Our self-propelled guns 2S35 "Coalition-SV" cannot use the ammunition load of other Russian self-propelled guns

The topic of armament of our self-propelled artillery mount 2S35 "Coalition-SV" is actually not so new. Therefore, raising it once again would make no sense, but with the start of a special military operation in Ukraine, the interest in artillery among the general public grew to heaven. In this connection, with enviable regularity, messages began to appear with calls to immediately put the car into service and almost send it to the front.

Here we can only say the following: to equip combat units with completely new equipment is not to fasten floats to the BMP-2. Not only will the pleasure turn out to be not cheap and impracticable in the current conditions, but also, in addition to various organizational and technical tasks, it is necessary to solve the problem of supplying ammunition, which the Coalition has are so specific that they will not work from other artillery of a similar caliber.

Unification

Unfortunately, in publications intended for a wide range of readers, the word "unification" is often associated with the platforms on which military equipment is built. That is, special attention is paid to chassis, engines and transmissions, and sometimes electronics.

But they usually just keep silent about the ammunition load - if only the numbers of millimeters were similar, since there is an opinion that since the caliber is the same, it will “fit” into any gun without any problems. And this is partly true: the same Tanks in the face of the T-72B3, T-80BVM and T-90 of various modifications, including the "M", they consume basically the same ammunition. Here, even the T-14 Armata does not stand out in any way - its 2A82-1M cannon is designed in such a way as to fire both absolutely all old Soviet-style shells, and the new Vacuum for example.

Artillery of 152-mm caliber is also not far behind: although not complete, unification between serial self-propelled guns and towed guns is ensured. This is where the erroneous idea arises that the “Coalition”, having the same millimeters in caliber, can easily join the team of the Russian “art” and eat up the same ammunition load as its Soviet counterparts.

Actually it is not. Until now, it is not known for certain how widely the shells for the 2A88 "Coalition-SV" gun and the same "Msta-S" are unified - according to some sources, only partially. But the most important thing is that this gun can only use specific - designed specifically for it - modular caseless propellant charges.

And there really are both disadvantages and advantages.

On the one hand, stockpiles of ammunition accumulated over decades since the days of the Soviet Union and to the present day, amounting to literally hundreds of thousands of tons, have not been put anywhere. In fact, for the most part, our army exists on them, and this is true not only for artillery, but also for tank troops. In addition, almost all production lines that produce complete shots are tailored exactly to the Soviet standard - here demand, as they say, creates supply. Therefore, the transition to new systems may seem at least not profitable in terms of using the existing potential.

Ammunition for "Coalition-SV"

But on the other hand, "Coalition-SV" should have and, we hope, will bring artillery to a higher quality level. The transition to this artillery system in order to replace the fleet of self-propelled artillery as a whole can be compared to how the Soviet tank troops switched from 100 and 115 mm calibers to smooth-bore 125 mm guns, greatly expanding their capabilities and providing a reserve for the future.

In our case, the caliber has not changed, but the use of the new 2A88 gun with a unique loading system for self-propelled artillery provided characteristics of range, rate of fire and variability in the choice of initial projectile velocities, unattainable for serial self-propelled guns in service in Russia.

What are these modules?

Still, artillery is a science far from being as simple as it might seem. On the one hand, it seems, throw shells into the cannon and know yourself to hit the enemy. On the other hand, in order to successfully defeat the enemy, it is necessary to calculate the mass of various kinds of corrections, taking into account the factors affecting the fire. Among them, a special place is occupied by the initial velocity of the projectile, which often has to be adjusted using propellant charges of different types in terms of the canopy of gunpowder in cartridge cases, both to ensure the desired firing range and based on the specifics of the projectiles.

With this, I must say, there is no convenience.

For example, for the same "Msta-S" there are three main types of charges: reduced, full variable and long-range. In this case, the total variable itself consists of four powder charges of different power. And all this diversity is by no means universal: one projectile needs a reduced charge, another a long-range one, and so on.

Modular charges in this regard have even become some salvation, expanding the range of tasks.

In fact, they are the good old caps, but in a modern design. In them, gunpowder, the total weight of which is the limit for a gun, is divided into equal parts and enclosed in rigid combustible cylindrical cases of circular cross section. In short, a sort of powder "blanks".

Modular propellant charges for "Coalition-SV". Source: soviet-ammo.ucoz.ru

The idea of ​​their use is simple: it is much easier and faster to drive the number of powder modules you need from the total pile into the gun chamber, providing the required initial velocity for the projectile, than to have a mass of shells with dissimilar propellant charges in the ammunition rack. This is especially important for self-propelled artillery mounts, the range of ammunition of which is strictly limited in terms of its range when performing a combat mission - part of the propellant charges of a fixed filling (classic) may simply remain superfluous.

In addition, modular loading implements the “fire raid” or “storm of fire” function much more fully, when a self-propelled artillery mount fires several shots in a short period of time at different gun elevation angles and different propellant charges so that the shells fall on the enemy at the same time. This will also work with cartridge cases, but charging modules have more variability in the initial velocity of the projectile due to their number.

Modular propellant charges and projectiles for "Coalition-SV". Source: soviet-ammo.ucoz.ru

It is also worth noting that powder modules make it possible to create a high-speed automatic gun loader by reducing its operation cycles - automation does not need to crank the conveyor full of various cased charges in search of the right one. Everything is loaded from a shared heap.

But for the sake of these undoubtedly necessary and important properties, unification with hundreds of thousands of complete shots for 152-mm guns accumulated over the years had to be completely abandoned. They could no longer be consumed by guns with modular loading, not only because the shells simply did not fit in their chambers, and automatic loaders were not able to work with them. But also for the reason that the guns did not have a classic breech - instead of it, a specific rammer, which closed the chamber and played the role of a shutter, acted as a concentrator of powder energy.

Schematic representation of the automatic loader and artillery system 2S36 "Coalition-SV"

At the same time, the modular charges were ignited using a microwave system, which could not work through a metal sleeve with its ignition device.

All this initially - within the framework of self-propelled artillery - was implemented on the first version of the "Coalition-SV" under the symbol 2S36. Yes, yes, in that very monstrous machine with two guns and an uninhabited tower.

Thanks to separate-modular loading, two barrels and a high-speed automatic loader with a pneumatic mechanism and a pendulum reloader for loading guns at any angle, this machine produced a truly monstrous rate of fire for domestic self-propelled guns up to 16 rounds per minute. Moreover, in some sources, its rate of fire and the possibility of a "fire raid" were compared with multiple launch rocket systems.

2S36 "Coalition-SV" with a two-gun mount

Then the 2S36 was abandoned: both the gigantic weight and dimensions of the turret, in which the twin artillery system was installed, and technical issues affected. But to replace this self-propelled gun, its new version was developed in the face of 2S35 "Coalition-SV", which was equipped with a new 2A88 gun.

2S35 "Coalition-SV" of the current version with one gun 2A88

It completely retained the design features of its predecessors, especially in terms of modular loading, but alone could give the same rate of fire to at least 16 rounds per minute due to the redesigned autoloader and active barrel cooling with a rapidly evaporating liquid (according to open data). By the way, it is with this gun that the Coalition now shines at parades and training grounds in front of television cameras.

Conclusions

Yes, initially we touched upon the aspect of the unification of the Coalition-SV ammunition load with its older counterparts. And it seems like it seems like it’s not even a stone or a brick, but a whole boulder thrown into the garden of a new self-propelled gun. But this is not really the case.

All that has been said about this is just another reminder of the fact that this self-propelled gun is not some kind of intermediate option, which, having slightly increased combat characteristics, can be built into the active troops without any special obstacles.
"Coalition-SV" is about re-equipping all self-propelled artillery and moving it to a qualitatively new level. Moreover, rearmament and in terms of supplying new ammunition that will meet the tasks assigned to the self-propelled guns.

However, the latter is simply impossible under the current conditions, since all production lines are busy producing complete shots for serial gun mounts and towed artillery. Especially considering the fact that the available stocks suddenly found the property to run out quickly. Therefore, everything that promising self-propelled guns can be content with for now is a very limited series of ammunition produced for the trial operation of vehicles.

Comments

[Andrey Moskvin]

You are beautiful, no doubt...
What about ammunition, what kind of long-term construction?

[Guran33 Sergey]

It is rather a "fog of war", the data is clearly closed and we will find out what is happening there after the end of the operation, and maybe never.

[Shurik70]

Since the new guns are more promising, then we need to switch to them, this is understandable.
But there are many more old trunks now, and it is with them that we are now fighting.
So for the production of ammunition now task number 1 is to provide existing guns with shells.
Well, new guns - according to the residual principle. You have to test them, of course. It will turn out to provide them NOT TO DAMAGE old artillery - it will be ideal. It won't work - they will put shells as much as they can.

[skeptic]

Quote: Shurik70

But there are many more old trunks now, and it is with them that we are now fighting.

And in the Patriotic War, there were new developments, but as they say - "according to clothes and stretch your legs." After the end of "SVO", this war will receive a more capacious name (depending on the result) and "Coalition", may well become the ancestor of a new era, Russian artillery. In the meantime, your comment could be the title of this article.

[KCA]

Do not read?
“However, the latter is simply impossible in the current conditions, since all production lines are busy producing complete shots for serial gun mounts and towed artillery. Especially considering the fact that the available stocks suddenly found themselves running out quickly. Therefore, everything that promising self-propelled guns can be content with is very limited series of ammunition issued for the trial operation of vehicles."

[Civil]

However, the latter is simply impossible in the current conditions,

And you have to! Through "I can't" and "later". We need these new systems now, but they will become critically needed as early as 2025, by which time the flywheel of Western industry will spin up and large-scale deliveries will begin under Lend-Lease.

[bayard]

Quote: Civil

And you have to! Through "I can't" and "then"

You are absolutely right . Even if it’s impossible, but it is necessary to organize the production of Coalition-SV and ammunition for them, while WITHOUT damage to the repairs and modernization of the Msta-S withdrawn from the reserve and the production of standard ammunition for the existing line of artillery systems.
How to do it ?
It is necessary to allocate a separate production for this. Perhaps at Omsktransmash, perhaps by urgently launching another production line, perhaps by creating new ammunition production facilities (because there are clearly not enough left after the liberal pogrom).
There is enough money for this in the treasury and capsules. Evidence of this is the increased (and not bad grown) size of the NWF due to unplanned budget profits for the LAST year !! Can you imagine - SVO, sanctions from Hell, arrest of state reserves abroad, closure of foreign enterprises in the Russian Federation and other "stones from the sky" ... and despite this, the Russian budget receives super profits, which it accumulates in the National Welfare Fund ... Yes, and the law was recently adopted on that the NWF can be used as an investment fund for national and infrastructure projects and (!) lending to businesses. So we have everything for this. Equipment and machine park - China or through gaskets + own production.
But it is necessary to bleed from the nose, to ensure the start of mass production of "Coalition-SV" and ammunition for them, because today our artillerymen simply have nothing to fight with NATO-made artillery of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. They shoot us in counter-battery combat from a distance unattainable for us. And the farther, the more such artillery the Armed Forces of Ukraine have, and the more they have 155 mm shells. caliber, incl. and managed.
Now we need the very Labor Feat that we remember / heard / read / watched in movies about the period of the Second World War and the period of Industrialization of the 30s of the last century. Though crack, but the towers must give birth ... or find and put in leadership positions, People of the Cause.
And control.
And encouragement.
And punishment for failure.

