It is reported about the start of production of a pilot batch of the new ACS 2S43 "Malva"

State tests of the 152-mm self-propelled artillery gun 2S43 "Malva" are proceeding according to plan, the preliminary completion date is the end of 2022. This was reported by the press service of "Uralvagonzavod".

Reportedly, the tests are being carried out by the Ministry of Defense, the developer presented a prototype of the SAO (self-propelled artillery gun) with modifications based on the results of preliminary tests that ended last year. As stated at UVZ, the sample undergoing state tests fully complies with the tactical and technical requirements and has confirmed its effectiveness.

At the same time, UVZ began production of a pilot batch of new self-propelled guns, which will go to the troops for trial operation. Dates are not named. The adoption of the gun into service is planned in 2023, at the same time, most likely, mass production will begin. The decision on this will be made by the Ministry of Defense.

The self-propelled artillery gun 2S43 "Malva" was developed by the Central Research Institute "Petrel" as part of the R & D "Sketch". For the first time, the howitzer was presented in 2019 in closed mode. It is known that the 152-mm 2A64 cannon used in the Msta-S self-propelled guns is used as a fire component on the Malva self-propelled guns. The howitzer's transportable ammunition load is 30 rounds, the mass of the SAO is 32 tons. The BAZ-6010-027 all-terrain vehicle with an 8x8 wheel formula manufactured by the Bryansk Automobile Plant acts as the chassis of the "Malva".

In general, within the framework of the R & D "Sketch" a whole series of self-propelled artillery guns is being developed. In addition to the "Malva" itself, the artillery "flower garden" included a 120-mm SAO "Floks" on the Ural-VV chassis, a 120-mm "Arctic" self-propelled gun "Magnolia" on the chassis of a two-link tractor DT-30MP and an 82-mm mortar "Drok" on Chassis "Typhoon-VDV".

Comments

[silverwolf88]

as the nature of the conduct of hostilities by the Russian army shows, artillery systems will be in demand ... therefore, their constant improvement (and their ammunition, too) is an important task for industry

[Shark Lover]

As are the tanks. Although, quite recently there was an opinion that tanks are not needed.

[Vladimir Postnikov]

Quote: Shark Lover

As are the tanks. Although, quite recently there was an opinion that tanks are not needed.

Can you tell me what the "current opinion" suggested instead of tanks? There had to be some kind of concept that would involve the use of other means.
And with artillery, too, not everything is so simple. It's good when you have large stocks of Soviet unguided projectiles, and still have production lines for the production of these projectiles. The same goes for tanks. In these conditions - one economy. And what will happen when the reserves are depleted and the lines wear out? I assure you, it will already be a different economy. It is no coincidence that today only old men went into battle. But tomorrow everything will change. The same applies to the West. It is no coincidence that they dump on Ukraine what they do not want. And at the same time they are testing the effectiveness of their new weapons. Ukrainians have already empirically confirmed the different value of Hymers and 777. But Hymers cost money. And Ukrainians are worth nothing. Moreover, instead of the "old men" dropped on Ukraine, the United States will sell its weapons to Europe, saving its economy. And here the economy is closely intertwined with politics.
Yes, and this Malva is just yesterday's Caesar. But Phlox is just squalor and a frank cut.
Summary: If there was any opinion not supported by the economy, then it was just erotic fantasies. In the end, everyone fights with what they can and how they can.

[Urs]

Well, there are objections and agreement with your opinion.
As a professional tanker, I’ll be honestly disappointed in the current tactics of using tanks according to the experience of the SVO. It seemed that the armor of the tanks did not seem to play a decisive role. "armor fist". With such a saturation of the TCP, this tactic of using tank units does not justify itself at all. In practice, tanks are used only as self-propelled guns with a high degree of security, but a 125 mm gun "It won't be enough."
Here I am a greater supporter of the use of the "terminator", the efficiency is much higher than that of tanks.
And about the "mallow". Well, nifiga is not a "Caesar" but our vision of the "concept" of a wheeled self-propelled gun, "Caesar" is the French vision of this "concept".
The main advantage of this type of self-propelled guns is higher mobility compared to tracked ones. I don’t see any big advantages. By and large, both Msta and Malva are the same only for different conditions of warfare.
In winter, in slush and frost, and if there is still precipitation, "mallow" will be, as it were, softer to say, well, it's bad in short.
My opinion

[Vladimir Postnikov]

Quote: Urs

Well, nifiga is not a "Caesar", but our vision of the "concept" of a wheeled self-propelled gun, "Caesar" is the French vision of this "concept".

I compared Malva with Caesar solely on the architectural layout, which is directly related to the tactics of use. But in addition to the architectural solution, there are also control systems that also affect the tactics of application. To what extent Malva corresponds to Caesar (or surpasses him), I do not presume to judge. Don't know.
As for the caterpillar and the wheel, it is impossible to grasp the immensity. Somewhere a wheel is appropriate, somewhere a caterpillar. If you have a choice, choose. If not, we fight with what we have.
Regarding Caesar, here we had a small dispute with a very competent and reasonable specialist Lopatov some years ago (today he is very lacking here). He defended Caesar's decisions, and I defended Archer. Today's war confirms that Archer is preferable, but he was initially quite expensive. But Archer's wheeled solution is much better than both yesterday's Caesar and tomorrow's Malva.
By the way, Sweden has not delivered a single Archer to Ukraine, even in memory of Poltava.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

"Phlox" is not squalor, although he also considered it as such at first. This is a battalion-level vehicle to replace the carried 120-mm Sani mortar. It would be a timely car, it's a pity it was delayed. Significantly strengthened the artillery support at the grassroots level. The range is just within the area of ​​responsibility of the battalion level, in the line of sight and reach of small UAVs. Of the advantages, an inexpensive wheeled chassis, an armored cab, drive automation, a large portable ammunition load and compatibility with existing mines. Of the significant shortcomings, only the low permeability and vulnerability of the loader.
Now it’s the number of barrels that decides and the early opening of fire on detected targets is possible, and here the Phlox at the battalion level would be perfect, especially where the 2S12 Sleigh is lacking.

