Military Review

Heavy thoughts over heavy flamethrowers

118
The other day, the media were full of headlines glorifying our heavy flamethrower systems (TOS) of all kinds, from "Buratino" to "Tosochka". Modernized, improved, installed a new one. With an open hint towards "potential" - be afraid, because our TOC has no analogues. And stuff like that.


And then the question arises: why did it happen that they do not have? What is so exclusive in our CBT that no one in the world can create such a thing?


First of all, you need to look in history and understand the real role of these machines on the battlefield.

First, a few words about a thermobaric explosion. That is, combining the defeat of the target by changing both temperature and pressure. After the explosion of the ammunition, the mixture is sprayed in the air and a cloud is formed, which is ignited.

The detonation velocity of this explosion is very slow, the mixture (propyl nitrate and magnesium powder) burns at a speed of 1500–3000 m / s, which is three times lower than conventional combustible mixtures.

But precisely because of such a low rate of combustion of the mixture, all oxygen is very carefully burned out of the air. The combustion temperature is about 3000 degrees Celsius, uncomfortable for almost the entire environment.


But combustion also generates a pressure jump. First, from the explosion itself and under the influence of temperature, the pressure increases, and when oxygen burns out in a given volume of air, the pressure drops by 150-200 mm Hg below atmospheric. For a very short time.

In general, everything is unpleasant for those who fall under such an explosion. Not temperature, so pressure can cause irreversible changes in the human body, incompatible with normal life.

They invented this cute weapon long. During the Cold War, in the process of improving the flamethrower. The flamethrower has proven itself very well in two world wars as an anti-personnel melee weapon. However, modernization for this terrible type of destruction of people suggested itself, because a flamethrower with a tank on its back was the primary target of an infantryman (for obvious reasons).

Yes, by the term "flamethrower" everyone understood a kind of weapon that threw a burning mixture over a short distance. But scientists, simply copying the principle of "Greek fire" (which was not delivered to the addressee by the ancient warriors), put the fire mixture into a capsule with the intention of delivering it to the place of activation using any accelerator.

In general, a weapon capable of destroying enemy soldiers in well-fortified bunkers, bunkers and other hard-to-reach places has long been required by all armies. World War II showed that something powerful and mobile (yes, like a flamethrower) in urban combat is a very useful feature.

This is how such an ammunition as TBG-7V was born. Yes, the RPG-7 is a very simple way to deliver a thermobaric warhead to the window of the house opposite. "Tanin" flew 100-200 meters and cut everything to the root within a radius of 10 meters from itself.

Heavy thoughts over heavy flamethrowers

Then there was "Bumblebee", which flew a little further (1000 m) and killed all living things in the volume of 80 cubic meters. And "Bumblebee-M" flew even further.


Naturally, something was drawn, in general, large and self-propelled. Because "Bumblebees" have proven themselves very well in Afghanistan.

So the appearance of "Buratino" was quite logical and reasonable. And the fact that TPS was tested in Afghanistan, too. Yes, the firing range was, to put it mildly, small, up to 4 km. But the chassis from the T-72 made it possible both to go to the distance of firing at the enemy, and after firing to leave, not really making out the road. Quickly.

And the transport-loading vehicle (TZM) was matched, based on the KrAZ-255B truck.

In the mountains of Afghanistan, "Buratino" showed itself in all its glory. It turned out that volumetric and thermabaric ammunition is very good precisely in the conditions of hard-to-reach mountainous terrain.

Moreover, the nuances were determined there, which played an important role in how this military equipment is used.

What was so new and “unparalleled” in the Buratino shells?


Photo: Vitaliy Ragulin, Wikimedia Commons

Well, nothing. The machine itself is very, very controversial. On the one hand, the armor tank and good speed make it possible to roll out to the launch line and quickly get out of there. But the frontier itself is small. 4 km (more precisely, 3600 m) - this is the "Cornet", and "Javelin", and "Stugna" easily turn the car into scrap metal. We are not even talking about more serious ATGMs and helicopters.

Therefore, the use of TOC against regular armies looks completely frivolous. In any of them there is something to smash self-propelled flamethrowers.


Source: mil.ru

Moreover, there are more weighty solutions for regular armies: the same Smerch / Tornado-S MLRS, which are capable of firing a 9M55S thermobaric warhead at a range of 25 to 70 km.


Expensive but effective. And, importantly, it is safe.

Another thing is irregular and somehow armed detachments of militants. No heavy weapons capable of damaging a tank platform. RPGs, you know, don't count here at all.

And it was quite possible to shoot at them (in Afghanistan, in Chechnya) with unguided and cheaper shells of the TOS "Buratino" rather than using "Smerchi". When working on areas, when you do not need to think about possible losses among the civilian population, which is not within the radius of action, and about accuracy, the NURS is a completely normal weapon.

Therefore, "Buratino" came to the court in Afghanistan and Chechnya.

And further evolution in the form of "Solntsepek" is already 6 km, not 4. The distance is increasing, although the developers of countermeasures do not sit still either. And yes, the "Smerch" (which was turned into "Tornado-S", connected to satellites, made the missiles controlled and corrected) did not become cheaper.

Now (quite expectedly) in service in the Russian army are both options - and "Buratino" and "Solntsepyok". Armor, speed, protection systems get along quite well with the NURS of the last century, which incinerate everything when working in areas.

Now there has been information about a new stage of development - TOS-2 "Tosochka", which will fire at a distance of up to 15 km. All the same NURS with thermobaric warheads. Just as cheap and reliable. When working on areas.

But questions arise. Why even in our army there are only a few such systems? Since they “have no analogues”, etc.? And in the world there is no queue for CBT. Iraq, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Saudi Arabia, Syria - that's who is armed with the TOS-1A. From this list, Kazakhstan and Syria can be called allies. And even then with a stretch.

So why is there so little CBT in any army with these weapons? And why are there no analogues if everything is so simple?

There are several reasons.

The main one is the extraordinary vulnerability of the machine to the fire of elementary automatic cannons. We are not talking about rocket weapons. Any mechanical action on the ammunition can cause a very bad reaction - fluid leakage and possible ignition. And then little will not seem to be yours.

It is not for nothing that even in Afghanistan, the extreme rows of the cells were not filled with missiles precisely because of this, and in Chechnya, TPSs worked only under the cover of tanks.


Source: Wikimedia Commons

So it is precisely the vulnerability and, as a result, the danger of defeat of its troops from ATGMs and automatic cannons that will not soon make TOSs the machines of modern combat on the front line. Moreover, during large-scale hostilities. There, TOCs outright lose to MLRS, both in range and in efficiency.

Moreover, laudatory odes are heard to the fact that the TOS-1A puts shells with an accuracy of +/- 10 meters. Distance measurements are made using a laser rangefinder. That is - to hit the target behind the mountain in any way?

And what do we have in fact?

And what remains is a purely police weapon. With a very narrow specialization - local conflicts on the territory of underdeveloped countries and counter-terrorist operations.

Let me emphasize: in mountainous areas.

Yes, in the mountains, where it is difficult because of the relief to use any technique, TPS, burning out a suspicious area, or an area in which militants were seen, or a response to the actions of militants - no doubt, this is effective. Given the lack of weapons capable of damaging the car, militants and terrorists.

It was not for nothing that the media reported that new TOS-2s would be delivered to part of the Southern Military District. It is in that district that we have a lot of mountain ranges, and in those places it is very often restless. So the appearance in the YuVO of new TOS-2 with an increased firing range is justified.

Now about why the spies of numerous “potential partners” do not hunt for the TOC secret. Probably because there is no secret.

But let's see. USA. By the way, they are doing well with thermobaric charges. But they deliver them either by aircraft, or by the same MLRS or cruise missiles. Their allies do much the same. Israel, for example, dropped such ammunition on residential buildings in Lebanon.

The Chinese are also in complete order. They copied everything they could get their hands on. Including our ODAB-500. And they also prefer to deliver their TB ammunition either by planes or by missiles.

More precisely it turns out.

As for the application, it does not come to mind where such an ammunition can be used today. Considering, moreover, the negative attitude of the UN towards him. Afghanistan? Alas, today a NATO contingent is sitting there. And, I must say, sits quite quietly. The showdown between the Taliban and government security officials suggests that the country is still undergoing a civil war, as it was 200 years ago under the British.