[Sergey Dvornikov]

Yes, Emelya, you are right, all that remains is to catch a pike and in the morning she will build dozens of factories - and it will be oomerika to pay for all this!

[sgrabik]

There is a way out of this situation, instead of bankruptcy and closing of some defense plants, it is necessary to re-profil them for the production of new types of ammunition, primarily for the Coalition SV self-propelled guns, I don’t understand at all how defense plants can go bankrupt and close in the current conditions, the market economy does not should have a negative impact on national defense and military-industrial complex enterprises should now develop and multiply, and not close.

[NickShel]

Your message is read with bitter irony against the backdrop of the recent closure and future demolition of two factories that once produced shells.

[TIR]

It is necessary to increase the production of old-style shells and guided Krasnopol. And a modification in an active-reactive version. Only Krasnopol can destroy an enemy tank at a great distance. The same kamikaze drones of the Lancet tank can only damage slightly. The same self-propelled guns they destroy in 40% of cases, in the rest they damage. Krasnopol + Orlan (with good optics!)

[Egg]

Quote: Civil

will become critically needed as early as 2025, by which time the flywheel of Western industry will spin up and large-scale deliveries will begin as part of Lend Lease.

Do you really think the Ze regime will last until 2025? Or do you hope?

[umah]

From the article, I still did not understand why old shells do not fit the new gun. It is clear from the charges, but why the new charge cannot throw the old projectile is not clear.

[Ponchik78]

For a red word, perhaps attributed. In the Military reception dedicated to the Coalition of the SV, she perfectly fired shells from the Msta-S. Moreover, they even clarified that "native" shells cannot be shown because of secrecy. Therefore, they will shoot old.

[Niknafnuf]

The article has some explanation

[/ quote] "... self-propelled guns are not some kind of intermediate option .... "Coalition-SV" is about re-equipping all self-propelled artillery and transferring it to a qualitatively new level ... and in terms of supplying new ammunition, which will [/ i] respond to the tasks assigned to the ACS." [quote]

It can shoot old ones, but the effectiveness will be like that of the Msta self-propelled guns. "Coalition-SV" is a new generation of artillery, which has a range of 40 km, and maybe more and with high accuracy, so new ammunition is needed. Like a sniper rifle. Soviet technology does not allow making such ammunition. We need new technologies, new equipment, in fact, new factories.

[hagen]

Quote: umah

From the article, I still did not understand why old shells do not fit the new gun.

And it will not be clear, because the author himself does not know what to talk about. After all, as he himself wrote, "It is still not known for certain how widely the shells for the 2A88 Coalition-SV gun and the same Msta-S gun are unified - according to some sources, only partially." The argument "according to some data" is not at all an indicator of the reliability of his assumptions.

[Oleg Ogorod]

The author says strange things

For example, for the same "Msta-S" there are three main types of charges: reduced, full variable and long-range. In this case, the total variable itself consists of four powder charges of different power. And all this diversity is by no means universal: one projectile needs a reduced charge, another a long-range one, and so on.

As far as I remember, this reduced one has 4 different charges and the numbers 1 2 3 4, and not the full one.
And it's not a projectile that needs a different charge, it's a shot that needs a different charge. Depending on the purpose. The target may be at a distance of 5 km, or maybe at 30.

[guerilla707]

The projectile has a different profile, the classic breech is missing

[SergioPetrov]

Wrong system gun and shells, not how it shoots.
A classic projectile a) will not fit, and if it does, then you will load it one by one with your hands, as during the Crimean War.
The principle of the shot was voiced there differently - on the basis of microwave radiation (for details, contact the CIA, the GRU and the FSB).

[Oleg Ogorod]

You can use old shells, you only need new charges, the release of which is quite easy to master.
Sleeves for revenge shots are made by one factory, gunpowder by another factory, shells are made by a third factory, and then it completes the shot.
That is, one new automated line for the production of a shellless charge can make them in large enough quantities with a minimum cost, basically this is only the cost of gunpowder. The shell of the charge does not compare with the cost of manufacturing a 152 caliber brass sleeve (materials and work).
So here the problem is rather far-fetched. That's why they don't make new howitzers. Taking into account the number of existing copies of the new howitzer. And the number of possibilities of their manufacture.
Another thing is that if there is no such automated line, and the existing charges for exhibitions were baked on their knees in some research institute.
But besides the shots, the new howitzer also has a problem with the manufacture of a new gun. Two enterprises in the country could make blanks for it. One of these enterprises was deliberately bankrupted by the state in order to expel the owner. By stopping the production of forged trunks. The second, just don't laugh, has been in bankruptcy for a long time. Although it continues to work, overloaded with orders. It is part of the structure of Rostec, but now there are strange games of transferring them to another structure of Rostec, but already 75% private. And which, in principle, was previously focused on aviation. Most likely, they are just cunningly shifting state property into a private pocket.
It is difficult to say how much this will help the production of art.
The production of military equipment is a broad interfactory cooperation. And the absence of any one wick can stop all production. Or stop him. As in the game, who is the weak link.

[Krasnoyarsk]

Quote: KCA

Do not read?

Well, I read it, so what? When did they start "quickly running out of shots for serial gun mounts"? Let's say at 22. And when did the Coalition appear? At 14. Now there are about 20 vehicles in service. Since the age of 14, they can’t set up the production of shots for the Coalition in any way? Lavrenty Palych is not on them.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Krasnoyarsk

Since the age of 14, they can’t set up the production of shots for the Coalition in any way? Lavrenty Palych is not on them.

Lavrenty Palych, and with him Yakovlev and Ustinov, could not receive the first KPV-2s from Plant No. 44 for a year, scheduled for delivery in June 1944.

[Igor_Sergeevich]

Agree. Create a self-propelled division (12 guns), attach a technical reconnaissance complex and use it purely for counter-battery combat. Thus, we will train artillerymen and test them in combat conditions. So they started with jet systems near Orsha in the 41st. The remaining 8 guns should be used for training, reserve in case of losses and parades. In parallel, create a production base at an accelerated pace.

[guerilla707]

Yes, maybe they are already creating it, obviously such info will be classified as three zeros

[Mitrich73]

The idea is correct, but it is better to form mixed counter-battery divisions. One battery on the Coalitions (4 guns), the second Tornado battery, the third UAV battery.

[PROXOR]

Quote: Andrey Moskvin

What about ammunition, what kind of long-term construction?

It seems to me that the question of mass character works. The front needs self-propelled guns, the production park does not allow switching to the Coalition now. In good conscience, it is necessary to build a separate plant for the production of Coalitions and another one for the production of shots.
In 1943, a variant of the A-43 (T-34) project with a torsion bar suspension was proposed. The torsion bar suspension made it possible to make the tank lower and the fighting compartment wider. But the project was killed for two reasons:
1) the A-43 project did not provide for a thickening of the frontal armor even up to 60 mm;
2) The launch of the A-43 project in a series actually stopped the factories, because the restructuring of the equipment took a lot of time.

[Evgeny Ivanov_5]

We would now completely switch to Msta, then Acacia with Carnations is not measured in the troops.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

It is, of course, better than Msta, but it does not completely replace Acacia and Carnation. Both are significantly lighter, to the point that Gvozdika floats. And the same Acacia looks better for direct fire in cramped conditions.

[Timur_kz]

And here is buoyancy, but what is it ... Can you find out which rivers and oceans Gvozdika crossed and amazed, in every sense, her opponents? Pontoons, pontoons and more pontoons, forget about this buoyancy.

[SergioPetrov]

So you tell me where she really needs to swim there? Is that right now?

[bayard]

Quote: Evgeny Ivanov_5

We would now completely switch to Msta, then Acacia with Carnations is not measured in the troops.

Different guns are needed, different guns are important. Look at the maximum range of fire at "Carnation" and "Acacia", it's from 14 to 20 km. maximum . In reality, they have effective fire at a distance of 10 and 12 - 15 km. This is artillery for work from the near rear, as close as possible to the LBS. Msta-S, on the other hand, has a range of up to almost 30 km. They have different niches for combat use.
And to complete the picture, artillery systems capable of firing at a distance of up to 50-70 km are urgently needed. And this is only "Coalition-SV", as well as "Malka", which will be of real use only when it has guided missiles. With guided projectiles from "Malok", there would be an order of magnitude + more sense than now. And we need to work on this. Right now .

[sgrabik]

Msta is already in the upgraded version, Msta SM.

[Bogalex]

You're wrong.
The modernized 2S19 "Msta-S" is a self-propelled gun 2014S2M19 developed under the theme "Dilemma" and put into service in 2. She did not change the code.
And "Msta-SM" is an experimental self-propelled howitzer 2S33. It was not created in metal, they managed to make a batch of ammunition and shoot it from ballistic barrels. The topic, although extremely promising, was closed after the completion of the technical project. The leadership of the Moscow Region then wanted a double-barreled "Coalition" ...

[Pavel57]

We must then also recall the T-43 project, from which the tower switched to the T-34-85.

[EMMM]

Best the enemy of the good!
In 1943, it was about increasing firepower and increasing armor protection. Against this background, lowering the height of the tank and improving the smoothness of movement could simply be forgotten.
Moreover, the front demanded a car!
However, work on new technology did not stop even in the most difficult times.
So the idea of ​​​​multi-cartridge loading seems promising to me.

[Sergey Venediktov]

You are beautiful, no doubt...

just the SVO showed that everything that is and everything that will be in our art is "the times of the Ochakovskys and the conquest of the Crimea."

It’s not serious in the 21st century to talk about a weapon that cannot hit with precision on 100-120 km с QUO 1-10 m. Everything below this bar in terms of range and QUO is "Legends of the ancient times"

Those interested can read:

Development of guided artillery shells abroad (2018)
(it is better to read in PDF format, there are photos and tables)

Projectile planning for 110 km was tested in 2019, mass production in 2025

GGRM-5 at the Poongsan booth at MADEX 2017.

manufacturer's story from 10:47 https://youtu.be/3lfuRgnun_o

I will leave one slide from the presentation of the Chief of the General Staff of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation for the Public Chamber of the State Duma of the Russian Federation 2011g. he was then scolded, but in vain. NWO after 11 years confirmed his assessment

(the presentation itself is in the Internet archive)

What should our arte strive for?

DIGITALIZATION

Digitalization from the process of target detection to projectile control in flight. Cast iron must be forgotten for firing from closed positions, only for direct fire.

