SAO 2S43 "Malva" after state tests and before deliveries to the troops

2C43 "Malva" on trials. Photo by Central Research Institute "Burevestnik"

The Russian defense industry, represented by the relevant enterprises from the state corporation Rostec, has completed the development of a promising self-propelled gun 2S43 Malva. The new product has successfully passed all the necessary tests, and now preparations are underway for full-fledged mass production. In the near future, self-propelled guns of a new type will have to get into the troops.

Project results

Recall that the existence of the project with the code "Malva" became known in 2019. It was developed by the Nizhny Novgorod Central Research Institute "Burevestnik" from the NPK "Uralvagonzavod" of the Rostec Corporation. Not later than 2020, the project reached the stage of building a prototype, which was then presented to the customer at a private event. Soon, the experimental CAO entered field tests. All stages of inspections, including state tests, were planned to be carried out over several years.

In mid-May 2023, UVZ General Director Alexander Potapov, as part of the Belarusian exhibition MILEX-2023, announced that the 2S43 Malva product had recently successfully passed state tests. The gun has confirmed the design characteristics, and now the issues of its production are being resolved. The general director of UVZ did not specify the timing of the receipt of equipment in the troops, but indicated that this would happen soon.

On July 27, the Rostec press service confirmed previously disclosed information about the completion of state tests and preparations for future deliveries of finished equipment to the army. Also in the official message, they recalled the main features of the new model, and also pointed out its advantages over systems of other classes.

So, it is again noted that the main advantages of "Malva" are associated with the use of a wheeled chassis with the formula 8x8 from the Bryansk Automobile Plant. Due to this, the new SAO compares favorably with the existing caterpillar self-propelled guns with increased mobility on the roads and improved running and operational characteristics. In addition, the chassis provides obvious advantages over towed guns of the same caliber.

Fire tests of the SAO, 2021. Photo by the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation

The press service of "Rostec" quotes the words of the industrial director of the cluster of weapons, ammunition and special chemicals Bekhan Ozdoev. He recalled that the development of "Malva" focused on increasing mobility. In the conditions of modern conflict, the safety of the calculation depends on such characteristics.

On the way to the troops

In the latter the news about "Malva" it was reported that guns of this type would soon go to the troops, where their development would begin. More exact terms are not called, but, probably, we are talking about several months. The possibility of fulfilling such plans and promises is confirmed by the news of the recent past.

In mid-August 2022, on the eve of the opening of the military-technical forum "Army", the press service of Rostec spoke about the latest achievements of the corporation, incl. within the framework of the 2S43 project. By that time, a prototype self-propelled gun had been submitted for testing. In addition, NPK UVZ prepared production facilities and started manufacturing a pilot batch of Malv. The size and timing of the completion of the construction of such a batch were not reported.

Pilot batches of equipment and armaments in domestic practice do not differ in large volumes, which to a certain extent speeds up their production. In addition, the relative technical simplicity of the 2S43 project, made on the basis of ready-made components and assemblies, should have a positive effect on the speed of construction.

Thus, it can be expected that a pilot batch of CAO 2S43 will go to the troops in the coming months, for example, before the end of this year. Then, taking into account the experience of testing a prototype, as well as the production and operation of the first batch of equipment, manufacturing organizations will finalize the production lines and establish full-fledged mass production.

"Malva" at the parade, 2021. Photo by the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation

New solutions

The 2S43 Malva project was built on the basis of a rather simple and curious concept, which, however, until recently has not been developed in our country. In general, we are talking about the installation of an artillery unit and auxiliary systems on a car chassis with sufficient characteristics. Due to this, you can get noticeable technical and operational advantages over towed and self-propelled tracked artillery, but at the cost of some restrictions.

"Malva" is being built on a four-axle all-wheel drive chassis BAZ-6610-027 "Voshchina" with a two-row cab. Such a machine is equipped with a YaMZ-8424.10 diesel engine with a power of 470 hp, due to which it can reach speeds of up to 80 km / h; cruising range on the highway - 1000 km. The chassis allows you to move both on the highway and off-road.

An artillery mount with a 152-mm rifled howitzer 2A64 is mounted in the rear of the chassis - a gun from self-propelled guns 2S19 "Msta-S". The howitzer has a 47 klb barrel with a developed muzzle brake and a semi-automatic wedge breech. Loading - separate-sleeve using a chambering mechanism. The howitzer is placed on the machine with the possibility of horizontal guidance within 30° to the right and left at elevation angles from -3° to +70°. The recoil momentum is transmitted to the ground by means of a lowered base plate.

The SAO is equipped with a modern fire control system that provides fast and accurate topographical positioning, calculation of data for firing and aiming. There are different shooting modes, including the so-called. fire attack. Preparing the guns in position and folding before leaving take minimal time.

The 2A64 howitzer allows the Malva to use the entire range of 152-mm rounds for the Msta-S/B. 30 shots are transported in stowage on the chassis. Also, a self-propelled gun can be accompanied by an ammunition transporter. Shells and shells are fed from the stowage to the gun manually.

Modern means

In the foreseeable future, Rostec will launch a full-fledged serial production of Malva products for delivery to the army. Together with the new equipment, the rocket troops and artillery of the ground forces will receive some new opportunities and advantages. They will be provided by the uncharacteristic for our artillery architecture of the combat vehicle.

The design image of the self-propelled gun is the first known image of "Malva" from 2019. Graphics Russianarms.ru

As the development organizations have repeatedly noted, the CAO 2S43 compares favorably with the existing self-propelled and towed systems by its increased mobility. The advantages over towed artillery are obvious - "Malva" moves independently and does not need a tractor. Tracked self-propelled guns, in turn, lose to wheeled self-propelled guns in mobility on highways and roads, as well as in matters of operation and maintenance.

At the same time, any "traditional" self-propelled guns of our army are superior to the "Malva" in some aspects. So, caterpillar self-propelled guns are distinguished by better off-road and rough terrain, and also have reservations and constantly protect the crew.

In general, the 2S43 wheeled self-propelled guns should not be considered as a competitor to existing caterpillar self-propelled guns. Such a sample is actually a replacement for towed guns. A separate tractor is replaced by a carrier vehicle, which provides an increase in part of the characteristics at a reasonable project cost.

Also, "Malva" can be considered as an intermediate link between self-propelled guns and towed guns. Combining the features and characteristics of these two classes, 2S43 can take on some of the combat missions, the solution of which with the help of existing artillery is difficult or impractical.

near perspective

Thus, the Russian defense industry continues to develop promising artillery systems of various kinds and develops new directions for itself. For the first time in domestic practice, the project of a wheeled self-propelled gun has successfully passed through all stages of development and testing, and in the near future new equipment is expected in the troops.

Combat vehicles of the new model 2S43 "Malva" will have a positive impact on the overall capabilities and potential of the artillery formations of our army. In addition, with their help, it will be possible to gain experience in the use of such equipment and evaluate it in conditions as close as possible to real ones - or even as part of a military operation. Based on the results of these events, the army will be able to draw conclusions and determine ways for the further development of self-propelled artillery, including the wheeled direction.

Comments

[Paul Siebert]

Nice girl with blue hair!
Saturate the Russian troops with them!
To the death of Bandera filth!

[bayard]

Quote: Paul Siebert

Nice girl with blue hair!

The people did not understand your allegory with Malvina from the "Golden Key" ... apparently they didn’t read good books, they didn’t watch Soviet films ...
And the self-propelled guns are really good - with their relatively low price, high mobility, incl. on public roads and fairly good performance. Moreover, this platform and the experience of its creation can be fully used for a similar self-propelled gun for the Coalition-SV gun, which will be 2-3 times cheaper than its tracked version and much more flexible in use and transfer along general roads.
And if, over time, the production of a new type of projectile for the "Coalition-SV" is established, which are significantly superior in aerodynamics to the existing ones, and these projectiles can be adapted for the guns "Msta" and "Malva", then the firing range of such projectiles from the "Malva" and "Msta" can easily reach 40 km. ... Alas, much depends on the shells.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: bayard

And the self-propelled guns are really good - with their relatively low price, high mobility, incl. on public roads and fairly good performance.

There is another advantage there (in terms of increasing production) - the chassis. The wheelbase makes it possible to increase the production of self-propelled guns without increasing chassis production at UZTM/Uraltransmash.
In general, it resembles the situation with the BA in the interwar period - to give the infantry a gun at least on wheels, without overloading the tank factories.

[bayard]

Quote: Alexey RA

In general, it resembles the situation with the BA in the interwar period - to give the infantry a gun at least on wheels, without overloading the tank factories.

Exactly . And also such self-propelled guns under its own power can very quickly be transferred and maneuvered along general-purpose roads without breaking them with caterpillars and without requiring a trailer.

[Mr. PeZhe]

And again, another "analo shit". Meanwhile, more than a THOUSAND 2A36 "Hyacinth" are in storage, which cover the "Msta" in range like a bull to a sheep. It would seem - put the "Hyacinth" on a wheeled chassis and get an self-propelled guns inaccessible to the "three axes". But no, we will screw on the chassis the ancient as mammoth shit "Msta", which is LONG AND HOPEPLY inferior in range to NATO artillery systems. And let's call it a "promising self-propelled artillery system."

[bayard]

Quote: Mr. PeZhe

. It would seem - put the "Hyacinth" on a wheeled chassis and get an self-propelled guns inaccessible to the "three axes". But no, we will screw the mammoth "Mstu" as ancient as shit on the chassis

They seem to have non-interchangeable shells. In addition, there are "Geocinths" on a tracked chassis.
In addition, the difference in range between Msta and Geotsint is 24,7 against 28,4. The difference is only 3,5 km. Apparently, which one was more convenient (including for shells), and this was put on the "Malva". When the "Coalition" and the shells for it are ready, nothing prevents them from changing the artillery unit to the "Malva" with minimal alterations and immediately getting a gun with a firing range of up to 70 - 80 km. ARS.

[Mr. PeZhe]

They seem to have non-interchangeable shells

The shells are the same. The charges are different.

In addition, the difference in range between Msta and Geotsint is 24,7 against 28,4.

The main shot of "Hyacinth" - ZVOF86 - has a range of 30,5 km. And with the new active-reactive ones you can compete with the "Coalition".

When the "Coalition" and the shells for it are ready, nothing prevents them from changing the artillery unit to the "Malva"

The fact of the matter is that the artillery unit from the towed "Hyacinths" is already there, and in quantity. But you won’t master a lot of budget on it ...

[bayard]

Quote: Mr. PeZhe

The fact of the matter is that the artillery unit from the towed "Hyacinths" is already there, and in quantity. But you won’t master a lot of budget on it ...

