Old design and new solutions: modernization of self-propelled guns 2S18 "Pat-S"

62
Old design and new solutions: modernization of self-propelled guns 2S18 "Pat-S"
Experienced self-propelled guns 2S18 "Pat-S" during testing


It became known about the resumption of the development of the self-propelled artillery installation 2S18 "Pat-S". The original version of this project was created back in the eighties, but then it was abandoned. Now it was decided to restart the development work and modernize the previously created self-propelled guns. It is assumed that "Pat-S" in a new guise will be able to find a place in the current structure of the army.



New modernization


The new plans of the Russian defense industry in the field of ground artillery on May 20 were reported by the RIA agency News. The source of information was an unnamed representative of the Kurganmashzavod enterprise (part of the High-Precision Complexes holding of the Rostec state corporation), which is engaged in the construction of armored vehicles and artillery systems.

The source said that the company is now engaged in the modernization of previously created self-propelled guns based on the modified chassis of the BMP-3 infantry fighting vehicle. We are talking about self-propelled guns of two types with guns of 120 and 152 mm caliber. According to the source, equipment of this kind will be able to positively affect the combat effectiveness of motorized rifle units.

RIA Novosti reveals the types of equipment undergoing modernization. The 120-mm artillery system is the 2S31 Vena self-propelled gun, and the 152-mm gun carries the 2S18 Pat-S product.

In fact, so far only the very fact of the existence of two projects has been reported. The set technical tasks and ways to solve them are not named. Also, the timing of the work and the possible entry of updated self-propelled guns into service are not announced. Apparently, such data will appear later - if the projects get full development and go through all the required stages.

Old sample


In the news about the modernization of old self-propelled guns, the mention of the 2S18 Pat-S product is of particular interest. The fact is that this self-propelled gun was developed several decades ago, and then it did not reach adoption and mass production. Now, it seems, they decided to return to this sample, but at a new technical level.


"Pat-S" at the Military Historical Museum of Artillery, Engineering and Signal Corps, 2017

Recall that at the turn of the seventies and eighties, it was decided to create new artillery systems in caliber 152 mm for use at the level of the regiment and brigade. With their help, it was planned to increase the firepower of ground formations, as well as respond to the latest foreign developments.

Sverdlovsk OKB-9 was entrusted with the development of two new guns - the towed 2A61 with the code "Pat-B" and the unified howitzer 2A63 for use on a self-propelled base. Such an ACS was designed by the Kurgan Machine-Building Plant; the project received the GRAU 2S18 index and the name "Pat-S".

Over the next few years, Kurganmashzavod and OKB-9 completed new projects and produced prototypes. So, according to the Pat-S project, one complete prototype was built. This machine has passed at least part of the tests. However, at this stage, the customer decided to abandon the continuation of development. The exact reasons for this are still unknown, although there are versions and assumptions of varying degrees of reliability and plausibility.

An unnecessary prototype 2S18 remained at the Rzhev test site for a long time. A few years ago, it was transferred to the Military History Museum of Artillery, Engineer and Signal Corps (St. Petersburg).

The Pat-B towed gun project turned out to be a little more successful. In 1991, this howitzer was officially put into service, but only 6 items were made. A full-fledged launch of production and rearmament of ground artillery did not take place.


However, the developments on the topic "Pat" have not disappeared. Chassis for self-propelled guns 2S18, built on the basis of the BMP-3, was used to create a new self-propelled gun 2S31 "Vena" with a smaller caliber gun. This combat vehicle in the mid-nineties reached the production of a small series and ended up in the troops.

Construction from the past


From the design point of view, the 2S18 self-propelled guns was a tracked armored combat vehicle with a full-revolving turret carrying weapons. Such a product had a length (along the hull) of less than 6,9 m and a combat weight of 18,7 tons. The crew included four people.

"Pat-S" was built on a modified BMP-3 chassis. The finished case was slightly shortened; protection remains the same. The layout has changed according to the role of the machine. The volume of the combat and troop compartments was used to accommodate a new larger tower. At the same time, according to some reports, the available volumes were not enough to obtain all the desired opportunities.

The power unit of the chassis during the restructuring has not changed. The design of the chassis as a whole remained the same. To properly distribute the loads, some torsion bars were moved, which changed the distance between the individual rollers. Engine UTD-29 with a power of 450 hp still allowed to get speeds up to 70 km / h on the highway. In addition, the possibility of navigation and the corresponding propulsion system have been preserved.

The 2A63 howitzer was a 152-mm rifled gun with a medium-length barrel and a semi-automatic breech. The gun received a large two-chamber active-reactive type muzzle brake and hydropneumatic recoil devices. The supply of ammunition was carried out manually, but there was a sending mechanism.


Two guns of the "Pat" family could use a wide range of 152-mm rounds of Soviet-designed separate-sleeve loading. It was allowed to use shots for howitzers ML-20, D-1 and D-20. Thus, the self-propelled guns could use high-explosive fragmentation, concrete-piercing, cluster, etc. shells. According to some reports, the possibility of integrating a guided weapons complex with the Krasnopol projectile was not ruled out.

2S18 could fire direct fire and overhead trajectories. Depending on the type of projectile and the charge used, as well as other factors, the maximum firing range reached 15-15,2 km. Ammunition - 35 shots.