[Momotomba]

Will the satellite give target designation? Well, if you need to get into the house, then okay, the house will not go anywhere. What if the target moves? And how long does it take to get results?
At one time, we abandoned artillery in favor of missiles ... Another stage of stupidity ...

[Georgy Sviridov_2]

What are you going to aim this projectile at 120 km? Not a single drone will reach there - they will shoot it down ...

[Fizik13]

Quote: Andrey Moskvin

What about ammunition, what kind of long-term construction?

NO!
We, unlike the West, HAVE SUCCESSION, i.e. old guns cannot use new bypasses, due to their greater power, it can break the barrel, but new systems can always use old bypasses. This is for YOU not the English Challengers, which seem to have the same caliber, but the bypasses are NOT the same.

[Vladimir_2U]

Until now, it is not known for certain how widely the shells for the 2A88 "Coalition-SV" gun and the same "Msta-S" are unified - according to some sources, only partially.

Of course, I’m not a real artilleryman, but everything is clear here, older shells will easily fit the new system, it’s just that the range and accuracy will probably be lower than for new ones. Indeed, for shells, the maximum twist of the rifling has changed, even the length of the barrel does not play a special role. In total, then the tables should be compiled for a different number of charges.

I had to completely abandon the unification with hundreds of thousands of complete shots for 152-mm guns accumulated over the years.

Characteristics require sacrifice, and no one gets rid of old systems, so there is where to attach old charges.

a classic breech - instead of it, a specific rammer acted as a concentrator of powder energy, closing the chamber and acting as a shutter.

Something strange what kind of hub? And since when did the breech and bolt become one and the same? And how the projectile is sent, because the shutter will not be able to bring it to its regular place, so that the belt would bite the rifling. Something the author overdid it.

But the most important thing is that this gun can only use specific - designed specifically for it - modular caseless propellant charges.

I didn’t see another advantage of throwing modules in the article - the uselessness of the sleeve, the product is quite expensive. I think that with this the complexity of the shutter, and not only, fully pays off.

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

I agree The author was too smart!
Even today there is no complete unification between the charges of domestic guns.
For example, Hyacinth and Msta. Objectively, in principle, this is not critical and at least not a reason to saturate our army with new weapons.

[kapitan92]

Quote: Kote pane Kohanka

I agree The author was too smart!

There is such a thing!

And this is partly true: the same tanks represented by the T-72B3, T-80BVM and T-90 of various modifications, including the M, consume basically the same ammunition.

In general, they are the same, but of the old "Mango and Lead" family. The modern BOPS "Vacuum 1" is 160mm larger, and the "Vacuum" was 260mm larger than the existing ones.
It is impossible to "shove" 900mm "Vacuum 1" into an existing automatic loader without altering the niches. MO refused it. In "Breakthrough" with a new gun, this is real.
It is necessary to strive for unification, BUT, it is criminal to design new installations for old ammunition.
On the example of the same tanks, "Vacuum 1", "Vacuum 2", promising "Gri
fel", well, you can’t "grip" old models into tanks without serious modification, which costs a lot of money.
In a word, you need to work! We pooped a lot of time talking, parades, eyewash. It's time to "gather the stones".

[dirk182]

We pooped a lot of time talking, parades, eyewash.

Not us, but "they". So many guys left .... It's just that there is no strength even to comment on what is happening. I think they are insane at the helm.

[bayard]

Quote: Kote pane Kohanka

no reason to saturate our army with new weapons.

And how will you, Vladislav, overcome the long-range artillery of the West, in service with the Armed Forces of Ukraine and NATO, in counter-battery combat? "Carnation"? "Acacia"? "Mstoy-S" with a range of 28-29,5 km. against 40 - 60 km. ? Maybe D-20 will help with this? Or D-1?
We potentially have only TWO systems potentially (!) Capable in the future (!) of fighting long-range NATO artillery from equal distances:
- "Coalition-SV", of which only a trial batch was fired and the release of shells for them has not been adjusted.
- "Malka", with its range up to 50 km. ... BUT (!!!) this is a very NON-quick-firing gun in the BC of which there are NO guided projectiles. If such GUIDED projectiles appear for them, the efficiency and effectiveness of Malok fire in the fight against long-range enemy artillery will increase by an order of magnitude! And even an order of magnitude.
But this is NOT available, it can and MUST be done.
Otherwise, all our artillery will be knocked out in counter-battery combat from distances unattainable for us.
Allocate a separate production (say Omsktransmash) for the production of "Coalition-SV", build a new plant OR a new production line at an existing enterprise for the production of shells for "Coalition-SV".
It is urgent to develop and establish serial production of guided projectiles for self-propelled guns "Malka" caliber 203 mm.
And the old types of shells should be mass-produced at existing facilities. All processes should go in parallel, giving synergy on the fronts of the NWO.

[dirk182]

Thoughts are good, of course, but now the existing production facilities need personnel and it is necessary to raise questions about the creation of new ones, starting with the question: "Where can I get personnel for these new plants?"

[bayard]

It is necessary to train personnel, including in the production facilities themselves around the backbone of the most experienced. Omsktransmash in the past built the T-80 and chassis for self-propelled guns and air defense systems, there were decent capacities and production areas, it is necessary to reanimate and, if necessary, expand. At the moment, they are mainly engaged in modernization there. It is necessary to restore the full cycle.

[user]

and where to get personnel for these new factories?

And you try to pay workers and engineers a normal salary in such a production, and then you won’t get a job there and the problem of personnel will be solved by itself. For some reason, every sales manager and marketer gets all sorts of goodies more than those who actually produce this kind of product.

[Akhr82]

Does religion not allow Tornado-S to be used for counter-battery combat?

[Oleg Ogorod]

Does religion not allow Tornado-S to be used for counter-battery combat?

Only with guided missiles.
And preferably those on the KAMAZ chassis. They can move faster.
Only they exist in single prototypes.

[Guran33 Sergey]

You don’t understand, the design of the shutter is fundamentally different, the author writes to you that the shot is fired by a microwave pulse, apparently over the entire area of ​​\uXNUMXb\uXNUMXbthe charge

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Guran33 Sergey

You don’t understand, the design of the shutter is fundamentally different, the author writes to you that the shot is fired by a microwave pulse, apparently over the entire area of ​​\uXNUMXb\uXNUMXbthe charge

This does not negate the need to send the projectile. And the principle of charge initiation will in no way change the principles of locking the barrel with a bolt. Well, there will be some kind of magnetron instead of the striker, what, the piston bolt will become some kind of "force fields" from this?

[Bad_gr]

If there is no sleeve, then the gun should be locked not with a wedge gate, but with a piston (to ensure obturation). And in the "Coalition-SV", as I understand it, the charge rammer and the piston valve are one detail. Based on this, the shells must have their own rammer.
PS
They forgot to mention that one of the requirements for the new self-propelled guns was the firing range, which should have exceeded the firing range of NATO counterparts, therefore the chamber of the new gun is much larger (for more gunpowder) than our old guns.
Another rather significant difference between the "Coalition-SV" and previous self-propelled guns is the ability to immediately make adjustments to the aiming of the gun, tracking the flight of its shells with locators.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Bad_gr

If there is no sleeve, then the gun should be locked not with a wedge gate, but with a piston (to ensure obturation).

As I wrote.

Quote: Bad_gr

And in the "Coalition-SV", as I understand it, the charge rammer and the piston valve are one detail. Based on this, the shells must have their own rammer.

Well, definitely not one detail, but the unit is another matter.

Quote: Bad_gr

therefore, the chamber of the new gun is much larger (for more gunpowder) than our old guns

Or a very high density of the powder module. In the photo, one module - "no more than 10 kg in weight", which for three modules gives 25 kg (at least) per 8 liters. And for Msta - B, the weight of a long-range charge is 12,5 kg, with 16 liters (although this is a chamber, not a sleeve).

Quote: Bad_gr

Forgot to mention

The author seems to be writing.

[ln_ln]

See the Broadwell ring https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadwell_ring
Chieftain L11, Challenger L30, and three axes, and a panzer-howitzer 2000.

[SergioPetrov]

Of course, I’m not a real artilleryman, but everything is clear here, older shells will easily fit the new system,

So don't talk nonsense just with neither ear nor snout

[FoBoss_VM]

The general message of the article, as I understand it, is this: do not expect it at the front in the coming years, it will not

[atos_kin]

Quote from: FoBoss_VM

she will not be at the front in the coming years

Until the "coalition of effective managers" dies out.

[Amateur]

On the one hand, stocks of ammunition accumulated over decades since the days of the Soviet Union and to the present day, amounting to literally hundreds of thousands of tons, have not been put anywhere.

In the memoirs of V.G. Grabin, it is described in great detail and angrily how the generals from the GAU did not allow him to make a 76 mm SPM cannon for the new ammunition, referring to the fact that the warehouses are full of 76 mm shells for the 1902 cannon, left over from the time of I MV, which is why in the first period of the Second World War in the spacecraft there were problems with anti-tank artillery.
Time passes, and the generals seem to be the same.

[Guran33 Sergey]

The general had a financier, and Grabin had "Wishlist" and the financier defeated the "Wishlist", the same thing with an increased power anti-tank gun - they were able to make guns (about 500 pieces) but there were no crowbars and they stood in the parks until more or less high-quality bops appeared .And all this talk about "excess power" is just misinformation.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Guran33 Sergey

and they stood in the parks until more or less high-quality bops appeared

What BOPS for SPM?!

[Guran33 Sergey]

Crowbars for 57 mm ptr 1941 when Comrade Grabin worked

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Guran33 Sergey

Crowbars for 57 mm ptr 1941 when Comrade Grabin worked

What kind of nonsense are you writing, what kind of "crowbars", first ask what a sub-caliber projectile is, and when it appeared as an anti-tank ammunition and what is the difference between a simple sub-caliber projectile and a BOPS.

And what is PTR ?! A gun or something...

[Guran33 Sergey]

Sorry! The demon beguiled, naturally sub-caliber, something I made a revolution in the anti-tank artillery of the Second World War

[mat-vey]

Quote: Guran33 Sergey

The general had a financier

The general had a technologist ... the longer the barrel, the more marriage .. At that time, if you had a marriage of 50%, then they hung an order for you ... But Grabin realized that you couldn’t jump above your head very quickly ...

Quote: Guran33 Sergey

And all this talk about "excess power" is just misinformation.

Another "beautiful" legend...

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: mat-vey

The general had a technologist ... the longer the barrel, the more marriage .. At that time, if you had a marriage of 50%, then they hung an order for you ... But Grabin realized that you couldn’t jump above your head very quickly ...
Quote: Guran33 Sergey
And all this talk about "excess power" is just misinformation.

Another "beautiful" legend...

I think that you are confusing the USV with the ZiS-2, where the 57 mm barrel was really problematic.

[mat-vey]

Perhaps you are right.............

[nedgen]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Quote: mat-vey

The general had a technologist ... the longer the barrel, the more marriage .. At that time, if you had a marriage of 50%, then they hung an order for you ... But Grabin realized that you couldn’t jump above your head very quickly ...
Quote: Guran33 Sergey
And all this talk about "excess power" is just misinformation.

