Military Review

A batch of modernized ACS 2S19M2 "Msta-S" transferred to the Ministry of Defense

44
A batch of modernized ACS 2S19M2 "Msta-S" transferred to the Ministry of Defense

The Ministry of Defense has received a new batch of modernized 2S19M2 Msta-S self-propelled howitzers. Self-propelled guns have been modernized at the Uraltransmash enterprise as part of the 2019-2021 government contract. This was reported by the press service of Uralvagonzavod (UVZ).


Dmitry Semizorov, Director General of Uraltransmash JSC, reported to Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu on the delivery of the latest modernization of self-propelled Msta-S howitzers to the Russian army. 152-mm self-propelled howitzer 2S19M2 is a combat tracked vehicle that meets all the requirements for modern artillery

- said in a statement.

The number of modernized self-propelled guns in the party is not reported. It is noted that this is the second batch of Msta-S self-propelled guns supplied by Uraltrnsmash. In the spring, two batteries from the 49th combined-arms army of the Southern Military District were re-equipped with modernized self-propelled guns.

As the press service explained, the advanced MSTA-S self-propelled guns have significant design differences from the previous modification of the artillery installation: they have a new automated fire control system that can significantly increase the rate of fire, there is the possibility of using digital electronic maps, which significantly speeds up orientation on the ground.

152-mm ACS "Msta-S" is equipped with a programmable charging complex. The maximum firing range is 29 km. Ammunition - 50 shells. Speed ​​- up to 60 km / h, power reserve - more than 600 km. Upgraded SAUs can fire with high-explosive, active-rocket jamming projectiles, as well as Krasnopole precision-guided munitions.

The 152-mm Msta-S howitzer entered service in 1989. Designed to destroy manpower, tactical nuclear weapons, artillery batteries, armored vehicles, anti-tank weapons and air defense weapons, as well as to destroy field fortifications and enemy command posts. Fire can be conducted on observed and unobserved targets from closed positions and direct fire. When firing, both shots from the ammunition rack and those supplied from the ground are used.
Photos used:
Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation
44 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Coconut
    Coconut 5 August 2020 16: 28
    10
    a creepy thing ... I wouldn't want to sit in a trench on the enemy's side ... 152 mm uzhos
    1. Insurgent
      Insurgent 5 August 2020 16: 34
      +5
      Quote: Coco
      creepy thing ... I wouldn't want to sit in a trench on the enemy's side ...

      And for dill, such, though "in the original", not modernized - there is what ... They managed to snatch from the legacy of the USSR during the division of the property of the Soviet Army.

      True, we also have something repeat
    2. Thrifty
      Thrifty 5 August 2020 16: 35
      +7
      Coconut hi -my friend in the army fell asleep for "acacia", nerves request during the volley, he was thrown from the position of about ten meters by the shock wave from the volley negative For three days (while I was on the lip) I could not sit down on the fifth point!
      1. Coconut
        Coconut 5 August 2020 16: 36
        0
        goddamn ...))) ass in place?))
        1. Thrifty
          Thrifty 5 August 2020 16: 42
          +5
          The coconut-ass is now on the spot, with a brain blow, he started to think that he got off easily, and then one good friend who fought in Afghanistan broke three ribs in this way, he also made a night in a "foreign" position, but then on "blue" was hiding. .. fool It's not so soft to fall on the stones. ..
        2. Insurgent
          Insurgent 5 August 2020 17: 03
          +8
          Quote: Coco
          goddamn ...))) ass in place?))


          In August 2019, from the district of np. Experienced (near Donetsk) through us either D-30 or Carnations were shot - the impressions were yes
          But what is characteristic - all nine shots turned out to be "zeroes" ...
          Either the dill were deliberately shot with blanks, or they had something wrong with the fuses.

          But the fact that at that time, where it all fell, got off with a slight fright is a fact.
      2. Narcologist
        Narcologist 5 August 2020 17: 04
        -4
        Quote: Thrifty
        Coconut hi -my friend in the army fell asleep for "acacia", nerves request during the volley, he was thrown from the position of about ten meters by the shock wave from the volley negative For three days (while I was on the lip) I could not sit down on the fifth point!

