Self-propelled gun 2S31 "Vena" in Special Operations: for the first time in combat

64
Self-propelled gun 2S31 "Vena" in Special Operations: for the first time in combat
JSC "Vena" in the area of ​​​​Artemovsk


As part of the current Special Operation to protect Donbass, a variety of domestically developed artillery systems, including the most interesting samples, are being tested in practice. Thus, the other day it became known that the 2S31 Vena self-propelled artillery gun is now participating in battles. The appearance of such equipment at the front is a good sign and indicates the continued development of artillery - and the growth of its fire capabilities.



For the first time on the screen


The appearance of “Vena” in the combat zone was first reported by the Rossiya 1 TV channel. On September 14, the evening edition of Vesti published a report dedicated to this self-propelled gun and its combat use. It showed at least one of the combat vehicles involved in the Special Operation, and also talked about the specifics of its use. The movement of the self-propelled gun along a dirt road was demonstrated. Unfortunately, the shooting was not shown.

Reportedly, several 2S31 products some time ago entered one of the combat units of the airborne troops participating in the operation. A unit using such equipment operates in the area of ​​Artemovsk (DPR) and strikes the enemy. The details of this application, for obvious reasons, are not specified.

The high efficiency of modern self-propelled guns and its advantages over similar equipment of the previous generation are noted. Thus, the “Vena” compares favorably with the older “Nona” with an improved gun, an improved fire control system and an increased ammunition load. All this gives a significant increase in combat qualities.


To date, paratroopers-artillerymen have accumulated some experience in the use of self-propelled guns 2S31. Now they expect that the number of such equipment in the troops will increase. Along with it, the efficiency of the relevant units and artillery as a whole will increase.

Way to the troops


In the early eighties, the newest 120-mm SAO 2S9 “Nona-S” entered service with the Soviet Airborne Forces. Soon such equipment was used in battles in Afghanistan, during which it confirmed the calculated characteristics and showed high efficiency. Based on the results of this, the USSR Ministry of Defense ordered the development of a similar combat vehicle for the ground forces.

Work on the new theme “Vienna” began in the second half of the eighties. The Perm Machine-Building Plant (now Motovilikha Plants) and the Central Research Institute Tochmash were responsible for the development of the project as a whole. The new line of ammunition was designed by the State Research and Production Enterprise Basalt.

The design of Vienna continued until the mid-nineties. In 1995, two prototypes were built according to the project, which were then put to testing. At the beginning of 1997, at the IDEX exhibition in the UAE, the self-propelled gun was first shown to the public. During the 2007s, the self-propelled guns underwent the necessary set of tests and fine-tuning. State tests were completed only in XNUMX.

According to known data, "Vienna" received a recommendation for adoption. An experimental batch of such equipment was manufactured, and in 2010 it was handed over to the troops. However, full-fledged mass production was not launched. During that period, the Ministry of Defense was finalizing and improving the artillery weapons system of the ground forces, and also worked out plans for the future. For one reason or another, there was no place for the self-propelled gun 2S31, and the purchase of serial equipment did not begin.


However, “Vienna” attracted the interest of a foreign customer. At that time, Azerbaijan was actively ordering various Russian-made military equipment and, together with other models, decided to purchase the SAO 2S31. He was supplied with 18 production cars.

As it now turns out, by now the Russian army has changed its attitude towards “Vienna”. This combat vehicle was considered suitable, at a minimum, for testing in real combat conditions. Several of these self-propelled guns are involved in the Special Operations and further production and re-equipment of artillery units is possible.

Unification and universality


The 2S31 "Vena" product is a tracked combat vehicle with a fully rotatable turret, equipped with a 120 mm rifled gun and other systems. The self-propelled gun is built using a number of off-the-shelf components. Other products were made by upgrading existing ones, and a number of systems were developed specifically for Vienna.

The self-propelled gun is built on a modified tracked chassis of the self-propelled gun 2S18 "Pat" - a modification of the BMP-3 chassis. In the version for Vienna, such a chassis has a welded armored hull with bulletproof and anti-fragmentation protection from all angles. The layout of the hull has not changed fundamentally in comparison with previous models: the control compartment is located in the bow, the fighting compartment is located behind it, and the engine and transmission compartment remains in the stern.