Another "beautiful" legend...

I think that you are confusing the USV with the ZiS-2, where the 57 mm barrel was really problematic.

Sorry Vladimir, but Sergey is confusing the F-22USV with the F-22. Here, Grabin was not allowed to make the F-22 with a new shot, and the F-22USV was already made under the standard three-inch shot from the very beginning. But with the ZiS-2, the story is a little different. Its production was officially stopped due to excess power, but in real life due to excessive high cost (primarily due to a large marriage in the production of barrels, according to some sources, up to 80% due to the long barrel length) and this despite the fact that in 1941 it was excellent with German tanks the F-22USV and F-22, and the 45mm gun, also coped after fixing the problem with the BS. And for the money of one ZiS-2, it was possible to produce 3 or even 4 45mm anti-tank guns. And the ZiS-2 used a very specific shot that only she used, and this was unreasonable during the transfer of shell factories to the east. In other words, there were not enough shots for the ZiS-2 !!!

[Alexey RA]

Quote: nedgen

Its production was officially stopped due to excess power, but in real life due to excessive high cost (primarily due to a large marriage in the production of barrels, according to some sources, up to 80% due to the long barrel length) and this despite the fact that in 1941 it was excellent with German tanks the F-22USV and F-22, and the 45mm gun, also coped after fixing the problem with the BS.

The fact of the matter is that 76-mm tanks could not cope with enemy tanks in 1941 - there were hellishly few BR-350A, so the main armor-piercing was "shrapnel to strike":

at a firing distance of up to 300 meters, it can penetrate up to 35 mm of armor

That is, on board from 300 m. Despite the fact that the guiding documents for anti-tank weapons until 1943 required anti-tank guns to fire in the forehead with the opening of fire upon the arrival of the target at a direct shot range.
With the 45-mm, too, everything was not immediately decided - shells with localizers went into production only from November 1941.
But the USSR was forced to exchange anti-tank defense for filling the front with full-fledged rifle divisions. For artillery regiments are the basis of the firepower of rifle divisions, without which it turns into a bunch of men with rifles. And without an artillery regiment, a division cannot be sent to the front - it will be of good use, like from several battalions.
And in a situation where the army, on the one hand, already by 01.09.1941/3100/8500 lost almost XNUMX divisional guns out of XNUMX, and, on the other hand, formed new formations at an accelerated pace

as early as July 1941, it was necessary to form 71 divisions (56 divisions and 15 cd), in August 110 divisions (85 div and 25 cd), and in October 74 rifle brigades

divisional guns were needed like air like bread. So the specialized 57-mm anti-tank guns were exchanged in production for 3-4 divisional 76-mm guns. For the enemy does not have so many tanks, and dangerous areas can be supported by corps artillery and anti-aircraft guns (well, if intelligence does not fix it), and there is nothing to keep the enemy infantry on the rest of the front without new and reorganized divisions.

[mat-vey]

Quote: Alexey RA

So the specialized 57-mm anti-tank guns were exchanged in production for 3-4 divisional 76-mm guns.

All the same, it turns out that the "technologist" was the most important of all, subject to a competent customer ...

[Bormanxnumx]

Quote: Guran33 Sergey

the same thing with an increased power anti-tank gun - the guns were able to make (about 500 pcs.)

If you are talking about the 107-mm M-60 divisional cannon, about 270 of them were fired, if about the Grabinskaya ZIS-28, then at the time of closing the closing of the program, there were 6 (six!) Guns in varying degrees of readiness, and the remaining 494 pieces "memoirs will endure everything "))))

[Khibiny Plastun]

Yes, thanks for reminding me about Grabin, one of the great designers of artillery, on a par with Petrov, did a lot, I really didn’t understand why Grabin considered 100 mm to be the wrong caliber for the army.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Amateur

In the memoirs of V.G. Grabin, it is described in great detail and angrily how the generals from the GAU did not allow him to make a 76 mm SPM cannon for the new ammunition, referring to the fact that the warehouses are full of 76 mm shells for the 1902 cannon, left over from the time of I MV, which is why in the first period of the Second World War in the spacecraft there were problems with anti-tank artillery.

True, Comrade Grabin did not specify where the USSR of the early 30s would have taken three times as much copper for the sleeve of a new ammunition. And how much time and money would it take to completely replace the mob stock of shells for the army's most massive gun (well, except for the 45-mm anti-tank gun). Do you remember how many 85-mm shells for the 52-K were fired in the pre-war year and a half?
It was not about the generals, but about the economy. Cartridge loading for large calibers in the requirements of the GAU did not appear from a good life. And the refusal to switch to larger calibers in divisional artillery in the late 30s, too.

Quote: Amateur

because of which, in the first period of the Second World War, there were problems with anti-tank artillery in the spacecraft.

There were problems in the PTA because the industry of the USSR could not work in the BBS. "Three-inch" did not penetrate the armor of German tanks, not because the ballistics were bad. but because instead of regular BBS, ersatz were used. For the industry completely disrupted the production of BBS before the war, giving only 20% of the 76-mm BBS from the plan. 192 shells from Vladik to St. Petersburg, including warehouses - and spin as you like. And it wasn't any better.

Due to the current lack of the required number of chamber armor-piercing shells in artillery units, firing at German tanks from 76,2-mm divisional guns with shells of other types is widespread ...

This was written by the specialized NII-48 in July 1942. Forty-two! The year of the war has passed - and the BR-350A is not enough. As a result...

3. Shrapnel is still one of the main armor-piercing projectiles, since at a firing distance of up to 300 meters it can penetrate up to 35 mm of armor, which allows it to be successfully used against light tanks, and at close range (up to 200 m) and against the side armor of medium tanks...

Shein wrote that in the docks of the 4th brigade from the time of the battles near Mtsensk in the column armor-piercing shells figured just USh.
Moreover, even if there was a BR-350A, there was no guarantee of tabular penetration. For, due to design features (hull with uneven hardening), the projectile had a bad habit of pricking on the armor.

[nedgen]

Quote: Alexey RA

True, Comrade Grabin did not specify where the USSR of the early 30s would have taken three times as much copper for the sleeve of a new ammunition. And how much time and money would it take to completely replace the mob stock of shells for the army's most massive gun (well, except for the 45-mm anti-tank gun). Do you remember how many 85-mm shells for the 52-K were fired in the pre-war year and a half?
It was not about the generals, but about the economy. Cartridge loading for large calibers in the requirements of the GAU did not appear from a good life. And the refusal to switch to larger calibers in divisional artillery in the late 30s, too.

Excuse me, Alexey, about cap loading for large calibers (I mean from 203mm and above), it also appeared due to the fact that the cartridge case with the charge becomes prohibitively heavy. For example, not a single naval gun with a caliber above 203 mm had a cartridge case. There is nothing to say about calibers 305 and 406 in general. Well, the transition to a division with a caliber above 76mm was not made yet because of the huge stocks of 76mm shells. In addition, in order to gouge bunkers and machine-gun points, 76mm caliber was still suitable.

[Soldatov V.]

Everything new needs to be dragged onto the battlefield. Only there you can evaluate the weapon. In principle, for example, it would be possible to arm an artillery regiment, or at least a battery of Coalitions of the SV, and send it to Donetsk for counter-battery combat, then it has a range of 70 km! I think they will make some new shells. Another experienced double-barreled shotgun to try out in battle, maybe it's not so bad. And the weight is no more than the carrying capacity of the railway platform, otherwise the self-propelled guns would have been hacked to death at the design stage.

[Bad_gr]

Quote: V.

Another experienced double-barreled gun to try out in battle, maybe it's not so bad.

She's not bad. It was also abandoned due to the fact that, having a meager superiority over a single-barreled one, it is much more complicated and expensive. In terms of rate of fire, it is almost like a single-barrel, because after firing with one barrel, it was necessary to give time until the second one stopped hanging out and only after that make a shot. Overheating of the barrel and single-barrel does not threaten - there, inside the barrel, after a shot, a liquid is injected that brings down the temperature.

[Soldatov V.]

If the double-barreled gun worked in principle in a prototype, then it can be finalized. The photo shows that the chassis is T - 90, the tower does not go beyond the dimensions of the chassis. The terms of reference always indicate the dimensions of the self-propelled guns, these are railway, automobile, and for passing under bridges. You can work on your weight too. So when moving to a position, you can reduce the transported ammunition, and this is 3-4 tons, and the remaining is 10-15 shells.
She may not be able to shoot 32 rounds per minute (which is not proven) but 20-25 is also good.
In the Navy, they use both two and four-barreled guns and they don’t talk anything. If it talks, it does not affect the homing one, and in terms of area it is even a plus.
In coastal defense units, it seems to me that it will be just right, and the technical culture in the fleet is higher.

[Bad_gr]

Quote: V.

In the Navy, they use both two and four-barreled guns and they don’t talk anything.

AK-130 is a Soviet double-barreled 130 mm naval gun mount. The weight of the combat module (only BM) is 89 tons. Maybe that's why he doesn't talk?

[BARKAS]

There is no unification in the 152mm caliber. Of course, you can load ammunition from another system and even shoot, but it is not known where this projectile will fly.

[Guran33 Sergey]

That's right, the cutting of the barrels of different guns is different and the propelling charges are selected for this cutting, the unitary or charge is from another and the projectile just flies like in the First World War - somewhere in the direction of the enemy

[Guran33 Sergey]

That's right, the cutting of the barrels of different guns differs from each other and the propellant charge is selected individually and tables for it. and the other unitar or charge is towards the enemy.

[Parvis rasulov]

Well, if you write about 152 mm shells, then it’s worth recalling that everything is not simple with her anyway, the same Hyacinth B and self-propelled guns 2S5 Hyacinth-S have their own shell and its shells cannot be used not with 2a65 MSTA guns and 2a33 guns from Akatsiya and D 20. If shells from Acacia can be used on MSTA, then the developed shells for 2A65 from cannot be used in the 2A33 gun SAO 2C3 Action

[Architect]

Another monster from the military-industrial complex.
First, they cut on the product itself.
Then on ammunition.
As the mess begins, it turns out that again something will not be enough.
All the same, the NATO approach with their 777 light howitzer and rockets is much more effective.
Mass character and mobility is the key to success.

[sgrabik]

For such amateurs as you may be, but in fact, self-propelled guns have repeatedly proved their undeniable advantage in all respects on the battlefield, there is no need to take examples from NATO, as it turns out, they are also far from being as rosy as they say about it .

[russianreactor]

It seems to me that the Coalition-SV is similar to the Armata, that both vehicles do not fight because of some obvious technological defects. Coalition-SV was officially put into service in October, as I remember. At least 12 pieces are made. However, there was not even a PR shooting for our Zomboyaschik from the NWO. Although a long-range howitzer practically does not risk anything, unlike a tank in the event of a breakdown.

