B-10 recoilless gun in the People's Militia of the LPR

68
B-10 recoilless gun in the People's Militia of the LPR
Unloading guns B-10 from the car


For well-known reasons, the People's Militia of the Republics of Donbass still has a lot of outdated models. For example, artillery units still have a certain number of B-10 recoilless rifles, which were produced back in the middle of the last century. However, such weapons, with proper use, can show good results.



On the battlefields


On December 20, the press service of the People's Militia of the Luhansk People's Republic showed the combat work of artillerymen of the 16th Territorial Defense Battalion of the 2nd Army Corps. Currently, they are firing at the enemy, attacking various targets and supporting the offensive of the main forces in the Seversk direction. The video includes footage of the combat use of a 120-mm mortar and an equally interesting sample - the B-10 recoilless gun.

The calculation of the gun moves on a UAZ van. The weapon in combat position, ready to fire, is transported directly in the cabin. Arriving at the position, three gunners manually unload the B-10 and set it on the ground, pointing towards the enemy. After the necessary preparation, aiming is carried out, a shot is loaded into the barrel and shooting begins.

A trained crew fires a shot, then reloads the gun and hits the enemy again. Preparing for a new shot takes only a few seconds, and in the minimum time, several projectiles are sent to the enemy. Then the gun is loaded into the car and decrease until the enemy takes aim at the position.

The commander of an artillery platoon with the call sign "Stary" noted that intelligence provided accurate data on enemy targets, and this made it possible to carry out an effective strike. However, immediately after the first shots, the enemy artillery began to fire back. Fortunately, the enemy missed, and the Luhansk artillerymen had time to leave.

The commander of the 10th armored personnel carrier, known under the call sign "Chechen", spoke about the advantages of the B-16 gun. According to him, the gun is small in size and weight, thanks to which it can be transported even by cars. This feature determines the tactics of use: the crew arrives at the forefront, quickly strikes at previously reconnoitered targets and decreases as soon as possible.


Gun and calculation on the position

The B-10 gun has a fairly high accuracy, which allows you to attack and hit various targets. According to Chechen, machine-gun nests, strongholds and other similar objects are destroyed with its help.

Apparently, the shown B-10 gun is not the only one in the LPR troops. In the combat zone, several crews with similar weapons can now work. Guns of the old type are quite capable of solving fire missions - until they exhaust their resource and use up the remaining stocks of shots.

Tool from the past


In the early fifties, the Main Artillery Directorate of the USSR Ministry of Defense launched a competition for the development of a promising recoilless gun in 82 mm caliber. With its help, in the near future it was planned to replace the easel grenade launcher SG-82 arr. 1950, which had limited potential.

The winner of the competition was the project of the Special Design Bureau of Smoothbore Artillery (SKB GA), carried out under the direction of B.I. Shavyrin. Already in 1954, the gun was put into service under the designation B-10 (GRAU index 52-M-881) and began to be delivered to various units and divisions of the Soviet army. Production of new weapons was carried out at the Tula Machine-Building Plant.

For several years, the B-10 recoilless rifles, together with other modern systems, provided the necessary rearmament of the army with the required fire capabilities. Then, in the early sixties, a more advanced heavy-duty grenade launcher SPG-9 "Spear" was developed. In connection with its adoption into service and the development of production, in 1964 the production of the B-10 was discontinued. For a long time, the Soviet army continued to operate such weapons, but then abandoned them.

The main recipient of the B-10 was the Soviet army. In addition, such weapons were supplied to the countries of the Warsaw Pact and distant states of Asia and Africa. Some foreign customers have also acquired a license to produce guns. In total, the B-10s were in service with several dozen armies. A significant part of them have now abandoned such weapons, but others continue to use them.


In 2014-15 a certain number of B-10s that were stored in the Ukrainian army after the collapse of the USSR went to the militias of the republics of Donbass. As is now known, the guns remain in service and are used as part of the current Special Operation.

Design features


The 52-M-881 / B-10 recoilless gun was designed as a light fire support weapon for infantry and airborne units. It was supposed to hit modern Tanks and other armored vehicles, as well as field installations and light fortifications over a wide range of ranges.

The B-10 system is built around a long, smooth 82 mm barrel. In the breech there is a chamber for a unitary shot. The barrel is locked by a movable bolt that opens to the left. A nozzle is provided on the shutter for removing powder gases and creating thrust that dampens recoil.