The times when the Soviet military could arrange a quick finale for the Mujahideen with the help of "Buratino", apparently, are in the past. Today, things are different in Afghanistan. Not so decisively, and the Americans and their allies are more profitable when locals die in the showdown.

Europeans with their areas and overcrowding, in general, shouldn't think about TB ammunition. It is terrible to imagine the consequences of the application. The Americans are no better. And there are not so many terrorists in the United States to build such machines for them.

Of the developed countries, only Israel is at war. But this is exactly the case when everything is so mixed up there that you also can't start swinging a thermobaric saber. Maybe, of course, I would like to go to Gaza, but who would allow it?

So it turns out that all the cases of using heavy flamethrower systems can be counted on one hand. Afghanistan (USSR), Chechnya and Syria (Russia), Karabakh (Azerbaijan).

Please note, all are cleanups.


Source: Wikimedia Commons

That is why the Russian TPS and remain "unparalleled", since purely police flamethrower systems, conditionally suitable only for clearing territories, are not needed by anyone in the world.

In reality, the armies of the world are in no hurry to adopt a miracle machine capable, with several hits of small-caliber shells, to arrange a local Apocalypse with their own.

In addition, TOC has another very weak point. The system is very weather dependent. The strong wind will scatter the cloud and prevent it from forming for the desired effect. The rain will simply "dilute" the fire mixture and press it to the ground. The fog will also have about the same effect.

Fight in perfect weather conditions? That's another option.

In general, really, only the police use and the moral impact on the enemy in that there is such "unparalleled". No more.

I am sure that if someone in the world needs such systems, then analogs will appear very quickly. Exclusively because there is nothing complicated and innovative in them.

Of course, the fact that we have them will not make anyone worse. Except for those who might be hit by these machines. In the Caucasus mountains, for example. There is something to think about for the future.

And the main thing here is not to overdo it.

As Colonel-General Stanislav Petrov of the RKhBZ once said in an interview with Krasnaya Zvezda, that the weapons of the RKhBZ troops can be used in peacetime to protect the environment.

Of course, you can, for example, burn a hemp field in a gulp of CBTs. Or poppy. You can try to fight forest fires. Yes, anything you can think of, but is it worth it?

Yes, we have a number of heavy flamethrower systems in service. They have no analogues in the world, no clearly formulated tactics of application. They just are. They are being modernized and improved. At least there is no harm from them.

How useful can these systems be? Considering their 40-year history has several uses? Time will show.
Author:
118 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. jonht
    jonht 3 December 2020 03: 52
    +55
    Strangely, the TOS was originally designed for the RChBZ troops, and their main purpose is to burn out chemical and biological agents, and the fact that one more use for them was found in Australia is rather an accident. And they were assigned to the RChBZ troops. hi
    1. frog
      frog 3 December 2020 18: 11
      +8
      Such are all flamethrowers - RHBZshniki, EMNIP. Do bumblebees also burn out microbes and mustard gas?
    2. psiho117
      psiho117 4 December 2020 01: 16
      +1
      Quote: jonht
      TOS was originally designed for the RChBZ troops, and their main purpose is to burn out chemical and biological agents.

      Stop massaging this heresy. They should not burn anything (and they cannot - they will only spread BOV over a larger area).
      This is a journalistic cartoon, from the category of "vacuum ammunition".
      1. jonht
        jonht 4 December 2020 10: 35
        +2
        Can you name a biological substance or chemical compound that can survive temperatures over 3000 degrees? Secondly, most of the CWA is not very volatile, since it is important for them to concentrate in open areas and such an indicator as filling shelters and other caches in the ground, both natural and artificial.
        Therefore, the fastest way to decontaminate the area, to burn it out ... And how the fire settles to go on the attack laughing
        1. Plate
          Plate 5 December 2020 09: 15
          0
          And how the fire settles to attack

          And why such difficulties if there is a gas mask and an individual anti-chemical package? Well, the economic and political aspects of the use of chemical weapons in today's conditions are subject to discussion.
          1. jonht
            jonht 5 December 2020 10: 12
            +4
            It is possible in chemical protection, but believe me, it's hard to run, and shooting in a gas mask will in itself be somewhere. Again, there is no visibility of the situation in a gas mask, and on the ground there may be stretch marks, mines, anti-personnel and anti-tank obstacles. And the filters in the gas mask are also not endless and require replacement.
    3. neri73-r
      neri73-r 4 December 2020 12: 29
      +1
      Quote: jonht
      Strangely, the TOS was originally designed for the RChBZ troops, and their main purpose is to burn out chemical and biological agents, and the fact that one more use for them was found in Australia is rather an accident.

      If I'm not mistaken, they are assigned to the RChBZ troops because of an international convention, such as being prohibited, I don't remember the details right now.
    4. Olgerd Gediminovich
      Olgerd Gediminovich 4 December 2020 13: 59
      +8
      Why "were". As before, this is part of the armament of the RChBZ troops. And the main purpose is to neutralize chemical and bacteriological weapons of mass destruction. That which is not used as intended is good. Strategic nuclear submarines or SS-18 have never been used for their intended purpose either. I hope you never need it.
    5. Maz
      Maz 4 December 2020 16: 46
      +21
      I barely read to the end, especially when the polygraphist tovarisch Skomorokhov * (surname apparently significant) gave out about the fact that the Russian army has "Buratino" in military service, how old is she then? And how is it not rusted, in military service? And as I read about the wind, what affects the detonation of the fire mixture, I understood that I was dealing with another expert journalist. Spat, and did not read the last paragraphs.

      I will tell you how the thermobaric projectile works here.

      In general, it is structurally very similar to a volumetric detonating bomb, I will not even draw a drawing, but the fundamental difference is that it uses a thermobaric mixture, which has the ability to explode without the participation of atmospheric oxygen. That is, it contains an explosive that provides at least the initial (anaerobic) stage of the explosion. Such mixtures have a high metallic fuel content. These are magnesium and aluminum well-known to young pyrotechnists, as well as much more flammable, expensive and therefore less frequently used lithium, zirconium, etc. normal) is biased towards fuel, or using automotive terminology - this is an over-enriched fuel mixture that allows you to create thermobaric charges for relatively small-caliber, small-sized weapons - projectiles for grenade launchers, even hand grenades. The ammunition of a volumetric explosion with a fuel mass of less than 1-13 kg is practically impossible to detonate. For the same reason, the reliability of the TBZ operation is thus higher than that of the BOV.

      The difference is that the TBZ does not have a second deceleration fuse. It explodes immediately, and a cloud of air-fuel mixture burns and forms at the same time. And one more thing - TBZ, due to the use of a high content of metallic fuel, can have a solid or plastic main charge, and CWA only liquid or gas.

      Thermobaric ammunition works like this:

      1. First, as in the CWA, the central sputtering charge is detonated, which has a high detonation velocity.

      2. From it there is an undermining and sputtering of the main charge with a lower detonation speed, while there is more fuel in the mixture than it would be necessary for the available amount of oxidizer or oxygen in the formula, it does not burn everything, but continues to scatter.