[Vladimir Postnikov]

Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich

"Phlox" is not squalor, although he also considered it as such at first.

Do you have a link to videos of his shooting? Anything like shooting Archer or Caesar, of which there are plenty? Without which no foreigner will buy it. Though small from a distance, even a carcass, even a stuffed animal. If not, then your comment was in vain. Drive automation sounds tempting, and I believe that you even meant an automated control system, although this is already yesterday in the world. But I have a question: do they take a loader from the circus there? But this is a joke. Further more:

Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich

especially where the 2S12 "Sled" is not enough.

This made me want to cry. What, M-30 howitzers are completely gone from their grandfathers? And the SU-122 is also gone? That's who had no problems with patency, and circus performers were not required, and the armor was just class (and for the entire crew)!

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

A vehicle for the battalion level with great compatibility of ammunition, at the regimental and brigade level it is already a 152-mm self-propelled gun.
This is essentially a mortar and should be compared with mobile mortars.

[Vladimir Postnikov]

Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich

at the regimental and brigade level already 152-mm self-propelled guns.

And what does 152 mm self-propelled guns have to do with it? We talked about 120 and 122 mm guns. Phlox's versatile weapon can fire mines too. But why write it down immediately into mortars? When you mentioned Sleigh here, you apparently forgot that this is not a self-propelled mortar. Excuse me, but it turns out "here we see, here we do not see, but here we wrap the herring." I don't like this kind of logic.

[Vadim237]

According to the results of the SVO, it can be said that all tanks need to be modernized; drones of the DJI type should be introduced into the tank with coordinate binding of data received from the drone camera to the tank’s aiming systems; on which dynamic protection will be attached, which will significantly strengthen the side projections from RPG ATGM high-explosive fragmentation and other shells into the side and protect the sides from close explosions of the same 50 mm mines and 60 mm shells; install active protection such as Drozd 120 or Arena 155; armor visors are just not the lattice squalor that they are now putting - low but high so that you can freely leave the car without problems to load ammo, etc. from the same titanium armor plates with a thickness of 2 - 2 mm on the sides covered with lattice screens that will block the side projections that the crew will be able to lift up if you need to get out of the car, this will allow you to really protect the upper projection from the NLAW Javelins of the same mines and shells flying into the tower and dropped mini bombs of the same UAVs to create 50mm shrapnel shells with a programmable fuse and similar to RMG shots - cumulative - volumetric detonating for combat operations in the city, also equip the tank turret with an all-round visibility system and protect the interior of the tank with a Kevlar coating so that in the event of penetration of the armor, most of the fragments from abuse would be retained. All this will increase the tank’s efficiency and crew survival by several times - but as practice shows our MO you don’t have to bother, tanks and tankers for them are quickly consumables in tank depots in bulk, and women still give birth to new tankers with everything else in the army; they don’t even provide normal training for personnel.

[Georgy Sviridov_2]

777 is far from a cutting-edge product. From the western ones, really advanced Swedish archers and German pz 2000 ...
At our a-222 coastal complex, the fire control system allows you to take lead and hit targets moving up to 180 km / h. And this is without precision-guided munitions ... Shipborne suos are similar ...
Similar suos (although not as powerful, they simply are not needed in land battles) are put on the veins and new lotuses with which they will now saturate the airborne forces.
Ordinary shells for artillery will be needed for a very long time, and especially mortar mines ... With high-precision systems, they will go in parallel ... Taking into account the capabilities of the FCS and UAV reconnaissance, the effectiveness of artillery has increased tenfold.

[Vladimir Postnikov]

Quote: Georgy Sviridov_2

Taking into account the capabilities of the SLA and UAV reconnaissance, the effectiveness of artillery has increased tenfold.

You have a bit of everything here. Efficiency if increased, then not tenfold, and not with us. You are trying to cram theory and Wishlist into reality. There were no drones in World War II, but there was aerial reconnaissance (fire adjustment). What's worse than a drone? The anti-aircraft guns were already equipped with SLAs. On others, the skill of a living person (a very adaptive and trainable "machine") was used after proper selection and sufficiently long training and training. It is this artillery that is currently in operation on the Russian side. But, ballistic projectiles and missiles still have one insurmountable drawback - the low probability of hitting a maneuvering target (when the time to maneuver is less than the flight time of the projectile). And the probability of hitting a stationary target is also low. Even the Archer is designed for sighting shots. However, even after it, the probability of hitting a target like a stationary tank is also not very high.

[Georgy Sviridov_2]

No, it’s in dozens, where 2-4 is now being spent, before that several dozen were used ... A drone is better because it can be constantly used ... You can’t call an airplane for every salvo, and it’s hard for him to fly over enemy positions to shoot down can. And then the plane-fun, shot down - let the next one go right away ...
Suo normal yes put in air defense and ship guns. We have a good example of suo at the coastal defense artillery complex. It would be logical to introduce such things into the artillery of the ground forces ... Vienna had a good suo, like on a lotus too. The lotus has gone, Vienna hasn’t ... Although, according to the mind, ordinary mortars should be slowly abandoned, well, leave them in mountainous units, near the landing force, the National Guard, army special forces - that is, those who work or are hidden or in places where equipment cannot work - mountains, forests, swamps ... And in other places, change battalion mortars, to Vienna ...

[Sergey3]

And what is the problem with the reproduction of ammunition? According to relatives who work at the nearest factory for the production of shells (conventional), since last year it has been working seven days a week and in 3 shifts. And what, what's the problem? Everything is automated there, the automation is ordinary, without scarce Western spare parts. I believe the NWO is being fired with fresh ammunition, not Soviet stocks. Maybe in the LDNR they are given from old stocks so that the West does not once again excite the next sanctions ...

[Vladimir Postnikov]

Quote: Sergey3

And what is the problem with the reproduction of ammunition? According to relatives who work at the nearest factory for the production of shells (conventional), since last year it has been working seven days a week and in 3 shifts.

"Here we see, here we don't see, but here we wrap the herring." How was the text?

And what will happen when the reserves are depleted and the lines wear out?