So "Msta-B" was produced in very respectable quantities, so if the artillery unit was taken simply from towed guns, then on the one hand there seems to be no difference - take the one that is better ... but they still did not take "Geocinth". And the last Soviet self-propelled guns were nevertheless made on the basis of the Msta gun, and not the Geocinth.
Why
Maybe due to insufficient barrel survivability? Since the charge is much more powerful, which means the pressure in the barrel and the initial speed, the load on the rifling ...
Could this be the question? And that is why, under equal conditions, "Msta" shows greater combat performance and more shot on the barrel before replacing it?
I'm not insisting, I'm guessing, trying to think logically.
And if the barrel survivability of the "Msta" is seriously higher, then the choice of this particular artillery unit is quite understandable and justified.
Perhaps "Malva" with a gun from "Msta" was chosen as a temporary measure for the transition period, until it goes into the "Coalition" series and shells for it. And then it will be enough just to change the artillery unit with some modification of the already finished platform.

Quote: Mr. PeZhe

the artillery unit from the towed "Hyacinths" is already there, and in quantity. But you won’t master a lot of budget on it ...

If these are already second-hand trunks, and besides, with a limited resource ... is it worth fencing a garden for this? And the barrels for "Msta-S" seem to be in production - there is a VERY active restoration, repair and modernization of the entire fleet of these self-propelled guns from storage bases. It is unlikely that their trunks have been preserved in perfect condition for 30 years, therefore it is obvious that they are being changed ... which means they are being produced ... and since they are being produced, then it is these NEW trunks that should be put on the "Malva". I think the choice was made according to this principle.

Quote: Mr. PeZhe

The main shot of "Hyacinth" - ZVOF86 - has a range of 30,5 km. And with the new active-reactive ones you can compete with the "Coalition".

In my opinion, their barrel lengths are the same, and the initial velocity of the shells is probably close, but the "Coalition", this is still a completely different generation of self-propelled guns, so ... with the residual resource of the "Geocinth" barrels, it is better for them to remain as they are and serve as a reserve. In the end, if there is a shortage of trunks for the "Malva", if necessary, it will be possible to take the trunks of the "Geocinths".
And you can cut grandmas on anything, even on artillery, even on laces for berets. And if the "Geocinths" had trunks in perfect order, there would long ago have been found someone who would cut any budget for this, and share firewood with whom.
By the way, the "Geocinths" were put on a caterpillar armored chassis (like the "Peony \ Malka"), so there are such samples in storage, and if anything, the barrels from the towed guns will replace just such full-fledged self-propelled guns.
A number of such self-propelled guns worked / are working with us in the Donbass.

[Mr. PeZhe]

During the war, survivability should fade into the background, the main thing is the main performance characteristics. With regard to the counter-battery, the Msta's lack of range turns into "kilometers of death." If there were no Hyacinths in storage, I would not ask any questions. But they are. And to use instead of them obviously inferior materiel, which, moreover, must also be produced - is criminal.

[bayard]

Quote: Mr. PeZhe

If there were no Hyacinths in storage, I would not ask any questions. But they are. And to use instead of them obviously inferior materiel, which, moreover, must also be produced - is criminal.

But "Geocinths" are used, and not only in the towed version. Self-propelled guns on a caterpillar base are also used. As for the "Malva", this project is already over 10 years old and they were prepared mainly for sale, mainly to the countries of Africa and Asia, along with the tracked "Mstoy-S". Perhaps that is why the Msta gun was chosen. And with the beginning of the SVO and the realization of the lack of self-propelled guns and the low survivability of towed artillery, they simply took the already finished "Malva", brought it to mind and are now being put into service. Here, most likely, the time factor - in this form, such guns will simply get to the front faster.
In addition, if it is true that work is now being completed on a new modification of the Msta-SM2, adapted to new shells from the Coalition, incl. under the new long-range "Krasnopol", then it is logical to see the same modification of the "Malva", or immediately make it for such ammunition. And then the range will be already over 40 km.
And the "Geocinths" ... I would withdraw from storage all the available tracked self-propelled guns "Geocinth-S" and use them to the fullest, and I would use the barrels of towed guns as donor ones. There is simply no other solution, because no one has been engaged in the modernization of the "Geocints" (as far as I know).

[Mr. PeZhe]

There is a rational grain in your words. But I would suggest an even better option - to use the 2S5 "Hyacinth" as the main self-propelled guns, replacing it with the "Carnations", "Acacia" and "Msta" existing in the troops and transplanting it onto the 2A36 "Hyacinth" wheeled chassis. The existing Hyacinths are enough to replace all the obsolete junk. And for the future replacement of the Hyacinths, slowly finish the Coalition.

[bayard]

I understand your affection for the "Geocinth", this is really a wonderful tool, but in the current conditions this is hardly possible. There just isn't time for it. After all, this is new R&D, testing, refinement. Nobody will do this. The new wheeled self-propelled gun has already been made, tested, and it will go into series. Where the range is not enough, there it will take maneuverability and mobility. And with new shells, it can even be equal to Western ones.
Well, no one has dealt with "Geocinth" all these years - the "Coalition" was sculpted and the "Mstu-S" was modernized.
So the most optimal thing is to pull out all the Geocinta tracked self-propelled guns from storage and to the troops. If the "Malki" have not yet intergrown at the storage bases (judging by the frames and recent photos), then there should be "Geocynths" somewhere, after all, they are with the "Malka" on the same (or similar) chassis. By the way, they appeared in our Donbass too.
And the industry should do what it can, what it is set up to do. And she is tuned to "Msta".

Quote: Mr. PeZhe

replacing it with the "Carnations", "Acacias" available in the troops

And as for Gvozdik and Acacia ... I'm here the other day in response to a publication about the imminent launch of a new self-propelled guns based on the BMP-3M with 152 mm. gun ... with a range of 14 - 15 km. , turned out like you. The fact that scarce chassis instead of badly needed infantry fighting vehicles are being transferred to flawed self-propelled guns. So I was politely corrected that this self-propelled guns is replacing the "Carnations" - as self-propelled guns for artillery support of the front line, for work in the battalion level - as an artillery reinforcement of infantry battalions. When the battalion commander directly calls for artillery support and gives a tip, without intermediaries and intermediate links of headquarters. For assault and just infantry units, this is very ... sometimes vital. The fact is that "Carnations" and "Acacias" are now finishing off their last resource, but there is nothing to change them with. there is no such new self-propelled guns. And she , it turns out , is very necessary . This and the experience of the Wagners in Artyomovsk showed - their experience.
So I agreed with them.

And about the fact that there are a lot of "Geocinths" towed, that's good. maybe over time, if there are free chassis (the production of them will expand) and the "Malva" themselves will go into series ... maybe it will be possible to push the idea of ​​\uXNUMXb\uXNUMXball the "Geocinths" into self-propelled guns ... But this is definitely not now. So for now they are a reserve. And it's good that he exists.

[Mr. PeZhe]

The fact is that "Carnations" and "Acacias" are now finishing off their last resource, and there is nothing to change them with. there is no such new self-propelled guns.

There is such an ACS - 120 mm "Vienna". As well as its simplified version of "Hosta". It fires both 120mm mines and 120mm ready-rifled projectiles. These shells are practically not inferior to 152-mm "suitcases" in terms of filling explosives. Significantly surpassing them in accuracy. At the same time, unlike the mythical reincarnation of "Pat-S", both "Vena" and "Hosta" have gone through all the stages of research and development, and there is technical equipment for mass production. But, as in the case of Malva, respected people want to master the budget.

[SNK_92]

How did these "masters" of budgets already get into their pockets, there is a war going on, whatever you call it, but you look at the news and you understand that many, as before (I hope less than before), only think about mastering it in your pocket and then take the loot out of the country

[sgrabik]

If we want to equalize the chances with enemy artillery, and even more so if we want to gain an advantage over him, then we need barrels capable of hitting standard ammunition at a distance of at least 30 km, otherwise we will lose all artillery duels with the enemy, it is necessary to lengthen the barrels to 48 - 52 calibers, as well as to constantly work on improving 152-mm artillery ammunition, a lot also depends on this.

[Blackgrifon]

Quote: Mr. PeZhe

And again, another "analo shit". In the meantime, more than THOUSAND 2A36 "Hyacinth" are in storage, which cover the "Msta" in range like a bull to a sheep.

So hides that both have the SAME or SLIGHTLY longer range for the most part b / c.

Quote: Mr. PeZhe

But no, we will screw the mammoth "Mstu" as ancient as shit on the chassis

Actually, Msta is more modern than Hyacinth ...

Quote: Mr. PeZhe

LONG AND HOPELESSLY inferior in range to NATO artillery systems

But it is fully MASTERED by industry and is produced by tens / hundreds, unlike single Caesars and pre-series coalitions.

Quote: Mr. PeZhe

And let's call it a "promising self-propelled artillery system."

Keyword SYSTEM. And yes - NUMEROUS self-propelled artillery systems are many times better and more promising than completely obsolete towed artillery.

Quote: Mr. PeZhe

put "Hyacinth" ... and get self-propelled guns inaccessible to "three axes"

A fairy tale ... And delusional in the "inaccessible" part.

Quote: Mr. PeZhe

put "Hyacinth" on a wheeled chassis

The only reasonable suggestion in a series of fantasies.

[Mr. PeZhe]

So hides that both have the SAME or SLIGHTLY longer range

Does your education allow you to understand the difference between the number "24" and the number "30"? And I still leave out the remake with a bottom gas generator.

But it is fully MASTERED by industry and is produced by tens / hundreds, unlike single Caesars and pre-series coalitions.

Does your education make you aware of the difference between producing and using what is already produced in sufficient quantity?
The use of the long-rotten Msta as a base artillery unit has neither military nor technical reasons. Just a banal drank the budget "Rostec".

A fairy tale ... And delusional in the "inaccessible" part.

The M777 base projectile has a range of 24 km. 30 gives out active-reactive, and 40 - excalibur. Where three axes start at 24 km, we on Hyacinth will start at 30 km. With the new active-reactive ones, one can hope for a range of 60-70 km.

[Blackgrifon]

Quote: Mr. PeZhe

Your education allows you

My education allows me to realize that Hyacinth was produced BEFORE Msta. And the release of Msta began much earlier than Rostec appeared - which you obviously do not know.

Is there anything known about the production of such a thing as trunks for ancient hyacinths? Hint - no.

Further, nothing that Hyacinth is a cannon, and Msta, M777 is a howitzer. The difference, of course, is imperceptible - so the letters are different - but in practice this difference is fundamental.

[Mr. PeZhe]

My education allows me to realize that Hyacinth was produced BEFORE Msta. And the release of Msta began much earlier than Rostec appeared - which you obviously do not know.