      3. Oxygen of the air enters into action and afterburns the fuel.

      About the vacuum. When these ammunition explodes, no vacuum is created. The graph of the overpressure of the explosion and BOV and TBZ for a certain conditional point, say 10 m from the epicenter, will be qualitatively approximately the same.
      By itself, a pressure drop of 0.15-0.2 atm, and in very rare cases more - by 0.5 atm is not fatal for a person, does not lead to "twisted lungs" and other horrors. Even a very large pressure drop of 0.5 atm can be compared to an explosive (the term means: very fast) depressurization in an airplane. Most often, BOV are aerial bombs, here large masses of charges are possible. Thermobaric charges, on the contrary, are often used in multiple launch rocket systems, grenade launchers and even hand grenades ... there are, but they are not! But! I'll tell you a secret - there are no fools sitting there either! They do something. For example, the American analogue of the Bumblebee - the SMAW-D assault grenade launcher (known as the M141) Bunker Defeat Munition (BDM - ammunition for destroying bunkers and bunkers)

  2. Sergey_G_M
    Sergey_G_M 3 December 2020 04: 56
    +76
    The author listed almost all the conflicts where Russia participated in these flamethrowers were used everywhere, and then asks about the need for such systems, a strange formulation of the question, if the author himself with this listing showed that these systems are in demand and are applied.
    1. KCA
      KCA 3 December 2020 06: 21
      -8
      And on the vulnerability, most likely, our military and designers are also working, the T-14 platform is best suited for remote control, tests are already being carried out, it is worth putting a TOS on it and it is no longer so risky to put it in a firing position, for equipment, of course, there is a risk will not decrease, but people will remain alive
      1. Thrombus
        Thrombus 9 December 2020 17: 42
        0
        If Toosochka has a range of 15 km. as the author writes, the overwhelming majority of its "destroyers" will no longer reach, such a mountain can, come in handy!
    2. venik
      venik 3 December 2020 15: 21
      +47
      Quote: Sergey_G_M
      The author listed almost all the conflicts where Russia participated in these flamethrowers were used everywhere, and then asks about the need for such systems, a strange formulation of the question, if the author himself showed by this listing that these systems are in demand and are used

      =========
      Conflicts - listed! And I also listed the disadvantages! One problem - Roman Skomorokhov did not understand the difference between ammunition volumetric explosion and ammunition thermobaric!!!
      It reads:
      ".... To begin with, a few words about a thermobaric explosion. That is, combining the destruction of a target by changing both temperature and pressure. After the explosion of an ammunition, a mixture of warheads is sprayed in the air and a cloud is formed, which is ignited. .....".
      The respected author has accurately described the triggering mechanism ... volume-detonating ammunition(!) Yes Yes! exactly volume-detonatingAnd not thermobaric! NO "aerosol cloud" is formed when TBB is triggered, from the word AT ALL! These 2 types of ammunition have a similar damaging effect, but completely different mechanisms (physical processes)!
      "....In addition, TOC has another very weak point. The system is very weather dependent. The strong wind will scatter the cloud and prevent it from forming for the desired effect. The rain will simply "dilute" the fire mixture and press it to the ground. Fog will also have about the same effect...... ".
      This all applies to BOV, not to thermobaric supplies!
      PS R. Skomorokhov: Before writing "devastating" articles, you must first understand the essence of the issue, then there will be no such "lapses"!
      1. carstorm 11
        carstorm 11 4 December 2020 00: 07
        +13
        Do not waste time) it so happened that people are engaged in the analysis of weapons without even studying the question) Roman is not doing this for the first time. I also precipitated with a cloud that will dilute the rain)))
        TBZ is undermined immediately, and the cloud of the fuel-air mixture burns and forms at the same time) I do not know for what reason there has been so much mess in the military field, but this is a fact ...
        1. Kart
          Kart 4 December 2020 09: 19
          +2
          Such articles are not written to explain technical details, but to create a negative information background about the "hated regime".
          How much truth there is is not important at all.
          The previous scheme, with chanting slogans, apparently no longer works.
          There is a transition to "technical" or "popular science" articles with a lot of technical details. comparisons, etc.
          Taking into account the fact that most readers do not understand the issue, and tend to believe well-formed texts - such a scheme can work for some time and be harmful.
          Nevertheless, despite the abundance of terms, the alleged knowledge of the issue, and the personal regalia of the authors (he must have lived in the USSR, a respected military man and commander), it is not difficult to make sure that such a text is a simple agitation, indistinguishable from the slogans-chants of the fighters against the Putin regime.
          Reincarnation of "officers' daughters".
          They don't work anymore. The "officers" themselves entered the ideological war.
          1. victor50
            victor50 5 December 2020 15: 09
            +2
            Quote: Carte
            Reincarnation of "officers' daughters".
            They don't work anymore. The "officers" themselves entered the ideological war.

            Quote: Carte
            about the "hated regime".

            Eck you got carried away! lol And what regime is "hated" in this case? USSR ?, Bourgeois RF? It seems that Afghanistan was under the USSR, while Chechnya was the opposite. No? request
          2. Evil Booth
            Evil Booth 9 December 2020 21: 28
            -1
            well it turned out the same. I'm not talking about elections, but about a covid that hasn't been in Asia since spring, but our schools are closed, or hospitals, and many times more people have died than theirs. what is the advanced Swedish with 7000 corpses per 11 million of the population against 126 million of the population and 2000 deaths in Japan, and you know only today five times they answered saying it doesn't matter! it is important that the reason is not in the mask)) that's at least what dzha do not understand.
            1. Siberian54
              Siberian54 5 January 2021 20: 46
              0
              Don't compare the actions of Western liberals and Eastern pragmatists ..
        2. venik
          venik 4 December 2020 11: 51
          +9
          Quote: carstorm 11
          Don't waste your time

          ========
          Greetings, Dmitry! I will spend! First of all, so that readers are not led to any get on! Alas, ANYONE cannot know EVERYTHING! Therefore, readers of the material, if they themselves are not aware of the issue, are often inclined to trust the author - such is human psychology: "once a person has written, it means he KNOWS WHAT he is writing about"! And therefore, if anyone understands the issue, he is simply obliged to gut such "opuses", "like Tuzik a heating pad" (wink ).
          PS Any author can be forgiven for making a mistake in some question. But building a whole "critical theory" without even understanding the essence, the fundamentals of the topic is already unforgivable! Sorry for the authors "minus" is impossible! hi
          1. carstorm 11
            carstorm 11 4 December 2020 13: 15
            +4
            The whole point is that the number of our comments is only good for him. And Roman has long ceased to value authority. Hence, getting in with feet from a topic in which the foot is not in the tooth. What is sad
          2. matross
            matross 5 December 2020 23: 43
            +1

            Quote: venik
            Any author is forgiven for making a mistake in some question. But building a whole "critical theory" without even understanding the essence, the fundamentals of the topic is already unforgivable! Sorry for the authors "minus" is impossible!

            After the publication of such an article, an honest author must shoot himself.
            Okay, let his life be on his conscience wassat at least no longer write on VO. Never!
      2. Skif
        Skif 4 December 2020 11: 17
        +1
        Bravo, venik! So them, "analysts" are uneducated.
      3. Glad
        Glad 4 December 2020 14: 18
        +8
        One trouble - Roman Skomorokhov did not understand the difference between volumetric explosion ammunition and thermobaric ammunition !!! .. These 2 types of ammunition have a similar damaging effect, but completely different mechanisms

        You are absolutely right, dear colleague! For my part, in order to reveal the question more deeply, I would like to recommend to the audience and the author of the article a book by very authoritative authors on the topic:
        Gelfand B.E. Silnikov M.V. Volumetric explosions: monograph. - SPb .: Asterion, 2008 .-- 374p., Ill.

        Let me give you a quote from this source. I apologize for the length of the quote.

        "A volumetric explosion is usually understood as an explosion of fuel-air or fuel-oxygen gaseous or aerosol mixtures .... Distinguish between detonation and deflagation combustion modes in which the leading stage is heat transfer due to heat transfer and thermal conductivity. Deflagation is understood as subsonic or supersonic combustion modes ... manifestations of the process of explosive transformation in the detonation mode, which is a supersonic wave in the form of a self-sustaining complex shock wave + self-ignition zone and subsequent combustion.

        The volumetric detonating system by its principle of operation is a two-stroke type of volumetric explosion ammunition (BOV). At the first step ... an explosive volume of a mixture of air and fuel is formed. On the second cycle, after a certain period of time after the first, an explosion of the formed combustible cloud is carried out with the help of an additional initiator.

        Another type of BOV is known as thermobaric ammunition - TBB. A typical TBB delivers to the target area a heterogeneous mixed charge of condensed (liquid, pasty or solid) explosives and combustible material "stuffed" with particles (for example, powders of aluminum, magnesium). The explosion of such a charge occurs in the same mode as in a conventional explosive (TNT, RDX, etc.) However, during the expansion of the explosion products, particles of excess combustible material mix with air and provide the effect of additional burnout. As a result, an extended blast wave is formed and a fireball, dangerous in its heat-emitting properties, is formed. The use of TBB is characterized by enhanced high-explosive and thermal damage. .. TBB is characterized by increased pressure impulse.

        Thus, TBB by its principle of operation is a single-cycle type of BOV.