2S31 is equipped with a UTD-29 diesel engine with a power of 450 hp. The mechanical transmission transmits torque to the stern drive wheels. The chassis has six road wheels per side with torsion bar suspension. The maximum speed on the highway is more than 70 km/h. To move through the water, there is a pair of water cannons in the rear of the hull.


The Vienna uses a 120mm rifled “universal” 2A80 gun. Due to the use of different ammunition, it is capable of performing the functions of a cannon, howitzer or mortar. The design of the tower provides circular guidance horizontally and vertically from -4° to +80°. Depending on the type of ammunition, a firing range of 12-14 km is achieved.

The 2A80 gun uses a wide range of ammunition for various purposes. A line of 120 mm shells was developed for it for firing in cannon or howitzer mode. It is also possible to use existing mortar shells of this caliber. It is noteworthy that the Vienna can fire both domestic and similar foreign ammunition. Ammunition stowage - 70 shells. In addition, there is a hatch on the side of the fighting compartment for firing shots from the ground.

SAO "Vena" differs from products of the "Nona" family by improved fire control means. The fire control system includes sights of various types for shooting in daylight and dark, both direct fire and from closed positions. The standard laser rangefinder can be used to guide guided projectiles. The control system has a ballistic computer, the memory of which stores data on a wide range of projectiles. Inertial and satellite navigation tools are integrated. It is possible to enter the coordinates of up to 30 targets for subsequent calculation of data for shooting.

Addition and replacement


Thus, the Russian army began to use another modern piece of equipment in the Special Operation - the 2S31 Vena self-propelled artillery gun. A certain number of combat vehicles of this type complement other barrel systems of different calibers and participate in solving common problems. This reportedly achieves high performance and efficiency.


"Vienna" and deputy commander of the self-propelled artillery division in which she serves

The advantages of the Vienna, as well as the older universal 120 mm systems, are well known. Self-propelled guns of this family have high mobility and are able to quickly enter or leave a firing position. At the same time, a special weapon allows you to fire in different modes, performing the functions of a system of three different classes at once. In essence, the 2S31 product is an addition or replacement for 120 mm self-propelled mortars and 122 mm howitzers. At the same time, it is inferior to systems of larger caliber in terms of firing range and projectile power.

The modern "Vienna" also has obvious advantages over the old "Nona-S". First of all, they are associated with the use of a modern fire control system, which has all the necessary functions and increases the efficiency of fire. In addition, a modified BMP-3 chassis is used, thereby achieving a greater degree of unification with the existing ground forces fleet.

However, there are still problems with realizing the full technical potential of the SAO 2S31. The number of such equipment, as far as is known, remains small. To re-equip artillery units and correspondingly increase the potential of artillery, full-fledged mass production is required. Perhaps it has already started and/or is gaining momentum, and all its results will appear in the foreseeable future.

New experience


The special operation shows that artillery maintains its position and remains the most important component of the ground forces. The army needs systems of different classes and calibers with various capabilities. In particular, universal systems like the modern “Vena” or the older “Nona-S” have high potential.

After many years of uncertainty, the self-propelled gun 2S31 "Vena" finally ends up in combat units and is used in real combat conditions. The combat vehicle shows high performance and confirms the correctness of the chosen technical solutions. It should be expected that the new operating and application experience gained during the Special Operation will have a positive impact on the future fate of the Vienna and will help it take its place in the troops.
64 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. -3
    20 September 2023 04: 32
    Well... a good "increase" in battalion artillery... universal.
    Well, just again... how much more convenient would this installation be for crew actions if it had been created on the basis of the BMP-3 "Manul" chassis
    1. 0
      20 September 2023 08: 09
      Quote: svp67
      how much more convenient would this installation be for crew operations if it had been created on the basis of the BMP-3 “Manul” chassis?

      Justify! "Pallas cat" still exists in "talks" and in a couple of prototypes! There is no practical experience in operating these machines!
      1. +3
        20 September 2023 14: 03
        Quote: Nikolaevich I
        Justify!

