Military Review

Why modern self-propelled guns are equipped with a tower

149
Source: ru.wikipedia.org
Source: ru.wikipedia.org



Why are modern self-propelled artillery mounts equipped with a rotating turret with a gun mounted in it? The question is really interesting, because in the not very distant past, many self-propelled guns were a tracked chassis with a fixed wheelhouse and a cannon, the guidance of which was very limited in the vertical and horizontal planes. At the same time, the cutting layout was considered the reference for accommodating a large caliber. So why was it abandoned? In this article, we will briefly go over a couple of myths that are firmly entrenched in the self-propelled guns of past generations.

Self-propelled guns "Msta-S" during the exercises. Source: en.wikipedia.org
Self-propelled guns "Msta-S" during the exercises. Source: en.wikipedia.org

Wider felling - more cannon?


Perhaps, since the period of the Great Patriotic War, there was an opinion among the military, engineers and even simple fans of armored vehicles that a powerful large-caliber and, most importantly, high-pulse gun can only be installed on a fixed support - in the very wheelhouse. There is no dispute. With this arrangement, it is much easier to distribute the shock effect of the recoil when fired, which in general will be distributed along the entire length of the self-propelled chassis, because the gun is mounted along the axis of the vehicle and can deviate in very limited angles.

ISU-152 is one of the most famous self-propelled guns with a cutting layout. Source: en.wikipedia.org
ISU-152 is one of the most famous self-propelled guns with a cutting layout. Source: en.wikipedia.org

This rule is fully implemented when using really large guns with a caliber much higher than 152 mm. Factors such as powerful recoil intervene here, which will not allow firing - be it a cannon in a rotating turret - in wide angles of horizontal aiming, and the difficulty in manufacturing this very turret. There will be no less difficulties with the chassis and with the running device. But how many serial cutting self-propelled guns with huge guns have you seen? Excluding the monstrous crafts of the Great Patriotic War, they can literally be counted on the fingers. And that's why.

German self-propelled artillery PzH 2000. Source: ru.wikipedia.org
German self-propelled artillery PzH 2000. Source: ru.wikipedia.org

Cutting is not a magic tool that will solve all problems overnight. As the authors of the study “From the wheelhouse to the tower layout of self-propelled guns”, published in 1983 in the USSR, correctly noted, the most important limitation of the caliber is the width of the self-propelled gun itself. At the same time, it does not matter whether it has a wheelhouse or a rotating tower. This is largely due to the recoil already mentioned above when fired, the amount of ammunition, the size of the breech of the gun, and so on.

In turn, the width of the car is strictly regulated by the railway gauge in order to ensure its trouble-free transfer by this type of transport. And since the width of the cabin and the turret have the same restrictions, the caliber of the gun in both layouts will not differ much and in modern realities is unlikely to exceed the standard 152–155 mm. Considering equal opportunities in terms of caliber, self-propelled guns with a rotating turret have an undeniable advantage in the form of the possibility of all-round fire.

American self-propelled guns M109 in Kuwait. Source: en.wikipedia.org
American self-propelled guns M109 in Kuwait. Source: en.wikipedia.org

Does the cabin have thicker armor?


Another common opinion, which can be called ambiguous, is that self-propelled artillery installations with a fixed cabin are much more protected - up to the level tank armor and even higher - than their counterparts with a tower. This statement is indeed not without foundation: there are plenty of examples from the time of the Great Patriotic War. In particular, if we talk about serial copies, the Germans did their best here with their serial Jagdpanthers, Ferdinands and Jagdtigers. However, the USSR and other countries had a lot of cars of this class.

The German self-propelled gun "Jagdpanther" is one of the self-propelled guns with high anti-tank capabilities. Source: en.wikipedia.org
The German self-propelled gun "Jagdpanther" is one of the self-propelled guns with high anti-tank capabilities. Source: en.wikipedia.org

Their main advantage was heavy armor, which made it possible to perform combat missions in direct fire contact with the enemy. However, shortly after the end of the war, their relevance gradually faded away, due to the emergence of a new generation of tanks with powerful armor and weapons capable of performing the same functions. Therefore, the role of self-propelled guns on the battlefield has shifted to a slightly different plane - defeating the enemy from distant positions.

The Soviet SU-122-54 is a representative of the kind of "endangered" post-war self-propelled guns with a cabin layout. Source: en.wikipedia.org
The Soviet SU-122-54 is a representative of the kind of "endangered" post-war self-propelled guns with a cabin layout. Source: en.wikipedia.org

As you can see, the armor for artillery "self-propelled guns" gradually faded into the background, but the issue of protecting cuttings is still interesting. Here it is worth referring to the combat mass of the vehicle. It's no secret that when creating a tank, self-propelled gun or other equipment, special attention is paid to its mass, as one of the main factors limiting mobility, transportability, resource and chassis capabilities, and so on.

A considerable part of the total "tonnage" of the vehicle is taken directly by the armor, and the thicker or larger it is, the more it weighs - an obvious fact. So, self-propelled guns with a fixed cabin, when compared with a turret layout, are always heavier, even with the same armament and armor protection.

Gvozdika is a Soviet light amphibious self-propelled gun. Source: en.wikipedia.org
Gvozdika is a Soviet light amphibious self-propelled gun. Source: en.wikipedia.org

This seemingly paradox is directly related to the horizontal guidance of the gun. It is simply impossible to make accurate aiming by turning the body of the vehicle, therefore, in self-propelled guns with cabins, the gun is not fixed and moves horizontally in limited angles using special mechanisms.

When the gun is turned to the right, its breech, located inside the wheelhouse, goes to the left and vice versa. As a result, the so-called "swept" space is formed, which is necessary for the free movement of the breech to the sides. It, firstly, forces to make the felling wider than the tower. Secondly, part of the equipment of the fighting compartment has to be moved closer to the stern. Due to such a "fat" of the useful reservation volume, the area of ​​​​the reservation increases accordingly, which affects the mass of the vehicle.

As an example, we can cite one of the last cutting serial self-propelled guns of the USSR - SU-122-54 - and compare it with the T-62A tank. Both products are made on the basis of the T-55 and have a comparable mass: 36 and 36,8 tons, respectively.

The guns of the tank and self-propelled guns, despite the different caliber (100 mm for the tank and 122 mm for the self-propelled guns), weigh the same in the swinging part - 2 kg. The amount of armor space they occupy is also almost the same and amounts to 600 cubic meters for the 1,09 mm and 122 cubic meters for the 1,05 mm. At the same time, the muzzle energy of a tank gun is higher.

The frontal armor of the SU-122-54 does not exceed 100 mm in thickness, while the thickness of the tank in the most exposed part - the turret - reaches 214 mm. Therefore, in order to bring the protection of the self-propelled guns to the level of a tank, its mass must be increased by an average of three tons. The conclusion is obvious.

Conclusion


Despite everything, the felling layout has a significant advantage - the cost of manufacture. In the production of self-propelled guns according to this scheme, complex machines for linear devices, boring towers, hulls, and so on are not required. In addition, cutting even in the light version will be preferable when creating some 170-203 mm self-propelled guns, if for some reason the monitor systems are out of date. Although this, of course, is already more in the field of theory than practice.