And now I'll tell you what you don't know. The artillery of the USSR was a harmonious and well-thought-out system. With regard to self-propelled guns, it looked like this: regimental "Carnation" - divisional "Acacia" - army "Hyacinth" and RGK "Pion". "Msta" began to be produced to replace "Acacia", no one was going to replace "Hyacinth" with it.

Is there anything known about the production of such a thing as trunks for ancient hyacinths? Hint - no.

I will try again. Slowly. There are MORE THAN THOUSAND towed "Hyacinths" in storage. You do not need to produce them - THEY ALREADY HAVE.

Further, nothing that Hyacinth is a cannon, and Msta, M777 is a howitzer. The difference, of course, is imperceptible - so the letters are different - but in practice this difference is fundamental.

The "Msta" has a "howitzer" elevation angle - 70 degrees. At "Hyacinth" - "cannon" 57 degrees. For counter-battery combat, the maximum range is needed, obtained at an elevation angle of 45+/- degrees. And now, please, enlighten me, what is the "fundamental difference" between the Msta howitzer firing at an angle of 45 degrees and firing at an angle of 45 degrees. cannon "Hyacinth". I'm already looking forward to it.

[Blackgrifon]

Quote: Mr. PeZhe

in relation to self-propelled guns, it looked like this: regimental "Carnation" - divisional "Acacia" - army "Hyacinth"

ABOUT! Now we finally remembered that the hyacinth is not only not a howitzer, but also belongs to the army artillery, and not to the division :)

Quote: Mr. PeZhe

I will try again. Slowly. There are MORE THAN THOUSAND towed "Hyacinths" in storage. You do not need to produce them - THEY ALREADY HAVE.

At least slowly, at least quickly, at least by spelling - once again, TRUNKs have a resource. And trunks for hyacinth are NOT PRODUCED.

Quote: Mr. PeZhe

And now, please, enlighten me, what is the "fundamental difference" between the Msta howitzer firing at an angle of 45 degrees and firing at an angle of 45 degrees. cannon "Hyacinth". I'm already looking forward to it.

At least 45, at least 150 - without counter-battery radars, this is all just from the category of rituals. And it is precisely to increase mobility and the ability to quickly work out and leave that they make mallow.

That's when the production of hyacinths and components for them is launched, then it is possible (and necessary) to make mallow for them. In the meantime, there is production ready and working for revenge - let the mallow and revenge be riveted.

[Mr. PeZhe]

Yes. Hard case. One would like to quote the immortal: "uncle, are you ...?" But I won't.

ABOUT! Now we finally remembered that the hyacinth is not only not a howitzer, but also belongs to the army artillery, and not to the division :)

It would be even better if you remembered that the artillery brigades of army subordination are leading the counter-battery, and the divisional artillery works mainly to support the offensive / defense of the division.

At least slowly, at least quickly, at least by spelling - once again, TRUNKs have a resource. And trunks for hyacinth are NOT PRODUCED.

Another leading question. HOW MANY YEARS will it take Motovilikha Plants to produce a THOUSAND MSTA artillery systems? While a thousand towed "Hyacinths" are ready NOW.

That's when the production of hyacinths and components for them is launched, then it is possible (and necessary) to make mallow for them. In the meantime, there is production ready and working for revenge - let the mallow and revenge be riveted.

Due to the loss in range and the inability to "get" modern NATO artillery systems, our artillerymen are dying. They die, among other things, because underdogs like you are ready to justify the drank of the budget, but in no case give the calculations a long-range artillery system, which is AVAILABLE.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

Don't you have the feeling that with your Wishlist you are breaking through an open door? I want to remind you that in addition to the barrel artillery itself, there is also a MLRS with a significantly greater range and capabilities.

[Mr. PeZhe]

Dispersion of NURS at such ranges and rifled artillery does not breathe into the navel. Yes, of course, it would be nice to have enough missiles with satellite guidance to Tornado-S (as an analogue of Himars). Or the long-suffering Hermes. But they are not. And we need to fight right now.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

Where does the information come from that there are no high-precision systems for MLRS?

[Mr. PeZhe]

The 9B706 control unit used in Tornado-S missiles is inertial. In terms of accuracy, it cannot compete with Himars satellite guidance.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

It is understandable to want to have everything. But maybe for now, use what is, before the one appears.

[Mr. PeZhe]

This is what we are talking about. Use more than two thousand available "Hyacinths". I would also add to them the five hundred available 130-mm M-46 cannons, which also utterly surpass the Msta in range. But in the production of "Msta" respected people master the budget. And this changes everything drastically.

[Beregovic_1]

For all your logic and obviousness, it is most likely impossible to put Hyacinth on a wheeled chassis for technical reasons. An overly powerful weapon. Heavy barrel and powerful charge. Hyacinth-s is on a caterpillar tractor, and Hyacinth-b has huge sliding stops and 4 wheels. In general, the design is heavy due to excessive power. Therefore, the wheeled chassis will either turn over or break. In addition, I have not heard about ARSs for domestic cannon artillery.

[Mr. PeZhe]

In the self-propelled version 2S5 "Hyacinth" is made on the same tracked base as the "Acacia". Which, in turn, is lighter than "Msta". Therefore, the wheelbase, which withstood the Mstu, will also withstand the Hyacinth without any problems. In extreme cases, a longer rollback and a more developed muzzle brake may be needed, but these problems are solvable. And even more so, these problems cannot be compared with the need to produce new Mstas from scratch.

In addition, I have not heard about ARSs for domestic cannon artillery.

Wikipedia for 2S5 indicates the firing range of the serial ARS ZOF60 of 37 km. And the new (non-serial) ARS - 41 km.

[sgrabik]

"Coalition SV" is the future of our artillery and the sooner it comes, the faster and more tangible will be our advantage over our enemies.

[Alekseev]

And from the length of the barrel (initial speed).
It's time to make a barrel with a length of 52-54 caliber, which can be replaced with a 47-caliber one during the repair of Msta. Well, God himself ordered to put this on Malva from the very beginning. Not easy? And who is easy now? Necessary. Rearmament to the Coalition will not happen overnight.

[Escariot]

A longer barrel does nothing by itself. It needs other charges capable of maintaining pressure in the barrel for a longer time, a different breech with a larger volume is needed, perhaps new recoil devices, a new fire control system, etc. are needed.

[Alekseev]

It gives by itself. But, of course, improved POUs and charges are also needed. Perhaps this will be the 2A88 gun from the Coalition. But you have to give birth. Today, only Tornadoes S and G, to some extent Malki (but we haven’t heard about 203-mm adjustable ammunition), Hurricanes, and Lancets help out effectively against long-range systems.
Not a specialist in aviation weapons, but, probably, they should be used more widely. It is clear that Drying with KABs or URs cannot be kept in the air around the clock, but the artillery preparation does not take 5 minutes, but everything is visible from above, including the change of positions by artillery.

[Escariot]

The problem is that at long ranges, the absolute dispersion also increases. The enemy levels this by using a corrective device, but how will we act? Take the number of shells?

[Beregovic_1]

That is, the same 2s36 "Hyacinth".

[sgrabik]

I completely agree, an increase in the length of the barrel and in parallel with this an increase in the power of ammunition will give an overall increase in the combat effectiveness of art. systems.

[avdkrd]

Why openly lie? Where did the "cheap price" come from? The chassis is the most expensive possible, and also redundant, both in terms of carrying capacity and size. For the Msta gun, a Kamaz or Ural would be perfect, but modularity is not provided. Much more powerful guns (with a chamber of 25-30 liters versus 15 Msta) are placed on cheaper and ARMORED platforms. For example, the Serbian self-propelled guns Alexander, modular, automatic loader, armored initially and with a firing range of 60 km.
On Malva, which, due to the short firing range, must operate as close to the front line as possible, an expensive, unarmored chassis of gigantic dimensions was used, perfectly visible for all types of reconnaissance.

[svp67]

SAO "Malva" is wonderful, but it's time to supply the troops with "Malva-M" with an artillery unit from the "Coalition", capable of high-quality counter-battery combat with long-range 155-mm enemy guns

[Aaron Zawi]

Quote: svp67

SAO "Malva" is wonderful, but it's time to supply the troops with "Malva-M" with an artillery unit from the "Coalition", capable of high-quality counter-battery combat with long-range 155-mm enemy guns

Difficult task. It took ours almost 8 years to create a gun with an automatic loader on a wheeled chassis.

[svp67]

Quote: Aron Zaavi

Difficult task.

Which has already been resolved, on "Malva"

Quote: Aron Zaavi

It took ours almost 8 years to create a gun with an automatic loader on a wheeled chassis.

Well, in this case, we have a semi-automatic device, in the trays of which the loaders put the projectile and charges ...

[garri-lin]

However, the makers say that Malva is capable of performing a "Fire Raid". This requires a wet rate of fire. Perhaps even with manual charging, they were able to achieve a high charging speed. Albeit for a short time. Suitable for a counter battery.

[glk63]

"A difficult task. It took ours almost 8 years to create a gun with an automatic loader on a wheeled chassis"

And what is the fundamental difference between an automatic loader on a tracked chassis and a wheeled one? So that's what took 8 years?

[qQQQ]

Quote: glk63

And what is the fundamental difference between an automatic loader on a tracked chassis and a wheeled one? So that's what took 8 years?

The caterpillar has already been worked out, you can’t cut so much dough.

[Aaron Zawi]

Quote: qqqq

Quote: glk63

And what is the fundamental difference between an automatic loader on a tracked chassis and a wheeled one? So that's what took 8 years?

The caterpillar has already been worked out, you can’t cut so much dough.

Just automation made a lot of problems. And so on a wheeled chassis we have been producing CAO for a long time.

[AAK]

Sorry, colleague, but I don’t find anything remarkable in this Malva ... for example, let’s compare it, let’s say, with the same Archer, which has been in service for more than 5 years. Unlike the "Malva", the "Archer" is installed on a 3-axle, and not on a 4-axle chassis, i.e. the complex is 25-30% lighter, more compact and more fuel efficient, while the "Archer" has a shell "clip" with an automatic loader, automatic guidance with GP-ES, as well as almost twice the firing range of the OFS, and here are our menagers from the military-industrial complex they are trying to fit junk into the troops under the guise of a wunderwaffe ...

[bayard]

Quote: AAK

here our menagers from the military-industrial complex are trying to fit junk into the troops under the guise of a wunderwaffe ...

It's just that she (Malva) was the most ready for the speedy launch into production.

Quote: AAK

Unlike the "Malva", the "Archer" is installed on a 3-axle, and not on a 4-axle chassis

You look at the quality of the soils of the homeland of "Archer", and at our clays and chernozems. A four-axle chassis for our conditions is the most suitable for cross-country ability. And fuel economy ... in a war, but for an oil-producing country this is not at all critical. The cross-country ability and stability of the platform during firing is much more critical ... As well as the possibility of further modernization for the "Coalition" gun - for this, only change the artillery unit.