        Yes, there is nothing to justify here. The front engine position allows for very convenient access to the fighting compartment for landing and disembarking, loading ammunition and servicing the artillery system
        Here's how on the M119 self-propelled guns

        Quote: Nikolaevich I
        "Pallas cat" still exists in "conversations" and in a couple of prototypes

        VERY unfortunately. Before it there was the Dragoon, also with a front-mounted MTO.

        The weakness of our industrial base, specifically at the Kurgan plant, which has now barely been able to organize mass production of the BMP-3, the vehicle of which has been produced for more than 40 years... there.
    2. -15
      20 September 2023 08: 23
      convenience in the army (?) wassat
      - it’s like: I like the helmet because it weighs 1 kg and wears for a long time - only it doesn’t even hold fragments - that’s why it’s comfortable and my head doesn’t sweat
      the army needs practicality, and inconveniences will be endured and trampled on
      1. +14
        20 September 2023 09: 08
        Quote: Romario_Argo
        convenience in the army (?) wassat
        - it’s like: I like the helmet because it weighs 1 kg and wears for a long time - only it doesn’t even hold fragments - that’s why it’s comfortable and my head doesn’t sweat
        the army needs practicality, and inconveniences will be endured and trampled on

        Naturally. For the military, war is work. Very difficult or difficult with irregular working hours. With fatigue, a person’s performance capacity decreases, and convenience makes it possible to reduce this very fatigue, and therefore increase the soldier’s combat effectiveness.
        1. -2
          20 September 2023 09: 36
          I think that with the advent of an exoskeleton in equipment, the situation will change
          and the exoskeleton will relieve the weight of the armored helmet (BSHK-5 weight 4,5 kg) from Armocom Vulcan-5 with visor and aventail, the helmet holds PS 7,62x39, PP 5,45x39 bullets (protection class Br4)
          + the visor (Br2) also weighs 1,8 kg, + the aventail weighs 0,6 kg (Br2) only 7 kg - just rub (!)
      2. +1
        23 September 2023 14: 32
        Quote: Romario_Argo
        convenience in the army (?) wassat
        - it’s like: I like the helmet because it weighs 1 kg and wears for a long time - only it doesn’t even hold fragments - that’s why it’s comfortable and my head doesn’t sweat
        the army needs practicality, and inconveniences will be endured and trampled on
        fool
    3. 0
      25 September 2023 16: 38
      Why do we need Pallas's cat for the art system? For an infantry fighting vehicle, it is controversial, on the one hand, the engine can protect the troops, on the other hand, without the engine, the vehicle will not go anywhere and the enemy will always be able to finish it off, but in theory, the troops can either run away or jump onto the armor of other infantry fighting vehicles in the platoon and continue moving, and loading and unloading troops there is not the most convenient...
      But in the artillery system there is no landing; the use of a self-propelled gun does not imply that the engine can protect against light calibrations; on the other hand, a running engine is the key to survival when the enemy begins counter-battery fire.
  2. +12
    20 September 2023 05: 10
    After years of uncertainty, The self-propelled gun 2S31 "Vena" still ends up in combat units and is used in real combat conditions.

    Fuck ...
    Years of development from 1980s to 2007
    And then in normal light, it appeared in black
    What we value and love, what the team is proud of.
  3. -2
    20 September 2023 05: 26
    The good news: after years of uncertainty, she joined the army.
  4. +12
    20 September 2023 06: 23
    Modern self-propelled guns need not so much ammunition as the ability to accurately adjust fire and counter-battery combat.
  5. +16
    20 September 2023 06: 30
    I climbed on it at an exhibition when I was still in school, in the 90s! What a horror, will we at least come up with something new or will we continue to use Soviet foundations? The excellent car was unnecessary, but then suddenly they remembered. Then they didn’t know where to put the terminator, now Vienna, the war gave our system a good kick, launched movement in the defense industry. We needed this kick!
    1. -4
      20 September 2023 07: 32
      Quote: Vadim S
      they didn’t know where to put the terminator