But in a more "running" caliber of 152-155 mm and below, of course, there are more minuses than pluses. A self-propelled gun with a wheelhouse always weighs more than its counterpart with a turret. A large part of its useful armor volume is not used due to the mobile gun, and automating its loading and ejection of spent cartridges is often much more difficult. In addition, the cutting ACS has low maneuverability due to the large overall length. And finally - the lack of the possibility of firing around. All these shortcomings predetermined the choice in favor of the turret layout, which has become the world standard in the production of self-propelled guns.
Author:
149 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Luminman
    Luminman 5 August 2022 05: 39
    +12
    I read it with pleasure. Thank you!
    1. Nicholas C.
      Nicholas C. 5 August 2022 08: 24
      +27
      For self-propelled guns of large calibers, there is another option with an open installation of a gun like Genocide-S or Malka.
      1. NAIL77DM
        NAIL77DM 5 August 2022 11: 23
        +15
        Genocide - exact definition
      2. stankow
        stankow 6 August 2022 00: 37
        0
        The article mentions - "monitor installation", the third type of design.
    2. Sexton
      Sexton 5 August 2022 16: 16
      -3
      In modern warfare, self-propelled guns, and even tanks (like the Merkava), shoot from closed positions from a long distance using external target designation. Guidance occurs automatically with the help of a calculator in the weapon control system, knowing its own coordinates and the orientation of the body in the direction and coordinates of the target. Target designation and shooting should take place in real time. What kind of felling can we talk about ... The author has no idea about modern warfare and hostilities. However, he is not alone, all this idiocy, as well as outdated methods of warfare, along with huge losses, we observe daily. And you can’t even dream about external target designation with target coordinates, even in real time ...
      All the latest modifications of the self-propelled guns "MSTA-S" and "Coalition-SV" and MLRS "Tornado-S" are sharpened for sniper shooting at target coordinates from a long distance, also with high-precision modern projectiles. But there is no external target designation for them, also in real time, and will not be for a long time yet. And these idiots play shock UAVs, despite the fact that there are NO ordinary ones with the issuance of enemy coordinates in real time and with target illumination !!! By the way, strike UAVs are not used without ordinary ones, they also need preliminary reconnaissance, and even better - external target designation with target illumination ...
      If at least something like that happened, no one would shoot at Donetsk ....
      1. kytx
        kytx 5 August 2022 17: 33
        +7
        Shooting from a tank at areas from closed positions is a very expensive and dubious pleasure.
      2. konstantin68
        konstantin68 5 August 2022 20: 15
        +6
        Quote: Sexton
        In modern warfare, self-propelled guns, and even tanks (like the Merkava), shoot from closed positions from a long distance using external target designation. Guidance occurs automatically with the help of a calculator in the weapon control system, knowing its own coordinates and the orientation of the body in the direction and coordinates of the target. Target designation and shooting should take place in real time

        Hm. It seems to be so, but there is one caveat, so to speak. Everything that you have written works on paper mainly, at most in piece episodes, or in a war with barmaley. In a foreign country, as in Ukraine, all this works a little differently.
        The sect of "target designators" is strong, I understand.
        Here's an introduction for you: the enemy's positions are known in advance, static and represent three lines of echeloned field defense (with oporniks, kilometers of trenches, dugouts, blind "appendixes" and other jokes). Camouflaged air defense covers all this. And what would you use in this situation to break the defense? High-precision bp or "mat"?
        Hence the conclusion: a weapon is a tool, for each type of "work" we choose the right one.
        Quote: Sexton
        But there is no external target designation for them, also in real time, and will not be for a long time yet.

        Here it is not at all clear. Why external? Why won't it be long? Can drone data be considered external target designation? Or give you from the TsU satellite constellation? So remember, if there was a cut in an adult way, there will be no satellites. This is exactly what I'm telling you. What will you do?
        1. Sexton
          Sexton 7 August 2022 02: 06
          -4
          In a foreign country, as in Ukraine, all this works a little differently.

          And the Russian Armed Forces in this battle are fighting so primitively and stupidly that ordinary words are not enough. Or maybe she doesn't know how? Do you know that she must fight wrong?
      3. BastaKarapuzik And
        BastaKarapuzik And 5 August 2022 21: 07
        +3
        Do you know only one type of target designation, and write about it everywhere?
        In addition to drones, there is no other target designation?
        The enemy has electronic warfare plus air defense, and then what to do? Target designation fell off?
        1. Sexton
          Sexton 7 August 2022 02: 00
          -4
          I know many types of target designation. I can tell you about the "advanced" reconnaissance aircraft Tu-214R, about the A-50 ... But why do you need it? You're off topic. I give the simplest and most understandable example for such teapots ...
      4. stankow
        stankow 6 August 2022 00: 42
        +3
        Sexton, sorry, you have continuous errors with terminology. And with concepts. Looks like they not only didn’t shoot, but they didn’t even read the “Guide to Shooting” ... Moderate your drinking ...
        1. Sexton
          Sexton 7 August 2022 01: 51
          -4
          Captain, you have short hair... That's it.
          You can throw your outdated, primitive views, along with your, alas, current artillery instructions, in the trash ... After saying that the main type of shooting for ARTA is direct fire, there is nothing to talk about with you. And the fact that everything is fine in your artillery is already a diagnosis. It's two!
          Yes, I have concepts, views and experience. And I do not conduct a conversation, but I inform you of verified, solid, well-founded views and positions. Listen and remember, think... Maybe it will help. These are three...
          1. stankow
            stankow 7 August 2022 02: 05
            +3
            What exactly is your "experience"? Shooting direct fire, firing from the PDO, firing with corrected BP, with air guidance, with correction through the UAV, using automated control systems, division control? Cannon, self-propelled, jet, mortar? Well, so that he knew and accidentally did not begin to explain to you the concepts known to you.
            1. Sexton
              Sexton 7 August 2022 12: 26
              -3
              And why do you have Ukrainian firmware? In intelligence? And to rearrange weakly? You don't know what "short cut" means. And "shorter"? So you are not a military man, stop lying! "Cossack mishandled".
              1. stankow
                stankow 7 August 2022 13: 01
                +2
                Did you shake with spy mania? No, I'm not sent and not Svidomo. Not Russian, that's right, but quite a so-so artillery captain in reserve. Unfortunately, it has already been deregistered, what can you do, godi. Hello friends from Eastern Europe ;)
      5. user
        user 6 August 2022 07: 46
        +3
        In modern warfare, self-propelled guns, and even tanks (like the Merkava)


        This is the Jewish view for the war with the Papuans.
      6. vova1910
        vova1910 6 August 2022 11: 03
        -1
        Quote: Sexton
        like "Merkava"), shoot from closed positions

        why? if the IDF is armed with armored vehicles with Spike missiles, and where they do not fit, American self-propelled guns, also in service with the IDF, will do.
  2. Amateur
    Amateur 5 August 2022 06: 00
    +2
    The guns of the tank and self-propelled guns, despite the different caliber (100 mm for the tank and 122 mm for the self-propelled guns), ... At the same time muzzle energy у tank guns above.

    Does the SPG have a shorter barrel?
    1. kytx
      kytx 5 August 2022 06: 19
      +13
      The tank gun has a higher initial speed. The tank is designed for direct fire.
      1. AUL
        AUL 5 August 2022 07: 25
        +2
        . And finally - the lack of the possibility of firing around.
        IMHO, with the modern vision of the place of the ACS in the database, this is not essential!
      2. TreeSmall
        TreeSmall 5 August 2022 10: 48
        0
        The tank is designed for direct fire.

        And the su-100, su-122-54, jagdpanther And the others described here: are they firing mounted fire?
        Maybe because in this incorrect example, the T-62A has a smoothbore 115 mm 2A20, and the 122-54 has a carved 122mm D-49?
        The D-49 gun was a modernization of the 122-mm ☝️ tank gun D-25T. The internal structure of the barrel, ballistics and ammunition of the gun remained the same. A chambering mechanism and an ejector device for purging the barrel bore were introduced into the design of the D-49 gun, as well as a number of changes in the shutter
        1. Foul skeptic
          Foul skeptic 5 August 2022 11: 26
          +3
          at T-62A

          Rifled 100 mm
          1. TreeSmall
            TreeSmall 5 August 2022 11: 37
            +4
            The appearance of powerful 105-mm tank guns in NATO forced our designers in 1959 to work on a new machine, which two years later went to the troops under the T-62 index.

            What was new was that for the first time in the world, the T-62 was equipped with a ☝️115 mm U-5TS smoothbore gun.
            1. Foul skeptic
              Foul skeptic 5 August 2022 12: 08
              +2
              In the article, as an example, they cited not the T-62, but the T-62A. They have different weapons.
              1. TreeSmall
                TreeSmall 5 August 2022 13: 07
                -2
                and T-62A. They have different weapons.

