The concept of an assault gun for the RF Armed Forces

51
The concept of an assault gun for the RF Armed Forces

Since the times of the Afghan and Caucasian wars, the need to expand the capabilities of armored vehicles to conduct combat operations in highly rugged, mountainous and urbanized terrain has become obvious.

The special operation in Ukraine confirmed this need.



To hit a significant number of targets, it was necessary to raise the bore of the gun, exceeding the technical capabilities of the main combat weapon. tank. Obviously, it became justified to involve cannon anti-aircraft weapons and self-propelled artillery systems with significant vertical guidance angles to work against these targets. However, this measure is still necessary.

The design of the ZSU - equipment, armor, etc. are optimized for work against air targets, and in a ground collision they are either redundant - such as sighting and navigation equipment, or insufficient - such as armor. At the same time, the high-explosive impact of 23–30 mm ammunition is not always sufficient. In addition, with modern trends in the expansion of air attack weapons, when any barmaley can use a drone of one or another complexity, anti-aircraft gunners have more than enough work and responsibility of their own.

The 122–152 mm shells used by self-propelled guns have an excellent high-explosive effect on the target, the elevation angle of the barrel of self-propelled howitzers is sufficient to hit most high-altitude targets, but self-propelled guns, like anti-aircraft gunners, have a similar situation - the armor of self-propelled guns does not contribute to confident direct fire work, and the main classic No one has canceled or will cancel the tasks of the artillerymen.


BMP-2 with Berezhok combat vehicle at the parade rehearsal. Photo by the author

BMP-2,3 with a maximum barrel elevation angle of 60 degrees was at one time put into operation, among other things, to expand the range of destruction at altitude compared to the same “penny”. 30-mm Tula masterpieces showed themselves with dignity in mountainous, wooded, and urban areas with industrial zones and waste heaps.


However, as mentioned above, you can’t always make a hole in the wall with a “thirty”, and you won’t bring down every rock. The low-impulse "hundredth" of the "troika" suggests cautious optimism - in terms of high-explosive impact on the target. And the level of protection of infantry fighting vehicles is far from that of a tank.

The Terminator BMPT in all versions has a good tank level of armor protection and mobility, literally winning its place in the ranks of domestic armored vehicles. Actually, the BMPT was initially created, among other things, as an addition to tanks for hitting targets on hills. Two 30-mm machine guns with an elevation angle of up to 45 degrees are convincing enough to neutralize the enemy’s militaristic intentions in the window openings of high-rise buildings and on mountain slopes.

But at the same time, if the enemy is behind a reliable wall or other obstacle, then nevertheless, for our enemy to change his militaristic intentions to the desire to work peacefully fruitfully, we will need an argument weighing at least 20 kg, leaving the bore at a speed of 600–800 m/ With. Which, as already mentioned, is impossible with small-caliber artillery.


BMPT "Terminator" at the parade rehearsal. Photo by the author

Let's try to formulate what requirements a piece of equipment should meet and what properties and design features should have, which will increase the effectiveness of combat operations in mountainous and urban areas.

Let's call this sample an assault weapon.


SG 2S3 during classes in mountainous areas. Photos from open sources

– Howitzer 2A61 with an initial speed of OFS 540 m/s. The howitzer was produced in a small series at the turn of the 80s and 90s and was planned for adoption. If the set of 2A61 production equipment remained unsold as scrap metal, this would serve as a good help for the use of this system for armament of the Shotgun.


Howitzer 2A61. Photos from open sources

Thus, a 125 mm tank gun and a 152 mm caliber gun were selected as the main armament of the assault gun.

In terms of its general layout - appearance - the assault gun will be a tank with an enlarged turret/self-propelled gun. An enlarged turret is not only a grenade launcher’s dream, it is also an expanded possibility of layout solutions for the placement of weapons, ammunition, reconnaissance and surveillance equipment (the same drone with control), sighting, communication and other equipment. This is an opportunity to provide better working conditions for the crew.

Of course, the increase in the dimensions of the tower should be minimal and be directly dependent on ensuring the maximum possible vertical guidance angle weapons - it’s better, of course, to have an angle of at least 60 degrees, but the final verdict on the angle and dimensions of the turret can be made by a careful design drawing of the layout of the assault gun.


The experienced Italian ZSU "Otomatic" with significant elevation angles of an automatic 76,2 mm cannon could serve as an example of the general layout of an assault gun. Of course, without radar. Photos from open sources

At the current stage, until unified modern platforms (Armata, etc.) have been put into operation, the use of the T-72/90 heavy tracked tank platform for an assault gun has every reason. The platform has been mastered by industry and the military; there is positive experience in using it as a base for self-propelled domestic and foreign howitzers, that is, adapting a tank chassis for firing from large-caliber guns at high sights.