So ask your relatives what condition their lines are in (just don't tell anyone).
Most of the organizations that produced these automatic lines have already been liquidated. Such is the news. But that's not all. Even the same old-style cartridge cases (which today went into battle) are made from expensive brass alloys and cost as much today as they cost. And if earlier it was possible, according to the old standards, to use so many dozens of shells to hit a fixed target with a certain probability, today it is much cheaper to hit such a target with one or two guided ones than with dozens of new unguided ones. The economy is different today. The Soviet freebie is over.

[storm]

Most of the organizations that produced these automatic lines have already been liquidated.

Do not aggravate the situation, the workshops have brand new CNC machines and produce modern ammunition for tanks.
I saw this workshop with my own eyes, the operators and adjusters of CNC machines and automatic lines work in the majority of young guys, the average age is about 30 years old ....

[Sergey3]

I wonder who drove all this into your head that there is nothing at all in Russia? In Russia, capitalism, and the production of military equipment gives a good stable income. So all military production has been dispersed among holdings and corporations and is in good condition. Yes, and conventional production has revived. There were several closed, destroyed factories around where I live, they were all recently bought up and brought into good condition, their territories didn’t look like that even under the USSR, then there was always a viper, but now it’s just a picture! Life-giving sanctions work wonders! The railway is simply overloaded, it’s impossible to cross, freight trains form traffic jams, this didn’t even exist in the USSR, and I see that lately cargo has become not transit, but domestic Russian, marshalling yards are simply overloaded, and transit cargo is not allowed through them.

[Vladimir Postnikov]

Quote: Sergey3

I wonder who drove all this into your head that there is nothing at all in Russia?

It is much more interesting who put it into your head that I could say that there is nothing at all in Russia? Find it, hit him in the head.

[Vladimir Postnikov]

Quote: assault

I saw this workshop with my own eyes, the operators and adjusters of CNC machines and automatic lines work in the majority of young guys, the average age is about 30 years old ....

I don't know what you saw. You didn't even mention what kind of equipment, whose production, what shop. Rostec made very good money in the 2014s by selling weapons. Something was bought for currency. And not only machines, but also tools. We also have a problem with the tool too. The first shop closed in XNUMX. And the last one a few months ago. Now only with problems and through third parties, or through China, if it sells. The situation already represents the anus, as a result, any aggravation can be considered as a complete anus. So I don't make it worse. The capitalist will not invest in the production of equipment if there is no investment in the industry as a whole. Do you see an increase in industrial production? Me not. And you uncomplicated look?
By the way, what does the age of the workers have to do with it? The labor market is a completely different topic.

[storm]

The defense enterprise, in the structure of Rostec, in most machines and lines of the turning group (more than a hundred units), has been working in three shifts since March ...

[Vladimir Postnikov]

I understand that the equipment is for turning shells, and not for pulling out shells. By the way, I mentioned Rostec, which sold a lot of weapons, including tanks. Now these tanks need shells. Rostec has done it. Naturally, he had the opportunity to spend part of the income on equipment. Turning equipment was sold to us six months ago, as well as a universal tool. Not now. Real import substitution is just beginning.

[Sergey3]

They are in excellent condition, in excellent condition, go to the corner, cry. I can tell by our production (we don't produce ammunition): they are equipped with the latest technology, the old equipment was dismantled and sold.

[stankow]

No one ever fires fresh ammunition. Old ones go to waste, new ones are replaced in warehouses.

[Jager]

The shelf life of shells is also very limited, as well as missiles.

[stankow]

30 years. Limited ?

[Jager]

So Soviet standards should no longer be.

[stankow]

How about drones? How are the crusaders? ;)

[svp67]

The self-propelled artillery gun 2S43 "Malva" was developed by the Central Research Institute "Petrel" as part of the R & D "Sketch".

Not an extra "flower" in our artillery "greenhouse", still put a gun from the "Coalition" on it ...

[Petr_Koldunov]

Yes, it would be nice to put the Coalition itself in the NVO zone in normal volumes. I, like, saw a couple of times - flashed on the pictures ... But they definitely need more. She is clearly missed by the Sumerian terrorists, embittered by impunity, who have dug in far in the rear and are shelling peaceful cities from afar.

[1Alexey]

Quote: Peter_Koldunov

Yes, it would be nice to put the Coalition itself in the NVO zone.

So it’s not clear: why develop, spending time and money, a new self-propelled gun Malva with an old gun from MSTA-S?
It would be better to speed up the production of the Coalition!

[moreman78]

Then, that the level of Kaolitsia is the art regiment of the division and the army art brigade. And Msta and Malva are the regimental / brigade level!

[DenVB]

Quote: moreman78

And Msta and Malva are the regimental / brigade level!

Just Msta - divisional level. The coalition is unclear. Army?

[neworange88]

The coalition is a new generation of self-propelled guns, replacing the Msta-S / Msta-SM. Malva is essentially a variant of the Msta-S self-propelled guns only on wheels.

. The novelty is equipped with a 152 mm 2A64 gun. The same is used today on tracked gun mounts "Msta-S". The howitzer is designed to destroy a variety of targets, from enemy infantry and equipment on the front line to tactical nuclear attack weapons in the near rear at ranges up to 24 km.

Mobility of "Malva" will be provided by the all-terrain chassis of the Bryansk Automobile Plant BAZ-6010-027 with an 8x8 wheel arrangement. The open installation of the howitzer without additional armor protection or a turret made it possible to lighten the vehicle. With an ammunition load of 30 shells, its weight is 32 tons. This is a quarter lighter than the tracked Msta-S with the same gun.

https://iz.ru/1109769/anton-lavrov-roman-kretcul/rastcvet-malvy-gaubitca-kabriolet-vykhodit-na-ispytaniia

[DenVB]

Quote from: neworange88

The coalition is a new generation of self-propelled guns, replacing the Msta-S / Msta-SM

The coalition is planned for a higher level than Msta. Well, as planned. We would be happy to replace Mstu with it, but production in such quantities looks fantastic.