                Yes cant.
                T-62 AM with 115
                T-62A (Object 165) - the basic version of the tank developed in parallel with the (Object 166) T-62. A new cast turret with a rifled 100-mm gun DT-62A (Object 165) was installed - the basic version of the tank developed in parallel with the (Object 166) T-62. A new cast turret with a rifled 100-mm D-54TS gun + a mechanism for ejecting shells through the aft hatch of the turret was installed

                D-54TS The length of its barrel (58,38 klb.) Pa 200 mm was longer than the length of the barrel of the D10-T2S gun (the length of the barrel fastened with a casing was 5700 mm). The muzzle energy was 8,31 MJ (847 ts-m). By increasing the initial speed of the armor-piercing projectile to 1015 m/s
                M-62S:
                Barrel length - 5610 mm;
                The initial velocity of the projectile - 950 m / s
                ---
                The difference in the length of the barrel is insignificant, which means different throwing in energy.
                Ek \u2d m * V ^ XNUMX
                You can't beat the square of speed
                1. Foul skeptic
                  Foul skeptic 5 August 2022 13: 43
                  +3
                  The difference in barrel length is negligible.

                  1) in calibers, not so insignificant
                  means different throwing energy

                  2) do not lose sight of the difference in the mass of shells (16 vs. 25). Square by square, but you can't get away with what
                  V1=sqrt(Ek/m1) > V2=sqrt(Ek/m2) for m1
                  And when you change the caliber, the mass changes in the cube)))
                  1. TreeSmall
                    TreeSmall 5 August 2022 14: 36
                    -3
                    What is primary?
                    A chicken or an egg?
                    Energy mv (well, the length of the barrel, of course) i.e. En set the speed.
                    En->Ek
                    The mass of the projectile ~ the cube is not just a caliber, but a linear size.
                    projectile mass ~ caliber square (diameter), if the lengths of the projectiles are equal
                    V= (pi* d^2/ 4)*L
                    If we ignore the cone
                    1. Foul skeptic
                      Foul skeptic 5 August 2022 15: 15
                      +1
                      What is primary?
                      A chicken or an egg?

                      Chicken
                      Energy mv (well, the length of the barrel, of course) i.e. En set the speed.
                      En->Ek

                      winked What is it for? Does anyone dispute this?
                      The mass of the projectile ~ the cube is not just a caliber, but a linear size.
                      projectile mass ~ caliber square (diameter), if the lengths of the projectiles are equal

                      1) Caliber - this is the linear size))
                      2) In the theory of designing artillery shots, there is the concept of the relative mass of the projectile Cq, equal to Cq \uXNUMXd q / d ^3, kg/m3, where d is the projectile caliber.
                      3) In the same theory of designing artillery shots, the lengths of shells (and indeed linear dimensions - wall thickness, etc.) are expressed in terms of the number of calibers. Therefore, if the caliber increases, the length also increases.
                      1. gsev
                        gsev 5 August 2022 19: 10
                        +1
                        Quote: Nefarious skeptic
                        the concept of the relative mass of the projectile Cq, equal to Cq=q/d^3, kg/m3

                        The mathematician Arnold told how the scientific work "The outflowing ability of whales" appeared, which, in principle, had an important national economic significance. Most of it came down to analyzing a simplified model of a whale where it was replaced by a cylinder and determining its volume. The author got a certain coefficient a little more than 3, which the author considered reliable for bowhead whales, but left to his successors to find this coefficient for other species of whales. The author of the work deduced the number Pi with an error of about 5%.
                    2. gsev
                      gsev 5 August 2022 19: 02
                      0
                      Quote from TreeSmall
                      projectile mass ~ caliber square (diameter), if the lengths of the projectiles are equal
                      V= (pi* d^2/ 4)*L
                      If we ignore the cone

                      if we neglect the cone, then the square multiplied by the length is the cube. Surely a 155mm projectile is longer than 20mm. This is a very rough estimate. With a powerful shot, there may be completely different requirements for the thickness of the projectile due to the requirement that the projectile self-detonate when leaving the barrel of a tank gun during a shot.
        2. kytx
          kytx 5 August 2022 12: 07
          +3
          Su100 and Jagdpanther are essentially PTS and not classic self-propelled guns. Understand the issue first.
          1. TreeSmall
            TreeSmall 5 August 2022 12: 57
            -2
            classic SAU. Understand the issue first.

            Read the article: find out what the author is referring to.
            fool
            Quote: author

            Su-152 ... This statement is indeed not without foundation: there are plenty of examples from the time of the Great Patriotic War. In particular, if we talk about serial copies, the Germans tried here with their serial Jagdpanthers, Ferdinands and Jagdtigers ... Su-122-54

            It's in your brain
            classic self-propelled guns

            ?
            Where is there a classic self-propelled guns in the article?
            PySy
            Get off your chair and look away from the screen in WoT
            1. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA 5 August 2022 15: 24
              +3
              Quote from TreeSmall
              Where is there a classic self-propelled guns in the article?

              What is a classic SPG? wink
              All the vehicles mentioned in the article are self-propelled guns. Here they are only given without division into classes and generations. With the same success, you can compare the PT-76 and T-35 on the basis that they are all tanks.
              All domestic self-propelled guns from the time of the war are either assault (yes, even SU-76), designed to work with direct fire from the second line at the targets of the battlefield, or anti-tank, designed to work with direct fire purely on tanks. They were made quickly, on the basis of serial equipment and in conditions of a shortage of everything that was possible - therefore, felling was the only choice.
              The USSR was able to provide fire support in self-propelled guns only after the war - when it became possible to make mobile the entire "body kit" for the self-propelled guns division (topographic positioning, adjustment, communications, transportation of shells) and train personnel for self-propelled artillery working with PDO (simultaneously gunners and tankers).
              1. TreeSmall
                TreeSmall 5 August 2022 15: 31
                0
                What is a classic SPG?

                Not a question for me!
                Talk to:
                Quote: kytx
                Su100 and Jagdpanther are essentially PTS and not classic self-propelled guns. Understand the issue first.

                What am I doing here?
            2. kytx
              kytx 5 August 2022 16: 44
              -1
              But now it was a shame!
              I'm not a player in HERE!
              :)
              1. TreeSmall
                TreeSmall 5 August 2022 16: 58
                -1
                Yes?
                And I shoot. And I'm not offended.
                "PT SAU" and the classic "SPG" are only there
                1. kytx
                  kytx 5 August 2022 17: 31
                  0
                  Well, they are smart about it. But ... Why is there a classic self-propelled gun in HERE? They still don’t shoot at the squares from closed positions.
                  Well, all the same, the game, it has its own conventions.
                  1. TreeSmall
                    TreeSmall 5 August 2022 17: 41
                    -1
                    Why is there a classic self-propelled gun in HERE?

                    That's what the Tax Inspectorate is for, so that the entrepreneur does not borzel.
                    Is there no aviation?
                    Yes, and if you are completely nerdy, on art you can raise silver for further existence.
                    PySy, most of the tanks were destroyed, after all, not by enemy tanks.
                  2. Alexey RA
                    Alexey RA 5 August 2022 18: 57
                    +2
                    Quote: kytx
                    But ... Why is there a classic self-propelled gun in HERE? They still don’t shoot at the squares from closed positions.