New life


It seems that the 2S18 Pat-S project, after a break of three decades, again interested the industry and, possibly, the army. The reasons for this interest are not difficult to understand. In a project from the mid-eighties, promising ideas were implemented that have recently become relevant again. Despite its significant age, the proposed appearance of the self-propelled guns can still have a future - of course, with its proper implementation.

Self-propelled guns "Pat-S" was created to strengthen the regimental artillery. In fact, it was supposed to replace the older 2S1 Gvozdika product with a 122-mm howitzer. Having close characteristics of the range and accuracy of fire, the 2S18 self-propelled gun was distinguished by a large caliber and a corresponding increase in power. In addition, the transition to "Pat-S" would make it possible to unify regimental artillery with the equipment of motorized rifle troops and get a certain benefit.

It is curious that over the past decades the situation has not fundamentally changed. The basis of the regimental artillery of the ground forces is still made up of "Carnations", although they are equipped with new means of communication and fire control. Larger caliber guns are used at other levels.

The current Special Operation has once again shown that the caliber is of great importance, and in order to effectively solve a combat mission, the heaviest shells and in the maximum quantity should be sent to the enemy. In this context, the Pat-S type of self-propelled guns could be a profitable replacement for the current 2S1. In this case, we are talking not only about combat qualities, but also about operational issues. "Carnations" are of considerable age and gradually consume the remaining resource.


Towed howitzer 2A61 "Pat-B"

However, the launch of the production of the 2S18 product in the configuration of the mid-eighties does not make sense, and its modernization is necessary. So, the chassis can remain the same, but you need to use a modern configuration and equipment. In particular, topical protective equipment is required.

The 2A63 gun unit as a whole looks modern and successful. In the past, it showed sufficient fire performance and had the great advantage of being compatible with different types of projectiles. To improve the overall performance of howitzers and self-propelled guns as a whole, modern fire control tools are needed. It is also necessary to ensure compatibility with military automated control systems. Then the self-propelled gun will be able to work in network-centric circuits and more effectively provide fire support at the regimental level.

It should be noted that the creation of such an ACS is unlikely to be an easy task. It is necessary to establish the production of a new artillery unit from scratch and, possibly, update it in accordance with the current capabilities of the industry. At the same time, "Pat-S" uses a serial chassis with a modified chassis. New control systems, in turn, can be borrowed from existing designs. In addition, earlier the industry offered unified sets of ground artillery controls.

Possible sequel


Thus, the Russian defense industry, incl. "Kurganmashzavod" is making efforts to further develop the artillery of the ground forces. Completely new models are being developed, and existing ones are undergoing the necessary modernization. At the same time, the experience of real combat operations accumulated in recent years is actively used.

The latest news about the resumption of the 2S18 Pat-S project is of particular interest. They show that even old projects that have been abandoned for a long time can retain significant potential, and they should be developed using modern technologies and best practices. How the current work on the modernization of the old self-propelled guns will end and whether the army will be interested in it, time will tell. It cannot be ruled out that the result of such work will meet all expectations.
62 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. -4
    23 May 2023 03: 42
    Yeah, no speed, no momentum, our leg-headed designers are going their own way again
    1. +8
      23 May 2023 04: 27
      The chassis is clearly too small, and why? For the sake of keeping the ability to swim? The BC will also follow her, but you need a lot of it, it is heavy ... At the same time, there is no range, well, what for? Heavy gun, accept that it is heavy! Other calibers should swim and airborne
      1. +1
        23 May 2023 11: 00
        There are other additional means for transporting ammunition. And there should be many.
      2. Owl
        +5
        23 May 2023 13: 48
        Chassis - unification with mass-produced samples. If the regiment (brigade) is on the BMP-3, then the artillery equipment has a similar base, so in the early 90s they wanted in the SME on the armored personnel carrier, instead of the minbatra on 120-mm mortars transported in GAZ-66 bodies, introduce a 120-mm battery " Nona-SVK".
    2. -1
      23 May 2023 05: 50
      Quote: Sergey Khatylaev
      our leg-headed designers are going their own way again

      Our behind-the-scenes leaders...
  2. +3
    23 May 2023 04: 47
    Not the ability to make specific ones. assignments for design bureaus from the Moscow Region and the inability of the industry to offer samples of self-propelled guns. And everything is fine. So they don’t understand what they are sculpting. then. In my opinion, this is a temporary step and not thought out., Just like the "Octopus". To saturate the front with supposedly "new" equipment
    1. +11
      23 May 2023 11: 22
      Quote: Mikhail Maslov
      .In my opinion, this is a temporary step and not thought out., Just like the "Octopus". To saturate the front with supposedly "new" equipment