        Nifiga yourself .. This is power! This is a straight monster.
        And then what happened to the enemy where the shells hit ..?
        1. 113262a
          113262a 5 August 2020 17: 53
          0
          Ask the miners of the seas, who from the Luhansk airport after this drunkards! After that, a howl about tactical nuclear weapons began.
          1. Narcologist
            Narcologist 5 August 2020 18: 56
            -3
            Quote: 113262
            Ask the miners of the seas, who from the Luhansk airport after this drunkards! After that, a howl about tactical nuclear weapons began.

            Yes, I remember hehe Donetsk airport see?
            Scattered, who had time
            1. Insurgent
              Insurgent 5 August 2020 19: 31
              +1
              Quote: Narkolog
              Yes, I remember hehe Donetsk airport see?
              Scattered, who had time

              Zema Lugansk 113262a writes about Luhansk airport.

              From ours, those "cyborgs" that remained there at the time of the final assault were simply destroyed, and only a few managed to leave. Part gave up.

              Then for a long time the Ukrainian team "Black tulip weight 200"they dug up the bodies of their ukrovoyaks from under the rubble in the" old "and" new "terminals, collected the remains at takeoff and around the territory.
              1. Narcologist
                Narcologist 5 August 2020 20: 06
                -1
                Quote: Insurgent
                From ours, those "cyborgs" that remained there at the time of the final assault were simply destroyed, and only a few managed to leave. Part gave up.

                Ours were also killed a lot during the assault, but they smoked out Bandera ... soldier
                Eternal, the memory of our soldiers who went to break through without cover, etc. ! Everything was badly organized at first, but then they found a method to wet it!
            2. 113262a
              113262a 5 August 2020 22: 28
              0
              Taki Lugansky! There were three barrels working from Pionersky, 20 km from the airport. Reactive-reactive, it was visible the flight of the projectile. Especially at night. So, the pluses at the airport reached us in Nikolaevka in almost two minutes. And the glass in the frames trembled and burst. The music is unforgettable! And what the svidomye felt in the airport porch ...
      3. chenia
        chenia 5 August 2020 17: 34
        +2
        Quote: Thrifty
        during the volley, he was thrown from the position of about ten meters by the shock wave from the volley

        Volley,. I understand it gave one weapon.
        Although there was a time (oh, and long ago, that was), I told the girls the wrong thing.
  2. Thrifty
    Thrifty 5 August 2020 16: 37
    0
    And, also, the Airborne Forces received new tanks today, T72B3, but I don’t understand why the Airborne Forces put mine trawls on the tanks? ?? belay
    1. Coconut
      Coconut 5 August 2020 16: 39
      +4
      And if the mines are like in Donetsk ...?
      1. Insurgent
        Insurgent 5 August 2020 16: 42
        +4
        Quote: Coco
        And if the mines are like in Donetsk ...?

        Mines - there are mines ... Though "Donetsk", even "Luhansk". And "ours" and "strangers" ...
      2. Thrifty
        Thrifty 5 August 2020 16: 53
        +1
        So you can equip robots like uranium with trawls, they are lighter than tanks!
    2. Lopatov
      Lopatov 5 August 2020 16: 40
      12
      Quote: Thrifty
      Why do the Airborne Forces put mine trawls on tanks?