                    So that bush lovers and lovers of the great standing (cowsheds on Malinovka, yeah ...) whine "nerf the art". smile
                    And so that the players have the opportunity to satisfy their base inclinations, throwing suitcases on the other side of the map with virtually impunity or putting heavy weights on the harp immediately after repair. As I remember the creeping "kvass" under the fire of my FV304 ... ehhh, they didn’t write anything about browns in the general chat, on the forum and in LiveJournal. smile
                    1. kytx
                      kytx 5 August 2022 19: 11
                      0
                      Thank. Neighing.
                    2. TreeSmall
                      TreeSmall 5 August 2022 19: 15
                      0
                      Chat is no more since 24.02…. It's a pity. Don't even express your thoughts
                2. Alexey RA
                  Alexey RA 5 August 2022 18: 51
                  0
                  Quote from TreeSmall
                  "PT SAU" and the classic "SPG" are only there

                  So the potato technique is just the period when tank destroyers bloomed and smelled. They died as a class later - by the 80s of the last century, having been supplanted by the SPTRK.
    2. dzvero
      dzvero 5 August 2022 09: 52
      0
      In calibers, yes. SU-122 has 49 klb; the T-62 has 54 klb.
  3. Konnick
    Konnick 5 August 2022 06: 07
    +8
    wheelhouse self-propelled guns have low maneuverability due to the large overall length. And finally - the lack of the possibility of firing around

    With the layout like that of the "Hummel", i.e. with a rear cabin, this statement does not work. And firing around is a highly dubious way of firing in the conditions of modern counter-battery combat. It's time to return to cutting self-propelled guns, there will be a reduction in weight and a reduction in cost.
    1. TreeSmall
      TreeSmall 5 August 2022 10: 52
      -3
      And firing around is a highly dubious way of firing in the conditions of modern counter-battery combat.

      Not more than a month ago, here, I was kicked by a crowd of hamadryas, foaming at the mouth, proving that the shooting of self-propelled guns with a clear aim at moving targets (destroy an infantry fighting vehicle that is going to capture) and shooting self-propelled guns with negative UVN (shooting from the mountains at croaking invaders ( this is a boon and the most urgent need for current self-propelled guns and the latest fashion yes
      1. Foul skeptic
        Foul skeptic 5 August 2022 11: 32
        +5
        destroy the BMP drg that is going to capture

        DRG on BMP (!!!) is going to capture (!!!) self-propelled guns?! What people don't think
        shooting self-propelled guns with negative UVN (shooting from the mountains at crouching invaders (

        What kind of mountain is this, that the angles of vertical aiming allow you to shoot at targets at the level of the foot of the mountain from the gentle ledges at the top?
        1. TreeSmall
          TreeSmall 5 August 2022 12: 00
          0
          What people don't think

          You should ask them this


          I didn’t get through to the brains ... maybe because of the lack thereof?
          https://topwar.ru/198329-avtomatizacija-na-kolesah-kompanija-excalibur-army-predstavila-samohodnuju-gaubicu-morana.html#comment-id-12625906
          1. Foul skeptic
            Foul skeptic 5 August 2022 12: 15
            +1
            In fairness, I must say that you slightly altered their words))
            1. TreeSmall
              TreeSmall 5 August 2022 14: 02
              -2
              I didn't quote! From memory, then I found quotes, provided screenshots.
              The essence is not changed, and the wrapper is not of fundamental importance.
          2. alexey sidykin
            alexey sidykin 5 August 2022 12: 33
            0
            Why didn't I answer? Let me explain, I was in the bath. And why he wrote, so the vidos saw where Msta was hitting with direct fire. I did not write that this is normal and normal. It is clear that force majeure, but nevertheless there is such an opportunity and it would be stupid to deny it.
            1. TreeSmall
              TreeSmall 5 August 2022 14: 09
              -1
              Why didn't I answer?

              Did I write "didn't answer" somewhere?
              . And why he wrote, so the vidos saw where Msta was hitting with direct fire.

              It?

              "The range to the target is 400m"
              belay
              1. Noodles
              2. If the command allowed this to happen, it is necessary to drive this
              Negative aiming angles and direct fire from a howitzer: this is "money down the drain" and stupidity
              1. alexey sidykin
                alexey sidykin 5 August 2022 16: 39
                0
                Drive not drive but there is a fact)))
                1. TreeSmall
                  TreeSmall 5 August 2022 17: 01
                  -1
                  I understood your idea: it is necessary to provide all guns with such carriages (and firing devices and radars), so that they could raise the role of anti-aircraft guns,
                  And add the ability to howitzers to shoot with anti-tank guns
                  It is clear that force majeure, but nevertheless there is such an opportunity and it would be stupid to deny it

                  come in handy
                  You can't ruin Masha with a castle
                  1. alexey sidykin
                    alexey sidykin 5 August 2022 17: 45
                    0
                    Maybe... but I didn't have any such thoughts. Just noted this fact without any such thought drinks PS. I have nothing to do with art, and I have never been particularly interested in it.
              2. stankow
                stankow 6 August 2022 01: 26
                0
                The command did not allow bi. But the enemy ran into. Hey, let's work! :)
                1. TreeSmall
                  TreeSmall 6 August 2022 03: 15
                  -1
                  Hey, let's work! :)

            2. stankow
              stankow 6 August 2022 01: 13
              0
              Direct fire is the main mode of operation of the artillery. It is studied and applied without any opposition between shooting and PDO. I don’t know who came up with the story about something like her dying off ... In all modern guns, two separate sights are installed at once - for direct fire and with PDO. Is it by chance?
              1. TreeSmall
                TreeSmall 6 August 2022 03: 18
                -1
                Shooting direct fire is main mode arti's work.

                belay
                … hashish or nasvay?
                Are we talking about PP-2 of 1935?
                1. stankow
                  stankow 7 August 2022 01: 50
                  0
                  Do not offend. One of the two main ways of shooting. It is studied by all gunners, it trains with calculations even more than when firing from the PDO. For example, on the Msta-B, the OP4M-97K sight. I touched and twisted this one on the MT-12. Luminosity, resolution, precision - just deadly!
        2. stankow
          stankow 6 August 2022 01: 21
          0
          vile skeptic
          Easy. The car got up on a bump, or the trench is uneven, the chassis has a +3 degree slope, and what, we can no longer visit closer than a kilometer? And just dangerous targets closer than 1 km laughing
      2. stankow
        stankow 6 August 2022 00: 59
        0
        TreeSmall Yes, the most pressing need. You with a rifle that cannot shoot closer than 10 m, will you go to the front line? Well, it just doesn't point, doesn't turn. Although they haven’t been going to shtikovuyu for a long time ...
        1. TreeSmall
          TreeSmall 6 August 2022 01: 07
          -1
          Yes, the most urgent need

          What a stupid analogy and completely off topic.
          You seem to want to write like this:
          you with an assault rifle that cannot shoot down satellites and [ shoot under water, as well as act as a jack, shovel and crowbar, will you go to the front line? Although there has long been a crowbar, a shovel and GBI and underwater shooting weapons

          Right?
          Will not go. It's hard and expensive.
          PySy: look at the cost and the number of rods, the year of production, as well as diagrams of loads and moments during shooting, and how much each degree costs minus 20 degrees of elevation.
          1. stankow
            stankow 7 August 2022 01: 54
            0
            I mean, why should the self-propelled guns be guided within +20 to +70 degrees? And how will you wipe the barrel?!? laughing laughing
            1. TreeSmall
              TreeSmall 7 August 2022 01: 59
              -2
              “Wipe” and charge is not to shoot with recoil (Which torments)☝️ Lower at least -10, do not be shy
    2. Romario_Argo
      Romario_Argo 5 August 2022 12: 27
      +2
      It's time to return to the cutting self-propelled guns

      felling self-propelled guns were developed as anti-tank for direct fire
      Self-propelled guns with a turret can transfer fire faster and more accurately within 15 degrees
      if the angles of rotation are greater, then the amplitude increases and the rate of fire decreases
      1. The comment was deleted.
    3. Sergey Aleksandrovich
      Sergey Aleksandrovich 5 August 2022 13: 03
      +3
      We have already seen such economists. Savings can lead to a "turretless" tank.
      1. kytx
        kytx 5 August 2022 16: 48
        +4
        Well, agree. How cool is he!
        wassat
        1. alexey sidykin
          alexey sidykin 6 August 2022 06: 35
          0
          Unless ... the idea was great, but the execution let us down.
      2. alexey sidykin
        alexey sidykin 5 August 2022 16: 51
        +2
        Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
        We have already seen such economists. Savings can lead to a "turretless" tank.

