

          And what do you think the 152-mm military did not suit?
          That preparation for their use can be carried out much more stealthily?
          1. +3
            April 8 2020 17: 37
            Quote: Spade
            And what do you think the 152-mm military did not suit?

            power - 200t, against 2kt request
            1. 0
              April 8 2020 23: 22
              Quote: ser56
              power - 200t, against 2kt

              It turns out that 152 is vice versa better.
              1. -1
                April 9 2020 14: 09
                Quote: Spade
                It turns out that 152 is vice versa better.

                depends on the goal ... request with your "logic" YaBCH in 1 kt is better than 600 kt ... request
      3. AUL
        0
        April 8 2020 13: 38
        Quote: Alexander72
        Malka is not only a Jewish female name (by the way, the name of the mother of Prince Vladimir the Holy (Baptist of Russia) - Malush is also from the chronicles of Malka), but also the names of rivers in Russia,

        And also, malka is a completely Russian name for a carpenter's tool!
        1. 0
          April 11 2020 23: 25
          Malka is not only a Jewish female name (by the way the name of the mother of Prince Vladimir the Holy (Baptist of Russia)

          Why are you talking about this stuff everywhere? Jews really want to declare themselves also Rurikovich, or is it just that the name Vladimir traditionally does not give rest? The mother of Vladimir was called Malush, and the brother of Malushi was called Dobrynya. Was Dobrynya a Jew too?
      4. 0
        April 9 2020 00: 53
        Malka, remove Malka, is a locksmith term. When sharp parts are machined on abutting parts. For example, when welding in a butt of sheet metal, or gluing wood, plywood. Still, maybe someone paid attention, there are wheel bearings with a removed malk on the inside.
    2. +3
      April 8 2020 09: 10
      Quote: andrewkor
      In modern realities, the firing range is max-47 km. obviously not enough!

      for barrel artillery - quite
      Quote: andrewkor
      How to shoot at 100-120 km.?

      MLRS
      1. 0
        April 8 2020 10: 29
        Quote: Gregory_45
        Quote: andrewkor
        How to shoot at 100-120 km.?

        MLRS

        Most advantageous are shells with a bottom gas generator. They allow you to take advantage of artillery (less starting weight) and missiles (range).
        This is due to the fact that missiles, at low speeds, do not have enough compression of the jet stream with atmospheric gases and the fuel is spent inefficiently. Guns allow you to skip this moment.
        1. +4
          April 8 2020 10: 41
          Quote: Genry
          Most beneficial shells with a bottom gas generator

          for firing at a long range (if the task is not to hit the areas) you need adjustable ammunition. In the MLRS shell this is implemented easier and more efficiently. Yes, and the impact power is higher, the MLRS battery per unit time will release much more shells than the Malok battery
          1. +1
            April 8 2020 11: 11
            Quote: Gregory_45
            Adjustable ammunition needed. In the MLRS shell this is implemented easier and more efficiently.

            Equally.
            Moreover, for a small correction, you can use pulsed transverse motors (centimeter shell), which slightly increases the cost of the shot. You can use the plate brakes, which open at a certain moment, adjust the range.
            Quote: Gregory_45
            the MLRS battery per unit time will release much more shells than the Malok battery

            When you need it fast, mobile and .... expensive.

            Preparatory shelling of the enemy’s defense, it is more profitable to make of guns. Slowly ... but more specific equivalent of shipped explosives, less logistics (packaging, transportation, storage, security, periodic inspection) and production costs.
            1. +3
              April 8 2020 11: 20
              Quote: Genry
              Adjustable ammunition needed. In the MLRS shell this is implemented easier and more efficiently.

              Equally.

              not at all. Firstly, the electronics of a corrected artillery shell are more expensive. than jet electronics, since the first one experiences a large overload when fired
              Secondly, the PC allows you to place electronics with virtually no damage to the mass and volume of the warhead

              Quote: Genry
              Preparatory shelling of the enemy’s defense, it is more profitable to make of guns. Slowly

              wait for the answer to arrive? Modern wars are still not a positional World War I.