Experienced Italian self-propelled gun "Otomatic" on the "Leorard-1" chassis. Photos from open sources

The appearance of both versions of the assault gun - with calibers of 125 mm and 152 mm - will differ slightly, however, the internal design of the fighting compartments may have significant differences. This is due to significant weight and size differences in the breech parts of guns, shells and charges of both calibers and, therefore, differences in systems for storing, loading and removing spent cartridges. In this case, one of the main problems will be the process of loading guns, including at high elevation angles.

For the 125 mm caliber, automatic/mechanized loading within the “tank” range of 13 degrees has been reliably worked out for quite a long time. It was not possible to find information in the open press about the possibility of using AZ/MZ at increased loading angles, but it is possible that research on this topic was carried out at one time.

In any case, these problems will have to be solved either by modifying existing automatic machines/mechanisms, or by creating fundamentally new units, or by using semi-automatic loading, following the example of howitzer systems. For the 152 mm caliber, the semi-automatic loading system used will need to, at a minimum, fit into the tank ring diameter of 2 mm, and it is better, of course, to be fully automated.

The combat operation of an assault weapon in mountainous and/or urban conditions provides for various conditions of use. In mountainous conditions, mobility will be a priority, in urban conditions - security. The greatest mobility with the least weight, all other combat characteristics being equal, should correspond to the basic level of armor for an assault gun.

Apparently, the basic level should provide at least all-round protection from small-caliber artillery with a reinforced front part of the turret and hull, as well as reliable fastening and functioning of reinforcement elements - overhead armor panels, dynamic protection units, grilles, etc.

Obviously, a model of an assault weapon for direct conduct of operations in urban conditions should have the greatest security using the maximum set of reinforcements for all armor surfaces, as well as additional attachments - blades, an overhead roof and other elements.


T-90M tank at the parade rehearsal. Additional protection is clearly visible. Photo by the author


Remote control with a 12,7 mm Kord machine gun on the roof of a T-90M. Photo by the author

Obviously, the basic set of additional weapons for an assault gun should be the “gentleman’s set” of domestic tanks that has been tested for decades - a twin 7,62 mm PKT and a mobile machine gun mount on the roof of the turret. In our case, a mobile machine gun mount must clearly meet all modern requirements and achievements - be remotely controlled and equipped with all observation and aiming devices.

The caliber of the mobile installation is traditional 12,7 or 7,62 mm, and the PKT remote control will be preferred due to better mobility, and the effectiveness of the propeller cartridge in suppressing tank-dangerous infantry at distances of tens to hundreds of meters will be no worse than 12,7 mm ammunition.


A remote control with a 7,62 mm PKT machine gun on the roof of a T-14. Photo by the author

Thus, the enlarged turret of the assault gun makes it possible to place traditional machine guns, hypothetically - an installation with an AGS, and also hypothetically use a coaxial 30-mm gun with the main one - by analogy with the Bakhcha BM.

The advantages of such a pairing are obvious; the question is the structural compatibility of the operation of large- and small-caliber guns, while the 125-mm tank gun has aоbetter chances compared to the 152-mm howitzer for bringing to life a workable twin installation.

From time to time, at various times, reports appear about renewed interest in medium and large caliber anti-aircraft barrel systems, made at the modern technical level. Hypothetically, the SHO with a 125-mm tank gun could perform the functions of an anti-aircraft gun with external target designation and, of course, a corresponding anti-aircraft projectile. This version of the assault gun could serve as the basis for creating a full-fledged anti-aircraft gun mount.

Options for the assault gun, both with a 125 mm cannon and with a 152 mm howitzer, have their advantages. For the 125 mm caliber, this is, first of all, better flatness, rate of fire and more ammunition with a lower weight of the entire installation; for the 152 mm caliber, this is, of course, firepower.

Surely, the quantitative and qualitative composition of the advantages and disadvantages will not be limited to those listed above, but can be identified during the actual work on creating a weapon model.

If all stages required by the standards are successfully completed, the weapon sample will go into service with the troops.

Let's try to determine the place in the army structure that an assault weapon could occupy - in combined arms, mountain and specialized assault formations.

Obviously, it is hardly necessary to make the established structure of motorized rifle, mechanized regiments, brigades, as well as light infantry heavier by introducing specialized assault armored vehicles.

Based on the example of recent urban battles, it seems advisable to include the tactical formation of assault guns in the structure of the corps - army and assign separate units to motorized infantry as needed.

For example, an infantry company for combat operations in an urban area could be supported by an assigned platoon consisting of one or two units of maximum security guns, one Terminator BMPT and one or two main battle tanks. Three such platoons are a company, 3–6 companies are a battalion (regiment) directly subordinate to the corps. This battalion could specialize in conducting combat warfare in urban environments, and outside the city provide general fire support for its infantry.

If we consider the mountain infantry, it makes sense to include assault guns in the mountain formations themselves. In this case, a platoon could consist of two SHOs with a 125-mm cannon and light base armor and two Terminators, a company could also consist of three platoons. A company or even a battalion of assault guns with BMPT could be included in the mountain brigade/division as its own unit.