"Coalition-SV" and "Msta" are systems of different directions. In the future, the "Coalition" is a vehicle that is designed for separate artillery brigades, that is, special artillery units. And "Msta" will gradually move into motorized rifle and tank units, separate divisions and artillery regiments

Valery Kukis
chief designer of the special design bureau "Uraltransmash"

[Bogalex]

to replace Msta-S/Msta-SM

It cannot replace Msta-SM in any way, since this experimental system never appeared.

[Genry]

Quote: Bogalex

because this experimental system never appeared.

И Coalition и Msta produced at different factories - both self-propelled guns are now in short supply.
They have different breech and different charges, but the Coalition automatically selects the charge power and does not use shells - therefore it is more economical in massive shelling.

Mallow it is produced with the Msta gun, since it is easier to load manually and the weight is less. Its purpose is counter. battery fight. As light and maneuverable as possible, she will quickly drive up to the place of the shot, fire it with the Krasnopol projectile and leave immediately. With a heavy self-propelled gun, such tactics will be unprofitable and the automatic loader is only a burden.

[Bogalex]

"Coalition" is not yet mass-produced. An experimental batch was made at the same plant where Mstu-S is assembled. This is first.
And secondly, why did you write your post? It has nothing to do with my quote.

[svp67]

Quote: Genry

Both Coalition and Msta are produced at different factories

Can you find out which????? Alas, in today's Russia there is ONE plant that carries out both the production of self-propelled guns and their modernization, this is the Ural Transport Engineering Plant (UZTM) located in the city of Yekaterinburg and part of the UVZ concern.
But the CAO, which includes "Malva", yes, this is the work of another enterprise of the Central Research Institute "Burevestnik", the city of Nizhny Novgorod

[Georgy Sviridov_2]

No, the revenge is the artillery of motorized rifle brigades. Quite to yourself.

[dnestr74]

Regimental we have 122mm-old Carnation ... AUUU

[Ruslan Saidov]

According to the stories of people in the "topic", during the tests, the BC detonated and the coalition exploded ... After that, the pace of testing was significantly reduced, etc. ....., I don't know the details

[Petr_Koldunov]

Quote: 1Alexey

So it’s not clear: why develop, spending time and money, a new self-propelled gun Malva with an old gun from MSTA-S?
It would be better to speed up the production of the Coalition!

Chassis. I have no other explanation. The wheeled chassis is a clear plus over the tracks in terms of maneuverability and speed. Otherwise, it will be difficult to surpass the Coalition.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

The wheeled chassis has no advantage over the tracked one in terms of maneuverability or speed. The advantage is lower fuel consumption, greater engine life, less weight and the ability to use asphalt roads without destroying them.

[Petr_Koldunov]

Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich

The wheeled chassis has no advantage over the tracked one in terms of maneuverability or speed.

It depends on the road :)
You will not assure that on asphalt a tracked vehicle is as fast as a wheeled one ...

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

Have you ever seen how fast columns of military equipment move?

[PROXOR]

This is an art system for export. To whom Msta-S is dear. On a Kamaz chassis with an open cabin, it will be an excellent export. Which, in terms of price, will be more profitable than the same Caesar or Archer.

[cash]

and who do you iron Kharkov? coalitions were there (in April anyway)

[qQQQ]

Quote: svp67

Not an extra "flower" in our artillery "greenhouse", still put a gun from the "Coalition" on it ...

I do not understand why they made such a long base. If the gun was moved towards the cab, then it was quite possible to remove one axle. Such a "fool" does not look very mobile, not to mention the service.

[Bad_gr]

Quote: qqqq

I do not understand why they made such a long base.

They took the finished car.

Quote: qqqq

If the gun was moved towards the cockpit, then it was quite possible to remove one axle.

And if they put a gun not 47 calibers long, but 52 calibers (in production), then this gun will already be the length of the entire machine.

[qQQQ]

Quote: Bad_gr

And if they put a gun not 47 calibers long, but 52 calibers (in production), then this gun will already be the length of the entire machine.

Increase the length by 5 calibers, this is 0.6 m, and there will be a margin of two meters. I'm not quite sure we don't have a three-axle base.

[Bad_gr]

Quote: qqqq

Increase the length by 5 calibers, this is 0.6 m

152 x 5 = 760 (0,76 meters)

Quote: qqqq

I'm not quite sure we don't have a three-axle base.

The weight of the installation is 32 tons (armored cab, ammunition, the gun itself with auxiliary mechanisms) and it is better to scatter it on the 4th axle than on the 3rd, because it’s not all the same for him to ride on asphalt, but dirt roads after rain should not create problems.

[qQQQ]

Quote: Bad_gr

The weight of the installation is 32 tons (armored cab, ammunition, the gun itself with auxiliary mechanisms) and it is better to scatter it on the 4th axle than on the 3rd, because it’s not all the same for him to ride on asphalt, but dirt roads after rain should not create problems.

The fact that it is better to scatter is clear. But the French somehow managed to do the same. By reducing the base, which means it is cheaper, you can also invest in a new gun that is lighter. Car maintenance, cross-country ability, maneuverability will definitely increase. I explain this not by the desire (worse, if not the ability) to make a new weapon and cut the loot on a more expensive car.

[Jager]

A smaller base does not mean that it is cheaper.

[stankow]

Axle load ? For driving on asphalt in peacetime?

[Pereira]

Are we quietly forgetting about the Coalition?

[uav80]

About the D-400 campaign too, while there are enough 2A65, 2A36, as well as D-20 in warehouses ...

[2 Level Advisor]

as I understand it, it's just Msta-s on a wheelbase? or what else is the innovation - the gun is written - the same .. but which is better - the question is debatable - wheels or tracks .. and despite the fact that the tracks are already in the army and have been produced for a long time - but is the same also needed on wheels ?

[Flooding]

Quote: Level 2 Advisor

Do you need the same one on wheels?

In any case, the modern army is leaving towed artillery.
Except perhaps for lightweight systems.
And if we take it as an axiom that the future belongs to self-propelled artillery systems, then it is logical that it should be presented not only in the category of 40-50 tons, but also in a more mobile version.

[Pereira]

For a serious assessment, statistics are needed - a comparison of the survivability of self-propelled and towed systems.
I hope that our General Staff took care of at least such a small thing and the decision to switch from caterpillars to wheels is justified by calculations.