              Quote: Genry
              less logistics (packaging, transportation, storage, security, periodic inspection) and production costs

              if we are already talking about logistics, then it is necessary to make an assessment of the "shell-gun" complex. And the MLRS are easier and cheaper (the launcher itself is much simpler and cheaper than an artillery gun)
              1. +1
                April 8 2020 11: 40
                Quote: Gregory_45
                Firstly, the electronics of a corrected artillery shell are more expensive. than jet electronics, since the first one experiences a large overload when fired

                Compounding does not affect the price.
                Quote: Gregory_45
                PC allows you to place electronics with virtually no damage to the mass and volume of the warhead

                The warheads of a missile and a projectile are practically identical in design. The differences are determined by their purpose (fragmentation, cumulative, volumetric,...).
                Quote: Gregory_45
                wait for the answer to arrive? Modern wars are still not positional

                When you have a prepared operation - all types of responses are very easily neutralized. The only option is longer-range weapons, a significant drawback of which is the long flight time of missiles, which (hitting the target) can be destroyed.
                Quote: Gregory_45
                it is necessary to make an assessment of the "projectile-weapon" complex. And the MLRS are easier and cheaper (the launcher itself is much simpler and cheaper than an artillery gun)

                Khrushchev tried to replace artillery with rockets - then he was intensively restored.
                1. +6
                  April 8 2020 12: 22
                  Quote: Genry
                  Warhead missiles and shells, by design, are almost the same

                  the rocket, due to the smaller overloads experienced at launch and flight, has a lighter construction. Accordingly, a potentially large warhead
                  Compare: 220 mm RS 9M27F Tornado system carries 100 kg warheads, 203 mm 3OF43 Pion shell: explosive mass (A-IX-2) - 17,8 kg.
                  Not to mention that the MLRS shells have a much larger range of warheads (RP, cluster, thermobaric, etc.)

                  Quote: Genry
                  Replace artillery with missiles

                  no one talks about the replacement. But monsters like Malki have outlived themselves
                  1. +2
                    April 8 2020 12: 35
                    Quote: Gregory_45
                    the rocket, due to the smaller overloads experienced at launch and flight, has a lighter construction.

                    A missile consists of (roughly) a warhead, engine and control unit.
                    And in the shell there is no bulky and heavy engine - there is a small bottom gas generator.
                    The size of the charge for firing a projectile is also small and can be a separate "pill" without a case. And it does not apply to the accelerated body, which in the case of a rocket requires additional fuel to accelerate this mass.
                    Quote: Gregory_45
                    Not to mention that the MLRS shells have a much larger range of warheads (RP, cluster, thermobaric, etc.)

                    The artillery has the same set, except for the cassette ones.

                    Quote: Gregory_45
                    But monsters like Malki have outlived themselves

                    This is just your opinion. In fact, they provide more accurate destruction of individual targets. MLRS, due to its multi-barrel (adapted for work on areas), is not effective in such cases.
                    1. +4
                      April 8 2020 12: 47
                      Quote: Genry
                      And in the shell there is no bulky and heavy engine

                      but the shell itself is a heavy and massive blank. In the same 3OF34 Albatross with a mass of 110 kg, explosives account for only 17,8 kg (16%), everything else is just iron
                      The 3OF44 Burevesnik-2 active-reactive projectile weighs 102 kg and carries 13,3 kg of explosive (13%)
                      At RS 9M27F with a weight of 280 kg, a centner falls on the warhead.
                      In any case, the rocket has the best weight ratios, despite the fact that it has an engine (in fact - powder bombs)
                      1. +2
                        April 8 2020 13: 05
                        Quote: Gregory_45
                        In the same 3OF34 Albatross with a mass of 110 kg, explosives account for only 17,8 kg (16%), everything else is just iron

                        You called the fragmentation part "just iron"!?!
                        Quote: Gregory_45
                        At RS 9M27F with a weight of 280 kg, a centner falls on the warhead.

                        Only 52kg BB.
                        The whole warhead 100 kg.
                        Quote: Gregory_45
                        In any case, the rocket has the best weight ratios, despite the fact that it has an engine (in fact - powder bombs)

                        Starting mass for acceleration of which fuel is consumed
                        110 and 280 (decreases with burnout) kg respectively. At the same time, the warhead is 110 and 100 kg.

                        For a shell with a bottom gas generator, for the range of the rocket, the mass would be added to a couple of tens of kg.