        This "type of tank" is essentially an anti-tank SU. Moreover, there is nothing new in the concept ... Wehrmacht control systems: Stug, Hetzer, Jagdpanther are also "turret-less" and there was a very serious technique.
        1. kytx
          kytx 6 August 2022 07: 08
          -1
          The Swedes, with the tenacity of the Vikings, believe that this is a tank.
          Foreigners who happened to get to know him better actually praise this self-propelled gun :)
          1. alexey sidykin
            alexey sidykin 6 August 2022 07: 46
            0
            The idea is not bad, but they were smart with aiming the gun, which is produced by the hull and not the barrel.
            1. kytx
              kytx 7 August 2022 06: 25
              -1
              No, to hell with him! I believe that hydraulics (those by changing the pitch) well, you can relatively accurately point to the corner-place. If the ground does not float. It also needs to be monitored and corrected.
              But how exactly to visit by turning the caterpillars x
              I do not know.
              Well, thanks to the Swedes for the crazy experiment. Cho.
      3. TreeSmall
        TreeSmall 5 August 2022 17: 24
        -2
        "Saving"?
        In 1967
        the cost of the development program was about 30 million dollars, and one sample - 400 thousand dollars

        I can assume that then for 400 k$ you could buy 2 leopards and 1,5 centurions
        1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
          Sergey Aleksandrovich 5 August 2022 18: 18
          +1
          Nobody needed it, it didn’t go for export, a small series, hence the high price for such an obscene product.
          1. TreeSmall
            TreeSmall 7 August 2022 02: 14
            -3
            not exported,

            And they were not going to, and never.
            Ten years of development were not in vain: the Swedish military received an extremely unusual, but at the same time technically advanced vehicle, ideally suited for Scandinavian conditions.

            If the Kungliga Arméförvaltningens Tygavdelning issued a specification for 20 tons, wood would be used in total
      4. stankow
        stankow 6 August 2022 01: 30
        0
        Well, not a leader, but you can’t call him unsuccessful either ...
        1. alexey sidykin
          alexey sidykin 6 August 2022 07: 50
          0
          Well, you can’t call him successful because he doesn’t seem to be in service.
          1. stankow
            stankow 7 August 2022 01: 32
            0
            Stood, 1960-1990s. Serial, 330 pieces.
    4. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 5 August 2022 15: 29
      +2
      Quote: Konnick
      And firing around is a highly dubious way of firing in the conditions of modern counter-battery combat.

      This is the ability to quickly open fire on targets outside the sector of 10-15 degrees along the course - without rough aiming with the hull. Plus, rapid deployment and collapse, without maneuvering on fire.
  4. The comment was deleted.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Gray-haired Zinnik
      Gray-haired Zinnik 5 August 2022 07: 04
      +5
      Link to source please. This news was released by IA Panorama.
      1. ares1988
        ares1988 5 August 2022 07: 29
        0
        https://tass.ru/ekonomika/15395741?utm_source=yandex.ru&utm_medium=organic&utm_campaign=yandex.ru&utm_referrer=yandex.ru
        It's great that even you recognize Tass as a humorous resource) As well as RIA Novosti, Rossiyskaya Gazeta, Lenta, MK)
      2. TreeSmall
        TreeSmall 5 August 2022 10: 55
        +2
        Quote: Gray-haired Cynic
        Link to source please. This news was released by IA Panorama.

        fool
        http://government.ru/docs/all/142323/

        Break away from the program 60 minutes
    3. Mister X
      Mister X 5 August 2022 09: 36
      +5
      Quote: carpenter
      need to extradite two more slaves

      Hear you, Birch!
      They will give you a load of beer.
  5. smaug78
    smaug78 5 August 2022 06: 08
    +16
    The author has written so much, but everything is past ... But the casket just opens - it’s enough to compare the range of tasks of self-propelled guns from the times of the Second World War and modern ones. And there will be no need to write a meaningless opus ...
    1. kytx
      kytx 5 August 2022 06: 22
      +5
      I personally enjoyed reading it. I learned a couple of things for myself
      1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Momotomba
      Momotomba 5 August 2022 07: 19
      +6
      Comparing self-propelled guns from the times of the 2nd world and modern cars is like comparing round with red ... Other use leads to a change in design - this is the main reason for abandoning cutting and moving to a tower ...
      1. kytx
        kytx 5 August 2022 07: 30
        +1
        There, as it were, sau vmv2 and modern ones cannot be compared. This is literally written in the article.
        1. Momotomba
          Momotomba 5 August 2022 20: 36
          0
          Quote: kytx
          There, as it were, sau vmv2 and modern ones cannot be compared. This is literally written in the article.

          Probably didn't notice...
          But in the article, the author, as I understand it, is trying to explain why they switched from self-propelled guns armed with a cannon in the wheelhouse to self-propelled guns armed with a howitzer in the turret ... It’s probably not worth comparing cars of different classes
          1. kytx
            kytx 5 August 2022 21: 34
            +1
            It's about something else.
            Having got rid of the tower, you get an "extra" horizontal drive and lose it in the space of the fighting compartment. Doubtful win.
            Then maybe it made sense.
            None in the real paradigm.
            1. Momotomba
              Momotomba 5 August 2022 22: 45
              0
              Quote: kytx
              Then maybe it made sense.

              If it doesn't make sense now, then it didn't make sense then. Just couldn't do it for whatever reason
      2. TreeSmall
        TreeSmall 5 August 2022 12: 06
        -1
        Other use leads to a change in design

        Yes, it's simple:
        1. automatic loader or groove
        2. electronics, navigation devices, ballistic computers, tablets, screens, communications
        3. The crew and the need to protect it from winter, bacteriological, nuclear weapons, anti-fragmentation and anti-dust protection
        1 + 2 + 3 = all this should be covered, both from atmospheric precipitation, and to ensure a stable temperature for the operation of the equipment
        4. Carousel machines and metal are not in short supply today, as during the war.
        5. Thanks to the az or groove, the rate of fire has increased and it is simply stupid to transfer fire in azimuth by turning the hull
        1. Momotomba
          Momotomba 5 August 2022 20: 42
          +1
          You are talking about all sorts of attachments that allow you to quickly and easily perform operations on the use of the main caliber. In reality, there was a change in the purpose of the self-propelled guns. Self-propelled howitzers appeared from vehicles walking behind tanks at a distance of 300-400 m and firing into the gaps between their own, which, I agree with you, in our time looks like arzoism. And with metal also it became easier.
          Quote from TreeSmall
          The crew and the need to protect it from winter, bacteriological, nuclear weapons, anti-fragmentation and anti-dust protection
          1 + 2 + 3 = all this should be covered, both from atmospheric precipitation, and to ensure a stable temperature for the operation of the equipment

          Cabin from the rain will not save? I don’t think that in the ISU-152 the crew was heavily flooded with rain)
          1. TreeSmall
            TreeSmall 5 August 2022 20: 57
            0
            From vehicles walking behind tanks at a distance of 300-400 m and firing into the gaps between their

            We are talking about howitzers, and not about "pt sau."
            The author messed everything up (cockroaches in the article and in the head)
            These types:
            https://amp.topwar.ru/108720-samohodnye-gaubicy-vtoroy-mirovoy-voyny-chast-2-sturmpanzer-i-bison.html
            They didn't go 400 meters and didn't shoot through the cracks.
            Cabin from the rain will not save? I don’t think that in the ISU-152 the crew was heavily flooded with rain)

            It's not about anti-tank self-propelled guns on the chassis at all

            Isu152 was not flooded and the marauder was not flooded.
            There is nothing to fill.
            Talking about this:


            And you turn it all around

            Although these latter are crammed with electronics and mechanisms, which are not like in the rain: you can’t leave them under the sun
            1. Momotomba
              Momotomba 5 August 2022 21: 41
              0
              Quote from TreeSmall
              And you turn it all around

              In the article, ISU-152, Jagdpanther, SU-122-54 are compared with M-109 and Gvozdika ... what conclusion should be drawn?
              1. TreeSmall
                TreeSmall 5 August 2022 21: 56
                -1
                In the article, ISU-152, Jagdpanther, SU-122-54 are compared with M-109 and Gvozdika ... what conclusion should be drawn?