If we talk about specialized assault units, the creation of which is being discussed, units with assault guns should be directly included in their composition. In this case, it is even possible to use both versions of the SHO - with 125 mm and 152 mm systems.

The proposed assault brigade may include a ShO battalion (1-2 ShO platoon with a 125 mm cannon, Terminator, 1-2 MBT), as well as a ShO battalion (division) with a 152 mm howitzer, representing the assault brigade’s own heavy artillery and, if necessary, also involved in direct fire work.

Of course, all of the above are theoretical assumptions, and the entire article can be called food for thought.

If the customer deems it necessary to equip the Armed Forces with a vehicle specialized for work in mountainous and urban areas, these thoughts can be transformed, say, into the technical task of the R&D “Production of a prototype armored combat vehicle for hitting protected targets in an extended vertical range.”

Prototype, testing, fine-tuning, putting the product into production, again testing and fine-tuning, development, until the prototype becomes a full-fledged mountain tank, or a protected howitzer, or an urban assault vehicle. Or all of the above in one person.

Time will tell whether the topic of creating and developing an assault weapon will be developed.
51 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +6
    6 September 2023 05: 56
    Thus, a 125 mm tank gun and a 152 mm caliber gun were selected as the main armament of the assault gun.

    I think that the gun should be large-caliber, but not a tank one, but with medium or even low ballistics. Otherwise, to ensure large elevation angles, the trunnions must be placed very high and the tower will become prohibitively high, anti-aircraft guns will not even come close...
    1. +4
      6 September 2023 08: 20
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      not tank, but with medium or even low ballistics.

      In addition. Tank guns are smooth-bore, and it seems that they are not very good for howitzer-flat shooting. If not, sorry. I propose to consider the option of 115 mm guns from the T-62. Fortunately, there should be a lot of such shells in warehouses. And in general, to convert the T-62 into an assault gun. The new turret, a low-ballistic gun with high elevation angles, can be paired with a 30mm. Strengthen the defense. Chassis in warehouses is still enough for rework.
      1. +2
        6 September 2023 09: 17
        A section was dropped from the publication, considering the choice of guns-100, 115, 120,122mm, etc., in short, the number of calibers must be reduced both in the army and in the unit
      2. -2
        6 September 2023 09: 26
        Quote: man in the street
        In addition. Tank guns are smooth-bore, and it seems that they are not very good for howitzer-flat shooting. If not, sorry.

        Yes, they are normal, just an HE shell with drop-down stabilizers is much, maybe several times more expensive than a simple one ... And the survivability of the barrel is also within reasonable limits, because the propellant charge is almost two times weaker than for "scrap". But there will be a unification of a hypothetical machine for ammunition with tanks.
        1. +6
          6 September 2023 10: 42
          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          I think that the gun should be large-caliber, but not tank, but with medium or even low ballistics.

          Quite right. Moreover, now we need to think first of all about an assault self-propelled gun / tank with 152 mm. projectile to support assault units during the assault on cities, fortified areas, industrial zones, etc. You don't have to think about mountains. And the caliber of an assault self-propelled gun / tank should be exactly 152 mm. A 125 mm. MBT already has it and it will be quite enough for us. But we need BMPT \ ShMPP (assault infantry support vehicle) in the form of "Terminator" and "Terminator-2" right now and in the most commercial quantities. At least 40% of the total number of MBTs. This can be achieved by installing the BMPT combat module on the MBT hulls of earlier versions, which are quite enough at the storage bases. And do it according to the BMPT-72 "Terminator-2" version - without grenade launchers, and possibly even on the basis of T-55 hulls (UVZ already presented this version 10-15 years ago, offering this version to all operators of Soviet tanks).
          About assault self-propelled guns / tanks.
          To speed up the process of designing, testing, adopting, saturating the troops with them and providing ammunition without unnecessary headaches, I propose to use a 152 mm rifled gun on such ShSAU \ ShBT. reduced ballistics. So that you can use conventional HE shells of regular artillery and not create logistical problems. The task of these assault guns is to disassemble highly fortified enemy positions and capital buildings under the cover of BMPT, with the support of assault units.
          So, from all of the above, the author really needs to get just such a ShSAU \ ShBT today, and to speed up the process - based on the chassis of an existing tank, with 152 mm. low ballistics gun and under the existing OFS. In fact, we need to make a new turret with a new (based on a shortened existing) gun, and install it on the existing shoulder strap.
          And yes - to provide the maximum possible protection without critical overweight, so that mobility remains high enough.
          About tactics of application.
          MBT in support of assault operations will play the role of 125 mm. sniper rifle, from a relatively safe distance hitting enemy firing points, military equipment and as a maneuverable fire reserve.
          BMPT / ShMPP and ShSAU / ShBT should provide direct support to assault infantry, while creating a high density of fire, the BMPT should suppress tank-dangerous infantry (including behind an obstacle) without giving it the opportunity to raise its heads while ShSAU / ShBT will dismantle their fortifications, buildings, structures. Moreover, it is enough for such equipment to now appear in the battle formations of our assault infantry, they themselves already know how to use this technique - rich experience in assault operations has been accumulated, but there is an acute shortage of appropriate tools.
          On the structure and location of assault formations / units / subunits.
          I think no one needs to be convinced that such a species as assault infantry has not only proved its right to life ... Life itself and 1,5 years of NWO have proved the urgent need to have an ENOUGH number of specially trained, armed and equipped assault formations / units \ divisions. Therefore, I believe that in the composition of each classical combined arms (and tank) division, there should be an assault brigade (in extreme cases, a regiment). With a division of three brigades. These brigades should include a tank battalion / company on MBT, a battalion / company on ShSAU / ShBT, a battalion / company of BMPT / ShMPP and TBTR based on 2 - 3 battalions.
          I repeat - each combined-arms (motorized rifle) and tank division of the RF Armed Forces should have an assault brigade, in extreme cases, a regiment. With all regular heavy weapons. This brigade / regiment should become the core and main striking force during assault operations. and we have a lot of such assaults in the next 10 years. All the production forces of the country's tank-building and tank-repair plants must be deployed to 100%, and if necessary (and it (the need) is obvious), expanded and new ones created. The priority when creating armored vehicles for the infantry should be its security and survivability of the crew and troops. Including mine protection). And the rejection of the functions of waterfowl for infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers, because we already have floating in bulk ... but in real conditions no one swims on it.
          Emphasis on the production of TBTRs (and TBMPs based on them) on the chassis of existing MBTs and with the same level of tank protection.
          All equipment should be designed on chassis existing in production and maximum unification with existing equipment in order to reduce development and refinement time, reduce production and launch costs, ensure the least difficulty with launching into a series and ensure maximum volumes of their production per unit of time.
          1. -1
            6 September 2023 13: 24
            Absolutely right. Moreover, we now need to think first of all about an assault self-propelled gun/tank with 152 mm. a projectile to support assault units during the assault on cities, fortified areas, industrial zones, etc.