Together with the B-10, two types of shots ("mines") were put into service: with a high-explosive fragmentation projectile MO-10 and a cumulative MK-10. Both projectiles were caliber and equipped with a small-diameter shank with a stabilizer. A propelling charge was placed in the shank. The initial velocity of both projectiles reached 320 m/s. Fragments of the MO-10 projectile showed a lethal range of up to 50 m, and the MK-10 pierced 250 mm of homogeneous armor.

On the left in the middle part of the barrel was placed a PBO-2 optical sight. Provided for direct fire (two types of shells) or hinged trajectories (only high-explosive fragmentation). The effective firing range of a cumulative projectile did not exceed 400 m, and for a high-explosive fragmentation projectile it reached 4500 m.

The barrel is standardly mounted on a tripod machine with guidance mechanisms in two planes. For ease of transportation across the battlefield, the machine is equipped with a removable wheel drive. Handles and an additional wheel are installed on the muzzle of the barrel, preventing sticking into the ground. It is curious that the mass and ergonomics of the guns allow firing from the gunner's shoulder - like from a hand grenade launcher. However, this method of shooting is not the main one.

With a total length of 1910 mm, the body of the B-10 gun weighs approx. 49 kg. The standard machine has a mass of 22 kg, another 13 kg falls on the wheel travel. The system with a total mass of about 84 kg, excluding ammunition, can be transported by various vehicles or carried by the crew in disassembled form. For short distances, the gun rolls on wheels.


The calculation is ready to leave the position

Limitations and Benefits


The 82 mm B-10 recoilless rifle is by no means a new or modern weapon. The newest products of this type were made almost 60 years ago, and they were long removed from service due to general obsolescence and the emergence of more modern systems. However, knowing the strengths and weaknesses of such weapons, you can get good results.

The main reason for the abandonment of the B-10 at one time was the limited penetration of the MK-10 projectile. By the mid-sixties, he had lost the ability to penetrate the armor of modern tanks, not to mention promising MBTs. The development of new armor-piercing ammunition and the further development of the weapon as a whole was considered impractical due to the availability of newer and more effective alternatives.

At the same time, the firing characteristics when using the MO-10 high-explosive fragmentation shot and the power of such ammunition remained at an acceptable level. The B-10 product could still perform infantry support tasks, but the range of targets hit was reduced.

Artillerymen of the NM LPR are reportedly using their B-10 guns to destroy enemy field installations of various kinds. Such targets are fired at direct fire using regular shots. The power of the MO-10 and MK-10 products is quite enough to destroy stationary structures, and firing from an open position increases the possible accuracy. With all this, the small mass of the gun simplifies and speeds up the deployment and departure from the position before the return fire.

Knowing the shortcomings of their weapons, the Luhansk artillerymen do not even try to attack targets that are inaccessible to them. When it comes to armored vehicles or fortified structures, other artillery or rocket systems with suitable characteristics are used.

In your niche


Thus, obsolete B-10 / 52-M-881 recoilless rifles can still find a place on the battlefield. They occupy their own specific niche and are used in "sniper" fire raids to destroy individual enemy objects and structures. This method of combat work makes it possible to use all the remaining advantages of the weapon and level out its shortcomings.