        The striking factors of CWA in open space are: thermal injury, high-explosive damage, fragmentation damage by flying fragments. The explosion of TBB in buildings due to the increased pressure impulse causes the destruction of walls and floors .. and ignites combustible materials. Landscape fires are being created in open areas. "
    3. Interlocutor
      Interlocutor 3 December 2020 17: 04
      +4
      The author listed almost all the conflicts where Russia participated in these flamethrowers were used everywhere, and then asks about the need for such systems, a strange formulation of the question, if the author himself with this listing showed that these systems are in demand and are applied.


      The author is "unpleasant" to get under it .... well, well.
      Hit it nearby, about 150 meters away ... it will be unpleasant to get there, though for the last time.
  3. Jacket in stock
    Jacket in stock 3 December 2020 05: 18
    +5
    And to me these TOSochki remind Barmaley ballonet, cheap and cheerful. Two in one.
    And it's not too stressful to do, it's not a pity to use it wherever it is necessary and not necessary. I screwed a weak racket to a huge barrel of explosives, and that's all. And who will fly on the head, will not seem a little.
    The perfect weapon.
    Yes, not for all cases. And thank God that other cases, i.e. war with a technically superior enemy did not happen. But in those that happened, it turned out to be a very useful thing.
  4. Thrifty
    Thrifty 3 December 2020 05: 42
    +27
    The problem is that having created such a weapon, we ourselves have not yet realized its necessity in the army. 4 kilometers firing range, you say? Do the tanks shoot much further? Let's give up tanks then! These systems are precisely melee combat, they should work along the first line of defense of the adversary, they are vulnerable, and should be covered by the same tanks, at the same time, from the air, drones should monitor the battlefield so that the adversary does not shoot flamethrowers with impunity. It is also a psychological weapon, just like in the last world war of Katyusha. And the absence of TPSs in service speaks only of the incompetence of those who are responsible for arming and equipping the army! TOSs are not needed by the uncle, the official, they are needed by the country, it is a relatively simple and effective means of hitting the enemy's line of defense, the technique of the first line of attack.
    1. Pas2x
      Pas2x 4 December 2020 15: 20
      +1
      In principle, the problem with the defeat of friendly forces due to the defeat of the installation itself is solved by the additional at least average armor of the weapon container and the remote control of the "tank" itself. As an option, a medium-range weapon has the right to be ...
  5. riwas
    riwas 3 December 2020 05: 55
    +5
    There is one more application - fighting in the city. Only for him many guides are not needed. Robots can be used to destroy buildings, armed with 2-4 shells in armored casings. Like.prototype.
    1. Old tanker
      Old tanker 3 December 2020 07: 11
      +7
      Hand flamethrowers are more effective for city combat. Less destructive impact, but similar to detonation of a 122mm high-explosive projectile, will not lead to the formation of massive blockages from destroyed buildings. As in the case of TOC. But these rubble are becoming impassable for the infantry, and generally insurmountable for equipment. So you yourself will disrupt the offensive, destroying only the discovered part of the barmaley. And if they also built shelters that prevent the mixture and shock wave from flowing, so generally turn the house wasted into ruins. In urban combat, an accurate sniper shot from a tank gun or a series of such shots can be much more effective than 2-3 TOS missiles.
      1. sen
        sen 3 December 2020 07: 25
        +12
        so generally turn wasted houses into ruins.

        During the storming of Berlin during the Second World War, of all types of artillery, the RS assault groups turned out to be the most effective (rockets were carried by hand and installed, as is, in their original packaging, using improvised means). Launched directly from window openings from a distance of 20 - 200 m, 300 mm M-31 rockets broke through brickwork 80 cm thick and bursting inside (warhead weight 52,4 kg) brought down the inner walls, floor and ceiling.
        1. riwas
          riwas 3 December 2020 08: 52
          +8
          During the storming of Berlin during the Second World War, of all types of artillery, the RS assault groups turned out to be the most effective (rockets were carried by hand and installed, as is, in their original packaging, using improvised means). Launched directly from window openings from a distance of 20 - 200 m, 300 mm M-31 rockets broke through brickwork 80 cm thick and bursting inside (warhead weight 52,4 kg) brought down the inner walls, floor and ceiling.

          I agree. I will add. During the storming of cities during the Second World War, the "redundant" 203-mm howitzer was very much in demand.
          The tactics of the proposed armored tracked robot are: jump out, shoot and hide.
          1. alexey sidykin
            alexey sidykin 5 December 2020 17: 44
            0
            It turned out that 203mm was unforgivably small and was not enough.
      2. venik
        venik 3 December 2020 15: 52
        +5
        Quote: Old Tankman
        And if they also erected shelters that prevent the mixture and shock wave from flowing, so generally turn the house wasted into ruins.

        ==========
        Such shelters are called SEALED! lol They are mainly used in laboratories (chemical, biological, radiation), and even in government bunkers! laughing
        About destruction - you, like the author, have mixed up the ammunition volumetric explosion (volumetric detonating) with thermobaric! The latter create much weaker shock wave and lead to smaller destruction! request
        1. Old tanker
          Old tanker 4 December 2020 06: 39
          +1
          I haven't met such utter stupidity for a long time. The fact that an ordinary cellar can be made airtight by installing a manhole instead of a wooden cover, a hatch from a tank, for example (this is just one option out of many, many others), the sofa expert does not know.
          Well, about the passage about the difference between volumetric explosion ammunition and thermobaric shock wave sizes, nothing but laughter causes.
      3. Kart
        Kart 4 December 2020 09: 30
        -3
        Quote: Old Tankman
        Hand flamethrowers are more effective for city combat. Less destructive effect, but similar to detonation of a 122mm high-explosive projectile,

        I saw a video about the use of the Zmey Gorynych remote mine clearance system in the city, in my opinion, by the Syrian army.
        The result is extremely impressive.
        1. Old tanker
          Old tanker 4 December 2020 16: 32
          +1
          This was used in the first Chechen in the private sector. And they covered the detachment of our entrenched in one of them. In other matters, in the second Chechen attack on the Krest hospital in Groshny, a company of the 506th regiment from Buratino was covered. The result is the same, unfortunately ...
  6. infantryman2020
    infantryman2020 3 December 2020 06: 57
    +4
    A hundred times already the TOS at the forum have been sorted out. The weapon is "indistinct" because it is "artificially born", at least in the form it has now reached.
    I don’t discuss the original purpose, the RHBZ knows better.
    The first option, on a highly protected, highly passable base, with a range of 4 km - still conceptually had the right to life (direct, semi-direct aiming, escorting tanks and motorized riflemen, etc.). Then it went - "faster, higher, further!"
    Now - 15 km, the wheelbase is a duplication of the MLRS with the corresponding ammunition. By the way, our MLRS park is still a "zoo".
    CBT is the departmental lobbying of the RChBZ Troops. It is like, for example, not giving (officially) "Bumblebees" to the infantry ("She! What are you saying! A complicated expensive weapon! Only chemists can use!").
    You give more weapons systems, good and different! The variety and variety is already off scale! Land, take care of the logistics, damn it !! :(
    1. psiho117
      psiho117 4 December 2020 01: 50
      +2
      Quote: infantryman2020
      Now - 15 km, the wheelbase is a duplication of the MLRS with the appropriate ammunition

      I agree with you, if they also increase the minimum range of this ammunition, it will generally be pointless. How it will then differ from the "Hurricane" is unclear.
      TOS was good, just as a kind of armored and maneuverable analogue of the Tulip mortar - high power, short range. And you are wrong, speaking about direct-semi-direct aiming - the TOS can also shoot from closed positions, using mortars - it has a minimum range of 400m. In general, in reality - an analogue of a super-heavy mortar, for work on highly protected objects. As an example of a niche application - the same storms of Al-Fallujah and Tikrit, with their meter thick blowers.
      Quote: infantryman2020
      CBT - narrow departmental lobbying of the RChBZ Troops

      The fact that the TOS is in service with the RChBZ (like the entire system, with the return of flamethrower systems to the "chemists") is a product of the Soviet "twilight genius".
      As well as a variety of types of ammunition, separately for the army, separately for the RChBZ - it is banal, the same ammunition, but in service with the infantry and "chemists" - has different designations GRAU, and is produced and supplied in different batches.
      Well, nonsense! am
      In modern conditions, it has long been necessary to reassign them to the ground forces.
      It's like, for example, not giving (officially) "Bumblebees" to the infantry