      And why do we need SUCH new equipment, if there is a lot of old one with the same characteristics - the same self-propelled guns "Acacia"? A gun of the same caliber, the same barrel length and the same projectile range.
      But they are ALREADY in stock. Yes, they need to be repaired, raised from the DH, maybe even slightly modernized, but it will cost a multiple of the cost of producing self-propelled guns from scratch with the characteristics of the good old Acacia. You can, in the end, change the barrel of acacias for this new one with a square muzzle brake !! But why sculpt a "new self-propelled guns" in an aluminum case ??
      Did the troops begin to lack barrel artillery?
      And why ?
      Due to unjustified losses, critical wear of barrels and shell hunger?
      So how will the appearance of a new self-propelled guns in an aluminum case with a range of 15 km help here. ? Maybe losses in artillery precisely because it has an effective fire range ... ridiculous by modern standards? And if you want to save money, do it quickly and so as soon as possible to the troops, then maybe you should focus on wheeled self-propelled guns like a convertible? On the same "Malva"?
      She has at least a range of 24 - 25 km.
      Too little, but after all, not 15 km. !!
      Not on a crawler chassis and in an aluminum hull !!
      Maybe just take the gun of the "Coalition" and install it on a four-axle BAZ chassis with an armored cab? A simpler automatic loader - a semi-automatic device with a manipulator and a rammer - something like that of the "Caesar"? It really is - "cheap and cheerful" will turn out (compared to the "Coalition-SV"), quickly (because there is a chassis, and the experience of "Malva", and an example of "Caesar", and the actual gun itself).
      Maybe try SO?
      And then everything that they do with domestic manual management ... everything turns out like a paradox ... or a mockery of common sense. A kind of liberal chutzpah.
      Quote: Mikhail Maslov
      step not thought out., just like "Octopus".

      Or thoughtful, but through Khutspa.
      At the storage bases of the RF Ministry of Defense, there are many thousands of T-72 and T-80 tanks suitable for modernization and return to service ... but instead, with the stubbornness of a rhinoceros, it is pressed through and launched ... IN THE SERIES (!!!) cardboard "Octopus-SDM" with a parachute in the back. Occupying production lines for the production of BMP-3M and BTR-3 critically needed for the front (on the same base). And now in the same place (!!) they are going to build this misunderstanding at the same facilities - an aluminum self-propelled gun with an Acacia gun, but with a square muzzle brake!
      "What not to do, just not to do"?
      Sabotage?
      Wrecking?
      Hutspa?
      stop Impunity. request
      1. +1
        23 May 2023 19: 30
        But they are ALREADY in stock. Yes, they need to be repaired, raised from the DH, maybe even slightly upgraded, but it will cost a lot less than the production from scratch of self-propelled guns with the characteristics of the good old "Acacia"

        Probably not from scratch, if there was already development. Perhaps, the calculation is that in the future this tower can be installed on Boomerangs and Kurgans when they go into series. Would it really be necessary to resume production of the Acacia chassis now from scratch and would it be more expensive?
        Who knows how it really is, but as an assumption ..
        1. +6
          23 May 2023 20: 23
          Would it really be necessary to resume production of the Acacia chassis now from scratch and would it be more expensive?

          I think this is the main reason. Recently, at VO there was an interview with a loader who participated in the NWO at the acacia, in general, the cars are in a very deplorable state.
          1. +2
            23 May 2023 20: 39
            Quote: LastPS
            cars are in a very poor condition.

            Naturally, because they were simply removed from storage, without repair, restoration, and even more so without modernization. In addition, their trunks were also shot.
            But to bring them into an acceptable and even excellent condition, you need several times less money than to produce this aluminum "miracle" from scratch. Replacement of the engine , barrel , a new sighting system and refurbishment of the chassis . And don't forget to paint. And consider it a new car. With better protection against heavy fragments.
            The main reason is the struggle for the budget without concern for the benefit of the cause.
            All KMZ lines must produce BMP-3M and BTR-3.
            In the maximum possible quantity. We have to arm whole new armies, and these should not be BMP-1 \ 2 tins, and not motorized leagues as a tracked armored personnel carrier. The armor of infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers must hold heavy fragments. The BMP-3M is capable of holding such, and in the presence of side screens with composite filling, it is capable of holding not only in the forehead, but also in the sides of 30 mm. armor-piercing projectile.
            1. +4
              23 May 2023 21: 39
              If there are still acacias in commercial quantities and they can be repaired, then yes, you are definitely right. If the decision to produce self-propelled guns on the BMP-3 chassis was dictated by the impossibility of restoring acacias in commercial quantities for some reason, then it is quite logical.
              1. -1
                23 May 2023 22: 28
                Quote: LastPS
                If the decision to produce self-propelled guns on the BMP-3 chassis was dictated by the impossibility of restoring acacias in commercial quantities for some reason, then it is quite logical.

                If there are problems with the restoration of "Acacias" (which is hard to believe) or in their number at the storage bases (there is data, but too lazy to look), then it makes sense to throw all the funds into the production of wheeled self-propelled guns "Malva" with an armored cabin. With their firing range up to 24,5 km. , it looks much more preferable ... and again cheaper.
                You understand that with a range of (maximum) fire of 15 km. , the effective firing range will be of the order of 10 - 11 km. Now imagine how close they will have to be brought to the leading edge, and what losses will be ... almost unrequited. Msta-SM and Malva have much more chances of success and survival. And if shells for the "Coalition-SV" appear, then it seems to me that the same "Msta-SM" will shoot at 5-10 km with such shells. further from the same barrel (aerodynamics and a smoldering bottom charge) ... which means that the "Malva" will look much more interesting and competitive.
                The need is for self-propelled guns with an aluminum hull and a gun for 15 km. I don't see absolutely. It’s just that losses in artillery will become even more expensive and painful for us.