However, physical obsolescence and the gradual consumption of ammunition do their job. Sooner or later, the remaining B-10 guns will have to be written off and replaced with modern models of one kind or another. And it is obvious that such an update of materiel will lead to a sharp increase in opportunities - at least due to the novelty of incoming samples.
68 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +6
    22 December 2022 04: 51
    "Boot" is too early to call names weapons from the past. The weapon is dangerous and, if used correctly, is terribly unpleasant for the enemy. However, it should be noted that on the part of the VFU they are also able to use it and deliver with it a lot of unpleasant moments. Just because, due to its specifics (mounted installation, accuracy of a shot at a previously reconnoitred target), like any cliff on a machine, it is more convenient to use it from a cover from a camouflaged position than on the offensive.
    1. +10
      22 December 2022 05: 34
      The boot was so affectionately deciphered by SPG-9.
      For obsolete weapons. AKM still enjoys well-deserved respect. From the story of a Marine Corps officer who from the first day there in the NVO participated in the storming of Mariupol. The locks in the doors from the AKM are knocked out with one maximum of two shots, from any AK of caliber 5.45 you can release the entire magazine except for marks, there will be nothing scratches. Removed early very early 7.62
      1. 0
        22 December 2022 05: 43
        I don’t know in the second photo, the fighter, according to mommy, is loading just a PGshka or OGshka for LNG and not 82.
        And as for the rifle calibers, all the same, a personal rifle, such as an "automatic" is designed to accurately hit a target at a distance. I’ll say something unpopular with sofa experts, but in shooting, accuracy is more important than “lethal force”. Therefore, it is preferable to have a rifle with a smaller caliber but more accurate and with a higher BC than a "lethal" fool who smears from the third shot (after all, the weapon, and not the shooter, is the second unpopular thing because of the high recoil) and to which you can take fewer magazines into unloading. And as for armor penetration and range, the distance of small arms combat in the NWO is rarely even a kilometer, but more often much closer and in the unit you need to have an RPK or PC for combing greenery and light shelters and not equip every 7,62 ...
        1. +1
          22 December 2022 05: 57
          Now there is practical confirmation that the caliber needs to be increased. How many videos where snipers and ordinary fighters show marks on the armor from arrivals on them. There are no words about 5.45 at all, a good armor with composite plates holds more than one hit of 5.45. The Americans have already adopted the program and have chosen weapons with an increased caliber. To increase ammunition, reduce the weight of wearable cartridges, cartridge cases are made of composite materials. It turned out to be a double benefit, the lower weight of the cartridge and the weapon heats up less.
          The distance of the shooting battle is always incl. and NWO rarely exceeds 300 meters and this is already considered a long range.
          1. +5
            22 December 2022 06: 17
            Something is mixed up with you.
            First, talk about the energy of the cartridge, about the "doors".
            And now about armor penetration. So 5,45x39 armor-piercing is higher than that of 7,62x39.
            Here you say
            The Americans have already adopted the program and have chosen weapons with an increased caliber

            The current wearable caliber for amers is 7,62x51 and 5,56x45. And where is the enlarged 6,8x51? Rather intermediate.
            We developed this one back in the USSR. And only the collapse of the country killed rearmament.
            1. 0
              22 December 2022 16: 42
              Well, I think it's started. "Yes, in 1974 we had exactly the same development at the Research Institute of KHERSNABPROMBYT, it was led by the head of the lab Semyonov Mikhal Mikhalych"
      2. +2
        14 February 2023 17: 33
        Firstly, no one removed 7,62, this caliber is in all the new series of 100, 200, 400 assault rifles ...
        Secondly, it is extremely dangerous to knock out locks from a rifled one; the ricochet of an automatic bullet can actually even kill.
        Thirdly, modern 5,45 bullets have better penetration than 7,62, there are no modern armor-piercing at least domestic under 7,62 * 39 ...
  2. +3
    22 December 2022 06: 05
    Both externally and according to the description of the shells, this is still more of a grenade launcher with an elongated barrel
    1. +1
      22 December 2022 06: 37
      An interesting beginning of the article, for well-known reasons, the DPR is armed with a lot of obsolete weapons. For whom known? Yesterday the president clearly said that we ask for something and we give it. So either they don't ask or they don't give.
      1. +3
        22 December 2022 22: 43
        I like this presentation of material - when they write about our long-obsolete weapons (about 50 years ago, or even much more), but which you have to use, it’s always in such a tone that nothing is old, but with skillful use it’s still hot- th! But when you have to mention Western weapons supplied to Ukraine, it is written only in such a tone that they say it is such utter junk, useless due to obsolescence, and only additional goals for our army and the Aerospace Forces. good
        1. 0
          26 December 2022 20: 40
          The information war never changes.
  3. 0
    22 December 2022 07: 34
    Shoots twice as far as the AGS-17.
    It can be launched from a long distance so that the enemy’s small arms do not reach, and the enemy’s artillery needs time to prepare.

    Light weight allows transport on small vehicles that make less noise than trucks and tracked vehicles, resulting in the Loaf of Invisibility.
  4. +2
    22 December 2022 08: 48
    It is curious that the mass and ergonomics of the guns allow firing from the gunner's shoulder - like from a hand grenade launcher. However, this method of shooting is not the main one.
    Known as the "Syrian" method ... however, someone claimed that Afghan Mujahideen also practiced shooting from the shoulder from a recoilless rifle ... But as far as I know, this "concerned" 82-mm Chinese-made recoilless rifles (! )...they were lighter! request
    1. +3
      22 December 2022 10: 08
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      But as far as I know, this "concerned" Chinese-made 82 mm recoilless (!) ... they were lighter!