      The infantry has long ago made their borders with a thermobar:
      light, caliber 72,5mm RShG-2, RMO-A (unification with RPG-22 / RPG-26), and medium, caliber 105mm RShG-1, RMG (unification with RPG-27).
      Now "Mix" is being created to replace the RPG-26 / RShG-2.
      1. infantryman2020
        infantryman2020 4 December 2020 06: 01
        +2
        I agree, all amendments are accepted.
        I am aware of the new models of assault rocket launchers in RPG hulls and, yes, they are already under the GRAU nomenclature.
        But I am operating with the real situation in the troops at the time of recent conflicts. Then only RChBZ-shny "Bumblebees" were really available. And, thank God, UNOFFICIALLY, the infantry had them in sufficient quantities ("like wood").
        And, little to develop. The problem will be settled when the troops are saturated with RPGs in an amount comparable to RPGs.
  7. Old tanker
    Old tanker 3 December 2020 06: 59
    +6
    I would very much like to know who lobbied for the adoption of this TOS into service and production (to save Omsktransmash (?)). Once he himself witnessed the real combat operation of these machines. Very impressive. Then we had a question, why are there no such systems in the troops? The answer of the knowledgeable uncle was simple: "Tornadoes are more effective and safer. Can you imagine if something flew from there to Buratino? We would evaporate." And then we thought about it ... And so, with the arrival of Shoigu, the TOSs went to the troops of the RHBZ in a significant number. First, they appeared in the district brigades of the RHBZ, and then in each army battalion.
  8. silberwolf88
    silberwolf88 3 December 2020 07: 39
    +35
    and the article is nasty ... a lot of reasoning and leads to the idea that this is a "police weapon" (oh, how it turned out) ... but the military aspects of the original developments as a mobile means of overcoming areas infected with chemical and bacteriological weapons remained outside the article ... well and the nature of wars and conflicts teaches us to apply what works ... and here everything is in the subject ... especially against bandits ... and other terrorist groups ...
    1. venik
      venik 3 December 2020 16: 16
      +10
      Quote: silberwolf88
      and the little article is nasty ... a lot of reasoning and leads to the idea that this is a "police weapon" (oh, how he turned it over) ...

      ===========
      good I agree completely! In addition, the author has demonstrated a complete misunderstanding of what is thermobaric ammunition and how they differ from volume-detonating! But I built a whole "theory"! drinks
      ----------
      Quote: silberwolf88
      but the military aspects of the original development as a mobile means of overcoming areas contaminated with chemical and bacteriological weapons remained outside the article

      ===========
      And here I am with you, my friend "categorically" disagree! Judge for yourself: 1 TOS machine - burns out an area of ​​about 4 hectares (i.e. an area of ​​200 x 200 meters). Just! More than enough to destroy a company stronghold! But for thermal disinfection of the territory - too little! And to use such a method, when the wind spreads the infection extremely quickly - also somehow ...
      But why these systems appeared in the chemical protection troops is another question! And it is connected with the fact that flamethrower units (usually companies) were originally part of chemical troops RKKA!
      Somewhere like that! hi
      1. Old tanker
        Old tanker 4 December 2020 16: 34
        +2
        A company strongpoint, my friend, 1,5 km along the front and one in depth. Combat regulations of the Ground Forces, part two.
  9. Viktor Sergeev
    Viktor Sergeev 3 December 2020 07: 48
    +18
    Eh, and the second would be to first study why Buratino was made, and then write this nonsense. The weapon itself does not fight, they are different wars, and open areas, viewed at 4 km. not so much, you can always find a shelter, a mound.
    1. lelik613
      lelik613 4 December 2020 08: 28
      0
      Find terms of reference for development ...
  10. Graz
    Graz 3 December 2020 07: 49
    +2
    Now there has been information about a new stage of development - TOS-2 "Tosochka", which will fire at a distance of up to 15 km. All the same NURS with thermobaric warheads. Just as cheap and reliable

    this is what you need.
    still to make a robotic platform with remote control, it would be generally gorgeous
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 3 December 2020 16: 19
      +8
      Quote: Graz
      this is what you need.

      The ambush is that after increasing the firing range and lightening the chassis, specialized TOS are no longer needed, since they begin to duplicate the existing MLRS.
      The early TOS had its own unique niche - a heavy assault flamethrower with a range of 3-4 km - in which conventional MLRS had nothing to do. But with a firing range of 12-15 km (and a wheeled chassis), it is cheaper and easier to give the same "Hurricane" a "heavy" thermobaric missile with a reduced range and a larger warhead mass. In addition, the READN have fire controls at such ranges. But the RChBZ troops to work with the new TPS will have to create their own "RChBZ artillery", duplicating the existing army artillery.
  11. The comment was deleted.
  12. The comment was deleted.
  13. mr.ZinGer
    mr.ZinGer 3 December 2020 08: 24
    -2
    [/ quote] when oxygen burns out in a given volume of air, the pressure drops by 150ꟷ200 mm Hg below atmospheric. Within a very short period of time. [Quote]

    When oxygen is burned, CO2 is formed, and for this reason the pressure cannot drop.
    1. psiho117
      psiho117 4 December 2020 01: 54
      0
      Quote: mr.ZinGer
      for this reason, the pressure cannot drop.

      Falls, but insignificantly (cannot be considered as a means of destruction of manpower). hi
  14. Whowhy
    Whowhy 3 December 2020 08: 25
    +11
    First, a few words about thermobaric explosion. That is, combining the defeat of the target by changing both temperature and pressure. After the explosion of the ammunition, the mixture is sprayed in the air and a cloud is formed, which is ignited.

    Do not set off! request
  15. riwas
    riwas 3 December 2020 09: 24
    +11
    the wind will scatter the cloud and prevent it from forming for the proper effect.

    Thermobaric ammunition is not susceptible to atmospheric phenomena (for example, the effect of wind), in comparison with volumetric detonating ammunition, because the explosion does not take time to form a cloud.
    http://cyclowiki.org/wiki/Термобарические_боеприпасы
    http://38niii.ru/obzory/boepripasy/156-termobaricheskie-boepripasy-chto-eto.html
  16. atos_kin
    atos_kin 3 December 2020 09: 31
    -7
    Change the thermobaric mixture to a water mixture and transfer the obsolete TOSK to the Ministry of Emergencies to extinguish fires.
  17. evgen1221
    evgen1221 3 December 2020 09: 32
    +5
    As a siege weapon for breaking through fortified zones and pillboxes with military assistance in the fire, it even comes into suppression. Men are already not producing bunkers to plug their breasts.
  18. Petrik66
    Petrik66 3 December 2020 09: 35
    +7
    The army is divided into a big war army and a small war army. In Afghanistan, the Soviet troops did not have either specialized units (mining rifle) or specialized weapons (remember the BMP 1 with an elevation angle of the Thunder cannon that was completely insufficient for a war in the mountains), and the equipment was a separate topic ( mountains - still that song). In Syria, the use of calibers, "Admiral Kuznetsov", strategic aviation was clearly redundant and had the character of demonstrating capabilities, gaining combat experience and testing new and old systems in a war with partisan formations. What's the problem with CBT? Wars, if any, in the form of proxy wars. Turkey will invade Crimea or Ukraine? But in Tajikistan or Kirghizia, the Babai fortified areas are the best thing. In France there is a French legion, which in the first and second world wars, did not show itself in anything special, since it was specialized light infantry, which was extremely difficult to distinguish itself against howitzers and tanks, but chasing Muslims in the desert and in the mountains is very good it worked.
  19. prior
    prior 3 December 2020 09: 44
    +20
    Strange article. CBT turns out to be very vulnerable. And how vulnerable an infantryman with a Kalashnikov assault rifle!
    So can it be canceled too ?! And how vulnerable were vehicles with fuel for tanks in Afghanistan. Them too?
    Each vegetable has its own fruit.
    Proper application is the basis for the effectiveness of any technique.
  20. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 3 December 2020 09: 50
    +2
    In NATO countries, the main striking power is Aviation ... and it does a lot and on a large scale - aviation and UAVs. It is more expensive, but they are also richer.
  21. Narak-zempo
    Narak-zempo 3 December 2020 10: 04
    -1
    Europeans with their areas and overcrowding, in general, it is better not to think about TB-ammunition

    Overpopulation can be fixed with their help. laughing
  22. Mikhail S.
    Mikhail S. 3 December 2020 10: 05
    +1
    There is an extensive path of development - this is when it is more and further away, and an intensive path is when it is smaller and more precise. Right out the window. Buratyns is the first way. Hopefully temporary, there are no modern technologies yet.
    1. psiho117
      psiho117 4 December 2020 02: 01
      +2
      Quote: Mikhail S.
      Buratyns is the first way. Hopefully temporary, there are no modern technologies yet.