                But the chassis from this strange self-propelled gun (but only in the future - after the war) can be useful for creating a really good light floating and airborne (but only by landing method) tank ... with an Octopus turret. However, the chassis for such can also be taken from the BMP-3M (with front-mounted MTO) - with its level of protection, its side screens (which also have positive buoyancy). The weight of such a light, and even a floating tank, will be about 25 tons, which will withstand 30 mm not only in the forehead, but also on the side. projectile and heavy fragments, with a 125 mm gun. , good ammo, and the possibility of leaving the tank through the aft door ... it will be much more convenient to load ammunition through it ... and there will also be a little space left in the stern for 2 - 4 paratroopers, add. BC or other useful property. And the front placement of the MTO will provide additional protection in the frontal projection (which is not at all useless for a light tank). Such a tank would be useful both for the Airborne Forces (but without a parachute!), for the Navy Marines, and for arming the avant-garde units of the tank and motorized rifle divisions of the Ground Forces (precisely as a amphibious tank, capable of forcing a water barrier on the move, capturing and holding a bridgehead until the approach I am sure that many foreign buyers of our equipment would also be interested in such a tank.
                1. 0
                  24 May 2023 08: 53
                  Hello colleague!
                  I would venture to suggest that the caliber 122 mm is all.
                  Correct in my opinion. Simplifies logistics.
                  So we started talking about the "Carnation" in 152 mm: Pat-S.
                  Range, more than 15 km = hull reinforcement.
                  Is there a way to enhance it? Doubtful. Price
                  and unification - two arguments in favor of Pat-S.
                  I don't see any other benefits. But perhaps this
                  enough. Quantity matters. 100%.
                  If they take the BMP-3M chassis, then it will be good.
                  And regimental artillery has always been simplified as much as possible. You can also land these howitzers
                  give. They also need to change their Carnations ... hi
                  1. 0
                    24 May 2023 10: 45
                    I will add one more argument.
                    Around my city, at least, there are a lot of bridges with a maximum load of 20 tons. It is risky to pass 2S3 "Acacia" weighing 28 tons over such bridges, and 2S18 "Pat-S" with a weight of 18,7 tons will be able to pass such bridges.
                2. +3
                  24 May 2023 10: 30
                  Here's what other people are saying:
                  Good news about SAU. The idea to make a 3 mm howitzer based on the BMP-152 is very promising. The fact is that the experience of military operations has shown that a standard BMP-3 turns out to be a good self-propelled mortar, with high accuracy, to support assault operations. At least, that's how it's often used. For such tasks, a huge range is not needed. And the experience of the Wagners, who use the D-1 howitzer, from the Second World War, with a relatively short range, but lighter and more maneuverable, showed that its ballistics, and on an armored chassis, make an ideal assault weapon.

                  So we are waiting for the troops.
                  1. 0
                    25 May 2023 00: 08
                    Quote: Alex777
                    combat experience has shown that a standard BMP-3 turns out to be a good self-propelled mortar, with high accuracy, to support assault operations. At least, that's how it's often used. For such tasks, a huge range is not needed. And the experience of the Wagners, who use the D-1 howitzer, from the Second World War, with a relatively short range, but lighter and more maneuverable, showed that its ballistics, and on an armored chassis, make an ideal assault weapon.

                    Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                    full of bridges with a maximum load of 20 tons. It is risky to pass 2S3 "Acacia" weighing 28 tons over such bridges, and 2S18 "Pat-S" with a weight of 18,7 tons will be able to pass such bridges.

                    lol Okay, agreed.
                    In addition, there were (purely from memory) something like 800 "Acacias" at the storage bases. , but this is not enough. Moreover, the losses have already been incurred, and the fight is still a long time. You really need a lot of such guns ... that's just the shells they need. Light weight, mobility (up to 70 km / h), high firepower, and even water navigation, outweigh its shortcomings. Would like to know the price. If you shoot along a gentle trajectory, then at such a range artillery reconnaissance may not be able to discern, especially if you do not stand still. These are suitable for both the MP and the Airborne Forces ... But this is not an assault weapon, but self-propelled guns for fire reinforcement of assault units from closed positions. But the assault self-propelled guns themselves should have tank-level security (or close to it) in order to be able to go on direct fire when the situation requires it. And such ones can be made from "Acacias" - by strengthening the armor, hanging side screens, on top of all this - dynamic protection, and in order to take it all out - a powerful engine and suspension reinforcement. And such modernization is possible.
                    Quote: Alex777
                    If they take the BMP-3M chassis, then it will be good.

                    It will be good, but it will weigh more. BMP-3M weighs 21 tons, and if this self-propelled guns weighed 18,7 at birth, then it is closer to the BMD-4 chassis, because its weight is indicated almost like that of the Octopus ... God forbid, the landing lobby will see and he wants to have a parachute in his ass ... then it's quite a disaster. Then no armor protection.
                    And on the body of the BMP-3M - it will work out well.
                    hi
        2. +3
          23 May 2023 20: 26
          Quote: S. Nikolaev
          Probably not from scratch, if there was already development.