      Well, yes, usually this method is illustrated with a photograph of just the Chinese version of the B-10:
    2. +1
      23 December 2022 17: 20
      49 kg plus projectile weight - from the shoulder? Even if there is enough strength to lift a very strong fighter, then it is already difficult to think about accurate aiming, the barrel will go from side to side by inertia and how to "calm" it? This is probably for some very extreme case.
      1. 0
        14 February 2023 17: 35
        49 is most likely with a machine that weighs 30 kg))).
  5. +1
    22 December 2022 09: 16
    I found an effective range for the B-10 of only 390 m, frankly, a little. And it is not indicated whether the cumulative shot is accelerated by a sustainer engine like the SPG-9. The initial speed of the shot is 320 m / s, like a mortar.
    1. 0
      22 December 2022 10: 06
      This is obviously wrong. Based on the size and mass, it should be thrown at least a couple of kilometers.
      1. 0
        22 December 2022 11: 09
        Do not confuse the effective range of direct fire and the maximum range of fire already mounted, when the gun is used almost like a mortar.
    2. 0
      22 December 2022 10: 21
      Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
      And it is not indicated whether the cumulative shot is accelerated by a sustainer engine like the SPG-9.

      As far as I understand, the main difference between a recoilless gun and an easel grenade launcher is precisely that the projectile / mine accelerates in the gun only in the barrel due to the propellant charge, and in the grenade launcher - even after leaving the barrel, due to the main engine .
      Here are the shots for the B-10 - a mine with an extended shank to install an enhanced additional charge:

      But the shots for the "boot" are a typical grenade with a propelling charge and a main engine:
      1. +1
        22 December 2022 10: 48
        The information about the shots is good, but the classification is wrong. SPG-9 has a fragmentation round OG-9V without a sustainer jet engine. I changed the ammunition to fragmentation and did the classification change right away, did the grenade launcher miraculously become a recoilless gun?
        Rather, it’s a matter of size, then the larger 82-mm B-10 was called a gun, and the 73-mm SPG-9 for more modern ammunition was called a grenade launcher. And the grenade itself for the LNG-9 with a sustainer engine is more like a rocket in fact.
        1. +1
          22 December 2022 12: 01
          Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
          SPG-9 has a fragmentation round OG-9V without a sustainer jet engine.

          OG-9V is an "exception to the rule" smile : classified as a grenade, similar to PG-9V, but it does not have a jet engine, only a powder charge OG-9P.
          Apparently, it was classified in such a way, just in order not to reclassify LNG into a recoilless gun every time it was loaded.
          1. 0
            22 December 2022 12: 18
            Then pay attention to the shots for the AGS-17, because they are also called grenades and do not fit into your speculative classification at all. I don't want to sound impolite, but this attraction to insignificant little things seems like a disorder.
        2. +1
          22 December 2022 16: 07
          I once read that when developing the 120-mm mortar "Nona-M1" (long-barreled, rifled, breech-loading), they were going to give it the function of a recoilless gun (!), For which a corresponding "nozzle" was developed! But then they changed their mind!
    3. +1
      22 December 2022 15: 50
      Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
      And it is not indicated whether the cumulative shot is accelerated by a sustainer engine like the SPG-9.

      SPG-9 is not in vain called a grenade launcher ... he can! And the B-10 has an ordinary propellant charge in a special sleeve! I don’t know how it is with tanks; but the recoilless fires at a distance of over 4 km with an aiming range of a thousand meters!
      1. +2
        23 December 2022 14: 44
        A conventional 4-mm mortar also has a range of 82 km. The essence of this pipe is precisely in direct fire at tanks. But I would not dare to go out with such a pipe even against the T-64B. Not only will there be little chance of survival, due to the small effective range of a direct shot (390m). Also, hitting a tank with an 82-mm cumulative mine does not at all guarantee penetration, but rather the absence of it.
        1. +1
          23 December 2022 15: 16
          Duc ... "There is no perfection in the world!" - as the Fox said, having learned that on the planet on which he arrived, there are no hunters ... but there are no chickens either! wink Despite the existing shortcomings, the B-10 gun is quite well known (including Chinese "copies" ...) in the world! request By the way, the ASUs also respond with Swedish 90-mm rifled recoilless ones!
          1. +2
            23 December 2022 15: 28
            In the absence of a cumulative ammunition with a powder accelerator, in modern conditions the B-10 is a completely unusable weapon. The same SPG-9, although of a smaller caliber, has a significantly greater direct range of an anti-tank grenade.
            1. +1
              23 December 2022 18: 56
              Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
              In the absence of cumulative ammunition ...