      Sweep the mines.
      1. Coconut
        Coconut 5 August 2020 16: 40
        +1
        Here I am about the same ...
    3. Narcologist
      Narcologist 5 August 2020 17: 06
      -3
      Quote: Thrifty
      And, also, the Airborne Forces received new tanks today, T72B3, but I don’t understand why the Airborne Forces put mine trawls on the tanks? ?? belay

      So soon there is work to be done .. Serious! soldier
  3. Coconut
    Coconut 5 August 2020 16: 47
    +1
    And what is the rate of fire of the MSTA ... I don't remember exactly, but it seems like 6 per minute ... 6 shells per minute ... who didn't hide, I'm not to blame)) by the way, it can hit with direct fire ...
    1. Andrey.AN
      Andrey.AN 5 August 2020 16: 56
      +1
      In reality, it can and one blow per day, just to keep up with intelligence. Although if you ask for support, you probably need a rate of fire, again the gunners dictate the pace on the spot, volley fire is not her element.
      1. BARKAS
        BARKAS 5 August 2020 17: 21
        0
        If a 152mm self-propelled guns division makes 3-4 shots in one gulp, then it will not seem enough in any case.
    2. 5-9
      5-9 5 August 2020 17: 47
      +2
      10 like ....
  4. ccsr
    ccsr 5 August 2020 17: 21
    -3
    152-mm self-propelled gun "Msta-S" is equipped with a programmable loading complex. The maximum firing range is 29 km. Ammunition - 50 shells. Speed ​​- up to 60 km / h, cruising range - over 600 km.

    Thanks to such unique characteristics and various projectiles, including nuclear ones, it is this armored vehicle that should become the basis of our ground forces, because the future belongs to it. Of course, over time, it will press against other types of armored vehicles and tanks in the first place, but nothing can be done, this is just a natural process of improving weapons. As far as I understand, with a skillful location on the ground or specially opened shelters, such self-propelled guns can fire not only with direct fire, but also with negative degrees relative to direct fire. Experts will correct it if this is not the case, but still this product is truly unique and in demand for the foreseeable future.
  5. gorenina91
    gorenina91 5 August 2020 17: 38
    -9
    - Strange .., but where is the "Coalition" ???
    The maximum firing range is 29 km.

    The 152 mm Msta-S howitzer entered service in 1989

    -For 1989, the Msta-S was quite decent armament ...
    -And today ... - the distance is 29 km ... - this is no longer the distance for firing ...
    -Let's allow the BLPA to start adjusting the fire of the batteries ... -and the range of these batteries does not exceed 30 km ... -What enemy to fight with them ... -China already has more advanced technology; among the Swedes and in Western Europe in general ... - also more modern weapons ...
    - For African countries ... for regional conflicts and wars, such weapons are quite suitable; but for a modern war with developed states ... this is already outdated weapons ...
    1. ccsr
      ccsr 5 August 2020 17: 47
      -7
      Quote: gorenina91
      but for a modern war with developed states ... this is already outdated weapons ...

      It is necessary to fight the developed states with nuclear weapons, and this technique is quite acceptable for tactical nuclear charges, but we are not talking about strategic ones. Than you are not satisfied with this, especially since this model is quite cheap, and the range of the projectile can be changed by using combined projectiles using the reactive component.
      1. gorenina91
        gorenina91 5 August 2020 17: 54
        -5
        It is necessary to fight with developed states with nuclear weapons, and this technique is quite acceptable for tactical nuclear charges,

        -Yes, the fact of the matter is that nuclear weapons ... is already the "last argument" when two (or more) states of the strategist collided ...
        -And against the same Turkey ...; Sweden; Norway; Poland; Germany ... and so on .. (of course I cite all this figuratively ... -no need to take everything literally) ... - such weapons are already clearly outdated ...
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 5 August 2020 19: 40
          +2
          Quote: gorenina91
          such weapons are clearly outdated ...

          Sorry, but this is the level of the most modern self-propelled guns, no "obsolescence"
      2. Lopatov
        Lopatov 5 August 2020 20: 26
        +5
        Everything is easier.
        First, the first axiom. Shoot as close as possible. For the closer, the more accurate. Moreover, in modern conditions, the closer, the more effective. The fighter will not have time to hide, even if a message about a fire raid reaches him. (fact: the warning system has ALREADY been worked out by many years of real combat practice in Afghanistan.