      Not everything can be solved with a super-expensive high-precision.
      And the refusal of the United States and many NATO countries from uncontrollable NURSs is met with a wave of criticism in the same United States.
      KMK, this is more a matter of the profits of arms corporations, and not concern for increasing accuracy and minimizing casualties among the civilian.
      How they protect the civilian population, we have repeatedly seen in the example of bombed weddings / funerals / hospitals, etc.
      It is commonplace, guided missiles are more expensive and more profitable to produce.
  23. Kostya Lavinyukov
    Kostya Lavinyukov 3 December 2020 10: 28
    -1
    Isn't the armor of these vehicles weakened relative to the tanks they are based on?
    1. Interlocutor
      Interlocutor 3 December 2020 17: 10
      +2
      Isn't the armor of these vehicles weakened relative to the tanks they are based on?


      no
  24. sleeve
    sleeve 3 December 2020 10: 34
    0
    This thing does not work from open positions. Should not have a big-headed commander. It was done against regular troops. Its "clearing" is urban development, strongholds in the field. But the author correctly intuitively guessed the direction of its modernization. Increasing the firing range to overcome the line of attack of portable ATGMs ... well, the mobile ones will soon be the same. In principle, the range can be increased "decisively" even tomorrow, but at the expense of reducing the power.
  25. Operator
    Operator 3 December 2020 11: 15
    +7
    TOS-2 shoots from a closed position, so the tank chassis was changed to a car chassis. The firing range of 15 km makes it possible to multiply the specific weight of the warhead in comparison with the MLRS with a longer range. Lightly armored launcher for protection against fragmentation ammunition.

    The thermobaric mixture (propylnitrite with magnesium), in contrast to the volume-detonating one (ethylene oxide), explodes during its spraying, without waiting for the formation of an aerosol cloud, therefore the first is practically independent of wind, rain, snow and fog, unlike the second.

    Classic volumetric detonating ammunition showed itself poorly in the mountains of Afghanistan - winds in mountain gorges dispelled a cloud of explosive mixture during its spraying, which reduced the effect of volumetric detonation by an order of magnitude. Therefore, only a thermobar remained in service with the domestic Armed Forces as part of rocket-propelled grenades, shells, missiles and bombs.
  26. Every
    Every 3 December 2020 11: 16
    +5
    TOS have already shown themselves in real battles and have shown themselves well. They cannot be classified as first strike weapons. If you bring them to the first line, the CBT will almost certainly be destroyed. In the first wave, long-range (and high-value) weapons work .. But they are not infinite, K and OT missiles will run out, troops will suffer losses in equipment.
    But then, when you need to clear the area from the remnants of the troops, the TOSs will come in handy. Not to catch each enemy separately?
  27. EVDmitri
    EVDmitri 3 December 2020 11: 29
    +2
    Hmm ... It seemed to me alone that the author most regrets that our sworn partners do not have such weapons?
  28. Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 3 December 2020 11: 47
    +2
    Well, such things as "thermobars" and "lighters" will always come in handy! But the expediency of "independent" TOS is questionable! There have already been mentioned the "thermobaric" supplies of the MLRS "Smerch", "Hurricane" ... with a "note": they are more expensive! Who saw the price tag? How much more expensive? "Recbus, Crocksword"? Now I want to be an amateur (which I really am!); That is, without looking into reference books, Wikipedia, draw my subjective conclusions ... MLRS "Uragan" can use "thermobaric" ammunition, and "high-explosive fragmentation" , cassette ... and with a long range! And can "Solntsepёk" fire off "high-explosive fragmentation" nourishment from the MLRS "Uragan"? Probably not! According to the "idea", the "Solntsepёk" feeds are shorter (lighter), which means that the guides are shorter than those of the "Uragan" MLRS! It can be assumed that a full charge of the "Solntsepёk" is easier than if the TOC is charged with nourishment from the MLRS "Uragan"! The load on the lifting and slewing mechanisms is different! And another thing is MLRS! Better the modular type ... which is very popular in the world now! By the way, besides the 12-barreled "Smerch" there is also a 6-barreled version ... But the Uragan-1M MLRS is especially suitable! Calibers 220 and 300 mm ... 2 rail packages! And this is a "quick" way to lightweight options (!) ... you can remove 1 package and remain with the only one ... the packages, according to the "idea", should be quick-detachable, which means that at the same plant you can make both "long" as well as "short" packages of guides ... for example, under the nurses "from the Sun"! (By the way, the package of guides for "Hurricane-1M" under 220 mm has 15 (!) Guides .... You can "figure out" and "short" 300-mm "thermobaric" feeds ... Price of 300-mm feeds for MLRS "Smerch "depends largely on the flight control system, but for" short "flights with a range of 10-12 km, you can do without a control (correction) system! In general, I would say: A violinist is not needed! But you will have to" figure it out " "!
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 3 December 2020 12: 41
      +2
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      Well, such things as "thermobars" and "lighters" will always come in handy! But the expediency of "independent" TOS is questionable! We have already mentioned the "thermobaric" supplies of the MLRS "Smerch", "Hurricane" ... with a "note": they are more expensive! Who saw the price tag? How much more expensive?

      Here the question is not even about the high cost of NURS. And the fact is that as soon as the TOS moves away from direct fire and at the targets observed by the crew, the cost of the battery / division as a whole rises sharply. Simply because now TOSs are becoming a full-fledged rocket artillery and require all artillery strapping to work with the PDO: reconnaissance and adjustment, AIR, data generation for firing, topography, new rear services based on the increased consumption of ammunition, etc.
      And it turns out that for the new TPS, the RChBZ troops need to organize their own independent artillery.
      1. Nikolaevich I
        Nikolaevich I 3 December 2020 18: 10
        0
        Duc, what is the gutar about! Caesar is Caesar's, but God be with God ... RKhBZ, let alone Buratins with a range of 4 km, if they only burn out chemical and biological "infections" ( belay !), and rocket artillery - "combat" troops! Why should "disinfectants" be given the functions of "combat" rocket artillery? stop But MLRS will be able to perform the functions of both artillery and "disinfectants"!
    3. psiho117
      psiho117 4 December 2020 02: 13
      0
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      We have already mentioned the "thermobaric" supplies of the MLRS "Smerch", "Hurricane" ... with a "note": they are more expensive! And who saw the price tag

      According to the estimates of the foreign publishing house Jane's Defense, the cost of the combat vehicle when delivered to the Saudis was $ 1,8 million, and the cost of one salvo of twelve "barrels" was $ 1,68 million.
      In general, I would say: A violinist is not needed!

      Needed, still needed. The minimum range of the Hurricane is 8 km, the Tornado in general is 40 km.
      The minimum TOC range is 400m.
      Then think for yourself.
      RKhBZ, nay, "Buratins" even with a range of 4 km, if they only burn out chemical and biological "contamination"
      I still do not understand, are you kidding, or seriously believe in this nonsense with disinfection ...
      1. Nikolaevich I
        Nikolaevich I 4 December 2020 10: 34
        0
        Quote: psiho117
        seriously believe in this nonsense with disinfection ...

        No, of course, I don’t believe it ... I even wanted to be ironic about this, but I got distracted and forgot about the intention ... I just "passed by" ...
        Quote: psiho117
        A violinist is not needed!

        Needed, still needed. The minimum range of the Hurricane is 8 km, the Tornado in general is 40 km.
        The minimum TOC range is 400m.