Quote: AAK

while "Archer" has a shell "clip" with an automatic loader

And very loaded rear axles. What affects the patency, reliability, survivability. And the automatic loader can at any time arrange a whim, which in the field cannot be eliminated. Therefore, a semiautomatic device is much more reliable, simpler, more maintainable in the field and CHEAP ... And all this together contributes to the speedy adoption and mass production ... and faster preparation of calculations.
In addition, when the Coalition-SV self-propelled guns are completed (and this will be very soon), nothing will really prevent you from installing its turret on a similar wheeled chassis and getting a full-fledged wheeled self-propelled gun with the ability to fire without leaving the cab ... with a very good machine gun loading and a large ammunition load.
But "Malva" in the current conditions is the simplest with the fastest implementation and launch into production, and simplicity and relative cheapness will ensure mass production and sufficiently large volumes of its production per unit of time.
And if, over time, mass production of shells of a new type for the Coalition is established, then it is quite possible that they will be used by both Mstoy-S and Malvoy, which will increase their maximum firing range to about 40 km. , which will equalize them with the latest Western designs. And the "Coalitions", in turn, will provide a fire advantage in counter-battery combat and when firing at targets at maximum distance.

Quote: AAK

"Archer" has a shell "clip"

And if this clip jams? Anything happens in a war. With manual feed, only the rammer can jam, which, by definition, is a very reliable thing.

Quote: AAK

The military-industrial complex is trying to get into the troops

And the troops are WAITING.

[Bolt cutter]

in a war, but for an oil-producing country this is not at all critical

Delivering and storing fuel in war is difficult and dangerous, no matter where it is produced.

[bayard]

Quote: Bolt Cutter

Delivering and storing fuel in war is difficult and dangerous, no matter where it is produced.

The difference in fuel consumption of 20 - 25% for the war of an oil-producing country is nonsense. Moreover, a caterpillar self-propelled gun eats it many times more ... but for it, a trailer is also needed for transfer along the roads.
I repeat once again - for OUR soils, it is the four-axis scheme that is most acceptable. And in Sweden - stony solid soils.

[alexmach]

The difference in fuel consumption of 20 - 25% for the war of an oil-producing country is nonsense

How to say. There is an opinion that a huge amount of abandoned equipment in the initial stages of the NWO is a banal consumption of fuel and a "lag" in the rear. And it seems that, according to statistics, the T-80s were thrown whole much more than the T-72s.

[Uno]

Fuel, it appears in the tanks on its own and it doesn’t matter if the oil-producing country is or not)

[Georgy Sviridov_2]

Well, Archer is the best wheeled art and generally the best in the west.

[Guran33 Sergey]

The machine in the tower is great! Semi-automatic open installation - the best solution, price quality.

[Ross xnumx]

Thus, the Russian defense industry continues to develop promising artillery systems of various kinds and develops new directions for itself.

Thus, one cannot abandon what has been started and unfinished and begin to praise some new one.
Why did the glorious army minds not suit the characteristics of the "Coalition-SV"? The same thing that does not please the Su-57?
Tyam is not enough to bring his plans to mind, or has the pursuit of profit overshadowed feelings for the Fatherland?
And this community curses the slogans and calls of the Soviet era?
So show yours, tell. how things are going and what (who) is preventing this ...
Let it be "Malva" or "Malvina" - do not care! It is important that Papa Carlo from Rostec plan the right amount of Pinocchio, and not pinch from worries about “honestly earned” billions ...

[svp67]

Quote: ROSS 42

Why did the glorious army minds not suit the characteristics of the "Coalition-SV"? The same thing that does not please the Su-57?

The problems are the same as those that arose during the Second World War. There is not enough strength to conduct R&D and mass production of existing systems at the same time.

[Stas157]

Quote: svp67

The problems are the same as those that arose during the Second World War

Same, but different.
It's not the problems that matter, but the solution.
Then there were simply no problems that could not be solved. And they solved problems with lightning speed. Unlike.

[bayard]

Quote: ROSS 42

Tyam is not enough to bring his plans to mind, or has the pursuit of profit overshadowed feelings for the Fatherland?

In fact, the main reason is the absence of a new type of shells in mass production, thanks to which such an outstanding range and accuracy of fire is possible. To do this, it was necessary to build a new plant / factories or rebuild existing ones ... and they are needed to provide artillery shells operating in the NWO. So they're building a new one.
In addition, a "customer incident" happened in the "Coalition-SV" - wanting to get a new self-propelled guns on the chassis of the serial T-90 tank, the customer set a strict condition - "only on this chassis" ... But it is short and not stable enough for such a huge gun and such a bulky tower. On the frames from the tests and firing, this is clearly visible. After all, why was it easier to use an existing chassis from the same "Malka"?
But it is based on the T-80 chassis. But SEMIKATOKOVE.
Or just take and lengthen the T-90 chassis for another skating rink. An engine of 1130 l / s would provide such an ACS with sufficient mobility and speed characteristics, but the platform would be more stable and create less pressure on the ground. But the customer did not want to change his Wishlist ... therefore, at the parades, they rolled "Coalition-SV" on the T-90 chassis. He wanted "complete unification" - it is easier to ensure the supply, operation and interchangeability of chassis parts.
Although what would prevent all this from an extra skating rink that would solve all the problems.
Now there are rumors that "Coalition-SV" is trying on the "Armata" chassis. The idea was not bad when it came to adopting the "Armata" into service ... but now this is no longer being discussed (in the foreseeable future), and an exotic chassis for only one self-propelled guns will create problems with maintenance, repair and operation. But the "Coalition-SV" tower (to be honest) really asks for the "Armata" platform.
Engine issue.
The engine for the "Armata" did not go - raw and requires a long refinement.
Adapting the engine from the T-90M is not so easy there - it is necessary to completely redo the MTO, although in principle there is enough power ... for self-propelled guns.
This is apparently what they are conjuring with.
In the meantime, production is being prepared for the mass production of shells for the "Coalition" ... which, in the potential, will be able to make the currently available artillery ("Msta", "Geotsint", "Malva") long-range enough to effectively counteract the best NATO artillery systems. It is enough just to look at the muzzle velocity of the projectile of our proven artillery systems and compare them in this indicator with opponents ... it's all about aerodynamics and the nuances of an active-rocket projectile.

Quote: ROSS 42

Let it be "Malva" or "Malvina" - do not care! It is important that Papa Carlo from Rostec plan the right amount of Pinocchio, and not pinch from worries about “honestly earned” billions ...

Maybe for the sake of this there were rumors about the establishment of a new Ministry of the defense industry, which will be led by a person from a completely different clip? And all defense enterprises and scientific institutes will be taken away from Rostec and the Ministry of Industry and Trade. Such a thing would have been done a few years before the NWO, but it can be seen until Thunder breaks out ... the "gentlemen" do not cross themselves.

[alexmach]

In the meantime, production is being prepared for the mass production of shells for the "Coalition" ... which, in the potential, will be able to make the artillery currently available ("Msta", "Geocint", "Malva") long-range enough to effectively counteract the best NATO artillery systems

It is not entirely clear where such confidence comes from that new shells will greatly enhance the capabilities of existing guns. There, after all, it’s not just about shells, after all, both the gun barrel and the charge are important. How to find out how much progress can be achieved with some new shells?

[bayard]

Quote: alexmach

It is not entirely clear where such confidence comes from that new shells will greatly enhance the capabilities of existing guns. There, after all, it’s not just about shells, after all, both the gun barrel and the charge are important. How to find out how much progress can be achieved with some new shells?

In fact, it is not at all difficult to extrapolate. It is enough to compare the barrel length and the INITIAL SPEED of the projectile of our guns (Msta, Geotsint) and NATO guns presented in Ukraine. Our guns often have higher muzzle velocity (especially compared to 777). Therefore, for a conventional OFS, the range is critically affected by more advanced aerodynamics (this can be seen with the naked eye), and for active-reactive, in addition to aerodynamics, the characteristics of the auxiliary engine. If we equalize in the quality of shells, we will equalize in range even for the guns of the penultimate generation of our artillery systems.

Saving on shells is unacceptable. Before the REV, Nikola saved money and even with his legs twisted that shells for the Navy and Army had to be purchased. Our factories bought in France on the eve of the war equipment for the production of high-quality shells for naval guns of the main and auxiliary calibers, but the cost of such shells was seriously more expensive than the old thick-walled and "lightweight" shells. As a result, our shells against the Japanese were not only LIGHTER (which the half-witted courtiers were even proud of), but their explosive charge weighed even lighter than the Japanese high-explosive 6 "compared to our OF 10" and 12 "!!! What success in the war can be there was a speech to conduct with such crown-bearing idiots @ mi and their relatives ??

And now we look around ... we wave our bonnets and rejoice.
Indeed, according to the words of the Mustache of the Kremlin, we now have exactly the same "as under Nicholas II." This is exactly what they tried and almost achieved the same.
Now there is only one hope for China, Iran, and comrade Yn ... as with Nikola-2 for France and Germany.
What they strived for, they achieved.

[Konnick]

Why did the glorious army minds not suit the characteristics of the "Coalition-SV"?

Maybe greed got in the way...

The military intend to recover 151,4 million rubles from the institute. penalties for violation of the terms of the state contract concluded in 2019. The court invited the parties to present the original documents under the contract and make a bilateral reconciliation of the calculations.

[bayard]

Quote: Konnick

Maybe greed got in the way...

Shoiga loves to breed sanctions and fines, one story against Pella was worth it! A company that, in a fantastically short time, developed and built the lead ship (Karakurt), which drives the hulls of these "Karakurts" despite engine suppliers not keeping up with them ... fined for the fact that the ship was late with the task for a couple of months due to .. PREPARATION AND PARTICIPATION IN THE PARADE!!! In parade BY ORDER OF MO !!
Either they earn bribes for themselves in this way, or they take revenge for not giving a bribe, or they are engaged in deliberate and expedient SABOTAGE and sabotage.
So greed and impunity are a symbol of victorious Feudalism with a capitalist bias ... As under Nicholas II ...

[Konnick]

Why did the glorious army minds not suit the characteristics of the "Coalition-SV"?

Or maybe pride played a role

The Burevestnik Central Research Institute is also involved in a patent dispute with government agencies - the prosecutor's office demands that the Russian Federation be also indicated in the patent for a self-propelled artillery mount.

bucked designers

[Revolver]

Quote: Konnick

bucked designers

Still would not buckle. Salary below $600 per month for a specialist with higher education and work experience??? In America, the poverty benefit is higher, and it also comes with food stamps, Medicaid, Section 8 Housing, and maybe something else, depending on the state and city.