              But the B-10 has long been no longer considered an effective anti-tank weapon ... but only as an infantry fire support weapon! But the SPG-9 also deserves attention! At one time he was "something"! It served as the basis for the creation of a low-pulse smooth-bore gun (gun) for the main armament of the BMP ... according to the project, "rocket" tanks were armed with this gun ... In my opinion, the Belarusians developed the Grom-2 modification with a whole "range" of ammunition, where it was even a shot with a concrete-piercing grenade! Shots used 57-mm "engines" from NAR S-5 ...
  6. +1
    22 December 2022 10: 05
    This weapon is outdated because its only advantage over a mortar was the ability to fire a direct fire cumulative projectile at a tank. Already RPG-7 brought it to naught.

    Now it is used simply because it is.
  7. 0
    22 December 2022 11: 18
    Similar recoilless rifles, and the 2B9 Vasilek, were to be replaced by the LShO-57. But somewhere the development got stuck. There, a high rate of fire was assumed with similar weight and size indicators. And ready-made ammunition for LSO would be much more convenient to use.
  8. 0
    22 December 2022 12: 37
    taking into account the difficulties with the logistics of LNG, AGS, ATGM, DShK and 82 mm mortar should be the basis of artillery of the near edge and saturation with them should be a priority .. in fact, an infantry platoon should have a platoon of heavy weapons in two squads, which has 2 LNG, 2 AGS, 2 ATGMs and 2 mortars. Then, in principle, it will be easier for artillery to counteract the enemy, otherwise it turns out that now you have to spend 152 mm shells on infantry 3 km from the LBS ..
    1. 0
      22 December 2022 14: 12
      I think the problem is the cost of this weapon. If resources are unlimited, then it is better for each infantry platoon to have a platoon of tanks. And if they are limited, then everything that is is raked out of the warehouses and distributed anyhow.
      1. 0
        22 December 2022 14: 30
        the problem is the lack of an organizational staff, if there is a 4th heavy weapons squad in a platoon to 3 infantry squads and a platoon command, then even 1 AGS, ATGM, SPG, DShK and an 82 mm mortar will close the LBS and facilitate front logistics - one truck of ammunition for these types of weapons can be use for a week or two, while those heh 152 mm shells will last at best for a couple of days to the battery
        1. 0
          22 December 2022 14: 46
          Why one truck? If there are enough resources, a division of hyacinths can work in the interests of the platoon with the consumption of a train of shells per week. But resources are limited.

          It is difficult to saturate a platoon with heavy weapons from the point of view that such heavy weapons have a number of restrictions, offhand:

          1. It is less mobile without transport. The platoon will either move at the speed of the DShK calculation, or the DShK calculation will fall behind and lose contact with the commander.
          2. If a platoon is on an infantry fighting vehicle, then for this heaviest weaponry it is necessary to allocate ... how many DShKs will climb into the infantry fighting vehicle along with the calculation? As if not alone.
          3. What to do with ags without grenades? Retreat to cover without a commander? Throw on the spot, and the calculation in the infantry?
          1. 0
            22 December 2022 15: 15
            one truck as an example. Regarding "if there are enough resources." the most important point IF.

            1) heavy weapons, if there is a calculation, are quite mobile for themselves, you also need to take into account that the task of the oporniks is to hold the defense and maximum mobility is needed when transferring the same mortar to spare positions, this does not require transport.
            2) If a platoon, then I already said, you need a 4th squad, which moves in its own transport, which can act as 2 infantry fighting vehicles / armored personnel carriers / MTLBs or one armored vehicle + truck.
            3) What does "no grenades" mean? this is what nonsense to write about? Weapons should have ammunition, if the platoon ran out of grenades for the AGS and there is no way to replenish the BC, then there will be completely different problems .. or do you think 3 PCs and 3 RPG-7 for infantry platoon is more than enough to stop the advance of an enemy infantry platoon in armored personnel carriers?

            so that they understand, I do not propose to invent something new, all this weapons are at the battalion level, the problem is that according to the charter the battalion must hold a front of 5 km and then these funds are quite enough, but now the situation is different and therefore each platoon must have this weapon
            1. 0
              22 December 2022 15: 55
              So it is in the battalion and above that it has its own commander, its own specifics, its own transport and its own logistics.