      We still don’t know. Formally, the Terminator is a BMPT that is supposed to support tanks in an attack, and is now used as a kind of self-propelled weapon for firing at enemy positions from a 30mm cannon. Moreover, it costs even more than a tank, and is less protected. In the sense that the combat module is made of cardboard, but the crew is truly protected with dignity.
      1. +2
        20 September 2023 09: 19
        Quote from Escariot
        Moreover, it costs even more than a tank, and is less protected. In the sense that the combat module is made of cardboard, but the crew is truly protected with dignity.
        According to the technical specifications, the BMPT should have powerful protection, but there was a weight limit. Remote weapons are the only option to meet these requirements.
        1. +1
          20 September 2023 10: 29
          Quote: Bad_gr
          Quote from Escariot
          Moreover, it costs even more than a tank, and is less protected. In the sense that the combat module is made of cardboard, but the crew is truly protected with dignity.
          According to the technical specifications, the BMPT should have powerful protection, but there was a weight limit. Remote weapons are the only option to meet these requirements.

          I agree that the BMPT must have powerful protection, but the tank must also have it. And the tank is fully armored, while the BMPT has a cardboard combat module. Maybe it’s easier to take a 30mm cannon (well, if you like it that much) and put it in the tank’s turret? Then your combat module will have serious armor.
          Also, the BMPT, in theory, should be in the same formation with tanks (for example, 3 tanks in a platoon + 1 BMPT as reinforcement), and therefore this platoon already has as many as 3 anti-tank guns. Why do you need an anti-tank system in addition to them? Maybe it would be better to load more ammunition?
          Now this BMPT is used as a means of fire reinforcement for infantry, firing from a 30mm cannon at enemy infantry. It’s not a bad thing, but the motorized infantry platoon already has 3 of these guns. And there are cornets too. Why do they need this BMPT? Those. A Terminator is better than nothing at all, but a tank with its 125mm cannon looks like a much greater help: it would be better to have 10 T-10Ms instead of 90 BMPTs.
          1. 0
            20 September 2023 12: 45
            BMPT cannot be considered in isolation from the concept of application. If it will perform the functions of evacuating the crews of damaged tanks and act as a control point and carrier for drones, a reconnaissance vehicle and a communications repeater, then such a vehicle is needed. But if you simply remove the gun and replace it with two weak 30-mm automatic ones, then the meaning is really visible with a stretch.
          2. +4
            20 September 2023 14: 09
            Quote from Escariot
            Also, in theory, BMPTs should be in the same formation with tanks (for example, 3 tanks in a platoon + 1 BMPT as reinforcement)

            No, the BMPT goes BEHIND the line of tanks, at a distance of 100 to 300 meters.
            Quote from Escariot
            A Terminator is better than nothing at all, but a tank with its 125mm cannon looks like a much greater help: it would be better to have 10 T-10Ms instead of 90 BMPTs.

            The BMPT is good because it can be made on any base chassis and even the T-54/55 may be suitable for this
            1. -1
              20 September 2023 17: 41
              Quote: svp67
              Quote from Escariot
              Also, in theory, BMPTs should be in the same formation with tanks (for example, 3 tanks in a platoon + 1 BMPT as reinforcement)

              No, the BMPT goes BEHIND the line of tanks, at a distance of 100 to 300 meters.
              Quote from Escariot
              A Terminator is better than nothing at all, but a tank with its 125mm cannon looks like a much greater help: it would be better to have 10 T-10Ms instead of 90 BMPTs.

              The BMPT is good because it can be made on any base chassis and even the T-54/55 may be suitable for this

              If the BMPT goes behind the tanks, then why is there a Cornet on it? The tank will see the target earlier (well, it’s in front) and will use its standard weapons. A war machine with Kornet is like a dog’s fifth leg.
              BMPT, of course, can be made on any tank chassis, but why? I’m not saying that the security of the BMPT will decrease, but another platoon (if we mean a tank platoon) will have different materiel. If we are going to make them, then obviously on the same tank chassis.
              If the BMTP is used as an infantry support weapon, then even an old tank is better than a BMPT based on this old tank with equal optics. Those. giving a motorized infantry platoon a T-62MV model 2022 or T-55S would be a much better idea than an BMPT on the same chassis, because even the outdated gun of these tanks is still a tank gun and is capable of dealing with targets that are inaccessible to a 30mm autocannon.
              1. +1
                20 September 2023 23: 54
                Quote from Escariot
                give a motorized infantry platoon a T-62MV

                Why are you all “giving” tanks and BMPTs to our enemies? In our army there are motorized rifles...
                Quote from Escariot
                If the BMPT goes behind the tanks, then why is there a Cornet on it?