[mark1]

Two questions
Why is there an ejector on the barrel?
Is it possible to reduce the length of the platform by 30 percent?

[Konnick]

Two questions
Why is there an ejector on the barrel?
Is it possible to reduce the length of the platform by 30 percent?

Because it is assembled from two manufactured products -

Malva" is built on a four-axle all-wheel drive chassis BAZ-6610-027 "Voshchina" with a two-row cab.

An artillery mount with a 152-mm rifled howitzer 2A64 is mounted in the stern of the chassis - a gun from self-propelled guns 2S19 "Msta-S".

Those. they simply collected from what was, declared loudly about the achievement and forgot about the really new Coalition-SV.

[mark1]

Quote: Konnick

installation with a 152-mm rifled howitzer 2A64 - a gun from self-propelled guns 2S19 "Msta-S".

Duc, after all, there is also 2A65 "Msta-B"

[Konnick]

Duc, after all, there is also 2A65 "Msta-B"

So I inserted a sentence from the article, so as it is.

[Reluctant volunteer]

Not anymore, Soviet stocks turned out to be not endless ...

[Orange Bigg]

Quote: Konnick

Two questions
Why is there an ejector on the barrel?
Is it possible to reduce the length of the platform by 30 percent?

Because it is assembled from two manufactured products -

Malva" is built on a four-axle all-wheel drive chassis BAZ-6610-027 "Voshchina" with a two-row cab.

An artillery mount with a 152-mm rifled howitzer 2A64 is mounted in the stern of the chassis - a gun from self-propelled guns 2S19 "Msta-S".

Those. they simply collected from what was, declared loudly about the achievement and forgot about the really new Coalition-SV.

Indeed, the new Coalition-SV is completing state tests and will be in the army by the end of the year. SAO Malva, in terms of its performance characteristics, is on par with the M-777 and Ceasar, which also shoot with conventional shells up to 25 km and only with the help of Excalibur they hit for 40 km.

A curious story of our front-line soldier about the situation in the Orekhovskoye direction in front of the settlement appeared on the telegram channel “Two Majors”. Rabotino. “I’ll tell you through the eyes of the artillery of this direction, which is held by one of the best combat divisions of the army, the howitzer division of the 71st regiment,” our fighter is quoted as saying. - For two months there were a huge number of counter-battery battles with similar enemy guns, in which he did not win a single victory.
The enemy countered our Msta-b 2a65 with the American M-777 howitzer. In view of the impossibility of winning the artillery duel, the enemy rolled back his guns to a distance of more than 40 km, using the new NATO Excalibur shells. What makes these guns inaccessible to our Msta-b, with a maximum range of 28 km.

https://svpressa.ru/war21/article/381539/

As you can see, just starting to use the Excaliburs, the M-777 howitzers were able to start shooting further than the Msta-b. Before that, they lost artillery duels to our Msta-b because they did not have an advantage in the range of destruction when firing conventional shells, which they got when they started using Excaliburs. So it all depends on the counter-battery fight than to shoot. A promising ammunition for her is the semi-mythical Krasnopol-D. .... now the latest ammunition is being tested. Most likely where it is really needed. What is its key difference? It's all about the range - it is known that the Msta-S / SM, and hence the Malva, is capable of launching it at a distance of as much as 43 kilometers, which instantly puts it on a par with the Excalibur. This property is achieved with the help of an improved jet engine, as well as a module for working with a GPS signal, which allows you to accurately enter a given area. In addition, the key property is preserved - guidance along the laser beam at the final stage of the flight, which the American simply does not have at the moment. That is, we managed to combine two concepts at once, depriving the product of all shortcomings.

[Konnick]

Indeed, the new Coalition-SV is completing state tests and will be in the army by the end of the year

Do you guarantee? And some kind of proof is possible?

[Orange Bigg]

Quote: Konnick

Indeed, the new Coalition-SV is completing state tests and will be in the army by the end of the year

Do you guarantee? And some kind of proof is possible?

Please.

MOSCOW, 25 April. /TASS/. The latest self-propelled artillery mount (SAU) "Coalition-SV" has not yet participated in a special military operation (SVO) in Ukraine, it is undergoing state tests. This was announced to TASS on Tuesday by Major General Sergei Medvedsky, who temporarily replaces the post of head of the Missile Forces and Artillery of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation.

“The self-propelled guns “Coalition-SV” have not yet taken part in the SVO, it continues to undergo state tests, which are expected to be completed by the end of the year,” he said. According to the general, work is currently underway to improve the running gear of the self-propelled guns. "In fact, she's on the way out," he said.

https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/17601511

[Konnick]

Please.

Well, it's from this series.

Speaking at the Army-2021 military-technical forum, Artyakov noted that together with the Armats, the military received modernized T-90M Proryv tanks and Pantsir-S anti-aircraft systems. He did not name the exact number of vehicles transferred to the Russian army.

“We shipped the latest upgraded T-90M Proryv tanks, an experimental industrial batch of T-14 Armata tanks to the troops, and supplies of Pantsir-S continue,” Rostec quotes Artyakov.

Earlier, UVZ, the developer and manufacturer of this tank, announced that the Ministry of Defense would receive a batch of T-14 Armata tanks. At the same time, it was clarified that it would be an installation batch, and serial deliveries will begin in 2022.

[Escariot]

Msta-b shoots at 28 km only with shells with gas generators. Similar shells for the M777, namely the M795, hit 30 km

[stankow]

2 km difference is not even noticeable. I have the honor, Captain of Artillery.

[Escariot]

There was a statement that they say the m777 loses to our artillery in terms of firing range, but it turned out that the foreign one even hits further by 5%. Here is such a squiggle

[qQQQ]

Quote: Konnick

Those. they simply collected from what was, declared loudly about the achievement and forgot about the really new Coalition-SV.

So it is, and even with the old barrel 47 cal. By and large, I don’t see anything in this product except how I drank the dough.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Konnick

Those. they simply collected from what was, declared loudly about the achievement and forgot about the really new Coalition-SV.

Haven't forgotten. "Malva" and "Coalition" are two parallel branches. "Coalition" is a replacement / strengthening of heavy tracked 2S19. And "Malva" is a replacement for the towed 2A65.
Plus, the BAZ chassis allows you to "get rid" of the pace of production of tracked chassis for self-propelled guns.

[Saburov_Alexander53]

Why is there an ejector on the barrel?
But it’s just that the barrels make everything the same and interchangeable with tracked self-propelled guns with closed cabins of the hulls, from where powder gases must be removed. I think so...
I don’t know if this affects the range and accuracy of fire, I’m not a specialist in artillery.

[stankow]

The ejector slightly improves cooling. Gases do not accumulate, but it is better not to let the loader directly into the face when the shutter is opened.

[Escariot]

Perhaps due to the fact that the trunks are just not made, but taken from storage or cannibalized from old self-propelled guns.

[svp67]

Quote: mark1

Why is there an ejector on the barrel?

Because this is a 2A64 gun from 2S19 MSTA-S, adapted to work with a semi-automatic loader. The towed 2A65 MSTA-B is adapted for manual loading

Quote: mark1

Is it possible to reduce the length of the platform by 30 percent?

This is exactly what cannot be done right now. The base Chassis BAZ is quite maneuverable even with such a length, but the "excess" length is a MODERNIZATION STOCK. Allowing you to install a longer barrel on this BS, from the same "Coalition"

[mark1]

Quote: svp67

adapted to work with a semi-automatic loader.

But after all, this is from the breech, which is screwed onto the barrel (or vice versa? This is in a broad sense), and the barrels are not taken from a landfill and not removed from existing self-propelled guns, they are produced and by no means on an automatic line.

[Bad_gr]

D-400 Gun from the Coalition-SV, and the same, with an ejector.

[Denis812]

Yes, a new chassis is cool and definitely needed.
I would like to see something with a longer range.
And, most importantly, more "Zoo" type systems.
Look at the Ukrainian channels - the superiority of Western systems in counter-battery firing is clearly visible.
And what normal artilleryman will go to the position if he knows that 100% will fly to him in a couple of minutes after he fires just a couple of shells at the enemy?

Superiority in artillery cannot be achieved with "lancets" alone.
The main enemy of artillery is enemy artillery.

[Konnick]

Superiority in artillery cannot be achieved with "lancets" alone.
The main enemy of artillery is enemy artillery.

The main enemy of artillery is aviation, and counter-battery combat with cannons is extremely ineffective due to equal opportunities.

[Georgy Sviridov_2]

Yes, that's exactly what it is.
As a shock, so are the UAV gunners of the Krasnopoles. So that the projectile hit even equipment that had already left the positions. Without guidance on a mobile target, it is useless to work further than 15-20 km. Especially protected type pz2000, where a direct hit is needed.

[Denis812]

the fact of the matter is that there are no equal opportunities.
The RF Armed Forces have only a few Zoo-type stations on the entire front, while the enemy has dozens of AN / TPQ.
These are absolutely losing conditions.

And about aviation - until you have the whole sky in drones, until that wonderful time, it is artillery that will be the main one in the counter-battery fight.
For example, from the latter - why was the RF Armed Forces squeezed out of Staromayorsky? Precisely because they gouged the artillery, which extinguished the enemy on the outskirts.
And how did they break it down?
They thrashed with counter-battery fire.
And why not?
Yes, because they stupidly have more artillery radars, better communications and better intelligence.

[Konnick]

the fact of the matter is that there are no equal opportunities.
The RF Armed Forces have only a few Zoo-type stations on the entire front, while the enemy has dozens of AN / TPQ.
These are absolutely losing conditions.

And about aviation - until you have the whole sky in drones, until that wonderful time, it is artillery that will be the main one in the counter-battery fight.
For example, from the latter - why was the RF Armed Forces squeezed out of Staromayorsky? Precisely because they gouged the artillery, which extinguished the enemy on the outskirts.
And how did they break it down?
They thrashed with counter-battery fire.
And why not?
Yes, because they stupidly have more artillery radars, better communications and better intelligence.

So it turns out that the counter-battery fight with just artillery can continue indefinitely, until we connect aviation. But aviators on their own, they can't even deal with air defense. Not a single massive missile attack was supported when it is possible to attack radars activated to repel a raid.
It was strike aircraft that dealt with the artillery batteries of the Center group during Operation Bagration. And the German defense was mainly artillery and successfully repelled the attacks of our Western and Kalinin fronts in the winter and spring of the 44th, inflicting huge losses on our troops, who could not even get close to enemy trenches and, of course, conduct successful shelling. In the course of fruitless attacks from artillery fire, only the 33rd army of Gordov died,
from a letter from the head of the operational department of the headquarters of the 33rd Army, Colonel Tolkonyuk Illarion Alekseevich. The active army on March 30, 1944.