              A platoon already has ten positions in the nomenclature of ammunition. And you propose to make 50. At least there is a supply in the battle to provide all this, and in the platoon everyone is the commander ...
              1. 0
                22 December 2022 16: 37
                its specificity works when everything is done according to the charter, i.e. the battalion holds the front at 5 km and then, having placed all the weapons on it, it closes, and when our front reaches 10-15 km for the battalion, the opornik fights either with what it has, or is forced to call in heavy artillery systems to suppress the enemy’s DRG or an infantry platoon in pickup trucks ... In fact, under the old scheme, we have 6 AGSs in the battalion, and according to the new one there will be 9 of them .. And yes, for example ... the defender needs to crush the enemy every day and he has a choice - 1 truck for a week of shells or 7 trucks with shells for artillery, which already has enough targets. Why do you think each opnik seeks to slam and quiet down its ATGM, AGS or LNG? And yes, supplying platoons is also the prerogative of the battalion
                1. 0
                  22 December 2022 18: 00
                  You are proposing a machine gun and artillery regiment. I have nothing against the very concept of fortified areas, but such formations cannot effectively attack.
                  1. 0
                    22 December 2022 18: 08
                    and they don’t have the task of advancing - the task is to hold the front and prevent it from breaking through .. and it always looks like this with us - a platoon with hand grenade launchers sits, two enemy platoons arrive and begin to advance, As a result, having no means, the platoon is forced to request art. support, and we have a couple of trucks of shells flying into the field, and having an AGS, ATGM, Mortar and DShK on hand, the platoon itself can repel the enemy’s attack. Moreover, I wrote above that these types of weapons already exist, But they are at the battalion level, which is not allows you to effectively distribute them and you have to guess "where can the enemy attack" when you can regularly place them in positions by tritely increasing the number and personnel from the calculation of 1 ATGM, mortar, AGS and a heavy machine gun with calculations for 1 platoon. And yes, this the unit will be more coordinated, and given the mobility of weapons, it can attack, since the platoon already has pocket artillery, and what one AGS with a quadrocopter on the outskirts of the village can do has already been shown more than once.
                    1. 0
                      22 December 2022 19: 05
                      Well, these were the same PulAbrs or whatever they were. Fortified areas.

                      By the way, is there any information about the structure of the forelocks in defense? They just have fortified areas there.
                      1. 0
                        22 December 2022 19: 11
                        there is not a lot of information, they now have the bulk of rifle units, in fact infantry from rifle units with a small number of off-road vehicles .. something serious only in "elite units" ... so oporniki are 20-30 fighters with riflemen and RPGs cannon fodder

                        and in terms of armament, I would recommend conducting an experiment and arming several units in this way .. I think everyone will like the result
                      2. 0
                        22 December 2022 20: 04
                        Who would let us experiment on humans)
                      3. 0
                        22 December 2022 22: 29
                        there are generals for this .. let them do it and don’t think how they need to paint the grass
  9. +3
    22 December 2022 13: 13
    There are no obsolete weapons, there is incorrect use.
  10. 0
    22 December 2022 14: 46
    The calculation of the gun moves on a UAZ van. The weapon in combat position, ready to fire, is transported directly in the cabin. Arriving at the position, three gunners manually unload the B-10 and set it on the ground, pointing towards the enemy. After the necessary preparation, aiming is carried out, a shot is loaded into the barrel and shooting begins.

    Here is one question, why should it be removed from the car, it can easily shoot from a car, since this recoilless rifle has no recoil at all, you can make several shots and easily leave the shooting place, especially since the sight from a height is easier to install, but of course it is easier will track through the thermal imager, but if it is on wheels, you can quickly leave ...
    1. 0
      22 December 2022 16: 24
      It's funny to even read this. The jet of powder gases behind the gun reaches a couple of tens of meters.
      1. -2
        22 December 2022 16: 35
        You, dear, express your thoughts more clearly what prevents these gases from flying out of the car, maybe you have never seen this weapon ..
        1. Alf
          +1
          22 December 2022 21: 42
          Quote: restless
          You, dear, express your thoughts more clearly what prevents these gases from flying out of the car, maybe you have never seen this weapon ..