            What kind of assault self-propelled guns are there, especially in the city?
            What are you talking about IT forgot?

            1. -1
              7 September 2023 16: 16
              Terry, small-town Bendor propaganda.

              Why post content on the resource with voiceover text:
              “Showed good results in repelling Russian aggression against Ukraine.”
              It's a Nazi stamp!

              And even with such a sad video (of our burnt equipment).
              It reminded me of the reports of the 90s, corrupt journalists, the ethnic Russophobe-oligarch Gusinsky.
              Then, even his media holding (NTV), flooded the air with the corpses of burnt Russian tankers in Grozny.
              You can't do that.
              1. -2
                7 September 2023 20: 13
                Quote: Comrade Kim
                It reminded me of the reports of the 90s, corrupt journalists, the ethnic Russophobe-oligarch Gusinsky.
                Then, even his media holding (NTV), flooded the air with the corpses of burnt Russian tankers in Grozny.
                You can't do that.

                To the wrong address of the claim about the photo and video of the burnt Russian tankers in Grozny, the journalists were just doing their job and risking their lives reporting from hot spots.
              2. 0
                7 September 2023 22: 44
                Terry, small-town Bendor propaganda.

                Why post content on the resource with voiceover text:
                “Showed good results in repelling Russian aggression against Ukraine.”
                It's a Nazi stamp!

                And even with such a sad video (of our burnt equipment).
                It reminded me of the reports of the 90s, corrupt journalists, the ethnic Russophobe-oligarch Gusinsky.
                Then, even his media holding (NTV), flooded the air with the corpses of burnt Russian tankers in Grozny.
                You can't do that.

                Unfortunately, I couldn’t find a video with a detailed description of the complex and without any propaganda at all, but here there is a minimum of it.
                But essentially I agree with you. hi
          2. 0
            6 September 2023 14: 40
            The best comment in the topic, although not on the topic))
          3. -5
            6 September 2023 19: 19
            This can be achieved by installing the BMPT combat module on the MBT hulls of earlier versions, which are quite enough at the storage bases.

            As a result, we get a tank chassis with a cardboard combat module. Isn't it easier not to block this module, but to squeeze the beloved 2A42 into the tank turret?
    2. +2
      6 September 2023 13: 17
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      but not tank-like, but with medium or even low ballistics