                Why was there an ATGM on the BMP? From the principle - “you can’t spoil porridge with oil”
                Quote from Escariot
                not available for 30mm autocannon.

                The power of the BMPT's weapons is no less sufficient to perform all basic fire missions
          3. -1
            21 September 2023 09: 16
            Why do they need this BMPT? Those. A Terminator is better than nothing at all, but a tank with its 125mm cannon looks like a much greater help: it would be better to have 10 T-10Ms instead of 90 BMPTs.

            Instead of an anti-aircraft machine gun, they would install a combat module with a 90mm automatic cannon on the T-30 turret and no BMPT would be needed, the tank would defend itself from tank-dangerous infantry.
            1. 0
              30 September 2023 13: 32
              The term "tank-dangerous infantry" requires decoding. Against ATGM crews capable of defeating armored vehicles from a distance of up to 2,5 km, a 30-mm cannon at a range of close to 1,5 km or more is useless. And against grenade launchers, a 7,62 mm machine gun is enough.
      2. +3
        20 September 2023 14: 06
        Quote from Escariot
        Moreover, it costs even more than a tank, and is less protected. In the sense that the combat module is made of cardboard, but the crew is truly protected with dignity.

        There are so many weapons on the BMPT that even damage to the moving turret gives a chance to fight back... But people must be protected.
        1. +4
          20 September 2023 17: 55
          Quote: svp67
          Quote from Escariot
          Moreover, it costs even more than a tank, and is less protected. In the sense that the combat module is made of cardboard, but the crew is truly protected with dignity.

          There are so many weapons on the BMPT that even damage to the moving turret gives a chance to fight back... But people must be protected.

          Then you have a problem with the execution of the BMPT concept. The fact is that the first BMPT (object 781) had as many as 2 turrets with 30mm cannons, 6 ATGMs, 5 PKT I
          and a couple of AGS. Well, just a sea of ​​fire and towers. Almost T-35. In comparison, the Terminator is a dull copy.
      3. -1
        5 November 2023 17: 30
        Quote from Escariot
        In the sense that the combat module is made of cardboard, but the crew is truly protected with dignity.

        The BMPT module occupies most of the upper hemisphere of the vehicle and, as you correctly noted, there is essentially no armor there. And this is a big problem if shelling is carried out with 25-40mm BOPS, since they do not fly level, but along the ground and arrive from above at an angle directly in the module, which will lead to the destruction of the vehicle. By the way, specialized people have always criticized this since the first prototype, and besides, the weak protection of ATGMs from fragments and small arms fire, when compared with how it is implemented on Bradley, CV90 and Puma. So far it is difficult to make any opinion, positive or negative, about the car, despite the fact that it participates in battles. Since in such battles the T-55 does not perform poorly. Urban battles, dynamic offensives, with passages of several kilometers a day can test such a machine.
    2. -6
      20 September 2023 10: 37
      Oh, I’m belittling you and what do you think? These have not yet been taken out of the bins of the galoshes that the president mentioned. It scares me to think that these are more terrible nuclear weapons and with ........ cores, as well as thermobaric shells.
      It's terrible what will happen.
      1. 0
        20 September 2023 11: 21
        Quote: Berkut752
        Oh, I’m belittling you and what do you think? These have not yet been taken out of the bins of the galoshes that the president mentioned.