        Secondly, the second axiom: the firing range should not be the maximum possible, but the one that is necessary. For example, if the battalion has a detailed reconnaissance zone of 5 km (open data), then why arrange dances for the sake of shooting at 40? They will still not be used at such ranges, on the strength of 10-15
        And it is not necessary to say that the UAV will fly somewhere there. There are established zones of detailed and surveillance reconnaissance. And it is there that they will shoot

        Third, the third axiom. MLRS are more suitable for long-range shooting. Well, or guided weapons such as GMLRS. Or if there is money, then the Iskander. With barreled artillery, everything is more complicated. It is designed to solve those tasks that MLRS are not suitable. These are tasks for which, in addition to coordinates and projectile consumption, time matters. That is, for example, NZO and PZO in defense. Or "object of attack", PSO, "barrage" and POGZ in the offensive. Or fire combing when guiding columns. Or fire blocking of the area or fire bordering with various kinds of CTO. But these tasks are not performed at maximum ranges.
        1. VO3A
          VO3A 5 August 2020 22: 42
          +1
          Lopatov, you voice the tactics of fighting the partisans, based on the experience of fighting the partisans. Therefore you have everything is simpler.
          For example, if the battalion has a detailed reconnaissance zone of 5 km (open data),

          Such a battalion will be immediately Khan, he will not even have time to shoot in a modern war ...
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 6 August 2020 09: 12
            +2
            Quote: VO3A
            Such a battalion will be immediately Khan, he will not even have time to shoot in a modern war ...

            laughing laughing laughing
            Couch.

            Actually, there is a regiment / brigade above the battalion, above them a division, an army, and so on. With its own forces and means of both reconnaissance and fire destruction.
            And with its zones of detailed and survey reconnaissance



            Quote: VO3A
            Lopatov, you voice the tactics of fighting the partisans, based on the experience of fighting the partisans.

            On the contrary. It is with the partisans that everything is more complicated. For, in fact, there is no line of contact. However, all three axioms are valid even there. It's just that such a war requires a different organization of the combat use of artillery.
            1. VO3A
              VO3A 6 August 2020 10: 36
              -2
              What is the line of contact? Which naphthalene cabinet you got out of?
              1. Lopatov
                Lopatov 6 August 2020 11: 53
                +2
                Quote: VO3A
                What is the line of contact? Which naphthalene cabinet you got out of?

                Gee ....
                I say, divan. laughing Very couch.
                1. VO3A
                  VO3A 6 August 2020 20: 08
                  0
                  Gee ....
                  I say divan

                  And now gygykalka, tell us where was the line of contact in Iraq, in Yugoslavia? There were pockets of resistance, which were blocked and the suppressed ones resisted ... They did not see any enemy, there was no line of contact ... When trying to find these lines, the advanced subdivisions and columns were destroyed !!!
                  If in the 90s they still talked about company strongholds, now they no longer exist ... There is a positional area, there are no contact lines in it ... What is discovered is destroyed, what is illuminated by the enemy is also destroyed with a high probability ... Leave your partisan tricks with Syria and Afghanistan, Libya, eastern Ukraine. There they are fighting in the old way, more precisely in the ancient way, like in World War II ... It's time to shake off the mothballs from the ears ...
    2. 5-9
      5-9 5 August 2020 17: 53
      +5
      The shorter range of Soviet self-propelled guns due to other powders (which of the advantages give less wear and tear of the barrel and the shelf life of shells many times longer, and not because "did not shmagala") and the desire to unify with old guns. In real life, the range is not so critical, in addition, the maximum is active-reactive, which in war will be used with a gulkin's nose and their power is lower. That is why there was an additional long-range Hyacinth-genocide in the USSR.
      Now the Coalition with new shells ... and its price is different.
      ACS with Msta automation from the 80s appeared in the West only in the 00s, this is Panzerhaubice2000.
      Americans with the ancient M109A6 with 3 shots in 2 minutes somehow live ... now I understand this outdated and not developed.
      1. K-612-O
        K-612-O 5 August 2020 18: 27
        -1
        I completely agree, no competent artilleryman fires at the maximum range, only US.
        The states of Excalibur do not want to fly for 15 years already, like our Krasnopol, but it seems that ours reported that they coped.
      2. VO3A
        VO3A 5 August 2020 23: 40
        -4
        What kind of gunpowder? We do not have reconnaissance systems, even based on UAVs, that provide automatic target designation in real time for weapons systems, only fire control systems with their ridiculous characteristics and protection, and suicide bombers with a walkie-talkie on their backs, on the front end ...
        1. 5-9
          5-9 6 August 2020 08: 36
          -1
          The ranges of NATO standard howitzers were noticeably greater than our standard ones (except for Hyacinth) even in those days when there was no hype about UAVs and no one knew a word like that ... (although in the USSR in the 80s there were a thousand UAVs, e.g. Tu- 143 Flight).