        Well, about the "Tornado", maybe you turned it down ... I've met and less "indicators"! It also depends on the modification of the Nurse. But this is not the main thing that I wanted to say ... you, nevertheless, did not read my comment very carefully. The "accent" of the commentary "rested" on the MLRS "Uragan-1M" ... There are rumors that this particular system should be called "Tornado"! But something didn't "grow together"! I wrote about the modular principle in MLRS, which is currently popular! During the development of the Uragan-1M system, a sweeping step was taken towards this principle, but then they stopped! I wrote that instead of 2 packages you can put 1 ... you can, along with "long" packages for MLRS "Uragan" and "Smerch", release "short" packages for "Solntsepёk" and "Tosochka"! And it will be possible, in this case, to maintain the minimum range of 400 m! And to do, in this case, without TOS-1 and TOS-2 ... ("Violinist" is not needed!) ... But it is necessary to pay more attention to modular (!) MLRS ... this will also allow you to reduce what has become redundant " variety "in types of MLRS! You can also "think" about the fact that the package of guides and lifting-and-turning mechanisms are carried out in a single module; that is, on a single base (platform) ... and thus, it would be possible to quickly and easily change not only packages ("long "and" short "... 300 mm and 220 mm ...), but also the chassis!
        1. psiho117
          psiho117 4 December 2020 14: 25
          0
          Quote: Nikolaevich I
          It also depends on the modification of the nursing

          old - 40 km, new, those with a trajectory correction system - 20 km.
          I wrote about the modular principle in MLRS ... I wrote that instead of 2 packages you can put 1 ... you can, along with "long" packages for MLRS "Uragan" and "Smerch" supplies, release "short" packages for supplies for "Sun" and "Tosochki"!

          It is possible and even necessary. Modularity is the future.
          A shell with a reduced range will definitely find its niche, because Hurricanes do not always need to hit targets at a distance of 10 km.
          However, we are all talking about the Hurricane. And the Hurricane is definitely not CBT, and perform the functions that were originally laid down in this platform (and from which they are now trying to leave for some reason) can not!
          TOS was created as a short-range tool - a tank chassis, armored TPK with an armored cover (why was it removed? It is really needed), and the minimum range that allows direct support for the advancing troops.
          All this Hurricane cannot a priori - and the battery commander, who tries to bring the launcher 400m to the enemy, will go under tribunal.
          This is not his niche, absolutely.
          So the "violinist" is still needed bully Unless, of course, its "effective managers" turn it into some kind of unarmored garbage on a wheeled chassis - such CBT - yes, not needed.
  29. A. Privalov
    A. Privalov 3 December 2020 11: 53
    +1
    Of the developed countries, only Israel is at war. But this is exactly the case when everything is so mixed up there that you also can't start swinging a thermobaric saber. Maybe, of course, I would like to go to Gaza, but who would allow it?

    I am very grateful for the complimentary introduction of Israel into the category of developed countries! hi
    Yes, and the war here, as such, in fact, and not soon 15 years.
    As for the pacification of Hamas attacks from the Gaza Strip, what kind of desire to beat with a thermobar are we talking about? There, on a tiny area of ​​40x10 km, with a density of 5500 people / kmXNUMX, there are more than two million poor people brought by Hamas to a state of complete insanity. Why are they? negative
  30. Bryanskiy_Volk
    Bryanskiy_Volk 3 December 2020 13: 12
    +2
    Mr Skomorokhov, apparently, is haunted by the laurels of Evgeny Damantsev? lol
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    "The trouble is, since the pies will start the cobbler oven,
    And boots stitch pastry:
    And it will not work well,
    Yes, and a hundredfold
    What who loves to take someone else’s craft,
    He forever others stubborn and foolish;
    He’s better to ruin everything
    And glad soon
    The laughing stock of becoming light
    Than honest and knowledgeable people
    Ask or listen to reasonable advice. "(IA Krylov -1813)
  31. Yuri Gulov
    Yuri Gulov 3 December 2020 13: 14
    -3
    TOS are intended for the troops of radiochemical and biological protection. Learn mat. part! Application to burn out enemy gangs and military formations ... A random "product". Have tried it. Liked.
    1. cat Rusich
      cat Rusich 3 December 2020 15: 36
      +1
      Quote: Yuri Gulov
      TOS are intended for the troops of radiochemical and biological protection. Learn mat. part! ...
      City "N" hit biological weapons - and infected anthrax... how to apply to "liberation" city ​​"N" TOS? ... Chemical and biological weapons are used against populated territories, it is used to defeat large areas - thousands and thousands of hectares. Against "chemistry" and "microbes" - needed antidotes и vaccines !!!
    2. My doctor
      My doctor 3 December 2020 16: 44
      +1
      Quote: Yuri Gulov
      TOS are intended for the troops of radiochemical and biological protection. Learn mat. part! Application to burn out enemy gangs and military formations ... A random "product". Have tried it. Liked.

      Tin. put a minus.
  32. demchuk.ig
    demchuk.ig 3 December 2020 13: 40
    +4
    The steak is somehow unclear, either praised, or crap, I don't understand. A hint that the Darkest uses and will only be in police operations? Well, then it was necessary to write that "soon they will be adopted by the Russian Guard."
  33. Boris Chernikov
    Boris Chernikov 3 December 2020 15: 24
    +1
    the author wrote so much .. but in the end admitted that he had no idea what to write .. thermobaric ammunition is used in accordance with the tactics of combat use .. ie. they can be from the air, but it is also possible with MLRS in the form of TOS ... according to tactics, strikes on fortified areas are carried out covertly ... and then 3 tanks from 6 km are much more difficult to detect than a link of bombers .. And "not enough" because they made in accordance with the request of the army, and the army gave them away to chemists ... but we do not have so many RCBZ brigades ..
  34. Superstarley
    Superstarley 3 December 2020 16: 03
    -1
    TB would still be good for destroying microbiological stations along the southern perimeters of our borders.
  35. iouris
    iouris 3 December 2020 17: 33
    0
    But it looks beautiful. When she hits. Or they get into it.
    1. psiho117
      psiho117 4 December 2020 02: 22
      0
      Quote: iouris
      looks beautiful. When she hits. Or get into it

      As a result of participation in the database, not a single car exploded, although there were hits from the PKM. But TPK is designed for these hits.
      In addition, I highly doubt that this ammunition can explode from a stray hit from small arms. Even an automatic cannon of an infantry fighting vehicle, for example, will not give a guarantee - modern ammunition has long ceased to be highly sensitive.
      Is it possible to set fire to the powder accelerator - but even then, there will be not an explosion, but an abnormal launch.
  36. tank64rus
    tank64rus 3 December 2020 17: 57
    +2
    In the comments, they correctly write that the author did not fully understand the topic, according to the experience of Chechnya, they did so there, they hung a container with UDSh smoke bombs on the BMP or KShM and, before entering the position of the BMP or KShM, went to the line, the checkers were dropped by putting a smoke screen. Then the TOS, under her cover, went into position and fired a volley, and after that it quietly left for cover. This is just one of the ways, and now 15 km of range is even better than 6. By the way, the use of UDSh checkers on tanks proved to be excellent during the assault on Grozny in the second Chechen campaign, when the fire weapons were paralyzed and even snipers sat on high-rise buildings, which allowed the units to calmly move around the battlefield without loss.
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 3 December 2020 18: 29
      +1
      Quote: tank64rus
      According to the experience of Chechnya, they did so there, they hung a container with UDSh smoke bombs on the BMP or KShM, and before entering the position of the BMP or KShM, they went to the line, the checkers were dropped by setting a smoke screen. Then the TOS, under her cover, went into position and fired a volley, and after that it quietly left for cover.

      It will work against the barmaley. Against a more or less normal army - hardly.
      Quote: tank64rus
      This is just one way, and now 15 km range is even better than 6.