          So you, dear, express yourself more clearly ..
          If you shoot from a Loaf, then prepare a fire extinguisher in advance for the car and for your own ... priests. But if from the Tadpole, then it’s quite.
          By the way, the true Aryans from NVA DDR used this way.
          1. +1
            23 December 2022 10: 16
            Quote: Alf
            By the way, the true Aryans from NVA DDR used this way.

            So almost all the military, professional and not very, having received jeeps and recoilless vehicles in their hands, immediately began to cross them. smile


            I'm not talking about shushwagens with BV ...
            1. +1
              23 December 2022 14: 29
              Now imagine shooting from a UAZ with a B-10, with an effective point-blank range of 390 meters? Even now, imagine that in the trenches opposite there is a certain "bespectacled man" (or a shooter with a collimator sight) with an AK-74 and a couple of free magazines for it. Have you imagined what will happen to the crew of this very B-10, and possibly the machine itself, if they are noticed? You will be slammed away, in a long burst, just at the moment of application to the sight.
              And for firing with a canopy, there is an 82-mm mortar, which will be much better than this pipe in terms of weight and dimensions.
    2. Alf
      0
      22 December 2022 21: 33
      Quote: restless
      Here is one question, why should it be removed from the car, it can easily shoot from a car, since this recoilless rifle has no recoil at all,

      There is no recoil, but there is no jet stream ... Try to hit from the RPG-7 if there is a wall behind your back ...
      1. -1
        23 December 2022 02: 07
        What kind of wall if it stands on a tripod in an UAZ under a tarpaulin, the tarpaulin to the side, I understood the tripod and ipash, the jet will go back into the field, I think it’s enough mind not to stand behind the pipe ...
        1. +1
          23 December 2022 14: 31
          I suggest you turn your head on. Are you going to shoot direct fire from UAZ?
          1. -1
            23 December 2022 15: 45
            Sergey Sanych, and when the recoilless shot at the coordinates, you didn’t see the recoilless, only the aiming is visual and in a straight line, there is, of course, aiming at the laser and cable, but here it’s just LNG, And LNG is easy to install on a car and aiming through optics for 2 km is provided, why are you pointing a stump on the wattle fence ...
            1. +1
              23 December 2022 15: 51
              And why do you need no recoil for shooting at coordinates? There are 82-mm mortars for this. And by shooting at the coordinates from a recoilless car from a passenger car, you can get a jet of hot gases in your pants. Do not deviate from the topic of shooting from the UAZ.
              And for the SPG-9 there is a grenade with a powder accelerator, it has a direct fire range three times higher.
              And to replace the B-10, Bumblebee long ago invented other portable grenade launchers (grenades).
              1. 0
                23 December 2022 23: 45
                I suggest you turn your head on. Are you going to shoot direct fire from UAZ?

                This is your thesis Sergey Sanych, you yourself are a contradiction, you already figure out how to use a recoilless rifle, otherwise you can’t use it in any way ..
                1. +1
                  23 December 2022 23: 52
                  No way in the performance of the B-10, this is a weapon of the last century. The direct fire range is short, and there is an 82-mm mortar canopy. And from UAZ direct fire, only if you are tired of living.
                  1. 0
                    24 December 2022 01: 01
                    Well, if there is a weapon and there is ammunition, it’s a sin not to use
              2. 0
                24 December 2022 01: 02
                Have you heard of such a thing - the economy of war? This is the answer to your question, why
    3. +1
      22 December 2022 22: 13
      Also drew attention to this. Indeed, in fact, the removal of the gun from the stores before the shot deprives the calculation of the possibility of an instant change of position immediately after the shot.
      1. +1
        23 December 2022 14: 34
        And the appearance near enemy positions in full growth in a car does not cause concern with an effective firing range of 390 m?
        1. 0
          23 December 2022 23: 50
          These are hand-held bazookas that shoot at this range, and easel bazookas are hitting be healthy, there is a projectile about two meters ...
  11. 0
    22 December 2022 22: 44
    But in the photo, maybe SPG-9? The B-10 has a slightly different back
  12. 0
    22 December 2022 23: 11
    Such a recoilless weapon is certainly outdated. But this is due to the mass, the inconvenient carriage / tripod design, the lack of modern sighting systems and current models of ammunition.
    After all, at its core, it's just a recoilless weapon. Like RPG-7 or Swedish Carl Gustaf. And both of them trace their history back to the 50s, but are still actively used.