      It is possible to redesign the 2S3 into a more protected body with a front-mounted MTO and the ability to load the power supply unit from the ground.
      1. 0
        15 October 2023 20: 12
        It is impossible to redesign the 2S3, the chassis and the self-propelled guns themselves have not been produced for a long time, the new equipment should have maximum unification with serial models until the Armata is developed, the T72/90 is, in fact, the only heavy tracked base
  2. +3
    6 September 2023 08: 10
    The history of KV-2 teaches that it teaches nothing request
    The text of your comment is too short and in the opinion of the site administration does not carry useful information.
    1. 0
      6 September 2023 09: 22
      Speaking about the concept of assault guns, it should be borne in mind that, historically, an assault gun has developed as the largest caliber for firing within a kilometer, that is, it is a short and thick barrel with the name MORTIRA. and it would be nice for us to create something similar at the modern level. And then if you set the task of hitting a target (for example, a high-rise prop) with one shot, then the most optimal would be a self-propelled gun with a muzzle-loading mortar and one round of ammunition, this will greatly simplify and facilitate the design of self-propelled guns, and reduce the crew to two people. . By the way, in the museums of the world there are trunks of medieval mortars, there are even calibers up to 320 mm with a weight of up to 1943 tons,
    2. +2
      6 September 2023 09: 29
      Quote: Adrey
      The history of KV-2 teaches that it teaches nothing

      But the history of the SU-152, "Brummbars" and "Sturmtigers" teaches, have you heard about this?
      1. 0
        6 September 2023 11: 00
        Quote: Vladimir_2U
        But the history of the SU-152, "Brummbars" and "Sturmtigers" teaches, have you heard about this?

        That's what I'm talking about. During the Second World War, designers of all warring parties came to the same conclusions. Either an adequately armored fixed cabin or a lightly armored turret (often open at the top). Well, either the KV-2 with its limited firing and rotation of the turret in a roll, or even prohibitive roll angles of the machine (otherwise the turret will simply fly off into the forces of its mass) hi
        1. 0
          6 September 2023 11: 32
          Quote: Adrey
          That's what I'm talking about. In the Second World War, the designers of all the warring parties came to the same conclusions. Either an adequately armored fixed cabin or a lightly armored turret (often open at the top).

          And, I decided that the claim to calibers. hi But in defense of 152 mm tanks, I’ll write that the gun for the KV was chosen unsuccessfully and the shoulder strap was too small for a gun with a rollback to fit into it at normal elevation angles. (for modern tanks, the gun fits into the shoulder strap)
          1. +3
            6 September 2023 12: 00
            Quote: Vladimir_2U
            And, I decided that the claim to calibers.

            No, in general, to the article. I understand, of course, that everyone has the right to "flight of thought", but I'll try to add "bucket fly in the ointment with honey" laughing
            So we want STORM SPG with caliber 152 with elevation angle 70*(!). OK.
            Since it is an assault, we mean combat use with all-round shelling. Of course, it would be nice to have all-round booking, but we will reasonably dwell on the principles of MBT. In these parameters, even using a non-existent shortened gun with medium-low ballistics, a tower of great height and size will be required. Do we armor like a tank (and the MBT has a turret, for a moment, the most armored part)? Of course, we will storm! And we have a big tower, it will fly into it "mom don't worry", so we're booking it like an MBT (or another "cardboard". Is it on it and for an assault? ..). And now the weight of this colossus? And the resulting power (dimensions, weight) of the units for its functioning, so that it would at least rotate at a speed of 30 * per second. And how will we stop with her wild inertia? At what roll angles of the machine can it really work? At what angles will it simply fly off the shoulder strap under its own weight? Will we strengthen the turret box, or will it do? The total weight of the machine? Tons so 70-80? What will we move and at what speed? Will the chassis of serial MBT images be pulled or will we sculpt a new one?
            They will develop this for 15 years for an ohreliard of money, so that later they can look and make sure that the concept is not viable and throw it in the trash (greetings from Oka and Capacitor).
            And so, yes ... We discuss further laughing
            1. +2
              6 September 2023 14: 48
              Quote: Adrey
              So, we want an ASSAULT self-propelled gun with a caliber of 152 with an elevation angle of 70*(!).

              It's cool, yes) Isn't it clear to people that heavy guns can't be dragged to the front line now? There is simply no time to carry them, deploy them, prepare for battle ... Any such device will be destroyed by missiles. They have ten times less delivery and combat deployment time, no matter how the engine puffs)
              Now an assault gun is a system capable of destroying not a fortification, but an arrow behind it, an autonomous combat module, etc. There is only time for rapid movements, two or three shots and move, move! Even our tanks are not particularly capable of this now, but here let's still fence monsters)
              1. +2
                6 September 2023 15: 04
                Quote: Mikhail3
                Cool, yes) Is it really not clear to people

                Yes, you can understand them ... Seeing our "successes" in the "strange operation", they are trying to find accessible and "painless" reasons for them. Well, they kind of find it ("grenades we have the wrong system"), as well as ways to solve the problem in the form of another "wunderwaffle" request
            2. -1
              6 September 2023 18: 05
              Quote: Adrey
              Do we armor like a tank (and the MBT has a turret, for a moment, the most armored part)?