[DenVB]

Quote: Pereira

I hope that our General Staff took care of at least such a small thing and the decision to switch from caterpillars to wheels is justified by calculations.

On tracks it is good to ride on primers for short distances. On wheels, you can maneuver hundreds of kilometers a day on public roads. Asphalt they do not kill.

[Georgy Sviridov_2]

Why switch. will be in parallel. No one will refuse tracked chassis.

[2 Level Advisor]

Yes, I agree .. and something like a global trend has gone for howitzers - to transfer them from the tracks to wheels .. in principle .. why do they need armor - with the high-precision of progressive modern weapons - that with armor that without - destroy - if they took the target .. but the wheeled one can be "lost" faster and can be much cheaper in production and operation ..

[Flooding]

Quote: Level 2 Advisor

why do they need armor - with the high-precision of progressive modern weapons - with armor or without destroying it - if they took the target

Without armor, fragments will cut faster than cover with a direct hit.
She just gives a few minutes of head start in order to take advantage of the mobility factor in time and leave the position.

[Genry]

Quote: Flood

Without armor, fragments will cut faster than cover with a direct hit.
She just gives a few minutes of head start in order to take advantage of the mobility factor in time and leave the position.

Now the era of high-precision weapons is coming, and if you don’t get out quickly, then you won’t have to count on fragments.
Automated self-propelled guns Msta and Coalition, necessary for massive shelling, can only be used when enemy artillery is suppressed. Therefore, in order to win back such an opportunity, you must first roll the MALVA with single shots with Krasnopol, until the enemy artillery is destroyed, and then put into operation automated heavy self-propelled guns - they significantly reduce the number of work hours for artillerymen.

[Mavrikiy]

Quote: Level 2 Advisor

why do they need armor - with the high accuracy of progressive modern weapons - what with armor, what without - destroy - if the target was taken .. but the wheeled one can be "lost" faster and can be much cheaper in production and operation ..

"Yes, you are right, but the opposite is also possible." No one guarantees a 100% direct hit, but without armor, a 100% defeat. Wheel chassis, more (+), service life and maintainability. But this is not during the slushy period, but only in winter and summer, when the ground rises. The tracked chassis is more reliable, but more difficult to maintain. Didn't drive anything, not even a moped

[stankow]

The modern army retreats with a towed artillery, but the mass, mobilization army relies on it. What we are seeing in the Armed Forces of Ukraine, soon in the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Level 2 Advisor

as I understand it, it's just Msta-s on a wheelbase?

I understand that this is a replacement for "Msta-B". To replace the towed guns with caterpillar self-propelled guns - the budget will overstrain, and they are heavy. Therefore, we decided to make a wheeled self-propelled guns.

[stankow]

No need to oppose. Both that, and another, and the third are necessary.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: stankow

No need to oppose. Both that, and another, and the third are necessary.

No. Towed artillery at the end of the Cold War was recognized as acceptable only for wars in third world countries, where counter-battery combat is in its infancy.
In all other cases, towed artillery is a disposable weapon.

[stankow]

But the practice of SVO shows something else. The towed one rules the ball, she is needed, demanded, she does the main work. And what kind of disposable, if for m777, but also d-20, Peony, Hyacinth, Msta, have been chasing for months, but still they are fighting? And if it was out of order, then a technical breakdown or wear and tear, and not a combat loss? Do we speak black to white?

[Alexey RA]

Quote: stankow

But the practice of SVO shows something else. Towed rules the ball, they need it, demand it, it does the main work.

Quite the opposite - towed artillery, even against our leisurely counter-artillery struggle, no longer pulls out. "Three axes" after the impact of the UAV rolled up for so long that they barely managed to escape from under the arriving RS package.
It is requested only because it is the only one that can be supplied in sufficient quantities. Better to have a D-20 or "three axes" than nothing.

Quote: stankow

And what kind of disposable, if for m777, but also d-20, Peony, Hyacinth, Msta, have been chasing for months, but still they are fighting?

They have been fighting for years. if the enemy has forgotten or cannot (technically or legally) engage in counter-battery combat. In a full-fledged SVO with a technically comparable enemy, the time the gun was on fire after the first shot, according to the norms of forty years ago, should not have exceeded 5 minutes. After that, a response arrived at the OP.

[stankow]

Again tales about the "answer" - see the adjacent article in "Popular Makeniks"

[Alexey RA]

Quote: stankow

Again tales about the "answer" - see the adjacent article in "Popular Makeniks"

Yes, I saw this answer - "crews hide in cracks 25 m from the gun."
And then what? If the calculations survived, then, crawling out of the gap, they will find damaged materiel, which, at best, is disabled for them for several days. That's it, the enemy has completed the task - this battery will no longer fire.
Artillery, like air defense, is fed by legs - for it, getting out of the strike is the only way to complete a combat mission today, tomorrow and beyond.

In NWO tactics lay and cover saves only because the counter-battery fight there is still being conducted by insufficiently trained and well-coordinated personnel without observing the norms for the consumption of shells for a typical target. How much do we have there for a battery of sheltered towed guns? EMNIP, 180 rounds of 152 mm caliber. Two divisions, 5 shots per gun.

[stankow]

Norm on suppression sheltered towed battery 240 rounds 122 mm. Suppression is when the battery goes silent for, well, an hour. Sort through the shells, bandage the wounded, raise the milestones, connect the broken telephone wires. For the destruction of 720 shells 122 mm. Self-propelled 900 152 mm for destruction. Destruction - this is the defeat of 30% of the materiel. The enemy battery will fire 720 shells for 3 hours, with delivery and equipment. Cope - well, the day was a success. But who will endure so many of them, his division will also "talk", help out. And there are a lot of fire tasks. Infantry, tanks will go - they will not immediately be up to the counter-battery. In combat, it's not like in the movies. You need to dig in, not run. And where are you running to? In an empty field? In Ukraine it is more reliable.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: stankow

The norm for suppressing a hidden towed battery is 240 rounds of 122 mm. Suppression is when the battery goes silent for, well, an hour. Sort through the shells, bandage the wounded, raise the milestones, connect the broken telephone wires. For the destruction of 720 shells 122 mm.