                        The design of the warhead itself does not play a role, since this is a question of the need to hit the target.
                      2. +2
                        April 8 2020 14: 58
                        Quote: Genry
                        You called the fragmentation part "just iron"!?!

                        It is the "iron"
                        As a "fragmentary part" such a body is very ineffective.
                  2. 0
                    April 8 2020 21: 28
                    But monsters like Malki have outlived themselves

                    Hello, your arguments are clear, it is difficult to disagree with them, but there must be at least some reason to modernize it? Why do you think this is done?
                    1. 0
                      April 8 2020 21: 57
                      Quote: alexmach
                      but there must be at least some reason to upgrade it?

                      I think, simply because they are (something about 60 units). And there have been a lot of shells for them since the Cold War, including - special ammunition. In addition, the latest technology is once again delayed in our arrivals.

                      But, I do not see any particular utility from the system in modern conditions. In the 60s - 70s, the place of Malki (Peony) was understandable. Firstly, it was a means of acquiring tactical nuclear weapons. Secondly, the missiles did not provide the necessary accuracy of hitting enemy targets, were expensive and difficult to operate, their mobility left much to be desired. 152 mm self-propelled guns did not provide a sufficient firing range.
                      But now, with the qualitative development of self-propelled guns with 6-inch guns, the appearance of UAS and special ammunition in the caliber of 152 (155) mm, the development of MLRS, combat helicopters and UAVs, the relevance of the system, in my opinion, is not high.
                      1. 0
                        6 July 2020 08: 22
                        Quote: Gregory_45
                        In addition, the latest technology is once again delayed in our arsenal.

                        Everything is always delivered on time with us. Just deadlines - they are fearful and restless, just a little - they are removed and run to the right. Here is the manufacturer and can’t catch them in any way until he takes laughing
                    2. 0
                      April 8 2020 22: 18
                      Quote: alexmach
                      but there must be at least some reason to upgrade it?

                      Send to Idlib. Pound rat burrows barmaley. Malka is for this purpose. To hack a fortified area
          2. +2
            April 8 2020 11: 12
            And perhaps the MLRS also wins in terms of mobility.
            1. +1
              April 8 2020 11: 17
              Quote: alexmach
              Yes, and perhaps the RZSO wins in mobility.

              Mobility.
            2. 0
              April 8 2020 17: 40
              Quote: alexmach
              in mobility RZSO wins.

              You also forgot about the density of fire in a salvo - it's noticeably more powerful
        2. 0
          April 8 2020 11: 16
          Quote: Genry
          This is due to the fact that missiles, at low speeds, do not have enough compression of the jet stream with atmospheric gases and the fuel is spent inefficiently.

          There is no "low speed"
          Let's take the Grad, for example. By the end of the active section of the trajectory, the RS accelerates to a speed of 715 m/s. For comparison, the D-30, when fully charged, has an initial HE shell speed of 690 m/s.

          It just makes the PC much smoother, with less acceleration and less load on the projectile
          1. +2
            April 8 2020 12: 11
            Quote: Spade
            There is no "low speed"

            You need to understand: at the starting point.
            Quote: Spade
            It just makes the PC much smoother, with less acceleration and less load on the projectile

            Smoothness is not a topic of conversation.
            Of interest is how many kilograms of gunpowder or rocket fuel is required for delivery to the required distance. I said that a combined shot has a much greater weight return than a purely rocket.
            1. +3
              April 8 2020 12: 50
              Quote: Genry
              Of interest is how many kilograms of gunpowder or rocket fuel is required for delivery to the required distance.

              Let's count.
              "Hurricane", 51,7 kg of gunpowder is used to deliver 36 kg of explosives at a distance of 104 km. Or 2 kg of gunpowder per kilogram of explosive
              "Malka", 17,8 kg of gunpowder is used to deliver 37 kg of explosives at a distance of 43,2 km. Or 2.4 kg of gunpowder per kilogram of explosive

              Conclusion - "Hurricane" is more effective
              1. +1
                April 8 2020 13: 20
                Quote: Spade
                Let's count.

                You completely forgot about the fragmentation part.

                It is necessary to calculate based on the total weight of the warhead, which can cause damage in accordance with the type of target. There is no point in comparing devices with different fragmentation and explosiveness. The weight of the Malka warhead is comparable to the Uragan.