          This is still a late Soviet development, to replace the Akatsiya and Gvozdika, but its range does not correspond to current realities.
          Quote: S. Nikolaev
          Perhaps, the calculation is that in the future this tower can be installed on Boomerangs and Kurgans when they go into series.

          For what ? Firstly, I have serious doubts whether the Kurganets (VERY overall and prohibitively expensive - more expensive than the T-90 tank) will go into the series, especially since the BIP-3M, an alternative to the Kurgan, has already gone into the series with a front-mounted MTO, a comfortable spacious landing compartment and the ability to install almost any combat module ... but the main one is "Bakhcha".
          Quote: S. Nikolaev
          And now it would really be necessary to resume production of the Acacia chassis from scratch

          Why renew something there if there are enough of them at the storage bases?
          Here's to capitalize, upgrade in light mode, that's it. You can also change the shot trunks ... yes, at least for the very thing that they put on this misunderstanding. This will turn out to be much (many times) cheaper and easier to implement, because modernization can also be organized at repair enterprises, and not to load the main production. The capacities of the Kurganskmashzavod should be fully loaded for the production of the badly needed BMP-3M and BTR-3 based on it. Neither the "Octopus-SDM" nor this "miracle" self-propelled guns are needed in the troops.
          The troops need long-range self-propelled guns. First of all, these are Msta-SM, Malva and, of course, Coalition-SV. As well as a convertible with a "Coalition" gun on a wheeled chassis, as a lighter, cheaper, and therefore massive alternative to tracked self-propelled guns and a replacement for towed artillery.
          The approach to choosing military equipment for production in time of war should be based on the RATIONAL principle in order to ensure the maximum amount of output at the lowest cost and lowest risk. This is not the time to play cuts.
          1. 0
            24 May 2023 05: 53
            Why renew something there if there are enough of them at the storage bases?
            Here's to capitalize, upgrade in light mode, that's it. You can also change the shot trunks ... yes, at least for the very thing that they put on this misunderstanding. This will turn out to be much (many times) cheaper and easier to implement, because modernization can also be organized at repair enterprises, and not to load the main production

            Yes, of course, all this is possible and necessary, and they will certainly do so. But for the future, if an Acacia-type chassis is not needed, then it may be replaced by the Boomerang platform. Yes, and the Kurganets in one form or another should still come out, the BMP3 needs a replacement - its modernization potential is already at the limit, apparently
            1. 0
              25 May 2023 01: 56
              Quote: S. Nikolaev
              But for the future, if an Acacia-type chassis is not needed, then the Boomerang platform may be prepared to replace it.

              belay This is where I don't understand at all. "Boomerang", this is a heavy wheeled armored personnel carrier, on which you can, of course, attach the "Octopus" turret, for fun, and the "Vienna" turret, but 152 mm. ... For what ?
              Quote: S. Nikolaev
              Yes, and Kurganets in one form or another still has to come out

              Hardly . Nobody needs such a huge target at the price of the T-90.
              Quote: S. Nikolaev
              BMP-3 needs a replacement - its modernization potential is already at the limit, apparently

              Its modernization potential is huge, in the BMP-3M version, it is almost \ almost ideal for such a weight category, and with such a combat module fellow . And on the basis of this hull, you can use self-propelled guns, and a light amphibious tank (holding a 30 mm projectile both in the forehead and on the sides), and armored personnel carriers, and KShM, and much more useful. The potential of the BMP-3M has yet to be revealed. And against this background, "Kurganets" has no chance at all, incl. and for the price.
              "Kurgan", this is a concept when they tried to do "like them" and even better. It didn't work out very well. But useful developments appeared with this project, a lot.
              1. 0
                25 May 2023 09: 10
                This is where I don't understand at all. "Boomerang", this is a heavy wheeled armored personnel carrier

                Yes, because I wrote too sparingly, so much so that the meaning was lost. It was meant that "to replace" this under this gun mount. That is, there is a tower that has already been developed and, in principle, ready for installation on a relatively light chassis (IFV), and if it is impractical to resume production of the Acacia chassis, then it turns out that this sau has one prospect - for future Kurgans or (and) Boomerangs. Regarding pricing, I can only say that the principles of the current economy are not a sacred cow. And the sooner they change, the better.
                1. 0
                  25 May 2023 11: 33
                  Quote: S. Nikolaev
                  That is, there is a tower that has already been developed and, in principle, is ready for installation on a relatively light chassis (IFV), and if it is impractical to resume production of the Acacia chassis, then it turns out that this self-propelled gun has one prospect - for future Kurgans or (and) Boomerangs.