        Why are there Soviet consumer goods in a combat zone?
        Or have you forgotten that in that speech the president separately singled out the defense industry and space as achievements of the Soviet government that we are proud of? wink :
        We are grateful to our grandfathers and our fathers for creating such a defense industry after the Great Patriotic War.
        From the audience: ... And the first satellite.
        Vladimir Putin: Both the first satellite and the first man in space are our common pride, these are the achievements of the Soviet government, of which we are all proud. These are nationwide achievements.
  6. +1
    20 September 2023 07: 14
    If only they remembered about the 160 mm mortar!!
    1. 0
      20 September 2023 09: 19
      But the 160-mm caliber mortar has almost no advantages over 152-mm howitzers, except for the lower price of the barrel. Since when installed on a chassis, the installation of anti-recoil devices will still be required. It is possible to develop a self-propelled gun like the Swedish 120 mm CV90 Mjölner, but it will be expensive and time-consuming. Therefore, a self-propelled gun like the Phlox on the Ural chassis suggests itself, only with a larger barrel.
      1. 0
        20 September 2023 11: 00
        In general, a whole scheme of mortars is drawn, both on a wheeled chassis and more armored ones on a tracked one
        82-mm mortar 2S41 Gorse - Kamaz
        120 mm self-propelled artillery gun 2S40 Phlox - Ural
        middle option:
        120-mm gun-mortar 2S23 Nona-SVK - BTR-80
        tracked, based on infantry fighting vehicles for motorized rifles and infantry fighting vehicles for airborne forces:
        120-mm self-propelled artillery and mortar mount 2S31 Vienna on a BMP-3 chassis
        120-mm gun-howitzer-mortar 2S42 Lotos on the BMD-4M chassis (to replace the 2S9 Nona-S)
        1. 0
          20 September 2023 12: 38
          It doesn't show up in your view. It was decided to abandon mortars on tracks. 1C31 Vienna will no longer be produced. If there is anything on the BMP-3 chassis, it will be the 152-mm Pat-S howitzer.
          Only for the landing force will they make an exception; they will have “Lotus”. There is also no talk of resuming production of Nona-SVK on the BTR chassis.
      2. +4
        20 September 2023 15: 41
        Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
        But the 160 mm caliber mortar has almost no advantages compared to 152 mm howitzers, except for the lower price of the barrel

        Any mine that is more powerful in comparison with a projectile of the same caliber...
        Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
        Since when installed on a chassis, the installation of anti-recoil devices will still be required.

        Not necessary. It is quite possible to use a scheme with a pallet
        1. +3
          20 September 2023 16: 44
          Why did a 160 mm mine suddenly become more powerful than a 152 mm projectile?
          152-mm ZVOF97 projectile weight 43,56 explosive weight 7,8 kg
          Mine 160 mm 53-VF-853A weight 41,14 explosive weight 7,723 kg.
          There is a more powerful mine 53-VF-843S with an explosive mass of 9 kg, but with a small charge it is possible to make a 152-mm projectile more powerful, but they don’t bother with it.
          A mine is almost always weaker than a projectile of a similar caliber.

          And a 160-mm mortar with an emphasis on the ground was needed for this if there was a 240-mm Tulip. In the 240 mm caliber, at least the risk of approaching the front edge is justified, due to the greater power of the ammunition. Why take risks with a 160-mm mortar, if there are much longer-range 152-mm howitzers and the handling of ammunition is well-established?
          The picture with the mortar was posted beautifully, but it is 120 mm and the loading scheme is slow, in a 160 mm caliber you cannot throw a mine on top, you will have to lower the breech-loading barrel and the rate of fire will be unacceptably low compared to howitzers.
          Special thanks for the significant minus. But your argumentation is very bad.
          1. 0
            21 September 2023 00: 21
            Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
            Why did a 160 mm mine suddenly become more powerful than a 152 mm projectile?