          Well, where self-propelled guns (real tracked, with 8+ rounds per minute) fire at each other at maximum range, no UAVs will be able to fly.
        2. ccsr
          ccsr 6 August 2020 12: 11
          +2
          Quote: VO3A
          We do not have reconnaissance systems, even based on UAVs, that provide automatic target designation in real time for weapons systems.

          Do not tell tales - even on the "Taran" from the reconnaissance battalion, an automated data exchange was provided for target designation of some objects not only to the command and control level of the division, but also for the army command and reconnaissance center. And this was laid down in the late eighties, when UAV squadrons existed, but they were part of the air armies, which is why then the processing of data from them in army structures was not yet laid down. It's hard for me to believe that this problem has not been solved until now - are you sure that it is now impossible at the command post of the division to receive operational information from the UAV in real time, albeit by relaying it from the drone control operator? Where did you get such confidence - tell me ...
    3. Lopatov
      Lopatov 5 August 2020 19: 38
      +1
      Quote: gorenina91
      -And today ... - the distance is 29 km ... - this is no longer the distance for firing ...

      Exactly.
      It will be too much

      Quote: gorenina91
      Let's say the BLPA will begin to adjust the fire of the batteries ... and the range of these batteries does not exceed 30 km

      Well, let them correct ...
      Something I do not understand, where does this desire to shoot away from?

      By the way, do not forget that 29 km is NOT an active jet, but a projectile with a gas generator.
      That is, the tool is very, very. There is simply no need to chase range.
    4. VO3A
      VO3A 5 August 2020 23: 20
      -3
      [
      Let's say the BLPA will start adjusting the battery fire ..

      How do you even understand this? And where and when can they do it? Name at least one OMS or ESU system with real-time communication channels, in which such your fantasy is provided nominally without strong words and yelling at the radio station ... I will say more, the target designation range of retractable OMS during the day is up to 10 km, plus their removal from the battery is up to 10 km, why do we need a firing range of more than 20 km, and the Coalition, in general, is not needed ...
      1. gorenina91
        gorenina91 6 August 2020 04: 19
        0
        I will say more, the target designation range of the retractable LMS during the day is up to 10 km, plus their removal from the battery is up to 10 km, why do we need a firing range of more than 20 km, and the Coalition is not needed at all ...

        - Yes ... of course ... - roll out batteries "for direct fire" and shoot at the enemy ... - Hahah ...
        - What are you writing at all ???
        - Personally, I myself am not a very great specialist in this field ...
        -But if the UAV found a small terrorist base 50 km away; Ishilovites; other insurgents ... -and what ??? -Start firing at them with MLRS systems ("Tornado", "Tornado", etc.) ... - "From a cannon to sparrows" ??? - Isn't it too expensive ... - it's easier to build a new port in Lebanon ... - Hahah ...
        -And such artillery systems are needed so that, on occasion, it was possible to deliver pinpoint precise strikes (at the expense of spotters in real time) ... -this is modern war ... -And then you read ... -and just wondering ... - it turns out that many are going to fight with nuclear weapons ... - Well, if that's the case ... - then of course ...
        1. Nastia makarova
          Nastia makarova 6 August 2020 08: 51
          -1
          for chiseled there are missiles and artillery for mass suppression, for example, to erase a town with militants