                  You can confidently forget about the "Kurgans" (I already wrote), they have a wonderful alternative. With all the security advantages of the Kurganets level, it has a smaller silhouette, is better armed and has a fairly comfortable and spacious troop compartment. And at the same time, it is almost 3 times (!!) cheaper than "Kurganets". Moreover, this is the modernization of an already serial machine, all components of which are in mass production and will not require restructuring of technological lines and chains of contractors. As you probably already guessed, this is the BMP-3M. The car turned out just wonderful and is already in mass production. So no one will bother with her less successful, larger and monstrously expensive competitor.
                  In addition (so as not to talk in vain) look at the appearance of the "Kurganets", its linear dimensions and HEIGHT. Then mentally draw a hefty 152 mm self-propelled gun turret on top. caliber, imagine the metacentricity of this design, the tendency to tip over and the consequences of recoil ... and you will understand that the Iron Kaput, compared to this monster, is simply the height of engineering perfection.
                  Quote: S. Nikolaev
                  Boomerangs

                  The Boomerang platform is not at all a "cheaper alternative", it is quite expensive, difficult to manufacture and it has a fairly high novelty coefficient ... it will be brought to mind for some more time, and when it is brought to mind, then it will be put into production in the first in turn, it (the platform) will go like a heavy wheeled armored personnel carrier and a wheeled infantry fighting vehicle. To make a wheeled tank and self-propelled guns on their basis ... this is only if a decision is made to create light motorized infantry divisions on wheeled vehicles alone. But this technique is only suitable for deserts and obviously hard soils (Africa, the Middle East, to a lesser extent Latin America and Southeast Asia). In the current SVO and for a very likely war with NATO, such equipment will hardly be in demand (we are talking about wheeled self-propelled guns and a tank). On our soft and sagging soils, the priority is precisely caterpillar vehicles ... or relatively light (convertible) wheeled chassis for LONG-TERM artillery. But certainly with an armored cab.
                  Quote: S. Nikolaev
                  Regarding pricing, I can only say that the principles of the current economy are not a sacred cow. And the sooner they change, the better.

                  In matters of pricing, there are basic principles. If the equipment is initially designed on an already proven and serial chassis, this is already 50% success. If at the same time already available combat modules are used / used, then this is already 90% success. And another 10% for a well-chosen lineup and marketing efforts.
                  Is it clearer now?
                  1. +1
                    25 May 2023 12: 55
                    You can confidently forget about the "Kurgans" (I already wrote), they have a wonderful alternative. With all the advantages in terms of security level "Kurganets"

                    Yes, it's clearer now. Very clear, I would even say
      2. +2
        24 May 2023 10: 34
        (heavy sigh) And there is nothing to add.
      3. +1
        25 May 2023 00: 00
        The thing is this ... The Germans back in World War II had 150 mm in the regimental level. They had such a howitzer-mortar SIG-33. A 150 mm projectile and a powerful over-caliber rocket mine with 50 kg of ammatol. Working in the interests of the regiment, she solved a lot of tasks that were too heavy for all sorts of farts.
        Such a thing would still be relevant today, for example, during the assault on Artemovsk. One shot can destroy a multi-storey building. So the desire to give 150 mm at the disposal of the regiment is, in principle, a good thing, but its implementation is not an easy task. If the battalion commander does not call for 150 mm howitzer fire from the divisional level, there will be a great benefit. Yes, a range of 100-500 km is not needed, the regiment does not look that far. 15 km is enough.
  3. +3
    23 May 2023 05: 14
    It seems that military-scientific engineering thought has almost died, since you have to return to Soviet developments or copy foreign rubber-running self-propelled guns. soldier
  4. +11
    23 May 2023 05: 47
    It seems that the 2S18 Pat-S project, after a break of three decades, again interested the industry and, possibly, the army.

    It seems that defective managers have lost all the scientific and technical personnel of institutes and production personnel of enterprises for incomes of hundreds of millions of rubles.
    A return to Soviet developments half a century ago can only mean one thing - the bourgeois representatives, placed in "bread" positions, show only concern for their well-being.
    Vzashey drive all this scum. which brought the military-industrial complex to such a deplorable state ...
    * * *
    15 km ... Yes, today systems with a firing range of at least 40 km, with an automatic loader and an on-board computer capable of calculating target coordinates from any convenient place are in demand ...
    What is there to talk about self-propelled guns when TOS cannot be taught to shoot at 15-20 km ...
    But wherever you poke, there are millionaires everywhere in the leadership ... As VVP said about Sechin and Miller (although this can be attributed to any “protege”), if they are paid little, they can go to foreign structures ... I would like to ask how Chubais ?!
    And you try to cut their salaries, and raise the direct workers of the scientific and productive spheres ... Let these "watchers" envy them ...
    And one more thing ... give up this piece-rate premium payment at meager base rates and “what the hell kind of” bonuses (parachutes) ...
    1. +2
      23 May 2023 20: 25
      It seems that defective managers have lost all the scientific and technical personnel of institutes and production personnel of enterprises for incomes of hundreds of millions of rubles.

      What options are now possible to make up for the loss of acacias, which are already breathing their last in working condition?
      1. 0
        23 May 2023 21: 32
        "Acacia" in storage was about a couple of thousand. However, I think the production of UVZ or Transmash is already busy with something.
        1. 0
          23 May 2023 21: 55
          I also think that not everything is so simple, since they decided to dig up this project and considered it expedient.
          1. 0
            24 May 2023 10: 27
            Rather, this self-propelled guns fit into the speculative concept, according to which howitzers should be on the tracks, and mortars on wheels. And this howitzer will also be able to swim together with an infantry fighting vehicle like a 122-mm Gvozdika. "Khosta" and "Vienna" did not fit into this concept, and the caterpillar chassis was left only as an exception for the Airborne Forces, in the form of "Lotus".
            Although the version with an overload of production capacities may also be appropriate.
    2. 0
      25 May 2023 00: 07
      You can do without revolutions. MO quite clearly articulate their Wishlist. And consider only those industry proposals that fully satisfy them. Then they will not push through various dubious projects. They will understand that there is no chance. In general, all this is the result of negative natural selection, which has been going on in the public sector, including in the Army for 30 years.
  5. -4
    23 May 2023 06: 03
    It is necessary to unify the chassis with the "Octopus" and in the Airborne Forces
    1. 0
      23 May 2023 08: 58
      For the Airborne Forces, they make a 120-mm Lotus, it is hardly worth abandoning it right away.
  6. +1
    23 May 2023 06: 03
    Maybe you still need to start supplying the "Coalition SV" to the army?
    1. +3
      23 May 2023 11: 08
      Quote: Vladivostok1969
      Maybe you still need to start supplying the "Coalition SV" to the army?