            Remember shooting theory, the section of internal ballistics. The loads when fired on a mortar mine in the barrel are lower than on an artillery shell, that is, the mine can be made thinner.
            Yes, you yourself proved this with characteristics
            for a 152-mm projectile, with a weight of 43,56 kg, explosives - 7,8 kg
            And a mine, with a lower total weight, has almost the same amount of explosives
  7. -5
    20 September 2023 08: 26
    the war gave our system a good kick, started movement in the defense industry

    I agree about the kick, but the result of the kick is that they take out from dusty closets a weapon that has no analogues, the place of which is in museums.
  8. fiv
    -4
    20 September 2023 09: 40
    A good series of weapons is Vienna, then Capillary, Artery. And, something super-powerful - the Aorta!
    1. -2
      20 September 2023 11: 13
      Beyond Vienna are Paris and Madrid!........
      1. fiv
        +1
        20 September 2023 13: 12
        Beyond Vienna are Paris and Madrid!........

        Beyond Vienna - Vaduz and Bern
  9. 0
    20 September 2023 13: 17
    What's the catch?
    If there is a 122mm rifled one, and a 125mm smooth one, then the 120mm rifled one is not to say that it will be much more compact than the 122mm one, there won’t be much more projectiles, what is the benefit?
    1. +5
      20 September 2023 13: 33
      The benefit is the ability to fire conventional 120mm mines and ready-rifled ammunition, which, according to some sources, is even cheaper than copper belt ammunition.
    2. +1
      20 September 2023 20: 33
      Quote: pettabyte
      If there is a 122mm rifled one, and a 125mm smooth one, then the 120mm rifled one is not to say that it will be much more compact than the 122mm one, there won’t be much more projectiles, what is the benefit?

      This system can work with a large barrel lift - 80 degrees. against 70 deg. 122 caliber, which means it can hit targets at a closer range (this is a battalion system).
      At a lower initial speed, a thin-walled projectile is used, and this allows it to be filled with a large amount of explosives, which brings its power closer to 152-mm caliber projectiles.
  10. -6
    20 September 2023 13: 36
    Quote: pettabyte
    What's the catch?

    the fact that you can “sell” any dubious sample at an inflated price (if out of desperation they installed turrets from “boats” on MTLB, and also took the T62 out of storage)
  11. +2
    20 September 2023 13: 48
    However, full-fledged mass production was not launched. During that period, the Ministry of Defense was finalizing and improving the artillery weapons system of the ground forces, and also worked out plans for the future. For one reason or another, there was no place for the self-propelled gun 2S31, and the purchase of serial equipment did not begin.

    They didn’t buy veins, but what did they buy instead? They didn’t buy coalitions, armata, BMP3s, all sorts of Kurgans, Su-57s and much more, but what did they buy instead? Combat modules for BMP-1?
    1. 0
      20 September 2023 16: 58
      The 152-mm self-propelled guns "Akatsia" and "Msta-S" were modernized. This is a much more powerful weapon, isn't it?
      1. 0
        21 September 2023 01: 02
        Something tells me that modernizing several hundred self-propelled howitzers in 10 years is a vanishingly small amount in the State Defense Order.
  12. 0
    20 September 2023 14: 32
    equipped with a 120 mm rifled gun

    A rifled gun and the ability to fire mines? How does it live together?
    1. -2
      20 September 2023 15: 43
      I think the rifling does not interfere with mine firing; the drop in pressure is compensated for by the additional charge and barrel length.
      1. +4
        20 September 2023 15: 47
        Quote: Foma Kinyaev
        I think

        You don’t have to think here, but you need to know... They use a special insert... made of plastic
  13. -3
    20 September 2023 15: 53
    Quote: svp67
    The weakness of our industrial base, specifically at the Kurgan plant, which has now barely been able to organize mass production of the BMP-3, the vehicle of which has been in production for more than 40 years...

    Don’t touch our industrial base. Better tell us about your achievements over 40 years.
  14. -1
    20 September 2023 17: 17
    Is this machine really needed in modern warfare? What will happen to her, to the crew, when they encounter a tank or even an infantry fighting vehicle? And the shooting range is so-so.
    1. +3
      20 September 2023 17: 23
      The point is not whether such a machine is needed or not. I need a car, I really need it. But the tracked chassis was considered too expensive for it. If something with a similar 120-mm gun appears as a replacement, it will be the wheeled self-propelled gun Phlox. And then she was prepared for the Airborne Forces.
    2. +2
      21 September 2023 00: 04
      Quote: RusGr
      Is this machine really needed in modern warfare?