Most likely there are some technical problems and not with ammunition, since the howitzer cannot even perform demonstration firing in fact

[Mordvin 3]

Quote from russianreactor

Most likely there are some technical problems and not with ammunition, since the howitzer cannot even perform demonstration firing in fact

There may well be problems with these caseless charges. That is, with their production.
I wonder how they solved the problem of cleaning this rammer-breech from soot and cooling it?

[Yuriy77]

Cooling is carried out by direct multi-jet injection of liquid into the chamber immediately after the shot. For this, an ejector was left on the barrel, which otherwise would not have been needed. the fighting compartment is uninhabited.

[Architect]

Quote from russianreactor

Most likely there are some technical problems and not with ammunition, since the howitzer cannot even perform demonstration firing in fact

Or financial.
Let's say shells cost 20 regular ones.
To take the same planning bomb is cheap and effective, but the military-industrial complex did not even want to equip it before the SVO. Because it's not profitable. Cheap.
I think that Serdyukov (for all his shortcomings) was like a bone in the throat for the military-industrial complex because he stirred up a hornet's nest.

[Repellent]

Quote from russianreactor

... even a shooting PR for our zombie man from NWO did not have... the howitzer can’t even make a demonstration firing in fact

It's called "suck it out of your finger"

The fact that the work of the Coalition at the NWO was not shown on television is sad, of course ... but not fatal. However, it does not follow from this that "the howitzer cannot shoot", it was someone who deceived you.

[sgrabik]

There are no technical problems there, everything has already been clearly and specifically explained to you that the main problem is the difference in ammunition, and you continue to invent some kind of ridiculous versions of your own.

[Niknafnuf]

It's not so much about technological and technical problems. In the USA, the Future Combat Systems program was launched, a new generation of weapons, and then closed. When the United States closed in Russia, on the contrary, they opened the Armata program. It was implemented quite cheerfully, since developments on it were made back in the USSR. In 2015, the first basic samples of T14 and T15 were ready. But the fighting in Syria showed that the nature of the fighting has changed and the old Soviet concept of new weapons needs to be revised. The program was put on hold. Technological and technical problems can be solved, something can be changed, corrected. But to make a mistake in the concept is fraught with the failure of the entire weapons system. Coalition-SV is also part of the new weapons program. Now it is based on the T-90 tank, but this base is rather weak; it must be placed on the Armata platform. ACS PzH 2000 on a seven-roller chassis from Leopard1 is rather weak, problems arise with the transmission. The impulse of the shot is very powerful, it is not for nothing that the Hyacinth-S self-propelled guns have a base plate that extends from behind. The Coalition-SV in the NWO most likely participates secretly and to a limited extent, it is simply necessary to test it in real combat operations. T-14 tanks will probably also participate when NATO equipment enters the battlefield. It is important to see the possibilities of this technique and the tactics of its application. After the end of the NWO, the concept of new weapons will be finalized and the program will be launched again. The main thing is not to make a mistake, we do not have so many resources to correct such a mistake.

[VicktorVR]

It is not clear from the article whether the shells from the old systems are suitable for the coalition?

If they fit, then there are no particular problems - the production of new "modular" charges will still have to be organized practically from scratch. At the same time, as far as I understand, they will be cheaper and easier to manufacture due to the lack of a sleeve.
Well, in any case, rearmament is a very slow business, and you don’t need to do it quickly. How many years did the USSR switch to tanks with a 125mm gun?

[mat-vey]

Quote: VicktorVR

At the same time, as far as I understand, they will be cheaper and easier to manufacture due to the lack of a sleeve.

Maybe cheaper, maybe not - the module shell must meet a bunch of criteria. Burn with a minimum of soot. Be waterproof, at least somehow protect the gunpowder in them from deformation.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: mat-vey

Burn with a minimum of soot. Be waterproof, at least somehow protect the gunpowder in them from deformation. And this is probably not an easy task.

Which has long been resolved in tank charges. And the pallet is there for obturation of the wedge gate.

[mat-vey]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Which has long been resolved in tank charges

And what's up with

Quote: VicktorVR

At the same time, as far as I understand, they will be cheaper and easier to manufacture due to the lack of a sleeve.

Cheaper, more expensive or the same price?

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: mat-vey

Cheaper, more expensive or the same price?

I guess it's a little cheaper, what do you think?

[mat-vey]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

I guess it's a little cheaper, what do you think?

And I think that you can assume anything ... But how in fact you don’t know. And I don’t know either - that’s why I would like to know ...

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: mat-vey

And I think you can guess anything

If there are restrictions, then you can’t assume anything. A full-size sleeve is, of course, more expensive than a pallet, both in terms of metal and technologically. The burning shell of the charge, I suppose, is cheaper than the metal of the sleeve, equal in length, and therefore "somewhat cheaper."
But completely burning cartridge-loading modules are certainly cheaper than a sleeve of the appropriate size.

[mat-vey]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

But completely burning cartridge-loading modules are certainly cheaper than a sleeve of the appropriate size.

And what is this based on? Again, on your assumptions? For example, I can assume that in the production of module shells, chemical components are used that are already lost in the modern Russian Federation, which cannot but affect the price .... on the other hand, you can say, and you will be right that everything is not so perfect in mechanical engineering either. And, accordingly, the price of pressing-stamping is also ... uh .. not stable. So all this, in the realities of our time, is only fortune-telling ...

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: mat-vey

For example, I can assume that in the production of module shells, chemical components are used that are already lost in modern Russia

Already gunpowder is in order, without any assumptions.

Quote: mat-vey

So all this, in the realities of our time, is only fortune-telling ...

An elementary understanding of the difference in technologies is enough.

Quote: mat-vey

And, accordingly, the price of pressing-stamping is also ... uh .. not stable.

I’ll write more for you, artillery shells are pulled, not stamped, so the difference will be even steeper.

[mat-vey]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

I’ll write more for you, artillery shells are pulled, not stamped, so the difference will be even steeper.

I saw how shells are made ... And I saw what happened to this enterprise now ....

Quote: Vladimir_2U

An elementary understanding of the difference in technologies is enough.

At those chemical enterprises where I had to visit, all military production facilities are closed - low efficiency for owners. Technologists behind the fence ...

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Already gunpowder is in order, without any assumptions.

During the war, there was the Kemerovo gunpowder plant - all the artillery was kept on it for the first half of 1942, while the Kazan technology was being debugged - they were one of the first to close ... And you perfectly understand that the shell is not gunpowder ... Although for the module and for gunpowder they can other requirements than for case equipment .... And this one is easier in a case with a decopper ..

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: mat-vey

I saw how shells are made ... And I saw what happened to this enterprise now ...

So, are they stamping cartridge cases for artillery rounds from 122 mm? And what happened .. yes ... albeit not with everyone.

Quote: mat-vey

At those chemical enterprises where I had to visit, all military production facilities are closed - low efficiency for owners. Technologists behind the fence ...

However, they did not stop firing shots to 125 mm, absolutely.

Quote: mat-vey

And you perfectly understand that the shell is not gunpowder

Of course, emnip is nitrocelludose impregnated with nitrolac, everything burns, of course. God knows what.

Quote: mat-vey

And this one is easier in a sleeve with a decopper ..

Well, probably, although judging by the density of the module, they did not regret sharpening the lead there with a file. ))) Although plastic belts are in trend now (just kidding).

[mat-vey]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

God knows what.

So it was with the ancient disappeared civilization, the remains of which we eat up ...
Although, you seem to be an optimist of unprecedented strength ...

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: mat-vey

Although, you seem to be an optimist of unprecedented strength ...

Not that it would, but "immediately into the coffin" is also not mine.

[mat-vey]

It's just that sometimes I have to deal with the feds from the pl(push ) supervision .... Sometimes they will tell you this ...

[sgrabik]

This is not an easy task, but it is quite solvable; many composite materials have already been developed that are guaranteed to meet all the necessary requirements.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: VicktorVR

It is not clear from the article whether the shells from the old systems are suitable for the coalition?

From Acacia to Msta, the whole nomenclature approached, but not vice versa, I think the situation is similar with the Coalition and Msta.

[Diger]

Quote: Eluard Petrov

Not only will the pleasure turn out to be not cheap and unrealizable .... you need to solve the problem of supplying ammunition, which the Coalition has so specific that it will not work with other artillery of a similar caliber.

I can guess 2 options.
1. The author considers the logisticians and suppliers of the RF Armed Forces to be so stupid that they are supplying ammunition for the 2S1 Gvozdika self-propelled guns (122 mm), 2SZ Akatsiya self-propelled guns (152 mm), 2S19 Msta-S self-propelled guns -mm), "Msta-B" (152 mm), guns 152S2 "Hyacinth" (5 mm) and 152S2 "Pion" (7 mm), 203-mm self-propelled guns 120S2 "Nona-SVK", 23S2 " Nona-S", 9S2 "Vena", 31B2 "Nona-K", 16B2M "Vasilek" (9 mm), 82B2-14 "Tray" (1 mm), mortar complex 82S2 "Sani" (12 mm) , self-propelled 120S2 "Tulip" (4 mm) ... unable to overpower the supply of one more ammunition?
2. Expensive? Is it cheaper to mobilize and "meat assaults" to capture a couple of streets and a bus stop in six months?
---
It would be better to write honestly: the industry of the Russian Federation is not able to produce weapons or ammunition under sanctions.
This artillery system is made piece by piece, for parades

Quote: Eduard Petrov

Then they abandoned 2С36: it affected like a giant weight

Couldn't it have been the other way around?
Abandon a frankly stupid idea, and spend the money on business?
As a result, the army does not have artillery with a barrel length of 52 calibers, and they hit it from afar with 52 calibers.

[Alexey RA]

Quote from Digger

As a result, the army does not have artillery with a barrel length of 52 calibers, and they hit it from afar with 52 calibers.

The army has mass-produced artillery with a barrel length of 47 calibers. But at the same time, she regularly flies from artillery with a barrel length of 39 calibers. And often not even from self-propelled guns, but from towed ones.
Maybe it's not the length of the barrel?

[Diger]

The army has a massive serial

2С19/2С19М1 и 2С19М2?
On paper? Maybe.
If it had "mass and serial" then the D-30 would not have been reanimated, ONLY the frankly old 2C3 and 2C1 would not have shone on the frames.
I don’t believe Konashenkov’s fairy tales, and people who go behind the ribbon convey something completely different.
And about the shell diet, they ate all the baldness.

th regularly flies from artillery with a barrel length of 39 calibers

The 39th is relatively small, and ERFB gives the same 30 km

The fact remains a fact: it does not have a 52 caliber. And amusing troops for parades, after 2022, they don’t scare anyone.

Maybe it's not the length of the barrel?

Maybe. And not even long.
But this in the Russian Federation is already a reason for the article of the Criminal Code and the Code of Administrative Offenses
Yuri Yevich will not let you lie

[Wildcat]

Old sign, IMHO.
For example, there are no Greek BMP1s, Turkish Cypri, American Avengers and Guardians, German Marders, etc.