      Necessary. Only she is many times more expensive than this Pat S.
      if you already have a ready-made chassis, a ready-made gun, and all this is not very expensive, then why not quickly saturate the army with cheap self-propelled guns. And sometimes the range is 40 km. and not needed - enough and 15.
  7. +6
    23 May 2023 06: 25
    It would be nice for the gentlemen of the critics to voice a list of Wishlist for self-propelled guns of the regimental level and a list of what they do not like in this case.
    1. 0
      23 May 2023 09: 05
      The absence of cluster munitions does not suit.
  8. IVZ
    +4
    23 May 2023 06: 46
    On the one hand, as a purely regimental artillery weapon, as a replacement for the Gvozdika, this is a huge progress. On the other hand, I cannot recall a single modern foreign development of guns with comparable ballistics. In this class, abroad, either a mortar or a 105 caliber (very rare). If the decision is made based on the results of the BP in the NWO, that's great. And if because because, that is, as very often now by forcing, well then ... The defense industry, and the entire industry of the Russian Federation, must be treated until effective amateurs completely ruined it.
    1. +6
      23 May 2023 09: 03
      I would say that the problem looks different. The transition from 122 mm to a heavier, in the literal sense, 152 mm caliber was largely associated with the transition to cluster munitions. But if cluster munitions have not appeared and are not used, then it is logical to return to 120 and 122-mm calibers, it is much more convenient for artillerymen to work with them. Otherwise, it is not at all clear what is happening and what guides them when making decisions.
  9. 0
    23 May 2023 07: 34
    The machine is certainly not devoid of a spark of God, but the gun range of 15 km, by today's standards, does not reach perfection, I hope, in addition to revising the general concept of self-propelled guns, at the same time they will refresh the main detail.
    And the towed version looks just like a cucumber, especially since, apparently, they tried to unify it as much as possible with the D-30, a very correct decision to use the potential of the old howitzer, adding to its power!
    1. 0
      23 May 2023 17: 15
      Quote: Romanenko
      And the towed version looks just like a cucumber

      The problem is that towed art is an anachronism.
  10. +2
    23 May 2023 07: 36
    For SMEs, such an ACS is excessively insufficient. It will not fully replace the support from the art regiment. The turret with a 152 mm gun for the BMP-3 chassis is prohibitively heavy. For the sake of unification on the chassis on the BMP-3, a turret from the Gvozdika with a slightly elongated barrel is enough.
    1. 0
      23 May 2023 17: 16
      Well, or convert all the remaining towed Hyacinths with Mstami to the wheelbase.
  11. +2
    23 May 2023 09: 25
    In my amateurish opinion, the project is not worth the effort. I think the RF Armed Forces need to cut the range of art. systems with an increase in the number of artillery pieces. This will simplify logistics and positively affect the price. I think it would look good in the army:
    82 mm mortar towed.
    120 mm mortar towed and self-propelled version of the Finnish ATMOS type.
    152 mm howitzer towed, self-propelled on tracks and on wheels like ARCER.
    203 mm self-propelled gun "But only if they make an active-reactive projectile corrected with a firing range of 150 km. And you don't need it without it."
    1. 0
      23 May 2023 11: 55
      It is high time to forget about the development of 203 mm. His and similar art. caliber niche was the destruction of especially fortified objects and the use of tactical nuclear weapons. In modern conditions - "nothing" - too inert in terms of deployment-folding speed, too cumbersome for redeployment around the city / crossroads, questions about cross-country ability / resource. If you make an AR projectile for 150 km for it, then it will be a 3-stage rocket with an explosive volume thrown in the size of a box of matches.
      And it’s really worth cutting the number of calibers. Ideally, gradually switch to NATO standards: mortar 82 and 120 - for a long time, 155 - in line. 122 is also gradually decommissioned, replacing the 152/155.
      1. 0
        23 May 2023 13: 00
        About 203 mm it was interesting. I don't know him very well. And why a 122 mm howitzer when there is a 120 mm mortar is not clear to me.
        1. 0
          26 June 2023 20: 55
          Hello everyone on the site. We need a replacement for Nona, she is needed. At exhibitions, they carried an interesting Baikal system. This module is designed to be installed on an infantry fighting vehicle. Caliber 75mm. But where is he? because of the speed of the aircraft. In my youth, 2 was in the ground forces, it crumbled perfectly, The old is not always scrap metal. In Donetsk, they beat from 57 and they say it helps the infantry very well.
  12. +1
    23 May 2023 09: 48
    The finished case was slightly shortened
    How does it fit with
    At the same time, according to some reports, the available volumes were not enough to obtain all the desired opportunities.
  13. -1
    23 May 2023 10: 53
    Transfer to a tank chassis, secure the turret and you get an assault self-propelled gun.
    1. 0
      23 May 2023 11: 11
      Quote: Konstantin Traflyalin
      Transfer to a tank chassis, secure the turret and you get an assault self-propelled gun.