    But as far as we have a gun, and not a hand grenade launcher, then firing from a gun carriage is a priority. And this is necessary for accurate shooting at long distances. I use active-rockets, and a sufficient barrel length (and for recoilless rifles, while maintaining a number of conditions, it also affects the speed of the released charge) can make the weapon dangerous even for modern tanks.

    The first thing to do is to completely change the materials used in order to make the grenade launcher and machine lighter, but maintaining strength. Here you can follow the path of the Swedes in their latest model Karl Gustof. Since the 90s, their “pipe” of the gun has not been solid steel, but consists of an inner thin-walled liner made of steel (Model Carl Gustaf M3) or titanium (Model Carl Gustaf M4) and an outer casing made of light but strong polymers.

    The second is to add a modern, more complex sight. Or a system of several quick-change sights (one day, the other night, as an example). Perhaps I would add a built-in laser to the sights with the ability for the shooter to turn it on / off at his own choice. When shooting at cover or light/medium armored vehicles, a rangefinder is used to aim and shoot faster. And for heavy equipment, due to the possible presence of backlight detection sensors, the laser rangefinder does not turn on so as not to unmask its position.

    Third (not mandatory), since we are already lightening the barrel, we can try to slightly increase the caliber in order to increase the maximum possible armor penetration of the shells (which, for a cumulative, strongly depends on the diameter of the funnel).

    Fourth - to develop a range of modern ammunition. For the same Gustav, the caliber is almost the same as ours, 84 mm., Against 82 mm. our B-10. And they were able to create shells in such a caliber capable of penetrating from 300 to 500 mm of armor. Yes, not much, but for most purposes this is enough. In addition, this caliber is enough to knock out a tank when firing from the rear. And for some tanks, it will be dangerous for such a projectile to even hit the sides. At the same time, equip it with a series of shells for other purposes. Anti-personnel, anti-bunker, lighting, etc.

    Fifth (radical, but the most important) - since we are still talking about the creation of a recoilless gun firing from the machine, and we greatly facilitated the machine and the barrel at point 1. But we want to preserve and increase the advantages of the mounted grenade launcher, and not turn it into a second manual (thanks, we already have an RPG-7). Then, in order to create a dangerous weapon, I propose to make the weapon .... paired. The bottom line is that these will be 2 fastened barrels, the loading mechanism of which will have one single lock for two barrels. In the fire control system, introduce 2 firing options, single and "double". In the first case, in order to shoot the arrow, it will be necessary to press the trigger separately for each shot. This scheme will allow you to fire faster. With the first shot, the shooter not only tries to hit the target, but in the event of a miss (foreboding insufficient damage to the target), he immediately makes an adjustment and immediately fires a second shot. While with single-shot guns, after the first shot, you have to wait until the loader loads the gun, and then re-target, since the sight is a bit from charging the gun, but still goes to the side.
    The second firing mode, the same "double", will allow the shooter to release two charges at the target with one pull of the trigger with a slight mechanical delay between the first and second shots. Such a "double" not only increases the chances of hitting a target. But even if both charges hit, it increases the total damage dealt and the chance to hit. For example, hitting a tank with a doublet increases the chance of damaging or temporarily disabling some of the important systems of the tank or its crew (for example, the chance that the crew will get a little shell-shocked from a double strike with a minimum delay or temporarily jam the turret rotation mechanism). Well, and most importantly, when shooting with a "doublet", the chance of hitting enemy equipment using KAZ increases. The first projectile initiates the KAZ and lures the counter-projectile on itself. And the second, flying right behind the first, flies through the defense and hits the target.
  13. 0
    24 December 2022 00: 59
    Now everyone shoots with a canopy)) on a tip from a drone. The recoilless ones are, rather, harassing fire. Such a pocket artillery
  14. 0
    16 February 2023 10: 23
    Put a pickup truck or a Sadko truck on a UAZ such a gun with a DShK, so a whole mobile point, and press it with a landmine and a machine gun soldier
  15. 0
    24 March 2023 19: 55
    The author in the photo is LNG-9, not B-10, do not mislead people.