[Diger]

I agree, but in general it is needed on the issue of artillery with a barrel length @ 39 calibers
The rest is secondary in this matter.

[Wildcat]

IMHO, offhand, then the Italian M109 (well, PC2000) is not enough.

[Alex_mech]

You have some very strange (or old) picture. According to the air defense system, there is no NASAMS at all and there is only one IRIS.

[Diger]

Only artillery is important there. The rest is not essential here

[Alex_mech]

I don’t follow artillery, but since there are air defense systems (of which there are fewer) and which such questions are in sight, then there is no point in believing the rest of the picture.

[Alexey RA]

Quote from Digger

2С19/2С19М1 и 2С19М2?
On paper? Maybe.

800 units for 2021. Fortunately, the transition to 47-caliber 6" at the level of divisions began even under the USSR.

Quote from Digger

39th is relatively small

Lolodins and Ports.
M777 even in Donetsk managed to work with relative impunity.

Quote from Digger

Maybe. And not even long.

Intelligence, target designation, operational data generation, correction and communication. However, as always.
Oh yes, more ammunition with trajectory correction.
With all this, even 155/39s become normal AUs.

[Diger]

My former colleague does not see these 800 there.
He sees junk, he sees a shell diet.
PySy aviation too.

M777 even in Donetsk managed to relatively

I would suggest that it's not just the mobility of this system.
------
Which of the military leaders (even rear rats), responsible for the plans of the operation, for the financial support, for "more than 100500% of the available weapons have been updated to have no analogues in the world" is not, not even by execution, and was not imprisoned, but at least removed from office and retired?
I do not know. Know what was awarded. For Kherson incl.
I know a little man was planted from mobiks, because he told the colonel and 2 poor fellows were publicly packed

[Alexey RA]

Quote from Digger

I would suggest that it's not just the mobility of this system.

All the "mobility" of the M777 is only for the smoking of the Zusuls, when you can drag the howitzers from the opornik to the opornik with impunity. In a war with an equal enemy, this is an ordinary towed howitzer.
Which, with the normal organization of artillery, has very little chance of having time to curl up after firing before the start of arrivals at the firing position. Normal - this is when the AIR worked properly, transmitted the approximate coordinates of the OP to the top in time, then they quickly left the performers, they also quickly gave out data for firing the AU and opened fire. Optionally, the nearest reconnaissance UAV was also aimed at the approximate firing place.
During the Cold War, it was believed that this cycle could take 5 minutes.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

The low weight of the M777, in addition, allows the use of a less powerful tractor and provides better flotation in muddy conditions. In a comparable weight, we only have a 152-mm D-1 howitzer from the Great Patriotic War, with significantly worse characteristics.

[Alex_mech]

You do not confuse, there "their respected people" at a difficult moment did not manage 100%, but only 90%. And then a strange peasant decided to swing the right.

[engineer74]

Quote: Alexey RA

Intelligence, target designation, operational data generation, correction and communication. However, as always.
Oh yes, more ammunition with trajectory correction.
With all this, even 155/39s become normal AUs.

It is a pity that only one plus is possible

[ycuce234-san]

Quote from Digger

Couldn't it have been the other way around?

The 2S36 was ahead of its time - only now it has become completely clear that from now on and forever the gunners will have a very limited firing time at their disposal and they need high mobility and at the same time security.

[Eug]

As for me, even a division of such self-propelled guns is a very serious KBB tool, with the proper levels of cover, reconnaissance and target designation. And a completely "worthy" test object in the NWO. Again - modern (pre-Coalition) artillery can use this type of powder charge (cap-composite)? If "yes", then maybe it should be produced to the maximum with the transfer of Msta and Acacia to it? As I understand it, shells are suitable for any type, the difference is in charges and methods of initiation.

[Shamil88]

The SV coalition cannot use a single shell at all, even its own, because there is no self-propelled gun itself, except for the front version, which is shown on May 9, to the delight of the people and the Kremlin grandfathers, and the army is fighting on Mstakh

[Tim666]

Quote: Amateur

On the one hand, stocks of ammunition accumulated over decades since the days of the Soviet Union and to the present day, amounting to literally hundreds of thousands of tons, have not been put anywhere.

In the memoirs of V.G. Grabin, it is described in great detail and angrily how the generals from the GAU did not allow him to make a 76 mm SPM cannon for the new ammunition, referring to the fact that the warehouses are full of 76 mm shells for the 1902 cannon, left over from the time of I MV, which is why in the first period of the Second World War in the spacecraft there were problems with anti-tank artillery.
Time passes, and the generals seem to be the same.

Only not the USV, but the F-22, and here everything is not so simple, it cannot be said that the generals were so wrong.

[Jager]

It is ridiculous to read that the whole point is the lack of unification and original ammunition for the new self-propelled guns.
Then our "Ukrainian partners" are not able to fight at all, having weapons from different countries and eras, starting with pre-war Soviet howitzers, Italian, Swedish, English, American and God knows what else. However...

[engineer74]

"NATO standards", um ... not quite an empty phrase, in the field of logistics ...

[Dimax-nemo]

Well, damn louse, what did you all want? It is not always possible to achieve a cardinal improvement in "old furs". In NATO self-propelled guns, modular loading was introduced even earlier. For manual loading, it is not a fact that it is more convenient than a cartridge case. For machine guns, it was howitzers that the author explained why. The AK-130 with a unitary loader has 45 rounds per barrel per minute, but no one demanded a variable charge from it.

[Egor Adashev]

Not only will the pleasure turn out to be not cheap and impracticable in the current conditions, but also, in addition to various organizational and technical tasks, it is necessary to solve the problem of supplying ammunition

what a seditious idea the author has! Isn’t he aware that commentators on VO need a child prodigy, even yesterday, and that they would demolish the floor of Washington with a hat, otherwise they’ll be minus to hell! In general, thanks to the author, I did not know about this ....

stocks of ammunition accumulated over decades since the days of the Soviet Union and to the present day, amounting to literally hundreds of thousands of tons, no one has gone anywhere.

there is an idea that if it lasts long enough, we will be able to dispose of old stocks and move on to updating not only shells, but also up to rifle ...

[Zaurbek]

Actually it is not. Until now, it is not known for certain how widely the shells for the 2A88 "Coalition-SV" gun and the same "Msta-S" are unified - according to some sources, only partially. But the most important thing is that this gun can only use specific - designed specifically for it - modular caseless propellant charges.


Question to the studio then: If the Coalition is objectively not a massive howitzer to replace the Msta-S, but in fact it is a replacement for the Hyacinth (Howitzers of greater power 152mm for counter-battery combat), why did the Moscow Region begin to bother immediately with an automated self-propelled gun? It was more logical to make an analogue of Hyacinth with an open cabin (part on a wheeled chassis) with similar automation. And to saturate the army with all this, to improve the quality of counter-battery combat and firing at important targets.


And already having statistics, to reflect on the final form of self-propelled guns.

[Bad_gr]

Quote: Zaurbek

If the Coalition is objectively not a massive howitzer to replace the Msta-S, but in fact a replacement for the Hyacinth (Howitzers of greater power 152mm for counter-battery combat), why did the Moscow Region begin to bother immediately with an automated self-propelled gun? It was more logical to make an analogue of Hyacinth with an open cabin (part on a wheeled chassis) with similar automation.

2С5 "Hyacinth-S" with a gun from the self-propelled guns "Coalition-SV"

[Dimax-nemo]

Because it was originally planned as a replacement for Msta. Hyacinths before SVO were mostly in storage. And on "automation" our gunners have always been "confused", both ship and army.

[anzar]

... and active barrel cooling with a rapidly evaporating liquid.

Alcohol? So he "evaporates" BEFORE firing starts))

[vindigo]

Perhaps my question is from the realm of fantasy. But is it possible in the future to use some binary liquid gunpowder instead of this cartridge loading? Two liquids, separately safe, are mixed in the breech, forming a combustible mixture. It is also possible to more accurately dose the amount of propellant charge and increase the accuracy of shooting.

[Zaurbek]

This is one of the artillery trends ..... it will allow you to maintain pressure in the barrel (stable or increasing) until the projectile takes off. There are no other methods of increasing projectile speed by burning the charge. Further only EM ... railgun

[Diger]

There are no other methods of increasing the speed of the projectile by burning the charge

phlegmatizers, catalysts, inhibitors.
MV initiation is combustion, not detonation. The combustion efficiency depends on the burning area and on the supply of the oxidizing agent.
You can still work with TMV.
Including programmable shot power
A:
LMW will allow you to maintain "stable or in the channel", but this is terribly technically difficult.
It will allow you to adjust the mass of the propellant charge, i.e. muzzle energy at the cut and the absence of solid particles of combustion

[Alex_mech]

But is it possible in the future to use some binary liquid gunpowder instead of this cartridge loading?

Probably possible. It remains only to: 1. Develop such powders, 2. Develop a supply system, 3. Test 1 and 2, 4. Achieve excellent performance. 5. Achieve comparable production costs "on paper". 6. Set up production lines. 7. Achieve comparable lifetime value. Produce in the right quantity: equipment, guns, ammunition. In my amateurish opinion, this is 10-15 years

[Diger]

Quote from: Alex_mech

Probably possible. It remains only: 1. Develop such gunpowder, 2. Develop a supply system

1. This is no longer gunpowder
Monergoli, Diergoli
2. Designed

From the 1st quarter of 1982... TsNII "Burevestnik" became the lead executor for R & D NV1-142-82 "Lava", within which the institute, together with the enterprises of PO Box V-8469, PO Box V-2281, PO Box A-7701 and the Institute of Petroleum Chemistry of the Siberian Branch of the USSR Academy of Sciences worked out a ballistic solution and tank gun circuit elements using LMW (liquid propellants). The conducted studies made it possible to recommend two directions for the design of artillery systems using LCM:
- with the placement of the charge of iron ore in the chamber of the artillery gun (volumetric combustion);
- with the distribution of the LMW charge along the length of the bore (distributed feed).

A 57-mm mortar ballistic mount was developed and manufactured

[Alex_mech]

Well, then I don’t see any problems, since a prototype has existed since 1985, and probably all the tests were successful .... The rest of the points remained. A mere trifle

[Diger]

1. That industry and those brains that were in 1985 are gone.
2. Expensive.
You don't steal. It is better to spend money on Poseidons / overexposures / petrels.
Just think: why, after a very successful 22350, they didn’t rivet them with industrial batches, but rushed into all sorts of fantastic stuff

[Alexey RA]

Can. But here's the problem - they've been digging the topic for half a century, and artillery systems with LMA are still at the prototype stage.
Back in the Soviet ZVO of the late 80s, I read about the 155-mm self-propelled guns on the ZhMV of the General Electric company, the gun for which is already being tested, and the self-propelled guns themselves may appear in the near future.