      And if not an assault self-propelled gun, but a classic one, then T-55 hulls can be used for these purposes. Of which there are many more.
  14. Owl
    +1
    23 May 2023 13: 53
    At present, the self-propelled guns should be able to fire quickly, in a short period of time, a series of 4-6 shots and then leave the firing position so as not to fall under counter-battery fire. This means that an automatic (mechanism) loader is needed for pre-prepared shots.
  15. +2
    23 May 2023 17: 12
    What for this stupid self-propelled guns with a range a little more than the guns of the Second World War, when there is already a "Malva" in the "Phlox" series?!! Or the "effective managers" of Kurganmashzavod once again overate their soup?!
  16. 0
    23 May 2023 17: 19
    So, you can understand that nothing happened with the self-propelled guns "Lotos" fool , and now you have to take out the Soviet development and try to modernize it ?! hi
  17. 0
    23 May 2023 18: 53
    Everyone is sawing and sawing, when will the saws be taken away from them, huh?
    1. IVZ
      -1
      23 May 2023 19: 28
      Everyone is sawing and sawing, when will the saws be taken away from them, huh?
      And there is no one to take away. The higher the position and position, the more productive the saw.
  18. 0
    24 May 2023 07: 37
    The war showed that shells and artillery do not happen much. Therefore, it is urgent to produce something quickly and a lot. Therefore, the gun is from the D-20 and the chassis is from the BMP-3. I think if you ask the regimental commanders that they would prefer 20 of these PAT-S or a couple of Coalitions, then for sure they will choose the first.
    1. 0
      24 May 2023 09: 08
      Is not a fact. Sometimes it is important to have an artillery mount capable of immediately opening fire in this sense, the "Coalition" is preferable. So both are needed.
  19. 0
    8 July 2023 10: 00
    SAU Vena is a universal balanced mortar gun that is simply necessary at the battalion level.
    When embedded in an automated command and control system, the self-propelled guns will have a "second life".
    A division of such guns in the amount of 18 units. should be in every motorized rifle regiment or brigade.
  20. 0
    8 July 2023 10: 18
    The main disadvantage of the 152 mm PAT gun is its low firing range, only 15 km, which promises it a definite loss in the counter-battery fight.
    For the BMP-3 chassis, the PAT gun is clearly too heavy, and the small amount of ammunition carried and the low rate of fire will not allow a sufficiently powerful and fast fire strike on enemy positions.

    On the basis of 152 mm PAT, an assault gun should have been created for fire support of engineering assault battalions.
    Tank chassis, well-armored cabin protected by remote sensing and anti-cumulative grilles.
    These self-propelled guns would easily destroy armored and concreted fortifications, "fold" the entrances of high-rise buildings with snipers, machine gunners and spotters with one shot.
    The short 152mm PAT gun will provide good maneuverability on city streets, and the DBM with Kord and AGS will allow you to work effectively against tank-dangerous infantry.
  21. 0
    8 July 2023 18: 35
    All this is old stuff. If only because the range of destruction and accuracy are already insufficient. It is necessary to "dance" from a distance of at least 40 km. Where are these "Coalitions"? Why spend money on something that is not new now? And tomorrow it will be completely obsolete weapons. And this "tomorrow" will come in a couple of years.
  22. 0
    11 July 2023 23: 56
    Quote from Old Metal
    The thing is this ... The Germans back in World War II had 150 mm in the regimental level. They had such a howitzer-mortar SIG-33. A 150 mm projectile and a powerful over-caliber rocket mine with 50 kg of ammatol. Working in the interests of the regiment, she solved a lot of tasks that were too heavy for all sorts of farts.
    Such a thing would still be relevant today, for example, during the assault on Artemovsk. One shot can destroy a multi-storey building. So the desire to give 150 mm at the disposal of the regiment is, in principle, a good thing, but its implementation is not an easy task. If the battalion commander does not call for 150 mm howitzer fire from the divisional level, there will be a great benefit. Yes, a range of 100-500 km is not needed, the regiment does not look that far. 15 km is enough.

    Well, yes, they had a mine that flew to hell where and loaded from the muzzle, rushed about with a blank cap. Pts it would be interesting to look at Shtug3 SiG33 with this mine on the barrel.
    Well, yes, of course, this is a cuttlefish tool on wheels with rubberized rims (bandages) and horse-drawn. The assault self-propelled guns based on the Shtug evenly evaporated from the battlefield immediately after Stalingrad. Well, a very relevant dense cuttlefish.
  23. 0
    16 July 2023 20: 15
    Based on the BMP 3, do what you want. And how much you want. Any military systems. From air defense to self-propelled guns and engineering vehicles. In addition to the BMP itself. Everything that does not go to the forefront. For "glass" beats very wellhi