Welcome to the future. 122-mm artillery remained only with the Airborne Forces and the People's Militia. And that D-30 is changed to D-20.
The standard artillery caliber is 152 mm.

Quote: stankow

Self-propelled 900 152 mm on destruction.

We are talking specifically about towed artillery. Which, unlike self-propelled guns, has no chance of getting away from a retaliatory strike in the event of a normal organization of counter-battery combat.
So - 540 HE 152-mm shells or 180 cluster shells. If the guns are dug in.
But there is one problem: the arrangement of shelters takes time. And this increases the likelihood of position detection by the same UAVs. So there is a high probability that the OPs will be from the series: they turned around in the clearing, unhooked, and the tractors took them away.

Quote: stankow

The enemy battery will fire 720 shells for 3 hours, with supplies and equipment.

So this is a war or a competition of the trueborn - "since the enemy has set up a battery, then I will also set up a battery"?
If the commander wants to complete a combat mission with minimal losses, then the detected battery will be targeted immediately to 1-2 divisions - in order to reduce the time of firing without reducing the consumption of power supply.

Quote: stankow

You need to dig in, not run. And where are you running to? In an empty field?

So you need to run before the breaks went. Towed artillery cannot physically do this. Unlike self-propelled, which can have time to shoot back and go behind the ellipse. And if she is caterpillar, then she does not care about the fragments.

[stankow]

The time of leaving the OP, either towed or self-propelled, is the same. And much higher than you imagine.
It is not clear in your model that with those mitotic
1-2 divisions, which will shoot back at the batteries and run to change their position, right? And they will leave the battle for the march and the occupation of a new OP, two hours back? So who in this case turns out to be depressed? No don't fight like that. Watch the video about the regular units, not the militia. And you will see self-propelled guns dug in along the hatch and disguised self-propelled guns and towed ones, and next to it there is a huge pile of shells. Which was shot for hours and days. Up to two BC per day. You say - fired and hit the road? No, they don’t fight like that and stop thinking.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: stankow

Watch the video about the regular units, not the militia. And you will see self-propelled guns dug in along the hatch and disguised self-propelled guns and towed ones, and next to it there is a huge pile of shells. Which was shot for hours and days. Up to two BC per day.

In your own words:

Quote: stankow

No, they don't fight like that.

Even in the early 90s, it was believed that a battery needed at least 3 OPs, spaced at least 500 m apart, from each of which only one fire mission could be performed. And "Military Thought" in general pumped upthat 10 minutes at one EP is too much, you need to reduce the standard to 5 minutes.
However, all these calculations were for normal artillery during the Cold War - with a regular number of functioning artillery reconnaissance radars and a well-developed system for generating and transmitting data for firing. And not like now, when the battery of towed guns is curtailed with impunity live with UAV.

[stankow]

Alexey R.A. In an ordinary combat day, there are 5-6 planned tasks. Plus "revived" goals. Multiply by infantry attacks, and they will easily climb three times by the turn of the day. Add enemy counterattacks, it will also fight back. ZO must be set. There are at least 15 fire tasks in total. By the way, if according to the charter it is not enough to equip the OP all night, there remains work on the next one. There is a lot of fire work, for two BCs. The infantry all hopes for artillery. Try to dream with the OP in the middle of a fight. You will personally wait for the regimental commander at your command post, furious, with two submachine gunners and yourself with a pistol in your hand. Well, explain to him an article from "Military Thought"

[Bogalex]

And why do you think that "Malva" is produced to replace tracked vehicles? I now think that the principle here is not "instead of", but "together". We have a big country - on different theaters, machines on different bases can be used.

[2 Level Advisor]

You are right in your own way .. but how many problems have already been on the variety of samples, and again there .. both for repairs and for cost, etc. so it’s still possible to do it on a floating platform, for example, and yes - it will probably come in handy .. but is it necessary to make a separate machine for each possible theater of operations?

[Bogalex]

but is it necessary to make a separate machine for each possible theater of operations

And why not?
Or for the sake of imaginary unification in the areas bordering Tajikistan should there be models adapted for operations in the Arctic? And that will definitely be beneficial.

and repair and cost, etc.

?

[2 Level Advisor]

in theory - yes .. but in practice, even striped ones with their unlimited budget do not do this and for repairs - what do you think, as an example, which is easier - one type of tank to maintain / build / maintain / teach people or 7 types of tanks? I'm talking about it..

[Bogalex]

Well, how many types of tanks do we now contain, did you count? It is precisely the attempt to create a uniform model for all regions that ultimately makes it very expensive and negates the desire to re-equip all the Armed Forces at once (or at least within a reasonable time frame). As a result, it is precisely in practice that everywhere in the troops we have both old and new, and the latter is much less. That's the whole "unification" for you ...
And it is necessary to refer very carefully to the experience of the "striped" ones. European countries, having reduced their aircraft to a minuscule, have no problems replacing, for example, a hundred М109G3 with PzH 2000 in a single Germany. But NATO artillery as a whole is a wild mixture of a variety of models and systems, even ballistically unified to the end. Please don't forget about that too.

[stankow]

There is no unification in NATO. There is Americanization. But this is just business, not standardization.

[storm]

[quote] in areas bordering Tajikistan, samples should be valid [/ [i] [/ i] quote]

Located at the bases for the repair and storage of military equipment, the best option is the T-62.
Until all units in Russia are re-equipped with new and modernized models, there should be no "charitable" deliveries to partners in the CSTO.

[Bad_gr]

Quote: Level 2 Advisor

but what is better is a moot point - wheels or tracks ..

In my opinion, the Malva chassis is quite suitable for these tasks: it has high cross-country ability and a low center of gravity with wide-spaced wheels.
And here, in my opinion, they screwed up with a selection of chassis (“Coalition-SV-KSh”):

[Vadim237]

They probably did it so that they would have been as clumsy on the roads as the Shell - constantly turning over.