                You apparently fell for my reservation about the specificity of explosives... But this is only true if the ratio of explosive mass to fragments is the same.
                1. +2
                  April 8 2020 15: 02
                  Quote: Genry
                  You completely forgot about the fragmentation part.

                  By no means.
                  The shell of such a shell is the most non-optimal version of the fragmentation part. It’s just that it’s impossible to use ready-made and semi-finished fragments in shells

                  Want to discuss shrapnel action *
                  Please.
                  "Hurricane" is 30 fragmentation submunitions weighing 1.8 kg.
                  "Malka" is 24 fragmentation submunitions weighing 1.4 kg.
                  1. 0
                    April 8 2020 22: 19
                    Quote: Spade
                    It’s just that it’s impossible to use ready-made and semi-finished fragments in shells

                    To the D-30 there were (probably, now there are) shells that could explode at a given height, covering a decent area with needles (small arrows with stabilizers). The results were good.
                    1. 0
                      April 8 2020 23: 24
                      Quote: Bad_gr
                      To the D-30 there were (probably, now there are) shells that could explode at a given height, covering a decent area with needles (small arrows with stabilizers). The results were good.

                      Shells with GGE, but there is completely different, there is no explosive, only a powder explosive.
                      In fact, this is a flying single-shot shotgun.
                      There is also a caliber in 152.
                      1. 0
                        April 8 2020 23: 41
                        Quote: Spade
                        Shells with GGE, but there is completely different, there is no explosive, only a powder explosive.

                        Clear. Thanks for the information.
              2. 0
                April 9 2020 08: 41
                They only forgot about the difference in cost of "gunpowder" in an artillery cartridge and a solid-fuel rocket engine. An artillery shell is always cheaper than a missile, except when a shell is turned into a smart missile, as the Americans did in the Long Range Land Attack Projectile (LRLAP) for the Zumwalt-class destroyers.
        3. +9
          April 8 2020 12: 16
          The bottom generator increases range but decreases accuracy.
          Without the supply of such a seeker shell, the bottom generator is meaningless.
          And GOS, control wings, etc. increase the cost of the projectile 10 times.
          1. +1
            April 8 2020 12: 19
            Quote: voyaka uh
            The bottom generator increases range but decreases accuracy.

            Yes, the range is unstable.
            Quote: voyaka uh
            GOS, control wings, etc. increase the cost of the projectile 10 times.

            I do not argue.
            There are only options with different levels of complexity and different advantages and significant differences in price.
        4. +2
          April 8 2020 12: 47
          missiles, at low speeds, do not have enough compression of the jet stream with atmospheric gases

          Are you talking about the off-design mode of operation of the nozzle so sloppy? The design mode of the nozzle is when the static in the jet is equal to the static in the external environment. Naturally, with these dimensions of the aircraft, making such a nozzle is unrealistic, therefore, in any case, the outflowing jet will be underexpanded, it continues to expand, slips the equilibrium state, becomes overexpanded, the narrowing begins, ending with the Mach disk, then everything repeats for 4-6 calibres until the turbulence does not eat all this beauty, the so-called barrels. This is very clearly visible when the fighter takes off in the afterburner.
          1. 0
            April 8 2020 14: 17
            Quote: Aviator_
            The design mode of the nozzle is when the static in the jet is equal to the static in the external environment.

            I am not so much talking about the dynamics of the outflowing stream, but about the primitive difference of the gun barrel.... The walls of the barrel create an ideal compression and the gas pressure effectively accelerates the projectile. In atmospheric conditions, where at zero-low rocket speed, there is not enough inrush of calm air, which with its mass creates a virtual gun barrel (at a decent speed). That is, at the start, only the reactive component works, which is very small (like in a vacuum).
            1. +1
              April 8 2020 14: 32
              Well what can I say - internal ballistics differ greatly from external ones. It is not necessary to transfer the movement of the projectile in the bore to the movement of the rocket; it is not necessary to introduce any "virtual barrel" to explain the movement of the rocket. It was at the time of early Tsiolkovsky that it was believed that the rocket flies, relying on a stream of gases, which, accordingly, rely on air. From this it was concluded that jet propulsion is impossible in an airless space. And Tsiolkovsky showed that air is not needed here - Newton's third law and that's it, they flew anywhere.
              1. 0
                April 8 2020 15: 20
                Quote: Aviator_
                it is not necessary to introduce any "virtual trunk" to explain the movement of the rocket.