[Zaurbek]

And, most likely, this topic is more important for a tank with its BOPS

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Zaurbek

And, most likely, this topic is more important for a tank with its BOPS

For a tank, the ZhMV main plus is not in the initial speeds and ballistics. And that it is theoretically possible to pick up a binary LMW, both components of which are mixed only before the shot, and do not detonate individually. And then the crew will no longer literally sit on a carousel with gunpowder.
Plus, due to their liquid nature, the LMA components do not have strict restrictions on geometric dimensions - and containers with them can be placed in the most protected or least affected parts of the tank. Instead of building a fence of charges around the tower.

[Negro]

Quote: Alexey RA

containers with them can be placed in the most protected or least affected parts of the tank.

Vice versa. Tanks with relatively safe liquid will, of course, be used as elements of protection.

[Captain Pushkin]

Quote: vindigo

But is it possible in the future to use some binary liquid gunpowder instead of this cartridge loading?

Liquid propellant mixtures have another plus - the ability to provide a higher initial speed than gunpowder.
In 1943, we conducted experiments with liquid propellant mixtures. A copper bullet of 14,5 mm caliber pierced tank armor.
Those. this topic has been in the works for a long time. Both here and abroad, but so far it has not been heard that someone would come close to serial production.

[Timur_kz]

14,5 in those years and with ordinary gunpowder pierced tank armor

[sergej_84]

On the one hand, the author's idea seems to be clear.
But if you look closely - it turns out an oxymoron - modern ammunition is an obstacle to mass production, because the industry can only produce ammunition from the last century.

[senima56]

If this "artillery system", with the same caliber, is so tricky, why was it created at all? To create problems for ourselves?

[cat Rusich]

Quote: senima56

If this "artillery system", with the same caliber, is so tricky, why was it created at all? To create problems for ourselves?

Counted on 25-30 years of the World... - but were forced to start War (SVO...) already February 24, 2022...

[senima56]

"If you want peace, get ready for war!"

[Alex_mech]

Coalition-SV is about re-equipping all self-propelled artillery and bringing it to a qualitatively new level.

Well, since a qualitatively new level, then the ending of this story will be bad, although the story itself is long. Qualitatively new will most likely remain only at the parade. It was the same with the Americans with their innovative ships, aircraft and self-propelled guns.

[Zaurbek]

The Americans have 777 and correspondent shells for them .... it shoots further than the MSTA and more accurately ..... and also with cap loading.

[Mustached Kok]

the problem is not in cap loading (although this is not fast, but it can be changed on existing systems), but in the fact that promising shells created specifically for the Coalition use unusual ignition through microwave radiation.
those. roughly speaking, there is a small microwave emitter in the gun chamber (as in a home microwave), which initiates the detonation of the expelling charge. And that makes the transition difficult. Again, you can spend the state. mass transition to the new system. But this requires money, production capacity and management decisions.
But our money is spent on something strange (and perhaps there is underfunding in the army, and therefore the results are the same, just unlike the 90s, we learned how to correctly hide it and create an advertising picture), there is very little production capacity for the army and it’s a stretch to maintain and gradually update the fleet of vehicles. And management...well, they can only talk about changes and shift the blame on each other.

[Alexey Lantukh]

It turns out that neither in 2022 nor in 2023 nor in 2024 did they think to supply the Coalition with shells. This is for parades only.

[Ruslan_3]

Quote: Alexey Lantukh

It turns out that neither in 2022 nor in 2023 nor in 2024 did they think to supply the Coalition with shells. This is for parades only.

Why all of a sudden? It's just that at the moment there is not enough production capacity for these ammunition.

[Mustached Kok]

The Coalition system is needed. BUT it fully manifests itself only if there are a lot of systems and shells are provided.
A simple but unfortunately bitter scheme follows from this.
If it is possible to ensure the mass production of shells for the Coalition, then it is necessary to redirect production from other systems specifically to the Coalition.

If the production of shells cannot be mass-produced, then redirect the production of the Coalitions to those artillery systems that use shells from warehouses. Of course, leave the documentation so that in the future, if necessary, production could be established. But spending precious (because there are not many of them left) production forces on equipment that amounts to a couple of dozen units of parade equipment is wasteful.
The coalition is good equipment and necessary. But spending energy on it only as a "front door", while problems with self-propelled guns and shells arise on old platforms (Msta, Gvozdika, etc.) due to a lack of conveyors and production - this is some kind of surrealism.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

The conclusion is wrong.


Shells for existing systems, of course, should be mass-produced.
But the range of the Coalition can be replaced, at the moment, only by the Smerch multiple launch rocket systems, missiles for it are needed more than ever, especially corrected and controlled ones.

[chingachguc]

Yes, these shells are no longer accumulated)) they shot everything

[mmaxx]

Guy at work. Served 10 years ago. For six months they were engaged in blowing up old shells. They were taken out of warehouses and tore. Such are our military thrifty. It is clear: the shelf life and other trali-wali. But .... not my own, okay. The boss did not order, so it should be so.

[Alexey Lantukh]

Those. talk about the fact that there will be no coalition in the Ukrainian war? Personally, that's how I understood it. Because there is no way to make ammunition. Well, they came. It's just a shame.

[Proctologist]

Quote: Amateur

referring to the fact that the warehouses are full of 76 mm shells for the 1902 cannon, left over from the times of WW I

Today the situation is much better! "Stocks" of shells are only on paper, so you can immediately proceed to the release of new guns.
(sarcasm)

[AlexisT]

"Yes, damn it, grenades of the wrong system!" (With)

[mmaxx]

It is already clear to the most stupid that our artillery lags behind NATO. And persuasion about unification will not give anything.
Production problems - it is. And always. But this is exactly where you need to jump out of your pants and do it. We can handle it with us - NATO is looming ahead. And to bring the shells where they need to be is not a problem for a long time. These are excuses from the military. Civilians carry anything and anywhere.

[cat hippopotamus]

I am not an artilleryman, and did not even suspect that shells from old stocks were not suitable for the new "Coalition-SV". Well, the propelling charge was changed and made caseless. Hooray, progress, no need to make shells and you can automatically fill the amount of gunpowder. But I don’t understand why you can’t use old shells of the same caliber?

[Bogalex]

Artillery ammunition is practically not produced and is not purchased element by element - a separate projectile, a separate charge. The Ministry of Defense buys a "shot" from industry - a projectile with a charge in a regular container. And he buys them not just "in reserve", but to accumulate certain norms - so many shots per unit of weapons. And if you take away a projectile for the "Coalition" from a previously purchased shot, then this means that in order to restore the "status quo" its cost is the cost of a new modular charge, a projectile taken from an old gun (which may already be fighting, but in battle only it obviously won’t go with charges), and a new projectile bought to replenish stocks for an old gun. Very, I'll tell you, an expensive pleasure is obtained.

[Bogalex]

Dear author, thanks for the interesting article.
I always read your materials with pleasure and I am glad that there are still creators about whom, without pretense of flattery, one can say "a surname is a sign of quality."
But I'll criticize a little.
Self-propelled artillery gun (SAO) 2S36 has nothing to do with the topic "Coalition-SV". This is a 120-mm SAO for the Airborne Forces, developed in the Zauralets-D R&D to replace the legendary Non.
Here it is:

The machine remained experimental, the groundwork obtained by the designers during its creation was used in the Lotos CJSC for a similar purpose.
Next.
You have identified the problems of completing variable charges, but you have not described them quite correctly. There are a lot of different nuances, pros and cons for each of the systems (sleeve or modular), which you can’t describe in any way within the framework of the comment - I won’t even try. This is a topic for a full-fledged article, but whether such an article is needed on "VO" - I'm not sure yet.
Here I will say this: the choice of a modular loading principle (and a very specific one - a monosystem) was chosen in the "Coalition" primarily because of the need to implement the concept of an unmanned combat compartment of a self-propelled gun. The designers at that time could not find reliable ways to ensure the possibility of completing the automatic loader with a variable charge in the sleeve. That's all. As a bonus, we got a lot of problems and a "long-term construction", which, I hope, will someday end successfully.

[Maximus19]

Everything seems to be much simpler than the author writes. There is no Coalition on the battlefield now for the same reasons as Almaty (which is being trained at the training grounds). Both types of machines are waiting for their finest hour when Nata invades 404 territory.

[Dmitry Smetanin]

This is right. Let him ride in parades, there are no analogues anyway. And the army will communicate with D-1 and D-20. Short KG/AM

[AC130 Gunship]

Chernomyrdin: "We wanted the best, but it turned out as always"

[Uncle_Misha]

I read the comments and have a few questions. Why do we need a firing range of 40 km with an ordinary blank? For counter-battery shooting? For such a small target as an artillery gun? You can hit such a target and at such a range with incredible luck, a huge supply of shells, or from a big hangover. How long will such a barrel live? For Americans, a shot on a long-range charge counts as two on a normal one. Even before the Second World War, the military came to the conclusion that for the caliber 76 mm the range is 5 km, for the caliber 122 the range is 10 km, for the 155 the range is 15 km, but the targets further than 15 km are targets for aviation. There are undoubtedly certain interesting solutions in the "Coalition", perhaps they will be useful in the future, but you should not wait for her, like her sister Armata, in the NWO

[Bogalex]

By itself, the technical ability of a gun to fire at 40 km or more should be considered not from the point of view of "shooting with an ordinary blank", but as a general indicator of its potential.
Accuracy of firing at extreme ranges is ensured in a variety of ways, ranging from the use of more advanced means of firing (like the same gun ballistic radar stations) to precision-guided munitions. Shooting at squares with the expenditure of echelons of ammunition, as in the First World War, is far from a panacea today.
But you need to understand well that no matter how hard you try, for example, it is impossible to shoot from the D-20 with the same Krasnopol at a maximum range comparable to 2A65. No matter how hard you try. Similarly, in order to ensure long-range firing of the VTB, promising guns must be able to fire a conventional projectile even farther than the 2A65.

[Uncle_Misha]

We are talking about the pointlessness of firing conventional OFS at such distances, there will be neither accuracy nor accuracy. We are not talking about shells with boosters and guidance systems. The same "Krasnopol" fired from the D-20 will fly its declared 20 km.

[Bogalex]

Yes, there are no questions, you can hammer nails with microscopes and be indignant why we need such expensive and useless microscopes.
Those who develop guns with a range of 30-40+ are talking about "shells with boosters and guidance systems." What you are talking about does not matter to them.
The firing range of the Krasnopol projectile from the D-20 howitzer gun and the 2S3M self-propelled howitzer does not exceed 17,5 km.

[Maxwrx]

I didn’t see it according to our statistics, but the best NATO guns have a dispersion of 0,3%, i.e. 15 km 45 meters. At 40 km 120 meters. Here only for adjustable ammunition.

[FVA]

The author needs to deal with the reduced variable charge! The initial speed has nothing to do with the numbers of charges. They are needed to increase the resource of the barrel, reducing the pressure in the barrel chamber and the required firing range!