During this period, the 33rd army lost only 20 people killed, and in total lost 975 people killed, wounded and missing, including 103 killed and 011 wounded division commander, killed and wounded 3 deputy commanders and chiefs of staff of divisions, 1 commanders regiments and their deputies, 8 battalion commanders, during the same period, the army lost 38 tanks and 174 self-propelled guns burned and broken by enemy artillery and aircraft directly on the battlefield; with an unsuccessful input to develop success, he suffered heavy losses and was brought into a non-combat state of the 419nd Guards. Tatsinsky tank corps.

The fact that many senior officers died is the result of the work of the Wehrmacht artillery, which began to work in the areas of concentration of forces before the offensive. While our artillery did not try to carry out the KBB, but for some reason hit the Wehrmacht defense line.
And only when the Germans were forced to leave only 60 fighters to cover the Center group, sending the main part of the aviation to France to counter the landing troops of the allies, and Stalin collected 6000 aircraft from 3 fronts, even from Karelian, and it was the German artillery that became the primary goal of strike aviation batteries in the depths of defense. And Operation Bagration became the most successful operation of the Red Army.

[Denis812]

You seem to be reading inattentively.
I immediately wrote that if you do not have air superiority, then artillery is the main one.
Do you have air superiority? No.

all your references to the affairs of bygone days are incorrect, because they refer specifically to examples where the USSR had air superiority.

[Konnick]

You seem to be reading inattentively.

You are not reading this carefully. KBB with only one artillery is like beer without vodka, money down the drain. Therefore, until aviation is fully operational, the CBB can continue indefinitely.

[Denis812]

I don't drink, because your reference to beer without vodka...leave that to drunks.
Yes, I agree, if aviation would work, then of course artillery would be on the sidelines.
But I repeat once again - since we do not have an aviation advantage, that is why the artillery decides now.

[Konnick]

I don't drink, because your reference to beer without vodka...leave that to drunks.

Are you sick? Or coded?

[alexmach]

But aviators on their own, they can't even deal with air defense. Not a single massive missile attack was supported when it is possible to attack radars activated to repel a raid

Where did you get such strange data from? There were, after all, directly opposite evidence in the public domain. Photo of an aircraft missile during a raid of cruise missiles and geraniums.

[Konnick]

Photo of an aircraft missile during a raid of cruise missiles and geraniums

There may be a photo, but there is no information about the defeat of the air defense system during the rocket attack, even from Konashenkov ..

[d4rkmesa]

The "Zoo" itself is not needed, sometimes I suspect that the name has played its bad joke. We need "trench" counter-battery systems.

[stankow]

The main enemy of artillery is aviation. Alien artillery is too busy working on the infantry.

[Alex 1970]

Eh, again a super weapon according to the written article (and I recognize the sweetheart by his gait), but in reality the characteristics are so-so in modern times. Range 2S43 "Malva" 24,5 km. Okay, in the NWO, the enemy does not have so many modern artillery systems, but if the batch goes further, will Poland catch up? Self-propelled guns Crab The effective firing range is 30 km, the maximum is even further. There is also Germany, which is already supplying the PzH 2000, which has an effective range of 30 km, the maximum is 50. Why rejoice? Another drank dough. And our gunners will fall with such a miracle weapon. To me it's just a crime.

[Revolver]

This gun obviously needs an automatic loader for at least five shells in order to shoot back in a minute and gas to another position until the response arrives. And the response, as mentioned above, can arrive in a couple of minutes if the enemy nearby has an anti-battery radar and a four-thread long-range enough and capable of receiving data from the radar, bypassing a person with a piece of paper and a phone.

[Oleg Ogorod]

An automatic loader is needed both in an archer and in a coalition, with a caseless stacking charge (tablets). The crew of the combat vehicle should not climb out of the armor. Under the fragments of drones. She drove up, rested on the ground, fired quickly with a series of shots, removed the emphasis and went. And the crew in the car, both sitting and sitting.
And then he must shove shells into the cannon from behind.
And of course, max 25 km is not very good these days. You can say bad.

[Vadim S]

Finally, we have ceased to be afraid of the wheels on arte! As all the experts shouted that the wheels were nothing, that this was nonsense and all that. And now they sing what a breakthrough and how good it turns out. The war quickly sobered everyone up and showed the reality, and it's good that a lot of things will still show the hardened. Only now the barrel is outdated, it is necessary to install from the coalition, and the cabin is not armored. Where is the project of the coalition tower at KAMAZ?

[Georgy Sviridov_2]

The disadvantage of the wheels is that if the arrivals are not even accurate, there is a great chance that the wheels will be pierced and the equipment will have to be abandoned and run on foot, under the gaps, the tracked vehicle dies only with a direct hit or a very close gap ...

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Georgy Sviridov_2

The disadvantage of the wheels is that if the arrivals are not even accurate, there is a great chance that the wheels will be pierced and the equipment will have to be abandoned and run on foot, under the gaps, the tracked vehicle dies only with a direct hit or a very close gap ...

So "Malva" is a replacement for towed guns. Their survivability is even lower - primarily due to the fact that with the counter-battery fight established by the enemy, they do not even have a theoretical chance to leave their position before arrival.
And even the USSR did not pull to replace all towed guns with tracked self-propelled guns.

[Georgy Sviridov_2]

Well, no one will change all the towed ones, the towed ones have their advantages, in addition to being cheap, they are compact and light, and transport capabilities are trite on the suspension of a helicopter, which is especially important in the mountains, and we had all the conflicts in the mountains with Afghanistan. The same axes of the amers also began to rivet for their marines in Afghanistan ...
In motorized rifle and tank units, of course, they will leave the towed ones. But in the artillery, mountain, airborne and marine corps, they will be for a long time to come.

[Reluctant volunteer]

You listen less than couch experts, self-propelled guns on a wheeled platform become a fixed target at the first arrival, but I am not writing from a couch, but from a firing position near Bakhmut ...

[Konnick]

You listen less than couch experts, self-propelled guns on a wheeled platform become a fixed target at the first arrival, but I am not writing from a couch, but from a firing position near Bakhmut ..

Yes, you can’t quickly tow such a weight and you can’t drive it into a caponier.

[Revolver]

Quote: Reluctant volunteer

I am writing not from the sofa, but from a firing position near Bakhmut

A question for you, as one who has practical experience: between Malva and Msta-B, what will you choose?

[Reluctant volunteer]

As the experience of the SVO has shown, self-propelled guns have an increased vulnerability, especially on wheeled platforms ...

[Konnick]

As the experience of the SVO has shown, self-propelled guns have an increased vulnerability, especially on wheeled platforms ...

On a wheeled track, it is necessary to install guns with a maximum firing range, and not to rearrange a gun from an armored tracked vehicle to a wheeled tractor.

[Reluctant volunteer]

This will not help, the wheeled gun has increased dimensions and height, which makes it very difficult to disguise it, and even our current enemy will be able to get it at any distance from the line of contact, there is nothing to say about the potential ...

[Konnick]

As the experience of the SVO has shown, self-propelled guns have an increased vulnerability, especially on wheeled platforms ...

Especially compared to towed ones?

[Konnick]

The press service of Rostec cites the words of the industrial director of the cluster of weapons, ammunition and special chemicals Bekhana Ozdoeva. He recalled that the development of "Malva" focused on increasing mobility. In the conditions of modern conflict, the safety of the calculation depends on such characteristics.

The firing range did not bother them .... Bekhan Ozdoev is the "largest" specialist in the field of weapons.
Current member of the boards of directors of holding companies and organizations:

JSC Concern Uralvagonzavod
JSC "Schwabe"
JSC NPO High Precision Complexes
JSC "SPECIAL CHEMISTRY"
JSC NPK Techmash
JSC Izhevsk Mechanical Plant (Chairman of the Board of Directors)
JSC Concern Kalashnikov (Chairman of the Board of Directors)
JSC "KBAL them. L.N. Koshkina (Chairman of the Board of Directors)

[Reluctant volunteer]

Quote: Konnick

As the experience of the SVO has shown, self-propelled guns have an increased vulnerability, especially on wheeled platforms ...

Especially compared to towed ones?

I have a D20 battery, in three months there were five arrivals with shrapnel Hymars, minus two sights, minus one panorama, the recoil brake was broken on one gun, everything is being repaired "in the field", I can't say from the losses of the calculations, state secret ... Yesterday it arrived two cassettes 30 meters from the gun, generally don't give a fuck.

[Oleg Ogorod]

In fact of the matter. He brought the towed one into the bushes and left it there. Disguised, dug in. Including a dugout where you can take cover during a raid. The value of an old cannon is not as great as the value of a new mallow. You can always then adjust any car, pick it up until they shoot and drag it to another place. Malva cannot be hidden so simply, and even difficult. If you damage the car engine, suspension, wheels, even though they are pumped), then you can’t drag it away. And if you drag, then a very powerful tractor.
Therefore, a wheeled SAO should be with automatic loading, the crew is in the cockpit, it does not climb out when firing. It quickly moved to the position, fired back and disappeared into the forest.
Well, the gun really needs to be installed 2A88 from the coalition. But the KAMAZ chassis is probably really weak for the coalition.

[Uncle_Misha]

As I understand it, the guns are dug in and spaced in range and direction? Then we are talking about small-sized single targets that can be hit either directly or very close, half the diameter of the funnel, with a hit. By the way, your words confirm reports of artillery hits during the Second World War, namely damage to sights, panoramas, breakdowns of knurlers.

[Wer best do]

I have already read an article about this mallow, but I still don’t understand what is the point of producing self-propelled guns with a gun from msta-s, inferior to msta-s in all characteristics, instead of msta itself.
About whether it would even make sense to develop this obsolete bicycle at the development stage, I think it’s not even worth asking.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

It can be transported by VTA aircraft, theoretically it should be cheaper than tracked self-propelled guns in production and operation, it can move along public roads on its own without destroying the asphalt.

[Slavs B]

As I understand it, the point is the price and speed of production. This Malva is probably more expensive and more difficult to manufacture than a towed gun (which, ideally, it should replace), but much cheaper than a full-fledged Msta

[Oleg Ogorod]

It’s not at all a fact that it’s much cheaper than revenge. Msta has long been serial production, albeit in small variations, such as M2. But Malva is cheaper than the coalition, that's for sure. And the coalition, as I understand it, has a problem, including with the chassis. It was supposed to be on the Armatov chassis, which means the Armatov engine, and they wrote problems with it. The wheeled coalition based on KAMAZ, with a heavy turret, is apparently too heavy for KAMAZ. Well, I am silent about the gun, making it is much more difficult than 2a64.