                In a vacuum - yes. But air... And water?
                Quote: Aviator_
                It was believed in the early Tsiolkovsky era that a rocket flies, relying on a stream of gases, which, accordingly, rely on air.

                Almost the way it is.
                In the atmosphere, the greater the air pressure (density), the more efficient the rocket engine. And the higher the speed, too - this is equivalent to an increase in density due to the mass of ambient air passing through over a period of time.
                Quote: Aviator_
                Tsiolkovsky showed that air is not needed here - Newton’s third law and everything flew anywhere.

                This does not cancel the work of the factor of atmospheric density and velocity.
                That’s why they try to make other hydrogen engines for vacuum, because kerosene is completely unsuitable (low reactive component of thrust due to low flow rate).
  3. -9
    April 8 2020 06: 32
    "Malka" is a strange Hebrew name.
    1. +7
      April 8 2020 07: 05
      Malka is a river in Kabardino-Balkaria, the left tributary of the Terek.
      Maybe the river series - "Tunguska", "Shilka", "Neva", "Dvina"
      1. +4
        April 8 2020 08: 18
        Quote: igordok
        "Tunguska", "Shilka", "Neva", "Dvina"

        ?
        "Msta", "Hosta", "Vienna". Plus "Iset" - one of the possible upgrades of 2S19
    2. +2
      April 8 2020 07: 19
      Quote: sergeyezhov
      "Malka" is a strange Hebrew name.

      The Jews themselves joke that "there is no such thing that could not become a Jewish surname."
      But seriously, then
      Malka (adaptation) - joiner's and locksmith tools for marking and transferring angles [1], drawing parallel lines. Consists of two parts fastened together by a clamping screw. The thicker part (block - base) is pressed against the workpiece, a thin part (line) is marked. Sometimes between two parts of the malki a scale is applied for measuring angles. Large fry can be used in construction work.
      wiki

  4. 0
    April 8 2020 06: 46
    Well, okay, as the author informed us, the B-84Bs were supplied by the Ukrainian industry. Well, what new engine will be installed now, in the article "Malka" with new engine will go to the troops "not a word about him.
    1. +10
      April 8 2020 07: 46
      Chelyabinsk from Ukraine will be returned to the place :-))
  5. +4
    April 8 2020 07: 09
    Oh, how did the B-84 become Ukrainian, when was that? The gearboxes seem to have been developed new, semi-automatic. They will install B72M on the T-3, new engines, not modifications, but by the year of production, maybe some other modification. They differ there in turbochargers.
  6. 0
    April 8 2020 07: 21
    They won’t let you dream. But I will dream. Malke would have a 10-shell cassette. And so in a minute, without human intervention. That would be a modernization. But direct communication with UAV intelligence is no longer bad.
  7. -3
    April 8 2020 07: 21
    A serious thing, it hits more than 40 km, the adversary will definitely not like it. Yes, self-propelled guns, a couple of shots made and a new position away from sin.
  8. +7
    April 8 2020 07: 54
    The author poured water. Double spacing between paragraphs why, more volume? Why did you write a lot of words about what has not been replaced? Trash...
    1. +4
      April 8 2020 09: 17
      Quote: egsp
      The author poured water. Double spacing between paragraphs why, more volume? Why did you write a lot of words about what has not been replaced? Trash...

      Moreover, a lot of repetitions.
      In a word, VO more and more sins with low-quality articles. It is an accident? Or targeted policy?
    2. +2
      April 8 2020 09: 50
      I agree the whole article in the paragraph would fit ..
  9. +2
    April 8 2020 08: 36
    In addition, expanding opportunities for interaction with artillery intelligence. So, last fall it was reported about the first experiments on the use of non-modernized 2S7M self-propelled guns in conjunction with reconnaissance UAVs. The drone discovered the target and determined its coordinates, and according to these data the self-propelled gun dealt an exact blow. Probably, new devices on board the self-propelled guns will allow receiving target designation both from UAVs and from other available sources

    wassat

    And where is the "extension" here?
    The guns firing from the PDO never received information directly from the UAV from anyone.
    There is always a "gasket", and sometimes more than one. In the case of "Malka", it is at least the SOB.
    1. 0
      April 8 2020 10: 08
      Oh is it? But what about the famous presentation from "Mikhailovka" about the testing of ROK tactics where we were not? When the consumption of projectiles decreased by orders of magnitude precisely because of the correction of fire from the UAV
      1. +2
        April 8 2020 10: 51
        Quote: Hermit21
        Oh is it? But what about the famous presentation from "Mikhailovka" about the testing of ROK tactics where we were not?