[stankow]

Art and infantry in the regiment should be on the same base - either a goose or wheels. To simultaneously nailed to the area of ​​​​concentration. And then any shaky bridge will cut off the caterpillars from the columns. During the mass mobilization, you will receive 2 million infantry in civilian Kamaz vehicles - there will not be enough for all BMPs. And now - you need to gradually accumulate a self-propelled wheeled one to a towed one.

[rocket757]

It is reported about the start of production of a pilot batch of the new ACS 2S43 "Malva"

the cannon artillery systems currently in use will have to be repaired and replaced, A LOT, due to intensive operation!
The process is underway, the main thing is that no one could interfere with this !!!

[Ros 56]

Here is the joy in the ukrovermacht, there will be a reason to surrender.

[Vyacheslav Borichevsky]

This is nonsense, not a tool!. 1. The chassis is expensive, why put on the bases it is not clear 3 axles would be enough !. for patency? so there are caterpillar sau!. No armor! What do we do sau on the principle of hit and run ?. Already now everyone is talking not about the quality of artillery, but about the backwardness of its use! No flexibility! We read here about miracle tablets, about the digital environment, but where is it?. Until when will calculations be made with a ruler and a calculator? Where advertised found marked on the tablet and hit?. Where is it all? Now the adjustment is being made by UAVs purchased from private traders, such UAVs are not produced at all for the army! The smallest is an eagle! there is nothing directly for the cutting edge, they are purchased privately!. What they write on this channel is partial window dressing and chatter! And people are dying because of these trifles for our superiors!. Yes, Ukraine has little artillery, but they have flexibility thanks to just one program that can be installed even on smart!. Where are the advertised electronics for the warrior kit? Where are these tablets and miracle binoculars? Where this principle discovered noted on the tablet and hit!. We see this concept of war on videos, exhibitions, but this is not at the forefront!

[Alien From]

Here you do not explain anything to anyone. Alas.....

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Vyacheslav Borichevsky

1. The chassis is expensive, why put on the bases it is not clear 3 axles would be enough!

Three axles for 152 mm on our directions few. It will work in South Africa or in France.
Even the KAMAZ base under 152 mm was four-axle.

Quote: Vyacheslav Borichevsky

No armor! What do we do sau on the principle of hit and run?

Otherwise you won't survive. On opened fire, they work out 152-mm shells and RS up to 300 mm. Here the armor does not solve anything.

Quote: Vyacheslav Borichevsky

Now the adjustment is being made by UAVs purchased from private traders, such UAVs are not produced at all for the army!

You are confusing divisional artillery with battalion artillery. Mavics are the eyes and ears of mortar batteries. The 152-mm gun mounts of the RF Armed Forces have just "Orlans".
Here NM at this level can have anything.

[stankow]

You come up with "principles" yourself, and then you also ask where they are!? What kind of "hit and run" nonsense? Who fights like this? What do you mean, street fights? There is military science, regulations, instructions, there is combined arms combat. If you don't know, listen more, panic less!

[hagen]

It is known that the 152-mm 2A64 cannon used in the Msta-S self-propelled guns is used as a firing component at the Malva self-propelled guns.

Hmmm ... It's strange that a completely new weapon with, frankly, not quite relevant characteristics is being installed on the new system. The maximum range for the OFS of 24,7 km is probably not enough with the widespread use of counter-battery fire, especially when you consider that the already serial PzH 2000 projectile throws up to 30 km, and when using the AR OFS, the German throws at 56 (an American with a British - 40), against our 29. I think the 2A88 from the Coalition would be a more promising weapon.

[DenVB]

Quote: Hagen

I think the 2A88 from the Coalition would be a more promising weapon.

Will the wheeled chassis withstand the recoil from the 2A88? The ability to shoot at 40 kilometers - it is not given in vain.

[hagen]

Quote: DenVB

Will the wheeled chassis withstand the recoil from the 2A88?

Caesar holds. Why are we worse? Yes, just put hydraulic outriggers and exclude the chassis from loads when fired. What is the problem? On a part of foreign "wheels" they are already used today. In any case, it is hardly advisable to make a new gun with characteristics worse than the Ukrainian Bogdan.

[DenVB]

Quote: Hagen

Caesar holds. Why are we worse?

Logical.

[Zaurbek]

Moreover, on Caesar Renault 6x6

[Bad_gr]

"Msta-S" is also available with a barrel length of 52 calibers (155 mm (2S19M1-155)).

[Zaurbek]

I agree ... you need to initially install a long-range gun.

[Amateur]

And about the trunk is. And about the chassis is. But about the most important thing for today - the guidance system, there is nothing. Or again, the PAB-2M compass, either 60 or 80?

[DenVB]

Quote: Amateur

And about the trunk is. And about the chassis is. But about the most important thing for today - the guidance system, there is nothing. Or again, the PAB-2M compass, either 60 or 80?

Let's hope they don't skimp on the gyrocompass.

[Urs]

Oh yes, as they say about the elephant, then we forgot. If again with a log. ruler and shooting tables on paper Then it's better "pedal drive" and "mortar battery on bicycles"

[stankow]

There is a SOB car with everything you need. Already the third generation is being produced. And a good, old, reliable, simple PAB is sure to be hidden in it. You never know what, but the fire mission needs to be fulfilled!

[Nikolay Dyaglev]

But isn't BAZ heavy for transporting a cannon? Kamaz 4-axle, I think it would pull easily + cheaper and gets into the dimensions everywhere

[Zaurbek]

Kamaz is not the most durable here .... Kraz or Tatra - yes. The shell, for example, cannot shoot from Kamaz on the move, but it shoots from MAN.

[Dost]

The shell does not shoot at all on the go, it's not his. Here Thor knows how, this is his duty.

[Zaurbek]

In the TK, there was such a request for him .... and he shoots at MAN in the UAE on the go.

[Dost]

It belongs to the object air defense, according to the terms of reference, it is not even required. Anything can shoot on the go, while you need to hit.

[Bad_gr]

Quote: Nikolay Dyagelev

and fits everywhere

And pictures with a gun will be added to similar pictures with the Shell.

This is not a wrecked vehicle, but a car that has fallen on its side due to the high center of gravity.

[Dost]

These are complaints about the gasket between the steering wheel and the seat.