                Cockroaches in my head
    3. Vladimir_2U
      Vladimir_2U 5 August 2022 07: 28
      +13
      Quote: smaug78
      But the casket just opens - it’s enough to compare the range of tasks of self-propelled guns from the times of the Second World War and modern ones.

      Yes, I am disappointed with the article, usually the author writes more carefully. Here, for some reason, he cites as a negative example anti-tank and assault self-propelled self-propelled guns with a rear-mounted MTO, but as a positive example howitzer (in fact) self-propelled guns. Completely different classes! But I forgot about Hyacinth and Malka, and in fact there is not even a cabin there, but after all, circular firing is also not implemented, I would have looked at the tower with a 203 mm gun.
      In addition, when comparing the armor of the Su-122-54 and T-62A, the author missed the angle of inclination of the frontal armor of the self-propelled gun over the entire height, plus the fact that the armor was not cast, but rolled, but these are trifles, the message of the article itself is strange.
  6. Grossvater
    Grossvater 5 August 2022 07: 04
    -3
    And what is the article about? The most important thing for whom?
  7. Mikhail3
    Mikhail3 5 August 2022 07: 22
    -5
    Why does a cat lick its balls? Because it can) the tower makes it much easier to aim if it is large enough and resistant to the momentum of the shot. Why was the USSR late with the T 34? Because the Americans refused to sell a machine capable of cutting a shoulder strap under a tower of sufficient width, and so far the USSR did not have its own such machines. Now there is a machine) What a strange article. Yes, 2x2=4 You can not prove it again)
    1. kytx
      kytx 5 August 2022 07: 31
      +4
      It's all conspiracy theories.
    2. dzvero
      dzvero 5 August 2022 10: 12
      +1
      Not this way. More details here:
      https://warspot.ru/17005-teoriya-bronetankovyh-zabluzhdeniy-tanki-v-chistom-pole-i-amerikanskie-stanki
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 5 August 2022 15: 39
        +2
        Quote: dzvero
        Not this way. More details here:
        https://warspot.ru/17005-teoriya-bronetankovyh-zabluzhdeniy-tanki-v-chistom-pole-i-amerikanskie-stanki

        Not everything is so clear. Indeed, Pasholok writes that:
        In itself, the inability of the Soviet industry to produce tanks with a shoulder strap diameter of more than 1500 mm raises a smile. When this topic is raised once again, a leading question arises - what was the diameter of the shoulder straps of the T-28 and T-35? Let's give a hint right away - a little more. Further, an equally interesting question arises about what shoulder strap diameter the tanks of the KV and KV-1s families had (1590 mm). There is nothing to say about the IS-1 and the IS-2 that followed it - there the shoulder strap diameter was 1800 mm. And this is just the beginning. In 1937, the Krasnodar Machine-Tool Plant named after Sedin began production of a single-column lathe model 152. Before the capture of Krasnodar by the Germans, more than a thousand of such machines were produced there. For reference, the maximum processing diameter was 2000 mm.

        But in the comments, the assertion about the provision of the tank industry with model 152 machines for processing shoulder straps is refuted. And in quantity:
        The site http://k-zts.ru/history.html states:
        On April 12, 1958, the 1000th machine was assembled, on September 24, 1967, the 10th, and on December 000, 27, the 1976th.

        That is, 1000 machines of all models by 1958, and not one model 152.

        And for the specs:
        In the book "Working of metals by cutting", 1959 on page 210 are given
        characteristics of the machine model 152:
        The largest turning diameter of the turret cutters is 1000 mm.
        The largest diameter of turning with cutters of the side support is 900 mm.
        1. dzvero
          dzvero 5 August 2022 17: 00
          0
          A shoulder strap of 1600 mm on the T-34 was planned before the war, i.e. there were machines in the country. Here:
          On December 13, 1940, the head of the 1st department of the 3rd department of the armored department of the GABTU KA, Lieutenant Colonel I. Panov (he oversaw work on the T-34 from the armored department) sent a letter to Lieutenant General Fedorenko, in which among
          other things
          “Is this expansion possible in terms of production? Perhaps, since this expansion does not matter for the Mariupol plant, and plant No. 183 has machine tools for the production of expanded shoulder straps.

          link:
          https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjv1_Ox6K_5AhXBXvEDHUuUBsw4FBAWegQIFBAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Ftms.ystu.ru%2FStanor%2520for%2520t-34.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2bhXudRdgS_t38cTcQdVps
          1. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 5 August 2022 19: 13
            +2
            Quote: dzvero
            A shoulder strap of 1600 mm on the T-34 was planned before the war, i.e. there were machines in the country.

            The question is, how did comrade lieutenant colonel consider the capabilities of the machine - in "cleanliness" only in terms of shoulder straps or "in the light" in terms of real blanks?
            Shoulder strap in light 1420.
            + 2x30 skirt. Already 1480.
            + 2x60...80 flange. Total 1600...1640 mm.
            + 10-50 mm reserve for casting (at the Kharkov plant in 1938 - up to 3% "ovality" of round castings was). Total 1650-1690 mm.
            It just turns out the "ideal size" for a milling and rotary machine with a grip of 1700 mm.

            For a shoulder strap with a clear shoulder diameter of 1600, you already need a machine with a processing diameter of at least 1800 mm (or rather, all 1900 mm).
            © from Marchenko's discussion on the shortcomings of the T-34

            By the way, the USSR really had machines for processing a large shoulder strap of tank towers. But in Leningrad, at the LKZ - providing the production of T-28 and KV. And this equipment went to the Urals during the war, to ensure the production of HF and IS at ChKZ.

            However, during the war, such a machine was also found for the T-34 - before the arrival of imports. During the evacuation, he was brought to Sormovo, to plant No. 112. And that is why the Sormovites were the first to start producing the T-34-85.
  8. 2 Level Advisor
    2 Level Advisor 5 August 2022 07: 55
    0
    if the budget from which you can get 50 self-propelled guns with a tower and 70 self-propelled guns with a cabin and there is no task to save money, they build with a tower, and they saved everything in WW2, so I think about towers and there was no talk, in addition, then self-propelled guns and participated in battles with tanks , and here the tower would obviously lose .... but in our time, there is a task to save money - a system with a cabin .. that's all .. when shooting "straight" like self-propelled guns, they most often do it - there is not much difference .. I'm sure what if you need it again - it’s mass self-propelled guns - they will be with a cabin ..
    1. kytx
      kytx 5 August 2022 08: 43
      +7
      In WWII, self-propelled guns were used as assault guns and PTS, which is why the frontal armor was also made thick.
      Now no one would think of such a thing.
      If you suddenly need massive self-propelled guns, they will be with a rotating gun and completely without armor :)
  9. UVB
    UVB 5 August 2022 08: 28
    +1
    Guns of the tank and self-propelled guns, despite the different caliber (100 mm for the tank and 122 mm for the self-propelled guns)
    The T-62 tank has a gun caliber of 115 mm.
    1. Vladimir_2U
      Vladimir_2U 5 August 2022 08: 53
      +3
      Quote: UVB
      The T-62 tank has a gun caliber of 115 mm.