        And?
        Was there something about "bundling" artillery pieces with the UAV?
        Worked PUOD, division fire control point. The same "gasket". And the guns first received installations, then proofs. The guns did not have direct access to information from the UAV.

        Quote: Hermit21
        When the consumption of shells decreased by orders of magnitude just because of the correction of fire from the UAV

        But this was already a great craftiness.
        They were compared with the expense for hitting an unobserved target.

        It's not about UAVs, it's primarily about the ability to visually observe the fact of hitting a target and cease fire after that. Drone is only one of the ways, and not the best.
        1. 0
          April 8 2020 12: 01
          Well compared. The use of drones gave an advantage. Where is cunning here?
          1. 0
            April 8 2020 12: 07
            The use of UAVs will give an advantage to any artillery system: mortar and howitzer ....
          2. +1
            April 8 2020 13: 03
            Quote: Hermit21
            Well compared. The use of drones gave an advantage.

            Using an observer provides exactly the same advantage.
        2. 0
          April 8 2020 12: 18
          The drone has one of the advantages - quick determination of target coordinates and the presence of a thermal imager (radar) and theoretically backlighting with a laser (if there is such an option) ... and yes, it’s one of the ways to observe the target and breaks.
  10. +3
    April 8 2020 09: 05
    The need to switch to domestic components most of all influenced the completion of the armored chassis. The V-84B diesel engine and mechanical transmission with planetary rotation mechanism and hydraulic control were produced by Ukrainian industry. They were replaced by Russian-made units.
    here author screwed up so screwed up. Initially, the Peony had a 780-horsepower V-46-1 engine, on the Malka it was replaced with an 840-horsepower V-84B. Both diesels are completely Russian, produced by ChTZ.
    Why write articles if you do not understand the issue at all?
    1. 0
      April 8 2020 12: 07
      There the chassis, like, is similar to the T-80
      1. 0
        April 8 2020 12: 23
        Quote: Zaurbek
        There the chassis, like, is similar to the T-80

        Based on the elements of the T-80 tank, the 7th skating rink was added. Running in relation to Peony has not changed
  11. IC
    +4
    April 8 2020 10: 52
    Weapons for past wars. After the first shot, it will be destroyed.
    It is not clear where to apply it now. Maybe only in operations as a Chechen company.
    1. +3
      April 8 2020 12: 19
      You can send to Idlib. "Our response to Erdogan" smile
      1. +1
        April 8 2020 12: 26
        Quote: voyaka uh
        You can send to Idlib. "Our response to Erdogan"

        it’s easier to take apart for scrap than with Turkish drones or artillery
        1. 0
          April 8 2020 12: 54
          Those. 155mm Turkish scrap metal shoots quietly and does the main damage .... but is it all bad?
          1. +1
            April 8 2020 13: 09
            Quote: Zaurbek
            Those. 155mm Turkish scrap metal shoots quietly and does the main damage .... but is it all bad?

            Yes.
            "Turkish scrap metal" is guaranteed to destroy "Malki" when conducting a counter-battery
          2. +1
            April 8 2020 13: 13
            Quote: Zaurbek
            Those. 155mm Turkish scrap metal shoots quietly and does the main damage .... but is it all bad?

            neither the Syrian aviation nor their own artillery crushed a single Turkish battery, and the air defense proved to be practically powerless against Turkish UAVs.