              It is not necessary, like a tank, if only because this machine does not need to resist crowbars, even theoretically.
              Quote: Adrey
              even using a non-existent shortened gun with medium-low ballistics, a tower of great height and size will be required
              What for? You don’t get fooled by the Otomatic tower, there are three crew members, electronics and radar consoles, and most importantly, a very high rate of fire was needed in ANY position of the gun, in an assault tank all this is not required and you can load the gun at some optimal position of the barrel.
        2. -2
          7 September 2023 21: 20
          We need a self-propelled gun with projectile-proof armor for a simple-shaped wheelhouse with mounted dynamic armor on the sides and spaced armoring of the wheelhouse roof against drones and anti-tank systems. To guarantee that the self-propelled gun could only be hit by an artillery shell.
          A 2s19 gun from Msta-s, a T-72 chassis or even a T-55. It is possible to produce on both chassis, the option of replacing the turret with a fixed wheelhouse. A sort of variant of a mobilization self-propelled gun, there is no point for tanks with a PDO to shoot and waste the resource of their guns.
          1. 0
            15 October 2023 20: 25
            2A65 Msta cannot be used due to the long barrel - more than 47 klb, this is not much for a howitzer, but excessive for an assault gun
        3. 0
          15 October 2023 20: 22
          The designers of all the warring parties were forced to use fixed cuttings due to the insufficient number of suitable rotary lathes. After the war, with the improvement of the production base, ALL countries switched to self-propelled guns with a rotating turret. To be honest, this happened almost simultaneously with the extinction of the concept of anti-tank self-propelled guns, but it's more of a coincidence
  3. +2
    6 September 2023 09: 07

    Shooting at targets overhead is not a daily task, and it’s not reasonable to drive a special car for this No.
    But once in the mountains or in the city, then there is a need for entire divisions capable of fighting targets on the hills fellow
    Alternatively, it would be easier to create tank blocks of C13 missiles that can be placed on turrets on the sides of the tower with the possibility of lifting them at an angle of at least 90 degrees.
    1. +1
      6 September 2023 19: 13
      Quote: Eroma

      Shooting at targets overhead is not a daily task, and it’s not reasonable to drive a special car for this No.
      But once in the mountains or in the city, then there is a need for entire divisions capable of fighting targets on the hills fellow
      Alternatively, it would be easier to create tank blocks of C13 missiles that can be placed on turrets on the sides of the tower with the possibility of lifting them at an angle of at least 90 degrees.

      And when an armor-piercing incendiary bullet hits this very block of missiles, your tank will come to full non-combat readiness
    2. +1
      7 September 2023 14: 46
      Perhaps, but the C13 needs to be installed, protected, connected to a sight, equipped with a drive, and much more. And, as it happens, at the most inopportune moment, a truck with blocks before mounting on a turret will disappear somewhere, the turret itself will be bent, and you still need to shoot, and the C13s themselves are from another, non-land department. It seems to me that it’s easier and more practical to request the SHO and housing at the right time
  4. +3
    6 September 2023 09: 48
    A possible solution would be to create a 152 mm PAT-S howitzer turret for the T-90 hull with conveyor loading like Leclerc. Insulate the laying in the tower. It won't be big, but do you need more? As already mentioned, this machine is extremely specific and a large number is not needed. To protect against tanks, it makes sense to install additional anti-tank systems.

    The second more realistic option is to armor the 57 mm Baikal module and install it on a tank. Yes, the shells are not so powerful, but it would be enough to demolish a firing point with 10 shots.
    I don’t see the point in talking about tank shells with air blasting. They have been needed for a long time.

    In general, it's time to create assault regiments for battles in city blocks. In particular, they should have tools of great power, like a peony and a tulip, as well as sunbeams. UR-77 is also there.
  5. +3
    6 September 2023 10: 02
    And who will have such equipment in the state?
    A separate assault company in the MST brigade? Or what or how do you even see?
    Why 125 mm, you can have a cheap 120 mm, with a barrel from nona / vein / lotus / hosts ... Cheap, you can hit it with direct fire and a canopy, a large selection of ammunition. OFZ, cassette, smoke, lighting, high-precision.
    Well, or 152. But 152 has disadvantages - large dimensions, small BC ...
    1. 0
      15 October 2023 20: 26
      Read the article, then comment
  6. +2
    6 September 2023 11: 25
    Amazingly "dirty" thinking. Not in the sense of bad, but heavily littered, unfocused, the line of reasoning falls to the sides all the time. To begin with, it was necessary to formulate requirements, and not to poke howitzers into the method. Then briefly justify why this particular requirement was included in the list. Then suggest solutions according to the list. Having laid out the solutions in sequence, proceed to the layout of weapons ...
    Anyway, okay. It is ridiculous to expect schools and skills from modern thinkers. From the fact that I raked (everything, of course, I was too lazy, it's not worth it) this attracted attention
    redundant - as sighting and navigation equipment