      Who will count the data for TOS shooting for 15 km? Chemists? wink
      Why the hell does the RHBZ have its own personal artillery (not an IED assault flamethrower, but a conventional MLRS), duplicating the army one? Given that the army has the same ammunition for their systems.
    2. iouris
      iouris 3 December 2020 18: 40
      -1
      This is understandable in Chechnya. And in Poland?
  37. Andrei Nikolaevich
    Andrei Nikolaevich 3 December 2020 19: 00
    0
    There are smart people. Think of such a weapon ..
  38. Bodipancher
    Bodipancher 3 December 2020 19: 43
    0
    We must not forget about the demoralizing effect, Buratino's volley that burns out all living things discourages any desire to defend. Moreover, there is nowhere to hide. Good thing, against all sorts of barmaley.
  39. xomaNN
    xomaNN 3 December 2020 20: 23
    +2
    "Having is better than NOT having." Very useful when suppressing pockets of resistance!
  40. infantry76
    infantry76 3 December 2020 20: 42
    +1
    Dear "military observers", how many "specialists" we have. There are military research institutes, there is a design bureau, and, finally, there is a military scientific committee of the RF Armed Forces. Let them decide for themselves and propose to the leadership of the country and the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, which is more effective and in demand in modern conditions. If you are concerned about the country's defense budget, then it was also not insane who determined it, made it up and offered it to the Government. The military-political situation is such that the army must be modernized, and not live with old baggage. IMHO.
    I have the honor! soldier
    1. infantryman2020
      infantryman2020 4 December 2020 06: 16
      -2
      1) with this position, what are you doing on the forum? We must sit in the kitchen and not meddle, the giraffe knows better!
      2) Your arguments are for an ideal spherical world in a vacuum. All these rational arguments are often interrupted by narrow departmental and other considerations;
      3) but from the point of view of logistics (unification, reduction of different grades, different types, nomenclature of ammunition, etc.) we are in a deep ass. This is just not fooled by anyone.
      1. infantry76
        infantry76 6 December 2020 16: 07
        0
        Oh, what a fine fellow you are! Apparently there is no one more valuable than you on the forum! After all, you are also in the ass, like the rest of us, in your expression. You are apparently a valuable designer and inventor, or a major economist, or a prominent military figure! Good luck, dear! I have the honor! soldier
    2. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 4 December 2020 12: 46
      +1
      Quote: infantry76
      Dear "military observers", how many "specialists" we have. There are military research institutes, there is a design bureau, and, finally, there is a military scientific committee of the RF Armed Forces. Let them decide for themselves and propose to the leadership of the country and the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, which is more effective and in demand in modern conditions.

      Here is one of the results of work competent military specialists:

      The unmanned boat Inspector Mk 2, which should normally be on the deck of the Alexander Obukhov minesweeper, but, alas, does not fit on it. The only way out is to constantly drag the boat in tow behind the TSC. smile
      And I still don't remember about the characteristics of the Inspector complex itself, also proposed by competent specialists.
      1. infantry76
        infantry76 5 December 2020 23: 58
        0
        Well, actually, this boat is French made. And it was not created for "Alexander Obukhov". They were purchased by 4 pieces, since R&D through our own BECs does not yet meet the requirements, although there are design bureaus and firms that are closely working on this problem, including taking into account the newly built minesweepers. I have the honor! soldier
  41. Al Asad
    Al Asad 3 December 2020 21: 31
    0
    Back in Iraq, they were used by government troops against an organization banned in Russia.
  42. maykl8
    maykl8 3 December 2020 21: 42
    +4
    But the frontier itself is small. 4 km (more precisely, 3600 m) - this is the "Cornet", and "Javelin", and "Stugna" easily turn the car into scrap metal. We are not even talking about more serious ATGMs and helicopters.

    Listen to the author, and tanks with armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles do not need to be done, so that their ATGMs and helicopters are not burned. They are even closer to the front edge, and the power of fire is much weaker !!! Each weapon has its place in the battle formation. TOS-1 and TOS-2 in modern full-scale war is used in the offensive, i.e. there is an absolute superiority of our firepower on the ground and in the air, to a depth of 2 to 4 km on the enemy in the founder of engineer-prepared positions, which will save hundreds of tons of conventional artillery ammunition.
    In a local war, hell, you will gather gang formations on such an area of ​​destruction.
  43. Knell wardenheart
    Knell wardenheart 3 December 2020 21: 59
    -3
    Anti-human weapons in general are akin to expansive bullets or white phosphorus / napalm. It is probably necessary to have it, however, the risk of being used in civil conflicts (such as Donbass, Karabakh, etc.) - with accompanying victims among women, children and the elderly from baro-thermo injuries is something like that ..
    1. carstorm 11
      carstorm 11 4 December 2020 00: 26
      -1
      Any weapon is like that. It all depends on who uses it and how. Do you consider artillery shelling at the same targets more humane? Thermobaric ammunition is needed for certain tasks and at certain moments. A monkey with a grenade is much more dangerous to humans. 404 has been proven many times.
      1. Knell wardenheart
        Knell wardenheart 4 December 2020 00: 43
        -4
        Yet there is a fairly definite line between humane and inhuman weapons. Inhumane weapons leave severely injured disabled people who require years of chronic treatment for most of their attendant goals. That is, the majority were not killed.
        I imagine how the body and especially the vessels, eardrums, eyeballs, etc. will react to such pressure surges - and to be honest, this is worse than barbarism.
        As I already mentioned, such a weapon is necessary to have and, probably, to develop. But it is ALMOST to specify the conditions and circumstances of its application - it is simply necessary. Often, goals can (and should) be achieved with much more delicate means, the development of which is now quite juicy.
        1. psiho117
          psiho117 4 December 2020 02: 53
          +1
          Quote: Knell Wardenheart
          I imagine how the body and especially the vessels, eardrums, eyeballs, etc. will react to such pressure surges.

          The infliction of barotrauma is the second, after the creation of fragments, the possibility of any more or less powerful ammunition. Even grenades.
          Accordingly, barotrauma is ubiquitous in any armed conflict, without any thermobaric ammunition.
          to be honest, it's worse than barbarism

          It is not clear to me, what are you doing in the heading "Armament" with such neatness?
          Here we are discussing exactly it - as a means of mass and inhuman killing of one's near (and far) one's own.
          To divide weapons into humane and inhuman is stupid. It kills, maims, and destroys destinies in the same way.
          goals can (and should) be achieved by much more delicate means

          Yes, yes, we have seen more than one hundred times how the stronghold of democracy and the beacon of tolerance operates with these very "delicate" means, as much as the guts of civilians fly in all directions.
          You know, in my opinion, they don't care how they were killed - high-precision or not.
          Remember, it is not the weapon that kills, but the man. And he shows humanism - he too, not a weapon.
    2. psiho117
      psiho117 4 December 2020 02: 28
      +1
      Quote: Knell Wardenheart
      Antihuman weapons in general

      Don't write heresy. Any weapon is inherently antihuman - it kills these very people, for this purpose it was invented.
      the risk of use in civil conflicts, with accompanying casualties among women, children and the elderly from baro-thermo injuries - this is so

      And the usual, conventional weapon, does it not selectively kill these "women, children and old people"?
  44. akims
    akims 4 December 2020 00: 27
    +2
    Pinocchio was named so because the character has a long nose and he can shove it into every crack. After Afgan, where there were many caves and qanats.
  45. TatarinSSSR
    TatarinSSSR 4 December 2020 00: 57
    +1
    And I believe that such machines alone replace the mortar battery, but at the same time tighter and more efficient. So they have a job
  46. psiho117
    psiho117 4 December 2020 01: 20
    0
    The novel writes:
    I am sure that if someone in the world needs such systems, then analogs will appear very quickly. Exclusively because there is nothing complicated and innovative in them.

    They already have, and for a long time - the same MOAB, for example. Like CBT, it is not a weapon, but a tool.
    A tool for demolishing barmaley huts, because only barmaley will allow themselves to be bombed from a transport ship hi
  47. mixail sherbakov
    mixail sherbakov 4 December 2020 08: 28
    +1
    It remains only to smell of "human rights" and "humanity" and the article on "the barbaric technique of wild Muscovites" on the editorial of Novaya Gazeta is ready))
  48. Moskal 55
    Moskal 55 4 December 2020 10: 57
    +3
    I started reading and immediately identified by style - Skomorokhov. And then there is Avia-Pro, they write about the same. Same style, same type of conclusions at the end. Trying ...
  49. Sedoy
    Sedoy 4 December 2020 13: 47
    +4
    while we have authors of buffoons - we will read a similar one ...
    1. Sergey Kulikov_3
      Sergey Kulikov_3 4 December 2020 18: 03
      -1
      As long as they are allowed to write, they will mean that "corporate ethics" is not very developed in our country.
  50. Mwg
    Mwg 4 December 2020 18: 05
    -1
    Good analytics