            Perhaps the right organizing entries have now been made, but we all saw what happened
            1. 0
              April 8 2020 14: 26
              UAVs flew according to the Sochi Accords and monitored the area over Idlib. Then they suddenly struck, and at the rear and on the approaches to the battle line. And the safety of Turkish batteries is not a matter of a battery fight contract. They did not even dig in. For aviation, this is an easy target. But Turkish aviation is not there. This is a matter of politics and the death of Turkish fighters.
          3. +3
            April 8 2020 13: 32
            The Turks corrected the fire of their artillery from drones in real time. Battery commanders saw a picture from drones and fired, immediately seeing the results of the hits. It was a master class of modern warfare.
            1. 0
              April 9 2020 12: 14
              The batteries of the Turks were not affected ...... although they could have been affected. The Russian group showed this whole company in Syria ... and bombed and corrected and scouted.
              1. 0
                April 9 2020 14: 33
                Scouted, corrected, bombed, but not in real time. Except those cases when they simply sent people with walkie-talkies to the cutting edge. Usually late from half an hour to several hours. On stationary objects it worked. In a dynamic battle, as was the case in Idlib, this is not enough.
                1. 0
                  April 9 2020 15: 03
                  At least one howitzer was hit?
            2. 0
              April 11 2020 18: 24
              "... a master class of modern war ..." - remember the UAV Bumblebee-1 (flight with cameras and infrared equipment 1989), Pchela-1T (first flight 1990, in 1995 5 Bees flew in Chechnya, 10 sorties - 8 combat , total flight time of 7,5 hours, losses - 2 Bees). Bumblebees and Bees were created specifically for reconnaissance of targets and adjusting artillery fire. One can argue for a long time why the Bees did not take root ... They created the first Bumblebee in 1983, following the example of Israel in the 1982 war - the Turks "did not discover America."
              1. 0
                April 11 2020 19: 01
                I did not claim that the Turks were the first.
                There were many military inventions that did not take root in
                developing countries.
                Turkey has effectively and widely deployed intelligence
                artillery spotters and attack UAVs in real warfare
                operations. Against enemy infantry and armored vehicles.
  12. +2
    April 8 2020 12: 06
    Three Rheinmetall artillery shells set new range records during a test firing event at the Alkantpan range in South Africa on November 6, 2019. "During the event, three new records for the maximum effective firing range of various guns were set. The G6 155 mm howitzer (barrel length 52 calibers) achieved the longest range ever achieved with a conventional artillery shell of this caliber - 76 kilometers, while the 52-caliber gun of the PzH2000 self-propelled howitzer threw a shell 67 kilometers. The field howitzer with a barrel length of 39 calibers threw a shell 54 kilometers," the company reported.
    1. +1
      April 8 2020 12: 27
      Quote: Zaurbek
      The 6 mm G155 howitzer (barrel length 52 caliber) reached the longest distance ever achieved with a conventional artillery shell of this caliber - 76 kilometers, while the 52-caliber PzH2000 self-propelled howitzer cannon projected 67 kilometers

      threw it away, but hit the target?
      1. 0
        April 8 2020 12: 52
        Escalibur, why not .... and if it shoots at 70, then at 40-50 it will hit for sure.
  13. -1
    April 8 2020 15: 29
    I saw her, in Tashkent, in 1991, inspires.
    1. 0
      April 8 2020 20: 19
      We look at Wikipedia, we see 2S7M "Malka" weight 45 tons, including the weight of the gun 14.6 tons, this means that the gun transporter itself weighs 30 tons, the question is, is it possible to make the transporter lighter, for example less than 20 tons, so that the total weight of the vehicle is less than 35 tons. The answer is, if you abandon the idea of ​​​​necessarily shooting from the transporter itself, then it is possible, because vehicles are mainly intended for transportation, it is undesirable to shoot from them with such calibers, but it is possible and necessary to transport guns on the roof, and you need to shoot, remove the gun from the roof, put it on the ground and shoot. You have to come up with the idea of ​​​​dragging a 203 mm gun onto the roof and bang !!! By the way, in the mountains, weapons are sometimes transported on pack animals and for some reason no one has thought of shooting from the back of a horse with a mortar
    2. -1
      April 8 2020 20: 20
      Minusator, I saw her in the Art Park, apparently repair, no politics. laughing
  14. +1
    April 8 2020 20: 08
    All this is good, but what about the replacement of the trunks? The resource is not infinite.
  15. 0
    April 8 2020 21: 36
    how much are the trunks shot and does their production exist in Russia now?
  16. -1
    11 May 2020 22: 54
    Strange deep modernization. Everything remained unchanged, with the exception of guidance devices.