    No, tree-stick! They are not redundant! They are simply not suitable for the task at hand! Without formulating the requirements, the author casually dismisses the most important thing. What to do, such "training", even began to look for a place in the army hierarchy ... And navigation, for positioning, highly desirable ultra-precise, is urgently needed, and only the sighting system ...
    The system should work as follows. This thing will have a little life time in battle anyway, hence the high speed and maneuverability, as well as a short time to hit the target. In rockets, this task is solved by systems of the "fire and forget" type, that is, with each shot we smash to smithereens (and it's good if it's on a target, not on a wall) rather advanced computer capacities. This is wasteful, especially when their production is not very good.
    So the shot should be prepared and fired like this. The device flies into the zone of the limits of destruction of the target. The operator clings to the target marker. Immediately, within two, maximum five tenths of a second, a shot should follow. Then the aiming navigation system comes into play. Navigation detects the place where the operator directed the marker, and keeps it, despite the movement of the machine, including recoil, smoke, dust, changing the target as a result of its destruction by a shot. That is, the navigation should immediately become attached to something that allows you to "keep zero".
    The aiming system rotates the barrel so that it is always directed optimally to hit the aiming point with, for example, two more projectiles. Such an assault complex system would be worth the money spent. Alas, it does not seem that the Moscow Region has at least an understanding of what exactly needs to be ordered, judging by such articles ...
    1. 0
      15 October 2023 20: 30
      Do you really think the ZSU sighting and navigation equipment is fully functional for a ground self-propelled gun?
  7. +2
    6 September 2023 12: 35
    Time will tell whether the topic of creating and developing an assault weapon will be developed.

    Taking the city by storm is like overcoming the Mannerheim Line head-on, heavy losses are guaranteed. Moreover, the city, like any fortified area, will eventually be destroyed.
    This tactic is only suitable when advancing by the front, when you do not have enough forces to cover the flanks when enveloping or encircling an object, which is typical for the Northern Military District, but this is not a normal war, this is a limited operation, there is no need to transpose its conditions to a real war.
    In a normal war, you will surround a fortified area (city), cut off supplies and systematically destroy the fortifications with heavy weapons until the garrison surrenders, undertaking minimal assault actions (cleansing) on ​​the ruins of the fortifications. Concrete-piercing bombs of 1500 and 5000 caliber are enough to destroy even very strong defensive structures, so you are unlikely to need 152 mm guns with a high elevation angle, there will be nowhere to rise there. But specially trained assault groups are really needed, however, the same training is needed in field fortifications.
    1. 0
      6 September 2023 14: 24
      In 1943 you would have been the first in the course with that answer. Can you tell me where to find a "normal war" now? And at the same time - who needs it and why?
    2. 0
      6 September 2023 16: 34
      I completely agree with Ilya, which I cannot say about the author of the article. Since the “assault” trend is now in vogue, it implies at least numerical superiority, possession of the initiative on the battlefield and determination to achieve the goal at any cost. And still, both the author and the commentators assume special assault (read anyway infantry) units. And no matter how this infantry is called, it needs, first of all, universal means of target designation for any weapon. Whether it's a portable ATGM, a flamethrower, a grenade launcher; tank, howitzer with "Krasnopol" or "Tulip" with adjustable ammunition; helicopter, attack aircraft or carrier FAB-5000. "You need to be softer towards people, and look wider at questions!" soldier
  8. -1
    6 September 2023 14: 09
    As a support weapon, old tanks are very well suited, which are replaced by new ones and there is no need to invent too much. T 54, T 62 and early T72 are simply wonderful assault guns (of course, after a major overhaul and retrofitting with modern optics, electronics and protection)
  9. 0
    6 September 2023 14: 28
    No need to overthink. Something like the good old Acacia is quite enough, only with enhanced armor. Reinforced not to the anti-projectile level, but at least to keep the fragments from close breaks of the enemy counter-battery. Including the top.