[Alexey RA]

Quote from Wer best do

I have already read an article about this mallow, but I still don’t understand what is the point of producing self-propelled guns with a gun from msta-s, inferior to msta-s in all characteristics, instead of msta itself.

Because not instead Msty-s, and parallel, in addition to the release of Msta-S.
The wheeled chassis makes it possible to increase the production of self-propelled guns without increasing the load on Uraltransmash - the production of barrels becomes decisive.
And yes, "Malva" is a replacement for the towed 2A65. It needs to be compared with it.

[Escariot]

There is another question: is the ACS Msta-S produced? In the sense that the warehouses are already packed with a thousand such self-propelled guns, so why else was it necessary to produce before the SVO. Perhaps all new cars are rebuilt Soviet-made cars

[Revolver]

Quote from Wer best do

what is the point of producing self-propelled guns with a gun from msta-s, inferior in all characteristics to msta-s, instead of the revenge itself.

A tracked armored hull costs more and takes longer to produce than a truck, even an 8x8. And it won’t go far on its own, it’s not for nothing that tanks and tracked self-propelled guns are transported on trailers.
And if you drive on your own, then remember the fate of the mechanized corps of the Red Army in 1941.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

And still, I would give such platforms no more than 20% of the total number of trunks. The rest, nevertheless, belongs to self-propelled caterpillars and towed artillery. Too controversial patency and resistance to enemy fire.

[Pavel57]

Belarusians should show interest in Malva, but on their own version of the chassis.

[Oleg Ogorod]

Belarusians should show interest in the wheeled coalition, but on their chassis. They have any, the coast was made on the Minsk chassis. Whoever made the coast can now make an analogue of the coalition, the entire art part, only to receive the chassis and control systems.

[Slavs B]

Sounds good, just as an alternative to trailed systems. Anyhow, things didn’t stall at the level of an experimental test batch, as we often do

[avdkrd]

Explain what's the point? If you need cheap and mobile artillery, then why choose such an expensive and large chassis? It’s not a fact that Malva will be cheaper than Msta ... If you need a prodigy, then why such a mediocre weapon? The range of 24 km, at the present time, sucks. The concept of wheeled self-propelled guns, in a quick reaction, fleeting and short strikes, with a quick exit from positions. Here accuracy and range and rate of fire are also important. What we have:
1.very large chassis, high visibility and low maneuverability.
2. Outdated gun, with a short firing range.
3. Lack of loading automation.
4. Perhaps there is an automation of pointing and aiming.
The last point can be implemented even on towed guns.
Question: Is this an illiterate technical task or a lack of design thought? Why did the Serbs, back in 17, make self-propelled guns Alexander, a cut above?
For reference, self-propelled guns Alexander, 152mm, firing range 62km, automation of all combat systems (guidance, loading), modularity (installation on any platform is possible).

[d4rkmesa]

Well, that's how they gave it out in "Petrel". In my opinion, this is a mistake, obviously an outdated gun and a heavy chassis. As for the guns, they would at least take the Hyacinth, especially since there are towed heavy chassis.

[Georgy Sviridov_2]

Msta has a normal range. The usual outfit is 25 km, the same Amer paladin 22 with an ordinary projectile ... It actively hits up to 30 places with a reactive, but in fact it’s easier to develop a new projectile there and will also hit at 35-40 km.
But the only question is that it is pointless, at least with conventional shells. We need either cassette or adjustable ones, using GLONASS to hit buildings and across the lake to hit military equipment, and also UAVs that will highlight and that will not be shot down ...
And so, at 30-40 km, only in large cities can you shoot in order to nightmare the peaceful ...
As for why such a base was chosen, I also xs, for me it is extremely ineffective. The only thing is if the Republic of Belarus insisted and plan to buy them ... There is no other option ...
Alexander has a more modest range than you wrote ... Ordinary ones up to 30 km, only 5 km further ... Active-reactive up to 52, but I say with ordinary shells at such a distance it is impossible to conduct a counter-battery fight ...
And 90% of the work of artillery is just ordinary shells, at a distance of just up to 20-25 km, and preferably less. Up to 15 km and the accuracy even with conventional shells is quite high ...

[Uncle_Misha]

Those who want to shoot with conventional OFS at 40 km and at the same time hit the target, at a small target, are apparently haunted by the laurels of the "Paris gun". In those days, Paris was a small provincial town, and it was a pleasure to shoot at it from a distance of 100 km. I’m probably already reading the tenth discussion and everyone is asked to increase the firing range. Yes, no question! Our designers know how to do it! But they also know where it leads. We need new barrel steels, we need a recalculation of recoil devices and much more. In the end, we need machine tools for the production of elongated barrels, and with the required accuracy, we need new gunpowder and a projectile. At the exit there will be a new gun. Can we do it at the moment? No ! And therefore, "Mallow" appear, made from what is,

[Alexey RA]

Quote: avdkrd

Explain what's the point? If you need cheap and mobile artillery, then why choose such an expensive and large chassis?

Because we are not in France. The Danes also chose a "salad" based on 8x8.

Quote: avdkrd

If you need a child prodigy, then why such a mediocre tool?

Not a prodigy. We need self-propelled guns, which can be made to replace towed artillery, while not loading the main production of 2S19.

[Yaroslav Tekkel]

Quote: Alexey RA

The Danes also chose a "salad" based on 8x8.

But he is better than a flower in everything.

[Radical]

Quote: mark1

Two questions
Why is there an ejector on the barrel?

To fear the enemy. But seriously, the gun was taken from the Msta self-propelled guns, so they didn’t bother with the alteration. In short, it sucks, like Malva itself.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

It sucks, it was a tower with a 14,5 mm KPVT machine gun on the BTR-60/70/80. This was a real suck, replicating a poor decision for decades. Although the BTR-80 still increased the angle of elevation of the machine gun barrel.

[Soldatov V.]

Judging by the photograph of the "Malva", the chassis allows you to install a barrel 25-30 percent longer, and this is one of the conditions for increasing the firing range. And if you install all the bells and whistles from the "Coalition", then in general it will be a masterpiece.

[TermNachTer]

If you choose - speed or cross-country ability, I would choose cross-country ability, because in a war, asphalt is somehow not very good)))

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

This is how the howitzer is positioned as a means of strengthening the airborne forces with the possibility of airlift. MSTA-S does not seem to fit in IL-76.
And so, yes, I would prefer to see Akatsiya or something like PAT-S as a means of fire support at the forefront, the resumption of work on which was recently reported.

[Nakhimov]

Wait a second, and who was laughing that the French Caesars are the last century?

[Mustached Kok]

That's how much I've been watching new self-propelled guns (including those that are only in the project), I still can't understand why no one pays attention to the extremely obvious vulnerability of self-propelled guns that are not present only in "tank-like" self-propelled guns (Like our Msta, American Pladin or German PzH2000).
Namely, a long time to leave the position.
Modern counter-artillery radars determine the trajectory of the projectile and the subsequent location of the artillery even in the process of the first projectile just flying up to the target. This means that a return shot will be fired within seconds after detection. As a result, a battery (or a single gun) may simply not have time to roll up to change position.
Even "tank-like" self-propelled guns sometimes don't make it in time or make it to the butt. And if the self-propelled guns need at least partial deployment (let's say the extension of the supports for stability), then when folding, it wastes valuable seconds.
Therefore, self-propelled guns need to be developed ... clotting speed!
So that a group of artillerymen could begin to change position so quickly that by the time a projectile / missile arrives at them, they would no longer be in a large radius from the launch site (so that even projectiles with adjustment / homing) could not to fall due to the fact that the equipment would fly out of the field of view of their devices).
Ideal - If the vehicle had already completed the roll-up and started moving to another position BEFORE the first volley reached the target!

[Red Hunter]

Mallow is complete bullshit today, the last century. The artillery unit of the self-propelled guns remained at the level of the late 80s, which does not allow it to compete with Western counterparts. The maximum firing range of 29 km is completely insufficient for the KBB, and the lack of an automatic loader does not allow for a high rate of fire for a long time. It is very doubtful that this self-propelled gun is capable of operating in the "flurry of fire" mode. The use of a turretless layout clearly does not add safety to the crew during firing. The wheeled chassis has certain advantages over the tracked one, but in our conditions it has more disadvantages - low maneuverability in the field during mudslides, high vulnerability to fragments, fire, anti-personnel mines and spikes, high center of gravity of the machine, the need to install outriggers or openers on the machine, weak booking.
It would be better if the money was spent on modernizing the existing 2S19, and not producing a "zoo" in artillery. If the production volumes of Malva are small, then it may well come out more expensive than Msta. In parallel with the modernization of old self-propelled guns, it is necessary to put the Coalition-SV on stream. It does not matter if its shells are incompatible with old systems and vice versa - for a radical increase in performance. always have to sacrifice something...

[maiman61]

Counter battery fighting is the death of towed guns. And "Malva" fired back and quickly washed off and look for fistulas!

[Reluctant volunteer]

Quote: Nagan

Quote: Reluctant volunteer

I am writing not from the sofa, but from a firing position near Bakhmut

A question for you, as one who has practical experience: between Malva and Msta-B, what will you choose?

D20 / D30, lighter, more accurate, more reliable

[Reluctant volunteer]

Quote: maiman61

Counter battery fighting is the death of towed guns. And "Malva" fired back and quickly washed off and look for fistulas!

Well, I won’t even say that the counter-battery fight is just being towed and they are experiencing it, this is not visible from the sofa. But there is a question, where will your Malva be washed off? Taganrog is not an option, they are already getting to him, to Moscow too ... Yes, at least half of the self-propelled guns in the NMD were destroyed just the same outside firing positions, in waiting areas, on marches, at reloading points (especially reagent) ...

[Reluctant volunteer]

Quote: Oleg Ogorod

Well, the gun really needs to be installed 2A88 from the coalition.

Forget about the Coalition, our industry does not produce shells under D20 / 30, we are already shooting with Chinese-Iranian ones, all the soviet garbage has been removed from the warehouses, I have already shot OF530 ...

[Reluctant volunteer]

Quote: garri-lin

However, the makers say that Malva is capable of performing a "Fire Raid". This requires a wet rate of fire. Perhaps even with manual charging, they were able to achieve a high charging speed. Albeit for a short time. Suitable for a counter battery.

The "fire raid" mode is like a fighter's super-maneuverability, you don't fucking need it, but we don't have anything other than it, so we'll kill it anywhere ...

[Zaurbek]

Why? You fired 10 shells at the target at once, which arrived almost simultaneously, and rolled off. And for each target there is a norm in shells. And they dumped it, which means they didn’t receive a notch from the counter-battery radar in response.