[Bad_gr]

Quote: Dost

These are complaints about the gasket between the steering wheel and the seat.

This is it, yes. But how many samples of wheeled vehicles do you know that can be put on their side on a good asphalt road? And this is military equipment, for which the requirements should be much tougher than for a civilian bus.
And if this complex were on the BAZ chassis (or MAZ, about the caterpillar version, in general, I won’t say anything) there would be no such jambs ..

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

So it is so, so it is of course, but in this case, the organizers of the road can claim a medal from the Queen of England. To topple such an expensive car, with just the wrong angle of the roadway, is expensive. And the culprit is always at hand, the gasket between the steering wheel and the seat, and the indirect culprit, as it were, has nothing to do with it. The one who developed the GOST, but now, it seems, is not mandatory, the one who designed the road junction, who built it, carried out the project examination, accepted it into operation, they are all, as it were, inaccessible, the culprit is always at hand, everything is as usual.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

These are roads built without the necessary inclination to prevent vehicles from tipping over and cargo rolling off when cornering. I tend to believe that roads are deliberately built dangerous and inconvenient. It is not excluded that there the foreign agents frolic or even continue to frolic.

[stankow]

The second picture is clearly a driver error. Did not fit, continued straight.

[steelmaker]

I believe that this weapon is made for export. For Russia, on wheels, such a tool is not relevant. The casket just opened.

[Zaurbek]

Not a fact. Msta and Kamaz 8x8 go as standard ... the gun is heavy, so maneuverability is higher. And maneuverability, it turns out, increases the survivability of the gun. Plus the SLA (top tie-down, etc. ...., which is not on the towed one)

[stankow]

Each gun does not need a topographic location, why? There is a SOB in the car, so the guns fit into it.

[Zaurbek]

I can’t say, but in the West of the bloc they also put towed guns for us ... In general, in combination with corruption with ammunition, something may change in the organization structure

[stankow]

This is when, in splendid isolation, a gun is on duty at a checkpoint in the wilderness and from time to time supports a platoon of infantrymen patrolling in the vicinity with fire on a call. As part of the battery, a topographical positioning unit and a calculator are not needed for each trunk.

[Zaurbek]

Each self-propelled gun has such a unit and there is data transfer from the battery .....

[stankow]

I'm talking about towed. The mass ones don't even have a battery. And it is not necessary. ACS - there is, of course, a navigator, determines the coordinates of the gun and transmits it to the command post. Topographic location, to determine mainstream - not needed. Enough one in the car SOB. There is data transmission equipment. Transmits the calculated direction and sight. If the tool will work alone, you can install the calculator. Optional, like m777. It will work in a battery, as in the Armed Forces of Ukraine - the calculator is not supplied, the commander's display is not installed, the initial speed determiner is torn off.

[Georgy Sviridov_2]

Why export? I think once in many ways under us. And perhaps even partially under the Russian Guard ...
It would be logical to unify them with the A-222 Bereg ... They would not have a price ... An ordinary projectile could easily hit equipment on the march without spending expensive red flags.

[iouris]

All this is wonderful. And what about modern ammunition with increased efficiency? Or is it like Raikin: "Do you have any complaints about the buttons?"

[andrey kuznetsov_3]

The appearance is impressive.

[Zaurbek]

In vain they didn’t immediately put the barrel from the Coalition (also with an open breech and mechanization) or from Geocinth.

[Zaurbek]

It is quite possible to install MLRS on the BAZ chassis .... from the Hurricane for sure.

[Mikhail Maslov]

Is this considered a new weapon commissioned by the Ministry of Defense? All those involved resign. Look at what they are fighting in Ukraine now and this is today. Open the Foreign Military Review, for an idea of ​​​​what the RF Armed Forces will have to face.

[Georgy Sviridov_2]

And why is she worse than the Caesars, for example? Or Polish sau? Nothing.

[Vadim237]

The firing range of shells is a maximum of 29 kilometers versus 41 kilometers for the same Caesar and other Western howitzers and self-propelled guns of 155mm caliber. And now in the United States, 155mm shells capable of firing at 80 and even 100 kilometers are being actively developed.

[stankow]

Don't confuse advertising and war. There are no targets for cannon artillery over 25 km. Let the rockets work there.

[Mikhail Maslov]

Yes, because both "Caesar" and "Crab" already exist and are participating in battles, and this development is only being tested and already outdated at the time of adoption.

[Aster Klaster]

Probably it was already necessary to increase the caliber to 200mm and pick up a new gunpowder so that it would hit an unguided projectile for 50 60 70 km.

[Mikhail Maslov]

And here I completely agree.

[Bad_gr]

Quote from Aster Klaster

increase the caliber to 200mm and select a new gunpowder so that it hits with an unguided projectile for 50 60 70 km.

To whom God will send.

[Dost]

They would also stir up something to replace Malka.

[storm]

For SAO "Malva" you need an automatic loader with a magazine for 10-12 rounds and a portable ammunition for 40-50 rounds.
The tactics of action are cyclic:
- 1-2 sighting shots,
- a volley of 8-10 shells,
- position change
Reloading the store by the crew

Then the cycle repeats, either fire at a new target or finishing off the previous one, if intelligence does not confirm the defeat.

[Sedoy]

artillery is needed, but with the range of ammunition that the troops have, this is an empty fuss ...
we lose both in range and in accuracy ...

[Barberry25]

everything depends on the price of the system .. in fact, it’s better to do it in the form of a trailer that can be attached to most modern trucks, otherwise the price of BAZ is quite high

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

The trailer or semi-trailer must be with driving axles, under the power take-off shaft from the tractor. It is unlikely that such a complex scheme will be significantly cheaper, but nevertheless, it makes sense.

[Barberry25]

as my artilleryman father says, towed artillery is good because it can be attached to any truck and it’s cheaper, it’s just that artillerymen already have trucks, so it’s easier to do everything on the basis of a trailer and fasten it to current trucks, the same Mustang is calmly a trailer of 20 tons he can drag, but the same Msta-B weighs 7 tons, I think that a trailer with an FCS will weigh no more than 10 tons