      The author pointed out the T-62A, there is a weave of increased power.
      1. UVB
        UVB 5 August 2022 09: 30
        +1
        Yes you are right.
    2. UVB
      UVB 5 August 2022 09: 32
      +2
      My cant, indeed, a rifled 62-mm gun U100-TS (D-8) was installed on the T-54A with improved, compared to the D-10T2S
  10. Ruby
    Ruby 5 August 2022 08: 31
    +6
    The layout of the task always dances. In WWII, the main tasks of the ACS were direct support and VET. Now fire from closed positions from several kilometers from the front line (quickly shoot back and just as quickly flee, ideally before the arrival of shells at enemy positions). Serious armor is not needed here and a tower is needed, primarily for quickly transferring the direction of fire. If self-propelled guns of the forties acted in battle formations of tanks and infantry, today the appearance of self-propelled guns on the front line means one thing. The front crumbled, the enemy went to the artillery positions. And in this case, a pair of infantry fighting vehicles will spray an ACS battery into atoms in a minute.
    1. stankow
      stankow 6 August 2022 02: 07
      0
      "quickly shoot back and just as quickly flee, ideally before the arrival of shells at enemy positions)"
      Complete nonsense. Nobody fights like that. Not according to the charter, not according to reason! Neither the possibility of technology, nor the possibility of calculations ...
  11. demiurg
    demiurg 5 August 2022 09: 09
    +6
    The felling self-propelled guns will be lighter than the tower. The author confuses soft with warm.
    The tower of modern self-propelled guns is generally not for firing in a circle, but for mechanized stacking to be in the same position relative to the AZ or rammer, which increases the rate of fire and makes the work of the loaders more comfortable. Well, yes, if the swinging part (with huge elevation angles and large recoil) moves along with stacking, this will save a lot of armored volume. If the AZ is taken out of the body (Hyacinth / Caesar), then suddenly a 360-degree turn is not needed.
  12. JD1979
    JD1979 5 August 2022 10: 06
    +7
    Mdya, somewhere in a parallel universe, the logic was lost ... The author, explain with what fright you explain the evolution of howitzers !!! Self-propelled guns through tank destroyers that have completely different tasks and a place on the battlefield? Moreover, the latter were used during WWII, when the tactics of using technology were completely different? Ptshki of that time fought at the forefront either in ambushes or stormed and had to keep the caliber of enemy tanks and their anti-tank guns. Hence the armor. Modern self-propelled guns are exclusively work in the rear, respectively, the armor is maximum anti-fragmentation.
    1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
      Sergey Aleksandrovich 5 August 2022 18: 25
      +1
      Modern self-propelled guns on a tracked chassis are not intended for use only in the rear, they are equipped with a sight for direct fire. Working exclusively in the rear is for wheeled self-propelled guns, but even those provide for direct fire, you never know what situation arises.
      1. JD1979
        JD1979 5 August 2022 19: 02
        0
        Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
        Modern self-propelled guns on a tracked chassis are not intended for use only in the rear, they are equipped with a sight for direct fire.

        Seriously? Could this be a last resort? If something unexpected happened.
        1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
          Sergey Aleksandrovich 5 August 2022 19: 48
          0
          You don't have to worry so much out of nowhere. There has already been a case of the destruction of an APU tank by direct fire from a 152-mm self-propelled gun during the SVO, and most likely not the last.
          1. JD1979
            JD1979 5 August 2022 22: 23
            +1
            Empty space?))) It's just a happy accident that the tankers didn't notice the self-propelled guns first, otherwise it would have been the other way around. On the Ukrainian side, by the way, there are also cases of atypical use of weapons with a successful outcome for them and deplorable for us.
            1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
              Sergey Aleksandrovich 5 August 2022 22: 36
              +1
              Having self-propelled guns on caterpillars and not having direct fire for it is, excuse me, from the other world or virtual reality. Self-propelled guns are used for direct fire and often. MSTA or "Coalition" do not look very good for this, but "Acacia" is just right.
              If you don’t have your own experience, then at least watch the video, there are self-propelled guns working direct fire.
              And about the deplorable outcomes for us, they noted it carefully, took care of it, did not give offense to the Ukrainian side, which is very logical of you.
              1. JD1979
                JD1979 6 August 2022 09: 21
                0
                Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                If you don’t have your own experience, then at least watch the video, there are self-propelled guns working direct fire.

                During the exercises?))) So crowbars or land mines do not fly back there))) Real cases of use in Syria, and precisely by the Syrians, again come from the fact that they are forced to do this, in the absence of an alternative. Moreover, they used them against firing points and buildings and tanks.
                Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                And about the deplorable outcomes for us, they noted it carefully, took care of it, did not give offense to the Ukrainian side, which is very logical of you.

                And how was it necessary to celebrate?))) in their style - to make a peramoga out of any zrada?))) Like they gouged us, but did we win anyway?))) Unlike you, I look at direct military operations from the point of view errors or shortcomings that led to certain results, both on the one hand and on the other. And if ours screw up, then they screw up, and there’s nothing to put on a pink filter here. And the competent actions of the enemy, it may seem strange to you))), you also need to analyze in order to avoid losses in the future in similar situations. And if we touch on the moral and ethical point of conducting the NWO, I am completely and completely on the side of Russia.
                1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
                  Sergey Aleksandrovich 6 August 2022 09: 24
                  0
                  Something is not visible on your part of the desire to see mistakes and shortcomings, only the desire not to offend the Armed Forces of Ukraine is noticeable. In your opinion, if there is success on our part, then this is an accident, and if on the part of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, then these are already cases in the multitude, how is this to be understood?
                  1. JD1979
                    JD1979 6 August 2022 17: 03
                    0
                    If you have nothing to say in essence, do not clutter up the chat))) You have some obsessive desire that others would definitely offend the Armed Forces of Ukraine))) Maybe they personally offended you with something?)) Or are they just Ukrainian roots? do not feed bread - let someone humiliate? Why should I offend them and how?))) They are already offended there, at the most reluctant, several hundred people a day))) If you want to offend them so much, go ahead - the contacts of the musicians are on the network, and shake the air or write in chat ))) so they are neither cold nor hot from this)))
                    1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
                      Sergey Aleksandrovich 6 August 2022 21: 49
                      0
                      You were not required to defend the Armed Forces of Ukraine, it is not clear where you got the desire to stand up for the Armed Forces of Ukraine out of the blue.
                      But in essence, there is nothing to say here, direct fire for tracked self-propelled guns is a necessity. If only because in order to hit targets in the depths of enemy defenses, it becomes necessary to position yourself close to the front line, and anything can happen there. You have to be a person who does not understand anything in military affairs to consider direct fire superfluous.
                      1. JD1979
                        JD1979 7 August 2022 00: 34
                        0
                        Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                        If only because in order to hit targets in the depths of enemy defenses, it becomes necessary to position yourself close to the front line, and anything can happen there.

                        Well, yes ... I was naive and thought that in this case something more long-range was taken ... MLRS there ... aviation ... But this is probably not in your universe.
      2. TreeSmall
        TreeSmall 6 August 2022 00: 52
        0
        Quote: S.A.
        Modern self-propelled guns on a tracked chassis are not intended for use ☝️only in the rear, they are equipped with a sight for ☝️direct aiming.

        belay
        Immediately reminded

        I'm afraid to run into rudeness, but still I'll ask: you didn't do boxing (in childhood)?
  13. Grossvater
    Grossvater 5 August 2022 10: 20
    +1
    Quote: Mikhail3
    capable of cutting a shoulder strap under the tower

    Boring! The shoulder strap is round, it is being bored! Plane straight sections. For example, the edges of armor plates.
  14. Grossvater
    Grossvater 5 August 2022 10: 29
    +2
    At the same time, the muzzle energy of a tank gun is higher.

    The D-10-T has a muzzle energy of 6 J.
    The D-25, whose ballistics was adopted for the D-49 gun, has a muzzle energy of 8 J.
    1. Vladimir_2U
      Vladimir_2U 5 August 2022 17: 09
      0
      Quote: UVB
      T-62A, a rifled 100-mm gun U8-TS (D-54) was installed with improved, compared to D-10T2S
      hi
      The D-54TS gun was almost 30% more powerful than the 100-mm D10-T gun. The length of its barrel (58,38 klb.) Pa 200 mm was longer than the length of the barrel of the D10-T2S gun (the length of the barrel fastened with a casing was 5700 mm). The muzzle energy was 8,31 MJ (847 tf-m)
  15. Yak28
    Yak28 5 August 2022 11: 34
    +2
    Modern turret self-propelled guns are designed for firing at long distances, they don’t need armor, and self-propelled guns with a cabin from the times of the Second World War are designed for direct fire at tanks and other equipment, you feel the difference Yagd. Panthers with dynamic protection in the forehead and a machine-gun turret on the roof and the whole tank destroyer is ready.
    1. Foul skeptic
      Foul skeptic 5 August 2022 13: 53
      0
      Doing today a modern version of Yagd. Panthers with dynamic protection in the forehead and a machine-gun turret on the roof and the whole tank destroyer is ready.