[Reluctant volunteer]

And I'll just add a few more points:
1 automated fire control system, so supposedly there is in 2S9 - our defense still hasn’t mastered the fire calculator, we still use the flawed PUO 108, all the Msta-S that I saw in the SVO for ten months, and you can count them on the fingers , are guided manually, because the automation there has been inoperative since birth.
2. Counter-battery radars are another fairy tale about a white bull, not only do they exist only in ultra-patriotic news, but no one has ever seen them here, but also absolutely useless crap. As well as storks with sables ...
3. Automatic loader - why the hell is it needed if the flight of the projectile is 30-60 seconds, plus the time to transfer the proofreading, plus its calculation, plus guidance ... Until the next shot, you can reload three or four times, but removing the misfired sleeve with a machine gun just like changing the tube is an incredible adventure...

[Zaurbek]

This is yesterday's decision. But there is no analogue of "long-barreled" NATO howitzers yet. And this, along with counter-battery systems, is the main problem.

[Reluctant volunteer]

Quote: Zaurbek

Why? You fired 10 shells at the target at once, which arrived almost simultaneously, and rolled off. And for each target there is a norm in shells. And they dumped it, which means they didn’t receive a notch from the counter-battery radar in response.

Well, firstly, not 10, but two, this is if the current systems, the first shot, for example, on the first charge, the second on full, three at the same time is unlikely to work, and secondly, I already wrote above, but where to dump it? I am now standing near Bakhmut, open a Google map, try to find a place on it where you can safely hide this hefty Malva! Yes, and even if there were places, but how are you going to move covertly? I have about 8 km to the first line, 20-30 birds pass over me a day, there is only one Strela-10 from air defense for the entire area, I hear incredible stories about electronic warfare only in the news, after the Wagners left, both navigation and starlink and Even the cellular network is here...

[Reluctant volunteer]

Quote: Zaurbek

Why? You fired 10 shells at the target at once, which arrived almost simultaneously, and rolled off. And for each target there is a norm in shells. And they dumped it, which means they didn’t receive a notch from the counter-battery radar in response.

And I forgot to mention something else, my regiment was formed from scratch last year, and we were lucky, we got almost new Bears for each gun, but there is fucking black soil, and after each not very heavy rain, the Bear cannot even leave the caponier, not to mention overcoming a not very blue ravine or just climbing up a hill, and after a good rain we somehow dragged a bear from the field with a tank, two cables broke. This is so, by the way, with wheeled chassis ...

[Zaurbek]

Well, nominally, a caterpillar only on the MT-12 is a tractor. And with an open cabin, there can be caterpillar ones. It's just that Western wheeled vehicles come with a "long gun" and shoot further. Therefore, my opinion is that it is not necessary to install MST on such a chassis, but something long-range.

[Sedoy]

Russian defense industry continues to develop advanced artillery systems

Wow... :)
"The last century" is "promising" for them ...
Compare with the Swedish "Archer" ...

[Zaurbek]

Archer is great, but Caesar is more of a workhorse

[JD1979]

Another useless development at the level of the 80s of the last century. Bravo.
What are its advantages over existing self-propelled guns? ...

As the development organizations have repeatedly noted, the CAO 2S43 compares favorably with the cash self-propelled and towed systems with increased mobility.

Just what? Not the range of destruction, rate of fire, range of shells? ...Mobility. "Boris - you'll get to hell" Russian version is useless and merciless.

The SAO is equipped with a modern fire control system that provides fast and accurate topographical positioning, calculation of data for firing and aiming. There are different shooting modes, including the so-called. fire attack. Preparing the guns in position and folding before leaving take minimal time.

Sorry again what? Can you be more specific about the minimum time? How long does it take for "running elephants" to manually drag shells from packs, lay them out and prepare them for delivery. How long does it take to MANUALly feed and charge the ILW? Does this CAO have automatic drives for returning to the stowed position if you need to urgently pull it off the position, or is everything the old fashioned way - turn the knobs?

An artillery mount with a 152-mm rifled howitzer 2A64 is mounted in the rear of the chassis - a gun from self-propelled guns 2S19 "Msta-S"

Excuse me?)))) i.e. do we have something "new" assembled from what was, without unification with new shells for self-propelled guns Coalition? Well, the barrel could have been put in or ... but I understood ... it will be Malva-2))) New R&D new money)

[bobnew2017]

I would hang an aluminum shell on it, such as drop-down petals, I think you understand the idea, it won’t save you from large hits, but small drones, at least some kind of protection.

[Georgy Sviridov_2]

It’s bad that nona-svk didn’t go into a large series, although it seems to be a simple technique.
You can make a lot of them. As mobile artillery, they are very good, especially for the offensive. They shoot on the move, they don’t need time to deploy, after each series of shots they can change their position, which means that without a UAV that hovered over them with a counter-battery, it’s very difficult to fight against them, only to cover huge areas based on luck ...

[Georgy Sviridov_2]

The question is also interesting, to which parts they want to supply these mallows ... If in artillery, then, in principle, the machine is normal, although of course it is healthy and spare parts for it are in short supply ...
If in art units of motorized rifle or tank brigades, then a hat ... There is no one to bother with them there.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

Only for the Airborne Forces and it is unlikely that other branches of the armed forces will be equipped with them. As it seems, another development of the 120-mm omnivorous SAO Phlox awaits wider use.

[Atlas]

Doubtful Artillery Mount....
As for me, a certain analogue of the self-propelled guns Zuzana 2, and not Bogdana, is needed. With such a barrel length, only Russia can make such a huge chassis

[bone1]

And why such a misunderstanding, is it perhaps several times cheaper than normal self-propelled guns?

[Gromovanton]

I believe this technical solution is a mistake. Efforts need to be increased in the area of ​​increasing the range of ammunition guided for counter-battery combat and increasing the range of standard OFS by improving their aerodynamic qualities, greater energy of gunpowder.
I would not write off the towed artillery with a number of upgrades that reduce the cycle of detection-destroyed - when implementing remote control of the gun.
A separate task not directly related to artillery, but ensuring successful KKB is secure communications and a single reconnaissance and control circuit (everyone knows what everyone knows, if he is allowed to know it, including data on enemy serifs with digital coordinates) + of course support for army and front-line aviation. The presence of mobile reconnaissance points, radars, systems for combating enemy drones.
For the long-term development of the industry, it is necessary to manage the scientific and technical policy from the Ministry of Defense, and military science has been significantly undermined by reforms, however, as well as the personnel of specialized design bureaus by a pseudo-capitalist mode of operation: we pay as under socialism, but we want results as under capitalism, while we want the result yesterday, and whether people will be needed or not after the project remains in question + elimination from long-term planning and long-term management of science and technology policy. Is it possible in such conditions to expect not only breakthroughs, but simply any viable results?

[megavolt823]

Let's sum it up: there is no new weapon. The same eggs in profile. There are already places S. Classics of the genre. Gusli, tower. All things. But Savushka is smaller in size. It's easier to hide. She somehow protects the crew. If 20 lies at 152 meters. Savushka will give more chances to survive. It can even leave positions on its own. But entot antamobile? Fuck hide. Shards will simply destroy it. So what is this beast for?

[mmaxx]

SAUshka can open a trench for herself. And this? Soldiers with shovels?

[Radical]

Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich

It sucks, it was a tower with a 14,5 mm KPVT machine gun on the BTR-60/70/80. This was a real suck, replicating a poor decision for decades. Although the BTR-80 still increased the angle of elevation of the machine gun barrel.

I don’t see the connection, especially since it’s the 21st century now. It’s quite normal for that period, but by the way, is this caliber still relevant at sea and on land, or do you have other information? But for 23 years, this one, how is it ... in short, what did he do to ensure that the country had armed forces capable of inflicting a crushing defeat on the enemy and solving the geopolitical problem? Forums, parades, again forums, again... summits... . Is this the job of the head of state? Instead, through the possibilities of the media, through the mouths of the mustachioed press talker, and Kalinka, readiness for the next agreement is voiced! When he said at a meeting with African leaders that the landing force was withdrawn from Kiev in order to provide a basis for negotiations, this is a spit in the soul of those who survived this landing, and the relatives of those who did not wait for their loved ones, including the lieutenant of the Airborne Forces, a Dagestani , who, covering his own, was blown up by a grenade! The one I'm talking about is an unscrupulous, deceitful, cynical person, if that word is applicable to him. The tragedy of the nuclear submarine "Kursk" is proof of this. Even then, it was clear to sane people who we slipped as a manager. Unfortunately, many still do not realize this, and do not realize. Alas.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

For no period of 14,5 mm in a turret without an electric drive and without a hatch, with a tape of 50 rounds, was it normal. Not to mention Afghanistan, where neither the BTR-60/70 nor even the BMP-1, with their 30-degree barrel elevation angles, turned out to be adapted to mountainous conditions.
If you want to argue, then dispute on the merits, and not indulge in idle reasoning.

[Dedok]

what is the article about, the author?
about the firing range - nothing, about the network-centric in fire control - also nothing ...
why is she like this? - carry on parades?
with the existing counter-battery fight - is it a burden or a help? - after what I wrote above?
some questions remain

[the same doctor]

Looking at this bandura, I do not understand two things.
First. Why is she so heavy? In theory, it should not weigh more than 10-12 tons.
Second: Why not place it in the format of a Truck trailer? The wear of the car is always faster than the wear of the tool. You don't have to abandon the gun because of a broken engine. As for cross-country ability, there is not a single point in Ukraine where the nearest paved road would be further than 10 km, and in the Donbas - 5 km.

[mmaxx]

In order for the military to whip such a thing, it takes another 50 years. It’s easier to drive a long truck through the fields and valleys. Maybe it will get stuck.

[Vladimir Shchennikov]

a lot of noise, more doubts...

[Voenoboz]

And the gun is at least armored, at least to protect the cabin from bullets about the radiators, I’m not even talking about. They do it for 50 years, a lot needs to be taken into account.

[mmaxx]

Without range, the Coalition is a waste of money.

[Voenmeh]

Talk, talk….. Instead of supplies to the Russian army, bleeding in the war. It is disgusting to read such news! First put in the troops, and then discuss how good this or that weapon is!

[storm]

the relative technical simplicity of the 2S43 project, made on the basis of ready-made components and assemblies, should positively affect the speed of construction.

During the Second World War, such projects were implemented in a month or two, and here they have been mulling for the fourth year ...
There is not a word about the firing range, does Malva even reach the French Caesars ???

[SoSl]

Fresh legend, but hard to believe. How many promising developments for several years (or even dozens) are about to get into the troops, right on the front line, and for some reason no one has ever seen them there.

[_KM_]

The bases seem to have Tutaev engines, not Yaroslavl ones.