      Very necessary. This is a battalion artillery vehicle, that is, direct infantry support.
      Quote: RusGr
      What will happen to her, to the crew, when they encounter a tank or even an infantry fighting vehicle?

      And what will happen to the same tank or infantry fighting vehicle when a 120-mm sYupriz arrives at them from above? It usually ends badly for them.
      Quote: RusGr
      And the shooting range is so-so.

      ENOUGH to support the battalion
  15. 0
    20 September 2023 17: 25
    do not read
    write the author at the beginning of the article!!!!
  16. +1
    20 September 2023 19: 45
    Instead of spending money on the Octopus, it’s better to make Vienna en masse...... a non-tank will not survive direct fire, and with a PDO, a 120mm mine is not much worse than a 125mm HE. Only make ATGM for 120mm....
  17. +1
    21 September 2023 01: 07
    In this area, its competitor could be the Khosta self-propelled gun, which is in service. But who saw her in the video from the front? What conclusions did you draw from the operation of “Khosta” and how did it perform? Its gun is almost the same, only with a muzzle brake. Now there is another analogue of it in trial operation at the front. "Lotus". Why are there so many of them?
  18. 0
    21 September 2023 01: 23
    Please explain why a self-propelled gun with such a small caliber is needed?
    1. +2
      21 September 2023 13: 47
      This is a 120mm mortar with a long barrel and a fire control system....the mortar is the bloodiest weapon in the army.
  19. 0
    21 September 2023 06: 46
    “After many years of uncertainty,” writes the author, and then “modern SAO”... how’s that?
  20. 0
    22 September 2023 17: 46
    They pull everything from warehouses to plug the holes. In the 2000s, they “sawed” the 2S34 “Khosta”, essentially a “Gvozdika” where the D30 artillery unit was replaced with a 2A80M and stuffed with electronic mince like in the M777. But the Ministry of Peace found it a little expensive, at the beginning they left electronic “goodies” in only two cars per battery, then only in one, and then they decided that the complex was not effective, for some reason, and abandoned modernization altogether.
  21. 0
    22 September 2023 20: 31
    Otherwise, these nons and veins are of much use in battle
  22. +1
    23 September 2023 17: 46
    "Vena" still ends up in combat units and is used in real combat conditions

    Another mess... :)
    “Vienna” was already “outdated” in 2010, because they sculpted samples from the saints of the 90s, and developed them from the 80s...
    First, since 2010 They sold out the company "Vena", made 18 pieces for the Azerbaijanis and that's it, then they promised to launch the company "Lotos" in 2020 - bullshit... :)
    "Vena", even based on the BMP3, is just armor, and "Lotos", based on the BMD4, is just "cardboard"...
    Everything that is done for the Airborne Forces is unnecessary garbage, because... The troops themselves are not needed - neither infantry, nor saboteurs...
    SVO - showed the futility of this idea of ​​landing behind enemy lines...
    We need to do SAO
    Both options are completely unsuitable for the battlefield - there is no necessary protection and are completely unsuitable as artillery - a range of 12 km by modern standards means nothing - a counter-battery will mow them down in one go...
    All that is good about these products is the idea of ​​a universal cannon - howitzer - mortar...
    But for the front line, you need to put it on the tank’s body - a la “Terminator”, but with a module containing a universal gun - we can do it...
    But the “range” is beyond our capabilities, and the caliber is not the same and the barrel length is too small in calibers...
  23. -1
    25 September 2023 13: 12
    Vienna, in the sense of a city. Good idea, the next one should be called Berlin 1A3. or Stockholm 2/-F.
  24. 0
    27 September 2023 14: 27
    Adjustable mines Gran + drone spotter. It turns out to be a very cool fire support vehicle.
  25. 0
    9 November 2023 08: 04
    Consider that Vienna is no longer in the troops, and now the wheeled Phloxes, where the crew is not protected during shooting, are completely trying to push through!
  26. 0
    18 December 2023 10: 16
    "Vienna" is an ideal weapon in mountain conditions. Can fire from different angles. in the steppe part, in the same Ukraine, longer-range systems are needed.