      It remains to figure out why it is needed.
      1. Yak28
        Yak28 5 August 2022 15: 32
        +1
        It will come in handy, you see in Ukraine all the junk of the 60s-70s had to be in place.
    2. Sergey Aleksandrovich
      Sergey Aleksandrovich 5 August 2022 22: 46
      0
      And if you have to fire direct fire in the mountains or in the city on the upper floors of high-rise buildings, isn't a large angle of elevation of the barrel needed?
      1. Yak28
        Yak28 6 August 2022 00: 15
        0
        The tank's barrel won't shoot high either, especially since the city can be made one-story. Nevertheless, I wrote that the self-propelled guns are anti-tank, and you want a universal robot that will let everyone shit in the field, in the city, and in the mountains.
  16. Pavel57
    Pavel57 5 August 2022 13: 45
    0
    An interesting analysis.
  17. Vincent price
    Vincent price 5 August 2022 13: 49
    -2
    Thanks for the stuff.
  18. Proctologist
    Proctologist 5 August 2022 14: 03
    0
    Thank you for reading with great interest! On booking, I’ll insert a remark from the sofa: if we are talking about modern long-range howitzers, such as those 155 mm, which are obviously a lot of talk lately, then either something harsh can fly in response - a rocket or an armor-piercing projectile capable of flying over 20 km - or, on the contrary, something small like a grenade from a drone or cluster submunitions. In both cases, heavy armor looks unnecessary. So?
    1. Foul skeptic
      Foul skeptic 5 August 2022 16: 22
      +2
      then in response it can fly either

      In 9 cases out of 10, a package of MLRS 122 or the same projectile 152/155 will arrive in response.
      therefore
      In both cases, heavy armor looks unnecessary. So?

      Ideally, protection should keep fragments from OFS 155 from a distance of at least 30 meters (STANAG 4569 lv.4), about 10 meters (STANAG 4569 lv.6) and do not stutter.
  19. svp67
    svp67 5 August 2022 15: 13
    0
    Therefore, in order to bring the protection of the self-propelled guns to the level of a tank, its mass must be increased by an average of three tons. The conclusion is obvious.
    No, it's not obvious. The maximum thickness of the tower was not over the entire area, but only in a certain area, in the frontal projection, if the same area of ​​​​armor on the SU-122-54 is brought to the same thickness, then it will be significantly less than three tons
  20. Konnick
    Konnick 5 August 2022 18: 59
    -1
    Our infantry needs a self-propelled gun with a powerful, short-barreled low-ballistic gun and a low profile with sufficient armor against return mortar fire. Direct presence near infantry units for firing from closed positions at target designation of infantry at a distance of up to 2-3 km. Like the German self-propelled gun Brumbar or Sturmpanzer IV.
    1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
      Sergey Aleksandrovich 5 August 2022 19: 57
      0
      And why do you need such a serious reservation if you are going to fire from closed positions? With mounted fire, it makes almost no difference from what distance to fire. At the mentioned range and beyond, the landing NONA will fit, and the delayed Phlox. In their 120-mm caliber, mines with ready-made rifling are quite accurate.
      And at distances of 2-3 km, one should not be afraid of enemy mines, but grenade launchers and ATGMs. This is their reach, more likely a line from an enemy AGS will arrive than an 82-mm mine.
  21. alexxxxz
    alexxxxz 5 August 2022 21: 56
    +1
    I was the only one who was embarrassed that the author did not know the caliber of the T-62A tank gun?
    "SU-122-54 - and compare it with the T-62A tank." and
    "(100 mm for the tank and 122 mm for the self-propelled guns)".
    This is somehow strange and more like a comparison of warm and soft. When making a comparison, the author, as an empirically savvy person, forgot, or rather did not know, that it is customary to bury equipment in the ground, the concept of "closed position" implies just that. And when working from a trench, self-propelled guns with a cabin are deprived of the possibility of turning the hull, only within the horizontal guidance angle. That is why modern self-propelled guns have towers. And the whole presentation by the author is pulling an owl on a globe. But I read it with pleasure as a humoresque. Laughed a lot. Thanks to the author!
    1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
      Sergey Aleksandrovich 6 August 2022 09: 39
      0
      Yes, and guidance with the help of caterpillars is not a pleasant pleasure, if the soil is loose, then you can dig in so that you can’t get out without outside help.
    2. Hog
      Hog 7 August 2022 23: 45
      0
      Quote: alexxxz
      I was the only one who was embarrassed that the author did not know the caliber of the T-62A tank gun?
      "SU-122-54 - and compare it with the T-62A tank." and
      "(100 mm for the tank and 122 mm for the self-propelled guns)".

      No, the author just played tanks, and then went to write an article.
  22. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 5 August 2022 23: 00
    0
    Su122-54 beauty… photo from Krasnodar. Museum of technology on Zaton
  23. stankow
    stankow 6 August 2022 00: 35
    0
    Whatever, not bad. Reasonable, clear. Convinced! :)
  24. DominickS
    DominickS 6 August 2022 17: 37
    0
    Quote: Nikolai S.
    Genocide-S

    cool typo
  25. Hog
    Hog 7 August 2022 23: 44
    0
    Honestly, the article is so-so, one comparison of tank destroyers and long-range artillery is worth something.
    But after this pearl, I did not read further.
    So, self-propelled guns with a fixed cabin, when compared with a turret layout, are always heavier, even with the same armament and armor protection.

    Apparently, a person has not seen any of the types of self-propelled guns since he makes such a conclusion.
    About the mass, the turret ones have a pagon with horizontal guidance drives (and they cannot be compared with what the turret ones have) + armor of the hull roof under the turret + armor of the lower part of the turret, or do you think they weigh nothing? Whether you like it or not, the mass of turret self-propelled guns will always be higher than that of those without turret ones.
  26. Sedoy
    Sedoy 7 August 2022 23: 59
    0
    Despite everything, the felling layout has a significant advantage - the cost of manufacturing

    again everything is measured by loot ...
    it is necessary to legally castrate all such experts so that they do not breed ...
    you need to think about people, about people ...
    not about the bubble...
    1. agond
      agond 9 August 2022 09: 05
      0
      Arguing that a turret or turretless self-propelled gun is better, one must take into account the fact that, as a rule, modern self-propelled guns take their positions at a significant distance from the front line (about 10 km or more), firing is carried out in a very narrow sector at fixed targets with known coordinates, therefore there is no need to use a turret self-propelled gun for such conditions, especially since the turret scheme dramatically increases the dimensions and height of the vehicle, it is much more difficult to disguise it or build a closed position for it
      Once again, a tower circuit is needed in two cases
      1 for firing within line of sight, for example for a tank
      2 for firing at moving targets, such as a ship's gun mount
      in long-range artillery you can do without a tower
      1. Sedoy
        Sedoy 9 August 2022 19: 29
        0
        such an approach is acceptable for consideration, but no more
        although it is necessary to proceed not only from the current, but also from the concepts of the future ...
        the lack of horizontal guidance is a big minus ...
        the article indicates the displacement of the gun breech at a horizontal pointing angle by the gun itself, and not by the turret ...
        given the current counter-battery duel, there is no time to adjust the hull - I turned the tower, shot it and bring it down quickly ...
  27. AlexHafele
    AlexHafele 10 August 2022 11: 11
    0
    Great article! I liked it very much. Thank you!