    Shooting direct fire with a 152 mm projectile is completely redundant. A modern FCS on a howitzer, with the inclusion of a unit in the general CICS, is enough, and it will be possible to accurately and quickly throw shells into the embrasures of enemy pillboxes from a closed firing position, on the tip of assault groups or drone guides.
    1. 0
      16 October 2023 07: 37
      Acacia is a self-propelled gun balanced for its time, balanced for its main task - firing with PDO, any change in the design will entail a deterioration in other characteristics, and - most importantly - Acacia has not been produced for a long time, and those available in the troops have enough of their own work.
      Regarding the throwing of shells with PDO into embrasures through the BIUS of units, read the FCS textbook, section “Dispersing shells”
  10. -2
    6 September 2023 19: 08
    As a result, something with cardboard armor will go in the same ranks with tanks and BMPTs. Such an idea.
    In the USA, they made it easier and added a course corrector to the 155mm howitzer projectile. As a result, the howitzer puts shells in the right house without coming close.
  11. +1
    6 September 2023 20: 10
    For urban battles, you need something like a Sturmtiger launcher capable of throwing a very large charge over a relatively short distance
  12. +1
    6 September 2023 20: 26
    Equipment will not be superfluous and self-propelled guns must be produced, but ... Let's just calculate the total weight of the gun and the maximum number of shells fired by it. We isolate from it the weight of explosives and gunpowder. And then we compare the weight of metal and gunpowder for the delivery of the same amount of explosives by rockets. The comparison will not be in favor of self-propelled guns.
    .
    Previously, missiles lost exactly. But now the electronics allow each missile to hit the target. And the cheapness of modern electronics makes it possible to equip every rocket with it. Moreover, electronics for a rocket are simpler than analogues for shells. And cheaper. Especially when you consider that such missiles will be needed hundreds and thousands of times less than shells.
    So the prospect is for individual-guided missiles delivered to the front line by robotic minicars one or two at a time. And then, the second missile is a means of delivering reconnaissance equipment and a radio signal repeater to the area of ​​\uXNUMXb\uXNUMXbthe intended target ...
    .
    A self-propelled gun projectile has only one advantage - it cannot be shot down like a rocket. The shell is too strong.
    In addition, target designation for a robotic gun is much simpler: you only need to transfer the azimuth and elevation angle, and all calculations are carried out away from it.
  13. +1
    6 September 2023 21: 18
    It seems that the author of this crazy opus never thought about the main problem of the tank in the building .. And this is never a small elevation angle .. And not even a lack of armor ... This is a six-meter length of the gun, coupled with four meters of the width of the tank itself . FSË! In order to freely turn the turret - if you please, find a free circle 16 meters in diameter ... At least ... Well, ammunition in combat ... Where from this sore subject ... And as for the lack of power of 30 mm ammunition ... The Americans decided the issue for Bradley. - Remote detonation and other perversions with a fuse, allowing a wall of one and a half bricks to break through and explode inside .. And in general, if we are already talking about a car for war in the city, Bradley is worth a closer look. Compact, protected, well armed ... And in general, judging by this video, Ukrainians climb them where they are afraid to climb on tanks ..
  14. +1
    6 September 2023 23: 50
    The best assault weapon. This is a cool armored tank. With a working KAZ.
  15. +2
    7 September 2023 09: 30
    I agree with the author that a larger caliber is better for buildings. In Bakhmut, self-propelled guns with Krasnopol worked well on fortifications, and Peonies with Granyu were also used. It’s easier to approach a stormtrooper with a laser pointer than to fit a heavy idiot for direct fire. Or even direct from Orlan. To support infantry with direct fire and create fire density, you need a Terminator 3 with 57 mm and machine guns. A hell of a 21st century thresher, the perfect balance between firepower and speed.
  16. +2
    7 September 2023 10: 28
    The main thing for the BT is that it can complete the combat mission. What prevents you from completing this task at SVO? Artillery, ATGM and mines. The first and second ones interfere with clearing mines. If you neutralize the UAV, the effectiveness of artillery will decrease by an order of magnitude. To do this, you need something like ZAK Derivation of Air Defense, it can also perform the functions of a BMPT. To reduce the threat of ATGMs, a short-range KAZ is needed. Long-range KAZ has many disadvantages - high cost, radio visibility, vulnerability, etc.
    How I see the use of BT - For landing troops, heavy infantry fighting vehicles based on tanks with multi-layer protection, armored protection and KAZ are needed. To suppress firing points, BT and infantry by direct fire - tanks with KAZ. For the destruction of UAVs, aviation, BT and infantry BMPT-ZAK.
  17. 0
    7 September 2023 15: 40
    If modern trends continue to be trends (the use of tanks and minimization of tank-tank battles), then you need to think about returning rifled guns to the tank. For example 130mm. It is comparable in power and weight, but more powerful in terms of RP effects. Some kind of crowbar or cumulative will bring a lot of trouble to the enemy tank. But for assault purposes and shooting with PDO it is much better.
  18. 0
    7 September 2023 20: 36
    Isn't it easier to solve emerging problems by expanding the range of ammunition for existing systems?
    For 152-mm self-propelled guns, it is possible to develop an ATGM launched through the barrel and thus solve the problem with the direct shot range and also equip it with a thermobaric charge.
    Develop a projectile with remote detonation for self-propelled guns and thereby increase the effectiveness of fire on enemy manpower.
    For the BMP-3, adapt a proximity fuse for the 100 and 130 mm AR-21 M2 high-explosive fragmentation projectile to the new Cherry projectile.
    For the automatic 82-mm mortar 2B9 "Vasilek" to develop a cumulative fragmentation ammunition capable of penetrating the roofs of dugouts.
    And so on, in the same spirit.
    Sights are being improved, even on the example of the BMP-2M, where on the Berezhok module, it seems, they got rid of a separate remote control for ATGMs. Which in theory allows you to increase the capabilities of 152-mm self-propelled guns without much piling up.
    1. 0
      7 September 2023 20: 47
      Amazing! The minus appeared before I had time to re-read what I had written. Author, isn’t it you who’s playing around like that? If so, at least justify your agility!
      1. 0
        7 September 2023 20: 56
        You correctly express your point of view on solving a common problem, I see no reason for minuses, in any case, it's not me
  19. -3
    9 September 2023 13: 08
    Let's invent "Nona" again? No, but what? The main thing is that it has no analogues in the world!