[Bogalex]

The initial speed has nothing to do with the numbers of charges

What do you mean it doesn't? In your opinion, taking out beams of gunpowder from a variable charge sleeve does not affect the change in the initial velocity of the projectile in any way?

[Maxwrx]

Given that the warehouses will be empty, I think it makes sense to switch to 155mm caliber. Do not throw slippers, I will explain why:
1. The most popular caliber in the world. It is much easier then to sell military equipment.
2. The caliber has some clear advantages, given that even China switched to it from 152mm.
3. A huge number of types of shells, you can do reengineering and, accordingly, complete analogues without long and expensive design work. And they have good ammo.
4. It is easier to buy shells on the world market if needed.
5. We have experience in creating weapons for the NATO caliber, everything is very fast and inexpensive.

In general, the most important task is to arrange the release of corrected ammunition in a huge number.

[Bogalex]

1. And who will let us enter the long-divided market with our ammunition? Given the need for a complete re-equipment of domestic production, the cost of Russian 155-mm ammunition will be simply cosmic.
2. No benefits. In China, both calibers are used, they definitely did not switch to 155 mm.
3. Not less than 152 mm. Their ammo is normal.
4. Well, yes, well, yes. That's what they give us on the world arms market to buy !!!
5. We have practically no experience in creating weapons for the NATO caliber. "Quickly and cheaply" will not work.

[Maxwrx]

1. The market for equipment, not ammunition. But in Russia the cost of ammunition is several times less than in NATO countries.
2. All new equipment they have is 155 caliber, under 152 nothing has been released for a long time, new ones are not being developed
3. The list of types of shells they have many times more.
4. Not now, but in 15-20 years?
5. For example, self-propelled guns 2S19M1-155 "Msta-S" under 155mm

[Bogalex]

For example, self-propelled guns 2S19M1-155 "Msta-S" under 155mm

SG (please do not use the illiterate abbreviation "SAU")
2S19M1-155 was created in a single copy, the ammunition for its testing was not manufactured, but purchased.

Not now, but in 15-20 years?

That is, having experience of a permanent deterioration in the global arms market for our country for at least the past 10 years, do you propose to invest trillions of rubles, based on the assumption that in 15-20 years it will be better? Citizen Serdyukov, I'm sure, would give you a standing ovation.

The list of types of shells they have many times more

Can you list with examples? And I will answer according to ours. This is probably the most constructive way to deal with this issue.

They have all new equipment in 155 caliber, under 152 nothing has been released for a long time, new ones are not being developed

Yes, new ones are not being developed. But this does not mean that China does not have a well-developed production of 152-mm shells, incl. and promising.
In China itself, there are more than enough of them - according to the reference book "The Military Balance 20222", the PLA has 620 155 mm guns (320 PLZ-05 and 300 PCL-181, all self-propelled) and 2450 152 mm (350 self-propelled PLZ-83A/B and 2100 towed PL-66 and PL-54). Directly in combat units, the ratio of 155-mm and 152-mm guns in the PLA is 620 to 650, i.e. approximately 1:1.
This is how China "switched" to the 155 mm caliber. Is it necessary to explain the situation with the production of 152-mm ammunition?

The market for equipment, not ammunition. But in Russia the cost of ammunition is several times less than in NATO countries

Dear MaxWRX, we do NOT have 155mm vehicles. At all. In general. The one-of-a-kind 2S19M1-155 mentioned by you, even the Indians did not need it. This market is confidently conquered by Koreans, French, Swedes and Germans. In the near future, Türkiye has a chance to break into it. Russia does not have them at all. No need to build illusions.
Is the cost of Russian shells lower? Can you substantiate this assertion?

[Maxwrx]

1. I threw off a specific version of the CAO that we made, there are examples of other countries like the same Poland is given in zuzana. There is nothing fundamentally difficult in changing the caliber.
2. Where does the cost in trillion rubles come from, given that the warehouses are empty? Mastering the production of a new caliber is a maximum of a couple of billion rubles, and the main thing will be a change in documentation and regulations. My enterprise produces 6,5 mm and there is nothing complicated in production. Just buy a measuring tool, it took 10 thousand rubles.
3. I have no information, healthy logic says that so many large and industrialized countries produce. I think everyone comes up with something for themselves.
4. China is not developing new technology in 152 mm caliber, which means that he recognized them as unpromising. In 15-20 years, the number that you wrote will be the opposite.
5. Well, the entire market is again divided between countries that produce 155 mm guns, so we are forever refusing to export CAO?
6. This was written more than once on military review + again, I produce 6,5 mm bullets, their prices are 4-8 times lower than foreign ones, while the accuracy is higher than ours.

[Uncle_Misha]

The 155 mm caliber is determined by the quadripartite agreement of the NATO countries on the unification of the ballistic characteristics of artillery guns. It also determines the length of the barrels, the volumes of the charging chambers, as well as the initial speeds of the projectiles. We went our own way, perhaps due to the impossibility of restructuring production and costly re-equipment. open-source NATO caliber shells are produced in Russia.

[Yaroslav Tekkel]

In the 90s and early 2000s, the transition to 155-mm caliber was considered in all seriousness. One general, I don’t remember his name now, was very much in favor of this. It must be understood that China has actually already made such a transition (152-mm systems will last for a long time, but there will be no new ones) and, according to some reports, the new North Korean guns are also 155-mm (based on unification with China). That is, we risk remaining the only country in the world with a unique caliber. That's for sure "unparalleled."

[Comandor777]

Be sure to go when we stop stealing ..

[Order]

In one of the Ukrainian publics there was such a message, they say moksha uses the SV coalition and this was clear from the speed of 152mm shells entering us and we cannot destroy it because it shoots far from the front line "and we have no aircraft.
Then there was a video on which the Ukrainian headquarters was being smashed, the speed and density of the incoming 152mm was also high, on the radio exchange the Ukrainians tried to find positions and respond with counter-battery fire and also could not find a position.
After the M142 HIMARS appeared in the Armed Forces of Ukraine, such messages from the Ukrainian side disappeared.
It can be assumed that Koalitsyu-SV was still used to a limited extent.

[storm]

"Coalition-SV" is about re-equipping all self-propelled artillery and moving it to a qualitatively new level. Moreover, rearmament and in terms of supplying new ammunition that will meet the tasks assigned to the self-propelled guns.

In the conditions of SVO, it is much more useful and practical to upgrade the entire fleet of Msta-S self-propelled guns (there are about 500 of them in total) to the level of Msta-SM2.
After that, switch to the production of self-propelled guns Coalition SV and, in parallel, establish mass production of long-range "smart" shells suitable for both Msta-SM2 and Coalition - SV.
The task of the new divisions of the self-propelled guns of the Coalition - SV should be, first of all, counter-battery combat and the destruction of strategically important enemy targets at a distance of 50-100 km from the front line.
One battalion of 12 self-propelled guns Coalition - SV will be able to provide counter-battery combat and carry out special tasks on the front line of 150-200 km.
The division should include a company of reconnaissance UAVs with a range of 200-300 km and a time spent in the air from 12 to 24 hours.

This is not a "mortar" that grinds hectares of land by firing tons of mines, the Coalition - SV is rather an ultra-long-range sniper large-caliber "rifle" operating on the principle "one projectile fired - one hit target" ...

[Dmitry Smetanin]

Why not 500 km? Western self-propelled guns with longer barrels and most likely better gunpowder shoot with an excalibur at a range of 40-57 km. Where do you get such numbers from, who whispers this to you is unknown

[storm]

Where do you get such numbers from, who whispers this to you is unknown

Read the literature, 155mm guided munitions with a range of 100-120km are being tested in the USA.
The coalition was tested with active-rocket projectiles at 70-80 km.

[Uncle_Misha]

Applying methods of counter-battery combat against self-propelled guns is not very effective. The low accuracy of determining the coordinates of the firing gun, the low speed of preparing data for firing, the lack of suitable projectiles, and even the flight time of the return projectile to the target, all this affects the self-propelled guns manages to change position. The use of "smart" ammunition will also not help much, the "mind" of the projectile needs to be loaded with something, and this again is time. We also do not forget that the same "Zoo" is primarily a radar, and any radar really does not like PRR ..

[soldat tv]

Powder modules are full of ... Especially with bulletproof armor. When hit, one caviar is enough to tear the self-propelled gun apart. We ride on a rake.

[Kuziming]

In short, grapes are green.
Yes, I'm too aphoristic, it's true.

[Order]

Quote: soldat-tv

Powder modules full size...

NATO uses and even invents shells for charges that do not allow the charge to bang and provide some kind of fire resistance for a short time, do not contaminate the bore, and also place charges in special armored compartments.
(Google translator - propellant has a heat-resistant, non-flammable surface coating attached to the outer surface of the main charge. This surface coating prevents unwanted self-ignition of the main charge from sparks, etc.)
Why the Crabs and so on are burning from the lancets of the Armed Forces of Ukraine is because they were supplied with cheaper charges in a fabric sheath.
In the Coalition, the charge is also not in a tissue shell, perhaps only nitrocellulose, as in T-72 charges, etc.

[Igorash]

Slow in time with laziness and with the task of sawing the dough, with the limited number of specialists, the change to new types of weapons did not occur. idlers and opportunists in uniform, this would have a sobering effect ...

[Seamaster]

In the early 50s, Stalin created a commission and began to investigate the causes of an almost prolific war. Slowly and carefully.
And he died very quickly.

[Seamaster]

Not Newton’s binomial.
Let's move on to the shells for the "Coalition", give the old shells to Prigozhin.
The same bullshit was in the 30s: the delay in the development of 3-inch artillery was due to the huge number of old shells of this caliber and old DESIGN left over from the 1st World War.

[Vladimir31]

Comrades, you cannot fire 152mm shots from Geotsint - 152mm MSTA, MSTA-B, D-20 systems. The weight of the projectile is different and the charge and sleeve are different. In the same way, Kaolitzia cannot fire shells from other systems, they are not suitable for ammo racks, and Kaolitzia charges will not work with other shells. This is a specific system. It needs to be finalized, especially in terms of ammunition - it needs guided munitions, work is underway

[Georgy Sviridov_2]

The unification of the charge is not so terrible if the unit has one type of howitzers. Or just the old ones or just the new ones...
Now, if it's a mess, then yes, it's a disaster ...

[nachkar67]

"... since all production lines are busy producing complete shots for serial gun mounts and towed artillery." If so, then why have not lines been built for the production of ammunition for the latest artillery? Neither the transfer of old lines for new ammunition, because. there are still a lot of old "trunks", namely new lines? No money left? Yes, nothing could have been built with "frozen" funds. Even before the conflict.

[Georgy Sviridov_2]

Yes, not BC, but propelling charges ...
The title gives the delitant.

[Dmitry Zadorozhniy]

Unification is certainly a good thing. But this way it is possible to “unify” to muzzle-loading muskets. What? You can mix black powder in any barn. You need to go to the front. Up to the transfer of towed artillery to new shots. And where to dump the old stuff in Gabonne? Fortunately, there are still so many people who can ride around Africa.